2017 General Teacher Prep Programs Policy
The state should collect and publicly report key data on the quality of teacher preparation programs. This goal was reorganized in 2017.
Student Growth Data: North Carolina requires educator preparation programs to report the effectiveness of their program completers on student learning by reporting the evaluation ratings of teachers under the state's evaluation system which includes student growth. In addition, preparation programs are required to report the proficiency and growth of students taught by educators holding an initial professional license, to the extent practicable, using where possible, data from North Carolina's Education Value-Added Assessment System.
Additional Program Data: North Carolina collects other objective, meaningful data to measure the performance of teacher preparation programs. Programs are required to annually report metrics including, but not limited to, the quality of students admitted into the program, the number of program completers, average pass rates on licensure exams, employment and licensure rates, teacher persistence, and the results of educator and principal satisfaction surveys. Data reported will be incorporated into the state's online Teacher Quality Dashboard.
16 NCAC 06C.0202 S599 115C-269.50 Teacher Quality Dashboard http://eqdashboard.northcarolina.edu/preparation/ Higher Education Report Cards http://apps.schools.nc.gov/pls/apex/f?p=141:5:1640122465961801::NO:::
As a result of North Carolina's strong data collection policy for its teacher preparation programs, no recommendations are provided.
North Carolina was helpful in providing NCTQ with the facts necessary for this analysis.
1C: Program Performance Measures
The state should examine a number of factors when measuring the performance of and approving teacher preparation programs. Although the quality of both the subject-matter preparation and professional sequence is crucial, there are also additional measures that can provide the state and the public with meaningful, readily understandable indicators of how well programs are doing when it comes to preparing teachers to be successful in the classroom.
States have made great strides in building data systems with the capacity to provide evidence of teacher performance. These same data systems can be used to link teacher effectiveness to the teacher preparation programs from which they came. States should make such data, as well as other objective measures that go beyond licensure test pass rates, central components of their teacher preparation program approval processes, and they should establish precise standards for performance that are more useful for accountability purposes.
National accrediting bodies, such as CAEP, are raising the bar, but are no substitute for states' own policy. A number of states now have somewhat more rigorous academic standards for admission by virtue of requiring that programs meet CAEP's accreditation standards. However, whether CAEP will uniformly uphold its standards (especially as they have already backtracked on the GPA requirement) and deny accreditation to programs that fall short of these admission requirements remains to be seen. Clear state policy would eliminate this uncertainty and send an unequivocal message to programs about the state's expectations.