ASSESSING CANDIDATE PERFORMANCE

William SharptonRichard HallUniversity of New OrleansProject Directors’ MeetingJuly 2007

Context

Shift to a performance-based model of teacher preparation

Increased accountability for PK-12 and higher education systems

OSEP personnel preparation project in low incidence disabilities (significant disabilities)

Shift in Preparation Model

From linearRecruitmentPreparationPlacement InductionRetention

To concurrent

Our Goal

Collaborate with PK-12 school partners and other stakeholders to extend knowledge and skills learned in preparation program into teaching practices

Key Program Components

CourseworkDivided into three levels

Field workOrganized within job-embedded format

Candidate assessmentAlignment with national and state standardsShift from “collection” of work to sustainable

model of performance review

Assessment Issues

Levels (depth) Standards based Multiple perspectives Alignment with induction needs Shift from university (short term) to

candidate/district (long term) use of model Adoption of reflection model that improves

practice

Levels

Initial – focus on student impact and candidate professional development

Intermediate – focus on student impact, classroom operation and candidate professional development

Advanced – focus on student impact, classroom operation, campus/district impact and candidate professional development

Standards Based

NationalCouncil for Exceptional Children (NCTAE

SPA)National Board (Advanced level)

StateLa Components of Effective TeachingCompetencies for teachers serving students

with significant disabilities

Multiple Perspectives

Reviews involve four partiesUniversity FacultyCohort Leader (Masters level teacher)Building administratorFamily member (supported by grant)

University is the “short term” partner

Induction Needs

Reorganization of coursework to focus on “layers” rather than specific topic

Design of field activities to match needs of classroom

Field activities include required and elective options

Elective activities are selected based on assessment of student/classroom/campus needs

Shift to Candidate Use of Model

Initial review – almost all artifacts in portfolio can result from assigned field activities

Intermediate review – 75% of artifacts can result from assigned field activities

Advanced review – A maximum of 50% of artifacts can result from assigned field activities

Reflection Model

Role focused Roles used in cohort groups to:

Determine progress to date in terms of teaching Identify next steps to take

Initial level field activities support engagement in small number of roles

Advanced field activities require engagement in 5-6 roles to product desired outcome(s)

Teacher Roles

Design and deliver instructionManage time, tasks, & environmentsCollaborate to support group practiceAdvocate for children, services, &

supportsUse inquiry to inform practiceImprove classroom & system practice