Field Experiences and Clinical Practices

Field experiences and clinical practices are integral to all of the professional preparation programs in the School of Education (see W&M Undergraduate Course Catalog and School of Education Graduate Programs Catalog in Evidence Room).  Field experiences and clinical practice are valued as opportunities to observe effective practice, develop professional relationships, employ and extend professional knowledge, apply and refine skills, and exhibit and commit to professional dispositions.  Such experiences are intentionally designed to require continuous reflection and subsequent professional growth and improvement. 

The following table summarizes the field experiences and clinical practices required of each program in the School of Education:

Table 3.1.  Field Experiences and Clinical Practice by Program

Collaboration between the School of Education and School Partners

The School of Education, as reflected in our mission statement and as emphasized in our Conceptual Framework (see Mission Statement and Conceptual Framework in Institutional Report), is committed to collaboration with our education colleagues, not only in research and service, but also in the design, development, and delivery of our programs.  The School of Education has long partnered with area school divisions, other institutes of higher education, and community agencies.  The School of Education maintains formal letters of agreement (see School Division Letters of Agreement in Evidence Room) with all local school divisions to ensure that our respective faculties “work collaboratively to provide the highest quality experiences for William and Mary teacher education students.”  More specifically, these agreements commit the School of Education to preparing and providing highly qualified candidates and supervisors who will work to ensure not only the success of the field experiences, but also the success of the K-12 students in the school settings.  School divisions, in turn, are committed to ensuring highly qualified clinical mentors in school settings with diverse student populations.

The collaborative design, development, and evaluation of our professional programs is the formal charge of the Teacher Education Advisory Committee (TEAC).  TEAC is comprised of two working groups:  (1) a K-12 Committee comprised of nine representatives of local school divisions and three faculty members from the School of Education and (2) an Arts & Sciences Committee, comprised of nine representatives of academic departments and three faculty members from the School of Education (see Teacher Education Advisory Committee notebook in Evidence Room).  The sub-committees are chaired by the Associate Dean for Professional Services and the Dean of the School of Education, respectively, who coordinate the work of the two committees and collaboratively chair joint meetings of the full committee.  The purpose of TEAC is to “collaborate with and advise the faculty and administration of the School of Education in the effective preparation of teachers in direct support of the mission of K-12 schools.”  The two arms of TEAC meet separately several times a year and jointly on an annual basis.  During the 2002-03 school year, major topics of discussion included the following:  development of the School of Education’s Conceptual Framework; articulation between teacher preparation programs and subject-area majors on campus; meeting critical-shortages areas in local schools; developing quality Clinical Faculty members and mentors to novice teachers; and the re-alignment of the student teacher competencies.  TEAC members contributed their own insights, experiences, and professional knowledge to the processes of redefining these critical organizational pieces.  It should be noted that K-12 TEAC members consist of a cross-section of school division representatives including teachers, building administrators, support personnel, and central office administrators.  Through this representative composition, the Committee is able to reflect on and evaluate the design and implementation of the School of Education programs at multiple levels, not only teacher preparation, but also counseling, school psychology, and educational leadership.

During the 2002-03 school year, a special project of the K-12 Committee was an evaluation of the field experiences of students in the initial teacher preparation programs.  Working with a team of doctoral students from an advanced research methods course, the K-12 Committee was able to gather qualitative data from a cohort of students to assess the students’ experiences ranging from matters as mundane as the communication of logistical information about practica experiences to more complex issues of the quality of their professional relationships with Clinical Faculty in their field placements.  The initial review of data during the committee’s May 2003 meeting resulted in changes to the training activities for the Summer 2003 cohort of the Clinical Faculty Program, including, for example, a renewed approach to articulating the stages of a constructive mentor-mentee relationship.

Another significant venue for collaborative development of the School of Education programs is the Lead Clinical Faculty workgroup.  Lead Clinical Faculty are K-12 teachers in selected partnership schools in which there is a critical mass of trained Clinical Faculty or in which there is a formal effort to increase the number of Clinical Faculty.  Currently, there are seven active Lead Clinical Faculty members, with three to five other teachers taking on such roles on interim bases in any given year.  Lead Clinical Faculty serve as a designated contact person in selected schools, communicating on behalf of the building administration directly with the Office of Professional Services for purposes of field placements, supervision, and evaluation.  In addition, the Associate Dean for Professional Services meets collectively with Lead Clinical Faculty on an annual basis (see Lead Clinical Faculty notebook in Evidence Room).  During these meetings, Lead Clinical Faculty discuss strengths and weaknesses of the teacher preparation programs, opportunities and barriers, and, of course, ideas for improvement.  They also have the opportunity to share ideas, thereby cross-fertilizing the successes that individual schools have enjoyed and strengthening the field experiences for William and Mary students.  For example, a growing practice among our partnership schools at the elementary level is the pairing of Clinical Faculty members at the primary grades with those in the upper grades as a means of facilitating practica students gaining experiences at multiple grade levels.  This practice was initially started at one of our partnership schools, and the practice is becoming more widespread, in part through the collaboration among School of Education faculty and administration, Lead Clinical Faculty members, and the Teacher Education Advisory Committee. 

Another example of innovative, collaborative practice spurred by the work of Lead Clinical Faculty is the joint determination of field placements for practica students and student teachers.  With approximately 200 placements in the field any given semester and, therefore, literally scores of requests for placements in any given school division, the need for centralized arrangement of placements is evident.  This is compounded by the fact that the Tidewater area has six teacher preparation institutions, all seeking field placements.  In most of the partnering school divisions, therefore, the protocol for placements is to make requests through a single point-of-contact in the central office administration.  While we respect and work within this protocol, the School of Education has created another avenue for placing interns that allows for much closer collaboration at the school level.  Specifically, we have an agreement with each of the area school divisions that we may work directly with trained Clinical Faculty members and Lead Clinical Faculty to place interns in schools.  Often, this collaboration takes place as face-to-face meetings between the Director of Professional Services and a Lead Clinical Faculty member in a school, during which School of Education students and cooperating teachers are hand-matched in order to best meet the needs of the intern and the school.  A similar procedure is followed in the school psychology, counseling, and leadership internships; however, university supervisors and the interns themselves play a much more significant role in working directly with partners in the field to match interns with qualified clinical supervisors.  In these programs, university supervisors are responsible for the final approval of internship placements.

The role of the Lead Clinical Faculty is predicated upon the presence of the William and Mary Clinical Faculty Program (see Clinical Faculty Program notebook in Evidence Room).  Initiated in 1999 and supported in part since then by competitive grants from the Virginia Department of Education, the Clinical Faculty Program prepares experienced, master teachers to serve as mentors to pre-service teachers and to novice teachers.  In collaboration with six local school divisions, the School of Education seeks to identify master teachers who meet important criteria for admission (see Standard 3.2 of this report) and then provides training in effective mentoring skills and dispositions.  An important feature of this training during the past six years has been the integration of instructional projects that actually serve as significant contributions from the cohort-in-training to the development of the School of Education programs.  For example, the first cohort of Clinical Faculty drafted an expanded set of student teacher competencies that were subsequently revised and adopted by the School of Education faculty.  In other years, cohorts of Clinical Faculty have created mentoring notebooks for their schools by which to orient new practicum students as well as new teachers; other cohorts have developed mentoring portfolios to serve as instructional resources for pre-service and novice teachers; and the current cohort launched an initiative to develop a standard evaluation rubric for use by cooperating teachers and university supervisors with student teachers.  This collaborative approach to designing key elements of the teacher preparation program is valued by School of Education faculty and our K-12 partners alike.

Throughout the professional preparation programs, multiple opportunities exist for candidates, cooperating clinical supervisors, mentors, university supervisors, and building-level administrators to provide evaluative feedback as to the quality and effectiveness of the programs.  A key element of this is the on-line course evaluation protocol employed by the School of Education, whereby every candidate is provided the opportunity to evaluate the effectiveness of his or her current courses across several variables using a Likert scale.  In addition, students are able to provide written comments to offer specific insights, suggestions, or criticisms that the course instructor can use to improve his or her course.  While the course evaluation system provides evaluative feedback to university faculty and adjunct instructors, it does not do the same for cooperating teachers and Clinical Faculty in the field, nor does it allow for feedback from these individuals.  Hence, the Curriculum and Instruction area implemented in 2002-03 a peer evaluation system.  The peer evaluation forms (see Handbook for Practica and Student Teaching Experiences in Evidence Room) provide a formal means for both students and university supervisors to give evaluative feedback on cooperating teachers, and it permits  cooperating teachers to give evaluative feedback on university supervisors.  Peer evaluation forms are submitted confidentially to the Office of Professional Services, where they are carefully reviewed and considered in making future placement and hiring decisions (see Peer Evaluations notebook in Evidence Room).  Peer evaluations are intentionally open-ended in order to allow for a range of possible responses.  The prompts on the form request respondents to describe strengths and weaknesses.  Use of the peer evaluation forms is completely voluntary; nonetheless, during the first year of use, 48 peer evaluations were returned to the Office of Professional Services.  The following table indicates the distribution of responses according to the tenor of the information provided in the written commentary:

Table 3.2.  Baseline Peer Evaluation Results (2002-04)

  A hallmark of the School of Education’s Conceptual Framework is the development of the knowledge, skills, and dispositions of an Effective Collaborator.   Not only is Collaboration an intended outcome of our professional preparation programs, but it is also a characteristic of the design of our programs.  To wit, it is the practice of School of Education faculty to contribute to and participate in the professional development activities as well as the instructional programs of local schools, while field practitioners similarly contribute to the School of Education’s program.  To highlight two examples in the area of Curriculum and Instruction, an assistant professor in reading has created a partnership with a local school in which she exchanges roles with three different classroom teachers during the course of the semester.  During these “teacher swaps,” the assistant professor takes on the full responsibility of the classroom teacher in the elementary school, focusing specifically on the elementary school students’ reading instruction.  Meanwhile, the elementary teacher is on the William and Mary campus instructing students in the teacher preparation program in reading.  As another example, an associate professor in English education is currently partnering with faculty of a local high school to integrate multiple modes of literary theory into the formal curriculum.  The high school faculty members and the School of Education faculty member regularly meet, share resources, and collaboratively plan.  The intended aims of this project are to (1) improve the articulation between preparation at the College and experiences in the field and (2) improve the learning of the high school students in the classroom through the professional development of in-service teachers.  Establishing a positive disposition toward on-going professional development is an important outcome for our students.  In the teacher preparation programs, cooperating teachers and university supervisors have consistently evaluated William and Mary students highly in the competency of "participates in professional development activities," with 99% of student teachers being judged as meeting or exceeding expectations during student teaching between Fall 1999 and Spring 2003.

Design, Implementation, and Evaluation of Field Experiences and Clinical Practice

Practica, student teaching, and professional internship experiences are viewed as essential elements of the professional preparation programs in the School of Education, providing an opportunity for candidates to observe, inquire, reflect, and practice in a professional setting (see Practica and Student Teaching Handbook, Internship Handbooks, and practica course syllabi for specific field experiences in Evidence Room).  As with on-campus coursework, field experiences are deliberately designed with the School of Education's Conceptual Framework as the targeted aim, integrating the knowledge, skills, and dispositions that define exemplary practice for a professional educator who is a Content Expert, Reflective Practitioner, Effective Collaborator, and Educational Leader.  The Conceptual Framework is extended to Clinical Faculty through a variety of means, including through internship handbooks, explicit course assignments, and the Clinical Faculty Program training for cooperating teachers in the teacher preparation programs.  Clinical Faculty are expected to serve three primary roles for their William and Mary students: to model, to mentor, and to monitor.

As indicated previously in Table 3.1, field experiences are a component of every program in the School of Education, ranging from a single practicum experience in the gifted education program to five consecutive practica experiences in the initial teacher preparation programs.  With the exception of the reading and gifted programs, which are specifically designed for the experienced teacher, all programs in the School of Education require distinct practica or field-based experiences prior to an extended internship.  The early clinical experiences--or practica--play a vital role in the development of professionals.  These experiences allow students to observe a variety of settings, interact with different professionals, and experience a variety of students and clients, all prior to taking on significant instructional or service responsibilities.  The breadth of these early field experiences provides students a broad view of the professional setting. 

Clinical experiences in the School of Education include full-time ten-week student teaching internships; consecutive part-time internships in administration and community counseling; full-time semester-long advanced internships in educational leadership; and full-time paid internships in school psychology.  In the teacher preparation programs, students complete their student teaching in the same setting in which they have participated in their practica experiences.  The Curriculum and Instruction faculty believe that this "single-school placement" provides for an intensive, in-depth experience for students, by which issues of school policy, interpersonal interactions, and classroom management are able to be addressed early on so that students can have a more authentic experience in teaching K-12 students--less encumbered by issues that would otherwise overwhelm the novice professional.  By way of the single-school placement, student teachers are enabled to become integral members of the school community, as opposed to being a "visitor" or a novelty in the classroom.  Faculty also assert that the intensity of the student teaching experience facilitates the students' development as Reflective Practitioners--another cornerstone of the School of Education Conceptual Framework.  Reflection plays a critical role in the student teaching experience, as students employ and develop their professional skills and then actively critique the outcomes of their practice and seek ways to improve future practice both in the internship experience and in full-time professional employment.  Reflective Practice is, indeed, a consistent strength among William and Mary students, as evidenced by the fact that 99% were judged by cooperating teachers and university supervisors as having met or exceeded standards during student teaching between Fall 1999 and Spring 2003.  The honing of the skills and dispositions of Reflective Practice occurs in great part through reflective journaling, seminar discussion, and portfolio development, which are elements (in their respective forms) of all clinical experiences, including teacher preparation, school psychology, counseling, and school leadership.  Administrative interns, for example, are encouraged to reflect upon their work through a variety of means. They send weekly email journal entries to their university supervisor, they engage with their university supervisor in three telephone coaching sessions per semester, reflect jointly with their university and field supervisors during a site visit, apply theory to write an extensive organizational analysis paper about their internship site, and write a final internship reflection paper at the end of each semester summarizing what the experience has meant to them and what they have learned.

During clinical experiences, students are members of a professional instructional team (see Handbook for Practica and Student Teaching Experiences, "Responsibilities" section, in Evidence Room).  Student teachers and practica students are encouraged and supported to develop a positive working relationship with the cooperating teacher and other professionals and support staff in the school; observe, participate in, and become familiar with the class or educational setting; become familiar with the climate, culture, rules, and procedures of the school; and interact with and instruct the students in the class.  More specifically, students are expected to meet formally with the principal; examine student records and become informed of students' physical disabilities or other health impairments in the class or team; observe a variety of teaching techniques used by a variety of professional staff outside of the assigned classroom; utilize alternative grouping arrangements, if appropriate; attend P.T.A., faculty, and in-service meetings; participate in parent-teacher conferences; observe and, as appropriate, participate in child study and eligibility meetings; and participate in and contribute to decision-making and planning at the team, grade, and/or department levels.  Similarly, interns in the school psychology, counseling, and leadership clinical experiences are required to develop professional working relationships with school personnel and to serve students and clients directly in support of student learning and well-being.

The student intern is also part of a team with regard to his or her professional internship experience and continuing learning, as he or she is placed with a Clinical Faculty member, who is directly responsible for the day-to-day supervision and support of the intern.  The third member of this team is a university supervisor, who is primarily responsible for coordinating the student's field experiences with the expectations of the School of Education, collaborating with the cooperating teacher in supervising the student, and, ultimately, evaluating the student teacher's performance according to the professional standards of the School of Education.  As indicated in Figure 3.1 below, the three members of this instructional team are, in turn, supported by additional members of the professional community who provide oversight and serve as additional resources.  Similar models of collaborative support and supervision characterize the internships in school psychology, counseling, and educational leadership.

Figure 3.1: Collaborative Partners for Practica and Student Teaching Experiences

In order to ensure supportive and professionally sound experiences during practica and student teaching placements, clinical supervisors for all programs are required to meet specific qualifications (see field experiences handbooks in the Evidence Room).  In the teacher preparation programs, for example, the following qualifications are required of all cooperating teachers:

·        Three years of successful teaching experience

·        Written or verbal recommendation or approval of building principal or designee

·        Valid teaching license in the area in which currently teaching

·        Teaching endorsement in the same area as that sought by the university student

·        Teaching in an accredited public or private school.

 

One of the distinguishing features of the School of Education teacher preparation programs is the presence and involvement of trained Clinical Faculty.  Clinical Faculty members are select, experienced teachers who have distinguished themselves in the field as accomplished professional teachers and who have completed graduate-level training with School of Education faculty in areas of supervision and mentoring.  These teachers regularly serve as cooperating teachers for William and Mary students, employing techniques from their training that result in improved practica and student teaching experiences.  More than 200 Clinical Faculty members are present in more than 25 schools in the School of Education's partnership area.  In many of these schools, Clinical Faculty members serve leadership roles among their teacher colleagues, sharing their insights, knowledge, and skills to improve the quality of field experiences for all student teachers and cooperating teachers in the building.  As adjunct faculty members of the School of Education, Clinical Faculty members play an important role in ensuring the articulation and alignment of expectations between theory and practice.  (See Clinical Faculty list in the School of Education Graduate Catalog in the Evidence Room.)

In addition to the field-based instructional team during the student teaching experience, student teachers benefit from participating in a seminar conducted by a School of Education faculty member.  The purpose of the student teaching seminar--which meets regularly throughout the student teaching experience--is to serve as an additional resource for support and supervision of students during the clinical experience by providing formal discussion, interaction, extension, and reflection among a cohort of student teachers.  During the seminar, students bring to completion their individual professional portfolios, which are designed to allow students to demonstrate their development of the knowledge, skills, and dispositions that are represented by the student teacher competencies, around which the program is built (see Handbook for Practica and Student Teaching Experiences, "Student Teacher Competencies" section, in Evidence Room).

In the school psychology, counseling, and educational leadership programs, a similar model of on-campus seminar support is in place.  In addition, the school psychology program requires students to participate in an on-going listserv discussion of important practicum-related topics, and the educational leadership program employs a professional "coaching" model, whereby administrative interns and the university supervisor hold structured, intentional discussions one-on-one at points throughout the internship.  In the counseling practica and internships, students meet weekly as a group with faculty for consistent, structured supervision and support.  Administrative interns also meet to share and reflect with other interns on their experiences, as well as to engage in professional development experiences such as mock interviews or in-basket experiences. In their final semester of internship, administrative interns complete work on their preparation portfolios with the addition of an executive summary, an index, an up-to-date resume, revisions to the leadership platform and personal professional development plan.

An example of the demonstration of professional competencies in the teacher preparation programs is the integrated use of instructional technology as a set of skills woven throughout the 30 professional competencies identified by the School of Education.  This is an area of particular strength for William and Mary students, all of whom complete at least one course and a designated practicum experience in instructional technology.  One of the learning activities in the course is to create an on-line portfolio mapped to the student teaching competencies.  This activity is greatly facilitated by the expertise of many of the Clinical Faculty in the field who have participated in the School of Education's ACT 2 program, a project funded by a federal PT3 (Preparing Tomorrow's Teachers for Technology) grant.  Through ACT 2, the School of Education has combined the instructional experience of in-service teachers with the technical know-how of our initial teacher preparation students.  During the past four years, cohorts of these groups have worked side-by-side with the leadership of the School of Education's instructional technology faculty to develop and improve their knowledge, skills, and use of technology in the classroom to support K-12 student learning (see ACT2 Evaluation Reports).

Another exciting, albeit developing, area of demonstrated professional competence during the student teaching experience is in the area of assessment of student learning.  During the past two years, faculty in the Curriculum and Instruction area, the Teacher Education Advisory Committee, and members of the Lead Clinical Faculty have had increasing discussion about the development of teacher competency in assessing student learning.  Partners in the field indicated that in an era of standards-based curricula and high-stakes testing, assessment is an area of weakness for in-service teachers.  The C&I faculty meanwhile conducted a comprehensive review and alignment of its student teacher competencies, during which it also identified the need to revise its articulation of knowledge, skills, and dispositions associated with student assessment (see Handbook for Practica and Student Teaching Experiences, "Student Teacher Competencies" section, in Evidence Room).  With this renewed emphasis on classroom-based assessment practices, an important new development in the teacher preparation programs is the requirement that student's provide one or more artifacts of their assessment of and effect upon K-12 student learning in their student teaching portfolios.  This initiative was launched in Spring 2003 and remains in development; nonetheless, the professional development in this area has also begun with in-service teachers through the Clinical Faculty Program training in the summers of both 2002 and 2003.  Furthermore, a related link to this assessment initiative is the ongoing focus and refinement of strategies for developing the knowledge and skills of students in the educational leadership programs to analyze state standardized assessment results to promote student achievement.  A hallmark of the K-12 administration program is a core of three instructional leadership courses, and it is primarily through these three courses that assessment of and for learning at the classroom, program, and school level are emphasized.

Candidates’ Development and Demonstration of Knowledge, Skills, and Dispositions to Help All Students Learn

Before beginning the professional internship experience of student teaching, candidates must demonstrate content knowledge, professional knowledge, pedagogical skills, and professional dispositions.  These are ensured by requiring that each student (1) take and pass Praxis I: Academic Skills Assessment, (2) complete an Application for Student Teaching (see Handbook for Practica and Student Teaching Experiences in Evidence Room) indicating their eligibility for student teaching, and (3) successfully complete all coursework in the teacher preparation program.  Prior to completing student teaching, each student must (1) take and pass the appropriate Praxis II content area exam, (2) successfully complete the student teaching seminar, and (3) successfully complete the student teaching experience as evidenced by the assessment methods described below.  Similar pre-requisites are evident in school psychology, counseling, and educational leadership.  For example, students in the school psychology program must complete all of the pre-requisite courses and earn a grade of "B-" or better in the diagnostic courses in order to enter the practicum.  Students in family and community counseling must fulfill established academic competencies before beginning clinical instruction.  Through the Student Monitoring Process, they must also demonstrate satisfactory "non-academic and professional performance" before and throughout their provision of direct services to clients.  The Associate Dean for Academic Programs, the Associate Dean for Professional Services, and Area faculty monitor students' compliance with the pre-clinical and program completion requirements.

The School of Education preparation programs are aligned with professional, state, and institutional standards.  In light of the School of Education's expanded Conceptual Framework and changing professional standards, the C&I faculty revisited and retooled its student teacher competencies during the 2002-03 academic year to ensure a stronger, more integrative alignment among professional standards from specialty area organizations, the Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (INTASC), the Virginia Department of Education Licensure Regulations, the School of Education's Conceptual Framework, and research-based best practice (see Competencies Committee folder in Evidence Room).  The result of this comprehensive analysis and revision is a set of 30 student teaching competencies, which are organized into the six major domains: (1) foundational understanding, (2) ability to plan, organize, and prepare for teaching, (3) teaching skills, (4) assessment and evaluation for learning, (5) classroom management, knowledge, and skills, and (6) professional knowledge and skills.  These six domains and the 30 competencies associated with them (see Handbook for Practica and Student Teaching Experiences, "Student Teacher Competencies" section, in Evidence Room) represent the intended outcome of the initial teacher preparation programs and, therefore, drive the learning experiences of candidates in coursework and in the field.  The new student teacher competencies were finalized and formally approved by the C&I faculty in Spring 2003 and were put in use beginning Fall 2003.

A primary purpose of the practica and clinical experiences is for students to demonstrate their mastery of these professional competencies.  For example, the practicum and internship experiences in school psychology are designed around the 11 competencies specified by the National Association of School Psychologists (NASP), and those in counseling adhere to standards set forth by the Council on Accreditation for Counseling and Related Educational Programs (CACREP).  In the teacher preparation, all of the major assessment instruments and strategies are aligned with the new student teaching competencies, and, as described previously, the student teacher competencies in the teacher preparation programs are closely aligned with state, national, and professional standards.  During the early practica experiences of the teacher preparation programs, students must (1) complete specific practica-related assignments aligned with course content, (2) maintain a log accounting for a minimum of 20 clock hours in the field for every one-credit practicum, (3) complete a self-evaluation of specific knowledge and skills developed during the practicum and of professional dispositions, and (4) obtain and submit a copy of the Clinical Faculty's evaluation of the candidate's developing knowledge and skills, as well as his or her related dispositions (see Handbook for Practica and Student Teaching, "Student's Self-Evaluation of Practicum," et al., in Evidence Room).  Dispositions, for instance, are assessed on a three-point scale and include such items as punctuality, organization and preparation, enthusiasm, attention to student safety, rapport with faculty and other school personnel, reflection upon practice, and potential for leadership.

Similarly, multiple assessments are used for the evaluation of student teachers during the full-time professional internship experience.  During student teaching, the candidate must (1) complete a professional teaching portfolio mapped to the student teaching competencies, (2) maintain a log accounting for a minimum of 150 hours of direct instructional experience and a total of an additional 150 hours of observation in the field, including previous practicum hours, (3) complete a self-evaluation at the mid-point and at the end of the experience using the School of Education student teacher competencies, (4) receive formal and informal feedback from the Clinical Faculty and university supervisor following observations of teaching, (4) participate in at least two three-way conferences with his or her clinical supervisor and university supervisor to receive formal feedback and evaluation, and (5) receive an acceptable, formal evaluation from the building administrator.  The intent of the multiple means of assessing student performance at various points during student teaching is to provide regular feedback to the student, initiate corrective strategies (if necessary), and ensure the continuation of a positive and productive learning experience for the K-12 students in the classroom during the student teacher's internship.  In the case of a serious deficiency in performance during student teaching, the Clinical Faculty member and university supervisor collaborate with school administration and with the Associate Dean for Professional Services to develop and enact a formal performance improvement plan (see Handbook for Practica and Student Teaching, "Unsatisfactory Performance" section, in Evidence Room).  The student evaluation procedures governing the clinical experiences in school psychology, counseling, and educational leadership also rely on multiple measures of an intern's developing knowledge, skills, and dispositions, as measured against articulated standards (see field experiences handbooks in Evidence Room).  For example, the practicum and internship experiences in school psychology are specifically designed around the 11 competencies specified by the National Association of School Psychologists (NASP).

Interwoven throughout the student teaching competencies that frame the teacher preparation programs is a focus on ensuring the learning of all students.  This emphasis is most transparent in the tenth competency, which reads, "provides for individual differences."  However, it is also evident in various performance indicators listed under other competencies.  For example, the student teaching competencies describe the following exemplary indications of professional performance:

• demonstrates understanding of students' cognitive, social, and emotional levels
• creates instructional opportunities that accommodate diverse students (cultural, linguistic, and socioeconomic diversity)
• differentiates instruction to accommodate multiple ability levels (including special education and gifted education students)
• clearly identifies intended learning outcomes for individual students
• accommodates regular, exceptional, and culturally diverse students
• differentiates instruction to accommodate students' multiple intelligences
• respects and accommodates individual differences in culture, experiences, learning styles, and levels of motivation.

To further facilitate the development of these skills and dispositions, students in the teacher preparation program complete coursework and practica experiences in characteristics and adaptations for exceptional populations.  Administrative interns, as another example, complete a Cultural Competence Assessment on their internship site and reflect on the results as part of the organizational analysis paper (see course syllabi).

In addition, the Office of Professional Services works closely with partners in the field to attempt to provide diverse settings for practica and student teaching experiences.  Students participate in field experiences in a variety of settings that include urban, suburban, and rural school divisions.  These districts (namely, New Kent County, Williamsburg-James City County, Gloucester County, York County, Newport News, Poquoson, and Hampton) contain diverse student populations.  During Fall Semester 2002, an associate professor in the elementary education program piloted a practicum experience to expand students' experience with English as a Second Language (ESL) learners.  The professor collaborated with 36 teachers in the Henrico County Schools in the Richmond area.  William and Mary students taught social studies lessons to more than 200 elementary and middle school students.  These lessons were designed with attention to the needs of ESL student populations in eight different schools.  An informal evaluation of the pilot program was conducted by the professor and a representative of the school division reviewing commentary from collaborating teachers and written reflections from students.  By these measures, the ESL practicum experience was an instructional success; however, its replicablity was limited by the logistical challenges of the time and cost of travel for students.  Nonetheless, the project has demonstrated the potential for targeted practica experiences of this type.

Table 4.7 in Standard 4 of this report provides a representative sample of the percentage of school populations by race in schools that hosted student teachers during the 2002-03 academic year.  This sample of data from the most recent cohort of student teachers is representative of the field experiences of students in previous cohorts.  The table also represents the geographic area in which most interns in the school psychology, counseling, and educational leadership programs participate in field experiences.  The diversity that characterizes the field placements is reflective of the diversity of the Tidewater Virginia region.

The diversity of the settings for field experiences is an important complement to the coursework in developing competencies of students in the initial teacher preparation program.  Moreover, diversity--as indicated by the representative performance indicators cited previously--is defined across multiple characteristics, including differences in gender, ethnicity, disabilities, socio-economic status, and primary language.  Given this perspective, the Office of Professional Services is initiating a more deliberate approach to monitoring and ensuring the diversity of the settings for field experiences.  During the Fall 2003 student teaching seminar, for example, students are completing an assignment whereby they will collect and analyze the demographic data of all of the classes in which they teach, considering five facets of diversity indicated above (see Student Teaching Demographics Project in the Evidence Room).  The data will also be provided to the Office of Professional Services so that a more complete database can be maintained to monitor this important aspect of field experiences and to work more intentionally with partners in the schools and school divisions to ensure that field placements are in diverse settings.  In addition, the Office of Professional Services is currently working with partnering school divisions to regularly gather more comprehensive data regarding the diversity of local schools.  It is anticipated that preliminary data will be available for the 2002-03 school year in Fall 2003 and will complement and expand upon the data provided in Table 3.3 above.

The effectiveness of students' preparation in competencies associated with serving diverse student populations is captured in evaluations from students, cooperating teachers, and university supervisors during the early practicum experience and the culminating student teaching experience.  For example, data for the 2001-02 academic year from the cooperating teachers working with elementary practica students indicated that 96% agreed or strongly agreed that students had gained practical experience in working with pupils of varying abilities and that 98% agreed or strongly agreed that students had learned