Meetings

MEMORANDUM

To: Members, Indiana Professional Standards Board (IPSB)

From: Steve Yager, Chair
Teacher Induction Committee (TIC)

Date: June 21, 2000

Subject: Teacher Induction Committee Minutes of May 17, 2000, Meeting

Members present: Kim Clark, Priscilla Donkle, Theresa Knipstein, Tom Pickering, Carol Potter, Sheridan Rayl, Joy Seybold, Patricia Strawbridge, and Steve Yager.

Members (consultants/staff) unable to attend: Shelly Furuness, Sandra Kelley, Roy Weaver, and Lynne Weisenbach.

Others in attendance: John Baker, Richard Frisbie, Ray Graves, Tom Hansen, Bet Kotowski, T. J. Oakes, Jamie Richie, Shawn Sriver, Nancy Taylor, and Joe Weaver.

The TIC meeting was convened by Steve Yager, on May 17, 2000, at 9:00 a.m. in Suite 220 Conference Room of the IPSB offices at 251 East Ohio Street in Indianapolis.

I. Consultants with representatives of education stakeholder groups: None

II. Materials reviewed as related to the TIC's charge:

A.
Minutes of the April 12, 2000, meeting.

B.
Draft Standards for Mentors.

C.
Draft Guidelines for Training Programs for Mentor Teachers.

D.
Initial draft framework for mentor training program submission and program approval.

E.
PowerPoint presentation of Mentor Support for a Standards-based Licensure System.

F.
Recommendations for Standards-based Mentor Capacity.

G.
Informational guide contrasting a standards-based unit with a traditional unit.

H.
Information regarding induction program and non-accredited private schools.

III. Issues/questions as related to the TIC's charge:

A.
The Committee approved the minutes for the April 12, 2000, meeting.

B.
The Committee reviewed the edited version of the Draft Standards for Mentors. Joy Seybold presented the rationale for the changes the work group made to reflect stakeholder feedback. An appendix will be attached to the Standards to include the ten core Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium principles.

C.
The Committee discussed the Draft Guidelines for Training Programs for Mentor Teachers. Following a discussion, the Committee approved changes recommended by the work group to the Guidelines.

D.
The Committee reviewed an initial draft framework of criteria for mentor training proposal submission and program approval. The draft created by a work group was presented by Pat Strawbridge. The Committee was in agreement that there is a need for the evaluation of the training programs to ensure that the criteria presented are met. Issues of the process for assessments, monitoring compliance, and using the feedback as a learning tool were discussed. All were in agreement that the framework had a significant basis from which to start. A draft document will be presented at the next meeting.

E.
Sheridan Rayl presented a PowerPoint presentation regarding the building of mentor capacity. Committee members were satisfied with the way in which the program was presented.

F.
The Committee reviewed the Memorandum Recommendations for Standards-based Mentor Capacity. A discussion followed on the importance of the mentoring program and of schools understanding the urgency of participating. After a few revisions, the Committee will send the recommendations to the Board for approval at the June meeting.

G.
The Committee and the IPSB staff were presented with a contrast between a standards-based unit and a traditional unit in science.

H.
The Committee discussed the services provided through the Region 8 Education Service Center contract. A report will be given to the Board in June.

I.
The Committee discussed the issue of the licensure of teachers in non-accredited schools under the new induction system. Further discussion will occur in June.

The meeting was adjourned at 3:00 p.m.

To:	Members, Indiana Professional Standards Board (IPSB)
From:	Steve Yager, Chair Teacher Induction Committee (TIC)
Date:	June 21, 2000
Subject:	Teacher Induction Committee Minutes of May 17, 2000, Meeting

I.	Consultants with representatives of education stakeholder groups: None
II.	Materials reviewed as related to the TIC's charge:

A.	Minutes of the April 12, 2000, meeting.
B.	Draft Standards for Mentors.
C.	Draft Guidelines for Training Programs for Mentor Teachers.
D.	Initial draft framework for mentor training program submission and program approval.
E.	PowerPoint presentation of Mentor Support for a Standards-based Licensure System.
F.	Recommendations for Standards-based Mentor Capacity.
G.	Informational guide contrasting a standards-based unit with a traditional unit.
H.	Information regarding induction program and non-accredited private schools.

A.	The Committee approved the minutes for the April 12, 2000, meeting.
B.	The Committee reviewed the edited version of the Draft Standards for Mentors. Joy Seybold presented the rationale for the changes the work group made to reflect stakeholder feedback. An appendix will be attached to the Standards to include the ten core Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium principles.
C.	The Committee discussed the Draft Guidelines for Training Programs for Mentor Teachers. Following a discussion, the Committee approved changes recommended by the work group to the Guidelines.
D.	The Committee reviewed an initial draft framework of criteria for mentor training proposal submission and program approval. The draft created by a work group was presented by Pat Strawbridge. The Committee was in agreement that there is a need for the evaluation of the training programs to ensure that the criteria presented are met. Issues of the process for assessments, monitoring compliance, and using the feedback as a learning tool were discussed. All were in agreement that the framework had a significant basis from which to start. A draft document will be presented at the next meeting.
E.	Sheridan Rayl presented a PowerPoint presentation regarding the building of mentor capacity. Committee members were satisfied with the way in which the program was presented.
F.	The Committee reviewed the Memorandum Recommendations for Standards-based Mentor Capacity. A discussion followed on the importance of the mentoring program and of schools understanding the urgency of participating. After a few revisions, the Committee will send the recommendations to the Board for approval at the June meeting.
G.	The Committee and the IPSB staff were presented with a contrast between a standards-based unit and a traditional unit in science.
H.	The Committee discussed the services provided through the Region 8 Education Service Center contract. A report will be given to the Board in June.
I.	The Committee discussed the issue of the licensure of teachers in non-accredited schools under the new induction system. Further discussion will occur in June.