The Essential Elements, which comprise a subset of those used to evaluate in-service classroom teachers, include subject matter knowledge, inclusive instruction, adjustments to practice (e.g., using assessments to identify student needs and modify lesson plans), collaboration in student learning and wellbeing, safe learning environment, high expectations, and reflective practice. For each of these elements, the instrument provides a rubric with ratings ranging from unsatisfactory to exemplary.
The state requires that candidates are observed and provided with feedback at least four times (two announced and two unannounced) throughout their CAP experience. The four observations through CAP are:
- A baseline assessment conducted by the supervising practitioner (i.e., cooperating teacher) establishes a starting point for candidates; afterward the candidate meets with the cooperating teacher and program supervisor to discuss the evaluation and set a professional learning goal and student learning goal.
- An interim formative assessment in the middle of the experience is an opportunity to determine if the candidate is making acceptable progress toward the essential elements of the CAP and toward the student learning goal.
- An assessment after the formative assessment is conducted to monitor the candidate’s continued growth after the formal feedback from the formative assessment.
- A summative assessment at the end of the clinical experience looks for evidence that student teachers are proficient in all essential elements. Within each Essential Element, candidates are evaluated based on quality (can they do the element?), scope (can they do the element for all students?), and consistency (can they do the element every time?). Candidates may score below proficient on scope and consistency, but must be proficient on quality to be recommended for a license.
Throughout the practicum, the cooperating teacher (known as the supervising practitioner), program supervisor, and candidate gather five types of evidence: observations, student feedback, measures of student learning, candidate artifacts (e.g., lesson plans, behavior plans, video recordings), and evidence related to the candidate’s professional practice goal. Currently, each prep program provides its own training on how to use the observation rubric, and the state considers whether the CAP is implemented with fidelity during its formal prep program review.
Using the program approval process to strengthen clinical practice
Over the last several years, Massachusetts has updated its Guidelines for Program Approval to align with the state’s focus on culturally and linguistically sustaining practices and to ensure that all teachers and teacher identities are welcome.
“Massachusetts prioritizes ensuring that all students are educated equitably, and doing so requires that all teachers are educated equitably. We are using all the tools at our disposal to ensure that teacher candidates have the experiences they need in their preparation programs to be effective educators for ALL students on day one.”Kenzie Chin, educator preparation coordinator
The state’s Program Approval Guidelines give explicit attention to partnerships and field placements.
Related to partnerships, the state expects that prep programs have “intentional and collaborative PK–12 partnerships that benefit candidates/completers and schools/districts,” with explicit guidelines about meeting the needs of all candidates with a focus on those from systematically marginalized groups and backgrounds, addressing district needs, and gathering input from district partners to identify strengths and areas for improvement in the prep program.
Related to field-based experiences, the Program Approval Guidelines detail the kinds of experiences that prep program are expected to provide:
“field-based experiences that afford candidates access to an anti-racist and culturally and linguistically sustaining school culture, effective supervising practitioners, high-quality curricular materials, PK–12 students from diverse identities and backgrounds, and opportunities to participate in all components of the school community.”
The Program Approval Guidelines also specify that field-based experiences in the prep program must expose candidates to a range of settings, including settings with:
- “access to high-quality curricular materials;
- diversity of students (including racial, ethnic, socioeconomic, linguistic diversity, and diversity of ability);
- opportunities to integrate candidates into all components of the school community (e.g., staff meetings, professional development, family engagement opportunities); and
- anti-racist and culturally and linguistically sustaining school cultures.”
Setting clear guidelines for the components of clinical practice
The state’s requirements for cooperating teachers include that they model evidence-based instructional practice; are able to support candidates of all races, ethnicities, identity groups, and backgrounds; and can provide high-quality feedback. The state requires that if a program is unable to identify cooperating teachers who meet this criteria, it must provide additional resources and support to candidates.
During the full-time student teaching component of clinical practice (known as the “practicum” in Massachusetts), candidates must take on full responsibility of a classroom (under the supervision of a cooperating teacher) for a minimum of 100 hours. The state also requires that candidates be integrated into “all components of the school community” including staff meetings, professional development, and family engagement opportunities.
The state also outlines requirements for pre-practicum experiences (field experiences prior to full-time student teaching). These include that candidates receive observation-based feedback from their program supervisor or course faculty at least twice prior to their full-time student teaching experience. Prior to full-time student teaching, candidates must also complete at least two “gateway assessment” performance tasks that assess content-specific skills and include clearly defined minimum standards that candidates must meet in order to advance to student teaching.
When developing these updated guidelines, the state sought to engage stakeholders throughout the process. It held roundtable meetings with students, educators, families, and teacher prep programs, and it conducted a listening tour to share information about the changes and listen to any concerns. The state has also convened communities of practice for any interested preparation programs to share problems and best practices as they implement these new guidelines.
Outcomes
Massachusetts rigorously investigates the quality of its policies and practices. Instrumental to this work is the data system the state has built, which assigns each teacher candidate a unique identifier and tracks information about who cooperating teachers are, where candidates are placed, and where they’re hired. This system allows the state to answer questions about where their pipeline of teachers are going and what share of student teachers are hired into the school where they student taught.
The state also enlisted the help of researchers from the Center for the Analysis of Longitudinal Data in Education Research to explore the predictive validity of the Candidate Assessment of Performance. This study found that ratings on the CAP predict novice teachers’ performance evaluations but does not predict their value added to student test scores. Next, the state plans to initiate a multi-year evaluation of the updated Standards for Effective Practice and the Candidate Assessment of Performance, which will include a predictive validity component associated with student outcomes.
The state is conducting a larger-scale exploration of the relationship between preparation pathways, clinical practice, and effectiveness in the classroom, including retention. Researchers on this project have already released a portion of the analysis focused on placements for special education teachers with implications for teacher retention.
Advice
Engage stakeholders throughout the process, and be open to change plans based on feedback.