Hot Topics on Evaluation

• Quality Standards
• Student Data and Teacher Evaluation   

Evaluation

Watch this page for essential resources on evaluation.  Meanwhile, KNEA offers this outline of important considerations.

• KNEA believes evaluation is a mandatory subject of bargaining.
  • Local associations and school districts have a responsibility to negotiate a meaningful evaluation provision into the negotiated agreement.
• What constitutes a quality evaluation should be a provision in negotiated agreement.
  • The process should focus on improvement, not punishment.
  • It should be clear and understandable to all parties.
  • It contains balance. Both teachers and administrators must work together to improve the quality of instruction and the quality of an individual's performance.
• For help – contact your UniServ Director or KNEA.

Student Data and Teacher Evaluation - It's Not That Simple!

Few would challenge the claim that teachers make a difference for student learning.  Many, however, question the connection between defining "teacher effectiveness" by looking at student test scores or using them to evaluate teachers.

Since the Kansas Individual Data on Students (KIDS) system will soon make it possible to connect student data to individual teachers (even though both will be identified only by randomly generated ID numbers), it is important to understand the problematic nature of simplistic application of that possibility.

KNEA is in the process of developing more detailed resources to help you respond to this issue.  In the meantime, we hope that the following information will provide some immediate assistance.

BACKGROUND

For years, measurement experts have cautioned against using student achievement test scores for measuring teacher performance.  As early as 1974, Gene Glass pointed out that such use is invalid and unreliable.

More recently, states and school systems have begun using various "value-added" statistical models that use student test scores to assess teacher effectiveness.  The state of Tennessee has the longest history in this arena, but even there, William Sanders, who developed the first model, acknowledged statistical difficulties that would have to be overcome for a value-added model to be accurate.

Another researcher, Ray Fenton, raised this concern: "My friends who are statisticians tell me, if the N is 50, generalizing may be OK. If it is less than 30, don't do it."  [N refers to the number of students whose scores are used to evaluate an individual teacher.]

THE CURRENT SCENE

Most recently, the National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality released a series of reports that provide the most up to date information about evaluating teachers and the strengths and weaknesses of using student achievement data to evaluate teachers.  NCCTQ is a collaborative effort between ETS, the Educational Testing Service, Learning Point Associates and Vanderbilt University and funded by the US Department of Education.

In short, they raise the following concerns about using student test scores to evaluate teachers:

• It assumes perfect alignment between the test and the curriculum.
• It assumes that the tests reflect improvement, which standardized tests often do not.
• It assumes test performance = student knowledge and skills, even though test performance is often affected by other influences [motivation, attitude, test taking skills, etc.].
• It averages test scores across all students in a classroom.
• It assumes that teachers are solely accountable for student learning, ignoring the influences of families, peers, the school and school system, etc.
• Drawing conclusions about individual teachers based on student test scores is not valid since teachers are not randomly assigned to schools and students are not randomly assigned to teachers.

[See A Practical Guide, April, 2009, pages 5 and 6, referenced below, for a more detailed description of the section above.]

That said, there are potential positive uses for student data linked to individual teachers:

• Teachers can use the data for formative assessment purposes, to help with instructional decisions prior to a summative assessment.t
• Teachers and schools can use the data to identify areas for professional development.
• Teachers and schools can use the data to identify groups of students with specific needs that should be addressed.

QUESTIONS TO ASK WHEN DEVELOPING PROCEDURES FOR  USING STUDENT DATA FOR TEACHER EVALUATION

1. Are all of the data valid and reliable?  How do you know?

2. How are "fairness variables" (ethnicity, SES, mobility, language proficiency, etc.) controlled?

3. Does consistent data exist over time, or is this one-time data?

4. Are the tests from which data is derived aligned with the local curriculum and instructional materials?  How do you know?

5. Have all of the students on whom data is collected attended class long enough for reliable data to exist?

6. Do multiple data sources exist to support conclusions about student performance and teacher performance?

7. What data will be used for teachers who teach subjects for which reliable testing data is not gathered?

8. What data will be used to assess student performance on district academic objectives or outcomes which are not subject to norm- or criterion-referenced assessments?

HELPFUL RESOURCES

Here is an annotated bibliography of several helpful resources you can find on the NCCTQ website:

Improving Instruction Through Effective Teacher Evaluation: Options for States and Districts.  February 2008.  Carrie Mathers, Michelle Oliva, Sabrina Laine.  This brief discusses the measures used in teacher evaluation and focuses on their strengths, limitations, and current use. It underscores aspects of evaluation policies currently aligned with best practices and illuminates areas in which policymakers can improve evaluation rules, regulations, and implementation-thereby improving teacher instruction and student performance.

Approaches to Evaluating Teacher Effectiveness: A Research Synthesis.  June 2008.  Laura Goe, Courtney Bell, Olivia Little.  This research synthesis examines how teacher effectiveness is currently measured and provides practical guidance for how best to evaluate teacher effectiveness. It evaluates the research on teacher effectiveness and the different instruments used to measure it. In addition, it defines the components and indicators that characterize effective teachers, extending this definition beyond teachers' contribution to student achievement gains to include how teachers impact classrooms, schools, and their colleagues as well as how they contribute to other important outcomes for students.
The findings are presented along with related policy implications. In addition, the synthesis describes how various measures have been evaluated, explains why certain measures are most suitable for certain purposes (high-stakes evaluation versus formative evaluation, for instance), and suggests how the results of the study might be used to inform the national conversation about teacher effectiveness.

Methods of Evaluating Teacher Effectiveness.  March 2009.  Laura Goe and Andrew Croft.  This brief is intended to help regional centers and state policymakers as they consider evaluation methods to clarify policy, develop new strategies, identify effective teachers, or guide and support districts in selecting and using appropriate evaluation methods for various purposes.

A Practical Guide to Evaluating Teacher Effectiveness.  April 2009.  Olivia Little, Laura Goe and Courtney Bell.  This guide offers a definition of teacher effectiveness that states and districts may adapt to meet local requirements. In addition, the guide provides an overview of the many purposes for evaluating teacher effectiveness and indicates which measures are most suitable to use under different circumstances. The guide also includes summaries of various measures, such as value-added models, classroom observations, analysis of classroom artifacts (e.g., lesson plans and student work) and portfolios. The summaries include descriptions of the measures, along with a note about the research base and strengths and cautions to consider for each measure.

Preamble

The educator, believing in the worth and dignity of each human being, recognizes the supreme importance of the pursuit of truth, devotion to excellence, and the nurture of the democratic principles. Essential to these goals is the protection of freedom to learn and to teach and the guarantee of equal educational opportunity for all. The educator accepts the responsibility to adhere to the highest ethical standards.

The educator recognizes the magnitude of the responsibility inherent in the teaching process. The desire for the respect and confidence of one's colleagues, of students, of parents, and of the members of the community provides the incentive to attain and maintain the highest possible degree of ethical conduct. The Code of Ethics of the Education Profession indicates the aspiration of all educators and provides standards by which to judge conduct.

The remedies specified by the NEA and/or its affiliates for the violation of any provision of this Code shall be exclusive and no such provision shall be enforceable in any form other than the one specifically designated by the NEA or its affiliates.

PRINCIPLE I
Commitment to the Student

The educator strives to help each student realize his or her potential as a worthy and effective member of society. The educator therefore works to stimulate the spirit of inquiry, the acquisition of knowledge and understanding, and the thoughtful formulation of worthy goals.

In fulfillment of the obligation to the student, the educator --
1. Shall not unreasonably restrain the student from independent action in the pursuit of learning.
2. Shall not unreasonably deny the student's access to varying points of view.
3. Shall not deliberately suppress or distort subject matter relevant to the student's progress.
4. Shall make reasonable effort to protect the student from conditions harmful to learning or to health and safety.
5. Shall not intentionally expose the student to embarrassment or disparagement.
6. Shall not on the basis of race, color, creed, sex, national origin, marital status, political or religious beliefs, family, social or cultural background, or sexual orientation, unfairly --
   a.  Exclude any student from participation in any program
   b.  Deny benefits to any student
   c.  Grant any advantage to any student
7. Shall not use professional relationships with students for private advantage.
8. Shall not disclose information about students obtained in the course of professional service unless disclosure serves a compelling professional purpose or is required by law.

PRINCIPLE II
Commitment to the Profession

The education profession is vested by the public with a trust and responsibility requiring the highest ideals of professional service.

In the belief that the quality of the services of the education profession directly influences the nation and its citizens, the educator shall exert every effort to raise professional standards, to promote a climate that encourages the exercise of professional judgment, to achieve conditions that attract persons worthy of the trust to careers in education, and to assist in preventing the practice of the profession by unqualified persons.

In fulfillment of the obligation to the profession, the educator --
1. Shall not in an application for a professional position deliberately make a false statement or fail to disclose a material fact related to competency and qualifications.
2. Shall not misrepresent his/her professional qualifications.
3. Shall not assist any entry into the profession of a person known to be unqualified in respect to character, education, or other relevant attribute.
4.    Shall not knowingly make a false statement concerning the qualifications of a candidate for a professional position.
5. Shall not assist a noneducator in the unauthorized practice of teaching.
6. Shall not disclose information about colleagues obtained in the course of professional service unless disclosure serves a compelling professional
purpose or is required by law.
7. Shall not knowingly make false or malicious statements about a colleague.
8. Shall not accept any gratuity, gift, or favor that might impair or appear to influence professional decisions or action.

Adopted by the NEA 1975 Representative Assembly

Welcome to the KNEA Professional Development Council online survey Web page.

Thank you for participating. 

The survey consists of 49 questions: the first 5 ask for demographic information, and the remaining questions are yes/no questions about your Professional Development Council.  We believe the questions are straightforward so we hope you will complete all of them.  However, if you are unable to complete the survey in one sitting, you should be able to close it and come back to finish your survey at a later time. 

At the end of the survey, before you submit your responses, you will be given instructions for printing a copy of your answers to the survey.  You will need your answers to compare with the survey analysis document that will be posted on the KNEA Web site in mid-May.  Your survey responses and the analysis document will assist you in assessing the effectiveness of your PDC.

Please click here to take the survey

A Vision of the Professional Teacher

NCATE believes that every child should be taught by teachers who are well-prepared and competent. A shared vision of teacher education includes the following tenets:

• All children can and should learn.
• Accredited schools, colleges, and departments of education should:
  
  • Ensure that new teachers meet accepted standards of practice, and attain the necessary knowledge, skills, and dispositions to teach independently;
  • Build a body of professional knowledge, and disseminate it through the professional community;
  • Commit to preparing teachers for a diverse community of students;
  • Encourage collegiality, reflective practice, continuous improvement, and collaboration among educators and learns; and
  • View teacher preparation and development as a continuum, moving from pre-service preparation to supervised beginning practice to continuing professional development.

Likewise, the new professional teacher who graduates from a professionally accredited school, college, or department of education should be able to:

• Explain instructional choices based on research-derived knowledge and best practice;
• Apply effective methods of teaching students who are at different developmental stages and have different learning styles, or come from culturally diverse backgrounds;
• Reflect on practice, and receive and act on feedback; and
• Create meaningful learning experiences for P- 12 students.

This teacher has gained those abilities through:

• A broad liberal arts education;
• In-depth study of the teaching field;
• A foundation of professional knowledge upon which to base instructional decisions;
• Diverse, well-planned, and sequenced experiences in P-12 schools; and
• An assessment of competence to practice, through an array of performance measures.

Hot Topics

• KSDE PDC Resource Guide

KNEA offers excellent PDC Regs training in collaboration with Greenbush

The Southeast Kansas Education Service Center (Greenbush) and Kansas NEA support the need for quality professional development and are, once again, offering training for PDC members in Kansas.

PDC, the basics and beyond…

  
The training will focus on:

• Deepening understanding of the regulations.
• Creating awareness of current professional development issues in Kansas.
• Deepening understanding of Application and Impact.
• Supporting PDCs in development of initiatives that take staff to Application and Impact.
• Providing opportunities for all participants to interact and collaborate with other PDCs and within your own PDC.

 2010-2011 Training Dates and Sites are:

Sept. 14 -- ESC, Greenbush
Sept. 20 -- KNEA, Topeka
Oct. 11 -- KNEA, Topeka
Oct. 13 -- ESC, Greenbush
Oct. 19 -- Andover
Nov. 3 -- ESC, Greenbush

All trainings will be from 9 a.m. to 2:00 p.m.

For optimum impact, this training is designed for PDC teams including administrators. Register your PDC teams now!

Cost:  $40 for PDP Toolbox Consortium Members or KNEA Members
          $120 for Non-members
          Includes materials, lunch and instruction

KNEA developed and adopted twelve quality standards for personnel evaluation systems.  While these standards are almost 20 years old, they are still current in that they reflect quality criteria for developing evaluation systems.

". . . Relatively few school districts have highly developed teacher evaluation systems, and even fewer put the results into action."

This disturbing conclusion, part of "Teacher Evaluation: A Study of Effective Practices," (Rand Corporation, 1984), prompted Kansas NEA to examine the  state of evaluation in Kansas schools.  Our examination revealed that what exists reflects a continuum of quality as broad as Kansas is wide. 

In particular, three common weaknesses were identified:  lack of validity of evaluation criteria and descriptors, lack of constructive feedback from evaluators to evaluatees, and lack of consistent implementation of evaluation systems.

Following this examination of current practice, the KNEA Task Force on Personnel Evaluation conducted a thorough review of research to identify commonalities of successful systems, pre-conditions for such systems, and best practices in personnel evaluation.  Paramount was the finding that local context is critical to a successful evaluation system.  Integral to that context is a climate in which collaboration is valued and in which trust exists among all parties involved in the evaluation process.

Consistent with the best practices identified in the literature, and in the spirit of offering constructive feedback from evaluators to evaluatees, Kansas NEA offers these twelve quality standards for personnel evaluation systems:

1. The system must include a clear statement of purpose, consistent with district/institutional educational goals.  No system should be adopted simply because that system works in another district/institution.
2. The system, including process and documents, must be developed cooperatively by all participants in the evaluation process.  It must reflect local concerns and must be monitored at regular intervals by all parties.
3. The methods for selecting those who will develop and monitor the evaluation process must be established through professional negotiations.
4. The system must include a thorough orientation for those being evaluated and comprehensive training for both evaluators and evaluatees.
5. The system must be implemented and maintained by commitment of sufficient district/institutional resources.
6. The system must include an ongoing formative assistance component, including but not limited to peer assistance, administrator assistance, and district/institution-supported staff development.
7. The system must include a summative evaluation component which is the sole responsibility of the district's/institution's administrators and which meets the requirements of  K.S.A. 72-9001 et seq.  Only the job responsibilities related to the evaluatee's primary contract shall be considered in a summative evaluation.  Information obtained from peer assistance activities must not be used in any connection with summative evaluation.
8. The system must include criteria and descriptors which are valid and significant and whose terms are clearly understood by all parties.  Rating scales used within a document must be accompanied by narrative rationale.
9. The system must include criteria and descriptors appropriate to the job responsibilities of each evaluatee.
10. The system must include multiple means of gathering data for summative evaluations.  The number and length of formal observations must be specified, and pre- and post-observation conferences must be held.  The system must require evaluators to provide candid and constructive feedback, including identified strengths.
11. The system must require evaluators to provide evaluatees with any identified deficiencies, remedial options, counseling, sufficient resources, and continuing opportunities for improvement at district/institutional cost.
12. The system must require that records of summative evaluations and responses be available, as prescribed in K.S.A. 72-9001 et seq.  All records of and information gained from peer assistance activities must be the confidential property of the person receiving assistance.  Such records and information shall not be used to make employment-related decisions.

Quality professional development improves student learning

• Intro
• Support for Professional Development
• Roadblocks to Quality Professional Development
• Teaching Practices
• Policy Implications
• Other points to consider

What teachers know and can do to help students achieve is what matters in schools today. Their knowledge and skills are impacted by ongoing professional and staff development.

A survey conducted for the Kansas State Department of Education (KSDE), gave us, for the first time, clear data about ongoing professional development in Kansas. Research and Training Associates, Inc. (RTA) did this survey. Following is a summary of the initial findings.

• Professional development should involve teachers in identifying what they need to learn and in developing the learning experiences in which they will be involved.
• Professional development should be primarily school-based and built into the day-to-day work of teaching.
• Most professional development should be organized around collaborative problem solving.
• Professional development should be continuous and ongoing, involving follow-up and support for further learning, including support from sources external to the school that can provide necessary resources and new perspectives.
• Professional development should incorporate evaluation of multiple sources of information on (a) outcomes for students and (b) the instruction and other processes involved in implementing lessons learned through professional development.

Following is additional information and results. Whether you are a professional thinking about your own staff development, a member of a local Professional Development Council (PDC), or a frequent presenter for your peers, the information from this survey will give you good background data and much to think about.

Support for Professional Development

Professional development does not exist in a vacuum, nor does it happen without conscious support from school leaders. Here's how professional development is supported in Kansas.

• The most uniform support for professional development reported by teachers and principals is the awarding of inservice points for participation. Almost all principals and about 90 percent of teachers indicate that awarding inservice points is a pervasive form of support. All teachers indicate that a written policy on earning inservice points exists.
• Virtually all principals indicate they support professional development through release time from teaching. More than three-fourths of teachers indicate their school has a written policy on release time. However, only half of the teachers indicate that release time is a standard practice in their schools; about half indicate that it sometimes occurs. Teachers in high-poverty schools indicate that release time from teaching for purposes of professional development occurs significantly more frequently than do teachers in low- poverty schools.
• Ninety percent of elementary principals and 84 percent of middle/secondary principals indicate that time is scheduled for study groups or grade level meetings. More than half of teachers indicate that study groups and grade level meetings are standard practice in their schools.
  
  Eighty-five percent of principals indicate that they provide opportunities for on-the-job practice of new skills and follow-up training. More than half indicate that teachers receive support through peer coaching. About one-third of teachers indicate that on-the-job opportunities are standard practice and one-fourth indicate that follow- up training and peer coaching are standard practices in their schools.
• About one-third of elementary schools report that their school has less than $2,500 in professional development funds; another 30 percent of elementary schools has between $2,500 and $5,000. Fewer than 40 percent of middle/secondary school principals report professional development funds in the amount of $5,000 or less. About 30 percent of both elementary and middle/secondary schools report professional development funds in the range of $15,000 to $50,000. Only six elementary schools and one middle/secondary school report professional development budgets in excess of $50,000.

Roadblocks to Quality Professional Development

Absences of support create some of the greatest roadblocks that currently exist, according to Research and Training Associate's (RTA) findings. Here are some highlights:

• The largest roadblock for both elementary and middle/secondary principals is the lack of availability of substitute teachers for release time. Thirty percent of elementary principals and 40 percent of middle/ secondary principals indicate that this roadblock exists to a large extent. Only 10-15 percent of principals indicate that the lack of substitutes is not at all a roadblock to professional development. Fewer than 20 percent of middle/secondary school principals report any other roadblock that exists to a large extent in their schools.
• Eighty percent of principals indicate that the lack of district administrative support for professional development is not at all a problem. Elementary principals are somewhat more likely to report lack of funds as a large roadblock to quality professional development efforts than are middle/secondary principals. About one-fourth of elementary principals indicate that the lack of funds for stipends, for consultants, and for follow-up training poses a roadblock to a large extent.
• The most important and most frequently recommended suggestion for improvement that principals provided is an increase in funding for professional development. About one-third of principals recommend the need for more time for teachers to practice new strategies (enabled by providing more substitute teachers), involving teachers in planning professional development opportunities, and developing a coherent plan for school improvement strategies.

Teaching Practices

Professional development efforts are often focused on affecting changes in teaching practices. Here's what respondents said:

• A majority of teachers in elementary and middle/secondary schools report daily use of practices that reflect traditional approaches to teaching and learning. For about 80 percent of teachers, class time is scheduled by subject/content area.
• Eighty percent of elementary teachers and 57 percent of middle/secondary teachers have students work individually on tasks on a daily basis. Almost 90 percent of elementary teachers and two-thirds of middle/secondary teachers expect their students to raise their hands for permission to speak.
  For more than two-thirds of teachers, knowledge and skills are taught in a specific sequence on a daily basis. More than half of elementary teachers report that they present or lecture to their classes on a daily basis; only one-fourth of middle/secondary teachers lecture or present on a daily basis. Only 40 percent of elementary teachers use worksheets to practice skills on a daily basis but almost 80 percent use worksheets at least weekly. Fewer than 15 percent of middle/secondary teachers use worksheets on a daily basis; almost 60 percent use worksheets at least weekly. For about one-third of elementary teachers, ability grouping is a daily feature of their classrooms; almost half of elementary teachers use ability grouping several times a year or less frequently. About two-thirds of middle/secondary teachers use ability grouping several times a year or less frequently.
• Student choice, a key feature of inquiry-based learning and motivational strategies, is a daily feature in 20 percent of elementary classrooms but is almost nonexistent in middle/secondary classrooms. While half of elementary teachers allow student choice on at least a weekly basis, half of middle/secondary teachers allow student choice only several times a year or never.
• One-fourth of elementary teachers and almost half of middle/secondary teachers almost never integrate technology as a teaching and learning tool in their classrooms. Only 30 percent of elementary teachers and 20 percent of middle/secondary teachers describe technology integration as a daily feature of their classroom instruction.
• Both elementary and middle/secondary teachers report daily or weekly use of some practices that reflect research on effective practices. More than one-third of elementary teachers have students work in cooperative groups on a daily basis and three-fourths do so on at least a weekly basis. Only 20 percent of middle/secondary teachers use cooperative groups on a daily basis, but almost 60 percent do so on at least a weekly basis.
• Elementary and middle/secondary teachers report similar assessment practices. One-third of elementary and middle/secondary teachers never use performance-based assessment in their classrooms or only several times a year. About one-fourth of elementary teachers and one-half of middle/secondary teachers almost never use student portfolios in their classrooms. More than 40 percent of elementary teachers infrequently have students assess their own work and more than 60 percent infrequently have students assess peers' work. Fewer than 10 percent of elementary and middle/secondary teachers use paper and pencil tests on a daily basis, but almost half of teachers use tests at least weekly or more frequently. More than two-thirds of elementary teachers and three-fourths of middle/secondary teachers rarely use conferencing strategies with students. Almost two-thirds of elementary teachers and 40 percent of middle/secondary teachers indicate they make observational assessments of students on a daily basis.
• Beginning elementary teachers use performance assessments with similar frequency, as do their peers. Beginning middle/secondary teachers use performance assessments significantly more frequently.
• Purposeful writing is not well entrenched in the daily life of elementary classrooms. Contrasting sharply to the pervasive focus on authentic reading, only one-third of teachers indicate that their students engage in purposeful writing on a daily basis. Twenty-five percent of elementary teachers indicate that students engage in purposeful writing only monthly or less frequently. Opportunities for authentic and purposeful writing occur even less frequently in middle/secondary schools. Only about 10 percent of teachers provide daily opportunities for purposeful writing. More than half of middle/secondary teachers indicate that students are provided opportunities for purposeful writing monthly or less frequently.

Policy Implications

So, now that you know what Kansas educators said about professional development, what can you do with the information? One thing is to advocate for additional support for professional and staff development with legislators, the State Board (which is already VERY supportive), and your local Board of Education.

Another is to work with your local Professional Development Council (PDC) to improve the opportunities available in your district.

Other Points to Consider

• Increase funding for support for professional development.
• Involve teachers in planning professional development opportunities so they have input into the content and quality of professional development.
• Provide all teachers - not just beginning teachers - with greater opportunities for on-the-job practice, follow-up training, coaching, mentoring, and other opportunities for extended, in-depth learning.
• Provide teachers more time for planning and learning new strategies.
• Encourage districts to obtain teacher evaluations of district-sponsored professional development to improve upon the 50 percent of teachers who indicate that district-sponsored professional development opportunities are not responsive to the needs of students or teachers.

Compiled by KNEA Director of Instructional Advocacy Peg Dunlap.

Regulations for Quality Performance Accreditation went into effect on July 1, 2005. To help ensure that you, your colleagues and your school are able to navigate the system, here is an explanation of how the accreditation decision for each school will be made.

The easiest way to think of the new system is with a mathematical sentence:
Quality + Performance = Accreditation.

In QPA, there are 11 Quality criteria and seven (eight for high schools) Performance criteria. Status on those determines accreditation status.
The most up-to-date, detailed information is on the KSDE Web site, www.ksde.org.

Quality (QC)

Quality criteria 1 requires a multi-year school improvement plan that includes a results-based staff development plan. The presumption is that both will be driven by student performance data.

QC 2 requires an external technical assistance team. In the new system, each school has the flexibility to select people that they believe will best help them meet their goals.

QC 3 states that each school must have locally determined assessments aligned with state standards.

QC 4 requires formal training for all teachers regarding state assessments and curriculum standards. The presumption is that different teachers will have different training needs.

QC 5 requires that 100% of teachers assigned to teach in areas assessed by the state or described as core academic subjects for ESEA/NCLB must be fully licensed and endorsed for their assignments. 95% or more of all other faculty must be fully licensed and endorsed for their assignments.

QC 6 requires that each school meet the KSDE requirements regarding staff, minimum enrollment, student credit, interscholastic athletics, and athletic practice. These are found in accreditation regulation 91-31-34.

QC 7 requires graduation requirements that include at least 21 credits: 4 English language arts, 3 history/government, 3 science, 3 mathematics, 1 physical education, 1 fine arts, and 6 electives. 

QC 8 requires that curricula are available that allow each student to meet the regent's qualified admissions program and state scholarship program. This does NOT require all students to take those curricula.

QC 9 requires all schools to offer programs and services in language arts, mathematics, science, history/government, physical education including health and human sexuality, fine arts, computer literacy, services for students with special learning needs, library services, and counseling services.

QC 10 requires all secondary schools to offer programs and services in industrial/technical education (including vocational agriculture), family and consumer sciences, business, and foreign language.

QC 11 requires local policies that ensure compliance with all other accreditation regulations and state laws.

The Quality Criteria will be monitored through assurances on the QPA Annual Report.

+ Performance

The Performance Criteria are closely tied with AYP.

Elementary schools must meet the AYP targets in reading and mathematics, the participation rate, and the attendance rate. They must also meet State Board-determined targets in history/government, science and writing.

Secondary schools must meet all of the above plus the AYP target for graduation rate.

= Accreditation

Accredited schools meet the performance and quality criteria.

Schools that are accredited on improvement have, for two consecutive years, failed to meet one or more of the performance criteria for all students assessed OR one or more of the performance criteria for any subgroup assessed OR three or more of the quality criteria. Those schools must, at the least, be assigned a technical assistance team from KSDE.

Schools that are conditionally accredited have, for three consecutive years, failed to meet one or more of the performance criteria for all students assessed OR four or more of the quality criteria. [Notice that only all student data is used for this level, not subgroup data.] These schools must also have a KSDE technical assistance team.

Schools that are not accredited have, for five consecutive years, failed to meet one or more of the performance criteria for all students assessed or four or more of the quality criteria.

NEA National Board Certification Loans

National Board Certification

Accept the Challenge and Get the Recognition You Deserve...
...Become a National Board Certified Teacher!

• All About National Board Certification (PDF file - 4 pages)
• Why become a National Board Certification teacher?
• Who is eligible for National Board Certification?
• What is the process for certification?
• What does it cost?
• What are the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards?
• Timelines and Assessment Testing Windows
• Contact information?

Why become a National Board Certified teacher?

National Board Certification allows teachers to be recognized for their highly accomplished teaching practices. National Board Certification stimulates teachers to evaluate, reflect and grow as professional educators.

Who is eligible for National Board Certification?

Any individual who:

• Holds a baccalaureate degree,
  
• Has taught for at least three years, and
• Holds a valid state teaching license for the area in which he/she is teaching.

What is the process for certification?

National Board candidates go through a two-part assessment that is based on the National Board standards and reflects a variety of teaching situations.

The candidate compiles a classroom performance portfolio that includes student work, videotapes, and other teaching exhibits. The portfolio includes commentaries about the goals and purposes of instruction and reflections on what occurred, the effectiveness of the practice, and the rationale for professional decisions. All entries are designed to help the candidate show evidence that he/she has met the standards in the classroom.

The candidate participates in exercises at a National Board Assessment Center. These exercises complement the portfolio and are organized around challenging teaching issues. The entire process occurs over most of the school year, taking approximately 200 hours or more.

What does it cost?

The current application fee is $2,500 plus a $65 nonrefundable processing charge - but don't panic! The State of Kansas has set aside money to pay fee subsidies of up to $2,000 for a number of candidates. To get a fee subsidy, you must submit your National Board for Professional Teaching Standards (NBPTS) application through the Kansas State Department of Education. First you get an application from the NBPTS, then submit it with the fee subsidy application to Susan Helbert at the State Department. Remember, the earlier you apply, the better your chance of getting a fee subsidy.

What is the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards?

The NBPTS board of directors, composed primarily of educators, has developed a system of advanced standards and assessments organized around five core propositions:

• Teachers are committed to students and their learning.
• Teachers know the subjects they teach and how to teach those subjects to students.
• Teachers are responsible for managing and monitoring student learning.
• Teachers think systematically about their practice and learn from experience.
• Teachers are members of learning communities.

NBPTS is developing advanced standards based on these propositions in more than 30 certification fields. Each set of standards represents consensus in the certification field of what makes an accomplished teacher.

With the 25 certificates currently offered, 80 percent of teachers have a certificate available in their subject area or level of student development.

Contact information?
Email:

• At KNEA:Peg Dunlap(peg.dunlap@knea.org) or Terry Forsyth (terry.forsyth@knea.org)
• At the State Department of Education: Susan Helbert
  (shelbert@ksde.org)
• At the Candidate Support Program: Roger Caswell (rcaswell@emporia.edu)
• At NBCT-KS: KNEA member-Janet Stramel
  (president@nbctks.org)

Web sites:

• The National Board: www.NBPTS.org

Distance learning opportunities for students create a range of questions for public K-12 schools, institutions of higher education, and local and state Boards of Education. The issues raised include teacher licensure, school and program accreditation, and accountability. Policy makers should consciously address these issues if they are to meet their responsibility for appropriate oversight of their respective jurisdictions. Here are a few of the items they should consider.

• Local School Districts
• State Boards of Education
• Schools of Education
• Online Resources
• Print Resources

Local school districts and boards of education are charged with the responsibility in general terms with curriculum adoption and assuring that a qualified staff is in place. Through administration, there is an expectation that staff are evaluated for their skills and their delivery of the adopted curriculum. While it is one thing to accept credits from other schools when students transfer, it is quite another to defer the actual education of those students to individuals and institutions not subject to the same scrutiny as local employees.

• What expectations can schools or students have that adequate preparation will be provided to prepare for state assessments, high-stakes tests, etc. when a course is designed and delivered by persons not fully familiar with the specific district or state testing requirements?
• Should there be an expectation that a school or district access transcripts of threaded discussions and chats in order to evaluate teaching?
• Are there considerations for school accreditation that must be accounted for when students are receiving instruction from persons outside the district (or state)?
• Could distance learning be used to provide "separate but equal" education?
• What input should districts have into the curriculum development, hiring practices, and evaluation of employees who work outside the boundaries of the school district?
• Who pays for the courses? Are there equity issues if students must pay an extra fee to enroll in the online offerings of a school district?
• What accommodations should be expected for special needs students to allow them to participate in online learning?
• What measures of student performance can be used for Quality Performance Accreditation and what special arrangements must be made to include students in statewide assessments?

State Boards of Education provide oversight to ensure appropriate educational opportunities for all students and appropriate use of funding from the state level.

• Could the availability of distance learning in some districts but not in others create questions of equity for students without those opportunities?
• Could distance learning be used as a substitute for preferable face-to-face learning opportunities in an effort to save money in some districts, again creating questions of equity?
• If State Boards require teachers to be licensed, what happens when a district utilizes distance learning to deliver courses taught by individuals outside the state and holding either a different license or no license at all?
• What expectations should states have for the purposes of accrediting schools that offer online learning as a part of their delivery method? What accrediting agencies might have credibility and are there agencies that do not?
• What are the expectations for funding of online programs? Will states require measures of seat-time or disallow online learning entirely for pupil counts?
• Does the money to districts for students enrolled follow them if they take part or all of their courses from an institution other than their local school district via online instruction?
• Should private sector (particularly for-profit institutions) be treated differently than the public school counterparts with regard to accreditation, licensure, student credit, etc.

Schools of education are typically given some authority to operate at the State level and may also receive national accreditation. The accrediting bodies (e.g. the National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education) must consider several issues regardless of whether a school of education provides any of its coursework via distance learning. Regardless of whether these issues are raised at the accreditation level, a school of education should consider these kinds of items as a part of its analysis of quality.

• Can a program of teacher education be truly appropriate and adequate if major parts or the entire non-field experience is delivered online?
• What field experiences might be appropriate online?
• Can a program of teacher education be truly adequate if it does not include information about the design and delivery of online learning opportunities for students?
• What are the appropriate checks on the coursework and learning opportunities for students that should be utilized by state or national accrediting agencies when schools and programs are accredited?

What other issues should be considered by policy makers? Submit your thoughts and comments to the web site administrator, Blake West.

Online Resources:

• A full text copy of the NEA research on quality online at: Quality on the Line
• Standards for distance learning are being investigated by the NCA Higher Learning Commission.
• A summary of recommendations from 1999 at: Distance Education Quality Checklist
• Distance Learning Policy Laboratory - The Southern Regional Educational Board Policy Laboratory has outlined several issues and is initiating study of: faculty (including performance assessment, governance, workload), student services (financial aid, admission, registration, advising, library resources, testing), credit (standards and procedures in lieu of Carnegie unit, degree requirements across universities), access and equity (bridging the digital divide, reaching underserved populations), quality assurance (ensuring "sameness" of rigor, responding to "self-pacing" & assessment on demand), and coherence and values in distance education (conveying a frame of reference, covering all the bases when courses come from various sources).
• The Commission on International and Transregional Accreditation (CITA) hopes to provide a vehicle for accreditation of schools that exist beyond state boundaries.
• Council for Higher Education Accreditation - This Web site summarizes several major pieces of research on distance education and outlines such key issues as intellectual property rights and quality.

Print Media Resources:

Thomas, W. R. Electronic Delivery of High School Courses: Status, Trends and Issues. Southern Regional Education Board (1999).

This brief 8-page report identifies the web as a promising medium for distance education due to its potential for interactivity that exceeds satellite-delivered instruction and more traditional correspondence programs. They also identify several factors that will limit the immediate availability of this media on a large scale. Those factors include the limited experience of teachers and students and teachers with web-based courses, the increased requirement for independent work beyond previous student experiences, the cost of developing high quality courses (and the infrastructure to host them), the likelihood that the full range of courses will not be immediately available.

Bond & Finney (2000) review several programs intended to provide standards for certifying teachers as qualified to teach via the Internet. At the time of the Bond & Finney article, some states were beginning to offer either certification or teaching license endorsements for distance education. Many colleges are already offering workshops, courses, and even graduate degrees intended to prepare teachers to teach online.

Mentor Program Planning Rubric

back to Induction, Mentoring and Peer Assistance

Induction, Mentoring, and Peer Assistance:
A Resource Guide for Teachers and School Administrators

• Before You Begin
• Induction Standards
• Mentoring Standards
• Rubric Intro
• Mentor Program Planning Rubric
• Contract Language
• Resources
• Resources part 2
• A Better Beginning
• Creating a Teacher Mentoring Program
• Using Data to Improve Teacher Induction Programs
• What is Peer Assistance?

Induction, Mentoring and Peer Assistance

In order to provide KNEA members with the greatest exposure to other induction, mentoring, and peer assistance programs, over 100 websites were reviewed to assess their value. We looked for sites that contained information and ideas that will help the reader consider and/or initiate an induction, mentoring, and/or peer assistance program. Review committee members discussed the merits of each site and ultimately selected those that appear on the list below. While it is impossible for the list to be exhaustive, we believe that this list represents the best of what is available on the internet.

Colleges and Universities:
http://www.gse.uci.edu
Book of practical ideas dealing with most basic areas of establishing a mentoring program. Information is somewhat dated but still useful.

Educational Laboratories:
http://www.nwrel.org/request/may01/mentoring.html
Links to a publication of the NW Regional Educational Laboratory titled "Supporting Beginning Teachers: How Administrators, Teachers and Policy Makers Can Help New Teachers to Succeed." Individual chapters can be accessed. Good bibliography.

School Districts:
http://www.dubuque.k12.ia.us/Mentoring/Mentoring1.htm
A detailed look at the Dubuque, Iowa mentoring program. Provides contact information on the Pathwise induction program, checklists, and frequently asked questions.

Have a competent, caring and qualified teacher in every classroom

- Intro
- Five Goals
- KCTAF Report
- Recommendations

Systematic changes are necessary to improve student learning in Kansas, with a particular emphasis on teacher quality as the single most important factor in affecting student achievement.

That's the crux of the Kansas Commission on Teaching and America's Future (KCTAF) report and recommendations as outlined in "Put Students First: A Competent, Caring & Qualified Teacher in Every Classroom."

The recommendations are a blueprint for how the state can guarantee a competent, caring and qualified teacher in every classroom by 2006. KCTAF co-chair persons Karen Gallagher and Gene Neely stressed that reaching that goal would require a commitment to view the recommendations as a complete package, rather than bits and pieces from which to choose.

"We know there is no 'silver bullet' to school improvement," said Gallagher. "The package of recommendations needs to move forward as a whole or it will not bring about the results we want by 2006. The system needs to change, from beginning to end."

"The recommendations form a tapestry and are intended to be systematic," said Neely. "To leave out one or two threads in the tapestry will cause it to unravel and will destroy the total impact for Kansas' students."

The KCTAF recommendations are patterned after five broad national goals:

1. Get serious about standards for students and teachers.
2. Reinvent teacher preparation and professional development.
3. Overhaul teacher recruitment and put a qualified teacher in every classroom.
4. Encourage and reward teacher knowledge and skill.
5. Create schools that are organized for student and teacher success.

The recommendations are not controversial, Neely added. They just require time, money and a change of attitude. The report includes background, recommendations, benchmarks and timelines and also assigns responsibility for each recommendation.

KCTAF members plan to oversee the implementations of the recommendations.

KCTAF was commissioned by Gov. Bill Graves and Commissioner of Education Andy Tompkins in 1996 after the National Commission on Teaching and America's Future released its report, What Matters Most: Teaching for America's Future. That report showed that more than 2 million teachers would need to be hired between 1996-2006. NCTAF formulated the five national goals as a way to enhance the teaching profession and asked states to help implement the goals in each state. Kansas was one of 12 states initially to answer the call and is the first to report its findings and recommendations. There are now 19 states working to implement the national goals.

KCTAF has been funded by grants from the Kansas State Department of Education, the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation, the National Commission on Teaching and America's Future, and contributions from organizations represented by KCTAF.

The KCTAF Report

The Kansas Commission on Teaching and America's Future seeks to ensure a competent, caring and qualified teacher in every classroom by 2006. The commission took this focus because it believes that teacher quality constitutes the single most important factor for improving student achievement. Study after study has confirmed the effect well-qualified teachers have on student achievement.

In every instance, students receiving instruction from highly qualified teachers significantly outperform their peers who receive instruction from less qualified teachers. What we can take from those results is that no program or curriculum, no matter how successful in any other school, can be replicated in schools where faculty members lack either the know-how or resources to implement effective change. And increased graduation and testing requirements create only greater failure if teachers do not know how to reach students.

The members of KCTAF recognize that the recommendations they have formulated must be taken as a whole to be effective. The goals and recommendations developed by KCTAF form a tightly woven tapestry. To leave out one or two threads in the tapestry would cause it to unravel and would destroy the total impact for Kansas' students. It is this tapestry image - the integration of the five overarching and sometimes disparate goals - that sets this effort apart from other education reform plans.

In addition to the five goal areas, the commission developed a list of recommendations for achieving each goal. In general they include:

Get serious about standards, for both students and teachers. Continuing several successful Kansas programs, including curriculum standards for students and the Quality Performance Accreditation program can do this. The development of a well-functioning system for setting, revising and enforcing standards for teacher preparation is also necessary, as are standards for teacher preparation programs that are linked to Kansas student learning goals.

Reinvent teacher preparation and professional development.
The commission recommends achieving this goal by using school-university collaborations to design teacher education programs that tightly integrate coursework and clinical experiences. A system for inducting, mentoring and evaluating beginning teachers will also be necessary, as will a system for evaluating induction programs. In the area of professional development, programs for principals need to be redesigned to prepare them to be instructional leaders. And all professional development programs should be based on teacher, student and professional development standards.

Overhaul teacher recruitment and put a qualified teacher in every classroom.
Kansas needs a system to determine and evaluate the supply of, demand for and turnover rates of qualified teachers in the state. There should be statewide policies and strategies for teacher preparation, salary and distribution to meet the state's supply and demand needs for qualified teachers, and barriers to teacher mobility need to be removed. A statewide process for collecting data related to pre-K through 12 student achievement, including teacher quality, is needed, and we must determine how information related to student achievement will be analyzed and reported to educators, public and policy makers.

Encourage and reward teacher knowledge and skill.
Renewal of professional teacher licenses needs to be based on growth in knowledge and skills. In addition, exemplary teachers should be rewarded and recognized, and their knowledge and skills shared with others. At the same time, teachers who are not meeting standards need to be removed.

Create schools that are organized for student and teacher success. Policies and incentives that encourage school redesign focused on student learning and teacher development are necessary. Our schools, as well as our districts and our state, must also direct an increasing proportion of resources to improving student success. Technology is likely to play a big part in this, so statewide resources that support the use of technology, including substantial funding for teacher preparation in the use of technology, need to be established.

Implementing the Recommendations

The recommendations outlined in the KCTAF report focus primarily on improving teacher quality. That is because, of the factors under our control, teacher qualifications have the greatest impact on student achievement. Current research shows us that what teachers know and can do makes the crucial difference in what children learn. So, if the KCTAF recommendations for improving the teaching profession are implemented, the result will be improved student performance.

In its report, KCTAF has outlined specific strategies for implementing each recommendation, as well as time lines for implementation and assignment of responsibility for each recommendation. According to the time line developed in the report, the majority of the recommendations should be implemented by 2003. Full implementation is not expected until 2006.

For those recommendations that will require additional funding, KCTAF has suggested a blend of private and public money. Primarily, KCTAF members look to the Legislature to recognize the importance of achieving the goals outlined in the KCTAF report and to allocate the funds needed to implement the strategies for achieving those goals.

Frequently Asked Questions

The federal No Child Left Behind legislation places a strong emphasis on having a highly qualified teacher in every classroom. This objective matches the State Board of Education goal of having a caring, competent and qualified teacher in every classroom. NCLB defines a highly qualified teacher as one that is fully licensed by the state and endorsed in the subject area with no licensure requirements waived on an emergency, temporary or provisional basis and who demonstrates competence in the content areas taught. The following information clarifies what is required in Kansas to be designated as highly qualified. Please be aware of the following:

• Any newly hired teachers of core academic areas (e.g., English, reading, language arts, mathematics, science, foreign languages, civics and government, social studies, economics, arts, history and geography) teaching in a program supported with Title I Part A funds (e.g., all teachers in a schoolwide and all teachers funded with Title I in targeted assistance schools) must meet these requirements now.
• All other teachers including those in non-Title I schools have until June 30, 2006, to meet these requirements.
• New Kansas teachers licensed under the state's new licensure system (effective July 1, 2003) will meet the highly qualified criteria based on achieving a passing score (set September 1, 2005) on a content assessment in all endorsement areas.

Specifically, in Kansas, a highly qualified veteran teacher must have a bachelor's degree and a Kansas teaching certificate or license. Additional criteria, such as content area knowledge, must be used to demonstrate competence. In Kansas, almost 95% of our educators hold a license to teach which requires at a minimum, a bachelor's degree. Additionally, and based on a KSDE review of teacher's credentials, we also know that most of our currently practicing licensed teachers have already demonstrated competence because they hold an endorsement, have a graduate level degree, or have completed an approved program.

As a result, KSDE is not going to require that every teacher complete a rubric to ensure they are highly qualified. However, there are two groups of teachers who will need to have their qualifications verified, as specified below. These two groups include any teacher who is "kicked out" of the Licensed Personnel Report prepared by KSDE's Teacher Education and Licensure team as well as any teacher who holds an elementary certificate and is assigned to teach a core content area in the middle or junior high school. For these two groups, the following criteria must be reviewed and assured to have been met. Specifically, demonstrated competence for highly qualified staff in Kansas includes the following:

A. If elementary, and teaching in an elementary school:

--A bachelor's degree, and

--A KS teaching certificate or license, and one of the following

• National Board Certification or
• 100 points on the Kansas rubric (attached to this e-mail) which allows teachers to demonstrate they are highly qualified through a combination of years of experience, coursework, and professional development.

B. If middle /secondary:

--A bachelor's degree, and

--KS teaching certificate or license, and one of the following

• National Board Certification or
• 100 points on the Kansas rubric which allows teachers to demonstrate they are highly qualified through a combination of years of experience, coursework, and professional development.

updated 4/1/05

Frequently Asked Questions:
Highly Qualified Middle/Junior High School Teachers

• Is a middle school teacher with only an elementary endorsement who is assigned to teach a specific content/subject area considered to be highly qualified?

It depends. A highly qualified teacher must possess at least three things: a bachelor's degree, a KS teaching certificate and one additional indicator. The additional indicator may be either of the following: has National Board Certification or has at least 100 points on the Kansas Content Area Rubric.

• What does it mean for a middle/junior high school teacher to be "endorsed at the level to which they have been assigned?"

Any middle school teacher assigned to teach a specific content/subject area who is operating only on an elementary endorsement is endorsed to teach elementary content, not specific subject matter content. A teacher holding a middle/high school teaching license, also includes a content specific endorsement such as mathematics or science. As a result, a middle/junior high school teacher assigned to teach a specific content area, under an elementary endorsement, is not necessarily highly qualified to teach middle/junior high content. To ensure these educators are highly qualified, some other indicator, including the use of the rubric, will need to be used for verification.

• Do all teachers who have a K-9 certificate have to complete the Kansas Content Area Rubric?

No, not all of them will have to complete the rubric. If they are teaching in a self-contained classroom at the elementary level, they are highly qualified because they have the content endorsement at that level. If teaching in a middle level content area under a K-9 certificate they will need to complete the rubric. If they cannot achieve 100 points on the rubric, they'll need to do professional development work in their content area or take college courses to bring their points up to 100. Please note that they have until 2005-2006 to achieve the highly qualified status.

• The Kansas Content Area Rubric includes service to the content area as well as awards, presentations, and publications. For the middle/junior high school teacher trying to verify subject matter knowledge, must the service, award or conference attendance be related to the content area?

Yes, it should be related to the content area. The purpose of determining whether a person is highly qualified is to ensure teachers have the breadth and depth knowledge of the content area to which they have been assigned to teach. If the teacher is attending a middle school conference, attendance at sessions specific to their assigned content area would be applicable. In terms of being recognized as a teacher of the year, it is assumed that they are being recognized for their ability to teach their content area (e.g., their ability to teach middle school mathematics). Also, if a teacher serves on an interdisciplinary team either to represent their content area or because of their expertise in their content area, it would apply.

Hot Topics

• KSDE PDC Resource Guide 05-06
• Outstanding resources for professional development, school improvement, student learning
• Online Professional Development: What Every PDC Needs to Know 

KNEA is putting its money where its mission is…

Outstanding resources for professional development, school improvement, student learning

Kansas NEA is once again providing outstanding resources! KNEA is offering two statewide cadres of teacher members who provide professional development training and assist schools working to improve.

Peg Dunlap, who coordinates the school assistance cadre, points out that both cadres:
· were formed in response to KNEA's strategic focus areas involving quality public schools and strengthening the teaching profession.
· will work to help KNEA members and Kansas schools impact teacher learning and student learning.
· will be able to take advantage of numerous NEA, regional and state training resources and opportunities to assist them in preparing for their work.

Participation on the cadre by KNEA members is a commitment to receive extensive training and then provide training to other adults or act as a resource person.

School Improvement

The School Improvement Cadre provides training and assistance to schools working on improvement plans.

This cadre provides assistance to schools wishing to move from meeting basic QPA requirements to satisfying the KNEA definition of a quality public school (see the KNEA Web site) and for schools having difficulty meeting ESEA requirements.

Professional Development

The Professional Development Cadre provides training or support on quality professional development and the new licensure/professional development systems.

The work of this cadre is highly specialized; it is specifically tied to the new professional development and licensure regulations in Kansas. "These regulation changes will ultimately impact everyone who holds a certificate/license," said Carolyn Schmitt, who chairs the work of the professional development cadre.

"Research shows effective teaching and organizing schools to support teaching are at the heart of increasing student achievement. Professional development that makes a difference for adults and students doesn't just happen; it occurs in well-designed programs with appropriate support," Schmitt added.

"The work of the cadre will assist Kansas schools in designing and implementing such programs."

How can you participate?

Interested members can participate by applying for cadre membership or by requesting assistance from the cadres after they are formed.

If you're interested in participating in any way, contact the KNEA office of Instructional Advocacy, go to www.knea.org/teachers or e-mail peg.dunlap@knea.org.