1. education

E1
Office of the President
TO MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATIONAL POLICY:
DISCUSSION ITEM
For Meeting of January 21, 2015
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA EDUCATOR PREPARATION PROGRAMS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The recruitment, preparation and retention of high-quality educators are among the most critical
issues facing the field of education today. This is particularly true in a state such as California
where the K-12 student population is comprised of significant numbers of students who are lowincome, English language learners, and increasingly diverse. Consecutive years of dwindling
resources, increased state and national attention on teacher and administrator impact on student
achievement, and the adoption of new Common Core State Standards (CCSS) and accountability
measures for K-12 students and schools continue to provide challenges and opportunities for
educator preparation and professional development programs. Compounding these issues is the
projected shortage of teachers due to budget cuts and the imminent retirement of large swaths of
career educators. This prospect places even greater importance on the state’s need to produce
high-quality teachers and administrators who can support all students’ acquisition of the 21st
century skills and aptitudes required to succeed in the future.
As a land-grant university dedicated to supporting research, teaching, and service to benefit the
people of the State of California, the University of California has a long tradition of producing
education leaders for our state and the nation (Morrill Act of 1862; Master Plan Survey Team,
1960). UC’s educator preparation and professional development programs are focused on
addressing the needs of 21st century learners by preparing teacher candidates and current
educators to engage students in rigorous, relevant, and inquiry-based educational experiences.
UC’s educator preparation and professional development programs recruit, prepare, and support
pre-service and professional educators who are committed to the principles of academic
excellence, equity, and integrity to cultivate the highest achievement and opportunity for all
students. With California’s adoption of new K-12 standards including CCSS, Next Generation
Science Standards, and English Language Development standards, as well as new CCSS-aligned
K-12 assessments developed by the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium, UC’s educator
preparation and professional development programs are at the forefront of helping the state
prepare educators to successfully implement the new standards and assessments.
COMMITTEE ON
EDUCATIONAL POLICY
January 21, 2015
-2-
E1
BACKGROUND
The University’s interest in supporting high-quality educator preparation programs is longstanding and historically grounded in both its land-grant mission of teaching, research, and
public service, and its commitment to public education and the goals of access and diversity.
Educator preparation is at the core of the University of California’s tripartite mission of research,
teaching, and public service. As a public research institution, UC is responsible for influencing
policy, informing practice, and shaping the research agenda in all disciplines, including the field
of education.
For nearly 100 years, UC has prepared educators to serve students in the state’s K-12 school
system. Today, even though UC teacher education programs prepare a lower share of the state’s
educators compared with other segments (7 percent of the state’s teachers annually), these
programs continue the long-standing tradition of excellence and equity, contributing to research
on best practices, innovative programming, and strategies for reaching all students, especially
those in high-need schools and districts.
UC’s active involvement and investment in ongoing evaluation and research around public
schools, public education systems, and teacher effectiveness are aimed at strengthening the
expertise of teachers and the academic achievement of students in communities throughout
California. As the state’s education community grapples with issues around defining standards
for teacher quality and effectiveness, teacher workforce shortages, and readying students for 21st
century college and careers, the University is uniquely positioned to bring its research and
practice expertise to bear on these current and future challenges in education.
UC’s Role in Preparing Educators
Guiding Principles of UC’s Educator Preparation Programs
All UC undergraduate campuses (except UC Merced) offer an array of educator preparation
programs. While each campus offers a unique educational experience, they share a set of guiding
principles, including a core belief that schools should be equitable and engaging places to learn
for every child, that schools are part of the solution, and that teachers are critical agents of
educational innovation and change who require support over the course of their preparation and
professional careers. Teaching is complex and preparation programs must address multiple
dimensions of teaching and learning. Effective teaching is a collaborative, evidence-based, and
iterative process whereby research informs practice and practice informs research.
UC educator preparation programs:
● Prepare qualified teachers to teach in the most challenging schools and trained to help all
students meet high academic standards.
● Prepare a community of scholars to help ensure that teachers develop a professional
identity and respect learners by consistently working to improve their teaching and
children’s learning.
COMMITTEE ON
EDUCATIONAL POLICY
January 21, 2015
-3-
E1
● Provide opportunities for candidates to become strong practitioners, utilizing student
work, close analysis of their own teaching, and deep discussion with other professionals
in order to continually improve classroom teaching.
● Educate future teachers with the expectation that they will assume leadership roles in
their schools, districts, and beyond.
● Support teaching within the context of diversity, focus on student learning, participation
in schooling, and teaching within the context of the broader community.
● Provide ongoing professional development and continued support for its graduates in
order to maintain high standards for teachers.
● Are research-based and committed to rigorous and ongoing research and evaluation that
supports a culture of research and inquiry for educators.
● Are regularly reassessed to ensure that they meet the needs of teachers and all children,
and the statewide goal of building a well-educated and civil society.
A Continuum of Learning and Teaching
The University of California’s educator preparation initiatives provide program and policy
leadership along a school-focused continuum of supporting educator preparation and ongoing
professional development to improve teaching and learning. Along this continuum, UC educator
preparation and professional development programs partner with schools and districts, prepare
K-12 teachers and administrators, and provide high-quality professional development for
teachers, teacher leaders, and administrators to meet the needs of California’s diverse students
and ensure that all students are college and career ready.
Undergraduate Preparation for Teaching
The UC educator preparation continuum begins with strengthening the pipeline of future
teachers. In order to address the state’s critical need for highly qualified math and science
teachers, the CalTeach/Science and Mathematics Initiative program was launched in
2005-06 on nine UC campuses. CalTeach provides multiple pathways for undergraduate STEM
(science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) majors to pursue teaching careers.
CalTeach provides students with the skills, experience, and tools to pursue a teaching credential
and eventually a career in teaching. Through rigorous CalTeach courses, students learn
conceptual teaching skills and practice these methods in local K-12 classrooms, primarily
through field experiences offered through their courses and through intensive summer
internships at local schools. Experienced mentor teachers oversee student on-site work in
K-12 math and science classrooms.
One strategy employed by several CalTeach programs for supporting the recruitment and
preparation of future mathematics and science teachers has been to develop new minors and
concentrations that focus specifically on math and science teaching. These programs bridge
math/science and education departments, allowing students to complete their undergraduate
coursework in a STEM field while simultaneously exploring and preparing for a career in
K-12 teaching.
COMMITTEE ON
EDUCATIONAL POLICY
January 21, 2015
-4-
E1
Post-Baccalaureate Educator Preparation
The University of California offers multiple routes to teacher credentialing, including both
traditional and alternative certification programs. Offered at the post-baccalaureate level, UC
houses Teacher Education Programs (TEPs) at eight UC undergraduate campuses and the
preparation for most students culminates in both the credential and a master’s degree. TEPs offer
multiple-subjects credentials for elementary teachers, single-subject credentials for secondary
teachers, and education specialist credentials for both elementary and secondary candidates. All
TEPs include a Cross-cultural Language Academic Development emphasis.
UC TEPs have high standards for admissions: a minimum GPA of 3.0 is required, but the
average for UC candidates is 3.3-3.4; prior work or volunteer experience with students is
required; and candidates must demonstrate the capacity and disposition to become teacher
leaders and remain in teaching. In accordance with California law, credential candidates must
have a bachelor’s degree in a specific discipline, such as mathematics, English, or biology.
Program coursework draws on current research and prepares students to plan, implement, and
assess learning in multiple ways, incorporating research-based practices that support academic
achievement for all students.
The programs integrate coursework and extensive clinical experiences to provide a carefully
sequenced, developmental progression aligned with research on best practices in teacher
education (Cochran-Smith & Lytle, 1999). UC candidates spend more than 600 hours in the
classroom during their credential programs. During clinical practice, UC supervisors work with
mentor teachers to support candidates as they learn to work in diverse classroom settings, and
candidates learn from and assist their mentor teachers in the classroom. In addition, candidates
are immersed in classrooms, schools, and communities where university- and school-based
faculty collaborate to provide supervision, facilitate reflective feedback, and evaluate
performance based on research and professional standards.
UC candidates are assessed in multiple ways throughout their preparation through observations
and consultations from supervisors, mentors, and the Performance Assessment for California
Teachers (PACT), a required performance-based, summative assessment of which UC was a lead
developer. Programs are also assessed using candidate assessment data, completer and employer
surveys, and other relevant data. UC Berkeley, UC Los Angeles, and UC Santa Barbara’s teacher
education programs have been highlighted for their pioneering strategies in “preparing teachers
for English language learners (ELLs), preparing teachers to succeed in urban schools, and
creating clinical training in professional development…that others have emulated” (Task Force
on Educator Excellence, 2012, p. 10).
UC Doctoral Preparation for Future Teacher Educators
As a leading academic and research institution, doctoral preparation and research are primary
functions at the University of California. Many of the doctoral candidates in UC Schools and
Departments of Education were classroom teachers, who are now interested in the education of
new teachers or the professional development of current teachers. UC teacher education and
professional development programs are vehicles for preparing future teacher educators for
COMMITTEE ON
EDUCATIONAL POLICY
January 21, 2015
-5-
E1
research and practice, a testament to UC’s dedication to continued analysis and improvement of
educator preparation.
There are important reasons for focusing on doctoral preparation for future teacher educators,
among them potential impact. Each UC Education doctoral graduate who goes into teacher
education – and a large percentage do – will work with a significant number of teacher
candidates. Each teacher candidate will go on to teach in classrooms of at least 20-30 students if
they are preparing to be elementary teachers, and even more if preparing to be secondary
teachers.
Thus, it is important that UC Schools and Departments of Education engage their doctoral
candidates in effective pedagogies, research, and design elements of teacher education through
purposeful coursework, research, and instructional opportunities within teacher education
programs.
Administrator Preparation
In response to California legislation and a shortage of well-prepared urban, K-12 school
administrators, the University of California established the Principal Leadership Institute
(PLI) programs at UC Berkeley and UCLA. Based on research that examined the characteristics
of effective and high-quality leadership preparation programs (Darling-Hammond, et al., 2007),
PLI prepares urban school leaders who are committed to academic excellence, equity, and
increasing educational opportunities for underserved students. Upon completing the program,
graduates receive a master’s degree and a Tier I Administrative Services Credential (ASC). PLI
graduates at both UCB and UCLA are highly recognized, well-prepared, diverse, and strongly
committed to serving in leadership roles in high-need, urban schools. Over 900 graduates of the
PLI program are in leadership roles at urban schools, primarily in the Los Angeles Basin and
greater San Francisco Bay Area.
Research affirms that retaining high-quality educators in urban education requires investment
into their continued professional growth, allowing them to grow as leaders within and/or outside
of the classroom (Olsen & Anderson, 2004). The PLI model has achieved state and national
recognition as one of California’s most important assets for identifying and preparing urban
school leaders (Task Force on Educator Excellence, 2012). PLI has also served as the basis for
ongoing study into effective frameworks for evaluating principals and other educator leaders,
and their impact on student achievement (Cheung, Grubb, & Liao, 2014).
UC campuses also provide other leadership preparation and ongoing support, such as UC Davis’
Systems Transformation Collaborative and the Superintendent’s Executive Leadership Forum.
The Collaborative seeks to accelerate the ability of 75 schools throughout the state to
substantially improve student achievement. It includes three phases – design, capacity building,
and sustainability – all of which are focused on district and school leaders and leadership within
districts to support change. The Forum also focuses on school leaders, supporting
superintendents in their efforts to shift from a “management” to an “instructional” approach to
leadership, a strategy supported by recent research (Hart, et al. 2008).
COMMITTEE ON
EDUCATIONAL POLICY
January 21, 2015
-6-
E1
Professional Development
UC has a historical commitment to support teachers over the course of their professional
development. Beginning over 40 years ago with the Bay Area Writing Project, UC has provided
leadership for the California Subject Matter Project (CSMP) for new and experienced
teachers, a statewide network of nine subject-specific projects that creates communities of
practice that promote high-quality teaching, leadership and educational equity. Its projects
encompass the course content represented in California’s K-12 standards and frameworks, and
cover all of the academic disciplines required for high school graduation and to meet college
entrance (a-g) requirements.
CSMP provides educators with a variety of professional learning opportunities that are
collaboratively designed by teachers and university faculty – including workshops, leadership
institutes and in-service programs. Participants improve and enrich their teaching of specific
subjects through long-term, intensive professional development (PD) that has been shown to
have the greatest impact on student achievement (Yoon, et al., 2007). CSMP provides a PD
infrastructure for educators to respond quickly and flexibly as needs change in schools and
districts.
In accordance with its legislative mandate, CSMP is aligned with state-adopted academic,
subject-specific, and professional standards – among them, the Common Core State Standards
(CCSS), Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS), Career Technical Education standards, and
English Language Development (ELD) standards. CSMP is at the forefront of providing ongoing
professional learning support to educators as they build on their content knowledge and
instructional strategies to help students meet these rigorous standards. Expert teacher leaders, in
collaboration with university faculty, help facilitate school-level transitions to new standards and
new CCSS-aligned Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC) assessments, as well as
the instructional strategies that teachers must use to address them.
CSMP is lauded as a model for other states throughout the nation “as a means of supporting
ongoing professional development in the content areas for growing networks of teachers” (Task
Force on Educator Excellence, 2012, p. 9). Participants consistently rate CSMP PD more highly
than other professional development they have received, and the project’s investment in
intensive and in-depth contact with teachers over time has resulted in changes in teacher practice
and improvements to student outcomes in a deep and sustained way (SRI, 2013). This type of PD
has also proved to have a positive impact on student achievement: teachers that participate in
substantial PD (an average of 49 hours) can boost their students’ achievement by more than
20 percent (Yoon, et al., 2007).
Research, Policy, and Innovation
Researchers on UC campuses have authored a number of recent and ongoing studies with
implications for educator preparation programs, for assessing teacher and teacher education
program effectiveness, and for impacting state and national policy discussions about the adoption
of new standards and assessments and the future of public education. In addition, UC campuses
have initiated innovative programs to recruit, retain, and prepare teachers more effectively and to
COMMITTEE ON
EDUCATIONAL POLICY
January 21, 2015
-7-
E1
integrate international perspectives and approaches in teacher preparation programs and
professional development.
Research and Policy Initiatives
Faculty in UC’s Schools of Education and Teacher Education Programs are currently tackling
some of the most critical research questions facing public education related to teacher practice,
such as:
● How can UC best prepare teachers who may be culturally and ethnically different from
the students they serve?
● What are the program practices – along the educator preparation program continuum –
that contribute to effective K-12 teaching?
● What are teachers’ qualities – when they enter programs and leave programs – that
contribute to effective K-12 teaching?
● What is the value-added of UC-prepared teachers to K-12 learning outcomes?
This research is being conducted through intersegmental and individual campus-based
collaborations and initiatives. The following are examples in each of these areas:
Intersegmental
The Teacher Education and English Learners (TEEL) research group at the University of
California Santa Cruz has developed and validated an effective model for training K-12 teachers
to teach STEM subjects, especially to the rapidly growing population of ELLs (National
Academy of Sciences, 2010). The TEEL model integrates language and literacy into math and
science instruction, and emphasizes contextualized learning. It is being implemented in preservice teacher education programs at universities in California, Arizona, and Texas.1 Results
show that novice teachers who participate in TEEL teacher education programs are significantly
more likely than their peers to effectively integrate the teaching of academic language and
literacy with the teaching of science and mathematics (Bravo, et al., 2014; Shaw, et al., 2014;
Stoddart, et al., 2013; Stoddart & Mosqueda, 2013; Stoddart, et al., 2010). Studies also found
improved student outcomes. ELLs in the classrooms of TEEL first-year teachers scored higher in
science, language, and literacy than ELL students in control group classrooms (Stoddart, et al.,
2002).
Campus-based
In fall 2014, the SBAC – one of two multi-state consortia awarded funding from the
U.S. Department of Education in 2010 to develop an assessment system aligned to the
CCSS – became an independent operating unit of UCLA’s Graduate School of Education and
Information Studies, with unanimous approval of the California State Board of Education.
1
Including Arizona State University, San Diego State University, San Francisco State University, University of
Arizona, and University of Texas, San Antonio. TEEL received $8 million in funding from the National Science
Foundation and the U.S. Department of Education for their research.
COMMITTEE ON
EDUCATIONAL POLICY
January 21, 2015
-8-
E1
California is joined in the Consortium by eight other states that collectively educate nearly ten
million students, or approximately 20 percent of all U.S. students. Nine additional states will join
SBAC by the end of 2014. UCLA’s leadership role in SBAC is one example of how UC’s
research expertise continues to inform both practice and policy in improving educational
opportunities for students.
Faculty and Graduate Student Research
UC faculty and graduate students are actively engaged in research focused on the implications
for students and schools of adopting not only the CCSS, but also the NGSS and ELD standards.
From theory, to policy, to practice, research by UC faculty and graduate researchers has the
potential to inform both practitioners at the school and district levels as well as policy makers.
This research explores critical policy areas, such as the implementation and impact of Stateadopted standards, English language learning and academic literacy, teacher preparation, and
professional development. As a system of leading research institutions, UC articulates a research
agenda that examines these topics through the lens of equity and access as a means of addressing
educational disparities throughout the state, nation, and world.
Innovation
UC is at the forefront of systemwide, research-based innovations in educator preparation,
manifested in initiatives both in California and abroad. The following two examples focus on
using technology to extend learning and share UC’s knowledge and expertise globally.
The Leadership Support Program (LSP) created by the PLI at UC Berkeley is a professional
preparation program, approved by the Commission on Teacher Credentialing, in which
participants earn an ASC (Tier II). The LSP is designed to build on the work that candidates
complete as PLI participants (Tier I ASC). In fall 2013, UCB and UCLA launched the LSP
Online – a hybrid online version of the LSP model that includes on-site, in-person coaching as
well as an on-site retreat and online monthly meetings for participating students from both
campuses.
As the U.S. becomes increasingly diverse and the world increasingly interconnected, this
generation of teachers must have experiences that prepare them to interact effectively with
diverse learners and to be knowledgeable about world cultures. To ensure these outcomes,
several UC TEPs have developed a number of strategies, including teacher candidate exchange
programs (e.g., with Denmark, Switzerland, and Singapore); collaborative research on teacher
effectiveness through the World Education Research Network (ten nations investigating
techniques to increase teachers’ abilities to perform continuous assessment of student learning);
courses jointly offered with faculty from other nations (e.g., from University of Helsinki); and,
development of a Memo of Understanding to promote first-year teacher graduates teaching
internationally (e.g., Bhutan, Vietnam, and Colombia).
COMMITTEE ON
EDUCATIONAL POLICY
January 21, 2015
-9-
E1
UC Program Outcomes
Methods for assessing program effectiveness remain highly debated in the field of education, and
UC is intent on strengthening its capacity to measure the impact of its educator preparation and
professional development programs. All UC educator preparation programs take into account the
latest research and outcome data to frame their program improvement strategies. The following
provides data and outcomes for programs spanning UC’s continuum of educator preparation.
CalTeach/Science and Mathematics Initiative
Since the CalTeach program began in 2005, over 1,000 math and science teaching credentials
have been awarded to UC graduates of the program, many of whom are in teaching positions in
high-need schools located throughout the state. Initial research on the impact of CalTeach
courses indicates that they have a positive influence on students’ attitudes toward teaching, make
students' own STEM learning more sophisticated, and build a foundation for future teachers to
develop the content-specific knowledge and skills needed to teach in a way that is consistent
with how people actually learn science (Czworkowski & Seethaler, 2013).
In 2012-13, CalTeach enrolled 1,738 participants, an increase of six percent over the previous
year. At this rate, the program will attract more than 2,000 participants annually by 2015-16.
This positive trend in participation has also yielded a steady rise in the number of credentials
awarded to CalTeach graduates, despite a diminishing number of teacher credentials being
awarded across the state (California Commission on Teacher Credentialing [CTC], 2014).
CalTeach graduates currently account for 40 percent of all math and science credentials awarded
to UC baccalaureates (CTC, 2013).
Across all UC campuses, most CalTeach participants are majoring in STEM fields. In 2012-13,
nearly 70 percent of all participants were STEM majors, with most majoring in the
Biological/Life Sciences or Mathematics/Statistics. As such, CalTeach helps to ensure that future
STEM instructors have the subject matter expertise required to deliver high-quality instruction.
COMMITTEE ON
EDUCATIONAL POLICY
January 21, 2015
-10-
E1
CalTeach also seeks to develop its participants’ abilities to head classes made up of students
from diverse backgrounds. Consistent with the program’s mission to prepare prospective
educators that reflect the growing diversity of California’s K-12 students, nearly 65 percent of
2012-13 CalTeach graduates were students of color, including underrepresented minorities and
students from Asian backgrounds.
CalTeach provides ample opportunities in the field for participants to nurture their expertise. In
2012-13, CalTeach students participated in field placements in 206 K-12 schools where they
gained real world classroom experience. Although these field placements occurred throughout
the state in schools with a variety of economic and education characteristics, nearly 40% were
schools that were low-performing and high-need, based on the state’s Academic Performance
Index (API 1-5). After graduating, most participants remain dedicated to serving in public
education in the state. Since the program’s inception, nearly 1,100 CalTeach graduates have gone
on to work in public schools throughout California.2
Teacher Education Programs
Over the last five years (from 2008-2013), nearly 4,200 teacher candidates completed a UC TEP.
In 2012-13, over 760 UC TEP graduates were recommended for a teacher credential. Among
those, 71 percent pursued and received positions at low-performing schools and 49 percent were
students of color. Testament to UC’s dedication to producing teachers in high-need fields,
55 percent of single-subject credentials awarded were in STEM fields.
A recent survey of California public school principals was conducted by the UCOP to elicit their
views about the quality and skills of their beginning (first three years), UC-prepared teachers. Of
the principals who responded, more than 70 percent rated their UC-prepared, beginning teachers
in the top 25 percent, compared to non-UC prepared, beginning teachers. In addition, over
85 percent thought that the “overall readiness to teach” of UC-prepared, beginning teachers was
“good” or “excellent.”
Principal respondents rated UC-prepared, beginning teachers very highly (“good” or “excellent”)
in the following areas:
● Knowledge of content (92.9 percent)
● Capacity to collaborate with colleagues (90.4 percent)
● Use of a variety of instructional strategies (83.1 percent)
● Capacity to reflect on student learning to inform instruction (82.8 percent)
● Ability to apply relevant research to practice (82.5 percent)
Principal Leadership Institutes
Since 2000, PLI has produced 922 graduates – education leaders prepared to tackle the most
critical needs of California’s primarily urban students, schools, and communities. Most PLI
participants (70 percent) come from racially and ethnically diverse backgrounds, and over
2
Based on data received from the California State Teachers’ Retirement System.
COMMITTEE ON
EDUCATIONAL POLICY
January 21, 2015
-11-
E1
90 percent of PLI graduates work as principals, assistant principals, or other education leaders in
high-poverty, high-need schools in the state.
California Subject Matter Project
In 2013-14, CSMP provided professional development programs and training for educators from
6,794 schools throughout California, 49 percent of which were low-performing (based on the
state’s API, API 1-5). CSMP provided 1,693 programs across nine subject areas. In total, these
programs amounted to 27,243 hours of professional development for California educators. All
CSMP programs are aligned with state-adopted standards and, in 2013-14, more than 30 percent
of programs were explicitly dedicated to developing teachers’ knowledge of and strategies
related to the Common Core.
A participant survey administered by SRI International yielded positive results related to the
influence of CSMP programs on teachers’ knowledge and instructional strategies, and their
students’ achievement.
Impact on teachers:
● Increase content knowledge 87 percent3
● Provided new standards-based instructional ideas: 89 percent
● Improved ability to teach to diverse students: 75 percent
Impact on students:
● Improved student learning: 87 percent
● Deepened student engagement: 87 percent
● Increased participation from low-achieving students: 80 percent
● Improved outcomes for English learners: 72 percent
CONCLUSION
The University of California is dedicated to its mission of teaching, research, and public service,
and UC educator preparation and professional development programs actively translate this
mission into practice. Among its many charges as a public research institution, UC is responsible
for influencing policy, informing practice, and shaping the research agenda in educator
preparation and professional development.
As the state’s education community grapples with issues around defining standards for teacher
quality and effectiveness, teacher workforce shortages, school rankings, and readying students
for college and 21st century careers, UC is uniquely positioned to bring its research and practice
expertise to bear on these current and future challenges in education.
To this end, UC is a leader at the state and national level, preparing educators to address
educational priorities in the areas of K-12 curriculum standards and assessments, professional
teaching standards, academic literacy, and ongoing professional development. With California’s
3
All percentages in this section are composites of “Moderate” and “Great” responses.
COMMITTEE ON
EDUCATIONAL POLICY
January 21, 2015
-12-
E1
adoption of the Common Core and SBAC, UC has ensured that its educator preparation and
professional development programs for prospective, pre-service, and current teachers deliver
instruction that aligns with these standards and assessments.
UC educator preparation and professional development programs also leverage current research
– by UC faculty and others – in order to continuously improve its offerings to teachers and
schools. For instance, UC’s approach to the fast-moving teacher evaluation agenda is one
founded in the latest research, that appreciates the potential usefulness of such techniques as
value-added measures, but warns against using them in human resources decisions (Glazerman,
et al., 2010) or in evaluating teachers’ preparation programs (Goldhaber, 2013). UC’s primary
teacher performance assessment tool – the PACT – is aligned with professional learning
standards that help to ensure quality and preparedness among UC-trained educators.
This illustrates one of the many ways that UC educator preparation and professional
development programs are leaders in the field. In this era of heightened attention on teacher
practice and preparation, UC is dedicated to assisting state and national policy makers in shaping
education policy and remains a stalwart advocate for students and teachers throughout
California.
Key to Acronyms
API
ASC
CCSS
CSMP
CTC
ELD
ELL
LSP
NGSS
PACT
PD
PLI
SBAC
STEM
TEEL
TEP
UCOP
Academic Performance Index
Administrative Services Credential
Common Core State Standards
California Subject Matter Project
California Commission on Teacher Credentialing
English Language Development
English language learners
Leadership Support Program
Next Generation Science Standards
Performance Assessment for California Teachers
Professional Development
Principal Leadership Institute
Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium
Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics
Teacher Education and English Learners
Teacher Education Program
UC Office of the President
COMMITTEE ON
EDUCATIONAL POLICY
January 21, 2015
-13-
E1
REFERENCES
Act of July 2, 1862 (Morrill Act), Public Law 37-108, which established land grant colleges,
07/02/1862; Enrolled Acts and Resolutions of Congress, 1789-1996; Record Group 11; General
Records of the United States Government; National Archives.
Bravo, M. A., Mosqueda, E., Solis, J., & Stoddart, T. (2014). Possibilities and limits of
integrating science and diversity education in pre-service elementary teacher preparation.
Journal of Science Teacher Education, 25, 601-619.
California Commission on Teacher Credentialing (CTC). (2014). Annual report card
on California teacher preparation programs for the academic year 2012‐2013 as required
by Title II of the Higher Education Act. Sacramento, CA: CTC.
Cheung, R., Grubb, W. N., & Liao, P. (Sept. 2014). Evaluating Berkeley’s Principal Leadership
Institute: Experiments with student outcomes. University of California, Berkeley: Principal
Leadership Institute, Graduate School of Education.
Cochran-Smith, M. & Lytle S. (1999). Relationships of knowledge and practice: Teacher
learning in the community. Review of Research in Education, 24, 249-305.
Czworkowski, J. & Seethaler, S. (2013). Content-intensive courses in an undergraduate science
education minor and impacts on participating students. Journal of College Science Teaching,
43(1), 48-53.
Darling-Hammond, L., LaPointe, M., Meyerson, D., Orr. M. T., & Cohen, C. (2007). Preparing
school leaders for a changing world: Lessons from exemplary leadership development programs.
Stanford, CA: Stanford University, Stanford Educational Leadership Institute.
Hart, H., Sporte, S., Ponisciak, S. M., Stevens, W. D., & Bolz, A. (2008). Teacher and Principal
Leadership in Chicago: Ongoing Analyses of Preparation Programs [Research Report].
Chicago, IL: Consortium on Chicago School Research at the University of Chicago Urban
Education Institute.
Herman, J., & Linn, R. (2013). On the road to assessing deeper learning: The status of Smarter
Balanced and PARCC Assessment Consortia. University of California, Los Angeles: CRESST.
Master Plan Survey Team. (1960). A Master Plan for Higher Education in California, 19601975. Sacramento, CA: California Department of Education.
Olsen, B. & Anderson, L. (2004). Courses of action: A report on urban teacher retention and
career development. Los Angeles, CA: UCLA Institute for Democracy, Education, and Access.
Shaw, J., Lyon, E. G., Stoddart, T., Mosqueda, E., & Menon, P. (2014). Improving science and
literacy learning for English Language Learners: evidence from a pre-service teacher preparation
intervention. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 25, 621-643.
COMMITTEE ON
EDUCATIONAL POLICY
January 21, 2015
-14-
E1
SRI International. (2013). CSMP literature review: A review of studies of the California Subject
Matter Project: 2005-2012.
Stoddart, T., Bravo, M. A., Mosqueda, E., & Solis, J. L. (2013). Restructuring pre-service
teacher education to respond to increasing student diversity. Research in Higher Education
Journal, 19, 1–19.
Stoddart, T., & Mosqueda, E. (2013). Teaching science to English language learners: A study of
pre-service teacher preparation. Teacher Education & Practice, 26,(4).
Stoddart, T., Pinal, A., Latzke, M., & Canaday, D. (2002). Integrating inquiry science and
language development for English language learners. Journal of Research in Science Teaching,
39, 664–687.
Stoddart, T., Solis, J., Tolbert, S., & Bravo, M. (2010). Effective science teaching for English
language learners. In D. Sunal & C. Sunal. Teaching Science with Hispanic ELLs in K-16
classrooms. Albany, NY: Information Age Publishing.
Task Force on Educator Excellence. (2012). Greatness by design: Supporting outstanding
teaching to sustain a Golden State. Sacramento, CA: California Department of Education.
Yoon, K. S., Duncan, T., Lee, S. W., Scarloss, B., & Shapley, K. L. (2007). Reviewing the
evidence on how teacher professional development affects student achievement, Regional
Educational Laboratory Southwest, Issues and Answers Report No. 2007-033; US Department of
Education; Institute of Education Sciences.