Common Standards Feedback and Addendum
Standards Requiring More Information
More Information Needed: Part(s) of the standards for which more information is needed
Additional Specific Evidence Needed for the Site Visit
Response from Program (Addendum)
Standard 1: Institutional Infrastructure to Support Educator Preparation
The reviewers did not find evidence that the institution and education unit create and articulate a research-based vision of teaching and learning that fosters coherence among, and is clearly represented, in all educator preparation programs.
Org chart for Unit, including responsibilities
Org chart for Admin Services
Recruitment materials for Clear Admin Services Credential
Vision statements are now posted on the website.
The reviewers did not find evidence that The institution actively involves faculty (mentors & supervisors), instructional personnel, and relevant stakeholders in the organization, coordination, and decision making for all educator preparation programs.
Process and procedures for credential recommendation for Clear Admin Services Credential
The institution actively involves relevant stakeholders, like the Advisory committee, made up of Human Resources Assistant Superintendents from the districts in the Consortium, with quarterly meetings that assist with decision making for both the administrative and teacher preparation programs.
In order to actively involve supervisors and relevant stakeholders, the Advisory committee has recently expanded to include faculty from the local Cal State Dominguez Hills University (Cristina Stephany), an induction program leader from a completely different program (Pat Pernin from Los Angeles Unified School District), and a community member, who supports many of our local educators, (Hazel Oh from Schools First Credit Union.
Additionally, the Program Leader meets virtually and communicates through email, with the Educational Services Assistant Superintendents from the surrounding districts and site principals to discuss how to align district and school site initiatives with program goals and needs; thereby assisting with program decision-making for both teacher and administrative programs.
Mid, end of year and post professional development surveys are sent to mentors (SBCTIP) and coaches (PVLEAD (i.e., faculty) as formative assessments to improve both educator preparation programs.
The reviewers did not find evidence that the education unit ensures that faculty and instructional personnel regularly and systematically collaborate with colleagues in P-12 settings, college and university units and members of the broader educational community to improve educator preparation.
Additionally, mentors participate in fall and spring mentor forums. Topics of these forums are driven by mentor and teacher needs. For example, our Fall 2020 forum offered mentors opportunities to regularly and systematically collaborate with one another around pressing issues of student engagement. In the 2021Spring Forum, mentors collaborated on CASEL’s 5 Social Emotional Competencies, as this was a foreseeable future need for all returning teachers and students. This same information was shared at our greater regional induction Directors’ “Cluster” meetings where best practices, updated legislation, and university information are shared. Spring Cluster 4 Directors Meeting
Spring Cluster 4 Directors Meeting April 24, 2019. The plan is to include similar coach forums for the PVLEAD program.
All after school workshops that are attended by mentors and candidate pairs, whose grade levels range from Pre-K through 12th grades, incorporate collaboration and networking time with their colleagues in P-12 settings.
The reviewers did not find evidence that the Unit Leadership has the authority and institutional support required to address the needs of all educator preparation programs and considers the interests of each program within the institution.
The letter of assurance from the Superintendent shows that there is institutional support that is required to address the needs of both SBCTIP and PVLEAD programs and considers the interests of each program within the institution.
The reviewers did not find evidence that recruitment and faculty development efforts support hiring and retention of faculty who represent and support diversity and excellence
Advertisements, criteria and email communication are shared with the district HR departments and site administrators who assist with the recruitment and support of the “faculty,” (aka teacher induction mentors and CASC Coaches) Each district HR department in the Consortium, selects the candidates with their own hiring processes that promote diversity and excellence. PVPUSD Hiring Process
Recent program changes include interviewing all new mentors, upon receipt of their applications to gain an insight into prospective mentor bias awareness and motivation for mentoring (TiP Mentor Interview Questions). Only those who reveal an understanding of their own biases are selected.
CASC Candidates currently recruit their own coaches, with the assistance of the PVLEAD Program Leader and Executive Directors of HR
The reviewers did not find evidence of howthe institution employs, assigns and retains only qualified persons to teach courses, provide professional development, and supervise field-based and clinical experiences
The institution employs, assigns and retains the following qualified people to teach courses, provide professional development, and supervise field-based and clinical experiences:
Tara Swall, PVPUSD’s Teacher of the Year, mentor, and adjunct professor to Cal State Dominguez Hill’s induction program since 2018, offered training on working with students with special needs and supports SBCTIP professional development Tara Swall Resumé,
Michelle O’Malley, a current classroom teacher and mentor of many years, attended New Teacher Center’s “Presenter’s Institute,” so that she may support the program with delivery of the Professional Learning Series, the training that all mentors are required to attend. Michelle O’Malley resumé
Allana Friedman is the consultant from New Teacher Center who works directly with the Program Leader as a coach to the Program Leader, and as a co-facilitator for all new Professional Learning Series modules. Allana Friedman resumé
Jennifer Abrams, an expert and author of “Having Hard Conversations” provides SBCTIP mentors, PVLEAD coaches and new administrators with effective and simple strategies, along with a template, for how to have “humane, growth producing conversations,” an act in which many leaders are reluctant to engage. Jennifer Abrams bio
The reviewers did not find evidence that the education unit monitors a credential recommendation process that ensures that candidates recommended for a credential have met all requirements.
The ILP Review Panel creates and monitors the credential recommendation process throughout the year. The panel consists of two retired teacher/ mentors and three current special education/ elementary/secondary teacher/mentors. Members select the tools used by candidates to exhibit CSTP mastery. The panel collaborates to create checklists and rubrics which will be used to monitor candidates’ progress throughout each unit. Additionally, they create reflection questions whereby candidates explain/reflect on their professional growth. This process ensures that candidates recommended for a credential have met all requirements.
The ILP Review Panel reads each candidate’s tools and reflection which showcases his/her work toward completion of the goal and progress towards mastery of the CSTPs. The readers provide feedback, and candidates are given the opportunity to revise their work until they have met the requirements for mastery. Each candidate’s portfolio is read twice to ensure competency. When competency is demonstrated the candidate receives a completion document.
Additionally, the panel uses the following checklists along with rubrics to ensure that candidates have met the requirements for each semester/unit.
The ILP Review Panel discusses each candidate’s reflection and submitted evidence with the Program Leader to ensure that only those candidates who have completed the requirements and can articulate their progress during the 2-year induction period, are recommended for Clear Credentials. The Program Leader then meets with each candidate for a brief exit interview and recommends them for their credentials.
The PVLEAD Program Leadership Team will use the CASC Program Requirements Timeline & Portfolio to monitor and ensure that PVLEAD candidates have met all requirements before being recommended for their credentials.
Standard 2: Candidate Recruitment and Support
The reviewers did not find evidence of the Admission requirements for all programs within the unit, specifically the Clear Administrative Services Credential Program.
The reviewers did not find evidence of the Advice and Assistance process for all programs within the unit, specifically the Clear Administrative Services Program.
Please provide “competency indicators” that support a recommendation for both Clear credentials. Please provide evidence of the program’s set criteria for completion.
The PVLEAD (aka CASC) Admission Requirements are in the following: PVLEAD Admission Requirements
The SBCTIP Admission Requirements are in the following: SBCTIP Admission Requirements
The competency indicators that support a recommendation for the CASC are collaboratively and clearly defined as follows:
The PVLEAD Program Leadership Team will review each submission and determine if the candidate has mastered and provided evidence for the CPSEL based outcomes, and has submitted their coaching portfolio. Once approved, the PVLEAD Program Leadership Team submits the candidate’s name to the Induction Program Leader who recommends the candidate for the Professional Clear Administrative Services Credential.
Standard 3: Course of Study, Fieldwork, and Clinical Practice.
The reviewers did not find evidence of how Site-based supervisors are trained in supervision, oriented to the supervisory role, evaluated and recognized in a systematic manner.
Mentors (aka Site-based supervisors) are trained in supervision, oriented to the supervisory role of new teachers, with New Teacher Center’s Professional Learning Series (PLS). PLS is our core curriculum for mentoring. Each PLS introduces mentors to critical knowledge, skills, and processes to support teacher colleagues. New Mentors engage in 2 days of New Mentor training in addition to 2 days of Mentor Training with Returning Mentors. The Mentor Expectations outlines the details of the training in which all mentors are expected to participate.
The reviewers did not find evidence of how all programs within the unit effectively implement and evaluate fieldwork and clinical practice.
In order to effectively implement and evaluate fieldwork and clinical practice, the Program Leader provides feedback to both candidates and mentors via email on the following.
Candidates and mentors receive feedback on how well their SMART professional goals connect to their selected CSTPs and the Continuum of Teacher Practice, and the Optimal Learning Environment, in addition to the relevance of their proposed evidence.
Within the designated framework (Teacher Induction Program Standards), and based on an integration of current district and candidate needs and within the context of the mentor standards, mentors develop their own Individual Learning Plan to chart their own growth with their own mentoring goals, strengths, challenges, and next steps to make progress. The Program Leader observes at least one coaching conversation and/or meeting per mentor/candidate pairing to observe and gives the mentor feedback the progress they are making towards their own ILP goal.
The reviewers did not find evidence of how the process and criteria result in the selection of site-based supervisors who provide effective and knowledgeable support for candidates
Standard 4: Continuous Improvemen
The reviewers did not find evidence that the education unit and its programs regularly assess their effectiveness in relation to the course of study offered, fieldwork and clinical practice, and support services for candidates.
The reviewers did not find evidence that both the unit and its programs regularly and systematically collect, analyze, and use candidate and program completer data as well as data reflecting the effectiveness of unit operations to improve programs and their services.
Standard 5: Program Impact
The reviewers did not find evidence of the Program Impact for all programs within the unit, specifically the Clear Administrative Services Credential Program.
Please provide any applicable survey data which supports the positive impact being felt by the teachers and admin candidates.