Commission on Teacher Credentialing

1900 Capitol Avenue Sacramento, CA 95811

(916) 324-8002

Fax (916) 324-8927

www.ctc.ca.gov

Professional Services Division

September 23, 2014

David Gordon, County Superintendent of Schools
Sacramento County Office of Education
10530 Mather Blvd.
Sacramento, CA 95655
Dear Dr. Gordon:
Thank you for your timely submission of your institutions biennial report. The Commission staff has had an opportunity
to review your submission and provides feedback to you at this time.
As you know, each institution is responsible for submitting aggregated candidate assessment and program effectiveness
data for all approved credential or certificate programs offered by the institution. The reports must include data for each
program approved by the CTC, an analysis of that data, and identify program improvements or modifications that would
be instituted to address areas of concern identified by the analysis of that data. Part B includes information from unit
leadership across all credential programs and revisions to this part of the report this past year were a result of discussions
held with the Committee on Accreditation over the last several years.
The Commission staff reviews each report submitted and provides feedback for your consideration. In reviewing the
reports, staff is looking for a few key components. Does the institution provide aggregated candidate data on 4-6 key
assessments for each credential area? Does the institution disaggregate the data based on delivery model to ensure that
key differences can be identified? Does the institution demonstrate that it uses assessments that are clearly based upon or
linked to competencies identified in the CTC adopted standards? Does the institution analyze the data and use the data to
make programmatic decisions? Did the program consider the feedback provided by CTC staff for its previous biennial
report submissions, if applicable, in developing this biennial report? Did the unit head closely review all reports and
discuss the results of program modifications?
Using these broad questions and others, the Commission staff provides comments for the program to consider. Please
note that none of the staff review comments are to be taken as an indication of whether standards are met or not met. The
information provided by your institution in the biennial reports will be maintained by the Commission. For those about to
begin the program assessment process, the biennial reports and CTC feedback are provided to the program assessment
reviewers for additional information about how your programs are meeting standards. In addition, the biennial reports and
feedback are provided to site visit teams as additional information to consider in making decisions on standards.
Biennial reports are a critical component of the accreditation system. Over the past few years, the Commission has
learned much about what makes for a robust, effective biennial report. The Commission would like to thank you for your
efforts in preparing your institutions 2013 report. If you have any questions about biennial report process, please feel
free to contact Cheryl Hickey at chickey@ctc.ca.gov.

Sincerely,

Cheryl Hickey
Administrator of Accreditation
Professional Services Division
Ensuring Educator Excellence

Sacramento County Office of Education

Biennial Report Response, For Reports Submitted in Fall 2014

Cohort Color: Indigo

CAEP: No

Components

Program(s)

Candidate/Program
Data Submitted

Evident/Meets Requirement

/- Present, but Insufficient

Comments/Additional Information Required

0

Missing/Not Evident

N/A Not applicable

Tier I
Preliminary
Administrative
Services
Credential

Data Presented
CPSEL Coursework Completion
Evaluation of Course
Effectiveness
Assessments/Data discussed but not
presented
End-of-Year Project And
Symposium (T1)

Context

Changes since last BR/SV

Assessments tied to CTC

Competencies

Sufficient # of
assessments

The preliminary and clear ASC programs are two separate

programs each of which are required to submit their own biennial
reports. Please include a Biennial Report, Section As for each
approved program in the future.

Aggregated data

Disaggregated data by
delivery model/pathway

NA

Analyzed/Discussed data

Modifications linked to data

Modifications identified by
Commission standards

The Biennial Report requires a program report(Part A) for each

approved program. The biennial report requires the submission of
aggregated data for 4-6 key assessments In your next biennial
report, please include aggregated candidate assessment and
program effectiveness data for the required number of key
assessments.

The candidate competency assessment used in the report focused

on completion rates rather than the competence demonstrated by
candidates. The Commission strongly urges the programs to

Fall 2013 Biennial Report

Components

Candidate/Program
Data Submitted

Program(s)

Evident/Meets Requirement

/- Present, but Insufficient

Comments/Additional Information Required

0

Missing/Not Evident

N/A Not applicable

identify assessment tools (e.g. candidate assessment #3) that can

be directly linked to candidate competencies outlined in the
program standards and/or by the institution.

Tier II Clear
Administrative
Services
Credential

Data Presented

CPSEL Course Completion

Descriptions of Practice
Assessments (TII)
Exit Interview (Tier II)
Workshop Feedback (Tier II)
Reflective Records (Tier II)
Mid-Program Review (Tier II)

Context

Changes since last BR/SV

Assessments tied to CTC

Competencies

Sufficient # of
assessments
Aggregated data

The preliminary and clear ASC programs are two separate

programs that are required to submit their own biennial reports.
Please include a Biennial Report, Section A for each approved
program in the future.

Disaggregated data by
delivery model/pathway

NA

Analyzed/Discussed data

Modifications linked to data

Modifications identified by
Commission standards

The inclusion of program effectiveness data such as the

workshop feedback is useful in determining program strengths
and weaknesses, however disaggregating by individual
workshop would provide more accurate information
Reviewers note that the modifications do not address the finding
that candidates need greater coach support in the Working with
Diverse Families and Communities course. This may be an area
in which the program may wish to further investigate.

Future biennial reports should link modification to Commission

Standards.
Gen Ed (MS/SS)

Data Presented

Fall 2013 Biennial Report

Context

Both the organization and the content of the report were easily

Components

Candidate/Program
Data Submitted

Program(s)

Evident/Meets Requirement

/- Present, but Insufficient

Comments/Additional Information Required

0

Missing/Not Evident

N/A Not applicable

Induction
Program

Education
Specialist Clear
Induction
Program

FACT completion
Continuum of Teaching Practice
Statewide Surveys (PT and SP used)
Assessment of SP Effectiveness
Midyear survey of SP and PT
BTSA Leadership Survey

Assessments/Data discussed but not

presented
Education Specialists portfolios and
competencies

Changes since last BR/SV

Assessments tied to CTC

Competencies

Sufficient # of
assessments

Aggregated data

Disaggregated data by
delivery model/pathway

Analyzed/Discussed data

Modifications linked to data

Modifications identified by
Commission standards

accessible and understandable with the action plan connected to

the findings. The selected assessments provide a well-rounded
look at the programs, and their candidates.

This report does not include two years of aggregated data. The
Commission expects that all Biennial Reports, with the exception
of new programs, will include a minimum of two years of
candidate and program data.

While the Commission understands the great overlap between the

two induction programs, it does require that data be
disaggregated by program (Ed Specialist, General Education). In
your next biennial report, submit a Biennial Report Part A for
each approved program

A robust biennial report includes both candidate assessment and

program effectiveness data. The Commission encourages the
program to include data from employer surveys, completers or
other post program information, in future reports to provide
additional information to inform the identification of areas of
strength, weakness, and program improvement.

Fall 2013 Biennial Report

Components

Candidate/Program
Data Submitted

Program(s)

Evident/Meets Requirement

/- Present, but Insufficient

Comments/Additional Information Required

0

Missing/Not Evident

N/A Not applicable

Preliminary
Multiple Subject
w/Intern

Data Presented

Context

NA

Changes since last BR/SV

NA

Assessments tied to CTC

Competencies

NA

Sufficient # of
assessments

Single Subject
Preliminary
Credential
(Intern options)

Data Presented

Assessments/Data discussed but not

presented

Fall 2013 Biennial Report

NA

Aggregated data

NA

Disaggregated data by
delivery model/pathway

NA

Analyzed/Discussed data

NA

Modifications linked to data

NA

Modifications identified by
Commission standards

NA

Context

NA

Changes since last BR/SV

NA

Assessments tied to CTC

Competencies

NA

Sufficient # of
assessments

NA

Aggregated data

NA

Disaggregated data by
delivery model/pathway

NA

Analyzed/Discussed data

NA

Modifications linked to data

NA

Modifications identified by

NA

This program is new. The Commission looks forward to a

description of the new data collection system that will be in place
for this program, as well as the aggregated candidate assessment
and program effectiveness data for 4-6 key assessments for this
new program in the next biennial report.

This program is new. The Commission looks forward to a

description of the new data collection system that will be in place
for this program, as well as the aggregated candidate assessment
and program effectiveness data for 4-6 key assessments for this
new program in the next biennial report.

Components

Candidate/Program
Data Submitted

Program(s)

Evident/Meets Requirement

/- Present, but Insufficient

Comments/Additional Information Required

0

Missing/Not Evident

N/A Not applicable

Commission standards
Designated
Subjects:
Supervision and
Coordination

Designated
Subjects: Special
Subjects

Data Presented
No Data was presented

Data Presented
No Data was presented
Assessments/Data discussed but not
presented

Fall 2013 Biennial Report

Context

Changes since last BR/SV

Assessments tied to CTC

Competencies

Sufficient # of
assessments

Aggregated data

Disaggregated data by
delivery model/pathway

Analyzed/Discussed data

Modifications linked to data

Modifications identified by
Commission standards

Context

Changes since last BR/SV

Assessments tied to CTC

Competencies

Sufficient # of
assessments

Aggregated data

Disaggregated data by
delivery model/pathway

Analyzed/Discussed data

Modifications linked to data

As an approved CTC program, a biennial report (Section A) is

expected from this program. Please have this data available for
review during the upcoming site visit.

As an approved CTC program, a biennial report (Section A) is

expected from this program. Please have this data available for
review during the upcoming site visit.

Components

Program(s)

Candidate/Program
Data Submitted

Evident/Meets Requirement

/- Present, but Insufficient

Comments/Additional Information Required

0

Missing/Not Evident

N/A Not applicable

Part B: Institutional Summary and Plan of Action

Modifications identified by
Commission standards

Graphic/outline of unit
assessment system

Actions taken based on data

and analysis

Implications related to
Common Standards based on
data

The Institutional Summary indicates that leadership has reviewed

the biennial report information submitted for all programs. It
demonstrates a thoughtful review of each programs report and
identifies areas of strength and areas in need of improvement and
identifies trends across programs within the institution.
Part B also requires a graphic or outline that provides an
overview of the Unit Assessment System. Please have this
available for review during the site visit.

Submission of a Biennial Report for each approved educator preparation program is required as part of the Commissions accreditation activities but does not, in and
of itself, imply that any of the Commissions Common or Program Standards are Met. The decision if each standard is met or not is the responsibility of the site visit
team.

Fall 2013 Biennial Report