City U Form 2A Final

8/6/2019 City U Form 2A Final

1/27

A POSITIVE IMPACT UPON TEACHER DIVERSITY

ALTERNATIVE ROUTES TO TEACHER CERTIFICATION

2011 PROGRAM PROPOSAL

Submitted by: City University of Seattle

Date: January 15, 2011


2/27

2

A Positive Impact on Teacher Diversity

City University of Seattles Program Application

for Alternative Routes to Certification

SECTION 1: PROGRAM INFORMATION Page 3

Overview Page 3

SECTION 2: PROPOSAL CONTENTS Page 4

A. Need for Program Page 4Snapshot of Student and Teacher Diversity Page 5

City Universitys Diversity Mandate Page 5

B. Market Analysis Page 6

Geographic Contributions Page 7

Student Access Contributions Page 7

Unique Endorsement Options Page 8

Unique Program Design Elements Page 9

Alternative Routes Decision-Makers Page 10

Considerations for Changing Times Page 10

SECTION 3: COMMITMENT OF PARTNERS Page 11

A. District Need Page 11B. Classroom Placement Page 11C. Route 1 and Route 2 Placements Page 13D. Selection of Mentor Teacher Page 14E. Field Experience Placement Page 16F. Program Design Page 18G. Organizational Capacity Page 26H. Program Delivery Page 26

APPENDICES

Appendix A: District Letters and Contact Information

Appendix B: Unique Program Design Elements

Appendix C: Field Documents and Eligibility/Entry Requirements

Appendix D: Signed Memorandum of Understanding


3/27

3

SECTION 1 PROGRAM INFORMATION

Program Name: Albright School of Education

Institution: City University of Seattle

Certificate Type: Residency Teacher Certificate

Proposed Routes: Route 1

Route 2

Route 3

Route 4

Proposed

Endorsements: Single Endorsements:Early Childhood Special Education

Mathematics

Middle Level Mathematics

Special Education

Dual Endorsements:

English Language Learners and Elementary Ed.

English Language Learners and Mathematics

Mathematics and Elementary EducationSpecial Education and Elementary Education

Special Education and English Language Learners

Special Education and Mathematics

Organization Type: Private non-profit organization

OVERVIEW

City University of Seattles Application for Alternative Routes to Certification seeks

approval to provide programs in all four routes to meet district needs for teachers in

special education, English language learners, mathematics, and early childhood special

education. This proposal will contribute approximately 65 new teachers every two years

to the states workforce, with a goal of 35% representing underserved communities.


4/27

4

SECTION TWO - PROPOSAL CONTENTS

A. NEED FOR PROGRAM:

This proposal addresses the shortage of special education, English language learners

(ELL), and mathematics teachers in western Washington school districts. City University

of Seattle has letters of support from Auburn, Everett, Mr. Vernon and Seattle School

Districts. We are also in the process of securing a letter of support from the North Kitsap

School District verifying current or anticipated teacher shortages in these content areas.

The letters also show the districts commitment to partnering with City U of Seattle

(CityU) in alternative route programming to meet staffing needs. (Please see Appendix A

for district letters). In some cases, the district/ university partnership is a new one, as

with Auburn, while others are ongoing, as with Seattle whose relationship began in 2004

and extends until 2013 per agreements with the district and the Seattle EducationAssociation.

All partnerships seek teachers who reflect the diversity of students in their schools. To

attract minority personnel into the teaching profession, CityU requests approval to offer

programming in all four Alternative Routes. Doing so enables us to attract a large

number of applicants and to customize the preparation of the selected participants

according to their individual strengths and qualifications. It is, in fact, the combination of

district needs and student backgrounds that determined the four single subject and six

dual endorsements CityU now proposes.

Supported by a P.E.S.B. special grant entitled Salish Pathways, the University is

conducting a needs assessment of the Suquamish and Port Gamble SKlallam Tribes, the

North Kitsap School District, and other Peninsula agencies on an early childhood special

education model for Native paraeducators. Preliminary results indicate interest in a

Route 1 reservation-based program with a potential start date of June, 2012. Figure 1

below summarizes this and other CityU proposed alternative route partnerships.

Figure 1: City Universitys Proposed Alternative Routes Partnership Programs

Routes Endorsement Partnerships Student #

Route 1: Employed paraeducators (AA)

Elementary Ed. + Eng. Lang. Learn.

Elementary Ed. + Mathematics

Elementary Ed. + Special Ed.Mathematics + Eng. Lang. Learn.

Special Ed. + Mathematics

Special Ed. + Eng. Lang. Learners

Seattle

Auburn

EverettMt. Vernon

6-15

6-15

6-156-15

Route 2: Employed paraeducators (BA) Mathematics Everett 5

Route 3: Individuals with bachelors

degrees

Middle-Level Mathematics

Mathematics

Seattle

Everett

Auburn

15

Route 4: Individuals with bachelors

degrees plus conditional or emergency

certificates

Middle-Level Mathematics

Mathematics

Seattle

Everett

Auburn

3


5/27

5

Route 1: Employed paraeducators with

transfer degrees

Early Childhood Special Ed.

North Kitsap

+Tribes

(In process)

5-10

A Snapshot of Student and Teacher Diversity in Washington State

There is an understandable sense of urgency among all educational stakeholders to

increase the diversity of the teacher workforce. As Washingtons K-12 student bodybecomes steadily more diverse, the percentage of educators reflecting the communities

they teach in has not kept pace. Numbers from O.S.P.I.s data administration and report

card websites show that underrepresented students increased from 7.5% of total school

enrollments in 1971 to 26.6% 30 years later in 2001. From 1971 to 2001, non-white

student numbers increased at about .6% a year. Moving ahead eight years from 2001

onward, non-white students represented 36.3% of Washingtons K-12 enrollment by

2009. This rate of change is occurring at 1.2% annually, or twice as fast as previously.

Figure 2 summarizes some of our states K-12 diversity data.

Figure 2: Washington States Increasingly Diverse K-12 Student Population

October/

Year Black Asian

Native

American Hispanic White

Total

Enrollment

Percent

Minority

1971 21,431 11,145 12,398 15,411 743,388 803,773 7.5

2001 54,563 75,782 27,281 110,136 741,651 1,010,424 26.6

2009 57,952 90,670 25,974 166,518 660,333 1,036,135 36.3

Data Sources:

For 1971: www.k12.wa.us/dataadmin

For 2001: http://reportcard.ospi.k12.wa.us/summary aspx?groupLevel=District&year=2000-2001

For 2010: http://reportcard.ospi.k12.wa.us/summary aspx?groupLevel=District&year=2009-2010

The demographic make-up of those teaching Washingtons students has not undergone

similar dramatic shifts. In fact, OSPI data for the most recent decade reveals that no shift

has occurred whatsoever.

Figure 3: The Ethnicity of Washingtons Certified Teachers in FTE Numbers and Percentages

Academic

Year Black Asian

Native

American Hispanic White

Total

FTE

1997-98 833 1.6% 1098 2.2% 403 .79% 890 1.8% 50,880 93.6% 50,880

2007-08 778 1.4% 1389 2.6% 406 .75% 1453 2.7% 49,889 92.1% 53,916

Data Source: www.k12.wa.us/DataAdmin/default.aspx

City University of Seattles Diversity Mandate

The above data mandates the pursuit of new and aggressive diversity goals. Fortunately,our university/district partnerships are no longer beginning from scratch. CityU has

analyzed the efficacy of our conventional and alternative routes preparation

programs. It is clear that our partnership models have grown increasingly more

successful with students of color. For example, in 2002 only 13% of our pilot cohort was

from under-served communities. Six years later, that number more than doubled.

Evergreen Training and Evaluation (2010) determined that 30% of our multiple cohorts


6/27

6

in 2008 were minorities. Such recruiting and retention successes are gratifying for our

partnerships and beyond.

The 2008 percentage of 30% is nearly twice O.S.P.I.s (2010) finding that 16% of the

states newly certified teachers in 2008-09 were non-white. More importantly, 30%

diversity among teachers begins to more closely approximate the diversity of

Washingtons current student population.

Though the efforts of all educational stakeholders are likely necessary to diversify

Washingtons teaching force, CityUs alternative routes programs propose to improve

our goals and results now. Our goal is to recruit cohorts this year that are at least 35%

diverse candidates. This percentage is more than we have achieved previously, but

there is no time to wait or waste.

Another endeavor is that CityU has infused our alternative model philosophy and design

into all of our regular preparation programs. The transformation is so nearly

complete, except for tuition pricing, that Alternative Route 1 participants could be

served in our conventional bachelors in education programs. Such program redesign

efforts were necessary. Currently, City University of Seattle is one of the largest teacher

preparation providers in the state. It is incumbent upon us to align both programs with

the states Strategic Master Plan for Higher Education (Washington Higher Education

Coordinating Board, 2008) by providing prior learning credit, entry support, intensive

advising, and performance-based, customized preparation.

B. MARKET ANALYSIS:

CityUs alternative routes programs target additional concerns at the local, state and

national levels. Nationwide studies underscore how several states, including ours,grapple with consecutive years, if not decades, of chronic teacher shortages in

mathematics, special education, English language acquisition, and, in some cases early

childhood special education (United States Department of Education, 2010; United

States Department of Labor, 2010).

State-specific research by several agencies reinforces the same high degrees of

shortages (P.E.S.B., 2008 p.1) throughout Washington (Higher Education Coordinating

Board, State Board for Technical and Community Colleges, and the Workforce Training

and Education Coordination Board, 2009; Office of the Superintendent of Public

Instruction, 2007).

City University of Seattle and its district partners have not encountered competition or

redundancy concerns regarding other institutions. We realize that as more partnerships

implement programs, this situation may change. Until then, Figure 4 summarizes some

of our district/partnerships distinct roles and contributions:


7/27


8/27

8

provider is Heritage while CityU serves western Washington. CityU remains the sole

Route 1 provider in all of western Washington. We fill a critical, unduplicated need for

our states paraprofessionals wanting to advance their educational careers. We are also

the sole institution serving both undergraduates and graduates by offering all four

routes.

Unique Endorsement Options

Since our partnership programs are unique in which students we serve and where, our

undergraduate endorsement offerings reflect distinct qualities as well. Figure 5 below

displays the six alternative route providers and compares their program components

against ours. Data for this figure was retrieved December 11, 2010 from PESBs website

athttp://pathway.pesb.wa.gov/alternative_routes/alt-route-programs/all-programs.

Please note, not all of each institutions endorsement offerings are listed in Figure 5.

Figure 5: City University and Other Alternative Route Programs as of December, 2010

Program

Providers

CityUs Proposed Endorsements and Routes Locale

El Ed ELL Math Mid

Math

Sp Ed EC Sp

Ed

Western

WA

Eastern

WA

City 1 1 1,2,3,4 1,2,3,4 1,2,3,4 1

Everett, Seattle, Auburn, & in

process Mt. Vernon, & Kitsap

Pacific Lutheran* X** 2,3,4 X 2,3,4 2,3,4 X Tacoma

Saint Martins * X 2,3,4 2,3,4 2,3,4 2,3,4 X Lacey

Seattle Pacific * 2,3,4 2,3,4 2,3,4 2,3,4 2,3,4 X Seattle

Heritage 1 1 X 1 1 X Toppenish

Regional Consortia* X 2,3,4 2,3,4 2,3,4 2,3,4 X Pasco & Yakima

* These providers offer additional endorsements not listed here

** This endorsement is not offered.

As Figure 5 indicates, CityUs alternative routes programs make multiple unduplicated

contributions to teacher education in Washington State. Likewise, when considering the

Universitys endorsement offerings, we are distinct in:

1. Serving Route 1 participants who want to teach mathematics. As of this writing,CityU is the sole provider in the state offering this option.

2. Serving Route 1 participants who want to teach special education and/or Englishlanguage learners. CityU is the sole provider of these endorsements to

paraprofessionals in western Washington. Heritage University is the sole

provider of similar endorsements in eastern Washington.

3. Offering what may be the states first alternative routes Early Childhood SpecialEducation endorsement to meet the needs of the Kitsap area.
http://pathway.pesb.wa.gov/alternative_routes/alt-route-programs/all-programshttp://pathway.pesb.wa.gov/alternative_routes/alt-route-programs/all-programshttp://pathway.pesb.wa.gov/alternative_routes/alt-route-programs/all-programshttp://pathway.pesb.wa.gov/alternative_routes/alt-route-programs/all-programs


9/27

9

City University of Seattle also proposes continuing our integrated dual endorsement, 90

credits Route 1 program. Our students realize employability benefits from earning

multiple subject credentials while the University is assured that we have done our part

to prepare teachers for a variety of settings. Our dual endorsements include:

Elementary Education + English Language LearnersElementary Education + Mathematics

Elementary Education + Special Education

Mathematics + English Language Learners

Special Education + Mathematics

Special Education + English Language Learners

While earning dual endorsements is a norm for approximately half of CityU participants,

such is not the case any longer for new teachers statewide. As OSPI (2010) documented

in itsAnnual Report: 2008-09 Certificates Issued, multiple endorsements were earned by

only 1.4% of the certified teachers in 2008-09. Citys participants credentials surpass

those of other new teachers and are a factor in our employment percentage rates that

typically surpass the states average.

Dual endorsements are important in a state with 151 rural districts (those with three or

fewer schools and 1000 or fewer students). Research consistently shows that the single

most important qualification for teachers in rural settings is having multiple

endorsements (Barley, 2008; Dadisman, Gravelle, Farmer & Petrin, 2010). Citys dual-

endorsed graduates are well-prepared for teaching in diverse educational settings.

City University of Seattles Unique Program Design Elements

In its final report, Evergreen Training and Evaluation (2010) concluded that the models

developed and piloted by CityU in Seattle and Skagit Valley are worthy prototypes for

others. Previously in 2008, the same evaluators cited program components as

breakthroughp. 21 and deserving ofkudosp.23. A sample of unique design features

and tools from various program phases are listed below.

Figure 6: A Sample of City University of Seattles Unique Program Features and ToolsProgram Phase Feature/ Tool Description

Before Admission

Self-Assessment for Transitioning

to Teaching

Prerequisite Quarter

Program inquirers use this tool to self-assess program readiness and as a guide to prepare for

admission (See Appendix C)

The PQ is a one-quarter option for Route 2 applicants who have not yet passed the special edcontent test. We are exploring this for other subject assessment required by RCW28A-410-220(3)

Entry into Program Individual Plan of Study

Upon entry, participant meets with advisory team to assess prior experience and knowledge via

transcript review, professional experiences, interviews, proficiency portfolio aligned with state

standards to craft an Individual Plan of Study. (See Appendix C)

During the Program

Integrated A and B Curricular

Model Program Handbook

Route 1,2,3,4:

Performance Tasks Handbook

A courses during Route 1 first year develop professional knowledge and endorsement

competencies or through the summer intensive and during the year-long mentored internship for

Routes 2,3,and 4. Courses may be waived with portfolio of evidence per Individual Plan of Study.

(See Sample Program Handbook in Appendix C)

B performance tasks during mentored year develop instructional skill, endorsement

competencies, and individual specialties. Candidates self-pace and have early exit option. (See


10/27

10

sample Performance Tasks Handbook in Appendix C)

During the Program Route 1,2,4 Job Retention

Agreements with classified unions and districts seek to enable alternative route candidates to retain

their jobs while in the program. (See Seattle Education Association letter in Appendix A)

Alternative Routes Program Decision-Makers

City University of Seattle has learned many lessons about the hows of offering

partnership-based, alternative routes to teacher certification. A necessary first step in

designing and offering such models is to form a program advisory board for each

alternative route model to be offered. Such boards are similar in nature to the

Professional Education Advisory Boards for regular preparation programs. Their broad

responsibilities are to

1) design and staff the alternative routes program model;

2) recruit, support, and place the participants;

3) troubleshoot issues as they arise; and

4) evaluate the quality of the participants experiences.

Each advisory board includes representatives from all stakeholder groups and includes:

City University program coordinator

City University associate faculty

District administrator from each district partnership

Mentor teacher representativeCity University field supervisor representative

Alternative routes participant representative

Family member representative

Classified employee union representative for Route 1 and 2 programs, and/or

Tribal Education committee representative if serving Native participants,

and/or consortia representatives such as community college

representatives

Considerations for Changing Times

The economic downturn that began in 2009 shrunk the states teaching workforce

primarily through attrition. However, as 2011 begins, new budget contractions are likely

and layoff of teachers will likely occur. The Professional Education Standards Board has

analyzed recent K-12 teacher data and suggested preliminary policy implications at their

site: https: //sites.google.com/a/pesbdata.org/dataand trends/reduction-in-force.

They estimated that new teacher hiring in 2009-10 was about one-half of what was

expected and attributed the reduced employment numbers to three factors:


11/27

11

1) Lower attrition of continuing teachers

2) Small declines in retirement

3) An overall reduction in the workforce.

They suggest that teacher preparation graduates including those in high need

endorsement areas will be affected and some who received alternative route bondedscholarships may face repayment.

As CityU proposes to provide alternative route programming in western Washington, it

is important that we inform applicants of our uncertain educational environment and

the likelihood of few available positions. That said, there are those among us (authors

included) who assert they must be teachers. CityU has taken proactive steps to address

the viability of institutional and tuition costs so that we may continue providing

alternative route programs while further reducing tuition rates (See Section 3H).

Additionally, we are launching deeper conversations with our partners about

how best to estimate teacher shortages and future district openings. Finally, our

candidates with their personal experiences in the school districts are prepared to be the

first hired even in these difficult hiring times.

SECTION THREE - COMMITMENT OF PARTNERS

3A. DISTRICT NEED

CityU has received letters from four of our district partners verifying their current or

anticipated teacher shortages in endorsements we offer. (See Appendix A).

Please note that conversations are underway with an additional partner, the Kitsap

Educational Agencies including the Suquamish Tribe and Port Gamble SKlallam Tribe

regarding a Route 1 program in early childhood special education. Figure 7 shows the

commitments received to date and letters in process (IP).

Figure 7: City Universitys District Partners

Districts Endorsements Routes Letters

Seattle

Elementary Ed. + English Language Learners

Elementary Ed. + Special Education

1

1

Everett Special Education + Mathematics

Mathematics


1

2,3,4

Auburn Elementary Ed. + English Language Learners

Elementary Ed. + Special EducationMathematics


1, 3,4

Mt. Vernon Elementary Ed. + English Lang. Learners 1 Tribes Kitsap Early Childhood Special Education 1 IP


12/27

12

3B. CLASSROOM PLACEMENT

My building, the district, and City U helped support me in every way that I

needed. I was able to truly feel like a teacher with my mentor teacher, my field

supervisor, the consulting teacher for the building and my principal by my side,

either face to face, telephone conversations and email.City University Participant cited in Evergreen Training and Evaluation (2010) p.11

The students statement above reflects the multiple forms of feedback, supervision and

support from district and university personnel, all of whom adhere to numerous

internship protocols. Supervising mentor teachers must meet pre-determined criteria,

one of which is training by CityU faculty (See district letters in Appendix A and Figure 8).

Candidates verify their readiness for work with K-12 students by securing formal

university approval. CityU assigns a field supervisor when the candidate and mentor

teacher are paired. With these roles in place, internship teams are formed to support

each candidates transformation into a teacher. The teams consist of the candidate,

mentor teacher, building principal or designee, university field supervisor, and, in somecases, other educators as well. It is the primary responsibility of the internship team

members to support and evaluate the candidate the majority of the time.

Candidates are expected to be in their assigned classrooms all day, every day for the

duration of their mentored internship (Appendix C Field Handbook pp.6-7). To develop

increasingly complex levels of professional excellence, each candidate receives

continuous formative & summative input from at least six district and university

personnel. The schedule and format of feedback are described in the Field Handbook

(Appendix C) and samples are listed in Figure 8. Please note, CityUs program documents

will be revised for the 2011/12 year upon approval of this proposal.

Figure 8: Intensive Mentoring from District and University Personnel

EVALUATOR

INFORMAL

FEEDBACK SAMPLES

FORMAL

FEEDBACK SAMPLES

University Field

Supervisor

Serves as liaison for district

and university & gives

related feedback monthly or

more frequently

Formalizes Teacher Development Plan

Scores Instructional Plans

Scores Performance-based Pedagogy

Scores Impact on Student Learning

Internship Seminars Once monthly campus-based reflection with

faculty and cohortUniversity Faculty Scores Impact on Student Learning

Internship Team:

District and University

Meets at beginning of

internship and quarterly

Reviews quarterly evaluations

Makes formal recommendations

District Mentor

Teacher

Gives feedback on skills andknowledge daily or weekly

and then less frequently

Signs off on Performance tasksMakes formal recommendations

Principal

Observes candidate and

gives informal feedback

Occasionally Conducts one informal and one formal

evaluation

Cooperating Teacher,

If present

Gives feedback on skills and

knowledge base as needed

Makes formal and informal

recommendations


13/27

13

The above chart does not reflect the candidates active role in self-reflection and

evaluation. Such processes are explained in the Field Handbook (Appendix C), Program

Handbook and Performance Task Handbooks (Appendix B). The amount of feedback and

evaluation does not necessarily decrease when the candidate is in the final phases of

internship since there is no limit to professional development.

All developmental milestones of each candidate are determined by the internship team.

Such decisions include the candidates readiness to student teach, recommendation for

certification, and any additional requirements if needed.

3C. ROUTE 1 AND 2 PLACEMENTS

Some CityU school district partners have provided groundbreaking support of Route 1

and 2 candidates by allowing them to retain their jobs during their mentored

internships. Evergreen Training and Evaluations final report (2010) cited the efforts of

the Seattle Public Schools, Seattle Education Association and the Mt. Vernon School

District in supporting their paraprofessionals:

CityUs Field Handbook addresses paraprofessional and Route 4 candidate employment

during internship. (See Appendix C, pages 3 and 5, currently to be revised for 2011/12.)

CityU strongly encourages district partners to retain employment of their paraeducators

while in program, and encourages districts considering such options. CityU will not

interfere with district requirements or negotiated agreements.

In Evergreen Trainings final report (2010), they reviewed and compared the

characteristics of alternative route programs nationally. They found that few states

considered the issue of job support in their alternative route programs. Washingtons

efforts in this regard are pioneering and necessary. The evaluators claim that, for the

many minority candidates attracted to our states model, job support was a huge factor

in student success and completion of these programs. CityU recognizes this is a

significant factor to the success of our Route 1 and Route 2 candidates.

The classified staff unions involvement and support made a

qualitative impact on the program in Seattle. For example, the union

helped meet professional development needs, which in turn, helped

reduce the stress of participants. The union also played a critical role in

ensuring that all Seattle participants could keep their jobs while they did

their internships. In Skagit Valley, Mt. Vernon School District allowed

participants to keep their jobs and paid for substitutes while participants

did their student teaching. p.7


14/27

14

3D. SELECTION OF A MENTOR TEACHER

Districts are responsible for identifying mentor teachers based on the pre-determined

qualifications identified in the partnership agreement (Figure 9). After districts have

selected mentors, City University faculty are responsible for their training which takes

place over the course of several Saturdays. The focus of the training is on the 25 topicslisted in the Table of Contents in CityUs Field HandbookAlternative Routes to

Certification (Appendix C). Other mentor topics and processes are mapped out in the

Program Handbook and Performance-Based Tasks Handbook(Appendix B). All mentor

teachers are trained in the co-teaching model. They receive clock hours and payment for

completing training as alternative route mentors.

Figure 9: Mentor Teacher QualificationsCity University of Seattle/District Partnership

Mentor Teacher Selection CriteriaApplicant/ Reviewer: __________________________________________________________________Date: _______________________________________________________________________________

Mentor Teacher Required Qualifications: Mentor Candidate Qualifications:

A minimum of three years of teaching

A continuing or professional certificate

Endorsement(s) in:

Subject areas taught:

Demonstrated excellence in teaching

Demonstrated positive impact on student learning

Demonstrated strong communication skills

Documented formalized mentor training

Documented CityU alternative route mentor training

Letter of recommendation from district official

Commitment to co-teaching with candidate

Commitment to one -five hrs weekly of mentoring candidateLacks prior relationship/personal experience with candidate

Ability to enlist content area, classroom managementor other teacher experts to assist intern if needed

Willingness to fulfill all mentor responsibilitiesoutlined in Field Handbook

Optional Qualifications, if any: (Samples only)

Prior mentoring experience

Bi-lingual skills

Documented leadership skills

Other University/District Considerations or Special Requests:

All alternative routes mentor teachers are expected to apply co-teaching strategies. In

addition mentors will:

1. participate in candidate team meetings;


15/27

15

2. make decisions about each candidates readiness based upon the skills,

knowledge, and disposition the candidate consistently exhibits;

3. understand, support and evaluate the candidates performance tasks and

other requirements;

4. secure content area, classroom management or other experts to assist in

strengthening the candidates skills and knowledge if needed;5. recommend the candidate for student teaching and certification

candidacy; and

6. submit quarterly evaluations formatted by CityU

to the program coordinator, and, upon receipt, receive the mentors

quarterly stipend.

The mentor model above has an underlying assumption that candidates are placed in

the supervising teachers classroom. In CityUs Alternative Route 4 program, mentors

are assigned to the classrooms. This model and all alternative route models require time

for the mentoring process to take place. CityU makes requests of two key district

partners: administrators and mentors, to either make or create time for mentoring.

Time Requests of Administrators and Their Strategies

CityU asks district administrators and/or building principals to arrange for mentors and

candidates to meet at least one hour weekly. It is preferable if mentoring collaboration

time is for a quarter, semester or the entire school year in advance. Both non-cost and

budget-related strategies have been developed and include:

Non-cost strategies

1. Align planning periods if part of the schools schedule2. Swap time by not attending other meetings, field trips, etc.

3. Use scheduled release days or professional development days

4. Bring in a specialist

Budget-related strategies

1. Hire a substitute2. Pay for other staff member to take over the mentors class3. Pay for a specialist

Time Requests of Mentors and Their Strategies

CityU asks mentors to check in daily with their candidate and dedicate at least one hour

weekly to mentoring. These are strategies that we have observed:

1. Check-in daily: before and after school, during recess or lunch, or between

classes.

2. Hour-long co-planning during preps, before and after school.


16/27

16

3. Mentors serving Route 4 candidates may ask the candidate to videotape their

instruction or management techniques to review later.

4. Ask the principal or other administrator to reduce the mentors other

responsibilities, provide release time, align preps, hire a substitute or

specialist, etc.

3E. FIELD EXPERIENCE PLACEMENT

1. Determining Placements

Designated district and university personnel are authorized to arrange classroom

placements. At CityU, this responsibility is filled by faculty level placement coordinators.

At the district level, our coordinators work with Human Resource directors or directly

with building principals depending upon the districts preferences.To initiate the

process, our candidates complete forms that include brief resumes of their professional

backgrounds and their preferred grade levels and subjects during internship. CityUs

placement coordinators compile such information and write district partners specifying

the placement requests. Such letters are typically followed up by meetings with district

personnel to review the requests; however, some are comfortable identifying

placements based on the Universitys documents. Once a district has determined that

one or more placements are feasible, it schedules a meeting with CityU and district

personnel to orient those involved to the alterative routes placement processes and

expectations.

2. Background Check and Fingerprinting

Prior to the beginning of all field experiences, CityUs placement coordinators determine

that each candidate has completed the character and fitness form and has cleared

background and fingerprint checks conducted through the Office of the Superintendent

of Public Instruction. In accordance with our district/university field placement

agreements, no candidates are placed without appropriate clearance verification.

Further, the University is responsible for assuring that clearances remain in effect for all

candidates throughout the completion of all field experiences. All background

clearances are handled through the Certification Office. The Certification Officer

monitors clearance dates and determines which candidates have clearances that wouldexpire while in program. Candidates are notified in advance of clearance expiration to

update their clearance. This allows a seamless transition to the extended clearance

date. It is also incumbent upon the University to keep abreast of any changes in

clearance requirement procedures which is accomplished by the Certification Officers

contacts with OSPI and the PESB.


17/27

17

3. Field Experiences in Citys District/ University Partnership

It is the expectation of the alternate routes partners that the internship pace and plan

are unique to each candidate while balancing the needs of K-12 students. At CityU, we

are guided by a developmental scheme that unfolds in five phases during a year-long

mentored internship (See Field Handbook in Appendix D).

The first three phases, Orientation, Emerging Competence, and Developing

Competence, recommend appropriate candidate experiences for varied lengths of time.

For example, it is expected that the candidate may observe the mentor teachers

classroom as well as those of others (Phase 1); work one-on-one with students or with

small groups (Phase 2); and progress to teaching individual classes up to a partial-days

schedule (Phase 3). However, it is also the case that Route 1, 2, and 4 candidates may

waive their Phase One introduction to the classroom depending upon their unique

circumstances. Such decisions are made by the internship team.

The fourth phase is referred to as Demonstrating Competence and includes Student

Teaching (internship) using the co-teaching model in which the candidate assumes the

lead role in co-planning, co-instructing and co-assessing. Arriving at this stage, or any

other milestone, is not the decision of any one individual. The full internship team must

agree that the candidate is ready. At this point, the team notifies CityUs Alternative

Routes Program Coordinator. The Coordinator is the one who notifies the candidate as

explained in CityUs Field Handbook that they are cleared for student teachingp.4.

The fifth and final phase of mentored internshipis Ramping Downwhere the lead roles

are transitioned back to the mentor to ease the K-12 students adjustment over one to

two weeks time.

Though the above accommodates a years timeframe, it is possible for Route 2, 3, and 4

candidates to do an early exit from the program. This option can be considered after the

candidate has spent a minimum of one-half of a year in the classroom and all members

of the internship team agree. The team also determines that all requirements are

complete with the necessary scores. For the internship, such requirements include:

1. All performance tasks are completed and scored At Standard or Quality.

2. All criteria on the performance-based pedagogy assessment were met.

3. Received Positive on all elements of the field evaluation of professional

attributes and essential dispositions.4. Completed evidenced-based portfolio and presented positive impact on student

learning.

If this appears to be the case, a University certification audit is conducted through the

Office of the Registrar. When the candidate receives a cleared for certification notice,

the appropriate paperwork is sent to the State of Washingtons Office of Professional


18/27

18

Practices for a temporary permit. Additional information is available in the Program

Handbook in Appendix B.

4. Roles and Responsibilities of the Candidates, Supervisors and Mentors

Extensive descriptions of the roles and responsibilities of the partnerships candidates,supervisors, and mentors are available in CityUs Field Handbook in Appendix C. Three

additional contributors, the school principal, the cooperating teacher (if needed) and

the internship team are also described. As explained in 3D above, it is necessary for

mentor teachers to demonstrate their responsibilities during the internship. They are

able to do so from the training provided by CityU faculty and from their participation in

the internship team.

3F. PROGRAM DESIGN

1. Description of the Routes and Partnership Roles

The intensive alternative routes programs require the combined contributions of the

partnership from designing the program model to supporting students as they transition

to teaching. A description of the alternative routes programs and how they are jointly

operated follows below in Figure 10.

Figure 10: The Operation of the Alternative Model ProgramsDistrict Role Route Descriptions* University Role

Identify shortage area needs

Route 1Begins July 1 and ends June 30 two

years later. Students take A coursesyear 1.

Do student teaching, performance

tasks, and capstone project during

year 2.

Route 2, 3, 4

Begins July 1, and ends June 30

one year later. Students take

intensive summer program.

Route 2 students may also

participate in the pre-req quarter

which is held spring quarter prior

to the summer intensive.

Contact districts to identify shortages

Establish and serve on Advisory Board Establish and serve on AdvisoryBoard

Co-design Route 1 model Co-design Route 1 model

Recruit and screen applicants Recruit and screen applicants

District teachers may be Associate

Faculty in Year 1 for Route 1 students or

in the summer intensive for Route

2,3,4 students

Provide faculty for Year 1 for Route 1

students or for the summer

intensive if Route 2, 3, or 4 students

Select mentor teachers and insure they

complete training

Develop and implement mentor

training

Districts place students with mentors Contact district regarding mentors

Mentor teacher supports and evaluates

candidates

Provide supervising faculty who

observe and evaluate candidate

Mentor teacher evaluates theperformance tasks Faculty and field supervisorsevaluate PPA and capstone project

Mentor signals readiness for student

teaching and completion

Informs University of readiness and

after audit clears student for student

teaching and program completion

*Route 2, 3, and 4 variations


19/27

19

2. Entry Requirements for Each Alternative Route Program

CityUs website atwww.cityu.edu/programsintroduces potential applicants to the four

alternative routes options, the endorsement areas the University provides, descriptions

of the programs, application processes, and eligibility requirements. The eligibility

requirements clearly specify those listed by the state legislature and the P.E.S.B. in itsproposal materials. CityUs application documents are in Appendix C. Please note, as of

this time the application materials are scheduled to be revised with more targeted

specific route content for 2011-12 alternative route students if this proposal is

approved.

The screening of applicants involves both district and university partners in some cases.

For example, Seattle Schools pre-screens its applicants as have other districts in the

past. CityU screens all applicants who are also interviewed in small groups as well as

individually. Our admissions rubric is included in Appendix C. Applicants must complete

a spontaneous writing sample while on campus.

Upon entry, each participant meets with the advisory team to assess their prior

experience and knowledge according to state standards, endorsement competencies,

and performance-based pedagogy assessment/TPA. Students transcripts, professional

experiences, and proficiency portfolios are aligned with such standards to determine the

Individual Plans of Study. Such plans serve as a blueprint of each students customized

and individualized course and field experiences. Please see the sample Plan of Study in

Appendix B.

3.Teacher Development Plan

City University of Seattle is in the process of piloting a customized approach for each

alternative route candidate. This avoids duplication of learning and unnecessary loss of

time or expense. In addition to a packaged tuition basis, the program has built in

processes to waive course and field experiences based upon a candidates prior learning

and/or demonstrated proficiency during the mentored internship. The following

explains how CityU accommodates each candidates knowledge and skills by crafting an

Individual Plan of Study for the field and course components of the alternative routes

preparation program.

Field-based Indicators of Proficiency

CityU uses a minimum of eight standards and performance-based indicators to

determine a candidates teaching proficiency throughout the year-long mentored

internship. It is assumed that the Individual Plan of Study will require a years time in the

field to develop the skills and competencies in using the tools. However, this timeframe

may be changed as explained in the next section. The eight tools address the states

standards for the residency certificate by integrating the endorsement competencies
http://www.cityu.edu/programshttp://www.cityu.edu/programshttp://www.cityu.edu/programshttp://www.cityu.edu/programs


20/27

20

and the knowledge and skills of WAC 181-78A-270. Members of the internship team

evaluate the candidates performance once quarterly, or more frequently if appropriate,

using pre-designated portions of the following standards- and performance-based tools:

1. Performance Tasks: These university-developed tasks address the endorsementcompetencies and the states required knowledge and skills.

2. Performance-based Pedagogy Assessment/Teacher Performance AssessmentThis state-developed tool assesses the instructional skills of the candidate.

3. Essential Dispositions Rubric Establishes the blueprint for Internship.4. Evidenced-based portfolio This is a candidate created tool that demonstrates

proficiency in State Competencies.

5. Before the end of the year-long, mentored internship, an additional evaluationfrom the school principal, or designee, will occur. This fifth tool will be of the

school districts choice, reflecting the performance indicators of certified

teachers.

6. Before candidates are recommended for residency certification, they mustcomplete CityUs capstone project that demonstrates their Positive Impact on

Student Learning. This project meets the states required knowledge and skills.

7. Professional Development Plan Informs continual professional development.8. CityUs Instructional Plan and Unit Plan Evidence of planning, instruction,

assessment and differentiation.

Just as more time and focus can be added to any of the above tools during the year-long

mentorship, it is also true that candidates may, after a half year or more in the field,

accelerate the demonstration of their proficiencies. In that event, a new timeframe will

be written into the Individual Plan of Study.

Open Exit Option

After one-half of a school year or longer of the mentored internship, all members of the

internship team, including the candidate, may agree that the candidate is teaching

proficiently. The team determines if all field-based requirements are complete with the

necessary scores:


2. All criteria on the performance-based pedagogy assessment were met.


attributes and essential dispositions.4. Completed performance portfolio and presented positive impact on student

learning.

If this appears to be the case, a university certification audit is conducted through the


the appropriate paperwork is sent to the Certification Office for a temporary permit and

then to OSPI.


21/27

21

Individual Plan of Study Development

Upon entry into the alternative routes program, candidates and their faculty advisors

will develop an Individual Plan of Study (IPS) to avoid redundancy and to streamline and

individualize the candidates focus and time in the program. The IPS involves several

steps and components. To formulate a plan, the following items must be secured andused:

1. CityUs alternative route course syllabi2. CityUs performance tasks3. States Performance-based Pedagogy Assessment Tool/TPA4. Essential dispositions5. Copies of candidates transcripts, job descriptions, military experience, job

evaluations, self-studies, portfolios, and/or any form of prior learning

documentation

6. The States WAC 180-78A-2707. CityUs Pre-Individual Plan of Study Assessment rubric that follows.

Instructions for Completing the Pre-Individual Plan of Study

Assessment Rubric

Candidates are responsible for making an initial analysis of their potential prior learning

areas that may fulfill program components. This is done by comparing onesdocumented experiences against Universitys courses, performance tasks, the state

performance-based pedagogy assessment tool/Teacher Performance Assessment and

the states knowledge and skills of teachers WACs 180-78A-270.

Select your prior experience and log it on the Pre-IPS rubric below or make atemplate of your own.

Name the document that provides evidence of your relevant prior experienceand attach it to the rubric (copies only).

Describe the outcome(s) the prior learning document addresses. Assess the level at which your prior learning meets the program requirement:

fails to meet, meets, or exceeds.

When you have done this preliminary assessment, request a meeting with your advisor

who will review your prior learning assessments with you. The advisor will determine if

prior learning efforts meet the program requirements. The advisor may also request

additional evidence from the candidate or discuss with the program coordinator

appropriate next steps to take.


22/27

22

Pre-Individual Plan of Study Assessment Chart

Candidates

Documented

Evidence

CUs Course

Syllabus

Component

and Related

WAC component

Candidates

Description of

Prior Learning

Outcome to

Waive Course

Component

Candidate and

City U Advisor

Assessment:

1) Fails to Meet

2) Meets

3) Exceeds

CUs

Performance

Task

Endorsement

Component

Candidates

Description of

Prior Learning

Outcome to

Waive

Performance

Task

Candidate and

City U Advisor

Assessments:

1) Fails to Meet

2) Meets

3) Exceeds

Candidate Advisor Candidate Advisor


23/27

23

WAC 180-78A-270

Foundational Knowledge

(a) The state learning goals and essential academic learning requirements.

(b) The subject matter content for the area(s) they teach, including relevant methodscourse work and the knowledge and skills for each endorsement area for which the

candidate is applying (WAC 181-82).

(c) The social, historical, and philosophical foundations of education, including an

understanding of the moral, social, and political dimensions of classrooms, teaching,

and schools.

(d) The impact of technological and societal changes on schools.

(e) Theories of human development and learning.

(f) Inquiry and research.

(g) School law and educational policy, including laws pertaining to school health and

safety.

(h) Professional ethics.

(i) The responsibilities, structure, and activities of the profession.

(j) Issues related to abuse including the identification of physical, emotional, sexual,

and substance abuse, information on the impact of abuse on the behavior and

learning abilities of students, discussion of the responsibilities of a teacher to report

abuse or provide assistance to students who are the victims of abuse, and methods

for teaching students about abuse of all types and their prevention.

(k) The standards, criteria and other requirements for obtaining the professional

certificate.

Effective Teaching(l) Research and experience-based principles of effective practice for encouraging the

intellectual, social, and personal development of students.

(m) Different student approaches to learning for creating instructional opportunities

adapted to learners from diverse cultural or linguistic backgrounds.

(n) Areas of exceptionality and learning -- including, but not limited to, learning

disabilities, visual and perceptual difficulties, and special physical or mental

challenges.

(o) Effective instructional strategies for students at all levels of academic abilities and

talents with an awareness of the influence of culture and gender on student

learning.(p) Instructional strategies for developing reading, writing, critical thinking, and problem

solving skills.

(q) The prevention and diagnosis of reading difficulties and research-based intervention

strategies.

(r) Classroom management and discipline, including:

(i) Individual and group motivation for encouraging positive social interaction, active

engagement in learning, and self-motivation.


24/27

24

(ii) Effective verbal, nonverbal, and media communication for fostering active inquiry,

collaboration, and supportive interactions in the classroom.

(s) Planning and management of instruction based on knowledge of the content area,

the community, and curriculum goals.

(t) Formal and informal assessment strategies for evaluating and ensuring the

continuous intellectual, social, and physical development of the learner.(u) Collaboration with school colleagues, parents, and agencies in the larger community

for supporting students' learning and well-being.

(v) Effective interactions with parents to support students' learning and well-being.

Professional Development

(w) The opportunity for candidates to reflect on their teaching and its effects on student

growth and learning.

(x) Educational technology including the use of computer and other technologies in

instruction, assessment and professional productivity.

(y) Strategies for effective participation in group decision making.

4. Strategies for Recruiting Candidates from Under-Represented Populations

Previously, CityUs district/university partnership has employed outreach strategies to

recruit diverse cohorts. While these have proved effective and will continue to be used,

we have identified new approaches based on different assumptions about how to

recruit. As Figure 11 shows, there is a shift from informing to involving targeted

individualsand services to assist us. We also intend to involve ourselves by giving service

to local community agencies. By forging relationships and establishing a presence in

communities of color, we hope to see a reciprocal response. Another effort on our part

is to write and promote diversity goals and develop related appropriate materials.

Figure 11: Recruiting Strategies to Increase Program Diversity

Ongoing Recruiting Strategies

Outreach via district administrators, classified staff

Outreach via specialized programs

Outreach to other districts and agencies

Secure local media coverage

Outreach to unions

Outreach to community/technical colleges

New Recruiting Strategies

Develop specialized materials

Tap employee connections to recruit

Ask faculty and teachers of color to recruit

Provide services to community groups, agencies

Use targeted radio, TV, and local newspapers

Enlist community leaders as spokespeople

Create diversity statement and promote


25/27

25

5. The Number of Candidates to Enroll at Each Site

Please refer to Figure 1 on page 3 for the numbers of students we expect at each site.

6. Formal Components of the Mentored Internship Leading to Certification

Elsewhere in this document, we have described many attributes of the mentored

internship. Figure 8 above listed sample formative and summative tools to frame the

mentoring experience and to evaluate a candidates proficiency as a classroom teacher.

What follows next is a sequential accounting of what tools are used and individuals

responsible for evaluation.

Figure 12. Formative and Summative Evaluation Tools of Mentored Internship

Purpose Tools Evaluators

Establishes Blueprint for Internship Essential Dispositions Rubric

Professional Growth Plan

Field Supervisor, Faculty Advisor

Mentor Teacher, Faculty Advisor

Structures Observations Classroom and Student Characteristics

Targeted Experiences List

Field Supervisor, Faculty Advisor

Candidate, Faculty Advisor

Evidence of Planning, Instruction,Assessment, & Differentiation

CityU Instructional Plan & Unit Plan

PPA/TPA

Candidate, Field Supervisor, Mentor Teacher, Faculty Advis

Candidate, Field Supervisor, Mentor Teacher, Faculty Advis

Demonstration of Proficiency in State

Competencies

Performance Tasks

Evidence Based Portfolio

Candidate, Mentor Teacher

Candidate, Faculty Advisor, Mentor Teacher, Peers

Evidence and Demonstration of Student

Achievement

Positive Impact on Student Learning (Capstone Project) Candidate, Mentor Teacher, Field Supervisor, Faculty Advis

Inform Continued Professional Development Professional Development Plan Candidate, Faculty Advisor

Program Plan for Open Exit Option

After one-half of a school year or longer of the mentored internship, the internship

team may determine that the candidate is teaching proficiently. The team determines if

all other requirements have been met. For the internship, such requirements include:


2. All criteria on the performance-based pedagogy assessment/TPA were met.


attributes and essential dispositions.

4. Completed performance portfolio and presented positive impact on student

learning.

If this appears to be the case, a University certification audit is conducted through the



26/27

26

the appropriate paperwork is sent to the State of Washingtons Office of Professional

Practices for a temporary permit. Additional information is available in the Program

Handbook in Appendix B.

3.G. ORGANIZATIONAL CAPACITY

1. Key PersonnelJudy Hinrichs, Dean of the School of Education and Division of Arts and Sciences

Dr. Craig Schieber, Director of Teacher Certification Programs

Sue Seiber, Academic Location Leader

Micki Evans, Stephen Smith, Alternative Route Program Coordinators

Jennifer Stack, Retta Main, Cescilio Chavez, Faculty Advisors

Gary Benedetti, Dale Fortenbacher, Placement Coordinators

Nicole Zeger, Certification Officer

Evette Dean, Kristen Graham, Administrative Assistants

2. Student-Faculty Ratio: 15-13. Prior Experience in Offering Alternative Route Programs:

Citu U has been offering Alternative Route Programs since 2002.

4. Signed Memorandum of Understanding(See Appendix D)3.H PROGAM DELIVERY

CityU recognizes that alternative routes programs must be package-priced with cost

savings for paraprofessionals, career-changers and conditionally certified teachers. Wehave developed meaningful processes to acknowledge students prior experience and to

support their individual rate of progress throughout the program. All of our alternative

routes candidates experience price reductions through several programmatic design

strategies:

1. Performance Tasks These are a hallmark of CityUs alternative routes programsand are required of all Route 1, 2, 3 and 4 students. Currently our regular BAED

students are charged up to $1750* for performance tasks*. Alternative route

candidates have that fee waived.

2.

Student teaching These timeframes are reduced for all four alternative routesmodels based upon prior experience and individual pace and growth. Alternative

route students will take only 8 credits of student teaching greatly reducing their

costs. Further individualized reductions may occur due to the length of time

candidates are in the field.

3. Integrated Bachelors of Arts with Dual Endorsements Route 1 candidates willtake 8 credits of student teaching as opposed to the 20 credits regular BAED

candidates will be taking for an additional reduction in tuition of $2,472*. In


27/27

addition, up to three internship credits may be eliminated based on the prior

experience and endorsement areas for an additional cost savings of up to

$927.00*.

Up to an additional six credits may be waived based on prior experience and

coursework for a possible reduction in tuition of up to $1,854*.

Program Costs for Route 1 Students in the BA ED + Dual Endorsements*

a. Cost for Route 1: $27,910 - $28, 223 based on the Individual Teacher Planb. Cost for Traditional Route: $33, 372c. Length of program: 8 10 quartersd. Projected start date: Summer, 2011e. Projected enrollment: 20 totalf. Location(s): Bellevue, Everett, Tacoma

Program Costs for Route 2, 3, 4 Students *

g. Cost for Alternative Route 2, 3, 4: $12,00 - $14,214 based on the Individual TeacherPlan

h. Cost for Traditional Route: NAi. Length of program: 4 quarters

j. Projected start date: Summer 2011k. Projected enrollment: 15 totall. Location(s): Bellevue and Everett*2010-11 tuition. Tuition may be adjusted for future years.

APPENDICES

Appendix A: District Letters and Contact Information

Appendix B: Unique Program Design ElementsAppendix C: Field Documents and Eligibility/Entry Requirements

Appendix D: Signed Memorandum of Understanding

Date post:	07-Apr-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	julian-a
View:	222 times
Download:	0 times