Saturday, January 20, 2007
Issues of Capacity with ACPs
As mentioned in the previous post, many ACPs suffer from problems of design. A lack of capacity forces several program directors to compromise the quality of their program. Here's a quote from the report by the Next Generation of Teachers:
"Charing little or no tuition means that programs may not have sufficient funds to hire a specialist in each subject for which they offer a license; to train or modestly compensate the mentors who supervise student teaching; or to offer meaningful follow-up support once candidates have begun their new teaching assignments."
Capacity refers to both human resource, or organizational, capacity as well as monetary capacity. From experience working in an ACP, I can tell you that limited capacity greatly affects the program's ability to strive for quality levels, especially when the program attempts to do more than its few employees are able to accomplish.
Here's how a lack of capacity impacts programming for many ACPs:
1. ACPs relied on recruitment and selection to ensure individuals are likely to succeed.
2. On-the-job support usually came from the school district rather than the program.
3. Many ACPs accepted more applicants, some underqualified, to reach a break even point or quota.
4. Organization staff juggled multiple tasks, unable to specialize or to complete specific projects to a level of quality.
5. Curriculum of program tended to be based on meeting certification requirements (test prep) rather than on teaching.
6. Some directors resorted to technology-based curriculum or e-mentoring as a way of cutting costs rather than employing unique features of computer-based learning.
7. Supervisors of new teacher received little or inadequate training.
8. Instructors lacked appropriate credentials.
9. Directors chose not to perform research or evaluation on the program results due to costs and/or time.
10. Many staff avoided suggesting innovations that required time and resources unavailable to the program.
I am sure that capacity issues have a greater impact than what I just listed here, but ten seemed like such a good number to stop at!
"Charing little or no tuition means that programs may not have sufficient funds to hire a specialist in each subject for which they offer a license; to train or modestly compensate the mentors who supervise student teaching; or to offer meaningful follow-up support once candidates have begun their new teaching assignments."
Capacity refers to both human resource, or organizational, capacity as well as monetary capacity. From experience working in an ACP, I can tell you that limited capacity greatly affects the program's ability to strive for quality levels, especially when the program attempts to do more than its few employees are able to accomplish.
Here's how a lack of capacity impacts programming for many ACPs:
1. ACPs relied on recruitment and selection to ensure individuals are likely to succeed.
2. On-the-job support usually came from the school district rather than the program.
3. Many ACPs accepted more applicants, some underqualified, to reach a break even point or quota.
4. Organization staff juggled multiple tasks, unable to specialize or to complete specific projects to a level of quality.
5. Curriculum of program tended to be based on meeting certification requirements (test prep) rather than on teaching.
6. Some directors resorted to technology-based curriculum or e-mentoring as a way of cutting costs rather than employing unique features of computer-based learning.
7. Supervisors of new teacher received little or inadequate training.
8. Instructors lacked appropriate credentials.
9. Directors chose not to perform research or evaluation on the program results due to costs and/or time.
10. Many staff avoided suggesting innovations that required time and resources unavailable to the program.
I am sure that capacity issues have a greater impact than what I just listed here, but ten seemed like such a good number to stop at!
# posted by A.J. Castro @ 8:27 PM 
