Teacher Preparation Program Accountability:
South Carolina

Analysis of South Carolina's policies

South Carolina's approval process for its traditional and alternate route teacher preparation programs is on the right track to hold programs accountable for the quality of the teachers they produce.

South Carolina collects results from new teacher performance evaluations (ADEPT), consolidates them by institution and then uses the information to affect decisions on the creation, continuation and elimination of programs. South Carolina requires at least a 95 percent pass rate for its ADEPT evaluation results.

South Carolina also collects programs' annual summary licensure test pass rates (80 percent of program completers must pass their licensure exams). Regrettably, the 80 percent pass-rate standard, while common among many states, sets the bar quite low and is not a meaningful measure of program performance. 

Finally, the state posts "Fact Sheets" on its website that include Praxis II and ADEPT pass rates for each institution. However, these were not available for the most recent year.

In South Carolina, national accreditation is required for program approval.

Citation

Standards, Policies and Procedures for Educator Preparation Units https://ed.sc.gov/scdoe/assets/File/educators/educator-preparation/educator-units/081012Standards_Policies_Procedures_Board_Approved_2015.pdf Fact Sheets http://ed.sc.gov/agency/act/se/ep/factsheets.cfm www.caepnet.org title2.ed.gov

Recommendations for South Carolina

Collect data that connect student achievement gains to teacher preparation programs. 
As one way to measure whether programs are producing effective classroom teachers, South Carolina should consider the academic achievement gains of students taught by programs' graduates, averaged over the first three years of teaching. Data that are aggregated to the institution (e.g., combining elementary and secondary programs) rather than disaggregated to the specific preparation program are not useful for accountability purposes. Such aggregation can mask significant differences in performance among programs.

Gather other meaningful data that reflect program performance. 
Although measures of student growth are an important indicator of program effectiveness, they cannot be the sole measure of program quality for several reasons, including the fact that many programs may have graduates whose students do not take standardized tests. The accountability system must therefore include other objective measures that show how well all programs are preparing teachers for the classroom. South Carolina should expand its requirements to its alternate routes and also include such measures as:  
1.   Satisfaction ratings by school principals and teacher supervisors of programs' student teachers, using a standardized form to permit program comparison
2.    Average raw scores of teacher candidates on licensing tests, including academic proficiency, subject matter and professional knowledge tests
3.    Number of times, on average, it takes teacher candidates to pass licensing tests
4.    Five-year retention rates of graduates in the teaching profession.

Maintain full authority over teacher preparation program approval.
South Carolina should not cede its authority and must ensure that it is the state that considers the evidence of program performance and makes the decision about whether programs should continue to be authorized to prepare teachers. 

State response to our analysis

South Carolina was helpful in providing NCTQ with facts that enhanced this analysis.