April 1, 2002



The Honorable Dede Alpert, Chair
Joint Committee to Develop a Master Plan for Education
State Capitol, Room 5050
Sacramento, CA 95814

RE: Professional Personnel Development Working Group Final Report

Dear Senator Alpert:

On behalf of the California State University (CSU), I am pleased to provide you and the members of the Joint Master Plan Committee with the CSU’s response to the Final Report of the Professional Personnel Development Working Group (PPD Final Report).

The goals of this working group – that every student will have the opportunity to learn from a fully qualified teacher or faculty member; and that the state will ensure a sufficient supply of teachers, faculty and administrators with the qualifications necessary to promote student learning – are central tenets of the CSU’s commitment to prepare high quality teachers and administrators. During the past year, the CSU produced 59 percent of the new teachers prepared in California. At the same time, CSU provided leadership in new and ongoing initiatives to assure that the quality of the teachers it prepares is at the highest possible level. And yet for all these efforts, as well as those of the University of California and the state’s independent and private universities, the state’s classrooms are still not filled with fully prepared and qualified teachers.

Thus, the focus of this working group may well become the single most important feature of the Master Plan that the joint committee has been charged with preparing. A cadre of well-prepared and qualified teachers and administrators is the engine which will make the educational enterprise run smoothly, and the success of the Master Plan as a whole will depend in large part on the state’s ability to achieve the goals that underscore the mission of this working group. Given the mission of the CSU and the role the system plays in preparing the state’s teachers, we stand ready to work with the committee and the citizens of California to achieve those goals and ensure the success of the new Master Plan.

In that spirit, CSU offers the following comments pertaining to the specific recommendations in the PPD Report that affect our ongoing activities in professional personnel development. We do not mean to imply that the recommendations not addressed in this letter are not involved in our work – as the process to develop a Master Plan continues, we may offer additional reaction to those items.

State/Regional Issues

Recommendation #1: Place responsibility for coordination of K-12 professional personnel development activities in the Governor’s Office through the Office of the Secretary for Education.

The CSU supports this recommendation and believes that the framework proposed – the establishment of an advisory body with representatives from all segments of the education policy community – is an appropriate means to ensure the coordination and accountability of existing efforts.

Recommendation #2: Create an independent entity that is responsible for collecting data related to teaching and school administration, and evaluating programs and initiatives. 

The creation of an independent entity for these operations is supported by the CSU. It is critical, however, that such an entity have proper oversight and that it include a mechanism for input and participation from the education segments. In addition, it is important that the entity survey existing data sources as well as program evaluation efforts prior to embarking on a "master plan" for such activities. The CSU supports the concept of a tracking system as well as development and implementation of a statewide system that follows those who have completed teacher education program to schools and classrooms in which they are teaching. Assembly Bill 1570, signed by Governor Davis in 1999, represented the first step towards creating a comprehensive data base, one which supports longitudinal studies of individual students. The CSU has actively participated in this development process.

However, CSU General Counsel has frequently advised that the use of Social Security numbers for such purposes is problematic given federal and state privacy law, so this aspect of the system may require additional attention. Finally, we would note that an annual evaluation of teacher education programs has been initiated by the CSU. We strongly urge that any new state entity capitalize on objective evaluation activities that have been started and support those actions, rather than recreate a new evaluation system.

Recommendation #3: Forge voluntary partnerships to provide program coordination, evaluation, monitoring and intervention at the local level.

As outlined in the report, such partnerships would organize efforts at personnel preparation and professional development among local districts and higher education institutions that serve their area and match district needs with university program offerings.

Collaboration with K-12 schools is a critical component of the CSU’s commitment to prepare high quality teachers. Each CSU teacher preparation program has significantly increased and expanded the number of partnerships with school districts, including intern to full credential programs, teacher aide to full credential programs, and induction programs to provide support for new teachers and lifelong professional development programs that include district and teacher organization participation.

One example of such a program, the Los Angeles-based collaborative Design for Excellence Linking Teaching and Achievement Initiative (DELTA), involves four CSU campuses (Los Angeles, Northridge, Dominguez Hills, and Long Beach), and provides schools with pre-service, in-service, and professional development activities for district teachers. The collaborative (which partners with schools in Los Angeles, Pasadena, and Long Beach) has provided a continuum of teacher development, through eight field-based Professional Development Centers coordinated by university faculty members and exemplary K-12 teachers. During 2000-01, DELTA activities included more than 4,700 teachers in 107 urban schools with 97,000 students. DELTA has had a major influence in the redesign of accelerated and field-based teacher preparation programs, the result being campus programs that are more closely aligned to the needs of an urban, diverse pupil population.


K-12 Professional Personnel Development

Recommendation #4: The state should require that all teachers are adequately prepared prior to assuming responsibility for a classroom.

The CSU supports this common-sense recommendation. As the report notes, alternative routes into teaching serve a valuable function, but exist in dynamic tension with the move towards standards-based programs. Multiple pathways are especially valuable in times of critical shortage, such as that which exists now, but the state should maintain complete preparation prior to teaching as priority. One example of a program with this goal is the Governor’s Teaching Fellowship Program, which encourages highly qualified prospective teachers to teach in low-performing schools for at least four years after attaining their teaching credential.

Embedded within this recommendation are several options to contend with the proliferation of emergency permit teacher in recent years. At CSU, the CalStateTEACH program is designed for exactly this purpose, and can serve as a model for future programs to achieve this goal. The program, an alternative path to the Multiple Subject Credential, maximizes the use of available technology. It is based on self-study with the availability of online, print, and CD-ROM materials, web-based "class discussions," and on-site coaching by CSU faculty. Interest in the program has increased signficantly in recent years; for instance, more than 800 interns were enrolled in CalStateTEACH during 2000-01, up from 400 the year before. In March 2001, 133 students became the first to complete the program and become fully credentialed teachers.

Recommendation #4.2: The state should increase the capacity of California’s higher education systems to prepare larger numbers of educators for the public schools.

The CSU supports this recommendation, in particular the notion of targeting shortage areas for expansion. We would also suggest the value of referencing successful undergraduate blended teacher preparation programs, which have become an important resource in the quest to meet the need for fully trained classroom teachers. The CSU has well-established undergraduate blended programs that provide multiple entry points, a system of application and early advisement, subject matter/teacher preparation integration, early field experiences for candidates, and local district participation.

Recommendation #5.3: The state should ensure that teacher preparation, induction and ongoing professional development include a focus on teaching in urban settings and teaching children who bring particular challenges to the learning environment.

Two examples of such programs are the Urban Learning blended teacher preparation program at CSU, Los Angeles, and the SERVE program at CSU, Long Beach, which places 600 undergraduate future teachers a semester in diverse, urban classrooms as literacy tutors.

Recommendation #6: The state, regional entities and local school districts must redesign their professional development activities as well as invest more of their resources in human capital development.

An example of a program that was developed in the spirit of this recommendation is the Educational Technology Professional Development Program, coordinated and administered by the CSU, which provides intensive school staff development in the use of technology in the K-12 classroom.

Recommendation #7: The state must redouble its efforts to diversify the educational workforce.

At the CSU, the purpose of the Teacher Recruitment Project (TRP) is to attract potential educators from underrepresented groups, creating a teaching force as diverse as today’s classrooms. For the past 13 years, allocations from lottery funds have provided the resources for the CSU campus TRPs to establish pipelines of future teachers within their service regions. These pipelines take a variety of forms, and have been designed to respond to unique regional characteristics, target multiple audiences, and include strategies that have proven successful in recruiting underrepresented students to teaching.

Recommendation #7.1: Enhance the role of community colleges in teacher preparation.

The May 2000 Memorandum of Understanding between the California Community Colleges (CCC) and the CSU specifically addresses the role each system plays in meeting the critical need for qualified teachers. The CCCs have the opportunity to participate in the pre-preparation experience for students who indicate an intent to enter the field of teaching by offering such courses as "Introduction to Teaching" and early field experiences in classroom settings.

This section of the report includes a recommendation for removing the limitation of the six unit ceiling for the transfer of units in teacher education from community colleges to the CSU. We wish to note that this limit applies only to professional preparation courses, for which the community college does not currently employ faculty with this specialization and/or expertise. In addition, admission policies to these programs are governed by state accreditation standards, for which the credentialing institution is fully responsible for upholding.

Community colleges currently offer many options in subject matter coursework, aligned with the K-12 Academic Content Standards, that are fully transferable to the CSU. The 6-unit limit was recently raised to its current level, to allow community colleges that wish to offer early fieldwork experience courses, as well as Education Introduction courses, to have these units transferable. While we do not believe there is a current need to revise this policy, the CSU has stated that transfer students make up the largest percentage of future teachers, and we will work with the CCC to ensure that transfer students are treated exactly the same as students enrolling in our CSU campus undergraduate programs with the intention of becoming teacher education candidates.

Recommendation #7.2: The state should expand outreach efforts to targeted groups.

The CSU believes it is also important to expand academic preparation programs targeting students who are disadvantaged educationally and economically, who are enrolled in public K-12 schools that have low-college going rates, and who need assistance in strengthening basic skills in math and English. In many instances, this academic preparation is equally important as outreach.

The CSU/K-12 Collaborative Academic Preparation Initiative (CAPI) represents an initiative to ensure that students develop the skills necessary to enter directly into CSU baccalaureate-level courses without the need to enroll in remedial courses.

Recommendation #8.1.2: The Legislature could create an advanced teaching credential that recognizes exceptional teaching and authorizes advanced services in instructional leadership within schools.

The CSU continues to support the concept of an advanced teaching credential, which was recommended by the final report of the Senate Bill 1422 Panel. This is an important step to ensure the expert training of those teachers entrusted with critical professional roles in working with novice colleagues. Such roles include serving as master teachers to student teachers, support providers in induction and intern programs, mentor teachers, and professional development advisors.

Recommendation #9: Local school districts and higher education institutions should develop partnerships to recruit, prepare and train quality principals.

The CSU believes that it is essential to develop leadership programs which are standards-based and outcomes-driven. Partnerships that include higher education and local education agencies have been productive and supported by foundations, the CSU, and local school districts. Higher education and school districts must partner in the development, implementation, and evaluation of preparation programs for school administrators.

The CSU and the Association of California School Administrators (ACSA) are developing a collaborative program to increase the number of educators prepared to become school principals, to ensure that all principals are qualified to lead schools in which teachers and students perform at the very highest levels.
 
 

Professional Development in Colleges and Universities

Recommendation #10: Increase the capability of California colleges and universities to attract and hire qualified faculty members (by a variety of means).

The CSU has benefited from programs that were funded by the legislature to increase capacity. Professional development initiatives helped campus programs to increase the numbers of faculty directly involved with preparing teachers for California. CSU urges the committee to consider future initiatives of this nature that will directly support the recruitment and retention of college and university personnel in teacher education and subject matter preparation.

Recommendation #12: Commission a study to evaluate the impact of the increasing utilization of temporary faculty (full-time and part-time) that examines (1) the depth of the preparation of temporary faculty in teaching strategies/student learning; (2) the impact of temporary faculty on student outcomes and advisement; and (3) the impact of temporary faculty on the ability of tenure track faculty to fulfill all other responsbilities and expectations.

Assembly Concurrent Resolution 73 (Strom-Martin, et al.), among other provisions, urged the CSU to develop a plan, in consultation with the CSU Academic Senate and the California Faculty Association, to raise the percentage of tenured and tenure track faculty to at least 75 percent.

Pursuant to the resolution, the CSU has conducted a study of the use of temporary faculty that will be released later this month. This study identifies the reasons why CSU relies upon a strong cadre of temporary faculty. The ability to use lecturers enables permanent tenured and tenure track faculty to take sabbaticals, get release time for service activities, and participate in the CSU’s Faculty Early Retirement Program. Lecturers also help to smooth the transitions between separations and new appointments, and they provide a ready workforce when new enrollment growth funding becomes available. More importantly, lecturers who have full-time employment outside of the CSU bring their valuable experience as practitioners into the classroom.

The CSU will be sharing the results of this study with the committee and all members of the Legislature shortly. We hope that it will help inform, if not resolve, many of the concerns of the working group which led to this recommendation.

Recommendation #14: Develop new and expanded education doctorate programs in the public sector in collaboration with K-12 educational leaders and community colleges.

Recommendation #14.1: The UC and CSU should report yearly on education doctorate progress, timelines and other accountability mechanisms such as number of students served, student satisfaction, and accreditation status.

The CSU strongly supports these recommendations, but would note the value of these programs in preparing leaders for K-12 schools as well as at community colleges. As the members of the committee are likely aware, CSU and UC have recently reached an agreement that will provide for expanded joint education doctorate programs that will be designed to meet the very goals outlined in Recommendation #14.

In conclusion, the CSU commends the working group for their efforts in identifying the key professional personnel development issues facing the state, and hopes that this initial response is useful in the committee’s ongoing deliberations. We look forward to working with the members and staff of the committee, and providing additional information and feedback, as the process continues.

Sincerely yours,
 

Karen Y. Zamarripa
Assistant Vice Chancellor

cc: Members, Joint Legislative Master Plan Committee
Gary Hart, Chair, Professional Personnel Development Working Group
Stephen G. Blake, Chief Consultant, Joint Legislative Master Plan Committee
Alva Johnson, Consultant, Professional Personnel Development Working Group