Skip to contentSkip to navigation

Get the latest information about Spring 2022 Updates/COVID-19. Before coming to campus, take the COVID-19 Daily Screening.

Standard 2 Aspect A

Standard 2a: Program completers engage in professional practice in educational settings and show that they have the skills and abilities to do so in a variety of additional settings and community/cultural contexts. For example, completers must have broad and general knowledge of the impact of culture and language on learning, yet they cannot, within the context of any given program, experience working with the entire diversity of student identities, or in all types of school environments. Candidate preparation, then, includes first-hand professional experience accompanied by reflection that prepares candidates to engage effectively in different contexts they may encounter throughout their careers. Understand and engage local school and cultural communities, and communicate and foster relationships with families/guardians/caregivers in a variety of communities


Data Sources & Analysis:

Data Source 1 CalAPA Leadership Cycle 2 (Rubric 2.2)
Data Source 2 CalAPA Leadership Cycle 1 (Rubric 1.7)
Data Source 3 CCTC Completer Survey (Q4) 
Data Source 4 P12 PASC Program AAQEP Candidate Self-Assessment

Data Source 1

CalAPA Leadership Cycle 2 (Rubric 2.2)
After the completion of the first semester of the PASC program, candidates exhibit knowledge and engagement of local school and cultural communities, while fostering relationships with families/guardians/caregivers in a variety of communities through their fieldwork and coursework experiences that culminate with the submission of CalAPA Leadership Cycle 2.  Rubric 2.2 evaluates the candidates’ ability to assemble and facilitate a community of practice that can intentionally include educators, and other community and family stakeholders, depending on the area of focus and the school’s vision, mission, and goals.  Candidates also work towards articulating how the work of the group is likely to advance conditions for student learning and/or well-being.

Perspective Captured from Data Source:
Assessment of candidate performance is evaluated by CCTC selected, Pearson calibrated, and CA Administrative Services Credentialed faculty and school/district/county educational leaders involved in overseeing or preparing school administrators. 

Rationale for using Data Source:
Rubric 2.2 is aligned to summative assessment of candidate performance (completers of first semester program content and skills) of the following AAQEP 2a aligned CAPEs elements: 1C.1) Engage staff and other stakeholders in sharing data to assess program/instructional strengths and needs that lead to student, staff, and community goals, and; 2C.2) Use state-adopted professional standards with staff and the community as a foundation to guide professional learning. Rubric 2.2 has been chosen as an appropriate measure for the demonstration of candidate understanding and engagement of local school and cultural communities, and communicating and fostering relationships with families/guardians/caregivers in a variety of communities.

Although Rubric 2.2 evaluates candidates’ abilities to engage local stakeholders while they are still in the program, our hope is that they will be able to draw on the knowledge and skills they develop once they have completed the program and are employed as administrators. 

Definition of Success for Each Element:
Semester one program completer success would be measured at Level 2 or Level 3 as proficiency with the CCTC is currently at a Level 2; however, Fresno State faculty instruct toward all 5 levels with an emphasis on Level 3 or 4. In addition, maintaining mean scores above the state average by rubric will be considered as an element of success criteria.

Displays of Analyzed Data:

Table 1

CalAPA Leadership Cycle 2, Rubric 2.2 for program level and state-wide mean scores by submission year

Submission Year Program State-wide Program Comparison
2018-2019

2.3
>2 yes

(n=72)

2.4

+.1
+ yes

2019-2020

3.0
>2 yes

(n=24)

2.4

+.6
+ yes

2020-Year to Date 

2.8
>2 yes

(n=16)

2.3

+.5
+ yes

Link to Full Dataset:  CalAPA Date AY 2018-2019, AY 2019-2020, YTD 2020-2021

Interpretation of Data:
Three years of data in relation to Rubric 2.2 highlight that first semester program completers are overall meeting and exceeding the current program expectation of 2 and above. The past two years, candidates are also performing above the State-wide average.  Overall, first semester completer responses show their ability to select and communicate an area of educational focus based on 3 years of student data. Furthermore, data also indicates first semester completers are able to assemble and facilitate a community of practice which can include a diverse set of educators, and other community and family stakeholders depending on the area of focus. 

The faculty focus for better supporting first semester program completers includes developing a plan to include a specific range of members in the community to ensure diverse viewpoints are represented and respected. Faculty should also collaborate regarding instructional strategies and resources to better assist first semester completers’ ability to articulate  how the work of the group is likely to advance conditions for student learning and a positive sense of well-being at the site.

Data Source 2

CalAPA Leadership Cycle 1 (Rubric 1.7)
After the second semester of the PASC program, candidates exhibit knowledge, skills, and abilities through their fieldwork and coursework experiences culminating with the submission of CalAPA Leadership Cycle 1.  Rubric 1.7 evaluates candidates’ ability to apply the feedback received from a key stakeholder(s) familiar with the school culture and context and describe next steps for creating stakeholder buy-in and potential implications for the adjusted set of strategies. Candidates also work to seek additional rounds of feedback from other stakeholders on the revised strategies to ensure they are proposing a feasible approach to addressing the equity gap and learning need as well as strategically plan to communicate and share the strategies with a diverse range of stakeholder groups. 

Perspective Captured from Data Source:
Assessment of candidate performance is evaluated by CCTC selected, Pearson calibrated, and CA Administrative Services Credentialed faculty and school/district/county educational leaders involved in overseeing or preparing school administrators. 

Rationale for using Data Source:
Specifically, Rubric 1.7 is aligned to summative assessment of candidate performance (completers of second semester program content and skills) of the following AAQEP 2a aligned CAPEs elements: 1C.4) Share results with students, staff, and other stakeholders and use this information to guide updates, revisions, and the allocation of resources to support the plan and advance the vision; 3C.1) Use principles of positive behavior interventions, conflict resolution, and restorative justice and explain to staff and community members how these approaches support academic achievement, safety, and well-being for all students; 5B.3) Involve family and community stakeholders in reviewing aggregated and, where appropriate, disaggregated student data and evidence-based best practices to identify and address actual and anticipated challenges that can negatively affect student success; 5C.2) Act with integrity, fairness, and justice and intervene appropriately so that all members of the school community are treated equitably and with dignity and respect; 6A.3) Facilitate discussions among staff and the community about aligning mandates and policies with staff and student goals for continuously improving instruction, learning, and well-being, and; 6B.4) Involve stakeholders in helping address the school’s challenges as well as sharing in its successes. Rubric 1.7 has been chosen as an appropriate measure for the demonstration of candidate understanding and engagement of local school and cultural communities, and communicating and fostering relationships with families/guardians/caregivers in a variety of communities.

Although Rubric 1.7 evaluates candidates’ abilities to engage local stakeholders while they are still in the program, our hope is that they will be able to draw on the knowledge and skills they develop once they have completed the program and are employed as administrators. 

Definition of Success for Each Element:
Semester two program completer success would be measured at Level 2 or Level 3 as proficiency with the CCTC is currently at a Level 2; however, Fresno State faculty instruct toward all 5 levels with an emphasis on Level 3 or 4. In addition, maintaining mean scores above the state average by rubric will be considered as an element of success criteria.

Displays of Analyzed Data:

Table 2

CalAPA Leadership Cycle 1, Rubric 1.7 for program level and state-wide mean scores by submission year

Submission Year Program State-wide Program Comparison
2018-2019

2.6
>2 yes

(n=63)

2.6

--
no change

2019-2020

2.6
>2 yes

(n=27)

2.5

+.1
+ yes

2020-Year to Date 

2.2
>2 yes

(n=10)

2.6

-.4
+ no

Link to Full Dataset:CalAPA Date AY 2018-2019, AY 2019-2020, YTD 2020-2021

Interpretation of Data:
Three years of data in relation to Rubric 1.7 highlight that program candidates are overall meeting the current program expectation of 2 and above, but are not yet performing consistently above the State-wide average, as based on initial data reporting. Based on the previous trend and once the entire data set is available, the program believes semester two completer mean scores will be above the State-wide scores.

Evidence shows that candidates' overall meeting proficiency in demonstrating the ability to apply the feedback received from a key stakeholder(s) familiar with the school culture and context and describe next steps for creating stakeholder buy-in and potential implications for the adjusted set of strategies. 

Although candidates are performing at current expectations, further focus on how to seek additional rounds of feedback from other stakeholders on the revised strategies to ensure they are proposing a feasible approach to addressing the equity gap and learning need as well as strategically plan to communicate and share the strategies with a diverse range of stakeholder groups. Candidates could also benefit from increased faculty support on how to coach stakeholders to examine and address potential biases that could impact student learning and well-being due to identified equity gaps, including those specifically related to sources of educational disadvantage or discrimination, and is transparent about the underlying potential contributing factors.  

Data Source 3

CCTC Completer Survey (Question 4)
After completion of the PASC program, the CCTC initiates a 35-item demographic and Likert-type self-report survey to all program completers to assess new administrator knowledge, skills, and abilities in the framework of the CAPEs based on their program fieldwork and coursework experiences. 

Perspective Captured from Data Source: Recent (3 months) program completers.

Rationale for using Data Source:
The CCTC Completer Survey is administered to all program completers within 3 to 6 months of finishing the program to gather information about their perceptions of the PASC program, including those which relate to AAQEP standard 2a, how program completers understand and engage local school and cultural communities, and communicate and foster relationships with families/guardians/caregivers in a variety of communities. Specifically, Question 4 asks program completers the following on a scale from 1 (not at all) to 5 (very well): How well did your administrator preparation program prepare you to do the following as an administrator: share leadership with others in the school community?  

Specific Elements of Data Source:
Q4 is a self-report item scaled from 1 (not at all) to 5 (very well) self-report founded in CAPEs 1C: Visionary Leadership. Students rate how well prepared they feel they are to engage and share leadership with others in the school community, which includes local families and community stakeholders based on the completion of the PASC program.

Definition of Success for Each Element:
Candidate success would be measured by 1) mean rating of 3 (adequately) or higher, and; 2) maintaining mean ratings above the State-wide average.

Displays of Analyzed Data:

Table 3

Table of CCTC Completer Survey program and state-wide self-report scale means for Q4 by academic year 

Academic Year Program State-wide Program Comparison
2017-2018

4.55
>3 yes

(n=95)

4.64

 (n=2572)

-.9
+ no

2018-2019

4.72
>3 yes

(n=78)

4.60

(n=2188)

+.12
+ yes

2019-2020

4.49
>3 yes

(n=67)

4.58

(n=1907)

-.9
+ no

Link to Full Dataset: California Commission on Teacher (CCTC) Credentialing Completer Survey, Q4

Interpretation of Data:
Based on three years of data, evidence highlights that PASC completers consistently feel the program prepared them overall well to very well for this construct. While this exceeds our success criteria of a mean score 3 and above, the program has yet to realize a consistent mean score above the State-wide level.

Data Source 4

P12 PASC Program AAQEP Candidate Self-Assessment

Perspective Captured from Data Source:
Candidate retrospective self-report of AAQEP Standard 2a at each semester end interval. 

Specific Elements of Data Source:
Item 2a: I understand and engage local school and cultural communities, and communicate and can foster relationships with families/guardians/caregivers in a variety of communities.

Rationale for using Data Source:
The P12 PASC Program AAQEP Candidate Self-Assessment was designed to capture student reflection and growth after each semester in the program in alignment with AQQEP aspects. The results capture one cohort (program graduates in May 2021) over the 3-semester program using a retrospective design to pilot the self-assessment and obtain initial data. This will now be used at the end of each semester as an additional program assessment data point used for reflection and continuous improvement.

Definition of Success for Each Element:
Candidate success would be measured by 1) average of 3 or higher for each semester and 2) evidence of mean growth from semester 1 to semester 3. 

Displays of Analyzed Data:

Table 4

Table of AAQEP Standard 2a Candidate Self-Assessment Response
Means for Cohort 0 (Pilot)

Question/Standard Semester 1 (N=14)  Semester 2  (N=14) Semester 3 (N=14)  Mean Growth
(AAQEP 2A) I understand and engage local school and cultural communities, and communicate and can foster relationships with families/guardians/caregivers in a variety of communities.

4.57

>yes

4.71

>yes

4.71

>yes

+.42

+yes

Link to Full Dataset:P12 PASC Program AAQEP Candidate Self-Assessment Descriptives Data for Standard 2 by Semester 

Interpretation of Data:
Overall, candidate reported mean scale scores for Standard 2a currently show growth from initial to end of program data points. Evidence also demonstrates that PASC program completers overall feel they can engage in professional practice in educational settings and show that they have the skills and abilities to do so in a variety of additional settings and community/cultural contexts at high levels (between a 4 and 5) which exceeds our success criteria of level 3. 

Next Steps for 2a

Based on the analysis of the four data point interpretation sections, the following next steps are recommended: 

Next steps 2a
1. Program faculty calibrate on teaching effective methods for engaging and establishing relationships with all community stakeholders.  2. Effective school leaders invited to guest speak on the effective methods of establishing relationships with diverse communities with opportunities for students to reflect on learning.  3. Provide peer to peer reflection opportunities to discuss best practices for healthy community relationships.  

Culturally responsive leadership for family and community engagement is central to the Preliminary Administrative Services Credential (PASC) program. Fresno State’s program is expected to foster aspiring school leaders who can develop strong family and community stakeholder relationships through cultural understanding and respect, responsive and ongoing communication, and provisions for and use of feedback from a diverse set of community and family/guardian/caregiver voices. In this way, our program works to integrate course and field experiences that move from exposure to planning for and applying strategies to engage local school and cultural communities, and communicate and foster relationships with families/guardians/caregivers in a variety of communities. 

In order to continuously improve candidate dispositions and behaviors required for successful professional practice, faculty will continue to work in communities of practices each month to analyze CalAPA results, identify best practices for reflection, and identify student exemplars to deconstruct, discuss, and develop additional learning opportunities in class.

Although evidence for Standard 2a demonstrates candidate proficiency specific actions will be taken beginning in the fall of 2021:

  • Make family and community engagement more central in the course redesign efforts in all three phases of the program,
  • Integrate instruction in which candidates consider how to engage families and community stakeholders in culturally responsive ways in relation to each phase of the program,
  • Incorporate more explicit fieldwork opportunities to observe, apply, and reflect on engaging local school and cultural communities, and communicate and foster relationships with families/guardians/caregivers in a variety of communities.

To evaluate our efforts in this area, faculty will:

  1. Utilize redesigned syllabi and course sequence for the new cohorts.
  2. Collect assignment examples in which candidates consider how to engage families and community stakeholders in culturally responsive ways in relation to each phase of the program.
  3. Collect additional feedback from each fieldwork supervisor to provide evidence of candidate knowledge and growth in the area of engaging families and community stakeholders in culturally responsive ways.

Aspect B →