The Renaissance Partnership for Improving Teacher Quality

1
The Renaissance Partnership for Improving Teacher
Quality

• A Title II Funded Project With Offices at Western
  Kentucky University
• 1999-2004
• Roger Pankratz, Director

2
Eleven Project Sites

• CSF California State, Fresno
• EMU Eastern Michigan
• ESU Emporia State
• ISU Idaho State
• KSU Kentucky State
• LCV Longwood, Virginia
• MTS Middle Tennessee State
• MUP Millersville, Pennsylvania
• SEM Southeast Missouri State
• UNI University of Northern Iowa
• WKU Western Kentucky

3
Partner Schools

• CSF - Central Unified School District
• EMU - Ypsilanti Public School
• ESU - Olathe School District
• ISU - League of Schools / Magic Valley School
  Partnership
• KSU - Franklin County Public School
• LVC - Regional 8 Superintendents Network
• MTS - Metro Nashville-Davidson / Rutherford
  County
• MUP - School District of Lancaster
• SEM - Charles R-1 School District
• UNI - Waterloo Community Schools
• WKU - Bowling Green City / Warren County Schools

4
Eleven Partnerships
5
Project Goals

• Become accountable for the impact of teacher
  candidates on P-12 student learning
• Improve teacher performance in key areas and show
  an increase in teachers ability to facilitate
  learning of all students

6
Project Objectives

• 1. Accountability Systems
• 2. Teacher Work Samples
• 3. Team Mentoring
• 4. Program Redesign
• 5. Business Partnerships
• 6. Networking
• 7. Research and Dissemination

7
Teacher Work Samples

• A process that enables teacher candidates to
  demonstrate teaching performances directly
  related to planning, implementing, assessing
  student learning and evaluating teaching and
  learning a four-week standards-based
  instructional unit.

8
Teacher Work Sample Teaching Processes

• Use of Context
• Learning Goals
• Assessment Plan
• Design for Instruction
• Instructional Decision Making
• Analysis of Student Learning
• Reflection and Self-Evaluation

9
Teacher Work Sample Components

• Teaching process standards
• Teaching performance prompt
• Scoring rubric
• Twenty page narrative plus attachments teaching
  exhibit
• lthttp//fp.uni.edu/itqgt

10
History of Renaissance TWS Development

• October 1999 - Cedar Falls Orientation
• January 2000 - Western Oregon Visit
• March 2000 - Renaissance Model Draft
• May/June 2000 - Training of Project Site Leaders
• Fall 2000 - First Semester Pilot
• January 2001 - Revision of Prompt and Rubric
• Spring 2001 - Second Semester Pilot
• June 2001 - Benchmarking and Scoring Revision of
  Prompt and Rubric
• Fall 2001 - Third Semester Pilot
• January 2002 Advanced Scoring Training
  Benchmarking New Work Samples Interrater
  Reliability Check
• Spring 2002 Fourth Semester TWS Implementation

11
(No Transcript)
12
Scoring Rubrics

• Analytic
• Semi-Holistic
• Holistic

13
(No Transcript)
14
Renaissance PartnershipProgress in 2002

• 700 - 1000 Teacher Work Samples
• 135 Courses Revised
• 100 Teacher Educators Trained
• 200 School Practitioners Trained
• 50 Arts Science Faculty Trained

15
Western Kentucky University

• 16,000 Students
• 500 New Teachers Each Year
• 500 Advanced Degrees/Certificates
  Each Year
• 80 of New Teachers Get Jobs in Kentucky
• Kentucky Requires Accountability for K-12
  Student Performance

16
WKU Program Entry Data

• Name and social security number
• Gender
• Ethnicity
• GPA
• Semester hours completed
• Admission test scores
• Certification code
• Major
• Estimated semester of graduation

17
WKU Electronic Portfolio Data

• Critical performances aligned with Kentuckys New
  Teacher Standards for all courses
• performance scores
• performance exhibits
• time for completion

18
WKUField Experience Data

• Documentation of field experiences
• Documentation of diversity experiences
• Documentation of special needs student
  experiences
• Documentation of student teaching experiences

19
WKU Program Exit Data

• Teacher Work Sample Evaluation
• Student Teaching Observation Evaluation
• GPA
• Praxis II Scores

20
WKU Graduate Follow-up Data

• Survey of first year teacher preparation for
  teaching with respect to New Teacher Standards
  and ability to facilitate learning in all
  students
• Kentucky Teaching Internship Program Performance
  Evaluation Scores

21
What is Critical Performance?

• Specific descriptions about what teacher
  candidates must know and be able to do at
  different levels of growth and development toward
  one or more teaching standards.

22
Critical Performance Profile
23
Critical Performances
24
Three Types of Data for Level 4 Critical
Performances

• Teacher Work Sample Exhibits
• Student Teaching Observation Record
• Candidate Portfolio
• Collaboration Exhibit
• Professional Development Plan

25
TWS Development at WKU

• Fall 2000
• 7 elementary ed candidates
• Spring 2001
• 17 elementary ed candidates
• Fall 2001
• 42 elementary ed candidates
• Spring 2002
• 115 elementary, 22 middle, 48 secondary ed, 30
  other candidates

26
Benefits of TWS

• Focus on P-12 Student Learning
• Focus on Development of Assessment Tools
• Focus on Key Standards
• Alignment of Standards, Curriculum and Assessments

27
Some Future Challenges of Expanding the Use of TWS

• Obtaining university buy-in for standards-based
  assessment and accountability
• Maintaining high standards while encouraging
  creativity in teaching performance
• Collecting and reporting comparable data across
  programs and program sites

28
Some Future Challenges of Expanding the Use of
TWS

• Obtaining adequate resources for data collection
  management and analysis
• Developing valid, reliable and user-friendly
  measures that show growth in
• P-12 student performance
• Using context to design instruction
• Making credible links between candidate teaching
  behaviors and future ability to impact student
  learning

29
Web Site Home Page
30
Symposia on Renaissance Model TWS at AACTE in New
York
31
Renaissance TWS Training Workshops in 2002

• June 13-15 Improving Performance on Teacher Work
  Samples (location TBA)
• July 12-13 Initial Training Scoring of
  Renaissance Model TWS (to be held near Kansas
  City airport)
• Check our web site for details
• http//fp.uni.edu/itq