The National Research Center for Career and Technical Education (NRCCTE) has responded to these developments by funding two projects that are developing professional development models for improving the skills of secondary CTE teachers. The Southern Regional Education Board (SREB) is developing and testing an induction model for alternatively certified teachers, those who have not completed a traditional teacher education program. NOCTI (formerly the National Occupational Competency Testing Institute) is applying its expertise to a professional development model designed to improve the ability of secondary-level CTE teachers and administrators to interpret data from technical skill assessments to improve instruction.
Alternative Certification
One of the most important challenges facing CTE is building a high-quality teaching force. The new demands and responsibilities on CTE teachers range from integrating grade-level literacy and numeracy to support increased student achievement to designing intellectually challenging projects and real-world problems that will engage an increasingly diverse population of learners. Alternative routes to CTE teacher licensure, embraced for nearly 100 years as a viable way of transitioning those with highly valued industry experience into the teaching profession, are one strategy for meeting the demand for more and better CTE teachers. Although an increasing percentage of teachers are entering the teaching profession through alternative routes, the requirements for these pathways vary greatly and the debate continues to rage as to whether alternative route teachers are less or equally effective as traditionally prepared teachers in impacting student achievement.
In partnership with the NRCCTE, SREB is developing an induction model for new CTE teachers pursuing an alternative route to certification that will increase their competence, self-efficacy, and career commitment. The model is designed to build the capacity of beginning CTE teachers to offer instruction that is intellectually demanding and standards-focused and thus more likely to improve CTE students’ academic achievement. The model also builds CTE teachers’ capacity to design instruction that is actively engaging using strategies such as project-based learning and cooperative learning. Students who are actively engaged intellectually and emotionally in their high school courses are more likely to stay in school, acquire high school diplomas in four years, and enter postsecondary institutions without the need for remediation.
The induction model includes 196 hours of professional development delivered through a 10-day summer institute prior to the first year of teaching, three, two-day workshops during the first year, and a 10-day summer institute following the first year. In addition, the model includes the support of coaching from the professional development instructor, on-site guidance from a mentor and administrator, and participation in an electronic community of practice. An iterative development process is being used to design the model. This report presents the findings of the first round of field tests of four training modules that comprise the professional development component of the model. The content of the modules was field tested between June 2009 and February 2010 in a series of four sessions each including three, six-hour days of training. Two of the four field test sessions were held in Oklahoma and two were held in South Carolina. A total of 46 teachers participated, representing different levels of education, work experience, and CTE content area.
An analysis of the field test data provided clear guidance on changes to make in program materials to meet the needs of alternative route teachers. Many learning activities were revised to fit the audience in order to provide more time for reflection or to clarify content. Field test participants identified key elements of the modules that they felt would be necessary for new teachers prior to entering the classroom, including: (1) the use of rubrics; (2) formative and summative assessment; (3) how to use a table of specifications to align their instructional goals and assessments to technical standards and 21st-century skills; (4) getting to know students; (5) engaging students in developing classroom rules and procedures; and (6) classroom management scenarios. Data suggested that three strategies used by program developers were particularly effective in supporting participant learning: (1) use of examples in participants’ content areas; (2) use of “floating” one-on-one and small group coaching during cooperative learning segments; and (3) facilitated small group discussion in the afternoon or evening to structure reflection. Field testing on the model will continue through 2012, when the fully-developed model will be ready for rigorous experimental testing.
Use of Technical Assessment Data
The term “data-driven decision making” has become ubiquitous in education, and yet it seems to be most often discussed with reference to policy decisions related to reporting requirements and accountability. With the increasing emphasis on the use of standardized tests for reporting on school, teacher, and student achievement, the true purpose of testing, that of program/ instructional improvement, could be lost or buried under the need to use the results for reporting and rating purposes. An understanding of assessment data, including their interpretation and uses, can encourage teachers who have used data for classroom improvement to continue to do so and help those who have not used them see the value in using test data for classroom improvement beyond regulatory requirements.
During the first year of the NOCTI project, teachers and administrators were surveyed to determine if and how they use analyses of testing data to modify curriculum and instruction, how they learned to use data, the effectiveness of their prior training, and the topics on which they would like to increase their knowledge and skills. The survey results established the felt need of respondents. Mini-case studies were also conducted with districts that demonstrated extensive use of test data to identify the changes that were made in how instruction was planned and delivered.
The findings from the first year, as well as an exhaustive literature review, were used to develop a professional development program to improve the ability of secondary CTE teachers and administrators to interpret assessment data to guide instructional improvement. The program, entitled CTEDDI (Career and Technical Educators Using Data-Driven Improvements) includes training in analyzing data from the participants’ own students and ongoing mentoring and coaching. Educators are also provided access to an electronic professional sharing site where they become members of a community of practice. This program was field tested in nine locations, and information collected from the facilitators and trainees was used to identify changes needed to improve the materials and process. The methods and findings from the first two years of this project are presented in detail. The revised version is undergoing additional review in new sites, and planning has begun to roll out the model through technical assistance to states that elect to provide this professional development. Using test results in this way is one of the core components of continuous quality improvement and strongly encouraged by the accountability requirements and the legislative intent, of Perkins IV.
The projects discussed in this report respond to core needs of the field, but the professional development challenge is far more extensive than what these projects address. Secondary CTE serves a large segment of secondary students and must contribute to their academic as well as technical learning. Most CTE teachers will need considerable professional development to broaden their teaching skills and to learn to use data for program improvement. The professional development they receive should be directly relevant to the courses that they teach and of sufficient intensity and duration to influence instruction. In the present economic climate providing adequate time for effective professional development may be the most difficult challenge of all.
