1 / 24

Alabama Education Accountability

Alabama Education Accountability. Teacher Preparation Report Card. May 26, 2005. Teachers must be properly prepared. Accountability Standards Alabama was the first state to hold preparation programs accountable by issuing Report Cards.

inigo
Download Presentation

Alabama Education Accountability

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Alabama Education Accountability Teacher Preparation Report Card May 26, 2005

  2. Teachers must be properly prepared Accountability Standards Alabama was the first state to hold preparation programs accountable by issuing Report Cards. Teacher preparation programs must “guarantee” graduates. Alabama Schools Are Focused On Success

  3. PublicPrivate Alabama A & M University Birmingham-Southern College Alabama State University Concordia College Athens State University Faulkner University Auburn University Huntingdon College Auburn University Montgomery Judson College Jacksonville State University Miles College Troy University Oakwood College Troy University Dothan Samford University Troy University Montgomery Spring Hill College University of Alabama Stillman College University of Alabama at Birmingham Talladega College University of Alabama in Huntsville Tuskegee University University of Montevallo University of Mobile University of North Alabama University of South Alabama University of West Alabama Institutions With Teacher Training Programs

  4. Teacher Preparation Program Report Assesses Program • Entrance requirements • Subject matter • Field/Clinical Experience • Supervision • Faculty • Institution’s resource commitment

  5. Teacher Preparation Measures Performance Using Professional Education Personnel Evaluation (PEPE) Using Surveys • New Graduates • Principals • Superintendents Alabama Prospective Teacher Testing Program • Basic Skills Assessments • Praxis II (Beginning in 2006)

  6. PEPE Already at Work • Each institution gets detailed information on each new teacher • This is the fifth year of report cards for teacher preparation programs PEPE began in 1988. Its mission is to assure excellence in education in Alabama's public schools. The primary purpose of the program is to assist educators through the process of performance evaluation and professional growth to deliver quality education services, thus increasing student achievement.

  7. The PEPE Scale • Four – Demonstrates Excellence • Indicates the teacher does an outstanding job. • Three – Area of Strength • Indicates teacher consistently meets expectations. • Two – Needs Improvement • Teacher sometimes meets expectations but improvement is needed. • One – Unsatisfactory • Teacher’s performance is not acceptable, immediate improvement is needed. (New teachers are graded on seven categories for a total of 28 possible points)

  8. Teacher Education Programs Meeting PEPE Standards • Early Childhood • Elementary • Career Technical Education • English / Language Arts • Fine Arts • Foreign Languages • Health Education/Physical Education/ Drivers Ed. • Mathematics • Reading • Sciences • Social Sciences/Studies • Special Education • Educational Administration • Library Media • School Counseling, Psychology, Psychometry

  9. Revised PEPE-Based Grading Formula Eliminated the three-year rolling formula and computed the annual grade for each program for which graduates were “PEPE’d” during the previous year (2003-2004 for this report), using the following scale based on the percentage of graduates who earned a PEPE score of 18 or higher: A= 95-100% B= 90-94.99% C= 85-89.99 D= 80-84.99 F= less than 80%

  10. Revised PEPE-Based Grading Formula To determine the institution’s score, total the points for each program area (counting each program area equally, regardless of the number of graduates who were PEPE’d) and divide by the number of program areas to determine the institution’s average score for all program areas.

  11. Revised PEPE-Based Grading Formula Apply the following scale to the institution’s average score for all program areas to determine the institution’s grade: A= 4 points B= 3.00-3.99 points C= 2.00-2.99 points D= 1.00-1.99 points F= 0-.99 points

  12. Revised PEPE-Based Grading Formula As recommended November 10, 2004, by the Advisory Panel on Teacher Education and Certification, discontinue the “Clear/Caution/Alert” designations and apply the following sanctions based on letter grades: A.) For each program based on program grade: Grade of A/B/C: No action is required. Grade of D or F: The State Superintendent of Education will recommend that the State Board of Education (SBE) rescind approval of a program that receives a grade of D for two consecutive years, a grade of F for two consecutive years, or a combination of a D and an F for two consecutive years.

  13. Revised the PEPE-Based Grading Formula B.) For each institution, based on the institution’s average score for all programs that result in the institution’s grade: Grade of A or B: No action required. Grade of C: Institution must develop and implement a plan for moving all programs to a grade of B or A within two years. All candidates must be notified. The State Superintendent of Education will recommend that the SBE rescind approval of an institution’s programs if the institution does not receive at least a grade of B within two years. Grade of D or F: Institution must develop and implement a plan to achieve a grade of B or A within two years. All candidates must be notified. Also, the State Superintendent of Education will recommend that the SBE rescind approval of an institution’s programs if the institution receives a grade of D for two consecutive years, a grade of F for two consecutive years, or a combination of an F and D for two years.

  14. Institution Summary Results

  15. Institution Summary Results

  16. Program Summary Results

  17. Number Responding to Survey • 574 Teachers • 326 Principals • 69 Superintendents

  18. Survey Results • Overall, 96% of responding recent graduates expressed they were satisfied or very satisfied with their preparation for teaching.

  19. Survey Results New Teachers Surveyed • While 96% were satisfied with their overall preparation: • 15% were unsatisfied or very unsatisfied with their preparation to improve reading comprehension. • 20% were unsatisfied or very unsatisfied with their preparation to recognize exceptional/special needs students. • 24% were unsatisfied or very unsatisfied with their preparation to work with exceptional/special needs students

  20. Survey Results Local Principals Surveyed • While 97% were satisfied or very satisfied with the overall preparation of new teachers: • 8% were unsatisfied or very unsatisfied with new teachers’ preparation to improve reading comprehension. • 7% were unsatisfied or very unsatisfied with teachers use of technology to improve instruction.

  21. Survey Results • Overall, 100% of responding superintendents were satisfied or very satisfied with the overall preparation of new instructional support personnel.

  22. Teacher Preparation Timeline 2004-2005 Teacher Prep Report Cards Dec. 2005 2005-2006 Teacher Prep Report Cards Dec. 2006 Praxis II Data Reported 2006-2007 Professional Development Ongoing Specific Program Methods Course 2006

  23. Teacher Prep Is Critical Today’s elementary students will reach their most productive years in 2022-2042.

More Related