Greg Gelderman Seattle Pacific University
Kathlyn Mickel Pacific Lutheran University
Jon Howeiler University of Washington-Bothell
Molly Ross Central Washington University
Louann Stalder Steilacoom Historical School District
Kathleen Allen St. Martin’s
Charles Murphy Toppenish School District
Tracy Land Granite Falls School District
Tamara Mosar Spokane Public Schools
LesLee Clauson (substituting for Robert Smart) Heritage University
Mea Moore Professional Educator Standards Board
Patti Larriva Professional Educator Standards Board
Overarching discussion questions:
1. Do we need to address / or are there concerns with using Standards/criteria that were originally developed for teacher evaluations for the purposes of licensure? (e.g., adding an endorsement to a teacher certificate)
- Necessity for licensure to be separate from teacher evaluation
- Criteria used for teachers already certificated and in the field.
- Correlation between criteria of the state 8 and the ProTeach criteria (consistency)
- Utilizing the state 8 to evaluation for teachers
- Isn't the 'state 8' for all teachers, not just to move to continuing contract status? Meaning it is evaluative but not only for that reason but for growth of teachers
- Measures competencies as oppose to being an evaluation tool, Met/Not Met tool,
For example: A preserrvice candidate faces completing two edTPAs vs. a certified teacher adding an endorsement by completing one PPA-C.
- Might have to wait to add the second endorsements
- If getting good advisement from IHE, teacher candidate is more marketable by exiting with multiple endorsements
- If they go to with multiple edTPA requirement, candidates may self-select to add endorsement later: factors to consider cost, time, and easier.
- edTPANot less expensive than PPA-C?
- Create a series of pathway 2 options to address sped teachers to add core content (HQT)
Discussions and edits on proposed documents:
- PPA-C Framework draft
- Assignment (who will continue the work based on outcomes of today’s discussion/ instruments) justification of the state 8 is being used to demonstrate competency in instruction
- Volunteers: Louann Stalder, (numbers 1-4); Tamara Mosar (numbers 5-8); Mea will take information and incorporate into frameworks draft
- Louann (Mon. Nov 26 to Tamara)and Tamara (back to Louann by Dec. 3) will have draft by Dec. 7, 2012 to Mea
- Classroom and Student Characteristics
- Scoring Rubric
- Scoring Observation tool
- Drafts will still be available on website
- Assignment: Tracy Land, Kathleen Allen, Louann Stalder
- Lesson plans Review pages 21-26(PPA) to ensure it is aligned with all other sections
- Develop lesson plan electronic template
- Update vocabulary/terminology
- Due date December 21, 2012
Webinar was recorded, to hear webinar visit follow up work session.
dialog before the webinar (emails)
From Louann Stalder:
Here are some questions I thought I would share before our webinar meeting tomorrow. The exact PPA-C document language is in black.
-add endorsements that were related, somewhat related and unrelated-
Is “related” determined by the crosswalk table on the web site?
-Current endorsement + 90 days teaching experience
PESB website language: 90 days of teaching in the current endorsement while holding that endorsement
Does “current endorsement” mean the endorsement currently listed on the professional certificate that matches one on the crosswalk table under held or currently being pursued ?
- Must observe teachers for the purposes of adding an endorsement at least twice
For a minimum duration? Until observation of all 8 criteria can be conducted or noted?
Question about the PPA-C Scoring Tool- Weren’t some of the relevant descriptors or evidence indicators from the old PPA going to be applied to the new criteria list on the tool?
-Using Greg and Jon’s work of applying/ correlating the 8 Criteria of TPEP to the old PPA and then eliminating redundant indicators of evidence I then listed which of the indicators could be used with the New 8. I tried to type them into the Scoring Tool spreadsheet that was sent, but had no luck formatting my input to sit correctly in the spreadsheet to make
Washington State Teacher Criteria
1. Centering instruction on high expectations for student achievement
5B- Lesson Sequence
5E- Culturally Responsive
1B- Meaningfulness/ Importance
2. Demonstrating effective teaching practices
5F- Materials and Resources
8A- Questioning/ Discussion Techniques
8B-Delivery & Pacing
8C- Differentiated Instruction
8D- Active Learning
9D- Response to Interventions
Mea Moore has offered more information regarding the 2 questions on our agenda for today.
1. This question seeks clarification on creating an instrument to use for licensure purposes (adding an endorsement is considered a part of licensure as it is added to a teacher’s certificate. The certificate is their license to teach), that is based on criteria that was developed for teacher evaluation purposes. If we use the TPEP State 8 criteria to determine if a teacher can enhance their license, the question seeks clarification because the State 8 criteria was developed for teacher evaluation- not licensure.
2. At issue here is the PESB, the Legislature, the State Board of Education and hiring School District’s positions on wanting teacher preparation programs to exit more candidates with multiple endorsements. The current requirement is that they only need one endorsement to exit. Increasing the number of teachers with multiple endorsements supports greater capacity in the educator workforce. One concern is that preservice candidates might choose to exit programs with only one endorsement because they may feel the edTPA is more involved and more costly than completing a the PPA-C once they have been certified.