Arts cuts in Pennsylvania are coming due to reckless legislation and empty promises.
How often has this happened in Indiana?
Tuesday, May 29, 2012
Saturday, May 26, 2012
REPA 2 Affects Other Professional Educator Licensing Rules Too
Please feel free to weave these talking points in your comments to legislators on the Indiana Select Commission on Education. These lawmakers are poised to influence the IDOE's ill-conceived change proposals to the Indiana teacher and administrator licensing process. cg
PUBLIC COMMENTS TALKING POINTS ON SPECIAL ED:
For Parents: The below statements are issues of concern for many parents of children with disabilities. Please feel free to use these ideas individual or in combination when submitting your public comment.
Parents 1:
Passing a test is not enough to ensure that my child’s Special Education teacher is ready to address my child’s learning needs. I expect my child’s teacher to understand my child’s disability, and know how to teach him/her. (Insert something about your child…My son Steven has difficulty reading and needs his teacher to know instructional strategies related to his disability…)
Parent 2:
As a parent, I see myself as an active partner in my child’s education. It is important for me to be able to discuss my concerns and contribute to the planning for my child’s future. I want my daughter’s special education teacher to be able to participate and interact with me in these discussions, working with me to develop an IEP. This is a problem already, even with teachers who are fully prepared and I can only imagine how much more difficult this would be with a teacher who received their license only by taking a test. (Insert a personal experience here)
Parent 3:
My child has a civil right to a free, appropriate, public education according to federal law. Reducing the skill level of my child’s special educator raises concern about the State of Indiana ensuring my child’s civil right.
For Teachers: The below statements are issues of concern for special education teachers in the state of Indiana. Please feel free to use these ideas individual or in combination when submitting your public comment.
Teachers 1:
As a teacher, passing a test does not demonstrate that I have the skills needed to apply them in the classroom. (Insert a personal experience here… “ I may know about various “textbook” strategies to teach a child who is struggling with reading, but actually using those strategies in the presence of a real student requires more than my knowledge
Teachers 2:
The job of a special educator is multifaceted and includes many tasks beyond instruction. Working with families and other professionals to ensure a quality education for students with disabilities, requires interpersonal and organizational skills that can only be develop through direct application acquired during field experiences and student teaching opportunities. These experiences provide critical reflection through the teacher education process. (Insert a personal experience where you benefitted from or needed some guidance in this area, e.g. working with a mentor or cooperating teacher.)
Teacher 3:
The REPA II proposal violates the intention of federal legislation, IDEIA and Section 504 of the Vocational Rehabilitation Act, which requires well trained “highly qualified” teachers to provide free appropriate public education to student with disabilities. REPA II undermines this intent by watering down a teacher’s qualification thereby diminishing the skill level of a special educator.
Teacher 4:
Given the complexity of my job as a special educator, I am concerned about my administrator’s ability to adequately evaluate my effectiveness. I am opposed to the idea that my administrator can determine my ability to maintain my licensure. Administrators can decide if I can remain on an emergency license indefinitely or lose it. Or as a teacher on a Professional License, my administrator’s evaluation can determine if I keep my “Professional” status or change to a “Probationary” status. (Insert an example – How does my administrator’s previous experience as a (insert here: elementary teacher, PE teachers, coach, etc) inform him/her about special education?)
For Parents: The below statements are issues of concern for many parents of children with disabilities. Please feel free to use these ideas individual or in combination when submitting your public comment.
Parents 1:
Passing a test is not enough to ensure that my child’s Special Education teacher is ready to address my child’s learning needs. I expect my child’s teacher to understand my child’s disability, and know how to teach him/her. (Insert something about your child…My son Steven has difficulty reading and needs his teacher to know instructional strategies related to his disability…)
Parent 2:
As a parent, I see myself as an active partner in my child’s education. It is important for me to be able to discuss my concerns and contribute to the planning for my child’s future. I want my daughter’s special education teacher to be able to participate and interact with me in these discussions, working with me to develop an IEP. This is a problem already, even with teachers who are fully prepared and I can only imagine how much more difficult this would be with a teacher who received their license only by taking a test. (Insert a personal experience here)
Parent 3:
My child has a civil right to a free, appropriate, public education according to federal law. Reducing the skill level of my child’s special educator raises concern about the State of Indiana ensuring my child’s civil right.
For Teachers: The below statements are issues of concern for special education teachers in the state of Indiana. Please feel free to use these ideas individual or in combination when submitting your public comment.
Teachers 1:
As a teacher, passing a test does not demonstrate that I have the skills needed to apply them in the classroom. (Insert a personal experience here… “ I may know about various “textbook” strategies to teach a child who is struggling with reading, but actually using those strategies in the presence of a real student requires more than my knowledge
Teachers 2:
The job of a special educator is multifaceted and includes many tasks beyond instruction. Working with families and other professionals to ensure a quality education for students with disabilities, requires interpersonal and organizational skills that can only be develop through direct application acquired during field experiences and student teaching opportunities. These experiences provide critical reflection through the teacher education process. (Insert a personal experience where you benefitted from or needed some guidance in this area, e.g. working with a mentor or cooperating teacher.)
Teacher 3:
The REPA II proposal violates the intention of federal legislation, IDEIA and Section 504 of the Vocational Rehabilitation Act, which requires well trained “highly qualified” teachers to provide free appropriate public education to student with disabilities. REPA II undermines this intent by watering down a teacher’s qualification thereby diminishing the skill level of a special educator.
Teacher 4:
Given the complexity of my job as a special educator, I am concerned about my administrator’s ability to adequately evaluate my effectiveness. I am opposed to the idea that my administrator can determine my ability to maintain my licensure. Administrators can decide if I can remain on an emergency license indefinitely or lose it. Or as a teacher on a Professional License, my administrator’s evaluation can determine if I keep my “Professional” status or change to a “Probationary” status. (Insert an example – How does my administrator’s previous experience as a (insert here: elementary teacher, PE teachers, coach, etc) inform him/her about special education?)
From Regina Weir
For more info on special ed rules changes go here:
Friday, May 25, 2012
Senate Members of Indiana Select Commission on Education need to hear from you about degredation of teacher licensing rule changes in REPA 2
REPA 2 Points of concern:
Creation of adjunct teaching permits, for which the only criteria are a 3.0/4.0 undergraduate grade point average and passage of the content assessment. Adjunct teachers would not be required to complete any preparation in how to teach nor pass the new pedagogy assessment required for new teacher licenses.
- Restrictions of the teacher license renewal criteria to only the results of teacher evaluations earned in their local schools with no external expectations for professional development.
- Elimination of the opportunity to renew existing 10 year licenses.
- Ability to add any content area to an existing license without any developmentally appropriate content or teaching preparations. This change includes the potential for license additions in the fine arts, special education, early childhood education and elementary education by licensed individuals simply passing a test.
- Changes to special education preparation that would not require any subject area preparation or expertise.
- Changes to the building principal license requirements, changes that reduce degree requirements and eligibility criteria at a time in which the building principals are being asked to do significantly more.
- Changes in the approval/accreditation criteria for state teacher preparation programs with no reference to national or professional criteria nor to a clear review process or time line.
In summary, the Indiana Department of Education made significant changes to teacher and administrator licensing and teacher preparation just two years ago; changes which have yet to be implemented fully even by the Department of Education. Coming before the original REPA revisions are fully implemented, REPA 2 will add significantly to the high level of instability in the policy environment affecting teachers and schools in Indiana. Perhaps, the primary recommendation should be "wait"; to allow for the changes made in 2010 to be implemented and for the results to be seen. If consideration of REPA 2 is not deferred, it is important to be aware of the proposed changes and to speak out on specific revisions needed to maintain quality standards for licensure and to avoid further de-professionalization of teaching. Review the proposed rules at http://www.doe.in.gov/sites/default/files/sboe/repa-2-april-25.pdf.
Indiana Select Committee on Education contact links:
REPA 2 Points of concern:
Creation of adjunct teaching permits, for which the only criteria are a 3.0/4.0 undergraduate grade point average and passage of the content assessment. Adjunct teachers would not be required to complete any preparation in how to teach nor pass the new pedagogy assessment required for new teacher licenses.
- Restrictions of the teacher license renewal criteria to only the results of teacher evaluations earned in their local schools with no external expectations for professional development.
- Elimination of the opportunity to renew existing 10 year licenses.
- Ability to add any content area to an existing license without any developmentally appropriate content or teaching preparations. This change includes the potential for license additions in the fine arts, special education, early childhood education and elementary education by licensed individuals simply passing a test.
- Changes to special education preparation that would not require any subject area preparation or expertise.
- Changes to the building principal license requirements, changes that reduce degree requirements and eligibility criteria at a time in which the building principals are being asked to do significantly more.
- Changes in the approval/accreditation criteria for state teacher preparation programs with no reference to national or professional criteria nor to a clear review process or time line.
In summary, the Indiana Department of Education made significant changes to teacher and administrator licensing and teacher preparation just two years ago; changes which have yet to be implemented fully even by the Department of Education. Coming before the original REPA revisions are fully implemented, REPA 2 will add significantly to the high level of instability in the policy environment affecting teachers and schools in Indiana. Perhaps, the primary recommendation should be "wait"; to allow for the changes made in 2010 to be implemented and for the results to be seen. If consideration of REPA 2 is not deferred, it is important to be aware of the proposed changes and to speak out on specific revisions needed to maintain quality standards for licensure and to avoid further de-professionalization of teaching. Review the proposed rules at http://www.doe.in.gov/sites/default/files/sboe/repa-2-april-25.pdf.
REPA 2 Public Comment Link on Special Education and Special Area Teacher Licensing Changes is Open:
Here is the link to make comments on the entire REPA 2 Rule licensing proposal or to individual rule changes:
http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/9VYXCQ3
After reading through this document and obtaining info from other educators I am providing analysis of the proposed rule changes in a later post.
It is important you give the IDOE feedback before the June 21 deadline. The comment section will be closed on that date and further public comments will not be considered.
http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/9VYXCQ3
After reading through this document and obtaining info from other educators I am providing analysis of the proposed rule changes in a later post.
It is important you give the IDOE feedback before the June 21 deadline. The comment section will be closed on that date and further public comments will not be considered.
Thursday, May 24, 2012
Indiana Department of Education will attempt to change special education and fine arts teacher licensing rules: Stay Tuned....
Public commenting on REPA 2 teacher licensing rule changes are slated to open today on May 24, however, that is subject to change.
I will post the link to the IDOE public comment page as soon as it is made available.
In the mean time, some points to ponder: What does it mean for students, parents and taxpayers to have teacher candidates without a comprehensive professional education background, working with students in fine arts or special education classes across Indiana Public Schools?
What kind of learning experiences are children likely to encounter with adults who have little or no training in education methods, pedagogy or child development who have been selected to teach visual arts, music or special education students?
Do parents and taxpayers expect special education, fine arts and music education teacher candidates to have extensive training as professional educators in the areas they have been intrusted to engage Hoosier school children in?
At the end of the public comment period, 21 days from it's inception, there will be ONE hearing. This will be your chance to personally speak and provide more insight into your concerns about these proposed rule changes.
Stay tuned!
campak14@yahoo.com
I will post the link to the IDOE public comment page as soon as it is made available.
In the mean time, some points to ponder: What does it mean for students, parents and taxpayers to have teacher candidates without a comprehensive professional education background, working with students in fine arts or special education classes across Indiana Public Schools?
What kind of learning experiences are children likely to encounter with adults who have little or no training in education methods, pedagogy or child development who have been selected to teach visual arts, music or special education students?
Do parents and taxpayers expect special education, fine arts and music education teacher candidates to have extensive training as professional educators in the areas they have been intrusted to engage Hoosier school children in?
At the end of the public comment period, 21 days from it's inception, there will be ONE hearing. This will be your chance to personally speak and provide more insight into your concerns about these proposed rule changes.
Stay tuned!
campak14@yahoo.com
Saturday, May 19, 2012
Public Comment Date changed....
The May 21st public comment date for REPA 2 has been extended to another date, sometime in June. As soon as the new date is made available, I will post it on this blog. Thanks so much! Clyde
Friday, May 11, 2012
REPA 2: Points of Concern
Creation of adjunct teaching permits, for
which the only criteria are a 3.0/4.0 undergraduate grade point average and
passage of the content assessment. Adjunct teachers would not be required
to complete any preparation in how to teach nor pass the new pedagogy
assessment required for new teacher licenses.
- Restrictions of the teacher license renewal criteria to only the results of teacher evaluations earned in their local schools with no external expectations for professional development.
- Elimination of the opportunity to renew existing 10 year licenses.
- Ability to add any content area to an existing license without any developmentally appropriate content or teaching preparations. This change includes the potential for license additions in the fine arts, special education, early childhood education and elementary education by licensed individuals simply passing a test.
- Changes to special education preparation that would not require any subject area preparation or expertise.
- Changes to the building principal license requirements, changes that reduce degree requirements and eligibility criteria at a time in which the building principals are being asked to do significantly more.
- Changes in the approval/accreditation criteria for state teacher preparation programs with no reference to national or professional criteria nor to a clear review process or time line.
In summary, the Indiana Department of Education made significant changes to teacher and administrator licensing and teacher preparation just two years ago; changes which have yet to be implemented fully even by the Department of Education. Coming before the original REPA revisions are fully implemented, REPA 2 will add significantly to the high level of instability in the policy environment affecting teachers and schools in Indiana. Perhaps, the primary recommendation should be "wait"; to allow for the changes made in 2010 to be implemented and for the results to be seen. If consideration of REPA 2 is not deferred, it is important to be aware of the proposed changes and to speak out on specific revisions needed to maintain quality standards for licensure and to avoid further de-professionalization of teaching. Review the proposed rules at http://www.doe.in.gov/sites/default/files/sboe/repa-2-april-25.pdf. More details about the public comment Website and the public hearing will be forthcoming.
- Restrictions of the teacher license renewal criteria to only the results of teacher evaluations earned in their local schools with no external expectations for professional development.
- Elimination of the opportunity to renew existing 10 year licenses.
- Ability to add any content area to an existing license without any developmentally appropriate content or teaching preparations. This change includes the potential for license additions in the fine arts, special education, early childhood education and elementary education by licensed individuals simply passing a test.
- Changes to special education preparation that would not require any subject area preparation or expertise.
- Changes to the building principal license requirements, changes that reduce degree requirements and eligibility criteria at a time in which the building principals are being asked to do significantly more.
- Changes in the approval/accreditation criteria for state teacher preparation programs with no reference to national or professional criteria nor to a clear review process or time line.
In summary, the Indiana Department of Education made significant changes to teacher and administrator licensing and teacher preparation just two years ago; changes which have yet to be implemented fully even by the Department of Education. Coming before the original REPA revisions are fully implemented, REPA 2 will add significantly to the high level of instability in the policy environment affecting teachers and schools in Indiana. Perhaps, the primary recommendation should be "wait"; to allow for the changes made in 2010 to be implemented and for the results to be seen. If consideration of REPA 2 is not deferred, it is important to be aware of the proposed changes and to speak out on specific revisions needed to maintain quality standards for licensure and to avoid further de-professionalization of teaching. Review the proposed rules at http://www.doe.in.gov/sites/default/files/sboe/repa-2-april-25.pdf. More details about the public comment Website and the public hearing will be forthcoming.
Thursday, May 3, 2012
Concerned about REPA TWO? Contact these folks:
Indiana Select Commission on Education will be convening a meeting with the Superintendent of Public Instruction on May 21. Here are the members of this committee:
http://www.in.gov/legislative/interim/committee/sedu.html
You can email the legislators here:
http://www.in.gov/cgi-bin/legislative/contact/contact.pl
Here are the minutes from last months meeting:
http://www.in.gov/legislative/interim/committee/minutes/SEDUF4O.pdf
The idea that pseudo teachers who lack first hand experience and extensive pedagogical knowledge could be issued a teaching license merely by passing an IDOE test is very disheartening.
REPA 2 will enable public and charter school administrators to hire the least-prepared and least-experienced teachers to work with significant numbers of heterogeneous groups of children including those who exist in psycho-emotionally fragile states. From a moral standpoint, the IDOE occupies the low ground on this issue and is misguided in thinking that the least prepared teachers can somehow provide the highest quality learning experiences for children. From a qualitative standpoint, there is no comparison to an educator who has devoted her/his life to teaching and has the professional education credentials to back it up.
http://www.in.gov/legislative/interim/committee/sedu.html
You can email the legislators here:
http://www.in.gov/cgi-bin/legislative/contact/contact.pl
Here are the minutes from last months meeting:
http://www.in.gov/legislative/interim/committee/minutes/SEDUF4O.pdf
The idea that pseudo teachers who lack first hand experience and extensive pedagogical knowledge could be issued a teaching license merely by passing an IDOE test is very disheartening.
REPA 2 will enable public and charter school administrators to hire the least-prepared and least-experienced teachers to work with significant numbers of heterogeneous groups of children including those who exist in psycho-emotionally fragile states. From a moral standpoint, the IDOE occupies the low ground on this issue and is misguided in thinking that the least prepared teachers can somehow provide the highest quality learning experiences for children. From a qualitative standpoint, there is no comparison to an educator who has devoted her/his life to teaching and has the professional education credentials to back it up.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
