Upload
kostya
View
39
Download
2
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Documenting Development: Studying a Statewide School/University Partnership. Van Dempsey, Fairmont State University Jaci Webb-Dempsey, West Virginia University Rosalyn Templeton, Marshall University. Context. Challenging geographic and economic landscape - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
Van Dempsey, Fairmont State UniversityJaci Webb-Dempsey, West Virginia UniversityRosalyn Templeton, Marshall University
Documenting Development: Studying a Statewide School/University Partnership
Context Challenging geographic and economic
landscape Mountainous, rural, developing infrastructure Limited resources
Idiosyncratic political landscape Unique cultures of higher education and
public schools Diverse organizational structures of
universities/colleges, partnerships, and teacher preparation programs
Partnerships at varying stages of development
West Virginia Partnerships for Teacher Quality (WVPTQ)
10 Partnerships Bluefield State College Concord University Fairmont State
University Glenville State College Marshall University Shepherd University West Liberty State
College West Virginia State
University WVU - Parkersburg WVU – The Benedum
Collaborative
A common agendaDevelopment of a resource baseEquitable distribution of resourcesShared vision for the work Addressing demands for accountability
Since 2004 Support from the Benedum Foundation, the
WV Department of Education and the Arts, the WV Legislature Creation of statewide network of partnerships Claude Worthington Benedum Foundation funding Development of legislative funding
Development of Board Adoption of targeted NCATE/FIPSE PDS
Standards Framework for developing partnerships Accountability
Addressing accountability Planning session
for WVPTQ Board and stakeholders Jenny Gordon,
Cindy Reed, Lee Teitel
Professional development for partnerships
Targeted NCATE PDS Standards
FIPSE Online PDS Standards Project Pilot
ChallengesLegislative funding commitment
increased, then leveled offBenedum Foundation funding
phased out Increased partnership work,
increased funding requests
WVPTQ Documentation Initiative
Commissioned by primary stakeholders to develop strategies for documenting developmental progress
Supported by funding from the Benedum Foundation
Representative input University faculty/researcher perspective PDS/Partner School faculty perspective Stakeholders
Cross-institutional research team
DesignTargeted PDS/FIPSE Standards
indicators as a framework Developmental perspectivePerspectives of University and PDS
faculty, teacher education candidates
Design Mixed methods Online survey of higher education and
partner school faculty in 10 partnerships
Case studies of 4 partnerships Site visits to the 4 universities/colleges
and a sample of their PDS/partner schools Interviews with higher education and
partner school faculty, teacher candidates Document analysis
Translating standards“AT STANDARD” DESCRIPTIONS (Learning Community, Collaboration, Accountability,
Organization, Roles and Resources, Diversity and Equity ) Standard I: Learning Community - A. Teacher Preparation Developmental Guidelines The PDS recognizes and supports the distinct learning needs of faculty/staff, teacher candidates, students,
parents and community members. Indicator 1: At StandardPDS partners collaboratively integrate PreK-12 instructional content priorities
in the teacher education program and field-based experiences.List of EvidenceSyllabi, Lesson plans, Meeting minutes, Memos/e-mail, Other.
Indicator 2: At StandardIHE and school faculty/staff ensure teacher candidates’ active participation in school and community related projects.List of EvidenceSyllabi, Newsletters, Meeting minutes, Memos/e-mail, Other.(1)
[1] Indicator 3: At StandardTeacher candidates observe, implement, analyze and refine standards-based teaching practices during the extensive internship.List of EvidenceSyllabi, Lesson plans, Reflections, Feedback/evaluation, Other.
Indicator 4: At StandardPDS partners facilitate reflection by collaborating to provide learning experiences that integrate theoretical models with classroom practice.List of EvidenceSyllabi, Lesson plans, Meeting minutes, Memos/e-mail, Other.
Indicator 5: At StandardPDS partners engage in reflection with one another.List of EvidenceReflections, Meeting minutes, Surveys, Memos/email, Other.
Standard I: Learning Community – B. Continuing Professional Development Developmental Guidelines
The PDS recognizes and supports the distinct learning needs of faculty/staff, teacher candidates, students, parents and community members.
[2] Indicator 1: At StandardPDS partners collaboratively create, conduct, and participate in needs-based professional development to improve instruction and positively impact student achievement.List of EvidenceSurveys, In-service/graduate courses, Syllabi, Meeting minutes, Other.
Indicator 2: At StandardPDS partners plan and participate in activities where all school staff is encouraged to support and interact with teacher candidates.List of EvidenceOrientation meetings, Handbook/expectations for mentors, Meeting minutes, Memos/e-mail, Other.
Framework(Organized Around Categories of Developmental Guidelines: Teacher Preparation, Continuing Professional
Development, Research & Inquiry, Student Achievement) Teacher Preparation (1) Standard 1: Learning Community, Indicator 3: Teacher candidates observe, implement, analyze and refine
standards-based teaching practices during the extensive internship. (5) Standard II: Collaboration, Indicator 1: IHE and school faculty collaboratively plan and implement curricula for
teacher candidates to provide authentic learning experiences. (6) Standard II: Collaboration, Indicator 7: IHE teacher education, arts and science, and school faculty collaborate in
planning and implementing content based learning experiences for PDS partners. (11) Standard III: Accountability, Indicator 1: IHE and school faculty collaboratively refine and implement formative and
summative standards based teacher candidate performance assessments. (15) Standard IV: Organization, Roles and Resources, Indicator 1: PDS partners communicate regarding roles,
responsibilities, and operating procedures and use continuous feedback to improve the operation of the PDS. (19) Standard V: Diversity and Equity, Indicator 2: Teacher candidates demonstrate skill in working with diverse
student, parent and staff populations. (20) Standard V: Indicator 3: Teacher candidates demonstrate the ability to work with students with special needs and
collaborate with special educators. Continuing Professional Development (2) Standard I: Learning Community, Indicator 1: PDS partners collaboratively create, conduct, and participate in
needs-based professional development to improve instruction and positively impact student achievement. (7) Standard II: Collaboration, Indicator 3: PDS partners determine professional development needs, plan professional
development activities to meet those needs, implement activities and assess the effectiveness of the implemented activities.
(12) Standard III: Accountability, Indicator 4: PDS partners work together to meet one another’s professional development needs.
(16) Standard IV: Organization, Roles and Resources, Indicator 1: IHEs recognize and reward the PDS work of IHE faculty and staff through organizational structures and incentives that fully integrate PDS work with the mission of the teacher education program.
(21) Standard V: Diversity and Equity, Indicator 2: PDS partners engage in actions to support broad involvement of stakeholders in PDS activities and assess the results of stakeholder involvement.
(3) Standard I: Learning Community, Indicator 1: PDS partners collaboratively engage in inquiry and/or action research.
(8) Standard II: Collaboration, Indicator 1: PDS partners collaboratively examine the action research/inquiry process. (9) Standard II: Collaboration, Indicator 2: PDS partners identify the research/inquiry agenda based on the data-driven
needs of the PDS. (13) Standard III: Accountability, Indicator 1: IHE and school faculty collaboratively develop assessments and feedback
tools to be used for PDS program planning and improvement.
Teacher preparation Partnerships have improved teacher preparation
Increased collaboration and communication between PDS and IHE faculty
Improved clinical experiences Practitioner expertise valued
Teacher Education Coordinator Network Teaching Fellows Professional Development Fellows Clinical instructors
All candidates have placements in PDSs; either for all or select placements Host PDSs PDSs hosting particular courses
Coursework aligned with needs of clinical settings PDS faculty teach courses in their classrooms IHE faculty integrate focus on needs in courses
Teacher preparation Coursework and placements include a
focus on meeting the needs of low-income, at-risk students Candidate case studies PDS professional development integrated into
coursework Teaching standards have been
developed and/or adopted, and are used as part of benchmark decision-making 10 Characteristics INTASC Dispositions
Research and inquiryProfessional development agenda
includes action research AR Fellows TeamsAR professional development, funding for site-
based initiatives coupled with AR projectsPrograms include action research
experiences for teacher candidatesCourseLesson analysis
Research and inquiryCollaborative research efforts
among PDS and IHE facultyIntrinsic and extrinsic motivatorsStudying aspects of teacher
preparationStudying effects of program on
graduates’ beginning teaching experiences
Professional development Partnerships have a positive impact on
professional development More relevant “Field-tested”
Varied strategies for professional development Sharing expertise across schools, between schools
and universities, across partnerships Partnership-wide PD Embedded PD (action research, book studies, etc.)
with PDS, IHE faculty, teacher candidates around PDS needs
On-site courses, customized courses Online PD Teacher candidates developing and offering PD
Professional developmentLeveraging/pooling professional
development fundsMatching funds for grantsCounties/Boards of Education
providing resources to support PD in partnerships
Counties/schools/partnerships sharing resources around a common agenda
Schools pooling funding from a variety of sources
Student achievement Partnerships have a positive impact on student
achievement Improved professional development Improved teaching Improved teacher candidate performance
Professional development targeting areas of student need IHE faculty developing customized PD Focus for partnership PD agenda
Course assignments linked to clinical placements include an analysis of the impact of teaching on student achievement
Contributing to longitudinal study of the effects of tutoring Individual case studies in reading, special education Journal entries/focused reflection Sustained AR projects during fulltime teaching placements
Student achievement Teacher candidates involved in
assessment of student achievement data Candidates as resources for addressing needs of
low-performing students Targeting areas of need for AR projects
Concern with documenting impact on student achievement Studies of the impact of PD initiatives, of
PDS involvement, of teacher candidates, of graduates
Partnership structures and governance
Partnerships have created opportunities for redefining roles Teacher leaders
Collaborative, representative decision making Smaller partnerships: Partnership Council, Advisory
Board Larger partnerships: representative groups for roles,
Executive Committee, systematic PDS input in teacher preparation
Key roles Partnership director – added to existing IHE faculty
responsibilities, new position, or rotating position Liaisons – IHE faculty working with individual schools,
working with particular needs/site-based courses, members of LSICs
Aggregate findings Partnerships are idiosyncratic
Leadership IHE and program structures Negotiation of benefits
Development is not steady progression, renewal is not always simultaneous Loss of key leaders, faculty Political and practical demands
Varying degrees of development across partnerships, across standards Newer partnerships able to “fast track,”
established partnerships need to assess and focus
Next steps Inform stakeholders Install longitudinal documentation
strategiesCollaborative exchange within
networkShare promising practices broadly
Paper and PPT notes available at: http://www.fairmontstate.edu/cea