1 / 18

Clinical Experiences RAC

Clinical Experiences RAC. Update for the CSU-MTEP Convening October 10-11, 2014. RAC Partners. Paired -Placement Internship Marilyn  Strutchens, Auburn University David Erickson, University Of Montana Jennifer  Whitfield, Texas A&M University

csilla
Télécharger la présentation

Clinical Experiences RAC

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Clinical Experiences RAC Update for the CSU-MTEP Convening October 10-11, 2014

  2. RAC Partners Paired-Placement Internship • Marilyn Strutchens, Auburn University • David Erickson,University Of Montana • Jennifer Whitfield, Texas A&M University • Lida Uribe-Florez and Jamie Baker, New Mexico State University Co-Plan and Co-Teach • JohannahMaynor, North Carolina Department of Public Instruction • Karen Hollebrands, North Carolina State University • RuthmaeSears, University of South Florida • Pat Brosnan, Ohio State University • Jennifer Oloff-Lewis, California State University, Chico & Stephanie Biagetti, California State University, Sacremento Co-Plan and Co-Teach • Maureen Grady, East Carolina University • Janet Andreasen, University of Central Florida • Jami Stone, Black Hills State University Methods • Greg Chamblee, Georgia Southern University • Michele Iiams, University of North Dakota • Jan Yow, University of South Carolina • Rebekah Elliot, Oregon State University • Mark Ellis, California State University, Fullerton • Jeremy Zelkowski, University of Alabama • Valerie Henry, UC Irvine

  3. Statement of the Problem Part 1 Teacher preparation programs face significant challenges in providing secondary mathematics teacher candidates with quality clinical experiences. • Inadequate supply of quality mentor teachers to oversee the experiences: • This is related to the quantity of teachers who are well versed in implementing the CCSS, especially embedding the standards of mathematical practice into their teaching of content standards on a daily basis.

  4. Statement of the Problem Part 2 There needs to exist a bidirectional relationship between the teacher preparation programs and school partners in which clinical experiences take place. • This relationship should reflect a common vision and shared commitment to the vision of CCSSM and other issues related to mathematics teaching and learning.

  5. Relation to Overall Drivers BCC

  6. Aim Statement (RAC) Operationalize models of clinical experiences that are aligned with the goals of the CCSS and implement them successfully for at least 80% of secondary mathematics teacher candidates enrolled in institutions participating in the clinical experiences RAC by December 2016.

  7. Driver Diagram Aim Statement Secondary Drivers Primary Drivers Clinical Preparation Operationalize models of clinical experiences that are aligned with the goals of the CCSS and implement them successfully for at least 80% of secondary mathematics teacher candidates enrolled in institutions participating in the clinical experiences RAC by December 2016. Develop a professional development program related to mentoring mathematics teachers. Mentorship Increase the quantity of quality mentor teachers and university supervisors. Provide professional development related to the CCSSM (content objectives and Standards of Mathematical Practice) • Partnerships • Create partnerships between university faculty, mentor teachers, and administrators around field experiences • Establish collaborative meetings to negotiate conflicting beliefs and constraints Identify, create and adapt tools for mentoring activities and evaluation. Develop infrastructures and clinical experiences that best meet the needs of the candidates. Evaluation: Ensure growth of all stakeholders and the effectiveness of the program as whole.

  8. Tertiary Drivers Primary Drivers Secondary Drivers Mentorship Increase the quantity of quality mentor teachers and university supervisors. Develop a professional development program related to mentoring mathematics teachers. • Partnerships • Create partnerships between university faculty, mentor teachers, and administrators around field experiences • Establish collaborative meetings to negotiate conflicting beliefs and constraints Provide professional development related to the CCSSM (content objectives and Standards of Mathematical Practice) Identify, create and adapt tools for mentoring activities and evaluation. Develop infrastructures and clinical experiences that best meet the needs of the candidates. Evaluation: Ensure growth of all stakeholders and the effectiveness of the program as whole.

  9. Possible Measures • X% of interns will master X% of tasks • Checklists for monitoring instruction related to the CCSS-M content objectives and SMP • Observation, dispositions, candidate proficiencies, and other protocols. • Affective surveys for prospective teachers and mentors • Number of mentors who complete the professional development programs • Portfolios for both teacher candidates and mentors • Surveys related to effectiveness of the field experiences for program completers

  10. Possible Measures • Surveys related to effectiveness of the field experiences by mentors • Ed TPA, MQI for Secondary • PLC for Quality • Pre and Post videos • Interviews and Focus Groups • What are effective characteristics of mathematics education mentor teachers? • What are qualities that we are looking for in mentor teachers prior to student teaching. • Survey to measure the effectiveness of the common mentoring PD, perceptions about preparedness, and how they use it in practice. (Common and specific to the model) • Ways to measure the effectiveness of the three models • How are constituents working together? • Under what conditions does the model work? • What were the outcomes of the students in the classroom? • How did the model contribute to the candidates’ developing the craft of teaching and dispositions related to teaching?

  11. General Approach Taken • Split up into three Sub-RAC. • Each Sub-RAC is implementing PDSA cycles based on their goals and objectives. • Have had a face-to-face meeting as a whole RAC with breakout meetings for Sub-RACs. • There are overlap areas that focus the RAC as a whole, such as PD for mentors around the CCSS and mentoring mathematics teacher candidates and outcome measures. • There are also specific goals to be attained within each of the Sub-RACs.

  12. Current Activities

  13. Co-Plan/ Co-Teach Model (CPCT) • Planning to have at least one unit per team in the sub-RAC to conduct the PD session/module along with three PDSA cycles per semester using the measuring instruments designed by the Sub-RAC. • Developing tools to measure the mentor/intern CPCT relationship, the shifts in instructional practice, and the effect the CPCT session/module has on learning by mentors, interns, and students engaged in the CPCT model. • Creating videos to help teacher candidates, mentor teachers, and university supervisors to understand the co-plan and co-teach model. References: Bacharach, Heck, & Dahlberg, 2010; Friend, 2008; Cook & Friend, 1995; Villa, Thousand, & Nevin, 2004.

  14. Methods • Improving teacher candidates’ (TCs’) and mentor teachers’ understanding of Standards for Mathematical Practice (SMP) (rigorous standards for career and college readiness) so that the SMP are apparent in lesson planning and teaching. • Developing the TC and mentor teacher relationship. • TCs will develop an understanding of the SMP. • Build TC and mentor teacher relationship. • Increase mentor teacher’s understanding of the SMP. References: Koestler, Felton-Koestler, Bieda, & Otten, 2013; http://www.insidemathematics.org

  15. Paired Placement Model • Three teams piloted the Paired-Placement Internship Model Spring semester 2014. • Teams read about the model. • One team piloted the model fall 2013 and reported to the other teams about its findings. • The other two teams used this information along with information from the literature to prepare mentor teachers and candidates for the experience. • Teams also worked with their participants to adjust the model within their context. • Teams monitored the process throughout the semester. • Teams met via conference call to discuss the results of the pilot and what they would do differently. • Teams are creating professional development modules and measures fall 2014. • They will try the model again spring semester 2015. References: Leatham& Peterson, 2010; Mau, 2013; Goodnough, Osmond, Dibbon, Glassman, & Stevens, 2008

  16. Lessons Learned • The model really helped the student teachers to focus on student learning. • The student teachers stated that they became very reflective on their teaching. • Student teachers learned the value of collaboration. • Cooperating teachers stated that it would be good for the student teachers to do their practicum experience with their cooperating teacher for the internship so that they would already be acclimated to the students and the school prior to the internship. • Need more flexibility of when student teachers can take over classes and the number of days that they need to teach consecutively.

  17. Next Steps • Sub-RACs will continue to implement PDSA cycles. • They will continue creating materials and getting them vetted across the RAC. • We will have a Face-to-Face Meeting November 15 -16, 2014. • Work on measures • Shore up modules • Work on grant proposals • Work on IRBs

  18. Opportunities for Involvement • Pilot materials from the Sub-RACs. • Review materials as they are developed.

More Related