The clock tower and Red Square at Evergreen's main campus.

Introduction. Evergreen’s Master in Teaching Program (MIT) has enjoyed a productive relationship with our Professional Education Advisory Board since its formation in 1997. MIT faculty and staff and members of the PEAB have continued to meet regularly, share important information, insights, and suggestions, and work collaboratively since our last accreditation visit in 2007.

Based on MIT’s experiences with the PEAB and on the evidence contained in this document, our program meets or exceeds standard for each criterion in this section. Links to evidence and data follow this summary. The PEAB has:

  • been established and maintained with diversity representation in terms of age, gender, ethnicity, public school and community roles (teachers, principals, district-level administrators, MIT faculty, staff, and administration), years of experience, and size and location of schools and districts
  • adopted and reviewed by-laws
  • met four times a year (2007-2009)and three times a year (2009-2012)in order to:
    • review program standards as directed by the PESB, and to review and approve decisions for the M.Ed. program.
    • review follow-up studies, placement records, Title II reports, EBI reports, and summaries of performances on the pedagogy assessment, West-B and West-E tests, and
    • make recommendations to the program and review responses from the faculty
  • submitted annual reports to the Professional Educator Standards Board
  • examined exemplar candidate work samples that document positive impact on student learning
  • submitted an executive summary of PEAB’s work and been apprised of OSPI’s response
  • read and provided input on the Institutional Report for the 2012 state re-accreditation site-visit


In addition to meeting the criteria outlined in this standard, MIT's PEAB members have participated in seminars with teacher candidates, observed a variety of workshops, attended presentations of Master's papers, and served as speakers in the programs. Our members have also contributed to education in this state through mentoring student teachers, serving on WASL committees, attending state PEAB conferences, and participating in a variety of professional organizations. We are enriched by having members who have been with us since our PEAB was formed as well as members who have joined us this year. One of our members requested that she become a community representative upon retirement from teaching.

Criteria are listed below. Please click on the links below to see evidence for the criteria.

MIT graduate Eugene with faculty Terry Ford and Sherry Walton. Eugene is now on the PEAB.

Contents

Standard I: Professional Education Advisory Board

Building on the mission to prepare educators who demonstrate a positive impact on student learning, the following evidence shall be evaluated to determine whether each preparation program is in compliance with the program approval standards of WAC 181-78A-220(1):

Ks2.jpg

Standard 1.1 Meeting Requirements

Standard 1.1(A)

Criteria

Meeting Membership/Operating Procedures A.1 The professional education advisory board has adopted operating procedures and has met at least three times a year.

A.2 The PEAB membership is in compliance

Standard 1.1(B)

Criteria

Meeting Activities

B.1 The professional education advisory board has reviewed all program approval standards at least once every five years. (Please note that PEABs were directed by the PESB to work only with Standard V in 2008-2009.)

B.2 The PEAB annually has seen, reviewed and approved an executive summary of the activities of the PEAB. The program has submitted the approved executive summary to PESB.

B.3 The PEAB for administrator preparation programs participated i the candidate selection process for principal preparation programs. (not applicable to our program)

B.4 The PEAB serves as the advisory board for both the residency and (if offered by the program) the professional certificate program. (not applicable to our program)

B.5 The PEAB has annually reviewed and analyzed data for the purposes of determining whether candidates have a positive impact on student learning and providing the institution with recommendations for programmatic change. This data may include, but not be limited to: student surveys, follow-up studies, employment placement records, student performance portfolios, course evaluations, and summaries of performance on the pedagogy assessment for teacher candidates.


K29.jpg

Standard 1.2 Collaboration

Standard 1.2(A)

Criteria

Collaboration

A.1 The PEAB has made recommendations when appropriate for program changes to the institution which must in turn consider and respond to the recommendations in writing in a timely fashion.

A.2 There is a clear feedback loop between the program and the PEAB