1. University Supervisor Training Austin Peay State University Fall 2012 Semester

2. Work with Mentor Teachers Provide program information to the mentor teacher –Clinical Teaching Handbook –Evaluation forms –Calendar –Explain about co-teaching and edTPA –Be positive and supportive

3. Work with Mentor Teachers Conference with Mentor Teacher on a regular basis about the progress of the Teacher Candidate What are the strengths? What are the weaknesses? Any concerns? Conduct a summative conference with Mentor Teacher and Teacher Candidate

4. Seminars NO seminars during the weeks of edTPA seminars on campus: September 10 September 24 October 11 All seminars are required attendance Suggest grade at end of placement: A, B, C, D, F, or Incomplete

5. Suggested Seminar Topics 1.Developing effective lesson plans 2.Classroom management, discipline, and motivation 3.Livelong professional growth and development 4.Parent-teacher relationships and communication 5.Professional organizations 6.Ethics, attitudes, and professional standards 7.Effective use of technology 8.Standards-based instruction 9.Common Core 10.Interview process 11.Professionalism

6. Weekly Reflections Submitted weekly to University Supervisor via email (determine deadline) Should be professionally written - What happened? What was the response? What are the lessons learned?

7. Lesson Plans CHECK LESSONS PLANS EVERY TIME YOU VISIT THE TEACHER CANDIDATE Are they complete? (standards, assessments, etc) Are they well-organized? Were they submitted on time? Do you have suggestions for improvement? Unit plans are not required in either placement.

8. Summary Teacher Candidate Responsibilities Weekly Seminar attendance Attendance at 5 school-related meetings (reported to 2 nd placement) edTPA (SPED – Milestone IV portfolio) Weekly reflections Daily lesson plans (no unit)

9. Evaluations 3 formative and 1 summative on teacher candidate Summative – attempt to fill in every blank Have a post-conference with Candidate Evaluations and ALL paperwork due by mid- semester seminar and final seminar –October 24 and December 7

10. Informal Evaluations Informal evaluations – Conference with teacher candidate: “How do you think the lesson went?” “What could you have done to improve the lesson?” “How could you have handled that situation differently?” “How are you preparing for tomorrow?”

11. Mileage Due by mid-semester and final seminar dates Call/email Theresa Dezellem if there are questions 931.221.7441 or dezellemt@apsu.edu

12. Communication Daily conferences with teacher candidate –Positive reinforcement –Instruction –Suggestions –Model for your teacher candidate – let them practice

13. Communication Mentor Teacher and Teacher Candidate Office of Clinical Teaching Be positive, but be honest –We want to help if there is a problem

14. Co-Teaching

15. is defined as two teachers (cooperating teacher and teacher candidate) working together with groups of students - sharing the planning, organization, delivery and assessment of instruction as well as the physical space. Both teachers are actively involved and engaged in all aspects of instruction Copyright 2011, St. Cloud State University, Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant

16. Why Co-Teach? Reduce student/teacher ratio Diversity and size of today’s classrooms Enhance classroom management Copyright 2011, St. Cloud State University, Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant

17. Why Co-Teach? Greater student participation and engagement Increase instructional options for all students Enhanced collaboration skills Copyright 2011, St. Cloud State University, Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant

18. Co-Teaching Findings Copyright 2011, St. Cloud State University, Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant

19. Type of Classroom Reading Proficiency χ ² (2 df, N=1353) = 12.79, p =.002 χ ² (2 df, N=2241) = 12.54, p = 002 Copyright 2011, St. Cloud State University, Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant

20. Type of Classroom Math Proficiency χ ² (2 df, N=1349) = 8.31, p=.016 χ ² (2 df, N=2355) = 7.35, p=.025 Copyright 2011, St. Cloud State University, Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant

21. Cumulative Data 2004-2008 (N=1,686) 7-12 Survey Cumulative Data 2004-2008 (N=1,686) Copyright 2011, St. Cloud State University, Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant

22. Benefits To Teacher Candidates End of Experience Survey (N=157) Teacher Candidates indicated that Co-Teaching led to:  Improved classroom management skills (95.5%)  Increased collaboration skills (94.9%)  More teaching time (94.6%)  Increased confidence (89.9%)  Deeper understanding of the curriculum through co- planning (89.1%)  More opportunities to ask questions and reflect (88.6%) Copyright 2011, St. Cloud State University, Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant

23. Benefits to Teacher Candidates Focus Groups (N=136) Additional benefits of co-teaching:  Being seen as a “real” teacher  Equal partnership  Sharing resources  Mutual support and learning Copyright 2011, St. Cloud State University, Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant

24. Benefits to Cooperating Teachers End of Experience Survey (N=279) Cooperating Teachers indicate that Co-Teaching led to:  Ability to reach more students, particularly those with high needs (93.5%)  Better relationship with their teacher candidate (91%)  Experienced professional growth (89.2%)  Enhanced energy for teaching (87.8%)  Hosting a candidate without giving up my classroom (87.1%)  Teacher candidate had a better experience than they would have through with a traditional model (81.7%) Copyright 2011, St. Cloud State University, Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant

25. Benefits to Cooperating Teachers Focus Groups (N=92) Additional benefits of Co-Teaching:  Ability to do projects more successfully  Class time is more productive  Modeling and participating in teamwork  Candidates become competent more quickly Copyright 2011, St. Cloud State University, Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant

26. Creating an Environment for Co-Teaching Copyright 2011, St. Cloud State University, Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant

27. Co-Teaching Strategies/Approaches One Teach, One Observe One Teach, One Assist Station Teaching Parallel Teaching Supplemental Teaching Alternative (Differentiated) Teaching Team Teaching Copyright 2011, St. Cloud State University, Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant

28. Co-Teaching is not simply dividing the tasks and responsibilities between two people. Co-Teaching is an attitude an attitude of sharing the classroom and students Co-Teachers must always be thinking We’re Both Teaching! Copyright 2011, St. Cloud State University, Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant

29. One Teach, One Observe One teacher has primary instructional responsibility while the other gathers specific observational information on students or the (instructing) teacher. Copyright 2011, St. Cloud State University, Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant

30. One Teach, One Assist One teacher has primary instructional responsibility while the other assists students’ with their work, monitors behaviors, or corrects assignments. Copyright 2011, St. Cloud State University, Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant

31. Station Teaching The co-teaching pair divide the instructional content into parts. Each teacher instructs one of the groups, groups then rotate or spend a designated amount of time at each station. Copyright 2011, St. Cloud State University, Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant

32. Parallel Teaching In this approach, each teacher instructs half the students. The two teachers are addressing the same instructional material using the same teaching strategies. Copyright 2011, St. Cloud State University, Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant

33. Supplemental Teaching This strategy allows one teacher to work with students at their expected grade level, while the other teacher works with those students who need the information and/or materials extended or remediated. Copyright 2011, St. Cloud State University, Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant

34. Alternative or Differentiated Teaching Alternative teaching strategies provide two different approaches to teaching the same information. The learning outcome is the same for all students however the avenue for getting there is different. Copyright 2011, St. Cloud State University, Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant

35. Team Teaching Well planned, team taught lessons, exhibit an invisible flow of instruction with no prescribed division of authority. Both teachers are actively involved in the lesson. From a student’s perspective, there is no clearly defined leader, as both teachers share the instruction, are free to interject information, and available to assist students and answer questions. Copyright 2011, St. Cloud State University, Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant

36. Hierarchy???? Team Teaching Alternative or Differentiated Teaching Supplemental/Extended Teaching Parallel Teaching Station Teaching One Teach, One Assist One Teach, One Observe Copyright 2011, St. Cloud State University, Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant

37. Implementation Team Teaching Parallel Teaching Station Teaching One Teach, One Assist Copyright 2011, St. Cloud State University, Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant

38. Sharing Responsibilities Cooperating Teacher Candidate Copyright 2011, St. Cloud State University, Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant Planning Teaching Assessment

39. Sharing Planning The Teacher Candidate and Cooperating Teacher will share: What content to teach What co-teaching strategies to use Who will lead different parts of the lesson How to assess student learning Materials and resources Copyright 2011, St. Cloud State University, Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant

40. Sharing Instruction While Co-Teaching, the Teacher Candidate and Cooperating Teacher will: Share leadership in the classroom Work with all students Use a variety of co-teaching approaches Be seen as equal partners Manage the classroom together Make changes as needed during a lesson Copyright 2011, St. Cloud State University, Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant

41. Sharing Assessment While Co-Assessing, the Teacher Candidate and Cooperating Teacher will: Both participate in the assessment of the students Share the workload of daily grading Provide formative and summative assessment of students Jointly determine grades Copyright 2011, St. Cloud State University, Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant

42. What does this look like… Teacher Candidates will be expected to: Contribute ideas from the very beginning of the experience Engage with students assisting with their learning from the very first day Be expected to take on full leadership in all 3 areas (planning, instruction & assessment) Demonstrate competencies as a teacher Have opportunities to teach alone Copyright 2011, St. Cloud State University, Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant

43. Summing It up… Co-Teaching requires the Teacher Candidate and Cooperating Teacher to build a strong relationship so they can collaboratively plan, teach and assess the students in their classroom. What are 3 things you can do to prepare for a teacher candidate? Copyright 2011, St. Cloud State University, Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant

44. edTPA

45. Create a body of evidence of teacher performance (pre-service) Contribute evidence for licensure decisions Measure a candidate’s readiness for licensure Provide a consistent measure across teacher preparation programs Support candidate learning Improve information base for accreditation Goals of edTPA

46. Pre-service assessments of teaching (for licensure, program requirements, etc.) should allow us to predict reasonably well how effective teachers will be in enabling students to learn important subject matter make teachers and teacher preparation better Core Premise

47. Task 1 – What to do Contextual Context Select learning segment Select central focus and key language demand Create instruction and assessment plan Respond to commentary prompts

48. Task 1 – What to submit Context for learning Lesson plans –instructional materials –assessment tools/procedures and criteria Planning Commentary

49. Task 2 – What to do Collect permission forms for video- recording Review lessons where students are engaged Submit 1-2 video clips Respond to commentary prompts

50. Task 2 – What to submit Video Clip Instruction Commentary

51. Task 3 – what to do Analyze class performance Identify 3 student work samples that illustrate student understanding Select and analyze the learning of 2 focus students Respond to commentary prompts Identify next steps

52. Task 3 – what to submit Student work samples Evidence of feedback Assessment commentary

53. Task 4 – What to do Explain what was learned by candidate What could be done differently Explain how changes would improve students’ learning

54. Task 4 – What to submit Analyzing teaching commentary

55. Contact Information Lisa Barron, Coordinator of Clinical Teaching –Office phone 931.221.7190 –Cell phone 615.519.0954 –Email barronl@apsu.edu –Theresa Dezellem, Administrative Assistant Office phone 931.221.7441 dezellemt@apsu.edu