The Isabelle Farrington College of Education at Sacred Heart University has been a pioneer in preparing K-12 public school teachers and leaders since 1950. For 75 years, the Farrington College of Education (FCE) has prepared thousands of professional educators. FCE graduates are educating K-12 public, private, and parochial school students and leading school change in nearly every school district in Southwestern Connecticut. As a function of prior expectations established by the National Council for the Assessment of Teacher Education (NCATE), the FCE developed key assessments and established candidate dispositions aligned to a conceptual framework that articulated the school’s core values and beliefs. These key assessments and dispositions …show more content…
measured candidate performance against a rigorous set of standards. While appropriate for its time, the alignment of key assessments to the conceptual framework did not reflect alignment to the most recent iteration of NCATE and Connecticut State Standards, and lacked a systematic approach to the collection, analysis, and reflection on candidate performance data. The FCE is now committed to aligning key assessments and candidate dispositions to the latest iteration of NCATE and Connecticut State Standards. As the FCE prepares teachers and school leaders with the skills to monitor student performance through the collection, analysis, and reflection on student performance data aligned to the Connecticut Common Core State Standards, so too is the school committed to the collection, analysis, and reflection on candidate performance data aligned to the NCATE and Connecticut State Standards. To that end, the FCE leadership team developed the Strategic Plan to Address the State Board of Education’s Probationary Approval Decision. In the spring of 2015, the FCE hosted an accreditation committee from the Connecticut State Department of Education.
In the summer of 2015, the Connecticut State Department of Education reviewed the report of the visiting committee, and voted to award the FCE a three-year probationary approval for all teacher education programs. This FCE Teacher Education Program probationary approval complements the state and national accreditation awarded the FCE Educational Leadership Program. The report of the visiting committee articulated a series of Areas for Improvement (AFI) for the FCE. The AFI’s highlighted the need to align key assessments, and establish candidate dispositions aligned to current NCATE and Connecticut State Standards. The FCE faculty and leadership team reflected on the identified AFI’s, and accepts the recommendation that the FCE develop a systematic approach to the collection of data, and use of data to analyze candidate preparation for the demands of 21st century public, private, and parochial school …show more content…
classrooms. In July 2015, the FCE reorganized the College’s Teacher Preparation Program.
The FCE appointed a new Teacher Education Department Chair, Educational Leadership Program Department Chair, and established a new position for an Assistant Dean. The FCE appointed an Assistant Dean in July 2015. The Assistant Dean was tasked with the responsibility of organizing a comprehensive, systematic approach to the alignment of key assessments to the most up-to-date NCATE and Connecticut State Standards. The Assistant Dean embraced the responsibility of training all full-time and adjunct faculty in the articulation of the new, systematic approach to the collection of data and evidence of candidate skills and dispositions aligned to the NCATE and Connecticut State Standards. The Assistant Dean, in collaboration with the FCE Leadership Team, selected an online SharePoint software system and named the system FRED. FRED is an online system that allows multiple users to access data files and align the files containing key assessments to NCATE and Connecticut State Standards. In August 2015, the FCE Assistant Dean trained all full-time FCE faculty in the use of
FRED. After training in use of FRED, the Assistant Dean directed all full-time faculty to align key assessments used to evaluate candidate skills and dispositions to NCATE and Connecticut State Standards. For the first time in FCE history, the entire faculty began using a common data warehouse (i.e. FRED) to review, revise, and align key assessments to the appropriate state and national standards. By the end of September 2015, the faculty completed the process of aligning key assessments to NCATE and Connecticut State Standards in FRED. In combination with online data warehouses called Qualtrics and eStar, FRED will be used to warehouse data from key assessments aligned to NCATE and Connecticut State Standards. The FCE will begin using FRED to collect data on candidate skills and dispositions aligned to NCATE and Connecticut State Standards by the end of the fall 2015 semester. The faculty will use the fall 2015 data to engage in a series of calibration exercises deigned to ensure inter-rater reliability. The calibration of assessment practices will ensure the validity and reliability of the data collected on each candidate. Thereafter, FCE will annually collect, analyze, reflect upon, and report on candidate performance during the spring of each school year. The FCE will report student performance data in an alignment study prepared at the end of each academic year. The alignment study will be shared with accreditors from the Connecticut State Department of Education. The FCE faculty and leadership team is confident that the steps outlined above will satisfy all expectations articulated in the AFI’s in the report of the accreditation visiting committee. Once these expectations are satisfied, the FCE will appeal to the Connecticut State Board of Education, and request full approval for all FCE Teacher Preparation Programs. The Strategic Plan to Address the State Board of Education’s Probationary Approval Decision contained herein articulates each of the steps necessary to respond to the AFI’s in greater detail.
Ms. Hall has had many years of public education experience and higher education training in which to hone her leadership style and framework. She started her career as a teacher in the Kirkwood School District. She then served as an assistant elementary principal at both Ritenour and Pattonville School Districts before being selected to serve as the assistant superintendent of the Maplewood Richmond Heights School District in 2008. Throughout her career she continued to pursue her education as a means o...
In 2010, Charlotte Danielson wrote an article, “Evaluations That Help Teachers”, for the magazine The Effective Educator. The purpose of this article was to explain how a teacher evaluation system, such as her own Framework for Teaching, should and can actually foster teacher learning rather than just measure teacher competence, which is what most other teacher evaluation systems do. This topic is especially critical to decision-making school leaders. Many of the popular teacher evaluation systems fail to help schools link teacher performance with meaningful opportunities for the teachers to reflect on and learn from in order to grow professionally. With the increased attention on the need for more rigorous student standards, this then is an enormous opportunity missed. Students can only achieve such rigorous expectations if their teachers can effectively teach them, and research has shown that teachers who are evaluated by systems that hold them to accountability and provide them for continuous support and growth will actually teach more effectively.
Charlotte Danielson, an internationally recognized expert in the area of teacher effectiveness, created The Framework for Teaching, which is comprised of four domains of teaching responsibility (Danielson, 1996). Danielson specializes in the design of teacher evaluation to ensure teacher quality and to promote professional learning. Danielson’s framework is based on large amounts of research, including the Measures of Effective Teaching (MET) project, supported by the Gates Foundation (Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, 2013). Danielson’s framework also aligns with the Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC), which outlines what a beginner teacher should possess in skills. In addition, it is the underlying set of ideas
Leading organizations of school administrators offer educators various opportunities to encourage educators to become leaders. No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB) has mandated that leaders be better prepared for the task of providing quality education to all. NCLB “… is forcing all educational stakeholders to face the weakness of contemporary school leadership and is making it impossible to ignore the need for higher quality principals” (Hale & Moorman, 2003, p.1). It is believed that all educators can be and are leaders in their own right. A leader is a visionary and has the ability to inspire others to aspire to greatness. Of the numerous opportunities that are offered, those that are most beneficial include but are not limited to leadership training programs, professional development, and creating shared leadership opportunities for teachers to become leaders. The systems “…that produce our nation’s principals are complex and interrelated – and governed by the states. Each state establishes licensing, certification and re-certification” (Hale & Moorman, 2003, p.1). States use the ISLLC standards “…as the framework for preparation programs and in service professional development of school superintendents, principals, and other leaders” (Hale & Moorman, 2003, p.3).
National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education. (2007). Professional standards for the accreditation of schools, colleges, and departments of education. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from: http://www.ncate.org
An effective school leader possesses skills to create, implement, evaluate, improve and share a staff development plan. I met with Ben Rhodes, Sandy Creek Middle School’s principal, to interview him on the specific elements of his yearly staff development plan. We began with the design process focusing on the district and school goals. District goals include improving literacy across the content areas in reading and writing, Guaranteed and Viable Curriculum (GVC). Guaranteed and Viable Technology (GVT), and Closing the Achievement Gap (Equity in Excellence). Using a variety of assessments to focus on specific needs, Ben Rhodes and Mary Sonya, our Pupil Achievement Specialist, examined CSAP, Explore, MAP, and RAD data. They use the Colorado Growth Model to help guide them to determine if students have made adequate yearly progress. Together, they created the plan that included the district goals mentioned above as well as continuing to include new technology skills, information on special education changes with Response to Intervention (RTI), maintaining current staff implementation of literacy goals and a new goal of raising achievement in math.
The current study for my internship with Dr. Joyce Many, aimed to examine the experiences of edTPA coordinators at institutions of higher education in Georgia, during an edTPA implementation year, and to explore how professional development or resources might meet the needs implied by these change facilitators’ stages of concern. The framework for the study embraces the Concerns-Based Adoption Model (CBAM), it is used to understand the change process. Why use the CBAM for this study? The Concerns-Based Adoption Model theorizes that professional development needs an implementation of curricular innovations that is directly related to facilitators’ and faculty members' stages of concern. Given the national trends in adopting the edTPA as a high stakes assessment, more information is needed to better understand how institutions conceptual framework and teacher educators’ concerns might inform the implementation process. Using the Concerns-Based Adoption Model, this study will extend the literature on how to support institutions during the edTPA implementation process (J. Many, personal communication, July 12, 2016).
I was struck by the statement from Dealing with Difficult Teachers, “when principals hire a new teacher, they should be more interested in the school becoming like the new teacher than in the new teacher becoming like the school” (Whitaker, 2015). I appreciate that Whitaker values the experiences and the enthusiasm that a new teacher brings with them. Nevertheless, at the same time, I feel it is important not for the school to become like the new teacher but for the new teacher to fit and add to the vision of the school and the team in which the teacher will be involved. Whitaker suggests looking for new teachers with leadership potential through either the interview or questions for their references (2015). New teachers begin with enthusiasm, excitement, and new ideas and some have strong leadership skills, but because they are new, they feel that they should not share their opinion. He also suggests openness with the new teachers about wanting them to share their opinions and valuing their fresh ideas
Every school district aims for high achievement; some consistently exceed expectations while others fail. With close to 3.2 million teachers employed nationwide (Fast Facts, 2011), school districts are often categorized into three groups: urban, suburban and rural. Within these categories, lower socioeconomic status is prevalent in the rural and urban areas. However, the students in urban districts are the most culturally diverse. Many people would assume a teacher in a rural school would use similar to identical teaching strategies as one in an urban school. However, this assumption is incorrect for several reasons. Students in urban schools endure many hardships unique to its location and the social issues that exist. This research expository will serve as a guideline for success for administrators and teachers in urban schools and teachers. In this unique environment, it’s critical that teachers build off the most important resource they have: the student body. Urban districts have many disadvantages and face my tribulations in its quest to become a successful school (meeting standards). The teachers in urban districts have typically been very unhappy compared to those who teach in rural and suburban districts. Many teachers claim they are dissatisfied because they feel their role is minimal in deciding important educational decisions such as curriculum. In these urban districts, a top-down approach is commonly used and teachers have claimed to feel as though the wrong people are making the most important decisions. Many administrators feel it is necessary in today’s urban educational environment because of the amount of first year teachers hired every year. Another reason district administrators create curriculum is b...
The teacher was rated using a rubric with specific criteria in four domains including planning and preparation, the classroom environment, instruction, and professional responsibilities (Hillsborough County Public Schools, 2012). Within each of these domains are components which are the performance factors that are relevant to classroom teachers. In domain one the components include: demonstrating knowledge of content and pedagogy, demonstrating knowledge of students, setting instructional outcomes, demonstrating knowledge of resources and technology, designing coherent instruction, and designing student assessments. The components for domain two include: creating an environment of respect and rapport, establishing a culture for learning, managing classroom procedures, managing student behavior, organizing physical space. In domain three the components included are: communicating with students, using questioning and discussion, engaging students in learning, using assessment in instruction, and demonstrating flexibility and responsiveness. There is only one component that was rated for domain four which is reflecting on teaching.
Jacobs, H. H. (1997). Mapping the big picture: Integrating curriculum and assessment. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
The state’s new evaluation system was in response to administrators who produced, “superficial and capricious teacher evaluation systems that often don't even directly address the quality of instruction, much less measure students' learning” (Toch, 2008). Too often, the “good-ol-boy” attitude would insure mediocre educators would remain employed. Realizing this was often more the rule then the exception, the governor created educational mandates to focus, “on supporting and training effective teachers to drive student achievement” (Marzano Center, 2013). Initially, they expected the school districts and the teachers would have issues and experience growing pains, but in the end the goal was, “to improve teacher performance, year by year, with a corresponding rise in student achievement” (Marzano Center, 2013).
In today’s classroom, student achievement is one of the components in measuring teacher success. It is critical that administrators provide the needed support for new teachers. “The quality of teachers and teaching are undoubtedly among the most important factors shaping the learning of students” (Ingersoll, 2004, p. 1). Student achievement suffers when new teachers lack
Instead, “scores are one factor that goes into a teacher effectiveness rating, which itself is just a single factor in a much more comprehensive evaluation.” The model even offers “ additional flexibility for school districts and schools to tailor the evaluation system to their liking”, taking into account the fact that every district is different, and must be able to adjust their policies to match their needs. As the plan was implemented over the course of three years, the focus of teacher evaluations became “ aimed at shifting the culture around teacher growth and development to encourage frank conversations about teacher practice."(Duncan). As far as teacher education, teachers must not only be able to perform scholastically, but be able to transfer this knowledge to an educational setting. Secretary Arne Duncan suggests the TEACH program, a plan that “would provide more support for institutions that prepare high-quality teachers from diverse backgrounds”, as well as “reduce the reporting burden on states, but help them build an effective data and accountability system, driven by essential indicators of quality”(Duncan). Many teachers are simply not taught the importance of engaging their students for extended periods of time to encourage maximum
In response to the increased interest in teachers’ professional competencies, teacher educators and educational researchers have paid particular attention to the issues on how to help pre-and in-service teachers have such an integrated body of knowledge and, by extension, how to ensure whether teachers are armed with to such competencies from the training and/or programs. In particular, evaluating teacher competencies and the quality of teaching have been paid greater attention to all of education communities coupled with the current accountability policies and initiatives. Many teacher education programs, organization, and teacher education researchers have developed evaluation models and systems to measure the teacher knowledge and skills (e.g., National Board for Professional Teaching Standards, National Education Association). Yet, they are by and large based on the individualistic approach to assessment practice, meaning that the central focus of assessment is on the extent to which an individual