Standards and Accountability Implementation, Why, How ... · Standards and Accountability Implementation, Why, How, Where: Teachers’ Perceptions E. Jane Irons, Nancy L. Carlson,

�

Standards and Accountability Implementation, Why, How, Where: Teachers’ Perceptions

E. Jane Irons, Nancy L. Carlson, Hollis Lowery-Moore, and Vicky R. FarrowLamar University

AbstractWith current considerations for reauthorization of the 2001 No Child Left Behind Act, national attention remains focused upon public education student outcomes. The purpose of this manuscript was threefold: to review the historical background of the standards reform movement; to discuss a research project to redesign program content and align standards in an EC-12 Special Education certification preparation program; and to discuss survey results concerning pre-service and experienced teacher perceptions about standards and accountability. Results suggest that standards-based accountability may be impacting teacher behavior with respect to student learning. University preparation programs are aligning state, NCATE, and professional association standards in teacher preparation programs. Both pre-service and experienced teachers appear to comprehend the purpose and implementation of standards within curriculum lesson planning and practice. Further research appears warranted to follow up on the impact of standards-based accountability training on pre-service teachers after they have entered the teaching profession. Further, empirical research appears warranted to investigate full implementation of standards-based accountability in field settings.

Introduction

Standards-basedaccountabilityemergedasamajorschoolreformagendaduringthe�990s.Theunderlyingconsiderationformingthephilosophyforpolicywasthateducatorswouldchangetheirbehaviorasaresultoffederalandstatemandatesfocusingupontherequirementsforestablishinghigher

Journal of Educational Research & Policy Studies

�standardsandgreateraccountabilityforstudentachievement(Cuban,�007;Hoff &Manzo, �007). Currently, standards form the essential underlyingframeworkforteacherpreparationprograms.Teachereducatorsandpublicschoolteachersholdpivotalpositionsinimplementingstandardsinprogramdevelopment,programimplementation,andinprogramevaluationaswell(Byrd&Adamy,�00�;Selke&Alouf,�004;Wise&Leibbrand,�00�). Withcurrentpublicattentionfocuseduponthe�007reauthorizationoftheNoChildLeftBehindAct(NCLB),therehavebeensuggestionsaboutincreasingtherigorofstatestandardsandtestingbylinkingthestatestandardstostandardssetatthenationallevel(Olson,�007).Anumberofstrategieswere offered for implementing state standards.Three appeared pertinentforschooldistrictimplementation.Instructionalplanningtimewasneededfor teachers todevelop learning activities associatedwith state standards.Benchmarktestingwasconsideredimportanttoassessformativeprogress,andprofessionaldevelopmentwasconsiderednecessaryforbothfacultyandstaff(O’Shea,�005). This manuscript reviews the history of the standards-based reformmovement.Aresearchstudyforthepurposeofredesigninganearlychildhoodthrough��th grade special education teacher certification program demonstrated standards alignment in teacher preparation.Additionally, survey resultsidentified current teacher candidate and public school teacher perceptions concerningtheimplicationsofintegratingtherequiredstateandlocaldistrictstandards-basedaccountabilitypolicies.

Literature Review

Teaching Standards: Historical Overview According toGratz (�000), standards had twopurposes. First, therewasthenationalconcernthatAmericawaslosingeconomiccompetitivenessbecauseofhigherinternationalstudentachievementlevels,particularlyintheareasofscienceandmathematics.Second,therewasnationalconcernaboutthegrowingstudentachievementgapbetweenwhitemiddleandupperclassstudentsanddisadvantagedstudents.Consequently,statestandardshavebeendevelopedtoincreaseachievementlevelexpectationsforallstudents. Thehistoryofstandardsbeganasearlyas�954withtheformulationoftheNationalCouncilforAccreditationforTeacherEducation(NCATE).Early

Fall 2007 / Volume 7, Number 2

�teacheraccreditationstandardsfocuseduponprocessrequirementssuchasthenumberofstudentsassignedtoalaboratoryschooloruponcompletionofstaterequiredforms.Althoughnostudentlearningoutcomeswererequired,NCATE collected information describing teaching methods and strategiesusedbystudentteachers(Wise&Leibbrand,�00�). AccordingtoWiseandLeibbrand(�00�),inthe�970sNCATEfocuseduponcurriculaforbeginningandadvancedteacherpreparation.Professionalorganizationsprovidedsubjectmattercontentguidelines.Teacherevaluationwas requiredat theendof thepreparationprogramandafterentering theteachingprofession.However,nocollaborationbetweenteacherpreparationprogramsandthepublicschoolswasrequired(Wise&Leibbrand,�00�). After�987,NCATEredesignedstandards.Collegesofeducationwererequiredtoshowthat their teacherpreparationprogramswerebaseduponcurrent research and best practices. NCATE accredited institutions wereexpectedtouseprogramstandardsfromprofessionalassociationsforcontentanddeliverymethods.Diversitywasaddressedonlyforstudentandfacultyqualifications (NCATE, 1990). Inthe�990s,NCATEstandardsforteacherpreparationwerestrengthenedtoalignwiththecurrentfocusuponachievementoutcomes.In�99�NCATEoutlined a continuum that linked teacher preparation with professionaldevelopment requirements. In�995NCATEshifted their focus to studentteachercandidateperformanceoutcomes.Thisshiftforcedcollaborationamonginstitutions of higher education, state departments of education standardsboards, and the teaching field. In 2000, NCATE ratified a performance-based accreditationsystemandstandards.Teachercandidateswerenowexpectedtodemonstratemasteryofbothcontentknowledgeandpedagogy(NCATE,�00�).

Standards-Evaluation and Accountability Currently, the standards movement focuses upon evaluation andaccountabilityforinstitutionsofhighereducation.NCATErequiresuniversitiesandcollegestoimplementasystemforevaluationofteachercandidatesatentry,duringtheirprogram,andagainatexit.Benchmarksandevaluationsmostclearlydenoteacceptableandunacceptableperformancelevels.Teachereducatorsareexpectedtodemonstrateavarietyofteachingmethodsinadditiontolecture(Wise&Liebbrand,�00�).


4 Tofurtheralignteacherpreparationaccountabilitywithstudentoutcomes,the�9memberCommissiononHigherEducationReformhasrecommendeddevelopmentofastudentdatabase.Thisdatabase, tobeknownasa“unitrecord,”wouldtrackindividualstudentprogress.Itwouldallowcomparisonsto be made among institutions of higher education teacher preparationprograms(Marklein,�006).

Mixedreviewsaboutimplementingstandards-basedaccountabilityhavesurfaced.Authorshaveexpressedconcernsaboutthewidedisparityfoundamong states in judging student proficiency. Cavanagh (2007) suggested that statesdeveloptestsandsetachievementlevelsbaseduponwherethemajorityoftheirstudentswerelikelytoscoreratherthanestablishinghighergoalsforallstudents.Incontrast,Hoff(�007)reportedthattestscoreswereontheriseinmoststatesafterresearchersexaminedthreeyearsofdata.Whiletherewasno definitive connection to the current No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act, HoffandManzo(�007)suggestedthatsomeindividualswerebeginningtonoticethateducatorswerechangingtheirbehaviorasaresultofpoliciesthatbeganinthe�990srequiringhigherstandardsandgreateraccountabilityineducation.

Aligning Standards in Teacher Preparation: A Research Study

Anexampleofprogramredesigntoalignstandardsandobtaincommunityinputfollows.

Purpose and Process for Research Project ThepurposeofthisresearchwastoredesignanEC-��specialeducationteacher certification program. State, NCATE, and the Council of Exceptional Children (CEC) standards were addressed.The process for this projectfollowedaresearchmodelandincludedthefollowingcomponents:instrumentdevelopment, respondents and data collection, data analysis and findings, and programredesign.

Instrument Development Contentfromthreedifferentuniversityspecialeducationdegreeprogramsfor teacherpreparationwas reviewedand thecorecontentwasutilized todevelopaneedssurvey.ALikert-typescalewasusedtoaskparticipantsto


5rateeachcontentitemas(�)leastimportantto(5)mostimportant.Asampleof Part II of the survey may be found in theAppendix.Two open-endedquestionssolicitedparticipantconcernsandrecommendationsforprogramimprovement.

Respondents and Data Collection Toensurecommunityparticipation,thelocaleducationservicecenterwasaskedtopartnerwiththeuniversityandaseniorfacultymemberfromtheDepartmentofEducationLeadershipservedastheprincipalinvestigator.Servicecenterpersonneldisseminatedtheneedssurveytoall��districtsintheirarea.Allofthe�50schoolswereinvitedtoparticipate.Twohundredtwenty-three individuals responded. Most of the responses were receivedfrommiddleschools(49%).Twenty-fourpercentrespondedfromelementaryschools and �5% from high schools. Over 4�% of the respondents weregeneraleducationteachers,while��%werespecialeducationteachers.Schooladministratorscomprised�7%oftherespondents.Eighty-fourpercentoftherespondentswereCaucasianfemales.

Data Analysis Afactoranalysiswasusedtoidentifypatternsofintercorrelationsamongitems to identify common strands (Kachigan, �986).The total amount ofvariance was accounted for in five strands. A correlation analysis was used to determinetotalinstrumentreliabilityaswellasthereliabilityofeachofthefive strands. Table 1 shows each of the specific strands with their associated Cronbach’s alpha reliabilityquotient.Total instrument reliabilitywas .9�.Strand �, titled Child Development/Classroom Management had a weakreliabilityof.65.Thismaybeexplainedbythevariedcontentthatwasplacedtogether in this strand because it did not fit into other strands and the content hadtobeincludedintheprogram.Strand�,CommunicationandCommunity,alsoshowsaverymoderatereliabilityof.74.SimilartoStrand�,contentnotnecessarilyalikesuchaslibraryandsupplementalmaterialwasplacedwithcontentfocusingondirectcommunicationandcommunitycontent.Allotherstrandshadhigherreliabilities. Survey findings were reported where responses clustered around common themes,calledstrands.Thestrandratedmostimportantbyrespondentswaschilddevelopmentandclassroommanagement,whilethestrandwiththeleastimportant


6Table�Survey Instrument and Strands with Reliability

Strands Reliability

Strand�–ChildDevelopment/ClassroomManagement

Contentincluded:learningtheories,childdevelopment,adolescentdevelopment,integratingtechnology,classroomenvironmentandmanagement,classroomassessmentmethods,disciplinetheoryandmanagement,behaviormanagement-specialeducation

.65

Strand�–CommunicationandCommunity

Contentincluded:childguidance,parentcommunication,diversityincontemporaryfamilies,libraryandsupplementalmaterial.

.74

Strand�–SpecialEducationApplications

Contentincluded:studentteachinginspecialeducation,roleofspecialeducationteacher,instructionalstrategies–specialeducation,assessinglearningdisabilitiesstudents–TAKS,assessingbehaviordisorderedstudents–TAKS,characteristicsofmentalretardationandseverephysicalhandicap,characteristicsoflearningdisabilities,characteristicsofbehaviordisorder,transition–alllevels,lowincidencedisabilities–deaf,blind,multi,andautism,implementingbehaviorplans,IEPS,andaccommodations,lessonplanningforspecialeducation.

.86

Strand4–ContentandAssessment

Contentincluded:roleofgeneraleducationteacherwithspecialeducationstudents,earlychildhoodcontent,reading,math,science, social studies, PE/health, fine arts, music, art, tests andmeasurementstheory,statisticalapplications.

.88

Strand5–LegalIssues

Contentincluded:stateandfederalspecialeducationmandates,ethicsconcerningideaimplementation,healthandsafetyissues in special education, confidentiality issues, and FERPA.

.87

TotalInstrumentReliability .9�


7ratingwascommunicationandcommunity.Forty-fourdistrictsrespondedtotheopen-endedquestions.Contentareasdeemedcriticalbyspecialeducationteachersweretheneedforspecialeducationcandidatestohaveexperiencesatavarietyofcampuseswithdifferentagegroupsandspecialeducationsettingsbeforestudentteaching(�4%).Twenty-sevenpercentofrespondentsstatedthatuniversityfacultyneededmorecollaborationwithsite-basedpersonnel,particularlywithprincipalsandsupervisingteachers.Inaddition,��%statedthat special education candidates needed more hands-on experiences ininclusionclassrooms.Recommendationsmadebytherespondentsforprogramimprovementsuggestedmoretrainingforgeneraleducationteachersinspecialeducationareas(��%).Additionally,studentteachingexperiencesneededtobelonger,atleastonefullsemester(�6%). AfocusgroupwasheldsothatrepresentativesfromstakeholdergroupscoulddiscusstheirrecommendationsforEC-��specialeducationpreparation.Thefocusgroupincludedsixteenparticipantsrepresentingspecialeducationdirectors, principals, general education and special education teachers, aneducationaldiagnostician,andacounselor.Additionally,universityprofessorsrepresenting Pedagogy, Special Education, and Educational Leadershippreparationprogramsattended. Focus group responses were unanimous among all �6 participants.Emerging trends indicateda changing role for special education teachers.Training issues supported the literature in that special education teachersmust be highly qualified through training, experience, and certification in bothcontentandpedagogyareas.Collaborationandrelationshipsemergedascomponentsforsuccessintoday’sclassrooms.Table�showsthequestionsusedfordiscussionandtheresponsesprovidedbythefocusgroupmembers.

Program Redesign Standards Alignment AfourmemberprogramdevelopmentcommitteewasappointedbytheDeanoftheCollegeofEducationandHumanDevelopment.Thechargegiventothiscommitteewasfourfold:�)toreviewfeedbackfromthesurveyandfocusgroupmeeting;�)tostudyEC-��SpecialEducationprogramstandardsfromthestateaswellasPraxisandCouncilforExceptionalchildren(CEC)standardsforalllevelspecialeducation;�)todevelopamatrixincorporatingNCATE, CEC, and state standards for current courses; and 4) to identifygapsanddesignnewcoursesneeded.Theprogramcommitteemetonseveral


8Table�Focus Group Questions and Summary of ResultsQuestion 1: What is the role of the mentor teachers during student teaching in field-based settings?

Resultssummary:• Schoolprincipalsneedmoredirectioninselectingmentors.• Majorroleofmentorisbuildingtrustingrelationships.• Mentorteachersneedtrainingonhowtomentor.• Needforcurrentlawsandstrategies.• Moresupervisionfromuniversityfacultyforbothmentorandmentee.

Question 2: Are you familiar with the MAST training? Tell us what you see happening in successfulstudentteaching.

Resultssummary:• A different kind of mentor training for teachers with alternative certification is needed.• MASTtrainingaddressesissuesofmentortrainingandshouldbeimplementedthroughoutall

field experience programs.

Question�:Tellusaboutgeneraleducationcontentareasnecessaryforspecialeducationteachers.What would be the areas and levels of emphasis?

Resultssummary:• Generaleducationteachersmusthavecourseworktodealwithspecialneedsstudents.

Specialeducationteachersshouldhavethemostemphasisonlowincidenceandstudentswithbehaviordisorders.

• Reading,math,andclassroommanagementisessentialforallteachers.• NCLB highly qualified requirements versus special education certification must be addressed.• SpecialeducationteachermusthavetheabilitytoalignIEPswithgradelevelTexasEssential

KnowledgeandSkills(TEKS)throughvariousinstructionalactivitiesandbeabletocommunicatethistothegeneraleducationteacher.

• Generaleducationteachersmustrecognizetheirresponsibilityforeducatingstudentswithdisabilities.

Question4:Whatspecialeducationexperiencesarecritical for special education teachers?

Resultssummary:• Howtokeepgooddatacollectionanddocumentation.• Knowledgeofvarioushandicappingconditionsandtheircharacteristics.• KnowledgeofIEPmeetingproceduresandpaperworkrequirements.• Howtoorchestratemultiplesubjects/IEPsatsametime.• HowtodevelopandfollowBIPswithappropriatestrategiesandpositivebehaviorsupports.• Awarenessoflegalmandatesandissues.• On-goingformativeassessmentandhowassessmentdrivesinstruction.• Familiaritywithresearch-basedmethodologiesandpractices.


9Table�(continued)

Question5:Whatbackgroundisneededintestsandmeasurementsforinstructionalsupportofstudents in regular classrooms by special education teachers?

Resultssummary:• Howtointerpretinformaltestdata,documentationandotherinformation.• WritinguseableassessmentresultsthatmeasureIEPprogress.• Howtointerpretinterventionstodetermineifaspecialeducationreferralisrequired.• Knowandutilizebasicstatisticalterminology.• Awarenessofwhatdataisavailable,howtointerpretanduseit,andtobeabletodisaggregate

data.

Question6:Whatbackgroundisneededinlegalissuesandstate/federalmandatesforsuccessfulSpecial Education Teachers?

Resultssummary:• Needworkingknowledgeofstate/federalmandatesandwheretogotokeepcurrent.• Haveknowledgeofdueprocess,grievanceprocedures,parentrights,andmediation.• Knowledgeofstudentdisciplineproceduresandissues.• Knowledgeoftransitionplanning.• Recognizingthattheroleofaspecialeducationteacherischangingtomorecollaborativewith

generaleducationteachersratherthanonlyacontentteacher.Mustsellideaofinclusionandacceptsachangerole.

• Thereisaneedforpracticalexperiencethroughoutentireteacherpreparationprogram.

occasionstocompletethischarge.Communityfeedbackonprogramcontentand field-based applications were incorporated. A matrix was developed aligning state, NCATE, and professional standards (CEC) for courserequirements.SeefoundationscourseexampleprovidedinTable�.ContentforeachofthenewlyredesignedcourseswasalignedwiththerequiredstandardsandNCATErequirements.Courseprerequisitesweredenoted.ExamplesofcontentfortwocorecoursesmaybefoundinTable4. An important part of the program redesign was to examine coursedescriptions,expectations,assignments,instructionalactivities,andvariousassessments contained in existing course syllabi.These previous coursesyllabiwerecomparedwiththeexpectationsofthenewlydesignedprogram.Pedagogyfacultyfamiliarwithandassignedtoteachthespecialeducationcoursesmet to examine the contentof theprevious course syllabi.Basedonthisexamination,thenewlydesignedcoursedescriptionsandstandardsrequirementswere incorporated.Thecoursesyllabiwere rewrittenfor the


�0


�0

Tabl

e�

Alig

ning

Sta

ndar

ds: C

orre

spon

ding

CEC

Con

tent

Sta

ndar

ds a

nd S

tate

Con

tent

Sta

ndar

ds (E

xam

ple

Stan

dard

1 o

nly)

CEC

Sta

ndar

ds�

Stat

eSt

anda

rdsS

pEd�

(EC

-��)

TExE

SD

omai

ns�

SPED

EC

-��

Cor

eC

ours

e

�.F

ound

atio

ns

Ph

iloso

phie

s:e

vide

nce-

base

dpr

inci

ples

and

th

eorie

s,re

leva

ntla

wsa

ndp

olic

ies,

dive

rse

and

hist

oric

alp

oint

sofv

iew

,his

toric

ala

ndfu

ture

in

fluen

ceo

nsp

ecia

ledu

catio

nan

dtre

atm

ento

fin

divi

dual

swith

ELN

insc

hool

and

soci

ety.

Pr

ofes

sion

alp

ract

ice:

asse

ssm

ent,

inst

ruct

iona

lpl

anni

ng,i

mpl

emen

tatio

n,a

ndp

rogr

ame

valu

atio

n.

H

uman

div

ersi

ty:i

mpa

ctso

nfa

mili

es,c

ultu

res,

and

scho

ols;

del

iver

yof

spec

iale

duca

tion

serv

ices

.

Rel

atio

nshi

ps:S

pEd

org

aniz

atio

nsto

org

aniz

atio

ns

and

func

tions

ofs

choo

ls,s

choo

lsys

tem

s,an

dot

her

agen

cies

.

Stan

dard

I.Th

esp

ecia

led

ucat

ion

teac

her

unde

rsta

ndsa

nda

pplie

skn

owle

dge

ofth

eph

iloso

phic

al,

hist

oric

al,a

ndle

gal

foun

datio

nso

fspe

cial

ed

ucat

ion.

Dom

ain

IV F

ound

atio

ns a

nd

Prof

essi

onal

Rol

es a

nd

Resp

onsi

bilit

ies (

estim

ate

20%

of

test

) St

anda

rds A

sses

sed:

Sp

ecia

lEdu

catio

nEC

–��

Stan

dard

I:

Spec

iale

duca

tion

teac

her

unde

rsta

ndsa

nda

pplie

skn

owle

dge

ofth

eph

iloso

phic

al,h

isto

rical

,and

le

galf

ound

atio

nso

fspe

cial

ed

ucat

ion.

�Sp

Ed

Foun

datio

ns

4A

sses

smen

t

6R

ole

ofth

eSp

ecia

lEd

ucat

or

Not

e.�

Beg

inni

ngsp

ecia

ledu

cato

rsd

emon

stra

teth

eirm

aste

ryo

fthi

ssta

ndar

dth

roug

hth

em

aste

ryo

fthe

CEC

Com

mon

Cor

eK

now

ledg

ean

dSk

illsa

nda

ppro

pria

teC

ECS

peci

alty

Are

a(s)

Kno

wle

dge

&S

kills

forw

hich

the

prog

ram

isp

repa

ring

cand

idat

es.

Sour

ce.

�C

ounc

ilfo

rExc

eptio

nalC

hild

ren

(CEC

).(�

00�)

.Wha

t eve

ry sp

ecia

l edu

cato

r sho

uld

know

: Eth

ics,

stan

dard

s, an

d gu

idel

ines

for s

peci

al e

duca

tors

, (5th

ed.

).A

rling

ton,

VA

:Aut

hor.

�St

ate

Boa

rdfo

rEdu

cato

rCer

tific

atio

n(S

BEC

).(�

00�)

.Spe

cial

Edu

catio

n St

anda

rds.

Aus

tin,T

X:A

utho

r.R

etrie

ved

Sept

embe

r�,�

006,

from

the

Wor

ldW

ide

Web

:http

://sb

ec.st

ate.

tx.u

s/SB

ECon

line/

stan

test

/sta

ndar

ds/a

llspe

ced.

pdf.

�St

ate

Boa

rdfo

rEdu

cato

rCer

tific

atio

n(�

005)

.TEx

ES: T

exas

Exa

min

atio

ns o

f Edu

cato

r Sta

ndar

ds: P

repa

ratio

n M

anua

l 16

1 Sp

ecia

l Edu

catio

n EC

-12.

Aus

tin,T

X:A

utho

r.R

etrie

ved

Sept

embe

r�,�

006,

from

the

Wor

ldW

ide

Web

:ht

tp://

sbec

.stat

e.tx

.us.


��Table4Core Courses EC- 12 Special Education Certification (only two courses shown)

3372 Behavior Modification and ClassroomManagementfortheStudent

withExceptionalities

4�08AppraisalProcessesinProgrammingfortheExceptionalLearner

�semesterhours �semesterhours

CourseDescription:Principlesofnormalandabnormalchildandadolescentdevelopment;Natureandcausesofbehaviorproblems.Basictechniquesforclassroomdisciplineandmanagement;PrinciplesofbehaviorassessmentandimplementationofBehaviorImprovementPlans.

CourseDescription:Formalandinformalassessmenttypes,functionsandlegalimplications.Introductiontotestsandmeasurementtechniques,datacollection,andreportwriting;interpretationtoprescribeappropriate curriculum modification, instructionalmaterials,teachingstrategies,classroommanagement,functionalbehaviorassessments,andbehaviorimprovementplans.

CECStandards�,�,7,8

CECStandards�,6,7,8,9

StateStandards:IV,V,VI,VII,X

StateStandards:I,II,V,VII,VIII,X,IX

TExESDomains:I,II,III,IV

TExESDomains:I,II,III,IV

NCATEAssessmentsDispositions,LessonPlan,ClassroomManagementPlan,BIP/FBA

NCATEAssessmentsDispositions,FBA/BIP

Prerequisites:AcceptedTeacherEdProgram;�.5GPA,PEDG��7�,��0

Prerequisites:AcceptedTeacherEdProgram;�.5GPA,PEDG��7�,��0

Note. 18 hours core course content; 6 hours field based experience; 24 total hours.Source: �CouncilforExceptionalChildren(�00�) � State Board of Educator Certification (2001) � State Board of Educator Certification (2005)


��new courses so that the syllabi now reflected the new course content, the matchingrequiredstandards,stateexaminationrequirements,andrequiredprerequisitesandco-requisites.Degreeplansforthespecialeducationprogramswere redesigned to incorporate the new requirements for certification.

Experienced Teacher Perceptions about Standards Ateachersurveywasdesignedtoinvestigateteacherunderstandingofstandards.Thesurveywasadministeredtosevenpublicschoolteacherswithfive or more years of experience. Survey questions were clustered into the followingcategories for experienced teachers:knowledgeand importanceof standards, lesson planning and instruction, accountability, benchmarkand teacher certification testing. Survey responses submitted by the seven experienced teacherswereanalyzedusingqualitativemethods.Responsesweregroupedwithrespecttorespondentconsensus.

Knowledge and Importance of Standards Allrespondentsexpressedknowledgeaboutthestate(Texas)standardsandwheretoretrievethemonthestateagencywebsite.SomerespondentsstatedthatuseoftheTexasstandardswasnon-negotiable.Teacherrespondentsstated that standards provided the framework for what students shouldknowandbeabletodoatvariouslevelsineachareaofstudy.Theteachersacknowledged that additional standards had been developed by variousprofessional organizations but these standards were not considered asimportantasthestatestandards.TheseteacherrespondentsconsideredtheTexasEssentialKnowledgeandSkills(TEKS)standardsthemostimportantbecausethesestandardswereincorporatedintostatestudentassessmentforaccountability.

Lesson Planning and Instruction The teacher respondents discussed a variety of ways to incorporatestandards into their lesson planning.Teacher suggestions included use ofcommercial textbooks that now include a list of identified state standards applicableforeachcontentunit.OtherparticipantsreportedusingtheTexasEducationAgencyWebpagesiteforstatestandardslessonplanideas.Schoolcurriculum guides, scope and sequence charts and curriculum maps werealignedwithstatestandards.Oneteacherwrote:“Theseteachingstandards


��determinethecurriculumtaughtinmylessons.IfollowtherequirementssetforthincurriculummapswhicharebasedonTEKS.”

Accountability Theteacherparticipantsagreedthatteachersarenowheldaccountableforstudentlearning.Studentsmustpassthestateteststograduatefromhighschool.Schooladministratorsreviewlessonplanstoensurealignmentwithstatestandards.Insomeschools,administratorsreviewteachers’lessonplanscreated on computer software specifically designed to incorporate appropriate standardsusingTEKScurriculumguides.

Benchmark and Teacher Certification Testing Teacherrespondentswereaskedaboutbenchmarktestingduringtheirteaching preparation and about their certification test. One teacher responded, “I do not recall because I tested for certification so long ago. However, I did notstudyteachingstandardsandIpassed!”Anotherrespondentreplied,“Ireceived my certification prior to certification testing; however, it does help to assurequalitycontroloveracademicdepartments.”Therespondentsagreedthatindividualspreparingtobecometeachersshouldbekeenlyawareofallstandardsrequiredbygoverningauthoritiesandstatepolicy. Teacherresponsessuggestanunderstandingoftheuseandimportanceofstandardswithintheteachingprofession.Awarenessofstandardsandstatepolicyconcerningplanningandinstructionappearstohavealteredteacherbehavior.Teachersappearkeenlyawareof their responsibility for studentlearningoutcomes.

Pre-Service Teacher Perceptions about Standards Twenty-two students enrolled in a post-baccalaureate course oncurriculumandinstructionmethodswereaskedtorespondtoasurvey.Surveyquestionswereclustered into fourareas:understandingof the importanceof using standards, benchmark and certification testing during preparation program,standardscoveredinlessonplanning,andstandardswithrespecttoaccountability.Surveyresponseswereanalyzedusingqualitativemethods.Responsesweregroupedaroundthemajorthemes.


�4Understanding the Importance of Standards Pre-servicestudentsagreedthatstandardsformedtheframeworkforcurriculumcontent.Onestudentstatedthat“standardsprovideuniformity.Ifastudentmovestheyarenotbehind.”Anotherstudentstated“withoutstandardswecannotconsistentlycontrolqualityandexpectationsinourprofession.”

Benchmark and Certification Testing Thepre-serviceparticipantswereatdifferentlevelsintheirpreparationprogram.Commentsconcerningevaluationduringtheirtrainingvaried.Onestudentcommented,“Ihavemeteverycorestandardforteachinginmycontentareaand inknowledgeofpedagogyin thecontentarea.”Anotherstudentstated:“Theseassessments–benchmarktesting–arenotauthenticandrarelyaccuratelymeasureknowledge.”Finally,onestudentacknowledged,“Testsare part of our program. We must pass in order to get certified.”

Lesson Planning and Accountability The pre-service teachers acknowledged an emphasis upon lessonplanning throughout their preparation program. One student stated, “WemakesurethelessonfollowsTEKSstandardsbecausetheyarethepointsofimportance.”Anotherstudentstated,“Wemustmakesurethatwemeetthelearningneedsofeachstudentbyplanningalessonthatincludesanactivity,adiscussion,andensuringthatchildrenlearnthelessonindifferentways.” Concerningaccountability,onestudentwrote,“Standardshelpteachersensurethattheyareaccountableforallthematerialthatneedstobetaught.”Anotherstudentcommentedthat“Ifyouhavefollowedthestandardsthentheaccountabilityofyourteachinghasbeenmet.” Thissmallsampleofpre-serviceteachersappearedtounderstandthatstatestandardsformedthebasisforcontentandthatstandardswereimportantinlessonplanning.Diversityinchildren’slearningneedsappearedtohavemeaningforthesepre-servicestudents.Thesestudentsappearedtoacceptbenchmark and TExES (state certification) testing as part of their program, although there are always those who do not value testing as a learningexperience.Asexpected, thesepre-service studentshavenotgaineddeepunderstandingoftheconceptsofstandards-basedaccountabilitythatmaybeassociatedwithyearsofteachingexperience.


�5Summary and Conclusions

The first NCATE teaching standards were initiated over a half century ago.Withtheimpetusofeducationreformpolicymakingofthe�990sthatfocuseduponstudentlearningoutcomes,standardshaveassumedacentralposition in changing the behavior of educators.At the university teacherpreparation level, programsarebeing revisited to ensure the inclusionofNCATE,state,andprofessionalassociationstandards.Accountabilitytestingisrequiredtoensurecontentandpedagogyqualityaswellasprogrampreparationcontinuity.Bothpre-serviceandexperiencedteacherparticipantsdocumentedanawarenessoftheimportanceofstandardsinlessonplanninganddelivery.Student diversity and differing learning needs are being recognized andconsideredimportantbyteachersasaresultofimplementingstandards.

Anegativesideofthestandardsmovementmustberecognized.Highstakestestingassociatedwithstandardsmaylimitcontenttaughttocontenttested,narrowingthedepthandbreadthofcontentareaoptionsbecauseofstringent state standards associated with them.Additionally, professionaldevelopmentcontentmustbeencouragedtoaddresstrendsandissuesbeyondlocalandstatestandardsifteachersaregoingtobepreparedtopracticeintoday’sglobalsociety. AtthepresenttimetheNCLBActisbeingconsideredforreauthorization.Persistentchallengesinraisingstudenttestscores,raisinggraduationrates,andschoolfundingissuescontinuetofocuspublicattentionuponthenation’sschools. Standards-based accountability appears to have the potential tochangethecontentandpracticeofteaching,asP-��educationmergesintoP-�6andmoreuniversityprogramscomeunderthescrutinyofhighstakestestingassociatedwithstandards. Basedonthelimitedsampleinthisstudy,furtherresearchiswarrantedto examine pre-service teacher effectiveness after entry into the teachingprofession.Anempiricalstudyofexperiencedteacherbehaviortoexaminethe impactof standardsupon teacher leadership for learningalsoappearswarranted.This research may also have implications for P-�6 teachingapplications.


�6References

Byrd,D.M.,&Adamy,P.(�00�).Overviewandframework.InE.M.Guy-tonandJ.D.Rainer(Eds.).Research on meeting and using standards in the preparation of teachers: Teacher Education Yearbook X (pp.59–65). AssociationofTeacherEducators.Dubuque,IA:Kendall/HuntPublish-ingCompany.

Cavanagh, S. (2007, June 13). Study casts doubt on states’ NCLB profi-ciencystandards.Education Week,26(4�),�,��.

Cuban,L.(�007,March�8).Thenever-endingquest:Lessonslearnedfromurbanschoolreform.Education Week,26(�9),�8-�9.

Gratz, D. B. (2000, May). High standards for whom? Phi Delta Kappan,81(9),68�-687.

Hoff,D.J.(�007,June6).StatetestsshowgainssinceNCLB.Education Week,26(�9),�,�0.

Hoff,D.J.,&Manzo,K.K.(�007,March�4).BushclaimsaboutNCLBquestioned.Education Week,26(�7),�,�6-�7.

Kachigan,S.K.(�986).Statistical analysis: An interdisciplinary introduc-tion to univariate and multivariate methods.NewYork:RadiusPress.

Marklein,M.B.(�006,September�7).Collegeoverhaulcalled‘overdue.’USA Today.�A.

NationalCouncilforAccreditationofTeacherEducation.(�990).Stan-dards, procedures, and policies for the accreditation of professional edu-cation units.Washington,DC:Author.

NationalCouncilforAccreditationofTeacherEducation.(�00�).Profes-sional standards for the accreditation of school, colleges, and department of education.Washington,DC:Author.

Olson,L.(�007,January�7).Standardsgetboostonthehill.Education Week,26(�9),�,�5.

O’Shea,M.R.(�005).From standards to success.Alexandria,VA:Asso-ciationforSupervisionandCurriculumDevelopment.

Selke,M.,&Alouf,J.(�004).Position framework: ATE.RetrievedJune8,�006,http://www.ate�.org/pubs/ATE_Position/Frame.cfm


�7Wise,A.E.,&Leibbrand,J.A.(�00�).Theevolutionofstandardsfor

teacherpreparation.InE.M.Guyton&J.D.Ranier(Eds.),Research on meeting and using standards in the preparation of teachers: Teacher Edu-cation Yearbook X (pp.�97-�09).Dubuque,IA:Kendall/HuntPublishingCompany.


�8

Appendix

SurveyInstrumentParticipantratingsoftheimportanceofcontentareasneededtobecomeaneffectivespecialeducationteacherintoday’spublicschools.Directions:Rateeachstatementbaseduponitsimportanceforthesuccessofspecialeducationteachers.Rate1asleastimportant;5mostimportant.Indicateyourratingbycirclingoneappropriateratingnumberforeachitem.Item Importance

leastmost�. LearningTheories 1 2 3 4 5�. ChildDevelopment 1 2 3 4 5�. AdolescentDevelopment 1 2 3 4 54. IntegratingTechnology 1 2 3 4 55. ClassroomEnvironment/Management 1 2 3 4 56. ClassroomAssessmentMethods 1 2 3 4 57. DisciplineTheoryandManagement 1 2 3 4 58. StudentTeachingStudentswithDisabilities 1 2 3 4 59. RolesofSpecialEducationTeacher 1 2 3 4 5�0. RoleofGeneralEducationTeacher-Studentsw/Disabilities 1 2 3 4 5��. BehaviorManagementStrategies-Studentsw/Disabilities 1 2 3 4 5��. Inst.StrategiesforStudentsw/Disabilities 1 2 3 4 5��. AssessmentofStudentsw/LearningDisabilities&TAKS 1 2 3 4 5�4. AssessmentofStudentsw/BehaviorDisorders&TAKS 1 2 3 4 5�5. CharacteristicsofStudentsw/MultipleDevelopmentaldisabilities

(MRandSevereandProfoundHandicap) 1 2 3 4 5

�6. CharacteristicsofStudentsw/LearningDisabilities 1 2 3 4 5�7. CharacteristicsofStudentsw/BehaviorDisabilities 1 2 3 4 5�8. TransitionofStudentsw/Disabilities-ElementarytoMiddle

School,MiddleSchooltoH.S.,H.S.toAdultCommunity 1 2 3 4 5

�9. IntroductiontoLearnerswithexceptionalities&lowIncidenceDisabilities,Deaf-Blind,Autism,MultipleHandicaps 1 2 3 4 5

�0. ImplementingBehaviorPlans,IEPs&Accommodations 1 2 3 4 5��. LessonPlanningforStudentsw/Disabilities 1 2 3 4 5��. EarlyChildhoodContent 1 2 3 4 5��. ReadingContent 1 2 3 4 5�4. ScienceContent 1 2 3 4 5�5. MathematicsContent 1 2 3 4 5�6. SocialStudiesContent 1 2 3 4 5�7. PhysicalEducation/HealthContent 1 2 3 4 5�8. FineArtse.g.Music&Art 1 2 3 4 5�9. ChildGuidance/ParentCommunication 1 2 3 4 5�0. DiversityinContemporaryFamilies 1 2 3 4 5��. LibraryandSupplementaryMaterial 1 2 3 4 5��. TestsandMeasurementTheoriesStatisticalApplications 1 2 3 4 5��. State/FederalMandatesConcerningStudentswithdisabilities 1 2 3 4 5�4. EthicsConcerningImplementingIDEA 1 2 3 4 5�5. Health&SafetyIssuesConcerningStudentsw/Disabilities 1 2 3 4 5�6. ConfidentialityIssuesandFERPA 1 2 3 4 5


�9�7. List any additional content areas you feel are needed for the success of Special Educationteachers:

PROGRAM IMPROVEMENTDirections: We invite participant input for improving our special EducationTeacher PreparationProgram.Pleaselistanyrecommendationsthatyouhave.Inparticular,pleaseaddressstudentteachingand university faculty collaboration and communication with field-based school.

Thankyouforyourassistanceincompletingthisneedssurvey.

Documents

Standards and Accountability Implementation, Why, How ... · Standards and Accountability Implementation, Why, How, Where: Teachers’ Perceptions E. Jane Irons, Nancy L. Carlson,