CSU Long Beach College of Education Accreditation
The campus commitment to serving a diverse student body is reflected in the unit’s Mission Statement, where we are explicit in our commitment to intellectual, personal and interpersonal growth for all students, to valuing diversity and our role in preparing educational professionals for a diverse world, and to promoting school improvement for all students. In the Conceptual Framework (Exhibit 5) we acknowledge our celebration of “the richness of our social mosaic” as we help candidates “develop a common core of skills, knowledge, and dispositions that open social, economic, intellectual, and cultural opportunities.” The unit’s commitment to diversity is operationalized in its goals and objectives to recruit, retain and prepare to the highest of standards a diverse student body; to prepare educational professionals for urban diverse public schools; to recruit, support and retain a diverse faculty; and to create programs that serve the educational needs of diverse candidates.
In fall 2006 we administered a faculty Diversity Survey (Exhibit 36) as a means of ascertaining our collective perception of how well we meet our goal. Findings from the survey suggest that overall, faculty think we are doing well with regard to diversity issues, especially in recruiting diverse faculty and candidates, knowing about diversity concepts and feeling comfortable teaching them, and preparation of candidates for dealing with diversity in the schools (Table 4.01: Faculty Diversity Survey, Fall 2006). However, faculty reported that we do a statistically significant better job recruiting diverse faculty than we do retaining them. There is a smaller, non-significant, discrepancy with respect to recruiting and retaining diverse candidates. There are lower ratings for professional development around diversity issues for faculty and for candidate opportunities to interact with diverse faculty at the university (items 14-15); these are clearly areas that need attention.
We also analyzed faculty responses to survey items by length of time at the university and whether faculty are White/Caucasian or not. In both cases we found a significant association: Faculty who have been here longer and faculty who are White/Caucasian had more positive ratings about the unit's efforts with regard to diversity issues, suggesting that newer faculty and minority faculty are somewhat more critical of the unit's efforts to maintain and attract diverse faculty and candidates and to prepare faculty and candidates to deal with the many challenges diversity provides. Again, these findings suggest areas requiring attention. The unit Strategic Planning Committee will take up this topic in spring 2007.
Candidates in unit programs are expected to acquire competencies in “helping all students to develop a common core of skills, knowledge, and dispositions.” Diversity is understood broadly as differences among groups of people and individuals based on ethnicity, race, socioeconomic status, gender, exceptionalities, language, religion, sexual orientation, and geographical area. Individual programs have courses whose titles and descriptions inform candidates that the course has diversity as a major focus, but virtually all courses address issues of diversity, in greater or lesser detail, in relation to the course content through readings, lectures, discussions, assignments and fieldwork experiences. All of these are designed to enhance candidates’ knowledge, skills and dispositions in their work with diverse students in P-12 educational settings.
In terms of “knowledge,” candidates in initial and advanced programs are expected to: develop an understanding of the traditions of major cultural and ethnic groups in California; identify pedagogical and school practices that may stem from racial, cultural, ethnic, and gender biases that hinder academic achievement and challenge the well-being of all students; demonstrate knowledge of key historical trends in education, including the education of special populations of learners; understand the impact of sociological and cultural influences on the process of education for children, including learners with special needs, teachers and policy makers; and know and understand the impact of local, state, and federal politics and laws on the process of education, especially as related to special education and student placement.
In terms of “skills,”candidates are expected to: utilize appropriate methods and materials to practice and promote multicultural education; identify, analyze, and minimize personal and institutional bias with regard to race, poverty, creed, nationality, gender, and sexual orientation; develop effective instructional strategies for use with the major cultural and ethnic groups in California; work successfully with diverse students in urban environments; develop planning and instructional skills for promoting academic achievement and educational equity for all students; develop appropriate cross-cultural communication skills to interact with children and adults from diverse cultural, linguistic, racial, ethnic, socio-economic backgrounds; develop responsive pedagogy that will both accommodate and challenge all students; and develop skills and strategies for positive familial engagement.
In terms of “dispositions,” candidates are expected to: realize their own personal and professional growth through reflection and self-evaluation; demonstrate sensitivity toward and effectiveness with people from diverse backgrounds; develop an understanding and appreciation of cultural diversity and its applications to teaching multicultural populations; examine their personal beliefs toward people of different cultural, linguistic, racial, ethnic, socio-economic and gender backgrounds; understand the impact of local, state, and federal politics and laws on the process of education, especially as related to special education and student placement; and understand the effects of family involvement on student achievement.
Through coursework and field experiences, candidates in teacher preparation programs develop awareness of the importance of diversity in teaching and learning and the knowledge, skills, and dispositions to help all students to learn. Methods classes include differentiated instruction and appropriate assessment practices for English Learners and students with special needs. In addition, specific courses have diversity as the principal focus. Candidates are assessed in coursework through examinations, projects, presentations, and in fieldwork through reflection, teaching assessment instruments, and portfolio review. Reviewers are directed to program Self-Studies, PAES Binders, and supporting materials in the Exhibits Room for the evidentiary record.
Table 4.02 (Examples of How Courses in Initial Teacher Preparation Programs Address Diversity) displays courses in initial teacher preparation programs that specifically address issues of diversity. Each program has one or more courses that focus on diversity, but diversity as a theme cuts across virtually all program courses. Candidates engage in course activities in which they look at relevant state and federal laws pertaining to the education of students with exceptionalities; study concepts of culture, educational equity social justice, multiple forms of diversity and developmentally appropriate teaching; explore child and adolescent development and its relationship to formal learning in schools; acquire teaching strategies for working with English learners; and develop theoretical background and practice approaches for differentiated instruction.
An assignment from the Single Subject Program course EDSE 435 (US Secondary Schools: Intercultural Education) is an example of the type of experiences initial teacher preparation program candidates have that generate reflection on their skills in working with diverse students. Candidates in the course are asked to obtain, describe and analyze the Academic Performance Index (API) for their fieldwork site to identify the academic status of the school. Variables such as socioeconomic status, demographic profile, and percentage of English learners are identified. Students obtain the school’s mission and goals to address questions in their reports about the school’s use of diversity programs. The information foregrounds their participant observations in the classroom where they identify the curriculum implemented by teachers in their own subject matter and its application. To augment their understanding of social dynamics of diverse populations in schools, they use social mapping to trace the dynamics to students in three landscapes in and out of the classroom. In the final report, candidates describe, interpret and analyze their findings, relate these to their scholarly readings, and present the implications for educating students about diversity in urban classrooms.
Candidates in advanced (continuing) teacher preparation programs and programs for other school personnel enhance their capacities to work in school settings with diverse P-12 students in coursework and through field and clinical experiences. Candidates are assessed in coursework through examinations, projects, and presentations and in fieldwork through reflection assignments, practica, fieldwork assessments, and portfolio review. Table 4.03 (Examples of How Courses in Advanced Teacher Preparation Programs Address Diversity) and Table 4.04 (Examples of How Courses in Programs for Other School Personnel Address Diversity) display key courses specifically addressing diversity. In these courses candidates complete course assignments in which they make critical analyses of cultural diversity and educational equity using a global lens, analyze tests used in assessing individuals with disabilities, and study criteria for evaluation, selection, setup and use of basic library reference sources to reflect the cultural and linguistic diversity of students in schools. Syllabi in the Exhibits Room provide details on a program-by-program basis.
An example of an assignment is in the Reading Program course EDRG 559 (Practicum in Reading/Language Arts) in which candidates study effective literacy and content instruction for English language learners, among other topics. Candidates study the Sheltered Instruction Observation Protocol (SIOP) model in class and design an intervention plan for a small group of their EL students. On two occasions candidates videotape themselves teaching the intervention plan. The videotapes are reviewed by the instructor and other candidates in the class. Feedback feedback from the instructor and peers on the first video is used as candidates plan their second videotaped lesson.
To inform us of how well candidates in the initial credential programs are prepared to work with diverse populations we use data provided by the CSU System-wide Evaluation of Teacher Preparation annual reports (Exhibit 29 & Figure 2.05), which includes data on candidates (CSU Exit Survey, Exhibit 6) as well as on program graduates (Survey of Graduates, Exhibit 7; Survey of Graduates’ Employment Supervisors; Exhibit 8). The CSU project is described in Standard 2.
Looking back on their program preparation at the conclusion of their first year of teaching, 72% of initial program graduates reported they were well or adequately prepared to work with students who are English language learners, 80% said they were well or adequately prepared to work with students from diverse cultural backgrounds, and 58% said they were well or adequately prepared to work to meet the instructional needs of students with special learning needs (Table 4.05: Initial Teacher Preparation Program Graduates’ Perceptions of Their Preparation for Working with Diverse Learners).
Triangulating data from different sources provides a fuller picture of program performance than reliance on a single indicator. The CSU evaluation project provides three additional data sources to consider.
For example, when asked about the value or helpfulness of program coursework and fieldwork relative to these three diversity measures, graduates of the Multiple Subject and Single Subject programs look back on their program experiences in a more positive light. Eighty-six percent said program instruction in coursework and fieldwork was very or somewhat valuable for preparing them to work with English learners, while 89% said instruction in cultural diversity and multicultural education was very or somewhat valuable, and 75% said instruction in teaching students with special learning needs was very or somewhat valuable (Table 4.06: Multiple Subject and Single Subject Program Graduates’ Perceptions of the Value of Their Program Experiences for Preparing Them to Work with Diverse Students).
As Table 4.07 (Employment Supervisors’ Ratings of Initial Teacher Preparation Program Graduates’ Preparation for Working with Diverse Students)shows, employment supervisors of initial program graduates rate graduates better prepared to meet the needs of ELs, work with students from diverse backgrounds, and meet the special learning needs of students than do the graduates themselves.
Candidates in the Multiple Subject, Single Subject, and Education Specialist programs perceive their preparation for diversity more positively than do graduates or the employment supervisors of graduates, as show by Table 4.08 (Initial Teacher Preparation Program Candidates’ Perceptions of Their Preparation for Working with Diverse Students at Program Exit). There are several possible explanations for this discrepancy. One is that the experiences of exiting student teachers and graduates at the end of their first year of teaching are significantly different and lead to graduates having a more sanguine perception of their preparation than they do when they are just completing the program. The differences can be on several dimensions. Graduates may be working in schools with a more diverse linguistic and cultural background student body than they experienced in student teaching, and in reflection do not perceive that they were as well prepared as they did earlier. As credentialed teachers, graduates have more preparations, more students, and more overall responsibilities than do student teachers, which may affect their reflections on the adequacy of their preservice preparation.
Results reported in Tables 4.05, 4.06, 4.07 and 4.08 lead us to conclude that candidates are receiving strong preparation for working with diverse P-12 student populations. However, the data show that providing instruction and experiences for our candidates to prepare them to meet the instructional needs of students with special learning needs provides a challenge we need to continue to address. Steps taken to address this challenge include developing a new course for Multiple Subject candidates (EDSP 303: Preparing to Teach Special Populations in the General Education Classroom) and adding a 3-unit course requirement to the Single Subject Program (EDSP 350: Education of Exceptional Individuals) during the most recent round of program revision. In addition, the unit sent a team of approximately 15 faculty to a CSU-sponsored workshop on March 9 in San Francisco, the purpose of which was to look at key areas of teacher preparation, such as working with English learners. We will continue to monitor this element closely as additional program evaluation data become available.
A final indicator of the attitudes, dispositions and skills candidates acquire in the programs regarding working with diverse P-12 populations is the kind of schools they teach in after graduating. Table 4.09 (Diversity in the Schools of Initial Teacher Preparation Program Graduates) shows data from the CSU evaluation project Annual Report, 2005 indicating the types of schools and student populations our graduates work in and with. Forty-six percent of graduates reported they taught at an urban, inner city school serving predominantly lower income families during their first year of employment. One hundred percent of the responding graduates said a greater than average number of students at their schools were eligible for subsidized meals. Forty-six percent of graduates reported that they worked at low or lowest performing schools, defined as schools in the lower 5 deciles on the state Academic Performance Index. Forty-one percent said they taught in a school in which 68% or more of the students were English learners. Another 57% said their schools had at least 34% English learners. Thirty-two percent of these graduates reported that they had 68% or more English learners in their classrooms, while an additional 65% said they had at least 34% ELs in their classrooms.
These numbers clearly indicate that a high proportion of graduates of our three initial teacher preparation programs end up in teaching assignments with significant numbers of lower income and educationally challenged students, as well as English learners. We believe that our graduates are not only well prepared to work in P-12 schools with diverse student populations and in challenging settings, but that they choose to do so, in part at least, because of their positive preservice experiences in their preparation programs.
Faculty in advanced (continuing) teacher preparation programs and programs for other school personnel have approached their program’s attention to diversity and assessment with equal intensity. In the Reading Program, candidates engage in extensive diagnostic testing of students from diverse races, ethnicities, and cultural backgrounds, and do an extended Sheltered Instruction Observation Protocol (SIOP) analysis that addresses interventions based upon the analysis. In some cases, awareness of systemic educational problems in our schools in the service area (i.e., the overrepresentation of African American and Latino students in special education) causes faculty to focus the curriculum and field experiences on particular assessments and effective use of data. For example, candidates in the School Psychology Program and the Special Education master’s program (which includes the Level II Education Specialist credential) collect and use data, then implement and refine appropriate assessments and interventions.
Exiting candidates in advanced programs and programs for other school personnel report positively about their preparation for working with students from diverse communities, as confirmed in program exit surveys. Data on diversity measures from exit surveys are reported for selected programs in Table 4.10 (Reading Program Candidates’ Perceptions of Their Diversity Experiences at Program Exit), Table 4.11 (Educational Administration Tier 1 Program Candidates’ Perceptions of Their Diversity Experiences at Program Exit), and Table 4.12 (School Psychology Credential Program Candidates’ Perceptions of Their Diversity Experiences at Program Exit). Refer to PAES Binders in the Exhibits Room for data on additional programs.
The unit is committed to assisting candidates to become effective educational professionals in a manner that is responsive to the diverse needs, abilities, and backgrounds of the students found in contemporary classrooms. This requires faculty to be knowledgeable and experienced in working in diverse P-12 settings. Recruitment of an increasingly diverse faculty is one way in which we have worked to ensure that teaching reflects knowledge about and experiences with cultural diversity and exceptionalities. Many faculty engage in scholarly activity reflective of expertise in, as well as personal and professional experience in working with, culturally diverse populations and the population of individuals with exceptionalities. These scholarly activities are featured in the display case in the lobby of Education Building 1, and identified in faculty web-based profiles and in vitae available in the Exhibits Room (Exhibit 49). The variety of strategies that are used to develop abilities in critical thinking and reflection that show up in course syllabi, assignments, and assessments are examples of how the faculty apply knowledge about cultural diversity and exceptionalities in their own teaching. Professional development activities often focus on developing faculty expertise in this area as well so as to further ensure that teaching reflects knowledge and experience with diverse abilities, needs, and cultural and linguistic backgrounds (refer to Standard 5).
In the 2005-06 snapshot year, 34% of the full-time faculty in the College of Education were from minority groups. Seventy-three percent of the faculty were female. For the university during the same period, 28% of the 852 tenure-track faculty were minority, and 41% were female. In the College of Health and Human Services (CHHS; houses Affiliated Programs) 21% of 141 tenured and tenure- track faculty were Caucasian/White, and the percentage held for its 231 full and part-time lecturers. Women comprised 61% of the CHHS faculty. Of the 8 full-time faculty in the Affiliated Programs, 2 (25%) were from minority groups and 3 (38%) were female. Thus, the College of Education is slightly more successful than the CHHS and the university at developing a faculty that mirrors the demographics of the student population, while it tends to have a gender imbalance in favor of females (Table 4.13: Faculty Profile by Rank, Gender & Ethnicity: Campus, College of Education, College of Health and Human Services, 2005-06).
The demographic characteristics of the faculty at the university, of tenure-track and part-time faculty in the College of Education and Affiliated Programs, and of teachers in area public schools ensures that candidates have ample opportunities to interact with faculty of diverse backgrounds. In 2005-2006 in Los Angeles County, 45% of K-12 teachers were from the non-white population, compared to 28% statewide. By comparison, Los Angeles County has a general population of approximately 9,559,635, of whom about 68% identify as non-white. During 2005-2006 in Orange County, 19% of the teachers were from the non-white population. By comparison, Orange County has a population of approximately 2,854,026, about 48% of whom identify as non-white. (Teacher characteristics source: http://data1.cde.ca.gov/dataquest; population characteristics source: http://ca.rand.org/stats/popdemo/popproj.html) We are mindful that while our level of diversity among the faculty has been improving steadily over the past decade, it still falls far short of the diversity found in the student population at CSULB and in the Southern California area, so we continue to emphasize efforts to recruit and retain a diverse faculty.
Table 4.14 (University Supervisors in Unit Programs, 2003-2006) displays the gender and ethnic characteristics of faculty who supervise candidates in initial teacher preparation programs and credential programs for other school personnel. For most of the programs, there has been little or no change in the gender and ethnic/racial make up recently due to the stability of the membership of the group of supervisors. About 71% of our university supervisors are female; about 21% are from non-white groups.
Faculty have both educational and practical experiences in interacting with students from diverse cultural backgrounds and students with exceptionalities. Over two-thirds of the full-time faculty in the CED have been hired since 2000. Many of the new faculty hired reported they were attracted to Southern California by the opportunities to teach and do research with the rich cultural and ethnic diversity here. These newer faculty, as well as our established faculty, infuse their expertise into courses and further enhance their knowledge and skills through their research (Table 4.15: Selected Examples of Faculty Scholarship Around Diversity Issues).
Recruitment of an increasingly diverse faculty is a way in which we have worked to ensure that teaching reflects knowledge about and experiences with cultural diversity and exceptionalities. New faculty searches have focused on increasing the number of faculty with specific expertise in educational issues related to cultural and linguistic diversity as well as exceptional needs. All tenure track searches adhere to a standard Search Protocol that is based upon university policy and procedures. Search committees cast the widest net possible to ensure a qualified and diverse applicant pool. Recruitment and advertising plans are submitted and approved by the campus Director of Equity and Diversity prior to being used. Efforts to recruit a diverse faculty have been successful in recent years, resulting in the recent hiring of extremely well qualified faculty from diverse backgrounds. During AY 2004-2005, the CED hired a total of seven tenure-track faculty, of whom five were female and two were from traditionally underrepresented groups. During AY 2005-2006, CED hired six new tenure-track faculty, of whom four were female and two were from minority groups (Table 4.16: CED New Hires, 2003-2006)
Once faculty are hired, systematic efforts to support and mentor faculty are initiated at the university, college, and department levels. Academic Affairs and the colleges each fund 3 units of faculty release time during the first year. All efforts are designed to retain the strong candidates that we hire. Most faculty are successful gaining tenure at CSULB, as we martial all efforts necessary to provide appropriate assistance, coaching, and mentoring to ensure their success. Other activities designed to assist new faculty to become oriented to the university and the challenges of their multi-faceted roles as faculty are detailed in Standard 5.
As Table 4.17 (Ethnicity and Gender of Candidates Admitted to Initial Teacher Preparation Programs, 2005-06)illustrates, in 2005-2006 there was no single majority ethnic/racial group in the initial teacher preparation programs. This majority-minority pattern mirrors student demographics in area P-12 schools where we place candidates for fieldwork and student teaching and that employ program graduates (Table 4.18: Student Demographics of Cooperating School Districts). The vast majority of candidates are female, even in the secondary program.
Another way of looking at the range of diversity in our candidates is provided by Table 4.19 (Ethnicity of Initial Teacher Preparation Program Completers), which illustrates the ethnic/racial make up of candidates recommended for credentials during the period 2002-2005.
An interesting marker of diversity to note is the number of languages spoken by candidates. The SERVE Program maintains records of languages spoken by candidates they place in field experience sites (Liberal Studies/ITEP candidates, Multiple Subject Credential candidates, and a few candidates from other programs). The 11 most frequently identified languages by candidates placed in field sites in 2005-2006 are shown in Table 4.20 (Most Frequent Second Languages Spoken by SERVE Program Participants, 2005-2006).
Advanced (continuing) teacher preparation programs and programs for other school personnel have demonstrated a similar balancing dynamic in their ethnic/racial make-up. Table 4.21 (CED Admits to Advanced Credentials/Master’s Programs by Gender and Ethnicity, 2005-2006) shows admissions to advanced programs in the 2005-2006 academic year. Forty-eight percent of candidates identify as non-white, while 55% identify as White, Other, or Decline to State. Eighty-five percent of candidates are female.
As the above tables illustrate, unit programs have diverse ethnic, cultural and linguistic populations. Candidates have ample opportunities to interact in and out of class with diverse peers at the undergraduate, post-baccalaureate credential program, and graduate levels. Faculty use various forms of group-work teaching strategies, which serve to bring candidates together in a variety of groupings that ensures, over time, that they interact with their peers from other ethnic and racial groups on numerous occasions.
CSULB is committed to serving non-traditional, underrepresented, and international students. Though Proposition 209 eliminated affirmative action in California, the university has continued to demonstrate its commitment to recruitment and retention of a diverse student population. Because CSULB has a culturally diverse undergraduate student population and because the university is located in one of the nation’s most demographically diverse population centers, unit programs have a diverse pool from which to recruit candidates. We have centralized recruitment and advising services for initial teacher preparation programs through the Teacher Preparation Advising Center (TPAC). This effort is significant because it allows us to provide consistent and timely advising information to candidates in initial teacher preparation programs. In the area of recruitment, we have funded an outreach staff to assist in recruitment efforts. These recruitment efforts have allowed us to present our programs to diverse prospective candidates since the school districts and community colleges to whom we have presented also serve very diverse student populations. An associate dean, through development of a recruitment plan, leads the efforts to recruit a well-qualified and diverse set of applicants to our initial and advanced programs.
Another method for recruiting, admitting, and retaining a diverse candidate population has been to offer multiple pathways for certification. In the late 1990s, when the southern California area was experiencing a critical shortage of teachers, CSULB developed a wide range of pathways for candidates to complete the Multiple Subject Program, as well as making the intern programs for Single Subject and Education Specialist more accessible for candidates. Within a short period of time we observed that some of the alternative pathways, as well as the internship credential pathways, were attracting a more diverse student population than our traditional pathways for initial teacher credentialing. The team approaches to support that these programs offer are essential components in retaining this diverse group as they begin meeting the daily demands of teaching while also completing the course requirements for each program.
One of our current recruiting efforts involves attracting greater numbers of candidates into the shortage areas of math and science. The targeted recruitment plan has several major thrusts: 1) Current undergraduate students on campus are targeted to increase the number of Foundation Mathematics Credential candidates in mathematics. In science, efforts are aimed at recruiting candidates for the Introductory Science Authorization. 2) Regular meetings of the university and Community College Partnership group are used to recruit candidates from the community college partners into the math and science teaching programs. 3) Current elementary teachers in local school districts are recruited to earn a secondary credential in mathematics or science.
Our continued support for bilingual credential programs, both the Spanish Bilingual Crosscultural Language and Academic Development (BCLAD) and the continued leadership of CSULB in the Asian BCLAD program, are evidence of our dedication to supporting diversity in programs and to increasing candidate diversity. Graduates of the Asian BCLAD programs—native speakers of Mandarin, Korean, Vietnamese, Tagalog, or Khmer—are highly sought by school districts throughout California, as well as in neighboring states.
The advanced (continuing) teacher preparation programs and programs for other school personnel regularly recruit diverse candidates. Each spring there is an extensive admission process for masters programs and advanced credential programs that ensures a high quality and diverse group of candidates for fall enrollment. The record of diversity for candidates admitted into the programs is good, as shown earlier. At the advanced level, there has also been support for bilingual education as well, and we have recently implemented a new Master of Arts Dual Language Development Program. A pilot cohort completed graduated in 2005, and a second cohort began in fall 2006.
Scholarship opportunities and such state programs as the CAL T Grant program and Assumption Program for Loans in Education (APLE) also help us to admit and retain a diverse population of candidates. CSULB is in year three of a $450,000 Robert Noyce Scholarship project, sponsored by the National Science Foundation, that is designed to recruit and support underrepresented candidates for secondary math and science teaching. Workshops sponsored by the Teacher Preparation Advising Center (TPAC) to help candidates prepare for the required California Basic Educational Skills Test, the California Subject Examinations for Teachers (CSET), and the Reading Instruction Competence Assessment (RICA) also provide support for candidates that affects retention of a diverse population of candidates.
Unit programs partner with over 50 local school districts to ensure that candidates engage in meaningful field experiences and clinical practice in diverse professional settings. These districts represent all societal strata in southern California. For a complete listing, refer to Table 4.18 (Student Demographics in Cooperating School Districts). Most local schools and districts exceed or are close to the state average for students receiving free or reduced lunch, English learners, and underrepresented groups. Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) is the largest district in the state with over 700,000 students, nearly 80% of whom receive free or reduced lunch, 43% are English learners, and 91% are from minority populations. The unit’s closest and largest school district partner is Long Beach Unified School District (LBUSD). LBUSD has over 90,000 students, of whom 69% receive free or reduced lunch, 26% are English learners, and 83% are from minority populations. The unit receives its largest percentage of undergraduate, credential program, and Master’s program students from LBUSD P-12 schools, the district is the site for the highest percentage of fieldwork activities in unit programs, and the district is the biggest employer of program graduates. Table 4.22 (Demographics of Schools with Large Numbers of Multiple and Single Subject Student Teachers, 2005-2006) shows the demographics of the local schools where we placed the highest number of elementary and secondary student teachers in the snapshot year 2005-2006. These are also districts that employ large numbers of our graduates and where large numbers of candidates in our advanced (continuing) teacher preparation programs and programs for other school personnel are employed. For a complete tabular display of field experiences in all unit programs, including hour requirements and descriptions of assignments, refer to Table 3.03 (Field Experiences and Clinical Practice in Unit Programs).
Candidates in our initial credential programs have a variety of field experiences prior to student teaching. The SERVE Program, beginning in 1995-1996, institutionalized a commitment from the faculty and our P-12 partners that all students completing the Liberal Studies undergraduate major subject (the primary major for candidates entering elementary teaching) would complete 120 hours of early field experiences in diverse urban classrooms. Candidates begin as early as their freshman year, doing three 40-45 hour placements, usually as literacy or math tutors.
Course-connected fieldwork ensures that initial credential candidates have extensive field experiences that provide them with the opportunity to develop competencies in teaching diverse student populations based upon the theories and practices they have studied in their coursework so that candidates are fully prepared for the contingencies of assuming full-time responsibilities for curriculum, instruction, and management during student teaching. In the Multiple Subject Program candidates engage in a minimum of 115 hours of early fieldwork during which at least one of their field experiences is in a cross-cultural classroom where at least 25% of the students are from a cultural, linguistic, racial, ethnic, or socio-economic background different from their own. The Single Subject Program requires a minimum of 105 hours of early field experiences that are designed to give candidates a variety of formative experiences in diverse public school settings. For example, in EDSE 435 (US Secondary Schools: Intercultural Education) candidates do a Cultural Plunge assignment in which they link their reading of Laurie Olson’s Made in America with experiencing an in-depth activity in a culture other than their own and outside the school setting. In the Education Specialist Program early field experiences include at least 10 brief experiences and one moderately long experience across varied educational settings and service delivery models, age groups, and across program competency areas and themes. ESCP candidates spend a minimum of 61 hours in early fieldwork.
California Teaching Performance Assessment, Tasks 1-4 (CA-TPA) ensure that candidates in the Multiple and Single Subject programs have multiple opportunities for substantial and significant experience with English learners, students with special needs, and students presenting other kinds of learning challenges. Each Task requires attention to two focal students who must be an English learner, a special needs student, or an otherwise challenging student. Each of the four Tasks requires candidates to adjust their teaching and assessment plan to accommodate the needs of an English learner and a special needs student or student presenting another learning challenge. Candidates must demonstrate an ability to promote learning for these students through the use of objective classroom achievement measures.
In advanced (continuing) programs and programs for other school personnel the knowledge, skills, and dispositions related to diversity are infused throughout the program. For example,
