In August, 1996 the CSU Executive Council endorsed the Mission Statement of the
CSU Presidents Group on Teacher Preparation and K-18 Education. The central
tenets of the statement declare:
It is our conviction that the strengthening of K-12 education
is of critical importance and must be a key strategic priority of
the California State University. A strong public school system is
not only of vital importance to our statešs economy but will ensure
that the California State University can focus its resources on
appropriate college level instruction, scholarly and creative
activity, and service. We believe that the central mission of CSUšs
relationship to K-12 schools ought to be to improve the quality of
preparation programs for school site personnel and to insure that
the scholarly, pedagogical, and technological expertise of the CSU
is available to the schools on an ongoing basis.
Based on the mission statement and the accompanying guiding principles,
Chancellor Munitz, in consultation with President Bob Maxson and Interim Senior
Vice Chancellor Charles Lindahl appointed three systemwide subcommittees:
Curriculum, Assessment and Standards, Rewards and Resources, and Market Share
and CSU Collaboration to address specific charges derived from the Presidents
statement and to make recommendations for implementation of the guiding
The subcommittees were comprised of a diverse group of individuals from across
the state representing Academic Vice Presidents, Deans of Education and Arts and
Sciences, faculty in various disciplines, and various other educators and
private sector representatives. All of the subcommittees began work in late
Fall, 1996 and have now completed their final reports, which are appended to the
Executive Summary. Although each subcommittee had distinct charges and
enumerated several recommendations, the final reports reveal a number of common
issues on which recommendations converged. These common themes are summarized
below and are followed by the key recommendations of each subcommittee.
The clarion call echoed by each subcommittee was the need for strong campus
leadership, particularly by the campus President and Academic Vice President, to
articulate and sustain a strong commitment to teacher preparation by all members
of the campus community. This commitment should be evidenced by a number of
Structures which promote, support and sustain the all-university
responsibility for teacher education.
Undergraduate academic major and teacher certification programs staffed by
core faculty committed to excellent teaching and learning.
Sufficient resources to achieve restructured teacher preparation programs to
meet the current demand for new teachers, as well as the estimated demand in
the foreseeable future.
Integrated undergraduate academic programs which are interdisciplinary,
linking subject matter content with professional preparation, including
multiple clinical experiences.
Flexible teacher preparation programs, jointly planned and implemented with
public school partners, which are tailored to students needs and circumstances
and include multiple entry points and multiple pathways into the teaching
Agreement on common exit standards based on the knowledge, skills, and
abilities of a well qualified teacher and development of ongoing assessment to
ensure that each candidate possesses the desired characteristics upon
completion of a CSU program.
Regional approaches to teacher preparation that include common entry and
exit standards and an articulated curriculum that provides for easy transfer
among campuses in both integrated undergraduate programs and teacher
These themes are more fully articulated in various key recommendations made by
the subcommittees. These recommendations are outlined below.
Key Recommendations - Curriculum/Assessment/Standards Subcommittee
The subcommittee endorsed the California Standards for the Teaching
Profession and adapted these standards to create the Characteristics of a Well
Prepared Teacher to describe the knowledge, skills, and abilities a CSU
teacher preparation program should impart to all graduates. These sets of
standards (summaries attached) should be distributed to all campuses and used
as a basis for the development, in conjunction with K-12 schools, of common
systemwide entry standards, transfer criteria and common exit standards.
Campuses should develop ongoing assessment systems derived from the
California Standards for the Teaching Profession and exit standards proposed
in the Characteristics of a Well Prepared Teacher to ensure that each teacher
candidate has successfully completed a teacher preparation program. Such
assessment systems should include formative measurements such as professional
portfolio which would be developed as the student progresses through his/her
coursework, as well as a summative assessment to ensure that each candidate
possesses the desired characteristics upon completion of a CSU preparation
Campus presidents should encourage and support the development of new
integrated subject matter/teacher preparation programs. Such programs should
embody interdisciplinary course work which integrates subject matter
instruction and pedagogy, includes early and frequent opportunities for a
common set of clinical experiences in schools and strong articulation with
Schools of Education. These programs should also include articulation
agreements with community colleges to ensure that prospective teachers receive
integrated, interdisciplinary experiences in the first two years of their
higher education experience.
Each campus should review existing Liberal Studies programs and other
undergraduate major programs which lead to a teaching credential to ensure
that the programs have (1) sufficient administration/coordinator time,
advising and course offerings, (2) quality faculty who model exemplary
instructional techniques for future teachers and (3) adequate opportunities
for the development of student support mechanisms to establish a community of
undergraduate majors who intend to become teachers.
The role of community colleges in providing early coursework and field
experiences to potential teachers should be recognized. Campuses should work
with community college campuses for cross enrollment opportunities and assign
CSU faculty to work with community college faculty to develop articulated
liberal studies or other subject matter programs and teacher preparation
Key Recommendations - Rewards and Resources
Presidents should work through campus academic governance to assure that
criteria for retention of probationary faculty and for the award of tenure,
promotion, and Performance Salary Step Increases recognize support for teacher
Given the impact of this initiative, campus presidents and provosts will
assure that criteria related to this initiative are given appropriate weight
in MPP evaluations. These criteria should encompass management of human,
fiscal, and physical resources as well as outcomes.
Those MPP criteria related to the teacher preparation roles of not only
deans of education but also vice presidents for academic affairs and
appropriate academic deans, associate deans, and assistant deans, will be
given appropriate priority in the evaluation of those administrators.
CSU campuses should reexamine the possibilities for collective rewards by
developing partnership incentive awards for collaborative teams of faculty
from departments or university-school partnership groups to address key K-16
Campus Presidents should utilize the new workload provisions of the MOU to
recognize the work of supervision in faculty assignments.
Key Recommendations - Market Share and CSU Collaboration
The CSU acknowledges its responsibility to produce an increasing number of
well qualified teachers to staff California schools and is fully committed to
fulfilling this obligation.
The CSU should collect and distribute recent information on state and
regional needs to assist each CSU campus to determine its role in meeting
If the CSU teacher preparation programs are to succeed in increasing
credential productivity, they need to be more agile, more flexible, more
entrepreneurial, more responsive, and more user-friendly.
Teacher preparation should be a collaborative partnership that includes
undergraduate programs that contribute subject matter, graduate offerings
that are in alignment with CTC standards, and local schools that provide
field experiences and student-centered opportunities for integrating practice
and theory. These collaboratives should annually assess the quality of the
credential candidates, establish benchmarks, and conduct appropriate
additional studies to determine program effectiveness.
These key recommendations are further described in the individual subcommittee
reports which also contain additional recommendations. The recommendations are
a thoughtful culmination of a yearšs work by the subcommittees.
If these recommendations are implemented, they will result in restructured
teacher preparation programs in the California State University. A system
approach and a partnership with K-12 education will provide new opportunities
for students, district teachers, and campus faculty. University responsibility
for teacher preparation will recognize those associated with the program with
appropriate rewards and resources and will reshape hiring and promotion
practices. Accountability will be expected and graduates will be recognized for
possessing the characteristics of well prepared teachers. Recommendations and
plans may only be a beginning but the development of an infrastructure for the
coming century is critical if the California State University is to fulfill its
core mission in teacher preparation.
Back to Undergrad Prep page