Specific reasons underlying the finding of necessity:
At its April 2010 meeting, the Board of Regents established certain eligibility requirements to participate in the clinically rich teacher preparation pilot program, including certain curriculum requirements, a clinical component, mentoring and training requirements. As part of the eligibility requirements adopted in April 2010, program providers were required to complete at least one continuous school year of experience. In order to provide program providers with the flexibility they need to provide innovative approaches to this new pilot program, the proposed amendment amends the clinical experience requirement to allow providers to provide up to one continuous school year of clinical experience.
Emergency action is necessary at the February Board of Regents meeting in order to ensure that the rule remains continuously in effect until such time as it can be adopted as a permanent rule on March 3, 2011 after expiration of the 30-day public comment period for revised rule makings prescribed in the State Administrative Procedure Act.
To amend the clinical experience requirement to provide program providers with the flexibility they need to be innovative.
Text of emergency rule:
Subclause (3) of clause (c) of subparagraph (iv) of paragraph (5) of section 52.21 of the Regulations of the Commissioner of Education shall be amended, effective February 15, 2011, to read as follows:
(3) Clinically rich experience component. The clinical experience component of the program shall meet the following requirements:
(i) . . . .
(ii) Prior to assigning the candidate to a classroom, the institution shall enter into a written agreement with the high need school wherein the high need school shall agree to establish a plan for [at least] up to one continuous school year of mentored clinical experience by the assigned teacher-mentor for the candidate and support by a team comprised of a faculty member of the program, the school principal or designee, the assigned teacher-mentor, and a school curriculum supervisor or specialist.
(iii) The program shall ensure its candidates receive mentoring support by a teacher-mentor during the entire period they are assigned to the classroom and enrolled in the program, which shall [be at least] include up to one continuous school year of mentoring.
(iv) . . . .
This notice is intended
to serve only as a notice of emergency adoption. This agency intends to adopt the provisions of this emergency rule as a permanent rule, having previously submitted to the Department of State a notice of proposed rule making, I.D. No. EDU-47-10-00011-P, Issue of November 24, 2010. The emergency rule will expire April 15, 2011.
Text of rule and any required statements and analyses may be obtained from:
Christine Moore, NYS Education Department, 89 Washington Avenue, Albany, NY 12234, (518) 473-8296, email: cmoore@mail.nysed.gov
Regulatory Impact Statement
1. STATUTORY AUTHORITY:
Section 207 of the Education Law grants general rule-making authority to the Regents to carry into effect the laws and policies of the State relating to education.
Section 208 of the Education authorizes the Regents to award and confer diplomas and degrees on persons who satisfactorily meet the requirements prescribed.
Section 210 of the Education Law authorizes the Regents to register domestic and foreign institutions in terms of New York standards, and fix the value of degrees, diplomas and certificates issued by institutions of other states or countries and presented for entrance to schools, colleges and the professions in this state.
Section 214 of the Education Law provides that institutions of the university shall include all secondary and higher educational institutions which are now or may hereafter be incorporated in this state, and such other libraries, museums, institutions, schools, organizations and agencies for education as may be admitted to or incorporated by the university.
Section 216 of the Education Law authorizes the Regents to incorporate any university, college, academy, library, museum, or other institution or association for the promotion of science, literature, art, history or other department of knowledge, or of education in any way.
Section 224 of the Education Law prohibits any individual, partnership or corporation not holding university, college or other degree conferring powers by special charter from the Legislature or the Regents from conferring any degree or using the designation college or university unless specifically authorized by the Regents to do so.
Subdivision (1) of section 305 of the Education Law empowers the Commissioner of Education to be the chief executive officer of the state system of education and of the Board of Regents and authorizes the Commissioner to enforce laws relating to the educational system and to execute educational policies determined by the Regents.
Subdivision (2) of section 305 of the Education Law authorizes the Commissioner of Education to have general supervision over all schools subject to the Education Law.
Subdivision (7) of section 305 of the Education Law authorizes the Commissioner of Education to annul upon cause shown to his satisfaction any certificate of qualification granted to a teacher.
Subdivision (1) of section 3004 of the Education Law authorizes the Commissioner of Education to prescribe, subject to the approval of the Regents, regulations governing the examination and certification of teachers employed in all public schools in the State.
Subdivision (1) of section 3006 of the Education Law provides that the Commissioner of Education may issue such teacher certificates as the Regents Rules prescribe.
2. LEGISLATIVE OBJECTIVES:
The proposed amendment carries out the objectives of the above-referenced statutes by modifying the registration requirements in the Regulations of the Commissioner of Education for teacher education programs, by amending the eligibility requirements for the graduate level clinically rich pilot teacher preparation program.
3. NEEDS AND BENEFITS:
At its November 2009 and December 2009 meetings, the Board of Regents approved the conceptual framework for graduate level clinically rich teacher preparation pilot programs. At its April 2010 meeting, the Board approved an amendment to the Commissioner's regulations to establish a graduate level clinically rich teacher preparation pilot program, effective May 1, 2010.
The amendment established two tracks for the graduate level clinically rich program: 1) the Model A track is the residency program for candidates working with a teacher of record in a high need school; and 2) the Model B track is the residency program for candidates employed as teachers of record in a high need school who will be eligible to receive a Transitional B certificate upon completion of required introductory preparation, tests, and workshops. To ensure program quality, the regulatory amendment requires that the pilot program meet the general registration standards established by the Board of Regents for graduate curricula in terms of instructional time, faculty qualifications, and the rigor of curriculum.
The pilot program also includes components of effective residency programs supported by research findings and best practices, which include, among other requirements:
• Recruitment and selection for program candidates: the recruitment process will be highly selective to attract not only the highest caliber of candidates to the pilot program but also candidates with a strong commitment to high need schools.
• Collaboration between program providers and partnering high need schools or school districts: program providers shall execute a written agreement with partnering high need schools which specifies the roles of each partner in the design, implementation, and evaluation of the pilot programs.
• Recruitment, selection, training, and support for mentors: program providers shall collaborate with the high need schools to select mentors that are highly effective teachers and must provide mentors with continuous support and research-based training to support program candidates. Mentors will work collaboratively with faculty supervisors to evaluate candidates and provide feedback.
• Mentoring and support for candidates throughout the program and after program completion: Prior to assigning candidates to a classroom, program providers will enter into a written agreement with the high need schools specifying the mentoring plan. During the clinical experience, each candidate will be assigned a teacher-mentor and a support team comprised of a faculty member of the program, the school principal or designee, the assigned teacher-mentor, and a school curriculum supervisor or specialist. In addition, program providers must have a formal written agreement with partnering schools or school districts to provide continued mentoring support for program graduates during their first year of teaching.
The regulatory amendments adopted in April 2010 also required that the pilot programs include at least one continuous school year of mentored clinical experience, grounded in the teaching standards currently being developed, and centered on practicing research-based teaching skills that make a difference in the classroom.
A competitive bidding process will be implemented to select program providers for the graduate level clinically rich teacher preparation pilot program. In order to provide program providers with the flexibility they need to be as innovative as possible, the Department believes that the one school year requirement for clinical experience is too restrictive. Therefore, the proposed amendment changes the required clinical experience component of the pilot program to require up to one continuous school year of mentored experience.
4. COSTS:
(a) Cost to State government: The proposed amendment will not impose any additional costs on State government, including the State Education Department.
(b) Cost to local government: The proposed amendment will not impose any additional costs on local government.
(c) Cost to private regulated parties. The proposed amendment will not impose any additional costs on private regulated parties.
(d) Costs to the regulatory agency: As stated above in Costs to State Government, the amendment does not impose any additional costs on the State Education Department.
5. LOCAL GOVERNMENT MANDATES:
The proposed amendment provides some flexibility to local governments by allowing local governments to provide less than one school year of mentored clinical experience to candidates enrolled in a graduate level clinically rich teacher preparation program, as opposed to the prior requirement, which required them to provide at least one continuous school year of clinical experience.
6. PAPERWORK:
The proposed amendment does not impose any paper requirements.
7. DUPLICATION:
The amendment does not duplicate other existing State or Federal requirements.
8. ALTERNATIVES:
There were no significant alternative proposals considered.
9. FEDERAL STANDARDS:
There are no Federal standards that deal with graduate level clinically rich program requirements qualifying individuals to teach in the New York State public schools, the subject matter of this amendment.
10. COMPLIANCE SCHEDULE:
If adopted as an emergency measure at the November Regents meeting, the proposed amendment will become effective on November 19, 2010. It is anticipated that the proposed amendment will become effective as a permanent rule on March 30, 2011.
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
a) Small Businesses:
1. Effect of rule:
The purpose of the proposed amendment is to change the program registration standards for the clinically rich graduate level pilot program. Some of the institutions that are selected by the Board of Regents to participate in this pilot program may be small businesses.
2. Compliance requirements:
At its April 2010 meeting, the Board of Regents established certain eligibility requirements to participate in the clinically rich teacher preparation pilot program, including certain curriculum requirements, a clinical component, mentoring and training requirements. As part of the eligibility requirements adopted in April 2010, program providers were required to complete at least one continuous school year of experience.
In order to provide program providers with the flexibility they need to provide innovative approaches to this new pilot program, the proposed amendment amends the clinical experience requirement to allow providers to provide up to one continuous school year of clinical experience.
3. Professional services:
The proposed amendment does not require small businesses to contract for additional professional services to comply.
4. Compliance costs:
The proposed amendment does not impose any additional costs on small businesses.
5. Economic and technological feasibility:
See above response to compliance costs. The proposed amendment would not require schools or school districts to secure special technology to comply.
6. Minimizing adverse impact:
As stated above, the proposed amendment is permissive in nature. As part of the eligibility requirements adopted at the April 2010 Regents meeting, program providers were required to complete at least one continuous school year of experience.
In order to provide program providers with the flexibility they need to provide innovative approaches to this new pilot program, the proposed amendment amends the clinical experience requirement to allow providers to provide up to one continuous school year of clinical experience.
7. Small business participation:
The conceptual framework of the graduate level clinically rich teacher pilot program was shared with the State Professional Standards and Practices Board for Teaching and comments were solicited from this board. This is an advisory group to the Board of Regents and the Commissioner of Education on matters pertaining to teacher education, certification, and practice. The board has representatives from school districts across the State.
b) Local Governments:
1. Effect of rule:
The purpose of the proposed amendment is to establish program registration standards for a clinically rich graduate level pilot program and to authorize institutions, other than institutions of higher education, that are selected by the Board of Regents, to offer teacher preparation programs under this pilot program. High need schools and school districts may opt to participate and collaborate with institutions that are selected by the Board of Regents to participate in this program.
2. Compliance requirements:
At its April 2010 meeting, the Board of Regents established certain eligibility requirements to participate in the clinically rich teacher preparation pilot program, including certain curriculum requirements, a clinical component, mentoring and training requirements. As part of the eligibility requirements adopted in April 2010, program providers were required to complete at least one continuous school year of experience.
In order to provide program providers with the flexibility they need to provide innovative approaches to this new pilot program, the proposed amendment amends the clinical experience requirement to allow providers to provide up to one continuous school year of clinical experience.
3. Professional services:
The proposed amendment does not require schools or school districts to contract for additional professional services to comply.
4. Compliance costs:
The proposed amendment does not impose any compliance costs on local governments.
5. Economic and technological feasibility:
See above response to compliance costs. The proposed amendment would not require schools or school districts to secure special technology to comply.
6. Minimizing adverse impact:
As part of the eligibility requirements adopted in April 2010, program providers were required to complete at least one continuous school year of experience.
In order to provide program providers with the flexibility they need to provide innovative approaches to this new pilot program, the proposed amendment amends the clinical experience requirement to allow providers to provide up to one continuous school year of clinical experience.
7. Local government participation:
The conceptual framework of the graduate level clinically rich teacher pilot program was shared with the State Professional Standards and Practices Board for Teaching and comments were solicited from this board. This is an advisory group to the Board of Regents and the Commissioner of Education on matters pertaining to teacher education, certification, and practice. The board has representatives from school districts across the State.
Rural Area Flexibility Analysis
1. Types and estimate of number of rural areas:
The proposed amendment will impact institutions that elect to offer a clinically rich teacher preparation program, which may include colleges and universities and institutions other than institutions of higher education that are selected by the Board of Regents to participate in this program. Such institutions may include cultural institutions, libraries, research centers, and other organizations with an educational mission. The proposed amendment will also impact high need schools and school districts in New York State that elect to participate in this program. These high need schools and institutions may be located in the 44 rural counties with fewer than 200,000 habitants and the 71 towns and urban counties with a population density of 150 square miles or less.
2. Reporting, recordkeeping and other compliance requirements and professional services:
Any institution that participates in this pilot program will be required to provide up to one continuous school year of clinical experience to meet the eligibility requirements of this program.
3. Costs:
The proposed amendment does not impose any additional costs on regulated entities.
4. Minimizing adverse impact:
Implementation of the proposed rule will not have a negative impact on entities or individuals located in rural communities. The proposed amendment is permissive in nature. Only program providers that wish to offer a clinically rich principal preparation pilot program are required to meet the new requirements for such programs. High need schools and school districts that elect to participate in the pilot program will benefit by having access to a larger pool of teacher candidates, although they will have the expense of providing mentoring support.
Moreover, the proposed amendment provides flexibility to program providers located in all areas of the State, including rural areas. The proposed amendment changes the clinical experience component of the program to require program providers to provide up to one continuous school year of clinical experience.
5. Rural area participation:
The concept of the graduate level clinically rich pilot programs was shared with the State Professional Standards and Practices Board for Teaching and comments were solicited from this board. This is an advisory group to the Board of Regents and the Commissioner of Education on matters pertaining to teacher education, certification, and practice. The board has representatives who live and/or work in rural areas, including individuals who are employed as educators in rural school districts.
Job Impact Statement
The purpose of the proposed amendment is to amend the clinical experience component of the graduate level clinical rich pilot programs to allow program providers to offer less than a year of mentored clinical experience to provide program providers with the flexibility they need to be as innovative as possible.
Because it is evident from the nature of the rule that it will not have a substantial adverse impact on jobs and employment opportunities, no affirmative steps were needed to ascertain that fact and none were taken. Accordingly, a job impact statement is not required, and one has not been prepared.
