---

Members Present: Fred Bechtold, Larry Gambaiani, Peggy Hinckley, Ted Kowalski, Ann England, Earlene Holland, Susan Switzer, Dan Grayson, Gary Collings

Members Absent: Rebecca Libler, Walter Harrison, Mike Horvath

Others Present: Shawn Sriver, Ann England, Betty Poindexter, Roger Thornton
____________________________________________________________________________________________

The External Committee for District Administrators of the Indiana Professional Standards Board convened at 9:00 a.m. on September 17,1999 at the Administrative Service Center of MSD Washington Township Schools
located at 3801 East 79th Street, Indianapolis.

Fred Bechtold, chairperson, called the session to order and asked for comments on the June 18 selections as mailed. The selections were accepted as presented.

1. New Committee Membership - Shawn Sriver confirmed that Marilyn Scannell had left the IPSB executive directorship and that Dave Kinman was serving as interim director. Dr. Kinman will not be able to facilitate and Ann England has been asked to serve as facilitator for this district committee. Since Mrs. England has fulfilled her term on the IPSB, she will be replaced on this committee by Mike Horvath.

2. Standards Status/Edit Team Status/Report to IPSB - Ann England reviewed the Edit Team report which Becky Libler will present to the IPSB at their meeting on November 17 and 18, 1999. Shawn Sriver noted that the report emphasizes that no changes to the standards are being requested. He reviewed the extensive distribution of the standards.

Fred Bechtold asked Roger Thornton of his view of the standards to date. Dr. Thornton has compiled a list of general questions about various standards from superintendents. He has submitted the list to IPSB and is expecting a written reply. Dr. Bechtold asked that he provide a copy of the IPSB reply to members of this committee.

3. Recommendation to the IPSB Executive Committee - Shawn Sriver commented that Dr. Libler will likely present the committee's proposed licensure pattern including a single induction period to the IPSB Executive Committee on October 20 if her schedule permits.

Peggy Hinckley asked for clarification about the proposed phasing out of the certification renewal units. Ann England confirmed that this is an item of continued discussion by the IPSB.

4. Decisions to be made on Induction Period for all Four Licenses -Shawn Sriver distributed the draft of the Assessment Recommendations from the Standing External Committee for Building Administrators. He noted this paper contained examples of the induction questions which this district committee must also address. The building administrators committee is now focusing on the development of a pilot program with
assessment components.

Shawn also reviewed the timeline for future activities. Once the IPSB votes to accept the edit team report, the standards will be considered final. All standards, however, will be on a five year review cycle. The Assessment Coordinating Committee has been eliminated. Recommendations are now submitted to the Executive Committee of the IPSB which meets every other month. The district committee needs to address the assessment framework, induction and continuing education with recommendations to the Executive Committee by April 2000. (This recommendation may be for an extension if agreed upon by the committee.) The committee may also recommend a pilot component.

5. Induction - Members took up the discussion of induction periods for the four licenses of superintendent and directors of: curriculum and instruction, career and vocational, and exceptional needs. Shawn Sriver noted elements to be discussed include:

length of time
portfolio components
- who will assess it
- how will it be assessed
- criteria for passing
- appeals process
- extension of time
- logistics
format for presentation to the IPSB Executive Committee

Members questioned the purpose of the induction period. Is the emphasis on showing one can apply what one has learned? Members compared and contrasted the mentorship and portfolio for district administrators. It was suggested that if candidates with a building administrators license have already completed an induction period, it would not seem necessary to require a district level induction period. It was proposed that those seeking a district administrators license with no previous administrative induction to be held to the induction framework of the
building administrators.

CONSENSUS: Mirror the induction period for building administrators for those candidates who do not have a building administrators license. (See the attached draft for a Superintendent licensure.)

NEXT MEETING: October 15, 1999 at MSD Washington Township Schools

NOTE: This framework does NOT address licensure for directors of curriculum, or vocational, or exceptional needs.

NOTE: This framework is still in the development stage. This reflects decisions the committee has made at this stage of the development. The committee will continue to work with this framework in an effort to improve it or clarify issues.

Preparation Program

A. Two years teaching experience and a proficient practitioner teaching license required for initial licensure.
B. Standards-based preparation using a variety of assessments and field experiences including an internship.
C. Satisfactory completion of a written assessment (test):
1. The School Leaders Licensure Assessment is recommended as it is designed to determine whether individuals possess occupation-relevant knowledge and skills at the time of entry into the profession. This
test is scored by the Interstate School Leaders Licensure Assessment.
The process for setting cut scores is developed later.
2. Only multiple measures; the exam will assist in identifying weaknesses. This information will be utilized in developing the Professional Growth Plan.
3. Institutional recommendation for the initial license must include evidence of
a. standards-based;
b. professional growth plan; and
c. progress in each standard.
D. Prior to initial licensure, candidates for the superintendent licensure are required to earn either an Ed.S., or Ed.D., or Ph.D. degree.

Initial Licensure Period

A. Not to exceed two (2) years unless specified otherwise.
B. (Portfolio?) development required:
1. standards-based,
2. professional growth plan,
3. evidence of progress in each standard.
C. Formative process with summative decision
D. Inductee Mentor Team - recommended that the three (3) advisors be compensated
1. Inductee district administrator for Superintendent's License
2. District Peer Advisor:
a. to be chosen from a pool to be organized and maintained by IPSB.
b. is a practicing administrator experienced in the position (superintendency).
c. may be a retiree in the licensed area.
d. is comfortable in a working relationship with the inductee and is willing to commit time to process.
e. has knowledge of the standards and expectations of proficient practitioner license requirements.
f. can objectively critique and provide constructive feedback regarding inductee's progress in developing proficiencies in standards.
g. plays no evaluative role in judging job performance for employment decisions.
h. makes recommendation as a member of the Mentor Team for advancement to proficient practitioner license.

3. University Advisor (required)
a. selected by the candidate
b. available for support and advice as needed
c. assists and advises in portfolio development
d. is one of three members of the mentor team
e. meets at least two times annually with inductee

4. Mentor Pool Advisor
a. is the team leader who will be responsible for making the final recommendation to the IPSB.
b. is recommended by the inductee to be accepted/rejected by IPSB from a pool of seasoned professionals:
- five (5) years experience;
- holds license in area of inductee's pursuit;
- must be in a related education field;
- may be retired for four (4) years or less.
c. is trained in the required assessment techniques.
d. has no conflict of interest with the inductee, district peer, university advisor and the school district.
e. organizes at least two (2) full team consultations annually.

E. Recommendation to IPSB
1. Mentor team (excluding the inductee) makes a recommendation based on an approved assessment.
2. Mentor team shall make one of the following four recommendations:
a. grant licensure; or
b. an additional one year induction; or
c. an additional two year induction; or
d. no licensure.
3. Mentor pool advisor is to provide written feedback to all relevant higher education institutions and the IPSB for their continuous assessment purposes.

Appeals Process

A. If the inductee does not meet induction expectations, he or she may:
1. accept the decision of the Mentor Team; or
2. request an appeals hearing.
B. The appeal process will utilize the current Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) process of the IPSB.

Proficient Practitioner License

A. Five (5) year period.
B. May be renewed continually throughout the Superintendent's career
C. IPSB assessment process required:
1. standards-based
2. professional growth plan
3. evidence of progress in each standard
D. Mentor Team becomes Professional Growth Team.
E. Continuing education is an expectation of assessment.
F. Professional Growth Team meets at least once annually.
G. Professional Growth Team makes recommendation based on assessment to the IPSB for licensure renewal.
H. Appeal Process?

Accomplished Practitioner License

A. Ten (10) year period with equivalent of six (6) semester hours credit for renewal.
B. Requires candidate to hold a proficient practitioner license and no less than seven (7) years of experience as a superintendent (not associate, assistant or deputy, etc.).
C. IPSB assessment process required:
1. standards-based
2. professional growth plan
3. evidence of progress in each standard

D. Doctoral degree required (Ed.D. or Ph.D.).
E. Mentor Team becomes Professional Growth Team.
F. Continuing education is an expectation of assessment.
G. Professional Growth Team meets at least once annually.
H. Professional Growth Team makes recommendation based on assessment to IPSB board for licensure.
I. No appeals process necessary; candidate may return to proficient practitioner cycle .




---