The State Board for Educator Certification met on September 30 to discuss educator preparation programs, preparation framework development, special education certification redesign, among others. An archive of this hearing and the agenda can be found here.
This report is intended to give you an overview and highlight of the discussions on the various topics taken up. It is not a verbatim transcript of the discussions but is based upon what was audible or understandable to the observer and the desire to get details out as quickly as possible with few errors or omissions.
Associate Commissioner’s Comments Regarding the SBEC Agenda
Emily Garcia, Associate Commissioner
- Had positive comments concerning the division update from the July meeting
- Moving forward will spread division updates out through different meetings
- Will be giving the board more visibility concerning complaints in the educator preparation process
Public Comment
Wendy Berk and Joe Berk, Self
- Provided testimony concerning personal experience with being stripped of credentials
Christine Brogle, Texans for Special Education Reform
- Speaking on proposed amendments to educator preparation programs; submitted comment with Texas Parent to Parent and Disability Rights Texas
- Are missed opportunities to fully implement HB 159; have met with TEA and look forward to working more with them
- Need to revise definition of students with a disability to encompass those covered under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act
- Need to expand on what it means to work with a child with a disability in a classroom; is currently vague
- Would like to see the knowledge and skills in HB 159 included in other areas of the survey, lesson planning, certification exams, etc.
Amy Bachtel, Texas School for the Deaf
- Garcia – Have met with this group and have incorporated their feedback into the item itself
- Testimony related to discussion of amendments to 19 TAC concerning professional assessment of educators
- Teacher certified in another state and hold a Texas Standard Certificate
- Not able to obtain needed content certification for the STR due to the exam’s inaccessibility as a deaf individual
- Chair Streepey – Thanks for testimony and will take this into consideration moving forward
Consent Agenda
Item 6: Proposed Rule Review of 19 TAC Chapter 233, Categories of Classroom Teaching Certificates
Item 7: Adoption of Proposed Revisions to 19 TAC Chapter 241, Certification as Principal
Christie Pogue, TEA Staff
- Staff will continue to work on survey updates as mentioned in
- SBEC Member Coleman – Want to take item 8 off the consent agenda; item number 8 is taken off the consent agenda
Members vote to consent including items 6 and 7
- Coleman – Stakeholder reached about with a concern and wanted to ask staff about it
- Coleman – edTPA pilot is continuing, but candidates who take edTPA will not have a score and will not be incorporated into the program’s indicator for PPR scores and ASEP calculations
- Coleman – Is no cut score for edTPA and no accountability for pedagogy of scores for EPPs participating in the pilot
- TEA Staff – True that edTPA is not a part of ASEP calculations
- Coleman – True that it would skew things especially for smaller programs? The stakeholder used Rice University as an example
- TEA Staff – Anything that is being piloting is excluded in calculations; if the program is small and only using those pilot exams, they would not have a score for that indicator
- TEA Staff – Board has created a larger index score that is an overall determination for the accountability of the program
Members vote to consent on item 8
Marilyn Cook, TEA Staff
- Agenda item has sparked two petitions; SBEC can either chose to vote to deny petitions or direct TEA staff to look into further options for rulemaking
- Two petitions requested changes to Chapter 230 regarding demonstration of English language proficiency for educator preparation program admission
- Currently under SBEC rule any applicant must “be able to communicate, read, write and comprehend the English language”
- Individual can demonstrate proficiency by completion of an undergrad/graduate degree from the U.S. or 32 other countries or verification of minimum scaled scores on the Test of English
- Petition one recommends adoption of a minimum score of 20 for the TOEFL for each section
- Previously, the board required individuals to just speak English until expanding to current requirements in 2016
- Staff recommends denying this petition
- Petition two requests the board add Uganda to the list of countries approved to satisfy the English language proficiency requirement
- Have previously done work with higher education to make the list of the 32 countries included
- Recommend at this time denying the petition, but will be going back and seeing if there is an opportunity to consider rulemaking to see if other countries can be added to the list
- SBEC Member Brescia – Was Uganda considered previously during the 2016 discussion?
- No
- Coleman – How does Uganda stack against other countries on the list?
- Other states and Canada have up to 50 countries on their lists; will come back next time and list may be more expansive
- SBEC Member Gore – Been a “norming” test to ensure not holding foreign nationals to a higher standard that native U.S. citizens?
- No; would be beneficial to look at the language in the test and the standards
- Gore – Been a “norming” between SAT, ACT and TOEFL?
- Will look into that
- SBEC Member Muri – Know criteria universities use in choosing what countries are on the list?
- Will ensure we are doing our due-diligence
- SBEC Member Galvan – Both petitions have brought up good points about TOEFL scores esp. in light of teacher shortage; do not want to set candidates up for failure
Members vote to deny the two petitions discussed above
Item 10: Approval of Proposed 2023 State Board for Educator Certification Meeting Dates
Christie Pogue, TEA Staff
- Notes meeting dates follow SBOE dates; SBEC members discuss meeting dates
Members vote to approve the SBEC 2023 board meeting and work session dates
Item 11: Pending or Contemplated Litigation, including Disciplinary Cases
- SBEC hears presentations and discussions on pending/completed litigation/disciplinary cases
Item 12: Discussion of SBEC Stakeholder Engagement
TEA Staff Presentation
- Recaps the two SBEC options
- Continue with EPSG and remain without adopting rules where TEA will continue the work and membership as determined by SBEC
- Engage in adopting EPAC into rule to establish the EPAC in compliance with TGC Chapter 2110
- Lists the differences and changes that will happen with adopting EPAC
- Member numbers; membership; meeting facilitation; reporting; purpose/task; annual evaluation; abolishment date; agenda setting
- Specifies that the two options cannot be combined
- The draft rule with TGC Chapter 2110 is not just for EPAC creation but will apply to advisory committees the Board establishes
Public Testimony
Dr. Elizabeth Ward, EPSG
- Recommends that the EPSG keep its original structure
- If SBEC decides to keep the original structure she suggests the following: a clear calendar established in advance for EPSG meetings; a process for alternative members; ESPEC direct TEA for technology allowing the public to view meetings in real time; materials be posted to the EPSG website
Â
Carry Griffith, Texas State Teachers Association
- Encourages to seek out mechanisms on expanding and improving how reporting is done
- If they choose to move forward with the advisory group, requests that professional organizations be members of that
- TEA Staff – Appreciated the testimonies and reassures that there wants are included in the plan drafts
- Muri – Comments seem clear and coherent, encourages the board for other conversations about how to be more efficient
- Chair Streepey- Approves of keeping the original EPSG structure and will work with them on the suggestions for improvement
TEA Staff Presentation
- Discussing proposed revisions into Chapter 239
- This includes the following changes: adding both revised standards, technical edits to certificate naming, and an effective date of Sep. 1, 2023
- Staff plans to propose action in later years to continuously provide feedback and update standards
- Before standards adoption: bring rule text to the December 2022 SBEC meeting for proposal to implement Ch. 239
- After standards adoption:
- Begin the process of redesign to school librarian and Reading Specialist exams
- Engage stakeholders in capacity building regarding updated standards and certifications
- Gore – This plan is fantastic, but questions and is concerned on how someone can obtain all of these skills
- Yes, they are very robust but both committees felt that it was needed
- Stephanie Alban, TEA – Pleased to see the reading specialist is aligning with the STR, explains the significance through interns’ positive comments
- We envision that the reading specialist role are in the coach and support role relating to reading teachers
Item 14: Discussion of Effective Preparation Framework Development
TEA Staff Presentation
- SBEC’s priorities to improve educator preparation are; rigorous educator certification exams, ASEP/EPP accountability, effective preparation framework, and expand preparation practices
- The intended purposes of the EPF are common language, continuous improvement, and alignment
- SBEC’s guiding principles:
- Focus on diversity and quality
- Fostering stronger collaborations between LEAs and EPPs
- Guiding mantra is “for the field by the field”
- EPSG has continued to support and help the development and stakeholder engagement
- Other groups who have contributed to the item and hope to continue:Â EPSG, EPF, EPP
- Attempted to codify the framework to ensure clarity and specificity
- Defining an aspirational bar for quality is vital in the framework for continuous improvement
- The intent is to set the bar unrealistically high (aspirational true north)
- Reinforced the idea of strong relationships between TEA, LEA, and SBEC all with EPPs
- Proposed next steps for accomplishing the framework:
- To engage with stakeholders, propose future rule making, update EEP rules, and adopt this framework
- Continuing approval review redesign
- Continuous improvement supports
- Started coordinating with EPIIC to help develop branding and structure for an EPF website
- Offering an ELAR training series for all EPPs facilitated by Teaching Works
- Explains structure of the EPF focusing on essential actions and key practices
- Rodriguez – Hopes to see the continuation of support after the response to the second question, it is just as important to consult with the field so stakeholders can fully understand EEP’s needs
- Muri – What does the balance of aspirational goals and reality look like? How do we encourage improvements with aspirational goals?
- Taking the aspirational framework to stakeholders and asking for the foundation to raise the bar
- Creating plans to get closer and closer to those aspirational goals is going to be the reality
- Implementing robust opportunities will be the proof that these practices can happen
- Muri – Do you think that the EEPs feel as if they own this document framework
- We have positive feedback from a survey we conducted but there is still work to do such as building awareness and development of the framework
- Within the framework there is an expectation of LEA action as a partner
- Torres – Asks to consider the recognition of programs when it comes to diversifying its candidates
- Our stakeholders really reinforce those priorities as well
- Galvan – One area we should continue to look out for is how we can align within and across the framework to establish clear relationships with our frameworks
- Stephanie Alban, TEA Staff – Providing the resources is what’s important so how can we continue this?
- Rodriguez – What goals and steps have you set as a program to improve?
- We will continue to work on getting information form stakeholders and improving our draft based on the provided recommendations
Item 15: Discussion of the Special Education Certification Redesign and Test Development Updates
Demarco Pitre and Jessica Mcloughlin, TEA Staff
- Special education is identified as a critical shortage area; attrition rate 35%
- Certification by examination largest producer of Special Education certificate holders
- Redesign started April 2018 and now are working on exams and rulemaking that will go through September 2026
- Three proposed pathways: Special Education Specialist EC 12, Core Subjects with STR/Special Education EC-6, and Deafblind EC-12
- Topics for additional stakeholder input are personnel assignments and coursework and training requirements
- Test launch timeline:
- September 1, 2023 English Language Arts and Reading and Physical Education
- September 1, 2024 Health
- September 1, 2025 Special Education Specialist EC-12 and Deafblind EC-12
- September 1, 2026 Core Subjects with Special Education EC-6
- TBD: ESL Supplemental, Bilingual Supplemental, Bilingual Special Education, Reading Specialist, School Librarian
- Heard the directive to streamline exams, will keep this in mind moving earlier
- Chair Streepey – Are the things brought up in public testimony being considered?
- Correct; want to ensure we are moving slower in that area to ensure we have all necessary input
- Chair Streepey – Appreciate thoughtfulness with EC-6 and 612 special education
- SBEC Member Rodriguez – If someone has a particular certification and link it to deafblind, how ensure initial certification is not limiting?
- Envision deafblind would work differently than other special education certificates
- Will come back to the board on which grade-bands drive decision making concerning personnel for deafblind
- Rodriguez – Discuss how EC-12 functions?
- Currently have an EC-12 standalone certificate and a supplemental
- Leaves some interpretation to the districts on who teaches what in what context
- Chair Streepey and Galvan note need to make clear there is a supplemental and standalone
Public Testimony
Casey Bennett, Self
- Education consultant in the field of deafblind; excited about the current roadmap
- Much more feedback is needed from teachers whether coursework and a practicum will be required, if there are any grandfathering exceptions
Demarco Pitre and Jessica Mcloughlin, TEA Staff
- Proposed updates have changes to testing figure and changes to uses of certification exams, test attempt waivers, and test exemptions
- Galvan – Test attempt waiver changes, when is notary public required in the steps?
- Will get back on that
- Galvan – May need to clarify hour requirements tied with the assessment
- Will consider that
- Coleman – Recommend adding to definition subject to review of the board at a minimum of an annual basis
- Is a good specification
- Chair Streepey and Mcloughlin discuss Amy Bachtel’s testimony; will work with her
Gina Anderson, TWUADOT
- Concerned about the definition of “pilot exam” ask the addition of a date of review
- Is a lack of clarity and consistency in the current definition
- Proposed definition would allow EPPs to allow candidates an option of exams; question whether there is true equity in terms of what is piloted, not just edTPA
- Should not be the sole pilot
Kelsey Kling, Texas AFT
- Agree with the comments of the previous testifier
- Data gathered through the pilot should be transparently presented to the field
- Coleman – What data are you discussing specifically?
- Qualitative data from candidates was not made available until before the June meeting where SBOE ratified SBEC’s rules
- TEA Staff – All qualitative summary data was presented, can discuss the types of specificity related to data and definition of a pilot
Marilyn Cook, TEA Staff
- Proposed change include removing references to deadline to use passing test scores and certificates no longer issued by SBEC
- Changes add three new special education certificates as presented earlier in item 15
- Changes cosmetology credentials update for the Trade and Industrial certificate
- Adds a new Tamil certificate to the list of Languages Other Than English
- In response to a previous petition
- Galvan – Asks about EC-6 four subjects and core subjects
- Took into consideration the grade bands and the volume of what was needed
Item 18: Discussion of Internship Requirements
Jessica Mcloughlin, TEA Staff
- SB 15 includes permissive language for SBEC to take into consideration related to internships
- SB 15 expires September 1, 2023 and SBEC has three options:
- Maintain current SBEC rules regarding the internship assignment to be completed in an actual school setting
- Amend the SBEC rules to allow internships to be conducted in a virtual setting
- Direct staff to explore a certificate for virtual teaching that would allow for virtual internship
- SBEC Member MacDonald – What is the concern here? Third one seems to address the issue
- Focused on candidates completing their internship
- Galvan – Learned that teachers did not have the training to teach certain topics online; need to think this one through very carefully
- MacDonald – Heard from virtual school providers who have hired candidates who they cannot move forward with since we have not taken action on this
- Intern certificates are not issued until they have an assigned placement; is shared responsibility between EPPs and LEAs
- Rodriguez – Suggest changing language from “actual school” to “in person”
- Is an opportunity to be specific on these definitions
- Galvan notes that the teacher survey and student survey are important components
Public Comment
Carrie Griffith, Texas State Teachers Association
- Support option 1 which is maintaining that candidates complete their internship teaching in person rather than online
- We want to set teaches up to have flexibility and training in person lends to this favor more
- Recommends a supplemental certificate
- Macdonald – If we can be proactive and up to date on things then I don’t believe technology will go away and I think we should take advantage of these opportunities
- Oeser – I look forward to preparing teachers for different environments
- Wants to make sure that we are careful about permissive language so that we don’t convey the wrong message for the field
- Brescia – The option reads, explore, so I favor exploration
- Muri – Virtual schools prepare for an education 100% online, so in person training makes no sense
- We don’t want to be their barrier but their enabler
- Garcia – Askes to use the term explore in multiple ways and to come back at a later time as a discussion item
Item 19: Discussion of A+ Texas Teachers Educator Preparation Program’s Agreed Order
Lorrie Ayer, TEA
- Implemented the program the board had agreed on at a prior meeting, giving updates
- Established weekly check ins with the monitor and program
Invited Testimony
Calvin Stocker, Monitor
- Giving updates, specifically about their weekly meetings where they discuss the agreed order, implementation, TAC, examples/non-examples, and questions
- Autoing weekly check ins and completing the review
- Muri – How is it going?
- We are implementing diligently, and the process is going to plan
- Muri – Are there specific elements of improvement?
- Admissions, requirements, and mentor teacher requirements
- Muri – Will we see an analysis at the December meeting?
- Yes, we will have an item to show the outcome of the review
- Chair Streepey – Can you give us an indication about the field-based experience or the mentor teacher improvements
- When both of those processes are implemented with diligence comply with your rule
- Albon – What reflective questions are they putting in the field-based manual and is anyone reviewing them?
- Has anyone evaluated the principal survey?
- We are in the support phase before the cleared deadline with the review for compliance
- We will have much more concrete evidence in our next meeting
Item 20: Discussion of Teacher Performance Assessment Options
Jessica McLoughlin
- Wil continue to head from stakeholders at the start of this agenda item, beginning with Public Testimony
Estras Contro, Certify Teacher
- Based in Spring, Texas and support over 90% of programs in Texas to help teacher candidates
- Consider teaching performance assessment developed for the State of Texas
- Not a final exam, objective is teacher readiness
- Will be ready for deployment Oct 17 and address same certifications area the previous areas targeted in one that was vetoed in June
Jill Fox, Certify Teacher for Advanced Research
- TPA solutions directly addresses challenges candidates encounter
- Based on first model developed in the US which was developed by 30 universities
- This is a formative assessment, not a summative and is designed to be integrated into curriculum
Otto Fini, Certify Teacher
- Support over 90% of programs in Texas
- Tools strengthen and enhance preparation programs overall
- Believe they product real results, such as spotlighting competency areas and determining next steps
- Spotlights supports and assistance in program such as language preference options and checks that all tasks have been addressed, etc.
Dan Sanders, Certify Teacher
- Price is reduced with promo code
- Intuitive nature of software and onscreen text windows guide candidate
- Candidates can select language, evaluator tool included, rubric report generated, etc
- Management dashboard offered free of charge
- Tommy Coleman, Board Secretary – why they have not heard from him before
- Contro – understand they had a complex system of 150 pages to help explain the system, they have been working on addressing concerns
- Coleman – are you capable of scaling up for the entire state?
- Contro – yes, they believe so since they are using Amazon as a structure, been using Amazon since 2014
- Coleman – how long have you been in Texas? Does it impact responsiveness?
- Contro – since 2005
- Contro – Have a tool built by Texans, continues to describe the tool supports offered
- Chair Streepey – how are portfolios scored? Did you envision support for EdTPA?
- Contro – evaluation done locally, tool provided for director and tool is intuitive
- Contro – yes, EdTPA does not have tool to assist, they have webinars
- Emily Garcia – there are specific guidelines for procurement so questions are cautioned
- Gore – version 2 next month?
- Garcia – stops questions, board will have chance to ask questions of those who respond to RFP
Carrie Griffith, Texas State Teachers Association
- Appreciate conversation of urgency and timing
- SBOE decided unanimously to reject edTPA, reviews comments during that vote
- Recommendation made use of performance assessment as a program requirement rather than a certification exam and this recommendation has been made by multiple stakeholders
- Candidate mistakes is what guides the learning, it would be a problem if this becomes a high stakes exam
- Learning days and testing days look different
- Coleman – would like to hear her final thought
- Developing portfolios and self-reflecting on craft is intent, the instrument does not work in a silo
- Ask them to imagine a scenario of master teachers losing license if they didn’t pass the test
- MacDonald – why is making it a program requirement preferred over an assessment if it is dumbing down learning
- Not saying it is dumbing down, and testimony is not on edTPA but on performance based instruments
- MacDonald – seeing best in world using edTPA, maybe it should be assessment and a program requirement, cautions only hearing anecdotal information to impact decisions
- Points out STAAR example, a tool used for growth develops different collaborative efforts
- Chair Streepey – concern of uniformity, do you thinking having it as a program requirement would create collaborative environment across all areas
- Would change number of field experience requirements
Mary Lowe, Moms for Liberty (Families engaged for effective Ed)
- edTPA is moving forward with no ethics
- edTPA uses videos of children in classrooms, parents don’t want videos of children on website
- Is edTPA being pushed because of money, concerned of conflict of interest
- We are talking to Senators, if you don’t stop this the Senators and Reps will
- Restore authority to teachers and it starts at the base level
Suzanne Nesbitt, Baylor University representing TCEP
- Members have signed onto to letter that was provided to the committee
- Training sequence is different for many which creates a patchwork product
- TCEP recommends that performance assessments based on key competencies, a timeline for demonstrating must be determined, SBEC has authority to set training requirements
- Accountability must be in place for curriculum quality and fidelity
Andrea Chevalier, ATPE
- Letter is passed out from work session panelist
- Have held several meetings before sending the letter
- Focus their ideas more on preparation side
- Letter framed in two sections: 1) on consensus and 2) area for further discussion
- Think candidates should demonstrate some key competencies and knows lesson plans have come up a lot – agrees that is a foundational skill
- Did have consensus of embedding performance assessment as a program requirement rather than a certification exam
- Idea was that SBEC would set criteria and it would help define what locally determined performance assessment could look like
- Accountability should be on the program and the quality provided
- Continues to walk through the letter, all groups look forward to future conversations
- Coleman – first page of letter mentions Ellis recommendation of involving stakeholders, what is your sense of involvement thus far
-  Been a sense that “we are barreling forward full steam” and not slowing down enough to have effective stakeholder engagement
- Groundwork has been laid and thinks they should continue moving in that direction
- Coleman – development of a Texas specific TPA, what does that encompass?
- Clarifies she is talking for herself, talking about an assessment in the curriculum and not a certification exam
- Code of ethics missing/code of conduct, Texas specific would include all of standards that are needed
- Concern of edTPA aligned to common core, want any exams teachers take aligned to the TEKS
- Preferably developed by Texas teachers and involving extensive feedback from Texas stakeholders
Jessica McLoughlin
- Slide presented covers SBEC work session panel feedback summary
- Panel 1 in July was made up of EPP, LEA and Teacher Organizations
- Embed a TPA as a program requirement rather than a certification exam
- Let LEPPs choose or develop a TPA that meets local needs
- Update PPR and consider grade banding and including constructed response
- Regarding accountability, the quality of implementation of a TPA should fall on EPPs, not on candidates
- Panel 2 in September was made up of edTPA Pilot EPPs
- edTPA as a certification exam drove programmatic improvement (ie refinement of curriculum, candidate supports, etc.)
- edTPA connects theory to practice and reinforces critical, foundational skills that support novice teacher readiness
- The edTPA pilot fostered stronger collaboration across EPPs based on shared experience and ability to analyze common data
- Participation in the edTPA pilot improved their program and the quality of the candidates they produced
- Panel 3 in September was made up of Education Policy Leaders
- Don’t delay talking action that will improve program quality in service of student outcomes
- Preparation for edTPA aligns with preparation for teaching: it requires authentic practice, effective coaching and quality feedback
- It will take multiple “puzzle pieces” working together to address current challenges
- Concern regarding the number of alternatively certified candidates and recommendation that the TPA requirement come before intern certification
- Chair Streepey – notes this is a good time to publicly recognize all those who served on the panel
TEA Staff
- Presenting a refined set of TPA options
- One being TPA as a certification exam that has been divided into option A and option B
- The other being TSA as a program requirement which is option C
- Presented board member feedback to the options above
- For Option B:
- There are concerns about deadlines and rules, as a result there was added clarification about edTPA scores
- Built in a buffer transitional year for TxTPA in 2025-2026 to allow a pilot for 2026-2027 if there were delays
- Chair Streepey – Believes we have some systemic issues, and we have control over this
- We don’t have a baseline of skills for teachers
- Need better data for evaluating pep programs
- Teachers are leaving their profession because they are not well prepared
- Muri- We must act on this issue of teachers to better future generations
- Alban – Concerned that the interns will be caught in the middle during the fast transition to edTPA
- Macdonald – We want the teachers to feel supported, but the mental burden of new teachers around you all the time is difficult
- Recommended alternative certification programs
- Rodriguez- having the time to transition is very important to consider a more reasonable transition so that is done correctly from the PPE perspective
- Chair Streepey – Do we want staff to bring back rule making about a certification exam?
- Brescia – Favors boldness and edTPA being required as an exam
- Chair Streepey – We need to move on rule making in December
- Garcia – We would do a discussion in December and not more
- Muri- We should consider options created within our state
- Assessment is a driver of achievement
- Chair Streepey – Can you provide appropriate timing for implementing a change
- Rodriguez- It is equally important to listen to those who dropped out to know what factors made them do so
- Coleman- Disagrees with edTPA as an exam
- Alban- We know we must improve teacher accountability, but several things need to be considered including COVID
- Oeser- The SBOE stated that this was not the end and should make sure that we consider pursing Texas based options
- We should take the time and give voice to option C
- Macdonald- Believes that the program benefit program is great, but how do we monitor it?
- What is most important is implementing the exam
- Brescia- Agrees with a consistent program
- Lofters – Concerned there are other options other than the certification
- Chair Streepey – My concern is the double payment
- Oeser – If the certification exam replaces the PPR, it is a problem as ones optional and the other is not,
- MacDonald – If we can’t use program requirements, is it fair to the program/candidate if it is not motivated?
- Rodriquez – The revised PPR is a concern to me, why are we adding more exams?
- Macdonald – If we believe NTPA is valuable enough then why don’t we make it our assessment?
- This seems fear driven and wish we had the courage to move forward
- Muri – This is an opportunity for a teacher to show they know the knowledge for an entry level teacher, so we must replace it with something more affective
- Chair Streepey – We are going to see exciting things in mentor support and we are here to support the students
- Rodriguez – Are we recognizing the need that not all APPs need the same type of intervention to produce quality teachers?
- Chair Streepey – How would we know if one has different certifications
- Oeser – Sees potential in adding on the teacher residency route
- This can be the differentiating factor for our programs
- Rodriquez – Can we still explore what a quality program is?
- Chair Streepey – We will return back to the item as a discussion item at the December meeting