Murray State University Selected Improvement Plan

Transcription

1 Murray State University Selected Improvement Plan The focus area our EPP selected for improvement is Standard 4, Program Impact. Our EPP will specifically work to improve our ability to address the satisfaction of completers, (Standard 4.4), as measured by the MSU Student Teacher Exit Survey and Kentucky New Teacher Survey. Strategies for implementation will span multiple standards with emphasis on Standard 2 and 5. Completer Satisfaction Data Trends Student Teacher Exit Survey This survey instrument measured student teachers perceptions of the quality of their program preparedness, the impact of the 200 hours of field/practicum experiences, the quality of student teaching experiences, and the impact of student teaching seminar sessions. Students respond using Google Survey. Over four semesters (Fall13-Spring15), the survey items reflecting the lowest satisfaction rates were consistently: a) Learned to differentiate instruction for diverse learners (75%-82%), b) Used pre-assessments (67%-81%), and c) Learned ideas for special education and regular education collaboration (68%-71%). Kentucky New Teacher Survey The purpose of the survey was to gather perception data on how new teachers and their supervising teachers ranked new teachers preparedness to teach in Kentucky schools. Aligned to the Initial-Level Indicators of the Kentucky Teacher Standards and questions concerning Title II requirements and implementation of the Common Core, the survey s questions were based on a four-point scale, identified by Excellent (4), Good (3), Fair (2) and Poor (1). Intern responses were examined for the last two administrations ( & ). The responses of Interns were examined on an item-by-item basis and at the teacher standardlevel. When compared to the average responses of all Kentucky institutions, EPP Interns consistently rated their perception of preparedness as a result of the EPP at or below the state average. Analysis Analysis of candidate responses indicated that the greatest gaps in candidate satisfaction were attributable to teaching and planning as related to differentiation, including the use of data to support instructional decisions. EPP leadership sees two contributing factors: (1) an over-

2 reliance of traditional classroom settings to teach about these instructional skills in isolation from clinical practice, and (2) inconsistencies in program improvement cycles that inhibit the revision of curricular and clinical expectations to reflect the field. Improvement goals were developed to address these two trends. Improvement Goals Goal 1: By Spring 2022, candidates ratings of Extensive or Very Extensive on each item of the Student Teacher Exit Survey will exceed 90% on all items. 1. By Spring 2018, candidates ratings of Extensive or Very Extensive on each item of the Student Teacher Exit Survey will exceed 80%. 2. By Spring 2020, candidates ratings of Extensive or Very Extensive on each item of the Student Teacher Exit Survey will exceed 85%. Goal 2: By Spring 2022, 90% of EPP completer responses as Interns on the Kentucky New Teacher Survey will be Excellent or Good for each item. 1. By Spring 2018, 80% of EPP completer responses as Interns on the Kentucky New Teacher Survey will be Excellent or Good for each item. 2. By Spring 2020, 85% of EPP completer responses as Interns on the Kentucky New Teacher Survey will be Excellent or Good for each item Rationale for Improvement Areas Improvement Area I - Ensure coordinated, high-quality clinical experiences at all levels within all programs The EPP was created over 90 years ago as a normal school to serve the region and is currently assigned the responsibility by the Council for Postsecondary Education to serve the 22 school districts located in the 18 counties of the western-most region of the state. There is a long history of strong relationships between the EPP and the regional school districts, as evidenced by a study by the Kentucky P-20 Collaborative that indicated over 50% of the faculty of 17 of the 22 school districts served by the EPP were graduates of the EPP at the bachelor degree level, master s degree level, or both. The foundation of the EPP s partnerships with these schools is a strong sense of trust and a sense of community built over generations. While the EPP has strong informal relationships with schools, formal structures and arrangements to facilitate more intensive work by candidates in the school setting are under-developed. Candidates receive adequate placements in schools, but the value-added to candidate professional development by more authentic, clinically intensive placements that result from more robust partnership agreements would impact greatly the satisfaction of candidates. Partnerships and Professional Development School style arrangements will enhance clinical experiences for candidates from the beginning to the end of the program. This improvement goal addresses Standards 2.1, 2.2 and 2.3 as a means of ultimately impacting Standard

3 Improvement Area II - Refine the Quality Assurance Process The EPP has a strong tradition of decentralized program-level continuous improvement and over-sight through the Quality Assurance Process. Program coordinators and department chairs work in collaboration with EPP faculty, the Office of Teacher Education Services, advisory councils, candidates, and P-12 partners to evaluate programs, establish goals with appropriate measures, and to institute change to improve programs. While the elements of this Quality Assurance Process are present across the EPP, there are some inconsistencies in implementation and documentation between programs. The refinement of these processes will provide the most progressive curriculum and intensive clinical experiences possible, resulting in greater satisfaction. This improvement goal leverages strategies that address Standard 5.1, 5.2, 5.3, and 5.5 as a means of ultimately impacting Standard 4.4. Areas, Strategies, and Actions Below are the areas, strategies, and actions that comprise the Selected Improvement Plan. The exact order of these steps can vary and many steps within or between areas may occur concurrently. Area I: Ensure coordinated, high-quality clinical experiences at all levels within all programs. Strategy 1 - Evaluation, model development, and transition from current to new models Action 1A: For all programs, evaluate field experience placements and expectations within the existing system in terms of a continuum of clinical experience. Modify courses and experiences as needed. Action 1B: For all programs, investigate the efficacy of field experiences and coursework through a review of archival data (eg., course evaluations, field experience evaluations) and candidate and practitioner feedback. Examine the curriculum for efficiencies and opportunities. Consider opportunities to restructure to support credit hour efficiency and/or to enhance clinical placement opportunities. Action 1C: For all programs, develop a model curriculum sequence to support the progression of candidates through curriculum, inclusive of enhanced clinical placements, within credit hour and degree completion constraints. Document the sequence through advising materials for broad distribution. Action 1D: For the unit, establish structures (eg, policies) and protocols to govern the oversight of program transitions associated with interdepartmental resource sharing, the restructuring of clinical placements, and the negotiation agreements (eg, MOAs, articulation agreements). Action 1E: Establish a matrix of all levels of clinical placements by site and curricular purpose so that there is a clear understanding across the unit of strategy and priority. Action 1F: Define guidelines for clinical placements and the roles and relationships for the oversight of clinical placements

4 Strategy 2 - Pilot development for partnership and professional development schools Action 2A: Establish operational definitions for partnership and professional development school models to support the pilot. Action 2B: Identify a program to focus on and an innovation team to develop relationships and structures to support the small- scale implementation of the practicum/student teaching aspects of partnership and/or of professional development schools. Action 2C: Agree upon conditions for the implementation of the pilot and associated outcomes to be evaluated. Action 2D: Identify/recruit test sites for the pilot model. Co-plan with program faculty and coordinating units to implement a small scale pilot and evaluate the practicum/student teaching aspects of the enhanced clinical model. Action 2E: Develop supporting structures for the pilot, including student recruitment processes/materials, model partnership agreements, mentor teacher recruitment and training materials, practicum handbook (expectations), and evaluation instrumentation. Action 2F: Recruit candidates and mentors for the pilot. Action 2G: Monitor implementation and document progress. Action 2H: Review evaluation results and adjust. Recommend continuance, discontinuance or expansion of the pilot within or across programs and with additional schools and districts. Action 2I: Expand the project team to include more partners across programs to review the results and work toward expanded implementation. Action 2J: Evaluate organizational structure and job descriptions in relation to the demands of the emergent model. Forecast resource needs. Strategy 3 - Full implementation of Enhanced Clinical Experiences Action 3A: Establish/orient all faculty/staff, relevant P-12, relevant university, and 2+2 personnel to critical elements of partnership and/or professional development schools. Action 3B: Finalize logic models for each program and problem-solve curriculum needs in balance with delivery issues (eg., staffing limitations, job description changes, 2+2 issues, budget). Action 3C: Finalize signed operational structures, including handbooks, evaluations and signed agreements with school districts. Action 3D: Reaffirm governance and oversight roles and responsibilities within the unit. Action 3E: Operationalize program changes through Academic Council process. Action 3F: Revise and bring to scale marketing/recruitment plans. Area II: Refine the Quality Assurance Process. Strategy 4 - Standardize expectations for the leadership of program improvement processes Action 4A: Communicate an expectation for and monitor the implementation of the frequency and documentation of meetings

5 Action 4B: Provide examples of advisory council formats and support the assemblage of appropriate parties for an annual advisory meeting. Action 4C: Document the functions and expectations of the coordinator, department chair, dean s office, and faculty with regard to program improvement. Action 4D: Communicate documentation needs with University partners regarding program improvement. Strategy 5 - Ensure the quality of assessments and related data. Action 5A: Establish an interdisciplinary governance body to support the selection and review of critical EPP assessments and related structures. This body would be responsible for any policy related to assessment implementation. Action 5B: Clarify roles and responsibilities as related to the aggregation and dissemination of proprietary and of EPP-developed assessment data to program leadership. Include a description of the timeline and distribution process. Action 5C: Clarify the process for revising and/or validating EPP-developed assessment data, including the process for communicating results and changes. Action 5D: Establish an orientation to the Quality Assurance Process for new faculty and anyone new to the system. Strategy 6 - Ensure the quality of clinical placements. Action 6A: Implement placement plans developed through the efforts to enhance clinical experiences (Action 1E, 1F). Action 6B: Focus on collaborating with district and university partners to establish mechanisms for the recruitment of quality clinical supervisors. Action 6C: Establish the protocol and timeline for a centralized review of clinical placements. Action 6D: Ensure that candidates, mentors and university supervisors have access to and are trained regarding the expectations/purpose of specific clinical placements

6 Implementation Plan Area Strategy Action Responsible Timeline Resources Area I: Ensure coordinated, highquality clinical experiences at all levels within all programs. Strategy 1 - Evaluation, model development, and transition from current to new models Chairs and Program Faculty Spring 2016 Fall 2018; Programs will phase in across this time period Action 1A: For all programs, evaluate field experience placements and expectations within the existing system in terms of a continuum of clinical experience. Modify courses and experiences as needed. Continuum Resources; Program Materials; Development incentives Action 1B: For all programs, investigate the efficacy of field experiences and coursework through a review of archival data (eg., course evaluations, field experience evaluations) and candidate and practitioner feedback. Examine the curriculum for efficiencies and opportunities. Chairs; Program Faculty Spring 2016 Fall 2018; Programs will phase in across this time period Field Experience Evaluation Results; Aggregated IAS Summaries; Advisory Council Feedback; Candidate Feedback; Praxis Results - 6 -

7 Consider opportunities to restructure to support credit hour efficiency and/or to enhance clinical placement opportunities. Action 1C: For all programs, develop a model curriculum sequence to support the progression of candidates through curriculum, inclusive of enhanced clinical placements, within credit hour and degree completion constraints. Document the sequence through advising materials for broad distribution. Chairs; Program Faculty Spring 2016 Fall 2018; Programs will phase in across this time period Support for new course development Action 1D: For the unit, establish structures (eg, policies) and understanding (eg, protocols) to govern Chairs; Director of Teacher Education Services Spring 2016 Fall 2016; Policy development to start Spring 2016 for ratification by the faculty during Time for collaboration and ratification - 7 -

8 the oversight of program transitions are related to interdepartmental resource sharing, the restructuring of clinical placements, and the negotiation agreements (eg, MOAs, articulation agreements). Fall Action 1E: Establish a matrix of all levels of clinical placements by site and curricular purpose so that there is a clear understanding across the unit of strategy and priority. Action 1F: Define guidelines for clinical placements and the roles and relationships for the oversight of clinical placements. Teacher Education Services; Chairs Director of Teacher Education Services; Teacher Quality Institute Spring 2017 Fall 2017; The Dean s office will construct and maintain the documentation of existing practices. Units will communicate the current practices for documentation. Spring 2016 Spring 2017; Guidance will be drawn from regulation, research-informed best practices and lessons learned Placement data; Feedback from departments Regulations; Research; Evaluation feedback from pilot - 8 -

9 through the pilot. Strategy 2 - Pilot development for partnership and professional development schools Action 2A: Establish operational definitions for partnership and professional development school models to support the pilot. Innovation team Spring 2016 Spring 2017 Research Action 2B: Identify a program and an innovation team to develop relationships and structures to support the smallscale implementation of the practicum/student teaching aspects of partnership and/or of professional development schools. Chair Fall 2015 Action 2C: Agree upon conditions for the implementation of the pilot and associated outcomes to be evaluated. Innovation team Spring 2016 Summer 2016 Research - 9 -

10 Action 2D: Identify/recruit test sites for the pilot model. Co-plan with program faculty and coordinating units to implement a small scale pilot and evaluate the practicum/student teaching aspects of the enhanced clinical model. Innovation team Spring 2016 Action 2E: Develop supporting structures for the pilot, including student recruitment processes/materials, model partnership agreements, mentor teacher recruitment and training materials, practicum handbook (expectations), and evaluation instrumentation. Action 2F: Recruit candidates and mentors for the pilot. Innovation team; partner districts Spring 2016 Application materials; Partner time

11 Action 2G: Monitor implementation and document progress. Action 2H: Review evaluation results and adjust. Recommend continuance, discontinuance or expansion of the pilot within or across programs and with additional schools and districts. Action 2I: Expand the project team to include more partners across programs to review the results and work toward expanded implementation. Innovation team Spring 2016 Spring 2017 Innovation team; EPP Faculty Innovation team; Chairs; Program faculties; School partners Spring 2017 Spring 2017 Instrumentation Results Results of pilot Action 2J: Evaluate organizational structure and job descriptions in relation to the demands of the emergent model. Forecast resource needs Chairs; Director of Teacher Education Services Spring and Results of pilot and continuous assessment with the evolution of new practice; Job audits; Possible line reallocations over

12 time Strategy 3 - Full implementation of Enhanced Clinical Experiences Action 3A: Establish orient all faculty/staff, relevant P-12, relevant university, and 2+2 personnel to critical elements of partnership and/or professional development schools. Chairs Spring 2017 and Training materials Action 3B: Finalize logic models for each program and problemsolve curriculum needs in balance with delivery issues (eg., staffing limitations, job description changes, 2+2 issues, budget). Chairs; Program faculty in collaboration with Dean s Office and Teacher Education Services. Spring 2017 and Time; Data from pilot; Research Action 3C: Finalize signed operational structures, including handbooks, evaluations and signed agreements with school districts. Chairs Spring 2017 and Format for new agreements and information from programs regarding needs Action 3D: Reaffirm Dean s Office Spring 2017 and

13 governance and oversight roles and responsibilities within the unit. Action 3E: Operationalize program changes through Academic Council process. Chairs; Program faculty Spring 2017 and Action 3F: Revise and bring to scale marketing/recruitment plans. Dean s office; Program leadership Fall 2016 and PR/Marketing funds and time Area II: Refine the Quality Assurance Process. Strategy 4 - Standardize expectations for the leadership of program improvement processes Action 4A: Communicate an expectation for and monitor the implementation of the frequency and documentation of meetings. Chairs Spring 2016 and Published and agreed upon forms and criteria Action 4B: Provide examples of advisory council formats and support the assemblage of Chairs Spring 2016 and Models to share; Funds to support cost of advisories

14 appropriate parties for an annual advisory meeting. Action 4C: Document the functions and expectations of the coordinator, department chair, dean s office, and faculty with regard to program improvement. Chairs Spring 2016 Fall 2016 Time to evaluate new demands Action 4D: Communicate documentation needs with University partners regarding program improvement. University partners Spring 2016 and Documentation regarding roles and expectations of partners in the process; Reporting structures Strategy 5 - Ensure the quality of assessments and related data. Action 5A: Establish an interdisciplinary governance body to support the selection and review of critical EPP assessments and related structures. This body would be Dean s Office Fall 2016 Revised policy

15 responsible for any policy related to assessment implementation Action 5B: Clarify roles and responsibilities as related to the aggregation and dissemination of proprietary and of EPP-developed assessment data to program leadership. Include a description of the timeline and distribution process. Action 5C: Clarify the process for revising and/or validating EPPdeveloped assessment data, including the process for communicating results and changes. Chairs; Teacher Education Services Chairs; Director of Teacher Education Services Spring 2016 Spring 2016 Spring 2017 Inventory of available/needed data Reallocation of time Action 5D: Establish an orientation to the Quality Assurance Process for new faculty and anyone Dean s Office Fall 2016 and Training materials

16 new to the system. Strategy 6 - Ensure the quality of clinical placements. Action 6A: Implement placement plans developed through the efforts to enhance clinical experiences (Action 1E, 1F). Chairs; Teacher Education Services Spring 2017 Revised plans; Possibly revised job roles Action 6B: Focus on collaborating with district and university partners to establish mechanisms for the recruitment of quality clinical supervisors. Chairs; Teacher Education Services Spring 2017 Revised agreements Action 6C: Establish the protocol and timeline for a centralized review of clinical placements. Chairs; Teacher Education Services Fall 2016 Spring 2017 Inventory of and access to evaluation data Action 6D: Ensure that candidates, mentors and university supervisors have access to and are trained regarding the expectations/purpose Chairs; Program Leadership; Teacher Education Services Fall 2015 Web support

17 of specific clinical placements. Review Process Innovation efforts are evaluated and the results disseminated across the EPP. EPP leadership will review progress within Selected Improvement Plan annually, the results to be shared with EPP faculty and school partners. The Selected Improvement Plan may be updated based upon feedback