Closing the Research-to-Practice Gap through Teacher Preparation

  • Published on
    15-Feb-2016

  • View
    30

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

Closing the Research-to-Practice Gap through Teacher Preparation. Marcy Stein, University of Washington Tacoma Diane Kinder, University of Washington Tacoma Bill Rasplica , Franklin Pierce Schools. Overview. Introduction Project Overview Coursework Fieldwork in Partner Schools - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Transcript

<p>Project RTI</p> <p>Closing the Research-to-Practice Gap through Teacher Preparation</p> <p>Marcy Stein, University of Washington TacomaDiane Kinder, University of Washington TacomaBill Rasplica, Franklin Pierce SchoolsOverview Introduction Project OverviewCourseworkFieldwork in Partner SchoolsBenefits &amp; challenges for university/school partnershipsBarriers to accurate evaluation of teacher preparation programs</p> <p> Project Overview325T Grant: Project RTI</p> <p>Purpose: This project will review and redesign the existing dual-track teacher certification program at the University of Washington, Tacoma to better prepare, retain, and support highly-qualified special education teachers who will receive dual licensure in general and special education. </p> <p>3Project RTI ObjectivesObjective 1: Restructure coursework so that all course content is evidence-based and aligns with NCLB, IDEIA, CEC and WA state requirements. Objective 2: Restructure fieldwork to establish a residency program with a [side by side] coaching component to be implemented during the candidates initial year of the dual track program.</p> <p>Objective 3: Develop an on-the-job induction program with a mentoring component to be implemented during the candidates initial year of teaching [and second year of graduate school].4Project RTI Objectives Objective 4: Design and/or improve technically sound formative and summative evaluations of applicants, teacher candidates, and graduates, including candidates implementation of technically sound evaluation of K-8 student performance.</p> <p>Objective 5: Develop collaborative partnerships with The Goodlad Institute for Educational Renewal, other national centers (IRIS), state agencies (OSPI and PSESD), and local school districts including Chief Leschi School. 5Teacher Preparation for Closing the Research-to-Practice Gap: CourseworkInitial Changes During Planning YearCourse sequenceCoordination with EdTPA</p> <p>Teacher Preparation for Closing the Research-to-Practice Gap: Fieldwork</p> <p>7Partner SchoolsSelection procedure PersonnelOrganization Partner School DemographicsHigh Needs and High Achievement2011-122012-132013-14WA Average2013-14Average percent of children receiving FRPM65 %(30-91%) 79%(61-91%) 74%(58-88%)46%Ethnic diversity: Non-White52%67%59% 41%Schools of Distinction2011Central Avenue2012Central Avenue, Gildo Rey, Pioneer2013Gildo Rey, Liberty RidgeWashington Achievement Awards2014Central Avenue, Gildo Rey, ChristensenFranklin Pierce Schools 7,600 students8 elementary schools2 middle schools2 high schoolsAlternative programs72% Receive Free and Reduced Lunch2 schools with over 90%30 Languages30% Mobility Rate12.2% Receive Special Education ServicesNO Priority, Focus or Emerging Schools</p> <p>10Franklin Pierce SchoolsSchoolAchievementBrookdale ElementaryHigh Progress in MathCentral Ave. ElementaryEnglish Language Acquisition4 Time School of DistinctionChristensen ElementaryReading and Math GrowthEnglish Language AcquisitionElmhurst ElementaryEnglish Language AcquisitionJames Sales ElementarySchool of DistinctionHarvard ElementarySchool of DistinctionFranklin Pierce High SchoolHigh Progress</p> <p>1111Moving the Indicators</p> <p>Fixsen et al. 2005</p> <p>Percent of 4th Graders in Special Education Meeting Reading Standard 2009-2013 </p> <p>13Percent of 4th Graders in Special Education Meeting Math Standard 2009-2013</p> <p>14Percent of 4th Graders in Special Education Meeting Writing Standard 2009-2013</p> <p>15Benefits and Challenges of University/School PartnershipsBenefits to University</p> <p>Coherence Coherence CoherenceCollaboration on coursework changesUseful leverage from the community Collaboration in hiring expert university instructional coaches</p> <p>Benefits and Challenges of University/School Partnerships (continued)Benefits to School District</p> <p>Coherence Coherence CoherenceSupport from university professors for implementation of RTIKeithley math example Shared professional development opportunitiesRandy Sprick, Mark Shinn, Daniel Willingham Hiring Advantage</p> <p>Hiring Data2012 Cohort2012 Cohort2013 Cohort2013 Cohort2014 CohortNo.PercentNo.PercentIn Partner Districts (percent of those teaching in the area)13 of 3339%9 of 1947%7 of 10 (70%) of currentlyhiredHigh Poverty Schools(76-100 % FRPL)6 19%632%Moderate Poverty Schools(51-75 % FRPL)2065%947%Average Income (40-50% FRPL, WA average = 46%)26%210%Above Average Income (less than 40% FRPL)310%210%Benefits and Challenges of University/School Partnerships (continued 2)Challenges Inherent in Partnerships</p> <p>CommunicationInappropriate use of teacher candidates (as paras)Coordination and balance among:General and special education placementsFull-time student teaching in spring and testingBoth K-8 spring testing and EdTPASustainability</p> <p>Barriers to Accurate Evaluation of Teacher Preparation Programs</p> <p>Time constraintsAccess to K-8 student data and comparison dataFirst grade DIBELS dataCoordination between preparation and the EdTPA</p> <p>Current EvaluationsPrincipal Satisfaction with PartnershipEmployer Satisfaction with PartnershipTeacher Candidates Satisfaction Both year 1 and year 2EdTPAPrincipals Evaluation of Partnership SatisfactionFrom 1-5: 1=Did not achieve; 3=Satisfactory; 5=Completely achievedMeanInterns received a realistic experience of teaching5.0Interns had opportunities to experience and to apply research to practice5.0Partnership has become a model program for teacher preparation4.2Interns had a stronger experience compared to interns of other programs4.6Partnership has produced well-prepared teachers4.6Principals Evaluation of Partnership Satisfaction (continued)From 1-5: 1=Did not achieve; 3=Satisfactory; 5=Completely achievedMeanCommunication between our school and UWT was effective4.8School refined or developed implementation of RtI4.4Students were helped by having additional support from UWT interns5.0Partnership has provided increased professional growth opportunities for our current teachers4.0Able to access an increased pool of well-prepared teacher candidates4.4What percentage of UWT interns would you be enthusiastic about hiring if you had an opening?53%(range 25-75)</p> <p>From Our Responsibility, Our Promise:High quality [teacher] preparation programs have several characteristics that make a difference in the candidates that they produce for the teaching profession. They are designed such that school districts have a significant role . . .These partnerships are critical to the success of preparation programs, and preparation programs should be held accountable for how well they address the needs of schools and help improve PK-12 student achievement and growth.</p> <p>(2012, Our Responsibility, Our Promise: Transforming Educator Preparation and Entry into the Profession: A Report by the CCSSO, p. 10 [formatting ours])</p> <p>Among the Recommendations for Educator Preparation ProgramsClinical practice in all licensure area programs should begin early and include</p> <p>i. Clear and rigorous clinical training expectations that build the link betweentheory and practice. (See Note 2 at the end of this report.)</p> <p>ii. More school-based models of preparation, such as residency models; school-university professional development school partnerships for teachers, especially in high-need communities; and residency components for principals.</p> <p>iii. Collaboration with school-based partners regarding the criteria for selection of school sites, effective clinical personnel, and site-based supervisingpersonnel. These partnerships create stronger programs and learner- andschool-ready candidates.iv. Selection of trained school-based clinical faculty who are knowledgeable and supportive of the academic content standards for students. School-basedclinical faculty should be trained in supervision, oriented to the supervisoryrole, and evaluated and recognized as effective teachers.Discussion QuestionAt the request of OSEP, the primary discussion question for this session is:</p> <p>how to do professional development schools with effective university/school partnerships.</p>

Recommended

View more >