Page 1
Proposal for an NCATE Transformational Initiative
A RESEARCH ON PRACTICE MODEL FOR IMPROVING
UNDERGRADUATE TEACHER EDUCATION.
College of Education, East Carolina University
Statement of Purpose
The National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE) Transformation Initiative (TI) provides
member institutions with an accreditation pathway that focuses on significant contributions to the field of education.
NCATE believes that the field of education is in need of an expanded research base to document and substantiate
promising and effective practices and innovations. Many of NCATE’s member institutions focus on improving the
overall quality of education by preparing more effective future educators, enhancing the effectiveness of current
educators, conducting practice-based research, and providing services in real-world schools. All of these endeavors
have the potential to inform the field at large through a rigorous process of research and development. Thus,
NCATE’s Transformation Initiative seeks accreditation proposals that document promising practices, innovations
and interventions directed at transforming educator preparation for greater effectiveness. The following outlines the
proposed TI Project of the College of Education at East Carolina University.
The East Carolina University (ECU) was founded as East Carolina Teachers College in 1907. In 2003, the School
of Education became the College of Education (COE). The University and the region it serves see the COE as the
preparer of teachers and administrators for eastern North Carolina. The pride that ECU teacher education graduates
take into the field is evident in many ways: they willingly mentor candidates in early field experiences and
internship, they attend annual professional development that keeps them abreast of program changes, and they
provide candid feedback about candidate preparedness. The community of stakeholders in eastern North Carolina candidates, faculty, public school partners, and business and community leaders want and need more effective
novice teachers who can have a positive impact on PK-12 students as soon as they enter the classroom.
The ECU TI Proposal considers the institution’s historical role in eastern North Carolina and its key role in
developing a better economic future for the region through practice-based initiatives transform key elements of
teacher preparation yield positive impacts on the PK-12 schools in which our graduates work. During the past
several years, the COE has embarked upon several initiatives that now form the foundation of this TI proposal. In
2006, the ECU and the COE began strategic investments in safe-guarding the institution’s teacher performance data
and laid the groundwork for the development of an integrated assessment system. In 2009, the ECU COE received a
USDOE Teacher Quality Partnership Grant (TQP) to reform teacher education in several key areas, including
curriculum reform and clinical partnerships. In 2010, the COE joined the national Teacher Performance
Assessment Consortium (TPAC) and began piloting and field testing the ed-Teacher Performance Assessment
(edTPA) in several teacher education program areas. The present TI Proposal unites these efforts with a series of
additional individual initiatives in our K-8 teacher preparation programs that previously operated as individual,
separate activities within specific teacher education programs. In a sustained, integrated effort to strengthen teacher
candidate development throughout our programs, the College of Education (COE) has developed the present the
ECU TI Proposal: A Research on Practice Model for Improving Undergraduate Teacher Education.
I. Significance of the Proposed TI Project
The proposed ECU TI Proposal is both multi-faceted and coordinated. The project is multi-faceted in that the overall
initiative consists of a series of components within the undergraduate teaching programs in Elementary Education
and in Middle Grades Education. The Elementary Education and Middle Grades Education department prepares
50% of the COE candidates seeking an initial teaching license. While other areas of teacher education could
implement the components with adaptations, they are not included in the ECU TI Proposal presented here. The idea
that the components are coordinated is based on two complementary perspectives. The first is that the components
themselves are explicit enhancements to the overall teacher education programs in the Elementary Education and
Middle Grades Education areas. The second is that each of the components addresses systemic aspects of teacher
education that enhance program quality and have been identified as issues in the field. Considered as a set of
complementary components, the proposed ECU TI Proposal reflects a college-wide “Research on Practice” model
through which the COE supports research and development (R&D) on systemic issues in teacher preparation.
Although teacher education is an active area of educational research, the involvement of Colleges of Education
FINAL 6/18/2013
Page 2
whose primary mission is undergraduate teacher education has been an underutilized resource in such research. This
is despite the fact that such Colleges of Education and their faculty whose focus is on preparing undergraduate
teachers operate in a research-rich environment that naturally encompass all of the systemic dynamics in the process
of teacher education. The proposed ECU TI Proposal demonstrates how development of the support capacity within
a College of Education can provide the means to engage undergraduate teacher education faculty in the forms of
research and development that address systemic elements of the teacher education process.
The significance of the Research on Practice Model for Improving Undergraduate Teacher Education is threefold.
First, the model coordinates the implementation and research design for innovative initiatives across the teacher
education curriculum by linking them vertically to study and assess their individual outcomes and overall integrated
value to the programs. Second, the model leverages previous and current resource investments in curriculum
development, instructional innovation, and systematic, integrated data collection to scaffold and sustain faculty
research on practice. Lastly, the model engages teacher education faculty in practice-based research with an overall
focus of preparing effective novice teachers (improving teacher candidate readiness to teach) who are able to have a
positive impact on PK-12 student achievement.
Literature Review
The Research on Practice Model has roots in the research literature as a response to the current national focus on the
need for increased accountability in teacher education and as overall conceptual framework to link the multifaceted
components of the project. First, the project will be framed in the national context, and then the research literature
for preparing effective novice teachers will be presented.
National Context for the TI Proposal
Accountability in schools of education has been influenced by the passage of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001
(NCLB). The NCLB required that all teachers teaching in core academic subjects be “highly qualified.” However,
the parameters of highly qualified were to be determined by each state, resulting in multiple definitions of the term.
Therefore, a highly qualified teacher in one state may not be considered highly qualified in another. In 2004, the
State Higher Education Executive Offices (SHEEO) established the National Commission on Accountability in
Higher Education and charged it to address the issue of accountability in higher education. In the overview of its
background and purpose of the commission, Executive Director, Paul Lingenfelter identified the impact of NCLB as
one of the “prominent features on the landscape.” Lingenfelter asserted that “the urgent national interest in
improving educational attainment naturally leads to the suggestion that ‘reform’ in higher education along the lines
experienced for K-12 is appropriate and inevitable” (2004, p. 2).
The current demand for accountability in post-secondary education can arguably be traced back to the 2006 report
issued by the Commission on the Future of Higher Education. A Test of Leadership: Charting the Future of U. S.
Higher Education (also known as the Spellings Report) addressed concerns about the deterioration of the American
higher education system. The report addressed four primary areas of concern: access, affordability, quality, and
accountability. The commission called for the development of a large, public database of information about
colleges and universities including data about the learning outcomes of students. (p. 22). According to the
commission, public access to this information would compel institutions of higher education to have a more vested
interest in the success of their students.
The implementation of Race to the Top (RttT) has spurred a shift from requiring teachers to be “highly qualified” to
assuring teachers are “highly effective.” One of the goals of the program is to hold teacher preparation programs
accountable for preparing their graduates to positively impact student achievement in the PK-12 classroom. Each
participating state is expected to publicly report data on the effectiveness of graduates from each state preparation
program. In order to receive RttT funds, states must be willing to tie teacher evaluations to student performance.
Calls for accountability have also been addressed at the state level. In 1998, California enacted a law requiring all
teacher candidates to successfully complete a state-approved performance assessment in order to be eligible for
licensure. Until recently Connecticut required beginning teachers to pass a performance assessment in their second
or third year of teaching in order to be eligible for a professional license. (The requirement was suspended in 2008
due to funding issues.) Both assessments have been validated to be predictors of student achievement (Pecheone &
Chung, 2006; Wilson, Hallam, Pecheone, & Moss, 2007). Massachusetts, Minnesota, Ohio, Tennessee, and
Washington are on accelerated timelines to adopt a valid and reliable teacher performance assessment as mandated
by state law (CCSSO, 2011).
FINAL 6/18/2013
Page 3
In 2010, the NCATE Blue Ribbon Plan on Clinical Preparation and Partnerships for Improved Student Learning
released its report which included “10 Design Principles for Clinically Based Preparation.” This document was a
call to action for teacher education programs nationwide. Elements of the ten design principles may be in place in
certain programs, but it is the coordinated and integrated effect of all principles that is thought to bring about the
change needed in teacher preparation. The shift proposed would require “structural, financial, programmatic, and
policy changes for all partners (p.12).” National models for changing clinically based programs, financing the
innovations, and assessing the impact of teacher preparation were highlighted. Of these promising programs, four
are included in this TI proposal for a Research on Practice Model.
Elements in the Preparation of Effective Novice Teachers. Effective teaching is something people believe they
are able to recognize when they see it. Having been students themselves, the public has experienced the benefits of
effective teachers and shared horror stories of ineffective teachers. Despite this vast experience, much disagreement
exists over how to define an effective teacher, much less how to prepare effective teachers. The issues are vast and
include defining effective teaching, practicing effective teaching, assessing effective teaching, supporting effective
teaching, and learning how to reflect effectively on teaching. A brief review of the literature in these areas follows.
Defining Effective Teaching. Effective teaching does not happen by chance. Researchers, educators,
politicians, and the public have all tried to answer the question, “What essential qualities make an effective
teacher?” Recently, various frameworks have emerged that provide research-based, comprehensive approaches to
describing and identifying effective teaching.
In 2007, Charlotte Danielson released her Framework for Teaching. This research-based framework included 4
major domains: planning and preparation, classroom environment, instruction, and professional responsibilities
(Danielson, 2011). The domains were then broken into 22 components that are defined even further. Presently, the
domains and categories align closely with the Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium
(INTASC) standards for new teachers. These INTASC standards are the national professional teaching standards for
new teachers. Danielson’s framework has been widely accepted and incorporated into other projects including a
collaborative partnership with Educational Testing Service (ETS) that resulted in the development of the Teachscape
observation instrument for teachers (Teachscape, 2011).
The Danielson Framework was incorporated into another project through the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation as
part of their Measures of Effective Teaching (MET) project. This project has been designed to find the best way to
give teachers the information and support needed to be effective in the classroom. Emphasis is placed on how to
measure effective teaching and teachers. Researchers in the study are collecting multiple points of data ranging from
student feedback to videotaped classroom lessons. The intent is that the results will inform how to identify effective
teaching and support teachers in reaching those levels (Danielson’s Framework for Teaching for Classroom
Observations, 2010).
In addition to Danielson's work in defining effective teaching, Doug Lemov (2010) discovered in a five year project
of recording the best teachers he could find across the country, according to test scores, that what looked like
“natural-born genius was often deliberate technique in disguise.” Lemov’s book, Teach Like a Champion: The 49
Techniques That Put Students on the Path to College, describes step by step techniques for effective teachers.
Lemov’s effective teaching techniques are minute decisions the teacher makes throughout the school day like “Stand
still when you’re giving directions” and “call on students regardless of whether they have raised their hands.” By
observing hundreds of classrooms where outstanding teachers had transformed at risk students into high achievers,
Lemov found that there are techniques every teacher can learn and employ to become effective.
Linda Darling-Hammond defines effective teachers as those who engage students in active learning, create
intellectually ambitious tasks, use a variety of teaching strategies, assess student learning continuously and adapt
teaching to student needs, create effective scaffolds and supports, provide clear standards, constant feedback, and
opportunities for revising work, and develop and effectively manage a collaborative classroom in which all students
have membership (Darling-Hammond, 2012).
Building on the past work of Lemov, Danielson, and others, University of Michigan's Deborah Loewenberg Ball led
the development of the Teaching Works framework. This initiative was designed to disseminate a core set of skills
for beginning teachers while serving as a clearinghouse of information and research about high-quality teacher
education. These high-leverage practices total 19 and include, but are not limited to, making content explicit through
modeling, setting up group work, setting long- and short-term learning goals for students, designing a sequence of
lessons toward a specific learning goal, identifying and implementing an instructional response to common patterns
FINAL 6/18/2013
Page 4
of student thinking, eliciting and interpreting individual students' thinking, selecting particular methods to check
understanding and monitor student learning, providing feedback, and communicating with other professionals
(Sawchuk, 2011).
The University of Kansas Center for Research on Learning (http://instructionalcoach.org/big4) found that there are
four big teaching practices that have the most effect on teaching and learning. This comprehensive framework of
excellence is titled “The Big Four” and includes these four areas: (1) classroom management, (2) content planning,
(3) instruction, and (4) assessment for learning
Role of Clinical Practice in Effective Teacher Preparation. Current trends in the literature suggest that a
quality clinical experience is a key essential in preparing teacher candidates. This experience is the teacher
candidate’s chance to be in the classroom, experiment with strategies and content from methods courses, and begin
making classroom decisions in a long-term teaching environment. Practicum experiences vary widely in different
programs. Candidates experience practice in a variety of settings before beginning their internships.
The expansion of practice as extended, multiple, supervised experiences in diverse settings closely conjoined with
coursework is emerging as a protocol through which teacher preparation programs can better prepare preservice
teachers for success with all students (Beyer, 1991; Bouas & Thompson, 2000; Cooper, Beare, & Thorman, 1990;
Ladson-Billings, 1991; Larke, Wiseman, & Bradley, 1990; Sleeter, 2001). Supervision and reflection become
crucial in these types of practice as students’ beliefs and attitudes are impacted by the multiple field experiences
(Bondy, Schmitz, & Johnson, 1993; Brown, 2004; Johnson, 2002).
Most educators value field experiences as an important part of learning to teach (Ball & Cohen, 1999; Hammerness,
Darling-Hammond, & Bransford, 2005). Discussion continues among educators as to what conditions create the
most effective learning environment for preservice teachers (Zeichner, 2012). Some educators believe that more
time in schools does not necessarily help preservice teachers. The main criticism with field experiences stems from
their apparent lack of connectedness to the other components in the teacher preparation programs (Guyton & Byrd,
2000; NCATE, 2001; NCTE, 1996; Fein-Nemser, 2001; Richardson, 1996; Wilson, Floden & Ferrini-Mundy, 2001;
Ziechner, 1990 as cited in Graham, 2006). The components that seem to be most effective in field experiences
include field experiences that are carefully coordinated with coursework and are supervised (Darling-Hammond,
Hammerness, Grossman, Rust, and Shulman, 2005; NAE, 2005; Zeichner, 2010). Darling-Hammond (2010) stated
that preservice teachers need to learn “to practice in practice, with expert guidance.” It is important the preservice
teachers are given the opportunity to teach, receive feedback, reflect on the teaching episode, and then teach again in
a cyclical fashion throughout the semester as well as the teacher education program (Darling-Hammond, 2010). As
a result, programs across the nation are reconsidering current practice and program requirements with a focal point
of greater integration of coursework and practice, as well as expanded field experience.
Role of Assessing Effective Teaching Proficiency. An increasing challenge for faculty within colleges of
teacher education is creating effective methods of assessing teacher candidates’ ability to use information they have
learned in their university courses as they enter the classroom. While colleges of teacher education have attempted
to do this for years, there is increased pressure coming from the public and state legislatures to produce evidence
that graduates of programs are effective teachers. This challenge requires updated performance-based assessments
that include innovative approaches to the assessment of preservice teachers including but not limited to attempts to
evaluate knowledge and skills, preservice teacher learning, student learning, professional dispositions, and reflective
practices.
Performance assessments have multiple benefits, including: providing documentation of individual student teacher
performance, noting progress toward postsecondary program goals, creating a common language, focusing
understanding, and dissecting programs’ strengths and weaknesses (Darling-Hammond, 2006).
Electronic portfolios (Eportfolios) are performance-based assessments that demonstrate positive course-based
learning outcomes of preservice teachers (Whitford, Ruscoe, & Fickel, 2000). Portfolios are used for formative,
summative, and predictive assessment (Bannink, 2009). Portfolio assessments help preservice teachers make
connections between theory and practice because they require the meaningful application of the information that
they have learned for planning and implementing lessons. These lessons and their reflections are captured in a
written document and placed in the portfolio. Portfolio assessments categorize content in terms of documentation of
planning, examples of instruction, methods of assessment, classroom management procedures, action research, and
reflective activities. Caution should be noted in that while such forms of portfolio assessment may be beneficial for
documenting certain aspects of the teaching certification process, they may not be valid for the overall assessment of
FINAL 6/18/2013
Page 5
teacher performance competencies in authentic classroom settings (Yao, Thomas, Nickens, Downing, Burkett, &
Lamson, 2008). In other words, while this type of portfolio helps university faculty assess the preservice teacher’s
ability to plan the lessons, this type of portfolio does not provide faculty with the means to see the implementation of
a lesson in a “real life” situation.
For the preceding reason, when portfolios are paired with video narratives, they become far more meaningful
representations of candidate teaching proficiency. Using such video narratives as an additional performance
assessment format helps bridge the gap between theory and practice. Video narratives combine self-selected video
snippets of the preservice teacher accompanied by narrative reflection discussing what was learned during the
teaching episode. This assessment moves preservice teachers from just the planning involved in many portfolios to
actual implementation. Bannink (2009) found that video narratives can demonstrate that preservice teachers have
learned research-based instructional strategies in their teacher education coursework and are able to implement those
in authentic classroom situations. This is important because preservice teachers who complete quality portfolios can
be simultaneously evaluated as “weak teachers” by their internship supervisors (Darling-Hammond & Snyder,
2000). Video narratives assess preservice teachers’ ability to connect theory and practice. This process moves
assessment beyond planning and into implementation. Many video narratives serve as performance-based
assessments during or after field experiences or internships.
Supporting Effective Teaching Internships. In the literature, clinical teachers and university supervisors
are found to be the traditional supports for preservice teachers in the field. One of the benefits of such preservice
clinical experience is that as pre-service teacher candidates develop increasing levels of understanding based on their
own teaching experiences, they also are supported by their clinical teachers and university supervisors. The
importance of these two individuals is evidenced in research that suggests a pre-service teacher’s teaching
effectiveness and productivity are dependent on the help and support provided by the clinical teacher and university
supervisor (Beck & Kosnik, 2000; Caires & Almeida, 2007; Levin & Rock, 2003). Because these two individuals
play such an important role in the success of pre-service teachers, it is important for colleges of education to
understand the roles of each person and how they affect the success of internships.
The clinical or cooperating teacher is usually the teacher of record in the classroom where a preservice teacher is
placed. As such, the preservice teacher spends all day, every day with this individual. While the preservice teacher
is in this classroom, he/she will gradually assume greater teaching responsibilities until he/she is responsible for the
entire classroom all day for a certain number of days. It is no surprise that studies by Griffin et al. (1983), Karmos
& Jacko (1977), Manning (1977), and McIntyre & Byrd (1998) identified the cooperating teacher as the individual
with the most significant influence on preservice teachers. Preservice teachers benefit from their clinical teachers
modeling classroom organization and management, positive student interactions, content knowledge and pedagogy,
and daily routine (Glenn, 2006). Clinical teachers and preservice teachers work to establish a collaborative
relationship allowing them to work together to improve the teaching of the preservice teacher (Glenn, 2006).
Clinical teachers serve in a mentoring or coaching role that goes beyond modeling to encouraging interns to try new
strategies while supporting them with materials, resources, and feedback (Fayne, 2007). The most effective
mentors, “collaborate rather than dictate, relinquish an appropriate level of control, allow for personal relationships,
share constructive feedback, and accept differences” (Glenn, 2006, p. 88).
Because clinical teachers have such a profound influence on the professional development of pre-service teachers,
clinical teachers’ effectiveness should be ensured through careful selection and formal training for their role as
supervisors (Killian & McIntyre, 1987; McIntyre & Byrd, 1998; Wang, 2000; Wilkins-Canter, 1996). According to
Killian & Wilkins (2009), the most effective clinical teachers held master’s degrees in teacher leadership and had
completed course work in observation, feedback and conferencing skills.
University supervisors also play an important part in internship support. University supervisors facilitate
communication and collaboration between the clinical teacher and the pre-service teacher as well as the university
and the public schools (Steadman, 2009). They help the preservice teachers use what they have learned in their
college classes in their classrooms (Ediger, 2009). University supervisors oversee the internship experience, serve
as confidante, and make evaluative judgments about pre-service teacher performance (Fayne, 2007). They mentor
preservice teachers on broader, more conceptual issues (McNamara, 1995) or overarching questions that transcend
the individual student teaching experience (Steadman, 2009; Talvitie, Peltokallio, & Mannisto, 2000). And as with
clinical teachers, characteristics like honesty, active listening, collaboration and mutual help are priorities for
university supervisors as part of the student teacher/supervisor relationship (Beck & Kosnik, 2000; Caires &
Almeida, 2007; Zantig, Verloop, & Vermut, 2001).
FINAL 6/18/2013
Page 6
While clinical teachers and university supervisors are fixtures in the clinical internship triad, a new type of
professional coach, instructional coaches, is emerging as an important support for preservice teachers. Instructional
coaches have become an integral part of school systems following the requirements of No Child Left Behind
(NCLB). Instructional coaching is recommended by NCLB for schools that do not make adequate yearly progress
(AYP) for two years or more (Kowal & Steiner, 2007; Annenberg, 2004). Rather than using instructional coaches
for ongoing professional development for inservice teachers, some innovative institutions are using them with
preservice teachers. While little research exists regarding the use of instructional coaches with preservice teachers,
some research is emerging around the role of literacy coaches with inservice teachers (Kissel, Mraz, Algozzine, &
Stover, 2011; Lynch & Ferguson, 2010; Scott, Cortina, & Carlisle, 2012; Stephens, et al., 2011).
The definition of instructional coach is still evolving, As a result, there is no standard model or uniform definition
(Kowal & Steiner, 2007). However, Kowal and Steiner defined it as “someone whose primary professional
responsibility is to bring practices that have been studied and validated using a variety of research methods into
classrooms by working with adults rather than students. They set aside significant time to offer classroom modeling,
supportive feedback, and specific observations of individual teaching practices” (Kowal & Steiner, 2007). In other
words, instructional coaching programs blend “elements of effective professional development with the essential
goals of professional learning communities in ways that advance both school and systemic improvement”
(www.Annenberg.org). Working with an instructional coach helps inservice teachers apply their learning more often
than when working alone; they improve their reflection skills, and apply their learning not only to their students but
also with their colleagues (Neufeld and Roper, 2003; Poglinco et al., 2003). This collaborative, reflective approach,
used by literacy coaches, has helped boost students’ reading scores by as much as 32 percent over 3 years (Viadero,
2010). Annenberg Institute suggests that, “when employed and supported effectively, instructional coaching
enhances district professional development systems by providing school and central office personnel with sustained,
targeted supports to build knowledge, improve practice, and promote student achievement” (www.Annenberg.org).
Effective instructional coaching requires long-term, substantive support by the district, principal, and teachers;
therefore, additional data on instructional coaching support needs to be gathered and the results used to inform
instructional practice (Walker, 2006). Instructional coaches must have strong pedagogical knowledge, content
expertise, interpersonal skills, and they need training to continually improve their knowledge and skills. This
training should be ongoing and collaborative while focusing on content areas, pedagogical techniques, and general
coaching strategies (Kowal & Steiner, 2007).
Jim Knight, an expert on instructional coaching, (Knight, 2007) identified how to work with teachers to effectively
implement proven teaching practices using what he has called a “Big Four Framework”. In guiding the focus of the
teaching evaluation process on the extent to which proven teaching practices are being used in a classroom setting,
observers use a reflective questioning process. Some examples of such focus questions are as follows:

“Does the teacher make significantly more positive comments than negative comments (at least a three to
one ratio)?”

“Has the teacher clearly communicated expectations, and do the students understand them?”

“Does the teacher care about his or her students’ welfare?”

“Does the teacher respect his or her students?”

“Has the teacher developed essential questions for all units?”

“Do those questions align with the state standards?”

“Does the teacher ask questions at an appropriate variety of levels?”

“Does the teacher effectively sum up lessons at the end of the class?”

“Does the teacher use formative assessments or checks for understanding to gauge how well students are
learning?”
Knight suggests that the technique for effective teaching lies with instructional coaches who work in partnerships to
accelerate teachers’ professional learning. Instructional coaches are colleagues, and confidants who listen with care
and share valuable information with teachers to improve the quality of teaching.
FINAL 6/18/2013
Page 7
Support for Reflective Teaching. Reflective teaching is an important part of our present teacher
preparation program, but it is not the main focus of the present Research on Practice Model. Once we are able to
incorporate the research-based TI operational building blocks within our refined teacher education program, we will
embed critical reflective commentary into key points within the resulting program.
Relationship between Identified Needs, Project Goals and Objectives, and Research Questions.
All teacher education programs have pockets of excellence and areas in need of improvement. At ECU, the open
dialogue with our program partners provides regular feedback on program strengths and weaknesses from an
external perspective, from the level of the University of North Carolina system to our public school partners in the
Latham Clinical Schools Network. When this feedback is joined with internal, annual assessment reviews by
program faculty across teacher education at ECU, a targeted list of program needs is clarified.
The areas of need addressed in the Research on Practice Model were developed using input from several key
constituencies, including, but not limited to:

Input from the University of North Carolina System General Administration, specifically their
commissioning of value-added studies linking K-12 student achievement to teacher preparation institutions
by program and pathway.

Input from a series of drill down studies by the Carolina Institute for Public Policy that found that ECU’s
teacher performance assessments were not valid or reliable, nor were they discerning enough to predict
which candidates would become successful teachers.

Input from the TQP Grant, which identified the need to build a solid instructional foundation – an
instructional toolbox – from which teacher candidates would be able to develop and implement effective
instruction for PK-12 learners.

Input from Latham Clinical Schools Network partners, including concerns about the number of early field
placement requests and the amount of instructional time clinical teachers give up when hosting a teacher
candidate for the student teaching internship.

Input from clinical teachers and part-time university supervisors at annual Clinical Teacher Conferences,
identifying the lack of clear communication between programs and clinical teachers, the need to update
clinical teachers on changes in program expectations, and the roles of all involved in the student teaching
internship semester.

Input from program faculty as part of annual assessment reporting, including focused assessment of
edTPA implementation.
Table 1. Research on Practice Model Needs, Goals, and Proposed Research Questions
Needs
Proposed Project
Component
Goals and Objectives
Proposed Major Research
Questions
Reduce demand on public
school partners for early field
placements while improving
observation skills of novice
observers
Introductory Clinical
Observation for Novice
Observers/Video Grand
Rounds
Develop and validate a
structured observation
protocol using video segments
prior to field experiences
Will the incorporation of
classroom video segments for
observation in conjunction
with an observational guide
result in higher quality
classroom observations and
student course satisfaction
than the traditional
unstructured observation
process in the current ELEM
2123 course?
Core set of instructional
strategies for all teacher
education candidates
ISLES Instructional
Strategies Modules
Design a series of online
modules to increase
knowledge of select, researchbased, instructional strategies
How effectively do interns
apply ISLES instructional
strategies in authentic
classroom settings?
FINAL 6/18/2013
Page 8
Clear curriculum mapping and
formative assessment to
improve teacher candidate
preparation for new summative
portfolio
edTPA Preparation
Modules Integrating ISDDevelopment Strategies
Incorporate edTPA-relevant
instructional development
strategies leading to effective
edTPA module design and
implementation
Were candidates able to
display mastery of and
incorporate the series of ISD
strategies in effective
simulated and actual edTPA
tasks?
More coaching support for
teacher candidates during
internship
Clinical Internship
Observation Model
Support with Instructional
Coaches
Provide coordinated support
for enhancing clinical
internship effectiveness using
a coaching model
What impact does the
instructional coach have on
the pre-service teacher’s
ability to effectively use the
TQP instructional strategies?
Improved communication and
training for clinical teachers,
university supervisors, and
faculty in support of teacher
candidates
Clinical Internship Model
for Coordinating Clinical
Support and Professional
Development
Develop a professional
development model to link and
clarify the roles of clinical
teachers, university
supervisors, and instructional
coaches during the internship
What impact does the revised
professional development
model have on the clinical
internship model? Does
professional development
increase the ability to
effectively support interns?
How effective is the internship
coordination of the roles of
communication between
clinical teachers, university
supervisors, instructional
coaches, and faculty?
Reduce demands on public
school partners for internship
sites while increasing the
quality of those placements
Clinical Internship
Experience Co-Teaching
Model
Experiment with different coteaching models to optimize
teacher candidate learning
Of the co-teaching models
being implemented, what
differences exist in the
teaching ability of the
participants as compared to
traditional placements?
More valid and reliable
summative portfolio assessment
to replace previous portfolio
assessment
edTPA Administration
Develop a replicable model for
edTPA implementation to
improve candidate readiness,
consistency of instruction, and
inter-rater reliability
Was the edTPA administrative
model successful in
implementing the edTPA
summative portfolio,
collecting the necessary data,
and the scoring candidate
performance?
Potential of the Project to Contribute to Advance Teacher Preparation
Making a systemic contribution to improving the field of teacher education requires the proposed TI project to
provide information in a timely manner that is relevant to theory and practice at the local, state, regional, and/or
national levels. The Research on Practice Model proposed here as a TI initiative has the potential to offer substantive
contributions to the field of teacher education for several reasons. First, each project component addresses a key
element in teacher education that is well-grounded in research. Second, the effectiveness of each project component
will be evaluated throughout the implementation time frame. Third, each project component will be documented in
a form appropriate for dissemination. And, fourth, each of the project components will be developed in a manner
allowing them to be utilized in other teacher education programs and in school-based professional development
initiatives.
Additionally, because the Research on Practice Model at the core of the proposed TI initiative has conducted
prototype development work on some project components (see Table 3), COE faculty researchers have already
participated in dissemination activities describing the prototype models and preliminary findings at the local, state,
and national levels. As a result, the scope of dissemination of the overall Research on Practice Model and on the
individual TI project components will be a natural expansion of these experiences. Examples of preliminary
dissemination of the prototype components and the overall college wide Research on Practice Model include:
FINAL 6/18/2013
Page 9

Presentations at the 2012 and 2013 AACTE national conference by faculty involved in:
o
Implementation of the ISLES strategies as a part of the TQP grant.
o
Implementation of the edTPA in a large scale teacher education program.
o
Development of an integrated assessment system.

Structured poster session acceptance for the 2013 AERA national conference titled, “Building the Capacity
for Research on Practice within a Large Undergraduate Teacher Education Program.”

Other national presentations at NCTE, AMLE/NMSA, among others.

State level presentations to UNC System colleagues, UNC Teacher Education Dean Meetings, and at the
NC-ACTE Annual Fall Teacher Education Forum.

Local presentations include poster sessions at the annual ECU Assessment Day, 2011 and 2012.
Potential for Unit Capacity Development and as a Model to Improve Teacher Education
The proposed TI project will demonstrate how development of the R&D capacity in the COE can serve as a resource
within a “Research on Practice” framework for improving teacher education. In this regard, the proposed TI project
will provide a framework for unit capacity development and in this regard, serve as a national model for improving
teacher education. Often high-production colleges of teacher education do not engage in substantive research on
their practice because they are fully engaged in the process of developing future teachers. The Research on Practice
Model provides the opportunity for this COE, and potentially others, to develop an R&D capacity as a means for
enhancing the knowledge base of the discipline. Once established, this model could be expanded to include other
areas of professional educator preparation, such as school leadership, school counseling, and school librarianship.
The ability of the Research on Practice Model to serve as a national model is rooted in the current literature. The
specific components in the TI proposal address identified needs for transformational changes in current teacher
preparation programs. By focusing on effective teaching, this model provides a clear framework within which all
project components are linked. As noted previously, in 2010, the NCATE Blue Ribbon Plan on Clinical Preparation
and Partnerships for Improved Student Learning released its report in which it highlighted promising programs that
could be replicated in new venues. Of the program highlighted, four have been investigated, adopted, adapted and
are being implemented as part of this TI proposal, Research on Practice Model. They are: Co-teaching; the use of
video for observation skill development; a teacher performance assessment instrument like the edTPA; and the use
of value-added data analysis to replicate effective efforts. While other institutions’ implementations will differ from
the one presented here, it is the unification of these efforts under one transformational umbrella that may serve as a
national model for what NCATE (2010) called, “mapping the shift” in teacher education (p. 12).
II. Quality of the Project Design
Recent national emphases on the need to improve teacher education and teacher effectiveness all imply
interdependency among preservice teacher preparation, teacher professional development, effective classroom
teaching, and teacher accountability. In combination with curricular content and structure, these teacher-oriented
components are key elements that have the potential to determine the degree to which K-12 educational institutions
are able to prepare teacher education students to engender K-12 student academic achievement.
Overview of the Research on Practice Model
An important dynamic aspect of the Research on Practice model is that it has an operational framework that
integrates research and development (R&D) with implementation. To be able to effectively and efficiently
implement any form of transformative initiative, project leadership must articulate the connections between the
research questions and the innovative activities. Often these two perspectives (R&D and implementation) do not
share the same academic language. Therefore, the Research on Practice Model has adopted and emphasized a
common referential context for all R&D activities addressing aspects of the ongoing teacher education process in the
College. Being the home of the ECU Pirates, it is common for students and faculty to identify with all things “pirate
related”. Linking the TI to the idea of expertise development and/or refinement using the familiar ECU mascot,
provides this TI project with an implementation framework that is meaningful, and thus, accessible to faculty and
candidates and aligned with the educational goals of the College of Education.
FINAL 6/18/2013
Page 10
As a result, the COE’s commitment to developing professional expertise is at the heart of the TI project design. The
Research on Practice Model embodies the knowledge, pedagogy, skills, and experiences that the COE believes will
produce candidates who are exceptional novice teachers. Within the components of this TI initiative, sophomore
candidates begin with structured observations defining and describing effective teaching in the clinical setting, then
progress to a finite set of research-based instructional strategies for effective teaching as junior candidates (ISLES
Instructional Strategies Modules). These candidates then extend their understanding of effective teaching through
successive ISLES modules infused with clinical examples. This preparation is extended to candidates’ experiences
in junior practica. During the senior year, interns complete the ISLES modules and demonstrate planning and
teaching with research-based instructional strategies in ways that meet the needs of all learners. At the same time,
interns are teamed with an Instructional Coach from the local school district whose primary responsibility is to
mentor interns in planning, teaching, and assessing effectively for the diverse learners in their internship setting.
While receiving coaching, interns are provided opportunities to practice effective teaching in traditional internship
settings or in co-teaching settings. These experiences then set the stage for interns to complete a final summative
Teacher Performance Assessment. It is in this final performance assessment that the interns are able to showcase
their effective teaching. The connective tissue in the Research on Practice model is the continual linking of
classroom theory to clinical experience. Candidates repeatedly and consistently see effective teaching, plan effective
teaching, implement effective teaching, and evaluate effective teaching. They clearly articulate what they know and
are able to do as effective novice teachers.
As shown in Table 2, the specific components in the proposed Research on Practice Model TI initiative include: (1)
Introductory Clinical Observation for Novice Observers/ Video Grand Rounds, (2) ISLES Instructional Strategies
Modules, (3) edTPA Preparation Modules Integrating ISD-Development Strategies, (4) Clinical Internship Support
with Instructional Coaches, (5) Clinical Internship Model for Coordinating Support and Professional Development,
(6) Clinical Internship Experience: Co-Teaching, and (7) edTPA Administration.
Table 2 overviews each of the seven components addressed in the TI Project within the Elementary and Middle
Grades Programs. Each project component is described below. Another essential project support component, the
unit’s integrated assessment system which will serve as an evaluative tool, is described in the following section.
Table 2. Overview of Research on Practice Model Project Components
Project
Project Component
Level
Description
Introductory Clinical
Observation for Novice
Observers/ Video Grand
Rounds
Soph.
Structured observation approach for students' initial observation of
classroom instruction prior to beginning the teacher education
program.
Code
1
2
ISLES Instructional Strategies
Modules
Jr.-Sr.
Computer-based modules modeling key TQP teaching strategies
within teacher education coursework in combination with
coaching support for use of the TQP Instructional Strategy
Lessons for Educators Series Strategies in clinical classroom
applications.
3
edTPA Preparation Modules
Integrating ISD-Development
Strategies
Jr.-Sr.
Integration of Instructional Systems Development strategies
within core teacher preparation coursework leading to effective
design of edTPA classroom tasks.
4
Clinical Internship Support
with Instructional Coaches
Sr.
Observational support model for guiding the systematic
incorporation of ISD, edTPA, and other evidence-based teaching
strategies within the internship experience.
5
Clinical Internship Model for
Coordinating Clinical Support
and Professional Development
Sr.
Initiative for coordinating clinical intern supervisors, clinical
teachers, and teacher education faculty to provide professional
development using edTPA orientation for instruction.
6
Clinical Internship Experience
Co-Teaching Model
Sr.
Clinical internship in which pairs of students are placed in a single
classroom internships to provide classroom relevant instruction in
collaboration with the clinical teacher.
FINAL 6/18/2013
Page 11
7
edTPA Administration
Sr.
Completion of the summative edTPA portfolio assessment.
Detailed Description of Project Components
The following describes each of the project components in Table 2.
1- Early Experience Observation for Novice Observers/Video Grand Rounds. The focus of this project
component is to develop and validate a structured observation approach for students' initial observation of classroom
instruction prior to beginning the teacher education program. Complementing the structured observation process,
this component uses video segments to enhance prospective teacher use of the structured observation model.
Prior to formal admission to undergraduate teacher education programs, a national accreditation guideline requires
students enrollment in a preliminary clinical experience course in which they spend a specified number of hours
(e.g., 16) in unstructured school observation and engage in complementary seminar-oriented discussions with
college faculty.
Considering the possible role of such classes in teacher education, two elements are important. The first is to provide
prospective teacher education students with exposure to representative K-8 classroom settings in a manner that helps
them determine if obtaining a teaching degree aligns with their future goals. The second is, given that participating
students are committed to pursuing a teaching degree, to provide students with an introductory framework for such
observations and subsequent discussions guided by faculty that provide a sound conceptual foundation for their
future study in the teacher education program.
This component provides a three-part perspective for framing an early clinical experience course: 1) video segments
of typical K-8 classrooms are viewed in class; 2) a structured classroom observation instrument is used to analyze
the video segment viewed in class; and 3) the structured classroom observation instrument is used to focus
subsequent the classroom observations in the field. By introducing such a conceptual framework for student
observations using video “snippets,” students are provided with a standardized and efficient means for guiding the
series of classroom observation experiences that comprise the remainder of the course.
Ideally, a conceptual framework for classroom observations by students who are novice observers must meet several
methodological requirements:

First, the requirements for observing, conceptualizing and categorizing the observed video content must be
within the cognitive/experiential capacity of the participating students.

Second, the conceptual framework for the observation task(s) should focus on systemic classroom
dynamics that are extensible for use in an increasingly detailed fashion in the teacher education program
itself.

Third, each category of classroom dynamics observed should be explainable by instructors in the form of
specific procedures that teachers could apply to accomplish the observed outcomes in a manner that
represents effective classroom practice.
Overall, these standards potentially allow the introductory clinical experiences to serve as a general introduction to
important aspects of teaching practices that provides an initial conceptual framework for students beginning a
teacher education program. In the design of the student observation model, two complementary components of a
structured observation system were developed: (a) general characteristics common to all classrooms (elements of the
structured observation model include: Classroom Organization; Affective Classroom Quality; Student Engagement
in Instruction; Teacher Informational Feedback); and, (b) selected instructional behaviors/actions exhibited by
teachers. The observation protocol requires candidates to cite specific evidence from the video snippets. This
required use of evidence and structured articulation serves as the foundation for the development of skills needed for
effective novice teaching.
The specific model developed for the revised initial clinical experience course is illustrative of how the explicit
design of a model for use in Elementary Education can contribute toward a college-wide Research on Practice
Model. Considering these key factors, the development of the model and of the potential capacity for evaluative
research support exemplifies criteria for improving the teacher education process.
FINAL 6/18/2013
Page 12
2- ISLES Instructional Strategies Modules. Upon completion of the early experience course, juniorlevel candidates are introduced to online modules modeling key Teacher Quality Partnership (TQP) instructional
strategies. The TQP strategies were identified and refined for use through a multi-year USDOE-funded project. The
first step in the curriculum reform process was to identify the research-based instructional strategies that would be
the focus of modules. Ten research-based strategies identified for this grant were culled from a list of 28
instructional strategies in implementation with a partner school district. Faculty at the university examined the list of
strategies and reviewed the literature for evidence of effectiveness of the teaching strategies. Additionally, faculty
examined potential overlap with current effective strategies already being taught in teacher education programs. A
framework including 5 instructional categories and 10 strategies was developed (see Figure 2).
Figure1. Framework for TQP Instructional Practices: Five Instructional Categories and Ten
Instructional Strategies.
Faculty then developed interactive, reflective online modules called ISLES (Instructional Strategy Lessons for
Educators Series). These web-based modules infused instruction within undergraduate coursework to develop and
enhance declarative, procedural, and conditional knowledge of the identified instructional strategies and technology
integration within a Universal Design for Learning framework. The ISLES modules utilized the STAR Legacy
Model framework developed by educators at Vanderbilt University
(http://iris.peabody.vanderbilt.edu/hpl/chalcycle.htm). The STAR Legacy framework is based on How People Learn
theory by John Bransford (1999) from the University of Washington. The model contains 5 parts (or points of the
star): Challenge, Thoughts, Perspectives and Resources, Assessment and Wrap up.
Three ISLES Modules were developed to teach the 10 instructional strategies to teacher candidates in the
elementary, middle grades, and special education programs. Modules were developed at the declarative, procedural,
and conditional levels. The modules were then integrated in selected courses throughout each program sequence.
The declarative module was integrated in the teacher candidate’s introductory methods course, the procedural
module integrated in an intermediate methods course, and the conditional module integrated in the first semester of
the senior year. This spiraling curriculum allowed candidates to build their knowledge of the instructional strategies
as they progressed through their program.
Additionally, video snippets were utilized in the ISLES modules. The use of video snippets was two-fold. First,
faculty members videoed in-service teachers modeling the 10 research-based instructional strategies. Faculty vetted
the videos together, coming to a consensus about which videos illustrated effective strategy usage. Examples and
non-examples of the instructional strategies were identified. Video snippets of clinical examples were then produced
and included in the ISLES modules, specifically ISLES 2. Incorporating these videos into the modules allowed
preservice teachers to see “real life” models of the instructional strategies. Having access to examples and nonexamples of the strategies allowed university faculty to lead in-depth discussions of instructional decision making
and implementation.
Second, when candidates completed ISLES 3 in their Junior year, they moved from watching videos to recording
themselves teaching a lesson with instructional strategies. The candidates then trimmed videos into 10 minute
snippets that best met the standards set forth in a scoring rubric. This reflective practice of analyzing teaching was
modeled after Task 2 in the edTPA created by SCALE at Stanford University.
FINAL 6/18/2013
Page 13
3– edTPA Preparation Modules Integrating ISD-Development Strategies. The focus of this project
component is to prepare teacher education students to effectively design segments of instruction, including the
design of edTPA classroom tasks, utilizing Instructional Systems Development (ISD) strategies. The product is a
series of online modules that will guide candidates through various check-points as they prepare to complete the
edTPA during their student teaching/internship semester. Of the seven project components, this component is most
nascent and currently in development, hence the description of it as a future product.
As an assessment tool, the edTPA requires students to design, develop, implement, and analytically evaluate a 3-5
lesson/hour learning segment on academic content representative of their course of study (e.g., elementary, middle
grade content areas) in authentic K-12 classroom settings. The focus and guidelines of the edTPA model incorporate
a number of important instructional dynamics, including the coordination of content focus, student learning
objectives, instructional strategies, and student performance assessment. While the content in the edTPA is nothing
new to most teacher preparation programs, the edTPA requires a shift in the focus of the internship. The edTPA
portoflio goes beyond just candidate teaching performance to include their ability to articulate what they taught, why
they taught it, how they met the needs of individual learners, how well the K-12 students learned the content, and
what should be taught next.
The objective of this particular project component is to implement modules incorporating a set of interdisciplinarybased enhancements into an existing teacher education junior level course that, in effect, establish a “curricular
trajectory” for student edTPA preparation within the ELEM, MIDG, and SPED teacher education programs. The
specific operational components of this initiative include the following steps:
Identifying and developing a set of modular and integrative components that address the scope of major edTPA task
requirements is the first step in ISD module devleopment. These components will be embedded within selected
teacher education school courses beginning semester 1 of the junior year through semester 2 of the senior year.

Determining both an ordered-sequence and the specific courses in which the components would be
embedded.

Determining both an ordered-sequence and the specific courses in which the components would be
embedded.

Evaluating the feasibility of embedding the components within courses that will include the assessment of
student proficiency across the set of components.

Assessing the cumulative impact of the initiative on student edTPA performance, and, eventually, on their
initial success in teaching.

Documenting and disseminating the set of components in the form of a model that facilitates adaptation to
other areas of teacher preparation.
The framework of the initiative is straightforward. Once teacher education students master modules addressing
components of edTPA tasks, they will be assigned integrative tasks in which edTPA-style lessons are developed,
piloted, and refined. As a result, as the preceding is accomplished, candidates will develop professional expertise in
the area of performance assessment.
4 – Clinical Internship Support with Instructional Coaches. The focus of this project component is to
provide coordinated support for enhancing clinical internship effectiveness. Within the model developed, TQPfunded instructional coaches enhance the focus of the traditional triad of clinical teacher, intern, and supervisor to
provide support of the use of effective instructional practices in classroom settings.
As an initial effort, a prototype observation model was implemented to enhance the curriculum and structure of the
internship experience. Specifically, the model focused on the use of evidence-based strategies resulting from a
public school - university collaborative partnership project, Teacher Quality Partnership (TQP), grant funded by the
USDOE as a means of making the present clinical internship a more effective experience for preservice teachers and
the public school teachers with whom they work. In doing so, through the systemic use of the strategies were
employed to positively impact student achievement. The results of the clinical field-testing of the prototype model
and data collection system provide evidence that instructional coaches strengthen the internship experience for
candidates; initial qualitative and quantitative data are emerging to support anecdotal findings.
FINAL 6/18/2013
Page 14
As the implementation of Instructional Coaches matures, this project component will be refined. Through the use of
an integrated data-collection system, the Elementary Education and Middle Grades programs will continually
evaluate the effect of instructional coaching to enhancing the curriculum and student internship experience. The
iterative refinement of the clinical internship model with instructional coaches will be essential as the model is
expanded beyond these two initial program areas.
Partnering school districts hire the instructional coaches to function as part of the educational team with clinical
interns, clinical teachers, and university supervisors to enhance learning for preservice teachers during their yearlong internship experience. These coaches mentor the interns, model best practices, conduct observations, and
provide professional development to support interns in writing lesson plans, integrating technology, and embedding
research based instructional strategies in their teaching.
During Senior 1,the first semester of a two-semester student teaching internship, interns were assigned to their local
school classrooms one day a week to observe their clinical teachers, meet the students, and teach three lessons. The
instructional coach observed the intern during the three teaching episodes and provided feedback, not as an
evaluator, but as an additional resource for improving lesson planning and implementation in the authentic school
setting. During Senior 2,the second semester, interns reported to their local schools every day to perform realistic
duties of teaching. The instructional coaches continued to observe interns and offer suggestions, as well as afterschool professional development specifically designed to meet the needs of the interns. Professional development
focused on behavior management, technology integration, and explicit instructional practices the interns had
experienced in their reformed coursework at the university.
The significance of this initiative consists of addressing the need for improving the coursework and internship
experiences of preservice students while supporting their teachers and intern supervisors through a design that
incorporates the use of evidence-based instructional strategies. This framework builds evaluative capacity for
collecting the effectiveness data necessary to iteratively refine and evaluate the models effectiveness on a continuing
basis.
As an initial pilot, a prototype observation model was implemented to enhance the feedback mechanisms in place in
the internship experience. Specifically, the observation model focused on the use of TQP evidence-based strategies.
Through the systemic use of the strategies explored in the ISLES modules, an important intent was to positively
impact PK-12 student achievement outcomes. Results of the clinical field-testing of the prototype model and data
collection system indicate increased specific guidance of candidate performance in the field.
The significance of this component provides additional, targeted support for interns as they apply their
understanding of effective teaching in the field. This approach builds evaluative capacity for collecting the
effectiveness data necessary to iteratively refine and evaluate the experiences of interns as they connect theory to
practice.
5 – Clinical Internship Model for Coordinating Clinical Support and Professional Development. The
focus of this project component is the development of a model that clarifies and informs the complementary roles of
clinical intern supervisors, clinical teachers, and teacher education faculty. Professional development for intern
supervisors, clinical teachers and teacher education faculty must provide all with a clear framework of where interns
have been, what they have done, and what to expect.
In response to current efforts to identify effective models leading to the development and graduation of beginning
teachers, one component of teacher education programs has attracted significant attention: the internship experience.
During the internship experinces, clinical intern supervisors, clinical teachers, and teacher education faculty work
together to promote the development of teacher candidates. In the past, much scholarly research has focused on the
teacher candidate and the clinical teacher. But as often-overlooked members of the student teaching triad, universitybased supervisors have long held a shadowy position, situated somewhere between the worlds of College of
Education-based teacher education programs and the PK-12 classroom, and have attracted little scholarly attention
and inconsistent definitions of their work. However, as teacher education programs adopt and implement more
rigorous, authentic accountability instruments and standards for their teacher candidates during the internship
semester, university supervisors are attracting increased attention and are being recognized at ECU as an
underutilized force in the development of teacher candidates.
This project component serves as a follow-up that emphasizes the changing role of clinical teacher and university
supervisors by providing clinical teachers and university supervisors new professional development opportunities
with teacher education faculty and within the internship triad. This model calls upon the theories of “socially-
FINAL 6/18/2013
Page 15
situated identity” (Gee, 1999, p. 13) and positioning theory (van Langenhove & Harre, 1999) to provide a contextual
lens through which to view the ways that individuals position and identify themselves in new social situations.
In the pilot exploration at the beginning of the semester, faculty members were positioned as the knowledgeable
members of a team dedicated to leading clinical teachers and college supervisors through a professional
development process. However, by semesters end, all participants viewed themselves as equally knowledgeable
based on the contribution of clinical teachers and university supervisors’ additional knowledge of what the clinical
internship process looked like in relation to real interns. Drawing upon that knowledge, the refinement and
validation of the model’s effectiveness is supportive of university supervisors and clinical teachers positioning
themselves within schools and in relation to college faculty as experts who self-identified as more self-assured and
knowledgeable mentors for preservice teachers.
6 – Clinical Internship Experience- Co-Teaching Model. The Co-teaching initiative is one extension of
TQP Clinical Practice Reform. The design is patterned after Marilyn Friend’s (2008) Co-teaching research and the
Academy for Co-Teaching and Collaboration at St. Cloud State University. During the spring semester 2012, the
ECU Office of Teacher Education piloted one Co-teaching model at an elementary school in Pitt County with one
clinical teacher supervising two interns. The success of this pilot led us to research and expand the model.
St. Cloud State University defines Co-teaching as two teachers (cooperating teacher and teacher candidate) working
together with groups of students – sharing the planning, organization, delivery and assessment of instruction, as well
as the physical space. Both teachers are actively involved and engaged in all aspects of instruction. In contrast,
Friend’s Co-teaching model includes 7 Co-teaching strategies: 1) One Teach, One Observe 2) One Teach, One
Assist 3) Station Teaching 4) Parallel Teaching 5) Supplemental Teaching 6) Alternative (Differentiated)
Teaching 7) Team Teaching.
At ECU, investigations of Co-teaching have focused on select Co-teaching strategies and associated training. During
the Senior 1 semester, interns and clinical teachers are trained in the Co-Teaching Foundations model. Later in
Senior 2 interns and clinical teachers will participate in a Co-Teaching Pairs Workshop to reinforce the co-teaching
Foundations Training and to prepare for Senior II. University supervisors, once assigned, will be trained in the CoTeaching Foundations model. Co-Teaching lead faculty may observe during one or more of the required teaching
episodes. During Senior 2, interns and clinical teachers will co-teach for the full semester with interns doing one
week of “solo teaching”. University supervisors will complete the required minimum of four progress reports. Lead
faculty and instructional coaches will document use of co-teaching strategies for research purposes.
Elementary and middle grades COE interns have the opportunity to teach in co-teaching classrooms during their
internship experience. These classrooms are under investigation from several vantage points to ensure that our
candidates are positively impacting student achievement in their initial years of teaching experience. During Senior
II, interns and clinical teachers will co-teach for the full semester with interns doing one week of “solo teaching”.
Lead faculty and instructional coaches will document use of co-teaching strategies for research purposes. As other
institutions have found success in the effectiveness of co-teaching, it is the intent of this project component to
replicate these successes through which candidates develop effective teaching skills.
7 – edTPA Administration. The focus of this project component is the development of a model for
college-wide edTPA implementation to be replicated across content areas and institutions.
Over 25 states and 180 teacher preparation programs have adopted or are considering the adoption of the Teacher
Performance Assessment (edTPA) instrument developed at Stanford University (AACTE, 2013) as a measure of
novice preservice teachers proficiency. In doing so, the systemic intention is to add successful edTPA performance
as a requirement for licensure or certification upon completion of teacher education programs in Colleges of
Education (see also Luster, 2010). As noted previously, the edTPA requires students to design, develop, implement,
and analytically evaluate a 3-5 lesson/hour learning segment on academic content representative of their course of
study (e.g., elementary, middle grade content areas) in authentic K-12 classroom settings. The focus and guidelines
of the edTPA model incorporate a number of important instructional dynamics including the coordination of content
focus, student learning objectives, instructional strategies along with the evaluative performance-based
recommendations for future lesson revision. Within the edTPA process, performance is evaluated through a
combination of written and video documentation using edTPA-developed multi-level rubrics.
The edTPA is a capstone, summative performance assessment that links theory and practice in the internship. It is a
nationally validated instrument that enables teacher education programs to discuss candidate successes and struggles
in like terms. Though summative for the individual intern, the results are used formatively at the program level to
FINAL 6/18/2013
Page 16
guide future improvements. The edTPA is truly educative in nature. Additionally, common reliable training is a
cornerstone of this assessment and strengthens the collaboration and communication between the university
supervisor, clinical teacher, intern, and instructional coach as the same vocabulary and concepts are explored.
Use of the edTPA as a measure of teaching proficiency at the completion of teacher education programs places
significant new requirements on Colleges of Education. For example, Colleges of Education must initiate,
document, and establish valid and reliable formative assessment within their teacher education programs to provide
students with the foundation necessary for successful completion of the edTPA. Additionally, Colleges of Education
must develop the organizational capacity and faculty support infrastructure necessary for edTPA implementation
and evaluation of edTPA student performance. Finally, the resulting dataset of candidate edTPA portfolios must be
accessible in a well-structured college wide database tool.
The objective of the edTPA Administration component is to describe the development and phased implementation
of a college wide organizational structure for implementing all aspects of the edTPA assessment system. Included in
this description is (a) the hierarchical team-oriented administrative structure composed of College faculty used to
implement the model, (b) issues arising as the implementation of the edTPA system evolved from including a few
College teacher education programs to all in the College, and (c) the strategy for documenting the edTPA
implementation model in a form detailed enough to be replicated in other Colleges engaged in offering teacher
education programs.
Comprehensive Project Plan, Methodology, and Timelines
This section presents the comprehensive project plan for the seven project components, including specific
component objectives, and a timeline for implementation. As noted earlier, within a Research on Practice Model,
each of the project components addresses major issues in teacher education identified in the literature review and the
development of each component will be documented in the form of a model that can be adopted by other teacher
education programs.
The specific objectives and form(s) of measurement for each component are summarized in Table 3.
Table 3. Major Goals and Indicators of Success for Research on Practice Model Project Components
Project Code
Project Component
Major Goals and Success Indicators
1
Introductory Clinical
Observation for Novice
Observers
Goal: Develop and validate a structured observation protocol using video segments
prior to field experiences.
Success Indicators: More coherent student observation reports of video and
classroom observations and more focused follow-up discussions (vs. controls).
ISLES Instructional
Strategies Modules
Goal: Design a series of online modules to increase the declarative, procedural, and
conditional knowledge of selected instructional strategies.
Success Indicators: Assessment of student mastery of procedures for using TQP
teaching strategies within teacher education coursework, tests in combination with
evaluation of effectiveness of classroom use of strategies as evaluated by faculty,
university supervisors, and instructional coaches.
edTPA Preparation
Integrating ISDDevelopment Strategies
Goal: Incorporate edTPA-relevant instructional development strategies leading to
effective edTPA module design and implementation.
Success Indicators: Assessment of student mastery of procedures for using the ISDdevelopment strategies for edTPA-focused instruction within core teacher
preparation coursework using both tests and applications applying the ISD
development strategies.
Clinical Internship
Support with
Instructional Coaches
Goal: Provide coordinated support for enhancing clinical internship effectiveness
using a coaching model.
Success Indicators: Evaluation of the feasibility and effectiveness of the
observational model to improve classroom effectiveness of internship based on
observational data and complementary surveys of interns, classroom teachers,
university supervisors and instructional coaches.
2
3
4
FINAL 6/18/2013
Page 17
5
6
7
Clinical Internship
Model for Coordinating
Clinical Support and
Professional
Development
Goal: Develop a professional development model to link and clarify the roles of
clinical teachers, university supervisors, instructional coaches during the internship.
Success Indicators: Evaluation of the feasibility and effectiveness of the clinical
support model based upon qualitative views of the three categories of professional
participants supporting the internship experience. Identification of qualitative
improvements to internship support process will be identified and documented.
Clinical Internship
Experience: CoTeaching Model
Goal: Experiment with different co-teaching models to optimize teacher candidate
learning as an alternative to traditional student teaching.
Success Indicators: Evaluation of the feasibility and effectiveness of the co-teaching
clinical internship model within the internship classroom setting based upon direct
observation, the views of clinical teachers, and an assessment of differential
achievement outcomes of K-8 students vs. demographically similar students.
edTPA Administration
Goal: Develop a replicable model for edTPA implementation to improve candidate
readiness, consistency of instruction, and inter-rater reliability
Success Indicators: Documentation of the effectiveness of the phased
implementation framework for developing the capacity of College faculty to be
engaged in the implementation of the edTPA. Evaluative data will include
assessment of faculty proficiency resulting from edTPA training and of the
consistency of faculty ratings of student edTPA performance materials.
Figure 2 details the structure of the project components in the Research on Practice Model. As Figure 2 indicates, a
sequential series of seven parallel components across the scope of the overall Elementary Education and Middle
Grades Education Teacher Education Programs will be developed and validated. As the shaded sections indicate, the
initial development of some of the components has been initiated previously. As a result, these initial development
efforts will serve as a foundation for the subsequent adaptation of components from one teacher education program
to the other (see arrows in Figure 2). As Figure 2 also shows, the project development strategy will use the
components previously initiated in the development sequence in one program (e.g., Elementary) as a foundation for
adaptation by the other (e.g., Middle Grades).
In outlining the comprehensive TI project plan and methodology, Figure 3 shows the sequence of steps to be
followed in the development of each different component, while Table 4 shows the present status of each component
(2012-2013) and the projected stages of development beginning with the 2012-13 academic year through the 201617 academic year. As Figure 3 and Table 4 show, the R&D methodology used for the development of each
component consists of 5 phases: (a) a careful analysis of the problem to be addressed, (b) a prototype design of the
component, (c) field-testing and iterative refinement (emphasizing feasibility, fidelity of implementation, and
targeted performance outcomes), (d) summative evaluation (focusing on the evaluative components in (c) above),
and (e) component adoption in the teacher education program (with evaluative monitoring).
FINAL 6/18/2013
Page 18
Figure 2. Framework for the proposed NCATE-TI Project showing the seven parallel
components for Elementary and Middle Grades Programs. Shaded boxes indicate
initial research and development (R&D) work in progress during 2012-13 (see Table
4 for details). Arrows indicate that the R&D work in one program will provide the
foundation for the adaptation of the component by the other, providing a “fastforward” R&D strategy. The College Integrated Database System described in a
following section provides support for housing all of the data obtained in the project.
FINAL 6/18/2013
Page 19
Figure 3. The five-phase R&D methodology used for component development beginning with
problem analysis (based on the literature review) through adoption. Different components in the
proposed NCATE-TI project are at different phases/status (see Figure 1 and Table 3)
Table 4 presents an overall timeline showing the status of each project component over the four-year project period:
2012-2013 through 2015-2016. As Table 3 shows, during the initial year (2012-2013) of the project, a number of
components have been piloted in preliminary fashion in either the Elementary or Middle Grades areas.
Table 4. Phases of Proposed Research on Practice Model Project Components by Year.
Project Component
TI Integrated Database Support Capacity (TEMS)
20122013
Phase 5
20132014
>
Phase 5
Elementary UG Teacher Preparation
FINAL 6/18/2013
20142015
>
Phase 5
20152016
>
Phase 5
20162017
>
Phase 5
Page 20
E-1
Novice Clinical Observation/Video Grand
Rounds (Soph)
Phase 3
>
Phase 4
>
Phase 5
>
Phase 5
>
Phase 5
E-2
ISLES Instructional Strategies Module (JrSr)
Phase 4
>
Phase 5
>
Phase 5
>
Phase 5
>
Phase 5
E-3
edTPA Preparation Integrating ISDDevelopment Strategies (Jr-Sr)
Phase 2
>
Phase 3
>
Phase 4
>
Phase 5
E-4
Clinical Internship Support with
Instructional Coaches (Sr)
Phase 5
>
Phase 5
>
Phase 5
>
Phase 5
>
Phase 5
E-5
Clinical Internship Model for Coordinating
Clinical Support and Professional
Development (Sr)
Phase 1
>
Phase 2
>
Phase 3
>
Phase 4
>
Phase 5
E-6
Clinical Internship Experience: CoTeaching Model (Sr)
Phase 2
>
Phase 3
>
Phase 4
>
Phase 5
>
Phase 5
E-7
edTPA Administration (Sr)
Phase 3
>
Phase 4
>
Phase 5
>
Phase 5
>
Phase 5
Phase 3
>
Phase 4
>
Phase 5
>
Phase 5
Middle Grades UG Teacher Preparation
MG1
Novice Clinical Observation/Video Grand
Rounds (Soph)
MG2
ISLES Instructional Strategies Module (JrSr)
Phase 4
>
Phase 5
>
Phase 5
>
Phase 5
>
Phase 5
MG3
edTPA Preparation Integrating ISDDevelopment Strategies (Jr-Sr)
Phase 2
>
Phase 3
>
Phase 4
>
Phase 5
>
Phase 5
MG4
Clinical Internship Support with
Instructional Coaches (Sr)
Phase 5
>
Phase 5
>
Phase 5
>
Phase 5
>
Phase 5
MG5
Clinical Internship Model for Coordinating
Clinical Support and Professional
Development (Sr
Phase 1
>
Phase 2
>
Phase 3
>
Phase 4
>
Phase 5
MG6
Clinical Internship Experience: CoTeaching Model (Sr)
Phase 2
>
Phase 3
>
Phase 4
>
Phase 5
MG7
edTPA Administration (Sr)
Phase 4
>
Phase 5
>
Phase 5
>
Phase 5
Phase 3
>
Note- Refer to Figure 2 for component status indicated by Phases 1 2 3 4 5.
As noted previously, a major objective is to document each component in a form that allows it to be replicated in
other teacher education settings and that each component addresses a significant issue in teacher education as noted
in the literature.
Collaborative Involvement of Appropriate Key Stakeholders
The cornerstone of much of the COE’s success has been its partnerships; partnerships across campus, across the
state, with public school partners and with business and community leaders are at the unit’s core. The College of
Education has several well-developed collaborative networks across the university service area consisting of
representatives of area K-12 school districts, as well as business and community leaders. A sample of these
partnerships is presented in Table 5. below. Public school partners are actively involved in the teacher education
program at ECU and contributed to the development of each project component included in the Research on Practice
Model through either their direct involvement or feedback. In addition, the proposed Research on Practice Model
will be coordinated with the North Carolina Department of Public Instruction as a component of program approval
documents and recommendation for initial teaching licensure.
FINAL 6/18/2013
Page 21
Table 5. ECU and COE Partnerships with PK-12, Business, and Community Partners
Partnership Group
Meeting Frequency
Membership
Council for Teacher
Education
Monthly during
academic year
Representatives from all NCATE accredited programs at ECU, three PK-12
school district representatives, two student representatives (one
undergraduate, one graduate)
Latham Clinical
School Network
Monthly during
academic year
The Walter and Daisy Carson Latham Clinical Schools Network is a
partnership between East Carolina University and 36 public school systems in
eastern North Carolina.
COE Professional
Advisory Board
Twice each semester
COE alumni, business leaders, community leaders, elected officials in service
region
COE Junior
Professional Advisory
Board
Twice each semester
Current COE students
III. Quality of the Research Design
The evaluative research design is an integral component of the 5-Phase R&D methodology to be used (see Figure 2,
Table 4). In doing so, the project will address the major objectives for each component shown in Table 3. IRB
approval has been obtained or is in process of being obtained for each project component.
Overview of Project Research Design
The project research design will follow a general framework that is based on the Phase for each of the seven project
components. As the following indicates, the research design for each of the five phases will include both quantitative
(e.g., direct observations, course-based tests, performance tests, participant surveys) and qualitative (e.g., participant
interview) data.
Phase 1: Problem Analysis Research Design. Phase 1 for each component consists of “Problem
Analysis.” In the Problem Analysis Phase, the evaluation will focus on the degree to which the solution advanced to
address the identified problem would – in the judgment of education professionals (e.g., faculty, university
supervisors, clinical teachers in K-8 schools, school district representatives to the Council of Teacher Education) –
enhance the overall quality of the teacher education program by addressing the identified problem. The Phase 1
Research Design would follow an iterative refinement/feedback process until a consensus of affected educational
professionals is reached. An important component of this evaluation design is the documentation of the process
through which consensus was reached.
Phase 2: Prototype Research Design. Phase 2 for each component consists of “Prototype Design.” In the
“Prototype Design” Phase, the evaluation will focus on the degree to which the specific model developed for
implementation is judged by education professionals as feasible to implement and the degree to which anticipated
model outcomes are measurable. As in Phase 1, the Phase 2 Prototype Design phase would follow an iterative
refinement/feedback process until a consensus of affected education professionals is reached. An important
component of this evaluation design is the documentation of the process through which consensus was reached.
Phase 3: Formative Research Design. Phase 3 for each component consists of “Field-Test and Iterative
Refinement” of the prototype model developed in Phase 2. In the “Field-Test and Iterative Refinement” Phase, the
formative evaluation will focus on the degree to which the field testing inidcates the prototype model is feasible to
implement and engenders the specific measurable outcomes for the specific component.
The forms of data for determining feasibility will include both direct observation of the component implementation
and interviews or surveys of participants. As appropriate, the forms of data for assessing outcomes will consist of
course-based tests, performance tests, and interviews or surveys of participants. Because the purpose of the Phase 3
Formative Research Design is to provide information leading to the iterative refinement of the prototype model,
during Phase 3, data will be obtained on a continuing basis and, based on the data; the prototype model will be
refined on an iterative basis as necessary until the model is effective.
FINAL 6/18/2013
Page 22
The result of the Phase 3 Formative Research Design will be a refined prototype model with implementation
feasiblity and for which evidence of effectiveness has be obtained. As in Phases 1 and 2, the cumulative data
obtained in Phase 3 and the evolutionary refinement of the model based upon the data obtained will be documented.
Phase 4: Summative Research Design. Phase 4 for each component will consist of rigorous Summative
Evaluation of the model refined in Phase 3. As in Phase 3, the same forms of data will be collected in Phase 4. In
Phase 4, the Summative Evaluation focus will be on obtaining data that provides evidence of the feasibility and
effectiveness of the component, using the same instrumentation in Phase 3. However, to the degree possible, the
Phase 4 Summative Research Design will incorporate comparisons among participants (e.g., students) receiving the
model as an intervention vs. comparison participants on the appropriate component outcome measures or in changes
in measured outcomes or trends over several years.
In Phase 4, the Summative Evaluation findings for each component will be documented in written form that will
include (a) documentation of the model in a form others can use to adopt the model, (b) the evaluative findings
providing evidence of the feasibility and effectiveness of the model for that component, and (c) specification of
factors affecting generalizability and/or limitations of the component model based upon the data collected. In the
event that the summative evaluation of the model does not confirm feasibility and effectiveness of the model, then
the model will require additional refinement and the Phase 4 Summative Research Design repeated.
Phase 5: Adaptation Research Design. Phase 5 for each component consists of the adaptation of the
model validated though the Phase 4 Summative Evaluation within the teacher education program. As an important
part of Phase 5, the assessment instruments used in Phases 3 and 4 will be used to monitor the implementation and
outcomes of the model adopted for use.
Statistical Analysis of Data Obtained in Across the Research Design Phases
Quantitative Data. For all quantitative data collected, descriptive statistics will be computed and reported
in aggregate and disaggregated form, as appropriate. In addition, general linear models (OLS, multilevel) will be
conducted for correlational and experimental studies. As a supporting form of teacher education student data,
relationships of student demographic characteristics to model outcomes will be explored. In a similar fashion,
demographics of K-8 school students will be used as statistical controls in analyses of school achievement data
measured by NC State tests.
Qualitative Data. For all participants (e.g., teacher education students, faculty, supervisors, clinical
teachers), interview and discussion data will be recorded, transcribed/transferred into electronic form, and analyzed
via NVivo software (version 10).
Assessment of Specific Project Component Feasibility and Outcomes
Following Table 2, this section details the major forms of data used in the development and validation of each
project component across the four Phases of the R&D development process. Phase 5 data collection will consist of
the same forms of data as Phase 4.
Table 6: Specific Research on Practice Model Project Component Outcomes and Feasibility
Project
Code
1
Project
Component
Introductory
Clinical
Observation for
Novice
Observers/Video
Grand Rounds
Goal
Major Success Indicators
Research Data Collection
Develop and validate a
structured observation
protocol using video
segments prior to field
experiences.
More coherent observation
reports of video and
classroom observations
and more focused followup discussions (vs.
controls).
Phases 1-2: Interviews/ surveys of
education professionals re: Adequacy
of the model
Phases 3-4: Participant student
observation reports and discussions;
comparison of participant student
observation reports vs. comparison
students.
2
ISLES
Instructional
Strategies
Modules
Design a series of
online modules to
increase the declarative,
procedural, and
conditional knowledge
of selected instructional
Assessment of student
mastery of procedures for
using TQP teaching
strategies within teacher
education coursework
tests in combination with
Phases 1-2: Interviews/ surveys of
educational professionals re:
Adequacy of the model
Phases 3-4: Student performance on
course-tests; proficiency in
implementing strategies in classroom
FINAL 6/18/2013
Page 23
strategies.
3
edTPA
Preparation
Integrating ISDDevelopment
Strategies
Incorporate edTPArelevant instructional
development strategies
leading to effective
edTPA module design
and implementation.
4
Clinical Internship
Support with
Instructional
Coaches
Provide coordinated
support for enhancing
clinical internship
effectiveness using a
coaching model.
5
Clinical Internship
Model for Clinical
Support and
Professional
Development
Develop a professional
development model to
link and clarify the roles
of clinical teachers,
university supervisors,
instructional coaches
during the internship.
6
Clinical Internship
Experience:
Co-Teaching
Model
Experiment with
different co-teaching
models to optimize
teacher candidate
learning as an
alternative to traditional
student teaching.
7
edTPA
Administration
Develop a replicable
model for edTPA
implementation to
improve candidate
readiness, consistency
of instruction, and inter-
evaluation of effectiveness
of classroom use of
strategies as evaluated by
faculty, university
supervisors, and clinical
coaches.
Assessment of student
mastery of procedures for
using the ISD-development
strategies for TPA-focused
instruction within core
teacher preparation
coursework using both
tests and applications
applying the ISD
development strategies.
settings; interviews/surveys of
participant students and clinical
support professionals re: Student
classroom performance.
Evaluation of the
feasibility and
effectiveness of the
observational model during
internship based on
observational data and
complementary surveys of
interns, classroom
teachers, and supervisors.
Evaluation of the
feasibility and
effectiveness of the clinical
support model based upon
qualitative views of the
three categories of
professional participants
supporting the internship
experience. Identification
of qualitative
improvements to internship
support process will also
be identified and
documented.
Evaluation of the
feasibility and
effectiveness of the coteaching clinical internship
model within the internship
classroom setting based
upon direct observation,
the views of clinical
teachers, and an
assessment of differential
achievement outcomes of
K-8 students vs.
demographically similar
students.
Documentation of the
effectiveness of the phased
implementation framework
for developing the capacity
of College faculty to be
engaged in the
Phases 1-2: Interviews/ surveys of
educational professionals re:
Adequacy of the model
Phases 3-4: Observational data of
student classroom performance;
Interviews/ surveys of students and
educational professionals.
FINAL 6/18/2013
Phases 1-2: Interviews/ surveys of
educational professionals re:
Adequacy of the model
Phases 3-4: Student performance on
course-tests; proficiency in
developing and field-testing multilesson instructional (teaching)
sequences; interviews/surveys of
participant students and clinical
support professionals re: Student
course-test achievement and
classroom performance.
Phases 1-2: Interviews/ surveys of
educational professionals re:
Adequacy of the model
Phases 3-4: Interviews/ surveys of
students and educational
professionals re: perspectives
resulting from the model
implementation.
Phases 1-2: Interviews/ surveys of
educational professionals re:
Adequacy of the model
Phases 3-4: Interviews/ surveys of
students and educational
professionals re: perspectives
resulting from the model
implementation; Determination of the
effect of the co-teaching model on
the academic achievement of K-8
students vs. classrooms with no
interns.
Phases 1-2: Interviews/ surveys of
educational professionals re:
Adequacy of the model
Phases 3-4: Interviews/ surveys of
educational professionals re:
Effectiveness of the different
Page 24
rater reliability.
implementation of the
TPA. Evaluative data will
include assessment of
faculty proficiency
resulting from TPA
training and of the
consistency of faculty
ratings of student TPA
performance materials.
elements of the TPA administrative
model (e.g., outcomes of faculty
training; reliability of faculty TPA
scoring.
IV. Institutional Capacity to Conduct the Initiative
This section presents evidence showing the capacity of the institution to implement the proposed project. The
description of the project components (Tables 2 and 3) provide a context for presenting the capacity of the COE to
implement the project. An important additional factor (see Figure 1, Table 4) is that (a) initial work is being
conducted by COE faculty and (b) that the overall project design involves cross-program adaptation between
elementary and middle grades programs. Capacity for expansion and implementation of Research on Practice
Model components beyond the Elementary and Middle Grades program is currently developing.
With regard to capacity, the focus of this section is on the factors resulting in the development of a college-wide
culture of change that provided the impetus for the TI initiative itself and the corresponding role of the present
college-wide database as a key tool for supporting the Research on Practice Model. In addition, the involvement of
specific faculty on each project component is presented. In all cases for all components, external partners/
stakeholders will be actively involved in the project.
As noted in the introduction to the TI proposal, the institution and the COE have been laying the foundation for
transformative change in its teacher education programs for several years. In addition to the strategic investments in
integrated data collection, assessment, and in grant writing, the unit has the human capital to take on such a large
project. As noted in the research literature, change in higher education is a slow, often deliberate process that
requires a willingness to change (Scott, 1998). In order to effect change in teacher education programs, faculty
committed to program improvement and student learning must be willing to adopt new ideas and change their own
teaching in order to bring change to PK-12 classrooms (Schien, 1990). In following the Research on Practice
Model, the COE has established a strong foundation for such faculty commitment. Ginsberg and Bernstein (2011)
describe the roles involved in bringing organizational change to institutions of higher education, including a leader,
change agents, and facilitators (see Table 7). Each role is essential in initiating transformational change in an
institution and each role is addressed within the Research on Practice Model that serves as a foundation for the
proposed TI initiative.
Table 7. Roles involved in organization change (Ginsberg and Bernstein, 2011).
Role
Importance
Person(s) Playing Role
Leader
Possesses institutional power and influence to help change
institutional culture
Dean of COE
Change Agent
Possesses passion and substantive knowledge to help make
change occur
Project Lead Faculty
Facilitator
Possesses combination of institutional clout and
substantive knowledge to help smooth the process of
change
Office of Assessment and Accreditation
Office of Teacher Education
Overview of the Teacher Education Integrated Assessment System
The Research on Practice Model will be supported by a strong and well-established teacher education
database/implementation tool that serves as a key form of institutional capacity for the TI project. This
comprehensive large-scale assessment/database system presently supports all aspects of the institution’s Teacher
Education Programs and initial phases of project components that have been previously initiated by teacher
education faculty (see Table 3). It has been designed and is fully capable of supporting all project components,
including the expansion of components to new program areas in teacher education.
FINAL 6/18/2013
Page 25
As undergraduate students progress through their teacher education programs, they generate extensive amounts of
data that include their academic progress toward degree completion, completed work, clinical assignments and
evaluations, and self-report perspectives. This comprehensive teacher education database in the College of
Education houses all records for all undergraduate teacher education students by uniting several data warehouses.
Given the archiving of such individual student data, faculty and teacher education administrators are able to both
enter and access data for both individual and groups of students. In addition, by linking the teacher education
database to university records, status reports and projections can be conducted through structured database queries,
In addition to supporting students and faculty, the longitudinal database serves as a research tool for undergraduate
teacher education faculty. First, it supports research-oriented queries of interest that explore facets of the teacher
education program, either in general or in specified area. Second, of equal importance, the longitudinal database
system is also able to support faculty research by developing web-based tools allowing either faculty or students to
enter information relevant to research questions in the form of tabled database records that, in turn, can be integrated
with existing database information and then accessed for analysis.
•Teacher
performace
assessment
data
•e-portfolio
assessments
and licensure
portfolios
TEMS
TaskStream
TracDat
Banner
•Institutional
level data
warehouse
•Student records
and other data
Figure 3. Elements of the Teacher Education Database Support System
By using a cross-sectional large scale systemic assessment program that accumulates reports into one universal
database, faculty have the capability to evaluate performance levels through multiple elements. To ensure success, a
comprehensible database management system has also been constructed to provide basic organization of data.
Members of the Office of Assessment and Accreditation work with the university’s Information Technology and
Computing Services group to upgrade the existing Teacher Education Management System (TEMS) to include data
exported from the college’s electronic portfolio system. Because the proposed Research on Practice Model is an
extension of initial work by faculty and the established database/implementation tool on selected components, the
project has a well-established foundation for successful completion.
Involvement of College Faculty in Each Research on Practice Model Component
Table 8 summarizes the involvement of specific COE faculty in each project component. Currently, lead faculty in
the Elementary and Middle Grades Education programs are leading several project components. As each project
components moves through the R&D process, additional faculty in the target program areas and other teacher
education programs are engaging in the effort. Additionally, for certain project components external partners,
including our two TQP partner school districts – Pitt County Schools and Greene County Schools – are listed.
Table 8. Current Faculty Leaders, Unit Faculty Support, and External Partners
Project
Code
1
2
Project Component
Lead Faculty (current)
Additional Faculty
External Partners
Teacher Education
Database Support System
Mary Worthington
Diana Lys
Ellen Dobson
ECU ITCS
TaskStream
Introductory Clinical
Observation for Novice
Observers/Video Grand
Rounds
ISLES Instructional
Kristen Cuthrell
Michael Vitale
Dawn Shelton
Joy Stapleton
Sharilyn Steadman
Elizabeth Hodge
Laura King
Ann Bullock
LCSN
Kristen Cuthrell
FINAL 6/18/2013
Pitt County Schools
Page 26
3
4
5
Strategies Modules
Diane Kester
edTPA Preparation
Integrating ISDDevelopment Strategies
Clinical Internship Support
with Instructional Coaches
Michael Vitale
Mark L’Esperance
Jamin Carson
Judy Smith
Vivian Covington
Kristen Cuthrell
Sharilyn Steadman
Susan Morgan
Vivian Covington
Clinical Internship- Model
for Coordinating Clinical
Support and Professional
Development
Clinical Internship
Experience:
Co-Teaching Model
6
7
edTPA Administration
Liz Fogarty
Judy Smith
Vivian Covington
Mark L’Esperance
Kristen Cuthrell
Ellen Dobson
Diana Lys
Laura King
Jane Manner
Greene County Schools
Other LCSN districts
Joy Stapleton
Pitt County Schools
Greene County Schools
Judy Smith
LCSN districts
Kristen Cuthrell
Ann Bullock
Debbie Metcalf
Susan Morgan
Sharilyn Steadman
Ron Preston
Allen Guidry
Program Coordinators in
12 additional teacher
education programs
Pitt County Schools
Greene County Schools
SCALE
UNC GA – NC TPAC
Pilot Project
Timeline and Support for each Research on Practice Model Component
Support for the Research on Practice Model is being provided internally by the COE. As the project expands to
other teacher education programs outside the COE, the ECU Provost’s Office has offered to consider the possibility
of providing additional support. Certain parameters for funding support have been established within the COE and
are linked to specific timelines and deliverables. For the years of the Research on Practice Model, the deliverables
will consist of the Phase 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 outcomes in the form of research findings and models suitable for
dissemination. That is, appropriate levels of funding will be linked to the R&D phase of each project component.
More specifically, each Phase described in Figure 1 and Table 3 may anticipate funding, as available, as outlined
below:

Phase 1 – No funding support; faculty exploration and project development

Phase 2 – Summer support for lead faculty

Phase 3 – Summer support for lead faculty

Phase 4 – Summer support decreased, move to in-load responsibility

Phase 5 – Embedded workload responsibility, no funding unless undergoing periodic review/update
Project Summary
The NCATE Transformational Initiative (TI) offers member institutions an accreditation pathway in the form of an
option for pursuing significant, evidence-based contributions that have the potential to advance the field of teacher
education. The project proposed by the COE at ECU addresses this NCATE-TI goal for systemically improving
aspects of the teacher education process in a manner that is both multi-faceted and coordinated.
The ECU project is multi-faceted in that the overall initiative consists of a series of components within the
undergraduate teaching programs in Elementary Education and in Middle Grades Education that ultimately could be
adapted for all teacher education programs (see Figure 1, Tables 4 and 5). The underlying the project design for
coordinating the proposed project components is based on two complementary perspectives. The first is that the
components themselves are explicit enhancements to the overall teacher education programs in the Elementary
Education and Middle Grades Education areas. The second is that each of the components addresses systemic
FINAL 6/18/2013
Page 27
aspects of teacher education that enhance program quality and have been identified as issues in the field. Considered
as a set of complementary components, the proposed ECU TI Proposal reflects a college-wide “Research on
Practice” model through which the COE supports R&D on issues in teacher preparation.
Following an R&D model consisting of a rigorous five-phase evaluative process (see Figure 2), this TI project
addresses the following specific undergraduate teacher preparation program components (see Table 2): (a)
Introductory Clinical Observation for Novice Observers/ Video Grand Rounds, (b) ISLES Instructional Strategies
Modules, (3) edTPA Preparation Modules Integrating ISD-Development Strategies, (d) Clinical Internship Support
with Instructional Coaches, (e) Clinical Internship Model for Coordinating Clinical Support and Professional
Development, (f) a Clinical Internship Experience Co-Teaching Model, and (g) a college wide edTPA
Administration Model.
Detailed in the proposal for each component intervention are: (a) Needs Addressed, (b) Goals and Objectives, and
(c) Major Research Questions (see Table 1) along with component Success Indicators (see Table 3). Also shown in
the proposal is a comprehensive project plan (see Table 4) in which a timeline is presented for each phase of
research methodology for each component, including data collection for each R&D development phase (see Table
6).
Presented in the proposal is strong evidence of the institutional capacity of the COE to conduct the initiative that
includes the following factors: (a) prior successful prototyping of several of the proposed interventions , (b) the use
of the present COE comprehensive undergraduate teacher database in support of the project components, (c) a
dedicated group of COE faculty committed to work collaboratively on the project (see Table 8) within a sound
leadership framework (see Table 7) and a well-established COE collaborative framework (see Table 5) involving,
K-12 school teachers and administrators in the COE university service area.
FINAL 6/18/2013
Page 28
REFERENCES
American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education (AACTE) (2013). About edTPA. Retrieved from:
http://edtpa.aacte.org/about-edtpa
Annenberg Institute for School Reform (2004). Instructional coaching: Professional
development strategies that improve instruction. Retrieved from www.annenberginstitute.org/
pdf/InstructionalCoaching.pdf
Bannink, A. (2009). How to capture growth? – Video narratives as an instrument for
assessment in teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25, 244-250.
Bates, A.W. (2005). Technology, E-Learning and Distance Education. New York:
Taylor & Francis.
Beck, C., & Kosnik, C. (2000). Associate teachers in preservice education: Clarifying and enhancing their role.
Journal of Education for Teaching, 26(3), 207-224.
Becker, J. (1979). The world and the school: A case for world-centered education. In J. Becker
(Ed.), Schooling for a global age. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Beyer, L. (1991). Teacher education, reflective inquiry, and moral action. In B. Tabachnik & K. Zeichner (Eds.),
Inquiry-oriented practices in teacher education (pp113-129). New York: Falmer Press.
Bouas, J. & Thompson, P. (2000). Preservice teachers’ perceptions of reflective
thinking practices used in a reading/language arts practicum experience: A study with cross-cultural
implications. A paper presented for the World Congress of the International Reading Association, New
Zealand.
Brown, E. (2004). What precipitates change in cultural diversity awareness during a
multicultural course: The message or the method? Journal of Teacher Education, 55(4), 325-340.
Brown, H. (1934). Curriculum revision in a teachers' college. The Journal of Higher
Education. 5(9), 490-496.
Caires, S. & Alemida, L. S. (2007). Positive aspects of the teacher training supervision: The student teachers’
perspective. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 22(4), 515-528.
Chung, R.R. (2008). Beyond assessment: Performance assessments in teacher education.
Teacher Education Quarterly, winter, 7-28.
Cooper, A., Beare, P., & Thorman, J. (1990). Preparing teachers for diversity: A
FINAL 6/18/2013
Page 29
comparison of student teaching experiences in Minnesota and South Texas. Action in Teacher Education,
12(3), 1-4.
Danielson’s Framework for Teaching for Classroom Observations. (October 2010) White Paper by The MET
Project by the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation. Retrieved from the www on August 30, 2012 at
http://metproject.org/resources/Danielson%20FFT_10_29_10.pdf
Danielson, C. (2011). Enhancing Professional Practice: A Framework for Teaching. 2nd edition, ASCD.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2006). Assessing teacher education: The usefulness of multiple
measures for assessing program outcomes. Journal of Teacher Education, 57(2),
120-135.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2010). Teacher education and the American future. The Journal of
Teacher Education, 61(1-2), 35-47.
Darling-Hammond, L., Chung, R., & Frelow, F. (2002). Variation in teacher
preparation: How well do different pathways prepare teachers to teach? Journal of Teacher Education,
53(4), 286-301.
Darling-Hammond, L., & Hammerness, K. (with Grossman, P., Rust, F., & Shulman, L).
(2005). The design of teacher education programs. In L. Darling-Hammond & J. Bransford (with P.
LePage, K. Hammerness, & H. Duffy) (Eds.), Preparing Teachers for a changing world: What teachers
should learn and be able to do (pp. 390-417). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Darling-Hammond, L., & Snyder, J. (2000). Authentic assessment of teaching in
context. Teaching and Teacher Education, 16, 523-545.
Darling-Hammond, L., & Snyder, J. (2000). Authentic assessment of teaching in context.
Teaching and Teacher Education, 16, 523-545.
Duquette, C. (1993). A school-based teacher education program: Perceptions
and attitudes. Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 39(4), 419-432.
Ediger, M. (2009). Supervising the student teacher in the public school. Education, 130(2), 251-254.
Fang, Z. (1996). A review of research on teacher beliefs and practices.
Educational Research, 38(1), 47-65.
Fayne, H.R., (2007). Supervision from the student teacher’s perspective: An institutional case study. Studying
FINAL 6/18/2013
Page 30
Teacher Education, 3(1), 53-66.
Friend, M. (2008). Co-teaching: A simple solution that isn’t simple after all. Journal of Curriculum and Instruction,
2(2), 9-19.
Ginsberg, S. M., & Bernstein, J. L. (2011). Growing the scholarship of teaching and learning through
institutional culture change. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 11(1), 1-12.
Retrieved from EBSCOhost.
Glenn, W. J. (2006, Winter). Model versus mentor: Defining the necessary qualities of the effective cooperating
teacher. Teacher Education Quarterly, 85-95.
Graham, B. (2006). Conditions for successful field experiences: Perceptions of cooperating teachers. Teaching and
Teacher Education, 22, 1118-1129.
Griffin, G., Barnes, S., Hughes, R., O’Neal, S., Defino, M., Edwards, S., et al. (1983).
Clinical preservice teacher education: Final report of a descriptive study.
(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED240101) Austin: University of Texas, Research and
Development Center for Education, Research in Teacher Education Program.
Johnson, L. (2002). My eyes have been opened: White teachers and racial awareness.
Journal of Teacher Education, 53(2), 153-167.
Karmos, A., & Jacko, C. (1977). The role of significant others during the student
teaching experience. Journal of Teacher Education, 28(5), 51-55.
Killian, J., & McIntyre, J. (1987). The influence of supervisory training for
cooperating teachers on preservice teachers’ development during early
field experiences. Journal of Education Research, 80(5), 277-282.
Killian, J. E. & Wilkins, E. A. (2009). Characteristics of highly effective cooperating
teachers: A study of their backgrounds and preparation. Action in Teacher
Education, 30(4), 67-83.
Kissel, B., Mraz, M., Algozzine, B., & Stover, K. (2011). Early childhood literacy coaches' role perceptions and
recommendations for change. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 25(3), 288-303.
doi:10.1080/02568543.2011.580207
FINAL 6/18/2013
Page 31
Knight, J. (2007). Instructional coaching: A partnership approach to improving instruction. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Corwin Press.
Kowal, J., & Steiner, L. (2007). Instructional coaching. Center for Comprehensive School Reform and
Improvement. Retrieved from: http://www.centerforcsri.org/files/CenterIssueBriefSept07Coaching.pdf
Ladson-Billings, G. (1991). When difference means disaster: Reflections on a teacher
education strategy for countering student resistance to diversity. A paper presented at the annual meeting
of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.
Larke, P. (1990). Cultural diversity awareness inventory: Assessing the sensitivity of
preservice teachers. Action in Teacher Education, 12(3), 23-30.
Larke, P., Wiseman, D., & Bradley, C. (1990). The minority mentorship project:
Changing attitudes of presence teachers for diverse classrooms. Action in Teacher Education, 12(3), 5-12.
Lemov, D. (2010). Teach like a champion: 49 techniques that put students on the path
to college. New Jersey: Jossey-Bass.
Levin, B.B, & Rock, T.C. (2003). The effects of collaborative action research on preservice and experienced teacher
partners in professional development schools. Journal of Teacher Education, 54(2), 135-149.
Luster, J. (2010). Why states should require a teaching performance assessment and a subject matter assessment for
a preliminary teaching credential. Research in Higher Education Journal 8, 1-16.
Lynch, J., & Ferguson, K. (2010). Reflections of elementary school literacy coaches on practice: Roles and
perspectives. Canadian Journal of Education, 33(1), 199-227. Retrieved from
http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=51974593&site=ehost-live
Manning, D. (1977). The influence of key individuals on student teachers in urban
and suburban settings. Teacher Educator, 13(2), 2-8.
McIntyre, D. J., & Byrd, D. M. (1998). Supervision in teacher education. In G.R. Firth
& E. Pajak (EDS.), Handbook of research on school supervision (pp. 409-427).
New York: McMillan.
McNamara, D. (1995). The influence of student teachers’ tutors and mentors upon their classroom practice: An
exploratory study. Teacher and Teacher Education, 11, 51-61.
Moore, R. (2003). Reexamining the field experiences of preservice teachers. Journal of
FINAL 6/18/2013
Page 32
Teacher Education, 54(1), 31-42.
Neufeld, B., & Roper, D. (2003). Coaching: A strategy for developing instructional
capacity, promises, and practicalities. Washington, DC: Aspen Institute
Program on Education and Providence, RI: Annenberg Institute for
School Reform. Retrieved from http://www.annenberginstitute.org/publications/list.html
Poglinco, S., Bach, A., Hovde, K., Rosenblum, S., Saunders, M., and Supovitz, J. (2003).
The heart of the matter: The coaching model in America's Choice schools.
Philadelphia: Consortium for Policy Research in Education, University of
Pennsylvania. Retrieved from www.cpre.org/Publications?Publications_Research.htm
Sawchuk, S. (2011). University of Michigan project scales up "high leverage" teaching practices.
EducationWeek. Retrieved from the www on August 31, 2012 at
http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/teacherbeat/2011/10/high_leverage_teaching_practices.html
Schein, E. H. (1990). Organizational culture. American Psychologist, 45(2), 109-119. doi:10.1037/0003066X.45.2.109
Scott, S. E., Cortina, K. S., & Carlisle, J. F. (2012). Understanding coach-based professional development in reading
first : How do coaches spend their time and how do teachers perceive coaches' work? Literacy Research &
Instruction, 51(1), 68-85. doi:10.1080/19388071.2011.569845
Scott, W. R. (1998). Organizations: Rational, natural, and open systems. Upper Saddle River,
NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Sleeter, C. (2001). Preparing teachers for culturally diverse schools: Research and the
overwhelming presence of whiteness. Journal of Teacher Education, 52(2), 94-106.
Steadman, S. C. (2009). Cycles of confidence: Supporting university supervisors’ recursive trajectories of
development. Teaching and Learning, 23(3), 98-110.
Stephens, D., Morgan, D. N., DeFord, D. E., Donnelly, A., Hamel, E., Keith, K. J., . . . Leigh, S. R. (2011). The
impact of literacy coaches on teachers’ beliefs and practices. Journal of Literacy Research, 43(3), 215-249.
doi:10.1177/1086296X11413716
Talvitie, U., Peltokallio, L., & Mannisto, P. (2000). Student teachers’ views about their relationships with university
FINAL 6/18/2013
Page 33
supervisors, cooperating teachers and peer student teachers. Scandinavian Journal of Educational
Research, 44(1), 79-88.
Teachscape (2010). Framework for Teaching Proficiency system. Retrieved from the www on
August 30, 2012 at http://www.teachscape.com/products/danielson-proficiency-system
The National Academy of Education, Committee on Teacher Education (2005) A good teacher in every classroom:
Preparing the highly qualified teachers our children deserve. Linda Darling-Hammond & Joan BaratzSnowden, eds. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Books.
Viadero, D. (2005). Review panel turns up little evidence to back teacher education
practices. Education Week, 24(41), 20.
Viadero, D. (2010). Coaching of teachers found to boost student reading. Education
Week, Retrieved from http://edweek.org/ew/articles/2010/
05/04/31literacy.html?tkn=YRQFeEEeCqUYAeve…
Walker, K. (2006). Instructional Coaches. Research Brief for the Principals’ Partnership. Retrieved from
http://www.principalspartnership.com/instructionalcoaches.pdf.
Wang, J. (2000). Contexts of mentoring and opportunities for learning to teach: A
Comparative study of mentoring practice. Teaching and Teacher Education,
17, 51-73.
Whitford, B.L., Ruscoe, G., & Fickel, L. (2000). Knitting it all together: Collaborative
Teacher education in Southern Main. In Darling-Hammond, L. (ED.), Studies of excellence in teacher
education: Preparation in the undergraduate years (pp. 172-257). New York: National Commission on
Teaching and America’s Future & Washington, DC: American Association of College for Teacher
Education.
Wilkins-Canter, E. A. (1996). Providing effective cooperative teacher feedback. In
D. J. McIntyre & D. M. Byrd (Eds.), Preparing tomorrow’s teachers: The field
experience. Teacher Education Yearbook IV (pp. 169-177). Thousand Oaks,
CA: Corwin Press.
Yao, Y., Thomas, M., Nickens, N., Downing, J.A., Burkett, R.S., & Lamson, S. (2008).
FINAL 6/18/2013
Page 34
Validity evidence for an electronic portfolio for preservice teachers. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice,
Spring, 10-23.
Zantig, A., Verloop, N., & Vermunt, J. D. (2001). Student teacher’s beliefs about mentoring and learning to teach
during teaching practice. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 71, 57-80.
Zeichner, K. (2003). The adequacies and inadequacies of three current strategies to
recruit, prepare, and retain the best teachers for all students. Teacher’s College
Record, 105, 490-519.
Zeichner, K. (2010). Rethinking the connections between campus courses and field experiences in college and
university-based teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education. 61(1-2) 89-99.
FINAL 6/18/2013