Seattle Pacific University

Seattle Pacific University
Alternative Routes to Residency Certification
Program Proposal 2011
Submitted to the
Professional Educators Standards Board
of Washington
March 2011
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION 1 – PROGRAM 4
SECTION 2 – PROPOSAL CONTENTS 5
A. Need for Program 5
B. Market Analysis 6
1. Evidence of regional need for the program 6
2. The unique features of the ARC program design at SPU 9
3. The size and growth projections for the ARC program at SPU 11
SECTION 3 – COMMITMENT OF PARTNERS 12
A. District Need 12
B. Classroom Placement 13
C. Route 1 and Route 2 Placements 14
D. Selection of a Mentor Teacher 14
1. Evidence of teaching experience 14
2. Evidence of mentor training 14
3. Letters of recommendation 15
4. District plan for mentoring time 15
E. Field Experience Placements 16
1. Determining placements 16
2. Background check and fingerprinting 17
3. Brief description of the field experience 17
4. Roles, responsibilities, and expectations 18
2
F. Program Design 20
1. Detailed description of the routes structure 20
2. Description of the screening process 24
3. Teacher Development Plans 27
4. Strategies for recruiting candidates from under-represented populations 28
5. Enrollment projections by route 29
6. Description of mentoring components 30
7. Evidence of program plan for an open exit option (RCW 28A.020) 30
G. Organizational Capacity 31
1. Key personnel 31
2. Anticipated student-faculty ratio 31
3. Previous experience in offering an ARC program 31
H. Program Delivery 32
1. Cost for candidates 32
2. Length of program 32
3. Projected start date 32
4. Projected enrollment 32
5. Location 32
SECTION 4 – CONTACT INFORMATION 33
DISTRICT SUPPORT LETTERS AND CONTACT INFORMATION 34
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING 35
3
Section 1 – Program Information
Program Name: Alternative Routes to Certification

Institution: Seattle Pacific University
Type of certificate program: Residency Teacher Certificate
Routes Offered:  Route 2
 Route 3
 Route 4
Endorsement(s) for Teacher Preparation:
Elementary & Middle Level (For Alternative Routes: all K-8 endorsement candidates must be pursuing at least
one of the following shortage area endorsements along with the K-8 endorsement: Mathematics, Middle Level Math,
any Secondary Science, Middle Level Science, English Language Learner, Bilingual Education, Special Education or
a locally identified shortage area).
 Elementary (K-8) with:

 Mathematics  Middle Level Math  Middle Level Science
 English Language Learner  Bilingual Education  Special Education
 Science  Biology  Chemistry
 Earth & Space Science  Physics
Secondary (5-12):
 Science  Biology
 Chemistry  Earth & Space Science
 Physics  Mathematics
All-level (P-12) Endorsements (restricted to the following shortage areas):

 Special Education (Birth-12)
 Bilingual
 English Language Learners
Organization type:  Four-year independent college or university
4
Section 2 – Proposal Contents
A. Need for program
The Educator Supply and Demand Report in Washington State, 2006 Report (OSPI, 2007) concluded that
Washington is experiencing an increased demand, and an associated difficulty in finding qualified
candidates, in the high-need endorsement areas of special education, mathematics, and the sciences.
The report notes that these high-need areas tend to be the same across the state, although there are
some districts showing higher degrees of shortage.
Information segmented by Educational Service Districts indicates some variability across regions. While
certain endorsement areas are in short supply across the state, others show shortages in some ESDs but
are more balanced in other ESDs. It is clear that geographic location and geographic flexibility of the
candidates become critically important in understanding whether a particular school system is able to
hire a highly qualified candidate in a particular endorsement area.
Of the 49 educational roles cited in the report, the teaching areas with considerable shortage include
special education, mathematics, physics and chemistry. The teaching areas with some shortage include
science, middle level math, middle level science, biology, bilingual education, ELL, earth and space
science, music, DWL Spanish, German, French, and theatre arts. SPU is approved to offer endorsements
in all the above-mentioned endorsement areas.
This mirrors data offered by the U.S. Department of Education (Teacher Shortage Areas: Nationwide List
2010-2011; retrieved at www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ope/pol/tsa.doc) that suggest 15 areas in
shortage for the state of Washington. From this list, SPU is approved to offer endorsements in biology,
chemistry, earth and space science, mathematics, middle level math, middle level science, physics,
science, and special education.
As a premier national Christian university seeking to engage the culture and change the world, the
School of Education at Seattle Pacific University (SPU) is accredited and approved to prepare teachers in
the various endorsement areas cited. We aim to very specifically engage the educational community
where it lives, in schools and districts that desire our assistance and are willing to partner with us as we
prepare teachers to positively impact student learning. The school’s mission for graduating educators of
competence and character who are dedicated to service and leadership is well known in the state. In
addition, the reputation of the Alternative Routes to Certification (ARC) program at SPU continues to
develop positively as our graduates fulfill a critical function for the state in state-identified shortage
teaching areas.
B. Market Analysis
5
1. Evidence of regional need for the program
Seattle Pacific University was founded 120 years ago by Free Methodist pioneers who valued a non-
sectarian approach to education that welcomed all those seeking scholarly excellence rooted in the
Christian gospel. SPU is located in urban Seattle and the School of Education maintains strong ties with
local, urban school districts. Many other universities offer a teacher education program in the Seattle
area, either on their main campus (e.g. University of Washington-Seattle, University of Washington -
Bothell; Antioch University; City University of Seattle; Northwest University) or through a satellite site
(e.g. Central Washington University in Lynnwood; Central Washington University in SeaTac; Heritage
University in Seattle; Western Washington University in Seattle; and Western Washington University in
Everett). However as of the 2010-2011 school year, no other university serves the local Seattle-area
urban districts by means of an alternative route to certification teacher education program with as
many approved endorsements areas as SPU (see endorsement list in Section 1 above).
Our presence in this area has offered SPU the opportunity to partner with local districts and meet local
needs on an annual basis. A SPU partnership represents an agreement to work with a local school,
especially one serving traditionally disenfranchised populations. It is an agreement to work together
collaboratively to positively impact student learning in that school, while preparing highly qualified
teachers who may, preferably, gain employment with the school district.
Many schools express an interest to host ARC teacher-candidate interns for an entire year. A sampling
of letters of support is provided in the appendix. These schools have learned that the ARC coursework
helps interns understand the local school system and the unique demands that this setting offers. Our
emphasis on working with diverse learners and integrating technology as part of the learning process
appears to be well appreciated by our partnering schools. Indeed, our goal to “cluster place,” or locate,
preferably, five or more interns in a building afford us the opportunity to serve each school and their
unique needs individually.
That said, the ARC program has not limited itself to the urban school districts among which SPU finds
itself. We also seek to partner with those districts in which the program’s students live. The guiding
assumption behind this approach is to help address both the geographical shortages as well as any
recruitment or subject area teaching shortages being experienced by school districts throughout the
state. This approach has afforded SPU to serve school districts all along the I-5 corridor. Over the past
nine years, the ARC program has been working with teacher-candidates from the following Educational
Service Districts: Puget Sound ESD 121, Northwest ESD 189, Olympic ESD 114, and ESD 112 (Vancouver
area). A sampling of letters of support is provided in the appendix. The ARC program has also prepared
teachers for a number of state-approved private secular and sectarian schools. Table 1 provides ARC
partnership school districts by year.
6
Table 1
ARC Partnership School Districts by Year
Puget Sound ESD 121

2002- Highline Kent Lake Washington Mercer Island Renton
2003 Seattle Tacoma Snoqualmie Valley
Puget Sound ESD 121

Issaquah Northshore University Place Seattle Renton
2003- Northwest ESD 189

2004 Edmonds Lopez Island Mukilteo
Private Schools
Puget Sound ESD 121

Bellevue Enumclaw Highline Northshore Kent
Lake Washington Renton Seattle Tukwila
2005 Edmonds Everett Granite Falls Monroe Mukilteo
Private Schools
Puget Sound ESD 121

Bainbridge Island Bellevue Kent Mercer Island Seattle
Northshore Snoqualmie Valley Shoreline
Northwest ESD 189
2005- Edmonds Lakewood Mukilteo Mount Vernon Monroe
2006
Olympic ESD 114
Bremerton South Kitsap
Private Schools
Puget Sound ESD 121

Bellevue Federal Way Lake Washington Highline Kent
Mercer Island Seattle Snoqualmie Valley
2006-
Northwest ESD 189
2007
Everett Lopez Island Stanwood-Camano Mukilteo Monroe
Snohomish
7
Olympic ESD 114
North Kitsap
Private Schools
Puget Sound ESD 121

Bellevue Highline Issaquah Kent Seattle
Lake Washington Mercer Island Shoreline
2008 Edmonds Lopez Island Marysville Monroe
Private Schools
Puget Sound ESD 121

Bellevue Highline Issaquah Kent Seattle
Lake Washington Mercer Island Snoqualmie Valley Northshore Shoreline
2008- Northwest ESD 189 Olympic ESD 114
2009 Edmonds Everett Chimacum
Private Schools
Puget Sound ESD 121

Bellevue Federal Way Highline Issaquah Kent
Mercer Island Northshore Renton Seattle Tacoma
Tukwila
2009-
2010 Northwest ESD 189
Edmonds Everett Mukilteo
Private Schools
Puget Sound ESD 121

Auburn Bellevue Federal Way Highline Kent
Lake Washington Mercer Island Northshore Puyallup Renton
Seattle Shoreline Tacoma Tukwila
Northwest ESD 189
2010-
Edmonds Everett Marysville
2011
Olympic ESD 114 ESD 112
Bainbridge Island North Kitsap Camas
Private Schools
8
Confirmed:
2011- Puget Sound ESD121 Snoqualmie Valley

2012 Northwest ESD 189 Oak Harbor Lakewood (Smokey Point)
Olympic ESD 114 Mossyrock
2. The unique features of the ARC program design at SPU.
The ARC program at SPU integrates a residency teacher certification program with either a Master of
Arts in Teaching degree (M.AT.) or a Masters in Teaching Math and Science degree (M.T.M.S.),
depending on a teacher-candidate’s endorsement area. Eight unique features of the ARC program
design continue to draw high-quality applicants to SPU:
1. The possibility of achieving Washington State Residency Certification in one year.
2. Progression through the program as a cohort. All ARC students proceed through the
program as a cohort of 16-20 students grouped by endorsement area. This allows for
community building and collaboration opportunities among teacher-candidates who share
similar endorsement-related certification goals.
3. A one-year field-based experience with diverse learners. The ARC program strives to
strengthen its collaborative partnerships with K-12 schools, and especially with those
schools serving traditionally disenfranchised populations. In particular, the ARC program
emphasizes that teaching is a service field and believes that education can make a positive
difference in individual lives of students of all ethnic, racial, and cultural backgrounds as
well as those with special needs. It is, therefore, a goal for field experience placement to
provide all teacher-candidates with settings where students of varied ethnic, racial, and
cultural backgrounds are served. It is also a goal to provide all candidates with placements
where there are students who have been identified as exceptional, including special
education and highly capable students. These goals extend beyond placement to the
expectation that teacher candidates will demonstrate knowledge, skills, and attitudes for
serving diverse populations. The draw of this type of a field-based, teacher preparation
experience is perhaps the number one reason that applicants choose SPU for teacher
certification.
4. The possibility of completing either a Master of Arts in Teaching (MAT) or a Master of

Teaching Math and Science (MTMS) degree in conjunction with the teaching certificate.
Although it is assumed, completion of the master’s component is not obligatory.
Nevertheless, the possibility of earning a master’s degree while obtaining residency
certification through a field-based approach has proven to attract high quality candidates to
the ARC program at SPU. This has been especially true for those Route 3 candidates who
are transitioning from existing careers and for those Route 4 candidates already teaching in
9
the schools. In addition to gaining residency certification, these candidates often mention
that the possibility of completing a graduate degree was one of the factors that helped
attract them to teaching. This is, perhaps, the second most cited reason for choosing SPU
for teacher certification.
5. The possibility of certifying in two related endorsement areas. ARC Teacher-candidates may
request placement in two subject areas to work toward multiple endorsements if the
endorsements are related by Pathway 1 (e.g. chemistry and biology). The SPU Placement
Office works with a partnering district to confirm such an internship if both placements can
be found in one building. Teacher-candidates who seek multiple endorsements that are
related by Pathway 2 (e.g. mathematics and physics) are placed only if both placements can
be found in the same building. In every situation, all mentors receive appropriate training to
support their ARC teacher-candidate intern. (Refer to http://www.k12.wa.us/certification/
ProfEd/pubdocs/PathwayChart2010.pdf for further information regarding pathways to
endorsements.)
6. Personalized advisement and mentoring. An ARC cohort averages 16-20 students. This
guarantees a high degree of faculty attention and personalized advising assistance. This
level of attention and assistance reflects the program’s philosophy to meet the specific
certification requirements of its students.
7. Personalized Teacher Development Plan. ARC teacher-candidates work with the ARC
program director to develop an individualized certification plan. In doing so, ARC teacher-
candidates are allowed to waive coursework through transcript review of equivalent
coursework or demonstration of competency. For those teacher-candidates demonstrating
some, but not all, of the competencies required for a course, modified course sessions
covering only the content they need or allowing the teacher-candidates to engage in more
independent coursework is permitted. Related to this, applicants are aware that program
length is based on evidence of proficiency rather than hours of instruction. This option of an
early exit is a draw for many applicants, too.
8. Technology embedded in the ARC curriculum. The use and modeling of educational
technology in the ARC program better prepares teacher-candidates to use these and similar
technologies in their teaching to positively impact student learning. Those teacher-
candidates in the MTMS cohort have discipline-specific technology courses designed to
acquaint them with the latest educational technology for math and science pedagogy.
10
3. The size and growth projections for the ARC program at SPU.
The ARC program at SPU is based on a cohort model, with a cohort averaging between 16 – 20 students.
The sheer number of high quality applicants afforded us the opportunity to offer two cohorts in the
program from 2004 – 2009. As the reputation of the ARC program continued to develop, we expanded
to a third cohort in 2009. For 2011-2012, enrollment of 60 teacher-candidates in three cohorts is
projected, which represents maximum capacity for efficiently running this program at SPU. Table 2
reviews the number of interns according to route from 2002 - present.
Table 2
Enrollment of Teacher-Candidates Organized by Route
Number of
Year Route 2 Route 3 Route 4
Interns
2002-2003 18 7 11 NA
2003-2004 18 4 14 NA
2004-2005a 28 6 16 6
2005-2006 38 8 24 6
2006-2007 38 11 19 8
2007-2008 36 3 25 8
2008-2009 40 7 25 8
2009-2010b 53 5 34 14
2010-2011 55 3 45 7
2011-2012c 60 - - -
a
Given the number of high quality applicants it was decided to organize two cohorts in 2004-2005.
b
Given the number of high quality applicants it was decided to organize three cohorts in 2009-2010.
c
Projections based on recruitment data for three cohorts.
11
Section 3 – Commitment of Partners
A. District Need
A SPU partnership represents an agreement to work with a local school, especially one serving
traditionally disenfranchised populations. It is an agreement to work together collaboratively to
positively impact student learning in that school, and to simultaneously prepare highly qualified
teachers. As a result, partnering schools and districts may vary from year to year. In each situation, SPU
works to communicate clearly the differences between the ARC internship and a more traditional model
so that we can ensure that our high expectations for a quality internship experience are respected.
Table 1 (above) highlights the number of partnering school districts in the since the inception of the ARC
program at SPU in 2002.
As briefly highlighted in Section 2.B.1, the ARC program at SPU has not limited itself to the urban school
districts among which SPU finds itself. We also seek to partner with those districts in which the
program’s students live. The guiding assumption behind this approach is to help address both the
geographical shortages as well as any recruitment or subject area teaching shortages being experienced
by school districts throughout the state. By virtue of Route 2, 3, and 4 applicants approaching SPU for
residency certification in their home district, SPU aims to fulfill both state-identified shortage area and
geographic-specific shortage area needs.
Table 3 is of particular interest as it highlights ARC partnerships with school districts outside the Seattle
area. This table identifies the route of the teacher-candidate served and whether or not the partnership
in question helped address either a state-identified shortage area or a geographic shortage area.
Table 3
School district partnerships outside of the Greater Seattle area
State-Identified Geographic
Year School District Route
Shortage Area Shortage Area
2003-2004 Lopez Island 3 X
2004-2005 Enumclaw 4 X
Granite Falls 4 X
Monroe 3 X
Oak Harbor 3 X
2005-2006 Bremerton 4 X
Lakewood (Smokey Point) 4 X
Monroe 3 X
Mount Vernon 4 X
South Kitsap 2 X
Monroe 3 X
North Kitsap 3 X
12
Snohomish 3 X
Stanwood-Camano Island 2 X
Marysville 3 X
Monroe 3 X
2008-2009 Chimacum 2 X
Snoqualmie Valley 4 X
a
2010-2011 Camas 3 X
Marysville 2 X
North Kitsap 3 X
b
2011-2012 Lakewood (Smokey Point) 4 X
Mossyrock 4 X
Oak Harbor 4 X
a
Teacher-candidates who will certify by June 2011.
b
Confirmed enrollment in the 2011-2012 ARC program.
B. Classroom Placement
ARC teacher-candidates are required to maintain the same school hours as their mentor teacher and
they are instructed to use their common preparation periods and before/after school time for mentor –
mentee interactions. As the partnership permits, the ARC program follows a CoTeaching model where a
mentor teacher and a teacher-candidate are both actively involved and engaged in all aspects of
instruction. As a team, they share the planning, organization, delivery and assessment of instruction.
This model assumes an extended period of observation, one-on-one work, and small group work, too.
The teacher-candidates develop observation plans under the guidance of their SPU course instructors to
help them focus their observations of their mentors and the classroom. Course assignments also
require the intern to initiate specific discussions with their mentors.
Route 2 and 3 interns are placed in the same room as the mentor teacher. This close proximity allows
for frequent observation, as well as numerous informal exchanges about techniques and methods of
instruction. Partner districts agree to allow intern placement for an entire year and also agree to accept
the interns as faculty members for non-instructional activities such as in-service, faculty meetings,
community service, building and district committee work, etc.
Route 4 interns already have full responsibility for a classroom under a conditional or emergency
certificate. Although they don’t have the luxury of two teachers in one room, partnership districts do
agree to assist in identification of highly qualified master teachers to serve as a mentor within the same
building. Mentor teachers are released through planning period or other administrative method to
observe the Route 4 interns on a regular basis providing at least weekly written and oral feedback to
the intern.
13
C. Route 1 and Route 2 Placements
Route 2 teacher-candidates are accepted into the ARC program on the condition that they can retain
employment as an employed staff member within their district. To help us in verifying this
arrangement, a potential Route 2 applicant must include must include the following two letters of
recommendation in his/her application file:
1) A letter from the classroom teacher or direct supervisor stating his/her willingness to
support and mentor the teacher-candidate, and
2) A letter from the building principal stating his/her support and detailing the conditions, if
any, under which the teacher-candidate will be allowed to complete an internship while
employed as a Route 2 intern.
The Placement Office Coordinator then follows-up with the building principal and supervisor to
formalize the internship agreement.
D. Selection of a Mentor teacher
1. Evidence that the Mentor teacher has had a minimum of three years teaching
experience and holds a continuing or professional certificate.
Mentor teachers in the ARC program are selected in cooperation with the school district based on an
established record of successful teaching experience and a willingness to work with a beginning
teacher. A special dedication to the teaching profession is usually recognized in the mentor teacher as
well as a willingness to share responsibility and recognition with a beginner.
To be selected to work with a teacher-candidate, ARC mentor teachers possess a valid Washington
teacher certificate (either continuing or professional) and have a minimum of three years of successful
full-time teaching experience at the current level or subject area.
2. Evidence that the Mentor teacher has completed formalized Mentor training either
through district, private organizations or institutions, university, OSPI mentor academies,
or through online modules.
The ARC program at SPU maintains that strong mentor training is vital to pre-service teacher
development and overall program success. Mentor training is individually designed to enhance the
mentor teacher’s ability to communicate effectively and clearly with his or her intern about
performance as a teacher. Since some of the ARC mentors have had several ARC students over the
years and many have had none, each mentor’s training is personalized to his or her specific
characteristics as a teacher, the professional growth of the intern, and their particular teaching context
together. One of the key characteristics of the ARC mentoring program is that is designed around the
particular needs of an ARC mentor which is often quite different than teachers mentoring a first year
teacher or working with a traditional student teacher.
The aim of ARC mentor training is to assist mentors in the provision of feedback to their interns around
their performance of the state teaching competencies (WAC 181-78A-270) in the context of their
placement. Designed to be minimally intrusive in the mentor teacher’s life, the mentor training
14
provided by the ARC is delivered through individual contact where each mentor teacher has regular
contact with the teacher-candidate supervisor as well as the Director of the ARC program.
ARC-sponsored mentor training consists of the following elements:

1. Extensive on-site, individualized mentoring support by the intern’s university supervisor who
has received training in supporting mentor teachers.
2. Training in the collaborative CoTeaching method of planning and instruction.
3. Access to resources on key mentoring skills, new teacher development, and adult learning.
4. Provision of a Mentor Manual.
5. Instruction in the use of the new Washington Teacher Performance Assessment (WATPA) for
formative assessment purposes and in preparation for summative evaluation using the WATPA
by the university supervisor.
In addition to the ARC sponsored mentor training program, mentor teachers are also encouraged to
attend those training sessions offered by their local school district.
In exchange for serving as a mentor and participating in the mentoring activities, mentors will receive a
$500.00 per year stipend, and continuing education course credit offered through the Center for
Professional Learning on campus.
3. A letter of recommendation from the Mentor teacher’s Principal or other District

designee that nominates them for Mentor teacher designation for a yearlong Alternative
Route candidate placement.
In addition to those attributes listed in Section 3.D.1 above, ARC mentor teachers are recommended
and approved by a building administrator to serve as a mentor teacher. Building administrators are
asked to identify teacher leaders who possess teaching skills that qualify the teacher to be a suitable
model for a teacher candidate. In addition, these potential mentor teachers must possess classroom
management skills that qualify the teacher to be a suitable model for a teacher candidate; possess
interpersonal and communication skills demonstrated in positive working relationships with others in
the school; have the desire to work with a beginning teacher; be willing to invest time and effort for
positive growth and development of another teacher; understand that teaching competence develops
over a period of time as a candidate gains experience and confidence; be willing to give the teacher-
candidate gradually increasing teaching and management responsibilities; and be willing to share with
the teacher-candidate both responsibility and recognition for accomplishment.
4. District plan for providing significant time for Mentor teachers to spend with alternative
route teacher candidates throughout their internship.
ARC interns are required to maintain the same school hours as their mentor teacher and they are
instructed to use their common preparation periods and before/after school time for mentor – protégé
interactions.
15
Route 2 and 3 interns are placed in the same room as the mentor teacher. This close proximity allows
for frequent observation, as well as numerous informal exchanges about techniques and methods of
instruction. Partner districts agree to allow intern placement for an entire year and also agree to accept
the interns as faculty members for non-instructional activities such as in-service, faculty meetings,
community service, building and district committee work, etc.
Route 4 interns in the ARC program already have full responsibility for a classroom under a conditional
or emergency certificate. Although they don’t have the luxury of two teachers in one room, partnership
districts do agree to assist in identification of highly qualified master teachers to serve as a mentor
within the same building. Mentor teachers are released through planning period or other administrative
method to observe the Route 4 interns on a regular basis providing at least weekly written and oral
feedback to the intern.
5. District acknowledgement that Alternative Route 4 candidates are eligible to be hired as

the teacher of record and are considered Highly Qualified Teachers (HQT) under
Federal No Child Left Behind (NCLB) regulations.
This item no longer applies to Route 4 teacher-candidates.
E. Field Experience Placements
1. Determining Placements.
All Seattle Pacific University School of Education teaching internship placements are designed to be
consistent with state law and School of Education policies. This includes being aware of implications of
WAC 181-44 and acknowledging that a properly certificated teacher must be responsible for the
classroom at all times. In practice, this means the mentor teacher is present in the room to supervise
the work of the teacher-candidate early in the experience, and that throughout the experience, a
certificated teacher is present in the building who retains legal responsibility for the students and the
classroom.
The School of Education Placement Office is responsible for all teacher-candidate internship
placements. As a result, all placements are considered to be tentative until they are confirmed by the
Placement Office. The Field Placement Coordinator within this office is responsible for initiating contact
with a school district, or as the district policy requires, with the local school directly. The Field
Placement Coordinator initiates individual contact to develop a match between the candidate needs
and endorsements, and the district needs for teachers and assistance in the building. The Field
Placement Coordinator maintains a contact list of district and/or school personnel with whom such
contact is initiated when requesting a placement.
As required by WAC 181-78A-125, SPU possesses field agreements on file with a number of districts
who have agreed to work with ARC teacher-candidates. Each agreement assures that the internship
placement is in compliance with the state law and university policies. Our placement goal is to “cluster
16
place,” or locate, preferably, five or more interns in a building so that we can more effectively partner
with a district to serve the school and their unique needs individually.
Once admitted to the program, an ARC teacher-candidates are asked to complete the Teacher-
Candidate Information Form and submit this form, along with a digital copy of his/her résumé, to the
Placement Office. This information is shared with a potential district and/or school contact who
reviews it in consideration of school goals, staffing needs, and qualified potential mentor teachers. The
list of mentor attributes shared in response to item Section D is provided for appropriate reference and
consideration, too.
The Placement Office will notify the teacher-candidate when a tentative placement has been made.
The teacher-candidate will then arrange to meet with the potential mentor teacher for a pre-internship
interview. This interview occurs to ensure the acceptance of the placement by both the teacher-
candidate and the mentor teacher. Teacher-candidates and mentors are asked to confirm that the
potential internship site is not a situation in which a personal relationships or previous experience could
interfere with an objective evaluation.
2. Background check and fingerprinting.
All applicants to the ARC program are asked to complete the OSPI Character and Fitness Supplement as
part of their application package. Upon admission to the program, the necessary fingerprint and
background check paperwork is completed and submitted. The School of Education Certification Office
monitors and confirms the results of the checks conducted through the Office of the Superintendent of
Public Instruction. This same office assures that the appropriate clearance remains in effect throughout
the teacher-candidate’s time in the ARC program. Under no circumstances can a teacher-candidate’s
official ARC internship begin until SPU receives confirmation of the candidate’s fingerprint and
background clearance from OSPI, and official verification of passing score(s) on the WEST-E
examination(s) for all requested endorsement area(s).
3. Brief description of the field experiences.
SPU possesses Statements of Understanding (field agreements) with a number of districts (as per WAC
181-78A-125) who have agreed to work with ARC teacher-candidates. These agreements assure that
internship placement is in compliance with the state law and university policies. It is understood that an
ARC placement is a year-long mentored internship with an option for an early-exit under RCW
28A.660.040 following a minimum of one-half of a school year successful internship experience.
The ARC placement goal is to “cluster place,” or locate, preferably, five or more interns in a building so
that we can more effectively partner with a district to serve the school and their unique needs
individually. To this extent, the field agreements state that the School of Education will confer with the
school district about numbers and types of ARC teacher-candidates it might accept for placement in the
district, the nature of school district needs, and its expectations of ARC teacher-candidates in meeting
those needs.
17
These agreements also confirm that the School of Education will provide the school district with
appropriate information about each ARC teacher-candidate’s professional interests and background,
and that ARC teacher-candidates will not be placed in settings in which personal relationships or
previous experiences could interfere with objective evaluation of candidates. Furthermore, the School
of Education provides verification that the ARC teacher-candidates are sufficiently prepared and
qualified to participate in site-based experiences. This verification includes Washington State Patrol and
Federal Bureau of Investigation fingerprint clearance and notification from the Office of the
Superintendent of Public Instruction that the teacher-candidate is cleared for such placement.
Fingerprint and character clearance under RCW 28A.410.010 remains current at all times during the
field experience.
4. Roles, responsibilities, and expectations.
The following provides an overview of the roles, responsibilities and expectations for ARC teacher-
candidates, SPU university field supervisors and mentor teachers. Greater details of the following roles,
responsibilities and expectations are formalized in both the SPU Residency Teacher Certification Manual
and the ARC Mentor Handbook; the former being provided to the ARC teacher-candidate and the latter
provided to the mentor teacher. Various planning, teaching and documentation expectations and tasks
are also included in these two resources. ARC teacher-candidates receive their resource when they
begin the ARC program. Mentor teachers receive the handbook once the internship placement has
been formalized. Copies are also made available to building administrators as requested. The ARC
program director and SPU Placement Office receive confirmation that mentor teachers understand and
will comply by these roles, responsibilities and expectations when they return their necessary mentor
teacher paperwork to the SPU Placement Office.
ARC Teacher-Candidates. ARC teacher-candidates are expected to teach using the co-teaching model
and complete all appropriate requirements related to this model. ARC Teacher-Candidates begin their
internship by serving a role as a support teacher in the classroom. This includes observing and assisting
the mentor teacher until gradually assuming full teaching responsibilities. As more teaching and
decision-making responsibilities are assumed, the teacher-candidate becomes the lead teacher.
Although the teacher-candidate is a learner, it is important from the beginning for the teacher-
candidate to convey a teacher image to school personnel and the students. Professional behavior and
competent performance of responsibilities help convey a teacher image. For example, the following
professional responsibilities are expected of all ARC teacher-candidates:
 The ARC teacher-candidate is expected to realize that he/she is under the direction of both the
mentor teacher and the university field supervisor and is, therefore, required to accomplish the
tasks that are assigned by them.
 The ARC teacher-candidate is expected to contribute to the class by sharing ideas and actively
supporting the mentor teacher and others in the classroom and school setting.
 The ARC teacher-candidate is expected to convey an interested and enthusiastic attitude
regarding classroom/school activities.
 In addition, the ARC teacher-candidate is expected to demonstrate professionalism by
accomplishing tasks thoroughly and on time, taking initiative where it is appropriate, being
dependable, conveying a positive attitude of responsibility toward faculty meetings, parent-
teacher meetings, school programs, etc., being punctual to school, meetings, and
18
appointments, including arriving early and staying late as appropriate, and presenting a
professional and appropriate appearance.
A successful ARC internship is grounded in effective communication between the teacher-candidate and
the mentor teacher. For example, the teacher-candidate is expected to cooperate in arranging
convenient conferencing times with his/her mentor teacher in order to talk about teaching methods
and the students’ progress. They are expected to demonstrate interest by asking questions, seeking
clarification, and offering suggestions, and attend all individual and/or small group sessions as called by
the university field supervisor. They are asked to communicate regularly and openly with the university
coordinator regarding the assigned teaching schedule, progress being made, and problems as they may
occur. Overall, they should demonstrate a willingness to implement improvements suggested by the
mentor teacher and/or university coordinator.
ARC University Field Supervisors. ARC university field supervisors are expected to maintain a highly
frequent internship visitation schedule throughout the year-long internship. During their visits, they are
expected to observe regularly teacher-candidates in action, debrief with both teacher-candidates and
mentor teachers, review teacher-candidate progress and, if applicable, any problems with the mentor
teacher, assist or facilitate the mentor-protégé relationship as needed, and confer with building
administrators as necessary.
Mentor teachers. The mentor teachers in the ARC program have been selected by building
administrators to work with an ARC teacher-candidate because of an established record of successful
teaching experience and a willingness to work with a beginning teacher. A special dedication to the
teaching profession has been recognized in the mentor teacher as well as a willingness to share
responsibility and recognition with a beginner.
Mentor teachers are expected to demonstrate the following while working with his/her ARC teacher-
candidate:
 Effective teaching and classroom management skills that qualify him/her to be a suitable model
for a teacher-candidate.
 Positive interpersonal and communication skills evidenced in positive working relationships
with others in the school.
 A desire to work with a beginning teacher.
 An understanding that teaching competence develops over a period of time as the beginner
gains experience and confidence.
 A willingness to invest time and effort for positive growth and development of another teacher.
 A willingness to give the teacher-candidate gradually increasing teaching and management
responsibilities.
 A willingness to share with the teacher-candidate both responsibility and recognition for
accomplishment.
For the teacher-candidate’s field experience success to be optimum, the mentor teacher needs to be
able to balance support for the teacher-candidate with enough freedom so that independence is
possible. The amount of support and assistance, while abundant at first, should be gradually decreased
as the teacher-candidate gains experience and confidence. For example, the following professional
responsibilities are expected of all mentor teachers:
19
 The mentor teacher is expected to confer with his/her protégé on a daily basis to plan the
teaching schedule.
 The mentor teacher is expected to provide guidance for teaching assignments including content
and techniques.
 The mentor teacher is expected to allow the teacher-candidate to try some methods and
techniques gained from other sources as he/she becomes more confident and secure.
 The mentor teacher is expected to preview and suggest revisions on the teacher-candidate’s
lesson plans so that they meet the mentor’s approval prior to the actual teaching.
 The mentor teacher is expected to provide constructive criticism with concrete, specific
suggestions for improvement as well as commendation.
 The mentor teacher is expected to evaluate through frequent informal conferences with the
intern and periodical formal conferences with the teacher-candidate and university field
supervisor.
Overall, the mentor teacher serves as the teaching model for the teacher-candidate. In this capacity, the
mentor teacher becomes the teacher-candidate’s closest advisor.
As the mentor teacher considers his/her students and their parents, mentor teachers need to
emphasize to all that co-teaching will be advantageous with another teacher in the classroom. The
additional teacher can provide more help for individuals in the class and enriched educational
opportunities. The parents should be informed that a teacher-candidate will be participating in the
school’s instructional program. It is important that the parents understand that the teacher-candidate
works under close supervision of the mentor teacher and a qualified university field supervisor.
5. Other provisions.
There are no other provisions that currently apply to field experience placements in the ARC program.
F. Program Design
1. A detailed description of how the routes will be structured and operated by the
partnership.
The ARC program at SPU integrates a residency teacher certification program with either a Master of
Arts in Teaching degree (M.AT.) or a Masters in Teaching Math and Science degree (M.T.M.S.),
depending on a teacher-candidate’s endorsement area. The certification component of the program is a
one year, internship-based program of graduate-level study leading to recommendation for Washington
State Residency Certification. Students normally complete the certification component of the program
before enrolling in the master’s component the summer immediately following their internship.
Although it is assumed, completion of the master’s component is not obligatory.
The ARC program at SPU is designed to serve Route 2, 3, and 4 candidates. All ARC students proceed
through the program as a cohort. An ARC cohort averages 16-20 students. This guarantees a high
20
degree of faculty attention and personalized advising assistance. This level of attention and assistance
reflects the program’s philosophy to meet the certification requirements of its students by offering a
highly individualized program based on their personalized Teacher Development Plan (TDP). Cohorts are
grouped by endorsement areas, rather than route designation. This allows for rich collaborative
experiences and networking opportunities among teacher-candidates who share similar endorsement-
related certification goals.
The ARC program is a full-time, internship-focused, performance-based program that is considered to

be very thorough and quite intense. Through the preparation of a teacher-candidate’s TDP, teacher-
candidates can use past professional and educational experience as appropriate teacher-based
evidence of proficiency to demonstrate competency related to state residency certification standards
(WAC 181-78A-270). The TDP also delineates remaining competencies and outlines the appropriate
evidence and coursework needed to document proficiency on the residency certification standards. For
institutional administrative purposes, state residency certification standards have been carefully
matched with content and course titles from either the MAT or MTMS degrees so that the teacher-
candidate can receive equivalent credit and transcript documentation reflecting preparation in a course
area as it applies to the respective graduate degree.
The ARC program consists of four elements. These elements include a blend of face-to-face, online, and
field-based coursework. During the academic year, the on-campus classes meet one night every two
weeks and are structured to be more independent and performance-based than regular classes in the
traditional certification programs. The online classes take place throughout the internship, thereby
reducing commute time to and from campus. These courses allow ARC teacher-candidates to work in a
virtual environment and benefit from asynchronous discussion formats. Field-based classes allow the
teacher-candidates to observe course concepts applied in the classroom and to engage professionals in
learning-focused discussions. All courses are organized so that ARC teacher-candidates can capitalize on
the opportunity for the immediate application of knowledge and skills in their internship setting.
ARC teacher-candidates are allowed to waive coursework through transcript review of equivalent
coursework or demonstration of competency. For those teacher-candidates demonstrating some, but
not all, of the competencies required for a course, modified sessions covering only the content they
need or allowing the teacher-candidates to engage in more independent coursework is permitted. This
is clearly specified in their TDP.
The Orientation Element (equivalent to 7 credits on the teacher-candidate’s university transcript)

comprises two courses that begin and end the certification component of the program. All ARC teacher-
candidates take these courses, regardless of endorsement area. Introduction to Teaching orients
teacher-candidates to the ARC program, to the performance-based teacher certification standards, and
to the development of their individualized TDP. The TDP, then, controls the rest of the program. The
orientation element also includes Leadership in Teaching, which is designed as a capstone experience to
the ARC program. This course provides the opportunity to use previous coursework and experiences
from the classes and internship experiences to develop tentative answers to challenges encountered in
teaching. ARC Teacher-Candidates are asked to reflect upon significant events, knowledge gained
throughout the program, and their successes, challenges, disappointments and surprises during their
internships. This helps them draft their professional development plan as a teacher.
In the Internship Element (equivalent to 14 credits on the teacher-candidate’s university transcript) ARC
teacher-candidates use their content and pedagogical knowledge and skill in school site observation
21
and teaching experiences. The internship is a vital, integrative experience in which they are paired with
a mentor teacher and conduct supervised teaching in a school setting over the course of an entire
school year (3 quarters, September – June, 5 days a week). For Route 2 teacher-candidates, the
internship is developed to include the roles and responsibilities associated with their classified staff
positions. Utmost attention is paid to ensure that these teacher-candidates fulfill their existing job
requirements during their internship. For Route 3 teacher-candidates, the internship typically follows a
CoTeaching model where a mentor teacher and a teacher-candidate are both actively involved and
engaged in all aspects of instruction. As a team, they share the planning, organization, delivery and
assessment of instruction. This model assumes an extended period of observation, one-on-one work,
and small group work, too. For Route 4 teacher-candidates, the internship is developed around their
current instructional load and includes opportunities for consultation and supervision by their mentor
teachers in the building. All ARC teacher-candidates are also expected to help out after school hours
just as any new teacher would.
The Foundations Element of the program (8 credits) provides teacher-candidates with a broad base of
information about education and the nature of students and society. Courses include Learners in
Context, Diversity in America, and Professional Issues. All ARC teacher-candidates take these courses,
regardless of endorsement area.
During the Application Element (12 credits) students acquire knowledge in the use of instructional and
management strategies. Depending on endorsement area, these courses include Inquiry, Teaching and
Assessment Methods, Classroom Management, an elective in educational technology, and field-based
content area methods.
Some of the following endorsement-specific courses are worth noting:
1. Teacher-candidates working towards an endorsement in Special Education have the following

Special Education-focused coursework:
a. Special Education Assessment – This courses teaches diagnostic and evaluative
procedures commonly used with exceptional children. It Includes construction of
criterion referenced tests and curriculum based assessment; the use and interpretation
of formal and informal tests, and procedures and related ethics procedures, and related
issues.
b. Individual Education Plans – This course centers on the interaction of the disabled child
with the school. Topics include federal and state regulations for the education of the
disabled; procedures for referral, diagnosis and placement; formation of individual
education programs, service models, task analysis and sequencing of skills; formation
and evaluation of behavioral objectives; selection of instructional materials and
methodology; and classroom organization.
c. Issues in Special Education – This course explores major trends and issues affecting
special education, including the rights of the disabled, emerging trends in educational
services and major issues surrounding the quality of life of disabled individuals.
2. Teacher-candidates working towards endorsements in mathematics or any of the sciences have

the following mathematics-science focused coursework:
a. Inquiry, Teaching, and Assessment Methods for Math and Science I - The first of a four-
course sequence addressing general and content-specific teaching methods, standards-
based assessment, and professional issues for math and science teachers. This course
22
focuses on planning for instruction, inquiry-based teaching strategies, and introduction
to state and national math and science standards. This course includes microteaching.
b. Inquiry, Teaching, and Assessment Methods for Math and Science II – This course is the
second of a four-course sequence. It focuses on content-specific instructional
strategies; formative assessment, including analysis of student work; structured
classroom observations; and introduction to professional organizations.
c. Inquiry, Teaching, and Assessment Methods for Math and Science III – This course is the
third of a four-course sequence. It focuses on assessment, particularly development of
skills and judgment needed to integrate assessment into instruction; and analysis of
teaching practice.
d. Inquiry, Teaching, and Assessment Methods for Math and Science IV – This course is the
fourth of a four-course sequence. It focuses on research in improving teaching,
including choice of effective instructional strategies; reflection on the relationship
between theory and practice; planning for ongoing professional development, and
other professional issues.
e. Educational Technology for Math & Science – This course provides experience in the
use of technology to solve problems and enhance teaching in math and science. It
includes exploration and evaluation of currently available resources and general
principles for the choice and use of emerging technologies.
f. Introduction to STEM Education Research – This course investigates research methods
and findings in math and science education, including research into student thinking
and how people learn, curriculum design, instructional strategies, and assessment
methods.
An optional fifth Master’s Element of the program provides 15 credit hours of enrichment courses for
teacher-candidates to enhance their knowledge in pedagogy, curriculum, educational psychology,
ethics, exceptionality, and research.
The ARC program begins with an intensive, five-week summer academy. During this time teacher-
candidates attend orientation sessions, prepare their TDP, and take coursework in General Inquiry
Teaching and Assessment Methods, Classroom Management and in Professional Issues. Students are
expected to report to their internship site following the same schedule as their mentor teacher. All
courses are taught by SPU faculty members or highly recommended practitioners from the field.
Program length is based on evidence of proficiency rather than hours of instruction and is, therefore,
determined by the time required for ARC candidates to demonstrate competency related to state
residency certification standards (WAC 181-78A-270). As such, the ARC program does allow for those
students demonstrating competency to exit the program early after a minimum of half a school year (18
weeks).
A web-based portfolio demonstration of knowledge, skills, and appropriate teacher- and student-based
evidence of positive impact, including results generated from applying the Washington Teacher
Performance Assessment, is used to assess proficiency.
23
2. Description of the screening process for applicants to alternative route programs,
including entry requirements specific to each route, advising and assessment of
candidates’ previous work experience.
The screening process for the ARC program seeks to admit only the most highly qualified candidates.
Whenever possible, this process also seeks to increase the number of teacher-candidates from under-
represented populations and admit eligible veteran or National Guard members.
Potential applicants learn about the ARC program through a variety of media including print and web
resources. The PESB Pathways to Teaching website is often cited as a first point of information
regarding the program. In addition to semi-annual open house events, applicants also have access to
the School of Education representative in the Graduate Center and to the ARC program chair for direct
communication and informal meetings.
The recruitment focus is for those potential applicants who satisfy the state’s eligibility criteria and
entry requirements as potential Route 2, 3, or 4 applicants. Priority admission status is first given to
those Route 2, 3 and 4 applicants who are seeking residency teacher certification in a state-identified,
teaching shortage area. Admission is then considered for those applicants seeking residency
certification in a geographic shortage area. It is then extended to those high quality Route 3 and 4
applicants seeking endorsements with a secondary or K-12 grade level designation. Final consideration
is given to those high quality applicants seeking endorsements in non-state-identified teaching shortage
areas. Table 4 provides a list of endorsement areas granted for the years 2002 – 2011, including a
projection for 2011-2012. Of particular interest is noting the number of secondary/K-12 subject-area
endorsement requests, such as DWL Spanish, DWL Japanese, Family and Consumer Sciences, Theater,
and Visual Art in Table 4. At least 90% of these endorsements have been awarded to Route 4 teacher-
candidates from partnering schools and districts.
Table 4
Endorsements Awarded through the ARC Program
Endorsement Areas
Year Geographic
Subject Shortagea Secondary/K-12 Subjectc
Shortageb
2002- Mathematics General Science

2003 Special Education ESL
2003- Mathematics Physics DWL Spanish

English
2004 Special Education Chemistry Visual Art
Mathematics Physics English Language Arts

2004-
Chemistry General Science Music DWL French DWL Spanish
2005
Special Education ESL Visual Art
24
Special Education Mathematics
Physics Chemistry English
2005-
General Science Biology Social Studies Health & Fitness
2006
Earth & Space Science ESL Visual Art
MY Math/Science
Special Education Mathematics English Music DWL Spanish
2006- Physics Biology Family & Reading Social Studies
2007 General Science ESL Consumer
MY Math/Science Sciences
Special Education Mathematics Social Studies Music DWL Spanish
Physics Biology English Language Arts
2007- Earth & Space Science General Science Visual Art Reading
2008 MY Math/Science Theater Health & Fitness
ML Humanities
Special Education Mathematics DWL Japanese Music DWL Spanish
2008- Physics Biology Theater Visual Art DWL German
2009 Earth & Space Science General Science ML Humanities Health & Fitness
English Language Arts
Special Education Mathematics Visual Art DWL Spanish
Physics Biology Social Studies DWL French
2009-
Earth & Space Science General Science Music DWL German
2010
Chemistry ELL English Language Arts
ML Science ML Mathematics Health & Fitness
Physics Biology Social Studies DWL French
2010- Earth & Space Science General Science Music DWL German
2011 Chemistry ELL ML Humanities DWL Japanese
ML Science ML Mathematics English Language Arts
Environmental & Sustainability Education Health & Fitness
Physics Biology Social Studies ML Humanities
2011-
Earth & Space Science General Science English Language Arts
2012 d
Chemistry ELL Health & Fitness
ML Science ML Mathematics
a
subject shortage area = subject matter shortage area
b
geographic shortage = shortage due to geographic location
c
secondary/K-12 subject = secondary grade level or k-12 subject area designations
d
projections based on admission data
25
Applications to the ARC program are handled through the Graduate Center on campus. Only completed
applications are passed on to the admissions committee for the ARC program.
The screening process primarily consists of three steps: a completed application packet, an admissions
interview, and completion of program requirements prior to enrollment. A completed application
packet consists of the following:
 Personal résumé. For Route 2 applicants, the résumé should demonstrate at least one year of
successful employment as a district classified staff. For Route 3 applicants, the résumé should
highlight some professional experience in the work force. For Route 4 applicants, the résumé
should highlight their conditional or emergency substitute teaching experience.
 Official transcripts from all accredited institutions of higher education to verify degrees and
overall GPA.
 WEST-B results.
 WEST-E results.
 Character and Personal Fitness requirement forms
 Personal statement. This brief essay clearly summarizes the following regarding the applicants:
personal strengths, knowledge of the subject matter to be taught, interest and experience in
teaching or working with children and/or adolescents, ability to be a positive role model for
students, and leadership skills.
 Minimum of two letters of recommendation.
 For Route 2 applicants, one letter must come from the building principal stating his/her
support and detailing the conditions, if any, under which the teacher-candidate will be
allowed to complete an ARC internship as a Route 2 intern. A second letter must come
from the classroom teacher or direct supervisor stating his/her willingness to support
and mentor the teacher-candidate as a Route 2 intern. Any additional letters should
recommend the applicant for a teaching career based on successful student interaction
and leadership or experience with children.
 For Route 3 applicants, at least one letter should recommend the applicant for a
teaching career based on successful student interaction and leadership or experience
with children.
 For Route 4 applicants, one letter must come from the building principal detailing
his/her support for the applicant to use the current teaching assignment as a Route 4
internship site. Any additional letters should recommend the applicant for a teaching
career based on successful student interaction and leadership or experience with
children.
 Graduate Records Examination (GRE) or Millers Analogy Test (MAT) results for those applicants
whose cumulative undergraduate GPA is less than 3.0.
 Completed institutional application form and fee.
Selected applicants are invited for a formal admissions interview on campus. This usually includes group
interaction activities in order to help assess those pre-service teacher dispositions desired in an ARC
candidate.
The final step in the admissions process includes an internship-site interview with a potential mentor
and building administrator. Following this interview, commitment is made to support the ARC candidate
towards certification. Of those candidates with completed application packets, approximately one in
three is selected to enter the program.
26
3. Teacher Development Plans.
The Teacher Development Plan (TDP) is a central component of the ARC experience insofar as it serves
as a guiding document to ensure that the teacher-candidate meets or exceeds the high performance
standards developed by the ARC program in conjunction with the School of Education. All TDPs include
a minimum of one-half of a school year, and an additional significant amount of time if necessary, of
intensive mentorship. For Route 2 and 3 teacher-candidates, internships begin with full-time mentoring
and progress to increasingly less intensive monitoring and assistance as the intern demonstrates the
skills necessary to take over the classroom with less intensive support.
All teacher-candidates in the ARC program take part in composing their individualized TDP. This process
begins in the weeks immediately preceding the first day of classes in the ARC program with the teacher-
candidate’s self-assessment of his/her past professional experience and educational background. This
self-assessment includes reviewing college transcripts, considering past endorsement-area related
professional experience, and documenting any previous teaching experiences with K-12-aged students.
During the intensive, five-week summer learning academy, the TDP is a primary consideration of the
Introduction to Teaching course, which is led by the ARC Director. TDP discussions during this course
outline those competencies that need to be a focus of a teacher-candidate’s TDP, and specifies the
appropriate evidence or coursework needed to complete residency certification standards.
Teacher-candidates are allowed to waive coursework through demonstration of competency through

the submission of evidence. For teacher-candidates demonstrating some, but not all, of the
competencies required for a course, the program remains flexible in structuring a modified session
covering only the content the intern needs (essentially waiving a portion of the course) or allowing the
intern to engage in more independent coursework. Teacher-candidates then work with individual
course instructors to tailor their independent coursework to their needs. In the end, all decisions
pertaining to the TDP are made with reference to the current performance-based state residency
certification standards (WAC 181-78A-270).
Teacher-candidates are asked to maintain the evidence record of their TDP so that it remains current.
Documentation of the TDP is kept in an electronic, web-based format, the bPortfolio. Currently,
teacher-candidates document their developing proficiency by reflecting on their overall development
and presenting teacher- and student-based artifacts as evidence to demonstrate their proficiency in
their personal bPortfolios. The Director of the ARC program, various course instructors and a teacher-
candidate’s field supervisor regularly review lesson plans, assignments, reflections, etc. and moderate
discussions through the bPortfolio website.
The TDP is reviewed in detail during the ARC capstone course, Leadership in Teaching, during which
time Draft Professional Development Plans are developed based on the evidence provided throughout
the year. Should an intern exit the program early, the TDP is reviewed in detail at that time in
conjunction with a bPortfolio assessment to ensure that all requirements have been attained for an
early exit, and that appropriate teacher- and student-based evidence has been submitted to
demonstrate proficiency on the certification standards.
Impartial bPortfolio assessors are assigned to assess a teacher-candidate’s development and growth on
two different occasions during the ARC program. A formative, developmental review of the teacher-
candidate’s bPortfolio takes place in early January, approximately one-half of the way through the
27
program. A successful review during this assessment cycle suggests the possibility of early certification
as the internship progresses. A summative, capstone review of the teacher-candidate’s bPortfolio takes
place in late May or when a teacher-candidate is ready to exit the program. All bPortoflio assessments
are standards-based and are developed using the performance indicators of WAC 181-78A-270. In
addition, actual classroom instruction is assessed through the Washington Teacher Performance
Assessment.
4. Strategies for recruiting candidates from under-represented populations.
The School of Education at SPU embraces and seeks the richness that diversity brings to our learning
community. Our commitment is to offer and enhance opportunities to all, including those who have
traditionally been underserved by and underrepresented in the institutions of our society. We seek to
increase the number of students from under-represented populations in all our programs, but set
realistic enrollment goals based on a demographic analysis of those regions from which SPU students
are drawn.
There are several major strategies used to recruit teacher-candidates from under-represented
populations. The School of Education has actively sought scholarship funds, and has also been active in
direct recruiting of teacher-candidates from under-represented populations. In addition, SPU seeks to
recruit Route 2 candidates from under-represented groups. ARC teacher-candidates from under-
represented populations are guaranteed some scholarship assistance through the School of Education’s
own diversity scholarship. In addition, additional scholarship funds targeted to individuals from diverse
populations have been actively sought. Information about these scholarships is readily available and
offered by representatives of the Graduate Center during recruitment open houses and contacts.
In addition to scholarships, the School of Education makes active efforts to recruit teacher-candidates
from under-represented populations into the ARC program. Every effort is made to follow up each
interested contact with a personal contact from the Graduate Center. Once a person signals intent to
apply, every effort is made to assist in the completion of the application packet. Furthermore, partner
districts are encouraged to identify their potential Route 2 teacher-candidates from under-represented
populations so that personal contact can be made with them. Finally, the School of Education is making
significant investment in long-term partnerships with schools serving historically marginalized and low
status students. We seek to help them see college as an option and teaching as a potential profession.
Infrastructure designed to support these efforts at the university as well as school level include: The
School of Education Diversity Committee; The University Graduate Center; the University Committee on
Diversity; and The John Perkins Center for Racial Reconciliation.
28
5. The number of interns the partnership intends to enroll in each route.
The ARC program at SPU is based on a cohort model, with a cohort averaging between 16 – 20 students.
For 2011-2012, the goal is to enroll 60 teacher-candidates in three cohorts. This represents the
maximum capacity for efficiently running this program at SPU. ARC program seeks to admit only the
most highly qualified candidates. Whenever possible, this process also seeks to increase the number of
teacher-candidates from under-represented populations and admit eligible veteran or National Guard
members
The recruitment focus is for those potential applicants who satisfy the state’s eligibility criteria and
entry requirements as potential Route 2, 3, or 4 applicants. While priority admission status is first
extended to those Route 2, 3 and 4 applicants who are seeking residency teacher certification in a state-
identified, teaching shortage area, the ARC problem does not established pre-set quotas for the number
of teacher-candidates in each particular route.
For general reference, Table 5 reviews the number of interns according to route from 2002 - present.
Table 5
Enrollment of Teacher-Candidates Organized by Route
Number of
Year Route 2 Route 3 Route 4
Interns
2002-2003 18 7 11 NA
2003-2004 18 4 14 NA
2004-2005a 28 6 16 6
2005-2006 38 8 24 6
2006-2007 38 11 19 8
2007-2008 36 3 25 8
2008-2009 40 7 25 8
2009-2010b 53 5 34 14
2010-2011 55 3 45 7
2011-2012c 60 - - -
a
Given the number of high quality applicants it was decided to organize two cohorts in 2004-2005.
b
Given the number of high quality applicants it was decided to organize three cohorts in 2009-2010.
c
Projections based on recruitment data for three cohorts.
29
6. A description of the components of the formal mentored internship leading to the
Residency Certificate.
To the greatest extent possible, the ARC formal mentored field experience is based on the co-teaching
internship model. This model is grounded in the philosophy that two educators working collaboratively
in the classroom can better meet the needs of student learners while simultaneously and effectively
preparing and mentoring the teacher-candidate in the successful completion of the internship.
Therefore, throughout the internship, the teacher-candidate works under the mentored guidance of
his/her mentor teacher to collaborate on planning, instruction, assessment and classroom
management. This approach significantly differs from the traditional model of teaching internships
where the teacher-candidate solos for a significant portion of the internship. In co-teaching, the teacher
candidate and the mentor teacher plan together to meet the learning needs of the students using a
range of co-teaching strategies. Highly effective schools depend on teacher collaboration in its many
forms, so developing such skills during the internship prepares the teacher-candidate for his/her future
classroom and school.
This model is dependent on effective collaboration and communication between the teacher-candidate
and mentor teacher. In the beginning, the mentor teacher takes primary responsibility for planning
while the teacher-candidate serves in a support role. This includes ample time for observation and one-
on-one work with students. Gradually, those roles shift as the teacher candidate takes on greater
responsibility. For example, in the planning process the teacher-candidate will provide suggestions to
the mentor teacher on the role he/she will play based on the various collaborative models and the
learning needs of the students.
Throughout the co-teaching experience, the mentor teacher and university field supervisor will be
assessing the teacher-candidate’s ability to take the lead role for the classroom and student learning.
This lead role will vary depending on individual growth and readiness of the teacher candidate. As a
general guideline, about 25% of the internship the teacher-candidate will be in the lead role. However,
it is important to note that each setting is unique and this schedule may be modified to meet the needs
of the classroom and internship experience. In some circumstances, more time will be allotted for the
lead role and this will be based on the professional judgment of the mentor teacher and university field
supervisor. To fulfill ARC program expectations and qualify for an early exit, the teacher-candidate must
be ready and able to manage and teach effectively in his/her own classroom in the professional
judgment of the mentor teacher and university field supervisor.
7. Evidence of a program plan for open exit option for candidates as regulated by RCW
28A.020.
Competency in the ARC program is measured by outcomes and not seat time. Therefore, ARC program
length is based on evidence of proficiency rather than hours of instruction and is, therefore, determined
by the time required for ARC teacher-candidates to demonstrate competency related to state residency
certification standards (WAC 181-78A-270). As such, the ARC program does allow for those students
demonstrating competency to exit the program early after a minimum of half a school year (18 weeks)
in accordance with RCW 28A.020. Competence is assessed through the use of the appropriate pedagogy
30
assessment tool, combined with university supervisor observation and consultation with the mentor
teacher.
G. Organizational Capacity
1. Key personnel (faculty, administration, support).
The ARC program employs one full-time faculty member as program director. The Director serves as the
chief contact for the program, principal teacher-candidate advisor, and program facilitator. Four SPU
faculty members, each of whom is a specialist in his or her field and has earned his/her terminal degree,
serve as ARC program instructors. A math-science specialist, two master middle school teachers and a
building principal from partnership districts also serve as adjunct instructors. The School of Education
Placement Office works to secure placement partnerships with the local school districts. Key personnel
in this office include a Director of Field Placement and School Partnerships, a Field Placement
Coordinator, and a Placement Assistant. The School of Education Certification Office works to ensure
that certification standards and endorsement competencies are being demonstrated and fulfilled. Key
personnel in this office include the Certification Officer and assistant. A number of trained professionals
serve as field supervisors for ARC teacher-candidates.
2. Anticipated student-faculty ratio.
The anticipated student-faculty ratio for advising is 60:1. The anticipated faculty-student ratio for class
instruction will not be greater than 20:1. The anticipated faculty-student ratio for internship supervision
is 1:1. The anticipated mentor-student ratio is 1:1.
3. Previous experience in offering an ARC program.
SPU has been offering the ARC program since July 2002, in conjunction with the first RFP associated
with the establishment of RCW 28A.660. The ARC program has developed during the past decade in
response to changes in certification standards and the rigor of offering graduate-level teacher
education. Due to the number of high quality applicants, SPU expanded the ARC program to two
cohorts in 2004 and to three cohorts in 2009. Over the last nine years, the ARC program at SPU has
educated 324 candidates for certification, most of them in state-identified shortage areas.
4. Signed Memorandum of Understanding outlining assurance of WEST-B and WEST-E

testing requirements for candidates entering the Alternative Route program and
Alternative Routes Enrollment Table and recruitment website commitments. (required for
PESB approval)
Please find attached.

H. Program Delivery
31
1. Cost for candidates.
a. Cost for Alternative Route: $17 105 (2010-2011)
b. If applicable: Cost for Traditional Route: $22 680 (2010-2011)
The ARC program at SPU has set a single package price for the program (i.e. students in the program
pay the same tuition to obtain their residency teaching certificate regardless of ability to waive course
requirements or exit the program early). The total package price is paid in four quarterly installments
during the university school year and is assessed equally to interns regardless of route eligibility. The
2011-2012 tuition has not yet been set. For 2010-2011, tuition for the ARC program was set at $17 105.
Tuition for the optional master’s component that leads to the Master of Arts in Teaching degree or
Master in Teaching Math and Science degree is charged at the going institutional rate. The ARC program
fee represents a 24.58% discount over tuition associated with the highly popular, traditional MAT
program and a 52.17% discount over tuition associated with the traditional post-baccalaureate
certification program on campus (see Table 6).
Table 6
Comparison of Tuition (2010-2011) between the SPU ARC program, the traditional MAT program and
the traditional post-baccalaureate program on campus
Traditional MAT Traditional Post-

ARC Tuition
Tuition Baccalaureate Tuition
a
Certification Component $17 105 $22 680 $35 763
Master’s Componentb $ 7 560 $ 7 560 n/a
Total $24 665 $30 240 $35 763
a
The certification component is comprised of 45 graduate-level credit hours.
b
The master’s component is comprised of 15 graduate-level credit hours.
2. Length of program: ARC certification component – 10.5 months (46 weeks)
3. Projected start date: July 25, 2011
4. Projected enrollment: 60 teacher-candidates
5. Location(s): principal site – Seattle Pacific University; field sites – as determined
32
Section 4 – Contact Information
Name: Les Steele

Title: Vice-President for Academic Affairs
Address: 3307 Third Ave. W., ste. 102
Telephone: 206.281.2125
Fax: 206.281.2115
Email: lsteele@spu.edu
________________________________ ______________
Endorsement by Chief Academic Officer, Date
ESD Superintendent, Organization President
or equivalent official
Name: Rick Eigenbrood

Title: Dean, School of Education
Telephone: 206.281.2214
Fax: 206.281.2115
Email: eigend@spu.edu
________________________________ ______________
Endorsement by Dean, Director of Degree/ Date
Certification Unit or equivalent official
33
District Support Letters and Contact Information
34
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
between
PROFESSIONAL EDUCATOR STANDARDS BOARD
and
Seattle Pacific University
Organization type:  Four-year independent college or university
Memorandum of Understanding: Agreement between the Professional Educator Standards

Board (PESB) and Seattle Pacific University regarding the exchange of information required by
the Alternative Routes to Certification Program Approval.
Purpose of Agreement: The purpose of this agreement is to specify reporting requirements of

Alternative Routes programs approved by PESB to offer teacher and or principal preparation
programs.
Period of Performance: The Agreement becomes effective the date of signature and remains
in effect until modified or cancelled by either party.
Confidential Information: The term “confidential information” as used in this Agreement

means any and all information provided by Seattle Pacific University to PESB, staff, officers,
and independent contractors which is exempt from mandatory disclosure under the terms of the
state public disclosure laws codified at chapter 42.56 RCW. The term “confidential information”
includes, but is not limited to:
1. Any personally identifiable student or staff-related information, including, but not limited
to (a) staff/student names, (b) the name of a staff/student’s parent or other family
members, (c) staff/student addresses, (d) the address of a staff/student’s family, (e)
personal identifiers such as a social security number or student number or
staff/certification number, (f) personal characteristics that would make a staff/student’s
identity easily traceable, (g) any combination of information that would make a
staff/student’s identity easily traceable, (h) test results for schools and districts which
test fewer than ten students in a grade level, and (i) any other personally identifiable
information, or portrayal of staff/student related information in a personally identifiable
manner. (See, specifically, RCW 42.56.230(1) which exempts personal information in
files maintained for students in public schools from mandatory public disclosure; RCW
42.56.070 (1) which exempts from mandatory public disclosure information specified in
certain RCWs and “other statute which … exempts or prohibits disclosure …” such as
the federal FERPA statute at 20 U.S.C. section 1332g and its implementing regulations
at 34 CFR Part 99, which prohibit the unauthorized public disclosure and redisclosure of
“personally identifiable student information” in or from student “education records”; the
state ethics law at RCW 42.52.050(2) which prohibits state officers and employees from
disclosing confidential information as defined above; and RCW 28A.655.090(7), the
fewer than 10 students rule.)
35
Description of Data: By reference, the information coded below is the complete list of data
required by the PESB:
As a requirement for recommendation of approval of an Alternative Route to Certification

program by the Professional Educator Standards Board (PESB), the program applicant agrees
to provide the PESB with the following data and comply with the following requirements for
operating an Alternative Route to Certification program.
1) Ensure that all candidates accepted into an approved Alternative Routes program have
passed required WEST-B and WEST-E assessments as a requirement for admission to
program.
2) Provide PESB with all program information in a guided format suitable for inclusion on
the PESB recruitment website www.pathways.wa.gov.
3) Provide the PESB with all candidate and Mentor teacher information in a guided format
suitable for inclusion in the Alternative Routes Enrollment Table.
Note: Information and guided formats are provided as an addendum to this Memorandum of
Understanding.
Data will be made available to PESB in a manner agreed to by both parties on a schedule
agreed to by both parties. The PESB may amend this agreement by annually negotiating
additional items of information to be included in this memorandum of understanding. Such
amendment will be in writing and signed by both parties. Amendments will specify the data, the
convention for entering the data, and the date of execution of the amendment. Unless amended
to include confidential information, data provided under this agreement shall be available per
state public disclosure laws codified in chapter 42.56 RCW. Confidential information shall only
be requested for use in specific projects requiring that information to conduct research or
analysis. An amendment for including confidential information shall specify safeguards for
information and redisclosure in compliance with all relevant federal and state laws.
Unless specified by amendment, information received by PESB from Seattle Pacific University
shall be analyzed by PESB solely for the purpose of developing policy guidance for the board
and information for the general public. Each party to this Agreement is entitled to display and
share information and analysis from this exchange.
Parties to this agreement may request and receive publicly available data held by PESB, so
long as the data has been determined as re-disclosable by the source of the data. PESB is not
a data source, but negotiates release of other, publicly produced data.
Redisclosure: Except as amended for confidential information, all data exchanged through this
agreement may be redisclosed by either party.
No Guarantee of Accuracy and Non-Liability: Neither OSPI or PESB guarantee the accuracy
of the data provided. All risk and liabilities of use and misuse of information by either party
provided pursuant to this Agreement are understood and assumed.
Termination: Either party may at its discretion disqualify at any time any person authorized
access to information by or pursuant to this Agreement. Notice of disqualification shall be in writing
and shall terminate a disqualified person’s access to any information provided by either party
36
pursuant to this Agreement immediately upon delivery of the notice. Disqualification of one or
more persons by either party does not affect other persons authorized by or pursuant to this
Agreement.
Nondiscrimination: No individual shall be excluded from participation in, denied the benefits
of, subjected to discrimination under, or denied employment in the administration of or in
connection with any program provided by this Agreement because of race, color, creed, marital
status, religion, sex, national origin, Vietnam era or disabled veteran’s status, age, the presence
of any sensory, mental or physical disability, or political affiliation or belief, provided that the
prohibition against discrimination in employment because of disability shall not apply if the
particular disability prevents the individual from performing the essential functions of her or her
employment position, even with reasonable accommodation. The parties agree to abide by the
standards of responsibility toward the disabled as specified by the Americans with Disabilities
Act and applicable state law. In the event that one of the parties hereto refuses to comply with
the above provision, this Agreement may be canceled, terminated, or suspended in whole or in
part by the other party.
Records Maintenance: The parties to this Agreement shall each maintain books, records,
documents and other evidence which sufficiently and properly reflect all work activity These
records shall be subject to inspection, review or audit by personnel of both parties, other
personnel duly authorized by either party, the Office of the State Auditor, and federal officials so
authorized by law. All books, records, documents, and other material relevant to this
Agreement will be retained for six years after expiration and the Office of the State Auditor,
federal auditors, and any persons duly authorized by the parties shall have full access and the
right to examine any of these materials during this period.
Records and other documents, in any medium, furnished by one party to this Agreement to the
other party, will remain the property of the furnishing party, unless otherwise agreed. The
receiving party will not disclose or make available this material to any third parties without first
giving notice to the furnishing party and giving it a reasonable opportunity to respond. Each
party will utilize reasonable security procedures and protections to assure that records and
documents provided by the other party are not erroneously disclosed to third parties.
Responsibility for Acts and Omissions: Each party to this Agreement shall be responsible
for any and all acts and omissions of its own staff, employees, officers, and agents acting within
the score of their responsibilities.
37
Contact information and signatures:
Name: Les Steele

Title: Vice-President for Academic Affairs
Telephone: 206.281.2125
Fax: 206.281.2115
Email: lsteele@spu.edu
________________________________ ______________
Endorsement by Chief Academic Officer, Date
ESD Superintendent, Organization President
or equivalent official
Name: Rick Eigenbrood

Title: Dean, School of Education
Telephone: 206.281.2214
Fax: 206.281.2115
Email: eigend@spu.edu
________________________________ ______________
Endorsement by Dean, Director of Degree/ Date
Certification Unit or equivalent official
Name:
Title:
Address:
Telephone:
Fax:
Email:
________________________________ ______________
PESB Signature Authority Date
38
Addendum: Memorandum of Understanding- Alternative Routes to Certification
Application
The following guided formats and information is provided:
1) Ensure that all candidates accepted into an approved Alternative Routes program have
passed required WEST-B and WEST-E assessments as a requirement for admission to
program. Required by RCW 28A.660.040
Information
Field Name Field Definition
Type
Name First First name of the enrolled student
Name Last Last name of the enrolled student
Contact Email Contact Email for the enrolled student
Contact Phone Contact phone number for the enrolled student
use "20XX-20XX" (yes, this will be the same for all students)
Program Academic Year This will be the current academic year for the cohort you are
entering
Program Institution The institution name (also the same for all your students)
Program Site Use the city address, i.e. "Olympia" or "Seattle"
Program Route Number Use only "1" "2" "3" or "4"
Program Scholarship Use only "Y" or "N"
Demographic DOB use MM/DD/YYYY format
Demographic Gender use only "Female" or "Male" or "Not Reported"
Demographic Ethnicity (new) This is the new Federal ethnicity codes (don't need for now)
This is the new Federal race codes (again, don't need for
Demographic Race (new)
now)
Use only the letters A, B, H, I, W, M, or N
"A" Asian/Pacific Islander, "B" Black/African American
Demographic Race (old)
"H" Hispanic, "I" Native American/Alaskan, "W" White
"M" Multiracial, "N" Not Reported
Mentor and (1-4) Mentor Teacher Cert
The mentor teacher's WA teaching cert number (123456A)
Training Number
Did this person have the proper Alternative Route Mentor
Mentor and Training?
(1-4) Y/N
Training If the student has only one mentor for the year, leave the rest
of the columns blank
Add the expected endorsement that this student will receive
Expected upon completion.
(1-4) Endorsement
Endorsement Select your answers from the Endorsement Table below
If only one, leave the other columns blank
Completion Completed (Y/N/D) Has this student completed/dropped the program?
Completion Date Completed Use MM/DD/YYYY
For our purposes, a student will not be considered completed
WA Cert Number
Completion until they have
Awarded
received a WA state certificate number (123456A)
39
2) Provide PESB with the following program information in a guided format suitable for inclusion
on the PESB recruitment website www.pathways.wa.gov:
 Name of Institution
 Institution Logo
 Main Address
 Site Address
 Description of Program by Site
 Routes and Endorsements offered by site
 Web page url for site
 Candidate Quote
 Coordinator information for each site
o Name
o Phone Number
o Email
3) Provide PESB with all candidate and Mentor teacher information in a guided format suitable
for inclusion in the Alternative Route Enrollment Table. All PESB approved Alternative Route
program(s) shall use the directions below for completing the MOU requirement of entering
candidates into the Alternative Routes Enrollment Table.
Directions for completing the Alternative Route Enrollment Table

The PESB Alternative Route Enrollment table is essentially an Excel Spreadsheet that you fill out
online. It saves, backs up, and shares the data with the appropriate people. There is more than one
tab in the workbook, but we only need the first filled out, the other tabs populate by themselves. The
key for this project is to be exact about how the data is keyed into the table (computers are very literal,
and will see Science and science differently)
Security/Sharing - Your work on this page is automatically saved and can been seen by
PESB and anyone on in your department that you would like to grant access. Permissions
are granted to your school email address and will require you creating a Google login and
password using your school email. This allows us to quickly and efficiently manage
permissions. Your Google account is yours, it can be used for PESB projects, or anything
other project with any other people.
Endorsement Table
Answer Options Category Answer Definition
Art Arts Visual
Bilingual Specialty Bilingual Education
Biology Science Biology
Chemistry Science Chemistry
Dance Arts Dance
Deaf Education Specialty Deaf Education
Earth and Space Science Earth and Space
Early Childhood Early Childhood Education
Early Childhood Special Ed Early Childhood Early Childhood Special Education
Elementary Education Elementary Elementary Education
English Language Arts Secondary English Language Arts
English Language Learners K-12 English Language Learners
Environmental Specialty Environmental and Sustainability Education
Gifted Specialty Gifted Education
Health and Fitness K-12 Health and Fitness
40
Endorsement Table
Answer Options Category Answer Definition
History Secondary History
Mathematics Secondary Mathematics
Middle Level Humanities Middle Level Humanities
Middle Level Mathematics
Middle Level Mathematics Middle Level Those that a Math/Science endorsement, add to both
categories
Middle Level Science Middle Level Middle Level Science
Choral Music
Choral Music Arts For those that have "All Music," place once in each
music endorsement
Designated Arts: General Music
General Music Arts For those that have "All Music," place once in each
music endorsement
Designated Arts: Instrumental Music
Instrumental Music Arts For those that have "All Music," place once in each
music endorsement
Physics Science Designated Science: Physics
Reading K-12 Reading
Science Science All Science
Social Studies Secondary Social Studies
Special Education K-12 Special Education
Theatre Arts Designated Arts: Theatre
Agricultural CTE Agricultural Education (CTE)
Business CTE Business and Marketing Education (CTE)
Family CTE Family and Consumer Science Education (CTE)
Technology CTE Technology Education (CTE)
World Language K-12 Designated Foreign Language
N/A Not applicable (i.e. Principal, Superintendent, ESA)
41

Seattle Pacific University - Form 2A Application

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originalbeschreibung:

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Seattle Pacific University - Form 2A Application

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Alternative Routes to Residency Certification

Program Proposal 2011

SECTION 2 – PROPOSAL CONTENTS 5

A. Need for Program 5

1. Evidence of regional need for the program 6

2. The unique features of the ARC program design at SPU 9

SECTION 3 – COMMITMENT OF PARTNERS 12

C. Route 1 and Route 2 Placements 14

D. Selection of a Mentor Teacher 14

1. Evidence of teaching experience 14

2. Evidence of mentor training 14

4. District plan for mentoring time 15

E. Field Experience Placements 16

2. Background check and fingerprinting 17

3. Brief description of the field experience 17

4. Roles, responsibilities, and expectations 18

1. Detailed description of the routes structure 20

2. Description of the screening process 24

3. Teacher Development Plans 27

4. Strategies for recruiting candidates from under-represented populations 28

5. Enrollment projections by route 29

6. Description of mentoring components 30

7. Evidence of program plan for an open exit option (RCW 28A.020) 30

2. Anticipated student-faculty ratio 31

3. Previous experience in offering an ARC program 31

1. Cost for candidates 32

3. Projected start date 32

SECTION 4 – CONTACT INFORMATION 33

DISTRICT SUPPORT LETTERS AND CONTACT INFORMATION 34

Program Name: Alternative Routes to Certification

Endorsement(s) for Teacher Preparation:

 Elementary (K-8) with:

All-level (P-12) Endorsements (restricted to the following shortage areas):

Organization type:  Four-year independent college or university

A. Need for program

ARC Partnership School Districts by Year

Puget Sound ESD 121

Puget Sound ESD 121

2003- Northwest ESD 189

Puget Sound ESD 121

Puget Sound ESD 121

Puget Sound ESD 121

Puget Sound ESD 121

Puget Sound ESD 121

Puget Sound ESD 121

Puget Sound ESD 121

2011- Puget Sound ESD121 Snoqualmie Valley

2. The unique features of the ARC program design at SPU.

1. The possibility of achieving Washington State Residency Certification in one year.

4. The possibility of completing either a Master of Arts in Teaching (MAT) or a Master of

Enrollment of Teacher-Candidates Organized by Route

School district partnerships outside of the Greater Seattle area

D. Selection of a Mentor teacher

ARC-sponsored mentor training consists of the following elements:

3. A letter of recommendation from the Mentor teacher’s Principal or other District

5. District acknowledgement that Alternative Route 4 candidates are eligible to be hired as

This item no longer applies to Route 4 teacher-candidates.

E. Field Experience Placements

2. Background check and fingerprinting.

3. Brief description of the field experiences.

4. Roles, responsibilities, and expectations.

The ARC program is a full-time, internship-focused, performance-based program that is considered to