biennial report for california educator preparation programs · 2011-11-23 · number of schools...

Biennial Report for

California Educator Preparation Programs

September 15, 2011

Biennial Report: # 414, 433, 960

1 9/2011

Commission on Teacher Credentialing

Academic Years 2009-10 and 2010-11

Institution Los Angeles Unified School District

Date report is submitted September 15, 2011

Programs documented in

this report

BTSA / Induction

District Intern Program

Credentials Awarded Multiple Subject (On Hiatus due to Reduction in Force)

Single Subject: Preliminary and Clear

Education Specialist: Preliminary and Level II

Education Specialist – Added Authorization

Program Contact Peggy Taylor-Presley, M.S., Director LAUSD BTSA

Patricia Pernin, Ed.D., DI Program Administrative Coordinator

Phone Numbers LAUSD BTSA: 231-241-5495

District Intern Program: 213-241-5466

Email [email protected]

[email protected]

Preparation assisted by Nancy Bisharat, M.Ed., District Intern Specialist

Jayne Gray, Ed.D., District Intern Special Education Adviser

Patrick D. Johnson, M.A., District Intern Special Education Adviser

Terri Kirkland, Ed.D., District Intern Special Education Adviser

Felissa Luque, M.A., District Intern Adviser

Daniel J. Ontell, M.A., District intern Adviser

Aleeta Powers, M.A., BTSA Coordinator

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]


2 9/2011

Table of Contents

Section A:

Credential Specific Information..........................................................................................4

Statewide and LAUSD LLES Program Changes………………………………………….5

Credential Program Contextual Information.............................................................. ........6

District Intern: General Education.................................................................................. ...7

Part I: Program changes.......................................................................................... 8

Part II: Candidate Assessment/Performance and BTSA/Induction Program

Effectiveness Information....................................................................... ....9

Part III: Analyses and Discussion of Candidate and Program Data......................13

Part IV: Use of Assessment Results to Improve Candidate and Program

Performance...............................................................................................24

District Intern: Education Specialist..................................................................................27

Part I: Program changes........................................................................................28.


Effectiveness Information..........................................................................29



Performance...............................................................................................44

District Intern BTSA..........................................................................................................49

Part I: Program changes.........................................................................................49


Effectiveness Information..........................................................................50

Part III: Analyses and Discussion of Candidate and Program

Data.......................53


Performance...............................................................................................58


3 9/2011

LAUSD BTSA / Induction...............................................................................................62

Part I: Program changes........................................................................................63


Effectiveness Information.........................................................................64



Performance...............................................................................................90

Section B:

Institutional Summary and Plan of Action........................................................................ 93

Introduction............................................................................................................93

Trends....................................................................................................................93

Strengths ...............................................................................................................94

Areas of Improvement...........................................................................................94

Next Steps .............................................................................................................95


4 9/2011

Section A: Credential Specific information

Credential Program contextual Information

The 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). For

2011-2012, 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.


5 9/2011

Program Changes

Significant changes made since the last Biennial Report or Program Assessment Review

Program

Standard(s)

Explanation of Change

STATEWIDE CHANGES

CS 9 Induction moved from Induction Program Review to Accreditation Process, revisions to the accreditation process

CS 9 Standards of Quality and Effectiveness for Teacher Induction Programs (Induction Standards) revised (June 2009,

implemented in LAUSD Induction program beginning 09-10 academic year)

CS 9 California 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 3 Global economic crisis resulting in budget reductions and uncertainty—Reduction in force impacting high percentages of

induction participants

CS 1 Changes in state task force and leadership team members

CS 9 Mandated Teacher Performance Assessment (TPA) for preparation programs

CS 9 Change from Level I/Level II Education Specialist credentials to Preliminary/Clear Education Specialist Programs

CS 9 Induction programs authorized to write to incorporate Education Specialist credential authorization

LAUSD LEA CHANGES

CS 1 Changes within LAUSD Superintendent and key district senior staff resulting in changes in local context and procedures.

CS 1 Changes in leadership and administrative procedures within the credentialing program(s).

CS 8

Revision of our selection and assignment process to include a video observation simulation that all general education

support providers in the district must pass before being eligible for assignment. This will scale up to include special

education support providers.

CS 8 Coordination of the Support Provider selection and assignment process across credential programs. Redesigned structures

for communication with school sites regarding the selection and assignment process.

CS 3, CS 8 Changes in staffing for each credential program due to the state-wide (global) fiscal crisis and LAUSD organizational

changes


6 9/2011

Program Information

Local Educational Agency

CD Code:

Number of Schools Type of BTSA

Induction Program

Support Provider

Model(s) Used

Formative Assessment

System

K-12 X Elementary 534

Single District

Classroom-based X

FACT---revised for Local

Context

FAS--pilot

Elementary Middle 129 Full-time

Released

High School High 129 Part-time

Released


7 9/2011

District Intern Preliminary Credential Program Participant Information

Single Subject / Multi-subject

09-10 10-11 9-10 10-11

Number of candidates (public/charter schools) 78 43 Total Number of candidates assigned to

School Improvement, Program Improvement

or SAIT-identified settings 65 40 Number of candidates (private schools) 0 0

Number of active Support Providers 57 18

Support Provider Ratio

Candidates: Non-NBC Support Provider

Candidates: NBC Support Provider:

2:1

4:1

2:1

4:1

Total number of candidates recommended for

Preliminary SS Credential 11 11

Number of Verification of Unavailability of a

Commission-Approved Induction Program

(CL-855) notices issued to eligible candidates 0 0

Total number of candidates recommended for

Preliminary MS Credential 0 0


8 9/2011

Part I: Single Subject Program Changes

Program Standard(s) Explanation of Change

Common Standard 8

Standard

The support provider selection process was changed.

Pre-service orientation was changed from 240 hours to 160 hours


9 9/2011

Part II (Part A): Single Subject Candidate

Candidate Performance Assessment Tools

Assessment

Tool

Table Description of Tool Data Gathered Use

California

Teacher

Performance

Assessment

(CalTPA)

1 A high-stakes, State mandated summative

assessment 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 and

2nd

attempts.

Evidence of candidates’

mastery of skills, abilities,

and knowledge required of

beginning teachers

District Intern

Portfolio Task:

Credo/Philosop

hy

2 Interns write their educational

philosophy. They submit several

revisions throughout their time in the

program as they grow in their teaching

practice.

Final philosophy statement

assessed using a rubric.


abilities to create and reflect

on their educational

philosophies with focus and

direction on their

instructional practice.

District Intern

Portfolio Task:

Spending Time

to Save Time

2 Interns produce and implement a

classroom procedural, organizational and

instructional plan designed to create an

environment that is conducive to student

learning.

Class Syllabus

Parent Letter

Student Survey

Unit Overview

3 revisions of a procedural

plan assessed using a rubric.


competency in maximizing

instructional time for

improving student

achievement.

District Intern

Portfolio Task:

My Life as a

Teacher

2 Interns maintain a reflective journal

based 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 week

and monthly support provider

responses assessed using a

rubric


abilities to use reflection and

feedback to improve teaching

practices and subject matter

knowledge.


10 9/2011


Candidate performance Assessment Tools

Assessment

Tool


District Intern

Portfolio Task:

Plan and Deliver

2

Interns develop, teach and reflect on a

thematic, 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 support

Thematic unit and End-of-

Unit Assessment (EOUA)

assessed using a rubric


competencies in planning

instruction and designing

learning experiences for all

students.

District Intern

Portfolio Task::

What’s Behind

the Classroom

Door

2

Interns learn about and establish rapport

with 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 assignment

assessed using a rubric


abilities to access

information about students

and connect to student

learning.

Classroom

Management

course final

grades

3 To 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 project


competencies in establishing

and maintaining a positive

learning environment.


11 9/2011


Candidate performance Assessment Tools

Teaching

English

Learners (EL)

course final

grades

3 Candidates 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 a

standards-based lesson plan

that incorporates: content

standards, ELA standards,

ELD standards, content and

language objectives, SDAIE

strategies, and interactive

activities


abilities to make content

comprehensible to ELs and

incorporate strategies to

increase content literacy.

Methods of

Teaching

English, Math

and Science

course final

grades

3 Candidates focus on planning and

delivering 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 material

Thematic unit plan using the

District Intern Program’s

standards-based lesson plan

template and

end-of- unit assessments.


competencies in making

subject matter

comprehensible to all

students using subject-

specific pedagogy.


12 9/2011

Part II (B): Single Subject Program

Program Effectiveness Assessment Tools

Assessment

Tool


End-of-Year

State Intern

Survey

4 Survey, developed by CTC, is taken

online 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 the

effectiveness of the program

according to interns’

perceptions.

TPA Passage

Rates

5 An assessment that requires 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 and

2nd

attempts.

Evidence of the program’s

effectiveness to prepare,

support and provide

intervention for candidates’

mastery of skills, abilities,

and knowledge required of

beginning teachers.

End-of-Year

Support

Provider

Survey Data

6 Support provider survey, developed by

CTC, is taken online in the spring of

school year.

Measurement of support

providers’ perceptions of the

program using a Likert Scale.

To determine the


for training/feedback to

support providers.

Program

Completion

Rates

7 Number of interns completing the

Preliminary program within the given

time frame of 18 months.

Number of interns who

received Preliminary

credentials.

Program effectiveness in

preparing and supporting

interns in successful course

completion and portfolio

requirements.


13 9/2011

Part III (Part A): Single Subject

Candidate Proficiency: Analysis and Discussion

TPA 1

First

Attempt

TPA 1

Second

Attempt

TPA 2

First

Attempt

TPA 2

Second

Attempt

TPA 3

First

Attempt

TPA 3

Second

Attempt

TPA 4

First

Attempt

TPA 4

Second

Attempt

Overall

First

Attempt

Overall

Second

Attempt

2009/10 76.19%

(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/A 75.36%

(52/69)

66.67%

(10/15)

2010/11 78.57%

(11/14)

100.00%

(3/3)

50.00%

(7/14)

100.00%

(7/7)

N/A N/A N/A N/A 64.29%

(18/28)

100.00%

(10/10)

Table 1: LAUSD District Intern CALTPA Passing Rate

In 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 Proficiency Areas of Strength Areas for Growth

The data indicates that interns show strength in designing

subject 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 needs


14 9/2011

experience 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.


15 9/2011



Portfolio Requirement Number Standard Deviation Median Score Mean Score

09-10 10-11 09-10 10-11 09-10 10-11 09-10 10-11

Credo/Philosophy 32 10 0.51 0.35 4.00 4.00 3.53 3.88

Spending Time to Save Time 15 12 0.51 0.69 3.00 4.00 3.40 3.55

My Life as a Teacher 15 3 0.28 0.71 3.00 3.00 3.08 3.50

Plan and Deliver 15 3 0.36 0.58 3.00 4.00 3.14 3.67

What's behind the classroom door 31 11 0.38 0.53 3.00 3.00 3.17 3.50

Table 2: Portfolio Task Data 2009-2010/ 2010-2011

Table 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 school

year. 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.


16 9/2011

Analysis and Discussion of Candidate Proficiency

Strength Areas for Growth

The Philosophy portfolio task and the Plan and Deliver task had

the 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 a

Teacher 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.


17 9/2011



2009-2010 Benchmark Course Passage Rate

Classroom Management Teaching English Learners Methods of Teaching

S/F 09/10 N

Not

Proficient Proficient Advanced

Not


Not


Percentage 100% 4.76% 80.95% 14.29% 4.76% 80.95% 14.29% 13.04% 56.52% 21.74%

Total 21 1 17 3 1 17 3 3 13 5

2010-2011 Benchmark Course Passage Rate

Classroom Management Teaching English Learners Methods of Teaching

S/F 10/11 N

Not


Not


Not


Percentage 100% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 0.00% 68.75% 31.25% 18.75% 18.75% 62.50%

Total 16 0 0 16 0 11 5 3 3 10

Table 3: Benchmark Courses

Table 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.


18 9/2011


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 the

next, 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.


19 9/2011


Program Effectiveness: Analysis and Discussion

Did Not Receive Instruction in This

Specific Area

Not at all

Effective

Somewhat

Effective Well Very Well

2009-2010 2010-2011

2009-

2010

2010-

2011

2009-

2010

2010-

2011

2009-

2010

2010-

2011 2009-2010

2010-

2011

Assessing Student

Learning 0% 4% 0% 13% 15% 54% 34% 28% 51%

Classroom

Management 0% 0% 7% 2% 22% 20% 44% 33% 28% 45%

Instructional Planning

and Delivery 0% 0% 7% 1% 17% 15% 41% 36% 35% 35%

Using computer

Technology 11% 8% 10% 4% 33% 35% 35% 32% 23% 30%

Reading and Literacy

Strategies 2% 1% 7% 3% 18% 15% 44% 36% 31% 46%

Teaching English

Learners 0% 0% 2% 0% 13% 10% 47% 43% 38% 47%

Teaching Special

Populations 0% 1% 4% 0% 24% 11% 41% 33% 30% 56%

Professional, legal,

ethical aspects of

teaching

0% 0% 2% 0% 16% 21% 53% 38% 29% 40%

Child/Adolescent

Development 5% 3% 2% 2% 46% 27% 36% 44% 16% 26%

Table 4: Effectiveness of Coursework in Specific Areas End-of-Year State Intern Survey

The 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,


20 9/2011

72% 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 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% of

participants rated this item as ―Well‖ to ―Very Well in 2009-2010 and 32% of participants rated this item as ―Well‖ to ―Very Well in

2010-2011. 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.

Analysis and Discussion of Program Effectiveness Areas of Strength Areas for Growth The coursework improved candidates’ teaching effectiveness in

the following areas:

Assessing Student Learning

Classroom Management

Instructional Planning and Delivery

Reading and Literacy Strategies

Teaching English Learners

The program needs to continue improving instructional

transference and feedback to interns in the following areas:

Using Computer Technology

Professional, Legal and Ethical

Child/Adolescent Development


21 9/2011



TPA 1

First

Attempt

TPA 1

Second

Attempt

TPA 2

First

Attempt

TPA 2

Second

Attempt

TPA 3

First

Attempt

TPA 3

Second

Attempt

TPA 4

First

Attempt

TPA 4

Second

Attempt

Overall

First

Attempt

Overall

Second

Attempt

2009/10 76.19%

(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/A 75.36%

(52/69)

66.67%

(10/15)

2010/11 78.57%

(11/14)

100.00%

(3/3)

50.00%

(7/14)

100.00%

(7/7)

N/A N/A N/A N/A 64.29%

(18/28)

100.00%

(10/10)

Table 5: Passage of Cal TPA Tasks: First and Second Attempts

In 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 the

2010/11 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) and

CalTPA DI (TPA 2) for both cohorts.


Preparation and support for interns to pass Cal TPA, task 1 on

the 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 successful

The programs needs to continue on improving in the preparation

an 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 Planning

TPE 2-Monitoring Students Learning During Instruction

TPE 3- Interpretation and Use of Assessments


22 9/2011



When training was Received Quality of Training provided this year only

Type of Training Prior Years Did not Receive Poor Good Mean Std

Beginning Teacher Development 45.20% 3.20% 0.00% 51.60% 2.58 1.50

The CSTPs 38.70% 0.00% 3.20% 58.10% 2.81 1.47

Support Strategies 29.00% 3.20% 0.00% 67.70% 3.06 1.39

Students Academic Content Standards and

Curriculum 35.50% 6.50% 0.00% 58.10% 2.81 1.45

Interpersonal Communication Skills 32.20% 6.50% 0.00% 54.80% 2.83 1.44

Knowledge of adult learning Theory 32.20% 32.20% 0.00% 35.50% 2.39 1.28

Table 6: Support Provide End of Year Quality of Training Report: 2010-2011

Table 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 Strength Areas for Growth

The data indicates that the program shows strength in providing

training in the following areas:

Support Strategies

CSTPs

Student 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 the

following areas:

Beginning Teacher Development

Interpersonal Communication Skills

Knowledge of adult learning theory


23 9/2011


Cohor

t

Tota

l

Complete

d

Course and

Portfolio

Task are

Up to Date

No Show Resigned Terminated

Extension/

Behind

Schedule

Percent Completed /

On track to

completion

09/10 26 11 N/A 1 3 3 8 42.31%

10/11 17 N/A 12 1 0 2 2 70.58%

Table 7: Intern Completion Rate

Table 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.


2010-2011 Cohort has 70.58% of interns on schedule to complete

their 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 assistance

o District Intern support workshops

o Individualized support to interns by DI staff

2009-2010 data indicates that there is a need for improvement in

supporting interns as they complete their coursework and

portfolio tasks.

The most common reason for not completing on time for the

2009-2010 cohort was the high number of missing assignments

from courses and portfolio tasks.

Late submission of TPAs also affected the completion rate of

2009-2010 cohort.


24 9/2011

Part IV: Subject Specific:

Improvement of Candidate performance

Data Source Common/Program

Standards

Plan of Action/Proposed

Change Passage Rate on the CalTPA Tasks

Common Standard 6: Advice and

Assistance

Common Standard 7: Field

Experience and Clinical Practice

Common Standard 9: Assessment of

Candidate Competence

Program Standard 18: Implementation of

the Teaching Performance Assessment:

Candidate Preparation and Support

Embed more practice and problem solving

opportunities so interns can strengthen their

practice in making adaptations for English

Learners and Students with Special Needs

So that interns can improve on incorporating

student data into their lesson plans, the DI

program 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

improvement

CalTPA, Task 4 will be due after all courses have

been completed.


25 9/2011

Performance on Portfolio Tasks including:

(Credo/Philosophy, Spending Time to Save Time,

My life as a Teacher, Plan and Deliver, What’s

behind the Classroom Door)


Assistance

Common Standard 7: Field Experience

and Clinical Practice



Program Standard 3: Foundational

Educational Ideas and Research

Program Standard 6: Pedagogy and

Reflective Practice

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.

Benchmark Course Passage Rate (Classroom

Management, Teaching English Learners, Methods

of Teaching)


Assistance

Common Standard 7: Field Experience

and Clinical Practice



Program Standard 6: Pedagogy and

Reflective Practice

Program Standard 12: Preparation to

Teach English Learners

Program Standard 8: Pedagogical

Preparation for Subject-Specific Content

Instruction

Increase the use of accountable talk into every

course.

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 components

Continue to scaffold the lesson planning process

so that interns internalize habits of mind.


26 9/2011

Part IV: Subject Specific:

Improvement of Program Performance

Data Source Common/Program Standards Plan of Action/Proposed Change Intern State Survey

Common Standard 2:

Unit and Program Assessment and Evaluation

Program Standard 11: Using Technology in the Classroom

Continue 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 the

DI 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 course

Intern Completion Rate

Common Standard 6: Advice and Assistance

Common Standard 9:

Assessment of Candidate Competence

Continue 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 Survey


Common Standard 8:

District-Employed Supervisors

Program Standard 1: Intern Program Delivery

Model

Increase collaboration and training with the

New Teacher Center for support provider

training.

Provide support in the support provider match-

up and selection process.


27 9/2011

District Intern Credential Program Participant Information

Special Ed 09-10 10-11

09-10 10-11

Number of candidates (public/charter schools) 282 211 Total Number of candidates assigned

to School Improvement, Program

Improvement or SAIT-identified

settings

Year 1 142 81

Number of candidates (private schools) 0 0

Number of active Support Providers 78 80

Year 2 100 102

Candidate: Support Provider Ratio

Participants: Non-NBC Support Provider

Participants: NBC Support Provider:

2:1

4:1

2:1

4:1

Total number of candidates recommended for Level I

Preliminary MS Credential 25 4

Total number of candidates recommended for Level I

Preliminary MM Credential 87 43


28 9/2011

Part I: Special Education Program Changes


Standard 8 Support Provider selection process changed.

Standards 9, 11, 13, 19 Combined courses ESEd 515and 516 and merged with ESEd 502.1c, renamed to ESEd

502.1c and differentiated curriculum for all Level II candidates, mild to moderate and

moderate to severe.

Standards 11, 13, 16, 19, 20, 24, 27 Merged ESEd 509 with ESEd 524, renamed to ESEd 524 and differentiated curriculum for

all Level II candidates, mild to moderate and moderate to severe.

Standards 10, 11, 16 Merged ESEd 401 with ESEd 409, renamed to ESEd 409/409.1 and differentiated

curriculum for all Level I candidates, mild to moderate and moderate to severe.

Standards 24 Merged ESEd 401a and 405 with ESEd 321, renamed to ESEd 321 and differentiated

curriculum for all Level I candidates, mild to moderate and moderate to severe.

Standards 12, 20 Merged ESEd 520 with ESEd 510, renamed to ESEd 510 and differentiated curriculum for

all Level II candidates, mild to moderate and moderate to severe.


29 9/2011

Part II (Part A): Special Education


Assessment

Tool


RICA 1 Reading Instruction Competence

Assessment verifies interns have

knowledge and skills to provide

effective reading instruction to

children.

RICA pass rates Evidence of candidate

competence to teach

reading.

Picture Worth 1000

Words 2 Portfolio task in which interns

submit a 20 minute video taped

lesson demonstrating effective use

of various strategies and

interventions.

Completed tasks assessed using a

rubric:

Videos, Lesson Plans Reflective

summaries

Evidence of candidate

competence to use

intervention/strategies

to teach students with

special needs.

Preliminary

Individualized

Induction Plan

3 Development of a focus area for

professional growth which will

become the foundation for action

research during the induction

process.

Completed tasks assessed using a

rubric

Evidence of

candidates’

competence to meet

the TPEs and self-

reflect upon their

practice.

Individualized

Induction Plan 4 Builds on the development of a

focus 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 growth


competence to use

action research to

improve practice.


30 9/2011

Part II (Part A): Special Education


Behavior/Classroom

Management Courses

Final Grades

5 Interns develop classroom

management plans, functional

behavior assessments, and positive

behavior support plans for

students with special needs.

Final grades based upon: classroom

management plans, Functional

Behavior Assessments, Positive

Behavior Plans


competence to

develop and

implement positive

behavior supports.

Teaching English

Learners Courses Final

Grades

6 Interns 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 of

candidates’ abilities

to make content

comprehensible to

ELs with special

needs and incorporate

strategies to increase

content literacy.

Assessment Courses

Final Grades 7 Interns use formal and informal

measures 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 the

students' abilities to function in the

least restrictive environment.

Final grades based upon: choosing

and administering formal/informal

assessments; writing present levels of

performance reports; developing IEP

goals/objectives; evaluating general

education/alternative curriculum;

developing resource specialist reports.


competence to link

assessment data to

students’

strengths/needs, to

inform the IEP

development, and

instruction.


31 9/2011

Part II (Part B): Special Education


Assessment

Tool


End-of-Year State

Intern Survey 8 Survey, developed by CTC, is taken

online by Interns finishing the Clear or

Preliminary credential program(s) in the

spring of each school year.

Measurement of

perceptions of the

program using a Likert

Scale.

To determine the


according to interns’

perceptions.

Course Evaluations 9 Intern evaluations of coursework are

administered at the end of each course.

Perceptions of alignment of coursework

to classroom practice.

Likert scales and open-

ended comments.


meeting standards.

RICA Passage Rates 10 Reading Instruction Competence

Assessment verifies interns have

knowledge and skills to provide effective

reading instruction to children.

Analysis of attempt

rates.

Program effectiveness.

Program Completion

Rates 11 Number of interns completing the Level I

and Level II programs within the given

time frame.

Number of interns who

received Level I and

Level II credentials.


preparing and supporting

interns in successful course

completion and portfolio

requirements.

End-of-Year Support

Provider Survey Data

Educational

Specialist Interns

State Survey

12 Support provider survey, developed by

CTC, is taken online in the spring of

school year.

Measurement of

perceptions of the

program using a Likert

Scale.

To determine the


for training/feedback to

support providers.


32 9/2011

Part III (Part A): Special Education

Candidate Proficiency Analysis and Discussion

2009-2010 2010-2011

RICA Attempts 20 1

RICA Passage 18 1

Passage Rate 90.00% 100.00%

Table 1: RICA Passage Rates

In 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 Proficiency Strength Areas for Growth

The data reflects strengths in the areas of knowledge and skills to

provide 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 continue

improving candidates’ RICA passage rate by providing effective

feedback.


33 9/2011



2009/2010 2010/2011

4 3 Total

Average

Score Stan Dev # 4 #3 Total

Average

Score Stan Dev

A Picture Is Worth A

Thousand Words 39 65 104 3.37 0.48795 38 2 40 3.85 0.19604

Table 2: Portfolio Assignment: (4-Advanced: 3-Proficient): A Picture Is Worth A Thousand Words

Interns submitted lesson plans, reflective summaries of lessons, and 20 minute videos of lessons demonstrating effective use of

various 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.


Data 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 reflection

summary of a Picture Is Worth A Thousand Words and the reflective

cycle in the induction process.


34 9/2011



2009/2010 2011/2012

4 3 Total

Average

Score Stan Dev # 4 #3 Total

Average

Score Stan Dev

Preliminary Induction

Plan 34 70 104 3.32 0.46768 35 5 40 3.5 0.30033

Table 3: Portfolio Assignment: (4-Advanced: 3-Proficient): Preliminary Induction Plan

Interns developed a focus area for professional growth which became the foundation for their action research during the induction process. In

2009-2010, 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 year

was 3.5.


Data reflects candidates demonstrated the abilities to reflect upon their

instructional practices and develop focus areas for professional growth, with a

success rate of 100%.

Data reflects the need to provide a clear link between the

development of the focus area and the next steps of the induction

process.


35 9/2011



Table 4: Portfolio Assignment: (4-Advanced: 3-Proficient): Individual Induction Plan

Interns 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 Proficiency Strength Areas for Growth Data reflects that candidates complete their development, implementation

and reflection of their action research in a one year period with a 94% to

100% success rate.

Data reflects as need to provide support and feedback to the

candidates that do not complete their action research in the one year

period.

2009/2010 2010/2011

4 3 INC Total Average

Score # 4 #3 INC Total

Average

Score

Individual Induction Plan 49 41 18 108 3.54 40 16 0 56 3.71


36 9/2011



N Not Proficient Proficient Advanced

9-10 10-11 9-10 10-11 9-10 10-11 9-10 10-11

Percentage 100% 100% 10.53% 0% 70.69% 33% 44.83% 67%

Total 73 33 6 0 41 11 26 22

Table 5: Behavior Management Courses Grades

Interns 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.


Data reflects strengths in the areas of developing positive behavior

plans.

Data reflects areas for growth in program providing support

and feedback.


37 9/2011



2009-2010


Percentage 100% 15.52% 60.34% 24.14%

Total 57 9 35 14

2010-2011


Percentage 100% 0% 12% 88%

Total 33 0 4 29

Table 6: Teaching English Learners with Disabilities Courses

Interns 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.


Data reflects candidates demonstrated the ability to use strategies and

interventions to enable English learners with special needs to access curriculum

across all content areas.

Data reflects areas for growth for the program to increase

collaboration with language acquisition branch to improve

curriculum to teach English learners.


38 9/2011


Candidate Proficiency Analysis and Discussion

2009-2010 Assessment

Not Proficient Proficient Advanced

Percentage 100% 3% 20% 77%

Total 141 5 28 108

2010-2011 Assessment

Not Proficient Proficient Advanced

Percentage 100% 5% 14% 81%

Total 133 7 18 108

Table 7: Benchmark Assignments

Interns 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 were

not 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 Proficiency Strength Areas of Growth

Data reflects interns used multiple assessments measures effectively. Interns

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.

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.


39 9/2011



RICA Passage Rate

2009-2010 2010-2011

RICA Attempts 20 1

RICA Passage 18 1

Passage Rate 90.00% 100.00%

Table 8: RICA

In 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 Effectiveness Strength Areas for Growth Data reflects an effective RICA preparation program that embeds

elements into CORE curriculum courses.

Data reflects the need to improve interventions for interns that have not

been successful in passing the RICA.


40 9/2011



Table 9: Educational Specialist Interns State Survey 2009-2010/10-11

In 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 Effectiveness Strength Areas for Growth

Data reflects program strengths in: Working with Families,

and Transition and IEPs

Data reflects program areas for growth in: Assessment and

Instructional Accommodations, Collaboration and Co-Teaching

Strategies, Disability Specific Content, and Positive Behavior Support

Did Not Receive Not at all Somewhat Well Very Well

2009-10 2010-11 2009-10 2010-11 2009-10 2010-11 2009-10 2010-11 2009-10 2010-

11

Working with Families 5.90% 50.00% 5.90% 0.00% 52.90% 50.00% 35.30% 50.00% 5.90% 0.00%

Assessment and Instructional

Accommodations 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 21.10% 33.30% 52.60% 66.70% 26.30% 0.00%

Collaboration and Co-teaching

strategies 26.70% 0.00% 6.70% 33.30% 53.30% 33.30% 20.00% 33.30% 20.00% 0.00%

Disability Specific Content 72.70% 0.00% 0.00% 33.30% 54.50% 33.30% 27.30% 33.30% 18.20% 0.00%

Positive Behavior Support 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 31.60% 33.30% 47.40% 66.70% 21.10% 0.00%

Transition and IEP's 11.80% 0.00% 11.80% 0.00% 58.80% 33.30% 17.60% 66.70% 11.80% 0.00%


41 9/2011

Part III (Part B): Special Education


Cohort Program Total Completed Extension

Percent

Completed

W

08/09 Mild/Mod 4 4 0 100.0%

S/F

09/10 Mild/Mod 16 15

1 93.7%

S/F

09/10 Mod/Sev 8 7

1 87.5%

S/F

10/11 Mild/Mod 33 33 0 100.0%

Table 10 A: Program Completion Level

The 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 SF

1011 Mild Moderate completed the program with a 100% success rate.


42 9/2011

Cohort Program Total Completed Extension

Percent

Completed

S/F 07/08 Mild/Mod 27 27 0 100.0%

S/F 07/08 MS Mod/Sev 13 13 0 100.0%

W 07/08 Mild Mod 7 3 4 43.0%

S/F 08/09 Mild/Mod 40 36 4 90.0%

S/F 08/09 Mod/Sev 13 13 0 100.0%

W 08/09

Mild/Mod

CENTSE 4 4 0 100.0%

S/F 09/10

CENTSE

M/M 26 22

4 85.0%

S/F 09/10

CENTSE

M/S 10 9

1 90.0%

Table 10 B: Program Completion Level II The 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 SF

0809 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 0910

CENTSE 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.


43 9/2011

Analysis and Discussion of Program Effectiveness Strength Areas for Growth

Data reflects strengths in the areas of program completion rates

ranging 85% to 100% for 91.6% of all cohorts.

Data reflects areas for growth in the area of progress monitoring with

support mechanisms and feedback for interns who are not

completing the program within the 2-3 years time period.


44 9/2011

Part IV: Special Education

Improvement of Candidate Performance

Data Source Common Standards and

Program Standards

Plan of Action/Proposed Change

RICA passage rates

Project: A Picture Worth

1000 Words

Preliminary

Individualized Induction

Plan

Individualized Induction

Plan

Program Standard : Common Standard: 2, 3, 9

Program Standard : 12, 15, 16, 18, 20

Common Standard: 2, 7, 9,

Program Standard: 12, 15, 16, 18, 20

Common Standard: 2,7, 9,

Program Standard: 12, 15, 16, 18, 20

Common Standard: 2, 7, 9

Provide feedback on course of action to increase abilities to

pass 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.


45 9/2011

Behavior/Classroom

Management Courses

Final Grades (2,4,6,7,9)

Teaching English

Learners Courses Final

Grades

(2,4,9)

Assessment Courses

Final Grades(2,3,4,6,7,9)

Program Standard : 15, 16, 22, 24, 25,

Common Standard: 2,3,9

Program Standard : 11, 12, 16, 17,

20, 26

Common Standard: 2,3,4,7

Program 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 practices.

Combined advanced behavior course from Level II to new

Preliminary Program

Review 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 SDAIE

components.

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.


46 9/2011

Common Standard: 2,3,9

Integrate the usage of District data bases to maximize the use of

multiple data points.

Combined advanced assessment, curriculum program

evaluation from Level II to new Preliminary program.


47 9/2011

Part IV (Cont.): Special Education

Improvement of Program Effectiveness

Data Source Common Standards Plan of Action/Proposed Change RICA passage rates

CTC End-of-Year survey

items specific to Education

Specialist

Course Passage Rates

Program Standard :


Program Standard :


Program Standard :

Common Standard: 2, 9,

Provide feedback on course of action to increase abilities to pass the

assessment.

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 and

lesson plans.

Provide interns with additional direction, models, and scaffolds.


48 9/2011

District Intern Preliminary Credential Program Participant Information

DI BTSA

09-10 10-11 9-

10 10-11

Number of candidates (public/charter schools) Total Number of candidates assigned to

School Improvement, Program Improvement

or SAIT-identified settings Number of candidates (private schools)

Number of active Support Providers

Support Provider Ratio

Candidates: Non-NBC Support Provider

Candidates: NBC Support Provider:

2:1

4:1

2:1

4:1

Total number of candidates recommended for Clear

Credential


Commission-Approved Induction Program

(CL-855) notices issued to eligible candidates


49 9/2011

Part I: DI BTSA Program Changes: Significant changes since last biennial report


Program Standard 1: Program

Design

In the 2010-2011 school year, participating teachers in the District Intern BTSA Induction Program

were 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.


50 9/2011

Part II: DI BTSA Candidate Assessment/performance and Program Effectiveness Assessment Tools


Assessment

Tool

Description of Tool Data Gathered Use

Portfolio Task:

Context for Teaching

Participating Teachers (PT) gather data about their

class, school, district and community and discuss

the implications of this with their support

providers using conversation guides.

Task assessed with criteria chart

and initial passage rate

Evidence of PTs’

ability to access

information about

students and connect

it to student learning

Portfolio Task: Initial

Assessment of

Teaching Practice

Provides PTs with the opportunity to compare and

contrast 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 chart

and initial passage rate

Evidence of PTs’

ability to use

reflection and

feedback to improve

teaching practice and

subject matter

knowledge

Portfolio Task:

Inquiry 1 on Equity

With 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 a

rubric on 5 areas of professional

growth: self assessment, the

lesson series and the observed

lesson, aligning, analyzing and

interpreting assessments,

differentiated instruction, writing

reflections

Evidence of PTs’

competency in the

assessed areas for

providing equity to

all students

Portfolio Task: With a focus on teaching English Learners, PTs Inquiry 2 task assessed with a Evidence of PTs’


51 9/2011

Inquiry 2 on teaching

English Learners

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.







reflections

competency in the

assessed areas for

teaching English

Learners

Portfolio Task:

Inquiry 3 on teaching

Special Populations

With a focus on teaching English Learners, 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 3 task assessed with a







reflections

Evidence of PTs’

competency in the

assessed areas for

teaching Special

Populations


52 9/2011

Part II (cont.): DI BTSA


Assessment

Tool

Description of Tool Data Gathered Use

End of Year

Support Provider

Survey

Survey developed by CTC are

taken online in the spring of

school year by support providers

Measurement of PTs’ perceptions of the

program. Uses Likert scale.

To determine the effectiveness

of the program according to

support provider perception

PT Completion rate Measurement of PTs completion

of the program within the

provided time frame

Measurement of the number of PTs who

completed the program on time, the

number who needed an extension and the

number who never completed the program


guiding and supporting

participating teachers as they

complete induction

requirements

Colloquium

Evaluations

At the end of the program, PTs

complete program evaluations

about their satisfaction with the

program.

Qualitative questions that highlight the

strengths and areas of needed growth for

the program.

To determine how PTs feel the

program is strong are where it

can be improved.


53 9/2011

Part III (Part A): DI BTSA

Candidate Performance: Analysis and Discussion

2009-2010 2010-2011 2009-2010 2010-2011 2009-2010 2010-2011 2009-2010 2010-2011

Portfolio Task Number of

Submission

Number of

Submission

Partially

Proficient

Partially

Proficient

Proficient Proficient %

Proficient

%

Proficient

Portfolio Task:

Context for

Teaching

75 49 10 7 65 42 87% 86%

Portfolio Task:

Initial Assessment

of Teaching

Practice

74 44 6 1 68 43 58% 98%

Table 1: Portfolio Assessment and Submission

The 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 and

98% of the Initial Assessment of Teaching Practice was assessed as proficient.


54 9/2011



In 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 below

90%. This may suggest that there is a need for growth in PTs’

ability to access information about students and connect it to

student learning.


55 9/2011



Inquiry Data

2009-2010

Number Median Mean Self-

Assessment

Lesson

Series

Analyze

Assessment

Differentiating

Instruction

Reflection

on Inquiry

Process

Inquiry 1 - Equity 32 2.00 2.46 2.78 2.88 3.00 2.63 2.78

Inquiry 2 - Teaching

English Learners

26 3.00 3.14 3.27 3.38 3.35 3.12 3.23

Inquiry 3 - Special

Populations

7 3.00 3.00 3.29 3.43 3.14 3.43 3.43

Inquiry Data

2010-2011

Number Median Mean Self-

Assessment

Lesson

Series

Analyze

Assessment

Differentiating

Instruction

Reflection

on Inquiry

Process

Inquiry 1 - Equity 48 3.00 2.64 2.99 3.04 2.99 2.86 3.01


English Learners

44 3.00 2.91 3.11 3.23 3.11 3.05 3.23

Inquiry 3 - Special

Populations

26 3.00 2.77 2.96 3.27 3.19 3.08 3.12

Table 2: Inquiry Task Data

The 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.


56 9/2011



Inquiry 2 on Teaching English Learners reflected the

highest 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 1

was 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.



Support Provider End of Year Survey: (See Data for General Education Support

Provider Survey)


57 9/2011



Year Total Completed

Transitioned to

LAUSD BTSA RIF Resigned Terminated Percent Completed

2009-2010 77 55 6 14 2 0 71%

2010-2011 54 34 18 0 1 1 76%

Table 3: DI BTSA Completion Rate

The 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 Effectiveness


The 2009-2010, there a completion rate of 71% and 2010-2011 the completion

rate 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 data

reflects 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, the

program can continue to focus on providing support

and assistance to PTs and support providers.


58 9/2011

Part IV: DI BTSA

Improvement of Candidate Effectiveness

Data Source Common Program Standards Plan of Action/Proposed Change Context for

Teaching

Common Standard 7:

Field Experience and Clinical Practice

Common Standard 8:


Common Standard 9:


Program Standard 4:

Formative Assessment System

Continue 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 of

Teaching Practice

Common Standard 6:

Advice and Assistance

Common Standard 7:


Common Standard 8:


Common Standard 9:


Program Standard 4:

Formative Assessment System

Continue 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 practice

Inquiry 1 - Equity Common Standard 6:


Common Standard 7:

Continue to provide workshops on areas that relate to

Equity and Universal Access such as: RTI2, differentiation,

and CRRE strategies


59 9/2011


Common Standard 8:


Common Standard 9:


Program Standard 5:

Pedagogy

Program Standard 6:

Equity for All Students


English Learners

Common Standard 6:


Common Standard 7:


Common Standard 8:


Common Standard 9:


Program Standard 5:

Pedagogy

Program Standard 6a:

Teaching English Learners


teaching English Learners such as: SDAIE, academic

vocabulary development, literacy in the content areas

Inquiry 3 - Special

Populations

Common Standard 6:



teaching Special Populations such as teaching students

with autism, modifications and adaptations, and working


60 9/2011

Common Standard 7:


Common Standard 8:


Common Standard 9:


Program Standard 5:

Pedagogy

Program Standard 6b:

Teaching Special Populations

with Gifted and Talented students.


61 9/2011

Part IV: DI BTSA


Data Source Common Program Standards Plan of Action/Proposed Change DI BTSA PT

Completion Rate


Common Standard 9: Assessment of Candidate

Competence

Program Standard 3: Support Providers and

Professional Development Providers

Continue 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 State

Survey


Common Standard 8: District-Employed Supervisors

Program Standard 3: Support Providers and

Professional Development Providers

Increase collaboration and training with the New

Teacher Center for support provider training.

Provide support in the support provider match-up and

selection process.


62 9/2011

Participant Information

LAUSD BTSA 09-10 10-11

09-10 10-11

Number of candidates (public/charter schools) 1707 687 Total Number of candidates assigned

to a school in Program Improvement"

which then covers QEIA, SAIT,

DAIT, etc.

Year 1 53 17 Number of candidates (private schools) 0 0

Number of active Support Providers 425 283 Year 2 77 70

Candidate: Support Provider Ratio

Candidates: Non-NBC Support Provider:

Candidates: NBC Support Provide

Candidates: Full Release Support Provider

2:1

4.1

18:1

2:1

4:1

18:1


Commission-Approved Induction Program (CL-855)

notices issued to eligible candidates

0 28

Total number of candidates recommended for Clear MS

or SS Credential 1108 562

Number of candidates recommended for Clear MS

or SS Credential via Early Completion Option 251 0


63 9/2011

Part I: LAUSD BTSA Program Changes: Significant changes since last biennial report

Program

Standard(s)

Explanation of Change

PS 4 Reduced number of formative assessment inquiries required for completion to two for LAUSD

BTSA induction.

PS 4

Pilot of the FAS formative assessment system with selected participants and Support Providers in

the 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, 6 Modified support for participating teacher’s completion of induction program to align with changes

in Program Standards and CSTP.

CS 6 Year 1 and Early Completion Option suspended for the 2010-11 academic school year, reinstated

for the 11-12 academic school year

CS 6

Admission and implementation modified—District Intern candidates may complete induction

through either the LAUSD BTSA Induction Program or the District Intern Induction Program based

on the District’s organizational and fiscal decisions each year.


64 9/2011

Part II (Part A): LAUSD BTSA Candidate


Assessment

Tool


State Survey

Annual survey designed by State agencies

electronically collected from btsa.ca.gov

website during the month of May

Specific questions selected for analysis focus

on:

o BTSA impact on participating

teachers’ practice in specific

areas

o BTSA impact on practice--CSTP

Results are given as

percentage of respondents

who selected a particular

choice for each questions

(NOT average with standard

deviation, as anticipated)

Used to assess

candidate

performance in the

areas: impact on

practice, CSTP, and

growth in assessed

areas.

LAUSD Mid

Year Survey

Local evaluation tool completed participating

teachers and support providers

Responses electronically collected through

Zoomerang Survey website

Questions specifically crafted to collect data

about support provider effectiveness, as well

as questions about program effectiveness that

Support 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 program

Data used to assess

program impact and

participant

opportunity to

demonstrate growth.


65 9/2011

mirror questions on the Statewide survey

Participating teachers electronically submit

their IIP cells 1-4 responses

impact on their own practice

scale 1-10

Summary of

Teaching Practice

Project

Summary 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 growth

assessed on a two point scale

(evidence of growth/no evidence of

growth)

Data used to assess

participant ability to

synthesize and present

evidence of growth in

the areas indicated in

the induction standards


66 9/2011

Part II (Part B): BTSA Candidate


Assessment

Tool

Table Description of Tool Data

Gathered

Use

BTSA

Statewide

Survey

Annual survey designed by State agencies electronically

collected from btsa.ca.gov website during the month of

May

Results 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 areas

2. The perception of BTSA impact on Support

Provider practice in specific areas

3. Support Provider Selection and Assignment

Results are given

as percentage of

respondents who

selected a

particular choice

for each questions

(NOT average

with standard

deviation, as

anticipated)

Used to assess

program

effectiveness in the

areas: impact on

practice, CSTP,

growth in assessed

areas, and support

provider selection

and assignment.

Video

Observation

The Video Observation was second part of a 5 Phase

Support 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 their

observations. 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 to

determine who was

eligible to proceed in

the selection and

assignment process

as well as to provide

insight into the areas

of professional

growth.

Local Survey (Mid-

Year) Local evaluation tool completed participating teachers and support

providers

Support providers and

participating teachers


67 9/2011

Participating

Teachers and

Support Providers

Responses electronically collected through Zoomerang Survey

website

Questions specifically crafted to collect data about support provider

effectiveness, as well as questions about program effectiveness that

mirror questions on the Statewide survey

responded on a

participating teacher’s

opportunity to

demonstrate growth in

assessed areas on a

Likert Scale 1-10,

support providers

assessed program impact

on their own practice

scale 1-10

Exit Survey Survey given immediately after the 2

nd year PT completed his/her

Exit Interview and taken electronically in the New Teacher Office

through Zoomerang Survey website.

First implemented in 2010-11 academic year

1. Specific questions selected for analysis focus on:

2. Opportunity to demonstrate practice in selected areas 3. Opportunity to identify areas for growth

Participating teachers

responded on their

opportunity to

examine their

proficiency as a

professional educator

and identify areas for

growth.

Data used to assess

areas of program

effectiveness in

providing participating

teachers opportunity to

examine their

proficiency as a

professional educator

and identify areas for

growth. Candidate Records

Data Database(s) of records—candidate enrollment, progress, completion,

etc; support provider selection, assignment and training

Data collected is the

enrollment progress

and completion of

requirements for

participating teachers.

Data used to monitor

candidate progress and

identify those who

have completed all

requirements for

recommendation for

the credential and

analyze timely

completion of program

requirements


68 9/2011

Part III (Part B): LAUSD BTSA


Graph 1: Support Provider Candidate Video Observation Scores

Numbers 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.

0

50

100

150

200

00 05 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50

2010-11 Support Provider ApplicantVideo Observation Scores

Total


69 9/2011


The 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 provider

professional 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.


70 9/2011



Graph 2: Time Frame for Teacher/Support Provider Interaction

On 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.


56% of participating teachers began working with support providers within 1

month 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 they

did not begin to work with their Support Providers

within the first 2 months

Increase the number of percentage of participants who

begin working with their support provider the first 30

days of program enrollment

56

11

33

0102030405060

Within one months of enrollment in the BTSA

Induction Program

Within two months of enrollment in the BTSA

Induction Program

More 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? (%) %


71 9/2011

Part III (Part B): DI BTSA


Graph 3: Selection of Support Providers o NOTE: 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.

49.40%

90.90%

74.00% 71.40%

0.00%10.00%20.00%30.00%40.00%50.00%60.00%70.00%80.00%90.00%

100.00%

1a. My site administrator selected me

1b. BTSA Induction

program staff selected me

1c. I completed an application

1d. I was interviewed

1e. I was observed

Pe

rce

nta

ge

How were you selected to be a Support Provider?(Select all that apply)

Support Provider Selection


72 9/2011


Over 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 Board

Certification

Although all but a handful of support providers are assigned

by their site administrator, nearly 50% identified that they

were assigned by BTSA staff – clarify communication


73 9/2011



Graph 4: CST Impact on SP Practice

The 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.


For 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 Providers

to grow in their practice as an effective classroom teacher.

83.10% 80.50% 80.50% 87.00% 88.30% 89.60%

0.00%

100.00%

Engaging and supporting all

students in learning

Creating and maintaining effective

environments for student learning

Understanding and organizing subject matter for student

learning

Planning instruction and designing

learning experiences for all students

Assessing students for learning

Developing as a professional educator

% o

f SP

s in

dic

atin

g im

pac

t

CSTP impact on SP Practice (self assessed)


74 9/2011

Graph 5: Support Provider Perceived Impact on Own Practice

The 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.

3.6

3.52

3.13

3.52

3.49

3.45

3.45

3.08

3.25

3.06

2.91

2.63

3.13

2.83

3.05

2.61

3.43

25a. Understanding the skills, roles and responsibilities of a Support …

25b. Understanding the use and purposes of the formative assessment …

25c. Assisting Participating Teacher(s) to connect their prior experience …

25d. Assisting Participating Teacher(s) in understanding the local …

25e. Understanding the processes and use of inquiry in formative …

25f. Using evidence from formative assessment activities to examine …

25g. Developing and implementing an Individual Induction …

25h. Identifying and responding to the diverse needs, knowledge, skills …

25i. Using coaching techniques to facilitate reflective conversations on …

25j. Working effectively with English Language Learners

25k. Working effectively with special needs students

25l. Using technology

25m. Using assessment data to differentiate instruction

25n. Examining bias and using culturally responsive pedagogy

25o. Creating a safe and healthy learning environment

25p. Using strategies for mediating conflicts

25q. Other- Please specify

To what extent did your work as a Support Provider impact your practice in the following areas?

no impact=1, slight impact=2, moderate impact=3, great impact=4


75 9/2011


Support Providers indicated that their work as a support provider had

between moderate and great impact on their own practice in 13 of the17

areas surveyed.

Support Providers indicated that their work as a support provider had

between slight to moderate impact on their own practice in 4 of the 17

areas surveyed

o mediating conflict

o examining bias and using culturally responsive pedagogy

o using technology and

o working effectively with special needs students


76 9/2011



Please rate the following from 0 (low) to 10 (high):

Low 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 High

the level to which your roles and responsibilities as a support

provider were clearly communicated to you by the leadership of

this BTSA Induction Program

0

0%

1

1%

0

0%

3

3%

8

8%

8

8%

7

7%

24

23%

21

20%

33

31%

the extent to which you feel that the CFASST or FACT training

prepares you to work with your participating teacher(s)

1

1%

2

2%

2

2%

2

2%

7

7%

7

7%

12

11%

26

25%

27

26%

19

18%

the impact of the formative assessment work you complete with

your participating teacher(s) in helping them to assess their

students’ specific learning needs

0

0%

1

1%

2

2%

0

0%

5

5%

8

8%

16

15%

29

28%

28

27%

16

15%

the impact of the formative assessment work you complete with

your participating teacher(s) in helping them to improve their

skill in using English language development methods and

strategies

0

0%

0

0%

1

1%

1

1%

5

5%

6

6%

21

20%

30

29%

26

25%

15

14%

Table 6: Support Provider rating of Communication and Impact of BTSA

On 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.


77 9/2011


81% of Support Providers rated the level to which their roles

and 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 a

score of 7 or higher

Increase the percentage of Support Providers who believe that

their 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

strategies


78 9/2011



5. 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

y

Limited

opportunity

Some

opportunity

Considerable

opportunity

Ensuring access to the curriculum for all students 0 5 93 393

0% 1% 19% 80%

Differentiating instruction to meet student needs 1 15 110 365

0% 3% 22% 74%

Minimizing the impact of bias on student achievement 2 34 166 289

0% 7% 34% 59%

Teaching English Language Learners/Standard English Learners 2 19 123 347

0% 4% 25% 71%

Teaching students with special needs 6 36 171 278

1% 7% 35% 57%

Using technology to enhance student learning 6 32 154 299

1% 7% 31% 61%

Using assessment to design instruction 1 12 127 351

0% 2% 26% 71%

Collaborating/Communicating with families 8 69 189 225

2% 14% 38% 46%

Table 7: Self-Assessment of the Effectiveness of FACT

On 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.


79 9/2011


Over 90% of participating teachers indicated that they had ―Some‖ or

―Considerable‖ opportunity to demonstrate practice in all areas

assessed.

Continue to provide participating teachers the opportunity to

demonstrate practice in the assessed areas.

Increase indicators to ―Considerable‖ rather than ―Some.‖


80 9/2011

Part III (Part A): LAUSD BTSA


Graph 8: PT and SP Assessment of PT Improvement

3.17

3.23

3.04

2.71

3.12

2.91

3.26

3.06

3.13

2.88

2.88

3.12

2.57

3.04

2.73

2.96

2.99

2.69

2.43

3.01

2.79

2.92

2.8

2.87

2.68

2.68

2.95

2.53

2.89

2.69

24a. Developing a repertoire of teaching strategies

24b. Ensuring access to the curriculum for all students

24c. Managing the classroom

24d. Mediating conflict

24e. Differentiating instruction

24f. Minimizing bias and using culturally responsive pedagogy

24g. Teaching to content standards

24h. Teaching students with special needs

24i. Teaching English Language Learners

24j. Using technology as a teaching tool

24k. Using technology as a learning tool

24l. Using assessment data to design instruction

24m. Working with families

24n. Collaborating with teachers and other resource personnel at their …

24o. Prioritizing the professional workload

Participating Teacher & Support Provider Assessment ofPT Improvement as a result of BTSA Participation

PT Mean SP Mean


81 9/2011

On 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.

The 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.


SPs rated BTSA impact on PT practice at a mean of 3.0 or higher in

9 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 rated

BTSA impact on PT improvement on the assessed areas as

―significant‖ or ―moderate‖:

Repertoire of teaching practices

Managing the classroom

Ensuring access to the curriculum of all students

Teaching to content standards

Teaching Students with special needs

Using technology as a tool

Using assessment data

Continue to provide the participating teachers with

opportunities to improve/grow in this area.

Assist participating teachers in identifying the

connection between their formative assessment work

and the areas assessed.


82 9/2011



Graph 9: PT and SP Assessment of BTSA Impact

On the 2010-11 state survey Support Providers and participating teachers were asked to assess the impact of BTSA on the

participant’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.

2.7 2.8 2.9 3 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7

23a. Engaging and supporting all students in learning

23b. Creating and maintaining effective environments for …

23c. Understanding and organizing subject matter for …

23d. Planning instruction and designing learning …

23e. Assessing student for learning

23f. Developing as a Professional Educator

SP and PT Assessment ofImpact of BTSA on Classroom Practice--CSTP

PT Mean

SP Mean


83 9/2011


The planning instruction and designing learning experiences

has 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 the

CSTP at 3.0 or above.

Continue to provide participating teachers with opportunities

to grow in their abilities to see the impact of BTSE induction

upon their practice.


84 9/2011



Low 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 High

your participating teacher's ability to help students focus on

their personal strengths

0

0%

0

0%

1

1%

0

0%

5

5%

7

7%

19

18%

29

28%

28

27%

16

15%

your participating teacher's ability to assess English learners 0

0%

0

0%

2

2%

0

0%

8

8%

8

8%

18

17%

33

31%

23

22%

13

12%

the extent that your participating teacher(s) needs additional

support and strategies in the area of behavior management

4

4%

14

13%

6

6%

8

8%

10

10%

8

8%

18

17%

22

21%

11

10%

4

4%

the level that your 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

0

0%

0

0%

0

0%

4

4%

5

5%

8

8%

27

26%

27

26%

21

20%

13

12%

Table 10: Support Provider Mid-Year Survey of Teacher Effectiveness: 10-11

On the 2010-11 LAUSD Local (mid-year) survey Support Providers were asked to rate statements regardin Program Effectiveness and

Candidate 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.


85 9/2011


88% of Support Providers rate their participating teacher's

ability 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 to

develop 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 needs


86 9/2011



Top number is the count of respondents selecting the option.

Bottom % is percent of the total respondents selecting the

option.

Low 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 High

my ability to use the formative assessment (FACT) work I complete

with my support provider to assess my student's specific learning

needs

15

2%

6

1%

9

1%

10

2%

37

6%

47

7%

96

15%

140

22%

133

21%

135

21%

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 strategies

16

3%

3

0%

10

2%

10

2%

31

5%

56

9%

108

17%

157

25%

121

19%

116

18%

my ability to assess English learners 8

1%

4

1%

2

0%

6

1%

41

7%

54

9%

108

17%

168

27%

124

20%

113

18%

the extent that I would like additional support and strategies in the

area of behavior management

35

6%

28

4%

31

5%

29

5%

74

12%

59

9%

94

15%

98

16%

83

13%

97

15%

the level to which I am able to recognize and assess the strengths of

both students with disabilities and with talents and to plan activities

around these strengths

8

1%

1

0%

6

1%

8

1%

39

6%

60

10%

127

20%

185

29%

105

17%

89

14%

Table 11: Teacher Mid-Year Survey of Their Effectiveness


87 9/2011

On 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.


79% 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 assess

English 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 to

improve their practice in assessing and planning instruction

for English language learners and students with special needs

Provide additional opportunities for participating teachers to

develop and implement behavior management strategies


88 9/2011



6. 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.)

# --yes %

SP formal or informal observation of my

teaching 374 76%

Looking in-depth at my Class Profile/Focus

Students 356 73%

Analysis of student work 446 91%

Observation of experienced teacher 333 68%

In-depth inquiry into my teaching practice 378 77%

Reflection on my teaching practice 447 91%

Examination of teaching practice against

specific criteria (DOP) 362 74%

Determining my strengths and areas for growth

on IIP 398 81%

Writing and implementing my IIP Action Plan 352 72%

Weekly meetings with my Support Provider 341 69%

Table 12: Participant Exit Survey

In 2010-11, participants completeing the program were given the LAUSD Exit Survey. Teachers were asked to respond to the

following 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.


89 9/2011


The participating teachers indicated that their ability to

analyze student work was a growth area.

The participating teachers indicated that their ability to reflect

on their teaching practice was a growth area.

Continue to provide opportunities for participating teachers to

examine their proficiency as professional educators and

identify areas of growth.


90 9/2011

Part IV: LAUSD BTSA

Improvement of Candidate Competency

Data Source Common/

Program

Standard(s)

Plan of Action or Proposed Changes

Support

Provider

Application

State Survey

CS 8

PS 1 & 3

Timely assignment of Support Providers--Support Providers who completed the revised application

process 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 a

Support 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 District

Intern Program.


91 9/2011

CS 9

PS 5 & 6 Consistency of perception of program impact

Re-organization of program staffing

Program 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 rate

o Survey completion time at scheduled meetings

o Reminders at Spring Seminar and Summary of Teaching Practice sessions

State Survey

Local (mid-

year) Survey

Exit Survey

CS 6 & 9

PS 1

Completion of Program as Scheduled

Advisement and support for all programs will be modified to have a greater emphasis on completing

within the designated time frame

Design and implementation of revised curriculum with specific support in the target areas

Explicit opportunity for participant response on what their needs are

Revised interim timelines for each program

State Survey

Local (mid-

year) Survey

Exit Survey

Candidate

Records Data

Analysis

CS 4 & 9

PS 1, 4, 5 & 6

Support for Teaching English Learners and Home/School Communication

These will serve as areas of emphasis for the 11-12 school year

o Seminars focusing on these areas

o Additional Support Provider training in these areas

o Revised portfolio components

Conflict 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 management


92 9/2011

Part IV: LAUSD BTSA


Data Source Common/

Program

Standard(s)

Plan of Action or Proposed Changes

State Survey

Local (mid-

year) Survey

Exit Survey

CS 6 & 8

PS 1 & 2 Revised Participating Teacher Responsibilities—Support Provider

Teacher 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 support

State Survey

Local (mid-

year) Survey

Exit Survey

Summary of

Teaching

Practice Project

CS 4 & 9

PS 1 & 2 Consistency of Perception of Program Impact

Support Providers will receive training in protocols to promote the PTs ability to understand the connections between

program opportunities and their professional growth

Support 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 growth

Increase Survey completion rate

Decrease standard deviation for program responses by increasing consistency and discussions of perception across all

groups

State Survey

Local (mid-

year) Survey

CS 4 & 9

PS 1, 2 & 4 Support 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 receive

Conflict 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 management


93 9/2011

Section B and Part 5: INSTUTITIONAL SUMMARY AND PLAN OF ACTION

Introduction

Within 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.

Trends

Across all programs our database systems are used to collect and compile data and the use of the database informs program

decision making

Across all programs participants successfully complete job-embedded portfolio tasks with a high rate of passage

Across all programs there is an emphasis on making standards-based content accessible to English Learners, Standard English

Learners and Students with Disabilities

Across 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 the

Teacher Performance Expectations.

Across all programs interns and participating teachers incorporate the problem-solving cycle and the reflective cycle in their

practice

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 teachers

Across all programs the passage/completion rate is increasing

Across all programs instructors explicitly model effective teaching strategies in courses

Across all District Intern programs instructors are providing more opportunities for practice and role play

Across all programs there is a focus on connecting student data to teaching practice.


94 9/2011

Strengths

The individuals within the unit work collaboratively, which creates consistency and coherence across all programs

Unit collaboration capitalizes on the various strengths of the team members

Candidates in all programs show strength in the ability to design lessons that account diverse learners

The 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

implemented

The data allows for systematic tracking of progress and completion

As often as possible we unite various program groups for instruction

There are multiple pathways to provide prompt feedback to interns and PTs such as intervention appointments, Moodle™, peer

networking, E-mail, Phone calls, and text messaging

The LAUSD DI Program encourages peer networking during class, on Moodle™ forums, collaborative projects

Areas of Improvement

Assisting interns and indication participants to use the data they have collected to inform instruction and improve differentiation

Increasing the use of technology for student use

Continue to incorporate the reflective and problem solving cycle throughout courses and assignments

Align Support provider training to DI Program needs

Next Steps

Data Use by Candidates

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’ needs

The District Intern programs will increase the use of data-driven dialogue throughout all courses

Technology


95 9/2011

To increase the use of technology by candidates for students, the program will add a technology component to the District

Intern lesson plan template.

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 delivery

Reflective and Problem Solving Model

Candidates 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 session

Candidates will have opportunities to work collaboratively the reflection and problem-solving

Support Provider Training

Increase communication and collaboration between programs utilizing Support Providers in designing SP training

Survey candidates to determine and prioritize needs

Increase collaboration with New Teacher Center

Increase opportunities for candidates and support providers to work together `````

biennial report for california educator preparation programs · 2011-11-23 · number of schools...

Documents