CENTER FOR IMPROVING TEACHER QUALITY CTQ NATIONAL INVITATIONAL FORUM

1
USING INTASC STANDARDS TO GUIDE TEACHER
PREPARATION AND PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT

• CENTER FOR IMPROVING TEACHER QUALITY (CTQ)
  NATIONAL INVITATIONAL FORUM
• Friday, June 29, 2007
• Double Tree Hotel
• Crystal City
• Arlington, VA 22202

2
Maryland State Department of Education
Dr. Virginia Pilato Director of
Certification and Accreditation, Program Approval
and Assessment Branch, Division of Certification
and Accreditation, Maryland State Department of
Education, Baltimore, Maryland Ms. Sharon A.
West Director of the Maryland State
Improvement Grant (MSIG), Division of Special
Education/Early Intervention Services, Maryland
State Department of Education, Baltimore,
Maryland Dr. Debi Gartland Professor,
Towson University, Towson, Maryland Dr. Roberta
Strosnider, MSIG Consultant Mr. James Hargest
MSIG Consultant, Division of Special
Education/Early Intervention Services, Maryland
State Department of Education, Baltimore, Maryland
3

• During this session, the CTQ team from Maryland
  will explain how they are using the INTASCs
  Model Standards for Licensing General and Special
  Education Teachers of Students with Disabilities
  A Resource for State Dialogue (2001) to help
  teachers teach ALL students. Four (4) products
  have been developed using the standards and are
  in different stages of review and use. They are
  designed to assess competency of special
  education teacher candidates, to assess
  competency of general education teacher
  candidates, to guide mentoring activities with
  new special education teachers and to guide
  professional development for all teachers of
  students with disabilities.

4
Maryland and INTASC

• Long term member
• Standards viewed as valuable tools to promote
  State dialogue
• Adoption of the 10 INTASC principles/standards as
  consistent with Maryland standards
• Value the special education products with
  elements for both special educators and general
  educators

5
Teacher Education Reform in Maryland

• State requirements
• INTASC or comparable State standards
• Professional Development Schools standards
• Year long internship
• State recognized national certification area
  standards, e.g. CEC
• Joint NCATE/ Maryland unit review, including
  standards based performance assessment system
• Successful performance for HEA/Title II State
  reporting

6
Maryland State Improvement Grant (MSIG)

• A component of IDEA (Part D) allows states to
  apply for discretionary grants to improve
  programs for students with disabilities. MSDE
  (DSE/EIS) submitted a grant to OSEP and was
  awarded 5.1 million over 3 years.

7
Maryland State Improvement Grant (MSIG)

• Goals of MSIG
• To increase the number of highly qualified
  special educators
• To improve the performance of students with
  disabilities on State accountability measures

8
MSIG II Year 2Improving results for students and
young children with disabilities
9
MSIG II Year 2 Design 2006

• Sub-grants include
• Blended Early Childhood/Special Education IHE
  Program Initiative
• RTC Program (Alternative Certification Program)
• IHE Grants for Mentoring and Coaching
• Voluntary State Curriculum (VSC)/Maryland
  Statewide On-Line IEP Project
• Passport to Success Middle School Expansion
  Project
• (based on the University of Kansas Strategy
  Instruction Model SIM)

10
Using Standards to Guide the Development of
Teacher Preparation and Professional Development

• MSIG SUPPORTED PRODUCTS
• Performance Assessments A Resource for Special
  Education Teacher Educators in Maryland (2003)
• Performance Assessments A Resource for
  Elementary General Education Teacher Educators in
  Maryland Teaching Students with Disabilities
  (2007)
• Stages of Professional Development for All
  Teachers of Students with Disabilities (2007)

11
Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support
Consortium (INTASC) Beginning Teacher Standards

• 1. Making Content Meaningful
• 2. Child Development Learning Theory
• 3. Learning Styles Diverse Learners
• 4. Instructional Strategies Problem Solving
• 5. Motivation Behavior
• 6. Communication to Foster Learning
• 7. Planning for Instruction
• 8. Assessment and Evaluation
• 9. Professional Growth Reflection
• 10.Interpersonal Relationships

12
Council for Exceptional Children
10 Standards for Beginning Teachers

• 1. Foundations
• 2. Development and Characteristics of
  Learners
• 3. Individual Learning Differences
• 4. Instructional Strategies
• 5. Learning Environments and Strategies
• 6. Communication
• 7. Instructional Planning
• 8. Assessment
• 9. Professional and Ethical Practice
• 10. Collaboration

13
MSIG Product 1

• Performance Assessments A Resource for
  Special Education Teacher Educators in Maryland
  (2003) has been developed to provide special
  education teacher educators in Maryland with
  sample performance assessments to evaluate
  preservice special educators.

14

• The purpose is to develop an evolving document
  that can be used by Institutions of Higher
  Education (IHEs) to design performance
  assessments to evaluate preservice special
  educators. IHEs will be able to use the format
  and modify the samples to create their own
  performance assessments.

15
DEFINITION

• PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT a method of evaluation
  in which the learner is placed in an authentic
  situation and asked to demonstrate his/her
  knowledge and skills.
• NCATE (2002) defines performance assessments as
  comprehensive assessments through which
  candidates demonstrate their proficiencies in
  subject, professional, and pedagogical knowledge,
  skills, and dispositions, including their
  abilities to have positive effects on student
  learning.

16
The sample performance assessments have been
designed to be consistent with

• Council for Exceptional Children (CEC)
• Special Education Content Standards
• National Council of Accreditation of Teacher
  Education (NCATE) Standards
• Interstate New Teachers Assessments and Support
  Consortium (INTASC) Principles
• MSDE- Essential Dimensions of Teaching Standards
  (EDoTs)
• Maryland Teacher Technology Standards

17
Participating Institutions of Higher Education

• Bowie State University
• College of Notre Dame
• Coppin State University
• Frostburg State University
• Goucher College
• Hood College
• Johns Hopkins University
• Loyola College
• McDaniel College
• Mount Saint Marys University
• Towson University
• University of Maryland College Park
• University of Maryland Eastern Shore

18
Performance Assessment Design Components

• CEC Standards
• Title
• Applicable MSDE Certification Area(s)
• Outcomes (Teacher candidate)
• Teacher Candidate Procedures
• Evaluation
• Instructors Notes
• Courses
• Modifications
• Application to Other Standards

19
Performance Assessment Design Component 1 CEC
Foundations

•   Special educators understand the field as an
  evolving and changing discipline based on
  philosophies, evidence-based principles and
  theories, relevant laws and policies, diverse and
  historical points of view, and human issues that
  have historically influenced and continue to
  influence the field of special education and the
  education and treatment of individuals with
  exceptional needs both in school and society.
  Special educators understand how these principles
  influence professional practice, including
  assessment, instructional planning,
  implementation, and program evaluation. Special
  educators understand how issues of human
  diversity can impact families, cultures, and
  schools, and how these complex human issues can
  interact with issues in the delivery of special
  education services. They understand the
  relationships of organizations of special
  education to the organizations and functions of
  schools, school systems, and other agencies.
  Special educators use this knowledge as a
  foundation upon which to construct their own
  personal understandings and philosophies of
  special education.

20
Performance Assessment Design Component 2

• Titles were written in short phrases to denote
  different performance assessments within one CEC
  standard area.
• Standard 8 Assessment Example
• Assessing Students with Exceptional Needs,
• Pre-referral Assessment
• Assessing Students with Exceptional Needs, Formal
  Assessment
• Paper and Pencil Assessment Based on the
  Curriculum (Written)
• Assessing Students with Exceptional Needs,
  Assessment Report

21
Performance Assessment Design Component 3

• Applicable MSDE certification areas
•  
• Check Applicable MSDE Certification Area(s)
•  
• X birth - grade 3
• X grade 1 - grade 8
• grade 6 - adult
• Hearing Impaired
• Visually Impaired
  SPH

22
Performance Assessment Design Component 4
Teacher Candidate Outcomes Example

• The teacher candidate will
•  1.  Select, accurately administer, and score
  standardized tests appropriate to the individual
  student being assessed.
• 2. Interpret test results as meaningful
  information that serves as a basis for
  recommendations when combined with other
  information to determine special needs of
  students.

23
Performance Assessment Design Component 5

• Teacher Candidate Procedures Example
• 1. Select a student.
• A general education student who is receiving
  special education services, or a student
  appropriately referred for possible special
  education services.
• 2. Reason for the referral.
• Describe the reason for referral (academic or
  social/ emotional concern) indicate the
  referring party. Documentation of the concern
  (e.g., a letter) may be specifically noted.

24
Performance Assessment Design Component 5
(Continued)
3. Administer, score, interpret formal tests.
Overall Achievement Test
Wide Range Achievement Test III
Woodcock Johnson-III Reading
performance Woodcock Reading
Mastery Test Writing
Test of Written Language Mathematics
performance Key Math
Videotape the administrations, if the taping will
not interfere with the results.
25
Performance Assessment Design Component 6

• EVALUATION
• Rubrics and/or Checklists have been
• designed to evaluate student progress
• over time.

26
Performance Assessment Design Component 7

• Instructors Notes
• Courses
• Modifications

27
Performance Assessment Design Component 8

• Application to Other Standards

28
WEBSITE

• http//perfstds.msde.state.md.us

29
MSIG Product 2

• Performance Assessments A Resource for
  Elementary General Education Teacher Educators in
  Maryland Teaching Students with Disabilities
  (2007)

30
GE Performance Assessment Committee
The Committee is Co-Chaired by a General
Education and Special Education Faculty Member
2004

• Committee is comprised of
• IHE Instructors
• General Education
• Special Education
• MSDE Staff
• Division of Certification and
  Accreditation
• Division of Special Education/Early
• Intervention Services
• Teachers (Maryland State Teachers Association)

31
The purpose of the committee was to

• Develop sample performance assessments consistent
  with the INTASC indicators for General and
  Special Educators.
• Develop performance assessments consistent with
  realistic general education classroom practices.
• Develop evolving documents that can be utilized
  across content areas.
• Provide a framework/ structure for the
  development of performance assessments that can
  be accessed by Maryland IHEs through the internet.

32
Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support
Consortium (INTASC) Beginning Teacher Standards

• 1. Making Content Meaningful
• 2. Child Development Learning Theory
• 3. Learning Styles Diverse Learners
• 4. Instructional Strategies Problem Solving
• 5. Motivation Behavior
• 6. Communication to Foster Learning
• 7. Planning for Instruction
• 8. Assessment and Evaluation
• 9. Professional Growth Reflection
• 10.Interpersonal Relationships

33
Each standard is divided into two sections
Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support
Consortium (INTASC) Beginning Teacher Standards

• Standards for General and Special Education
  Teachers
• Standards for Special Educators

34
Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support
Consortium (INTASC)

• Principle 1 The teacher understands the
  central concepts, tools of inquiry, and
  structures of the discipline(s) he or she teaches
  and can create learning experiences that make
  these aspects of subject matter meaningful for
  students.
• Implications for students with disabilities
  Both general and special education teachers
  demonstrate an understanding of the primary
  concepts of thinking and knowing the content
  areas they teach as articulated in INTASC. They
  understand the underlying values and implications
  of disability legislation and special education
  policies and procedures as they relate to their
  roles and responsibilities in supporting the
  educational needs of
• students with disabilities. All
  teachers provide equitable access to and
  participation in the general curriculum for
  students with disabilities.

35
Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support
Consortium (INTASC)

• General and Special Education Teachers
• 1.01 All General and Special Education Teachers
  have a solid base of understanding of the major
  concepts, assumptions, issues, and processes of
  inquiry of the subject matter content areas that
  they teach. They understand how knowledge in a
  content area is organized and how it relates to
  other content areas.
• 1.02 All teachers know which key concepts, ideas,
  facts, and processes in their content area
  students should understand at different grades.
  Developmental levels can appropriately structure
  activities that reflect the scope and sequence of
  the content area. They understand that
  developmental levels affect students reasoning,
  perceptions, misconceptions, and naïve
  conceptions about
• content and tailor instruction based on
  student responses to promote students learning
  of the content.

36
GENERAL EDUCATION PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT(GEPA)
DESIGN COMPONENTS

• 6. Outcomes
• 7. Teacher Candidate
• Procedures
• 8. Evaluation
• 9. Instructors Notes
• 10.Application to Other Standards

• 1. INTASC Principle
• 2. Implications for Students with Disabilities
• 3. INTASC Performance Standard
• 4. INTASC Dispositions
• 5. Title

37
GEPA Design Component 1INTASC Principle

• Example
• Principle 8 The teacher understands and uses
  formal and informal assessment strategies to
  evaluate and ensure the continuous intellectual,
  social and physical development of the learner.

38
GEPA Design Component 2Implications for
Students with Disabilities

• Individualized comprehensive assessments are
  required for students with disabilities and are
  used to determine eligibility for special
  education services, to plan individualized
  instruction, and to monitor and evaluate student
  performance. It is also expected that students
  with disabilities will participate in the overall
  assessment programs of the classroom, and that
  they may require accommodations to demonstrate
  their knowledge and skills. In addition, some
  students with disabilities may require
  assessments related to
• achievement in an expanded curriculum (i.e.
  
• alternate assessments).

39
GEPA Design Component 3INTASC Performance
Standard

• Example
• Performance Standard 8
• ASSESSMENT AND EVALUATION

40
GEPA Design Component 4INTASC Dispositions

• General and Special Education Teacher
• Key Knowledge, Skills, and Dispositions
• ___ 8.01 _X_ 8.02 _X_ 8.03
• ___ 8.04 _X_ 8.05

41
GEPA Design Component 5Title

• Title Monitoring Student Achievement

42
GEPA Design Component 6 Outcomes

• Outcomes
• The teacher candidate will be able to
• Design differentiated assessment procedures which
  document student learning on State or district
  content standards.
• Incorporate accommodations to standard
  assessments, as well as alternative assessments,
  into the ongoing process of
• assessing students with disabilities.

43
GEPA Design Component 7Teacher Candidate
Procedures

• The teacher candidate will
• Select a lesson plan developed for a general
  education class which reflects relevant state or
  district content standards.
• Review a profile that is provided by the course
  instructor of a student(s) with disabilities.
• Develop a variety of assessment strategies which
  reflect the differentiated learning needs of the
  students in a typical classroom, including the
  student(s) with disabilities presented in the
  profile.
• Provide a rationale for the selection of each
  assessment strategy developed, describing how it
  addresses student needs.

44
GEPA Design Component 8Evaluation

• Rubrics have been designed to evaluate student
  progress over time. The GEPA Committee believes
  that the rubrics should have several consistent
  components including
• Rubrics should not be longer than two pages
• List from highest score to lowest score
• Use 4 to 1 criteria Exceeds, Meets,
• Approaches, and Attempts

45
(No Transcript)
46
(No Transcript)
47
GEPA Design Component 9Instructors Notes

• Instructors Notes Can Include
• Course(s)
• Modifications
• Cautions
• Student Reflections

48
GEPA Design Component 9Instructors Notes

• EXAMPLE
• Courses Methods, Internship
• Course Modification Student profiles can be
  adjusted to align with goals of candidates,
  including areas and levels of study.
• Teacher Candidates Reflection Activity Write a
  reflection for INTASC Standard 8 using this
  performance assessment.

49
GEPA Design Component 10Applications to Other
Standards

• ACEI Association for Childhood Education
• International
• CEC Council for Exceptional Children
• EDoTS MSDE Essential Dimensions of
• Teaching
• INTASC Interstate New Teacher Assessment
• Consortium
• MTTS Maryland Teacher Technology
• Standards

50
GEPA Design Component 10

• Application to Other Standards

51

• The performance assessments in these documents
  are not to be viewed as being exemplary.
• The performance assessments in these evolving
  documents will need to be revised as we learn
  more about performance assessments through CEC
  and NCATE.

52
GENERAL EDUCATION PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENTS May 7,
2007
53
(No Transcript)
54
PILOTING GENERAL EDUCATION PERFORMANCE
ASSESSMENTS

• IHE and LEA representatives facilitated focus
  groups of teacher candidates, experienced
  teachers and IHE instructors.
• The focus groups received orientations to provide
  an overall understanding of the performance
  assessment components.

55
EVALUATION RUBRIC

• A rubric was used to evaluate the performance
• assessments. The following criteria were
• considered
• Does the performance assessment measure a
  competency required by general educators teaching
  students with disabilities?
• Is the performance assessment clearly aligned
  with INTASC principles and dispositions?
• Does the performance assessment provide
  opportunities for the candidate to demonstrate
  skills related to the standards?

56
(No Transcript)
57
MSIG Product 3

• Stages of Professional Development for All
  Teachers of Students with Disabilities (SPDT)

58
Stages of Professional
Development for All Teachers of Students with
Disabilities

• PURPOSE(S)
• To serve as a tool that could be used for
  monitoring a teachers growth in implementing
  instructional practices that are effective with
  students with disabilities
• To serve as a tool to assist teachers in
  developing professional development plans

59
Stages of Professional Development
for All Teachers of Students with Disabilities

• AUDIENCE
• All Teachers
• Mentors and Mentees
• IHE Faculty
• Administrators

60
A Team of Consultants

• Developed a written report of the following
• information
• Research and review of other continuums of
  professional development
• A continuum of professional development based
  upon the INTASC principles/standards for teachers
  teaching students with disabilities
• An outline and action plan for inservice training
• A plan to evaluate the effectiveness of the
  continuum/stages of professional development in
  cooperation with Center for Technology in
  Education (JHU)

61
CONSULTANTS

• Dr. Roberta Strosnider, Professor, Towson
  University, Chairperson
• Dr. Debi Gartland, Professor, Towson University
• Ms. Stacey Williams, Special Education PDS
  Coordinator, University of Maryland College
  Park

62
Stages of Professional Development for ALL
Teachers of Students with Disabilities (Feb. 28,
2006)

• Basic Organization
• Based on the ten INTASC standards and
  implications for students with disabilities
• Indicators were developed for each standard
• Each indicator was divided into four STAGES of
  development
• Each indicator was matched to CEC standards

63
Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support
Consortium (INTASC) Beginning Teacher Standards

• 1. Making Content Meaningful
• 2. Child Development Learning Theory
• 3. Learning Styles Diverse Learners
• 4. Instructional Strategies Problem Solving
• 5. Motivation Behavior
• 6. Communication to Foster Learning
• 7. Planning for Instruction
• 8. Assessment and Evaluation
• 9. Professional Growth Reflection
• 10.Interpersonal Relationships

64
INTASC Standard 4Instructional Strategies
Problem Solving

• Provides effective instruction that results in
  positive learning outcomes for students with
  disabilities in the general or expanded
  curriculum
• Uses strategies from different learning theories
  and scientific research to provide effective
  instruction to students with disabilities and
  promote the development of critical thinking and
  problem-solving skills for students with
  disabilities
• Uses differentiated instruction to support the
  learning needs and ensure success of students
  with disabilities
• Provides multiple ways and supports such as
  scaffolding for students with disabilities to
  participate in and find success
• in learning activities.

65
INTASC Standard 4Instructional Strategies
Problem Solving

• CONTINUED
• E. Provides a variety of ways for students with
  disabilities to demonstrate their learning
• F. Adjusts instruction for students with
  disabilities in response to information gathered
  from ongoing monitoring of performance and
  progress

66
Stages of Professional Development for ALL
Teachers of Students with Disabilities (SPDT)

• The teacher understands the competency, attempts
  to apply it, and accesses supportive resources to
  meet the needs of students with disabilities
• The teacher has knowledge of the competency. The
  teacher does not have or lacks experience in the
  demonstration of the competency.
• The teacher works collaboratively or
  independently to apply the competency
  consistently across all environments accessed by
  students with disabilities. The teacher
  demonstrates self-initiated planning.
• The teacher models the competency, makes
  adjustments upon reflection, and serves as a
  resource for others responsible for meeting the
  needs of students with
• disabilities

67
Stages of Professional Development for ALL
Teachers of Students with Disabilities (SPDT)

• This product is comprised of
• Part 1 INTASC Principle/Standards
• Indicators and Stages
• Part 2 Action Plan
• Part 3 Utilization Guide

68
Review Committee met in February, 2006

• Committee was comprised of
• Special education teachers
• General education teachers
• Special Education IHE faculty
• General Education IHE faculty
• MSDE representatives
• Directors of Special Education

69
Piloting the Stages of Professional Development
for ALL Teachers of Students with Disabilities
(SPDT)

• During the 2006-2007 school year, Stages of
  Professional Development will be piloted with 35
  mentors and over 150 new special educators.

70
Outcomes for the Special Education Mentoring
Institute(SEMI) 2006-2007

• The participants will
• Define coaching/mentoring roles
• Identify the needs of new special educators
• Build effective mentoring relationships
• Examine effective research-proven mentoring
  practices
• Develop the language and behavior of support
• Differentiate support
• Share strategies for completing special education
  paperwork
• Assess new special educators teaching practices
  and
• Develop skills in modeling instruction and
  conferencing with mentees.

71
Special Education Mentoring Institute(SEMI)
2006-2007

• Nine sessions were planned over nine months.
• These sessions were designed to be consistent
  with
• INTASC and CEC standards
• COMAR Mentoring Bylaw
• Maryland S.B. 238 Comprehensive Induction
  Guidelines
• New Teacher Center (NTC) induction research
  findings (University of California at Santa Clara)

72
Stages of Professional Development for ALL
Teachers of Students with Disabilities (SPDT)

• Self-Assessment Form

73
(No Transcript)
74
(No Transcript)
75
(No Transcript)
76
(No Transcript)
77
Stages of Professional Development for ALL
Teachers of Students with Disabilities (SPDT)

• Professional Development Plan

78
(No Transcript)
79
Second Review SessionJune 25, 2007

• The first draft of Stages of Professional
  Development for ALL Teachers of Students with
  Disabilities (SPDT) was modified based upon
• a review by outside consultants
• a review by the 2006 Review Team
• a utilization and review by the mentors and
  mentees
• in the Special Education Mentoring Institute
  (SEMI)
• The Review Team met again to review the
  recommended changes and discuss the utilization
  of SPDT. This team was composed of teachers,
  mentors, mentees, administrators, MSDE staff, and
  other interested professionals.

80
Resident Teacher Certificate (RTC) Program
81
IHE Grants for Mentoring and Coaching
82
MSIG Product 4Collaboration Communication
Record 2006-2007

• This record form is used to monitor face-to-face
  interactions between mentor and new special
  educators in the MSIG supported grants. The form
  includes areas addressed, what is working well,
  what do we need to focus on, teachers next
  steps, mentors next steps, and the INTASC
  standards addressed.

83
(No Transcript)
84
Keys to Success in Maryland

• Collaborative development of products with IHEs,
  LSS, and MSDE
• Collaboration
• Within MSDE our two divisions (Certification/Accr
  editation and Special Education/Early
  Intervention Services)
• Accountability with high levels of support

85
Maryland State Department of
EducationDr. Nancy Grasmick, State
SuperintendentDr. Carol Ann Baglin, Assistant
State SuperintendentDivision of Special
Education/Early Intervention ServicesDr. John
Smeallie, Assistant State SuperintendentDr.
Virginia Pilato, Director of Certification
Division of Certification and Accreditation

• Maryland State Improvement Grant (MSIG)

• Kim Lewis, Program Manager, Program
  Administration and Staff Development Branch
• Deborah Metzger, Program Manager, Maryland
  Infants and Toddlers Program/Preschool Services
• Sharon West, MSIG Director, Section Chief,
  Instructional Support and Professional
  Development
• James Hargest, Education Program Specialist, IHE
  Programs