Increasing the odds: Strategies for building successful productive PDS

Dennis Pataniczek, PhD, Carol Wood, PhD,

& Stacie Siers, MEd

Salisbury University

INTRODUCTIONS

Who are we? Where are we from

36 School Partners in 8 counties

COLLABORATE

How do we begin?

EVALUATE the need

COMMUNICATE with ALL

SOLICITATE feedback

UPDATE stakeholders

GENERATE consensus

ACTIVATE new

EVALUATE AND UPDATE

Anecdotal evidence Candidates Faculty School partners

Annual data collection “New” reporting

requirements Results of an accreditation

report

COMMUNICATE CHANGE

EvaluateDraft changes

Gather feedback

Adjust draft

Feedback then activate Candidates

Faculty

School Partners

Employers

SOLICIT INPUT

Candidates

Faculty and curriculum groups

Professional Development School Council

Local School System Partners

Who’s holding th

e card

s?

Accreditors

THE CANDIDATES The Challenge:

What kind of feedback Evaluation of Mentors and Supervisors Evaluation of School Site Evaluation of Program Satisfaction

Exit Alumni

Pay off: Candidate feedback CAN improve programs

THE FACULTY (11 INITIAL PROGRAMS)

The Challenge: Creating a culture of

Collaboration (University and School faculty are under different DEMANDS)

Providing enough evidence to convince faculty to MODIFY programs

The Pay off: Collaboration between faculty

and the public schools strengthens programs and promotes buy-in

Programs can CHANGE

SCHOOL PARTNERS (RPDS COUNCIL/LSS)

The Challenge: 2 to 3 meetings/year membership can be a revolving

door The Pay Off:

Stakeholder feedback provides input for changes in programs

Collaborative relationships are strengthened when input is requested and changes are made

THE ACCREDITORS: (STATE AND NATIONAL)

The Challenge: Requirements and processes

are EVER changing The Pay Off:

Close communication with these groups keeps our programs strong and on TARGET

ASSESSMENT STRATEGIES

The Challenge:

Frequency

Outcomes

Repetition

Multiples

The Payoff: Data driven decision making

DATA SOURCES The Candidates

Exit information The Faculty

Annual program feedback from multiple sources

The Council Clinical Field Experience

Expectations (Methods courses) “Top 10”

Local School System Access to resources & special

services for our candidates The Employers

Satisfaction

THE QUESTION- HOW EFFECTIVELY DO CANDIDATES ADAPT INSTRUCTION AND ADJUST INSTRUCTION FOR ALL LEARNERS?

Adap

t Ins

truct

ion

Adju

st Lea

rnin

g0

1

2

3

4Program ExitAlumniEmployer

Very well prepared = 4, well prepared = 3, prepared = 2, somewhat prepared = 1, not prepared = 0

TARGETED FOR IMPROVEMENT ACROSS ALL PROGRAMS IN THE UNIT

THE QUESTION- HOW DOES THE UNIT ENSURE THAT TEACHER CANDIDATES HAVE OPPORTUNITIES TO COLLABORATIVELY PLAN AND TEACH WITH SPECIALIZED RESOURCE PERSONNEL?

The Results Over the last three years 55.56% of candidates reported

that he/she reviewed and IEP with the mentor teacher

The Council indicated in the “TOP 10” that candidates needed more “Familiarity with Special Ed/ IEP/ 504”

Faculty were given the task to improve the opportunities for candidates in their program to gain more knowledge about IEPs/504s/ Faculty targeted specific courses to build assignments with

outcomes related to IEPs

Local School System group strategized solutions to improving candidate access to IEPs within their schools