Sponsors of the preliminary teacher preparation program establish collaborative partnerships that contribute substantively to the quality and effectiveness of the design and implementation of candidate preparation.
Partnerships address significant aspects of preliminary preparation, and include collaboration
between (a) subject matter preparation providers and pedagogical preparation providers;
and (b) these pedagogical preparation providers and at least one local education agency
that sponsors aninduction program for beginning teachers where program completers are likely to be
In each partnership, collaboration includes purposeful, substantive dialogue in which
the partners contribute to the structured design of the preliminary preparation program
and monitor its implementation on a continuing basis. These partnerships would include
developing program policies and reviewing program practices pertaining to the recruitment,
selection and advisement of candidates; development of curriculum; delivery of instruction;
selection of field sites; design of field experiences; selection and preparation of
cooperating teachers; and assessment and verification of teaching competence.
Participants cooperatively establish and review the terms and agreements of partnerships,
including (a) partners’ well-defined roles, responsibilities, and relationships; and
(b) contributions of sufficient resources to support the costs of effective cooperation.
The program-based fieldwork component offers opportunities for purposeful involvement
in collaborative partnership(s) for the design and delivery of programs by parent
and community organizations, county offices of education, educational research centers,
business representatives, and teachers’ bargaining agents.
The Kremen School of Education and Human Development (KSOEHD) has a long history of
collaboration with local education agencies and other members of the education community.
In its 2009-2010 annual report, the school described numerous special partnerships
with K-12 districts and/or schools. The KSOEHD’s Dean meets regularly with his Council
for Professional Education composed of K-12 personnel, business and community leaders,
and others interested in teacher preparation programs. The Single Subject Coordinator
sits on this council. He conducts occasional focus group sessions throughout the region
concerning teacher preparation. He also regularly attends county superintendents’
meetings to get input on districts’ needs relevant to teacher preparation. The Dean
holds program coordinator meetings regularly each semester to share this input with
program coordinators. All school districts who receive student teachers or interns
have a formal partnership agreement with the KSOEHD.
Decision-making regarding every major aspect of the Single Subject Program is based
on a lively dialogue among subject matter faculty and administrators, professional
education faculty and administrators, and K-12 faculty and administrators. These
issues include candidate admission requirements, curriculum, qualifications of instructors,
nature of field experiences, selection of cooperating teachers and field sites, qualifications
of university supervisors, methods of candidate assessment, and methods of program
assessment. Currently, for example, new methods of student teaching placement are
under discussion. Decisions regarding this issue will be made with input from all
the program’s constituents.
A program governance committee (which is chaired by the Single Subject program coordinator
and made up of faculty who teach courses within the program, including faculty from
the KSOEHD as well as faculty from each of the academic departments associated with
a Single Subject credential offered by the University) makes recommendations concerning
curriculum and other matters related to the program to the Associate Dean and the
Dean of the KSOEHD, who is also the Director of Teacher Education. Administrators,
teachers, business leaders, and other community members provide input regarding the
program via the Dean’s Council on Professional Education (See Appendix D for description
of the Dean’s Council on Professional Education.)
Collaborative efforts in which university faculty and K-12 administrators and faculty
share their expertise are numerous. Teachers and administrators from K-12 teach courses
in the KSOEHD on both a part-time and temporary, full-time basis. For example, the
science methods course has been taught by a science teacher on temporary assignment
to the university. In addition, the early field experience has been staffed by a
teacher “on-loan” from a local district. Our K-12 partners not only teach in the
credential programs but also help plan the curriculum for these programs as members
of advisory committees. University faculty members from the subject matter departments,
who teach the subject matter methods courses, as well as professional education faculty
from the KSOEHD, have played leadership roles in the subject matter projects in English,
social science, mathematics, and science.
In addition to the previously discussed avenues for participation in development and
review of program policies, practices, curriculum, instruction, and field experiences,
several other mechanisms are in place. The program coordinator and other faculty meet
on a regular basis (six or more times each year). These meetings include not only
KSOEHD faculty members, but also one or more faculty members representing each of
the academic departments associated with a Single Subject Credential area. Program
faculty members participate in making decisions with regard to every aspect of the
program from admission through evaluation. Representatives of this group serve on
the Admission and Standards Committee that formulates policy with regard to admission
for the basic teaching credential programs and reviews individual applications for
special admission. Each candidate is advised by both a professional education faculty
member (usually the program coordinator or a specially designated program advisor)
and a faculty member in the academic department associated with the credential. Subject
area faculty also teach the subject-specific methods courses. With reference to field
experiences, the selection of field sites and cooperating teachers is coordinated
by the Single Subject program coordinator in consultation with the KSOEHD director
of professional field experience. Formal criteria for selection of field sites and
cooperating teachers have been developed by the program faculty in consultation with
participating school districts. Some districts in the CSUF service area designate
one individual to work with the Single Subject program coordinator and university
supervisors in the placement of student teachers. Other districts have delegated this
responsibility to site administrators. In some districts this process is being revised.
In Clovis Unified and Fresno Unified School Districts, a list of approved cooperating
(master) teachers is being developed for use by the university. Direct responsibility
for placement in the initial student teaching semester rests with the Single Subject
Program coordinator. In final student teaching it rests with designated faculty members
in the various subject matter departments. KSOEHD faculty members supervise students
in the initial student teaching semester. Subject matter faculty members supervise
in the final student teaching semester. A professional development day for university
supervisors and cooperating teachers is held each year. Professional education faculty,
subject area faculty, and secondary teachers jointly plan the day, and serve as presenters.
University supervisors and cooperating (master) teachers are jointly responsible for
assessing candidates’ competence in student teaching. (See student teacher evaluation forms in the Student Teaching and Internship Handbook.)
Because subject-matter preparation providers also serve as faculty for the subject-specific
pedagogy course and supervise final student teaching, it is very natural for them
to relate the teacher preparation curriculum to the subject matter curriculum. This
transition is also facilitated in several other ways. The KSOEHD governance policy
calls for the Single Subject Credential program coordinator to review all subject
matter preparation programs before they are submitted to the CTC for approval. Additionally,
because general methods faculty members use the K-12 content standards and frameworks
in their course ( CI 159 Methods and Materials in Secondary Teaching), they are familiar with at least some
of the concepts, principles, and values of the respective disciplines. As previously
mentioned, representative subject matter faculty and KSOEHD professional education
faculty meet together on a regular basis, which promotes communication in this area.
Also, some of the subject matter faculty have addressed Single Subject supervisors
of the initial student teaching experience, who are all generalists, regarding important
subject-specific issues. For example, in the past, English faculty members have addressed
these supervisors regarding contemporary approaches to grammar instruction in the
secondary English classroom.
The KSOEHD has formal agreements with each of the districts in which it places student teachers. Also, as previously noted, there are several avenues for most of the constituents named in this standard to have input regarding the design and delivery of the Single Subject program (e.g., Dean’s Council on Professional Education, master teacher meetings). Currently school site administrators, department chairs, and master teachers each play key roles in the selection of master teachers, the design of field experiences, and/or the assessment of candidates.
The Director of Field Experiences for the KSOEHD currently serves on our regional
BTSA Council. Program input from BTSA coordinators is received via the Director of
The KSOEHD has a strong record of supporting partnerships with K-12 schools. The KSOEHD
plans to continue providing the necessary resources for full participation in these
types of relationships. The university has also identified K-12 partnerships as a
university-wide priority in the coming years.
Integrated/Blended Program Delivery Model:
The overall design and implementation of an Integrated/Blended Program result from
demonstrated, fully supported collaboration based on shared decision making among
faculty and administrators in the academic units responsible for subject matter preparation
and teacher education. An Integrated/Blended Program includes the involvement of
K-12 educators in curriculum development and program implementation. Where appropriate,
the four-year institution works jointly with selected community colleges to develop
a seamless transfer program.
All of the structures and processes for communication and collaboration described
above apply to the blended program in physical education. The Director of Teacher
Education (the Dean of the KSOEHD) and the Coordinator of the Single Subject Credential
program reviewed and approved the proposal for this blended program before it was
submitted to the CTC.
Intern Program Delivery Model:
Intern programs are joint programs of employing school districts and approved program
sponsors and require ongoing collaboration to ensure effective operation of the program.
It is important that the partners ensure that the program is operating in a manner
to further the educational goals of the district and meet the goals and purposes of
the preparation program. Partnerships with school district bargaining agents address
the availability, selection, preparation, and services of mentor teachers.
The Teacher Internship Program (TIP) was developed for the purpose of providing greater assistance to school districts in the University’s service area. In 1991-92, faculty of the KSOEHD developed the TIP approval document in cooperation with school district representatives and teachers’ bargaining agents. Since then, continued collaboration has been maintained in the modification and update of the program’s organizational structure. Four special Saturday training sessions for interns have been added, grade level clusters for this training have been implemented, and courses have been modified. These modifications have been a result of input from the external evaluator’s survey of participating school districts, school district representatives serving on the TIP Advisory Board and TIP staff. All modifications have been implemented to meet the needs of participants in the TIP. The intern program office has on file letters of agreement from each partnering school district in order to ensure effective operation of the program.