PESB to meet Jan. 7-8

Posted on 07. Jan, 2010 by Heather.

The Professional Educator Standards Board is meeting today and tomorrow at St. Martin’s University in Lacey. The agenda is available here. And the full Board packet here (warning: it’s a 75MB file).

Some of the agenda highlights include:

• Discussion of work related to implementation of ESHB 2261
• Update on progress of Race to the Top application
• Professtional Certificate portfolio
• Some revision to alternate route pathways
• Reducation in Force report

Continue Reading

PESB meeting recap

Posted on 25. Sep, 2009 by Heather.

The Professional Educator Standards Board meet Wednesday and Thursday in Spokane. The agenda featured a lot of good updates, as well as some interesting discussion.

On the updates side:

• The ProTeach portfolio is plowing ahead — to earn Professional Certification educators will need to complete a portfolio (ProTeach) — the submission webportal looks very user-friendly and appears on track.
• Looks like Washington will participate in a cross-state pilot of a pre-service teacher assessment.
• Judy Hartmann, K-12 policy advisor to Gov. Gregoire, updated the PESB on Race to the Top funds and Washington’s proposed plan of action –  we will apply in Round 1 in December, receive feedback from the U.S. Department of Education then submit a (hopefully successful) application for Round 2 in June 2010.
• Update from OSPI on implementing ESHB 2261 and areas involving the PEB.
• Survey results from first-year teachers and educators who complete alternate route programs provided some anecdotal insight into their experiences, but cannot be considered representative of all teachers in each cohort.

On the discussion side:

• Length of residency certificate: Currently Residency Certificates can be valid for up to nine years. The PESB needs to decide if this is the timeline it wants for beginning educators. ESHB 2261 and PESB discussion in July indicate seven years may be the more appropriate limit. This issue brought up a lot of questions for PESB members, especially around those educators that take time off for medical reasons, or have trouble finding teaching positions.
• Master-level certification: ESHB 2261 tasked the PESB with creating a new tier of certification. A drafting group working on the standards for Master Certification presented, and highlighted that a Master educator would be one who not only improves student learning but also works with fellow educators to improve their classrooms. Discussion focused around confusion over the need for Master Certification, since it’s meant to be synonymous with National Board certification. Other concerns over cost to educators, as well as no associated pay increase with obtaining this level of certification [Jennifer Wallace and others clarified that it is the intent that the educator pay model be revised to match certification levels.]

Continue Reading

PESB meeting Sept. 23-24 in Spokane

Posted on 22. Sep, 2009 by Heather.

The Professional Educator Standards Board is meeting tomorrow and Thursday in Spokane. The agenda is available here.

Continue Reading

Becoming Señora Wallace: Identity Crisis: Quack goes the…Dawg?

Posted on 04. Feb, 2009 by admin.

It’s official — I am headed for Huskydom.

How did I decide? First of all, I just couldn’t justify paying $30K for Seattle U (almost twice as much as the UW Masters in Teaching program costs).

More importantly, UW’s new and improved Secondary Teacher Education Program seems like an appropriate fit. These are the highlights and advantages that convinced me to…gulp…become a Husky:

- I can pursue a second endorsement in ESL right off the bat (once again, it’s cost effective!).

- I will take classes through the summer, and I get to work with a high school summer program!

- After four quarters, I will wrap up “traditional coursework” and have the spring (2010) free to hunt for job openings.

- I will have my own classroom by fall 2010! While I won’t earn my master’s until after my first year of teaching, I will have ongoing support during the first year. Plus, the capstone project I will complete during the second year of the program will prepare me to pursue National Board Certification.

Three years ago during my last term at the University of Oregon, if someone told me I’d be headed to UW to become a teacher, I probably would have laughed. Yet, here I am — less than two months from being a full-time student again, and I can’t imagine pursuing any other path.

Continue Reading

PESB: Day 2

Posted on 19. Sep, 2008 by admin.

Posted by Heather

Thursday’s portion of the Professional Educator Standards Boardmeeting began with a look at the finances of the PESB. Transportation costs are up, and the PESB, like everyone else, is feeling the effects in its budget. The PESB isn’t running up a huge deficit, but Jennifer Wallace said the PESB will be asking the Office of Financial Management for some additional dollars for FY 2009 because of rising costs.

Later, Ms. Wallace presented on the PESB’s Goal 1 – a state-level system for assessing educator preparation program quality. A large chunk of this is done through site visits and PESB approval of programs. As the committee working on this moves forward, Ms. Wallace said the following are things to think about:
- What should ongoing site visits look like?
- To what extent should data items be included in site visit reports?
- How will the PESB weight items for approval?
- Should types of programs offered be a consideration?
- Is it better to collect information from programs annually?

Members of the board provided feedback, the most interesting focused on a potential “high-performing” label for preparation programs. Some members of the board cautioned against it, and others thought it a good idea if the bar for earning the distinction was raised (eg. earning “exemplary” in categories, rather than just meeting standard).

Corrine McGuigan, OSPI, returned to present on the implementation of Standard V – a new certification standard that requires candidates to provide teacher and student evidence to demonstrate mastery. July 2009 is the deadline for the PESB to approve preparation programs’ implementation of Standard V, and OSPI is working on data reporting templates to provide preparation programs. OSPI is currently raising awareness of Standard V to preparation programs, ESDs and professional organizations. Ultimately, the goal is for all teachers, teacher leaders and school support staff to know about Standard V and the importance of evidence of student learning.

The final agenda item before the board moved into executive session focused on Professional Certificate programs and their differences (ProCert is what teachers must pursue within their first seven years in the classroom). Mary Jo Larsen, OSPI, looked at all of the programs offered in the State and reported on their commonalities and differences. ProCert programs are based on the same WAC framework, but do vary in scheduling and additional portfolio components. Some programs are more flexible in terms of course requirements, while others prescribe specific courses to all candidates.

Final thoughts on the two-day meeting: The PESB is opening up possibilities to change the way Washington recruits and trains teachers. Given the other action in Olympia (State Board of Education, Basic Education Finance Task Force, budget session) the PESB may have its work cut out for it in the next year — I foresee a potential cage match over the importance of pedagogy in teacher preparation and some intense discussion on alternative routes to teaching.

Continue Reading

PESB: Day 1

Posted on 17. Sep, 2008 by admin.

Posted by Heather

Here’s a recap of today’s Professional Educator Standards Board meeting. Handouts are not online yet, but some are worth a read once they are (or contact PESB staff next week and they will email them to you).

To start, David Kinnuen, Corrine McGuigan, JoLynn Berge and Superintendent of Public Instruction Terry Bergeson presented on certification fees for FY 2007-08. Certification fees are collected to finance certification office expenditures. Previously, revenues from certification fees exceeded expenditures, but now, the opposite is true. OSPI would like to 1) revamp the accounting system for cert fees (to make things more transparent) and 2) talk to all parties about raising certification fees (but won’t be asking to do so in the 2009 legislative session).

Next, Jennifer Wallace (PESB) presented on the work of the PESB Task Force - Ensuring an Adequate Supply of Well-Qualified Math and Science Teachers (summary materials from August meeting available here). I won’t rehash the entire summary — the meeting summary on the PESB website does it well enough. This Task Force has taken on a large task and it will be interesting to see what its final recommendation is. After Ms. Wallace’s presentation, Chair Van Glubt required every PESB member to comment on the issue. Below are questions and comments raised:

- Are math and science teachers on Task Force? They should be included.

- Pedagogy and subject-area knowledge are important.

- Need to look beyond UW-Seattle to supply teachers.

- Access is an issue: subject-area courses are often offered during the day, which are hard for working individuals to attend.

- Teacher compensation needs to be looked at.

- Easier access to information for interested candidates, maybe one person/group as the information source.

- Teachers don’t know about retooling, don’t feel incentive ($) to retool.

- Concern over differential pay; try loan forgiveness instead. How will English teachers feel? What about elementary teachers who teach all subjects?

- Why can’t we recruit teachers? Money is an issue. Maybe embed teaching course requirements into math and science majors.

- We need a substantial mentorship program, 5-10 years.

- Need to change image of teaching: salary, challenges under NCLB, etc. No one saying “this is a great profession.”

Ms. Wallace then presented on out-of-state and online teacher preparation programs that operate field experiences in Washington State. The PESB is putting together a policy framework for working with these programs.  This proposal outlines requirements for these programs, including conducting a needs assessment and agreements with school districts.

After lunch, Nasue Nishida (PESB) put forward three legislative budget and policy requests to be made to the Office of Financial Management and Gov. Gregoire. (These handouts are suggested reading)

1) Educator Workforce Data System: This proposal will be made with the State Board of Education and wants a data system by the end of the 2010-11 school year. The system should respond to the needs of stakeholders and include, at minimum, whether and where teachers are assigned, teaching assignments versus qualifications, and teacher qualifications related to student demographics by school.

2) Institutional Priority for Teacher Education Task Force: This Task Force would “raise the level of awareness, attention and dialogue addressing how Washington’s state institutions will better reflect and prioritize the need to produce more teachers, particularly in hard-to-fill subject areas and hard-to-staff locations.” Members of the Task Force will come from the PESB, public universities, the Higher Education Coordinating Board, OSPI and K-12. The Task Force has a list of directives and will need to make recommendations by September 2010. (Price tag: $59,500)

3) Preparation Program Quality and Teacher Effectiveness: This proposal seeks to revamp the evidence-based pedagogy assessment teacher candidates must take, increase response rates on beginning teacher survey, and fully funding the Teacher Assistance Program (linked to teacher survey). (Price tag: $695,288)

The final two agenda items — the biennial SBE-PESB report and changing program administrator certification requirements — need follow-up, so I’ll leave them for now.

Continue Reading

Becoming Senora Wallace: The adult version of the WASL

Posted on 12. Sep, 2008 by admin.

Posted by Katie.

Just as high school students have to take exams to graduate, aspiring teachers have to take exams to reenter the classroom.

In Washington State, teachers must pass a subject-area Praxis test and the Washington Educator Skills Test – Basic. The Praxis evaluates a person’s proficiency in a specific subject-area while the WEST-B evaluates one’s basic skills in reading, writing and math. Potential educators must pass both exams before pursuing their Masters in Teaching and in order to earn their teaching certificate.

I have never been a good test taker. Through all my years of schooling, I could always make the grade, but standardized testing has been one of my lifelong enemies. Initially, as my test taking anxiety got the best of me, I was hoping that the Praxis and WEST-B would not be too difficult. The Praxis, which tested my content knowledge in Spanish, pushed me just enough. It clearly illustrated my strengths and areas in which I need to improve. However, as I sat through 4.5 hours of the WEST-B, I wanted to cry – not because it was too hard but because it was a joke.

I describe the WEST-B as the “adult version of the WASL,” yet the scary thing is that it’s much easier than the WASL. According to this exam, navigating a table of contents and reading a bar graph are components in determining a quality teacher.

What does it mean that the math skills required to become a certified teacher in our state are more basic than the skills measured by the WASL for 10th grade students? We need to expect more from our teachers. Our teachers should be held to higher standards than their students.

Let’s just put it this way – if Washington students only had to pass the WEST-B in order to graduate, graduation rates would soar.

Continue Reading

LIVE BLOGGING: Basic Education Finance Task Force Meeting

Posted on 06. Aug, 2008 by admin.

Posted by Heather

1:15-2:30pm

Teacher Preparation and Certification in Washington: State Policy Perspective and Direction

Jennifer Wallace, PESB
Roger Erskine, PESB and LEV board
With Pat Wasley, Dan Goldhaber and Frank Kline

Ms. Wallace began by discussing the challenge the Professional Educator Standards Board (PESB) regularly struggles with: balancing between defining and requiring appropriate credentials and providing access and opportunity to acquire them.

The PESB sets the credentialing requirements/standards for teachers in the State and approves/reviews teacher credentialing programs in the State. Ms. Wallace then highlighted that data produced by colleges of education are not easily accessible to the public or policymakers.

Rep. Priest asked about when the evolution of teacher preparation programs stops. Ms. Wallace replied that the PESB has put in place a number of accountability mechanisms but wants more.

Ms. Wallace presented lessons from other states: 1) accountability at institutions leadership level, 2) state investment in redesign/faculty development, and 3) better data systems.

Somehow we got onto cut scores of certification exams. Chair Grimm asked if the cut scores changed every year, to which Ms. Wallace responded “no.” Rep. Hunter asked about the percentage of test takers who fail credentialing exams, which Ms. Wallace estimated at 10 or 20 percent. Mr. Erskine added that the percentage is higher for underrepresented groups.

Then we moved to out-of-endorsement assignment of teachers. This is a concern in the State, and the PESB is developing strategies to end this practice.

Superintendent Kowalkowski asked about measuring teachers’ mastery of pedagogy, to which Ms. Wallace clarified that certification in Washington tests teachers’ mastery of both subject-area knowledge and pedagogy.

Ms. Wallace then spoke to Washington’s need for better data. The following points of data are unavailable at present: whether/where WA program completers are teaching and how they are doing; whether and where teaching assignments match qualifications; teacher qualifications related to student demographics; and true picture of out-of-field assignments.

She also spoke to measuring teacher quality, saying it goes beyond a single test. Rep. Anderson asked a question about measuring teacher effectiveness, and Ms. Wallace pointed out there is a difference between knowing math and knowing how to teach math. Chair Grimm asked about studies showing the benefit of pedagogy on student achievement. Mr. Kline and Ms. Wallace both said yes, there is evidence that pedagogy matters. Chair Grimm asked about testing pedagogy. Ms. Wallace responded that some states do test pedagogy mastery with pen-and-paper exams, but Washington law specifically prohibits it. Chair Grimm then asked if that was a wise law. Ms. Wallace provided the perceived rationale behind the law — that it takes more than a pen-and-paper test to determine mastery of pedagogy. Chair Grimm then asked if the PESB would have as much work if there was a pen-and-paper test to determine pedagogy mastery. Ms. Wallace said the work of the PESB is about more than determining mastery of pedagogy of teacher candidates, but also award accreditation to colleges of education.

Rep. Hunter asked about the ability of the PESB to close down programs that do not meet standard. Ms. Wallace shared that one school has lost its accreditation and has ceased operation and another school (Central Washington University) that lost its accreditation but recently regained it (by reviewing its program and fixing any shortcomings).

Ms. Wallace picked up Chair Grimm’s disinterest in hearing about meeting districts’ need for teachers and started to skip that portion of her presentation, but touched on financial assistance available to prospective teachers. Rep. Priest then said standards are important, but so is recruitment and wants to know who is responsible for recruitment of teachers. And if it’s not the PESB, then maybe it’s the legislature. Rep. Hunter proffered that school boards are responsible, since they are penalized for not having highly qualified teachers. Ms. Wallace answered, in many states it is the legislature and maybe it needs to be that way in Washington. Dr. Goldhaber chipped in that compensation is tied to this issue and should be considered with recruitment. Dr. Hyde suggested no one in Washington is responsible for recruitment and that needs to be corrected. And if colleges of education have open slots and people aren’t applying, then raising compensation may help with that and/or offering scholarships. Ms. Wasley said there are scholarships out there. Superintendent Kowalkowski asked about the cost to a university for teacher candidates. Ms. Wasley said it costs $22,000 for a five-year program at SPU, which does not account for housing, books, or other costs. And a retooling program costs about $5,000.

Dr. Goldhaber added that a lot of teachers are counseled out of teaching in the first three years of teaching, often quietly, so it can be hard to track. This coincides with scholarships because the State could then provide a lot of money to educate individuals who end up not teaching for a long period of time. Rep. Haigh suggested loan forgiveness after a certain number of years in the classroom as an alternative. Dr. Goldhaber and Ms. Wasley both cautioned that loan forgiveness is less attractive to potential candidates than scholarships. Chair Grimm made the comment “money is money” and seemed to suggest compensation would be the best incentive.

In closing, Mr. Erskine said that not only do we need to educate novice teachers, but we need to provide continuing support to ensure all teachers remain excellent educators.

On to Q&A. Rep. Hunter asked about assessments — not a test — of teacher quality and effectiveness, like the Teaching Assistance Program or National Board Certification. He acknowledged this would be expensive. Dr. Goldhaber doesn’t think there is one assessment we could use to measure teacher effectiveness, just like the SAT cannot always predict how a student will do in college. Ultimately, Rep. Hunter asked about finding a better way to link licensure with student achievement. Dr. Goldhaber said he would be shocked if we couldn’t come up with a better way to do that, seconded by Mr. Erskine. Ms. Wasley referenced a few tools and programs in use now that attempt to measure this. Ms. Wallace seconded and spoke about the shift to evidence-based competencies by the PESB. Dr. Hyde asked about a timeline for some of these tools in development.

Rep. Haigh asked about retooling and posited teachers eligible for retooling are the ones we should go after. Ms. Wallace said there are a lot of programs and scholarships available for retooling.

Chair Grimm asked Dr. Hyde about districts reporting of out-of-endorsement assignments. Dr. Hyde spoke about the NCLB requirement of districts to report the number of teachers who are highly qualified. Superintendent Kowalkowski said districts also need to report to the PESB the number of teachers they have teaching out of endorsement and apply for waivers.

Continue Reading

LIVE BLOGGING: Basic Education Finance Task Force Meeting

Posted on 06. Aug, 2008 by admin.

Posted by Heather

11-11:15am

Mike Brown, executive director, Fire Chiefs

Mr. Brown spoke to the Task Force about the need for increased safety and emergency services for schools. The fire chiefs support these services and asked for increased funding to provide these services. Rep. Haigh asked about funding sources for the legislation they referenced, which Mr. Brown provided.

11:15am-12pm

Frank Kline, Washington Association for Colleges of Teachers Education

Pat Wasley, dean, UW College of Education

With Jennifer Wallace, PESB, and Roger Erskine, PESB and board member of LEV

Mr. Kline spoke about WACTE’s role in teacher development and licensure. He then gave an overview of certificates offered in Washington. A Residency Certificate is a general certificate, and all candidates must show competency of standards, an impact on student learning and competency in at least one endorsement area (eg. math or English). A Professional Certificate is a “contextualized” certificate, where candidates work with a committee (made up of another teacher, district representative and program representative) and must demonstrate competencies in three areas within the context of their job assignment — effective teaching, professional development and leadership.

Then he moved on to WACTE’s role in accountability. WACTE wants to see an integrated assessment system of P-12 students, teaching candidates and professional education programs developed. Rep. Hunter asked about WACTE’s feelings on including student performance data in such a system. Mr. Kline said he is unsure about WACTE’s feelings as a whole, but he personally is open to it as long as it would be implemented well. Rep. Hunter asked about value-added data, and Ms. Wasley expressed hesitancy as making it the only indicator because there are some gray areas in research on the issue. Chair Grimm offered including value-added data as one part of such a system, and Ms. Wasley seemed to agree. The WASL was offered as a measure and Mr. Kline showed some hesitancy. He would prefer a “comprehensive” system, as he outlined next.

WACTE is developing a system, which would include the WEST-B, admission requirements, program portfolio, WEST-E, Pedagogy Performance Assessment, follow-on study, retention study, value-added studies and information on induction studies. Mr. Kline said WACTE is already pursuing some of these components (with support from the Carnegie Foundation) and also plans to ask the Legislature for some financial support in 2009. Sen. Tom expressed concern over a plan on paper that never actually comes to fruition. Ms. Wasley responded by saying some of the components already exist and are bringing together superintendents and the like in the winter to review this system and provide feedback.

Rep. Priest stated Washington needs to improve data collection. Mr. Kline and Ms. Wasley agreed. There was legislation presented before and WACTE has been cooperating with data collection efforts led largely by Marge Plecki at UW.

The limited availability of teacher data, especially the endorsements of teachers and the number who teach out of their endorsement areas, was highlighted by Ms. Wasley and Ms. Wallace. Chair Grimm asked about plans to acquire that data. Ms. Wallace said there have been plans but have hit roadblocks, and the PESB continues to push for a system to gather that data. At present PESB collects information via survey, but not all districts participate. Dr. Hyde offered that districts do have to report some teacher certification information because of No Child Left Behind; however, Ms. Wallace countered that the definition of Highly Qualified Teacher under NCLB is different from State certification and endorsement standards. Task Force members asked about consequences for districts who do not report data. Ms. Wallace said they publish the list of districts that don’t provide data, but there is no tangible consequence for districts. Sen. Brown offered that legislation should be proposed that requires districts to report this kind of data.

Mr. Kline laid out some of the issues surrounding Washington’s need for more teachers. Schools of education can accommodate the teachers Washington needs, but they need recruitment help. WACTE conducted a math study and found they have 1,000 open spots in teacher training programs with no students to fill those seats. Mr. Kline and WACTE are asking for help with recruitment (casting teaching in a positive light and sharing subject-area needs) and better pay for teachers. Ms. Wasley offered that salary is a significant disincentive for individuals to pursue teaching.

Rep. Haigh asked about recruiting teachers from other states. Ms. Wallace shared that about a third of Washington’s teachers come from out of state and they are working on recruitment strategies. Ms. Wasley added that all states in the U.S. need more math teachers, making competition fierce.

In summary, Mr. Kline said, professional education is a developmental process, with the Residency, Professional and National Board certification. WACTE is working on accountability for teachers and trying to meet the State’s need in certain subject areas.

We will be back after lunch.

Continue Reading

Live blogging tomorrow: Basic Education Finance Task Force

Posted on 05. Aug, 2008 by admin.

Posted by Heather

The Basic Education Finance Task Force will meet tomorrow in Olympia. The work session will focus on teacher preparation in Washington. Considering the concern many Task Force members have shown around this topic, the meeting should be an especially interesting one.

To see the agenda and featured speakers, click here.

For play-by-play coverage, check back throughout the day tomorrow as I’ll be live blogging from Senate Conference Room ABC. TVW is scheduled to broadcast the audio from the meeting.

Continue Reading