Principle Recommendation
P20 WIN should be given a statutory deadline of July 1, 2016 to deliver this data framework to educator preparation programs. Effective teachers boost student achievement.[i] States that seek to focus teacher preparation programs on effectiveness require robust data systems and data sharing.[ii]
Connecticut’s longitudinal data sharing program, P20 WIN,[iii] does not have the current capacity to share teacher performance data with educator preparation programs.[iv]
P20 WIN must provide educator preparation programs with critical data linking their candidates with their school district jobs and related student growth data. Educator preparation programs should have the tools with which to improve their programs. If they do not, their licenses should be at risk.
Current Connecticut Statute
The Connecticut State Board of Education licenses educator preparation programs.[v] A preparation program’s continued licensing is not strictly linked to the performance of the educators it produces.[vi] In 2012, the Educator Preparation and Advisory Council (EPAC) was established to restructure the state’s educator preparation system.[vii] The P20 WIN data system will provide the framework for the EPAC accountability system.[viii]
Supporting Research
In a survey done by the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education, most of the responding institutions said they tried to track their graduates, but only about one-third succeeded.[ix] Only 8% of them had student performance data associated with their graduates.[x]
Sources
[ii] Education Commission of the States (2014). The Progress of Education Reform: Effectiveness-Focused Teacher Preparation. Retrieved November 2014 at www.ecs.org/clearinghouse/01/15/35/11535.pdf
[iii] Since federal funding provided for the creation of the State Longitudinal Data System in 2009, P20 WIN has succeeded in executing the legal agreements for the “participating agencies to share data, developed a data governance framework to guide data sharing, and selected a technical model for implementation.” P20 Win Data Sharing Website (n.d.) Retrieved November 2014 at www.ct.edu/initiatives/p20win#approach.
[iv] Ibid.
[v] C.G.S. 10-145b.
[vi] Connecticut regulations about the continued licensure of educator preparation programs speak about student teaching performance and student candidate knowledge in the classroom, but not specifically about how certain educators improve (or don’t improve) student achievement. Title 10-145d of the Connecticut General Regulations.
[vii] Letter from Stefan Pryor and Robert Kennedy to EPAC members, retrieved from: http://www.sde.ct.gov/sde/lib/sde/pdf/epac/epac_invitation_letter.pdf
[viii] EPAC presentation of Feb. 25, 2014, retrieved from: http://www.sde.ct.gov/sde/cwp/view.asp?a=2760&Q=334636
[ix] The Changing Teacher Preparation Profession,Washington, D.C. American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education, 2013, retrieved from: https://aacte.org/news-room/13-press-releases-statements/145-aacte-releases-first-national-data-report-on-teacher-preparation-profession
[x] Ibid.
