Step 2: Facilitate Needs Assessment
Prioritizing content, practices, and processes for program reform requires a systematic and data-driven approach coupled with stakeholder input. Teams must collaborate to examine data from multiple sources to explore needs and assess reform priorities.
Outcomes:
- The steering committee has gathered needs-sensing information from stakeholder groups who are directly involved or will be impacted by program reform efforts.
- Faculty have been extensively consulted about their needs and ideas for program reform and continuous improvement priorities.
- Multiple sources of data have been examined to generate a comprehensive picture of program needs and improvement priorities.
Steps
Step 2.1 Examine Multiple Sources of Data
Guiding Questions
- What questions can data answer that will be helpful in targeting needed program improvements or validating the direction of ongoing improvements? For example, who are our teacher candidates, where do they come from, and where do they end up teaching (or not)?
- What can the steering committee learn from comprehensive needs assessments or program reviews that have been completed in the past?
- What have previous program accreditation and/or reauthorization reviews (e.g., CAEP reviews) identified as needs and potential areas for improvement?
- How has the EPP performed in meeting state and/or specialty standards?
- What do teacher candidate performance data (e.g., subject area assessments, edTPA, candidate clinical observation data, candidate performance assessment data) suggest about the EPP’s needs and potential areas for improvement?
- What do graduate perception data (e.g., completer surveys) suggest about the EPP’s needs and potential areas for improvement?
- What do employer perception data (e.g., school district employer surveys) suggest about the EPP’s needs and potential areas for improvement? What is the feedback from local districts about graduates and their competencies?
- Does the steering committee have access to student achievement data for program completers? If so, what do the data suggest about potential areas of focus for program reform?
- What other sources of data should be examined as part of the needs assessment (e.g., retention data, employment data)?
Step 2.2 Engage External Stakeholders
Guiding Questions
- What external stakeholder groups will be impacted by program reform and continuous improvement efforts?
- How will input be gathered from external stakeholders about their needs and perspectives on EPP quality and areas for improvement?
- Local partner school districts?
- Recent program graduates?
- SEA leaders or staff?
Step 2.3 Gather Faculty Input
Guiding Questions
- In what content or topic areas (e.g., reading, math, behavior, universal design for learning [UDL]) do faculty feel program improvement is needed? Why?
- Are there specific courses or individual programs (e.g., elementary, secondary, special education) that faculty want to focus on for program reform and improvement? Why?
- What expertise currently exists among faculty in areas targeted for program reform?
- Do faculty need to build additional knowledge of content or cross-cutting instructional practices?
- How are clinical experiences within or across programs aligned to desired outcomes?
- What is the feedback from district partners about areas for improving clinical experiences?
- In what areas do faculty need professional development (e.g., knowledge of research, teacher preparation practices, EBPs, systemic reform)?
Step 2.4 Leverage Current Initiatives
Guiding Questions
- Have any recent initiative inventories been conducted to explore opportunities for alignment at the state, district, or university level? How will the steering committee identify opportunities and the capacity to align them?
- What current initiatives at the state or district level support a need to engage in program reform and continuous improvement? How do they support this need?
- What opportunities exist to align program reform and continuous improvement efforts with instructional priorities of state-level strategic plans (e.g., State Systemic Improvement Plan, ESSA state plans)?
- What strategic initiatives related to content or pedagogy are partner school districts currently implementing? How can program reform and continuous improvement efforts align with and/or support these partner school district initiatives?
- Are there existing initiatives under way within the EPP that are aimed at improving candidate competence before the culminating clinical experiences? How might these initiatives inform program reform and continuous improvement efforts?
- How can conducting program review using the CEEDAR Center ICs or similar tools help in responding to program approval and/or accreditation requirements?
- How can the EPP leverage resources from other university initiatives (e.g., human resources, financial resources) to support program reform and continuous improvement?
Resources
Active Implementation Frameworks:
- Initiative Inventory Activity: Supports the review of past and current initiatives that can help determine if faculty are able to commit to reform. Information gathered through the activity can be used to explore how additional EPP initiatives align with current work without duplication.
- Exploration Stage of Implementation: Details the exploration stage of implementation. The exploration stage is when the EPP team considers the extent to which a potential reform meets the needs of the EPP or school.
Leading by Convening (Coalescing Around Issues):
- Meet the Stakeholders: Helps EPP teams identify external stakeholder groups that are connected to the work, such as districts, students, parents, and teacher candidates, and how each stakeholder group is connected to the work.
Other:
- Center on Great Teachers and Leaders Data Review Tool: Assists teams to assess, analyze, and communicate their state data about students having equitable access to educators.
