Strengthening the TECSCU Voice and Solutions in Washington

www.bakerdconsulting.com

Strengthening the TECSCU Voice and Solutions in Washington

October 3, 2011

2

We Will Be Heard!

The Elements Take the pulse: TECSCU public policy and

advocacy status – Executive Committee meeting – Membership survey

Assess the playing field– Federal landscape analysis

Develop policy priorities and strategy– Recommend a federal agenda (draft)– Propose a 2012 work plan (draft)

3

Membership SurveyPurpose: Determine what TECSCU members view as sector issues and needs that can be addressed through public policy and advocacy.

4

Distinguishing Characteristics

5

Certifications (e.g. # of certificates and programs)

Preparation for diverse student populations

PK-12 partnerships

Clinical and field experience

Candidate assessment

Content knowledge focus

Classroom rigor (e.g. skills development)

Candidate performance (e.g. state test scores)

Specific program offerings

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

# of mentions

Tracking Graduate Success

6

Sector Challenges

7

Consensus Themes

Colleges of Education largely are not defining themselves effectively to policymakers and the public, but are being defined by others.

Third parties are increasingly seen as “the authorities,” either for reform ideas or producing better results.

Too often we are reacting “on our heels,” rather than being part of or the solution.

8

Consensus Themes (cont.) Our improvements and good results too

often are unrecognized. Concerns are acute about the quality of

education preparers. Access to and use of data to track teacher

success is important and needs to be applied thoughtfully.

9

Landscape Analysis

Purpose: Characterize the policymaking environment in which TECSCU priorities will be considered.

10

Federal Landscape Congress has a lot on its plate, but not much of

it is getting digested. Enormous partisan tension on all fronts.– FY 2012 budget– The “Super Committee”– Elementary and Secondary Education Act

• House multi-bill approach• Harkin draft• Senate markers (S. 1250, 1567, 1569)

– IES reauthorization

11

Federal Landscape (cont.) Executive Branch is mostly going it alone

given a reluctant or distracted Congress. – Agency-driven programs to challenge the

status quo (e.g., Race to the Top, Our Future, Our Teachers)

– A Blueprint for Reform– Stimulus funding cliff, now even more sheer– ESEA state waivers and other regulations

12

Federal Landscape (cont.) External parties often are defining the

issues and the policymaking agenda– National Council on Teacher Quality– Gates Foundation, Brookings Institution– Private, for-profit institutions

13

Agenda RecommendationsPurpose: Identify the strategic positioning, messaging, and policy priorities that will comprise the TECSCU federal agenda.

14

15

“The right to be heard does not automatically include the right to be taken seriously.”

Hubert H. Humphrey (1911 - 1978)

Strategy One: Embrace Reality The policy landscape has shifted in the

area of education generally, and teacher preparation specifically.– Need to work within the current environment,

not against it.– Position as a key part of the solution given the

large number of teachers TECSCU institutions have and will educate.

16

Strategy Two: Build on Strengths

TECSCU schools are leaders in the teacher preparation arena, in terms of:– Number of schools– Number of students– Understanding educational pedagogy

This affords incomparable reach in terms of connection to key audiences

17

Strategy Three: Emphasize Students

TECSCU schools exist to serve both higher education students who will become teachers and the K-12 students they will educate.– Highlight a focus on outcomes.– Use data to illustrate progress of graduates in

their classrooms.

18

Key Messages Students + Teachers = Learning The education process is constantly changing

and TECSCU institutions are applying new teaching and learning methods to better prepare our nation’s teachers.

The learning environment also is evolving more rapidly and TECSCU institutions are incorporating advanced learning technologies and other innovations into their work.

19

Policy Priorities (Draft Concepts)

Adopt best practice metrics and advocate for a pilot program that tracks performance by TECSCU graduates.

Develop and advocate for a policy that advances a nationally recognized certification for teachers.

20

Year One Work PlanPurpose: Establish primary goals and implementation tactics for the 2012 TECSCU public policy and advocacy initiative.

21

2012 Work Plan (Draft)

Goals

– Define and advocate for public policy priorities.– Develop TECSCU member relationships with key

policymakers. – Employ the broad membership reach to enhance

TECSCU visibility in Washington.

22

2012 Work Plan (Draft) Implementation tactics

– Articulate the TECSCU public policy agenda.– Identify legislation and administrative vehicles to advance the

agenda (e.g., Elementary and Secondary Education Act, FY 2013 budget, IES reauthorization).

– Engage Congress and Administration officials to advocate for the agenda items and to become a preferred source.

– Raise visibility of TECSCU solutions through briefing, hearing, and media tactics.

23

2012 Work Plan (Draft) Estimated timeline

– Oct. 2011: Incorporate feedback and finalize work plan.– Nov. – Dec. 2011: Finalize 2012 federal agenda; draft supporting

policy papers and legislative language; schedule direct advocacy activities.

– Q1 2012: Launch public policy priorities with decision-makers; identify and engage potential “champions” and external partners.

– Q2-Q3 2012: Develop collaborative policy event to highlight TECSCU educator success; ramp up advocacy strategy.

– Q4 2012: Conduct annual assessment of TECSCU public policy and advocacy initiatives; update goals and work plan.

24