T he Changing Landscape of Teacher Education: CCTC Update and Priorities for 2014

1. The Changing Landscape of Teacher Education: CCTC Update and Priorities for 2014 CalTPA Users Meeting Mary Vixie Sandy, Ed.D. March 7, 2014

2. Teacher Preparation Program Enrollment, 2007-2008 to 2011-2012

4. Figure 4: Statewide Certification Data for 2011-2012 • In state: • Out of state:

5. Demand Uptick Source: CDE Data Quest, Projected Teacher Hires

7. Things we’ve been working on • Operational effectiveness in discipline, credentialing, communications • Suspended, restarted accreditation site visits • New standards for Adaptive PE, WL:ELD, Admin • Modifications to standards to improve delivery of services to English learners • Alignment of TPEs and CSET with CCSS • Finalization of the TAP panel work: 40 recommendations • Review of the edTPA: approval for limited pilot • New policy to require administrators to complete an APA • Piloted a program completer survey

8. Need to review and update accreditation system • Procedurally cumbersome, costly and resource intensive for programs and CTC • Heavily weighted toward “inputs” • Not using performance outcome data systematically • Susceptible to attacks from other entities looking at quality in teacher preparation • Need to sharpen effectiveness and efficiency in this accountability system

9. Questions we are pondering… • How do we know that teacher preparation in California is • Focused on the right things? • Of high quality? • What aspects of the current system yield the greatest insight into program quality? • How can we use available performance indicators to sharpen our understanding of program quality and improve our accreditation system?

10. Systems that inform quality • Three interdependent systems impact quality and shape accountability in educator preparation • Standards for preparation • Performance assessments and examinations (RICA, CSET) • Accreditation • Improving quality and sharpening accountability requires attention to all three of these systems

11. CTC Goals for 2014 • Focus on the essentials: • Streamline and reduce the prescriptive nature of standards • Ensure they support high leverage practices, encourage innovation • Increase reliance on outcome measures • Performance assessments • Educator surveys • Employer surveys • Other indicators (admissions, program completion rates, employment rates, retention rates, etc.) • Decrease over-reliance on lengthy documentation

12. Improvements in TPAs • Incorporate new TPEs, Common Core Standards • Strengthen reliability within models • Create comparability across models • Incorporate results into program review • Bring Performance Assessment into Administrator licensing and accreditation

13. TPA Implementation • CTC is required to ensure that all candidates have demonstrated their readiness and ability to teach • CTC relies on program completion and TPAs to meet this requirement • TPAs also required by statute to shed light on program quality • Three models currently approved in CA: edTPA in pilot mode • ETS has a new model, the Pre-Professional Assessment of Teachers that may be coming to CA for piloting purposes

14. TPA Implementation Standards • Standard 17: Administered for Validity, Accuracy and Fairness • Consistent with design, careful monitoring, focus on equitable treatment of candidates • Standard 18:Assessor Qualifications and Training • Selection of qualified assessors, training, review • Standard 19:Administration, Resources and Reporting • Scores and data inform induction; program review; accreditation

15. Accountability… • The assessment standards set the right stage for consistency, but accreditation is not well suited to monitor and ensure that they are well implemented in every case • TPAs are locally implemented, and we have little to no evidence that verifies equitable implementation and consistent scoring within or across models • How can we strengthen expectations for all approved TPAs to increase consistency in scoring and reporting?

16. Emerging proposal • RFP to adapt, adopt or develop a new state model TPA that meets the following conditions • Comprehensive task based system that measures TPEs • Aligns with CCSS and NGSS • Multiple, Single subject and Education Specialist • One stop online system of candidate registration • Electronic platform for uploading TPAs and distributing to scorers • Centralized or locally mediated scoring, online or in person • System of scorer training, calibration, recalibration, oversight and ongoing monitoring

17. Emerging proposal • Recruitment of California faculty and practitioners as scorers • Comprehensive reporting system for candidates, programs and CTC for use in accreditation • More than pass / fail rates • Tied to rubrics that relate to the TPEs • Informative for the IIP process • Formative assessment, opportunities maintained in programs

18. Anticipated outcomes • A new state of the art statewide TPA system aligned with CSTP, CCSS, NGSS, TPEs • Consistent, comparable candidate and program outcomes • Within programs • Within institutions • Within TPA model • Across models • Multiple models still enabled by statute • must demonstrate consistent and reliable scoring • Passing standard equivalent to the state model passing standard

19. TPA Pass Rates CalTPA