|
Archived Licensure Framework Documents
APPENDIX A
LICENSURE COMMITTEE MEMBERS
Licensure Committee members, as appointed, represent the stakeholders in the process to develop a Licensure Framework. All members, with the logical exception of the outside Facilitator, had served on at least one content area or developmental level advisory group. Licensure Committee members are listed below, including place of employment, community, and designated area represented. Jeffrey Doebler was Chair and Kathleen Klawitter was Recorder. James Fleck facilitated during the first year.
Lisa Bischoff, School of Education, Indiana State University, Terre Haute, representing school services
William Christopher, Student Assistance Commission, Indianapolis, state governmental representative
Lewis Ciminillo, Indiana University Northwest, Gary, IPSB member representing higher education
Jeffrey Doebler, Chair, Valparaiso University, Valparaiso, representing higher education
James Fleck, Facilitator, Fleck Leadership Center, Columbia City
Daniel Grayson, Twin Lakes High School, Monticello, representing vocational
education
Barbara Horvath, Monroe County Community School Corporation, Bloomington, representing specialty content areas (vocational education, exceptional needs, library/media)
Kathleen Lattimer, North Central High School, Indianapolis, representing elective content areas (fine arts, physical education, foreign language, health)
David Kinman, Indiana University, Bloomington, representing higher education and licensing advisors
Kathleen Klawitter, Recorder, Northeast Dubois County School Corporation, Dubois, representing elementary educators
Philip Metcalf, Wawasee High School, Syracuse, IPSB Chair, representing core content areas (mathematics)
Elaine Pitts, Gavit Middle School, Hammond, representing core content areas (mathematics, science, social studies, language arts)
James Renz, Greencastle Community School Corporation, Greencastle, representing administration/student services
Elizabeth Schurtz, Indiana Professional Standards Board, Indianapolis, IPSB Director of Teacher Licensing, (Retired)
Shawn Sriver, Indiana Professional Standards Board, Indianapolis, IPSB Assistant Director of Preservice Education
Nancy Taylor, Indiana Professional Standards Board, Indianapolis, IPSB Consultant of Preservice Education
APPENDIX B
OTHER RECOMMENDATIONS ON UNRESOLVED ISSUES The following unresolved issues will be considered by the Board for assignment to work groups, consultants, and other various committees appointed by the Board.
Content Standards
The Licensure Committee recommends that the IPSB assemble advisory groups to create content standards in the following areas:
- Communication Disorders - Possibly to be added to the Exceptional Needs content area once standards are developed.
- General Business Education
- Journalism
Certificates
The Licensure Committee recommends that teacher preparation institutions and/or professional organizations develop certificates in the following areas, which are licensed or endorsed under the current licensure plan:
- Adaptive Physical Education
- Bilingual Education
- Computer Education
- Driver/Traffic Safety
- Gifted and Talented
- Interdisciplinary Cooperative Education (ICE)
- Motorcycle Education
- Reading
- Speech/Communication
APPENDIX C
Clarification of Issues Suggested During Public Dissemination, Including Recommendations
| 1. |
All Grade Licenses, K-12 Licenses
Issue: What about a K-12 license for teachers of traditionally K-12 programs (e.g., visual arts, music, physical education, library/media, exceptional needs, etc.)?
Answer (a): IPSB's non-negotiables require all teachers to meet the standards for the school setting(s) (and content area(s)) to earn a license.
Answer (b): The recommended Framework allows teacher preparation institutions to continue preparing teachers for the K-12 setting.
Answer (c): Based on the preliminary findings of the Comprehensive Standards Document Advisory Group (CSDAG), the Licensure Committee believes it is possible to meet the standards for multiple school setting(s) during a four-year degree program--ELEMENTARY: PRIMARY; ELEMENTARY: INTERMEDIATE; MIDDLE SCHOOL / JUNIOR HIGH; AND HIGH SCHOOL --which would be the equivalent of the current K-12 license. The CSDAG found five unifying themes across all developmental levels: developmental psychology, curriculum development, instructional strategies, field experiences, professionalism. It is imperative that departments/schools of education and their content area personnel work diligently and collaboratively to achieve this goal. This is NOT to say that all initial teacher candidates should or must meet the standards in more than one developmental level; rather, it is a recognition that for at least certain areas which have traditionally had K- 12 licensure, there is a need among school corporations to hire one person who can teach at all developmental levels. Finally, meeting the standards in more than one developmental level helps the teacher to better understand the full range of student development and also provides employment flexibility.
|
| 2. |
Areas for which IPSB standards do not exist
Issue: What about areas that currently are endorsed, but for which IPSB standards do not exist?
Answer: See Appendix B, Other Recommendations on Unresolved Issues.
|
| 3. |
Building Level Administrator
Issue: Do the content Standards for Building Level Administrators cover all school settings?
Answer: Members of the Comprehensive Standards Document Advisory Group have closely examined the Building Level Administrator Standards and report that they do cover all school settings.
|
| 4. |
Business Education
See General Business Education. |
| 5. |
Communication
See Appendix B, Other Recommendations on Unresolved Issues. |
| 6. |
Communication Disorders
See Exceptional Needs and Appendix B, Other Recommendations on Unresolved Issues. |
| 7. |
Diversity
Issue: Do the content areas and developmental level standards address diversity?
Answer: Members of the Comprehensive Standards Document Advisory Group have closely examined all developmental level and content area standards and report that they do address diversity, corroborating data garnered by focus groups. |
| 8. |
Endorsements
See Teaching Majors, Minors, or Endorsements. |
| 9. |
Exceptional Needs
Issue 1: Do the content area and developmental level standards address exceptional needs students?
Answer: Members of the Comprehensive Standards Document Advisory Group have closely examined all developmental level and content area standards and report that they do address exceptional needs students.
Issue 2: Should Communication Disorders be part of Exceptional Needs or School Services?
Answer: The Licensure Committee concurs with the recommendation of the School Services Advisory Group that standards for Communication Disorders be developed and that Communication Disorders be added to the Exceptional Needs content area.
|
| 10. |
General Business Education
Issue: Should General Business Education (as opposed to Vocational Business/Marketing) be part of Career/Technical Education, or should it have its own content standards?
Answer: The Licensure Committee recommends that the IPSB develop stand-alone content standards for General Business Education.
|
| 11. |
Generalist Standards
Based on the IPSB charge to the Comprehensive Standards Document Advisory
Group, the Licensure Committee recommends that the Generalist Standards
for ELEMENTARY: PRIMARY and ELEMENTARY: INTERMEDIATE school settings
be compiled from the IPSB Early Childhood Standards, the IPSB Middle
Childhood Standards, and the NCATE Draft Program Standards for Elementary
Teacher Preparation. (See * regarding teaching competencies required in Preschool school setting.) |
| 12. |
Gifted and Talented
Issue 1: Do all content area and developmental level standards address gifted and talented students?
Answer: The Licensure Committee believes that Gifted and Talented is addressed in all content areas and developmental levels. All educators are responsible for meeting the needs of all learners in their classrooms.
Issue 2: Should Gifted and Talented be considered a licensure content area?
Answer: The Licensure Committee recommends that Gifted and Talented should be a certificate area. (Refer to Appendix B.)
|
| 13. |
Journalism (Including Print, Radio, Television)
Issue: Do the Language Arts standards address the field of Journalism?
Answer: The Licensure Committee recommends that the IPSB consider the development of standards for the area of Journalism (including Print, Radio, and Television) separate from those of Language Arts. The development of standards would lead to the eventual addition of a license content area in the area of Journalism:
- Writing styles unique to Journalism (e.g., news writing, feature story articles, sports writing, broadcast writing, headlines, captions, etc.);
- Layout/design techniques
- Photojournalism
- Advertising
- Journalism law and ethics
- Journalism teaching methods
- Journalism history
- Journalism editing
- Coordinating school publications.
|
| 14. |
Majors
See Teaching Majors, Minors, or Endorsements. |
| 15. |
Minors
See Teaching Majors, Minors, or Endorsements. |
| 16. |
Reading (Language Arts Literacy)
Issue 1: Should Reading be considered a Licensure content area?
Answer: The Licensure Committee recommends that Reading be a certificate area.
Issue 2: Do all content area and developmental level standards address reading?
Answer: Members of the Comprehensive Standards Document Advisory Group have closely examined all developmental level and content area standards and report that they do address reading.
- Additional commentary on the importance of Reading:
Research indicates that students who possess a basic understanding of language have a greater chance for success in all future endeavors. Reading must be incorporated into all subject areas. Both expert testimony and the attention given to reading by State Legislators emphasize the primacy of reading. Because reading is integrated into all content areas, strategies to increase literacy skills must be incorporated across subject areas. And while the Generalist Standards for Early and Middle Childhood and the Standards for Teachers of English Language Arts content areas are the most explicitly focused on reading strategies, all content areas include language/literacy. Additional literacy preparation is encouraged for all professional educators. |
| 17. |
Real World Applicability Tests Not Addressed Elsewhere
Issue 1: License renewal
Answer: License renewal is beyond the charge of the Licensure Committee because it does not apply to the initial license.
Issue 2: Adding content areas and developmental levels to the license.
Answer: It would be possible to add content areas and developmental levels to the initial license during the teacher internship program, but the process for doing so has not been addressed by the Licensure Committee.
Issue 3: Expiration dates and different areas and dates on the license.
Answer: Regardless of when content areas or school settings are added to the Professional Educator License, it is the License that has an expiration date. The areas listed on the License do not.
|
| 18. |
Recency of Credits
Issue: Recency credit and the validity period for individuals who do not enter the teaching profession immediately upon completion of their teacher education programs.
Answer 1: Individuals who complete an IPSB-approved teacher education program may apply for their license during the five year period immediately following program completion. The application process includes verification of program completion within a five (5) year period.
Answer 2: Individuals who completed an IPSB-approved teacher education program but who did not apply for their initial license within five years of completing their teacher preparation program must either complete an institutional update program (as determined by the teacher preparation institution) or submit a professional growth plan to the appropriate local school district. This plan would also apply to candidates who received their teacher preparation outside Indiana. |
| 19. |
Reciprocity and Transfer of Licenses between and among States
Issue: Will the proposed framework allow for reciprocity and transfer of licenses between and among states?
Answer: There are 38 states that currently have a reciprocity agreement with Indiana. Upon review of the proposed Framework, none of them has indicated that reciprocity would be discontinued. On the contrary, several were pleased to received Indiana's Framework as a model for revising their own.
|
| 20. |
Speech and Communication
Issue: Is Speech/Communication covered in Language Arts?
Answer: The Language Arts standards are comprehensive, encompassing reading, writing, speaking, listening, viewing and enactment. Although Speech/Communication is covered for initial licensure, the Licensure Committee recommends that Speech/Communication should be a certificate area.
|
| 21. |
Speech Language Pathology
See Appendix B; identified as Communication Disorders.
|
| 22. |
Substitute Teachers
Issue: Should substitute teachers be a part of the Framework?
Answer: The Licensure Committee believes that substitute teachers cannot be "licensed" within the proposed Framework because their preparation does not match the definition of "license." Rather, the recommendation is that the IPSB allow school corporations to determine their own substitute teacher policy, to be approved by the IPSB. |
| 23. |
Teaching Majors, Minors, or Endorsements
Issue: Would Teaching Majors, Minors, or Endorsements work within the proposed Licensure Framework?
Answer: Licensure Committee consensus is that the current practice of using designators such a Majors, Minors, or Endorsements, while perhaps useful in higher education, serves no appropriate licensing function under the standards-based guidelines. The determination of whether a teacher candidate is eligible for licensure in a certain content area or school setting(s) is based on the demonstration of competence on the standards, as determined by the teacher preparation institution.
|
| 24. |
Technology
Issue: Do the content area and developmental level standards address technology?
Answer: Members of the Comprehensive Standards Document Advisory Group (CSDAG) have closely examined all developmental level and content area standards and report that they do address technology. |
APPENDIX D
GRAPHIC ORGANIZER FOR LICENSURE COMMITTEE
Charge: To make a final committee recommendation to the IPSB in June, 1999, on a new state initial teacher licensure framework.
The Board directs the Licensure Committee to conduct its business in the following manner:
| A. |
Continue to:
Solicit responses to the draft Licensure Framework from various interest groups.
| a. |
Identify key issues that are the specific responsibility of the Licensure Committee
based on the feedback. |
| b. |
Recommend workable solutions to address problem areas within the Licensure
Committee's responsibilities. |
|
| B. |
Make recommendations on the Licensure Framework in the following areas:
| a. |
Licenses for teachers of children with speech and language disorders. |
| b. |
Teaching majors, minors and endorsements. |
| c. |
Licensing areas within the vocational/career education category. |
| d. |
Licenses for district level administrators. |
| e. |
Licenses for school services personnel. |
| f. |
Provide a definition for "certificate" and "license." |
| g. |
Developmental areas. |
|
| C. |
Test recommendations from #'s 1 and 2 above for real world applicability including but not limited to such issues as:
| a. |
License reciprocity and transfer. |
| b. |
License renewal. |
| c. |
Adding content/developmental areas to the license. |
| d. |
District staffing issues. |
| e. |
Transition and implementation issues (in coordination with the Teacher Education Committee and the Indiana Association of Colleges for Teacher Education). |
| f. |
Other issues suggested from dissemination of the Framework. |
|
| D. |
Adjust the Framework as necessary. |
THE FOLLOWING DECISION RULES MUST BE FOLLOWED:
| 1) |
The standards must always be the driving force in all decisions. |
| 2) |
Utilize the best research available. |
| 3) |
The new framework must have a K-12 connection. |
| 4) |
The final recommendation for a licensure framework must substantially simplify the existing framework for issuing licenses. |
| 5) |
The new framework must contain broader areas of licensure. |
| 6) |
The new framework must cause subject integrated teaching. |
| 7) |
Share with the Indiana Professional Standards Board an interim report that addresses both process and present status of the initial Licensure Framework. |
Furthermore, the criteria previously listed in the first charge of May 15, 1997 given to the Licensure Committee continue to be important: Complete Charge of the Licensure Committee Adopted on May 15, 1997
| I. |
The Charge
The Licensure Committee is responsible for recommending a framework for licensing professional educators and for testing the framework against the standards for preparation and licensure and for real world applicability. |
| II. |
The Framework
| A. |
The framework must be congruent with non-negotiables consisting ofThe Indiana Professional Standards Board (IPSB) System for Redesign (The House). |
| B. |
Standards (Floor 1)
- The Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (INTASC) core principles;
- The IPSB content and developmental standards and Components for Building a Licensure Framework; and
- The National Board for Professional Teaching Standards (NBPTS) certification areas. |
| C. |
Assessments (Floor 2)
- The IPSB Ten Principles of Assessment; and
- The Continuum Linkage Committee recommendations (subject to IPSB approval). |
|
| III. |
Real World Applicability Criteria
The framework will:
- Accommodate the needs of a mobile society by facilitating reciprocity among the states.
- Be written in clear, concise language.
- Provide a reasonable transition process that is sensitive to the needs of all future and current education professionals.
- Address the issue of the generalist and the specialist.
- Accommodate the needs of career changers.
- Be implemented easily.
- Create a valued marketable license.
- Provide sufficient flexibility to manage emergency staffing issues.
- Promote professional pride and personal commitment among educators. |
|
Home