Spring Meeting and Collaboration

Spring Meeting, Thursday, April 22, 2010
Spring Collaboration, Friday, April 23, 2010

Location:  Crowne Plaza, 2200 Freeway Boulevard, Minneapolis, Minnesota

 

 

 

Rooms are available at the Crowne Plaza- Minneapolis North by calling the hotel directly at 763-566-8000.  To guarantee receiving the contract's conference room rate, reserve your room at least three weeks in advance and mention MACTE's special discount rate. Reservations at the MACTE discounted rate are now available online:  MACTE February Meeting Crown Plaza Reservations.

 

 

Please note our new registration policy:   "All MACTE meeting and congress registration cancellations must be made in writing to the executive assistant one week prior to the event.  Due to meeting and congress costs incurred, refunds cannot be issued within the week prior to the event.  Registrations may be transferred within each institution.

 

 

 

In announcing his selection of Chicago superintendent Arne Duncan as his pick for Secretary of Education, President-elect Barack Obama outlined his vision for a 21^st century education system, stressing the importance of "recruiting, retaining, and rewarding" teachers. In addition, he praised Duncan's work in the Chicago schools saying, "He has worked tirelessly to improve teacher quality." This is just the latest in a series of statements from national and state leaders that brings focus to the issue of teacher effectiveness. Indeed, the Minnesota Board of Teaching's goals for fiscal year 2009 address the same topic, with particular attention to recruitment, licensure requirements, and retention.

 

The concept of teacher effectiveness is complex and involves a variety of factors. Teacher effectiveness requires recruiting outstanding candidates, preparing them effectively to meet rigorous standards, inducting them into the profession, providing them with effective school and district leaders, and presenting them with quality professional development opportunities throughout their careers. As teacher educators, we are involved in every aspect of this continuum. We encourage talented young people to consider a teaching career. We help professionals make a career change from corporation to classroom. We partner with schools to provide induction programs and lead professional development offerings for veteran educators. MACTE institutions continue to play an integral role in ensuring effective teachers for Minnesota students.

 

 Recently there has been much discussion about one element of teacher effectiveness:  admission to teacher education programs. Let us take a moment to focus on this aspect of the teacher effectiveness continuum.

 

Nationally there is a concern that the "best and brightest" are no longer attracted to the teaching profession. This does not describe the situation in Minnesota. To be eligible for admission to teacher education programs in MACTE institutions, candidates must demonstrate academic achievement, complete and pass prerequisite coursework in the content area, and pass general coursework such as composition and speech. In undergraduate teacher preparation programs, candidates have demonstrated their academic ability and are in their junior year before they are admitted to the program. In addition, individual institutions require some or all of the following: evidence of volunteer experiences working with children, a writing sample, a statement of goals or philosophy, an interview, diversity experience, and letters of reference. In most institutions, admission to professional education is quite competitive. The actual average grade point average of candidates admitted to MACTE teacher education programs is 3.30 for undergraduate programs and 3.49 for graduate programs. Indeed, Minnesota is attracting some of the "best and the brightest" to the teaching profession.

 

While we are proud of the academic skills of our candidates, MACTE institutions are concerned with evaluating the whole person when reviewing potential candidates. We take very seriously our responsibility to select candidates who hold promise as future educators. We want teachers who possess the characteristics required of the profession, and who have the social and communication skills that will help them support student learning and development. Our assessment of candidate qualifications does not stop at admission. Teacher education candidates meet rigorous benchmarks throughout their programs. They must earn passing grades in all required content coursework. Candidates are assessed on their knowledge and skills in meeting the BOT content and pedagogy standards. They go through an application process for student teaching. They are assessed on their teaching skills and behaviors in classroom settings. All candidates must pass the Praxis testing series. In addition, most programs require a portfolio that documents the candidate's mastery of the standards.

 

Minnesota can be proud of the teacher education candidates at MACTE institutions. We need to recognize them for their academic achievement and their commitment to help all students learn. Greater recognition and appreciation of our teacher candidates can encourage more of the best and brightest college students to become teachers.

 

We are in challenging times. The new budget forecast has been released and the news is sobering. Clearly we all will need to be fiscally responsible as we make decisions. And, many would say, quality education is our hope for the future. Fiscally responsible educational decisions may be among the most critical decisions to be made during the coming year. Both BOT and MACTE are charged with making many of the critical educational decisions.

Let's consider some of the types of educational decisions facing us and consider the financial consequences.

MACTE and BOT are collaborating to revise the PEPER process. Program review is essential to ensuring that we produce high quality teachers who are knowledgeable about content and pedagogy. This type of process also costs money. The BOT has to pay staff and reviewers to review data and render decisions regarding licensure program quality. MACTE institutions need to employ faculty and staff to gather data, analyze data, build reports, and maintain a dialogue to answer BOT questions. The larger MACTE institutions report that it requires the equivalent of a half-time position more than one year to prepare a PEPER report under our current PEPER process. This does not include the time required for many individual faculty within each institution to document their own work and that of their students.  Additional time is required during the years between reports in order to maintain a data-based system. Can our revised PEPER process maintain high standards for quality, but reduce the effort and costs?

Changes in rule-making also involve costs. BOT invests staff time in decisions that may lead to rule-making. The state bears the costs of gathering comments, hosting hearings, and providing judgments on new educational rules. MACTE bears the costs and time involved with serving on state-wide committees, and revising and/or planning courses and programs that will meet the new rules. The time and costs for MACTE members goes beyond simply having a faculty member adjust a syllabus. Similar to the BOT process, MACTE requires curricular decisions to go through several committees and levels of review and approval. Rule-making changes are costly and take time.

The BOT and MACTE are also in dialogue about how to accomplish alignment of learner and teacher standards. The ultimate goal of standards alignment is logical and valuable.  But, are we also analyzing the costs of different approaches to standards alignment?  Both BOT and MACTE will need to invest staff time in resolving standards alignment. How time-intensive and cost-expensive does that alignment process need to be, while still maintaining educational quality? We appear to be headed towards investing BOT and MACTE staff/faculty time in developing an approach to alignment, deciding on a reasonable amount of documentation, collecting and analyzing documentation, creating reports, and evaluating reports. Are we being cost conscious in that process? Are we having an explicit dialogue about costs as we consider this educational decision?

High quality education in Minnesota will ensure a high quality future. We will need to work together to use our limited financial resources to ensure we maintain a high quality education. Quality and cost may become our mantra over the next year.

 

 "The development and implementation of accountability systems has been one of the most powerful, perhaps the most powerful, trend in educational policy in the last 20 years" (Barber, 2004, p.1). The need to uphold high standards for all students has resulted in an "accountability agenda", with data being placed at the forefront of reform efforts. The authors of, Leading Schools in a Data-Rich World: Harnessing Data for School Improvement, describe the demand for high accountability as "the watchword of education with data holding a central place in the current wave of large-scale reform" (Earl, Katz, & Fullan, 2006, p.3). Clearly, all schools are feeling the pressure of increased information requirements from funding agencies, state education departments, and local boards of education.

Recently, President Bush "put his final stamp on the No Child Left Behind Act" which, "directs states to make public information comparing student achievement on their own tests against national-assessment scores" (Hoff, 2008, p.1). Increased attention to student achievement has led to further debate over the relationship between teacher education and teacher effectiveness (Darling-Hammond, Holtzman, Gatlin, & Heilig, 2006). Advocates for strong teacher preparation programs cite studies documenting the positive effects of teacher education and certification on student achievement. In Minnesota, teacher education programs must provide evidence that students meet subject matter standards. Programs must also provide evidence that their students understand how children learn and how to teach in a way that all students can be successful. This is especially critical in schools serving low-income students and students of color. In contrast, there are those who believe that bright individuals with subject matter knowledge and little or no preparation for teaching can be equally effective in classrooms. They often argue that teacher preparation programs merely impose unnecessary requirements and additional costs without any added benefits. 

These debates have led to questions asking whether certified teachers are more effective than those who have not completed requirements for certification and "whether some candidates with strong liberal arts backgrounds might be at least as effective as teacher education graduates" (Darling-Hammond, et al., 2005, p. ii). An increasing amount of research is being conducted to help answer this question. For example, in a study out of Stanford University, Linda Darling-Hammond and her research team collected and examined student achievement data linked with data about their teachers' certification status, experience, and degree levels over a period of seven years (2005, p.3). Results found certified teachers to be "significantly more effective in raising student test scores than teachers without certification or with substandard certification in 22 of 36 estimates" (p.20), suggesting that teachers' effectiveness appears strongly related to the preparation they have received for teaching. This study is unique in that the researchers compared the effectiveness of differently prepared or certified teachers using appropriate controls for their students' prior learning (p.2).

MACTE institutions recognize the importance and legitimacy of teacher education accountability. We rely on credible evidence and data to demonstrate our programs' effectiveness and to make changes for improvement. We encourage the Board of Teaching to hold all teacher preparation programs, including alternative programs, to the same level of accountability and to require the same quality of evidence and data to support their effectiveness. There are many challenges to providing more credible evidence of teacher program effectiveness. For this reason we are pleased to be playing an active role in the Board's current work to redesign the program approval process. We look forward to developing a system that effectively assesses the quality of all teacher education programs and the students that complete them.

 

October 16, 2008

As thousands of teachers and their students began working together this fall in classrooms across the state of Minnesota, Governor Pawlenty toured the state discussing his 3E's initiative on energy, education, and the economy. We applaud the Governor's acknowledgement that there is much work to do regarding the state's economy as well as its energy policy. We are also encouraged to hear that education will be part of this important conversation, and we note that these three E's are not unrelated.  As any school administrator can attest, school funding has not kept pace with the demands on school budgets. When schools must continually appeal to their local communities for funding, students suffer. While Governor Pawlenty wants to reform the state tax code to create a friendlier climate for business, we suggest he needs to make the education landscape friendlier as well.  As heating costs soar and unfunded mandates to measure student performance increase, districts across the state are considering four-day weeks and other cost reduction measures so they can provide basic services to students and communities. 

In his 2008 State of the State address in February, Governor Pawlenty praised the hard work, dedication, and character of Minnesotans as a major factor in putting us near the top in the nation in most quality of life measures. With regard to education, his address complimented our education system:

"We're number one in ACT scores, the percentage of adults with a high school diploma, and number two in the country in eighth grade math scores." 

In the same address, Governor Pawlenty criticized the quality of teachers attracted to the profession.  The Governor suggested that the profession no longer attracts "top-tier" candidates.

By any measure, hardworking, dedicated, teachers of character are underpaid for their important work with Minnesota children. To suggest that they are unprepared and of lesser quality than in the past is simply false and not based on data. Furthermore, such comments are not consistent with comments made recently regarding the quality of teachers in Minnesota. In a recent press release (Sept. 23, 2008) unveiling his proposed education reform initiatives, he is quoted as saying, "Minnesota is blessed with some of the best teachers in the country and we appreciate our teachers.  With these proposals, we will lead the nation in improving teacher effectiveness."

It is not a coincidence that Minnesota has some of the best-prepared teachers in the country. Every approved teacher education program in Minnesota must follow state-established standards, demonstrate that it prepares highly qualified teachers, and have in place admission and program gateways that monitor candidate performance. In addition to demonstrating competency with regard to a myriad of state standards, every licensed teacher coming into the profession must pass standardized exams related to their subject matter and to the skills of effective instruction. Last year, the average admission GPA (grade point of candidates entering teacher education programs) at MACTE institutions was 3.3 at the undergraduate level and 3.4 at the graduate level (Measures of Teacher Quality in Minnesota, 2007).

There is much in Governor Pawlenty's education proposals with which we agree. We stand ready to work with the Governor on attracting more teachers into math and science; we will continue our work with the Minnesota Board of Teaching to include assessment outcomes in the teacher education program approval process; we look forward to the Governor's support of our ongoing efforts to partner with schools and districts to provide relevant, research-based professional development to Minnesota teachers; we encourage continued funding of the math academies established in regions around the state last summer; and we applaud the Governor's interest in providing intensive support for struggling 8^th graders. In addition, we extend our continued and active support for new teacher induction systems that provide targeted professional development to teachers new to the profession. We would welcome the Governor's support for this initiative. Additionally, we all need to work together to attract more teachers of color into the profession.  We encourage the Governor to support initiatives to attract and retain highly qualified teachers of color for Minnesota's school children. 

Yet, despite our agreement on several key issues, we must underscore our concern that P-12 school funding in Minnesota must be increased. New initiatives cannot succeed when the basic funding for schools continues to fall short. 

Minnesota Association of Colleges for Teacher Education Executive Committee
Maureen Prenn, North Mankato

John Clementson, LeSueur

Elaine Ackerman, St. Cloud
Jane Gilles, Lino Lakes
Bruce Munson, Duluth
Jo Olsen, Duluth
Scott Page, Mankato

John Clementson, President
Gustavus Adolphus College
800 West College Avenue, St. Peter, MN 56082
tel. 507.933.7456(w)
fax. 507.933.6020

jclement@gustavus.edu