Post on 09-Feb-2016
description
1
Emerson Elliott Rachelle Brunoemerson@ncate.org bruno@nku.edu
AACTEFebruary 7, 2009
The Next Generation of NCATE Program Standards
1
2
AgendaTask Force ChargeTask Force Activities Challenges and Task Force ResponseKnowledge BasePrinciplesStructure and FormattingEvidenceDiscussion
2
33
Task Force on Program Standards
Rachelle Bruno, Chair, Northern Kentucky University
Gene Martin, former Chair of SASB, Texas State University-San Marcos
Joe Prus, Executive Board, Winthrop University Gail Dickinson, Chair of SASB P&E Committee,
Old Dominion University John Johnston, SASB, University of Memphis Charles Duke, Chair of SASB, Appalachian
State University Ron Colbert, SASB, Fitchburg State University NCATE Staff
Emerson ElliottMargie CrutchfieldBoyce Williams
44
Our ChargeThe existing SASB guidelines for SPA
standards need to be rethought in light of current research, national experience, and constructive feedback. As a result the SASB chair will appoint an inclusive task force to create a conceptual framework with comprehensive guidelines for the development of SPA program standards.
55
ActivitiesReviewed current research Reviewed existing NCATE reports and reports from
others, interviewed representatives from INTASC and NBPTS
Requested input from SPA’s, universities and states December email (SPA’s and universities) May Clinic (SPA’s and states) August email (SPA’s, states and universities) Web-based forum (SPA’s)
Held four meetings (January, April, May and October) Joint UAB-SASB meeting (October)Reviewed McKinley findings, Executive Board request
for “transformation and redesign of the NCATE [unit] accreditation and program review process,” and updated context
Held two conference calls (November, January)
66
SummaryTHE CHALLENGE THE TASK FORCE RESPONSE
STANDARDSRequire “too much”Are too different from SPA to SPAAre not congruent / Unit Standard 1Some are not aligned with the 2004 program review report
Principles for more common approach, parallel to Standard 1Formatting guides to keep standards focused, restrict # of standards, and limit sub categories
RESEARCHResearch is not consistently incorporated into standardsField and clinical experiences are not emphasized enough
Ground recommendations in research and state trendsSPAs can propose a field and clinical standard to SASB; NCATE is considering additional options
EVIDENCEData requirements are perceived as too prescriptiveInstitutions still have difficulty creating assessments that provide valid evidence of standards
Guidelines on evidence (e.g., limit # of SPA required assessments; standards must be assessable)Principles for assessments (e.g., assessments are “aligned” with standards; assessments “sample” standards)
77
The knowledge baseOn learning
• Preconceptions must be engaged• Competence requires deep factual knowledge and a
strong conceptual framework• Students need metacognitive strategies to monitor their
understanding and progress in their own learningOn assessment for learning
• Formative assessment makes students’ thinking visible to themselves as well as teachers
• Training on assessment should be linked to actual classroom experience in assessment
• Descriptive feedback to students makes their learning more effective and efficient
On student development • Teachers need to know child and adolescent
development as it influences learning at different levels
88
More on the knowledge base “Knowing” content means factual information and
routine procedures, but also integration of knowledge, skills, and procedures to interpret and solve problems in new situations
Pedagogical content knowledge develops teacher strategies to help students learn a domain
Research findings are not just generic, but need adaptation to each specialty field
State trendsCollaborationHigher order thinking, problem solving, information and
media literacy skillsFormative assessmentsCross-disciplinary content
99
PrinciplesFour principles; aligned with NCATE Unit Standard 1
Unit standard 1: Content knowledge
Principle 1: Content knowledge
Unit standard 1: Pedagogical content knowledge and skills
Principle 2: Content pedagogyPrinciple 3: Learning environments
Unit standard 1: Professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills
Principle 4: Professional knowledge and skills
1010
Principles, continued
1. CONTENT KNOWLEDGE—SPA standards address: Candidates’ knowledge of content they plan to teach or use as school professionals, and their ability to explain important principles and concepts delineated in professional standards.
1111
Principles, continued2. CONTENT PEDAGOGY—SPA standards address:
Candidates knowledge of content pedagogy (effective teaching strategies to impart the specialized knowledge of a subject area) or of a professional practice (such as planning, instruction, analysis, and evaluation), including:
Knowledge of how students develop and learn, Students’ diversity and differing approaches to learning, Cultural influences on learning, Students’ preconceptions that must be engaged for effective
learning, and Familiarity with standards-based instruction, assessment,
and learning.
1212
Principles, continued3. LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS—SPA standards address:
Candidates’ ability to apply their knowledge appropriately in their education role by creating and maintaining safe, supportive, fair, and effective learning environments for all students—among them linguistically and culturally diverse students and those with exceptionalities—including:
individual and group motivation for a disciplined learning environment and engagement in learning,
Assessment and analysis of student learning, making appropriate adjustments in instruction, and monitoring student progress to assure meaningful learning experiences for all students, and
Use of a variety of instructional strategies, materials, and applications of technology to encourage students’ development of critical thinking, problem solving, and performance skills.
1313
Principles, continued4. PROFESSIONAL KNOWLEDGE AND SKILLS—SPA
standards address: Candidates’ knowledge of professional practices in their field and readiness to develop them, including:
engagement in professional experiences, and reflection on them, to enhance their own professional growth;
understanding and ability to demonstrate a commitment to equitable and ethical treatment of all students and colleagues; knowledge of the collaborative roles of other school professionals and readiness to work with colleagues, families, and community agencies; and
ability to identify opportunities for collaborative and leadership roles as members of teams.
14
Do the principles reflect what is critical to professional preparation today? What would be the advantage to having SPA standards organized according to these principles?
Discussion notes
1515
Draft guidelines for structure and formattingWriting standards
The principles serve as an organizer or framework for standardsCould be exceptions only for school professional specialties
that do not have an instructional component “Standards” is the term that describes the primary
level and “elements” is the term for the next level No additional layers of terminology (such as “indicators” or
“sub-elements”) below thatStandards are written so that each concept that is
to be an element appears in the language of the standard
Standards are based in research findings from consensus reports, longitudinal data studies, and judgments on what has been learned from practice
1616
Structure and formatting, continued
Limits on standardsThe number of standards and elements must
be sufficiently limited that they can be sampled in the program report assessments (a range for number of standards will be recommended).
Standards are limited to SPA-specific topics appropriate for each principle.
Standards are limited to what education professionals who are completing preparation programs must know and be able to do, related to the principles.
17
In what way will revisions in structure and formatting of SPA standards assist universities in preparing program submissions? Are there other revisions that would be useful?
Discussion notes
1818
Guidelines for EvidenceAssessments should Sample critical elements of the knowledge and skills to be
acquired by professional educator candidates that are described in program standards
Match the substance of the standard with a consistent form or method (e.g.,test, essay, performance based on observation and judgment, or direct personal communication)
Be consistent with the method of inquiry in the discipline
Include one or more measures that have been created, reviewed, and/or scored by specialty professionals external to the program (such as field-based master teachers, clinical teachers, intern supervisors, and/or supervisors/employer of program candidates/graduates).
1919
Guidelines for Evidence – assessment alignmentCover the same or consistent content topics as
the standardsAddress the range of knowledge and skills that are
described in standardsBe congruent with the complexity, cognitive
demands, and skill requirements in the standardsBe consistent with the level of effort required, or
difficulty or degree of challenge in the standardsHave rubrics to guide decisions about candidate
performance that are consistent with standards.
2020
DiscussionIn what way will revisions in structure and
formatting of SPA standards assist universities in preparing program submissions? Are there other revisions that would be useful?
Do the principles reflect what is critical to professional preparation today? What would be the advantage to having SPA standards organized according to these principles?
Comments regarding evidence??