|Action||Comprehensive Revision of the Regulations Governing the Review and Approval of Education Programs in|
|Comment Period||Ends 10/31/2015|
Comments regarding regulation changes
A. Proposed regulation: The education endorsement program’s candidate passing rates, reported by percentages, shall not fall below 80 percent biennially for program completers
and program non-completers. (Program completers are individuals who have
successfully completed all coursework, required licensure assessments, and
supervised student teaching or required internship. Program non-completers are
those individuals who have been officially admitted into the education program
and who have taken, regardless of whether the individual passed or failed,
required licensure assessments, and who exit the program prior to completion.)
Program non-completers shall have been officially released (in writing) from an
education endorsement program by an authorized administrator of the program.
- The type of required licensure exams should be clarified. If students can’t pass certain licensure exams and change their major, this should not count against the university;
- If students do pass their licensure exams but do not complete the program due to a move to another state, or acquiring a job, this should not be held against the university;
- For small programs, the 80% mark, if not met is devastating since the university would have to cancel the program and reapply again as if the program would be newly starting. A recommendation would be to have an “improvement plan” allowed so the university can develop steps to improve the 80% or lower completer rate without having to cancel and then reapply for the program. Universities should have the ability to improve their rates by a corrective action plan and report back to the state.
- Can we put forth a university remediation plan for those students who do not pass the Praxis Core Math or Praxis II Elementary Math Content since these areas are ones students have the most problems with and may need more support??
- Students should have to complete the entire program before being considered an “exiter”.
B. Proposed regulation: Employer job satisfaction documentation must address teachers’ performance, including student academic progress.
(1) School principals will be bombarded with so many surveys of varying lengths and with different questions from so many universities, the return rate will most likely be miniscule. Can we develop a uniform instrument that would be sent to the K-12 schools from all VA state universities? This would assist in the process to document our teachers’ performance upon hire.
C. To receive a provisional special education license only one class in SPED is required now
(1) I support the proposed regulation that 9 credit hours or 3 classes should be required to get a provisional SPED license.
D. Proposed Regulation: Addition of Annual Report Card: Institutions of higher education will be required to submit data on education programs, and the Virginia Department of Education will produce an annual report card published on the Department’s Web site. The information required on the Report Card will be approved by the Board of Education, including the institution’s accreditation status, the education endorsement program status, the
number of candidates admitted in endorsement programs; the number of program
completers, biennial data results, the number of candidates admitted into the
program who did not meet the prescribed admission assessment and the
opportunities provided to the candidates to address any deficiencies, and other
data as requested by the Board.
- With all the reporting that Teacher Education programs need to complete for their state, their university, accrediting agency, federal government, etc., why can’t these be combined in some way or have the data taken from other reports, i.e. Title II??
- Another reporting requirement takes away from universities focusing on curriculum and instruction for the benefit of our future teachers.
(3) The language of “and other data as requested” is misleading and too open-ended and should be deleted.
E. Revision of VDOE Matrices
(1) Complete revision of the matrices should be for new programs or new courses, not an entire rewriting of the matrices.