The June meeting of the California Commission on Teacher Credentialing was attended by ACSA CTC Liaison Doug Gephart, who filed the following report. Education Specialists will be taking teaching performance assessments in the 2022-23 school year under a transition plan approved by the California Commission on Teacher Credentialing in its June meeting. In previous action, the CTC adopted revised preparation standards and requirements for Education Specialist teaching credentials. In its June 13 meeting, the commission approved a transition plan that would give Education Specialist preparation programs until fall of 2022 to align to these new standards. The plan also factors in the development of the Education Specialist Teaching Performance Assessment. In support of the commission’s work, Gov. Gavin Newsom’s budget includes funding and staffing for the CTC to create an Education Specialist Teaching Performance Assessment over the next three years.  Institutes will have a number of internal procedural steps to get new coursework approved for their teacher preparation programs. Currently there are 133 distinct programs offered at a total of 66 different institutions leading to a preliminary Education Specialist credential. It can take up to one year from the time faculty complete revisions to coursework for these changes to be approved by the academic senate. The CTC approved an extended timeline to the fall of 2022. By doing so, the Commission’s model Education Specialist CalTPA will be far enough along and sufficient information will have been shared with all preparation programs to make the transition to new standards and integration of the TPA as smooth as possible.  Candidates enrolling for the 2022-23 academic year would meet the updated Teaching Performance Expectations and would be required to take and possibly pass a TPA, this leaves open the option for the 2022-23 year to be a non-consequential year for special education candidates.

The proposed timeline for transition is outlined below: Year 2019-20

• If not completed in 2021-22, conduct Standard Setting Study and determine. recommendation for initial passing standard for the operational Education Specialist CalTPA.
• First operational administration, Recruit and train additional assessors.

TPA requirement for concurrent bilingual candidates  The Assessment Design Standards, which govern the development of Teacher Performance Assessment models, require candidates to address the teaching of English learners, as well as the development of literacy for all students. The Design Standards do not provide clarity or guidance for candidates in placements where English is not the language of instruction. The CTC discussed the options provided by staff and agreed to the following principles that would serve as the basis for guidance to the field:

1. Preliminary Multiple Subject credential candidates may teach a lesson for inclusion in the TPA that develops students’ literacy in a language other than English.
2. Concurrent bilingual candidates are not required to translate student work for inclusion in the TPA in a language other than English in a bilingual classroom.
3. Candidates must demonstrate the skills to teach English learners in English.
4. Some or all of TPA-required reflections/analyses need to be submitted in English.

Streamline of the Single Subject Matter program standards  In October 2009, staff recommended to the CTC a plan to convene a Subject Matter Advisory Panel to review the Standards Common to All — a set of 10 program standards that were applicable across all Single Subject Matter programs. In an effort to simplify the process, the commission adopted two Standards Common to All for the Single Subject Matter programs. However, there were additional program standards for each content area that were not modified in 2010.  Some Single Subject content areas have program standards that incorporate field experiences and teacher preparation concepts that go beyond the scope of the content-specific Subject Matter Requirements and corresponding California Subject Examinations. A recent review of the Single Subject Matter program standards identified areas that could be streamlined and brought into alignment with the Elementary Subject Matter review process. Single Subject Matter programs are required to provide narrative responses to program standards that often align with the Subject Matter Requirements that are also addressed in the content-specific course matrix. Not only does this reveal an inequity regarding the expectations for the different Single Subject Matter programs, but it also highlights submission requirements that are redundant and excessive when compared to what is currently required. To create parity among all subject matter programs and to focus on the Subject Matter Requirements, the commission approved the staff recommendation to align to the process that was adopted for ESM program submissions.  Passing score standards for the redeveloped TPA The CTC redeveloped the CalTPA for several key reasons, including alignment with the expectations of the state-adopted Common Core State Standards, the Next Generation Science Standards, and the Commission’s Accreditation Data System. The revised CalTPA was piloted by 24 institutions and 250 candidates in early 2017, revised in the summer of 2017, and was subsequently field-tested by 27 programs during the 2017-18 academic year. Following the field-testing process, the commission completed a “standard setting” process to determine a minimum passing score, or cut score, for new or revised assessments.  The standard setting process resulted in a recommended cut score from the expert panel to the Commission for each of the two instructional cycles of the CalTPA. In addition, the majority of panelists recommended that no scores of 1 on a rubric would be allowed. Staff generally agree with the standard setting panel that the goal is to have candidates who are eligible for a preliminary teaching credential earn no scores of “1” on the CalTPA. However, only 27 of the 60 CalTPA-using institutions participated in the pilot and/or the field test of the new CalTPA. With so many new programs using the CalTPA in 2018-19, it is possible that some of these programs were not as knowledgeable about the evidence required via tasks, the essential questions and the rubric descriptors of performance.  Staff suggested, and the commission approved, that for at least the next two years, a candidate who earns a score of “1” on no more than one rubric per cycle and also earns a 19 on Cycle 1 and a 21 on Cycle 2 should pass the assessment.  Data will be analyzed during the next two years and staff will, in two years, bring back a report to the commission for reconsideration, including the requirement that a candidate cannot score a 1 on a rubric and meet the passing standard.

Newsom’s budget adds staff support for clearing caseload Gov. Newsom and the Legislature are providing additional financial resources to the CTC budget to help address the increasing number of credential holder cases handled by the Department of Justice. Typically, the commission budget is almost exclusively funded by credential fees, testing fees, and accreditation fees; however, in the past couple of years the caseload for credential holders has increased more rapidly than staff and the Department of Justice can process. The additional funding will provide three additional staff persons to assist with investigations and is allocated on a one-time basis. Funding may be reallocated from year to year based upon need. Eminence Credentials: History and policy discussion The CTC discussed the history of Eminence Credentials and how they fit into current education policy in California. California Education Code section 44262 authorizes the commission to grant an Eminence Credential to an individual who has met specified criteria that verifies their eminence in a specific field or endeavor. At the time of its inception, the Eminence Credential was referred to as “the concept that would enable Einstein to teach in a California public school.” The Eminence Credential was included in the Ryan Act as a compromise to the request of the Governor’s Commission on Educational Reform to have a single teaching credential and no credential requirement for non-teaching assignment. The commission regularly receives Eminence Credential applications, yet the vast majority do not meet the criteria to be brought forward for consideration by the commission. The commission has only granted a total of 30 Eminence Credentials since 1971. Only 22 of these Eminence Credential holders moved on to earn the clear Eminence Credential. Currently, there are only 11 individuals in the entire state with valid Eminence Credentials.  Following a discussion of this topic, the commission tabled the topic and staff will bring this topic back to the Commission for additional discussion and/or a specific decision.