Workshop: Teachers Know Their Content and Teach Effectively: CAEP Standard 1 (CAEP 201) Stevie Chepko, Sr. VP for Accreditation stevie.chepko@caepnet.org CONNECT WITH CAEP | www.CAEPnet.org | Twitter: @CAEPupdates Culture of Evidence • EPPs intentionally and purposefully select evidence that documents a standard is met  Not a compliance model  Not a checklist  CAEP seeks to partner with EPPs in creating a culture of evidence • • • • That encourages and allows for innovation That asks and answers important questions Documents what works and what does not work That changes or staying the course is based on data driven decisions CONNECT WITH CAEP | www.CAEPnet.org | Twitter: @CAEPupdates Testing hypotheses, teaching strategies, and innovations  Testing assumptions about EPPs effectiveness • Through data collection and analyses • Using assessments that have been validated and field tested • Ensuring the reliability of the data • Demonstrating that data have been used appropriately and support conclusions • Finding out what does not work is as important as finding out what does not work! – All the data does not have to be positive – Using data to support change is important CONNECT WITH CAEP | www.CAEPnet.org | Twitter: @CAEPupdates Assessment Rubric (DRAFT) • Assessment rubric is available on CAEP’s website  Provides guidance on what reviewers will be seeking specific to EPP created assessments  Why Rubrics? • EPPS need to define the criteria used to determine candidate’s classroom readiness • Important conversations for faculty and P-12 partners to have together – Define expectations in conjunction with partners – Provide on-going and specific feedback to candidates on EPP’s performance expectations – Most important part of process – the conversations on expectations CONNECT WITH CAEP | www.CAEPnet.org | Twitter: @CAEPupdates Six Big Questions on Assessments     What is the purpose and use of the instrument? How was the instrument developed? What are respondents told about the instrument? Are assignments aligned with standards? • Informs content and construct validity and relevance  Do the instruments require the assessment of higher levels of intellectual behavior (e.g., creating, evaluating, analyzing, applying, etc.)?  Do scoring levels provide distinct levels of candidate performance? CONNECT WITH CAEP | www.CAEPnet.org | Twitter: @CAEPupdates First Category of Evidences for Submission – EPP created Assessments • EPP created assessments  Instrument purpose and use in the program  Instrument development • What stakeholders participated in the development? • Were other frameworks used?  What information was provided to respondents? • Instructions • Description of assignment All items on all assessments must be tagged CONNECT WITH CAEP | www.CAEPnet.org | Twitter: @CAEPupdates First Category of Evidences for Submission – EPP created Assessments (cont.)  Upload any protocols associated with the assessment  Upload the assessment and the rubric used with the assessment if applicable • Includes such evidence as surveys (exit, employers, inservice, etc.) • Includes any EPP created assessments such as observation instruments, work samples, lesson or unit plans, etc.  Upload data charts for each submitted assessment  Narrative on how validity was established  Narrative on how reliability has been or will be established CONNECT WITH CAEP | www.CAEPnet.org | Twitter: @CAEPupdates Second Category of Evidence – Other forms of Evidence • Evidence that is not data related or collected using an instrument of some kind        Minutes from meetings MOU on Partnerships with PDS Requirements for various entry points into the program Portions of student teaching handbook Catalogue information Narrative data from focus groups Other types of narrative data CONNECT WITH CAEP | www.CAEPnet.org | Twitter: @CAEPupdates Third Category of Evidence – Proprietary Assessments • Proprietary Assessments  Assessments where an outside agency or company holds the copyright on the assessment • State licensure exams • edTPA, PPAT, VAM, etc. • Other national assessments including surveys  For proprietary assessments, EPPs submit the data from the assessment • Report any validity or reliability data on the assessment provided by the agency or company • Data must be aligned to standard/component CONNECT WITH CAEP | www.CAEPnet.org | Twitter: @CAEPupdates Fourth Category of Data – EPPs Plans • Any plans submitted by EPPs as evidence during the transition phase-in period  For Early Adopters, this includes how the feedback will be used from the Optional 3 year out review  Applies to Component 1.4 under Standard 1 • Fifth Category of Data – State requirements  Only applies to EPPs in states that allow the Program review with Feedback Option  Reviewed by the state representative on the visitor team CONNECT WITH CAEP | www.CAEPnet.org | Twitter: @CAEPupdates Standard by Standard Buckets of Evidence • Think of each standard as a bucket  EPPs drop (valid) evidence in the bucket specific to the standard • Requires multiple data points for each standard • Addresses each component, but EPPs do not have to “meet” each component • Having an identified weakness in an area or component is NOT a bad thing – How have you use the data to determine that weakness? – What are you next steps to address that area of weakness? CONNECT WITH CAEP | www.CAEPnet.org | Twitter: @CAEPupdates Standard 1 Bucket  Component 1.1 – Content and Pedagogical Knowledge • Four categories of InTASC Model Teaching Standards – Learner and learning » Internship/student teaching observation instrument » Grades from required classes specific to development » Work Sample » edTPA or PPAT » State licensure tests – Content Knowledge » Grades » State licensure test » Application of knowledge from observation instrument(s), work samples, unit plans, etc CONNECT WITH CAEP | www.CAEPnet.org | Twitter: @CAEPupdates Component 1.1 (cont.)  Instructional Practice • • • • • Clinical observation instrument Work Sample Any impact on student learning measures Assessment assignments with scoring guides Lesson and unit plans  Professional responsibilities • Any disposition measures • Any professional participation requirements – Faculty meetings – Professional development – Memberships in professional associations CONNECT WITH CAEP | www.CAEPnet.org | Twitter: @CAEPupdates Everything placed in Bucket for Component 1.1 • Ask - have we addressed the standard completely with multiple data points? • Even if you just have one data point for each of the four InTASC principles – you have provided multiple data points  Only the items specific to component 1.1 are cited as evidence  All evidence is linked directly to standard/component by specifically tagging that item  For Standard 1, some items may provide evidence for other components CONNECT WITH CAEP | www.CAEPnet.org | Twitter: @CAEPupdates Bucket for Component 1.2 – Research and Evidence • Evidence specific to candidates’ use of research and evidence     Work sample Lesson or unit plans Clinical observation instruments Others? CONNECT WITH CAEP | www.CAEPnet.org | Twitter: @CAEPupdates Bucket for 1.3 – Application of Content and Pedagogical Knowledge • Evidence specific to application of content knowledge  Evidence includes SPA reports or state review of program specific data  States can add specific requirements to this component • For example, specific list of required courses  Make sure the evidence is congruent with the “application” of Content and Pedagogical Knowledge CONNECT WITH CAEP | www.CAEPnet.org | Twitter: @CAEPupdates Bucket for 1.4 – College and Career Readiness • Evidence specific to college and career readiness  Plans, assignments, or observational data demonstrate candidates’ skills for – • Deep content knowledge • Eliciting P-12 student application of their knowledge to solve problems and think critically • Cross-discipline teaching • Differentiation of instruction • Ability to identify and interpret assessments to match P-12 college and career readiness goals/objectives  What goes in this bucket?  What would be in the plan for addressing 1.4? CONNECT WITH CAEP | www.CAEPnet.org | Twitter: @CAEPupdates Bucket for 1.5 – Model and Apply Technology • Evidence specific to technology  Accessing data bases, digital media, and tools to improve learning  Knowing why and how to aid student access and evaluation of digital content  Ability to design and facilitate digital learning  Using social networks as a resource  Using digital networks to report and track student learning • What do you have for this bucket? CONNECT WITH CAEP | www.CAEPnet.org | Twitter: @CAEPupdates Summary Reflection • For each standard, EPP completes a summary reflection based on the evidence presented  Reviewers determine if the standard is met based on the preponderance of evidence presented.  All components must be addressed, but not all components have to be met.  There can be weaknesses in evidence for component(s), but overall the standard was met  Decision is made on the overall strength of the evidence and not individual components CONNECT WITH CAEP | www.CAEPnet.org | Twitter: @CAEPupdates Engaged is vital to CAEP. You will have an opportunity to complete a survey at the end of the conference. Surveys will be sent via email on Friday, April 10. We encourage your participation. Thank you! CONNECT WITH CAEP | www.CAEPnet.org | Twitter: @CAEPupdates