Date post: | 28-Dec-2015 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | nathaniel-cummings |
View: | 220 times |
Download: | 0 times |
Overview of SCEE’s Initiatives to Increase Teacher and Leader Effectiveness
SCEE Topical MeetingInTASC’s Standards as Driver of Effective Teaching:
Transforming SystemsSan Diego, CA
December 8-9, 2011
Education Workforce Team
Janice Poda Strategic Initiative Director for Education Workforce and Director of
State Consortium on Educator Effectiveness (SCEE)
Kathleen Paliokas Director, Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium
(InTASC)
William Bentgen Program Assistant, Education Workforce
Allie Masterson Program Assistant, Education Workforce
Education Workforce Team
Jon Quam Director, National Teacher of the Year Program
Andy Drewlinger Program Assistant
Education Workforce Team
Full-time Consultants
Mary-Dean Barringer Educator in Residence, Eastern Region + Michigan
Holly Boffy Educator in Residence, Central and Deep South Region
Terry Janicki Educator in Residence, Western Region
Education Workforce Team
Part-time Consultants
Mary Canole
Peter McWalters
Irv Richardson
West Wind Education Policy
Circe Stumbo
Deb Hansen
Valerie Nyberg
Student Success
Growth Opportunities & Supports
High Quality Instruction & Leadership
Educator & System
Accountability
Core Teaching
Standards
Professional Development
Standards
Common Core State
Standards for Students
Data Standards
School Leader
Standards
CCSSO’s Conceptual Framework
College and Career Ready
Students who are college- and career-ready is the larger goal.
Common Core State Standards are a tool for getting us there
They define performance standards for today’s students – the WHAT
HOW we get to readiness is through effective instruction
Teaching standards define what effective instruction looks like
Leadership standards define what school leaders do to support instruction
The goal of professional development is to improve instruction
Common Core State Standards: ADOPTION
Initiated, organized, and led by two national organizations of state-level leaders
National Governors’ Association (NGA)
Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO)
46 States and DC have fully adopted
MN has adopted ELA only
States that have not adopted: AK, NE, TX, VA
State participation is voluntary
Common Core State Standards: CONTENT
Core standards, ONLY in English and mathematics Truly different than current state standards
• “Fewer, Clearer, Higher”• Progressions across grades• English: Literature and Informational text• Math: Basic Numerical Literacy before
Applications CCSS built on College and Career Readiness
(CCR) HS graduation standards set at CCR level Backwards design, from grade 12 to kindergarten
A New Vision of Teaching
• Developmental Continuum
• A Focus on 21st Century Knowledge and Skills
• Personalized Learning for Diverse Learners
• Increased Emphasis on Assessment Literacy
• A Collaborative Professional Culture
• New Leadership Roles for Teachers and Administrators
The Learner and LearningStandard #1: Learner Development Standard #2: Learning Differences Standard #3: Learning Environments ContentStandard #4: Content Knowledge Standard #5: Application of Content
Groupings of Standards
Groupings of Standards
Instructional PracticeStandard #6: Assessment Standard #7: Planning for Instruction Standard #8: Instructional Strategies Professional ResponsibilityStandard #9: Professional Learning and Ethical Practice Standard #10: Leadership and Collaboration
Theme Knowledge Disposition Performance
*Collaboration 3(g), 3(h), 3(i), 5(p), 10(f), 1(k), 3(k), 3(l), 3(nm), 1(c), 3(a), 3(b), 3(d), 5(f), 6(b),
10(h) 5(v), 6(m), 7(l), 8(s), 9(l), 7(a), 8(b), 8(c), 9(a-c), 9(e), 10(a),
10(k), 10(l) 10(b), 10(c), 10(d)
*Communication 3(i), 3(j), 5(o), 6(j), 8(o) 3(o), 3(n), 6(o), 8(u) 3(b), 3(e), 5(e), 5(f), 6(c), 8(h),
8(i), 8(j), 10(e)
*Creativity/innovation 5(k), 5(q), 8(l), 8(o) 3(m), 5(v) 5(d), 5(g), 5(h), 6(g), 8(k), 9(f)
*Critical thinking, problem solving
4(h), 5(j), 5(n), 6(k), 8(l), 8(n)
4(n), 5(s), 8(r) 4(b), 4(c), 5(a), 5(b), 5(d), 5(g),
5(h), 6(d), 8(f), 8(g), 8(k), 9(b)
Cultural competence
1(g), 2(i), 2(l), 2(m), 3(i), 4(k), 5(r), 7(f), 8(m)
3(n), 4(m), 5(v), 5(w), 7(f), 8(t),
2(f), 3(e), 5(h), 9(c)
Key Cross-Cutting Themes in Updated InTASC Standards
InTASC Teaching Standards Linked to Common Core Students Standards
InTASC Teaching Standards
Standard 5:CCSS Mathematics
Policy Implications
Preparation Program approval/accreditation as leverage
Clinical practice
Licensing/Certification Tiered licensure to reflect developmental continuum
Renewal requirements based on performance v. credits
Ongoing Professional Learning
Teacher and Leader Evaluation – “effectiveness”
State Consortium on Educator Effectiveness (SCEE)
Created in fall 2010Purpose is to help states
Transition from a policy environment of highly qualified to highly effective
Develop coherent standards-based educator effectiveness SYSTEMS (Preparation, Licensure, Professional Development, Evaluation)
SCEE Summit and Topical Meetings
2nd SCEE National Summit on Educator Effectiveness will be held May 2-4 in Seattle, Washington
TBD: Topical meeting on teacher and leader preparation
Preparation of Teachers and Leaders
General consensus is that teachers and leaders are not being prepared for today’s learning environments
Don’t have the depth of knowledge of content or pedagogy to take students to higher levels of learning
• Common Core State Standards
• Assessment literacy
Aren’t being prepared as facilitators of learning– still sage on the stage approach
Preparation of Teachers and Leaders
Using state levers to improve educator preparation:
Recommendations for licensure/certification
• What assessments are being used to make determination for licensure/certification?
• Are they aligned with the state’s expectations?
Program approval v. national accreditation
• National accreditation is voluntary
• Program approval can be redesigned to set expectations for candidates who are recommended for licensure/certification
Professional Learning
Professional learning communities
Embedded in the teacher’s work day
Focused on teacher’s current work
Follow up in the classroom
Observe master teacher teaching/facilitating instruction
Team teach with a master teacher
Have master teacher observe teaching and give feedback
Individual professional learning available 24/7
Online resources
Self-assessments
Evaluation and Support
Evaluation is a major focus in most states
Many states are selecting/adapting models currently available
TAP
Marzano
Danielson
Doug Reeves
Val-Ed
Smorgasbord (allow districts to choose based on state criteria)
Evaluation and Support
Sources of evidence
Classroom observations
Portfolios
Surveys
Student assessment and performance data
Student Achievement Issues Related to Teacher and Leader Evaluation
Methodology to determine growth/absolute achievement
Technical issues
Fairness
Reliability (consistency)
Validity (confidence)
Comparability (tested v. non-tested grades and subjects)
Pearson Foundation and CCSSO Partnership
CCSSO has sponsored the National Teacher of the Year Program since 1952 Former Teachers of the Year want to have
input into policy and decisions made
Some former teachers of the year will work with the Pearson Foundation and CCSSO to develop video clips that will illustrate the InTASC standards
Pearson Foundation and CCSSO Partnership
Will involve former Teachers of the Year in international education via
Study of the education system in other countries
Participation in the International Summit on Excellence in the Teaching Profession
Regional meetings or electronic means of sharing lessons learned from international success stories
For More Information
Please go to:
• www.ccsso.org/intasc• www.ccsso.org/scee• www.ccsso.org/Resources/Progra
ms/Implementing_the_Common_Core_Standards_(ICCS).html
• www.caepsite.org