CTC Review of Preconditions
The information provided by your institution to demonstrate that each Commission approved credential program is operating in compliance with preconditions have been reviewed by staff. For preconditions that have been determined are met, no further action is necessary. If additional information is needed, the precondition responses must be revised (use a different colored font), and resubmitted to Preconditions@ctc.ca.gov by June 29, 2018. Institutions failing to submit revised preconditions within this time frame will be included in the next Committee on Accreditation meeting agenda for discussion and possible action. If you have any questions about the feedback provided here, please contact Preconditions@ctc.ca.gov.
Madera Unified School District
Needs Additional Information
Note: Links within the General Preconditions document do not link to the evidence. Content not available.
Precondition 2: Please provide a working link to the Teacher Induction Handbook that identifies the institutions teach out plan. Provide a statement of assurance covering language in i-iv (specifically iv).
Precondition 3: Provide an organization chart clearing showing the reporting relationships between key individuals.
Precondition 4: Provide links or copies to documents that includes non-discrimination language related to candidates in the program – admissions, retention, graduation and so forth. These are typically in candidate handbooks or candidate recruitment materials.
Precondition 8: Provide links to grievance process. Links provided do not open to evidence.
Precondition 10: Link provided as evidence has no content. Please provide the URL to the approved program sponsor website that does not require individuals to provide information to the entity, having to create a log in and password, or any other barrier to accessing information about the institution and the program.
General Comments: Reviewers found it extremely difficult to locate evidence in this submission due to accessibility issues and due to evidence not being directly linked in the submission. Reviewers suggest that the program sponsor link to all relevant evidence directly and ensure that all evidence is accessible to reviewers. In addition, please consult the Teacher Induction guidance document before resubmission.
Precondition 1: Reviewers were unable to locate specific evidence explicitly describing in official programmatic documentation that the induction program is designed to provide a two-year, individualized; job-embedded system of mentoring, support and professional learning that begins in the teacher’s first year of teaching. Please provide.
Precondition 2: Reviewers were unable to locate a specific policy statement indicating that the induction program must identify and assign a mentor to each participating teacher within the first 30 days of the participant’s enrollment in the program, matching the mentor and participating teacher according to credentials held, grade level and/or subject area, as appropriate to the participant’s employment. Please provide.
Additionally, the mentor matches provided do not specifically show how the mentors are matched with the candidates— is it by credentials held, grade level, and/or subject area? Provide clarification.
Precondition 3: Provide a specific policy statement in official programmatic documentation stating that the induction program assures that each participating teacher receives an average of not less than one hour per week of individualized support/mentoring coordinated and/or provided by the mentor.
Precondition 4: Reviewers were unable to locate the MIC Handbook in the submission (perhaps due to accessibility issues). Provide the specific policy statement in official programmatic documentation explicitly stating that the goals for each participating teacher must be developed within the context of the Individual Learning Plan (ILP) within the first 60 days of the teacher’s enrollment in the program.
Additionally, it is not clear how the program knows the ILP development process takes place within 60 days of the candidate’s enrollment. It is noted that the program “requires” candidates to write the ILP goals within 60 days, but does not describe how the program knows that this occurs. Provide clarification.
Precondition 5: Provide a signed assurance by the unit head stating that the ILP must be designed and implemented solely for the professional growth and development of the participating teacher and not for evaluation for employment purposes.
Precondition 6: The evidence provided does not adequately describe the program’s ECO option. Furthermore, the evidence provided does not define what the “experienced and exceptional criteria” is for the program. Provide further evidence in official programmatic documentation or link to the application process that describes the ECO option in addition to defining what the experienced and exceptional criteria is for the program.