Los Angeles Unified School District



Biennial ReportforCalifornia Educator Preparation ProgramsSeptember 15, 2011Commission on Teacher CredentialingAcademic Years 2009-10 and 2010-11InstitutionLos Angeles Unified School DistrictDate report is submittedSeptember 15, 2011Programs documented in this reportBTSA / InductionDistrict Intern ProgramCredentials AwardedMultiple Subject (On Hiatus due to Reduction in Force)Single Subject: Preliminary and Clear Education Specialist: Preliminary and Level II Education Specialist – Added AuthorizationProgram ContactPeggy Taylor-Presley, M.S., Director LAUSD BTSAPatricia Pernin, Ed.D., DI Program Administrative CoordinatorPhone NumbersLAUSD BTSA: 231-241-5495District Intern Program: 213-241-5466EmailPeggy.presley@Patricia.pernin@Preparation assisted byNancy Bisharat, M.Ed., District Intern SpecialistJayne Gray, Ed.D., District Intern Special Education AdviserPatrick D. Johnson, M.A., District Intern Special Education Adviser Terri Kirkland, Ed.D., District Intern Special Education Adviser Felissa Luque, M.A., District Intern AdviserDaniel J. Ontell, M.A., District intern AdviserAleeta Powers, M.A., BTSA CoordinatorTable of ContentsSection A:Credential Specific Information..........................................................................................4Statewide and LAUSD LLES Program Changes………………………………………….5Credential Program Contextual Information.............................................................. ........6District Intern: General Education.................................................................................. ...7Part I: Program changes.......................................................................................... 8Part II: Candidate Assessment/Performance and BTSA/Induction ProgramEffectiveness Information....................................................................... ....9Part III: Analyses and Discussion of Candidate and Program Data......................13Part IV: Use of Assessment Results to Improve Candidate and ProgramPerformance...............................................................................................24District Intern: Education Specialist..................................................................................27Part I: Program changes........................................................................................28. Part II: Candidate Assessment/Performance and BTSA/Induction ProgramEffectiveness Information..........................................................................29Part III: Analyses and Discussion of Candidate and Program Data......................32Part IV: Use of Assessment Results to Improve Candidate and ProgramPerformance...............................................................................................44District Intern BTSA..........................................................................................................49Part I: Program changes.........................................................................................49Part II: Candidate Assessment/Performance and BTSA/Induction ProgramEffectiveness Information..........................................................................50Part III: Analyses and Discussion of Candidate and ProgramData.......................53Part IV: Use of Assessment Results to Improve Candidate and ProgramPerformance...............................................................................................58LAUSD BTSA / Induction...............................................................................................62Part I: Program changes........................................................................................63Part II: Candidate Assessment/Performance and BTSA/Induction ProgramEffectiveness Information.........................................................................64Part III: Analyses and Discussion of Candidate and Program Data......................68Part IV: Use of Assessment Results to Improve Candidate and ProgramPerformance...............................................................................................90Section B:Institutional Summary and Plan of Action........................................................................ 93 Introduction............................................................................................................93 Trends....................................................................................................................93 Strengths ...............................................................................................................94 Areas of Improvement...........................................................................................941600200-1016000Next Steps .............................................................................................................95Section A: Credential Specific informationCredential Program contextual InformationThe Los Angeles Unified District (LAUSD) credential program consists of two major components: BTSA/Induction Programs and the District Intern Programs. The LAUSD Credential Programs serves two credential pathways: General Education (Single Subject and Multiple Subject which has been placed on hiatus) and Education Specialist (Mild/Moderate and Moderate/Severe).The LAUSD District Intern Program is designed as an alternative certification teacher credentialing program that gives its teacher candidates’ practical hands-on learning experiences aligned to the California State Standards that can be applied in their classrooms the very next day. The teacher training is accredited and it is designed to meet the needs of teachers in an urban school district with diverse populations. Teacher candidates are teaching in LAUSD classrooms while receiving their training and are closely assisted by their instructors, program specialists, teacher advisers and trained support providers during the course of their internship. The District Intern program provides coursework for General Education Preliminary and Clear Credentials (Single Subject and Multiple Subject which has been placed on hiatus) and Education Specialist Level I and II Credentials (Mild/Moderate and Moderate/Severe). For2011-2012, the new Preliminary Special Education (Mild/Moderate and Moderate/Severe) will be implemented. The District Intern Program training facility is at the centrally located campus of Johnnie L. Cochran, Jr. Middle School.After the participants complete the District Intern Program and are granted their preliminary credentials, they move into the District Intern BTSA/Induction program that guides then through the steps necessary to gain their professional level credentials.Teachers entering LAUSD with a preliminary credential from an institution other than the District Intern program may move into the LAUSD BTSA/Induction Program that guides them through the steps necessary to gain their professional clear credentials.4Program ChangesSignificant changes made since the last Biennial Report or Program Assessment ReviewProgramStandard(s)Explanation of ChangeSTATEWIDE CHANGESCS 9Induction moved from Induction Program Review to Accreditation Process, revisions to the accreditation processCS 9Standards of Quality and Effectiveness for Teacher Induction Programs (Induction Standards) revised (June 2009,implemented in LAUSD Induction program beginning 09-10 academic year)CS 9California Standards for the Teaching Profession revised (October 2009, implemented in LAUSD Induction beginning 10-11 academic year, scaling up to full implementation for 2011-12)CS 3Global economic crisis resulting in budget reductions and uncertainty—Reduction in force impacting high percentages ofinduction participantsCS 1Changes in state task force and leadership team membersCS 9Mandated Teacher Performance Assessment (TPA) for preparation programsCS 9Change from Level I/Level II Education Specialist credentials to Preliminary/Clear Education Specialist ProgramsCS 9Induction programs authorized to write to incorporate Education Specialist credential authorizationLAUSD LEA CHANGESCS 1Changes within LAUSD Superintendent and key district senior staff resulting in changes in local context and procedures.CS 1Changes in leadership and administrative procedures within the credentialing program(s).CS 8Revision of our selection and assignment process to include a video observation simulation that all general educationsupport providers in the district must pass before being eligible for assignment. This will scale up to include special education support providers.CS 8Coordination of the Support Provider selection and assignment process across credential programs. Redesigned structuresfor communication with school sites regarding the selection and assignment process.CS 3, CS 8Changes in staffing for each credential program due to the state-wide (global) fiscal crisis and LAUSD organizationalchangesProgram InformationLocal Educational AgencyCD Code:Number of SchoolsType of BTSAInduction ProgramSupport ProviderModel(s) UsedFormative AssessmentSystemK-12XElementary534Single DistrictClassroom-basedXFACT---revised for LocalContextFAS--pilotElementaryMiddle129Full-timeReleasedHigh SchoolHigh129Part-timeReleasedDistrict Intern Preliminary Credential Program Participant InformationSingle Subject / Multi-subject09-1010-119-1010-11Number of candidates (public/charter schools)7843Total Number of candidates assigned toSchool Improvement, Program Improvement or SAIT-identified settings6540Number of candidates (private schools)00Number of active Support Providers5718Support Provider RatioCandidates: Non-NBC Support ProviderCandidates: NBC Support Provider:2:14:12:14:1Total number of candidates recommended forPreliminary SS Credential1111Number of Verification of Unavailability of aCommission-Approved Induction Program(CL-855) notices issued to eligible candidates00Total number of candidates recommended forPreliminary MS Credential00Program Standard(s)Explanation of ChangeCommon Standard 8StandardThe support provider selection process was changed.Pre-service orientation was changed from 240 hours to 160 hoursCandidate Performance Assessment ToolsAssessmentToolTableDescription of ToolData GatheredUseCaliforniaTeacher Performance Assessment (CalTPA)1A high-stakes, State mandated summativeassessment that requires all credential candidates to demonstrate mastery of knowledge/skills/abilities required of a beginning teacher, as exemplified in the Teacher Performance Expectations (TPEs)TPA Passage Rate on 1st and2nd attempts.Evidence of candidates’mastery of skills, abilities, and knowledge required of beginning teachersDistrict InternPortfolio Task: Credo/Philosop hy2Interns write their educationalphilosophy. They submit several revisions throughout their time in the program as they grow in their teaching practice.Final philosophy statementassessed using a rubric.Evidence of candidates’abilities to create and reflect on their educational philosophies with focus and direction on their instructional practice.District InternPortfolio Task: Spending Time to Save Time2Interns produce and implement aclassroom procedural, organizational and instructional plan designed to create an environment that is conducive to student learning.Class SyllabusParent Letter Student Survey Unit Overview3 revisions of a procedural plan assessed using a rubric.Evidence of candidates’competency in maximizing instructional time for improving student achievement.District InternPortfolio Task: My Life as a Teacher2Interns maintain a reflective journalbased on teaching experiences in their first year of teaching in order to improve their teaching competencies. Support providers read and respond to reflections providing meaningful feedback.A journal entry for each weekand monthly support provider responses assessed using a rubricEvidence of candidates’abilities to use reflection and feedback to improve teaching practices and subject matter knowledge.AssessmentToolTableDescription of ToolData GatheredUseDistrict InternPortfolio Task: Plan and Deliver2Interns develop, teach and reflect on athematic, standards-based unit in their subject area that incorporates multiple, effective learning strategies. Interns revise the unit twice during the program. The first revision includes the incorporation of literacy strategies in the content area and the second revision incorporates culturally relevant and responsive strategies. Interns receive feedback on delivery of their lesson from their supportThematic unit and End-of-Unit Assessment (EOUA)assessed using a rubricEvidence of candidates’competencies in planning instruction and designing learning experiences for all students.District InternPortfolio Task:: What’s Behind the Classroom Door2Interns learn about and establish rapportwith students and their parents/guardians through exploration of school and community by collecting and analyzing data such as surveys, assessment data, community visits, etc.Final portfolio assignmentassessed using a rubricEvidence of candidates’abilities to access information about students and connect to student learning.ClassroomManagement course final grades3To maximize Academic Engaged Time(AET) for all students, candidates learn to create and maintain well-managed, safe, inclusive and positive learning environments that foster students’ physical, cognitive, emotional and social well-being.Final grades based upon:modified procedural plans, classroom observations,time management plans, and final projectEvidence of candidates’competencies in establishing and maintaining a positive learning environment.TeachingEnglish Learners (EL) course final grades3Candidates acquire the knowledge skills,and abilities to deliver comprehensive instruction to English Learners (ELs). Candidates focus on the theoretical framework and pedagogical theories, principles, and instructional practices of language acquisition and practical strategies to increase students’ English language proficiency and literacy.Final grades based upon astandards-based lesson plan that incorporates: content standards, ELA standards, ELD standards, content and language objectives, SDAIE strategies, and interactive activitiesEvidence of candidates’abilities to make content comprehensible to ELs and incorporate strategies to increase content literacy.Methods ofTeaching English, Math and Science course final grades3Candidates focus on planning anddelivering a thematic, standards-based content-specific (math or science) unit. Topics include: long-term and short-term learning goals, explicit teaching and sequencing instruction, connecting content to preceding and subsequent content materialThematic unit plan using theDistrict Intern Program’s standards-based lesson plan template andend-of- unit assessments.Evidence of candidates’competencies in making subject matter comprehensible to all students using subject- specific pedagogy.AssessmentToolTableDescription of ToolData GatheredUseEnd-of-YearState InternSurvey4Survey, developed by CTC, is takenonline by Interns finishing the Preliminary Credential Program(s) in the spring of each school year.Measurement of interns’perceptions of the program using a Likert Scale.To determine theeffectiveness of the program according to interns’ perceptions.TPA PassageRates5An assessment that requires candidates todemonstrate mastery of knowledge/skills/abilities required of a beginning teacher, as exemplified in the Teacher Performance Expectations (TPEs)TPA Passage Rate on 1st and2nd attempts.Evidence of the program’seffectiveness to prepare, support and provide intervention for candidates’ mastery of skills, abilities, and knowledge required of beginning teachers.End-of-YearSupport Provider Survey Data6Support provider survey, developed byCTC, is taken online in the spring of school year.Measurement of supportproviders’ perceptions of theprogram using a Likert Scale.To determine theeffectiveness of the program for training/feedback to support providers.ProgramCompletionRates7Number of interns completing thePreliminary program within the given time frame of 18 months.Number of interns whoreceived Preliminary credentials.Program effectiveness inpreparing and supporting interns in successful course completion and portfolio requirements.Part III (Part A): Single SubjectCandidate Proficiency: Analysis and DiscussionTPA 1FirstAttemptTPA 1SecondAttemptTPA 2FirstAttemptTPA 2SecondAttemptTPA 3FirstAttemptTPA 3SecondAttemptTPA 4FirstAttemptTPA 4SecondAttemptOverallFirstAttemptOverallSecondAttempt2009/1076.19%(16/21)100.00%(5/5)63.16%(12/19)66.67%(4/6)68.75%(11/16)25.00%(1/4)100.00%(13/13)N/A75.36%(52/69)66.67%(10/15)2010/1178.57%(11/14)100.00%(3/3)50.00%(7/14)100.00%(7/7)N/AN/AN/AN/A64.29%(18/28)100.00%(10/10)Table 1: LAUSD District Intern CALTPA Passing RateIn 2009/10 the LAUSD District Intern Program had – general education candidates who attempted the first CalTPA Teaching Performance Assessment, Subject Specific Pedagogy. Of these candidates, 75.36% (n=52) successfully passed all four CalTPA tasks on their first attempt. Of the 2010/11 cohort CalTPA CTE, or TPA 4, has not been submitted so the data in the table is for CalTPA tasks 1-2. Comparing the first time passage rate data from 2009/10 and 2010/11 on each of the comparable CalTPA tasks shows that the passage rate dropped between CalTPA SSP (TPA 1) and CalTPA DI (TPA 2) for both cohorts.Analysis and Discussion of Candidate ProficiencyAreas of StrengthAreas for Growth The data indicates that interns show strength in designingsubject specific pedagogy, which was demonstrated in TPA, task 1. This was consistent for both years. TPA Task 1 addresses the following: Understanding connections between student information and lesson design Developing a variety of assessments to determine student progress and plan instruction Adapt lessons for an English Learner and a student with special needs According to 2009-2010 data, Task 4, culminating teaching The data indicates a drop in passage rates between Task 1,Subject Specific Pedagogy and Task 2, Designing Instruction. Anecdotal evidence shows that the two most difficult sections of the CalTPA tasks for the LAUSD interns are the MA (Making Adaptations) and the PFI (Planning for Instruction).TPA assessors indicate that interns struggle with making adaptations that are specific to the learning needs of their EL focus student and focus student with special needs861695108648500experience task has a 100% passage rate. Interestingly, the CalTPA tasks increase in difficulty from the first task to the final task. However, participants develop an efficacy as they receive instruction in curriculum development, assessment practices, and providing a classroom environment that is more conducive to learning. The increase in the passing rate shows that participants are able to demonstrate their knowledge with respect to the Teacher Performance Expectations. The 2010/11 cohort showed greater gains in second try passage rates with 100.00%, which suggests that interns benefit from TPA intervention when they do not pass on the first try.Part III (Part A): Single Subject136969544640500Candidate Proficiency: Analysis and DiscussionPortfolio RequirementNumberStandard DeviationMedian ScoreMean Score09-1010-1109-1010-1109-1010-1109-1010-11Credo/Philosophy32100.510.354.004.003.533.88Spending Time to Save Time15120.510.693.004.003.403.55My Life as a Teacher1530.280.713.003.003.083.50Plan and Deliver1530.360.583.004.003.143.67What's behind the classroom door31110.380.533.003.003.173.50Table 2: Portfolio Task Data 2009-2010/ 2010-2011Table 2 indicates the Median and Mean of the portfolio tasks as they were assessed by program instructors. Task is assessed using a 4- point rubric. 2010-2011 have not had all portfolio assignments submitted since they have not completed all of their course work. There has been an increase in performance of all portfolio tasks between the 2009-2010 and 2010-2011 school years. The Credo/Philosophy assignment had a mean of 3.53 in the 2009-2010 school year and a mean of 3.88 mean in the 2010-2011 schoolyear. Spending time to save time had a mean of 3.40 in 2009-2010 and 3.55 in 2010-2011. My Life as a Teacher had a mean of 3.08 in 2009-2010 and 3.50 in 2010-2011. Plan and Deliver had a mean of 3.14 in 2009-2010 and 3.67 in 2010-2011. What’s Behind the Classroom Door had a mean of 3.17 in 2009-2010 and 3.50 in 2010-2011.Analysis and Discussion of Candidate ProficiencyStrengthAreas for Growth The Philosophy portfolio task and the Plan and Deliver task hadthe highest averages. Interns demonstrated strengths in the following areas: TPE 8-Learning about students-accessing appropriate information about students and their school community using the districts’ data tools. TPE 9-Instructional Planning- interns show strength in planning lessons using the DI lesson plan, sequencing lessons for student learning and incorporating strategies for maximizing student achievement. TPE-12 Professional Growth –interns show strength in developing educational philosophies geared toward student achievement that guide their professional growth The lowest average was for the portfolio task, My Life as aTeacher in which candidates use reflection and feedback to improve their teaching practice. This suggests that interns show the need for improvement in TPE 13, Professional growth. Portfolio tasks also reflect that interns are able to gather data about their students, and plan for instruction but have difficulties in connecting information about students into their lesson plans.Part III (Part A): Single SubjectCandidate Proficiency: Analysis and Discussion2009-2010 Benchmark Course Passage RateClassroom ManagementTeaching English LearnersMethods of TeachingS/F 09/10NNotProficientProficientAdvancedNotProficientProficientAdvancedNotProficientProficientAdvancedPercentage100%4.76%80.95%14.29%4.76%80.95%14.29%13.04%56.52%21.74%Total211173117331352010-2011 Benchmark Course Passage RateClassroom ManagementTeaching English LearnersMethods of TeachingS/F 10/11NNotProficientProficientAdvancedNotProficientProficientAdvancedNotProficientProficientAdvancedPercentage100%0.00%0.00%100.00%0.00%68.75%31.25%18.75%18.75%62.50%Total16001601153310Table 3: Benchmark CoursesTable 3 indicates the passage rate for courses relating to classroom management, teaching English Learners and Methods of teaching math and science. There are three possible levels of performance: advanced, proficient, and not proficient. Not proficient indicates the Interns were not successful in completing the course. There is a significant increase in the number of advanced scores from 2009-2010 to 2011-2012.Analysis and Discussion of Candidate ProficiencyAreas of StrengthAreas for Growth They show strength in creating and maintaining an effective learning environment. 100% of the cohort scored Advanced in 2010-2011. Classroom management was heavily emphasized in 2010-2011. The book, Discipline in the Secondary Classroom was incorporated in 2010-2011 as an instructional tool in pre- service orientation which gave interns a solid foundation. The Methods of Teaching course showed high percentage of advanced in 2010-2011. This may be attributed to an increase in hands-on, lab-based instruction. The unit plan was redesigned allowing interns to focus on subject-specific pedagogy demonstrated in one solid lesson. According to course performance, interns have a need for growth in Teaching English Learners. Although there has been a significant increase in performance from one year to thenext, both years have a need for growth. Course record sheets indicate that all interns turned in lesson plans with SDAIE strategies imbedded, however the strategies lacked specificity. In both years, the Methods of teaching course had the highest number of not-proficient scores. Instructors indicate that interns struggle with completing assignments.Part III (Part A): Single SubjectProgram Effectiveness: Analysis and DiscussionDid Not Receive Instruction in ThisSpecific AreaNot at allEffectiveSomewhatEffectiveWellVery Well2009-20102010-20112009-20102010-20112009-20102010-20112009-20102010-20112009-20102010-2011Assessing StudentLearning0%4%0%13%15%54%34%28%51%ClassroomManagement0%0%7%2%22%20%44%33%28%45%Instructional Planningand Delivery0%0%7%1%17%15%41%36%35%35%Using computerTechnology11%8%10%4%33%35%35%32%23%30%Reading and LiteracyStrategies2%1%7%3%18%15%44%36%31%46%Teaching EnglishLearners0%0%2%0%13%10%47%43%38%47%Teaching SpecialPopulations0%1%4%0%24%11%41%33%30%56%Professional, legal,ethical aspects of teaching0%0%2%0%16%21%53%38%29%40%Child/AdolescentDevelopment5%3%2%2%46%27%36%44%16%26%Table 4: Effectiveness of Coursework in Specific Areas End-of-Year State Intern SurveyThe intern survey, developed by CTC, is taken online in the spring of school year. The table displays the degree that interns rated the effectiveness of 9 instructional skills taught. In, Assessing Student Learning, 82% of participants rated this item as ―Well‖ to ―Very Well‖ in 2009-2010 and 85% of participants rated this item as ―Well‖ to ―Very Well in 2010-2011. With Classroom Management,72% of participants rated this item as ―Well‖ to ―Very Well in 2009-2010 and 78% of participants rated this item as ―Well‖ to ―VeryWell in 2010-2011. With Instructional Planning and Delivery, 76% of participants rated this item as ―Well‖ to ―Very Well in 2009-2010 and 71% of participants rated this item as ―Well‖ to ―Very Well in 2010-2011. With using computer technology, 58% ofparticipants rated this item as ―Well‖ to ―Very Well in 2009-2010 and 32% of participants rated this item as ―Well‖ to ―Very Well in2010-2011. With reading and literacy strategies, 71% of participants rated this item as ―Well‖ to ―Very Well in 2009-2010 and 82% of participants rated this item as ―Well‖ to ―Very Well in 2010-2011. With teaching English Learners, 85% of participants rated this item as ―Well‖ to ―Very Well in 2009-2010 and 90% of participants rated this item as ―Well‖ to ―Very Well in 2010-2011. With teaching special populations, 71% of participants rated this item as ―Well‖ to ―Very Well in 2009-2010 and 89% of participants rated this item as ―Well‖ to ―Very Well in 2010-2011. With professional, legal, and ethical aspects on teaching, 82% of participants rated this item as―Well‖ to ―Very Well in 2009-2010 and 78% of participants rated this item as ―Well‖ to ―Very Well in 2010-2011. With child/adolescent development, 52% of participants rated this item as ―Well‖ to ―Very Well in 2009-2010 and 70% of participants rated this item as ―Well‖ to ―Very Well in 2010-2011.116014587820500532701587820500Analysis and Discussion of Program EffectivenessAreas of StrengthAreas for GrowthThe coursework improved candidates’ teaching effectiveness inthe following areas:Assessing Student Learning Classroom Management Instructional Planning and Delivery Reading and Literacy Strategies Teaching English LearnersThe program needs to continue improving instructionaltransference and feedback to interns in the following areas: Using Computer TechnologyProfessional, Legal and EthicalChild/Adolescent DevelopmentProgram Effectiveness: Analysis and DiscussionTPA 1FirstAttemptTPA 1SecondAttemptTPA 2FirstAttemptTPA 2SecondAttemptTPA 3FirstAttemptTPA 3SecondAttemptTPA 4FirstAttemptTPA 4SecondAttemptOverallFirstAttemptOverallSecondAttempt2009/1076.19%(16/21)100.00%(5/5)63.16%(12/19)66.67%(4/6)68.75%(11/16)25.00%(1/4)100.00%(13/13)N/A75.36%(52/69)66.67%(10/15)2010/1178.57%(11/14)100.00%(3/3)50.00%(7/14)100.00%(7/7)N/AN/AN/AN/A64.29%(18/28)100.00%(10/10)Table 5: Passage of Cal TPA Tasks: First and Second AttemptsIn 2009/10 the LAUSD District Intern Program had – general education candidates who attempted the first CalTPA Teaching Performance Assessment, Subject Specific Pedagogy. Of these candidates, 75.36% (n=52) successfully passed all four CalTPA tasks on their first attempt. During the time period covered in this report, some general education teaching candidates dropped out of the program for various reasons. Of the2010/11 cohort CalTPA CTE, or TPA 4, has not been turned in so the data in the table is for CalTPA tasks 1-3. Comparing the first time pass rate data from 2009/10 and 2010/11 on each of the comparable CalTPA tasks shows that the passage rate dropped between CalTPA SSP (TPA 1) andCalTPA DI (TPA 2) for both cohorts.5269230147828000Analysis and Discussion of Candidate ProficiencyAreas of StrengthAreas for GrowthPreparation and support for interns to pass Cal TPA, task 1 onthe first try which assesses interns’ subject specific pedagogy. Preparation and support for interns to pass Cal TPA, task 4 on the first try which is a culminating teaching experience.In 2010-2011, 100% of TPAs, task 1 and task 2 were passed on the second try after receiving Cal TPA intervention. This suggest that TPA intervention has been successfulThe programs needs to continue on improving in the preparationan support for TPA, task 2 which measures interns’ ability to Design Instruction and TPA, task 3 which measures interns’ ability to assess learning.The following TPEs need to be emphasized more in DI courses: TPE 9-Instructional PlanningTPE 2-Monitoring Students Learning During InstructionTPE 3- Interpretation and Use of AssessmentsProgram Effectiveness: Analysis and DiscussionWhen training was ReceivedQuality of Training provided this year onlyType of TrainingPrior YearsDid not ReceivePoorGoodMeanStdBeginning Teacher Development45.20%3.20%0.00%51.60%2.581.50The CSTPs38.70%0.00%3.20%58.10%2.811.47Support Strategies29.00%3.20%0.00%67.70%3.061.39Students Academic Content Standards andCurriculum35.50%6.50%0.00%58.10%2.811.45Interpersonal Communication Skills32.20%6.50%0.00%54.80%2.831.44Knowledge of adult learning Theory32.20%32.20%0.00%35.50%2.391.28Table 6: Support Provide End of Year Quality of Training Report: 2010-201111430001334135005398770133413500Table 6 data describes the effectiveness of support provider training. Support Providers were asked about the quality of the training they received this year organized by various categories. An average of %34.46 received training in prior years bud did not receive the training this year. An average of 54.2 % of teachers felt that the training that they received this year was good.Areas of StrengthAreas for GrowthThe data indicates that the program shows strength in providingtraining in the following areas: Support Strategies CSTPsStudent Academic Content Standards and Curriculum The data indicates strength in providing effective feedback to support providers to improve their professional growth.The data shows that the needs to improve training in thefollowing areas:Beginning Teacher Development Interpersonal Communication Skills Knowledge of adult learning theoryPart III (Part A): Single SubjectProgram Effectiveness: Analysis and DiscussionCohor tTota lComplete dCourse andPortfolio Task are Up to DateNo ShowResignedTerminatedExtension/ Behind SchedulePercent Completed / On track to completion09/102611N/A133842.31%10/1117N/A12102270.58%Table 7: Intern Completion RateTable 7 data indicates the completion rate for the 2009-2010 cohort. For the 2010-2011 cohort, since the interns are scheduled to complete in June 2012, the table reflects the number of interns who are current with their courses and portfolio tasks is displayed. The percent completed includes interns who withdrew from the program because they either resigned from their position or they were non- reelected. In 2009-2010, out of 26 candidates, 11 candidates completed the program on time; 7 interns withdrew from the program, and 8 required an extension. In 2010-2011, out of 17 candidates, 12 candidates are anticipated to complete program on time, two interns withdrew from the program, and two will likely need an extension.Areas of StrengthAreas for Growth2010-2011 Cohort has 70.58% of interns on schedule to completetheir coursework and portfolio tasks on time. Only 2 interns are anticipated to require an extension due to maternity leave. The program has made extra efforts in the 2010-2011 school year to provide the necessary support such:o Early intervention advice and assistanceo District Intern support workshopso Individualized support to interns by DI staff2009-2010 data indicates that there is a need for improvement insupporting interns as they complete their coursework and portfolio tasks.The most common reason for not completing on time for the2009-2010 cohort was the high number of missing assignments from courses and portfolio tasks.Late submission of TPAs also affected the completion rate of2009-2010 cohort.Part IV: Subject Specific:Improvement of Candidate performanceData SourceCommon/ProgramStandardsPlan of Action/ProposedChangePassage Rate on the CalTPA TasksCommon Standard 6: Advice andAssistanceCommon Standard 7: FieldExperience and Clinical PracticeCommon Standard 9: Assessment ofCandidate CompetenceProgram Standard 18: Implementation of the Teaching Performance Assessment: Candidate Preparation and SupportEmbed more practice and problem solvingopportunities so interns can strengthen their practice in making adaptations for English Learners and Students with Special NeedsSo that interns can improve on incorporating student data into their lesson plans, the DIprogram will provide more direction, models and, scaffolds.The DI program will develop a process for improved analysis of the Records of Evidence (ROE) to provide specific and timely feedback to interns about which areas there is need for improvementCalTPA, Task 4 will be due after all courses have been completed.Performance on Portfolio Tasks including:(Credo/Philosophy, Spending Time to Save Time,My life as a Teacher, Plan and Deliver, What’sbehind the Classroom Door)Common Standard 6: Advice andAssistanceCommon Standard 7: Field Experience and Clinical PracticeCommon Standard 9: Assessment ofCandidate CompetenceProgram Standard 3: FoundationalEducational Ideas and ResearchProgram Standard 6: Pedagogy andReflective PracticeContent delivery will incorporate more problemsolving, inquiry based activity based activities.The reflective process will continue to be part of every course by including a cumulative reflective journal after every course where interns reflecton what they learned in the course and their growth over time.Benchmark Course Passage Rate (ClassroomManagement, Teaching English Learners, Methods of Teaching)Common Standard 6: Advice andAssistanceCommon Standard 7: Field Experience and Clinical PracticeCommon Standard 9: Assessment ofCandidate CompetenceProgram Standard 6: Pedagogy andReflective PracticeProgram Standard 12: Preparation toTeach English LearnersProgram Standard 8: Pedagogical Preparation for Subject-Specific Content InstructionIncrease the use of accountable talk into everycourse.Increase the use of strategies for English Learners and Students with Special Needs in all other courses.Provide models of exemplary lesson plans with all four SDAIE componentsContinue to scaffold the lesson planning process so that interns internalize habits of mind.62979304321175006297930549529000Part IV: Subject Specific:629793059817000Improvement of Program PerformanceData SourceCommon/Program StandardsPlan of Action/Proposed ChangeIntern State SurveyCommon Standard 2:Unit and Program Assessment and EvaluationProgram Standard 11:Using Technology in the ClassroomContinue to increase the use of technology/multi-media into course presentation. Continue to increase the incorporation of information technology such as LAUSD’s digital library into DI courses. Add the use of technology for students into theDI lesson planning template. Identify when coursework addresses ethical issues and professional obligations. Continue to emphasize child and adolescent development (cognitive, social, emotional) into the foundations of education courseIntern Completion RateCommon Standard 6:Advice and AssistanceCommon Standard 9:Assessment of Candidate CompetenceContinue to provide support and outreach to assist interns with pacing of portfolio task Continue to provide support sessions during winter break, spring break and after school. Ensure that program requirements are aligned and connected to courses and TPEs and are relevant to their teaching assignment.Support Provider State SurveyCommon Standard 6:Advice and AssistanceCommon Standard 8:District-Employed SupervisorsProgram Standard 1: Intern Program DeliveryModelIncrease collaboration and training with the New Teacher Center for support provider training. Provide support in the support provider match- up and selection process.District Intern Credential Program Participant InformationSpecial Ed09-1010-1109-10 10-11Number of candidates (public/charter schools)282211Total Number of candidates assignedto School Improvement, Program Improvement or SAIT-identified settingsYear 114281Number of candidates (private schools)00Number of active Support Providers7880Year 2100102Candidate: Support Provider RatioParticipants: Non-NBC Support ProviderParticipants: NBC Support Provider:2:14:12:14:1Total number of candidates recommended for Level IPreliminary MS Credential254Total number of candidates recommended for Level IPreliminary MM Credential8743Program Standard(s)Explanation of ChangeStandard 8Support Provider selection process changed.Standards 9, 11, 13, 19Combined courses ESEd 515and 516 and merged with ESEd 502.1c, renamed to ESEd502.1c and differentiated curriculum for all Level II candidates, mild to moderate and moderate to severe.Standards 11, 13, 16, 19, 20, 24, 27Merged ESEd 509 with ESEd 524, renamed to ESEd 524 and differentiated curriculum forall Level II candidates, mild to moderate and moderate to severe.Standards 10, 11, 16Merged ESEd 401 with ESEd 409, renamed to ESEd 409/409.1 and differentiatedcurriculum for all Level I candidates, mild to moderate and moderate to severe.Standards 24Merged ESEd 401a and 405 with ESEd 321, renamed to ESEd 321 and differentiatedcurriculum for all Level I candidates, mild to moderate and moderate to severe.Standards 12, 20Merged ESEd 520 with ESEd 510, renamed to ESEd 510 and differentiated curriculum forall Level II candidates, mild to moderate and moderate to severe.AssessmentToolTableDescription of ToolData GatheredUseRICA1Reading Instruction CompetenceAssessment verifies interns have knowledge and skills to provide effective reading instruction to children.RICA pass ratesEvidence of candidatecompetence to teach reading.Picture Worth 1000Words2Portfolio task in which internssubmit a 20 minute video taped lesson demonstrating effective use of various strategies and pleted tasks assessed using arubric:Videos, Lesson Plans Reflective summariesEvidence of candidatecompetence to use intervention/strategies to teach students with special needs.PreliminaryIndividualizedInduction Plan3Development of a focus area forprofessional growth which will become the foundation for action research during the induction pleted tasks assessed using arubricEvidence ofcandidates’ competence to meet the TPEs and self- reflect upon their practice.IndividualizedInduction Plan4Builds on the development of afocus area for professional growth by narrowing down to a focus question which is the foundation for action research.Self assessments of strengths/needs;informal and formal research activities; design and implementation of lesson series; data analysis; reflection on professional growthEvidence of candidatecompetence to use action research to improve practice.Behavior/ClassroomManagement CoursesFinal Grades5Interns develop classroommanagement plans, functional behavior assessments, and positive behavior support plans forstudents with special needs.Final grades based upon: classroommanagement plans, Functional Behavior Assessments, Positive Behavior PlansEvidence of candidatecompetence to develop and implement positive behavior supports.Teaching EnglishLearners Courses FinalGrades6Interns develop practices,strategies and interventions that enable English learners with special needs to access curriculum across all content areas.Final grades based upon a standards-based lesson plan that incorporates: content standards, ELA standards, ELD standards, content and language objectives, SDAIE strategies, and interactive activities.Evidence ofcandidates’ abilities to make content comprehensible to ELs with specialneeds and incorporate strategies to increase content literacy.Assessment CoursesFinal Grades7Interns use formal and informalmeasures to develop curriculum and individualized instruction for individuals with mild-moderate and moderate-severe disabilities. Interns develop knowledge to work collaboratively with the general education faculty and other special education specialists to effectively promote thestudents' abilities to function in the least restrictive environment.Final grades based upon: choosingand administering formal/informal assessments; writing present levels of performance reports; developing IEP goals/objectives; evaluating general education/alternative curriculum; developing resource specialist reports.Evidence of candidatecompetence to link assessment data to students’ strengths/needs, to inform the IEP development, and instruction.AssessmentToolTableDescription of ToolData GatheredUseEnd-of-Year StateIntern Survey8Survey, developed by CTC, is takenonline by Interns finishing the Clear or Preliminary credential program(s) in the spring of each school year.Measurement ofperceptions of the program using a Likert Scale.To determine theeffectiveness of the program according to interns’ perceptions.Course Evaluations9Intern evaluations of coursework areadministered at the end of each course. Perceptions of alignment of coursework to classroom practice.Likert scales and open-ended comments.Program effectiveness inmeeting standards.RICA Passage Rates10Reading Instruction CompetenceAssessment verifies interns have knowledge and skills to provide effective reading instruction to children.Analysis of attemptrates.Program effectiveness.Program CompletionRates11Number of interns completing the Level Iand Level II programs within the given time frame.Number of interns whoreceived Level I andLevel II credentials.Program effectiveness inpreparing and supporting interns in successful course completion and portfolio requirements.End-of-Year SupportProvider Survey DataEducational Specialist Interns State Survey12Support provider survey, developed byCTC, is taken online in the spring of school year.Measurement ofperceptions of the program using a Likert Scale.To determine theeffectiveness of the program for training/feedback to support providers.Candidate Proficiency Analysis and Discussion2009-20102010-2011RICA Attempts201RICA Passage181Passage Rate90.00%100.00%Table 1: RICA Passage RatesIn 2009-2010 twenty interns participated in the administration of the Reading Instruction Competence Assessment (RICA) to demonstrate the knowledge and skills to provide effective reading instruction to children. Eighteen interns passed the RICA resulting in a 90% passage rate. In 2010-2011, one intern participated in, and passed the administration of the RICA, resulting in a 100% passage rate.Analysis and Discussion of Candidate ProficiencyStrengthAreas for GrowthThe data reflects strengths in the areas of knowledge and skills toprovide effective reading instruction to children as demonstrated by the passage rate of the RICA.The data reflects an area of growth for the program to continueimproving candidates’ RICA passage rate by providing effectivefeedback.2009/20102010/201143TotalAverageScoreStan Dev# 4#3TotalAverageScoreStan DevA Picture Is Worth AThousand Words39651043.370.48795382403.850.19604Table 2: Portfolio Assignment: (4-Advanced: 3-Proficient): A Picture Is Worth A Thousand WordsInterns submitted lesson plans, reflective summaries of lessons, and 20 minute videos of lessons demonstrating effective use ofvarious strategies and interventions for students with special needs. In 2009-2010, a total of 104 interns submitted the tasks, 39 interns received advanced scores of 4, and 65 interns received proficient scores of 3. The average score for the year was 3.37. In 2010 -2011, a total of 40 interns submitted the task, 38 interns received advanced scores of 4, and 2 interns received proficient scores of 3. The average score for the year was 3.85.Analysis and Discussion of Candidate ProficiencyStrengthAreas for GrowthData reflects candidates demonstrated the ability to plan, implement,and reflect on instruction with a success rate of 100%.Data reflects a need to provide a clear link between the reflectionsummary of a Picture Is Worth A Thousand Words and the reflective cycle in the induction process.2009/20102011/201243TotalAverageScoreStan Dev# 4#3TotalAverageScoreStan DevPreliminary InductionPlan34701043.320.46768355403.50.30033Table 3: Portfolio Assignment: (4-Advanced: 3-Proficient): Preliminary Induction PlanInterns developed a focus area for professional growth which became the foundation for their action research during the induction process. In2009-2010, 104 interns completed a Preliminary Individualized Induction Plan in which 34 interns received advanced scores of 4 and 70 interns received proficient scores of 3. The average score for the year was 3.32. In 2010 - 2011, a total of 40 interns submitted the task, in which 35 interns received advanced scores of 4 and 5 interns received proficient scores of 3. The average score for the yearwas 3.5.Analysis and Discussion of Candidate ProficiencyStrengthAreas for GrowthData reflects candidates demonstrated the abilities to reflect upon theirinstructional practices and develop focus areas for professional growth, with a success rate of 100%.Data reflects the need to provide a clear link between thedevelopment of the focus area and the next steps of the induction process.2009/20102010/201143INCTotalAverageScore# 4#3INCTotalAverageScoreIndividual Induction Plan4941181083.5440160563.71Table 4: Portfolio Assignment: (4-Advanced: 3-Proficient): Individual Induction PlanInterns narrowed their focus areas and implemented action research as part of the induction process. In 2009-2010, 108 interns completed an Individualized Induction Plan in which 49 interns received advanced scores of 4, and 41 interns received proficient scores of 3, and 18 required revisions to complete assignments. The average score for the year was 3.54. In 2010 - 2011, a total of 56 interns completed an Individual Induction Plan in which 40 interns received advanced scores of 4, and 16 interns received proficient scores of 3. The average score for the year was 3.71.Analysis and Discussion of Candidate ProficiencyStrengthAreas for GrowthData reflects that candidates complete their development, implementationand reflection of their action research in a one year period with a 94% to100% success rate.Data reflects as need to provide support and feedback to thecandidates that do not complete their action research in the one year period.NNot ProficientProficientAdvanced9-1010-119-1010-119-1010-119-1010-11Percentage100%100%10.53%0%70.69%33%44.83%67%Total733360411126222707005-88392000Table 5: Behavior Management Courses GradesInterns developed classroom management plans, conducted functional behavior assessments, and developed positive behavior plans for students with special needs. In 2009-2010, 73 interns enrolled in the course in which 26 received advanced scores, 41 received proficient scores, and 6 received scores that were not proficient. Interns demonstrated a 92% success rate. In 2010-2011, 33 interns enrolled in the course in which 22 received advanced scores, 11 received proficient scores, and 0 received scores that were not proficient. Interns demonstrated a 100% success rate.Analysis and Discussion of Candidate ProficiencyStrengthAreas for GrowthData reflects strengths in the areas of developing positive behaviorplans.Data reflects areas for growth in program providing supportand feedback.2009-2010NNot ProficientProficientAdvancedPercentage100%15.52%60.34%24.14%Total57935142010-2011NNot ProficientProficientAdvancedPercentage100%0%12%88%Total330429Table 6: Teaching English Learners with Disabilities CoursesInterns develop practices, strategies and interventions that enable English learners with special needs to access curriculum across all content areas. In 2009-2010, 57 interns enrolled in the course in which 14 received advanced scores, 35 received proficient scores, and 9 received scores that were not proficient. Interns demonstrated a 84.48% success rate. In 2010-2011, 33 interns enrolled in the course in which 29 received advanced scores, 4 received proficient scores, and 0 received scores that were not proficient. Interns demonstrated a 100% success rate.Analysis and Discussion of Candidate ProficiencyStrengthAreas for GrowthData reflects candidates demonstrated the ability to use strategies andinterventions to enable English learners with special needs to access curriculum across all content areas.Data reflects areas for growth for the program to increasecollaboration with language acquisition branch to improve curriculum to teach English learners.385508547942500Candidate Proficiency Analysis and Discussion2009-2010 AssessmentNot ProficientProficientAdvancedPercentage100%3%20%77%Total1415281082010-2011 AssessmentNot ProficientProficientAdvancedPercentage100%5%14%81%Total133718108Table 7: Benchmark AssignmentsInterns used multiple assessment measures to develop curriculum and Individualized Education Plans (IEPs) for students with mild- moderate and moderate-severe disabilities. Interns worked collaboratively with the general education faculty and other special education specialists to effectively promote the students' abilities to function in the least restrictive environment. In 2009-2010, 141 interns enrolled in the course in which 108 received advanced scores, 28 received proficient scores, and 5 received scores that werenot proficient. Interns demonstrated a 97% success rate. In 2010-2011, 133 interns were enrolled in the course in which 108 received advanced scores, 18 received, and 7 received scores that were not proficient. Interns demonstrated a 95% success rate.Analysis and Discussion of Candidate ProficiencyStrengthAreas of GrowthData reflects interns used multiple assessments measures effectively. Internsused multiple assessment measures to develop curriculum and Individualized Education Plans (IEPs) for students with mild-moderate and moderate-severe disabilities. Interns worked collaboratively with the general education faculty and other special education specialists to effectively promote the students' abilities to function in the least restrictive environment.Data reflects the need to sustain a high proficiency rate,and for instructors/ facilitators to continue to provide effective instruction in the area of assessment.Candidate Proficiency: Analysis and DiscussionRICA Passage Rate2009-20102010-2011RICA Attempts201RICA Passage181Passage Rate90.00%100.00%Table 8: RICAIn 2009-2010 twenty interns participated in the administration of the Reading Instruction Competence Assessment (RICA) to demonstrate the knowledge and skills to provide effective reading instruction to children. Eighteen interns passed the RICA resulting in a 90% passage rate. In 2010-2011, one intern participated in, and passed the administration of the RICA, resulting in a 100% passage rate.Analysis and Discussion of Program EffectivenessStrengthAreas for GrowthData reflects an effective RICA preparation program that embedselements into CORE curriculum courses.Data reflects the need to improve interventions for interns that have notbeen successful in passing the RICA.Program Effectiveness: Analysis and DiscussionDid Not ReceiveNot at allSomewhatWellVery Well2009-102010-112009-102010-112009-102010-112009-102010-112009-102010-11Working with Families5.90%50.00%5.90%0.00%52.90%50.00%35.30%50.00%5.90%0.00%Assessment and InstructionalAccommodations0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%21.10%33.30%52.60%66.70%26.30%0.00%Collaboration and Co-teaching strategies26.70%0.00%6.70%33.30%53.30%33.30%20.00%33.30%20.00%0.00%Disability Specific Content72.70%0.00%0.00%33.30%54.50%33.30%27.30%33.30%18.20%0.00%Positive Behavior Support0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%31.60%33.30%47.40%66.70%21.10%0.00%Transition and IEP's11.80%0.00%11.80%0.00%58.80%33.30%17.60%66.70%11.80%0.00%Table 9: Educational Specialist Interns State Survey 2009-2010/10-11In the survey items specific to Education Specialist Interns, participants rated the effectiveness of course work on a scale from ―Very Well‖ to ―Did Not Receive.‖ Summarizing the combined results in the categories of ―Well‖ and ―Very Well,‖ the data reflects the interns’ ratings of items as: Effectiveness of Working with Families in 2009-10 was 41.2% and 2010-11 was 50%; Assessment and Instructional Accommodations in 2009-10 was 78.9% and 2010-11was 66.7%; Collaboration and Co-Teaching Strategies in 2009-10 was 40% and 2010-11was 33.3%; Disability Specific Content in 2009-10 was 45.5% and 2010-11 was 11 33.3%; Positive Behavior Support in 2009-10 was 68.5% and in 2010-11 was 67.7%; Transition and IEPs in 2009-10 was 29.4% and in 2010-11 was 67.7%.Analysis and Discussion of Program EffectivenessStrengthAreas for GrowthData reflects program strengths in: Working with Families,and Transition and IEPsData reflects program areas for growth in: Assessment andInstructional Accommodations, Collaboration and Co-TeachingStrategies, Disability Specific Content, and Positive Behavior SupportPart III (Part B): Special EducationProgram Effectiveness: Analysis and DiscussionCohortProgramTotalCompletedExtensionPercentCompletedW08/09Mild/Mod440100.0%S/F09/10Mild/Mod1615193.7%S/F09/10Mod/Sev87187.5%S/F10/11Mild/Mod33330100.0%Table 10 A: Program Completion LevelThe number of interns completing the Level I program within the specified time period was tallied to determine the completion rate. Cohort W 0809 Mild Moderate completed the program with a 100% success rate. Cohort SF 0910 Mild Moderate completed the program with a 93.7% success rate. Cohort SF 0910 Moderate Severe completed the program with a 87.5% success rate. Cohort SF1011 Mild Moderate completed the program with a 100% success rate.CohortProgramTotalCompletedExtensionPercentCompletedS/F 07/08Mild/Mod27270100.0%S/F 07/08 MSMod/Sev13130100.0%W 07/08Mild Mod73443.0%S/F 08/09Mild/Mod4036490.0%S/F 08/09Mod/Sev13130100.0%W 08/09Mild/ModCENTSE440100.0%S/F 09/10CENTSEM/M2622485.0%S/F 09/10CENTSEM/S109190.0%Table 10 B: Program Completion Level IIThe number of interns completing the Level II program within the specified time period was tallied to determine the completion rate.Cohort SF 0708 Mild Moderate completed the program with a 100.0% success rate. Cohort SF 0708 Moderate Severer completed the program with a 100.0% success rate. Cohort W 0708 Mild Moderate completed the program with a 43.0% success rate. Cohort SF0809 Mild Moderate completed the program with a 90.0% success rate. Cohort SF 0809 Moderate Severe completed the program with a 100.0% success rate. Cohort W 0809 CENTSE Mild Moderate completed the program with a 100.0% success rate. Cohort SF 0910CENTSE Mild Moderate completed the program with an 85.0% success rate. Cohort SF 0910 CENTSE Moderate Severe completed the program with a 90.0% success rate.Analysis and Discussion of Program EffectivenessStrengthAreas for GrowthData reflects strengths in the areas of program completion ratesranging 85% to 100% for 91.6% of all cohorts.Data reflects areas for growth in the area of progress monitoring withsupport mechanisms and feedback for interns who are not completing the program within the 2-3 years time period.Part IV: Special EducationImprovement of Candidate PerformanceData SourceCommon Standards andProgram StandardsPlan of Action/Proposed ChangeRICA passage ratesProject: A Picture Worth1000 WordsPreliminary Individualized Induction PlanIndividualized InductionPlanProgram Standard : Common Standard: 2, 3, 9Program Standard : 12, 15, 16, 18, 20Common Standard: 2, 7, 9,Program Standard: 12, 15, 16, 18, 20Common Standard: 2,7, 9,Program Standard: 12, 15, 16, 18, 20Common Standard: 2, 7, 9Provide feedback on course of action to increase abilities topass the assessment.Provide meaningful exercises within the course work that support the connection of strategic lesson planning to the provision of effective instruction for all students.Clearly link the self-reflection processes to the reflective cycle in the induction process through meaningful exercises embedded in the course work.Incorporate additional problem-solving, inquiry-based activities in content delivery processes.Enhance the reflective process by incorporating more interactive classroom exercises focused on actively reflecting and receiving immediate feedback.Increase support and outreach to assist interns with pacing and completion of induction tasks.Offer support sessions weekly throughout the school year. Refine the alignment of induction course work increasing relevancy to interns’ teaching assignments.838835108648500Behavior/Classroom Management Courses Final Grades (2,4,6,7,9)Teaching English Learners Courses Final Grades(2,4,9)Assessment CoursesFinal Grades(2,3,4,6,7,9)Program Standard : 15, 16, 22, 24, 25,Common Standard: 2,3,9Program Standard : 11, 12, 16, 17,20, 26Common Standard: 2,3,4,7Program Standard : 10,Incorporate self- reflective processes to strengthen abilities to analyze and identify the function of behaviors.Promote the continuous evaluation of adult attitudes/reactions and their relationship to student behaviors.Increase awareness of culturally relevant and responsive instructional bined advanced behavior course from Level II to newPreliminary ProgramReview researched-based instructional methods for EL in every course.Model the use of strategies for English Learners in all other courses.Provide models of exemplary lesson plans with all four SDAIEcomponents.Increase collaboration with District’s Language Acquisition branch to remain current with research-based practices. Combined Level II advance teaching strategies for English Learners in new Preliminary program.Increase direct instruction and practice opportunities to increase the effective use of multiple measures of assessment.Improve the understanding of the effective use of baseline, formative and summative assessment data.838835108648500Common Standard: 2,3,9Integrate the usage of District data bases to maximize the use of multiple data bined advanced assessment, curriculum program evaluation from Level II to new Preliminary program.Part IV (Cont.): Special EducationImprovement of Program EffectivenessData SourceCommon StandardsPlan of Action/Proposed ChangeRICA passage ratesCTC End-of-Year survey items specific to Education SpecialistCourse Passage RatesProgram Standard :Common Standard: 2, 3, 9Program Standard : Common Standard: 4, 8, 9Program Standard : Common Standard: 2, 9,Provide feedback on course of action to increase abilities to pass theassessment.Increase opportunities to practice using assessment tools to derive data that drives instruction.Identify and model instructional accommodations.Incorporate collaboration and co-teaching strategies throughout course work.Emphasize coursework focused on disability specific content. Integrate positive behavior support strategies.Illustrate purposeful integration of TPEs/CSTPs across curriculum content.Increase opportunities to problem-solve to strengthen interns’ abilities to make instructional adaptations for English Learners and Students with Special Needs.Improve interns’ abilities to incorporate student data into IEPs andlesson plans.Provide interns with additional direction, models, and scaffolds.District Intern Preliminary Credential Program Participant InformationDI BTSA09-1010-119-1010-11Number of candidates (public/charter schools)Total Number of candidates assigned toSchool Improvement, Program Improvement or SAIT-identified settingsNumber of candidates (private schools)Number of active Support ProvidersSupport Provider RatioCandidates: Non-NBC Support ProviderCandidates: NBC Support Provider:2:14:12:14:1Total number of candidates recommended for ClearCredentialNumber of Verification of Unavailability of aCommission-Approved Induction Program(CL-855) notices issued to eligible candidatesProgram Standard(s)Explanation of ChangeProgram Standard 1: ProgramDesignIn the 2010-2011 school year, participating teachers in the District Intern BTSA Induction Programwere transitioned to the LAUSD BTSA Induction Program to complete the remaining requirements for their clear credential. A select few who had less than a semester to compete earned their clear credential with the District Intern BTSA Induction Program in 2010-2011.Part II: DI BTSA Candidate Assessment/performance and Program Effectiveness Assessment Tools78168543116500221107042481500914527043116500Candidate Performance Assessment ToolsAssessmentToolDescription of ToolData GatheredUsePortfolio Task:Context for TeachingParticipating Teachers (PT) gather data about theirclass, school, district and community and discuss the implications of this with their support providers using conversation guides.Task assessed with criteria chartand initial passage rateEvidence of PTs’ability to access information about students and connect it to student learningPortfolio Task: InitialAssessment ofTeaching PracticeProvides PTs with the opportunity to compare andcontrast the teacher preparation program with those of the Induction Program. They consider prior knowledge and skills acquired during teacher preparation, their current context for teaching, and evidence gathered by a trained support provider during a classroom observation, to assess their teaching practice and identify strengths and areas for growth.Task assessed with a criteria chartand initial passage rateEvidence of PTs’ability to use reflection and feedback to improve teaching practice and subject matter knowledgePortfolio Task:Inquiry 1 on EquityWith a focus of providing equity to students’diverse learning needs, PTs gather information, collaborate with (and/or observe) a colleague, develop an action plan, implement the action plan, reflect on collected evidence and apply new learning to future practice. The results of an inquiry are used by participating teachers and support providers to explore the impact of instruction on student achievement while guiding the participating teacher's future professional development.Inquiry 1 task assessed with arubric on 5 areas of professional growth: self assessment, the lesson series and the observed lesson, aligning, analyzing and interpreting assessments, differentiated instruction, writing reflectionsEvidence of PTs’competency in the assessed areas for providing equity to all studentsPortfolio Task:With a focus on teaching English Learners, PTsInquiry 2 task assessed with aEvidence of PTs’Inquiry 2 on teachingEnglish Learnersgather information, collaborate with (and/orobserve) a colleague, develop an action plan, implement the action plan, reflect on collected evidence and apply new learning to future practice. The results of an inquiry are used by participating teachers and support providers to explore the impact of instruction on student achievement while guiding the participating teacher's future professional development.rubric on 5 areas of professionalgrowth: self assessment, the lesson series and the observed lesson, aligning, analyzing and interpreting assessments, differentiated instruction, writing reflectionscompetency in theassessed areas for teaching English LearnersPortfolio Task:Inquiry 3 on teachingSpecial PopulationsWith a focus on teaching English Learners, PTsgather information, collaborate with (and/or observe) a colleague, develop an action plan, implement the action plan, reflect on collected evidence and apply new learning to future practice. The results of an inquiry are used by participating teachers and support providers to explore the impact of instruction on student achievement while guiding the participating teacher's future professional development.Inquiry 3 task assessed with arubric on 5 areas of professional growth: self assessment, the lesson series and the observed lesson, aligning, analyzing and interpreting assessments, differentiated instruction, writing reflectionsEvidence of PTs’competency in the assessed areas for teaching Special PopulationsPart II (cont.): DI BTSAProgram Effectiveness Assessment ToolsAssessmentToolDescription of ToolData GatheredUseEnd of YearSupport ProviderSurveySurvey developed by CTC aretaken online in the spring of school year by support providersMeasurement of PTs’ perceptions of theprogram. Uses Likert scale.To determine the effectivenessof the program according to support provider perceptionPT Completion rateMeasurement of PTs completionof the program within the provided time frameMeasurement of the number of PTs whocompleted the program on time, the number who needed an extension and the number who never completed the programProgram effectiveness inguiding and supporting participating teachers as they complete induction requirementsColloquiumEvaluationsAt the end of the program, PTscomplete program evaluations about their satisfaction with the program.Qualitative questions that highlight thestrengths and areas of needed growth for the program.To determine how PTs feel theprogram is strong are where it can be improved.Part III (Part A): DI BTSACandidate Performance: Analysis and Discussion2009-20102010-20112009-20102010-20112009-20102010-20112009-20102010-2011Portfolio TaskNumber ofSubmissionNumber ofSubmissionPartiallyProficientPartiallyProficientProficientProficient%Proficient%ProficientPortfolio Task:Context forTeaching7549107654287%86%Portfolio Task:Initial Assessment of Teaching Practice744461684358%98%Table 1: Portfolio Assessment and SubmissionThe table reflects the number of portfolio tasks submitted for the first two components of FACT, Context for Teaching and Initial Assessment of Teaching Practice. Both tasks were assessed using a criteria chart. They are assessed as either proficient or partially proficient. In 2009-2010, 87% of the Context for teaching tasks was assessed as proficient and 58% of the Initial Assessment of teaching practice tasks was assessed as proficient. In 2010-2011, 86% of Context for Teaching Tasks was assessed as proficient and98% of the Initial Assessment of Teaching Practice was assessed as proficient.Analysis and Discussion of Candidate ProficiencyAreas of StrengthAreas for GrowthIn 2010-2011, there was a high proficiency rate for the Initial Assessment of Teaching Practice. This reflects that participating teachers are strong in their ability to use reflection and feedback to improve teaching practice and subject matter knowledge.In both years, proficiency rate for Context for Teaching was below90%. This may suggest that there is a need for growth in PTs’ ability to access information about students and connect it to student learning.Part III (Part A): DI BTSACandidate Performance: Analysis and DiscussionInquiry Data2009-2010NumberMedianMeanSelf-AssessmentLessonSeriesAnalyzeAssessmentDifferentiatingInstructionReflectionon InquiryProcessInquiry 1 - Equity322.002.462.782.883.002.632.78Inquiry 2 - TeachingEnglish Learners263.003.143.273.383.353.123.23Inquiry 3 - SpecialPopulations73.003.003.293.433.143.433.43Inquiry Data2010-2011NumberMedianMeanSelf-AssessmentLessonSeriesAnalyzeAssessmentDifferentiatingInstructionReflectionon InquiryProcessInquiry 1 - Equity483.002.642.993.042.992.863.01Inquiry 2 - TeachingEnglish Learners443.002.913.113.233.113.053.23Inquiry 3 - SpecialPopulations263.002.772.963.273.193.083.12Table 2: Inquiry Task DataThe Table reflects the performance by PTs on three separate inquiries: 1) inquiry focused on equity, 2) inquiry focused on teaching English Learners and 3) inquiry 3 focused on teaching special populations. Each inquiry is assessed on a scale of 1-4. The data reflects the overall mean for each task for the 2009-2010 and 2010-2011 school years and the mean for each of the sub scores of the rubric. The number of inquiries submitted each year was inconsistent due to fluctuating program enrollment.Analysis and Discussion of Candidate ProficiencyAreas of StrengthAreas for GrowthInquiry 2 on Teaching English Learners reflected thehighest mean for both years. Interns showed strength in Program Standard 6a: Teaching English Learners. In this inquiry, interns demonstrate the ability to implement one or more of the components of English Language Development, grade-level academic language instruction, ELD by proficiency level and/or content-based ELD.With a mean of 2.46 in 2009-2010 and 2.64 in 2010-2011, Inquiry 1was consistently low for both years. This would suggest that PTs have a need for growth in Induction Standard 6: Equity for all students. In this inquiry, PTs demonstrate the ability to examine and strive to minimize bias in classrooms, schools and larger educational systems while using culturally responsive pedagogical practices.Part III (Part A): DI BTSACandidate Performance: Analysis and DiscussionSupport Provider End of Year Survey: (See Data for General Education SupportProvider Survey)Part III (Part A): DI BTSACandidate Performance: Analysis and DiscussionYearTotalCompletedTransitioned toLAUSD BTSARIFResignedTerminatedPercent Completed2009-201077556142071%2010-201154341801176%Table 3: DI BTSA Completion RateThe following data shows the completion rate for participating teachers who completed their Clear Credential. In 2009-2010, 14 teachers were released due to Reduction in Force, 15 teachers earned their Clear Credential and 6 teachers were transitioned to the LAUSD BTSA Program to complete their remaining program requirements. In 2010-2011, 20 PTs remained in the District Intern BTSA Induction Program and completed their Clear Credential and 19 transitioned to the LAUSD BTSA Induction Program.Analysis and Discussion of Program EffectivenessAreas of StrengthAreas for GrowthThe 2009-2010, there a completion rate of 71% and 2010-2011 the completionrate of 76%. Although the data shows that 71% and 76% completed the program, factors beyond our control such as RIF or program changes, affected the outcome. In calculating the factors that are in our control, the actual completion rate is 87% for 2009-2010 and 94% in 2010-2011. The datareflects that the program was effective in providing adequate support and advice for participating teachers to complete induction requirements on time Support mechanisms included Advisement and Feedback Sessions, District Intern Professional Development Workshops on topics relating to program standards, support provider training and individualized intervention.In order to strive for 100 % on time completion, theprogram can continue to focus on providing support and assistance to PTs and support providers.Part IV: DI BTSA569023567056000Improvement of Candidate Effectiveness5690235389445500Data SourceCommon Program StandardsPlan of Action/Proposed ChangeContext forTeachingCommon Standard 7:Field Experience and Clinical PracticeCommon Standard 8:District-Employed SupervisorsCommon Standard 9:Assessment of Candidate CompetenceProgram Standard 4:Formative Assessment SystemContinue to provide electronic means for gathering and analyzing data about students, school, and community. Content delivery will incorporate more problem solving, inquiry based activity based activities. The reflective process will continue to be part of every course by including a cumulative reflective journal after every course where interns reflect on what they learned in the course and their growth over time.Initial Assessment ofTeaching PracticeCommon Standard 6:Advice and AssistanceCommon Standard 7:Field Experience and Clinical PracticeCommon Standard 8:District-Employed SupervisorsCommon Standard 9:Assessment of Candidate CompetenceProgram Standard 4:Formative Assessment SystemContinue to provide training to support providers in the area of dialogue and providing feedback to PTs Continue to provide training to PTs and support providers on collection and use of evidence to assess practice Continue to provide training on setting and meeting goals for improvement on teaching practiceInquiry 1 - EquityCommon Standard 6:Advice and AssistanceCommon Standard 7:Continue to provide workshops on areas that relate to Equity and Universal Access such as: RTI2, differentiation, and CRRE strategiesField Experience and Clinical PracticeCommon Standard 8:District-Employed SupervisorsCommon Standard 9:Assessment of Candidate CompetenceProgram Standard 5: PedagogyProgram Standard 6: Equity for All StudentsInquiry 2 - TeachingEnglish LearnersCommon Standard 6:Advice and AssistanceCommon Standard 7:Field Experience and Clinical PracticeCommon Standard 8:District-Employed SupervisorsCommon Standard 9:Assessment of Candidate CompetenceProgram Standard 5: PedagogyProgram Standard 6a: Teaching English LearnersContinue to provide workshops on areas that relate toteaching English Learners such as: SDAIE, academic vocabulary development, literacy in the content areasInquiry 3 - SpecialPopulationsCommon Standard 6:Advice and AssistanceContinue to provide workshops on areas that relate toteaching Special Populations such as teaching students with autism, modifications and adaptations, and working659130108648500Common Standard 7:Field Experience and Clinical PracticeCommon Standard 8:District-Employed SupervisorsCommon Standard 9:Assessment of Candidate CompetenceProgram Standard 5: PedagogyProgram Standard 6b: Teaching Special Populationswith Gifted and Talented students.Part IV: DI BTSA572643077279500Improvement of Program Effectiveness5726430364617000Data SourceCommon Program StandardsPlan of Action/Proposed ChangeDI BTSA PTCompletion RateCommon Standard 6: Advice and AssistanceCommon Standard 9: Assessment of CandidateCompetenceProgram Standard 3: Support Providers andProfessional Development ProvidersContinue to provide support and outreach to assist PTs with their pacing of Inquiries and other FACT tasks Continue to provide support sessions during winter break, spring break and after school. Ensure that program requirements are aligned and connected to courses and TPEs and are relevant to their teaching assignment.Support Provider StateSurveyCommon Standard 6: Advice and AssistanceCommon Standard 8: District-Employed SupervisorsProgram Standard 3: Support Providers andProfessional Development ProvidersIncrease collaboration and training with the NewTeacher Center for support provider training. Provide support in the support provider match-up and selection process.Participant InformationLAUSD BTSA09-10 10-1109-10 10-11Number of candidates (public/charter schools)1707687Total Number of candidates assignedto a school in Program Improvement" which then covers QEIA, SAIT, DAIT, etc.Year 15317Number of candidates (private schools)00Number of active Support Providers425283Year 27770Candidate: Support Provider RatioCandidates: Non-NBC Support Provider: Candidates: NBC Support Provide Candidates: Full Release Support Provider2:14.118:12:14:118:1Number of Verification of Unavailability of aCommission-Approved Induction Program (CL-855)notices issued to eligible candidates028Total number of candidates recommended for Clear MSor SS Credential1108562Number of candidates recommended for Clear MSor SS Credential via Early Completion Option2510Part I: LAUSD BTSA Program Changes: Significant changes since last biennial reportProgramStandard(s)Explanation of ChangePS 4Reduced number of formative assessment inquiries required for completion to two for LAUSDBTSA induction.PS 4Pilot of the FAS formative assessment system with selected participants and Support Providers inthe 2011-12 school year. Although there are changes in structure \document names the basic alignment with the Induction Standards is still intact. A full release Support Provider model will be piloted with this group.PS 5, 6Modified support for participating teacher’s completion of induction program to align with changesin Program Standards and CSTP.CS 6Year 1 and Early Completion Option suspended for the 2010-11 academic school year, reinstated for the 11-12 academic school yearCS 6Admission and implementation modified—District Intern candidates may complete inductionthrough either the LAUSD BTSA Induction Program or the District Intern Induction Program basedon the District’s organizational and fiscal decisions each year.261874055664100026187405926455002618740628777000Part II (Part A): LAUSD BTSA Candidate2628900919480002628900145288000572643091948000Candidate Performance Assessment ToolsAssessmentToolTableDescription of ToolData GatheredUseState SurveyAnnual survey designed by State agencies electronically collected from btsa. website during the month of MaySpecific questions selected for analysis focus on:o BTSA impact on participating teachers’ practice in specific areaso BTSA impact on practice--CSTPResults are given as percentage of respondents who selected a particular choice for each questions (NOT average with standard deviation, as anticipated)Used to assesscandidate performance in the areas: impact on practice, CSTP, and growth in assessed areas.LAUSD MidYear SurveyLocal evaluation tool completed participating teachers and support providersResponses electronically collected throughZoomerang Survey websiteQuestions specifically crafted to collect data about support provider effectiveness, as well as questions about program effectiveness thatSupport providers and participating teachers responded on a participating teacher’s opportunity to demonstrate growth in assessed areas on a Likert Scale 1-10, support providers assessed programData used to assessprogram impact and participant opportunity to demonstrate growth.26187401264920002628900163576000mirror questions on the Statewide surveyParticipating teachers electronically submit their IIP cells 1-4 responsesimpact on their own practicescale 1-10Summary ofTeaching PracticeProjectSummary of Teaching Practice Project—Each culminating teacher beginning in the 2010-11 school year completes a project in the form of a scrapbook, power point presentation or written narrative describing growth as a professional educator in selected areas and identifying evidence to support their assessment of growth.Teacher demonstration of growthassessed on a two point scale (evidence of growth/no evidence of growth)Data used to assessparticipant ability to synthesize and presentevidence of growth inthe areas indicated in the induction standards262890034404300019939004841240002618740660019000Part II (Part B): BTSA Candidate2628900905510002628900143891000642747090551000Program Effectiveness Assessment ToolsAssessmentToolTableDescription of ToolDataGatheredUseBTSAStatewideSurveyAnnual survey designed by State agencies electronically collected from btsa. website during the month of MayResults are given as percentage of respondents who selected a particular choice for each questions (NOT average with standard deviation, as anticipated) Specific questions selected for analysis focus on:1. Perception of BTSA has impact on new teachers’practice in specific areas2. The perception of BTSA impact on SupportProvider practice in specific areas3. Support Provider Selection and AssignmentResults are given as percentage of respondents who selected a particular choice for each questions (NOT average with standard deviation, as anticipated)Used to assess programeffectiveness in theareas: impact on practice, CSTP, growth in assessed areas, and support provider selection and assignment.VideoObservationThe Video Observation was second part of a 5 PhaseSupport Provider Application process. Participants scoring at or above 25 advanced to the next phase. The video observation consisted of a brief introduction, followed by applicants viewing a video and recording theirobservations. The Participants then responded to prompts. The responses were scored on a rubric. Possible scores for this assessment, based on the scoring rubric, were: 0, 5, 10,15, and 20. 35 30, 35, 40, 45 or 50.Responses scored on a rubric such that the score indicates the areas of strength and areas for growth.Use was todetermine who was eligible to proceed in the selection and assignment processas well as to provide insight into the areas of professional growth.Local Survey (Mid-Year)Local evaluation tool completed participating teachers and support providersSupport providers andparticipating teachers2618740109283500ParticipatingTeachers andSupport ProvidersResponses electronically collected through Zoomerang Survey websiteQuestions specifically crafted to collect data about support provider effectiveness, as well as questions about program effectiveness that mirror questions on the Statewide surveyresponded on aparticipating teacher’s opportunity to demonstrate growth in assessed areas on a Likert Scale 1-10, support providersassessed program impacton their own practice scale 1-10Exit SurveySurvey given immediately after the 2nd year PT completed his/herExit Interview and taken electronically in the New Teacher Office through Zoomerang Survey website.First implemented in 2010-11 academic year1.Specific questions selected for analysis focus on:2. Opportunity to demonstrate practice in selected areas3. Opportunity to identify areas for growthParticipating teachersresponded on their opportunity to examine their proficiency as a professional educator and identify areas for growth.Data used to assessareas of program effectiveness in providing participating teachers opportunity to examine their proficiency as a professional educator and identify areas for growth.Candidate RecordsDataDatabase(s) of records—candidate enrollment, progress, completion,etc; support provider selection, assignment and trainingData collected is theenrollment progress and completion ofrequirements forparticipating teachers.Data used to monitorcandidate progress and identify those whohave completed allrequirements for recommendation forthe credential andanalyze timely completion of program requirementsPart III (Part B): LAUSD BTSAProgram Effectiveness: Analysis and Discussion2001501005002010-11 Support Provider ApplicantVideo Observation Scores0005101520253035404550Total1776730-228409500Graph 1: Support Provider Candidate Video Observation ScoresNumbers on the X axis indicate how many support provider applicants received the score along the Y axis. 3 applicants earned a score of ―0‖, 5 applicants earned a score of ―5‖, 7 applicants earned a score of ―10‖, 14 applicants earned a score of ―15‖, 18 applicants earned a score of ―20‖, 163 applicants earned a score of ―25‖, 119 applicants earned a score of ―30‖, 90 applicants earned a score of ―35‖, 42 applicants earned a score of ―40‖,15 applicants earned a score of ―45‖, 7 applicants earned a score of ―50‖, 441 support provider applicants scored at or above 25, and were eligible to progress in the selection and assignment process.93726058864500509841558864500Analysis and Discussion of Candidate ProficiencyAreas of StrengthAreas for GrowthThe majority of Support Provider applicants passed the video observation. Implementation of this phase ensures that participating teachers receive support from qualified support providers. The video observation scoring rubric is designed such that the scores allow us to assess areas of need for support providerprofessional growth.Video Observation results indicate that areas of growth for Support Providers include further development of observation skills and prioritizing support for the participating teachers.Part III (Part B): LAUSD BTSA129032042862500Program Effectiveness: Analysis and Discussion605650403020100Within one months of enrollment in the BTSA Induction Program11Within two months of enrollment in the BTSA Induction Program33More than two months after the enrollment in the BTSA Induction Program# 40 12. In general, when did you begin working with your BTSA Induction Participating Teacher(s) this year? (%) %Graph 2: Time Frame for Teacher/Support Provider InteractionOn the 2010-11 state survey participating teachers were asked to identify when they began working with their Support Provider. Note: Implementation of the new application and selection process is believed to be a key factor in this as all schools needed to be trained in the process prior to accepting applicants.Areas of StrengthAreas for Growth56% of participating teachers began working with support providers within 1month enrollment.All support providers (100%) assigned during that time had passed the newly revised application process.Institutional support was strengthened and resulted in school site implementation teams attending mandatory training to understand the new support provider selection and assignment process prior to assigning support providers.Approximately 1/3 of participants indicated that theydid not begin to work with their Support Providers within the first 2 monthsIncrease the number of percentage of participants who begin working with their support provider the first 30days of program enrollment100.00%80.00%153733576835Percentage00Percentage70.00%60.00%50.00%40.00%30.00%20.00%10.00%0.00%Part III (Part B): DI BTSA149987023685500Program Effectiveness: Analysis and DiscussionSupport Provider Selection90.90%74.00%71.40%49.40%1a. My site administrator selected me1b. BTSA Induction program staff1c. I completed an application1d. I was interviewed1e. I was observedselected meHow were you selected to be a Support Provider?(Select all that apply)Graph 3: Selection of Support ProvidersoNOTE: 144 of the Support Providers were NBC teachers. NBC teachers were allowed to use NBC certification as a substitute for the interview and observation phases.The state survey asked Support Providers to indicate how they were selected. Note: In LAUSD National Board Certification was accepted as a substitute for the interview and classroom observation components of the application process.937260141160500Areas of StrengthAreas for GrowthOver 90% of Support Providers indicate that they applied for the position, with over 70% indicating that they were both interviewed and observed. (NBC teachers were allowed to use their certification to waive interview and observation portions of the application process.) 144 of the Support Providers selected have attained National BoardCertification Although all but a handful of support providers are assignedby their site administrator, nearly 50% identified that they were assigned by BTSA staff – clarify communicationPart III (Part B): LAUSD BTSAProgram Effectiveness: Analysis and Discussion1308735105410% of SPs indicating impact00% of SPs indicating impact100.00%CSTP impact on SP Practice (self assessed) 83.10% 80.50% 80.50% 87.00% 88.30% 89.60% 0.00%Engaging and supporting all students in learningCreating and maintaining effective environments for student learningUnderstanding and organizing subject matter for student learningPlanning instruction and designing learning experiences for all studentsAssessing students for learningDeveloping as a professional educator1271270-236537500Graph 4: CST Impact on SP Practice11658601017270005327015101727000The state survey asked Support Providers to respond to the following question: 30. In what areas of the CSTP has your participation as a Support Provider in BTSA made you a better teacher? (Check all that apply): Results were reported in terms of the percentage of Support Providers who checked yes for each standard.Areas of StrengthAreas for GrowthFor each of the CSTPs over 80% of Support Providers indicated that working with the BTSA program impacted their practice.Continue to provide opportunities for Support Providersto grow in their practice as an effective classroom teacher.To what extent did your work as a Support Provider impact your practice inthe following areas?no impact=1, slight impact=2, moderate impact=3, great impact=425q. Other- Please specify25p. Using strategies for mediating conflicts25o. Creating a safe and healthy learning environment2.613.053.4325n. Examining bias and using culturally responsive pedagogy25m. Using assessment data to differentiate instruction25l. Using technology2.832.633.1325k. Working effectively with special needs students2.9125j. Working effectively with English Language Learners3.0625i. Using coaching techniques to facilitate reflective conversations on…3.2525h. Identifying and responding to the diverse needs, knowledge, skills…3.0825g. Developing and implementing an Individual Induction…3.4525f. Using evidence from formative assessment activities to examine…3.4525e. Understanding the processes and use of inquiry in formative…3.4925d. Assisting Participating Teacher(s) in understanding the local…3.5225c. Assisting Participating Teacher(s) to connect their prior experience…3.1325b. Understanding the use and purposes of the formative assessment…3.5225a. Understanding the skills, roles and responsibilities of a Support…3.6928370-441388500Graph 5: Support Provider Perceived Impact on Own PracticeThe state survey asked Support Providers to assess the impact of serving as a Support Provider on 17 areas of practice using the following scale: 1 no impact 2 slight impact 3 moderate impact 4 great impact.Scores were reported as the mean of Support Provider responses.Areas of StrengthAreas for GrowthSupport Providers indicated that their work as a support provider hadbetween moderate and great impact on their own practice in 13 of the17 areas surveyed.Support Providers indicated that their work as a support provider hadbetween slight to moderate impact on their own practice in 4 of the 17 areas surveyedomediating conflictoexamining bias and using culturally responsive pedagogyousing technology andoworking effectively with special needs studentsPart III (Part B): LAUSD BTSAProgram Effectiveness: Analysis and DiscussionPlease rate the following from 0 (low) to 10 (high):Low23456789Highthe level to which your roles and responsibilities as a support provider were clearly communicated to you by the leadership of this BTSA Induction Program00%11%00%33%88%88%77%2423%2120%3331%the extent to which you feel that the CFASST or FACT training122%22%22%77%77%1211%2625%2726%1918%prepares you to work with your participating teacher(s)1%the impact of the formative assessment work you complete with your participating teacher(s) in helping them to assess their students’ specific learning needs00%11%22%00%55%88%1615%2928%2827%1615%00%the impact of the formative assessment work you complete withyour participating teacher(s) in helping them to improve their skill in using English language development methods and strategies00%11%11%55%66%2120%3029%2625%1514%Table 6: Support Provider rating of Communication and Impact of BTSAOn the Local (mid-year) survey Support Providers were asked to rate from low (1) to high (10) components of communication and impact of BTSA work on their practice and that of the participating teachers. Within each cell, the top number is the count of respondents selecting the option and the bottom % is percent of the total respondents selecting the option.Areas of StrengthAreas for Growth 81% of Support Providers rated the level to which their rolesand responsibilities as a support provider were clearly communicated to them by the leadership of the BTSA Induction Program at 7 or higher 80% of Support Providers rated the extent to which they felt that the formative assessment training prepared them to work with their participating teacher(s) at a score of 7 or higher 85% of Support Providers rated the impact of the formative assessment work they complete with their participating teacher(s) in helping them to assess their students’ specific learning needs at a score of 7 or higher 88% of Support Providers rated the impact of the formative assessment work they complete with their participating teacher(s) in helping them to improve their skill in using English language development methods and strategies at ascore of 7 or higher Increase the percentage of Support Providers who believe thattheir roles and responsibilities as a Support Provider were clearly communicated to them Increase the percentage of Support Providers who believe that the formative assessment training prepares them to work with their participating teacher Increase the % of Support Providers who highly rate the impact of formative assessment on their participating teacher’s ability to assess their students’ specific learning needs and improve their skill in using El methods and strategiesPart III (Part B): LAUSD BTSA83883542481500Program Effectiveness: Analysis and Discussion5. As I completed the Formative Assessment Process (FACT), I had opportunities to demonstrate my practice in the following areas:Top number is the count of respondents selecting the option. Bottom % is percent of the total respondents selecting the option.No opportunit yLimited opportunitySome opportunityConsiderable opportunityEnsuring access to the curriculum for all students05933930%1%19%80%Differentiating instruction to meet student needs1151103650%3%22%74%Minimizing the impact of bias on student achievement2341662890%7%34%59%Teaching English Language Learners/Standard English Learners2191233470%4%25%71%Teaching students with special needs6361712781%7%35%57%Using technology to enhance student learning6321542991%7%31%61%Using assessment to design instruction1121273510%2%26%71%Collaborating/Communicating with families8691892252%14%38%46%Table 7: Self-Assessment of the Effectiveness of FACTOn the Local (mid-year) survey participating teachers were asked to indicate the extent to which they had opportunity to demonstrate their practice in selected areas: No Opportunity, Limited Opportunity, Some Opportunity, and Considerable Opportunity. Within each cell, the top number is the count of respondents selecting the option and the bottom % is percent of the total respondents selecting the option.Areas of StrengthAreas for GrowthOver 90% of participating teachers indicated that they had ―Some‖ or―Considerable‖ opportunity to demonstrate practice in all areasassessed.Continue to provide participating teachers the opportunity todemonstrate practice in the assessed areas.Increase indicators to ―Considerable‖ rather than ―Some.‖Part III (Part A): LAUSD BTSACandidate Performance: Analysis and DiscussionParticipating Teacher & Support Provider Assessment ofPT Improvement as a result of BTSA ParticipationPT MeanSP Mean24o. Prioritizing the professional workload24n. Collaborating with teachers and other resource personnel at their…2.692.732.893.0424m. Working with families24l. Using assessment data to design instruction2.532.572.953.1224k. Using technology as a learning tool24j. Using technology as a teaching tool24i. Teaching English Language Learners2.682.882.682.882.873.1324h. Teaching students with special needs2.83.0624g. Teaching to content standards24f. Minimizing bias and using culturally responsive pedagogy24e. Differentiating instruction2.922.792.913.013.2624d. Mediating conflict24c. Managing the classroom24b. Ensuring access to the curriculum for all students24a. Developing a repertoire of teaching strategies2.432.712.693.123.042.99 3.232.96 3.171005840-430149000Graph 8: PT and SP Assessment of PT Improvement1143000403796500On the 2010-11 state survey, Support Providers and participating teachers were asked to assess participating teacher improvement as a result of BTSA participation in 17 areas using the following scale: 1- No improvement, 2-Some improvement, 3- Moderate improvement, 4- significant improvement. Scores for each surveyed group were reported as the mean of responses.914400117602000The red bar indicates the mean of participating teacher responses. The blue bar indicates the mean of Support Provider responses. Support Providers consistently rated the participating teachers as having achieved greater improvement than the participants did themselves.Areas of StrengthAreas for GrowthSPs rated BTSA impact on PT practice at a mean of 3.0 or higher in9 of 17 areas assessed. The experienced practitioners were able to see a greater degree of growth than the novice teachers. Participating teachers and Support Providers consistently ratedBTSA impact on PT improvement on the assessed areas as―significant‖ or ―moderate‖: Repertoire of teaching practices Managing the classroomEnsuring access to the curriculum of all studentsTeaching to content standards Teaching Students with special needs Using technology as a toolUsing assessment data Continue to provide the participating teachers withopportunities to improve/grow in this area. Assist participating teachers in identifying the connection between their formative assessment work and the areas assessed.Part III (Part A): LAUSD BTSA125222047180500Candidate Performance: Analysis and DiscussionSP and PT Assessment ofImpact of BTSA on Classroom Practice--CSTP23f. Developing as a Professional Educator23e. Assessing student for learning23d. Planning instruction and designing learning…23c. Understanding and organizing subject matter for…23b. Creating and maintaining effective environments for…23a. Engaging and supporting all students in learningPT MeanSP Mean2.72.82.933.13.23.33.43.53.63.7Graph 9: PT and SP Assessment of BTSA ImpactOn the 2010-11 state survey Support Providers and participating teachers were asked to assess the impact of BTSA on theparticipant’s classroom practice in relationship to the California Standards for the Teaching Profession. Our scale was 1-no impact, 2- slight impact, 3-moderate impact, 4-great impact. Scores for each group are reported as the mean of responses. The red bar indicates participating teacher responses and the blue bar indicates Support Provider responses.Areas of StrengthAreas for Growth The planning instruction and designing learning experienceshas been identified as strength. Support Providers assessed BTSA impact on participating teacher practice at a mean of 3.4 or above for all areas of the CSTP. Participating teachers assessed impact on all areas of theCSTP at 3.0 or above. Continue to provide participating teachers with opportunitiesto grow in their abilities to see the impact of BTSE induction upon their practice.Part III (Part A): LAUSD BTSACandidate Performance: Analysis and DiscussionLow23456789Highyour participating teacher's ability to help students focus on their personal strengths00%00%11%00%55%77%1918%2928%2827%1615%your participating teacher's ability to assess English learners00%00%22%00%88%88%1817%3331%2322%1312%the extent that your participating teacher(s) needs additionalsupport and strategies in the area of behavior management44%1413%66%88%1010%88%1817%2221%1110%44%the level that your participating teacher(s) is/are able to recognize and assess thestrengths of both students with disabilities and with talents and plan activities around these strengths00%00%00%44%55%88%2726%2726%2120%1312%Table 10: Support Provider Mid-Year Survey of Teacher Effectiveness: 10-11On the 2010-11 LAUSD Local (mid-year) survey Support Providers were asked to rate statements regardin Program Effectiveness andCandidate Performance on a scale from low (1) to (10) high. Within each cell, the top number is the count of respondents selecting the option and the bottom % is percent of the total respondents selecting the option.Areas of StrengthAreas for Growth 88% of Support Providers rate their participating teacher'sability to help students focus on their personal strengths at a level of 7 or higher 82% of Support Providers rate their participating teacher's ability to assess English learners at a level of 7 or higher or higher 84% of Support Providers rate the extent that their participating teacher(s) is/are able to recognize and assess the strengths of both students with disabilities and with talents and plan activities around these strengths at a level of 7 or higher Provide additional opportunities for participating teachers todevelop behavior management strategies: 52% of Support Providers rate the extent that their participating teacher(s) needs additional support and strategies in the area of behavior management at a level of 7 Continue to provide opportunities for participants to develop skills in Supporting English learners and students with special needsPart III (Part A): LAUSD BTSACandidate Performance: Analysis and DiscussionTop number is the count of respondents selecting the option. Bottom % is percent of the total respondents selecting the option.Low23456789High152%my ability to use the formative assessment (FACT) work I completewith my support provider to assess my student's specific learning needs91%102%376%9615%13321%61%477%14022%13521%my ability to use the formative assessment (FACT) work I complete with my support provider to improve my skill in using English language development methods and strategies163%30%102%102%315%569%10817%15725%12119%11618%my ability to assess English learners81%41%20%61%417%549%10817%16827%12420%11318%the extent that I would like additional support and strategies in the area of behavior management356%284%315%295%7412%599%9415%9816%8313%9715%81%the level to which I am able to recognize and assess the strengths ofboth students with disabilities and with talents and to plan activities around these strengths61%81%396%12720%10517%10%6010%18529%8914%Table 11: Teacher Mid-Year Survey of Their Effectiveness914400114427000On the 2010-11 LAUSD Local (mid-year) survey Support Providers were asked to rate statements regardin Program Effectiveness and Candidate competence on a scale from low (1) to (10) high. Within each cell, the top number is the count of respondents selecting the option and the bottom % is percent of the total respondents selecting the option.Areas of StrengthAreas for Growth79% of participating teachers rate their ability to use the formative assessment (FACT) work they complete with their support provider to assess their student's specific learning needs at a level of 7 or higher 79% of participating teachers rate their ability to use the formative assessment (FACT) work complete with their support provider to improve their skill in using English language development methods and strategies at a level of 7 or higher 82% of participating teachers rate their ability to assessEnglish learners at a level of 7 or higher 59% of participating teachers rate the extent that they would like additional support and strategies in the area of behavior management at a level of 7 or higher 80% of participating teachers rate the level to which they are able to recognize and assess the strengths of both students with disabilities and with talents and to plan activities around these strengths at a level of 7 or higher Continue to provide opportunities for participating teachers toimprove their practice in assessing and planning instructionfor English language learners and students with special needs Provide additional opportunities for participating teachers to develop and implement behavior management strategiesPart III (Part A): LAUSD BTSACandidate Performance: Analysis and Discussion6. I was able to examine my proficiency as a professional educator and identify areasfor growth while working through the following BTSA components. (Please check all that apply.)# --yes%SP formal or informal observation of myteaching37476%Looking in-depth at my Class Profile/FocusStudents35673%Analysis of student work44691%Observation of experienced teacher33368%In-depth inquiry into my teaching practice37877%Reflection on my teaching practice44791%Examination of teaching practice againstspecific criteria (DOP)36274%Determining my strengths and areas for growthon IIP39881%Writing and implementing my IIP Action Plan35272%Weekly meetings with my Support Provider34169%Table 12: Participant Exit SurveyIn 2010-11, participants completeing the program were given the LAUSD Exit Survey. Teachers were asked to respond to thefollowing prompt: ―I was able to examine my proficiency as a professional educator and identify areas for growth while working through the following BTSA components. (Please check all that apply.)‖ The first column indicates the number of participants selecting ―yes‖ and the second column indicates the percent of respondents selecting yes.Areas of StrengthAreas for GrowthThe participating teachers indicated that their abiliBtyientonial Report: # 414C, o43n3ti,n9u6e0 to provide opportunities for participating teachers to83820043561000analyze student work was a growth area. The participating teachers indicated that their ability to reflect on their teaching practice was a growth area.examine their proficiency as professional educators andidentify areas of growth.Part IV: LAUSD BTSAImprovement of Candidate CompetencyData SourceCommon/ProgramStandard(s)Plan of Action or Proposed ChangesSupportProviderApplicationState SurveyCS 8PS 1 & 3Timely assignment of Support Providers--Support Providers who completed the revised applicationprocess in 2010-11 are automatically eligible to serve in 2011-12. Central Office staff will: Support Providers identified during 2010-11 were surveyed during June 2011 regarding their availability and desire to continue for the 2011-12 school year. Notify Support Providers that were certified in 2010 -11 that they should consult with their administrator the first week of school to determine if there are teachers who need support and to request that the formal selection process be expedited. Contact the schools of teachers enrolled in BTSA and offer assistance with the Support Provider assignment process Give each participant that attends orientation a letter for their site administrator advising them that aSupport Provider should be assigned. Provide each site administrator with a welcome letter and a roster of the qualified Support Providers currently at their school sites. Recruit Support Providers in shortage areas (i.e., Special Education) via collaboration with the DistrictIntern Program.29432251264920002943225397700500CS 9PS 5 & 6Consistency of perception of program impactRe-organization of program staffingProgram staff will examine implementation to ensure that every participant has equal access to effective program implementation A needs survey will be offered as an optional opportunity for participants to request assistance during the Fall Semester and Spring Semester At the orientation and subsequent sessions participants will be advised that they may request additional support as needed Focus groups and/or survey questions to clarify to what degree discrepancies of response are related to individualization allowing each participant to select the areas they most need to focus on Work to increase survey response rateo Survey completion time at scheduled meetingso Reminders at Spring Seminar and Summary of Teaching Practice sessionsState SurveyLocal (mid- year) SurveyExit SurveyCS 6 & 9PS 1Completion of Program as Scheduled Advisement and support for all programs will be modified to have a greater emphasis on completing within the designated time frameDesign and implementation of revised curriculum with specific support in the target areasExplicit opportunity for participant response on what their needs areRevised interim timelines for each programState SurveyLocal (mid- year) SurveyExit SurveyCandidate Records Data AnalysisCS 4 & 9PS 1, 4, 5 & 6Support for Teaching English Learners and Home/School Communication These will serve as areas of emphasis for the 11-12 school yearo Seminars focusing on these areaso Additional Support Provider training in these areaso Revised portfolio componentsConflict Mediation The areas in which conflict mediation is addressed within the program will be highlighted at the orientation and/or mid-year advisement session as well as Support Provider training Program staff will collaborate with the salary point office to identify and/or develop one or more conflict management classes that the teachers could select as part of their professional development plan Increase opportunities for participating teachers to develop strategies for behavior managementPart IV: LAUSD BTSA2943225111887000Improvement of Program Effectiveness29432253890010002943225439293000Data SourceCommon/ProgramStandard(s)Plan of Action or Proposed ChangesState SurveyLocal (mid- year) SurveyExit SurveyCS 6 & 8PS 1 & 2Revised Participating Teacher Responsibilities—Support ProviderTeacher to take letter to site administrator to request assignment of a Support Provider Participating Teacher to notify Program staff if they have not been assigned a Support Provider Special Support Sessions for interim supportState SurveyLocal (mid- year) SurveyExit SurveySummary of Teaching Practice ProjectCS 4 & 9PS 1 & 2Consistency of Perception of Program Impact Support Providers will receive training in protocols to promote the PTs ability to understand the connections betweenprogram opportunities and their professional growthSupport Provider assignment is anticipated to address some of this issue (see above)Participating Teachers will participate in surveys, focus groups and informal contact to communicate the support they need to experience growthIncrease Survey completion rateDecrease standard deviation for program responses by increasing consistency and discussions of perception across all groupsState SurveyLocal (mid- year) SurveyCS 4 & 9PS 1, 2 & 4Support for Teaching English Learners and Home/School Communication Teachers will be guided to provide more evidence of their growth in these areas in conjunction with the enhanced support they will receiveConflict Mediation Participants will specify support needed using surveys, focus groups and informal contacts and provide evidence of application in their portfolio Increase opportunities for participating teachers to develop strategies for behavior managementSection B and Part 5: INSTUTITIONAL SUMMARY AND PLAN OF ACTIONIntroductionWithin the LAUSD Credential Program there are several credentialing pathways including: multiple subject, single subject preparation, special education and DI BTSA induction. We feel strongly that the process of compiling the biennial reports is important to the overall growth and development of the programs we operate. As such, we embrace the opportunity to examine our work for the purpose of continuous improvement.As an aim to build coherence and consistency throughout our programs, we have collected and analyzed data to determine modifications that need to be made. With this data we identified our program strengths, areas of improvement and next steps.Trends91440035052000 Across all programs our database systems are used to collect and compile data and the use of the database informs program decision makingAcross all programs participants successfully complete job-embedded portfolio tasks with a high rate of passageAcross all programs there is an emphasis on making standards-based content accessible to English Learners, Standard English91440017589500Learners and Students with DisabilitiesAcross all programs Participants report that coursework/activities had a positive effect on their practice.Across all programs and related coursework are clearly linked to the California Standards for the Teaching Profession and theTeacher Performance Expectations. Across all programs interns and participating teachers incorporate the problem-solving cycle and the reflective cycle in their practice91440036195000 All stakeholders groups report positive perceptions in regard to the LAUSD District Intern Program and BTSA credentialing programs.Across all programs support and intervention is readily available to interns and participating teachersAcross all programs the passage/completion rate is increasingAcross all programs instructors explicitly model effective teaching strategies in coursesAcross all District Intern programs instructors are providing more opportunities for practice and role playAcross all programs there is a focus on connecting student data to teaching practice.Strengths914400-1016000The individuals within the unit work collaboratively, which creates consistency and coherence across all programsUnit collaboration capitalizes on the various strengths of the team membersCandidates in all programs show strength in the ability to design lessons that account diverse learners91440054800500The program excels in providing the necessary support for candidates to complete program requirements in a timely manner Curriculum is designed to meet the daily needs of classroom teachers so that course content and strategies can be immediately implementedThe data allows for systematic tracking of progress and completionAs often as possible we unite various program groups for instructionThere are multiple pathways to provide prompt feedback to interns and PTs such as intervention appointments, Moodle?, peernetworking, E-mail, Phone calls, and text messaging The LAUSD DI Program encourages peer networking during class, on Moodle? forums, collaborative projectsAreas of Improvement914400-1016000Assisting interns and indication participants to use the data they have collected to inform instruction and improve differentiationIncreasing the use of technology for student useContinue to incorporate the reflective and problem solving cycle throughout courses and assignmentsAlign Support provider training to DI Program needsNext StepsData Use by Candidates137160036131500 The District Intern programs will provide opportunities in class to analyze student data and facilitate the planning of instruction based on data findings.The District Intern programs will model how to plan lessons based on student data which are specific to students’ needsThe District Intern programs will increase the use of data-driven dialogue throughout all coursesTechnology To increase the use of technology by candidates for students, the program will add a technology component to the DistrictIntern lesson plan template.137160036322000 The District Intern programs will also ask candidates to fulfill program requirements by using various form of electronic and multi-media submission.The District Intern programs will increase the usage of the digital library in courses. A variety of multi-media technology will be incorporated to course delivery137160019304000Reflective and Problem Solving ModelCandidates will reflect upon their practice regularly throughout all course and all course assignments, and portfolio entries. Problem-solving activities will be part of every class sessionCandidates will have opportunities to work collaboratively the reflection and problem-solving137160017399000Support Provider TrainingIncrease communication and collaboration between programs utilizing Support Providers in designing SP trainingSurvey candidates to determine and prioritize needsIncrease collaboration with New Teacher CenterIncrease opportunities for candidates and support providers to work together ````` ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download