Transforming Principal Preparation: Reflecting on UPPI’s Progress

Casey Cobb and Miguel Cardona at UPPI kickoff meeting
Casey Cobb, Neag Endowed Professor of Educational Policy (left) and Miguel Cardona ’01 MA, ’04 6th Year, ’11 Ed.D., assistant superintendent for teaching and learning for Meriden (Conn.) Public Schools, take part in a UPPI kickoff meeting earlier this year. (Photo Credit: Shawn Kornegay/Neag School)

As 2017 nears its close, work on the University Principal Preparation Initiative (UPPI) — an initiative led at UConn by the Neag School’s University of Connecticut Administrator Preparation Program (UCAPP) — is getting ready to celebrate its first birthday. This past year, UConn was one of seven universities selected to take part in the Wallace Foundation-funded initiative, which launched officially in January and is focused on improving training programs for aspiring school principals nationwide. At UConn, UCAPP is a school leadership program based at the Neag School that prepares highly qualified school administrators in Connecticut.

Faculty from the Neag School, administrators from the Connecticut State Department of Education (CSDE), leaders from several public school districts in Connecticut, and other stakeholders­ from across the nation who have joined UConn’s UPPI workgroups are collaborating to address how university principal preparation programs — working in partnership with high-needs school districts, exemplary preparation programs, and the state — can improve their training so it reflects the evidence on how best to prepare effective principals. Over the past 10 months, these workgroups have been developing a “theory of action” for redesigning UCAPP that is focused on three main facets: revising the UCAPP curriculum, developing a leader tracking system, and redesigning the program’s internship component.

“UCAPP is universally recognized as a top program that creates opportunities and helps other programs. We’re looking to continuously improve the program so this momentum can keep up steam for years to come.”

— Richard Gonzales,
UPPI project director and principal investigator

“The main question we’re asking here is: How can a traditional university program work with partners to redesign themselves and align with the best in the field?” says Richard Gonzales, project director and principal investigator for UPPI. Gonzales has coordinated the effort to redesign and improve the program so that the curriculum and the internship experience parallel each other more effectively.

For the Connecticut State Department of Education, this partnership will, according to Sarah Barzee, CSDE chief talent officer, allow for a “transformation through a targeted focus on principal preparation with the goal of ensuring that each and every principal enters this phase of their career with the knowledge, skills, and understanding to be a ‘school-ready’ principal.”

Curriculum Revision
The workgroup taking on revisions to the UCAPP curriculum has come together to review existing UCAPP curriculum materials, syllabi, and more in order to identify the programs’ strengths as well as areas of opportunity — with the ultimate goal in mind of proposing solutions and improvements where appropriate. The workgroup was co-chaired by Sarah Woulfin, assistant professor in the Neag School, and Erin Murray, assistant superintendent for Simsbury (Conn.) Public Schools.

“Principals are no longer merely managers inside the office; rather, they are responsible for transforming teaching and learning to yield equitable outcomes for children, families, and communities,” say workgroup members in a self-assessment report they issued this past summer. “Wallace UPPI is grounded in the theory of action that if university-based principal preparation programs improve, then principals will be more effective leaders to promote positive educational outcomes.”

The report proposes a variety of short-term and long-term next steps and recommendations for improving the UCAPP curriculum, some of which could potentially involve piloting, testing, and refining new approaches. It also points out existing gaps in data collection and analysis, “acknowledg[ing] that the leader tracking system will enable the program to obtain additional data.”

Developing a Leader Tracking System
Meanwhile, the Leader Tracking System (LTS) is being developed to evaluate leadership development from the district, university, and state perspectives. The workgroup behind these efforts envisions using such a system to provide data to the Connecticut State Department of Education, partner districts, and the Neag School that would ultimately be used to make decisions about the preparation, hiring, development, and placement of school leaders.

According to Louis Bronk, director of talent at Meriden (Conn.) Public Schools and a co-chair for the UPPI workgroup focused on the LTS, the team is focused on figuring out what they are specifically looking for in school leadership, and what information and data they need to answer this question. A fully realized LTS would ultimately outline what qualities candidates must exhibit and what knowledge they must possess.

Sarah Woulfin at UPPI kickoff meeting
Sarah Woulfin, a Neag School assistant professor and member of the UPPI Steering Committee, takes part in a UPPI kickoff meeting on the UConn Storrs campus earlier this year. (Photo Credit: Shawn Kornegay/Neag School)

“From a university standpoint, the LTS would provide information on a candidate’s success post-graduation for the prep program,” says Bronk. “From a [school] district perspective, it will allow us to evaluate our internal leadership development systems and also allow us to better engage in data-driven decision making in regard to administrator placement and development.”

Internship Redesign
For UPPI’s internship workgroup, the goal has been “to bring coherence to all aspects of the internship across the three models of training within UCAPP,” says Jennifer Michno, co-chair of UPPI’s internship workgroup. The three models of training within UCAPP include a traditional track, designed for Connecticut-certified educators with at least three years of experience in teaching; a track known as Preparing Leaders for Urban Schools (PLUS), for educators working in Hartford or New Haven (Conn.) public schools; and a residency track, which is designed to prepare principal candidates to serve specifically in turnaround schools.

In its efforts to unite the internship component across UCAPP’s models, the workgroup will be looking, Michno says, not only to shift the internships from a focus on supervision to one on coaching, but also to bring measurability to all facets of the UCAPP internship at large and to decide on consistent practices and protocols that will be used across all UCAPP internships.

In addition, the workgroup is partnering on internship redesign efforts with a number of other collaborators from across the nation, including the New York City Leadership Academy, a nonprofit that prepares and supports educators to lead schools, and mentors assigned through the University of Illinois-Chicago.

As the UPPI project progresses, such collaborative efforts across each of the workgroups will continue to evolve. “UCAPP is universally recognized as a top program that creates opportunities and helps other programs,” Gonzales says. “We’re looking to continuously improve the program so this momentum can keep up steam for years to come.”

Learn more about the Neag School’s involvement in the University Principal Preparation Initiative (UPPI) and how it is working to transform principalship at s.uconn.edu/UPPI.

Related Stories:

10 Questions With Neag School Experts in Gaming and Education

Student at esports conference
Students engage in multiplayer video games at an esports event hosted at UConn in April 2017. (Photo Credit: Eve Lenson/Neag School)

In our recurring 10 Questions series, the Neag School catches up with students, alumni, faculty, and others throughout the year to offer a glimpse into their Neag School experience and their current career, research, or community activities. 

In their recently published edited volume, Exploding the Castle: Rethinking How Video Games and Game Mechanics Can Shape the Future of Education (Information Age, 2017), Neag School faculty Michael Young and Stephen Slota — both longtime video game devotees — explore the value of games, the role of games in the future of K-12 and higher education, and more.

Here, Young, associate professor of cognition, instruction, and learning technology, and Slota, assistant professor-in-residence of educational technology discuss the book and share their insights on the intersection between games, technology, and learning.

 

What about gaming initially captured your interest?

Stephen Slota: I’ve been a gamer since I was very young. Much of my experience revolves around video and board games (the Super Nintendo Entertainment System being my first console). The combination of creativity and strategy is likely what spurred my interest — I loved drawing, and I loved puzzles, so games were a natural fit. I even mailed Nintendo headquarters a few game ideas!

Michael Young: Me, too. Like Steve, I have always been fascinated by jigsaw puzzles, board games, and actual sports, like tennis. But when the games are on the computer and can be played with thousands of others around the world simultaneously … now that gets fun. “World of Warcraft” was such a game for me.

“A quality game experience is one that enables you to accomplish some goal that is meaningful to you.”

—Michael Young, associate professor

What do you believe makes a quality video game or gaming experience?

SS: Different games can be appealing to different players for very different reasons, or even to the same player placed under different conditions —whether emotional, psychological, or physical. This makes it difficult to say concretely what makes for a ‘good’ or ‘bad’ game or gaming experience.

Personally, I find myself most engaged with games that have a cohesive narrative, challenging puzzles, interesting character interactions and development, player agency, and internal consistency (i.e., objects, characters, and interactions work as we would expect them to in the given game world). “The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild” is my go-to example for A+ design.

MY: Steve is right … gameplay is “situated,” meaning that it unfolds on the fly, in a different context every time. So it is not possible to make broad generalizations about how gameplay might affect any particular student or groups of learners. For me, games like “Two Dots” meet a need for a distraction to cleanse my concentration during the day, while “Pokemon Go” gets me out walking around, something I also need to do more. A quality game experience is one that enables you to accomplish some goal that is meaningful to you.

Stephen Slota and Michael Young
Neag School faculty members Stephen Slota, left, and Michael Young, both longtime video game devotees, recently co-published Exploding the Castle: Rethinking How Video Games and Game Mechanics Can Shape the Future of Education. (Photo Credit: Shawn Kornegay/Neag School)

What are the greatest myths or misconceptions about video games that you would like to see dispelled?

SS: There are two myths that really need to be dispelled.

First, that violent video games cause violent behavior. There are correlations between aggression and violent video gameplay, but there are similar correlations between aggression and reading violent passages in books, including works like the Iliad and the Bible. Like those, video game aggression appears to dissipate minutes after play, often below aggression levels measured pre-play — meaning “Mortal Kombat” and “Grand Theft Auto” are more likely to help a player burn off steam than induce horrific, real-world outcomes.

Second, that games are a silver bullet for fixing all that’s broken in education. Try as we might, no individual game will ever be able to meet the individual needs of every individual student. Our goal should simply be to ensure or afford players as many opportunities to tackle target learning objectives as possible.

MY: My favorite game myth is that if something is playful, it can’t be serious. Children play cops and robbers and war games like capture the flag. Certainly we can all agree war is deadly serious. Children also play house, and certainly that part of life is quite important to us as well. … Any teacher or parent who dismisses games and playful learning as not serious about the school curriculum has to reconsider that thought.

“Games are interactive fiction — and narrative will never be unimportant to teaching, learning, and human cognition.”

—Stephen Slota, assistant professor-in-residence

How do you see gaming as being relevant, beneficial, or important to learning, teaching, and/or the field of education?

SS and MY: Though the specific technologies used to create and implement educational games will continue to evolve, cycle into and out of popularity or out of use altogether, the broader concept will almost certainly persist as instructional strategies (hopefully informed by contemporaneously evolving learning theory). In the short term, [games] will likely become popular as part of massive online open courses (MOOCs), mobile/personalized “just in time” learning modules or applications, and competency-based evaluation methods, all of which we touch on in Exploding the Castle. Games are interactive fiction — and narrative will never be unimportant to teaching, learning, and human cognition.

Do different video games offer different benefits or help strengthen certain skills?

SS and MY: Each game — video or otherwise — offers a range of something we call affordances. In brief, affordances are the opportunities for action we perceive (see, touch, feel, etc.) around us and, under the right circumstances, choose to act upon.

One possible affordance of a game like “Assassin’s Creed” might be to use it as the basis for a history project (by way of comparing the game’s content to actual historical records). A puzzle game like “Tetris” affords players an opportunity to demonstrate and develop spatial recognition and manipulation skills. Games like “World of Warcraft” afford a range of social interaction and problem-solving opportunities (both individual and group), allowing players to develop very different skills than they might have developed through a game like “Super Mario Bros.”

Dr. Slota, you previously served as a high school teacher. Did you incorporate gaming into your classroom in any way?

SS: While I was teaching high school, I incorporated gaming — or game-like activities, at least — as often as I could. This was partly because it made lesson planning more engaging for me, but, more importantly, because some of my early gamified instructional experiments did wonders for engaging my students.

The effects were pronounced enough that I actually made the decision to return to graduate school after a particularly successful game-based unit that involved my lowest-tracked 10th- and 11th-grade biology students roleplaying as epidemiologists to investigate a fictional disease outbreak. Overall interest and achievement improved so dramatically in such a short period of time that I knew I’d tapped into something special, even if I didn’t yet understand it. Incidentally, a (2008) UConn Advance profile on Mike (Young) and Roger Travis was what started me down the educational psychology, technology, and game design path.

MY: I serve on the Ellington (Conn.) Board of Education. There, I get to see how games and playful learning are an increasing part of K-12 schools, starting from every kindergarten student’s day, and with the increasing use of technology for learning, building up in all classrooms with virtual environments to learn and role playing games that organize entire high school courses. Add to this the use of playful learning in times between classes (as in Makerspaces) and after school (as in robotics clubs and esports) and you have a pretty substantial role for games in schools.

Should more schoolteachers be finding ways to incorporate gaming it into their curricula?

SS and MY: While students at all levels can and do benefit from games and playful learning in their classes, not all teachers should necessarily have to incorporate games into their curricula. Teaching is partly a skill that must make contact with one’s personal goals and interests. To be genuine in the classroom, a teacher cannot be just doing what they are told. Teaching has to come from them. So to the extent that more teachers could be helped to find ways to incorporate games whose play can align with their desired student learning outcomes, then, yes. The more we do research and understand how games and playful learning can work, then we can design professional learning experiences to invite more teachers to try it. But I don’t think we’d ever say that games are the magic bullet that all teachers should be using.

Associate Professor Michael Young teaching class
“I believe the world’s next Shakespeare will be an interactive storyteller — someone who can tell a good story across multiple media in a strategic way. To that extent: a game builder,” says Michael Young, associate professor of cognition, instruction, and learning technology. (Photo Credit: Lucie Turkel/Neag School)

What audiences are you intending to reach with your book, Exploding the Castle, and what do you ideally hope those audiences take away from it?

SS and MY: We focused principally on students, teachers, parents, administrators, researchers, game designers, and self-described gamers.

It’s our hope that the volume will inspire more advanced and theoretically sound designs going forward, particularly among aspiring and practicing educators.

What would you tell people considering a career related in some way to gaming?

SS: My journey to the realm of educational game design and research is pretty nontraditional. I started out as pre-med with a focus on genetic engineering, made my way into K-12 education, and later found a serendipitous opportunity to blend my skills in art, science, education, and game design through the Neag School’s Cognition, Instruction, and Learning Technology program. That makes giving advice a bit challenging, but the following capture my ‘big ticket’ thoughts:

  • Connect with researchers and game designers to explore the creation of your own games or game-infused activities. One useful resource includes the Higher Education Video Game Alliance.
  • Explore different examples of gamification and game-based learning. Consider which learning theories (if any) were used to develop those games and whether or not the game maintains a consistent 1:1 ratio of game and learning objectives. (For a brief introduction, see Slota, 2017.)
  • Review James Paul Gee’s What Video Games Have to Teach Us About Learning and Literacy (St. Martin’s Griffin, 2007), considered a seminal work within the field of game-based learning.
  • Play games. Play many different types of games. Get a sense of which mechanics best meet your instructional and other needs.

What are you most excited about when it comes to the future of gamification?

SS: Game-based instruction is going to shape and be used to teach in the ever-expanding world of online and mobile education. Many popular technologies (e.g., FitBit, Apple Watch, digital insulin monitors/injectors) already utilize various games or game-like apps to promote user engagement and inform individual well-being, and some artistic, government, and medical institutions have done the same with the express purpose of strengthening public education (e.g., The Metropolitan Museum of Art, Planned Parenthood). I’m excited to see this approach become more widespread as app development software becomes more accessible, K-12 students are trained in computer programming, and gaming continues to become more mainstream.

MY: Games are not new. They were part of learning before there was formal school and institutions of public education. Augmented reality can bring the world into the classroom, from the very small to the epic scale of the universe. Making anything, including school, more playful and enjoyable should be an aim of progress in all areas. I believe the world’s next Shakespeare will be an interactive storyteller — someone who can tell a good story across multiple media in a strategic way. To that extent: a game builder.

Read other installments of the Neag School’s 10 Questions series here.

$5M in Federal Funding to Support Educational Psychology Research

Fourth-graders working on experiment with teacher
At the Renzulli Gifted and Talented Academy in Hartford, Conn., elementary school students work on an experiment with their teacher. (Photo Credit: Peter Morenus/UConn)

Led by educational psychology professors in the Neag School of Education, two research projects have recently been awarded a total of nearly $5 million in federal funding, made available through the Jacob K. Javits Gifted and Talented Students Education Act.

“These are incredible, national-level investments in one of the world’s top gifted and talented education programs, furthering the research of two outstanding professors and their research teams,” says Scott Brown, Board of Trustees Distinguished Professor of Educational Psychology and the head of the Neag School’s Department of Educational Psychology.

Project LIFT
Awarded a total of $2.4 million in funding that went into effect earlier this month, Project LIFT (Learning Informs Focused Teaching) is focused on students with high academic potential — particularly those from underserved populations.

“The overall premise of Project LIFT,” according to principal investigator Catherine Little, professor of educational psychology, “is that students with high academic potential are more likely to demonstrate high-potential behaviors while engaged in instruction that encourages such response.” In addition, she says, “teachers can strengthen their use of such instruction through professional development and access to resources.”

With Project LIFT, the research team will be building on ongoing work in the field centered not only on promoting teachers’ understanding of the behaviors that may indicate high potential in students, but also on offering students access to opportunities to demonstrate their potential.

“These are incredible, national-level investments in one of the world’s top gifted and talented education programs,
furthering the research of two outstanding professors and their research teams.”

— Board of Trustees Distinguished Professor Scott Brown, Department Head, Educational Psychology

Professor Catherine Little
Professor Catherine Little is the principal investigator for Project LIFT, recently awarded $2.4 million in funding.

“We feel that it is really important to focus on how general education teachers are equipped to support the needs of advanced learners within the context of serving all the learners they support,” Little says, adding that “the most powerful supports can come through curricular and instructional resources.”

By examining differences in teacher practice, teacher perceptions, and student achievement between a treatment and comparison group, the researchers hope to learn more about how teachers understand these populations, as well as what professional development approaches are helpful for these teachers in their work.

Also part of Project LIFT are Christopher Rhoads, associate professor of measurement, evaluation, and assessment; Rebecca Eckert, associate clinical professor of teacher education; and Kelly Kearney ’14 Ph.D., a research associate in the Department of Educational Psychology.

The project is funded through September 2022.

Thinking Like Mathematicians
Professor of educational psychology E. Jean Gubbins is the principal investigator of a second newly funded project, entitled “Thinking Like Mathematicians: Challenging All Grade 3 Students.”

E. Jean Gubbins
Professor E. Jean Gubbins is principal investigator for a  project entitled “Thinking Like Mathematicians,” awarded $2.5 million over five years.

Funded for five years through the Jacob K. Javits Gifted and Talented Students Education Act, the project is a “scale-up of promising evidence-based quantitative and qualitative mathematics studies; identification and programming studies; and a qualitative study of identification practices for English learners,” which were also previously funded by the Javits Act, according to the researchers. These prior studies emphasized the importance of supporting talented students from historically underrepresented groups.

The Thinking Like Mathematicians project “focuses on providing challenging curriculum to promote talent development among all students in academically and culturally diverse schools,” Gubbins says, “and experiments with developmental identification strategies, which are important issues in our field.”

Funding for the project’s first year, which went into effect Sept. 1, is $500,000, with funding for the second through fifth years remaining the same in each subsequent year, pending the availability of funds from the U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Elementary and Secondary Education.

Bianca Montrosse-Moorhead and Aarti Bellara, assistant professors of measurement, evaluation, and assessment, as well as Tutita Casa, associate professor of curriculum and instruction, are serving as co-principal investigators.

 

Related Stories

Educators Must Teach Civility, Inclusiveness

Editor’s Note: The following — written by George Sugai, Neag School professor of special education, and Geoff Colvin, a retired research associate in the University of Oregon’s College of Education — was originally published in the “Guest Viewpoint” section of The Register-Guard, a local newspaper based in Eugene, Ore. 

George Sugai
George Sugai, professor of educational psychology at the Neag School of Education, speaks to teachers at Illing Middle School in Manchester, Conn. (Photo credit: UConn)

As a new school year begins, educators, families and students are gearing up with high aspirations for a successful year. However, relatively overnight we have witnessed significant changes in societal and global norms that are in sheer opposition to the norms and practices we promote in our schools. Specifically, the presidential election was associated with reports of unprecedented negativity, intolerance and disrespect.

The Southern Poverty Law Center, for example, reported 900 cases last November of harassment and intimidation in schools across the nation in which President Trump’s name was invoked by the harassers. In addition, the center disclosed that 90 percent of educators surveyed reported that the election created a negative climate in their schools that will likely have a lasting effect.

Sadly, these negative effects persist as we speak. For instance, the Unite the Right rally and torch-lit march of white nationalists in Charlottesville, Va., represented seemingly commonplace images of hate, intolerance, incivility, dishonesty and unbridled racism that children and youth are exposed to frequently. Instead of providing moral leadership for the nation on Charlottesville, the president of the United States chose to make inflammatory statements that only worsened the situation, setting the stage for further violent confrontations.

Moreover, the ongoing acts of terrorism throughout Europe, most recently in Barcelona, have exacerbated the divisions and hatred among people at a global level.

Our schools are in a prime position to support the academic, social, emotional and behavioral health of our children and youth and to counter the negativity
so prevalent in today’s society.

Of paramount concern to us is the effect that these messages of negativity may have on our children. Many years of published research (e.g., the U.S. Surgeon General’s report) warn that what children see and hear about the world through the media influences how they behave.

As the new school year begins, we appeal to all educators, school leaders and family members to redouble their efforts to actively resist and prevent the negative influence these troubling trends may have on the growth, development and education of our children and youth. How can this be done?

It is immediately within the purview of schools to 1) systematically model, encourage, and formally “teach” civil, safe and responsible behavior to promote and model respect for differences and diversity; 2) reject dehumanizing behavior, and 3) stand up for children and youth who are victimized by hate and discrimination. We cannot afford to wait and hope for the negative public discourse to simply go away.

Fortunately, we have teaching practices and effective models with strong evidence to guide this doubling-up effort. For example, in the early 1990s, the U.S. Department of Education funded a project we developed in the College of Education at the University of Oregon designed to shift school practice from reactive, exclusionary and negative discipline to more preventive, inclusionary and positive support.

Initially, this federally funded project was piloted in three local school districts, and then expanded to schools throughout Oregon and other states. The current form of this project, called Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports, widely adopted in Lane County schools and throughout the state of Oregon, has been tested and implemented in more than 25,500 schools across the United States and adopted internationally (e.g. Canada, Europe, Asia, Australia, Africa, New Zealand and the Caribbean).

More than 20 years of research results indicate meaningful and sustained improvements in school discipline, academic achievement, school climate, school attendance and related social behavioral outcomes (see pbis.org).

Given the 180-day school year and the six-hour school day, our schools are in a prime position to support the academic, social, emotional and behavioral health of our children and youth and to counter the negativity so prevalent in today’s society.

Our schools must act decisively and urgently to (re)teach, model and encourage behavior that nurtures and maintains our most cherished individual and collective values of civility, diversity, equity, responsibility and freedom of expression that serve as the foundation of our democracy.

The tools are available. It can be done.

Malala Yousafzai, in her inspiring story of survival from terrorism, “I am Malala: The Girl Who Stood Up for Education and Was Shot by the Taliban” (2013), expressed our message most poignantly: “Let us pick up our books and our pens. They are our most powerful weapons. One child, one teacher, one book, and one pen can change the world.”

Geoff Colvin of Eugene is a retired research associate in the University of Oregon’s College of Education. George Sugai is a former professor at the UO and currently a professor at University of Connecticut’s Neag School of Education.

Republished with permission from The Register-Guard

Campbell Named Co-Editor, Journal of Science Teacher Education

Todd Campbell meeting with students
Professor Todd Campbell has been named editor of the Journal of Science Teacher Education. (Photo Credit: Shawn Kornegay/Neag School)

Todd Cambpell, professor of science education, has been named co-editor of the Journal of Science Teacher Education (JSTE), the flagship journal of the Association for Science Teacher Education (ASTE).

As the only English-language journal focused exclusively on science teacher education, JSTE disseminates research and theoretical position papers concerning preservice and in-service education of science teachers, including articles offering ways to improve classroom teaching and learning; professional development; and teacher recruitment and retention at preK-16 levels[1]. It is published online eight times a year and in print on a quarterly basis by Taylor & Francis.

Also joining the new editorial team are Campbell’s fellow co-editors University of Colorado at Denver’s Geeta Verma and Lakehead University’s Wayne Melville. Their appointment begins Jan. 1, 2019.

Access the most recent issue of the Journal of Science Teacher Education here.

 

[1] http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?show=aimsScope&journalCode=uste20