Education Professional Standards Board

February 17, 2007

EPSB Vision Statement

Every public school teacher and administrator in Kentucky is an accomplished professional committed to helping all children become productive members of a global society.

The Education Professional Standards Board promotes high levels of student

achievement by establishing and enforcing rigorous professional standards for preparation, certification, and responsible and ethical behavior of all professional educators in Kentucky.

EPSB Mission Statement

Every approved educator preparation program meets or exceeds all accreditation standards and prepares knowledgeable, capable teachers and administrators who demonstrate effectiveness in helping all students reach educational achievement.

EPSB Goal 1

Redesign of Master’s Programs

Purpose b

“An efficient and effective public school system must provide equal educational opportunities for all children, regardless of race, gender, geographic location, diverse learning need, or the financial standing of family or community. Kentucky schools are accountable for closing the achievement gaps that exist among demographic groups."

from Kentucky Supreme Court 1990

Charge

Kentucky schools are charged with reaching proficiency by 2014 with school district administrators and teachers held accountable for rigorous performance standards tied to annual assessments.

Charge

Educators need rank change/master’s degree programs that have rigor and relevancy and equip them to move student learning to higher levels. The master’s degree programs should not only be concerned with transmission of knowledge but should facilitate involvement in the processes by which knowledge is attained.

Why Redesign is Necessary

● EPSB requirement for Rank II● Research on value of having a Master’s degree● Need for additional professional pathways● Need for advanced skills

New Teacher survey results Assessment of student learning Use of technology Differentiated instruction

Master’sProgram Design

● Collaboration with districts in design of programs● Collaboration with Arts and Science faculty on

design of programs● Focus on student achievement● Differentiated program based upon candidate

interests and needs● Include endorsements/enriched permissions● Establish professional learning communities● Effective utilization of assessment data

Master’sProgram Design

● Support job-embedded professional experiences for candidates

● Permits multiple career pathways● Address ease of transferability across institutions in

the program approval process● Utilize mixed delivery methods that might include:

Face-to-Face Workshops/seminars/symposia On-line or distance learning Practicum Weekend/night District locations Exemplary practitioners

• Evaluate high-quality research on student learning

• Emphasize differentiated learning and classroom management

• Emphasize candidate expertise in content knowledge, as applicable

• Emphasize reflections that inform practice

• Emphasize leadership development

• Provide clinical experiences that enhance student achievement

• Align curriculum with state and national standards and Core Content/Program of Studies

Master’s Program Curriculum

Continuous Assessment

Continuous monitoring and evaluation of candidate progress which demonstrates the ability to impact P-12 student learning which might include:

• Evaluate practicum/clinical experiences

• Conduct and/or design research projects

• Develop a culminating performance-based assessment event (such as a TPA-like project)

Recommendations

Committee Recommendations:

• Combine the New and Experienced Teacher Standards into one set of Kentucky teacher standards

• Continue to grant rank changes through the 5th and 6th year options

• Continue to grant initial principal certification at the master’s level

• Require all advanced programs for rank change to be resubmitted for program review and approval

• Note: Committee members believe that out-of-state institutions should be held to the same standards as in-state institutions

EPSB Policy Issues

Developing out-of-state online program regulations

Updating of “New to Kentucky” Teachers’ Online Module

Addressing ease of transferability across institutions in the program approval process

QUESTIONS AND DISCUSSION

Education Leadership Redesign

Mission

To collaborate with Kentucky’s key educational partners for redesign of the preparation and professional support of school and district educational leaders: resulting in a seamless, career development process with a clear focus on improving student learning, growth, and achievement.

Purpose

The education leadership programs in Kentucky need to ensure future and current leaders demonstrate the proper dispositions and are tooled with the skills necessary to lead schools to high levels of achievement. Current leadership must not only manage the daily events of the school, but they are more importantly charged with ensuring their students have access to equitable and quality education.

Resolution

House Joint Resolution 14

(See Hand-Out)

Education Leadership Redesign

Work Groups

Preparation Programs

Professional Development

Induction & Working Conditions

Doctoral Programs

Preparation Programs Work Group

Recruitment and selection policies that ensure persons with high leadership potential and talent are being prepared to lead Kentucky schools

Strong emphasis on developing essential competencies necessary for improving the safe and efficient management of schools and increasing student achievement

Coherent goals, learning activities, and assessment around a shared set of values, beliefs, and knowledge about effective administrative practices that are researched based

Preparation Programs

Strong clinical training options throughout the programs that include extensive collaboration between postsecondary education institutions and school districts

Relevant field-based experiences

Instruction and the improvement of student learning, growth, and achievement

Problem-based learning which addresses state and national leadership standards

Preparation Programs

Mid-Year Report

● Candidates will develop an admission portfolio that contains the following:

Letters of recommendation from the applicant's principal or supervisor (Each local superintendent should collaborate with universities to establish requirements for the principal’s recommendation)

Copies of the candidate’s most recent performance appraisal (Districts and universities should collaborate on the development of the performance appraisal)

Evidence of knowledge of curriculum, instruction and assessment (Districts and universities should collaborate on what evidence shall be required)

Evidence of leadership and management potential, including most recent accomplishments

Preparation Programs

Mid-Year Report

Personal statement of the candidate’s career goals and how the program would assist the candidate in meeting those goals

Evidence of leadership and management potential, including most recent accomplishments

Educator preparation programs permit candidates with a baccalaureate or master’s degree to enter the program at a fifth year level with three years’ minimum teaching experience or demonstrated abilities

Preparation Programs

Mid-Year Report

Candidates will begin the practicum upon admission into the education preparation program and will be allowed 18-20 days a year to participate in the practicum

A mentor (who consults with the school to determine how to best meet the needs of the candidate) will be assigned for beginning candidates

The districts should be reimbursed for the utilization of a substitute teacher while a candidate participates in a practicum

Professional Development Work Group

Strong emphasis on developing the essential competencies necessary for improving the safe and efficient management of schools and increasing student achievement

A standards and research base with coherent goals, learning activities, and assessment around a shared set of values, beliefs, and knowledge about effective administrative practices

Instruction and the improvement of student learning, growth, and achievement

Problem-based learning while addressing state and national leadership standards

Professional Development

Provisions for high-quality professional development that strengthens current school leaders’ capacity to work with faculty in changing school and classroom practices to increase student learning, growth, and achievement

Alignment with state policies and NCLB for high-quality professional development

Recommendations for the establishment of an executive leadership academy for professional development focusing on the improvement of student learning, growth, and achievement by developing the instructional leadership and management expertise of Kentucky’s principals, especially for those in low performing schools/districts

Professional Development

Mid-Year Report

The focus is on a number of key issues:

• Accountability and quality control for professional development (PD) for administrators

• The Leadership Academy

• Standards for practice/statement of eligibility

• Recommendations in the areas of EILA approval process

• Alignment of PD standards to key principal competencies

• Creation of a data warehousing/tracking system to monitor/assess the relationship of PD being completed and the impact on student achievement

Induction and

Working Conditions

Work Group

Strong emphasis on developing the essential competencies and working conditions necessary for improving the safe and efficient management of schools and increasing student achievement

Field-based internships that incorporate problem-based learning and utilize cohort groups and mentors whenever possible and appropriate

Extensive collaboration between postsecondary

education institutions and school districts

Induction and

Working Conditions

Components for newly hired and other leaders which provide both collegial support and individual mentoring with documented evidence of the new principals’ or other education leaders’ abilities to focus on high levels of student learning, growth, and achievement

Requirements for demonstration of leadership competencies in real-life situations

Evaluative components based on state and national standards

Induction and

Working Conditions

Identify postsecondary education institution and school district resources that can be utilized to make educational leadership programs highly effective

Collection of information through surveys or other means

Analysis of current working conditions, detailing strengths and areas of concern

Suggested instructional leadership strategies which focus on student learning, growth and high achievement

Principal Induction Program Structure

YEAR ONE(principals & full-time assistant principals)

“Student-Principal” experience Individual acts as a principal under supervision

Strong focus on how to be an effective evaluator & on instructional leadership

Establish a structured support systemWritten plan reflecting how new principal will access resources such

as people, technology, literature, etc. to assist with problem-solving & professional growth

Principal Induction Program Structure

YEAR ONE(principals & full-time assistant principals)

A team-building component The principal formally identifies strengths & abilities of teachers &

other administrators, & develops an understanding of how they will contribute to his/her role as principal

Participation in an institute or symposium New & beginning principals share ideas, debrief, & build networks

Cohort Composed of 3-4 other principals going through the induction process

Principal Induction Program Structure

YEAR ONE(principals & full-time assistant principals)

Mentorship With an approved mentor. One (1) visit per month

Instructional modules Offered in a variety of media (e.g. online, face-to-face) that provide

content & instruction based on activities correlated with the rhythm of the school (e.g. budget, state assessment analysis) and other Critical Success Factors

Principal Induction Program Structure

YEAR TWO(principals)

AssessmentThree (3) observations per year by each committee member (mentor,

superintendent, & administrator educator) of current practices and professional growth plan

Intern Work SampleDocumentation illustrating successful implementation of Critical

Success FactorsPGPSample SBDM agendas & minutesCSIPSample teacher evaluationsSchool budgetSample student disciplinary interventions

Principal Induction Program Structure

YEAR TWO(principals)

Committee meetingsThree (3) times per year with intern to

discuss standards, observations, & work sampleevaluate work performance formulate a PGP to work on items of concern

Trainings, PD, & book studiesSuggested as part of the PGP at each observation cycle

EvaluationFinal determination of Induction success or repetition of the Induction

process for one year

Determine how P-12 student performance can be used to assess a principal’s performance.

KPIP committee uses principal’s Individual Growth Plan (IGP) generated in the district to focus its coaching efforts with the principal intern.

University and LEA staff will co-design/revise & co-deliver instructional modules to all Year 1 & 2 induction interns that correlate with the rhythm of the school.

Principal Induction

Other Tasks / Activities

Principal Induction

Other Tasks / Activities

Local district evaluation and the KPIP process should inform one another

Selection of principal interns is critical and there should be collaboration and agreement between the superintendent and SBDM Council.

Develop a university reward system for participation as an administrator educator

Doctoral Programs Work Group

Strong demonstration of need

Evidence of high quality content

Clear demonstration of collaboration among existing doctoral programs and comprehensive universities

Evidence of alignment of high quality masters and principal preparation programs

Doctoral Programs Work Group

Mid-Year Report

Agreed that the most important point to consider is that any educational doctorate programs must align with the work of the larger task force regarding redesign of the principal preparation programs in Kentucky and ongoing work by the EPSB in the redesign of masters’ programs in the state

Reviewed and discussed various position papers and research articles regarding this area

Discussed the importance of “need” when establishing these programs in the future

Began the formulation of criteria for what constitutes “need”

Discussed various delivery models and their relationship to current “principal academies” in the state

Doctoral Programs Work Group

Mid-Year Report Settled on three major tasks:

Designing criteria for the best program design (to be viewed in light of eventual recommendations from other work groups)

Designing outcomes and assessments for potential graduates of these programs

Constructing a survey as a basis for determining need to be administered to potential students in such programs and potential employers

Finalized survey questions and sent to UK Survey Center for formatting assistance

Refined survey based on input from UK Survey Center and subcommittee members

Doctoral Programs Work Group

Mid-Year Report

Solicited EPSB purchase of survey software; formulated target groups of those with administrative certification (potential candidates) and superintendents SBDM members, and state school board chairs (potential employers)

Launched survey to potential doctoral program candidates on 1/10/07 and potential employers on 1/17/07

Closed survey on February 2 with an strong response rate (1614 respondents to the Potential Applicants Survey and 384 to the Employer Survey

Reviewed responses and formulated plans for constructing the subcommittee’s final report

QUESTIONS AND DISCUSSION