UW College of Education
WTEP Residency
[Student Teacher- SECONDARY including K-12 Art]
Developing Competent
and
Democratic Professionals
Revised: Fall 2009
Table of Contents-Secondary
PAGE
Spring 2010 Residency Dates . . . . . 3
Mentoring in a Partner School District . . . . 4
Partner School Districts History . . . . . 5
Key Contact Information ...... 6
Field Placements & Accreditation . . . . . 7
If Difficulties Arise ...... 8
Guidelines for the Identification, Preparation, and Reflections
of Preservice Mentor Teachers . . . . 8
Mentor Teacher Roles and Responsibilities During Residency . 11
Mentor Teacher Semester Checklist . . . . . 13
Suggested Residency Experiences . . . . . 14
Employment Status During Residency . . . . 15
Substituting, Coaching, Other Employment During Residency . 15
Placement Process for Phase III Methods/Residency . . 17
Residency ...... 18
Residency Timeline and Checklist . . . . . 19
Student Teacher Responsibilities . . . . . 20
Partner School Facilitator Roles and Responsibilities . . 21
UW Faculty/Consultant Roles and Responsibilities During Residency 22
WTEP Visitation Record ...... 23
Documentation of Outcomes ...... 24
WTEP Assessment Plan ...... 26
Syllabus EDSE 4500 Residency in Teaching . . 27
Praxis II Information ...... 28
Wyoming Teacher Certification . . . . . 29
Institutional Recommendation . . . . . 30
The Job Search ...... 30
Belief Matrix ...... 31
Secondary Residency Evaluation Forms 32
· Social Studies, Modern Languages, Agriculture,
Technical Education and K-12 Art . . . 33
· English ...... 45
· Mathematics ...... 56
· Science ...... 69
SPRING 2010 UW RESIDENCY (STUDENT TEACHING) DATES
ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY MAJORS:
Starting Date: January 4, 2010 (or when teachers report back in your school district…even if those early days are in-service days.)
Midterm Evaluation due: February 24, 2010 (Wednesday)
Final Evaluation due: April 28, 2010 (Wednesday)
Last Day of Student Teaching: April 30, 2010 (Friday)
K-12 MAJORS (Art and Music):
Starting Date: January 4, 2010 (or when teachers report back in your school district….even if those early days are in-service days.)
First Midterm due: January 29, 2010 (Friday)
First Final due: February 24, 2010 (Wednesday)
Beginning of new placement around March 1, 2010 (Monday)
Second Midterm due: March 26, 2010 / April 2, 2010 ***
*** Depends on when your district spring break is; due at the end of the first four full weeks of your second placement.
Second Final due: April 28, 2010 (Wednesday)
Last Day of Student Teaching: April 30, 2010 (Friday)
Laramie Graduation: May 8, 2010 (Saturday)
UWCC Graduation: May 13, 2010 (Thursday)
The last day of Residency may be adjusted depending on your start date of the semester and/or an unusual number of absences. Any deviations from this schedule must be reviewed and approved IN ADVANCE by the relevant Department Head.
Mentoring a student teacher in a Partner School District — how things have changed
(D. Parkinson, April 2006; updated with terminology by K. Persichitte, October 2007)
“Traditional” Student Teaching Model / Mentoring in a Partner School District· Student teacher placements are made solely by the district
· University “supervisor” visits 1-2 times per semester
· Only 1-3 student teachers are placed in each school
· University student teacher experience is primary focus
· Mentor teacher solely responsible for planning student teacher experience
· Mentor teacher leaves the classroom frequently while student teacher “takes over”
· Mentor teacher solely responsible for debriefing, reflecting, providing feedback, and evaluating student teacher
· No focus on professional development
· No focus on research
· Often little appreciation for mentor teachers’ time, expertise, & commitment / · Student teacher placements are made collaboratively with district & university faculty
· During the Residency semester, university methods faculty participate in Partner School activities with mentors and student teachers in the district on a scheduled, regular basis
· A cohort of student teachers are placed in each school (ideally with all eligible mentor teachers), creating peer support groups for student and mentor teachers and a critical mass for change
· University student teacher experience & student learning are the primary focus through participation in a collaborative partnership
· Partner School “team” (mentor, university faculty, & student teacher) plans and customizes the Residency experience to create a good “fit” for each mentor teacher, classroom of students, school, and student teacher
· Mentor teacher and student teacher co-teach frequently to provide students with small group instruction and 1:1 support for at risk students
· Student teachers attend regular seminars for additional debriefing, reflecting, and feedback. 3-way conferences (mentor/student teacher/university faculty) are a Partner School staple
· Professional development is an integral part of the collaborative community for both district & university faculty
· When possible, research projects are incorporated into Partner School activities—as graduate work for mentors pursuing an advanced degree, to meet the needs of the district, and/or to meet the tenure requirements for the university faculty
· Partner School partnership is built on mutual respect, trust, and appreciation for the experience and expertise that each brings to the mentoring of the preservice teacher in the final transition to “teacher’
PARTNER SCHOOL DISTRICTS
(formerly PROFESSIONAL LEARNING COMMUNITIES--PLCs)
Drivers for the Professional Learning Community (PLC) Evolution
· Increase effectiveness & direct engagement of CoEd faculty during the Residency
· NCLB and “highly qualified” definitions
· Revisions to NCATE accreditation requirements
· PTSB certification & endorsement adaptations to meet USDOE mandates
· Mentor & preservice teacher feedback regarding UW faculty interactions and residential requirements (Methods & Residency)
WTEP Goals
· Every program graduate will have the knowledge, skills, & dispositions to assure that ALL children in their future classrooms will learn
· Use PLCs and WTEP curricula to maintain our focus on “Developing Competent and Democratic Professionals”
· Program graduates will have transcripts and approved programs that offer the best opportunity for recognition as “Highly Qualified” regardless of state where employed
PLC Evolution Timeline
· Spring 2002 through Spring 2003: University & WY district conversations & site visits to functioning professional development schools (PDSs) in CO, NE, and UT
· Fall 2003: CoEd adopts philosophical basis for Professional Learning Communities (PLCs) and discussions begin with WY volunteer districts: Sheridan 2, Fremont 14 & 25, Laramie 1, Albany 1…resulting in 3-year agreements to develop PLCs
· 2003-04: Minimal implementation of the PLC concept; largely a planning & preparation year; major revisions to WTEP curriculum [Residency candidates in 29 WY districts in Spring 2004]
· 2004-05: WTEP changes implemented; CoEd faculty load assignments revised; UW support for pilot funding plan; initial concurrent majors developed (4); WSUP Task Force for Mentor Teachers [Residency candidates in 19 WY districts in Spring 2005]
· 2005-06: Full implementation of PLCs & new WTEP requirements for elem & sec Residency; pilot Mentor Teacher Workshops; 11 new concurrent majors developed; expiration of initial PLC agreements [Residency candidates in 17 WY districts in Spring 2006]
· 2006-07: New 4-year agreements implemented that extend the number of participating districts to 7 and includes UWCC in partnership [Residency candidates in 14 WY districts in Spring 2007]
· Fall 2007: change of title for PLCs to Partner School Districts given conflict with use of the PLC term related to professional development efforts by the WDE
Supporting Research
· PLC type partnerships enhance teacher & candidate learning
· Teacher retention is problematic & affected by key elements of the education program
· Institutional leadership is critical to the cultural changes required to implement PLC type partnerships
· PLCs must be an accepted part of mainstream teacher preparation, professional development, & research
· Significant changes occur in role & responsibility
Key References
· Levine, M. (Ed.) (1992). Professional practice schools: Linking teacher education and school reform. NY: Teachers College Press.
· Teitel, L. (2004). How professional development schools make a difference: A review of research. Washington, DC: National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education.
· Sandholtz, J., & Dadlez, S. (2000). Professional development school tradeoffs in teacher preparation and renewal. Teacher Education Quarterly, 27(1), 7-27.
KEY CONTACT INFORMATION
UW Faculty or Consultant
Name
Telephone e-mail
Mentor Teacher(s)
Name
Telephone e-mail
Name
Telephone e-mail
Partner School Facilitator or District Liaison
Name
Telephone e-mail
School Principal
Name
Telephone Fax______
Additional Contacts
Manager of Student Advising
Todd Krieger 307.766.2230
Coordinator of Student Advising
Christi Hutchison 307.766.2230
Office of the Registrar 307.766.5272
Office of Student Financial Aid 307.766.2116
Center for Advising Career Services 307.766.2398
CoEd Graduation Coordinator
Debbie Beck 307.766.2066
Director of Teacher Education
Dr. Judith Ellsworth 307.766.2230
Elementary/Early Childhood Department 307.766.6366
Secondary Education Department 307.766.3275
Special Education Department 307.766.6325
UW College of Education web address: http://ed.uwyo.edu/
FIELD PLACEMENTS & ACCREDITATION
Prepared for the MOU discussions [spring, 2006]. Shared with other Partner Schools and CoEd faculty in June, 2004.
Accreditation elements related to field placements taken from the Acceptable level rubrics established by NCATE (selection of these parts and the italics by Kay Persichitte):
· The unit, its school partners, and other members of the professional community design, deliver, and evaluate field experiences to help candidates develop their knowledge, skills, and dispositions.
· The unit and its school partners jointly determine the specific placement of student teachers and interns for other professional roles to provide appropriate learning experiences.
· Criteria for clinical faculty are clear and known to all of the involved parties. Clinical faculty are accomplished school professionals.
· Clinical faculty provide regular and continuous support for student teachers and other interns through such processes as observation, conferencing, group discussion, email, and the use of other technology.
· Candidates, school faculty, and college or university faculty jointly conduct assessments of candidate performance throughout clinical practice.
· Field experiences allow time for reflection and include feedback from peers and clinical faculty.
· All candidates participate in field experiences that include students with exceptionalities and students from diverse ethnic, racial, gender, and socioeconomic groups.
· Faculty (professional education and clinical) have knowledge and experiences related to preparing candidates to work with students from diverse cultural backgrounds, including students with exceptionalities.
· Candidates interact and work with candidates from diverse ethnic, racial, gender, and socioeconomic groups in schools.
· Field experiences in settings with exceptional populations and students from different ethnic, racial, gender, and socioeconomic groups are designed for candidates to develop and practice their knowledge, skills, and dispositions for working will all students.
· Feedback from peers and supervisors helps candidates reflect on their ability to help all students learn.
· School faculty are licensed in the fields that they teach or supervise, but often do not hold the doctorate.
· Professional education faculty provide service to the college or university, school, and broader community in ways that are consistent with the institution and unit’s mission. They are actively involved with the professional world of practice in P-12 schools.
· Professional education faculty collaborate regularly and systematically with colleagues in P-12 settings, faculty in other college or university units, and members of the broader professional community to improve teaching, candidate learning, and the preparation of educators.
IF DIFFICULTIES ARISE
If difficulties arise during the Residency semester:
· Discuss the problem(s) immediately with your mentor teacher if appropriate. Always contact your UW Faculty/Consultant, as well. In a Partner School setting, you may contact the Partner School Facilitator as the liaison with your UW Faculty/Consultant.
· Contact the UW Faculty/Consultant if the problem(s) are not resolved between you and your mentor teacher. The call to the UW Faculty/Consultant may come from the student teacher, the mentor teacher, or a clinical liaison. The UW Faculty/Consultant will travel to the school immediately when his/her presence is required.
· Mentor teachers and student teachers are strongly encouraged to share any and all concerns regarding the Residency experience at the first sign of difficulty. Experience tells us that by waiting to discuss any concerns, the problem is likely to escalate.
GUIDELINES FOR THE IDENTIFICATION, PREPARATION, AND REFLECTIONS OF PRESERVICE MENTOR TEACHERS
(Adopted 7.21.05)
“Both research and experience suggest that the models whom prospective teachers see in their university classes and during their internships have a major influence on the development of their teaching attitudes and practices. The evidence is persuasive that teachers who see themselves as students of teaching are the ones who continue to grow as individuals and as professionals.” (from Guidelines for the Preparation of Teachers of English)
IDENTIFICATION
It is in the best interest of districts, p-12 students, the CoEd, and preservice teachers for University faculty and district representatives to collaborate in identifying qualified and appropriate preservice mentor teachers. We recognize that the final approval of any teacher to serve as a preservice mentor is the decision of the school district. The district is responsible for the contractual responsibilities and performance evaluation of their faculty and will have knowledge of unique experiences, constraints, and strengths of which the UW College of Education (CoEd) will be unaware; in the same way that UW administration has contractual responsibilities and obligations to college faculty about which the districts will be unaware. That said, the deep historical partnerships that exist in Wyoming for teacher preparation field experiences provide an opportunity for the Wyoming Teacher Education Program (WTEP) to meet one accreditation criterion by including University faculty in the initial identification of potential preservice mentors.
Minimum criteria for initial consideration are:
· employed on a Continuing Contract for the academic year that they would serve as a preservice mentor
· has approval/support from the building principal to serve as a preservice mentor
· has served as a peer mentor OR completed the peer mentoring program in their district (e.g., PathWise, CONNECT)