- South Bay Consortium Teacher Induction Program
- Teacher Induction Program Feedback and Addendum
TIP Program Feedback and Addendum
-
Standards Requiring More Information
Comment from Program Reviewers
Response from Program
Standard 1: Program Purpose
Provide clarification regarding how the program builds on the knowledge and skills gained during the Preliminary Preparation program.
The Program Leader meets individually with candidates to understand how to integrate candidates’ incomplete Preliminary Preparation program requirements with the SBCTIP requirements. Mentors assist candidates with TPA and RICA requirements as part of their Individual Learning Plan (ILP) and yearlong goals. This is covered in the “Creating the ILP: Goal Setting” professional development. Additionally, induction directors around the greater Los Angeles area work together to provide free, virtual professional development to assist candidates with completion of these requirements.
Standard 3: Designing and Implementing Individual Learning Plans within the Mentoring System
Reviewers could not find evidence of professional learning within the ILP. Please provide.
The Professional Learning is addressed in the candidates’ responses to the Reflection Questions (#4) which is attached to the ILP. Candidates’ reflections are attached to their online ILPs in the Learning Zone (2019 – 20) and now in Kiano (2020-21)
The Professional Development document from the Learning Zone (19 – 20) is a tool that candidates use to verbalize the connections of their PD to their goals.
Standard 4: Qualifications, Selection and Training of Mentors
Reviewers could not find evidence of Mentor’s knowledge of context and the content area of the candidate’s teaching assignment. Please provide.
Standard 5: Determining Candidate Competence for the Clear Credential Recommendation
Provide evidence of an appeal process for candidates.
Standard 6: Program Responsibilities for Assuring Quality of Program Services
Reviewers could not find evidence of candidate feedback regarding the quality of services provided by mentors. Please provide.
Reviewers could not find evidence of who mentors would be reassigned if the pairing was not effective. Please provide.
