Significant and Sustainable Change through Systemic Partnership

1. Significant and Sustainable Change through Systemic Partnership Denise B. Jones October 31, 2006

2. Partnership Enhancement via TQEG • Nationally recognized TWS experts • Representatives from every academic level and subject area from around Kentucky • Technology support and development • Sponsored research

3. Change-in-Progress • Keep the basic structure of KTIP, but replace the portfolio with a TWS, which is included in our Teacher Performance Assessment (TPA). • Improve assessment documentation with rubrics.

4. Why Change KTIP? Portfolio: • Currently "input" focused - mainly concerned with teacher performance. • Portfolio offers no statement of purpose, rubrics or guidelines for the intern. This undermines any hope of scoring validity and makes the portfolio seem like nothing more than a scrapbook or a hoop through which the intern must jump. Process: • Current scoring system offers no option other than met/not met, with less than 1% of all interns deemed unsuccessful. This prevents an authentic gauge of how interns are actually progressing. • Committee training is largely procedural, with little emphasis on coaching skills and analysis of student work.

5. Our Goals • To make beginning teachers more accountable for student achievement through an emphasis on data about students and their learning. • To help teachers link instructional practice to how learning can be improved and supported. • To include divergent viewpoints in our development process in order to challenge the status quo and prepare for changing demographics and technology

6. TPA Development Stance RESEARCH has identified three core principles as a basis for teacher performance evaluation: • RIGOR - Create high expectations and a challenging learning experience for each teacher. • RELEVANCE - Make student learning relevant to teacher's experience and own performance evaluation.  Demonstrating student learning via the TPA is NOT an "add-on requirement", it is THE requirement at the core of their job. • RELATIONSHIPS - Provide a safe, respectful and caring environment for every teacher to grow and contribute to a community of learning-focused professionals.

7. What have we learned from our partners during the pilot?The Resource Teacher: • 50% are mentoring interns out of their subject or grade area. • 1/3 of them are first-time RTs, and ¼ of them have only served one other intern as RT. • They report mostly “casual conversations” as their mentoring activities. • They need more training on assessment in general and TWS specifically in order to help the interns.

8. What have we learned from our partners during the pilot?The intern: • In the first cycle, they are anxious about KTIP in general. • They report less contact with their RTs than their RTs report. • They report that the TWS was very helpful – once they finish it. • They need more TWS preparation, especially in assessment and analysis.

9. What have we learned from our partners during the pilot?The rest of the committee: • Majority of TE’s are unfamiliar with the TWS (adjunct faculty). • Principals are optimistic about TWS potential. • Until change is mandated or proven to be successful, buy-in is difficult. • Important partners were left out of our process initially.

10. What have we learned from the process? • Scoring is not reliable YET. • The TPA provides credible evidence in the appeals process for unsuccessful interns.

11. What have we learned from our partners during the pilot?The researchers (Bradley and Sampson) : • Teachers indicated that they rely most heavily on their personal judgment when evaluating the quality of their instruction. • A subculture within teachers promotes an “unwritten curriculum” • Students report than an “organized class” matters • Core content is prescriptive

12. What have we learned from our partners during the pilot?The researchers (Thacker and Sinclair) : • Guidance for teacher practice may not include attention to context. • Teachers are not very skilled at writing test items. • Teachers are generally not aware of patterns in student improvement or decline. • The most effective teachers have a hierarchy of emphasis: management/discipline, student ownership, pace or volume of teaching, and content depth • The least effective teachers are very open with students about their unhappiness.

13. What do we need from higher ed? • More candidate experience in assessment and analysis. • Expertise and ideas for developing support materials. • Feedback on intern and committee needs once they are in the field. • More research.

14. What else do we need? • Data access and security. • New professionals: data managers and analysts. • Credible, value-added methodologies. • New systematic knowledge about what to do with information. • More dialogue with our behind-the-scenes partners to identify common issues.

15. Phases of First Year Teachers’ Attitudes Towards TeachingFrom a study by the New Teacher Center Santa Cruz Anticipation Anticipation Reflection Rejuvenation Survival Disillusionment