Compendium of Resources

A Ground-Breaking, Totally Brand-New Approach to Helping Students Succeed

Years ago, a town’s churches and school served as major community and social anchors. In some instances, the two shared a single building. Parents, students, and teachers spent a lot of time together since local events were often held there. As a result, communication was frequent, and relationships were strong. Adults worked together to support the growth, development, and learning of students. Today, as our towns have grown into cities and residents are busy traveling from place to place, we’ve lost that central gathering place. Many parents rarely if ever visit their child’s school, and they typically receive a call or email from a teacher only when there’s a problem. While this practice may have been birthed from an efficiency perspective, it’s resulted in relationships that really aren’t—interactions simply represent the transfer of information: message sent/message received.

It may be one reason why students are still falling between the cracks. Teachers and parents are so busy trying to be efficient they may be overlooking the importance of truly considering the needs of each student. A gifted child may be feeling really frustrated because he’s bored in math class. A student diagnosed with Attention Deficit Hyperactive Disorder (ADHD) has recently turned inward and has stopped interacting with her peers on the playground. A student whose native language isn’t English may be struggling in American Literature class. Concerns like these can’t be addressed by a simple exchange of information through a phone call or email; it takes collaboration and partnership. It takes active listening, and it takes meeting people where they’re at. In other words, it takes building trust.

Rich, meaningful relationships are hard to build in the sterile, institutional environment found in most schools. That’s why an approach like some teachers in the Salt Lake City metro area are using appears to be so effective—because they are taking an important first step in building trust with parents—they are making home visits. This approach is not earth-shattering nor ground breaking; I actually recall many years ago my sister’s high school English teacher coming to our house for dinner one evening. I remember the uncertainty looming in the house before the event—we weren’t sure why she was coming or what to expect—we just received a note letting know what day and time she would be there. As a result, we cooked and cleaned as if the Queen herself was paying us a visit, hoping it would somehow be acceptable. Turns out, we fretted for nothing—the teacher was there simply to introduce herself and to get to know us better, so she could in turn better meet the needs of her student, my sister.

Of course, the Salt Lake City pilot is not without its critics despite its success stories; a lot of the concern centers around the age-old question, “But who’s going to pay for it?” I don’t claim to have the answer but it’s an approach worth thinking about.

One thing I do know, however, is that in the fast-paced, tech-driven society we live in, we must be very careful not to overlook one important thing: that each child, each student is precious, and they deserve our very best in helping them become their very best. We collectively share a large part of the responsibility for their success. If simply having teachers and parents slow down and take the time to talk with each other would help, isn’t it worth considering?

–rrf

 

Dr. Roberta Ross-Fisher is a national leader in educator preparation, accreditation, online learning, and academic quality assurance. An accomplished presenter, writer, and educator, she currently supports higher education, P-12 schools, and non-profit agencies in areas such as competency-based education, new program design, gap analysis, quality assurance, leadership, outcomes-based assessment, and accreditation through her company, Global Educational Consulting, LLC. She also writes about academic excellence and can be contacted for consultations through her blog site (www.robertarossfisher.com). 

 

 

Uniqueness vs. Accreditation: Why Must We Choose?

In the most recent issue of the New England Journal of Higher Education, Mark LaCelle-Peterson introduces the educator preparation community to a new way of thinking about quality assurance and accreditation of programs. In the piece, LaCelle-Peterson challenges the notion that measuring the quality of an education program through a compliance lens really isn’t necessary—in fact, it can sometimes inhibit quality by forcing programs to demonstrate adherence to a rigid set of standards and criteria that may or may not be an appropriate fit for all programs given the diversity of missions, visions, populations served, and instructional delivery approaches. For example, what may be appropriate criteria for measuring the quality of a program that serves 18-22-year-old students on a residential suburban campus may be quite different from one that serves learners whose average age is 39 and who pursue their academic studies online within a competency-based educational model. Both prepare educators. Both are committed to quality. But when it comes to making judgments about those programs, one size just doesn’t seem to fit all—and what’s more, why should it? Why is it necessary to have a single set of standards and criteria that all programs must adhere to?

It seems to me that as a community of educators we figured out a long time ago that creating one lesson plan and teaching to students in the middle was simply not an effective approach—nor was it ethical, because that model failed to consider the needs of students who did not fit into a pre-determined mold.  Today we encourage our teacher candidates to not only acknowledge the differences in students, but to embrace that diversity, and to celebrate it—because we know that a diverse group of learners contributes to a dynamic and robust community—one that thrives because of its diversity, not in spite of it.

Quality assurance measures through an appropriate accreditation model can be instrumental to preparation programs’ success through data-driven decision making, continuous program review, and collaboration within the community. Program leaders should not have to put their uniqueness on a shelf in pursuit of accreditation.

–rrf

Dr. Roberta Ross-Fisher is a national leader in education transformation, teacher preparation, and academic quality assurance. An accomplished presenter and writer, she currently supports educational institutions and non-profit agencies in areas such as educational systems design, online learning experiences, competency-based education, and accreditation. Roberta also blogs about academic excellence and can be contacted for consultations, webinars, and on-site workshops through her site (www.robertarossfisher.com). 

###

One-Room Schools: Outdated, or Ahead of Their Time?

I’ve always been fascinated by the old one-room schoolhouses. I think it all started when my younger sister and I would walk up our country road and play for hours on the site of an old school, long since abandoned. That school must have educated every boy and girl for miles around, and those children grew up to be postal carriers, soldiers, bankers, farmers, and teachers.

In that school and others like it, students from multiple age groups and grade levels worked and learned together. In many instances, older students taught younger ones, with the teacher providing guidance as needed. Classics frequently served in the place of textbooks, and students applied what they were learning in the context of what was relevant to their lives. They developed a body of knowledge, but even more importantly, they learned how to apply that knowledge to solve problems.

It was a simpler time, and yet many of the methods found in those one-room schools were ahead of their time. Today we often hear about new techniques and methods for helping students learn. We talk about concepts such as competency-based, proficiency-based, and personalized learning. I would argue that besides a homeschool environment, one-room schools were the birthplace of individualized instruction. And the new performance assessments that are gaining so much attention? Students in one-room schools often had to demonstrate what they knew through projects such as planting an herb garden appropriate for local soil; raising goats for meat and dairy; making apple butter; building a machine shed that could stand up to wind; or providing first aid. Like the competency-based educational model, Simousek points out that most one-room schools adhered to the “time is variable/learning is constant” mantra, whereby learners worked on topics and skills until they could successfully demonstrate their proficiency before moving on. In other words, what students learn is more important than how quickly they learn it.

There are actually still a few hundred one-room schools in the United States today, many located in very rural and remote areas. However, a charter school in Gainsville, Florida was started in 1997 specifically with the one-room school model in mind. Focusing on meeting the needs of high achievers, the One Room School House Project (ORSH) serves students through eighth grade. In addition, some modern-day homeschools are perfect venues for the one-room schoolhouse model.

While I recognize the benefits of larger schools today, I have to wonder if perhaps it might be worth having a conversation about the benefits of smaller schools designed around the one-room schoolhouse model. Even in our fast-paced, mobile society, I believe there is still a need for schools that serve as community anchors; that can truly provide individualized instruction and support for all learners; and that prepare students to interact with others in a positive way.

–rrf

Dr. Roberta Ross-Fisher is a national leader in education transformation, teacher preparation, and academic quality assurance. An accomplished presenter and writer, she currently supports educational institutions and non-profit agencies in areas such as educational systems design, online learning experiences, competency-based education, and accreditation. Roberta also blogs about academic excellence and can be contacted for consultations, webinars, and on-site workshops through her site (www.robertarossfisher.com). 

###

A Gentle Nudge to CCSSO: What Do We Really Mean by Competency-Based Teaching and Learning?

Competency-Based Education (CBE) has really started gaining the attention of P-12 school districts, colleges and universities, and state departments of education in recent years. CBE emphasizes demonstrated learning over traditional seat time, and it offers a more flexible way to support students achieve their educational goals.

We can talk about the benefits of CBE and we can describe its attributes. However, it seems that there are numerous definitions of the term that while well-intentioned are lacking or are not always hitting the mark. For example, the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) developed a working definition of the term competency in 2011; that definition identifies five major components that must be present in a competency-based educational model. While I congratulate the CCSSO for their work in this area I would encourage them to revisit what they mean by competency. Given that this organization leads policies and practices of departments of education and P-12 school districts across the nation, it is important to have a current, accurate, and clear definition. I’ve taken the CCSSO’s definition and have offered a few questions as food for thought in order to advance the conversation:

  1. Students advance upon demonstrated mastery.
    • Advance in what way? To the next assessment? To the next chapter or unit? To the next course?
    • How is mastery demonstrated? Through what form(s) of assessment?
    • Is demonstrating mastery really the same as demonstrating competency?
  1. Competencies include explicit, measurable, transferable learning objectives that empower students.
    • Do competencies truly include learning objectives, or are those LOs created as a measurable subset of the competencies?
    • How are learning objectives transferable? Transferable to what?
    • What do competencies that empower students look like? How would we identify them, as compared to competencies that do not empower students? Empower in what way(s)?
    • From what source(s) are competencies derived?
  1. Assessment is meaningful and a positive learning experience for students.
    • Meaningful to whom? Learners? Educators? Parents? Educational agencies?
    • Meaningful in what way(s)?
    • Must all assessments be deemed as positive learning experiences for students?
    • What benchmark(s) should be used in order to judge each assessment’s merit in this regard?
    • How are educators able to ensure that assessments are of high-quality?
  1. Students receive rapid, differentiated support based on their individual learning needs.
    • What is the definition of rapid support? Is this truly intended to be time-bound?
    • What would be the source of this support? From a teacher or designee? From a software application or AI device?

 

  1. Learning outcomes emphasize competencies that include application and creation of knowledge along with the development of important skills and dispositions.
    • Should learning outcomes that comprise competencies represent each level of Bloom’s Taxonomy, thereby requiring students to demonstrate what they know and are able to do at each cognitive level (knowledge, comprehension, application, analysis, evaluation, synthesis)?
    • How might learning outcomes include the development of dispositions? What might that look like in measurable terms? Which dispositions?

 

This is just a partial list of questions that must be answered by the CCSSO as they revisit what they mean by competency-based education. Their definition will steer how CBE is implemented in school districts and state departments of education for years to come and it’s important to get it right.

–rrf

 

Dr. Roberta Ross-Fisher is a national leader in educator preparation, accreditation, online learning, and academic quality assurance. An accomplished presenter, writer, and educator, she currently supports higher education, P-12 schools, and non-profit agencies in areas such as competency-based education, new program design, gap analysis, quality assurance, leadership, outcomes-based assessment, and accreditation through her company, Global Educational Consulting, LLC. She also writes about academic excellence and can be contacted for consultations through her blog site (www.robertarossfisher.com). 

Practical Ways to Meet the Needs of Adult Learners

A huge chunk of college enrollments today is made up of adult learners—sometimes referred to as non-traditional students. Just as it’s not appropriate to teach all P-12 students in exactly the same way we must be careful to consider and address the unique needs of adult learners in our colleges and universities. In her article entitled, “4 Ways Universities Can Better Engage with Nontraditional Students,” Meghan Bogardus Cortez shares some tips for higher education programs, each of which can impact student enrollment, retention, graduation, and satisfaction rates. I’d like to add my own tips here:

Make what they are learning meaningful and relevant. Help adult learners to see connections between theory and practice. Show them why it’s important to be able to solve algebraic equations, or why they should know what the War of 1812 was all about. Try to tie it in to how key concepts and skills can be applied their current and future career goals.

Be respectful of them as adults. Non-traditional learners have very different needs than those 18-22-year-olds; treat them accordingly. Listen to them. Take them seriously. And don’t talk down to them.

Acknowledge that they are juggling a lot to go to school. Most adult students work at least one full-time job. They have a spouse and are raising multiple children. Perhaps they’re taking care of aging or infirm parents. Acknowledging that you know “sometimes life gets in the way” is not offering an excuse for them to fail but it’s important they know that you understand that sometimes other priorities must take precedence over their academic studies, and that’s OK.

Help them to set their own reasonable goals and support their efforts in attaining them. It doesn’t do any good to create a schedule for an adult learner or tell them how much they should read or complete in a week’s time—those decisions should be made by them, with some guidance from you. Help them avoid frustration and disappointment by steering them away from committing to too much at once. For example, most learners who are working full-time and trying to raise three kids while going through a divorce should probably not try to complete 18 credits in a semester or think they can read seven chapters and write a 15-page paper over a weekend. In some instances that kind of workload can be maintained for a while but eventually the stress builds up. It’s much better to take it a little slower and succeed than to let a student try to get through a program in record time and then fail.

Help them to see light at the end of the tunnel. Adult learners need an end game—they need to be able to know that their efforts will pay off for them when they are finished—and they need to know that this day will come sooner rather than later.

A dose of compassion and empathy works wonders: Sometimes you are the only positive, affirming, supportive person they will talk to in a give day or even a given week. Be a sounding board when things go wrong, and a cheerleader when things go right. You’re not their therapist nor their friend, per se, and yet so much of effective mentoring requires a dose of both.

These are all things that faculty members can do to help adult learners stay enrolled, graduate, and achieve their goals. Some students, particularly those who struggle or may be identified as “at-risk” could benefit from additional support through a mentoring model, which can be tailored depending on the structure of each college and university.

–rrf

 

Dr. Roberta Ross-Fisher is a national leader in educator preparation, accreditation, online learning, and academic quality assurance. An accomplished presenter, writer, and educator, she currently supports higher education, P-12 schools, and non-profit agencies in areas such as competency-based education, new program design, gap analysis, quality assurance, leadership, outcomes-based assessment, and accreditation through her company, Global Educational Consulting, LLC. She also writes about academic excellence and can be contacted for consultations through her blog site (www.robertarossfisher.com). 

Tackling the STEM Teacher Shortage

Today in school districts across the US, there’s a high school chemistry lab with test tubes, Bunsen burners, the periodic chart, and tables of students. The only problem is that the class is being taught by a substitute teacher who may only have completed 60 college hours—in anything. And those students may see a different face in that classroom multiple times a week for months, or even an entire school year. Welcome to the reality of the teacher shortage. It’s here. It’s real. And we need to fix it. 

We’ve known for several years now that we have a supply/demand challenge in some key areas: special education, English language learning, mathematics, and the sciences. The shortage is real, and it’s not just isolated to a few states. The fact is, we are approaching crisis levels in nearly every state and despite well-intentioned efforts by some state departments of education the problem doesn’t appear to be going away anytime soon.

The Association of Mathematics Teacher Educators provides some excellent information about teacher supply, demand, and shortages in that subject area. The AMTE cites factors such as declining enrollments in educator preparation programs; large classroom sizes and increasing student enrollments; and high turnover rates—as high as 8% annually–as major reasons why there is such a high need for math teachers. The AMTE takes it a step further, stating that math and science teachers who were prepared through alternative pathways actually average a 17% attrition rate, which suggests that we should be taking a very careful look at the quality of those alternative educator preparation programs. Preparing teachers for success in the classroom doesn’t necessarily have to be accomplished through traditional programs, but programs that focus on helping candidates pass their state licensure exam and then spending only a few weeks on effective teaching, learning, and classroom management methods need to be carefully scrutinized.

The New Jersey Center for Teaching and Learning is experimenting with an alternative preparation program of its own: taking experienced classroom teachers (with a focus on African American and Latino teachers) in other areas and preparing them to become science teachers. As a result of the program, that state licensed 50 more chemistry teachers and 217 more physics teachers since 2010. Based on its own description, the program provides a crash course in the new subject area of mathematics or science and helps prepare the teacher to pass the state’s required subject area exam. While this may sound good, the program’s long-term success still remains to be seen. Questions that must be answered include: (1) Out of those 267 teachers added to the roster, how many are still actively teaching math or science today? (2) How successful are those teachers as compared to those not prepared using this alternative method? (3) What is the impact on student learning and achievement?

The teacher shortage is real, and it’s not going away anytime soon. It’s time we had a national conversation to tackle it in a sensible, responsible way. Who will stand up for our students and lead this charge?

–rrf

 

Dr. Roberta Ross-Fisher is a national leader in education transformation, teacher preparation, and academic quality assurance. An accomplished presenter and writer, she currently supports educational institutions and non-profit agencies in areas such as educational systems design, online learning experiences, competency-based education, and accreditation. Roberta also blogs about academic excellence and can be contacted for consultations, webinars, and on-site workshops through her site (www.robertarossfisher.com). 

A True Education

“The function of education is to teach one to think intensively and to think critically. Intelligence plus character – that is the goal of true education.” – Martin Luther King Jr.

This philosophy as articulated so eloquently by Dr. King should steer the mission and vision of every P-12 and higher education institution in our nation, whether it be public, private, charter, or homeschool. The strength of our nation depends on an educated society—a society whose citizens are intellectually curious and who possess the ability to read and think critically.

Many years ago, I heard a pastor say, “You have to be able to separate the grass from the weeds.” This is the essence of critical reading and critical thinking: being able to comprehend, analyze, and evaluate what one is hearing and reading, and then drawing well-informed conclusions that perpetuate a solid body of knowledge that we can rely on.

However, as Dr. King cautioned us, simply having this ability is not enough—it’s what we do with it that’s important. That’s where character comes in, because simply being smart or informed doesn’t mean we are educated—we must use our knowledge to positively impact the lives of others–to serve the greater good. This requires a solid core of ethics and integrity—an inner compass. It requires being a person of your word so that others can count on you. It requires you to do the right thing even when no one else is looking. It mandates that we take a different path, even when it may be lonely or unpopular. Learning builds our brain, but character builds our core. When coupled together, the result is an individual who is a lifelong learner, who carefully considers and reflects, and one who uses his or her knowledge to make the world a better place.

I challenge every educator (teacher, school leader, paraprofessional, parent, curriculum director, etc.) to take a moment to seriously reflect and consider: Where does YOUR school fit on this continuum of academic excellence? Are you contributing to providing your students with a true education, as defined by Dr. King? If not, why not? What is holding you back? What would you need to light this match and make it happen? Make a commitment and get started. Today.

–rrf

 

Dr. Roberta Ross-Fisher is a national leader in educator preparation, accreditation, online learning, and academic quality assurance. An accomplished presenter, writer, and educator, she currently supports higher education, P-12 schools, and non-profit agencies in areas such as competency-based education, new program design, gap analysis, quality assurance, leadership, outcomes-based assessment, and accreditation through her company, Global Educational Consulting, LLC. She also writes about academic excellence and can be contacted for consultations through her blog site (www.robertarossfisher.com). 

Is Being Accredited Really That Important When Selecting a College?

We all hear and read about the benefits of earning a college degree: We make more money over a lifetime; we get better jobs; we receive company-paid benefits; we tend to be happier and healthier overall. However, choosing the right college or university can be quite daunting, and yet it’s terribly important, because not all institutions are alike, and the quality can vary widely. While there are lots of things to consider such as cost, degree programs, scheduling, and the like, one thing many college students often overlook is whether or not the university is accredited.

There are many types of accreditation–you may likely hear terms such as regional accreditation, national accreditation, functional or programmatic accreditation, and sometimes even state accreditation. Each plays an important role in quality assurance for specific programs or an entire institution but here’s a strong recommendation:

Don’t ever take a single course from an institution that is not accredited. Never. Ever.

While no guarantee of perfection, accredited institutions have provided certain levels of assurance to respected bodies within academia that students will be taken care of. Non-accredited institutions have had no one looking over their shoulder, digging deep and looking in various academic or financial nooks and crannies; they can accept your money with absolutely no guarantee that the course or degree that you completed will be worth anything at all.

Plus, if you complete courses from an unaccredited institution, there is no guarantee that those courses will be accepted should you decide to transfer to another university later on. Even worse, if you go the distance and complete an entire degree from an institution that’s not accredited, you may find that many employers or graduate schools will not recognize that degree–in their eyes it will be like you don’t have a degree at all–but you’ll still have those student loans to pay back just the same.

Here is an entertaining yet informative video that clears up some of the confusion:

ASPA 2016 Explainer

You should be able to choose a college or university that fits your particular needs:

  • faith-based
  • public
  • private
  • traditional brick & mortar
  • online
  • non-profit
  • for-profit

Regardless of which you choose, make sure it’s a program that is accredited.

–rrf

 

Dr. Roberta Ross-Fisher is a national leader in educator preparation, accreditation, online learning, and academic quality assurance. An accomplished presenter, writer, and educator, she currently supports higher education and P-12 schools in areas such as competency-based education, teacher preparation, distance learning, and accreditation through her company, Global Educational Consulting, LLC. She can be reached at: globaleducationalconsulting@gmail.com

 

Professional Dispositions: Essential Traits for Effective Teaching & School Leadership

Thanks for visiting this page.

The content of Professional Dispositions: Essential Traits for Effective Teaching & School Leadership has been incorporated into the following publication:

Key Skills and Dispositions: Essential Traits all Exceptional Teachers Must Have

 

Please click the link to learn more about this important topic. Thanks for being committed to academic excellence!

 

–rrf

 

Dr. Roberta Ross-Fisher is a national leader in accreditation, quality assurance, teacher preparation, and empowerment-based learning. An accomplished presenter, she currently supports educational institutions and non-profit agencies in areas such as quality assurance, accreditation, competency-based education, and educator preparation.  Roberta also writes about academic excellence and can be contacted for consultations, webinars, and on-site workshops through her site (www.robertarossfisher.com). 

###

Competency-Based Education to Support P-12 Student Success

The competency-based educational (CBE) model has been used successfully in higher education for the past two decades, and it is starting to gain national traction at the P-12 level. Several states, particularly on the east coast, have already come to appreciate its benefits. The Marzano Academy at Lomie G. Heard Elementary School, a new magnet charter school focusing on STEM will open its doors this fall under the CBE model. The state of Illinois currently has 10 school districts that will begin a pilot in academic year 2018-19 under the Illinois’ Competency-Based High School Graduation Requirements Pilot Program.

Within CBE, learners must demonstrate what they know and are able to do through carefully designed and calibrated assessments. Expectations are clear and well-defined, and there is thoughtful, purposeful alignment between curriculum, instruction, and assessment.

It’s All About Learning

This model is truly learner-centered: Seat time becomes less important than learning time. Students are able to drive their own learning and work at their own pace within structured guidelines. They are supported through meaningful feedback and mentoring.

Parents and caregivers feel more informed about their child’s progress under the CBE model. They know what their student is learning, their learning goals, progress, and their level of proficiency in each skill set. This helps them to partner with teachers to provide additional support at home.

Teachers recognize the positive impact the CBE model has on student learning and development. They are able to easily track the progress of each student on a daily basis, and they know exactly when a learner needs additional support.

School leaders are able to support teachers more effectively when they know exactly what their needs are. With the CBE model, they can provide strategic assistance through forming a mentoring network to support struggling students; through building school-community partnerships; through offering targeted professional development support, and the like.

Before making a decision to develop one or more programs based on the CBE model, educators must consider the following major questions:

  • Would CBE align with our school’s mission and vision?
  • What are the benefits of CBE for our students?
  • What are the challenges and caveats of CBE?
  • What are the basic steps needed to convert our current curriculum to the CBE model?
  • How can we train and support our faculty and staff so they could implement the CBE model successfully?
  • Could our school commit to a pilot lasting at least five years so we can fully measure the impact CBE has had on our learners?

The Bottom Line

Competency-based education is NOT a shortcut nor an easy fix to serious school challenges. However, if built correctly and maintained properly, the CBE model can prove to be a powerful way to increase student learning, achievement, and satisfaction.

–rrf

 

Dr. Roberta Ross-Fisher is a national leader in accreditation, quality assurance, teacher preparation, and empowerment-based learning. She supports educational institutions and non-profit agencies in areas such as quality assurance, accreditation, competency-based education, and educator preparation.  Roberta also writes about academic excellence and can be contacted for consultations, webinars, and on-site workshops through her site (www.robertarossfisher.com). 

###

AI to Assess Teacher Dispositions? 

I just finished reading a piece entitled AI Could Conduct Peer Review, Report Findsit actually focuses on using robots to detect plagiarism, finding instances of misused data and noting when statistical tests have been used incorrectly. This sounds like Turnitin perhaps joined at the hip with SPSS software–on steroids. It may prove to be quite a handy tool.

However, I had other thought: Could forms of artificial intelligence accurately identify individuals who have a propensity for success in the classroom? In other words, could they be programmed to assess an individual’s professional dispositions? Dispositions are the “soft skills” needed to have a positive impact on the lives of students–not just academically but also developmentally, socially, and emotionally. Skills like compassion, caring, ethics, values, commitment, grit, attentive to detail, organized, collaborative, and so on–cannot easily be measured but we know them when we see them, and they make a huge difference in the classroom. I’ve seen so many times over the years individuals who had a tremendous command of their subject matter and yet they were terrible teachers–they didn’t have those dispositions necessary for working well with students, parents, colleagues, and others.

Institutions of higher education struggle with how best to measure dispositions; it’s often cost-prohibitive or personnel-prohibitive to assess each applicant once, much less at multiple points in their program. But what if we could build tech tools that would be very effective at evaluating the professional dispositions of prospective teachers or school leaders? If developed correctly, this could potentially save schools of education huge sums of money each year and it would help them to better identify those who are most likely to be successful: Most likely to be retained in the program, most likely to graduate, and most likely to be successful after program completion.

Of course, this would also open the door to all sorts of research studies! And, it would be entirely possible to confirm things such as content validity, reliability, inter-rater reliability, and so on.

What might this look like? And how would we get started?

 

–rrf

 

Dr. Roberta Ross-Fisher is a national leader in educator preparation, accreditation, online learning, and academic quality assurance. An accomplished presenter, writer, and educator, she currently supports higher education and P-12 schools in areas such as competency-based education, teacher preparation, distance learning, and accreditation through her company, Global Educational Consulting, LLC. She can be reached at: globaleducationalconsulting@gmail.com

Meeting the Needs of Learners in Today’s Universities

In a recent piece entitled Survey: American Confidence in Higher Ed is Waning, it appears that only about 25% of the sample thinks the current higher education system is fine the way it is, and among millennials, that number drops to 13%. First of all, why do 75% believe the system is NOT meeting their needs? And of the millennial group, why do they feel even more strongly about the current system? In other words, what do today’s learners need that our colleges and universities are not providing?

We need to take a deep dive into this survey data in order to learn more about exactly what questions were asked, and what the demographics of respondents were. For example, are we reading the results of a representative sample, or were most respondents within a particular age group? Were the questions focused on seeking a first college degree, or did they include advanced studies? That sort of thing…However, just speaking in general terms, I’d say we need to focus on two things:

First, we need to revisit the relevance of curriculum found in today’s college degree programs. Are they workforce-driven? Will what students are learning really help them develop better job skills? I see very little true collaboration between higher education institutions and specific industries; this is essential for modernizing the curriculum and ensuring that what graduates will know and be able to do upon graduation will prepare them to be workforce-ready.

Second, we need to provide more structured support for those who need it throughout their programs, from matriculation to graduation. Mentoring models work wonders–This is particularly true for first-generation college students but really can benefit all learners. The key is to have a formal mechanism in place for continually monitoring and evaluating the progress of each learner, and to provide a safety net for them all along the way. Regular phone calls, emails, academic outreach, and the like can work wonders to help learners stay focused, achieve manageable goals, and attain success.

–rrf

 

Dr. Roberta Ross-Fisher is a national leader in educator preparation, accreditation, online learning, and academic quality assurance. An accomplished presenter, writer, and educator, she currently supports higher education and P-12 schools in areas such as competency-based education, teacher preparation, distance learning, and accreditation through her company, Global Educational Consulting, LLC. She can be reached at: globaleducationalconsulting@gmail.com

Competency-Based Education: Academic Excellence in Action

 

Competency-based education (CBE) is quickly becoming accepted as an effective way to facilitate powerful, authentic learning at all levels. Sometimes referred to as personalized learning, mastery learning, or proficiency learning, students must demonstrate what they know and are able to do, rather than just put in “seat time” and complete a prescribed set of courses. However, designing a solid CBE program is not as simple as it sounds–it requires a great deal of thought, understanding, and know-how.

I’ve worked in institutions using traditional learning models and spent 10 years working in one that employs the CBE model effectively. I’ve really come to appreciate the level of learning that takes place in a CBE model, and I’ve seen over the years how effective it is in supporting students’ learning. I’ve celebrated with students and their families who reached their goals and achieved their dreams because they were in an environment that enabled them to show what they knew and then move on at their own pace. CBE, when structured properly, helps educators to personalize learning experiences. I predict the CBE model will be a major player in the educational arena over the next two decades at the P-12 level as well as at the collegiate level.

There are some essential thoughts to consider for programs thinking about adopting the competency-based education (CBE) model, and I shared some of those tenets in a commentary published in the Journal of Competency-Based Education entitled, Implications for Educator Preparation Programs Considering Competency-Based Education. 

Helping students to demonstrate what they know and are able to do within the context of a set of well-articulated competencies and measured through high-quality assessments is certainly one example of academic excellence.

–rrf

 

Dr. Roberta Ross-Fisher is a national leader in educator preparation, accreditation, online learning, and academic quality assurance. An accomplished presenter, writer, and educator, she currently supports higher education and P-12 schools in areas such as competency-based education, teacher preparation, distance learning, and accreditation through her company, Global Educational Consulting, LLC. She can be reached at: globaleducationalconsulting@gmail.com

Alternative Educator Preparation: A Viable Option, or a Non-Starter?

There’s an interesting article about alternative teacher preparation programs entitled Analysis Finds Alternatively Credentialed Teachers Performed Equal to Peers in First Two Years–while the results are inconclusive on several fronts it does present some thoughtful information to consider, including:

  • Are traditional educator preparation programs the ONLY way to train future teachers successfully? Are they BEST way?
  • Can alternative (non-traditional) educator preparation programs support student learning in a positive way, whilst supporting supply and demand challenges faced by multiple school districts across the nation?
  • What are the long-term impacts of educator preparation on our country’s workforce? And, what are the long-term impacts of what we view as an educated society?
  • Will how teachers are prepared impact our standing in the world relative to student achievement?
  • How would we know? What research questions need to be posed?

 

An experienced consultant can help with these questions, and more. Reach out to me for program development, collaboration, accreditation, clinical partnerships, and other matters related to preparing educators with excellence.

–rrf

 

Dr. Roberta Ross-Fisher is a national leader in educator preparation, accreditation, online learning, and academic quality assurance. An accomplished presenter, writer, and educator, she currently supports higher education and P-12 schools in areas such as competency-based education, teacher preparation, distance learning, and accreditation through her company, Global Educational Consulting, LLC. She can be reached at: globaleducationalconsulting@gmail.com

Transition Points & Gateways: Stop Gaps Universities Should Consider

Each higher education institution’s program of study, regardless of major, contains specific phases of progression that each student must successfully complete before being allowed to graduate. In other words, there is a planned, purposeful order to completing a program or earning a college degree—an individual does not just apply for admission and have complete autonomy over the courses taken, the sequence of coursework, when/where/if practica or internships are completed, and so on. The institution makes those decisions after carefully designing each given program of study. They decide things such as:

  • Admission and enrollment criteria
  • General education requirements
  • # of semester hours required for graduation
  • Minimum GPA required to pass each course
  • Clinical experiences, internships, practica
  • Exit examinations required for graduation (or state licensure, depending on the program)

Transition points are sometimes referred to as “gateways”—they are specific points at which a student passes from one stage in his or her program to the next. As long as a student meets the stated expectations, the journey continues and he or she moves ahead toward graduation. If the student fails to meet one or more expectations in a given stage, the institution implements a plan for remediation, additional support, or in some case, counseling out of the program.

I have created a Transition Points framework that may be useful to some educator preparation programs. Of course, Transition Points must be tailored to fit each unique program but could include gateways such as:

  • Transition Point I: Applicant to Pre-Candidate Status 
    • Admission to the program
  • Transition Point II: Pre-Candidate to Candidate Status
    • Completion of Block #1 Coursework & Preparation for Formative Field Experiences
  • Transition Point III: Candidate to Pre-Graduate Status
    • Completion of Block #2 Coursework & Formative Field Experiences 
  • Transition Point IV: Pre-Graduate to Graduate Status
    • Completion of Block #3 Coursework & Culminating Clinical Experiences
  • Transition Point V: Graduate to Program Completer Status
    • Pass Required Licensure/Certification Examination(s)

Do you see the progression? When detailed out, a complete Transitions Points or Gateway table should paint a portrait of a student’s journey from matriculation to program completion; the sequence should represent a logical flow with at least some detail relative to minimum expectations.

I hope this has been helpful to you. Need more ideas? Want to collaborate on a project? Feel free to reach out to me.

–rrf

 

Dr. Roberta Ross-Fisher is a national leader in educator preparation, accreditation, online learning, and academic quality assurance. An accomplished presenter, writer, and educator, she currently supports higher education and P-12 schools in areas such as competency-based education, teacher preparation, distance learning, and accreditation through her company, Global Educational Consulting, LLC. She can be reached at: globaleducationalconsulting@gmail.com

Educator Prep: There’s a Better Way.

Numerous sources can point to a teacher shortage across the United States, with some areas having a much greater need than others. With some exceptions, Elementary and Social Studies teachers tend to be in greatest supply but in least demand, while the converse is true for Special Education, English Language Learning, Mathematics, and Science teachers. School districts typically have a much harder time filling teaching positions in urban districts, in Title I schools, and in remote rural areas. In many instances, a lack of experienced, qualified teachers in those areas forces districts to fill those classrooms with individuals who may be well-intentioned but lack sufficient training and cultural competence to be successful. Moreover, those districts often fail to provide adequate mentoring and support in the first two years of employment which results in new teachers feeling isolated and without tools to succeed. Consequently, we typically see a high turnover rate in those areas which has a negative impact on students and the local community at-large over time.

Various state departments of education have taken steps to address this problem. California has recently committed $25 million for scholarship money to help alleviate the teacher shortage by using a “grow your own” model. They are distributing this money to 25 school districts and county offices of education to help 5,000 support staff members earn their teaching credentials while continuing to work at their schools. While the idea has some merit, I see big gaps in the approach. Specifically, they are granting funds only to individuals who complete their teaching license requirements at one of the California State University campuses; this severely restricts the type of training these individuals will receive and it only supports the enrollment of those campuses. Moreover, EdSource reports 1,000 eligible employees can get stipends of $4,000 per year over the course of the five-year grant, which could cover all or most of the cost to enroll in those select institutions, depending on how many courses these employees take per semester. Acknowledging it could take up to five years doesn’t make a convincing case that these programs are innovative or cutting edge—in fact they are likely just serving as a feeder into their current programs. So, for continuing business as usual, these institutions are reaping the reward of 1,000 new enrollments and $25 million. The latest initiative proposed in California is to offer teachers who have taught at least 5 years in the state freedom from state income tax. While an interesting idea, I don’t see it encouraging sufficient numbers of individuals to enter or to remain in the teaching profession. Plus, it could have a negative impact on a state already short on cash.

The state of Nevada has attempted to alleviate the teacher shortage, most severe in the Clark County School District located in Las Vegas. School officials in that district, reportedly the third largest in the nation, face the daunting task each year of hiring approximately 2500 teachers. At the time of this writing, there are currently 672 openings for licensed teachers. The Nevada Department of Education approved an Alternative Route to Licensure (ARL) program designed to alleviate shortages across the state but it seems to be only a partial solution in its present form. What’s of equal concern is that once hired, districts struggle to retain teachers for a variety of reasons.

In addition to approaches that focus on state funding and providing paths to licensure through nontraditional means, the Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education has recently begun looking at teacher preparation itself; staff have initiated statewide conversations amongst educators regarding how new teachers should be prepared. And of course, the National Council on Teacher Quality (NCTQ) has established itself as a national leader on educator quality and preparation through research and rankings of educator preparation programs.

 So what’s the answer?

The solution to having an adequate supply of qualified, well-prepared teachers who will positively impact the lives, learning, and development of their students is not simplistic—it is complicated, and that’s why no one has solved it yet. However, I believe one answer lies in how teachers are prepared. While many educator prep programs do a fine job, many do not and new teachers are simply not ready to enter the classroom, hitting the ground running. They have absolutely no idea how to effectively manage a classroom, deal with an angry parent, meet the needs of EVERY learner in their class, and so on. There is an apparent disconnect between what is being taught in colleges of education and the reality of teaching in today’s classrooms. Is one reason because those responsible for preparing those future teachers have little to no current teaching experience themselves? Have they stepped foot in a P-12 classroom in the past five years? Have they cleaned up vomit all over desks and the floor? Have they done before and after school bus duty? Have they had a student arrested in their class? Have they had to bring comfort to a child who is homeless? I think that while credentialed education faculty are well-intentioned, knowledgeable, and experienced, their skills may not be what’s needed in today’s classrooms.

I have been developing some specific ideas regarding how to train new educators some of which challenge the current preparation model. I’m working on creating an educator preparation program that could work for new teachers as well as new educational leaders that has features unique to any other program I’ve reviewed. Some would call it an alternative program, but I really don’t like that word and would love to see it disassociated with education preparation. Want to know more? Interested in partnering with me on a project of immense importance that is built from the ground level up on academic excellence? Let me hear from you…

–rrf

 

Dr. Roberta Ross-Fisher is a national leader in educator preparation, accreditation, online learning, and academic quality assurance. An accomplished presenter, writer, and educator, she currently supports higher education and P-12 schools in areas such as competency-based education, teacher preparation, distance learning, and accreditation through her company, Global Educational Consulting, LLC. She can be reached at: globaleducationalconsulting@gmail.com

 

 

Accreditation Site Visit Logistics

Preparing for an accreditation site visit is always stressful for university faculty and staff, even under the best of circumstances. Depending on whether we’re talking about a regional accrediting body, a state compliance audit, or a discipline-specific accreditor, there are certain processes and procedures that must be followed. However, for the sake of simplicity, this blog will focus on one discipline–that of teacher preparation–using the Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP) as the sample accrediting body. In this piece, I provide topics to be covered during a pre-visit conference call between the site team lead, the education preparation provider (EPP), and state representatives. By the end of this call, all parties should be “on the same page” and should be clear regarding what to expect in the upcoming site visit. Here are the topics that are essential to cover:

  • Any general questions the EPP has regarding completion of the Addendum
  • Confirm Addendum submission date
  • Review and revise draft visit schedule
  • Travel Details
    • Confirm preferred airport
    • If arrival and departure times coincide, team prefers to pick up a rental car at the airport and provide their own transportation during the site visit.
    • Otherwise, EPP will need to make ground transportation arrangements.
  • Reminder per CAEP guidelines: No receptions, banquets, poster sessions, dinners with EPP representatives, etc.
  • School Visits
    • Typically limit of 2 (from different grade levels such as 1 Elem & 1 HS)
    • Should not require significant drive time
    • EPP should provide a guide (typically faculty) to drive and serve as host/hostess
    • Usually should take no more than 1 hour on-site at school
  • Work Room at Hotel and on Campus
    • Must be secure and private; lockable.
    • Only site team members and state representatives are to enter the work rooms.
    • Conference table large enough to accommodate all team members and state representatives
    • Printer, secure wifi, LCD or HDTV projector
    • Shredder
    • Basic office supplies (i.e., stapler, paper clips, post-its, note pads, pens, highlighters, etc.)
  • Food/Snacks
    • There should be healthy snacks and beverages (i.e., bottled water, coffee, soda) in the work room at the hotel and on campus.
    • The team will eat breakfast at the hotel each morning.
    • If at all possible, the team will want to remain on campus for lunch, with the ideal arrangement to have lunch catered either in the workroom or in an adjacent room.
    • The EPP should suggest a variety of restaurants within easy driving distance of the hotel for dinner each night.
  • Interviews
    • Generate interviewee list.
      • Dean
      • Assessment Director
      • Field Experiences Coordinator
      • Full-Time Faculty
      • Key Adjunct Faculty
      • Current candidates representing multiple programs
      • Program completers representing multiple programs
      • Cooperating teachers from field experiences
      • Clinical supervisors
      • P-12 partners (i.e., superintendents, principals, teachers, etc.)
      • Other:
    • Interview Rooms
      • Depending on final schedule, 3 rooms may be needed simultaneously.
      • Should have a door for privacy
      • EPP representatives should not attend interviews with candidates, program completers, or cooperating teachers
      • EPP should prepare sign-in sheets for each interview.
      • A staff member should be responsible for get all participants to sign in and then leave the room.
      • All sign-in sheets should be sent to the site team lead.
    • Requests for Additional Information or Data
      • All requests should flow from and back to the site team lead.

There will be additional items to discuss but these are the most essential. Remember–advanced preparation is one key to a successful site visit. Do your homework and know what is required. Get organized. Appoint someone with experience to coordinate the event. Start well in advance. And if in doubt, hire a consultant. Earning accreditation is crucial to an institution’s overall success and should never be taken lightly.

–rrf

 

Dr. Roberta Ross-Fisher is a national leader in educator preparation, accreditation, online learning, and academic quality assurance. An accomplished presenter, writer, and educator, she currently supports higher education and P-12 schools in areas such as competency-based education, teacher preparation, distance learning, and accreditation through her company, Global Educational Consulting, LLC. She can be reached at: globaleducationalconsulting@gmail.com

A Global Commitment to Academic Quality

There appears to be an increasing effort to ensure the academic quality of higher education institutions across the globe, and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) Ministry of Education is leading the way in that region. Starting in early 2018, all licensed colleges and universities will be issued a star rating based on a variety of data that when considered holistically will reveal useful information regarding each institution’s quality, relevance, innovation, and efficiency. Within the context of these four pillars, determinations will be made regarding institutional teaching quality, public reputation, and internationalization (globalization), likely with a drill-down to the programmatic level. For the most part, these criteria are similar to what other nations have focused on. However, the UAE Ministry of Education has decided to take it a step further by adding another criterion by which to rate the quality of its licensed colleges and universities: that of research. Program efficacy and impact are often key indicators of an institution’s quality, and thus the UAE will also be looking at the quality, quantity, and impact of research conducted by its colleges and universities.

I find this both fascinating and encouraging. The UAE is right to hold institutions accountable for their quality of instruction, their commitment to local communities, and for their contribution to a global society. Where I believe they are breaking new ground is in the area of research—few accrediting bodies or governmental agencies have considered the important role that conducting high-quality research can and should play on the advancement of civilization. Institutions of higher learning should not only be supporting faculty members in their professional growth and development as researchers, but programs should be developed to teach students how to become researchers in their respective fields of study. And then there’s the impact piece: It’s not enough simply to conduct research—the point is to use what is learned from the findings to trigger positive change across areas that touch multiple aspects of our lives (social, educational, medical, industrial, etc.).

As they move forward I’m sure the UAE Ministry of Education as well as governmental agencies from other nations will continue to examine and refine the criteria by which they determine the quality of their educational institutions. I would like to offer a few additional thoughts for consideration:

  • Institutions of high quality should make data-driven decisions based on a combination of both qualitative and quantitative data.
  • Data should be triangulated, with both input and output data considered.
  • Data should be collected and reviewed per an established cadence; a periodicity table should be constructed whereby specific data are collected, analyzed, reviewed, interpreted, and acted upon throughout each academic year.
  • Institutions should be making decisions and connecting long-term and short-term goals that are directly related to an interpretation of their data.
  • External stakeholders such as the UAE’s Ministry of Education should be able to easily connect the dots between each institution’s data and their vision, mission, and strategic goals.
  • The efficacy of programs should be criteria-based and performance-based.
  • A portion of an institution’s efficacy should be measured by the impact its program completers has on the lives of those they touch after graduation. For example, teachers should be able to demonstrate a positive impact on the academic achievement of their students, while healthcare providers should be able to demonstrate a positive impact on the health and wellbeing of their patients. Educational policy agencies, accrediting bodies, and institutions should collaborate in advance on a definition of what types of data would be acceptable to demonstrate this positive impact.

 

There are additional things to be considered when making judgments about an institution’s quality. However, it is vital to begin the conversation so that everyone can begin working toward a common goal: To prepare current and future generations for service to others. The extent to which we will be successful in this endeavor lies in our firm commitment to academic excellence.

 

–rrf

 

Dr. Roberta Ross-Fisher is a national leader in educator preparation, accreditation, online learning, and academic quality assurance. An accomplished presenter, writer, and educator, she currently supports higher education and P-12 schools in areas such as competency-based education, teacher preparation, distance learning, and accreditation through her company, Global Educational Consulting, LLC.

 

Supporting Learners in a Competency-Based Education Classroom

This is the fourth installment in a series of blog posts on the topic of competency-based education. Previous posts included: There IS a Better Way to Teach; What’s Under the Hood; and The Basics of CBE Curriculum Development.

How we teach is just as important as what we teach. In other words, instructional methods are just as vital to the learning process as the content being taught. Very few students learn by simply reading or absorbing material—if they did, we really wouldn’t need teachers.

Just as with traditional learning models, there are many ways P-12 and higher education faculty can instruct students within the competency-based education (CBE) model. However, the key here is to provide academic support in a way that helps learners attain essential content and ultimately demonstrate what they know and are able to do. Facilitation, as opposed to direct instruction, has been proven to be an effective way of providing this type of academic support primarily because by its very nature the CBE model creates a space for flexibility for instructors as well as for learners. Of course, face-to-face and online learning environments may require use of different facilitation models, but some good options to consider include:

 

Regardless of the facilitation model chosen, learning should be constant, and not time-dependent in a competency-based learning environment. In other words, learners should be actively engaged at all times but should not be forced to move in lockstep fashion with all other students. They should have the freedom and flexibility to learn at their own pace and in their own way—which is one reason why CBE is commonly referred to as personalized learning, although the two terms are not completely synonymous.

In the next blog installment, we will dive more deeply into the teacher’s role within a competency-based learning environment.

 

–rrf

 

Dr. Roberta Ross-Fisher is a national leader in educator preparation, accreditation, online learning, and academic quality assurance. An accomplished presenter, writer, and educator, she currently supports higher education and P-12 schools in areas such as competency-based education, teacher preparation, distance learning, and accreditation through her company, Global Educational Consulting, LLC.  

 

Is There Room for Two Accrediting Bodies in Educator Preparation?

Depending on their state’s statutes, many US educator preparation providers may soon have a choice regarding which accrediting body they want to evaluate the quality of their programs.

The Association for Advancing Quality in Educator Preparation (AAQEP), developed primarily by an advisory council and a small team of staff members with previous accreditation experience, have finalized a process by which the quality of educator preparation providers (EPPs) will be reviewed.  If this sounds strikingly similar to the regulatory body that already serves in this capacity, that’s because it is. The Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP) was birthed as a result of consolidation between the National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE) and the Teacher Education Accreditation Council (TEAC); it became fully operational as the nation’s sole accrediting body for educator preparation providers in mid-2013.

Similar to the CAEP model, AAQEP is partnering with several state departments of education for the purpose of streamlining and codifying expectations for program quality. According to its Spring 2018 newsletter, four providers are planning for AAQEP accreditation reviews in early 2019. As part of its adopted policy, the new body recognizes the accreditation conferred by the Montessori Accreditation Council for Teacher Education, the National Association for the Education of Young Children, the Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation, and any accreditor recognized by the Council for Higher Education Accreditation or by the Secretary of the United States Department of Education.

CAEP, on the other hand, is currently the only programmatic accrediting body for educator preparation that’s recognized by the Council for Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA).    It also has the benefit of being in existence for five years and has had a chance to test its policies, procedures, and evaluation framework. Numerous changes have been made during that time, mostly because of feedback from institutions that have undergone program review. While providers embrace the need for quality assurance, many have expressed frustration by a lack of consistent messaging by CAEP staff and point to a perception that key elements of the program review process have been changed with little notice or explanation. CAEP leadership indicate they are committed to improving their system and seem to be taking steps to improve communication with providers but many challenges remain.

Common Goals, Different Approaches

While each body has developed its own set of program review protocols and standards, the goal is essentially the same – to ensure that educators are fully prepared to meet the needs of students in 21st Century schools. In order to make this happen, educator preparation providers responsible for training teachers and school leaders must work closely with P-12 school districts to provide high-quality learning experiences from curriculum that is current and standards-based. Performance expectations should be high with appropriate academic support, guidance, and mentoring as needed. Subject- and grade-appropriate field and clinical experiences should play an integral role in every program, and providers should monitor the success of their program candidates as well as the success of the P-12 students being served. And finally, an overarching goal for all providers must be a deep commitment to continuous program and systematic improvement.

Standards-Based Frameworks

While both bodies rely on a standards-based framework for program review, those standards are not identical. CAEP adopted five standards designed to evaluate programs that lead to initial and advanced level teaching credentials:

  • Content and Pedagogical Knowledge
  • Clinical Partnerships and Practice
  • Candidate Quality, Recruitment, and Selectivity
  • Program Impact
  • Provider Quality, Continuous Improvement, and Capacity

AAQEP, on the other hand, bases program review on a set of four standards:

  • Completer Performance
  • Completer Professional Competence and Growth
  • Quality Program Practices
  • Program Engagement in System Improvement

 

One functional accrediting body for EPPs is enough; why would we want to add another?

Programs want options for greater individualization. Not all schools of education are created alike, and while they strive to attain the same goal of preparing teacher and school leader candidates for their careers, they enjoy a variety of missions, visions, program designs, and delivery systems. For example, a completely online program operating in multiple states may have a very different model from one serving teacher candidates in a traditional, face-to-face learning environment. One that focuses on social equity and recruits 18-22-year-olds may take a very different approach from an alternative preparation provider that recruits adult learners who already have a bachelor’s degree. In other words, while a one-size-fits-all approach to accreditation doesn’t always support a provider’s diversity or uniqueness.

There’s a risk in having only one body to judge the quality of all programs. Having a monopoly is never a good idea, regardless of the enterprise. Competition ultimately helps all stakeholders to reach higher and become better. This is also true for accrediting bodies. Professional educators, preparation providers, public stakeholders, and accrediting bodies should all have a seat at the table while making important decisions about how teachers and school leaders should be trained. To do otherwise creates a risk of well-intentioned efforts that miss the mark and fail to accomplish our shared goal, which is to:

Strengthen our nation by building a well-educated society facilitated by exceptionally prepared teachers.

 

Is there really room for two accrediting bodies in educator preparation?

Will AAQEP be recognized by the Council for Higher Education Accreditation? Will state departments of education be eager to partner with another accrediting body?  What will be the US Department of Education’s position, given that it currently recognizes neither? If given the choice, will some educator preparation providers want to be accredited only by one body, or will they choose to be accredited by both CAEP and AAQEP? Those are all questions that remain unanswered. However, if the addition of  a new accrediting body creates a space for freedom of choice and mission-specific program review while ensuring academic excellence, how can that be a bad thing?

–rrf

 

Dr. Roberta Ross-Fisher is a national leader in education transformation, teacher preparation, and academic quality assurance. An accomplished presenter and writer, she currently supports educational institutions and non-profit agencies in areas such as educational systems design, online learning experiences, competency-based education, and accreditation. Roberta also blogs about academic excellence and can be contacted for consultations, webinars, and on-site workshops through her site (www.robertarossfisher.com). 

###

Tired of subs? Grow your own teachers. But do it with excellence.

There has been a nationwide shortage of math, science, English language learning, and special education teachers for several years, and it will only get worse unless creative, out-of-the-box ideas are piloted. Gone are the days when individuals go into teaching just to “have something to fall back on” and to work the same hours as their children—teaching is a demanding profession and the classroom can be a tough place to be.

California education officials recognize this critical teacher shortage, and they are committed to finding a solution.  In my recent blog post entitled Accelerating the Pathway to Initial Teacher Certification, I wrote about the new initiative approved by the California Commission on Teacher Credentialing that focuses on growing the number of qualified mathematics teachers. At the district level, the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) is trying to shore up its supply of special education and other hard-to-find teachers through its STEP UP and Teach program. This program provides mentoring as well as financial support to qualified candidates, often those who are already employed in the district as paraprofessional and who have strong ties to the local community.

This “grow your own” approach is similar in many ways to other nationwide efforts such as the Kansas City Teacher Residency project. Based on the premise that teachers are best trained on-site and under the careful mentoring of experienced teachers in real-life situation, such training is certainly workforce-driven. It’s also competency-based in many respects, because teacher candidates must demonstrate what they know and able to do on a daily basis. Admission requirements into programs such as the KCTR are strict, admitting only those candidates who demonstrate a strong propensity for long-term success as a caring, effective educator. This is as it should be—we want only the very best teaching our children and our grandchildren.

All these pilots share some things in common but there is still something they are missing—and that is a curriculum that is built by the best of the best—those educators and school leaders who have been recognized as high performing. A feature I would love to see embedded in other programs is evidence that teacher candidates are being trained by those who have been highly successful in today’s classrooms and who understand how to meet the needs of students in 2018 and beyond. Curriculum written by faculty who can talk theory but who have little teaching experience will fall flat on its face. Likewise, a program built by those who haven’t seen the inside of a P-12 school in 20 years simply cannot prepare teachers for 21st Century schools. It’s just not realistic, and yet we see those programs training new teachers by the thousands in every state across our nation. As a result, we are licensing new teachers who discover they have come down with a case of, “What have I gotten myself into?” syndrome. Those teachers leave the classroom in droves, headed for less stressful jobs often with more pay. That’s why about half of all new teachers leave the profession within five years of obtaining their license.

What’s more is that accrediting bodies, whose role is to ensure programmatic quality, don’t even look for evidence that programs have been created by high-performing university faculty with proven, recent success in the P-12 sector. How can something of such importance fail to be on their radar? And what’s it going to take to start building educator preparation programs by those who actually know what skills new teachers need to know in order to be successful in today’s classrooms?

 

–rrf

 

Dr. Roberta Ross-Fisher is a national leader in educator preparation, accreditation, online learning, and academic quality assurance. An accomplished presenter, writer, and educator, she currently supports higher education, P-12 schools, and educational agencies in areas such as competency-based education, teacher preparation, distance learning, leadership, outcomes-based performance, making data-driven decisions, and accreditation through her company, Global Educational Consulting, LLC. She also writes about various issues related to academic excellence through her blog site (www.robertarossfisher.com). Roberta can be reached through Twitter (@RRossFisher), LinkedIn (Roberta Ross-Fisher) and email at: globaleducationalconsulting@gmail.com

 

Looking for Innovation? Think CBE.

Thinking about adopting a competency-based educational (CBE) model? This can be a great, innovative way to teach adult learners at the community college or university level, but it can also be quite appropriate for youngsters at the elementary, middle, and high school levels. Here are a few basic tenets of CBE to consider:

Competency-based education is not an easy way to learn or to earn a college degree. Instead, it is a different way to learn. Rather than just sitting in a class and earning attendance points, learners really have to demonstrate what they know and are able to do through a variety of high-quality assessments.

True competency-based education is standards-based education. A house must have a solid foundation in order to stand over time. Likewise, curriculum must be based on standards, and from those standards, competencies, learning objectives, and assessments are developed. As industry standards change, so must a competency-based curriculum evolve to ensure relevancy and currency.

 

Competency-based education is carefully planned and developed. It is not a simple matter to create or switch to a competency-based educational model. It requires a great deal of thought, planning, training, and a commitment to various resources. Simply put, it is not realistic for an institution to believe this can be created by one or two faculty members given extra teaching load pay over a semester or two. It requires systemic commitment and long-range strategic planning.

The curriculum found in a high-quality competency-based educational program comprises both breadth and depth. As previously stated, a solid curriculum must be standards-based. In addition, a CBE curriculum can’t just “cover” certain key concepts and principles—this approach will not lead to deep, sustained learning. Instead, major content must be identified and embedded multiple times within signature learning experiences; they must be scaffolded throughout a program of study at increasing levels of complexity. Learners must be given multiple opportunities to understand and apply what they are learning in various contexts.

Self-paced learning is a cornerstone of the CBE model. Rote memorization has been debunked by many over the years as an ineffective way to learn. Likewise, educators now acknowledge that lockstep teaching and learning does not meet the needs of individuals. An age-old approach known as “Teach to the Middle” is still often the norm in environments where class size is excessive and teachers need to work as efficiently as possible simply to manage their classrooms. However, this approach neglects the needs of students who are struggling, and it neglects the needs of students who have already mastered those skills and are ready to move on. One of the most beautiful aspects of competency-based education is that it is based on a self-paced learner model: Students work at their own pace, taking as much or as little time as they need to understand, apply, and demonstrate their proficiency in the stated competencies and learning objectives. Learners are less frustrated; they feel empowered and more in control of their own progress.

The competency-based model lends itself well to online learning. CBE certainly can work well in traditional face-to-face learning environments. However, it can work equally well in distance learning models. There are different nuances to consider in the planning stage, but CBE is adaptable to all learning environments. What’s important is the strength of the curriculum, the learning resources, the quality of instruction, and the support given to learners. If the curriculum can be seen as the foundation of the house, then the other instructional elements can be viewed as the walls supporting the structure.

The quality of a competency-based program is heavily reliant upon the quality of its assessments. In a competency-based model, learners demonstrate what they know and are able to do relative to specific learning objectives. They demonstrate this through a variety of high-quality assessments, frequently in the form of internally-created objective examinations, performance assessments, field-based assessments, and externally-created proprietary assessments. If the curriculum is the home’s foundation, and the walls are comprised of learning resources, instructional quality, and learner support, assessments represent the roof. There must be direct alignment between what learners are taught and how their knowledge is measured.

Continuous, critical review of assessment data is essential. Many educators throw around the term “data-driven” decision making these days, but few really understand what it means. As with curriculum development, a comprehensive assessment plan is essential to any institution, regardless whether it adheres to a competency-based educational model or not. There are many steps that need to be taken to ensure the quality, integrity, and continual improvement of the ways in which learner proficiency is measured.

The bottom line: It’s all about efficacy. Irrespective of the educational model being implemented, the strength of a program actually can best be determined by the sustained impact on the lives of learners and those they interact with in their chosen profession. For example, do graduates from an educator preparation program demonstrate a positive impact on their P-12 students’ learning and development? Do graduates from a medical school demonstrate a significant impact on improving the quality of their patients’ lives?

Competency-based education is not just about learning in the moment; it’s about learning for a lifetime to serve the greater good.

–rrf

 

 

The Drive-Thru Approach to Teacher Preparation

The Drive-Thru Approach to Teacher Preparation

I read yet another article about national teacher shortages; this one was entitled Teacher Shortages Spur a Nationwide Hiring Scramble (Credentials Optional). As a result of their desperation to staff classrooms, school district officials are putting pressure on states to relax teacher licensure requirements. In some cases, this has led to the watering down of standards and expectations. Some are taking advantage of the current climate, smelling the sweet aroma of serious revenue by offering what is essentially a drive-thru teacher preparation program: The “customer” arrives at the window, attracted by the bright lights and yummy-looking food pics. Enrollment counselors take their order and send them on. Worker bees behind the scenes serve up a program that may be of questionable or untested quality and the customer is on their way in record time. They don’t know that their fries were cold or there was no straw until they are miles down the road. Programs know such a model is cheap to build and cheap to operate; it’s easy money and there are so many students rolling through the drive-thru lane that they can afford to have some unhappy customers and still turn a profit.

In the short term, school districts are happy because they have a less difficult time hiring teachers, and program completers are happy because they’ve gotten through their program at break-neck speed and haven’t had to “waste” their time on courses they perceive as useless. However, in the long term, a host of new cyclical problems are revealed, including:

  • Individuals are admitted to the programs who really shouldn’t be—they sometimes lack the academic preparation or the professional dispositions necessary for success in the classroom.
  • Program completers are often ill-prepared to enter the classroom; they require a great deal of on-site training by the school district.
  • Many new teachers quickly become disillusioned and leave the profession because they didn’t know how challenging teaching really can be. Some leave in the middle of a school year.
  • Students often suffer due to constant turnover and lack of consistency.
  • Test scores lag and fall behind state averages; impact outcomes tend to be dismal.

 

Not all for-profit alternative certification programs are of poor quality, but many are. While accrediting bodies have recently come under greater scrutiny for their standards and expectations, many of these programs fly under the radar and are not regionally accredited*, which is the foundational accreditation any legitimate institution of higher education should attain. Some are taking the easy path to accreditation through bodies that focus mostly on career schools** such as beauty schools, truck driving schools, at-home hypnosis training, etc. just to state on their program’s website that they are accredited. These programs use “sleight of hand” language with the lay public, saying they are “accreditation eligible” which in reality means nothing but it sounds very convincing to those who are not well versed in the lingo.  Make no mistake: The drive-thru teacher preparation model is very real, and it is having a very real impact on our P-12 schools. The question is: Are we going to accept it as the new normal, or are we finally going to draw a line in the sand and insist on academic excellence for our children?

 

–rrf

 

*The regional accreditation bodies in the United States include: (1) Higher Learning Commission (HLC); (2) Middle States Commission on Higher Education (MSCHE); (3) New England Association of Schools and Colleges (NEASC-CIHE) Commission on Institutions of Higher Education; (4) Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges (SACSCOC); and (5) WASC Senior College and University Commission (WSCUC).

**The Distance Education Accrediting Commission (DEAC) awards accreditation to degree-granting, high school, military, and post-secondary schools. A search of accredited post-secondary schools, which would apply to alternative teacher certification programs, includes the Hypnosis Motivation Institute, At-Home Professions, and the Modern Gun School, to name a few.

Rural Schools: Let’s Talk Teacher Shortages and What to Do About Them.

Recruitment. Salaries. Culture Shock. Retention. These are all factors that contribute to nationwide shortages of teachers—particularly challenging in areas of high demand, such as mathematics, science, special education, English language learning, and the like. While we commonly read about and focus on solutions to meet demand in urban settings, educational reformers and policy makers need to also consider how best to meet demand in rural areas. While there are some commonalities, the solutions are not one and the same.

Recruitment. As with urban districts, rural schools often have difficulty in recruiting qualified applicants for teaching positions. In some areas, school officials won’t receive a single applicant for a given position. Part of the problem is getting the word out—many rural school districts still rely on word-of-mouth, or publication in the local newspaper, or posting on the school’s website–but there are other factors that contribute to recruitment issues such as low salaries, few cultural opportunities, and feelings of isolation for individuals who may not have family ties to a given area. Plus, it’s likely that every other district in that area is also trying to recruit for the same positions, so there’s a competition factor at play as well.

Salaries. In some areas, a district’s salary scale is so low that teachers’ own children qualify for free or reduced lunch, due in part because of the declining number of local businesses and industries that contribute to the tax base. Less industry means less revenue generated in taxes, both from business owners and from their employees—who support local schools through real estate taxes. Moreover, principals and superintendents can’t always hire the “best” candidate or the most highly qualified candidate—because their salary budget is so limited, they often have to hire someone fresh out of college with no experience, primarily because they can pay that person less money than someone with 10 years of experience and a master’s degree. Plus, teachers already employed in a district have little incentive to go back to school and earn an advanced degree—in some rural districts teachers have received a total increase of $250 for earning a master’s degree—which is spread out over 12 months and subject to tax withholdings.

Culture Shock. When I was in school, it was easy to spot teachers who weren’t from my area—they dressed differently; they spoke differently; and they weren’t related to anyone I knew. And, more often than not, they didn’t drive a pickup truck—a dead giveaway that they were not local. With very few exceptions, those teachers never stayed long—after a year or two at the most they moved on—usually back to where they went to college or where they had family. I recall one high school teacher who packed up and left after one quarter—she had a bachelor’s degree and her state teacher certification but she was not prepared for such a cultural shock. I still think about her to this day, wondering if she ever recovered and returned to another classroom.

Retention. Retaining teachers after they’ve been hired is an ongoing challenge in every school district. Some teachers just job hop—for various reasons they like moving around. Others feel as though they have been treated unfairly for one reason or another. In many instances, a spouse’s job takes them to another location. School officials can’t always retain their high-quality teachers, but more could be done to keep them and support their ongoing professional growth—including finding ways to promote those who demonstrate a propensity for leadership roles.

                             

                               A Few Recommendations

I’m a firm believer that if you’re not part of the solution you’re part of the problem. So, here are a few ideas I have for addressing each of the challenges outlined above. Keep in mind this is just a start—a springboard for further conversation if you will:

Recruitment:

  • Start Building that Pipeline—School officials could work with local churches, parent and civic groups, and high schools to promote the benefits of local school involvement and employment. Build a cohesive, year-long campaign and improve upon it each year by making it a community-wide effort.
  • Use the Grow Your Own Approach—Principals and superintendents should look closely at those paraprofessionals, substitute teachers, and volunteers who have a bachelor’s degree—if they show promise they should be mentored and encouraged to get that teaching certificate. Form a committee for this purpose and make it a priority to identify, recruit, and mentor individuals who demonstrate a propensity for success and who have strong ties to the local community.

Salaries & Retention:

Endowed Positions—School districts could partner with local businesses and industries to attract and retain high-quality teachers, particularly those in shortage areas. For example, an endowment could be established in a company’s name to supplement the income of a highly-qualified math teacher—the district would provide the regular salary and benefits, with the business adding an extra layer of salary as an incentive. Such an endowment would be good public relations for the business and may even provide some tax benefits. This may help not only to recruit but also retain high-quality teachers filling key positions, and it would further encourage school-business partnerships to create a workforce-influenced curriculum.

–rrf

 

Dr. Roberta Ross-Fisher is a national leader in educator preparation, accreditation, online learning, and academic quality assurance. An accomplished presenter, writer, and educator, she currently supports higher education, P-12 schools, and educational agencies in areas such as competency-based education, teacher preparation, distance learning, leadership, outcomes-based performance, making data-driven decisions, and accreditation through her company, Global Educational Consulting, LLC. She also writes about various issues related to academic excellence through her blog site (www.robertarossfisher.com). Roberta can be reached through Twitter (@RRossFisher), LinkedIn (Roberta Ross-Fisher) and email at: globaleducationalconsulting@gmail.com

 

Source: America Must Get Serious About Addressing Teacher Shortages in Rural Areas | Knowledge Bank | US News

Accelerating the Pathway to Initial Teacher Certification

In an attempt to ease the shortage of more than 33,000 mathematics teachers over the next decade, the California Commission on Teacher Credentialing has given four state universities $250,000 each to create new preparation programs that will cut the normal time to earn math credentials and a degree from five and a half years to four. Cal State Los Angeles, San Jose State, San Diego State and Fresno State were selected to create curriculum and design accelerated (compacted) programs to encourage individuals pursuing a bachelor’s degree to consider becoming middle school or high school math teachers.

While this may sound good on the surface, I just don’t think it’s enough to really address the shortage in the long run—these prospective teachers will still have to jump through a lot of hoops just to earn their teaching credential, including all the requirements to earn a four-year bachelor’s degree.

I haven’t seen any emphasis on truly innovative training, or on measuring the longitudinal impact of graduates on their students’ learning—nor did I read anything about intensive mentoring support from the employing school district or the home university in the first two or three years following program completion. All those things, plus many more, are necessary for a teacher to be truly ready for the classroom. Otherwise, the likelihood of them being successful or of them staying for more than a year or two is greatly reduced. And—this grant program only focuses on mathematics—what about the critical shortages in sciences, special education, English language learning, and the like? And—why was this initiative focused only on those earning their bachelor’s degree? We mustn’t forget those who have already demonstrated a propensity for success in the classroom as well as strong ties in the school—those paraprofessionals and substitute teachers—many of whom already have a bachelor’s degree but just need their teaching credential.

I have built a preparation framework designed for this latter group. It’s innovative. It’s unique. It’s research-based. And it’s 10 months long. Care to learn more, California Commission on Teacher Credentialing?

–rrf

 

Dr. Roberta Ross-Fisher is a national leader in educator preparation, accreditation and academic quality assurance. She currently supports higher education and P-12 schools in areas such as competency-based education, teacher licensure, distance learning, and accreditation through her company, Global Educational Consulting, LLC.  

 

 

Source: California colleges address math teacher shortage by accelerating pathway to credentials | Education Dive