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

Areas of Focus

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

Contact Information

Janice Podajanicep@ccsso.org

202-336-7057

Kathleen Paliokaskathyp@ccsso.org

202-336-7058