1<!doctype html > 2<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" lang="en" 3 class="ios-preview-native-scroll"> 4<head> 5 <meta charset="utf-8"> 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44
45<script type="text/javascript"> 46 window._currentDevice = 'desktop'; 47 window.Parameters = window.Parameters || { 48 HomeUrl: 'https://www.edpreppartners.org/', 49 50 SystemID: 'US_DIRECT_PRODUCTION', 51 SiteAlias: '9beebeba', 52 SiteType: atob('RFVEQU9ORQ=='), 53 PublicationDate: 'Oct 01, 2026', 54 ExternalUid: null, 55 IsSiteMultilingual: false, 56 InitialPostAlias: '', 57 InitialPostPageUuid: '', 58 InitialDynamicItem: '', 59 DynamicPageInfo: { 60 isDynamicPage: false, 61 base64JsonRowData: 'null', 62 }, 63 InitialPageAlias: 'edprepinsights', 64 InitialPageUuid: 'be394123135c477483e9ec388616daff', 65 InitialPageId: '1215292935', 66 InitialEncodedPageAlias: 'ZWRwcmVwaW5zaWdodHM=', 67 InitialHeaderUuid: 'f342e07c82c04b0382ba163abf3f23c1', 68 CurrentPageUrl: '', 69 IsCurrentHomePage: false, 70 AllowAjax: false, 71 AfterAjaxCommand: null, 72 HomeLinkText: 'Back To Home', 73 UseGalleryModule: false, 74 CurrentThemeName: 'Layout Theme', 75 ThemeVersion: '500000', 76 DefaultPageAlias: '', 77 RemoveDID: true, 78 WidgetStyleID: null, 79 IsHeaderFixed: false, 80 IsHeaderSkinny: false, 81 IsBfs: true, 82 StorePageAlias: 'null', 83 StorePagesUrls: 'e30=', 84 IsNewStore: 'false', 85 StorePath: '', 86 StoreId: 'null', 87 StoreVersion: 0, 88 StoreBaseUrl: '', 89 StoreCleanUrl: true, 90 StoreDisableScrolling: true, 91 IsStoreSuspended: false, 92 HasCustomDomain: true, 93 SimpleSite: false, 94 showCookieNotification: false, 95 cookiesNotificationMarkup: 'null', 96 translatedPageUrl: '', 97 isFastMigrationSite: false, 98 sidebarPosition: 'NA', 99 currentLanguage: 'en', 100 currentLocale: 'en', 101 NavItems: '{}', 102 errors: { 103 general: 'There was an error connecting to the page.<br/> Make sure you are not offline.', 104 password: 'Incorrect name/password combination', 105 tryAgain: 'Try again' 106 }, 107 108 mapConsent: { 109 message: 'This content is served by a third party, {0}. If enabled, {0} may collect information about your activity.', 110 enable: 'Enable' 111 }, 112 NavigationAreaParams: { 113 ShowBackToHomeOnInnerPages: true, 114 NavbarSize: 4, 115 NavbarLiveHomePage: 'https://www.edpreppartners.org/', 116 BlockContainerSelector: '.dmBody', 117 NavbarSelector: '#dmNav:has(a)', 118 SubNavbarSelector: '#subnav_main' 119 }, 120 hasCustomCode: true, 121 planID: '7', 122 customTemplateId: 'null', 123 siteTemplateId: 'null', 124 productId: 'DM_DIRECT', 125 disableTracking: false, 126 pageType: 'FROM_SCRATCH', 127 isRuntimeServer: true, 128 isInEditor: false, 129 isInPreview: false, 130 hasNativeStore: false, 131 defaultLang: 'en', 132 hamburgerMigration: null, 133 isFlexSite: false 134 }; 135 136 window.Parameters.LayoutID = {}; 137 window.Parameters.LayoutID[window._currentDevice] = 6; 138 window.Parameters.LayoutVariationID = {}; 139 window.Parameters.LayoutVariationID[window._currentDevice] = 5; 140</script>
140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163<!-- Injecting site-wide to the head --> 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182
183<script type="text/javascript" id="d_track_campaign" data-entry-referrer> 184 (function() { 185 if (!window.location.search) { 186 return; 187 } 188 const cleanParams = window.location.search.substring(1); // Strip ? 189 const queryParams = cleanParams.split('&'); 190 191 const expires = 'expires=' + new Date().getTime() + 24 * 60 * 60 * 1000; 192 const domain = 'domain=' + window.location.hostname; 193 const path = "path=/"; 194 195 queryParams.forEach((param) => { 196 const [key, value = ''] = param.split('='); 197 if (key.startsWith('utm_')) { 198 const cookieName = "_dm_rt_" + key.substring(4); 199 const cookie = cookieName + "=" + value; 200 const joined = [cookie, expires, domain, path].join(";"); 201 document.cookie = joined; 202 } 203 }); 204 }()); 205</script>
205 206
207<script type="text/javascript" > 208 var _dm_gaq = {}; 209 var _gaq = _gaq || []; 210 var _dm_insite = []; 211</script>
211 212 213 214 215
216<script> 217 const siteGoogleAnalyticsTagIds = ['AW-17633630307', 'G-GXJMQ1KN3Q']; 218 (function (w, i, g) { w[g] = w[g] || []; if (typeof w[g].push == 'function') w[g].push.apply(w[g], i) }) 219 (window, siteGoogleAnalyticsTagIds, 'google_tags_first_party'); 220</script>
vendor: 1 bytes, line 220
220
221<script async src="/fyb52nqswd-9beebeba/y4zCsYd2qDq2-VwCmSiwmOoCVt58hg"></script>
vendor: 1 bytes, line 221
221
222<script async src="/hwj36ctlrx-9beebeba/y4zCsYd2rkDckCF5-yrN5elgfIY"></script>
222 223
224<script type="text/javascript" id="d_track_ga"> 225 window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; 226 _dm_gaq.siteAlias = '9beebeba'; 227 _dm_gaq.externalGaqID = 'non-empty'; 228 229 function gtag() { dataLayer.push(arguments); } 230 231 function pushInsiteImpressions(id) { 232 _dm_insite.forEach((rule) => { 233 _dm_gaq.pushEvent(id, 'insite_impression', 'insite', rule.ruleType + '__' + rule.ruleId); 234 }); 235 } 236 237 _dm_gaq.pushEvent = function(trackingId, event, category, label, value, additionalParams = {}) { 238 const eventProps = { 239 event_category: category, 240 event_label: label, 241 value, 242 ...additionalParams 243 }; 244 gtag('event', event, eventProps); 245 } 246 247 gtag('js', new Date()) 248 249 250gtag('set', 'developer_id.dMDU5Nj', true); 251gtag('set', 'developer_id.dYmRlZG', true); 252gtag('set', 'developer_id.dMWY5NG', true); 253gtag('config', 'AW-17633630307', { 254 'send_page_view': false, 255 'linker': { 256 'domains': ['www.edpreppartners.org'] 257 } 258}); 259gtag('config', 'G-GXJMQ1KN3Q', { 260 'send_page_view': false, 261 'linker': { 262 'domains': ['www.edpreppartners.org'] 263 } 264}); 265 266 _dm_gaq.pushEvent('', 'page_view'); 267 268 pushInsiteImpressions(_dm_gaq.externalGaqID); 269</script>
269 270 271 272 273 274 275<!-- End Injecting site-wide to the head --> 276 277<!-- Inject secured cdn script --> 278 279 280<!-- ========= Meta Tags ========= --> 281<!-- PWA settings -->
282<script> 283 function toHash(str) { 284 var hash = 5381, i = str.length; 285 while (i) { 286 hash = hash * 33 ^ str.charCodeAt(--i) 287 } 288 return hash >>> 0 289 } 290</script>
vendor: 1 bytes, line 290
290
291<script> 292 (function (global) { 293 //const cacheKey = global.cacheKey; 294 const isOffline = 'onLine' in navigator && navigator.onLine === false; 295 const hasServiceWorkerSupport = 'serviceWorker' in navigator; 296 if (isOffline) { 297 console.log('offline mode'); 298 } 299 if (!hasServiceWorkerSupport) { 300 console.log('service worker is not supported'); 301 } 302 if (hasServiceWorkerSupport && !isOffline) { 303 window.addEventListener('load', function () { 304 const serviceWorkerPath = '/runtime-service-worker.js?v=3'; 305 navigator.serviceWorker 306 .register(serviceWorkerPath, { scope: './' }) 307 .then( 308 function (registration) { 309 // Registration was successful 310 console.log( 311 'ServiceWorker registration successful with scope: ', 312 registration.scope 313 ); 314 }, 315 function (err) { 316 // registration failed :( 317 console.log('ServiceWorker registration failed: ', err); 318 } 319 ) 320 .catch(function (err) { 321 console.log(err); 322 }); 323 }); 324 325 // helper function to refresh the page 326 var refreshPage = (function () { 327 var refreshing; 328 return function () { 329 if (refreshing) return; 330 // prevent multiple refreshes 331 var refreshkey = 'refreshed' + location.href; 332 var prevRefresh = localStorage.getItem(refreshkey); 333 if (prevRefresh) { 334 localStorage.removeItem(refreshkey); 335 if (Date.now() - prevRefresh < 30000) { 336 return; // dont go into a refresh loop 337 } 338 } 339 refreshing = true; 340 localStorage.setItem(refreshkey, Date.now()); 341 console.log('refereshing page'); 342 window.location.reload(); 343 }; 344 })(); 345 346 function messageServiceWorker(data) { 347 return new Promise(function (resolve, reject) { 348 if (navigator.serviceWorker.controller) { 349 var worker = navigator.serviceWorker.controller; 350 var messageChannel = new MessageChannel(); 351 messageChannel.port1.onmessage = replyHandler; 352 worker.postMessage(data, [messageChannel.port2]); 353 function replyHandler(event) { 354 resolve(event.data); 355 } 356 } else { 357 resolve(); 358 } 359 }); 360 } 361 } 362})(window); 363</script>
363 364<!-- Add manifest --> 365<!-- End PWA settings --> 366 367 368 369<link rel="canonical" href="https://www.edpreppartners.org/edprepinsights"> 370 371<meta id="view" name="viewport" content="initial-scale=1, minimum-scale=1, maximum-scale=5, viewport-fit=cover"> 372 373<meta name="apple-mobile-web-app-capable" content="yes"> 374<title>EDPREP INSIGHTS 375</title> 376 377<!--Add favorites icons--> 378 379<link rel="icon" type="image/x-icon" href="https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/site_favicon_16_1741103386704.ico"/> 380 381<!-- End favorite icons --> 382<link rel="preconnect" href="https://irp.cdn-website.com"/> 383<link rel="preconnect" href="https://irp.cdn-website.com" crossorigin/> 384<link rel="preconnect" href="https://static.cdn-website.com"/> 385 386 387 388<!-- render the required CSS and JS in the head section -->
389<script id='d-js-dmapi'> 390 window.SystemID = 'US_DIRECT_PRODUCTION'; 391 392 if (!window.dmAPI) { 393 window.dmAPI = { 394 registerExternalRuntimeComponent: function () { 395 }, 396 getCurrentDeviceType: function () { 397 return window._currentDevice; 398 }, 399 runOnReady: (ns, fn) => { 400 const safeFn = dmAPI.toSafeFn(fn); 401 ns = ns || 'global_' + Math.random().toString(36).slice(2, 11); 402 const eventName = 'afterAjax.' + ns; 403 404 if (document.readyState === 'complete') { 405 $.DM.events.off(eventName).on(eventName, safeFn); 406 setTimeout(function () { 407 safeFn({ 408 isAjax: false, 409 }); 410 }, 0); 411 } else { 412 window?.waitForDeferred?.('dmAjax', () => { 413 $.DM.events.off(eventName).on(eventName, safeFn); 414 safeFn({ 415 isAjax: false, 416 }); 417 }); 418 } 419 }, 420 toSafeFn: (fn) => { 421 if (fn?.safe) { 422 return fn; 423 } 424 const safeFn = function (...args) { 425 try { 426 return fn?.apply(null, args); 427 } catch (e) { 428 console.log('function failed ' + e.message); 429 } 430 }; 431 safeFn.safe = true; 432 return safeFn; 433 } 434 }; 435 } 436 437 if (!window.requestIdleCallback) { 438 window.requestIdleCallback = function (fn) { 439 setTimeout(fn, 0); 440 } 441 } 442</script>
442 443 444<!-- loadCSS function header.jsp--> 445 446 447 448 449 450
451<script id="d-js-load-css"> 452/** 453 * There are a few <link> tags with CSS resource in them that are preloaded in the page 454 * in each of those there is a "onload" handler which invokes the loadCSS callback 455 * defined here. 456 * We are monitoring 3 main CSS files - the runtime, the global and the page. 457 * When each load we check to see if we can append them all in a batch. If threre 458 * is no page css (which may happen on inner pages) then we do not wait for it 459 */ 460(function () { 461 let cssLinks = {}; 462 function loadCssLink(link) { 463 link.onload = null; 464 link.rel = "stylesheet"; 465 link.type = "text/css"; 466 } 467 468 function checkCss() { 469 const pageCssLink = document.querySelector("[id*='CssLink']"); 470 const widgetCssLink = document.querySelector("[id*='widgetCSS']"); 471 472 if (cssLinks && cssLinks.runtime && cssLinks.global && (!pageCssLink || cssLinks.page) && (!widgetCssLink || cssLinks.widget)) { 473 const storedRuntimeCssLink = cssLinks.runtime; 474 const storedPageCssLink = cssLinks.page; 475 const storedGlobalCssLink = cssLinks.global; 476 const storedWidgetCssLink = cssLinks.widget; 477 478 storedGlobalCssLink.disabled = true; 479 loadCssLink(storedGlobalCssLink); 480 481 if (storedPageCssLink) { 482 storedPageCssLink.disabled = true; 483 loadCssLink(storedPageCssLink); 484 } 485 486 if(storedWidgetCssLink) { 487 storedWidgetCssLink.disabled = true; 488 loadCssLink(storedWidgetCssLink); 489 } 490 491 storedRuntimeCssLink.disabled = true; 492 loadCssLink(storedRuntimeCssLink); 493 494 requestAnimationFrame(() => { 495 setTimeout(() => { 496 storedRuntimeCssLink.disabled = false; 497 storedGlobalCssLink.disabled = false; 498 if (storedPageCssLink) { 499 storedPageCssLink.disabled = false; 500 } 501 if (storedWidgetCssLink) { 502 storedWidgetCssLink.disabled = false; 503 } 504 // (SUP-4179) Clear the accumulated cssLinks only when we're 505 // sure that the document has finished loading and the document 506 // has been parsed. 507 if(document.readyState === 'interactive') { 508 cssLinks = null; 509 } 510 }, 0); 511 }); 512 } 513 } 514 515 516 function loadCSS(link) { 517 try { 518 var urlParams = new URLSearchParams(window.location.search); 519 var noCSS = !!urlParams.get("nocss"); 520 var cssTimeout = urlParams.get("cssTimeout") || 0; 521 522 if (noCSS) { 523 return; 524 } 525 if (link.href && link.href.includes("d-css-runtime")) { 526 cssLinks.runtime = link; 527 checkCss(); 528 } else if (link.id === "siteGlobalCss") { 529 cssLinks.global = link; 530 checkCss(); 531 } 532 533 else if (link.id && link.id.includes("CssLink")) { 534 cssLinks.page = link; 535 checkCss(); 536 } else if (link.id && link.id.includes("widgetCSS")) { 537 cssLinks.widget = link; 538 checkCss(); 539 } 540 541 else { 542 requestIdleCallback(function () { 543 window.setTimeout(function () { 544 loadCssLink(link); 545 }, parseInt(cssTimeout, 10)); 546 }); 547 } 548 } catch (e) { 549 throw e 550 } 551 } 552 window.loadCSS = window.loadCSS || loadCSS; 553})(); 554</script>
554 555 556 557
558<script data-role="deferred-init" type="text/javascript"> 559 /* usage: window.getDeferred(<deferred name>).resolve() or window.getDeferred(<deferred name>).promise.then(...)*/ 560 function Def() { 561 this.promise = new Promise((function (a, b) { 562 this.resolve = a, this.reject = b 563 }).bind(this)) 564 } 565 566 const defs = {}; 567 window.getDeferred = function (a) { 568 return null == defs[a] && (defs[a] = new Def), defs[a] 569 } 570 window.waitForDeferred = function (b, a, c) { 571 let d = window?.getDeferred?.(b); 572 d 573 ? d.promise.then(a) 574 : c && ["complete", "interactive"].includes(document.readyState) 575 ? setTimeout(a, 1) 576 : c 577 ? document.addEventListener("DOMContentLoaded", a) 578 : console.error(`Deferred does not exist`); 579 }; 580</script>
580 581<style id="forceCssIncludes"> 582 /* This file is auto-generated from a `scss` file with the same name */ 583 584.videobgwrapper{overflow:hidden;position:absolute;z-index:0;width:100%;height:100%;top:0;left:0;pointer-events:none;border-radius:inherit}.videobgframe{position:absolute;width:101%;height:100%;top:50%;left:50%;transform:translateY(-50%) translateX(-50%);object-fit:fill}#dm video.videobgframe{margin:0}@media (max-width:767px){.dmRoot .dmPhotoGallery.newPhotoGallery:not(.photo-gallery-done){min-height:80vh}}@media (min-width:1025px){.dmRoot .dmPhotoGallery.newPhotoGallery:not(.photo-gallery-done){min-height:45vh}}@media (min-width:768px) and (max-width:1024px){.responsiveTablet .dmPhotoGallery.newPhotoGallery:not(.photo-gallery-done){min-height:45vh}}#dm [data-show-on-page-only]{display:none!important}#dmRoot div.stickyHeaderFix div.site_content{margin-top:0!important}#dmRoot div.stickyHeaderFix div.hamburger-header-container{position:relative}@media (min-width:768px) and (max-width:1024px){.responsiveTablet #dm .dmInner .hide-for-medium,[data-hidden-on-tablet]{display:none!important}} 585 586 587</style> 588<style id="cssVariables" type="text/css"> 589 :root { 590 --color_1: rgba(255, 255, 255, 1); 591 --color_2: rgba(248, 193, 38, 1); 592 --color_3: rgba(27, 126, 186, 1); 593 --color_4: rgba(18, 65, 85, 1); 594 --color_5: rgba(0, 0, 0, 1); 595 --color_6: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.4); 596 --color_7: rgba(0, 46, 89, 1); 597 --color_8: rgba(149, 190, 132, 1); 598} 599</style> 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625<!-- Google Fonts Include --> 626 627 628 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639<!-- loadCSS function fonts.jsp--> 640 641 642 643<link type="text/css" rel="stylesheet" href="https://irp.cdn-website.com/fonts/css2?family=Inter:[email protected]&family=Amiko:wght@400;600;700&family=Barlow:wght@100;200;300;400;500;600;700;800;900&family=Montserrat:[email protected]&family=Source+Sans+Pro:wght@200;300;400;600;700;900&family=Droid+Serif:wght@400;700&subset=latin-ext&display=swap" /> 644 645 646 647 648 649<!-- RT CSS Include d-css-runtime-desktop-one-package-structured-global--> 650<link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="https://static.cdn-website.com/mnlt/production/6813/_dm/s/rt/dist/css/d-css-runtime-desktop-one-package-structured-global.min.css" /> 651 652<!-- End of RT CSS Include --> 653 654<link type="text/css" rel="stylesheet" href="https://irp.cdn-website.com/WIDGET_CSS/b46045d0fd934158d6895268fe2f0427.css" id="widgetCSS" /> 655 656<!-- Support `img` size attributes --> 657<style>img[width][height] { 658 height: auto; 659}</style> 660 661<!-- Support showing sticky element on page only --> 662<style> 663 body[data-page-alias="edprepinsights"] #dm [data-show-on-page-only="edprepinsights"] { 664 display: block !important; 665 } 666</style> 667 668<!-- This is populated in Ajax navigation --> 669<style id="pageAdditionalWidgetsCss" type="text/css"> 670</style> 671 672 673 674 675<!-- Site CSS --> 676<link type="text/css" rel="stylesheet" href="https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/files/9beebeba_1.min.css?v=e937442058f86549f59aa0baf323231e" id="siteGlobalCss" /> 677 678 679 680<style id="customWidgetStyle" type="text/css"> 681 682</style> 683<style id="innerPagesStyle" type="text/css"> 684 685</style> 686 687 688<style 689 id="additionalGlobalCss" type="text/css" 690> 691</style> 692 693<style id="pagestyle" type="text/css"> 694 *#dm *.dmBody a.span.textonly 695{ 696 color:rgb(255,255,255) !important; 697} 698*#dm *.dmBody div.dmform-error 699{ 700 font-style:normal !important; 701} 702*#dm *.dmBody div.dmforminput textarea 703{ 704 font-style:italic !important; 705} 706*#dm *.dmBody div.dmforminput *.fileUploadLink 707{ 708 font-style:italic !important; 709} 710*#dm *.dmBody div.checkboxwrapper span 711{ 712 font-style:italic !important; 713} 714*#dm *.dmBody div.radiowrapper span 715{ 716 font-style:italic !important; 717} 718*#dm *.dmBody div.u_1213107879 .authorBar 719{ 720 color:rgba(147,147,147,1) !important; 721} 722*#dm *.dmBody div.u_1213107879 .readMore a 723{ 724 color:rgba(0,0,0,1) !important; 725} 726*#dm *.dmBody div.u_1213107879 .postDescription 727{ 728 max-height:4.1em !important; 729} 730*#dm *.dmBody div.u_1223119059 731{ 732 background-color:rgba(0,0,0,0) !important; 733} 734*#dm *.dmBody *.u_1392011549:before 735{ 736 opacity:0.5 !important; 737 background-color:var(--color_1) !important; 738} 739*#dm *.dmBody *.u_1392011549.before 740{ 741 opacity:0.5 !important; 742 background-color:var(--color_1) !important; 743} 744*#dm *.dmBody div.u_1392011549:before 745{ 746 background-color:rgba(0,0,0,1) !important; 747 opacity:0.4 !important; 748} 749*#dm *.dmBody div.u_1392011549.before 750{ 751 background-color:rgba(0,0,0,1) !important; 752 opacity:0.4 !important; 753} 754*#dm *.dmBody div.u_1769234532 .dmBlogSearchInput 755{ 756 border-color:rgba(27,126,186,1) !important; 757 border-radius:10px 10px 10px 10px !important; 758 border-style:solid !important; 759 border-width:2px !important; 760 font-weight:700 !important; 761 color:var(--color_3) !important; 762} 763*#dm *.dmBody div.u_1769234532 .dmBlogSearchIcon 764{ 765 color:var(--color_3) !important; 766} 767*#dm *.dmBody div.u_1213107879 .postTitle a 768{ 769 font-family:'Montserrat' !important; 770} 771*#dm *.dmBody div.u_1392011549 772{ 773 background-repeat:no-repeat !important; 774 background-image:url(https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/opt/AdobeStock_939143979-2880w.jpeg) !important; 775} 776*#dm *.dmBody div.u_1213107879 .postArticle>.inner 777{ 778 box-shadow:none !important; 779 -moz-box-shadow:none !important; 780 -webkit-box-shadow:none !important; 781 border-radius:0px !important; 782 -moz-border-radius:0px !important; 783 -webkit-border-radius:0px !important; 784 border-color:rgba(224,224,224,1) !important; 785 border-width:0px !important; 786 border-style:solid !important; 787} 788*#dm *.dmBody div.u_1213107879 .postArticle .blogImgLink 789{ 790 height:381px !important; 791} 792*#dm *.dmBody div.u_1639566867 .authorBar 793{ 794 color:rgba(147,147,147,1) !important; 795} 796*#dm *.dmBody div.u_1639566867 .readMore a 797{ 798 color:rgba(0,0,0,1) !important; 799} 800*#dm *.dmBody div.u_1639566867 .postDescription 801{ 802 max-height:4.1em !important; 803} 804*#dm *.dmBody div.u_1639566867 .postTitle a 805{ 806 font-family:'Montserrat' !important; 807} 808*#dm *.dmBody div.u_1639566867 .postArticle>.inner 809{ 810 box-shadow:none !important; 811 -moz-box-shadow:none !important; 812 -webkit-box-shadow:none !important; 813 border-radius:0px !important; 814 -moz-border-radius:0px !important; 815 -webkit-border-radius:0px !important; 816 border-color:rgba(224,224,224,1) !important; 817 border-width:0px !important; 818 border-style:solid !important; 819} 820*#dm *.dmBody div.u_1306608780 821{ 822 background-color:rgba(255,255,255,1) !important; 823} 824*#dm *.dmBody div.u_1869217444 825{ 826 background-color:rgba(255,255,255,1) !important; 827} 828*#dm *.dmBody div.u_1639566867 .postArticle .blogImgLink 829{ 830 height:314px !important; 831} 832 833</style> 834 835<style id="pagestyleDevice" type="text/css"> 836 *#dm *.d-page-1716942098 DIV.dmInner 837{ 838 background-repeat:no-repeat !important; 839 background-size:cover !important; 840 background-attachment:fixed !important; 841 background-position:50% 50% !important; 842} 843*#dm *.d-page-1716942098 DIV#dmSlideRightNavRight 844{ 845 background-repeat:no-repeat !important; 846 background-image:none !important; 847 background-size:cover !important; 848 background-attachment:fixed !important; 849 background-position:50% 50% !important; 850} 851*#dm *.dmBody div.u_1213107879 .authorBar 852{ 853 font-size:13px !important; 854} 855*#dm *.dmBody div.u_1213107879 .readMore a 856{ 857 font-size:14px !important; 858} 859*#dm *.dmBody div.u_1027403962 860{ 861 margin-left:0px !important; 862 padding-top:0px !important; 863 padding-left:0px !important; 864 padding-bottom:0px !important; 865 margin-top:0px !important; 866 margin-bottom:0px !important; 867 margin-right:0px !important; 868 padding-right:0px !important; 869} 870*#dm *.dmBody div.u_1223119059 871{ 872 padding-left:0px !important; 873 padding-right:0px !important; 874 padding-top:0px !important; 875 padding-bottom:0px !important; 876} 877*#dm *.dmBody div.u_1392011549 878{ 879 padding-top:90px !important; 880 padding-bottom:90px !important; 881 padding-left:0px !important; 882 padding-right:0px !important; 883 background-attachment:initial !important; 884 background-size:cover !important; 885 float:none !important; 886 top:0px !important; 887 left:0 !important; 888 width:100% !important; 889 position:relative !important; 890 height:auto !important; 891 max-width:none !important; 892 min-width:0 !important; 893 text-align:start !important; 894 background-position:50% 50% !important; 895} 896*#dm *.dmBody div.u_1769234532 897{ 898 float:none !important; 899 top:0px !important; 900 left:0 !important; 901 width:calc(100% - 265px) !important; 902 position:relative !important; 903 height:54px !important; 904 padding-top:0px !important; 905 padding-left:0px !important; 906 padding-bottom:0px !important; 907 min-height:auto !important; 908 margin-right:auto !important; 909 margin-left:auto !important; 910 max-width:670px !important; 911 margin-top:10px !important; 912 margin-bottom:0px !important; 913 padding-right:0px !important; 914 min-width:25px !important; 915 text-align:start !important; 916} 917*#dm *.dmBody div.u_1213107879 918{ 919 display:block !important; 920 float:none !important; 921 top:0px !important; 922 left:0 !important; 923 width:calc(100% - 0px) !important; 924 position:relative !important; 925 height:auto !important; 926 padding-top:0px !important; 927 padding-left:0px !important; 928 padding-bottom:0px !important; 929 margin-right:auto !important; 930 margin-left:auto !important; 931 max-width:100% !important; 932 margin-top:20px !important; 933 margin-bottom:0px !important; 934 padding-right:0px !important; 935 min-width:25px !important; 936 text-align:start !important; 937 min-height:auto !important; 938} 939*#dm *.dmBody div.u_1769234532 .dmBlogSearchInput 940{ 941 font-size:16px !important; 942} 943*#dm *.dmBody div.u_1213107879 .postTitle a 944{ 945 font-size:22px !important; 946} 947*#dm *.dmBody *.u_1213107879 .postText * 948{ 949 text-align:LEFT !important; 950} 951*#dm *.dmBody div.u_1306608780 952{ 953 padding-top:53px !important; 954 padding-bottom:69px !important; 955 margin-left:0px !important; 956 padding-left:30px !important; 957 margin-top:0px !important; 958 margin-bottom:0px !important; 959 margin-right:0px !important; 960 padding-right:30px !important; 961 width:auto !important; 962 float:none !important; 963 top:0 !important; 964 left:0 !important; 965 position:relative !important; 966 height:auto !important; 967 min-height:auto !important; 968 max-width:100% !important; 969 min-width:0 !important; 970 text-align:start !important; 971} 972*#dm *.dmBody div.u_1639566867 .authorBar 973{ 974 font-size:13px !important; 975} 976*#dm *.dmBody div.u_1639566867 .readMore a 977{ 978 font-size:14px !important; 979} 980*#dm *.dmBody div.u_1879118725 981{ 982 margin-left:0px !important; 983 padding-top:0px !important; 984 padding-left:0px !important; 985 padding-bottom:0px !important; 986 margin-top:0px !important; 987 margin-bottom:0px !important; 988 margin-right:0px !important; 989 padding-right:0px !important; 990} 991*#dm *.dmBody div.u_1639566867 992{ 993 display:block !important; 994 float:none !important; 995 top:0px !important; 996 left:0 !important; 997 width:calc(100% - 0px) !important; 998 position:relative !important; 999 height:auto !important; 1000 padding-top:0px !important; 1001 padding-left:0px !important; 1002 padding-bottom:0px !important; 1003 margin-right:auto !important; 1004 margin-left:auto !important; 1005 max-width:100% !important; 1006 margin-top:20px !important; 1007 margin-bottom:0px !important; 1008 padding-right:0px !important; 1009 min-width:25px !important; 1010 text-align:start !important; 1011 min-height:auto !important; 1012} 1013*#dm *.dmBody div.u_1639566867 .postTitle a 1014{ 1015 font-size:22px !important; 1016} 1017*#dm *.dmBody *.u_1639566867 .postText * 1018{ 1019 text-align:LEFT !important; 1020} 1021*#dm *.dmBody div.u_1869217444 1022{ 1023 padding-top:53px !important; 1024 padding-bottom:69px !important; 1025 padding-left:30px !important; 1026 padding-right:30px !important; 1027 width:auto !important; 1028 float:none !important; 1029 top:0 !important; 1030 left:0 !important; 1031 position:relative !important; 1032 height:auto !important; 1033 min-height:auto !important; 1034 max-width:100% !important; 1035 min-width:0 !important; 1036 text-align:start !important; 1037} 1038*#dm *.dmBody div.u_1639566867 .authorBar 1039{ 1040 font-size:13px !important; 1041} 1042*#dm *.dmBody div.u_1639566867 .readMore a 1043{ 1044 font-size:14px !important; 1045} 1046*#dm *.dmBody div.u_1879118725 1047{ 1048 margin-left:0px !important; 1049 padding-top:0px !important; 1050 padding-left:0px !important; 1051 padding-bottom:0px !important; 1052 margin-top:0px !important; 1053 margin-bottom:0px !important; 1054 margin-right:0px !important; 1055 padding-right:0px !important; 1056} 1057*#dm *.dmBody div.u_1639566867 1058{ 1059 display:block !important; 1060 float:none !important; 1061 top:0px !important; 1062 left:0 !important; 1063 width:calc(100% - 0px) !important; 1064 position:relative !important; 1065 height:auto !important; 1066 padding-top:0px !important; 1067 padding-left:0px !important; 1068 padding-bottom:0px !important; 1069 margin-right:auto !important; 1070 margin-left:auto !important; 1071 max-width:100% !important; 1072 margin-top:20px !important; 1073 margin-bottom:0px !important; 1074 padding-right:0px !important; 1075 min-width:25px !important; 1076 text-align:start !important; 1077 min-height:auto !important; 1078} 1079*#dm *.dmBody div.u_1639566867 .postTitle a 1080{ 1081 font-size:22px !important; 1082} 1083*#dm *.dmBody *.u_1639566867 .postText * 1084{ 1085 text-align:LEFT !important; 1086} 1087*#dm *.dmBody div.u_1869217444 1088{ 1089 padding-top:53px !important; 1090 padding-bottom:69px !important; 1091 padding-left:30px !important; 1092 padding-right:30px !important; 1093 width:auto !important; 1094 float:none !important; 1095 top:0 !important; 1096 left:0 !important; 1097 position:relative !important; 1098 height:auto !important; 1099 min-height:auto !important; 1100 max-width:100% !important; 1101 min-width:0 !important; 1102 text-align:start !important; 1103} 1104 1105</style> 1106 1107<!-- Flex Sections CSS --> 1108 1109 1110 1111 1112 1113 1114 1115<style id="globalFontSizeStyle" type="text/css"> 1116 1117</style> 1118<style id="pageFontSizeStyle" type="text/css"> 1119</style> 1120 1121 1122 1123 1124<style id="hideAnimFix"> 1125 .dmDesktopBody:not(.editGrid) [data-anim-desktop]:not([data-anim-desktop='none']), .dmDesktopBody:not(.editGrid) [data-anim-extended] { 1126 visibility: hidden; 1127 } 1128 1129 .dmDesktopBody:not(.editGrid) .dmNewParagraph[data-anim-desktop]:not([data-anim-desktop='none']), .dmDesktopBody:not(.editGrid) .dmNewParagraph[data-anim-extended] { 1130 visibility: hidden !important; 1131 } 1132 1133 #dmRoot:not(.editGrid) .flex-element [data-anim-extended] { 1134 visibility: hidden; 1135 } 1136 1137</style> 1138 1139 1140 1141 1142<style id="fontFallbacks"> 1143 @font-face { 1144 font-family: "Inter Fallback"; 1145 src: local('Arial'); 1146 ascent-override: 90.199%; 1147 descent-override: 22.4836%; 1148 size-adjust: 107.4014%; 1149 line-gap-override: 0%; 1150 }@font-face { 1151 font-family: "Amiko Fallback"; 1152 src: local('Arial'); 1153 ascent-override: 82.254%; 1154 descent-override: 35.9861%; 1155 size-adjust: 112.8212%; 1156 line-gap-override: 0%; 1157 }@font-face { 1158 font-family: "Arial Fallback"; 1159 src: local('Arial'); 1160 line-gap-override: 0%; 1161 }@font-face { 1162 font-family: "Barlow Fallback"; 1163 src: local('Arial'); 1164 ascent-override: 103.1323%; 1165 descent-override: 20.6265%; 1166 size-adjust: 96.9628%; 1167 line-gap-override: 0%; 1168 }@font-face { 1169 font-family: "Montserrat Fallback"; 1170 src: local('Arial'); 1171 ascent-override: 84.9466%; 1172 descent-override: 22.0264%; 1173 size-adjust: 113.954%; 1174 line-gap-override: 0%; 1175 }@font-face { 1176 font-family: "Georgia Fallback"; 1177 src: local('Arial'); 1178 ascent-override: 92.2092%; 1179 descent-override: 22.0458%; 1180 size-adjust: 99.4469%; 1181 line-gap-override: 0%; 1182 } 1183</style> 1184 1185 1186<!-- End render the required css and JS in the head section --> 1187 1188 1189 1190 1191 1192 1193 1194 1195 1196 <link type="application/rss+xml" rel="alternate" href="https://www.edpreppartners.org/feed/rss2"/> 1197 <link type="application/atom+xml" rel="alternate" href="https://www.edpreppartners.org/feed/atom"/> 1198 <meta property="og:type" content="website"/> 1199 <meta property="og:url" content="https://www.edpreppartners.org/edprepinsights"/> 1200 <!--Zoho Campaigns Web-Optin Form's Header Code Starts Here--> <meta content="width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0, maximum-scale=1.0, user-scalable=0" name="viewport"/> 1201
1201<script type="text/javascript" src="https://zcsub-cmpzourl.maillist-manage.com/js/optin.min.js" onload="setupSF('sf3z3cdc99cd3e159b477f2e7ace3bb614e72a1747e04de4ebbce07cc417ac1343f0','ZCFORMVIEW',false,'acc',false,'2')"> 1202 1203 1204 1205 1206 1207 1208 1209 1210 1211 1212 1213 1214 1215 1216 1217 1218 1219 1220 1221 1222 1223 1224 1225 1226 1227 1228 1229 </script>
1229 1230
1230<script type="text/javascript"> 1231 1232 1233 1234 1235 1236 1237 1238 1239 1240 function runOnFormSubmit_sf3z3cdc99cd3e159b477f2e7ace3bb614e72a1747e04de4ebbce07cc417ac1343f0(th){ /*Before submit, if you want to trigger your event, "include your code here"*/ }; 1241 1242 1243 <!-- Google tag (gtag.js) -->
vendor: 64 bytes, line 1243
1243 <script async src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtag/js?id=
1243AW-17633630307
vendor: 33 bytes, lines 1243-1252
1243"> 1244 1245 1246 1247 1248 1249 1250 1251 </script> 1252
1252<script> 1253 1254 1255 1256 1257 1258 1259 1260
vendor: 127 bytes, line 1260
1260window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; function gtag(){dataLayer.push(arguments);} gtag('js', new Date()); gtag('config', '
1260AW-17633630307
vendor: 22 bytes, lines 1260-1268
1260'); 1261 1262 1263 1264 1265 1266 1267 1268
1268</script>
1268 1269 <style> 1270 1271 1272 1273 1274 1275 1276 1277 1278 1279 1280 1281 1282 1283 #sf3z3cdc99cd3e159b477f2e7ace3bb614e72a1747e04de4ebbce07cc417ac1343f0 #customForm *:not(.dateClass){ -webkit-box-sizing: border-box !important; -moz-box-sizing: border-box !important; box-sizing: border-box !important; word-break:break-word; overflow-wrap: break-word; } #sf3z3cdc99cd3e159b477f2e7ace3bb614e72a1747e04de4ebbce07cc417ac1343f0 .dateClass{ -webkit-box-sizing: unset!important; -moz-box-sizing: unset !important; box-sizing: unset !important; word-break:break-word; overflow-wrap: break-word; } /*** RESPONSIVE START */ @media only screen and (max-width: 319px){ #sf3z3cdc99cd3e159b477f2e7ace3bb614e72a1747e04de4ebbce07cc417ac1343f0 #signupMainDiv{ width:220px !important; min-width:220px !important; margin: 0px auto !important; } #sf3z3cdc99cd3e159b477f2e7ace3bb614e72a1747e04de4ebbce07cc417ac1343f0 #SIGNUP_PAGE{ padding:0px !important } #sf3z3cdc99cd3e159b477f2e7ace3bb614e72a1747e04de4ebbce07cc417ac1343f0 [changeitem="SIGNUP_FORM_FIELD"]{ width:94% !important; } #sf3z3cdc99cd3e159b477f2e7ace3bb614e72a1747e04de4ebbce07cc417ac1343f0 .zcinputbox{ width:100% !important; max-width:100% !important; float:none !important; } #sf3z3cdc99cd3e159b477f2e7ace3bb614e72a1747e04de4ebbce07cc417ac1343f0 #captchaDiv{ width:69.5% !important; } #sf3z3cdc99cd3e159b477f2e7ace3bb614e72a1747e04de4ebbce07cc417ac1343f0 #relCaptcha{ margin-right:11px !important; } #sf3z3cdc99cd3e159b477f2e7ace3bb614e72a1747e04de4ebbce07cc417ac1343f0 .recaptcha{ transform:scale(0.55);-webkit-transform:scale(0.55);transform-origin:0 0;-webkit-transform-origin:0 0;} } /*Major Mobiles*/ @media screen and (min-width: 320px) and (max-width: 580px){ #sf3z3cdc99cd3e159b477f2e7ace3bb614e72a1747e04de4ebbce07cc417ac1343f0 #signupMainDiv{ width:280px !important; min-width:280px !important; margin: 0px auto !important; } #sf3z3cdc99cd3e159b477f2e7ace3bb614e72a1747e04de4ebbce07cc417ac1343f0 .zcinputbox{ width:100% !important; max-width:100% !important; float:none !important; } #sf3z3cdc99cd3e159b477f2e7ace3bb614e72a1747e04de4ebbce07cc417ac1343f0 [changeitem="SIGNUP_FORM_FIELD"]{ width:95% !important; } #sf3z3cdc99cd3e159b477f2e7ace3bb614e72a1747e04de4ebbce07cc417ac1343f0 #captchaDiv{ width:72% !important; } #sf3z3cdc99cd3e159b477f2e7ace3bb614e72a1747e04de4ebbce07cc417ac1343f0 #captchaText{ width:96% !important; } #sf3z3cdc99cd3e159b477f2e7ace3bb614e72a1747e04de4ebbce07cc417ac1343f0 #relCaptcha{ margin-right:6px !important; } #sf3z3cdc99cd3e159b477f2e7ace3bb614e72a1747e04de4ebbce07cc417ac1343f0 #capRequired{ margin-right: -10px !important; } #sf3z3cdc99cd3e159b477f2e7ace3bb614e72a1747e04de4ebbce07cc417ac1343f0 .recaptcha{ transform:scale(0.72);-webkit-transform:scale(0.75);transform-origin:0 0;-webkit-transform-origin:0 0;} } @media screen and (min-width:581px) and (max-width: 767px){ #sf3z3cdc99cd3e159b477f2e7ace3bb614e72a1747e04de4ebbce07cc417ac1343f0 #signupMainDiv{ width:440px !important; min-width:440px !important; margin: 0px auto !important; } #sf3z3cdc99cd3e159b477f2e7ace3bb614e72a1747e04de4ebbce07cc417ac1343f0 .zcinputbox{ width:100% !important; max-width:100% !important; float:none !important; } #sf3z3cdc99cd3e159b477f2e7ace3bb614e72a1747e04de4ebbce07cc417ac1343f0 [changeitem="SIGNUP_FORM_FIELD"]{ width:95% !important; } #sf3z3cdc99cd3e159b477f2e7ace3bb614e72a1747e04de4ebbce07cc417ac1343f0 #captchaDiv{ width:84.4% !important; } #sf3z3cdc99cd3e159b477f2e7ace3bb614e72a1747e04de4ebbce07cc417ac1343f0 #captchaText{ width:96% !important; } #sf3z3cdc99cd3e159b477f2e7ace3bb614e72a1747e04de4ebbce07cc417ac1343f0 #relCaptcha{ margin-right:14px !important; } #sf3z3cdc99cd3e159b477f2e7ace3bb614e72a1747e04de4ebbce07cc417ac1343f0 #capRequired{ margin-right: -10px !important; } #sf3z3cdc99cd3e159b477f2e7ace3bb614e72a1747e04de4ebbce07cc417ac1343f0 .recaptcha{ transform:scale(1.13);-webkit-transform:scale(1.0);margin-bottom:40px;transform-origin:0 0;-webkit-transform-origin:0 0;} } /* Desktops and laptops ----------- */ @media only screen and (min-width : 1025px) { #sf3z3cdc99cd3e159b477f2e7ace3bb614e72a1747e04de4ebbce07cc417ac1343f0 #signupMainDiv{ width:600px !important; min-width:600px !important; margin: 0px auto !important; } #sf3z3cdc99cd3e159b477f2e7ace3bb614e72a1747e04de4ebbce07cc417ac1343f0 .recaptcha{ transform:scale(1.03);-webkit-transform:scale(1.08);transform-origin:0 0;-webkit-transform-origin:0 0;} } /* Large Screens */ @media only screen and (min-width : 1824px) { #sf3z3cdc99cd3e159b477f2e7ace3bb614e72a1747e04de4ebbce07cc417ac1343f0 #signupMainDiv{ width:600px !important; min-width:600px !important; margin: 0px auto !important; } #sf3z3cdc99cd3e159b477f2e7ace3bb614e72a1747e04de4ebbce07cc417ac1343f0 .recaptcha{ transform:scale(1.03);-webkit-transform:scale(1.08);transform-origin:0 0;-webkit-transform-origin:0 0;} } @media only screen and (min-device-width: 1200px) and (max-device-width:1200px){ #sf3z3cdc99cd3e159b477f2e7ace3bb614e72a1747e04de4ebbce07cc417ac1343f0 #signupMainDiv{ width:600px !important; min-width:600px !important; margin: 0px auto !important; } } /* iPads*/ @media only screen and (min-width : 768px) and (max-width : 1024px){ #sf3z3cdc99cd3e159b477f2e7ace3bb614e72a1747e04de4ebbce07cc417ac1343f0 #signupMainDiv{ width:500px !important; min-width:240px !important; margin: 0px auto !important; } #sf3z3cdc99cd3e159b477f2e7ace3bb614e72a1747e04de4ebbce07cc417ac1343f0 #captchaDiv{ width:86.8% !important; } #sf3z3cdc99cd3e159b477f2e7ace3bb614e72a1747e04de4ebbce07cc417ac1343f0 #relCaptcha{ margin-right:12px !important; } #sf3z3cdc99cd3e159b477f2e7ace3bb614e72a1747e04de4ebbce07cc417ac1343f0 .recaptcha{ transform:scale(0.90);-webkit-transform:scale(0.90);transform-origin:50% 50%;-webkit-transform-origin:0 0;} }
1283 /*** RESPONSIVE END */ #sf3z3cdc99cd3e159b477f2e7ace3bb614e72a1747e04de4ebbce07cc417ac1343f0 .bdr_btm_hover{background-color:#f9f9f9; padding:10px;} #sf3z3cdc99cd3e159b477f2e7ace3bb614e72a1747e04de4ebbce07cc417ac1343f0 .bdr_btm{padding:10px } #sf3z3cdc99cd3e159b477f2e7ace3bb614e72a1747e04de4ebbce07cc417ac1343f0 .f14{font-size:14px} large_form_6_css [changeitem="SIGNUP_FORM_FIELD"]{ box-sizing:initial !important; border-radius:0px !important; } 1284 1285 1286 1287 1288 1289 1290 1291 1292 1293 1294 1295 1296 1297 </style> 1298 <!--Zoho Campaigns Web-Optin Form's Header Code Ends Here--> <meta property="og:image:type" content="image/png"/> 1299 <meta property="og:image:width" content="1200"/> 1300 <meta property="og:image:height" content="630"/> 1301
1301<script type="text/javascript"> 1302 1303 1304 1305 1306 1307 1308 1309 1310 1311 window._mfq = window._mfq || []; 1312 (function() { 1313 var mf = document.createElement("script"); 1314 mf.type = "text/javascript"; mf.defer = true; 1315 mf.src = "//cdn.mouseflow.com/projects/4919c481-e2dd-4001-a567-52a7af1f5fee.js"; 1316 document.getElementsByTagName("head")[0].appendChild(mf); 1317 })(); 1318 1319 1320 1321 1322 1323 1324 1325 1326 1327 1328 1329 1330 </script>
1330 1331 1332 <meta name="twitter:card" content="summary"/> 1333 <meta name="twitter:image" content="https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/opt/edprep-social-1920w.png"/> 1334 <meta property="og:image" content="https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/opt/edprep-social-1920w.png"/> 1335 1336 1337 1338 1339<!-- SYS- VVNfRElSRUNUX1BST0RVQ1RJT04= --> 1340</head> 1341 1342 1343 1344 1345 1346 1347 1348 1349 1350 1351 1352 1353 1354 1355 1356 1357 1358 1359 1360 1361 1362<body id="dmRoot" data-page-alias="edprepinsights" class="dmRoot dmDesktopBody fix-mobile-scrolling addCanvasBorder dmResellerSite dmLargeBody responsiveTablet " 1363 style="padding:0;margin:0;" 1364 1365 > 1366 1367 1368 1369 1370 1371 1372 1373 1374 1375 1376 1377 1378 1379 1380 1381<!-- ========= Site Content ========= --> 1382<div id="dm" class='dmwr'> 1383 1384 <div class="dm_wrapper standard-var5 widgetStyle-3 standard"> 1385 <div dmwrapped="true" id="1901957768" class="dm-home-page" themewaschanged="true"> <div dmtemplateid="Hamburger" data-responsive-name="ResponsiveDesktopTopTabletHamburger" class="runtime-module-container dm-bfs dm-layout-sec hasAnimations rows-1200 dmPageBody d-page-1716942098 inputs-css-clean dmFreeHeader" id="dm-outer-wrapper" data-page-class="1716942098" data-soch="true" data-background-parallax-selector=".dmHomeSection1, .dmSectionParallex"> <div id="dmStyle_outerContainer" class="dmOuter"> <div id="dmStyle_innerContainer" class="dmInner" data-auto="page-inner"> <div class="dmLayoutWrapper standard-var dmStandardDesktop"> <div id="site_content"> <div class="p_hfcontainer showOnMedium"> <div id="hamburger-drawer" class="hamburger-drawer layout-drawer" layout="e9d510f4eb904e939c2be8efaf777e6e===header" data-origin="side"> <div class="u_1843524807 dmRespRow" style="text-align: center;" id="1843524807"> <div class="dmRespColsWrapper" id="1784828075"> <div class="u_1759644205 dmRespCol small-12 medium-12 large-12 empty-column" id="1759644205"></div> 1386</div> 1387</div> 1388 <div class="u_1962136191 dmRespRow middleDrawerRow" style="text-align: center;" id="1962136191"> <div class="dmRespColsWrapper" id="1535901216"> <div class="dmRespCol small-12 u_1361731990 medium-12 large-12" id="1361731990"> <nav class="u_1755486735 effect-bottom2 main-navigation unifiednav dmLinksMenu" data-auto="links-menu" role="navigation" layout-main="vertical_nav_layout_2" layout-sub="" data-show-vertical-sub-items="HIDE" id="1755486735" dmle_extension="onelinksmenu" data-element-type="onelinksmenu" data-logo-src="" alt="" data-nav-structure="VERTICAL" wr="true" icon="true" surround="true" adwords="" navigation-id="unifiedNav"> <ul role="menubar" class="unifiednav__container unav-top " data-auto="navigation-pages"> <li role="menuitem" class=" unifiednav__item-wrap " data-auto="more-pages" data-depth="0"> <a href="/" class="unifiednav__item unav-item unav-top-item " target="" data-target-page-alias="home"> <span class="nav-item-text " data-link-text="HOME" data-auto="page-text-style">HOME<span class="icon icon-angle-down" data-hidden-on-mobile="" data-hidden-on-desktop="" data-hidden-on-tablet=""></span> 1389</span> 1390</a> 1391</li> 1392 <li role="menuitem" class=" unifiednav__item-wrap " data-auto="more-pages" data-depth="0"> <a href="/#OURMISSION" class="unifiednav__item unav-item unav-top-item " target="" data-target-page-alias="home#OURMISSION"> <span class="nav-item-text " data-link-text="OUR MISSION" data-auto="page-text-style">OUR MISSION<span class="icon icon-angle-down" data-hidden-on-mobile="" data-hidden-on-desktop="" data-hidden-on-tablet=""></span> 1393</span> 1394</a> 1395</li> 1396 <li role="menuitem" aria-haspopup="true" aria-expanded="false" data-sub-nav-menu="true" class=" unifiednav__item-wrap " data-auto="more-pages" data-depth="0"> <a href="/how-we-help" class="unifiednav__item unav-item unav-top-item unifiednav__item_has-sub-nav" target="" data-target-page-alias="services"> <span class="nav-item-text " data-link-text="HOW WE HELP" data-auto="page-text-style">HOW WE HELP<span class="icon icon-angle-down"></span> 1397</span> 1398</a> 1399 <ul role="menu" class="unifiednav__container unifiednav__container_sub-nav unav-sub" data-depth="0" data-auto="sub-pages"> <li role="menuitem" class=" unifiednav__item-wrap " data-auto="more-pages" data-depth="1"> <a href="/how-we-help#TECNHICALASSISTANCE" class="unifiednav__item unav-item " target="" data-target-page-alias="services#TECNHICALASSISTANCE"> <span class="nav-item-text " data-link-text="TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE" data-auto="page-text-style">TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE<span class="icon icon-angle-right" data-hidden-on-mobile="" data-hidden-on-desktop="" data-hidden-on-tablet=""></span> 1400</span> 1401</a> 1402</li> 1403 <li role="menuitem" class=" unifiednav__item-wrap " data-auto="more-pages" data-depth="1"> <a href="/services#PROGRAMPERFORMANCEREVIEW" class="unifiednav__item unav-item " target="" data-target-page-alias="services#PROGRAMPERFORMANCEREVIEW"> <span class="nav-item-text " data-link-text="PROGRAM PERFORMANCE REVIEW" data-auto="page-text-style">PROGRAM PERFORMANCE REVIEW<span class="icon icon-angle-right" data-hidden-on-mobile="" data-hidden-on-desktop="" data-hidden-on-tablet=""></span> 1404</span> 1405</a> 1406</li> 1407 <li role="menuitem" class=" unifiednav__item-wrap " data-auto="more-pages" data-depth="1"> <a href="/services#PATHWAYEXPANSION" class="unifiednav__item unav-item " target="" data-target-page-alias="services#PATHWAYEXPANSION"> <span class="nav-item-text " data-link-text="PATHWAY EXPANSION" data-auto="page-text-style">PATHWAY EXPANSION<span class="icon icon-angle-right" data-hidden-on-mobile="" data-hidden-on-desktop="" data-hidden-on-tablet=""></span> 1408</span> 1409</a> 1410</li> 1411 <li role="menuitem" class=" unifiednav__item-wrap " data-auto="more-pages" data-depth="1"> <a href="/services#DATAINFORMEDPRACTICES" class="unifiednav__item unav-item " target="" data-target-page-alias="services#DATAINFORMEDPRACTICES"> <span class="nav-item-text " data-link-text="DATA INFORMED PRACTICES" data-auto="page-text-style">DATA INFORMED PRACTICES<span class="icon icon-angle-right" data-hidden-on-mobile="" data-hidden-on-desktop="" data-hidden-on-tablet=""></span> 1412</span> 1413</a> 1414</li> 1415</ul> 1416</li> 1417 <li role="menuitem" class=" unifiednav__item-wrap " data-auto="more-pages" data-depth="0"> <a href="/who-we-are" class="unifiednav__item unav-item unav-top-item " target="" data-target-page-alias="who-we-are"> <span class="nav-item-text " data-link-text="WHO WE ARE" data-auto="page-text-style">WHO WE ARE<span class="icon icon-angle-down" data-hidden-on-mobile="" data-hidden-on-desktop="" data-hidden-on-tablet=""></span> 1418</span> 1419</a> 1420</li> 1421 <li role="menuitem" aria-haspopup="true" aria-expanded="false" data-sub-nav-menu="true" class=" unifiednav__item-wrap " data-auto="more-pages" data-depth="0"> <a href="#" class="unifiednav__item unav-item unav-top-item unifiednav__item_has-sub-nav" target="" data-target-page-alias=""> <span class="nav-item-text " data-link-text="INSIGHTS & PUBLICATIONS" data-auto="page-text-style">INSIGHTS & PUBLICATIONS<span class="icon icon-angle-down"></span> 1422</span> 1423</a> 1424 <ul role="menu" class="unifiednav__container unifiednav__container_sub-nav unav-sub" data-depth="0" data-auto="sub-pages"> <li role="menuitem" class=" unifiednav__item-wrap " data-auto="more-pages" data-depth="1"> <a href="/edprepinsights" class="unifiednav__item unav-item dmNavItemSelected " target="" data-target-page-alias="edprepinsights" aria-current="page" data-auto="selected-page"> <span class="nav-item-text " data-link-text="EDPREP INSIGHTS" data-auto="page-text-style">EDPREP INSIGHTS<span class="icon icon-angle-right" data-hidden-on-mobile="" data-hidden-on-desktop="" data-hidden-on-tablet=""></span> 1425</span> 1426</a> 1427</li> 1428 <li role="menuitem" class=" unifiednav__item-wrap " data-auto="more-pages" data-depth="1"> <a href="/our-publications" class="unifiednav__item unav-item " target="" data-target-page-alias="our-publications"> <span class="nav-item-text " data-link-text="OUR PUBLICATIONS" data-auto="page-text-style">OUR PUBLICATIONS<span class="icon icon-angle-right" data-hidden-on-mobile="" data-hidden-on-desktop="" data-hidden-on-tablet=""></span> 1429</span> 1430</a> 1431</li> 1432 <li role="menuitem" class=" unifiednav__item-wrap " data-auto="more-pages" data-depth="1"> <a href="https://www.edpreppartners.org/beyond-access" class="unifiednav__item unav-item " target="_blank" data-target-page-alias="https://www.edpreppartners.org/beyond-access"> <span class="nav-item-text " data-link-text="BEYOND ACCESS SERIES" data-auto="page-text-style">BEYOND ACCESS SERIES<span class="icon icon-angle-right" data-hidden-on-mobile="" data-hidden-on-desktop="" data-hidden-on-tablet=""></span> 1433</span> 1434</a> 1435</li> 1436</ul> 1437</li> 1438</ul> 1439</nav> 1440 <div class="u_1350906553 dmRespRow" id="1350906553"> <div class="dmRespColsWrapper" id="1885989237"> <div class="u_1669839032 dmRespCol small-12 medium-12 large-12" id="1669839032"> <div class="u_1041642042 align-center text-align-center dmSocialHub gapSpacing" id="1041642042" dmle_extension="social_hub" data-element-type="social_hub" wr="true" networks="" icon="true" surround="true" adwords=""> <div class="socialHubWrapper"> <div class="socialHubInnerDiv " data-auto="social-hub-inner"> <a href="https://www.linkedin.com/company/edprep-partners/" target="_blank" dm_dont_rewrite_url="true" aria-label="linkedin" onclick="dm_gaq_push_event &&
1440 dm_gaq_push_event('socialLink', 'click', 'Linkedin')"> <span class="dmSocialLinkedin icon-linkedin oneIcon socialHubIcon style4" aria-hidden="true" data-hover-effect=""></span> 1441</a> 1442</div> 1443</div> 1444</div> 1445 <a data-display-type="block" class="u_1028877819 align-center dmButtonLink dmWidget dmWwr default dmOnlyButton dmDefaultGradient button_2" file="false" href="/#scroll_to_bottom" id="1028877819" data-element-type="dButtonLinkId" data-buttonstyle="ROUND_SIDES"> <span class="iconBg" id="1308032609"> <span class="icon hasFontIcon icon-star" id="1464089037"></span> 1446</span> 1447 <span class="text" id="1748750384">Contact Us</span> 1448</a> 1449</div> 1450</div> 1451</div> 1452</div> 1453</div> 1454</div> 1455 <div class="dmRespRow u_1798572783" style="text-align: center;" id="1798572783"> <div class="dmRespColsWrapper" id="1346492520"> <div class="u_1091634380 dmRespCol small-12 medium-12 large-12" id="1091634380"> <div class="u_1790633400 imageWidget align-center" data-element-type="image" data-widget-type="image" id="1790633400"><img src="https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/opt/EPP-Logo-4Csm-05-1920w.png" alt="" id="1620532880" class="" width="1920" height="979" data-dm-image-path="https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/EPP-Logo-4Csm-05.png" onerror="handleImageLoadError(this)"/></div> 1456</div> 1457</div> 1458</div> 1459</div> 1460 <div class="layout-drawer-overlay" id="layout-drawer-overlay"></div> 1461</div> 1462 <div class="site_content"> <div id="hamburger-header-container" class="showOnMedium hamburger-header-container p_hfcontainer"> <div id="hamburger-header" class="hamburger-header p_hfcontainer" layout="44dc38f951e9489490b055748e10ba9f===header"> <div class="u_1292909277 dmRespRow" style="text-align: center;" id="1292909277"> <div class="dmRespColsWrapper" id="1491656620"> <div class="dmRespCol small-12 u_1938274309 medium-4 large-4 empty-column content-removed" id="1938274309"></div> 1463 <div class="dmRespCol small-12 medium-4 large-4" id="1474315460"> <div class="u_1726482561 imageWidget align-center" data-element-type="image" data-widget-type="image" id="1726482561"> <a href="/" id="1536715804" file="false"><img src="https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/opt/EPP+Logo+4Csm-05-1920w.png" id="1503320206" class="" data-dm-image-path="https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/EPP+Logo+4Csm-05.png" width="1920" height="979" onerror="handleImageLoadError(this)"/></a> 1464</div> 1465</div> 1466 <div class="dmRespCol small-12 medium-4 large-4 empty-column" id="1139269953"></div> 1467</div> 1468</div> 1469</div> 1470</div> 1471 <button class="showOnMedium layout-drawer-hamburger hamburger-on-header" id="layout-drawer-hamburger" data-auto="layout-drawer-hamburger" aria-label="menu" aria-controls="hamburger-drawer" aria-expanded="false"> <span class="hamburger__slice"></span> 1472 <span class="hamburger__slice"></span> 1473 <span class="hamburger__slice"></span> 1474</button> 1475 <div class="dmHeaderContainer fHeader d-header-wrapper showOnLarge"> <div id="hcontainer" class="dmHeader p_hfcontainer u_hcontainer" freeheader="true" headerlayout="718" layout="3160be7e691447abbddc535d6cfafc7a===header" data-auto="header"> <div dm:templateorder="85" class="dmHeaderResp dmHeaderStack noSwitch" id="1709005236"> <div class="dmRespRow fullBleedChanged fullBleedMode u_1207498703" style="text-align: center;" id="1207498703"> <div class="dmRespColsWrapper" id="1255518508"> <div class="u_1270959392 dmRespCol small-12 large-2 medium-2" id="1270959392"> <div class="u_1727829263 imageWidget align-center" data-widget-type="image" id="1727829263" data-element-type="image"> <a href="/" id="1650082078" file="false"><img src="https://lirp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/opt/EPP+Logo+4Csm-05-1920w.png" id="1317830122" class="" data-dm-image-path="https://lirp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/opt/EPP+Logo+4Csm-05-1920w.png" onerror="handleImageLoadError(this)"/></a> 1476</div> 1477</div> 1478 <div class="u_1906560465 dmRespCol small-12 large-8 medium-8" id="1906560465"> <nav class="u_1535761567 effect-bottom main-navigation unifiednav dmLinksMenu" data-auto="links-menu" role="navigation" layout-main="horizontal_nav_layout_1" layout-sub="submenu_horizontal_1" data-show-vertical-sub-items="HOVER" id="1535761567" dmle_extension="onelinksmenu" data-element-type="onelinksmenu" data-nav-structure="HORIZONTAL" wr="true" icon="true" surround="true" adwords="" navigation-id="unifiedNav"> <ul role="menubar" class="unifiednav__container unav-top " data-auto="navigation-pages"> <li role="menuitem" class=" unifiednav__item-wrap " data-auto="more-pages" data-depth="0"> <a href="/" class="unifiednav__item unav-item unav-top-item " target="" data-target-page-alias="home"> <span class="nav-item-text " data-link-text="HOME" data-auto="page-text-style">HOME<span class="icon icon-angle-down" data-hidden-on-mobile="" data-hidden-on-desktop="" data-hidden-on-tablet=""></span> 1479</span> 1480</a> 1481</li> 1482 <li role="menuitem" class=" unifiednav__item-wrap " data-auto="more-pages" data-depth="0"> <a href="/#OURMISSION" class="unifiednav__item unav-item unav-top-item " target="" data-target-page-alias="home#OURMISSION"> <span class="nav-item-text " data-link-text="OUR MISSION" data-auto="page-text-style">OUR MISSION<span class="icon icon-angle-down" data-hidden-on-mobile="" data-hidden-on-desktop="" data-hidden-on-tablet=""></span> 1483</span> 1484</a> 1485</li> 1486 <li role="menuitem" aria-haspopup="true" aria-expanded="false" data-sub-nav-menu="true" class=" unifiednav__item-wrap " data-auto="more-pages" data-depth="0"> <a href="/how-we-help" class="unifiednav__item unav-item unav-top-item unifiednav__item_has-sub-nav" target="" data-target-page-alias="services"> <span class="nav-item-text " data-link-text="HOW WE HELP" data-auto="page-text-style">HOW WE HELP<span class="icon icon-angle-down"></span> 1487</span> 1488</a> 1489 <ul role="menu" class="unifiednav__container unifiednav__container_sub-nav unav-sub" data-depth="0" data-auto="sub-pages"> <li role="menuitem" class=" unifiednav__item-wrap " data-auto="more-pages" data-depth="1"> <a href="/how-we-help#TECHNICALASSISTANCE" class="unifiednav__item unav-item " target="" data-target-page-alias="how-we-help#TECHNICALASSISTANCE"> <span class="nav-item-text " data-link-text="TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE" data-auto="page-text-style">TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE<span class="icon icon-angle-right" data-hidden-on-mobile="" data-hidden-on-desktop="" data-hidden-on-tablet=""></span> 1490</span> 1491</a> 1492</li> 1493 <li role="menuitem" class=" unifiednav__item-wrap " data-auto="more-pages" data-depth="1"> <a href="/how-we-help#PROGRAMPERFORMANCEREVIEWS" class="unifiednav__item unav-item " target="" data-target-page-alias="how-we-help#PROGRAMPERFORMANCEREVIEWS"> <span class="nav-item-text " data-link-text="PROGRAM PERFORMANCE REVIEWS" data-auto="page-text-style">PROGRAM PERFORMANCE REVIEWS<span class="icon icon-angle-right" data-hidden-on-mobile="" data-hidden-on-desktop="" data-hidden-on-tablet=""></span> 1494</span> 1495</a> 1496</li> 1497 <li role="menuitem" class=" unifiednav__item-wrap " data-auto="more-pages" data-depth="1"> <a href="/services#PATHWAYEXPANSION" class="unifiednav__item unav-item " target="" data-target-page-alias="services#PATHWAYEXPANSION"> <span class="nav-item-text " data-link-text="PATHWAY EXPANSION" data-auto="page-text-style">PATHWAY EXPANSION<span class="icon icon-angle-right" data-hidden-on-mobile="" data-hidden-on-desktop="" data-hidden-on-tablet=""></span> 1498</span> 1499</a> 1500</li> 1501 <li role="menuitem" class=" unifiednav__item-wrap " data-auto="more-pages" data-depth="1"> <a href="/services#DATAINFORMEDPRACTICES" class="unifiednav__item unav-item " target="" data-target-page-alias="services#DATAINFORMEDPRACTICES"> <span class="nav-item-text " data-link-text="DATA INFORMED PRACTICES" data-auto="page-text-style">DATA INFORMED PRACTICES<span class="icon icon-angle-right" data-hidden-on-mobile="" data-hidden-on-desktop="" data-hidden-on-tablet=""></span> 1502</span> 1503</a> 1504</li> 1505 <li role="menuitem" class=" unifiednav__item-wrap " data-auto="more-pages" data-depth="1"> <a href="/how-we-help#COMMUNITIESOFPRACTICE" class="unifiednav__item unav-item " target="" data-target-page-alias="how-we-help#COMMUNITIESOFPRACTICE"> <span class="nav-item-text " data-link-text="COMMUNITIES OF PRACTICE" data-auto="page-text-style">COMMUNITIES OF PRACTICE<span class="icon icon-angle-right" data-hidden-on-mobile="" data-hidden-on-desktop="" data-hidden-on-tablet=""></span> 1506</span> 1507</a> 1508</li> 1509 <li role="menuitem" class=" unifiednav__item-wrap " data-auto="more-pages" data-depth="1"> <a href="/how-we-help#CONVENINGS" class="unifiednav__item unav-item " target="" data-target-page-alias="how-we-help#CONVENINGS"> <span class="nav-item-text " data-link-text="CONVENINGS" data-auto="page-text-style">CONVENINGS<span class="icon icon-angle-right" data-hidden-on-mobile="" data-hidden-on-desktop="" data-hidden-on-tablet=""></span> 1510</span> 1511</a> 1512</li> 1513</ul> 1514</li> 1515 <li role="menuitem" class=" unifiednav__item-wrap " data-auto="more-pages" data-depth="0"> <a href="/who-we-are" class="unifiednav__item unav-item unav-top-item " target="" data-target-page-alias="who-we-are"> <span class="nav-item-text " data-link-text="WHO WE ARE" data-auto="page-text-style">WHO WE ARE<span class="icon icon-angle-down" data-hidden-on-mobile="" data-hidden-on-desktop="" data-hidden-on-tablet=""></span> 1516</span> 1517</a> 1518</li> 1519 <li role="menuitem" aria-haspopup="true" aria-expanded="false" data-sub-nav-menu="true" class=" unifiednav__item-wrap " data-auto="more-pages" data-depth="0"> <a href="#" class="unifiednav__item unav-item unav-top-item unifiednav__item_has-sub-nav" target="" data-target-page-alias=""> <span class="nav-item-text " data-link-text="INSIGHTS & PUBLICATIONS" data-auto="page-text-style">INSIGHTS & PUBLICATIONS<span class="icon icon-angle-down"></span> 1520</span> 1521</a> 1522 <ul role="menu" class="unifiednav__container unifiednav__container_sub-nav unav-sub" data-depth="0" data-auto="sub-pages"> <li role="menuitem" class=" unifiednav__item-wrap " data-auto="more-pages" data-depth="1"> <a href="/edprepinsights" class="unifiednav__item unav-item dmNavItemSelected " target="" data-target-page-alias="edprepinsights" aria-current="page" data-auto="selected-page"> <span class="nav-item-text " data-link-text="EDPREP INSIGHTS" data-auto="page-text-style">EDPREP INSIGHTS<span class="icon icon-angle-right" data-hidden-on-mobile="" data-hidden-on-desktop="" data-hidden-on-tablet=""></span> 1523</span> 1524</a> 1525</li> 1526 <li role="menuitem" class=" unifiednav__item-wrap " data-auto="more-pages" data-depth="1"> <a href="/our-publications" class="unifiednav__item unav-item " target="" data-target-page-alias="our-publications"> <span class="nav-item-text " data-link-text="OUR PUBLICATIONS" data-auto="page-text-style">OUR PUBLICATIONS<span class="icon icon-angle-right" data-hidden-on-mobile="" data-hidden-on-desktop="" data-hidden-on-tablet=""></span> 1527</span> 1528</a> 1529</li> 1530 <li role="menuitem" class=" unifiednav__item-wrap " data-auto="more-pages" data-depth="1"> <a href="https://www.edpreppartners.org/beyond-access" class="unifiednav__item unav-item " target="" data-target-page-alias=""> <span class="nav-item-text " data-link-text="BEYOND ACCESS SERIES" data-auto="page-text-style">BEYOND ACCESS SERIES<span class="icon icon-angle-right" data-hidden-on-mobile="" data-hidden-on-desktop="" data-hidden-on-tablet=""></span> 1531</span> 1532</a> 1533</li> 1534 <li role="menuitem" class=" unifiednav__item-wrap " data-auto="more-pages" data-depth="1"> <a href="https://www.edpreppartners.org/founding-year-report-2025" class="unifiednav__item unav-item " target="_blank" data-target-page-alias="https://www.edpreppartners.org/founding-year-report-2025"> <span class="nav-item-text " data-link-text="FOUNDING YEAR REPORT" data-auto="page-text-style">FOUNDING YEAR REPORT<span class="icon icon-angle-right" data-hidden-on-mobile="" data-hidden-on-desktop="" data-hidden-on-tablet=""></span> 1535</span> 1536</a> 1537</li> 1538</ul> 1539</li> 1540</ul> 1541</nav> 1542</div> 1543 <div class="u_1502766817 dmRespCol small-12 large-2 medium-2" id="1502766817"> <div class="u_1790695240 dmRespRow" id="1790695240"> <div class="dmRespColsWrapper" id="1301932558"> <div class="u_1479724167 dmRespCol small-12 large-4 medium-4" id="1479724167"> <div class="u_1867638381 align-center text-align-center dmSocialHub gapSpacing" id="1867638381" dmle_extension="social_hub" data-element-type="social_hub" wr="true" networks="" icon="true" surround="true" adwords=""> <div class="socialHubWrapper"> <div class="socialHubInnerDiv " data-auto="social-hub-inner"> <a href="https://www.linkedin.com/company/edprep-partners/" target="_blank" dm_dont_rewrite_url="true" aria-label="linkedin" onclick="dm_gaq_push_event &&
1543 dm_gaq_push_event('socialLink', 'click', 'Linkedin')"> <span class="dmSocialLinkedin icon-linkedin oneIcon socialHubIcon style4" aria-hidden="true" data-hover-effect=""></span> 1544</a> 1545</div> 1546</div> 1547</div> 1548</div> 1549 <div class="u_1709250153 dmRespCol small-12 large-8 medium-8" id="1709250153"> <a data-display-type="block" class="u_1094580557 align-center dmButtonLink dmWidget dmWwr default dmOnlyButton dmDefaultGradient button_2" file="false" href="/get-in-touch" id="1094580557" data-element-type="dButtonLinkId" data-buttonstyle="ROUND_SIDES"> <span class="iconBg" id="1699132815"> <span class="icon hasFontIcon icon-star" id="1728599696"></span> 1550</span> 1551 <span class="text" id="1273452565">Contact Us</span> 1552</a> 1553</div> 1554</div> 1555</div> 1556</div> 1557</div> 1558</div> 1559</div> 1560</div> 1561</div> 1562 <div dmwrapped="true" id="dmFirstContainer" class="dmBody u_dmStyle_template_edprepinsights dm-home-page" themewaschanged="true"> <div id="allWrapper" class="allWrapper" data-auto="all-wrapper"><!-- navigation placeholders --> <div id="dm_content" class="dmContent" role="main"> <div dm:templateorder="170" class="dmHomeRespTmpl mainBorder dmRespRowsWrapper dmFullRowRespTmpl" id="1716942098"> <div class="u_1392011549 dmRespRow hasBackgroundOverlay dmSectionNoParallax" style="text-align: center;" id="1392011549"> <div class="dmRespColsWrapper" id="1493896379"> <div class="u_1223119059 dmRespCol small-12 medium-12 large-12" id="1223119059"> <div class="dmNewParagraph" id="1325704721" style="transition: opacity 1s ease-in-out;" data-element-type="paragraph" data-version="5"> <h1 class="text-align-center" style=""><span style="display: initial; color: var(--color_1);">EdPrep Insights</span></h1> 1563</div></div> 1564</div> 1565</div> 1566 <div class="dmRespRow" id="1359197027"> <div class="dmRespColsWrapper" id="1986892843"> <div class="dmRespCol large-12 medium-12 small-12" id="1731410278"> <div class="u_1769234532 default dmBlogSearch" searchpage="blog-search" id="1769234532" dmle_extension="internal_blog_search" data-element-type="internal_blog_search" wr="true" icon="true" surround="true" adwords="" placeholder="Search EdPrep Insights"> <div class="dmBlogSearchWrapper"><!-- position relative --><input type="text" placeholder="Search EdPrep Insights" class="dmBlogSearchInput" aria-label="Search" maxlength="100" data-placeholder-original="Search EdPrep Insights"/> <div class="dmBlogSearchClickOverlay"></div> 1567 <div class="dmBlogSearchIcon dm-icon-search2"></div> 1568<!-- position absolute --></div> 1569</div> 1570</div> 1571</div> 1572</div> 1573 <div class="u_1869217444 dmRespRow hide-for-large" id="1869217444"> <div class="dmRespColsWrapper" id="1920771256"> <div class="dmRespCol large-12 medium-12 small-12 u_1879118725" id="1879118725"> <div class="u_1639566867 default mainBlog layout4" id="1639566867" dmle_extension="internal_blog_list" data-element-type="internal_blog_list" show-images="true" initialized="undefined" wr="true" trim-title="false" show-blog-title="false" posts-animation="undefined" data-paginate-listable-widget="false" show-action-text="true" text-align="left" icon="true" surround="true" adwords="" list-layout="layout4" visible-items="18" visible-post-lines="3" search-tags="" search-term="" more-posts-text="More Posts" header-type="H2" posts-padding="10" posts-per-row="3" show-author="true" text-box-padding="false" action-text="Read more â" skip-post-index="-1" blog-posts-feature-flag="true" data-image-hover-effect="zoomout" show-more-posts-text="true" data-paginate-total-elements="26"> <div class="inner "> <div style="-ms-grid-column:1; -ms-grid-row:1" class="postArticle " data-auto="blog-post-article"> <div class="inner clearfix wow" style="animation-delay: 200.0ms;"> <a class="blogImgLink" data-auto="blog-img-link" dont-color-link="true" href="/from-design-to-practice" data-blog-post-alias="from-design-to-practice" aria-label="FROM DESIGN TO PRACTICE | Founding Year Report 2025"> <div class="blogImg" data-auto="blog-img" style="background-image: url('https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/opt/EdPrep+-+Founding+Year+Report-1920w.png');"><img src="https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/opt/EdPrep+-+Founding+Year+Report-1920w.png" alt="" onerror="handleImageLoadError(this)"/></div> 1574</a> 1575 <div class="postTextContainer"> <div class="postText clearfix"> <div class="postTitle" data-auto="blog-post-title"> <h3> <a dont-color-link="true" href="/from-design-to-practice" data-blog-post-alias="from-design-to-practice">FROM DESIGN TO PRACTICE | Founding Year Report 2025</a> 1576</h3> 1577</div> 1578 <div class="authorBar" data-auto="blog-author-bar"> <span>By EdPrep Partners</span> 1579 <span>•</span> 1580 <span>September 11, 2026</span> 1581</div> 1582 <div class="postDescription" data-auto="blog-post-description">The promise starts long before a teacher’s first day in the classroom. It starts in preparation: in clear expectations for candidate readiness, purposeful opportunities to learn and practice, strong coaching and feedback, teacher educators who model the work of teaching, evidence that guides improvement, and partnerships that connect preparation to the needs of P-12 students and schools. EdPrep Partners was founded to help educator preparation programs, states, districts, and partner organizations move from knowing what strong preparation requires to doing it consistently. To make quality preparation focused, actionable, and visible. The work is urgent, and full of possibilities. It lives in what candidates experience. It lives in what teacher educators do. It lives in how programs use evidence to strengthen preparation. It lives in the routines that make quality preparation both possible, and routine. In 2025, EdPrep Partners put that c
1582ommitment to work: defining quality, examining preparation in practice, supporting implementation, and building a national team with the field experience to help partners move from evidence to action. Let’s make teacher preparation better together.</div> 1583</div> 1584 <div class="readMore" data-auto="blog-read-more"> <a dont-color-link="true" href="/from-design-to-practice"></a> 1585</div> 1586</div> 1587</div> 1588</div> 1589 <div style="-ms-grid-column:2; -ms-grid-row:1" class="postArticle " data-auto="blog-post-article"> <div class="inner clearfix wow" style="animation-delay: 400.0ms;"> <a class="blogImgLink" data-auto="blog-img-link" dont-color-link="true" href="/from-reading-foundations-to-candidate-readiness" data-blog-post-alias="from-reading-foundations-to-candidate-readiness" aria-label="From Reading Foundations to Candidate Readiness"> <div class="blogImg" data-auto="blog-img" style="background-image: url('https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/opt/edPrep+LI+Cover+-+Reading+Foundations-1920w.png');"><img src="https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/opt/edPrep+LI+Cover+-+Reading+Foundations-1920w.png" alt="" onerror="handleImageLoadError(this)"/></div> 1590</a> 1591 <div class="postTextContainer"> <div class="postText clearfix"> <div class="postTitle" data-auto="blog-post-title"> <h3> <a dont-color-link="true" href="/from-reading-foundations-to-candidate-readiness" data-blog-post-alias="from-reading-foundations-to-candidate-readiness">From Reading Foundations to Candidate Readiness</a> 1592</h3> 1593</div> 1594 <div class="authorBar" data-auto="blog-author-bar"> <span>By EdPrep Partners</span> 1595 <span>•</span> 1596 <span>July 21, 2026</span> 1597</div> 1598 <div class="postDescription" data-auto="blog-post-description">How States and Regions Can Strengthen Literacy Preparation Through Review, Action Planning, and Implementation Support Helping States and Regions Strengthen Literacy Preparation Day One Readiness Should Not Be a Mystery The 2026 National Council on Teacher Quality Reading Foundations sends an important signal to the field: teacher preparation programs are making real progress in aligning coursework to scientifically based reading instruction, but alignment alone is not the finish line. The next phase of reading reform is implementation. States have passed reading laws. Districts are adopting stronger materials. Educators are receiving professional learning. At the same time, many future teachers still need more structured opportunities to practice the reading instruction they will be expected to use with students. Future teachers need more than exposure to the science of reading. They need preparation systems that help them build literacy knowledge, understand how students learn to read and write, analyze instruction, rehearse evidence-based practices, enact those practices with students, receive feedback, use student data, and demonstrate readiness before day one. Alignment is progress. Readiness requires candidate practice and feedback. EdPrep Partners’ literacy framework centers the interaction of literacy content knowledge, student learning progressions, and evidence-based literacy pedagogies and practices – the preparation conditions that support high-impact literacy development and P-12 instruction. That is
1598where EdPrep Partners works alongside states, regions, and programs: helping turn alignment into development, and development into readiness for students' future teachers. Content Knowledge for Literacy Development: The literacy knowledge and skills candidates need to teach reading and writing effectively, including the essential components of reading. Student Learning Progressions in Literacy: Candidates’ understanding of how students develop as readers and writers, and how to use that understanding to plan instruction. Evidence-Based Literacy Pedagogies and Practices: Candidates’ ability to analyze, rehearse, teach, and receive feedback on evidence-based literacy instruction aligned to the science of reading.</div> 1599</div> 1600 <div class="readMore" data-auto="blog-read-more"> <a dont-color-link="true" href="/from-reading-foundations-to-candidate-readiness"></a> 1601</div> 1602</div> 1603</div> 1604</div> 1605 <div style="-ms-grid-column:3; -ms-grid-row:1" class="postArticle " data-auto="blog-post-article"> <div class="inner clearfix wow" style="animation-delay: 600.0ms;"> <a class="blogImgLink" data-auto="blog-img-link" dont-color-link="true" href="/making-candidate-readiness-visible" data-blog-post-alias="making-candidate-readiness-visible" aria-label="Making Candidate Readiness Visible"> <div class="blogImg" data-auto="blog-img" style="background-image: url('https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/opt/EdPrep-DTCC-1920w.png');"><img src="https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/opt/EdPrep-DTCC-1920w.png" alt="" onerror="handleImageLoadError(this)"/></div> 1606</a> 1607 <div class="postTextContainer"> <div class="postText clearfix"> <div class="postTitle" data-auto="blog-post-title"> <h3> <a dont-color-link="true" href="/making-candidate-readiness-visible" data-blog-post-alias="making-candidate-readiness-visible">Making Candidate Readiness Visible</a> 1608</h3> 1609</div> 1610 <div class="authorBar" data-auto="blog-author-bar"> <span>By EdPrep Partners</span> 1611 <span>•</span> 1612 <span>July 14, 2026</span> 1613</div> 1614 <div class="postDescription" data-auto="blog-post-description">Making Candidate Readiness Visible How Delaware Tech is building a shared path from instructional expectations to candidate readiness Day One Readiness Should Not Be a Mystery Day one readiness should not be discovered, or even fully measured, at the end of preparation. If teacher candidates are expected to enter classrooms ready to support student learning, educator preparation programs need more than a final assessment. They need a clear picture of what readiness requires, where candidates will develop those practices, how teacher educators will support their growth, and what evidence will show candidates are moving toward proficient practice over time. A final measure can tell a program something about candidate readiness. It cannot, by itself, create the conditions that help candidates become ready. As states and programs strengthen pedagogical performance measures, this creates an important design challenge. Performance measures can determine whether candidates are able to apply pedagogical skills, support student learning, and demonstrate the practices expected of beginning teachers. But they are strongest when they are connected to the full preparation experience: coursew
1614ork, clinical practice, coaching, feedback, progress monitoring, candidate support, and teacher educator development. A strong performance measure is not separate from preparation. It should reflect how the program develops candidates. That is the work Delaware Technical Community College has been advancing through its Candidate Readiness Framework and aligned Pedagogical Performance Measure system. Across recent work with EdPrep Partners, Delaware Tech faculty, clinical supervisors, and leaders have focused on a candidate-centered design question: What should candidates be ready to attempt, practice, and demonstrate, and by when? That question shifts the work from final measurement to preparation design. It asks programs to define readiness clearly, build a developmental path toward it, and use candidate evidence to support growth before candidates enter classrooms as teachers of record. Delaware’s Statewide Focus on Candidate Readiness In Delaware, this work sits within a broader statewide effort to strengthen how educator preparation programs assess and support candidate pedagogical readiness. House Bill 207 charged the Delaware Department of Education with engaging stakeholders to make recommendations on how educator preparation programs should assess the pedagogical skills of teacher candidates. That work led to a statewide Community of Practice and a shared set of Pedagogical Performance Measure (PPM) criteria focused on observable teaching behaviors, student learning, variation in candidate performance, alignment to the Delaware Teacher Growth and Support System, reliability, and connection to P-12 student outcomes. In 2025–26, the Delaware Department of Education, in partnership with EdPrep Partners, reintroduced and expanded those criteria to provide clearer expectations for implementation. The initiative included program self-assessments, Learning Walks, technical assistance, and implementation planning designed to help each educator preparation program strengthen its PPM system in ways that reflect both state expectations and each program’s context. The purpose is not simply to add another requirement. It is to support programs in building performance measures that are rigorous, reliable, connected to Delaware’s instructional expectations, and useful for strengthening candidate development for P-12 instruction. “Delaware's decision to allow educator preparation programs to develop their own Pedagogical Performance Measures recognizes that authentic assessment systems should reflect each of our EPPs unique curricula, culture, and instructional priorities. The result of these efforts will be beneficial to emerging educators and EPPs — performance evidence that is more meaningful and holistic for candidates, more useful for programs, and more closely connected to the realities of Delaware classrooms, all while meeting shared state expectations.” – Claire O’Neal, Education Associate, Delaware Department of Education That statewide focus creates an important opportunity for programs: to make readiness visible before candidates become teachers of record, not only through final measures, but through the coursework, clinical experiences, feedback, support(s), and evidence systems that help candidates become ready. Delaware Tech’s work offers one example of how a program has taken up that opportunity. Start With the Candidate, Not the Measure Pedagogical performance measure work can quickly become technical. Programs must make decisions about rubrics, scoring, observation cycles, assignments, data systems, reporting, and implementation timelines. Those decisions are necessary. But when the work begins only with the measure, the candidate can become secondary to the tool. Delaware Tech’s work begins with candidate development. The Delaware Tech Candidate Readiness Framework defines the instructional practices teacher candidates are expected to develop and demonstrate across the Associate of Arts in Teaching (Elementary Education) and Bachelor of Science in Elementary Education programs. It is grounded in Delaware’s Teacher Growth and Support System (DTGSS), the state’s system for supporting teacher growth and classroom instruction. A central part of DTGSS is the Delaware Teacher Classroom Observation Framework , which helps educators align on what high-quality teaching and learning looks like, collect evidence from classroom observations, and identify strengths and areas for growth. Delaware Tech’s Candidate Readiness Framework applies those expectations to teacher preparation by translating them into pre-service candidate performance based “look fors” that can be taught, practiced, observed, coached, and assessed throughout preparation. Practicing teachers and teacher candidates do not have the same developmental needs. Candidates need expectations that are rigorous and aligned to the profession, while still being appropriate for where they are in preparation. They need to know what strong instruction looks like, what to practice with support, and what evidence will show they are moving toward readiness. The Candidate Readiness Framework gives Delaware Tech a shared language for that work. Faculty, clinical supervisors, and cooperating teachers can use it to align coursew
1614ork, modeling, rehearsal, clinical support, observation, feedback, and assessment. Candidates can use it to understand expected instructional practices, reflect on feedback, and track their growth. District and school-based partners can use it to align mentoring and feedback with the instructional expectations candidates will encounter in Delaware classrooms. “This work helped us realize a vision we have held for some time: a unified framework that brings together our expectations for candidates across coursework, residency, feedback, and assessment. It gives faculty, clinical supervisors, cooperating teachers, and candidates a shared language for what readiness looks like and how candidates build toward it over time.” – Holly Hermstedt, Collegewide Director,Bachelor of Science in Education Program, Delaware Technical Community College The value of the framework is not that it creates another document. Its value is that it gives the program one shared approach to candidate development. Candidates encounter clear instructional expectations, practice those expectations with support, enact them in classrooms, receive aligned feedback, and demonstrate readiness through measures connected to the path they have traveled. Readiness becomes more than an end point. It becomes something candidates build toward throughout preparation. Translate In-Service Expectations Into Pre-Service Look Fors One of Delaware Tech’s most important moves was not simply choosing what to include in the Candidate Readiness Framework. It was building a shared understanding of how to translate Delaware’s instructional expectations into language that could support teacher candidates. DTGSS was developed for classroom instruction and educator growth. Its language describes the kinds of teaching and student learning Delaware wants to see in P-12 classrooms. That makes it a strong foundation for preparation, but Delaware Tech could not simply place DTGSS in front of candidates and expect it to function as a preparation tool. The team needed to ask what the framework means for a candidate who is still learning to teach. Delaware Tech faculty, clinical supervisors, and leaders approached that shift through three core questions: What is being measured? What actions would we need to see from the candidate and students? How should those actions be stated as observable “look fors”? Those questions helped move the conversation from broad instructional descriptors to the actual teaching moves candidates need to learn, practice, and demonstrate. “The three questions gave the team a way to move from framework language to candidate practice. We were asking: What is the expectation really measuring? What would we need to see from the candidate and students? And how do we state that clearly enough that faculty, supervisors, and candidates can use it?” – Andrew McDermott, Technical Assistance Partner, EdPrep Partners For example, when a framework says students should understand what they are learning, participate in a productive learning environment, respond with evidence, or use academic language, the preparation task is to name the candidate moves that make those outcomes possible: communicating an aligned objective in student-friendly language, connecting tasks to the purpose of the lesson, establishing and reinforcing routines, redirecting off-task behavior in ways that preserve learning time, preparing questions aligned to the lesson objective, providing wait time and scaffolds, modeling academic language, and giving students opportunities to explain, elaborate, and build on one another’s thinking. This is the shift from describing effective instruction to preparing candidates to enact it. The “look fors” were not intended to turn teaching into a checklist. They were a translation tool. They helped Delaware Tech faculty, clinical supervisors, and leaders make the practices within DTGSS visible enough to teach, model, rehearse, observe, coach, and assess. The collaborative process was essential. Faculty considered where candidates would first encounter and practice these expectations in coursew
1614ork. Clinical supervisors considered what evidence they would need to see during observation and feedback. Program leaders considered how the same language could connect assignments, residency experiences, performance measures, and candidate supports. By working through the three questions together, Delaware Tech began turning DTGSS from an in-service instructional framework into a pre-service candidate development tool. Candidates need more than a description of strong teaching. They need to understand the actions that make strong teaching possible and the evidence that shows their practice is growing. Observable practice is the bridge between instructional expectations and candidate development. Sequence What Candidates Attempt, Practice, and Demonstrate Defining candidate expectations is necessary. It is not sufficient. Candidates also need a developmental path. Delaware Tech’s work moved from naming core teaching practices to considering how those practices build over time. Faculty and staff identified how Candidate Readiness Framework criteria may develop from practices that establish the essential conditions for learning to practices that require candidates to integrate multiple instructional skills. The point was not to decide that some practices matter and others do not. All criteria remain part of candidate readiness. The purpose was to determine what candidates should be expected to attempt, practice, and demonstrate at different points in preparation. Delaware Tech organized this work through four developmental categories: Most Foundational: practices that create the essential conditions for teaching and learning. Foundational: practices that build from those conditions and establish core instructional structures. Developing Complexity: practices that require candidates to monitor, respond to, and support student learning with increasing independence. Integrated Practice: practices that require candidates to draw on multiple earlier skills at once. This developmental lens changes how programs think about readiness. A candidate learning to facilitate evidence-based student discussion also needs to establish participation structures, pose aligned and scaffolded questions, support academic language, respond to student thinking, and create conditions for students to engage with one another. A candidate learning to differentiate and support rigorous application also needs to understand the learning objective, criteria for success, student needs, and evidence of student progress. More complex teaching depends on earlier practices. A candidate developmental trajectory helps programs decide what candidates should develop first, what those practices enable next, and where candidates should have opportunities to learn, practice, receive feedback, and demonstrate increasing proficiency. Delaware Tech participants named this need directly in feedback after the May session. They identified opportunities to embed prioritized
1614indicators into coursework, assignment directions, scoring rubrics, feedback comments, deliberate practice activities, observation assignments, residency supports, and clinical feedback. They also noted the need to avoid overwhelming candidates by introducing the framework in “bite-sized pieces” and building candidates’ understanding over time. Programs cannot simply tell candidates what readiness looks like at the end. They have to build the experiences that help candidates get there. For Delaware Tech, the Candidate Readiness Framework provides a way to organize those decisions. It names the practices candidates are expected to develop, begins to identify which practices are most foundational and which require greater integration, and creates a basis for aligning coursework, clinical experiences, observation, feedback, and performance measures to a clearer developmental path. Align Measures to the Path Candidates Travel Once candidate expectations are visible and developmentally sequenced, the next question is whether the program’s measures reflect the path candidates travel. Delaware Tech has moved from framework development into implementation planning. During its June technical assistance session, Delaware Tech worked to integrate the newly adopted instructional framework into its PPM design priorities and key elements. The team refined decisions related to candidate assessment, observation structures, performance tasks, training, progress monitoring, and data collection. They also mapped the candidate experience, clarified pilot implementation structures for 2026–27, and prepared the Delaware Department of Education implementation memo. One question guided the work: Does our PPM measure what matters? That question pushed the team beyond scoring and submission requirements. It required Delaware Tech to examine where each framework competency is introduced and practiced, when and how it is assessed, what evidence is collected, who evaluates candidate performance, and where gaps or action items remain. "Our focus on candidate development truly advances equity by providing all candidates with opportunities to build and demonstrate effective teaching practices." – Samantha Lopez, Education Department Chair, Delaware Technical Community College, Orlando J. George, Jr. Campus, Wilmington The emerging Delaware Tech PPM system is designed to assess candidate readiness across the yearlong residency. It includes four formal observation cycles, written lesson plans, lesson implementation, pre- and post-conferences, Student Achievement Charts, professional practice ratings, documentation in Brightspace, scoring structures, calibration, and data collection. Each performance task is intended to provide evidence of candidate growth and support ongoing coaching, goal setting, and additional support(s) where needed. The measure is not detached from candidate development. It is connected to the practices candidates are expected to build, the experiences through which they practice those skills, the feedback they receive, and the evidence the program can use to supp
1614ort candidates and improve preparation. The PPM system also creates opportunities for progress monitoring. Delaware Tech’s planning materials identify intentional checkpoints, growth goals, progress plans, additional observations with targeted feedback, additional training for cooperating teachers, and formal improvement plans with actionable items and measurable outcomes. These structures allow the program to identify candidate needs while there is still time to respond. This work also gives Delaware Tech a structure for content-specific preparation, including Delaware’s Science of Reading priorities. Content-specific expectations can be embedded into coursework, clinical feedback, observation evidence, and candidate performance data through the same developmental system. The larger lesson is clear: a performance measure is only as strong as the preparation path behind it. When measures are connected to clear candidate expectations, sequenced practice, feedback cycles, progress monitoring, and teacher educator support, they do more than document readiness. They help programs see and support candidate growth while it is still developing. Equip the People Who Make Readiness Visible Candidate readiness becomes visible through the people that prepare candidates. Frameworks, rubrics, and performance measures can clarify expectations. Faculty, clinical supervisors, cooperating teachers, and program leaders help candidates understand those expectations, practice them, receive feedback, and use evidence to improve. Implementation cannot stop with a completed framework or an approved memo. Delaware Tech’s developing PPM system identifies distinct roles for teacher candidates, clinical supervisors, cooperating teachers, and Delaware Tech’s Education Department leadership. Candidates complete performance tasks across the yearlong residency. Clinical supervisors evaluate candidate performance across instructional performance areas and provide support when candidates are not meeting benchmarks. Cooperating teachers contribute to evaluation of professional responsibilities and provide additional support. Program leadership provides training and calibration, supports validity and reliability of scoring, analyzes and shares PPM data, and initiates intervention strategies when needed. “The Candidate Readiness Framework and PPM system give us a clearer way to see how candidates are developing, where they need support, and how we can respond before they become teachers of record. This helps us leverage evidence more effectively to better prepare and support our candidates.” – Beth Altemus, Education Department Chair, Delaware Technical Community College, Charles L. Terry, Jr. Campus, Dover Those roles shape the candidate experience. A candidate may first encounter an instructional practice in coursework. They may analyze examples, rehearse with peers, apply the practice during residency, receive feedback from a clinical supervisor, reflect with a cooperating teacher, and then demonstrate growth through a performance task. If each person in that process uses different language or applies different expectations, the candidate’s path becomes harder to navigate. If each person works from the Candidate Readiness Framework and understands how the practice develops over time, the candidate receives clearer support. That requires training, tools, and calibration. Delaware Tech’s materials name these needs directly: training for clinical supervisors and cooperating teachers, scoring guides, reliability activities, shared language, learning management system documentation, data review routines, and communication with stakeholders. These are not finishing touches. They are part of the design. “Having a shared framework helps us better track and support candidates. It gives clinical supervisors and cooperating teachers clearer evidence to look for, stronger language for feedback, and a more consistent way to help candidates understand where they are growing and what they need to work on next.” – Jennifer Leach, Instructional Coordinator and Clinical Supervisor, Delaware Technical Community College, Jack F. Owens Campus, Georgetown This work aligns closely with the EdPrep Performance Framework and the 14 Levers for Quality Teacher Preparation. It reflects common frameworks for teacher educators and candidates, an explicit candidate developmental trajectory, intentional performance gateways, practice-based developmental experiences, formalized coaching and feedback structures, faculty and clinical supervisor development and calibration, and data-driven decision-making. For Delaware Tech, the next stage of work is not only piloting a measure. It is supporting the people who will make the measure useful for candidates. That is
1614where preparation quality lives: in the design of the program, the clarity of expectations, the quality of feedback, and the shared work of the people helping candidates become ready. A Roadmap for Making Readiness Visible Delaware Tech’s work offers a practical roadmap for educator preparation programs working to strengthen candidate readiness and performance measurement. First, define what candidates should be ready to do . Programs need shared instructional expectations that are aligned to the realities candidates will encounter in classrooms and appropriate for candidates who are still developing. Second, translate expectations into observable practice . Broad instructional descriptors become useful for preparation when programs name the candidate and student actions teacher educators can teach, model, rehearse, observe, coach, and assess. Third, sequence candidate development . Programs need to determine what candidates should attempt, practice, and demonstrate over time, including which practices are foundational and which require candidates to integrate multiple skills. Fourth, align measures to the developmental path . Performance measures should not be the first place candidates encounter the practices they are expected to demonstrate. They should be part of a connected path in which candidates have opportunities to learn, analyze, rehearse, enact, receive feedback, and improve. Fifth, equip the people who make readiness visible . Faculty, clinical supervisors, cooperating teachers, and program leaders need shared language, clear tools, training, calibration, feedback routines, and data systems that help them support candidate growth. That is the work EdPrep Partners supports alongside educator preparation programs and state partners. Grounded in the EdPrep Performance Framework and the 14 Levers for Quality Teacher Preparation, EdPrep Partners helps programs move from shared priorities into implementation by strengthening instructional expectations, candidate developmental trajectories, coursework and clinical connections, teacher educator practices, coaching and feedback structures, performance measures, and improvement routines. Our work with Delaware Tech reflects this approach. EdPrep Partners supported Delaware Tech faculty, clinical supervisors, and leaders as they translated a state-aligned instructional framework into pre-service candidate expectations, organized those expectations developmentally, and began aligning the Candidate Readiness Framework to a PPM system that can support candidate growth, evidence collection, feedback, and program improvement. Delaware Tech’s continued work will determine how these expectations are refined, piloted, and embedded across the program. The direction is clear: readiness should be visible before day one. Not as a single score. Not as a final task. But as a developmental path that candidates, teacher educators, supervisors, cooperating teachers, and program leaders can understand, support, and strengthen together. Candidate readiness should not be a mystery at the end of preparation. It should be built, supported, observed, and strengthened throughout the candidate experience. Every child deserves an excellent educator. Every teacher candidate deserves preparation that equips them to become one. Let’s make teacher preparation better together.</div> 1615</div> 1616 <div class="readMore" data-auto="blog-read-more"> <a dont-color-link="true" href="/making-candidate-readiness-visible"></a> 1617</div> 1618</div> 1619</div> 1620</div> 1621 <div style="-ms-grid-column:1; -ms-grid-row:2" class="postArticle " data-auto="blog-post-article"> <div class="inner clearfix wow" style="animation-delay: 800.0ms;"> <a class="blogImgLink" data-auto="blog-img-link" dont-color-link="true" href="/beyond-the-review-where-reports-end-and-results-begin" data-blog-post-alias="beyond-the-review-where-reports-end-and-results-begin" aria-label="Beyond the Review: Where Reports End and Results Begin"> <div class="blogImg" data-auto="blog-img" style="background-image: url('https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/opt/EdPrep+Insights+-+012026+Square-1920w.png');"><img src="https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/opt/EdPrep+Insights+-+012026+Square-1920w.png" alt="" onerror="handleImageLoadError(this)"/></div> 1622</a> 1623 <div class="postTextContainer"> <div class="postText clearfix"> <div class="postTitle" data-auto="blog-post-title"> <h3> <a dont-color-link="true" href="/beyond-the-review-where-reports-end-and-results-begin" data-blog-post-alias="beyond-the-review-where-reports-end-and-results-begin">Beyond the Review: Where Reports End and Results Begin</a> 1624</h3> 1625</div> 1626 <div class="authorBar" data-auto="blog-author-bar"> <span>By EdPrep Partners</span> 1627 <span>•</span> 1628 <span>January 20, 2026</span> 1629</div> 1630 <div class="postDescription" data-auto="blog-post-description">Beyond the Review: Where Reports End and Results Begin How clear findings and priorities drive lasting improvement in educator preparation The missing link between reviews and results If you lead an educator preparation program or oversee the reviews of programs, you know
1630what it means to be surrounded by data - and how difficult it can be to turn that data into real improvement. Enrollment dashboards, observation results, surveys, candidate coursework, and assessments fill your folders and, hopefully, inform your conversations with stakeholders. But how much of that information truly reveals what matters most? The challenge is rarely a lack of data. It is that much of what is collected does not illuminate the performance of candidates or the systems and people responsible for developing their instructional practice. And even when it does, the next steps often remain unclear. Too many continuous improvement efforts end with long inventories and detailed reports but little tangible direction about what to do next. The difference between activity and improvement is not more evidence. It is the discipline to translate evidence into findings and findings into prioritized action. Doing that well takes more than good intentions. It requires expert review teams trained in a shared and rigorous methodology - people who know educator preparation from the inside, across all parts of programming, and can distinguish isolated examples from true patterns of practice at both the systems and teacher educator levels. Evidence is the starting point, not the destination Evidence should capture how preparation actually operates for candidates and teacher educators, not only what is planned or intended. The goal is not to collect more data but to collect the right evidence that highlights how programs, teacher educators, and candidates typically perform. Doing this well requires both discipline and expertise. Strong reviews depend on teams that apply consistent, evidence-based methods to analyze performance, verify patterns, and separate signal from noise. Without that structure and skill, data collection becomes a compliance exercise, or worse a skewed reflection of program quality, rather than a driver of improvement. In an EdPrep Partners Program Performance Review there are three major types of evidence examined: Artifacts. These include syllabi, course materials & assignments, handbooks, observation tools, mentor and teacher educator training, data sets, candidate assignment samples, among many others. Within artifacts there are both inputs such as what programs design or expect, and outputs such as what candidates or teacher educators actually produce. Artifacts reveal how preparation is structured on paper and how that design translates into candidate or faculty performance. Observations. These capture how stakeholders enact the preparation. This includes live instruction of both candidates and faculty members, observation and feedback cycles with clinical supervisors, etc. Within observations there are inputs such as the systems and routines that make these experiences possible, and outputs such as the observed actions, language, and feedback that both demonstrate and shift practices. Interviews. These surface what people understand about roles, systems, and the impact of actions, and how they describe their own practices and contributions. Faculty, clinical supervisors, candidates, mentors, and partners alike provide context that connects what is designed to what is enacted. Interviews include inputs such as intentions, structures, and beliefs and outputs such as reflections on outcomes and evidence of follow through or perceived needs to improve the system. Collecting these three types of evidence is only the first step. High-quality Program Performance Reviews evaluate each source through two essential lenses. Evidence should be representative of what typically happens for most candidates and teacher educators rather than an isolated example. Evidence should be reinfor
1630ced by multiple sources rather than driven by a single piece that tells a different story. Together, these perspectives separate isolated examples from reliable patterns. They help reviewers determine whether the evidence reflects a single strong case or a consistent way of working across the program. When convergence confirms a pattern, that evidence becomes the foundation for a credible finding. When evidence conflicts, the gaps between sources often reveal where systems are misaligned or breaking down. Evidence observed through these two lenses paints a clear picture of how preparation functions in practice. It shows not only what exists but how consistently and effectively it operates for the people most central to preparation - teacher educators and candidates. Findings make meaning leaders can use A finding is not a restatement of evidence. It is a clear explanation of a system pattern grounded in multiple sources. Interpretation is a professional discipline in educator preparation. It is the work of translating evidence into meaning that leaders, faculty, and partners can use to make decisions and take action. Strong findings do four things: Identify the pattern that holds true across multiple sources Locate the root cause within the system Explain why it matters for candidate readiness and P 12 learning Point to the leverage that would change it at scale This is where many reviews fall short. They inventory, but do not interpret. They describe but do not prioritize. High-quality findings require expert teams with evaluative skill, and with deep content knowledge in teacher preparation, including people who have served and led in educator preparation and who can synthesize, not summarize, distinguishing isolated signals from recurring systematic patterns. At EdPrep Partners, our approach to Program Performance Reviews centers on how structures operate in practice. We look at how faculty label and model methods, pedagogy, and content-pedagogy, how candidates rehearse and receive feedback, how faculty, clinical supervisors, and mentors alike coach to shared criteria, and how these actions connect back to what candidates learn in coursework and to what P-12 districts expect in classrooms. When these pieces align, candidates progress from analysis to rehearsal to enactment with increasing skill. When they do not, even the strongest intentions to develop candidates fail to take hold. Findings emerge only when the weight of evidence points in the same direction and any conflicting data have been resolved. Findings connect structures to experience and experience to outcomes . They give leaders a set of truths they can act on - clear, credible insights that anchor improvement in evidence and strengthen how programs develop their candidates. Prioritized action is most likely to lead to action Not every finding carries the same weight, and trying to change everything that needs improvement within a program at once dilutes impact. Prioritization is not about doing less. It is about focusing energy and attention on the few actions that matter most, first. To determine what comes first, we use three guiding considerations: Impact on candidate experience and performance Feasibility given time, people, and resources Dependencies that must be in place so early progress does not collapse The outcome is a concise set of recommendations rooted in EdPrep Partners’ ‘14 Levers for Quality Teacher Preparation’ , with clear owners, milestones, and supports. A short-cycle plan builds early momentum, and a year one roadmap sequences the larger shifts that follow. At EdPrep Partners we “roll up our sleeves” and model and complete these actions alongside programs, and regular progress checks confirm whether core actions are happening with quality and consistency. Quarterly reviews test whether those changes are reflected in candidate performance and partner outcomes. How lasting improvement takes hold The strength of any review is measured not only by the quality of its findings but by what happens next. Many reviews stop at recommendations, leaving programs without the clarity, systems, or support to act. At EdPrep Partners, our approach is different. We connect evidence, findings, and action through four complementary approaches that we take alongside programs to
1630sustain improvement over time. Focus on locus of control. Reviews center on decisions that leaders, faculty, clinical supervisors, and partners can make — and on the stakeholders they can most directly influence and impact now. This keeps the work grounded, practical, and moving forward. Begin by investing in teacher educator practice. Quality lives in the people who label, model, develop, coach, and give feedback. When faculty and clinical supervisors use shared definitions, clear look-fors aligned to a candidate’s developmental trajectory, and consistent teacher educator practices for how they will develop candidates, candidates improve faster and quality strengthens across the program. Keep score with simple routines. Leaders do not need a new data warehouse or elaborate dashboards, though those can help. What matters most is a short set of leading indicators that confirm core practices are happening — and a few strong routines that create space to check in, validate impact on candidate development and partner outcomes, and plan whether to expand, adjust, or retire a practice. Provide hands-on technical assistance to design, implement, and sustain change. Improvement is not sustained through reports or one-time recommendations; it requires partnership. Our technical assistance model pairs expert guidance with on-the-ground support — modeling teacher educator practices, facilitating capacity-building, and embedding the routines that ensure programs can sustain, scale, and continuously strengthen their systems. Through strategic planning, coaching, and progress monitoring, we help teams design, do, and sustain the work long after the review concludes. Together, these approaches create system-level improvement. Coursework and clinical experiences align. Teacher educator practice strengthens. Partner expectations are met. Candidates enter classrooms ready to teach. From findings to action EdPrep Partners’ Program Performance Reviews produce a focused set of findings that lead to a clear set of prioritized actions - the few changes that make the greatest difference. We then work alongside leaders, faculty, and clinical supervisors to implement those actions with precision and care, building the routines that sustain and scale quality teacher preparation. Because every child deserves an excellent educator, and every candidate deserves excellent preparation. Let’s deliver both. This approach is adaptable across pathways and designed to strengthen the systems programs already have while aligning to what partners need most. The field does not need more reports. It needs Program Performance Reviews that lead to tangible improvements in what candidates experience and how teacher educators prepare them. When evidence becomes findings, and findings become focused action, improvement stops being a plan and becomes practice - the way preparation was always meant to operate: by teaching well. Let’s make teacher preparation better together.</div> 1631</div> 1632 <div class="readMore" data-auto="blog-read-more"> <a dont-color-link="true" href="/beyond-the-review-where-reports-end-and-results-begin"></a> 1633</div> 1634</div> 1635</div> 1636</div> 1637 <div style="-ms-grid-column:2; -ms-grid-row:2" class="postArticle " data-auto="blog-post-article"> <div class="inner clearfix wow" style="animation-delay: 1000.0ms;"> <a class="blogImgLink" data-auto="blog-img-link" dont-color-link="true" href="/edprep-partners-quarterly-update-winter-2025" data-blog-post-alias="edprep-partners-quarterly-update-winter-2025" aria-label="EdPrep Partners Quarterly Upd
1637ate - Winter 2025"> <div class="blogImg" data-auto="blog-img" style="background-image: url('https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/opt/EdPrep+Insights+-+Web+Covers+%28LinkedIn+Post%29-a20b8e2a-1920w.png');"><img src="https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/opt/EdPrep+Insights+-+Web+Covers+%28LinkedIn+Post%29-a20b8e2a-1920w.png" alt="" onerror="handleImageLoadError(this)"/></div> 1638</a> 1639 <div class="postTextContainer"> <div class="postText clearfix"> <div class="postTitle" data-auto="blog-post-title"> <h3> <a dont-color-link="true" href="/edprep-partners-quarterly-update-winter-2025" data-blog-post-alias="edprep-partners-quarterly-update-winter-2025">EdPrep Partners Quarterly Update - Winter 2025</a> 1640</h3> 1641</div> 1642 <div class="authorBar" data-auto="blog-author-bar"> <span>By EdPrep Partners</span> 1643 <span>•</span> 1644 <span>December 29, 2025</span> 1645</div> 1646 <div class="postDescription" data-auto="blog-post-description">EdPrep Partners Quarterly Update Winter 2025 | From Design to Practice. What Works at Scale. What We’re Designing For As one year comes to a close and another begins, many educator preparation programs and system partners are taking stock of how their work is showing up in practice. Across the field, there is real momentum around strengthening preparation, alongside a growing recognition that progress depends on whether effective teaching practices are intentionally built into candidate preparation and show up consistently in P-12 classrooms. That recognition sits at the center of EdPrep Partners’ work. We focus with our partners on preparation that results in consistent candidate readiness, not isolated bright spots. That requires attention to the systems that shape daily teaching & learning: the opportunities candidates have to practice the work of teaching, the ways teacher educators model and coach those pedagogies, and the degree to which expectations and feedback are aligned across coursework and clinical experiences. When those elements are intentionally built into the design of the preparation program, improvement is more likely to hold as programs scale, staffing changes, and contexts shift. Design, in this sense, is concrete. It shows up in whether candidates have sustained opportunities to move from analyzing teaching to rehearsing and enacting it. It shows up in whether faculty and clinical supervisors share clear instructional expectations and provide feedback that supports improvement. And it shows up in whether evidence is used routinely to guide decisions over time, strengthening both teacher educator practice and candidate learning. Over the past quarter in the bodies of work we have the privilege of supporting, we have seen programs and states increasingly centering the work on a common set of fundamentals: clarifying what strong practice looks like, narrowing priorities, strengthening teacher educator practices, and building routines that connect evidence to action. The progress emerging from these efforts reflects a shared understanding that durable improvement comes from doing fewer things with greater intent and building systems that support consistent execution. This quarterly update reflects that focus. It includes a synthesis of emerging patterns in how preparation improvement work is taking shape, highlights from organizations and research informing our thinking, a recap of recent EdPrep Insights, and a look ahead to where our work will deepen in the months ahead. We are grateful to the preparation leaders, faculty, clinical supervisors, district partners, and state teams engaging in this work with care and a serious attention to what we know works . When preparation systems are built with clarity and discipline, candidates are better prepared to enter classrooms ready to teach and contribute meaningfully to P-12 student learning from day one. Let’s make teacher preparation better together. Calvin J. Stocker Founder & CEO, EdPrep Partners</div> 1647</div> 1648 <div class="readMore" data-auto="blog-read-more"> <a dont-color-link="true" href="/edprep-partners-quarterly-update-winter-2025"></a> 1649</div> 1650</div> 1651</div> 1652</div> 1653 <div style="-ms-grid-column:3; -ms-grid-row:2" class="postArticle " data-auto="blog-post-article"> <div class="inner clearfix wow" style="animation-delay: 1200.0ms;"> <a class="blogImgLink" data-auto="blog-img-link" dont-color-link="true" href="/beyond-access-part-5-what-strong-hqim-integration-looks-like-for-programs" data-blog-post-alias="beyond-access-part-5-what-strong-hqim-integration-looks-like-for-programs" aria-label="Beyond Access Part 5: What Strong HQIM Integration Looks Like for Programs"> <div class="blogImg" data-auto="blog-img" style="background-image: url('https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/opt/1-725e7a7b-1920w.png');"><img src="https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/opt/1-725e7a7b-1920w.png" alt="" onerror="handleImageLoadError(this)"/></div> 1654</a> 1655 <div class="postTextContainer"> <div class="postText clearfix"> <div class="postTitle" data-auto="blog-post-title"> <h3> <a dont-color-link="true" href="/beyond-access-part-5-what-strong-hqim-integration-looks-like-for-programs" data-blog-post-alias="beyond-access-part-5-what-strong-hqim-integration-looks-like-for-programs">Beyond Access Part 5: What Strong HQIM Integration Looks Like for Programs</a> 1656</h3> 1657</div> 1658 <div class="authorBar" data-auto="blog-author-bar"> <span>By EdPrep Partners</span> 1659 <span>•</span> 1660 <span>November 18, 2025</span> 1661</div> 1662 <div class="postDescription" data-auto="blog-post-description">A Five-Part Series on HQIM Readiness in Teacher Preparation</div> 1663</div> 1664 <div class="readMore" data-auto="blog-read-more"> <a dont-color-link="true" href="/beyond-access-part-5-what-strong-hqim-integration-looks-like-for-programs"></a> 1665</div> 1666</div> 1667</div> 1668</div> 1669 <div style="-ms-grid-column:1; -ms-grid-row:3" class="postArticle " data-auto="blog-post-article"> <div class="inner clearfix wow" style="animation-delay: 1400.0ms;"> <a class="blogImgLink" data-auto="blog-img-link" dont-color-link="true" href="/beyond-access-part-4-what-strong-hqim-integration-looks-like-for-teacher-educators" data-blog-post-alias="beyond-access-part-4-what-strong-hqim-integration-looks-like-for-teacher-educators" aria-label="Beyond Access Part 4: What Strong HQIM Integration Looks Like for Candidates"> <div class="blogImg" data-auto="blog-img" style="background-image: url('https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/opt/2-0f87c1fc-1920w.png');"><img src="https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/opt/2-0f87c1fc-1920w.png" alt="" onerror="handleImageLoadError(this)"/></div> 1670</a> 1671 <div class="postTextContainer"> <div class="postText clearfix"> <div class="postTitle" data-auto="blog-post-title"> <h3> <a dont-color-link="true" href="/beyond-access-part-4-what-strong-hqim-integration-looks-like-for-teacher-educators" data-blog-post-alias="beyond-access-part-4-what-strong-hqim-integration-looks-like-for-teacher-educators">Beyond Access Part 4: What Strong HQIM Integration Looks Like for Candidates</a> 1672</h3> 1673</div> 1674 <div class="authorBar" data-auto="blog-author-bar"> <span>By EdPrep Partners</span> 1675 <span>•</span> 1676 <span>November 11, 2025</span> 1677</div> 1678 <div class="postDescription" data-auto="blog-post-description">A Five-Part Series on HQIM Readiness in Teacher Preparation</div> 1679</div> 1680 <div class="readMore" data-auto="blog-read-more"> <a dont-color-link="true" href="/beyond-access-part-4-what-strong-hqim-integration-looks-like-for-teacher-educators"></a> 1681</div> 1682</div> 1683</div> 1684</div> 1685 <div style="-ms-grid-column:2; -ms-grid-row:3" class="postArticle " data-auto="blog-post-article"> <div class="inner clearfix wow" style="animation-delay: 1600.0ms;"> <a class="blogImgLink" data-auto="blog-img-link" dont-color-link="true" href="/beyond-access-part-3-what-strong-hqim-integration-looks-like-for-candidates" data-blog-post-alias="beyond-access-part-3-what-strong-hqim-integration-looks-like-for-candidates" aria-label="Beyond Access Part 3: What Strong HQIM Integration Looks Like for Candidates"> <div class="blogImg" data-auto="blog-img" style="background-image: url('https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/opt/3-6f9a31ce-1920w.png');"><img src="https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/opt/3-6f9a31ce-1920w.png" alt="" onerror="handleImageLoadError(this)"/></div> 1686</a> 1687 <div class="postTextContainer"> <div class="postText clearfix"> <div class="postTitle" data-auto="blog-post-title"> <h3> <a dont-color-link="true" href="/beyond-access-part-3-what-strong-hqim-integration-looks-like-for-candidates" data-blog-post-alias="beyond-access-part-3-what-strong-hqim-integration-looks-like-for-candidates">Beyond Access Part 3: What Strong HQIM Integration Looks Like for Candidates</a> 1688</h3> 1689</div> 1690 <div class="authorBar" data-auto="blog-author-bar"> <span>By EdPrep Partners</span> 1691 <span>•</span> 1692 <span>November 4, 2025</span> 1693</div> 1694 <div class="postDescription" data-auto="blog-post-description">A Five-Part Series on HQIM Readiness in Teacher Preparation</div> 1695</div> 1696 <div class="readMore" data-auto="blog-read-more"> <a dont-color-link="true" href="/beyond-access-part-3-what-strong-hqim-integration-looks-like-for-candidates"></a> 1697</div> 1698</div> 1699</div> 1700</div> 1701 <div style="-ms-grid-column:3; -ms-grid-row:3" class="postArticle " data-auto="blog-post-article"> <div class="inner clearfix wow" style="animation-delay: 1800.0ms;"> <a class="blogImgLink" data-auto="blog-img-link" dont-color-link="true" href="/beyond-access-part-2-aligning-with-the-quality-curriculum-that-matters-most" data-blog-post-alias="beyond-access-part-2-aligning-with-the-quality-curriculum-that-matters-most" aria-label="Beyond Access Part 2: Aligning with the Quality Curriculum that Matters Most"> <div class="blogImg" data-auto="blog-img" style="background-image: url('https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/opt/4-8241180d-1920w.png');"><img src="https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/opt/4-8241180d-1920w.png" alt="" onerror="handleImageLoadError(this)"/></div> 1702</a> 1703 <div class="postTextContainer"> <div class="postText clearfix"> <div class="postTitle" data-auto="blog-post-title"> <h3> <a dont-color-link="true" href="/beyond-access-part-2-aligning-with-the-quality-curriculum-that-matters-most" data-blog-post-alias="beyond-access-part-2-aligning-with-the-quality-curriculum-that-matters-most">Beyond Access Part 2: Aligning with the Quality Curriculum that Matters Most</a> 1704</h3> 1705</div> 1706 <div class="authorBar" data-auto="blog-author-bar"> <span>By EdPrep Partners</span> 1707 <span>•</span> 1708 <span>October 28, 2025</span> 1709</div> 1710 <div class="postDescription" data-auto="blog-post-description">A Five-Part Series on HQIM Readiness in Teacher Preparation</div> 1711</div> 1712 <div class="readMore" data-auto="blog-read-more"> <a dont-color-link="true" href="/beyond-access-part-2-aligning-with-the-quality-curriculum-that-matters-most"></a> 1713</div> 1714</div> 1715</div> 1716</div> 1717 <div style="-ms-grid-column:1; -ms-grid-row:4" class="postArticle " data-auto="blog-post-article"> <div class="inner clearfix wow" style="animation-delay: 2000.0ms;"> <a class="blogImgLink" data-auto="blog-img-link" dont-color-link="true" href="/beyond-access-part-1-the-case-for-hqim-in-teacher-preparation" data-blog-post-alias="beyond-access-part-1-the-case-for-hqim-in-teacher-preparation" aria-label="Beyond Access Part 1: The Case for HQIM in Teacher Preparation"> <div class="blogImg" data-auto="blog-img" style="background-image: url('https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/opt/5-5863bc26-1920w.png');"><img src="https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/opt/5-5863bc26-1920w.png" alt="" onerror="handleImageLoadError(this)"/></div> 1718</a> 1719 <div class="postTextContainer"> <div class="postText clearfix"> <div class="postTitle" data-auto="blog-post-title"> <h3> <a dont-color-link="true" href="/beyond-access-part-1-the-case-for-hqim-in-teacher-preparation" data-blog-post-alias="beyond-access-part-1-the-case-for-hqim-in-teacher-preparation">Beyond Access Part 1: The Case for HQIM in Teacher Preparation</a> 1720</h3> 1721</div> 1722 <div class="authorBar" data-auto="blog-author-bar"> <span>By EdPrep Partners</span> 1723 <span>•</span> 1724 <span>October 21, 2025</span> 1725</div> 1726 <div class="postDescription" data-auto="blog-post-description">A Five-Part Series on HQIM Readiness in Teacher Preparation</div> 1727</div> 1728 <div class="readMore" data-auto="blog-read-more"> <a dont-color-link="true" href="/beyond-access-part-1-the-case-for-hqim-in-teacher-preparation"></a> 1729</div> 1730</div> 1731</div> 1732</div> 1733 <div style="-ms-grid-column:2; -ms-grid-row:4" class="postArticle " data-auto="blog-post-article"> <div class="inner clearfix wow" style="animation-delay: 2200.0ms;"> <a class="blogImgLink" data-auto="blog-img-link" dont-color-link="true" href="/edprep-partners-quarterly-update-fall-2025" data-blog-post-alias="edprep-partners-quarterly-update-fall-2025" aria-label="EdPrep Partners Quarterly Upd
1733ate - Fall 2025"> <div class="blogImg" data-auto="blog-img" style="background-image: url('https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/opt/EdPrep+Insights+-+Web+Covers+%28LinkedIn+Post%29-f7f34892-1920w.png');"><img src="https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/opt/EdPrep+Insights+-+Web+Covers+%28LinkedIn+Post%29-f7f34892-1920w.png" alt="" onerror="handleImageLoadError(this)"/></div> 1734</a> 1735 <div class="postTextContainer"> <div class="postText clearfix"> <div class="postTitle" data-auto="blog-post-title"> <h3> <a dont-color-link="true" href="/edprep-partners-quarterly-update-fall-2025" data-blog-post-alias="edprep-partners-quarterly-update-fall-2025">EdPrep Partners Quarterly Update - Fall 2025</a> 1736</h3> 1737</div> 1738 <div class="authorBar" data-auto="blog-author-bar"> <span>By EdPrep Partners</span> 1739 <span>•</span> 1740 <span>October 15, 2025</span> 1741</div> 1742 <div class="postDescription" data-auto="blog-post-description">EdPrep Partners Quarterly Update Fall 2025 | Preparation Moves Forward. With Purpose. Our State of Readiness Across the nation, teacher preparation is gaining measurable traction. State leaders are investing not just in recruitment but in readiness itself, expanding quality pathways and making them more accessible, strengthening literacy and mathematics preparation, and aligning programs to the expectations of today’s classrooms and to the standards that have guided the field for decades. The message is consistent and aligned to what we’ve known for decades: the quality of candidate preparation determines the quality of learning for P-12 students. Arizona, Florida, and Wisconsin have enacted major literacy laws that require every preparation program to teach evidence based reading instruction aligned to the science of reading. Maine and Massachusetts are embedding the science of reading and mathematics into teacher education statewide. Colorado and Tennessee have scaled apprenticeship and residency models that allow candidates to learn in classrooms while earning full credentials. Large states are leading as well. California dedicated hundreds of millions of dollars in its 2025 budget to student teacher stipends and residency grants, ensuring candidates can complete full time clinical training without financial hardship. Texas passed House Bill 2, creating new formula funding for quality pathways, mentors, and preparation. Michigan continued its statewide investment in workforce development, while Delaware advanced a comprehensive agenda linking literacy, strategic staffing, and pedagogical performance measures. From small rural states to large urban systems, these efforts reflect a national shift, from isolated reform to focused implementation. States are raising expectations for preparation, investing in teacher educators, and creating the conditions for sustainable improvement. At EdPrep Partners, we are proud to help translate this momentum into daily practice. Our work alongside states, educator preparation programs, and P-12 districts is rooted in a shared belief: when preparation is rigorous, practice based, and aligned to what teachers will actually teach, candidates enter classrooms ready to make an immediate and long-term impact on P-12 learning. Let’s keep the momentum going. Let’s make teacher preparation better together. Calvin J. Stocker Founder & CEO, EdPrep Partners Beyond Access: Preparation That Builds Readiness with HQIM on Day One Districts and states continue to invest in high quality instructional materials (HQIM) because the research is clear: when used well, these materials accelerate P-12 student learning and help teachers focu
1742s on what matters most - quality instruction & student learning. Yet for too many teacher candidates, their first encounter with HQIM happens only after they begin teaching as a teacher of record. EdPrep Partners’ Beyond Access series calls on educator preparation programs to make HQIM readiness a central outcome of teacher preparation. The five part EdPrep Insights series invites programs to design coursework, clinical experiences, and faculty practice around the materials that define effective instruction in today’s classrooms, ensuring every candidate graduates proficient in the tools their P-12 districts and school use with students to accelerate learning. The message is simple and urgent: preparation must mirror practice. Readiness grows when candidates learn to identify, internalize, adapt, and facilitate instruction using HQIM that reflects the materials adopted by their partner districts. Through clear examples and practical guidance, the series illustrates what strong HQIM integration looks like, first for candidates, then for teacher educators, and ultimately for programs as a whole. Together, these installments help the field move beyond access to instructional materials toward ensuring that every new teacher can use them skillfully to advance P-12 student learning. Visit the full series at www.edpreppartners.org/beyond-access and follow EdPrep Partners on LinkedIn for upcoming EdPrep Insights and ‘Beyond Access’ releases.</div> 1743</div> 1744 <div class="readMore" data-auto="blog-read-more"> <a dont-color-link="true" href="/edprep-partners-quarterly-update-fall-2025"></a> 1745</div> 1746</div> 1747</div> 1748</div> 1749 <div style="-ms-grid-column:3; -ms-grid-row:4" class="postArticle " data-auto="blog-post-article"> <div class="inner clearfix wow" style="animation-delay: 2400.0ms;"> <a class="blogImgLink" data-auto="blog-img-link" dont-color-link="true" href="/the-prioritization-imperative-how-programs-make-change-stick" data-blog-post-alias="the-prioritization-imperative-how-programs-make-change-stick" aria-label="Title slide: "The Prioritization Imperative: How programs make change stick," focusing on candidate readiness."> <div class="blogImg" data-auto="blog-img" style="background-image: url('https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/opt/1-08d7f553-1920w.png');"><img src="https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/opt/1-08d7f553-1920w.png" alt="Title slide: "The Prioritization Imperative: How programs make change stick," focusing on candidate readiness." onerror="handleImageLoadError(this)"/></div> 1750</a> 1751 <div class="postTextContainer"> <div class="postText clearfix"> <div class="postTitle" data-auto="blog-post-title"> <h3> <a dont-color-link="true" href="/the-prioritization-imperative-how-programs-make-change-stick" data-blog-post-alias="the-prioritization-imperative-how-programs-make-change-stick">The Prioritization Imperative: How Programs Make Change Stick</a> 1752</h3> 1753</div> 1754 <div class="authorBar" data-auto="blog-author-bar"> <span>By EdPrep Partners</span> 1755 <span>•</span> 1756 <span>September 16, 2025</span> 1757</div> 1758 <div class="postDescription" data-auto="blog-post-description">The Prioritization Imperative: How Programs Make Change Stick Focusing on What Matters Most for Candidate Readiness The Power of Focus Educator preparation programs often try to fix everything at once: new frameworks, new pathways, new partnerships, new requirements. The result is predictable: initiative overload, surface level change, and candidates who do not get the preparation they deserve. As the saying goes, when everything is a priority, nothing is. This EdPrep Insight highlights how programs serious about dramatic improvement narrow their focus to a few high leverage shifts, sequence change through Strategic Action Plans (SAPs) and a phased improvement approach, and reinforce focus with disciplined data routines that bring teacher educators together around improvements in candidate preparation and experiences. Why Prioritization Matters: What’s at Stake Research across fields is clear: spreading change too thin produces fatigue, weak implementation, and little impact. Lasting improvement comes from narrowing focus, sequencing efforts, and holding the line on what matters most. Every program leader has lived it: a new mandate from the state, a promising partnership opportunity, another framework to align to, and an urgent grant requirement - all arriving at once. The instinct is to take on everything. The outcome is predictable: initiative overload . Faculty and clinical supervisors inevitably feel scattered, action items pile up, and candidates’ preparation experiences begin to fragment. Across disciplines, the evidence points to the same truth: lasting improvement does not come from doing more. It comes from doing a few things deeply, and well. Improvement Science: Define the Problem, Test the Solution Anthony Bryk and colleagues remind us that progress begins with a sharply defined problem of practice. Too often, programs fall into “solutionitis” - adopting broad reforms without clarifying the real problem. Improvement science instead calls for narrowing the focus and running small, rapid tests of change before scaling. Each test yields evidence about what works, for whom, and under what conditions. Over time, this disciplined inquiry produces scalable, reliable improvement. Implementation Research: Overload Creates Fatigue, Not Change Dean Fixsen and the National Implementation Research Network (NIRN) have shown that implementation succeeds when it is staged and supported by aligned drivers: competency (training and coaching), organization (systems and infrastru
1758cture), and leadership. When programs try to implement everything at once, none of these drivers get adequate attention. The result is what Douglas Reeves calls the law of initiative fatigue : as initiatives multiply, the time, energy, and resources for each one dwindle, and impact collapses. Lessons from System Change: Choosing the Right Drivers Michael Fullan describes the trap of “wrong drivers”: piling on new mandates, compliance tasks, or fragmented programs that give the illusion of progress but fail to change practice. The alternative is what he calls simplexity : focusing on a small number of high-leverage drivers, pursuing them with depth, and aligning everything else behind them. Proof This Works The logic of prioritization is not unique to education, and it’s proven to work: Healthcare: The Institute for Healthcare Improvement’s 100,000 Lives Campaign didn’t ask hospitals to improve everything. It focused on six specific interventions. The result: more than 122,000 lives saved in 18 months. K–12 systems: The Peel District in Ontario reduced overload by pruning initiatives and focusing on four strategic goals. Teachers reported renewed clarity, and student outcomes improved. Individual schools: In Garden Grove, California, leaders resisted scattershot reforms and instead rallied staff around a few shared goals, building coherence and producing sustained literacy gains. Whether in healthcare, K–12, or educator preparation, the evidence is clear: focus is not a constraint. Focus is the condition for sustained improvement. Programs that try to do everything at once rarely change much at all. Programs that choose a vital few priorities, sequence them, and hold attention are the ones that produce measurable shifts in practice and outcomes. System Design: How EdPrep Partners Approaches Change At EdPrep Partners, we see prioritization as system design. The EdPrep Performance Framework and the 14 Levers for Quality Teacher Preparation define what strong preparation looks like in action. But improvement does not come from pulling all 14 levers at once. It comes from selecting the right levers for the moment based on where a program currently is, sequencing those levers and corresponding actions across an intentional period of time, and building capacity and structures either within existing systems or from the ground-up. Most importantly, it means leveraging what already works and holding focus until the changes show up in teacher educator and candidate performance. Choose a vital few, on purpose. The EdPrep Partners 14 Key Levers for Quality Teacher preparation are all essential for high quality preparation. But programs cannot pull them all with equal force at the same time. Improvement requires a methodical order, identifying which levers are of highe
1758st priority right now and which will drive the most significant improvement in candidates’ developmental experiences and readiness. We help teams prioritize the Key Levers that will have the strongest line of sight to candidate readiness, which often begins with a program’s vision for quality teaching & learning, extends to teacher educator practices, and then considers how data can support alignment within, across and external to the program to better meet the workforce needs/priorities in the field. The outcome of this step is explicit: a short list of near term priorities, goals, actions, and metrics for progress monitoring change. Sequence before you scale. Depth requires pacing. We guide programs to stage both what changes and how changes are introduced over time, planning for what happens next week, in six weeks, over a semester, across a year, and through a three year trajectory. A clear roadmap gives program leadership, faculty, and clinical supervisors the confidence and processes they need to enact changes with fidelity and to reinforce new expectations as they take hold. Sequencing protects people from initiative overload and protects the work from shallow adoption. Build the conditions for focus. Sustained focus is only possible when the right conditions are in place. At EdPrep Partners, we use the Four C’s as the readiness screen for whether change will stick and scale: Commitment: Leaders demonstrate visible will, urgency, and sponsorship for improvement, backed by time, resources, and capacity. Capacity: Faculty, clinical supervisors, and mentors have the people, time, and basic systems needed to enact new practices with quality. Clarity: Goals, measures, and expectations are shared, simple, and aligned to what matters most for candidate readiness. Collaboration: Candidates, teacher educators, P-12 districts, and community partners are all engaged in both the decision-making and the implementation. We help state agencies, regional collaboratives, and teacher preparation programs assess, strengthen, and monitor these conditions so that chosen priorities can take root, spread, and endure through leadership, staffing, policy, or environmental changes. Lead from your locus of control. Programs gain traction fastest when they begin where authority, influence, and ability to impact change are strongest. We guide teams to focus first on what they can control — program design, faculty expectations, clinical supervision protocols, tools, training and development, and candidate experiences. From there, we help them influence what they can — such as partnership agreements, calendars, and shared practices with districts. Finally, we prepare them to navigate what is beyond their control without letting it dictate the agenda or distract from the work. This discipline keeps energy aimed at changes that can be implemented with quality and sustained over time. Design for practice. The real test of prioritization is whether teacher educators change how they prepare candidates through their practices, the environments they create, and the routines they model, and what they prepare candidates to do through the methods, instructional moves, and content pedagogies that matter most for readiness. Success is measured by whether candidates can demonstrate these practices against shared standards in both coursew
1758ork and clinical experiences. Guardrails that protect focus. Every priority is anchored in a clear aim, a focused set of action steps, a near term win window, and defined owners. Just as important, every plan also identifies what will not be added during the term. These guardrails keep agendas, professional learning, and project management aligned to the same targets until evidence shows the work is landing. By naming both the work to pursue and the work to defer, programs protect faculty and clinical supervisors from overload and ensure that chosen priorities move from plan to practice. Operationalizing Change: The Playbook Strong programs do not rely on willpower alone. They put structures in place that protect focus: Strategic Action Plans that anchor one or two priorities, phased models that define what happens now versus later, and data routines that keep attention on the chosen goals. 1. Strategic Action Plans (SAPs) A Strategic Action Plan is the anchor document that turns broad aspirations into focused, near term work. A well designed SAP answers five questions: Aim: What one or two priorities are we pursuing this term? Drivers: What specific practices, structures, or conditions must change to make progress? Milestones: What 90 to 120 day wins will show evidence of progress? Evidence: What data, artifacts, or observations will we use to know it is working? Owners: Who is responsible, and by when? Equally important is naming what will not be added this term. These guardrails prevent initiative creep and keep agendas disciplined. For example, a program might set an aim of improving candidate rehearsal and feedback cycles. The SAP would specify drivers such as faculty & clinical supervisor modeling & labeling criteria-driven feedback, rehearsal opportunities, and each of the elements of quality coaching. Milestones might include teacher educator professional development, practice opportunities, shadowing or observations, peer feedback, and candidate survey data. SAPs become the plan of record for program leaders, faculty, and clinical supervisors. Meeting agendas, professional learning, and all corresponding coaching cycles are aligned to the SAP, ensuring energy is directed toward the Key Lever of focus rather than scattered across competing initiatives. 2. Phased Improvement Change is more sustainable when sequenced over time. EdPrep Partners uses a three phase approach that helps programs distinguish between what happens now, and what comes later: Diagnose & Plan Conduct diagnostic reviews to surface strengths and gaps Use prioritized stakeholder questions and artifact reviews to i
1758dentify high leverage levers Co create an initial SAP with near term wins Implement and Early Scale Support faculty, clinical supervisors, and mentors to put new practices into action Provide modeling, professional learning, and coaching aligned to SAP drivers Capture early evidence of candidate and teacher educator practice shifts Evaluate fidelity before expanding Sustain and Monitor Embed routines that ensure practices stick across semesters Adjust and refine based on evidence Decide whether to deepen the same lever or add a new one Each phase has gates: clear evidence criteria that determine whether a program is ready to move forward. These gates prevent programs from scaling new practices before they are ready and keep attention fixed on current priorities until they are solid. 3. Data Routines That Hold Focus Data routines are the discipline that sustains prioritization. They are not compliance exercises. They are structured, repeatable processes that ensure data is not just collected but actively interpreted, discussed, and used to improve candidate preparation. When implemented with consistency, data routines clarify not only what happened but also what should happen next. A strong data routine keeps action close to the candidates’ developmental experiences. Faculty, clinical supervisors, mentors, and candidates themselves use timely evidence to adjust instructional practices, coaching approaches, and supports in ways that directly impact candidate development. A simple monthly or bi monthly routine might include: Agenda: 75 minutes, with 80 percent devoted to current SAP priorities Artifacts: candidate observation and signature assignment data, rehearsal performance results, coaching feedback notes (faculty and clinical supervisors) Questions: Are candidates enacting the instructional practices - methods, pedagogies, and content knowledge - along the program’s developmental trajectory with consistency? What trends are emerging in candidate performance? Which teacher educator practices are promoting or deterring candidate growth? What does teacher educator performance reveal about readiness? What trends are visible in disaggregated data compared to aggregate data? At their best, data routines do two things at once: they reinfor
1758ce or refine focus by keeping the chosen lever at the center of discussion, and they surface near term wins by highlighting evidence of progress to celebrate and build momentum. We explore this idea in greater depth in a previous EdPrep Insight, From Data Collection to Daily Practice: How Strong Data Routines Improve Teacher Preparation. Read here Measures of Progress: Depth Over Breadth The best signal of successful prioritization is not the number of initiatives launched. It is the evidence that one or two critical improvements are implemented with depth, sustained across semesters, and visible in both teacher educator practices and candidate enactment. At EdPrep Partners, we look for progress across four dimensions: 1. Implementation Fidelity The first signal is whether the plan is being executed with discipline. SAP milestones completed on time, showing that 90 to 120 day wins are achieved Leadership, faculty, and clinical supervisor meetings aligned to stated priorities Calibration checks showing implementation in programmatic experiences These indicators reveal whether programs are sticking with their priorities rather than drifting back into overload. 2. Practice Change The real test of prioritization is what happens in the daily work of teacher educators and candidates. Faculty and supervisors enacting practices tied to the chosen priority area(s) Candidates demonstrating stronger performance on prioritized skills in rehearsals, coursework, and clinical observations Coursework and clinical expectations aligned so all teacher educators are reinforcing the change When prioritization is working, practice across the program becomes coherent, not just compliant on paper. 3. Sustained Focus Improvement is fragile unless it survives the inevitable turnover and shifting pressures. Priorities carried consistently across two or more terms, even with leadership or staffing changes Practices and routines institutionalized over two or more years so they become standard operating procedures rather than temporary projects Depth requires persistence. Sustained focus shows that programs are embedding change rather than launching initiatives that fade. 4. Guarding the Gains Strong programs protect improvements even as new priorities emerge. Evidence that gains from prior terms are still holding No regression in candidate performance or faculty practices tied to earlier Key Levers Standard operating procedures in place so progress does not depend on one leader or champion Guarding the gains ensures improvement is cumulative. Eac
1758h new priority builds on the last rather than replacing it. Let’s Give Them One Dramatic improvement does not come from doing everything. It comes from doing the right things, deeply and well. Programs that choose a vital few priorities, sequence them with discipline, and sustain them through practice based routines are the ones that change what candidates experience, how they perform, and ultimately the outcomes of P12 students. At EdPrep Partners, we help programs focus, sequence, and sustain the improvements that matter most. Because every child deserves an excellent educator. Let’s give them one.</div> 1759</div> 1760 <div class="readMore" data-auto="blog-read-more"> <a dont-color-link="true" href="/the-prioritization-imperative-how-programs-make-change-stick"></a> 1761</div> 1762</div> 1763</div> 1764</div> 1765 <div style="-ms-grid-column:1; -ms-grid-row:5" class="postArticle " data-auto="blog-post-article"> <div class="inner clearfix wow" style="animation-delay: 2600.0ms;"> <a class="blogImgLink" data-auto="blog-img-link" dont-color-link="true" href="/the-coaching-gap-moving-from-chance-to-design" data-blog-post-alias="the-coaching-gap-moving-from-chance-to-design" aria-label="The Coaching Gap: Moving From Chance to Design"> <div class="blogImg" data-auto="blog-img" style="background-image: url('https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/opt/2-7ac2acfe-1920w.png');"><img src="https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/opt/2-7ac2acfe-1920w.png" alt="" onerror="handleImageLoadError(this)"/></div> 1766</a> 1767 <div class="postTextContainer"> <div class="postText clearfix"> <div class="postTitle" data-auto="blog-post-title"> <h3> <a dont-color-link="true" href="/the-coaching-gap-moving-from-chance-to-design" data-blog-post-alias="the-coaching-gap-moving-from-chance-to-design">The Coaching Gap: Moving From Chance to Design</a> 1768</h3> 1769</div> 1770 <div class="authorBar" data-auto="blog-author-bar"> <span>By EdPrep Partners</span> 1771 <span>•</span> 1772 <span>September 8, 2025</span> 1773</div> 1774 <div class="postDescription" data-auto="blog-post-description">The Coaching Gap: Moving From Chance to Design Implementing Coaching Systems Every Candidate Can Count On Why Coaching Forecasts Readiness Clinical and internship teaching are often cited as the most impactful portions of teacher preparation for two reasons: they allow candidates to enact instructional practices with P-12 students, and they provide iterative coaching from faculty, clinical supervisors, mentors, and peers. Yet across both coursework and clinical experiences, feedback remains inconsistent and often falls short . A recent study analyzing more than 11,000 supervisor evaluations and candidate reflections found that fewer than half of evaluations included a clear area for improvement or an actionable next step. Supervisors most often flagged classroom management as the area for growth, while candidates themselves highlighted lesson planning. The quality and focus of feedback matters, and the gaps are visible in how our field is currently leveraging coaching across preparation. Meta analyses reinforce what we already know: coaching and mentoring improve candidates’ instructional skills, but not all feedback is equal. The most powerful driver of growth is when teacher educators-whether faculty in coursew
1774ork or supervisors and mentors in clinical settings-model practices, make their thinking visible, and then give candidates the chance to rehearse those methods, instructional and content pedagogies, or strategies with criteria driven feedback. In programs that do this, preservice teachers show much clearer improvement in their teaching and in their ability to make lessons clear for students. Feedback alone is not enough. Feedback plus modeling and rehearsal is what moves practice. We have a system design problem, and it has become painfully clear: too often, feedback depends on an individual faculty member, supervisor, or mentor and their own experience and skill in coaching rather than on a consistent structure every candidate can count on. What is missing is a common coaching cycle: beginning with pre observation planning aligned to candidate developmental needs, narrowing to one or two refinement areas during observation, and following with evidence based debriefs that link teacher moves to student learning. High quality coaching closes by modeling the expected practice with clear criteria, giving candidates space to rehearse it, providing feedback during the rehearsal, and setting clear action steps with additional follow up. Without this structure, feedback risks being occasional advice or scattered tips rather than a deliberate system for growth. This is the kind of challenge the field can solve together. By building on a shared approach, programs can move from good intentions to a reliable system that ensures every candidate, across coursework and clinical experiences, receives the coaching they need, and deserve, to be truly prepared for P-12 students. Barriers That Prevent Quality Feedback The inconsistent quality and timeliness of feedback to candidates is not simply a matter of individual effort. It reflects predictable barriers in program structures and processes that most preparation programs face when coaching is not designed with intentionality. Coaching usually depends on the individual teacher educator. Too often, the quality of feedback rests on the interests and expertise of a faculty member, clinical supervisor, or mentor, shaped by their own experience and level of skill in coaching. Without a shared structure, candidates end up with very different developmental opportunities depending on who they are assigned. We wait until clinical supervision for quality, criteria driven, instructional framework based feedback. Programs often treat coursework as the place for feedback on theory, leaving the more structured, criteria based coaching tied to the instructional framework for clinical experiences. This delay means candidates miss opportunities to build their understanding of quality instruction as defined by their campus and district, to develop habits earlier and more consistently, and it reinforces the idea that coaching is an event in supervision rather than a throughline across preparation. Time and scheduling work against consistency. Candidates are often grouped or assigned without a clear purpose for maximizing observation and coaching, defaulting instead to logistical convenience. Clinical supervisors then juggle multiple campuses and candidates, while faculty balance coursework and other responsibilities. Without program level norms that protect and prioritize time for coaching, feedback becomes irregular or rushed. If a program intentionally partners on placements and reduces the number of campuses it serves, supervisors can spend more time observing, debriefing, and strengthening the quality of onsite supports. Feedback is delayed or diluted. Candidates sometimes wait days for written notes or receive general comments instead of specific, actionable guidance they can use in their very next lesson. Delayed or vague feedback loses its power to shape immediate growth and leaves candidates uncertain about what to do next. Coaching debriefs lack success criteria and rehearsals. Too often, post observation conversations stop at pointing out what was seen or offering general advice. Without clear criteria for what “good” looks like and without structured opportunities to rehearse the move, candidates leave with feedback they cannot immediately translate into action. Roles are not calibrated. Faculty, supervisors, and mentors often work from different playbooks and hold different understandings of the standard, emphasizing varied priorities or using inconsistent language. Candidates then hear mixed messages about what matters most, and their development depends more on who is coaching them than on a shared vision of quality teaching. Limited ongoing development for teacher educators. Faculty, supervisors, and mentors are often expected to coach without consistent training, practice, or feedback on their own coaching. Opportunities for ongoing development, including train the trainer models and observation of teacher educators themselves, are rare. Without this support, even well intentioned teacher educators struggle to provide the high quality feedback candidates need, and deserve. These barriers are real, but they are not permanent. Eac
1774h can be addressed by treating coaching as a system that ensures every candidate, in both coursework and clinical experiences, participates in the same cycle of focused observation, timely feedback, modeling, and rehearsal. The opportunity is to move from coaching by chance to coaching by design. Designing a Shared Coaching Cycle</div> 1775</div> 1776 <div class="readMore" data-auto="blog-read-more"> <a dont-color-link="true" href="/the-coaching-gap-moving-from-chance-to-design"></a> 1777</div> 1778</div> 1779</div> 1780</div> 1781 <div style="-ms-grid-column:2; -ms-grid-row:5" class="postArticle " data-auto="blog-post-article"> <div class="inner clearfix wow" style="animation-delay: 2800.0ms;"> <a class="blogImgLink" data-auto="blog-img-link" dont-color-link="true" href="/from-data-collection-to-daily-practice-how-strong-data-routines-improve-teacher-preparation" data-blog-post-alias="from-data-collection-to-daily-practice-how-strong-data-routines-improve-teacher-preparation" aria-label="From Data Collection to Daily Practice: How Strong Data Routines Improve Teacher Preparation"> <div class="blogImg" data-auto="blog-img" style="background-image: url('https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/opt/3-6df0ad6e-1920w.png');"><img src="https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/opt/3-6df0ad6e-1920w.png" alt="" onerror="handleImageLoadError(this)"/></div> 1782</a> 1783 <div class="postTextContainer"> <div class="postText clearfix"> <div class="postTitle" data-auto="blog-post-title"> <h3> <a dont-color-link="true" href="/from-data-collection-to-daily-practice-how-strong-data-routines-improve-teacher-preparation" data-blog-post-alias="from-data-collection-to-daily-practice-how-strong-data-routines-improve-teacher-preparation">From Data Collection to Daily Practice: How Strong Data Routines Improve Teacher Preparation</a> 1784</h3> 1785</div> 1786 <div class="authorBar" data-auto="blog-author-bar"> <span>By EdPrep Partners</span> 1787 <span>•</span> 1788 <span>September 3, 2025</span> 1789</div> 1790 <div class="postDescription" data-auto="blog-post-description">From Data Collection to Daily Practice: How Strong Data Routines Improve Teacher Preparation Improving Candidate Development and Strengthening Let’s Start Using Data to Improve Preparation Educator preparation programs are not short on data. Programs collect everything from candidates’ instructional performance to certification exam attempts to stakeholder surveys. But when that data gets pulled out for a faculty meeting once a year or tucked away in a compliance folder, it rarely changes what matters most: how candidates are being prepared, supported, and developed in real time. The challenge is not necessarily a lack of data. It is a lack of data routines. Too often, data becomes a performance-something reviewed to meet compliance or displayed on a dashboard rather than used to drive change. The issue is not too much information. It is that the right people are not looking at the right data at the right time, with the intention to act. What preparation programs need is not more data, rather better (and often simpler) infrastructure and processes for using the data they already have. Programs across the country must move from passive collection to active improvement. When implemented with intention and consistency, data routines become the mechanisms that surface patterns, prompt timely action, and distribute decision-making across the people closest to candidate development. Strong programs and teacher educators do not use data just to understand what happened. They use it to decide what will happen next, and then they act on it. Data Routines are used to: Monitor candidate development across coursew
1790ork and clinical experiences Strengthen faculty and clinical supervisor practice Identify and address misalignment between candidate expectations and performance Inform improvements in coursework, coaching, and support structures Data routines are not something that happens once a semester. They are built with intention, follow a consistent cadence, and bring everyone to the table. What Is a Data Routine? A data routine is not a dashboard. It’s not a spreadsheet review. And it’s not a one-time meeting. Data routines are the structured, recurring processes that help educator preparation programs monitor performance, identify trends, and take meaningful action. They are improvement mechanisms, embedded into the core work of faculty & clinical supervisors’ teaching, coaching, and candidate support. High-quality routines follow a predictable pattern: A Simple, Powerful Cycle:</div> 1791</div> 1792 <div class="readMore" data-auto="blog-read-more"> <a dont-color-link="true" href="/from-data-collection-to-daily-practice-how-strong-data-routines-improve-teacher-preparation"></a> 1793</div> 1794</div> 1795</div> 1796</div> 1797 <div style="-ms-grid-column:3; -ms-grid-row:5" class="postArticle " data-auto="blog-post-article"> <div class="inner clearfix wow" style="animation-delay: 3000.0ms;"> <a class="blogImgLink" data-auto="blog-img-link" dont-color-link="true" href="/edprep-partners-quarterly-update-summer-2025" data-blog-post-alias="edprep-partners-quarterly-update-summer-2025" aria-label="EdPrep Partners Quarterly Update Summer 2025"> <div class="blogImg" data-auto="blog-img" style="background-image: url('https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/opt/4-83f1d760-1920w.png');"><img src="https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/opt/4-83f1d760-1920w.png" alt="" onerror="handleImageLoadError(this)"/></div> 1798</a> 1799 <div class="postTextContainer"> <div class="postText clearfix"> <div class="postTitle" data-auto="blog-post-title"> <h3> <a dont-color-link="true" href="/edprep-partners-quarterly-update-summer-2025" data-blog-post-alias="edprep-partners-quarterly-update-summer-2025">EdPrep Partners Quarterly Update Summer 2025</a> 1800</h3> 1801</div> 1802 <div class="authorBar" data-auto="blog-author-bar"> <span>By EdPrep Partners</span> 1803 <span>•</span> 1804 <span>August 12, 2025</span> 1805</div> 1806 <div class="postDescription" data-auto="blog-post-description">EdPrep Partners Quarterly Update Summer 2025 | Invest in Preparation. Deliver What Works The Readiness Imperative: Building & Doing What Matters Over the last two decades, I’ve worked alongside preparation leaders and faculty who have poured extraordinary amounts of energy into building plans, frameworks, and bold visions for improvement in educator preparation. I’ve learned so much—and have been continually humbled by the innovative, purposeful leaders alongside me driving improvements in our field. That groundwork matters. But despite this progress, too much of what’s needed still lives on paper rather than in practice. It’s not that the work hasn’t started—it’s that lasting, high-impact implementation remains uneven, most especially for teacher candidates and P-12 students. Now, more than ever, is the moment to shift from planning for quality preparation to practicing it. At EdPrep Partners, we believe the next chapter isn’t about chasing trends—it’s about delivering on what we as a field already know works. That doesn’t mean the work is simple. Preparing excellent teachers requires intention, precision, and sustained support. We recognize there are new and promising ways to organize staffing and reimagine pathways—and we’re incredibly excited about those shifts. But the fundamentals of great teaching and teacher preparation remain under-implemented in far too many places. The drivers of teacher candidate readiness aren’t a mystery—and they shouldn’t be. We need to democratize what works so that every program, every pathway, and every candidate has access to the preparation practices that most quickly build readiness to teach. Quality teaching at every level is the engine of readiness. When faculty, supervisors, and mentor teachers explicitly model high-leverage practices, label the criteria behind them, and develop rigorous, high-impact practices, candidates internalize what excellent teaching looks like—and how to facilitate it. Structured practice leads to stronger instruction. Teacher candidates improve when they rehearse and enact teaching moves in authentic classroom settings—whether through representations or enactments with P-12 students—where candidates are both challenged and supported. High-frequency, high-quality feedback drives growth. Candidates need routine, specific, and timely feedback aligned to a clear developmental trajectory—not just reflection prompts, but feedback anchored in criteria, informed by modeling, and focused on instructional pedagogy and decision-making proven to improve P-12 outcomes. When paired with structured practice, these feedback opportunities build the habits and precision needed for day-one readiness. Not all efforts lead to impact. Some strategies feel comfortable or manageable for programs—not because they’re high-leverage, but because they’re low-resistance. At its core, this is about preparation—real, rigorous preparation that equips candidates to teach effectively both during their program and well beyond it. To make meaningful progress, we must get sharper about what truly builds readiness—and commit to doing it. That means adopting a mindset of discipline, intentionality, and purposefulness in how candidates spend their time in preparation—applied not only to candidates themselves, but to the people and systems responsible for preparing them. Let’s make teacher preparation better—together. Calvin J. Stocker Founder & CEO, EdPrep Partners EdPrep Perspective: A Systems Response to the Learning Crisis Our EdPrep Perspective series provides guidance on urgent challenges in educator preparation—grounded in research and focused on actionable solutions. Refocusing on What Works In the wake of national learning setbacks and increased urgency around teacher readiness, Refocusing on What Works offers a candid response. Drawing from a recent New York Times article and EdPrep Partner’s experience, this brief calls for a systems-level shift—away from slogans and toward preparation practices that drive candidate preparation and, ultimately, student learning. Let’s implement blueprints that move from intention, to impact. Read the EdPrep Perspective What’s Ahead: Strengthening Preparation Through State-Led Commitments EdPrep Partners was founded with a clear purpose: to dramatically improve the quality of teacher preparation nationwide. Across the field, we see educator preparation programs, faculty, funders, and state agencies working hard to strengthen both where and how future teachers are developed. Yet even with this momentum, too many candidates still enter classrooms without the instructional skills or developmental support needed to succeed on day one. The opportunity now is to move with greater precision and urgency—to build on existing strengths, align preparation to what works, and reimagine pathways in ways that expand access without compromising quality. That doesn’t require starting over; it requires support that is targeted, practical, and sustainable. This year, we’re supporting a new wave of multi-year efforts across several states, each grounded in that commitment. Formal announcements will come directly from our partners, but we’re excited to share that this work reflects exactly what we exist to do: support programs and systems ready to deepen their efforts and take the next step toward rigorous, practice-based preparation that equips teachers to improve outcomes for P–12 students. Across our engagements, we focus on five high-leverage drivers of change: Deep program diagnostics to identify what is—and isn’t—effectively preparing candidates for high-quality instruction with P–12 students. Prioritized recommendations that drive purposeful, timely shifts in the areas that most impact instructional qual
1806ity and student outcomes. Technical assistance that builds the capacity of EPP leaders and teacher educators through strategic, high-frequency support—designed to drive lasting, scalable improvement. Pathway diversification that meets candidates and the educator preparation market where they are—while scaling sustainable models that deliver on quality. Streamlined data routines that increase the consistency and utility of data use—enabling programs to plan, communicate, and improve more effectively. We help programs democratize data so it becomes a tool for improvement, not just compliance. We don’t just name what matters—we help programs do it. Whether through state systems work, cross-institutional technical assistance, or focused program support, we partner with those ready to raise the bar for preparation—and stay there. From the Field: What’s Working and Why It Matters Across the field, bold and grounded work is pushing preparation forward. These recent contributions—from national leaders and institutions—spotlight the practical shifts, leadership priorities, and instructional models that most urgently deserve attention. Each underscores a shared commitment: deepen candidate development, raise expectations for educator learning, and design systems that deliver real results for teacher candidate preparation and P–12 students. From TeachingWorks at the University of Michigan In A Brief Exploration of Mathematical Literacy, Nicole Garcia, Deborah Loewenberg Ball, and the TeachingWorks team emphasize that mathematical literacy isn’t a given—it must be intentionally built. Students need to engage in meaningful problem-solving, communicate their mathematical thinking, and develop positive math identities. To meet that charge, TeachingWorks and the New York State Education Department collaborated to distill decades of research into eight concise, accessible briefs. The briefs outline essential practices for building mathematical proficiency and offer practical guidance on instruction, assessment, curriculum use, leadership, and more. Read the Post Read the Briefs From TeachingWorks at the University of Michigan Francesca Forzani from TeachingWorks offers the field a timely reminder: teacher preparation isn’t just complex—it’s public work. Her call to make our teaching visible through thoughtful syllabi, course plans, and public materials challenges us to represent preparation clearly and professionally. “Just because it’s tough doesn’t mean we shouldn’t do it,” she writes. “As the preparers of our nation’s public school teachers, we shouldn’t be affronted by requests to make clear what we do and how we do it.” Read Francesca’s Post Read EdPrep Partner’s Response From Dean’s for Impact In Rethinking Leadership in
1806Educator Preparation, Deans for Impact shares findings from a national study examining the evolving role of leadership in educator preparation. The report outlines a new vision for program leadership—one grounded in instructional focus, system-level strategy, and proactive coalition-building. At its core, the report calls on EPP leaders to: Reclaim instructional improvement as the central purpose of preparation, focusing leadership energy on strengthening candidate learning experiences. Lead discerning strategic change by aligning people, systems, and decision-making to long-term priorities—not short-term fixes. Engage in proactive advocacy to advance a shared vision of quality educator preparation at the local, state, and national levels. Each priority is brought to life through powerful case studies of leaders who are threading the needle between innovation and accountability. Read the Publication From Dean’s for Impact In From Preparation to Prosperity: Federal Actions to Support Future Teachers, Deans for Impact outlines a bold federal agenda to address the national teacher shortage and strengthen educator preparation. The brief calls on federal leaders to (1) invest in teacher preparation through sustained and streamlined funding for accessible, practice-based pathways; (2) reset the national conversation on teaching and learning , including recognizing aspiring teachers and elevating evidence-based workforce strategies; and (3) advance policy to scale affordable, high-quality preparation , including stronger PK–12 and EPP partnerships, paid clinical experiences, and aligned accountability. Read the Brief From Arizona State University’s Next Education Workforce From the team at Arizona State University’s Mary Lou Fulton Teachers College, The Next Education Workforce offers a compelling call to rethink how we organize educators and learning in schools. Brent Maddin and his team raise up the long-standing one-teacher, one-classroom model and propose a team-based approach that distributes expertise, deepens student learning, and improves outcomes for all P-12 students. These models include new roles, advancement pathways, and more sustainable working conditions for educators. With practical guidance for school leaders, preparation providers, and policymakers, the book outlines how to launch and sustain these models—calling for a system-wide shift in leadership, human capital strategy, and educator development to meet today’s learning demands.  Explore the Book Read the Preliminary Research EdPrep Insights: What You May Have Missed Our EdPrep Insights series surfaces urgent challenges in educator preparation and lifts up research-aligned, actionable strategies for improvement. Each brief is grounded in EdPrep’s technical assistance approach and directly reflects the EdPrep Performance Framework and our 14 Levers for Quality Teacher Preparation. If you haven’t yet explored the most recent editions, here’s what you missed: Delaware’s Playbook: A Signal for What’s Possible in Teacher Preparation and Literacy This EdPrep Insight highlights how Delaware’s statewide approach—blending residency, strategic staffing, a focus on literacy, and a clear set of standards, and aligned program supports—offers a model for what’s possible when policy, preparation, and practice work in sync. Read the EdPrep Insight The Faculty Factor: Elevating the Teacher Educators Who Equip Future Teachers We can’t raise the bar for candidates without raising the bar for those who prepare them. This EdPrep Insight outlines the urgent need—and concrete actions—for supporting faculty, supervisors, and mentors to ensure quality teaching at every level. Read the EdPrep Insight When Preparation Is the Priority: How UH Is Redefining Quality ACP at Scale This EdPrep Insight profiles the University of Houston’s ACP as a bold example of what happens when preparation—not just compliance—drives program design. It’s a roadmap for building high-quality alternative pathways without lowering the bar. Read the EdPrep Insight Gatekeepers of Readiness: Reclaiming Quality in Teacher Preparation Too many teacher candidates advance without ever demonstrating they’re ready to teach. Performance gateways offer preparation programs a clear, evidence-based way to ensure every candidate is truly instructional day one ready. Read the EdPrep Insight Our Growing Team: Leaders Advancing a Shared Mission We’re thrilled to welcome three exceptional leaders to the EdPrep Partners team —each bringing deep expertise and a clear charge to help strengthen the systems, supports, and partnerships that enable educator preparation programs and state agencies in making high-quality preparation possible. Stephanie Howard joins as Senior Director of Programs & Partnerships , where she will lead diagnostic review teams, support technical assistance implementation, and help shape EdPrep Partner’s national strategy for dramatically improving teacher preparation. With deep experience in educator development, program diagnostics, systems design, and partnership building, Stephanie is already deepening our work to define quality, elevate preparation practices that work, and expand the tools programs use to drive candidate growth. Dr. Stephanie Lund serves as our new Director of Technical Assistance , focused on codifying and scaling EdPrep Partner’s on-the-ground support to educator preparation programs and P–12 partners. Drawing from her experience strengthening clinical models and instructional leadership, along with supporting large-scale redesign in coursew
1806ork, she is already feverishly supporting EdPrep Partners and our stakeholders in refining technical assistance structures, building faculty capacity, and leading cross-organizational initiatives to improve teacher candidate readiness and P-12 student outcomes. Liz Lindsey is our Director of Operations & Administration , leading the systems and infrastructure that power EdPrep Partners’ day-to-day operations and long-term growth. She focuses on strategically leveraging resources to drive efficiency and support our mission to dramatically improve the quality of teacher preparation nationwide. Liz ensures our teams deliver with excellence—aligning financial, compliance, and operational practices to the same high standards we uphold in our technical assistance and expect of the programs we serve.</div> 1807</div> 1808 <div class="readMore" data-auto="blog-read-more"> <a dont-color-link="true" href="/edprep-partners-quarterly-update-summer-2025"></a> 1809</div> 1810</div> 1811</div> 1812</div> 1813 <div style="-ms-grid-column:1; -ms-grid-row:6" class="postArticle " data-auto="blog-post-article"> <div class="inner clearfix wow" style="animation-delay: 3200.0ms;"> <a class="blogImgLink" data-auto="blog-img-link" dont-color-link="true" href="/but-who-develops-the-mentors" data-blog-post-alias="but-who-develops-the-mentors" aria-label="But Who Develops the Mentors?"> <div class="blogImg" data-auto="blog-img" style="background-image: url('https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/opt/5-d157f22b-1920w.png');"><img src="https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/opt/5-d157f22b-1920w.png" alt="" onerror="handleImageLoadError(this)"/></div> 1814</a> 1815 <div class="postTextContainer"> <div class="postText clearfix"> <div class="postTitle" data-auto="blog-post-title"> <h3> <a dont-color-link="true" href="/but-who-develops-the-mentors" data-blog-post-alias="but-who-develops-the-mentors">But Who Develops the Mentors?</a> 1816</h3> 1817</div> 1818 <div class="authorBar" data-auto="blog-author-bar"> <span>By EdPrep Partners</span> 1819 <span>•</span> 1820 <span>July 30, 2025</span> 1821</div> 1822 <div class="postDescription" data-auto="blog-post-description">But Who Develops the Mentors? Why Faculty Development Is the Foundation of Teacher Preparation-And How Great Teacher Educators Make Great Mentors Possible The Missing Link in Mentor Development We’ve spent a lot of time lately talking about the people mentoring apprentices and residents in the field—and rightly so. This latest New America report has sparked renewed attention to a long-overlooked truth: in K–12 apprenticeship, pre-service, and sometimes in-service models, mentor teachers are the backbone of teacher preparation. They model instruction, guide day-to-day practice, and offer the kind of real-time feedback that, in the best-case scenario, accelerates candidate growth. But we can’t “hope” candidates learn how to teach. And we can’t keep overlooking a key group in the process: the faculty and staff inside educator preparation programs. And that raises a question the field doesn’t ask often enough, though one that actually matters most to the developmental outcomes of a teacher candidate: Who’s developing the mentors? In educator preparation, we’ve come to expect that in-service teachers can take on an ever-growing set of responsibilities—coaching, modeling, and providing developmental feedback—
1822often without access to deep, structured, and resourced support. Because they spend the most time with candidates, operate closest to the realities of P–12 classrooms, and often form the most meaningful relationships, mentors are seen as “high-leverage.” As a result, we’ve too often placed the bulk of candidate development on mentors and P–12 schools’ shoulders. At the same time, we’ve accepted a pair of quiet assumptions: First: That the people responsible for supporting mentors—EPP directors, faculty, and supervisors—already know how to effectively model instruction, coach mentors, and deliver high-quality feedback. That they don’t need structured development themselves. Second: That the EPP teacher educators have already equipped mentors with the tools, training, and support needed to develop teacher candidates well. Faculty and supervisors within educator preparation programs are the developers of mentors. And they need tools, routines, and ongoing development just as much as anyone else in the system. In fact, they need it most . Their role isn’
1822t just to support candidates, but to develop the teacher educators who do. When faculty aren’t equipped to design developmental experiences, lead effective coaching and rehearsal cycles, or provide feedback aligned to shared expectations, research-backed methods, and defined instructional criteria, mentoring breaks down—even with the best intentions in place. Faculty development isn’t optional or periodic, it’s the foundation of scalable, high-quality teacher preparation. As Francesca Forzani of TeachingWorks reminds us, “As teacher educators, no one should take instruction more seriously than we do.” The Conditions That Shape Mentoring In too many educator preparation programs, mentoring is treated as a standalone function—isolated from the faculty, coursework, and routines that define a candidates’ preparation experiences more broadly and deeply (meaning, where the time and resources in preparation are spent (coursework, clinical experiences and observation cycles, etc.). Mentors are expected to model high-quality instruction, guide novice practice, and give actionable feedback. But what do we imagine happens when the people designing those experiences haven’t been supported to do that work themselves? Mentorship doesn’t operate in a vacuum. It reflects what faculty and field supervisors prioritize, plan for, and model. Strong mentoring depends on strong teacher educators, including those who can translate instructional frameworks into rehearsal and feedback routines, scaffold development across time, and consistently model what high-quality teaching looks like. To do that well, they must be equipped with clear performance criteria and the capacity to offer focused, developmental feedback. And yet, in too many places: There’s often no shared definition of high-quality teacher educator practice. No clear criteria, performance expectations, or consistent observation and feedback structures like the ones we expect for candidates. Frameworks and practices, like those from TeachingWorks , offer strong starting points to embed within faculty development. Observation and feedback tools vary widely, or don’t exist at all. This gap extends beyond coaching protocols and includes uneven or missing use of instructional frameworks, which serve as the shared foundation for candidate development and performance expectations. Faculty often receive little to no structured development on how to label, model, teach, or coach toward proficiency in key methods, instructional pedagogies, content pedagogies, or instructional strategies. These gaps aren’t incidental, they’re structural. And they directly impact the candidate experience. When faculty aren’t prepared to develop mentors, mentors can’t fully develop candidates. And the entire system suffers from a lack of clarity, consistency, and support. How Strong Programs Develop Better Mentors Strong mentoring doesn’t start in the P–12 classroom. It begins with the people and practices that develop effective mentors. The strategies that make mentoring effective—modeling instruction, defining clear expectations, using structured coaching routines, and providing actionable feedback—aren’t just for mentors. They’re core responsibilities of the faculty, supervisors, and program leaders who design, support, and sustain high-quality teacher preparation. When teacher educators are equipped to model, label, and coach instructional practice themselves, they’re better positioned to develop mentors who can do the same. And when expectations are aligned across coursew
1822ork and clinical experiences, candidates experience more consistent and connected support. Strong programs invest in the people and structures that make effective mentoring possible. Mentoring systems don’t improve by chance. They improve through clear expectations, shared language, and deliberate, supported practice—starting with the people who lead them. Five things strong programs do to ensure faculty, supervisors, and mentors are all set up to succeed: Establish Clear Criteria for Instructional Practices Strong programs don’t leave quality teaching to interpretation. They ensure teacher educators can articulate, teach, and apply clear criteria for what proficient performance looks like, grounded in the instructional methods and pedagogies the program prioritizes. Candidates know what’s expected. Mentors and faculty know how to support it. Label & Model High-Quality Instructional Practices Faculty, supervisors, and mentors consistently label & model prioritized instructional methods and pedagogies—not just in coursework, but across rehearsals, field-based debriefs, and candidate coaching. They explicitly label the criteria of effective teaching and connect them to the program’s instructional framework, reinforcing shared language and clear expectations. Use Structured Coaching and Feedback Routines Strong programs don’t leave coaching to chance, they rely on repeatable, structured routines when engaging with candidates in their development. These include clear observation protocols, intentional debrief planning that prioritizes the highest-leverage growth area(s), and focused feedback conversations that incorporate labeling, modeling, and rehearsal. Next steps are actionable, aligned to each candidate’s developmental trajectory, and anchored in the instructional performance criteria defined by the program and P–12 partners. Deliver Feedback That Builds Proficiency Over Time Effe
1822ctive feedback is specific, timely, actionable, developmentally appropriate, and aligned to shared expectations. It meets candidates where they are—and builds toward where they need to be—by supporting the knowledge, skills, and practices required for more advanced methods, pedagogies, and the needs of P–12 students. Faculty and supervisors provide both oral and written feedback that reinforces common instructional language, supports growth over time, and builds toward instructional proficiency. Crucially, feedback is calibrated across raters—ensuring it is fair, focused, and consistent. Align Expectations Between Faculty and Mentors Strong programs ensure that faculty, supervisors, and mentor teachers operate from a shared understanding of instructional expectations and feedback language. This alignment doesn’t happen by chance—it requires intentional faculty development, structured calibration routines, and shared tools that anchor conversations in the program’s instructional framework. When expectations are aligned, candidates receive clearer, more consistent support across coursework and clinical practice. These five practices aren’t just features of building strong mentoring programs, they’re the habits of strong programs. When faculty and supervisors do these things consistently, mentoring becomes a system, not a guess. E
1822xpectations are clearer. Support is more focused. And candidates are better prepared to teach. Programs don’t need to overhaul everything to improve faculty practices—and, in turn, mentor practices. Strong programs start small. They choose and consistently apply a common instructional framework. They identify core instructional methods, along with the definitions and criteria that guide candidate development within them. They select one or two high-leverage teacher educator practices that all faculty, supervisors, and mentors will use to support candidates. They adopt a focused coaching structure and process—such as Jim Knight’s Impact Cycle, Elena Aguilar’s Transformational Coaching Cycle, or Paul Bambrick-Santoyo’s “See It, Name It, Do It” model—and align all feedback to the instructional framework and method criteria. From there, they progress monitor and ensure teacher educators are prepared to support mentors with the same clarity, consistency, and intentionality we expect mentors to show candidates. Where Quality Mentoring Begins Strong mentoring doesn’t happen by accident, and neither does strong teacher preparation. It happens by design. Programs that cultivate strong mentors understand that quality mentoring stems from strong modeling, clear expectations, and consistent support upstream. And that means attending to the development of the people who make it all possible: the faculty, supervisors, and staff inside educator preparation programs. If mentors deserve support, modeling, and clarity, then the same must be true for those preparing them. These teacher educators do not just contribute to the preparation system—they shape the conditions, habits, and practices that drive it. They influence how mentors understand quality, how feedback is delivered, and how candidates make meaning of what it means to teach well. At EdPrep Partners , we work alongside programs to build that foundation, helping faculty and supervisors define what high quality practice looks like, model it with intention, and build the tools and routines to help others do the same. Our work supports not just individual development, but system level clarity and alignment, so that every candidate benefits from all teacher educators. Because when all teacher educators grow, candidates grow. And when candidates grow, so do P–12 students. Let’s make teacher preparation better—together.</div> 1823</div> 1824 <div class="readMore" data-auto="blog-read-more"> <a dont-color-link="true" href="/but-who-develops-the-mentors"></a> 1825</div> 1826</div> 1827</div> 1828</div> 1829 <div style="-ms-grid-column:2; -ms-grid-row:6" class="postArticle " data-auto="blog-post-article"> <div class="inner clearfix wow" style="animation-delay: 3400.0ms;"> <a class="blogImgLink" data-auto="blog-img-link" dont-color-link="true" href="/gatekeepers-of-readiness-reclaiming-quality-in-teacher-preparation" data-blog-post-alias="gatekeepers-of-readiness-reclaiming-quality-in-teacher-preparation" aria-label="Gatekeepers of Readiness: Reclaiming Quality in Teacher Preparation"> <div class="blogImg" data-auto="blog-img" style="background-image: url('https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/opt/6-0453b027-1920w.png');"><img src="https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/opt/6-0453b027-1920w.png" alt="" onerror="handleImageLoadError(this)"/></div> 1830</a> 1831 <div class="postTextContainer"> <div class="postText clearfix"> <div class="postTitle" data-auto="blog-post-title"> <h3> <a dont-color-link="true" href="/gatekeepers-of-readiness-reclaiming-quality-in-teacher-preparation" data-blog-post-alias="gatekeepers-of-readiness-reclaiming-quality-in-teacher-preparation">Gatekeepers of Readiness: Reclaiming Quality in Teacher Preparation</a> 1832</h3> 1833</div> 1834 <div class="authorBar" data-auto="blog-author-bar"> <span>By EdPrep Partners</span> 1835 <span>•</span> 1836 <span>July 17, 2025</span> 1837</div> 1838 <div class="postDescription" data-auto="blog-post-description">Gatekeepers of Readiness: Reclaiming Quality in Teacher Preparation The Challenge: Candidate Program Progress ≠ Proficiency No gateway, no guarantee. If we truly want readiness, we have to require it. Every year, thousands of teacher candidates advance through preparation programs without clear, evidence-based confirmation that they’re ready for what’s next. Coursework and clinical experiences are completed. Clinical hours and documentation is logged. Evaluations are submitted. But critical questions remain: Can this candidate plan and deliver effective instruction? Has the candidate demonstrated proficiency in essential pedagogical methods? Is the candidate prepared to lead a classroom on day one? Too often, the answer isn’t yes or no—it’s maybe, probably, or simply unclear. And when progression is based more on time or task completion than demonstrated readiness, even well-intentioned systems can fall short. The result? Districts are left unsure of what a candidate can do. And ultimately, P&nd
1838ash;12 students experience the consequences in real time. The Solution: Performance Gateways At EdPrep Partners, we believe advancement in teacher preparation should be earned —not assumed. That’s where performance gateways come in. Performance gateways are structured checkpoints built into a preparation program where candidates must demonstrate clear, observable proficiency in core instructional competencies before moving forward. They aren’t hurdles—they’re commitments to readiness. They reflect what many on the field have long recognized: that advancing through preparation requires defined opportunities to demonstrate performance, not just passive participation. When done well, performance gateways give everyone a shared bar for what “ready” actually looks like. They align expectations across coursework and clinical experiences, helping programs feel confident that candidates aren’t just progressing—they’re prepared. What Gateways Look Like in Practice Strong programs don’t treat performance gateways as one-time checks. They build them into the architecture of preparation—across three critical domains: 1. Coursework Progression Gateway assignments—whether performance tasks, planning artifacts, or modeled pedagogical practices—aren’t just graded activities. They’re structured demonstrations of instructional skill. Candidates must show proficiency against pre-developed criteria, using shared instructional frameworks, aligned to core methods and content pedagogy before advancing to later coursework or entering clinical placements. 2. Clinical Transition Points Before taking on any level of teaching responsibility—whether through co-teaching or as a full-time teacher of record—candidates engage in structured opportunities to demonstrate proficiency in core instructional methods and pedagogies. These gateways may include rehearsals, lesson enactments, or other representations of teaching, supported by observation of practice, planning artifacts, and content-pedagogy evidence assessed against shared instructional frameworks. When expectations aren’t yet met, candidates receive targeted coaching—clear, high-quality oral and written feedback—alongside additional practice and a reassessment opportunity. The goal is not punishment, but support and growth. 3. Licensure Readiness and Program Completion Some performance gateways—whether tied to licensure, graduation, or overall program completion—draw on aggregated evidence of candidate performance. This may include portfolios, demonstration lessons, observation data, feedback cycles, and ratings on core instructional methods, pedagogical practices, and professional dispositions. These gateways offer a more comprehensive view of readiness—not just a checklist of completed tasks. When candidates don’t yet meet expectations, strong programs respond with support—not exclusion. That support includes targeted coaching, individualized growth plans, and multiple structured opportunities to demonstrate progress—ensuring that any high-stakes decision to advance or withhold a candidate is grounded in evidence. What Strong Programs Do Differently Programs that implement effective performance gateways don’t leave readiness to chance. They build it into the structure of preparation—and they’re willing to make hard decisions in service of quality. Here’s what they prioritize: Shared Criteria and Expectations Gateways are aligned to a shared instructional framework, with consistent criteria & look-fors, proficiency benchmarks, and frameworks used across faculty, supervisors, mentors, and candidates. Calibration Across Roles Faculty and field supervisors alike are trained and calibrated on what quality looks like—and how to assess it reliably. Transparent Candidate Support Plans Candidates know what’s expected and what happens if they don’t meet the bar. Growth plans are not reactive—they’re proactive. Data-Driven Progression Decisions Advancement is grounded in multiple data sources: performance assessments, observation feedback, candidate coursework, and candidate and faculty/staff reflections—not gut instinct or seat time. Willingness to Hold the Line Strong programs are willing to hold a candidate in a ‘phase of support’ when readiness isn’t yet demonstrated—
1838because advancing without proficiency serves no one. They pair high expectations with high support, ensuring every candidate has the opportunity to meet the bar before moving forward. Candidate Readiness as a Shared Responsibility Performance decisions aren’t the job of one teacher educator. They require aligned systems, clear structures, and shared ownership across faculty, supervisors, and district partners. When the entire preparation ecosystem supports a common bar for readiness, gateways become reliable—not random. This work requires intention, structure, and investment. But the payoff—better-prepared candidates who are ready on day one—is worth it. Why This Matters When performance gateways are clearly defined and well-executed, everyone benefits: For Candidates: They receive timely, actionable feedback and know exactly what’s expected at each stage. ‘Readiness to Teach’ isn’t a guessing game—it’s something they can see and achieve. For Programs: They gain confidence that their completers are truly ready—and have the data to prove it.. Gateways strengthen program credibility, build trust with P-12 partners, and elevate outcomes. For Districts: They hire new teachers who are instructionally ready—not just licensed. These candidates have already demonstrated they can plan, teach, and adapt in real P-12 classrooms. For P–12 Students: They’re taught by educators who are truly prepared to lead learning from day one. And as research shows, the quality of the teacher makes all the difference. At EdPrep Partners, performance gateways are a core lever of our EdPrep Performance Framework. We support educator preparation programs to: Design developmental trajectories that build toward clear, proficiency-based benchmarks Establish structured performance gateways across coursework and clinical experiences Develop and calibrate observation frameworks, criteria, and look-fors aligned to core instructional practices Implement targeted support plans for candidates who need additional time or coaching to meet expectations Make progression decisions that are consistent, equitable, and grounded in multiple sources of evidence We help programs shift from informal checkpoints to intentional, performance-based systems of candidate development—ensuring every candidate advances based on one overarching thing: demonstrated readiness to teach. Let’s Stop Guessing at Readiness Teacher preparation isn’
1838t about getting candidates through the program. It’s about getting them ready—deliberately, thoroughly, and with high expectations—for the P-12 classrooms they will lead. It means candidates demonstrating skills. It means meeting a clear, shared bar. It means performance—and readiness. Let’s stop implying readiness. Let’s measure it. Let’s make teacher preparation better—together.</div> 1839</div> 1840 <div class="readMore" data-auto="blog-read-more"> <a dont-color-link="true" href="/gatekeepers-of-readiness-reclaiming-quality-in-teacher-preparation"></a> 1841</div> 1842</div> 1843</div> 1844</div> 1845 <div style="-ms-grid-column:3; -ms-grid-row:6" class="postArticle lastArticle" data-auto="blog-post-article"> <div class="inner clearfix wow" style="animation-delay: 3600.0ms;"> <a class="blogImgLink" data-auto="blog-img-link" dont-color-link="true" href="/refocusing-on-what-works" data-blog-post-alias="refocusing-on-what-works" aria-label="Refocusing on What Works"> <div class="blogImg" data-auto="blog-img" style="background-image: url('https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/opt/8-a52854a7-1920w.png');"><img src="https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/opt/8-a52854a7-1920w.png" alt="" onerror="handleImageLoadError(this)"/></div> 1846</a> 1847 <div class="postTextContainer"> <div class="postText clearfix"> <div class="postTitle" data-auto="blog-post-title"> <h3> <a dont-color-link="true" href="/refocusing-on-what-works" data-blog-post-alias="refocusing-on-what-works">Refocusing on What Works</a> 1848</h3> 1849</div> 1850 <div class="authorBar" data-auto="blog-author-bar"> <span>By EdPrep Partners</span> 1851 <span>•</span> 1852 <span>July 10, 2025</span> 1853</div> 1854 <div class="postDescription" data-auto="blog-post-description">Refocusing on What Works A Call for a Systems Response to the Learning Crisis, Teacher Readiness, Instructional Quality, and What We Collectively Need to Do Next A National Challenge That Demands Local Action Every Child Deserves an Excellent Educator. Let’s Give Them One. In a recent New York Times article, “Has America Given Up on Children’s Learning?” journalist Dana Goldstein describes a stark picture: academic learning has drifted from the center of our national education agenda. While political debates over curriculum, culture, and governance continue, instructional quality and student learning outcomes—once considered the foundation of our education system—are no longer prioritized. Is this true? That depends on the lens you're using, the data you're referencing, and the people you're asking. This is clear though: Far too many students—and the teachers who serve them—remain underprepared. Across the country, teacher candidates are entering classrooms without the depth of preparation required to help students thrive (or reach proficiency). In many states, first-year novice teachers now make up more than 10% of the total P-12 teaching workforce —a figure that continues to grow. We’ve long known that novice teachers—those just entering the profession—are the least likely to accelerate student learning, often struggling to navigate the steep learning curve of effective instruction. That’s why preparation matters. That’s why preparation matters. As the share of inexperienced educators continues to rise, the consequences of weak preparation grow more urgent—not just for P–12 students, but for families, communities, and the nation. The stakes are not abstract: student achievement, instructional qual
1854ity, and teacher retention are all directly tied to how well teachers are prepared before stepping into their own classrooms. At EdPrep Partners, we do not view this moment with despair—but with clarity and urgency. This is not a call to return to antiquated systems, models, or slogans. It’s a call to refocus on what we know works : high-quality teaching at every level—including the instruction provided by teacher educators at educator preparation programs—grounded in evidence-based preparation, driven by meaningful practice, and centered on candidate development and P-12 student learning. For us and many of my colleagues across the nation, this is about dramatically improving the quality of teacher preparation . Dramatic doesn’t always mean changing everything . Sometimes it’s small, intentional shifts—if and how faculty label & model instructional practices, if and how feedback is delivered, if and how coursework aligns with clinical experiences—that create lasting impact. Sometimes it’s major shifts. We use the word dramatically deliberately: because we know the stakes, and because we’ve seen what’s possible. Across the country, some educator preparation programs are already pushing toward these shifts—what’s needed now is the support to help them go further, faster, and sustain what works. When the profession of teaching is separated from the science of how people learn, and change, we all lose. It’s time to move beyond rhetoric and toward action that strengthens the systems that produce excellent educators—because nothing matters more for P-12 students than the teacher in the classroom. What We’re Doing Differently We agree: the national conversation has drifted away from what matters most—the quality of preparation and its impact on student learning. Even within teacher preparation, the focus too often centers on staffing models, licensure flexibilities and/or needs, and placement practices. But these conversations frequently skip the most urgent question: Are teacher candidates prepared to lead learning with P–12 students? At EdPrep Partners, we believe the answer must be yes—and we exist to help make that true everywhere. We know that access and scale do not have to come at the expense of readiness (no matter the pathway). We work alongside educator preparation programs, districts, and state agencies to ensure their efforts are anchored in what research shows works: structured, practice-based preparation led by skilled teacher educators and grounded in the instructional needs of P–12 students. We don’t debate whether preparation matters. We build the systems that ensure it does —through research-backed preparation models, practice-based development, and a relentless focus on candidate readiness and student outcomes. Our Approach: Turning Barriers Into Breakthroughs Across the field, the challenges facing educator preparation are well known—and increasingly urgent. But they are not insurmountable. The issues highlighted in the New York Times article cited above—
1854drifting national priorities, inconsistent instructional quality, and underdeveloped preparation systems—mirror what we see daily on the ground. With the right structures and support, programs can overcome these barriers and build the conditions that lead to stronger preparation and better outcomes for teacher candidates and P–12 students. We must not respond with surface-level fixes, general advocacy, or staffing re-structuring alone, but with systems and educator preparation program-level solutions designed to ensure every teacher candidate enters the classroom ready to lead learning on day one. Our work is grounded in three foundational components: EdPrep Performance Framework – Defines the essential structures, practices, and indicators of quality across four performance areas: Program Leadership & Continuous Improvement, Candidate Preparation & Development, Teacher Educator Practices, and District & Program Partnerships. 14 Levers of Quality Teacher Preparation – Clear, actionable strategies that programs implement to strengthen coursework, clinical experiences, feedback systems, and data practices. Embedded Technical Assistance – On-the-ground, sustained support that moves programs from planning to implementation—focused on what’s within their control. Some of the most salient challenges in educator preparation are our collective responsibility:</div> 1855</div> 1856 <div class="readMore" data-auto="blog-read-more"> <a dont-color-link="true" href="/refocusing-on-what-works"></a> 1857</div> 1858</div> 1859</div> 1860</div> 1861</div> 1862 <a dont-color-link="true" class="more-posts-text-container dmWidget"> <span class="morePosts text">More Posts</span> 1863</a> 1864</div> 1865</div> 1866</div> 1867</div> 1868 <div class="u_1306608780 dmRespRow hide-for-small hide-for-medium" id="1306608780"> <div class="dmRespColsWrapper" id="1324661878"> <div class="dmRespCol large-12 medium-12 small-12 u_1027403962" id="1027403962"> <div class="u_1213107879 default mainBlog layout4" id="1213107879" dmle_extension="internal_blog_list" data-element-type="internal_blog_list" show-images="true" initialized="undefined" wr="true" trim-title="false" show-blog-title="false" posts-animation="undefined" data-paginate-listable-widget="false" show-action-text="true" text-align="left" icon="true" surround="true" adwords="" list-layout="layout4" visible-items="50" visible-post-lines="3" search-tags="Insights" search-term="" more-posts-text="More Posts" header-type="H2" posts-padding="10" posts-per-row="3" show-author="true" text-box-padding="false" action-text="Read more â" skip-post-index="-1" blog-posts-feature-flag="true" data-image-hover-effect="zoomout" show-more-posts-text="true" data-paginate-total-elements="13"> <div class="inner "> <div style="-ms-grid-column:1; -ms-grid-row:1" class="postArticle " data-auto="blog-post-article"> <div class="inner clearfix wow" style="animation-delay: 200.0ms;"> <a class="blogImgLink" data-auto="blog-img-link" dont-color-link="true" href="/making-candidate-readiness-visible" data-blog-post-alias="making-candidate-readiness-visible" aria-label="Making Candidate Readiness Visible"> <div class="blogImg" data-auto="blog-img" style="background-image: url('https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/opt/EdPrep-DTCC-1920w.png');"><img src="https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/opt/EdPrep-DTCC-1920w.png" alt="" onerror="handleImageLoadError(this)"/></div> 1869</a> 1870 <div class="postTextContainer"> <div class="postText clearfix"> <div class="postTitle" data-auto="blog-post-title"> <h3> <a dont-color-link="true" href="/making-candidate-readiness-visible" data-blog-post-alias="making-candidate-readiness-visible">Making Candidate Readiness Visible</a> 1871</h3> 1872</div> 1873 <div class="authorBar" data-auto="blog-author-bar"> <span>By EdPrep Partners</span> 1874 <span>•</span> 1875 <span>July 14, 2026</span> 1876</div> 1877 <div class="postDescription" data-auto="blog-post-description">Making Candidate Readiness Visible How Delaware Tech is building a shared path from instructional expectations to candidate readiness Day One Readiness Should Not Be a Mystery Day one readiness should not be discovered, or even fully measured, at the end of preparation. If teacher candidates are expected to enter classrooms ready to support student learning, educator preparation programs need more than a final assessment. They need a clear picture of what readiness requires, where candidates will develop those practices, how teacher educators will support their growth, and what evidence will show candidates are moving toward proficient practice over time. A final measure can tell a program something about candidate readiness. It cannot, by itself, create the conditions that help candidates become ready. As states and programs strengthen pedagogical performance measures, this creates an important design challenge. Performance measures can determine whether candidates are able to apply pedagogical skills, support student learning, and demonstrate the practices expected of beginning teachers. But they are strongest when they are connected to the full preparation experience: coursew
1877ork, clinical practice, coaching, feedback, progress monitoring, candidate support, and teacher educator development. A strong performance measure is not separate from preparation. It should reflect how the program develops candidates. That is the work Delaware Technical Community College has been advancing through its Candidate Readiness Framework and aligned Pedagogical Performance Measure system. Across recent work with EdPrep Partners, Delaware Tech faculty, clinical supervisors, and leaders have focused on a candidate-centered design question: What should candidates be ready to attempt, practice, and demonstrate, and by when? That question shifts the work from final measurement to preparation design. It asks programs to define readiness clearly, build a developmental path toward it, and use candidate evidence to support growth before candidates enter classrooms as teachers of record. Delaware’s Statewide Focus on Candidate Readiness In Delaware, this work sits within a broader statewide effort to strengthen how educator preparation programs assess and support candidate pedagogical readiness. House Bill 207 charged the Delaware Department of Education with engaging stakeholders to make recommendations on how educator preparation programs should assess the pedagogical skills of teacher candidates. That work led to a statewide Community of Practice and a shared set of Pedagogical Performance Measure (PPM) criteria focused on observable teaching behaviors, student learning, variation in candidate performance, alignment to the Delaware Teacher Growth and Support System, reliability, and connection to P-12 student outcomes. In 2025–26, the Delaware Department of Education, in partnership with EdPrep Partners, reintroduced and expanded those criteria to provide clearer expectations for implementation. The initiative included program self-assessments, Learning Walks, technical assistance, and implementation planning designed to help each educator preparation program strengthen its PPM system in ways that reflect both state expectations and each program’s context. The purpose is not simply to add another requirement. It is to support programs in building performance measures that are rigorous, reliable, connected to Delaware’s instructional expectations, and useful for strengthening candidate development for P-12 instruction. “Delaware's decision to allow educator preparation programs to develop their own Pedagogical Performance Measures recognizes that authentic assessment systems should reflect each of our EPPs unique curricula, culture, and instructional priorities. The result of these efforts will be beneficial to emerging educators and EPPs — performance evidence that is more meaningful and holistic for candidates, more useful for programs, and more closely connected to the realities of Delaware classrooms, all while meeting shared state expectations.” – Claire O’Neal, Education Associate, Delaware Department of Education That statewide focus creates an important opportunity for programs: to make readiness visible before candidates become teachers of record, not only through final measures, but through the coursework, clinical experiences, feedback, support(s), and evidence systems that help candidates become ready. Delaware Tech’s work offers one example of how a program has taken up that opportunity. Start With the Candidate, Not the Measure Pedagogical performance measure work can quickly become technical. Programs must make decisions about rubrics, scoring, observation cycles, assignments, data systems, reporting, and implementation timelines. Those decisions are necessary. But when the work begins only with the measure, the candidate can become secondary to the tool. Delaware Tech’s work begins with candidate development. The Delaware Tech Candidate Readiness Framework defines the instructional practices teacher candidates are expected to develop and demonstrate across the Associate of Arts in Teaching (Elementary Education) and Bachelor of Science in Elementary Education programs. It is grounded in Delaware’s Teacher Growth and Support System (DTGSS), the state’s system for supporting teacher growth and classroom instruction. A central part of DTGSS is the Delaware Teacher Classroom Observation Framework , which helps educators align on what high-quality teaching and learning looks like, collect evidence from classroom observations, and identify strengths and areas for growth. Delaware Tech’s Candidate Readiness Framework applies those expectations to teacher preparation by translating them into pre-service candidate performance based “look fors” that can be taught, practiced, observed, coached, and assessed throughout preparation. Practicing teachers and teacher candidates do not have the same developmental needs. Candidates need expectations that are rigorous and aligned to the profession, while still being appropriate for where they are in preparation. They need to know what strong instruction looks like, what to practice with support, and what evidence will show they are moving toward readiness. The Candidate Readiness Framework gives Delaware Tech a shared language for that work. Faculty, clinical supervisors, and cooperating teachers can use it to align coursew
1877ork, modeling, rehearsal, clinical support, observation, feedback, and assessment. Candidates can use it to understand expected instructional practices, reflect on feedback, and track their growth. District and school-based partners can use it to align mentoring and feedback with the instructional expectations candidates will encounter in Delaware classrooms. “This work helped us realize a vision we have held for some time: a unified framework that brings together our expectations for candidates across coursework, residency, feedback, and assessment. It gives faculty, clinical supervisors, cooperating teachers, and candidates a shared language for what readiness looks like and how candidates build toward it over time.” – Holly Hermstedt, Collegewide Director,Bachelor of Science in Education Program, Delaware Technical Community College The value of the framework is not that it creates another document. Its value is that it gives the program one shared approach to candidate development. Candidates encounter clear instructional expectations, practice those expectations with support, enact them in classrooms, receive aligned feedback, and demonstrate readiness through measures connected to the path they have traveled. Readiness becomes more than an end point. It becomes something candidates build toward throughout preparation. Translate In-Service Expectations Into Pre-Service Look Fors One of Delaware Tech’s most important moves was not simply choosing what to include in the Candidate Readiness Framework. It was building a shared understanding of how to translate Delaware’s instructional expectations into language that could support teacher candidates. DTGSS was developed for classroom instruction and educator growth. Its language describes the kinds of teaching and student learning Delaware wants to see in P-12 classrooms. That makes it a strong foundation for preparation, but Delaware Tech could not simply place DTGSS in front of candidates and expect it to function as a preparation tool. The team needed to ask what the framework means for a candidate who is still learning to teach. Delaware Tech faculty, clinical supervisors, and leaders approached that shift through three core questions: What is being measured? What actions would we need to see from the candidate and students? How should those actions be stated as observable “look fors”? Those questions helped move the conversation from broad instructional descriptors to the actual teaching moves candidates need to learn, practice, and demonstrate. “The three questions gave the team a way to move from framework language to candidate practice. We were asking: What is the expectation really measuring? What would we need to see from the candidate and students? And how do we state that clearly enough that faculty, supervisors, and candidates can use it?” – Andrew McDermott, Technical Assistance Partner, EdPrep Partners For example, when a framework says students should understand what they are learning, participate in a productive learning environment, respond with evidence, or use academic language, the preparation task is to name the candidate moves that make those outcomes possible: communicating an aligned objective in student-friendly language, connecting tasks to the purpose of the lesson, establishing and reinforcing routines, redirecting off-task behavior in ways that preserve learning time, preparing questions aligned to the lesson objective, providing wait time and scaffolds, modeling academic language, and giving students opportunities to explain, elaborate, and build on one another’s thinking. This is the shift from describing effective instruction to preparing candidates to enact it. The “look fors” were not intended to turn teaching into a checklist. They were a translation tool. They helped Delaware Tech faculty, clinical supervisors, and leaders make the practices within DTGSS visible enough to teach, model, rehearse, observe, coach, and assess. The collaborative process was essential. Faculty considered where candidates would first encounter and practice these expectations in coursew
1877ork. Clinical supervisors considered what evidence they would need to see during observation and feedback. Program leaders considered how the same language could connect assignments, residency experiences, performance measures, and candidate supports. By working through the three questions together, Delaware Tech began turning DTGSS from an in-service instructional framework into a pre-service candidate development tool. Candidates need more than a description of strong teaching. They need to understand the actions that make strong teaching possible and the evidence that shows their practice is growing. Observable practice is the bridge between instructional expectations and candidate development. Sequence What Candidates Attempt, Practice, and Demonstrate Defining candidate expectations is necessary. It is not sufficient. Candidates also need a developmental path. Delaware Tech’s work moved from naming core teaching practices to considering how those practices build over time. Faculty and staff identified how Candidate Readiness Framework criteria may develop from practices that establish the essential conditions for learning to practices that require candidates to integrate multiple instructional skills. The point was not to decide that some practices matter and others do not. All criteria remain part of candidate readiness. The purpose was to determine what candidates should be expected to attempt, practice, and demonstrate at different points in preparation. Delaware Tech organized this work through four developmental categories: Most Foundational: practices that create the essential conditions for teaching and learning. Foundational: practices that build from those conditions and establish core instructional structures. Developing Complexity: practices that require candidates to monitor, respond to, and support student learning with increasing independence. Integrated Practice: practices that require candidates to draw on multiple earlier skills at once. This developmental lens changes how programs think about readiness. A candidate learning to facilitate evidence-based student discussion also needs to establish participation structures, pose aligned and scaffolded questions, support academic language, respond to student thinking, and create conditions for students to engage with one another. A candidate learning to differentiate and support rigorous application also needs to understand the learning objective, criteria for success, student needs, and evidence of student progress. More complex teaching depends on earlier practices. A candidate developmental trajectory helps programs decide what candidates should develop first, what those practices enable next, and where candidates should have opportunities to learn, practice, receive feedback, and demonstrate increasing proficiency. Delaware Tech participants named this need directly in feedback after the May session. They identified opportunities to embed prioritized
1877indicators into coursework, assignment directions, scoring rubrics, feedback comments, deliberate practice activities, observation assignments, residency supports, and clinical feedback. They also noted the need to avoid overwhelming candidates by introducing the framework in “bite-sized pieces” and building candidates’ understanding over time. Programs cannot simply tell candidates what readiness looks like at the end. They have to build the experiences that help candidates get there. For Delaware Tech, the Candidate Readiness Framework provides a way to organize those decisions. It names the practices candidates are expected to develop, begins to identify which practices are most foundational and which require greater integration, and creates a basis for aligning coursework, clinical experiences, observation, feedback, and performance measures to a clearer developmental path. Align Measures to the Path Candidates Travel Once candidate expectations are visible and developmentally sequenced, the next question is whether the program’s measures reflect the path candidates travel. Delaware Tech has moved from framework development into implementation planning. During its June technical assistance session, Delaware Tech worked to integrate the newly adopted instructional framework into its PPM design priorities and key elements. The team refined decisions related to candidate assessment, observation structures, performance tasks, training, progress monitoring, and data collection. They also mapped the candidate experience, clarified pilot implementation structures for 2026–27, and prepared the Delaware Department of Education implementation memo. One question guided the work: Does our PPM measure what matters? That question pushed the team beyond scoring and submission requirements. It required Delaware Tech to examine where each framework competency is introduced and practiced, when and how it is assessed, what evidence is collected, who evaluates candidate performance, and where gaps or action items remain. "Our focus on candidate development truly advances equity by providing all candidates with opportunities to build and demonstrate effective teaching practices." – Samantha Lopez, Education Department Chair, Delaware Technical Community College, Orlando J. George, Jr. Campus, Wilmington The emerging Delaware Tech PPM system is designed to assess candidate readiness across the yearlong residency. It includes four formal observation cycles, written lesson plans, lesson implementation, pre- and post-conferences, Student Achievement Charts, professional practice ratings, documentation in Brightspace, scoring structures, calibration, and data collection. Each performance task is intended to provide evidence of candidate growth and support ongoing coaching, goal setting, and additional support(s) where needed. The measure is not detached from candidate development. It is connected to the practices candidates are expected to build, the experiences through which they practice those skills, the feedback they receive, and the evidence the program can use to supp
1877ort candidates and improve preparation. The PPM system also creates opportunities for progress monitoring. Delaware Tech’s planning materials identify intentional checkpoints, growth goals, progress plans, additional observations with targeted feedback, additional training for cooperating teachers, and formal improvement plans with actionable items and measurable outcomes. These structures allow the program to identify candidate needs while there is still time to respond. This work also gives Delaware Tech a structure for content-specific preparation, including Delaware’s Science of Reading priorities. Content-specific expectations can be embedded into coursework, clinical feedback, observation evidence, and candidate performance data through the same developmental system. The larger lesson is clear: a performance measure is only as strong as the preparation path behind it. When measures are connected to clear candidate expectations, sequenced practice, feedback cycles, progress monitoring, and teacher educator support, they do more than document readiness. They help programs see and support candidate growth while it is still developing. Equip the People Who Make Readiness Visible Candidate readiness becomes visible through the people that prepare candidates. Frameworks, rubrics, and performance measures can clarify expectations. Faculty, clinical supervisors, cooperating teachers, and program leaders help candidates understand those expectations, practice them, receive feedback, and use evidence to improve. Implementation cannot stop with a completed framework or an approved memo. Delaware Tech’s developing PPM system identifies distinct roles for teacher candidates, clinical supervisors, cooperating teachers, and Delaware Tech’s Education Department leadership. Candidates complete performance tasks across the yearlong residency. Clinical supervisors evaluate candidate performance across instructional performance areas and provide support when candidates are not meeting benchmarks. Cooperating teachers contribute to evaluation of professional responsibilities and provide additional support. Program leadership provides training and calibration, supports validity and reliability of scoring, analyzes and shares PPM data, and initiates intervention strategies when needed. “The Candidate Readiness Framework and PPM system give us a clearer way to see how candidates are developing, where they need support, and how we can respond before they become teachers of record. This helps us leverage evidence more effectively to better prepare and support our candidates.” – Beth Altemus, Education Department Chair, Delaware Technical Community College, Charles L. Terry, Jr. Campus, Dover Those roles shape the candidate experience. A candidate may first encounter an instructional practice in coursework. They may analyze examples, rehearse with peers, apply the practice during residency, receive feedback from a clinical supervisor, reflect with a cooperating teacher, and then demonstrate growth through a performance task. If each person in that process uses different language or applies different expectations, the candidate’s path becomes harder to navigate. If each person works from the Candidate Readiness Framework and understands how the practice develops over time, the candidate receives clearer support. That requires training, tools, and calibration. Delaware Tech’s materials name these needs directly: training for clinical supervisors and cooperating teachers, scoring guides, reliability activities, shared language, learning management system documentation, data review routines, and communication with stakeholders. These are not finishing touches. They are part of the design. “Having a shared framework helps us better track and support candidates. It gives clinical supervisors and cooperating teachers clearer evidence to look for, stronger language for feedback, and a more consistent way to help candidates understand where they are growing and what they need to work on next.” – Jennifer Leach, Instructional Coordinator and Clinical Supervisor, Delaware Technical Community College, Jack F. Owens Campus, Georgetown This work aligns closely with the EdPrep Performance Framework and the 14 Levers for Quality Teacher Preparation. It reflects common frameworks for teacher educators and candidates, an explicit candidate developmental trajectory, intentional performance gateways, practice-based developmental experiences, formalized coaching and feedback structures, faculty and clinical supervisor development and calibration, and data-driven decision-making. For Delaware Tech, the next stage of work is not only piloting a measure. It is supporting the people who will make the measure useful for candidates. That is
1877where preparation quality lives: in the design of the program, the clarity of expectations, the quality of feedback, and the shared work of the people helping candidates become ready. A Roadmap for Making Readiness Visible Delaware Tech’s work offers a practical roadmap for educator preparation programs working to strengthen candidate readiness and performance measurement. First, define what candidates should be ready to do . Programs need shared instructional expectations that are aligned to the realities candidates will encounter in classrooms and appropriate for candidates who are still developing. Second, translate expectations into observable practice . Broad instructional descriptors become useful for preparation when programs name the candidate and student actions teacher educators can teach, model, rehearse, observe, coach, and assess. Third, sequence candidate development . Programs need to determine what candidates should attempt, practice, and demonstrate over time, including which practices are foundational and which require candidates to integrate multiple skills. Fourth, align measures to the developmental path . Performance measures should not be the first place candidates encounter the practices they are expected to demonstrate. They should be part of a connected path in which candidates have opportunities to learn, analyze, rehearse, enact, receive feedback, and improve. Fifth, equip the people who make readiness visible . Faculty, clinical supervisors, cooperating teachers, and program leaders need shared language, clear tools, training, calibration, feedback routines, and data systems that help them support candidate growth. That is the work EdPrep Partners supports alongside educator preparation programs and state partners. Grounded in the EdPrep Performance Framework and the 14 Levers for Quality Teacher Preparation, EdPrep Partners helps programs move from shared priorities into implementation by strengthening instructional expectations, candidate developmental trajectories, coursework and clinical connections, teacher educator practices, coaching and feedback structures, performance measures, and improvement routines. Our work with Delaware Tech reflects this approach. EdPrep Partners supported Delaware Tech faculty, clinical supervisors, and leaders as they translated a state-aligned instructional framework into pre-service candidate expectations, organized those expectations developmentally, and began aligning the Candidate Readiness Framework to a PPM system that can support candidate growth, evidence collection, feedback, and program improvement. Delaware Tech’s continued work will determine how these expectations are refined, piloted, and embedded across the program. The direction is clear: readiness should be visible before day one. Not as a single score. Not as a final task. But as a developmental path that candidates, teacher educators, supervisors, cooperating teachers, and program leaders can understand, support, and strengthen together. Candidate readiness should not be a mystery at the end of preparation. It should be built, supported, observed, and strengthened throughout the candidate experience. Every child deserves an excellent educator. Every teacher candidate deserves preparation that equips them to become one. Let’s make teacher preparation better together.</div> 1878</div> 1879 <div class="readMore" data-auto="blog-read-more"> <a dont-color-link="true" href="/making-candidate-readiness-visible"></a> 1880</div> 1881</div> 1882</div> 1883</div> 1884 <div style="-ms-grid-column:2; -ms-grid-row:1" class="postArticle " data-auto="blog-post-article"> <div class="inner clearfix wow" style="animation-delay: 400.0ms;"> <a class="blogImgLink" data-auto="blog-img-link" dont-color-link="true" href="/beyond-the-review-where-reports-end-and-results-begin" data-blog-post-alias="beyond-the-review-where-reports-end-and-results-begin" aria-label="Beyond the Review: Where Reports End and Results Begin"> <div class="blogImg" data-auto="blog-img" style="background-image: url('https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/opt/EdPrep+Insights+-+012026+Square-1920w.png');"><img src="https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/opt/EdPrep+Insights+-+012026+Square-1920w.png" alt="" onerror="handleImageLoadError(this)"/></div> 1885</a> 1886 <div class="postTextContainer"> <div class="postText clearfix"> <div class="postTitle" data-auto="blog-post-title"> <h3> <a dont-color-link="true" href="/beyond-the-review-where-reports-end-and-results-begin" data-blog-post-alias="beyond-the-review-where-reports-end-and-results-begin">Beyond the Review: Where Reports End and Results Begin</a> 1887</h3> 1888</div> 1889 <div class="authorBar" data-auto="blog-author-bar"> <span>By EdPrep Partners</span> 1890 <span>•</span> 1891 <span>January 20, 2026</span> 1892</div> 1893 <div class="postDescription" data-auto="blog-post-description">Beyond the Review: Where Reports End and Results Begin How clear findings and priorities drive lasting improvement in educator preparation The missing link between reviews and results If you lead an educator preparation program or oversee the reviews of programs, you know
1893what it means to be surrounded by data - and how difficult it can be to turn that data into real improvement. Enrollment dashboards, observation results, surveys, candidate coursework, and assessments fill your folders and, hopefully, inform your conversations with stakeholders. But how much of that information truly reveals what matters most? The challenge is rarely a lack of data. It is that much of what is collected does not illuminate the performance of candidates or the systems and people responsible for developing their instructional practice. And even when it does, the next steps often remain unclear. Too many continuous improvement efforts end with long inventories and detailed reports but little tangible direction about what to do next. The difference between activity and improvement is not more evidence. It is the discipline to translate evidence into findings and findings into prioritized action. Doing that well takes more than good intentions. It requires expert review teams trained in a shared and rigorous methodology - people who know educator preparation from the inside, across all parts of programming, and can distinguish isolated examples from true patterns of practice at both the systems and teacher educator levels. Evidence is the starting point, not the destination Evidence should capture how preparation actually operates for candidates and teacher educators, not only what is planned or intended. The goal is not to collect more data but to collect the right evidence that highlights how programs, teacher educators, and candidates typically perform. Doing this well requires both discipline and expertise. Strong reviews depend on teams that apply consistent, evidence-based methods to analyze performance, verify patterns, and separate signal from noise. Without that structure and skill, data collection becomes a compliance exercise, or worse a skewed reflection of program quality, rather than a driver of improvement. In an EdPrep Partners Program Performance Review there are three major types of evidence examined: Artifacts. These include syllabi, course materials & assignments, handbooks, observation tools, mentor and teacher educator training, data sets, candidate assignment samples, among many others. Within artifacts there are both inputs such as what programs design or expect, and outputs such as what candidates or teacher educators actually produce. Artifacts reveal how preparation is structured on paper and how that design translates into candidate or faculty performance. Observations. These capture how stakeholders enact the preparation. This includes live instruction of both candidates and faculty members, observation and feedback cycles with clinical supervisors, etc. Within observations there are inputs such as the systems and routines that make these experiences possible, and outputs such as the observed actions, language, and feedback that both demonstrate and shift practices. Interviews. These surface what people understand about roles, systems, and the impact of actions, and how they describe their own practices and contributions. Faculty, clinical supervisors, candidates, mentors, and partners alike provide context that connects what is designed to what is enacted. Interviews include inputs such as intentions, structures, and beliefs and outputs such as reflections on outcomes and evidence of follow through or perceived needs to improve the system. Collecting these three types of evidence is only the first step. High-quality Program Performance Reviews evaluate each source through two essential lenses. Evidence should be representative of what typically happens for most candidates and teacher educators rather than an isolated example. Evidence should be reinfor
1893ced by multiple sources rather than driven by a single piece that tells a different story. Together, these perspectives separate isolated examples from reliable patterns. They help reviewers determine whether the evidence reflects a single strong case or a consistent way of working across the program. When convergence confirms a pattern, that evidence becomes the foundation for a credible finding. When evidence conflicts, the gaps between sources often reveal where systems are misaligned or breaking down. Evidence observed through these two lenses paints a clear picture of how preparation functions in practice. It shows not only what exists but how consistently and effectively it operates for the people most central to preparation - teacher educators and candidates. Findings make meaning leaders can use A finding is not a restatement of evidence. It is a clear explanation of a system pattern grounded in multiple sources. Interpretation is a professional discipline in educator preparation. It is the work of translating evidence into meaning that leaders, faculty, and partners can use to make decisions and take action. Strong findings do four things: Identify the pattern that holds true across multiple sources Locate the root cause within the system Explain why it matters for candidate readiness and P 12 learning Point to the leverage that would change it at scale This is where many reviews fall short. They inventory, but do not interpret. They describe but do not prioritize. High-quality findings require expert teams with evaluative skill, and with deep content knowledge in teacher preparation, including people who have served and led in educator preparation and who can synthesize, not summarize, distinguishing isolated signals from recurring systematic patterns. At EdPrep Partners, our approach to Program Performance Reviews centers on how structures operate in practice. We look at how faculty label and model methods, pedagogy, and content-pedagogy, how candidates rehearse and receive feedback, how faculty, clinical supervisors, and mentors alike coach to shared criteria, and how these actions connect back to what candidates learn in coursework and to what P-12 districts expect in classrooms. When these pieces align, candidates progress from analysis to rehearsal to enactment with increasing skill. When they do not, even the strongest intentions to develop candidates fail to take hold. Findings emerge only when the weight of evidence points in the same direction and any conflicting data have been resolved. Findings connect structures to experience and experience to outcomes . They give leaders a set of truths they can act on - clear, credible insights that anchor improvement in evidence and strengthen how programs develop their candidates. Prioritized action is most likely to lead to action Not every finding carries the same weight, and trying to change everything that needs improvement within a program at once dilutes impact. Prioritization is not about doing less. It is about focusing energy and attention on the few actions that matter most, first. To determine what comes first, we use three guiding considerations: Impact on candidate experience and performance Feasibility given time, people, and resources Dependencies that must be in place so early progress does not collapse The outcome is a concise set of recommendations rooted in EdPrep Partners’ ‘14 Levers for Quality Teacher Preparation’ , with clear owners, milestones, and supports. A short-cycle plan builds early momentum, and a year one roadmap sequences the larger shifts that follow. At EdPrep Partners we “roll up our sleeves” and model and complete these actions alongside programs, and regular progress checks confirm whether core actions are happening with quality and consistency. Quarterly reviews test whether those changes are reflected in candidate performance and partner outcomes. How lasting improvement takes hold The strength of any review is measured not only by the quality of its findings but by what happens next. Many reviews stop at recommendations, leaving programs without the clarity, systems, or support to act. At EdPrep Partners, our approach is different. We connect evidence, findings, and action through four complementary approaches that we take alongside programs to
1893sustain improvement over time. Focus on locus of control. Reviews center on decisions that leaders, faculty, clinical supervisors, and partners can make — and on the stakeholders they can most directly influence and impact now. This keeps the work grounded, practical, and moving forward. Begin by investing in teacher educator practice. Quality lives in the people who label, model, develop, coach, and give feedback. When faculty and clinical supervisors use shared definitions, clear look-fors aligned to a candidate’s developmental trajectory, and consistent teacher educator practices for how they will develop candidates, candidates improve faster and quality strengthens across the program. Keep score with simple routines. Leaders do not need a new data warehouse or elaborate dashboards, though those can help. What matters most is a short set of leading indicators that confirm core practices are happening — and a few strong routines that create space to check in, validate impact on candidate development and partner outcomes, and plan whether to expand, adjust, or retire a practice. Provide hands-on technical assistance to design, implement, and sustain change. Improvement is not sustained through reports or one-time recommendations; it requires partnership. Our technical assistance model pairs expert guidance with on-the-ground support — modeling teacher educator practices, facilitating capacity-building, and embedding the routines that ensure programs can sustain, scale, and continuously strengthen their systems. Through strategic planning, coaching, and progress monitoring, we help teams design, do, and sustain the work long after the review concludes. Together, these approaches create system-level improvement. Coursework and clinical experiences align. Teacher educator practice strengthens. Partner expectations are met. Candidates enter classrooms ready to teach. From findings to action EdPrep Partners’ Program Performance Reviews produce a focused set of findings that lead to a clear set of prioritized actions - the few changes that make the greatest difference. We then work alongside leaders, faculty, and clinical supervisors to implement those actions with precision and care, building the routines that sustain and scale quality teacher preparation. Because every child deserves an excellent educator, and every candidate deserves excellent preparation. Let’s deliver both. This approach is adaptable across pathways and designed to strengthen the systems programs already have while aligning to what partners need most. The field does not need more reports. It needs Program Performance Reviews that lead to tangible improvements in what candidates experience and how teacher educators prepare them. When evidence becomes findings, and findings become focused action, improvement stops being a plan and becomes practice - the way preparation was always meant to operate: by teaching well. Let’s make teacher preparation better together.</div> 1894</div> 1895 <div class="readMore" data-auto="blog-read-more"> <a dont-color-link="true" href="/beyond-the-review-where-reports-end-and-results-begin"></a> 1896</div> 1897</div> 1898</div> 1899</div> 1900 <div style="-ms-grid-column:3; -ms-grid-row:1" class="postArticle " data-auto="blog-post-article"> <div class="inner clearfix wow" style="animation-delay: 600.0ms;"> <a class="blogImgLink" data-auto="blog-img-link" dont-color-link="true" href="/the-prioritization-imperative-how-programs-make-change-stick" data-blog-post-alias="the-prioritization-imperative-how-programs-make-change-stick" aria-label="Title slide: "The Prioritization Imperative: How programs make change stick," focusing on candidate readiness."> <div class="blogImg" data-auto="blog-img" style="background-image: url('https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/opt/1-08d7f553-1920w.png');"><img src="https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/opt/1-08d7f553-1920w.png" alt="Title slide: "The Prioritization Imperative: How programs make change stick," focusing on candidate readiness." onerror="handleImageLoadError(this)"/></div> 1901</a> 1902 <div class="postTextContainer"> <div class="postText clearfix"> <div class="postTitle" data-auto="blog-post-title"> <h3> <a dont-color-link="true" href="/the-prioritization-imperative-how-programs-make-change-stick" data-blog-post-alias="the-prioritization-imperative-how-programs-make-change-stick">The Prioritization Imperative: How Programs Make Change Stick</a> 1903</h3> 1904</div> 1905 <div class="authorBar" data-auto="blog-author-bar"> <span>By EdPrep Partners</span> 1906 <span>•</span> 1907 <span>September 16, 2025</span> 1908</div> 1909 <div class="postDescription" data-auto="blog-post-description">The Prioritization Imperative: How Programs Make Change Stick Focusing on What Matters Most for Candidate Readiness The Power of Focus Educator preparation programs often try to fix everything at once: new frameworks, new pathways, new partnerships, new requirements. The result is predictable: initiative overload, surface level change, and candidates who do not get the preparation they deserve. As the saying goes, when everything is a priority, nothing is. This EdPrep Insight highlights how programs serious about dramatic improvement narrow their focus to a few high leverage shifts, sequence change through Strategic Action Plans (SAPs) and a phased improvement approach, and reinforce focus with disciplined data routines that bring teacher educators together around improvements in candidate preparation and experiences. Why Prioritization Matters: What’s at Stake Research across fields is clear: spreading change too thin produces fatigue, weak implementation, and little impact. Lasting improvement comes from narrowing focus, sequencing efforts, and holding the line on what matters most. Every program leader has lived it: a new mandate from the state, a promising partnership opportunity, another framework to align to, and an urgent grant requirement - all arriving at once. The instinct is to take on everything. The outcome is predictable: initiative overload . Faculty and clinical supervisors inevitably feel scattered, action items pile up, and candidates’ preparation experiences begin to fragment. Across disciplines, the evidence points to the same truth: lasting improvement does not come from doing more. It comes from doing a few things deeply, and well. Improvement Science: Define the Problem, Test the Solution Anthony Bryk and colleagues remind us that progress begins with a sharply defined problem of practice. Too often, programs fall into “solutionitis” - adopting broad reforms without clarifying the real problem. Improvement science instead calls for narrowing the focus and running small, rapid tests of change before scaling. Each test yields evidence about what works, for whom, and under what conditions. Over time, this disciplined inquiry produces scalable, reliable improvement. Implementation Research: Overload Creates Fatigue, Not Change Dean Fixsen and the National Implementation Research Network (NIRN) have shown that implementation succeeds when it is staged and supported by aligned drivers: competency (training and coaching), organization (systems and infrastru
1909cture), and leadership. When programs try to implement everything at once, none of these drivers get adequate attention. The result is what Douglas Reeves calls the law of initiative fatigue : as initiatives multiply, the time, energy, and resources for each one dwindle, and impact collapses. Lessons from System Change: Choosing the Right Drivers Michael Fullan describes the trap of “wrong drivers”: piling on new mandates, compliance tasks, or fragmented programs that give the illusion of progress but fail to change practice. The alternative is what he calls simplexity : focusing on a small number of high-leverage drivers, pursuing them with depth, and aligning everything else behind them. Proof This Works The logic of prioritization is not unique to education, and it’s proven to work: Healthcare: The Institute for Healthcare Improvement’s 100,000 Lives Campaign didn’t ask hospitals to improve everything. It focused on six specific interventions. The result: more than 122,000 lives saved in 18 months. K–12 systems: The Peel District in Ontario reduced overload by pruning initiatives and focusing on four strategic goals. Teachers reported renewed clarity, and student outcomes improved. Individual schools: In Garden Grove, California, leaders resisted scattershot reforms and instead rallied staff around a few shared goals, building coherence and producing sustained literacy gains. Whether in healthcare, K–12, or educator preparation, the evidence is clear: focus is not a constraint. Focus is the condition for sustained improvement. Programs that try to do everything at once rarely change much at all. Programs that choose a vital few priorities, sequence them, and hold attention are the ones that produce measurable shifts in practice and outcomes. System Design: How EdPrep Partners Approaches Change At EdPrep Partners, we see prioritization as system design. The EdPrep Performance Framework and the 14 Levers for Quality Teacher Preparation define what strong preparation looks like in action. But improvement does not come from pulling all 14 levers at once. It comes from selecting the right levers for the moment based on where a program currently is, sequencing those levers and corresponding actions across an intentional period of time, and building capacity and structures either within existing systems or from the ground-up. Most importantly, it means leveraging what already works and holding focus until the changes show up in teacher educator and candidate performance. Choose a vital few, on purpose. The EdPrep Partners 14 Key Levers for Quality Teacher preparation are all essential for high quality preparation. But programs cannot pull them all with equal force at the same time. Improvement requires a methodical order, identifying which levers are of highe
1909st priority right now and which will drive the most significant improvement in candidates’ developmental experiences and readiness. We help teams prioritize the Key Levers that will have the strongest line of sight to candidate readiness, which often begins with a program’s vision for quality teaching & learning, extends to teacher educator practices, and then considers how data can support alignment within, across and external to the program to better meet the workforce needs/priorities in the field. The outcome of this step is explicit: a short list of near term priorities, goals, actions, and metrics for progress monitoring change. Sequence before you scale. Depth requires pacing. We guide programs to stage both what changes and how changes are introduced over time, planning for what happens next week, in six weeks, over a semester, across a year, and through a three year trajectory. A clear roadmap gives program leadership, faculty, and clinical supervisors the confidence and processes they need to enact changes with fidelity and to reinforce new expectations as they take hold. Sequencing protects people from initiative overload and protects the work from shallow adoption. Build the conditions for focus. Sustained focus is only possible when the right conditions are in place. At EdPrep Partners, we use the Four C’s as the readiness screen for whether change will stick and scale: Commitment: Leaders demonstrate visible will, urgency, and sponsorship for improvement, backed by time, resources, and capacity. Capacity: Faculty, clinical supervisors, and mentors have the people, time, and basic systems needed to enact new practices with quality. Clarity: Goals, measures, and expectations are shared, simple, and aligned to what matters most for candidate readiness. Collaboration: Candidates, teacher educators, P-12 districts, and community partners are all engaged in both the decision-making and the implementation. We help state agencies, regional collaboratives, and teacher preparation programs assess, strengthen, and monitor these conditions so that chosen priorities can take root, spread, and endure through leadership, staffing, policy, or environmental changes. Lead from your locus of control. Programs gain traction fastest when they begin where authority, influence, and ability to impact change are strongest. We guide teams to focus first on what they can control — program design, faculty expectations, clinical supervision protocols, tools, training and development, and candidate experiences. From there, we help them influence what they can — such as partnership agreements, calendars, and shared practices with districts. Finally, we prepare them to navigate what is beyond their control without letting it dictate the agenda or distract from the work. This discipline keeps energy aimed at changes that can be implemented with quality and sustained over time. Design for practice. The real test of prioritization is whether teacher educators change how they prepare candidates through their practices, the environments they create, and the routines they model, and what they prepare candidates to do through the methods, instructional moves, and content pedagogies that matter most for readiness. Success is measured by whether candidates can demonstrate these practices against shared standards in both coursew
1909ork and clinical experiences. Guardrails that protect focus. Every priority is anchored in a clear aim, a focused set of action steps, a near term win window, and defined owners. Just as important, every plan also identifies what will not be added during the term. These guardrails keep agendas, professional learning, and project management aligned to the same targets until evidence shows the work is landing. By naming both the work to pursue and the work to defer, programs protect faculty and clinical supervisors from overload and ensure that chosen priorities move from plan to practice. Operationalizing Change: The Playbook Strong programs do not rely on willpower alone. They put structures in place that protect focus: Strategic Action Plans that anchor one or two priorities, phased models that define what happens now versus later, and data routines that keep attention on the chosen goals. 1. Strategic Action Plans (SAPs) A Strategic Action Plan is the anchor document that turns broad aspirations into focused, near term work. A well designed SAP answers five questions: Aim: What one or two priorities are we pursuing this term? Drivers: What specific practices, structures, or conditions must change to make progress? Milestones: What 90 to 120 day wins will show evidence of progress? Evidence: What data, artifacts, or observations will we use to know it is working? Owners: Who is responsible, and by when? Equally important is naming what will not be added this term. These guardrails prevent initiative creep and keep agendas disciplined. For example, a program might set an aim of improving candidate rehearsal and feedback cycles. The SAP would specify drivers such as faculty & clinical supervisor modeling & labeling criteria-driven feedback, rehearsal opportunities, and each of the elements of quality coaching. Milestones might include teacher educator professional development, practice opportunities, shadowing or observations, peer feedback, and candidate survey data. SAPs become the plan of record for program leaders, faculty, and clinical supervisors. Meeting agendas, professional learning, and all corresponding coaching cycles are aligned to the SAP, ensuring energy is directed toward the Key Lever of focus rather than scattered across competing initiatives. 2. Phased Improvement Change is more sustainable when sequenced over time. EdPrep Partners uses a three phase approach that helps programs distinguish between what happens now, and what comes later: Diagnose & Plan Conduct diagnostic reviews to surface strengths and gaps Use prioritized stakeholder questions and artifact reviews to i
1909dentify high leverage levers Co create an initial SAP with near term wins Implement and Early Scale Support faculty, clinical supervisors, and mentors to put new practices into action Provide modeling, professional learning, and coaching aligned to SAP drivers Capture early evidence of candidate and teacher educator practice shifts Evaluate fidelity before expanding Sustain and Monitor Embed routines that ensure practices stick across semesters Adjust and refine based on evidence Decide whether to deepen the same lever or add a new one Each phase has gates: clear evidence criteria that determine whether a program is ready to move forward. These gates prevent programs from scaling new practices before they are ready and keep attention fixed on current priorities until they are solid. 3. Data Routines That Hold Focus Data routines are the discipline that sustains prioritization. They are not compliance exercises. They are structured, repeatable processes that ensure data is not just collected but actively interpreted, discussed, and used to improve candidate preparation. When implemented with consistency, data routines clarify not only what happened but also what should happen next. A strong data routine keeps action close to the candidates’ developmental experiences. Faculty, clinical supervisors, mentors, and candidates themselves use timely evidence to adjust instructional practices, coaching approaches, and supports in ways that directly impact candidate development. A simple monthly or bi monthly routine might include: Agenda: 75 minutes, with 80 percent devoted to current SAP priorities Artifacts: candidate observation and signature assignment data, rehearsal performance results, coaching feedback notes (faculty and clinical supervisors) Questions: Are candidates enacting the instructional practices - methods, pedagogies, and content knowledge - along the program’s developmental trajectory with consistency? What trends are emerging in candidate performance? Which teacher educator practices are promoting or deterring candidate growth? What does teacher educator performance reveal about readiness? What trends are visible in disaggregated data compared to aggregate data? At their best, data routines do two things at once: they reinfor
1909ce or refine focus by keeping the chosen lever at the center of discussion, and they surface near term wins by highlighting evidence of progress to celebrate and build momentum. We explore this idea in greater depth in a previous EdPrep Insight, From Data Collection to Daily Practice: How Strong Data Routines Improve Teacher Preparation. Read here Measures of Progress: Depth Over Breadth The best signal of successful prioritization is not the number of initiatives launched. It is the evidence that one or two critical improvements are implemented with depth, sustained across semesters, and visible in both teacher educator practices and candidate enactment. At EdPrep Partners, we look for progress across four dimensions: 1. Implementation Fidelity The first signal is whether the plan is being executed with discipline. SAP milestones completed on time, showing that 90 to 120 day wins are achieved Leadership, faculty, and clinical supervisor meetings aligned to stated priorities Calibration checks showing implementation in programmatic experiences These indicators reveal whether programs are sticking with their priorities rather than drifting back into overload. 2. Practice Change The real test of prioritization is what happens in the daily work of teacher educators and candidates. Faculty and supervisors enacting practices tied to the chosen priority area(s) Candidates demonstrating stronger performance on prioritized skills in rehearsals, coursework, and clinical observations Coursework and clinical expectations aligned so all teacher educators are reinforcing the change When prioritization is working, practice across the program becomes coherent, not just compliant on paper. 3. Sustained Focus Improvement is fragile unless it survives the inevitable turnover and shifting pressures. Priorities carried consistently across two or more terms, even with leadership or staffing changes Practices and routines institutionalized over two or more years so they become standard operating procedures rather than temporary projects Depth requires persistence. Sustained focus shows that programs are embedding change rather than launching initiatives that fade. 4. Guarding the Gains Strong programs protect improvements even as new priorities emerge. Evidence that gains from prior terms are still holding No regression in candidate performance or faculty practices tied to earlier Key Levers Standard operating procedures in place so progress does not depend on one leader or champion Guarding the gains ensures improvement is cumulative. Eac
1909h new priority builds on the last rather than replacing it. Let’s Give Them One Dramatic improvement does not come from doing everything. It comes from doing the right things, deeply and well. Programs that choose a vital few priorities, sequence them with discipline, and sustain them through practice based routines are the ones that change what candidates experience, how they perform, and ultimately the outcomes of P12 students. At EdPrep Partners, we help programs focus, sequence, and sustain the improvements that matter most. Because every child deserves an excellent educator. Let’s give them one.</div> 1910</div> 1911 <div class="readMore" data-auto="blog-read-more"> <a dont-color-link="true" href="/the-prioritization-imperative-how-programs-make-change-stick"></a> 1912</div> 1913</div> 1914</div> 1915</div> 1916 <div style="-ms-grid-column:1; -ms-grid-row:2" class="postArticle " data-auto="blog-post-article"> <div class="inner clearfix wow" style="animation-delay: 800.0ms;"> <a class="blogImgLink" data-auto="blog-img-link" dont-color-link="true" href="/the-coaching-gap-moving-from-chance-to-design" data-blog-post-alias="the-coaching-gap-moving-from-chance-to-design" aria-label="The Coaching Gap: Moving From Chance to Design"> <div class="blogImg" data-auto="blog-img" style="background-image: url('https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/opt/2-7ac2acfe-1920w.png');"><img src="https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/opt/2-7ac2acfe-1920w.png" alt="" onerror="handleImageLoadError(this)"/></div> 1917</a> 1918 <div class="postTextContainer"> <div class="postText clearfix"> <div class="postTitle" data-auto="blog-post-title"> <h3> <a dont-color-link="true" href="/the-coaching-gap-moving-from-chance-to-design" data-blog-post-alias="the-coaching-gap-moving-from-chance-to-design">The Coaching Gap: Moving From Chance to Design</a> 1919</h3> 1920</div> 1921 <div class="authorBar" data-auto="blog-author-bar"> <span>By EdPrep Partners</span> 1922 <span>•</span> 1923 <span>September 8, 2025</span> 1924</div> 1925 <div class="postDescription" data-auto="blog-post-description">The Coaching Gap: Moving From Chance to Design Implementing Coaching Systems Every Candidate Can Count On Why Coaching Forecasts Readiness Clinical and internship teaching are often cited as the most impactful portions of teacher preparation for two reasons: they allow candidates to enact instructional practices with P-12 students, and they provide iterative coaching from faculty, clinical supervisors, mentors, and peers. Yet across both coursework and clinical experiences, feedback remains inconsistent and often falls short . A recent study analyzing more than 11,000 supervisor evaluations and candidate reflections found that fewer than half of evaluations included a clear area for improvement or an actionable next step. Supervisors most often flagged classroom management as the area for growth, while candidates themselves highlighted lesson planning. The quality and focus of feedback matters, and the gaps are visible in how our field is currently leveraging coaching across preparation. Meta analyses reinforce what we already know: coaching and mentoring improve candidates’ instructional skills, but not all feedback is equal. The most powerful driver of growth is when teacher educators-whether faculty in coursew
1925ork or supervisors and mentors in clinical settings-model practices, make their thinking visible, and then give candidates the chance to rehearse those methods, instructional and content pedagogies, or strategies with criteria driven feedback. In programs that do this, preservice teachers show much clearer improvement in their teaching and in their ability to make lessons clear for students. Feedback alone is not enough. Feedback plus modeling and rehearsal is what moves practice. We have a system design problem, and it has become painfully clear: too often, feedback depends on an individual faculty member, supervisor, or mentor and their own experience and skill in coaching rather than on a consistent structure every candidate can count on. What is missing is a common coaching cycle: beginning with pre observation planning aligned to candidate developmental needs, narrowing to one or two refinement areas during observation, and following with evidence based debriefs that link teacher moves to student learning. High quality coaching closes by modeling the expected practice with clear criteria, giving candidates space to rehearse it, providing feedback during the rehearsal, and setting clear action steps with additional follow up. Without this structure, feedback risks being occasional advice or scattered tips rather than a deliberate system for growth. This is the kind of challenge the field can solve together. By building on a shared approach, programs can move from good intentions to a reliable system that ensures every candidate, across coursework and clinical experiences, receives the coaching they need, and deserve, to be truly prepared for P-12 students. Barriers That Prevent Quality Feedback The inconsistent quality and timeliness of feedback to candidates is not simply a matter of individual effort. It reflects predictable barriers in program structures and processes that most preparation programs face when coaching is not designed with intentionality. Coaching usually depends on the individual teacher educator. Too often, the quality of feedback rests on the interests and expertise of a faculty member, clinical supervisor, or mentor, shaped by their own experience and level of skill in coaching. Without a shared structure, candidates end up with very different developmental opportunities depending on who they are assigned. We wait until clinical supervision for quality, criteria driven, instructional framework based feedback. Programs often treat coursework as the place for feedback on theory, leaving the more structured, criteria based coaching tied to the instructional framework for clinical experiences. This delay means candidates miss opportunities to build their understanding of quality instruction as defined by their campus and district, to develop habits earlier and more consistently, and it reinforces the idea that coaching is an event in supervision rather than a throughline across preparation. Time and scheduling work against consistency. Candidates are often grouped or assigned without a clear purpose for maximizing observation and coaching, defaulting instead to logistical convenience. Clinical supervisors then juggle multiple campuses and candidates, while faculty balance coursework and other responsibilities. Without program level norms that protect and prioritize time for coaching, feedback becomes irregular or rushed. If a program intentionally partners on placements and reduces the number of campuses it serves, supervisors can spend more time observing, debriefing, and strengthening the quality of onsite supports. Feedback is delayed or diluted. Candidates sometimes wait days for written notes or receive general comments instead of specific, actionable guidance they can use in their very next lesson. Delayed or vague feedback loses its power to shape immediate growth and leaves candidates uncertain about what to do next. Coaching debriefs lack success criteria and rehearsals. Too often, post observation conversations stop at pointing out what was seen or offering general advice. Without clear criteria for what “good” looks like and without structured opportunities to rehearse the move, candidates leave with feedback they cannot immediately translate into action. Roles are not calibrated. Faculty, supervisors, and mentors often work from different playbooks and hold different understandings of the standard, emphasizing varied priorities or using inconsistent language. Candidates then hear mixed messages about what matters most, and their development depends more on who is coaching them than on a shared vision of quality teaching. Limited ongoing development for teacher educators. Faculty, supervisors, and mentors are often expected to coach without consistent training, practice, or feedback on their own coaching. Opportunities for ongoing development, including train the trainer models and observation of teacher educators themselves, are rare. Without this support, even well intentioned teacher educators struggle to provide the high quality feedback candidates need, and deserve. These barriers are real, but they are not permanent. Eac
1925h can be addressed by treating coaching as a system that ensures every candidate, in both coursework and clinical experiences, participates in the same cycle of focused observation, timely feedback, modeling, and rehearsal. The opportunity is to move from coaching by chance to coaching by design. Designing a Shared Coaching Cycle</div> 1926</div> 1927 <div class="readMore" data-auto="blog-read-more"> <a dont-color-link="true" href="/the-coaching-gap-moving-from-chance-to-design"></a> 1928</div> 1929</div> 1930</div> 1931</div> 1932 <div style="-ms-grid-column:2; -ms-grid-row:2" class="postArticle " data-auto="blog-post-article"> <div class="inner clearfix wow" style="animation-delay: 1000.0ms;"> <a class="blogImgLink" data-auto="blog-img-link" dont-color-link="true" href="/from-data-collection-to-daily-practice-how-strong-data-routines-improve-teacher-preparation" data-blog-post-alias="from-data-collection-to-daily-practice-how-strong-data-routines-improve-teacher-preparation" aria-label="From Data Collection to Daily Practice: How Strong Data Routines Improve Teacher Preparation"> <div class="blogImg" data-auto="blog-img" style="background-image: url('https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/opt/3-6df0ad6e-1920w.png');"><img src="https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/opt/3-6df0ad6e-1920w.png" alt="" onerror="handleImageLoadError(this)"/></div> 1933</a> 1934 <div class="postTextContainer"> <div class="postText clearfix"> <div class="postTitle" data-auto="blog-post-title"> <h3> <a dont-color-link="true" href="/from-data-collection-to-daily-practice-how-strong-data-routines-improve-teacher-preparation" data-blog-post-alias="from-data-collection-to-daily-practice-how-strong-data-routines-improve-teacher-preparation">From Data Collection to Daily Practice: How Strong Data Routines Improve Teacher Preparation</a> 1935</h3> 1936</div> 1937 <div class="authorBar" data-auto="blog-author-bar"> <span>By EdPrep Partners</span> 1938 <span>•</span> 1939 <span>September 3, 2025</span> 1940</div> 1941 <div class="postDescription" data-auto="blog-post-description">From Data Collection to Daily Practice: How Strong Data Routines Improve Teacher Preparation Improving Candidate Development and Strengthening Let’s Start Using Data to Improve Preparation Educator preparation programs are not short on data. Programs collect everything from candidates’ instructional performance to certification exam attempts to stakeholder surveys. But when that data gets pulled out for a faculty meeting once a year or tucked away in a compliance folder, it rarely changes what matters most: how candidates are being prepared, supported, and developed in real time. The challenge is not necessarily a lack of data. It is a lack of data routines. Too often, data becomes a performance-something reviewed to meet compliance or displayed on a dashboard rather than used to drive change. The issue is not too much information. It is that the right people are not looking at the right data at the right time, with the intention to act. What preparation programs need is not more data, rather better (and often simpler) infrastructure and processes for using the data they already have. Programs across the country must move from passive collection to active improvement. When implemented with intention and consistency, data routines become the mechanisms that surface patterns, prompt timely action, and distribute decision-making across the people closest to candidate development. Strong programs and teacher educators do not use data just to understand what happened. They use it to decide what will happen next, and then they act on it. Data Routines are used to: Monitor candidate development across coursew
1941ork and clinical experiences Strengthen faculty and clinical supervisor practice Identify and address misalignment between candidate expectations and performance Inform improvements in coursework, coaching, and support structures Data routines are not something that happens once a semester. They are built with intention, follow a consistent cadence, and bring everyone to the table. What Is a Data Routine? A data routine is not a dashboard. It’s not a spreadsheet review. And it’s not a one-time meeting. Data routines are the structured, recurring processes that help educator preparation programs monitor performance, identify trends, and take meaningful action. They are improvement mechanisms, embedded into the core work of faculty & clinical supervisors’ teaching, coaching, and candidate support. High-quality routines follow a predictable pattern: A Simple, Powerful Cycle:</div> 1942</div> 1943 <div class="readMore" data-auto="blog-read-more"> <a dont-color-link="true" href="/from-data-collection-to-daily-practice-how-strong-data-routines-improve-teacher-preparation"></a> 1944</div> 1945</div> 1946</div> 1947</div> 1948 <div style="-ms-grid-column:3; -ms-grid-row:2" class="postArticle " data-auto="blog-post-article"> <div class="inner clearfix wow" style="animation-delay: 1200.0ms;"> <a class="blogImgLink" data-auto="blog-img-link" dont-color-link="true" href="/but-who-develops-the-mentors" data-blog-post-alias="but-who-develops-the-mentors" aria-label="But Who Develops the Mentors?"> <div class="blogImg" data-auto="blog-img" style="background-image: url('https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/opt/5-d157f22b-1920w.png');"><img src="https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/opt/5-d157f22b-1920w.png" alt="" onerror="handleImageLoadError(this)"/></div> 1949</a> 1950 <div class="postTextContainer"> <div class="postText clearfix"> <div class="postTitle" data-auto="blog-post-title"> <h3> <a dont-color-link="true" href="/but-who-develops-the-mentors" data-blog-post-alias="but-who-develops-the-mentors">But Who Develops the Mentors?</a> 1951</h3> 1952</div> 1953 <div class="authorBar" data-auto="blog-author-bar"> <span>By EdPrep Partners</span> 1954 <span>•</span> 1955 <span>July 30, 2025</span> 1956</div> 1957 <div class="postDescription" data-auto="blog-post-description">But Who Develops the Mentors? Why Faculty Development Is the Foundation of Teacher Preparation-And How Great Teacher Educators Make Great Mentors Possible The Missing Link in Mentor Development We’ve spent a lot of time lately talking about the people mentoring apprentices and residents in the field—and rightly so. This latest New America report has sparked renewed attention to a long-overlooked truth: in K–12 apprenticeship, pre-service, and sometimes in-service models, mentor teachers are the backbone of teacher preparation. They model instruction, guide day-to-day practice, and offer the kind of real-time feedback that, in the best-case scenario, accelerates candidate growth. But we can’t “hope” candidates learn how to teach. And we can’t keep overlooking a key group in the process: the faculty and staff inside educator preparation programs. And that raises a question the field doesn’t ask often enough, though one that actually matters most to the developmental outcomes of a teacher candidate: Who’s developing the mentors? In educator preparation, we’ve come to expect that in-service teachers can take on an ever-growing set of responsibilities—coaching, modeling, and providing developmental feedback—
1957often without access to deep, structured, and resourced support. Because they spend the most time with candidates, operate closest to the realities of P–12 classrooms, and often form the most meaningful relationships, mentors are seen as “high-leverage.” As a result, we’ve too often placed the bulk of candidate development on mentors and P–12 schools’ shoulders. At the same time, we’ve accepted a pair of quiet assumptions: First: That the people responsible for supporting mentors—EPP directors, faculty, and supervisors—already know how to effectively model instruction, coach mentors, and deliver high-quality feedback. That they don’t need structured development themselves. Second: That the EPP teacher educators have already equipped mentors with the tools, training, and support needed to develop teacher candidates well. Faculty and supervisors within educator preparation programs are the developers of mentors. And they need tools, routines, and ongoing development just as much as anyone else in the system. In fact, they need it most . Their role isn’
1957t just to support candidates, but to develop the teacher educators who do. When faculty aren’t equipped to design developmental experiences, lead effective coaching and rehearsal cycles, or provide feedback aligned to shared expectations, research-backed methods, and defined instructional criteria, mentoring breaks down—even with the best intentions in place. Faculty development isn’t optional or periodic, it’s the foundation of scalable, high-quality teacher preparation. As Francesca Forzani of TeachingWorks reminds us, “As teacher educators, no one should take instruction more seriously than we do.” The Conditions That Shape Mentoring In too many educator preparation programs, mentoring is treated as a standalone function—isolated from the faculty, coursework, and routines that define a candidates’ preparation experiences more broadly and deeply (meaning, where the time and resources in preparation are spent (coursework, clinical experiences and observation cycles, etc.). Mentors are expected to model high-quality instruction, guide novice practice, and give actionable feedback. But what do we imagine happens when the people designing those experiences haven’t been supported to do that work themselves? Mentorship doesn’t operate in a vacuum. It reflects what faculty and field supervisors prioritize, plan for, and model. Strong mentoring depends on strong teacher educators, including those who can translate instructional frameworks into rehearsal and feedback routines, scaffold development across time, and consistently model what high-quality teaching looks like. To do that well, they must be equipped with clear performance criteria and the capacity to offer focused, developmental feedback. And yet, in too many places: There’s often no shared definition of high-quality teacher educator practice. No clear criteria, performance expectations, or consistent observation and feedback structures like the ones we expect for candidates. Frameworks and practices, like those from TeachingWorks , offer strong starting points to embed within faculty development. Observation and feedback tools vary widely, or don’t exist at all. This gap extends beyond coaching protocols and includes uneven or missing use of instructional frameworks, which serve as the shared foundation for candidate development and performance expectations. Faculty often receive little to no structured development on how to label, model, teach, or coach toward proficiency in key methods, instructional pedagogies, content pedagogies, or instructional strategies. These gaps aren’t incidental, they’re structural. And they directly impact the candidate experience. When faculty aren’t prepared to develop mentors, mentors can’t fully develop candidates. And the entire system suffers from a lack of clarity, consistency, and support. How Strong Programs Develop Better Mentors Strong mentoring doesn’t start in the P–12 classroom. It begins with the people and practices that develop effective mentors. The strategies that make mentoring effective—modeling instruction, defining clear expectations, using structured coaching routines, and providing actionable feedback—aren’t just for mentors. They’re core responsibilities of the faculty, supervisors, and program leaders who design, support, and sustain high-quality teacher preparation. When teacher educators are equipped to model, label, and coach instructional practice themselves, they’re better positioned to develop mentors who can do the same. And when expectations are aligned across coursew
1957ork and clinical experiences, candidates experience more consistent and connected support. Strong programs invest in the people and structures that make effective mentoring possible. Mentoring systems don’t improve by chance. They improve through clear expectations, shared language, and deliberate, supported practice—starting with the people who lead them. Five things strong programs do to ensure faculty, supervisors, and mentors are all set up to succeed: Establish Clear Criteria for Instructional Practices Strong programs don’t leave quality teaching to interpretation. They ensure teacher educators can articulate, teach, and apply clear criteria for what proficient performance looks like, grounded in the instructional methods and pedagogies the program prioritizes. Candidates know what’s expected. Mentors and faculty know how to support it. Label & Model High-Quality Instructional Practices Faculty, supervisors, and mentors consistently label & model prioritized instructional methods and pedagogies—not just in coursework, but across rehearsals, field-based debriefs, and candidate coaching. They explicitly label the criteria of effective teaching and connect them to the program’s instructional framework, reinforcing shared language and clear expectations. Use Structured Coaching and Feedback Routines Strong programs don’t leave coaching to chance, they rely on repeatable, structured routines when engaging with candidates in their development. These include clear observation protocols, intentional debrief planning that prioritizes the highest-leverage growth area(s), and focused feedback conversations that incorporate labeling, modeling, and rehearsal. Next steps are actionable, aligned to each candidate’s developmental trajectory, and anchored in the instructional performance criteria defined by the program and P–12 partners. Deliver Feedback That Builds Proficiency Over Time Effe
1957ctive feedback is specific, timely, actionable, developmentally appropriate, and aligned to shared expectations. It meets candidates where they are—and builds toward where they need to be—by supporting the knowledge, skills, and practices required for more advanced methods, pedagogies, and the needs of P–12 students. Faculty and supervisors provide both oral and written feedback that reinforces common instructional language, supports growth over time, and builds toward instructional proficiency. Crucially, feedback is calibrated across raters—ensuring it is fair, focused, and consistent. Align Expectations Between Faculty and Mentors Strong programs ensure that faculty, supervisors, and mentor teachers operate from a shared understanding of instructional expectations and feedback language. This alignment doesn’t happen by chance—it requires intentional faculty development, structured calibration routines, and shared tools that anchor conversations in the program’s instructional framework. When expectations are aligned, candidates receive clearer, more consistent support across coursework and clinical practice. These five practices aren’t just features of building strong mentoring programs, they’re the habits of strong programs. When faculty and supervisors do these things consistently, mentoring becomes a system, not a guess. E
1957xpectations are clearer. Support is more focused. And candidates are better prepared to teach. Programs don’t need to overhaul everything to improve faculty practices—and, in turn, mentor practices. Strong programs start small. They choose and consistently apply a common instructional framework. They identify core instructional methods, along with the definitions and criteria that guide candidate development within them. They select one or two high-leverage teacher educator practices that all faculty, supervisors, and mentors will use to support candidates. They adopt a focused coaching structure and process—such as Jim Knight’s Impact Cycle, Elena Aguilar’s Transformational Coaching Cycle, or Paul Bambrick-Santoyo’s “See It, Name It, Do It” model—and align all feedback to the instructional framework and method criteria. From there, they progress monitor and ensure teacher educators are prepared to support mentors with the same clarity, consistency, and intentionality we expect mentors to show candidates. Where Quality Mentoring Begins Strong mentoring doesn’t happen by accident, and neither does strong teacher preparation. It happens by design. Programs that cultivate strong mentors understand that quality mentoring stems from strong modeling, clear expectations, and consistent support upstream. And that means attending to the development of the people who make it all possible: the faculty, supervisors, and staff inside educator preparation programs. If mentors deserve support, modeling, and clarity, then the same must be true for those preparing them. These teacher educators do not just contribute to the preparation system—they shape the conditions, habits, and practices that drive it. They influence how mentors understand quality, how feedback is delivered, and how candidates make meaning of what it means to teach well. At EdPrep Partners , we work alongside programs to build that foundation, helping faculty and supervisors define what high quality practice looks like, model it with intention, and build the tools and routines to help others do the same. Our work supports not just individual development, but system level clarity and alignment, so that every candidate benefits from all teacher educators. Because when all teacher educators grow, candidates grow. And when candidates grow, so do P–12 students. Let’s make teacher preparation better—together.</div> 1958</div> 1959 <div class="readMore" data-auto="blog-read-more"> <a dont-color-link="true" href="/but-who-develops-the-mentors"></a> 1960</div> 1961</div> 1962</div> 1963</div> 1964 <div style="-ms-grid-column:1; -ms-grid-row:3" class="postArticle " data-auto="blog-post-article"> <div class="inner clearfix wow" style="animation-delay: 1400.0ms;"> <a class="blogImgLink" data-auto="blog-img-link" dont-color-link="true" href="/gatekeepers-of-readiness-reclaiming-quality-in-teacher-preparation" data-blog-post-alias="gatekeepers-of-readiness-reclaiming-quality-in-teacher-preparation" aria-label="Gatekeepers of Readiness: Reclaiming Quality in Teacher Preparation"> <div class="blogImg" data-auto="blog-img" style="background-image: url('https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/opt/6-0453b027-1920w.png');"><img src="https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/opt/6-0453b027-1920w.png" alt="" onerror="handleImageLoadError(this)"/></div> 1965</a> 1966 <div class="postTextContainer"> <div class="postText clearfix"> <div class="postTitle" data-auto="blog-post-title"> <h3> <a dont-color-link="true" href="/gatekeepers-of-readiness-reclaiming-quality-in-teacher-preparation" data-blog-post-alias="gatekeepers-of-readiness-reclaiming-quality-in-teacher-preparation">Gatekeepers of Readiness: Reclaiming Quality in Teacher Preparation</a> 1967</h3> 1968</div> 1969 <div class="authorBar" data-auto="blog-author-bar"> <span>By EdPrep Partners</span> 1970 <span>•</span> 1971 <span>July 17, 2025</span> 1972</div> 1973 <div class="postDescription" data-auto="blog-post-description">Gatekeepers of Readiness: Reclaiming Quality in Teacher Preparation The Challenge: Candidate Program Progress ≠ Proficiency No gateway, no guarantee. If we truly want readiness, we have to require it. Every year, thousands of teacher candidates advance through preparation programs without clear, evidence-based confirmation that they’re ready for what’s next. Coursework and clinical experiences are completed. Clinical hours and documentation is logged. Evaluations are submitted. But critical questions remain: Can this candidate plan and deliver effective instruction? Has the candidate demonstrated proficiency in essential pedagogical methods? Is the candidate prepared to lead a classroom on day one? Too often, the answer isn’t yes or no—it’s maybe, probably, or simply unclear. And when progression is based more on time or task completion than demonstrated readiness, even well-intentioned systems can fall short. The result? Districts are left unsure of what a candidate can do. And ultimately, P&nd
1973ash;12 students experience the consequences in real time. The Solution: Performance Gateways At EdPrep Partners, we believe advancement in teacher preparation should be earned —not assumed. That’s where performance gateways come in. Performance gateways are structured checkpoints built into a preparation program where candidates must demonstrate clear, observable proficiency in core instructional competencies before moving forward. They aren’t hurdles—they’re commitments to readiness. They reflect what many on the field have long recognized: that advancing through preparation requires defined opportunities to demonstrate performance, not just passive participation. When done well, performance gateways give everyone a shared bar for what “ready” actually looks like. They align expectations across coursework and clinical experiences, helping programs feel confident that candidates aren’t just progressing—they’re prepared. What Gateways Look Like in Practice Strong programs don’t treat performance gateways as one-time checks. They build them into the architecture of preparation—across three critical domains: 1. Coursework Progression Gateway assignments—whether performance tasks, planning artifacts, or modeled pedagogical practices—aren’t just graded activities. They’re structured demonstrations of instructional skill. Candidates must show proficiency against pre-developed criteria, using shared instructional frameworks, aligned to core methods and content pedagogy before advancing to later coursework or entering clinical placements. 2. Clinical Transition Points Before taking on any level of teaching responsibility—whether through co-teaching or as a full-time teacher of record—candidates engage in structured opportunities to demonstrate proficiency in core instructional methods and pedagogies. These gateways may include rehearsals, lesson enactments, or other representations of teaching, supported by observation of practice, planning artifacts, and content-pedagogy evidence assessed against shared instructional frameworks. When expectations aren’t yet met, candidates receive targeted coaching—clear, high-quality oral and written feedback—alongside additional practice and a reassessment opportunity. The goal is not punishment, but support and growth. 3. Licensure Readiness and Program Completion Some performance gateways—whether tied to licensure, graduation, or overall program completion—draw on aggregated evidence of candidate performance. This may include portfolios, demonstration lessons, observation data, feedback cycles, and ratings on core instructional methods, pedagogical practices, and professional dispositions. These gateways offer a more comprehensive view of readiness—not just a checklist of completed tasks. When candidates don’t yet meet expectations, strong programs respond with support—not exclusion. That support includes targeted coaching, individualized growth plans, and multiple structured opportunities to demonstrate progress—ensuring that any high-stakes decision to advance or withhold a candidate is grounded in evidence. What Strong Programs Do Differently Programs that implement effective performance gateways don’t leave readiness to chance. They build it into the structure of preparation—and they’re willing to make hard decisions in service of quality. Here’s what they prioritize: Shared Criteria and Expectations Gateways are aligned to a shared instructional framework, with consistent criteria & look-fors, proficiency benchmarks, and frameworks used across faculty, supervisors, mentors, and candidates. Calibration Across Roles Faculty and field supervisors alike are trained and calibrated on what quality looks like—and how to assess it reliably. Transparent Candidate Support Plans Candidates know what’s expected and what happens if they don’t meet the bar. Growth plans are not reactive—they’re proactive. Data-Driven Progression Decisions Advancement is grounded in multiple data sources: performance assessments, observation feedback, candidate coursework, and candidate and faculty/staff reflections—not gut instinct or seat time. Willingness to Hold the Line Strong programs are willing to hold a candidate in a ‘phase of support’ when readiness isn’t yet demonstrated—
1973because advancing without proficiency serves no one. They pair high expectations with high support, ensuring every candidate has the opportunity to meet the bar before moving forward. Candidate Readiness as a Shared Responsibility Performance decisions aren’t the job of one teacher educator. They require aligned systems, clear structures, and shared ownership across faculty, supervisors, and district partners. When the entire preparation ecosystem supports a common bar for readiness, gateways become reliable—not random. This work requires intention, structure, and investment. But the payoff—better-prepared candidates who are ready on day one—is worth it. Why This Matters When performance gateways are clearly defined and well-executed, everyone benefits: For Candidates: They receive timely, actionable feedback and know exactly what’s expected at each stage. ‘Readiness to Teach’ isn’t a guessing game—it’s something they can see and achieve. For Programs: They gain confidence that their completers are truly ready—and have the data to prove it.. Gateways strengthen program credibility, build trust with P-12 partners, and elevate outcomes. For Districts: They hire new teachers who are instructionally ready—not just licensed. These candidates have already demonstrated they can plan, teach, and adapt in real P-12 classrooms. For P–12 Students: They’re taught by educators who are truly prepared to lead learning from day one. And as research shows, the quality of the teacher makes all the difference. At EdPrep Partners, performance gateways are a core lever of our EdPrep Performance Framework. We support educator preparation programs to: Design developmental trajectories that build toward clear, proficiency-based benchmarks Establish structured performance gateways across coursework and clinical experiences Develop and calibrate observation frameworks, criteria, and look-fors aligned to core instructional practices Implement targeted support plans for candidates who need additional time or coaching to meet expectations Make progression decisions that are consistent, equitable, and grounded in multiple sources of evidence We help programs shift from informal checkpoints to intentional, performance-based systems of candidate development—ensuring every candidate advances based on one overarching thing: demonstrated readiness to teach. Let’s Stop Guessing at Readiness Teacher preparation isn’
1973t about getting candidates through the program. It’s about getting them ready—deliberately, thoroughly, and with high expectations—for the P-12 classrooms they will lead. It means candidates demonstrating skills. It means meeting a clear, shared bar. It means performance—and readiness. Let’s stop implying readiness. Let’s measure it. Let’s make teacher preparation better—together.</div> 1974</div> 1975 <div class="readMore" data-auto="blog-read-more"> <a dont-color-link="true" href="/gatekeepers-of-readiness-reclaiming-quality-in-teacher-preparation"></a> 1976</div> 1977</div> 1978</div> 1979</div> 1980 <div style="-ms-grid-column:2; -ms-grid-row:3" class="postArticle " data-auto="blog-post-article"> <div class="inner clearfix wow" style="animation-delay: 1600.0ms;"> <a class="blogImgLink" data-auto="blog-img-link" dont-color-link="true" href="/the-faculty-factor-elevating-the-teacher-educators-who-equip-future-teachers" data-blog-post-alias="the-faculty-factor-elevating-the-teacher-educators-who-equip-future-teachers" aria-label="The Faculty Factor: Elevating the Teacher Educators Who Equip Future Teachers"> <div class="blogImg" data-auto="blog-img" style="background-image: url('https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/opt/9-9d2244ec-1920w.png');"><img src="https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/opt/9-9d2244ec-1920w.png" alt="" onerror="handleImageLoadError(this)"/></div> 1981</a> 1982 <div class="postTextContainer"> <div class="postText clearfix"> <div class="postTitle" data-auto="blog-post-title"> <h3> <a dont-color-link="true" href="/the-faculty-factor-elevating-the-teacher-educators-who-equip-future-teachers" data-blog-post-alias="the-faculty-factor-elevating-the-teacher-educators-who-equip-future-teachers">The Faculty Factor: Elevating the Teacher Educators Who Equip Future Teachers</a> 1983</h3> 1984</div> 1985 <div class="authorBar" data-auto="blog-author-bar"> <span>By EdPrep Partners</span> 1986 <span>•</span> 1987 <span>July 2, 2025</span> 1988</div> 1989 <div class="postDescription" data-auto="blog-post-description">The Faculty Factor: Elevating the Teacher Educators Who Equip Future Teachers We can’t raise the bar for teachers without raising the bar for those who prepare them. In the national conversation on teacher readiness, the spotlight often lands on curriculum, high-quality instructional materials, clinical models, or candidate recruitment. But behind every well-prepared teacher is a teacher educator—a faculty member, field supervisor, or mentor whose impact can either sharpen or stall a candidate’s development. As educator preparation evolves to meet a long-recognized need—practice-based instruction supported by real-time coaching and high-quality feedback—we must extend the same level of development and accountability to the people preparing teacher candidates. Quality preparation doesn’t stop at program design; it lives and dies in the instructional practice of teacher educators. Why Teacher Educator Practices Matter Research confirms what many EPP leaders already know: the quality of support candidates receive from faculty and field-based educators is one of the strongest predictors of instructional readiness. Yet in many programs, the individuals preparing teachers—particularly clinical supervisors, adjunct faculty, and mentor teachers—receive little structured training, limited feedback, and no ongoing development in how to support candidate growth. Studies show that teacher educators and program design structures significantly influence the quality of clinical experiences and the integration of theory and practice (Burns et al., 2015; Zeichner, 2010). Additionally, candidates are more instructionally effective when placed in settings where clinical educators provide targeted, high-quality feedback—emphasizing the direct link between educator practice and candidate readiness (Ronfeldt, 2014). The EdPrep Partners Performance Framework makes this clear: high-quality teacher educators are not just content experts or course designers—they are instructors of teaching practice. Their role extends beyond delivering content, to modeling, coaching, and guiding candidates toward instructional proficiency. Strong preparation programs recognize that quality teaching at every level —from the P–12 classroom to the coursework and field supervision for candidate development—
1989depends on the knowledge and skill of those doing the preparation of teacher candidates. To support candidate growth, teacher educators must be able to: Model effective instructional practices in their own teaching and the pedagogies they are developing in candidates—clearly labeled and intentionally scaffolded to ensure candidates understand not just the what, but the why and how of strong instruction. Observe candidate practice with precision and consistency , using shared criteria and developmental trajectories to prioritize both the what and the how of effective teaching. Deliver timely, high-quality oral and written feedback that is actionable, aligned to defined criteria, and anchored in candidate developmental progressions. Use shared tools, rubrics, and performance benchmarks to support instructional growth—clearing the path for candidates, identifying when intervention is needed, and clearly communicating where a candidate is, what’s missing, and what’s next. Facilitate structured coaching and support cycles that promote candidate reflection, guide next steps, and move candidates from analysis to rehearsal to enactment—
1989while adjusting teacher educator practice in response to candidate needs. This isn’t evaluative work—it’s instructional. It demands intentional practice, ongoing calibration, and a shared vision of what high-quality preparation looks like. Yet while we invest heavily in developing teacher candidates, the development of those preparing them is too often overlooked. Without strong systems to support teacher educator practice, program improvement remains surface-level—and real instructional change stalls. Persistent Gaps in Teacher Educator Development & Practices Despite the clarity of what teacher educators must be able to do, most programs lack the infrastructure to support these core practices. Across the field, persistent challenges in teacher educator development are well known—confirmed by research, surfaced in stakeholder feedback, and reinforced through the diagnostic and technical assistance work of countless programs and organizations. Hiring and onboarding of clinical supervisors is inconsistent and misaligned. Clinical supervisors are often hired late, selected for convenience or availability rather than their ability to teach or coach aspiring educators. Many are retired principals or former educators without recent classroom experience or training in practice-based teacher development. They are onboarded inconsistently—or not at all—and often operate in silos, disconnected from coursework, program goals, and shared candidate expectations. Coaching practices vary widely, with little to no accountability for the quality of support provided. Faculty expectations and instructional messages are fragmented. Faculty expectations also vary, sending mixed messages to candidates about what strong instruction looks like. In the absence of shared tools or developmental benchmarks, feedback and debriefs are inconsistent. Too often, candidates receive generic advice or “tips and tricks” rather than evidence-based coaching grounded in observed practice and instructional impact. Few faculty provide rehearsal opportunities or explicitly connect feedback to candidate developmental trajectories. Professional learning for faculty and field-based educators is limited. Many are excluded from ongoing development or receive one-off trainings that lack follow-up or coherence. They often have little exposure to their program’s instructional framework, teacher educator practices, or core tools—leaving them underprepared to support candidate growth in consistent, aligned ways. Observation, feedback, and rehearsal practices lack calibration. Most programs lack shared coaching protocols, defined performance criteria for pedagogies and content-specific practices, or normed expectations for feedback and evaluation. As a result, teacher educators rely on their own interpretations of quality, leading to wide variation in what ‘good teaching’ looks like and how it’s communicated to candidates. Feedback and accountability structures for teacher educators are weak or nonexistent. While candidates are routinely observed, evaluated, and coached, the same cannot be said for the individuals responsible for candidate development. Faculty, clinical supervisors, and mentor teachers often operate without receiving feedback on their own practice—no observations, no coaching, and no performance expectations tied to their impact as teacher educators. Without structures to assess and develop teacher educator effectiveness, programs cannot ensure consistency, quality, or improvement across candidate experiences. While these challenges often surface locally, they reflect a broader systemic gap in how we develop and support the people who prepare teachers. They are symptoms of a broader systemic problem: the absence of robust infrastru
1989cture for developing and supporting the people who prepare teachers. And when left unaddressed, these gaps undermine even the strongest curriculum or clinical placement design. If we care about candidate quality, we can’t leave teacher educator quality to chance. What Strong Programs Do Differently Effective educator preparation programs recognize that developing teacher candidates requires equally rigorous investment in the development of teacher educators. They implement structured systems that align with research-backed practices, ensuring that teacher educators are equipped to model, coach, and support candidates effectively. Start with clear expectations for teacher educator practice. Strong programs define what quality looks like—not just for candidates, but for the people developing them. They establish explicit competencies for faculty, clinical supervisors, and mentor teachers aligned to research-based teacher educator practices. These expectations anchor coaching protocols, feedback cycles, and performance reviews—replacing ambiguity with clarity. Onboard and train all teacher educators with purpose. Onboarding is not an afterthought. Effective programs provide structured, role-specific training before a course is taught or a candidate is coached. Whether full-time faculty or part-time field supervisors, every educator receives grounding in the program’s instructional model, pedagogical expectations, feedback protocols, and the developmental trajectory of candidates. Embed coaching and rehearsal into teacher educator development. Programs that prioritize practice-based preparation also ensure that teacher educators themselves rehearse the practices they’ll be facilitating. This includes opportunities to model instructional strategies, analyze candidate performance, and role-play feedback conversations—all grounded in the same tools and criteria expected of candidates. Observe, support, and develop their teacher educators—routinely. Strong programs don’t just evaluate teacher educators—they coach them. Faculty and clinical educators receive feedback on their instructional moves, the quality of their feedback to candidates, and their al
1989ignment to core pedagogies. Observation and coaching cycles are routine, not reserved for remediation. The goal isn’t compliance—it’s growth. Build shared infrastructure to calibrate and align. To ensure consistency across courses, supervisors, and sites, strong programs implement shared tools: observation rubrics, coaching protocols, feedback templates, and performance benchmarks that make expectations visible. These tools are used not only with candidates, but with the teacher educators who support them—ensuring everyone is working from the same definition of quality. Treat teacher educator development as ongoing, not episodic. Professional learning is structured, job-embedded, and responsive. Strong programs create feedback loops from candidate performance to teacher educator development—recognizing that improving instruction at the candidate level requires skill-building at the educator level. They invest in communities of practice, calibration routines, and data-driven development plans. This work requires intention, structure, and investment. But the payoff—better-prepared candidates who are ready on day one—is worth it. A Call to Action: Elevating the Faculty Factor If we’re serious about dramatically improving teacher preparation, we have to begin with those responsible for delivering it. The research is clear. The practices are clear. And the need is urgent. We’ve long known that strong preparation requires aligned coursework, clinical experiences, and access to high-quality instructional materials. Even well-designed programs can struggle to deliver on their promise if faculty, supervisors, and mentors lack the support to bring them to life. Strong programs support candidates—but that support is only as effective as the people delivering it. And when those people lack the skills, structures, and support to model and develop effective instruction, candidates enter classrooms unready for day one. Teacher educator development is not a side issue—it’s the fundamental driver of program quality. At EdPrep Partners, we believe this is one of the most urgent and actionable levers for strengthening preparation nationwide. That’s why our work—spanning diagnostics, technical assistance, and implementation support—centers on developing the practices of teacher educators. We help programs define expectations, build infrastructure, and implement systems that elevate faculty, supervisors, and mentors as skilled instructors of teaching. Programs that make this investment aren’t just building stronger teams. They’re improving candidate outcomes, strengthening partnerships, and delivering on the promise of readiness for every candidate. Let’s raise the bar—for teacher educators, for teacher candidates, and for the future of the profession. Let’s make teacher preparation better—together. Calvin J. Stocker Founder & CEO, EdPrep Partners A Note on the Field’s Progress & TeachingWorks I’ve long championed and supported the development of both innovation and attention in this space, and EdPrep Partners will continue that commitment—
1989focusing teacher educator development as a core driver of program quality. Our technical assistance is grounded in the knowledge, skills, and systems that enable faculty and supervisors to prepare candidates well. We recognize the essential contributions of partners who have shaped this work nationally. TeachingWorks, in particular, has meaningfully codified what it means to prepare the people who prepare teachers—bringing clarity, structure, and urgency to the field. Their thought leadership continues to elevate expectations and sharpen the vision for teacher educator practice. We are proud to learn from and alongside them.</div> 1990</div> 1991 <div class="readMore" data-auto="blog-read-more"> <a dont-color-link="true" href="/the-faculty-factor-elevating-the-teacher-educators-who-equip-future-teachers"></a> 1992</div> 1993</div> 1994</div> 1995</div> 1996 <div style="-ms-grid-column:3; -ms-grid-row:3" class="postArticle " data-auto="blog-post-article"> <div class="inner clearfix wow" style="animation-delay: 1800.0ms;"> <a class="blogImgLink" data-auto="blog-img-link" dont-color-link="true" href="/when-prep-is-the-priority" data-blog-post-alias="when-prep-is-the-priority" aria-label="When Prep is the Priority"> <div class="blogImg" data-auto="blog-img" style="background-image: url('https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/opt/10-73509b0a-1920w.png');"><img src="https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/opt/10-73509b0a-1920w.png" alt="" onerror="handleImageLoadError(this)"/></div> 1997</a> 1998 <div class="postTextContainer"> <div class="postText clearfix"> <div class="postTitle" data-auto="blog-post-title"> <h3> <a dont-color-link="true" href="/when-prep-is-the-priority" data-blog-post-alias="when-prep-is-the-priority">When Prep is the Priority</a> 1999</h3> 2000</div> 2001 <div class="authorBar" data-auto="blog-author-bar"> <span>By EdPrep Partners</span> 2002 <span>•</span> 2003 <span>May 22, 2025</span> 2004</div> 2005 <div class="postDescription" data-auto="blog-post-description">When Preparation Is the Priority: How the University of Houston Is Redefining Quality ACP at Scale The Big Picture: Preparation, Not Pathway As the nation continues grappling with how to solve the teacher shortage, one question—often unspoken—keeps surfacing: traditional, alternative, or no preparation at all? It’s time to take one variable off the table. This is no longer a debate about pathway . It’s about preparation . As we’ve outlined in a previous EdPrep Insight— Ready or Not: What Texas’ 2024–2025 Data Reveals About Teacher Preparation Gaps —the real dividing line is between programs that prepare teachers to be ready on day one, and those that don’t. Unfortunately, and far too often—no matter the pathway—preparation is the missing piece. The result? Let’s look at Texas—one of the nation’s largest producers of year-zero teachers—during the 2024–2025 academic year: 43,771 teachers were newly hired across the state. 31% (≈13,569 teachers) were hired without a Texas teacher certification or SBEC-issued permit. Just 12.3% (≈5,382 teachers) were hired with a Standard Certificate and completed clinical student teaching. Texas hired nearly 44,000 new teachers last year. But nearly one in three entered the classroom without certification or a state-issued permit. Fewer than 13% were fully certified with completed clinical student teaching. This isn’t an exception—it’s the system. And it’s failing to prepare—especially those teachers just starting in the profession, those who support and work alongside year-zero teachers on campus, and ultimately, the P–12 students they serve. UH ACP: From Pilot to Scale Back in 2022, during our time working at US PREP National Center, two colleagues and I met with two visionary leaders who were growing increasingly concerned about declining enrollment and meeting the needs of their district partners. Enrollment in their teacher preparation program was falling, and districts were sounding the alarm—they weren’t producing enough educators. Dr. Shea Culpepper and Dr. Amber Thompson , leaders of the University of Houston (UH) teacher preparation program, went all-in. Together, with the support of the Houston Endowment, we co-designed a scaled alternative certification program (ACP) that has helped redefine what quality can look like in a university-based ACP. We built on more than 15 years of learning from innovative alternative preparation programs across the country—models and structures proven to rapidly develop teacher candidates while meeting the real-time needs of P&nd
2005ash;12 districts. Programs like Teaching Excellence at YES Prep Public Schools , Urban Teachers , Relay Graduate School of Education , Sposato , and Alder GSE have led the way in demonstrating what’s possible when design is grounded in practice. UH launched its ACP with just 17 candidates in its first year, partnering with two school districts. In year two, enrollment grew to 106 candidates and five districts . Now, just over two years since that first planning meeting, UH is on track to enroll just under 200 candidates in districts across the Houston area for the 2025–26 school year. That means more than 200 well-prepared teachers will enter Houston-area classrooms—backed by a program that has scaled with intention, not compromise. To support this growth, UH now has eight full-time Site Coordinators to support candidates, ensuring the program not only expands—but strengthens. At a time when most university-based teacher preparation programs are shrinking, UH is opening new pathways . Not because it lowered the bar—but because it raised it across all programs and pathways. And because it listened—to districts, to candidates, and to what the research tells us works. What Makes Alternative Certification Work: Elements of High-Quality ACP Not all ACPs are created equal. In fact, much of the skepticism around alternative certification stems from programs that shortcut preparation—offering minimal training, limited coaching, and few performance expectations before teachers take full responsibility for a classroom. But that’s not how it has to be. High-quality ACPs share a set of non-negotiable design elements—structures that ensure teacher candidates are prepared to lead P-12 learning from day one. These elements are grounded in EdPrep Partners’ Performance Framework and reflect over a decade of national learning from programs that work. The University of Houston’s ACP shows what’s possible when these elements are put into practice.</div> 2006</div> 2007 <div class="readMore" data-auto="blog-read-more"> <a dont-color-link="true" href="/when-prep-is-the-priority"></a> 2008</div> 2009</div> 2010</div> 2011</div> 2012 <div style="-ms-grid-column:1; -ms-grid-row:4" class="postArticle " data-auto="blog-post-article"> <div class="inner clearfix wow" style="animation-delay: 2000.0ms;"> <a class="blogImgLink" data-auto="blog-img-link" dont-color-link="true" href="/ready-or-not-what-texas-20242025-data-reveals-about-teacher-preparation-gaps" data-blog-post-alias="ready-or-not-what-texas-20242025-data-reveals-about-teacher-preparation-gaps" aria-label="Ready or Not: What Texasâ 2024â2025 Data Reveals About Teacher Preparation Gaps"> <div class="blogImg" data-auto="blog-img" style="background-image: url('https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/opt/16-1920w.png');"><img src="https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/opt/16-1920w.png" alt="" onerror="handleImageLoadError(this)"/></div> 2013</a> 2014 <div class="postTextContainer"> <div class="postText clearfix"> <div class="postTitle" data-auto="blog-post-title"> <h3> <a dont-color-link="true" href="/ready-or-not-what-texas-20242025-data-reveals-about-teacher-preparation-gaps" data-blog-post-alias="ready-or-not-what-texas-20242025-data-reveals-about-teacher-preparation-gaps">Ready or Not: What Texas’ 2024–2025 Data Reveals About Teacher Preparation Gaps</a> 2015</h3> 2016</div> 2017 <div class="authorBar" data-auto="blog-author-bar"> <span>By EdPrep Partners</span> 2018 <span>•</span> 2019 <span>May 20, 2025</span> 2020</div> 2021 <div class="postDescription" data-auto="blog-post-description">What Texas’ Data Shows About Preparation Every child deserves an excellent educator. Let’s give them one. Recent data released by the Texas Education Agency (TEA) highlights concerning trends in how many newly hired teachers enter the profession with or without formal preparation. While rates vary across the state’s 20 education regions, the statewide picture reveals a growing divide between hiring needs and expectations, candidate enrollment, and the preparation pathways that support the demand. Texas Statewide Newly Hired & Certification Data in 2024–2025: 43,771 teachers were newly hired across Texas. 31% (approx. 13,569) were hired without a Texas teacher certification or SBEC-issued permit. 34% (approx. 14,882) were re-entering teachers, returning after a break in Texas public school teaching. Only 12.3% (approx. 5,382) were Standard Certified teachers—those who had completed clinical student teaching prior to being hired. Two Texas regi
2021ons help help illustrate how this plays out on the ground: In Region 4 (Houston), 9,950 new teachers were hired. Only 2,782 (28%) were newly certified, while 3,191 were hired without a Texas certification or permit. In Region 19 (El Paso), 947 new teachers were hired. 434 (46%) were newly certified, and 96 entered without certification or under emergency permits. These aren’t just numbers. They reflect fundamentally different teaching conditions for P–12 students across Texas and continue to raise urgent questions for preparation programs, districts, and state leaders: Are preparation pathways keeping pace with the realities of regional hiring needs? Are certification and preparation being prioritized—or deprioritized—in staffing decisions? What systems are in place to ensure all new teachers are truly ready to teach? You can explore this data, and more, in the TEA Regional Dashboard . Preparation is the Non-Negotiable It’s time to reframe the conversation. This is no longer about traditional vs. alternative pathways. It’s about preparation vs. no preparation. Texas has long relied on a mix of pathways to meet workforce needs—from traditional certification programs to alternative certification and internship-based models. Each has a role to play. But across all pathways, the baseline expectation must be the same: teachers must be prepared to teach P–12 students on day one. When preparation is missing, the burden shifts to schools and students. Gaps in readiness lead to inconsistent instruction, classroom management challenges, higher attrition, and decreased outcomes for students. But when teacher candidates are well-prepared—through rigorous coursework, structured clinical experiences, and expert coaching—students benefit, and so do the systems that support them. What Quality Preparation Requires To close both certification and achievement gaps, we must shift the frame from "how many teachers" to "how well-prepared are they—and how do we scale that quality?" At EdPrep Partners, we believe the solution lies in investing in all preparation programs and pathways—traditional, residency, internship-based, and community college—that are designed to deliver both quality and scale. Any pathway can work when it reflects what research and real-world success tell us is essential. That means programs must be: Coherent and research-based: Coursework, clinical experiences, and data systems must align to a shared vision of instructional performance. Candidates, faculty, supervisors, and mentor teachers should all reinfor
2021ce the same expectations—grounded in what excellent teaching is. Practice-rich and structured with high-quality feedback: Candidates need multiple, scaffolded opportunities to observe, rehearse, and enact instruction—both before and while they take on full classroom responsibility. Structured practice (such as simulations, rehearsals, and supported teaching experiences) must be paired with timely, specific, and high-quality feedback that drives meaningful reflection and instructional growth. Performance-driven and competency-based: Candidate progression must be based on demonstrated readiness, not just clock hours or course completion. Strong programs define clear developmental trajectories, set intentional benchmarks, and establish structured performance gateways—ensuring that candidates show they’re ready before advancing to the next stage of preparation or independent teaching. Accessible, scalable, and sustainable: The most effective programs reduce barriers to entry without lowering the bar—ensuring that preparation remains both inclusive and high-quality. This requires building the systems, staffing, and structures needed to “scale well.” Access and quality must grow together—not in opposition. This also means meeting candidates where they are, through the refinement and development of programs and pathways they’re most likely to pursue, while incentivizing and supporting more rigorous, practice-rich models that lead to lasting success in P-12 classrooms. These aren’t theoretical ideals—they’re already in practice across countless programs nationwide and are embedded in EdPrep Partners’ Performance Framework and 14 Levers for Quality Teacher Preparation. We’ve seen firsthand how these structures drive results for teacher candidates and P–12 students—and we’ve supported programs in building and refining them to increase quality, enrollment, completion, and retention. And we need to rapidly support more. The Research Is Clear: Preparation Matters A 2024 policy brief from Texas Tech University found that uncertified teachers without prior classroom experience were associated with significant declines in student achievement, while those with experience (like paraprofessionals) did not harm outcomes. ¹ A separate study from Texas State University showed that students taught by unlicensed instructors experienced up to three months less academic growth in math, and those teachers also left the profession at far higher rates.² Well-prepared teachers improve student learning and stay in the classroom longer. And any pathway that prepares them well is worth investing in. The Opportunity for States, Regions, and Programs Texas is not alone. States across the country are grappling with the same challenge: How do we expand the teacher workforce without sacrificing preparation quality? The data shows us both the risk and the opportunity. Some regions—like El Paso—are making aligned, intentional moves that prioritize preparation. Others are navigating fractured systems, where hiring decisions are driven more by urgency than by long-term readiness. The difference isn’t just about policy. It’s about intentionality, investment, and systems. At EdPrep Partners, we’ve seen what’s possible when systems and teacher preparation programs commit to: Using data not just to report progress, but to drive strategy —clarifying where to invest, how to improve, and where to grow. Aligning teacher educator practices across coursew
2021ork, clinical experiences, and district hiring —so expectations are simplified, and preparation is streamlined around what matters most. Investing in the people who make preparation work —faculty, staff, supervisors, mentors, and program leaders. Building lasting infrastructure and capacity —anchored in enrollment, staffing, and program scale, so that change sticks beyond pilots and funding cycles. The tools exist. The frameworks are in place. We know what quality looks like. But knowing what works is not enough. We need bold action, strategic investment, and a shared sense of urgency—paired with the capacity and know-how to scale what works and sustain it over time. This, like many before, is a pivotal moment for teacher preparation. If we act now—with coherence, ambition, and long-term systems in mind—we can ensure that every P–12 student is taught by a well-prepared teacher. Let’s make this our shared commitment. Let’s make teacher preparation better—together. Calvin J. Stocker Founder & CEO, EdPrep Partners</div> 2022</div> 2023 <div class="readMore" data-auto="blog-read-more"> <a dont-color-link="true" href="/ready-or-not-what-texas-20242025-data-reveals-about-teacher-preparation-gaps"></a> 2024</div> 2025</div> 2026</div> 2027</div> 2028 <div style="-ms-grid-column:2; -ms-grid-row:4" class="postArticle " data-auto="blog-post-article"> <div class="inner clearfix wow" style="animation-delay: 2200.0ms;"> <a class="blogImgLink" data-auto="blog-img-link" dont-color-link="true" href="/delaware-s-playbook" data-blog-post-alias="delaware-s-playbook" aria-label="Delaware's Playbook"> <div class="blogImg" data-auto="blog-img" style="background-image: url('https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/opt/11-c6b473cc-1920w.png');"><img src="https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/opt/11-c6b473cc-1920w.png" alt="" onerror="handleImageLoadError(this)"/></div> 2029</a> 2030 <div class="postTextContainer"> <div class="postText clearfix"> <div class="postTitle" data-auto="blog-post-title"> <h3> <a dont-color-link="true" href="/delaware-s-playbook" data-blog-post-alias="delaware-s-playbook">Delaware's Playbook</a> 2031</h3> 2032</div> 2033 <div class="authorBar" data-auto="blog-author-bar"> <span>By EdPrep Partners</span> 2034 <span>•</span> 2035 <span>May 19, 2025</span> 2036</div> 2037 <div class="postDescription" data-auto="blog-post-description">Delaware’s Playbook: A Signal for What’s Possible in Teacher Preparation and Literacy A Signal for What’s Possible The 2025 Delaware Teacher Pathways Showcase wasn’t just a convening. As Michael Saylor, Director of Educator Excellence at the Delaware Department of Education, described it, the goal was to “Share. Learn. Get Inspired.” What unfolded was more than that. It was a signal. A signal that system-level transformation in teacher preparation isn’t theoretical—it’s already underway and positioned for rapid statewide expansion. That expanding access to the profession must be matched by a deep focus on candidate readiness. And that addressing long-standing student learning challenges requires investing in how teachers are developed. Delaware isn’t standing still. It’s moving with intention—through policy, partnership, and preparation systems designed to drive meaningful, lasting change. The Literacy Crisis: Delaware and the Data Demand More Delaware isn’
2037t avoiding the hard challenges. One of the clearest takeaways from the 2025 Teacher Pathways Showcase was how openly state and institutional leaders acknowledged the depth of the literacy crisis—and their shared responsibility for solving it. Several speakers and panelists throughout the day pointed to the need for honest, systems-level reflection on current conditions and the bold steps required to drive lasting change. The data underscores the urgency. According to the 2024 Nation’s Report Card, gaps in literacy by race, income, and gender remain largely unchanged since 1998, and: Only 26 percent of DE 4th Grade students read at or above Proficient ; 45 percent scored below Basic . Just 23 percent of DE 8th Grade students reached Proficient ; 41 percent scored below Basic . These results aren’t anomalies—they are the predictable outcomes of preparation systems that have not fully aligned with how students actually learn to read. Too often, teacher preparation and P–12 instruction operate in silos, disconnected from the structured, evidence-based practices that research shows make a difference. Delaware is responding differently. Through strategic investments in pathways, preparation systems, and instructional alignment, the state is making it clear: improving literacy outcomes begins with how teachers are prepared—not just how they perform. Pathways With Purpose: Delaware’s Approach to Statewide Infrastructure Delaware is addressing its educator workforce challenge not with scattered programs, but through a coordinated, statewide strategy. The state is developing multiple entry points into the profession—each grounded in rigorous preparation, aligned to workforce needs, and designed to scale sustainably. As Senator Laura Sturgeon noted during the Showcase’s opening session, “We don’t have time to wait.” That urgency is evident in both the design and the rapid expansion of Delaware’s pathway system. Here’s where Delaware is currently investing in preparation pathways:</div> 2038</div> 2039 <div class="readMore" data-auto="blog-read-more"> <a dont-color-link="true" href="/delaware-s-playbook"></a> 2040</div> 2041</div> 2042</div> 2043</div> 2044 <div style="-ms-grid-column:3; -ms-grid-row:4" class="postArticle " data-auto="blog-post-article"> <div class="inner clearfix wow" style="animation-delay: 2400.0ms;"> <a class="blogImgLink" data-auto="blog-img-link" dont-color-link="true" href="/no-more-data-for-data-s-sake" data-blog-post-alias="no-more-data-for-data-s-sake" aria-label="No More Data for Data's Sake"> <div class="blogImg" data-auto="blog-img" style="background-image: url('https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/opt/13-4a1d2bcf-1920w.png');"><img src="https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/opt/13-4a1d2bcf-1920w.png" alt="" onerror="handleImageLoadError(this)"/></div> 2045</a> 2046 <div class="postTextContainer"> <div class="postText clearfix"> <div class="postTitle" data-auto="blog-post-title"> <h3> <a dont-color-link="true" href="/no-more-data-for-data-s-sake" data-blog-post-alias="no-more-data-for-data-s-sake">No More Data for Data's Sake</a> 2047</h3> 2048</div> 2049 <div class="authorBar" data-auto="blog-author-bar"> <span>By EdPrep Partners</span> 2050 <span>•</span> 2051 <span>May 7, 2025</span> 2052</div> 2053 <div class="postDescription" data-auto="blog-post-description">No More Data for Data’s Sake Compliance-Driven Data ≠ Continuous Improvement Across the field of educator preparation, programs are inundated with data: licensure pass rates, observation data, candidate surveys, retention dashboards, etc. Yet despite this volume, many educator preparation programs struggle to translate data into sustained improvement. Instead, data use often centers on meeting accreditation requirements or state reporting mandates—important, but insufficient. The real risk is this: when data is collected but not used to inform decisions, it erodes credibility, overwhelms stakeholders, and ultimately does little to improve candidate readiness or program quality. It’s time to move from compliance to comittment—where data is not just stored and sorted, but embedded in daily practice, coaching, and leadership decisions. Data Is a Lever for Growth, Not Just a Record of the Past The strongest teacher preparation programs use data as a continuous improvement tool—not a retrospective one. That means: Grounding data in a shared vision for quality teaching & learning. Leveraging multiple data types (coursework, clinical, candidate performance, etc.). Using structured, routine data reviews to inform coaching, coursework revisions, and partnership decisions. Empowering faculty, supervisors, and candidates to own and act on the data—not just leaders. This shift—from data as evidence to data as action —is at the heart of EdPrep Partners’ approach. What It Looks Like in Practice: Frame → Describe → Plan Data protocols should be designed for clarity, utility, and collective ownership. Here’s how we have thought about shrinking the change and behavior of data usage: Frame Establish purpose and expectations. What are we trying to understand? What assumptions or biases might we bring into the conversation? “We expect strong performance in elementary certification areas, but prior data suggested gaps in secondary math. What will this year’s trends tell us?” Describe Analyze and interpret the data. What patterns, gaps, or inconsistencies are emerging? What seems surprising—or missing? “Observation counts meet minimum standards, but no extra support was provided to struggling candidates. That’s a missed opportunity.” Plan Develop a concrete action plan. What changes will we make? Who owns what? How will we monitor and report progress? “We’ll launch a targeted support series for secondary math candidates, implement coaching development for supervisors, and track & view impact data quarterly.” This protocol is intentionally simple—but powerful. It ensures that data review isn’t a one-time event or isolated to leadership. It’s a discipline of improvement shared across faculty, field supervisors, and program leaders. The Stakes: Why The Data Matters When data is embedded into the culture of teacher preparation, it improves outcomes for everyone. This seems obvious, though doesn’t live out in practice as much as we would hope: For Teacher Candidates : More timely support, clearer expectations for instruction and growth (for teacher educators too), and coaching that actually supports their instructional performance in the classroom with P-12 students. For Teacher Educators : Transparent benchmarks that articulate candidate growth, opportunities for feedback and professional development, improvement in candidate development practices, and a shared vision for quality teaching & learning. For Educator Preparation Programs : Alignment to district needs, stronger evidence of impact, and a more responsive approach to coursew
2053ork, clinical design, and candidate supports. For State Agencies & Funders : Real-time insights into what’s working—and what isn’t—driving smarter investments and systemic improvement. This Is Not About More Data—It’s About Better Use If your data isn’t shaping quality teaching at every level , improving feedback, influencing program structures, or informing policy—it’s not doing its job. Across educator preparation, programs are working hard to collect and report meaningful data. But too often, those systems remain disconnected from the daily decisions that matter most—where faculty, field supervisors, and candidates need timely, actionable insights to grow. It’s not a question of effort. It’s a question of connection and use. We don’t need more data—we need more will to act. The good news is: the pieces are already in place. Many programs have clear frameworks, committed teams, and tools at their fingertips. What’s needed now is shared focus—embedding these tools into ongoing practice focused on quality of teaching, learning, and the programming that drives candidates’ development. The path to quality is clear. It’s time to walk it. Let’s stop collecting data for data’s sake. Let’s make teacher preparation better—together.</div> 2054</div> 2055 <div class="readMore" data-auto="blog-read-more"> <a dont-color-link="true" href="/no-more-data-for-data-s-sake"></a> 2056</div> 2057</div> 2058</div> 2059</div> 2060 <div style="-ms-grid-column:1; -ms-grid-row:5" class="postArticle lastArticle" data-auto="blog-post-article"> <div class="inner clearfix wow" style="animation-delay: 2600.0ms;"> <a class="blogImgLink" data-auto="blog-img-link" dont-color-link="true" href="/field-supervision-matters-high-impact-coaching-feedback-matters-even-more" data-blog-post-alias="field-supervision-matters-high-impact-coaching-feedback-matters-even-more" aria-label="Field Supervision Matters. High-Impact Coaching & Feedback Matters Even More."> <div class="blogImg" data-auto="blog-img" style="background-image: url('https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/opt/15-319756c8-1920w.png');"><img src="https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/opt/15-319756c8-1920w.png" alt="" onerror="handleImageLoadError(this)"/></div> 2061</a> 2062 <div class="postTextContainer"> <div class="postText clearfix"> <div class="postTitle" data-auto="blog-post-title"> <h3> <a dont-color-link="true" href="/field-supervision-matters-high-impact-coaching-feedback-matters-even-more" data-blog-post-alias="field-supervision-matters-high-impact-coaching-feedback-matters-even-more">Field Supervision Matters. High-Impact Coaching & Feedback Matters Even More.</a> 2063</h3> 2064</div> 2065 <div class="authorBar" data-auto="blog-author-bar"> <span>By EdPrep Partners</span> 2066 <span>•</span> 2067 <span>April 5, 2025</span> 2068</div> 2069 <div class="postDescription" data-auto="blog-post-description">Field Supervision Matters. High-Impact Coaching & Feedback Matters Even More. Focusing on What Matters Most for Candidate Readiness Every child deserves an excellent educator. Let’s give them one. During my time at Teaching Excellence at YES Prep Public Schools as an instructional coach and program leader, we were relentless about quality coaching & feedback for teacher candidates. We applied the same principles we used in coaching teachers to the feedback we provided to one another as coaches and leaders. Every observation and coaching cycle was hyper-focused on developing candidates and moving them along a structured developmental trajectory. There wasn’t a moment or opportunity wasted. We drew heavily from the work of coaching experts like Jim Knight, Elena Aguilar, and Paul Bambrick-Santoyo—ensuring our coaching was: Focused , with clear criteria and modeling. Immediately actionable by the candidate. Tied to clear developmental goals . Andrew Kwok's recent article in Education Week reinfor
2069ces something we already knew: Field supervisors are critical, but often overlooked, players in candidate development. His article highlights that effective supervision isn’t just about providing feedback; it’s about providing the right feedback, at the right time, in a targeted and actionable way. That’s when feedback becomes “quality.” Why So Many Programs Struggle Despite the progress made by programs and states adopting coaching models like the Texas Instructional Leadership (TIL) Initiative , too many programs still struggle to implement these processes consistently. It comes down to operationalization . Far too often, programs lack systems and structures that promote consistent development, implementation, and progress monitoring of coaching and feedback processes. This leads to inconsistency in the quality of feedback provided by coursework faculty and field supervisors. What’s Needed Shared Vision & Coherent Program Design: Programs must establish a stakeholder-driven vision that aligns coursework, clinical experiences, and feedback cycles to create seamless candidate development trajectoriesâ. Shared Instructional Frameworks: Faculty, supervisors, and mentor teachers must model and reinforce consistent instructional expectations across all candidate experiences, this includes both the instructional expectations for candidates (e.g. pedagogical practices, content-pedagogy practices) and teacher educator practices (e.g. coaching & feedback practices, labeling, modeling, establishing criteria, rehearsals, etc.)â. Structured Coaching & Feedback Cycles: High-impact observation and coaching models are essential to ensuring candidates receive consistent, evidence-based, and timely feedback that drives their growthâ. EdPrep Partners’ Approach At EdPrep Partners, we help educator preparation programs build emulatable, effective, and streamlined systems and structures that ensure every teacher educator—whether coursework faculty or clinical/field supervisors—provides quality oral & written feedback via structured observations & coaching cycles. These systems do not need to be complicated, rather effective and consistent. Our EPP Performance Framework and 14 Levers for Quality Teacher Preparation provide a comprehensive roadmap for strengthening teacher educator practices, enhancing coherence, and embedding sustainable systems for continuous improvementâ. If you haven’t already, be sure to read Andrew Kwok’s article in Education Week here: Preservice Teachers
2069Need Better Feedback. Here’s How . Let’s make teacher preparation better together.</div> 2070</div> 2071 <div class="readMore" data-auto="blog-read-more"> <a dont-color-link="true" href="/field-supervision-matters-high-impact-coaching-feedback-matters-even-more"></a> 2072</div> 2073</div> 2074</div> 2075</div> 2076</div> 2077</div> 2078</div> 2079</div> 2080</div> 2081</div> 2082</div> 2083</div> 2084</div> 2085 <div class="dmFooterContainer"> <div id="fcontainer" class="u_fcontainer f_hcontainer dmFooter p_hfcontainer"> <div dm:templateorder="250" class="dmFooterResp generalFooter" id="1943048428"> <div class="u_1634281106 dmRespRow fullBleedChanged fullBleedMode" style="text-align: center;" id="1634281106"> <div class="dmRespColsWrapper" id="1660044154"> <div class="u_1717613156 dmRespCol small-12 medium-12 large-12" id="1717613156"> <div class="u_1150930812 imageWidget align-center" data-widget-type="image" id="1150930812" data-element-type="image"> <a href="/" id="1158683139" file="false"><img src="https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/opt/edprepR+copy-1920w.png" id="1452979129" class="" data-dm-image-path="https://irp.cdn-website.com/9beebeba/dms3rep/multi/edprepR+copy.png" width="330" height="168" onerror="handleImageLoadError(this)"/></a> 2086</div> 2087 <div class="u_1462816617 dmNewParagraph" data-element-type="paragraph" data-version="5" id="1462816617" data-styletopreserve="{" background-image":""}"=""><p class="text-align-center m-size-13"><strong style="font-weight: 400; display: unset; color: var(--color_1);" class="m-font-size-13">EdPrep Partners is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization dedicated to advancing high-quality teacher preparation nationwide.</strong><span style="display: initial;"><br/></span></p></div> 2088 <div class="u_1863801445 align-center text-align-center dmSocialHub gapSpacing" id="1863801445" dmle_extension="social_hub" data-element-type="social_hub" wr="true" networks="" icon="true" surround="true" adwords=""> <div class="socialHubWrapper"> <div class="socialHubInnerDiv " data-auto="social-hub-inner"> <a href="mailto:[email protected]" dm_dont_rewrite_url="true" aria-label="email" onclick="dm_gaq_push_event && dm_gaq_push_event('socialLink', 'click', 'Email')"> <span class="dmSocialEmail dm-social-icons-email oneIcon socialHubIcon style5" aria-hidden="true" data-hover-effect=""></span> 2089</a> 2090 <a href="https://www.linkedin.com/company/edprep-partners/" target="_blank" dm_dont_rewrite_url="true" aria-label="linkedin" onclick="dm_gaq_push_event && dm_gaq_push_event('socialLink', 'click', 'Linkedin')"> <span class="dmSocialLinkedin icon-linkedin oneIcon socialHubIcon style5" aria-hidden="true" data-hover-effect=""></span> 2091</a> 2092</div> 2093</div> 2094</div> 2095</div> 2096</div> 2097</div> 2098 <div class="u_1859952573 dmRespRow" id="1859952573"> <div class="dmRespColsWrapper" id="1945674976"> <div class="dmRespCol large-12 medium-12 small-12" id="1644209926"> <div class="dmDividerWrapper clearfix u_1794418113" data-element-type="dDividerId" data-layout="divider-style-1" data-widget-version="2" id="1794418113"><hr class="dmDivider" style="border-width:2px; border-top-style:solid; color:grey;" id="1001415204"/></div> 2099</div> 2100</div> 2101</div> 2102 <div class="dmRespRow u_1777709964" id="1777709964"> <div class="dmRespColsWrapper" id="1276739925"> <div class="dmRespCol large-12 medium-12 small-12" id="1115223719"> <div class="u_1878843279 widget-1f5975 dmCustomWidget" data-lazy-load="" data-title="" id="1878843279" dmle_extension="custom_extension" data-element-type="custom_extension" icon="false" surround="false" data-widget-id="1f5975986930429f819d4cd2154b5c4a" data-widget-version="25" data-widget-config="eyJyZXZlcnNlRmxhZyI6bnVsbCwiY29weXJpZ2h0VGV4dCI6IjxwIGNsYXNzPVwicnRlQmxvY2tcIj5FZFByZXAgUGFydG5lcnMuIEFsbCByaWdodHMgcmVzZXJ2ZWQuIHwgTm9ucHJvZml0IG9yZ2FuaXphdGlvbiBkZWRpY2F0ZWQgdG8gZXhjZWxsZW5j
2102ZSBpbiB0ZWFjaGVyIHByZXBhcmF0aW9uLjwvcD4ifQ=="> <div class="copyright"> <div>© 2026 </div> 2103 <div><p class="rteBlock">EdPrep Partners. All rights reserved. | Nonprofit organization dedicated to excellence in teacher preparation.</p></div> 2104</div> 2105</div> 2106</div> 2107</div> 2108</div> 2109</div> 2110 <div id="1236746004" dmle_extension="powered_by" data-element-type="powered_by" icon="true" surround="false"></div> 2111</div> 2112</div> 2113</div> 2114</div> 2115</div> 2116</div> 2117</div> 2118</div> 2119</div> 2120 2121 </div> 2122</div> 2123<!-- Add full CSS and Javascript before the close tag of the body if needed --> 2124 2125 2126 2127 2128 2129 2130 2131 2132 2133 2134 2135 2136 2137 2138 2139 2140 2141 2142 2143 2144 2145 2146 2147 2148 2149 2150 2151 2152 2153 2154 2155 2156 2157 2158 2159 2160 2161 2162<!-- ========= JS Section ========= -->
2163<script> 2164 var isWLR = true; 2165 2166 window.customWidgetsFunctions = {}; 2167 window.customWidgetsStrings = {}; 2168 window.collections = {}; 2169 window.currentLanguage = "ENGLISH" 2170 window.isSitePreview = false; 2171</script>
2171 2172 2173 2174
2175<script> 2176 window.customWidgetsFunctions["1f5975986930429f819d4cd2154b5c4a~25"] = function (element, data, api) { 2177 null 2178 }; 2179</script>
2179 2180 2181
2182<script type="text/javascript"> 2183 2184 var d_version = "production_6813"; 2185 var build = "2026-09-30T12_48_50"; 2186 window['v' + 'ersion'] = d_version; 2187 2188 function buildEditorParent() { 2189 window.isMultiScreen = true; 2190 window.editorParent = {}; 2191 window.previewParent = {}; 2192 window.assetsCacheQueryParam = "?version=2026-09-30T12_48_50"; 2193 try { 2194 var _p = window.parent; 2195 if (_p && _p.document && _p.$ && _p.$.dmfw) { 2196 window.editorParent = _p; 2197 } else if (_p.isSitePreview) { 2198 window.previewParent = _p; 2199 } 2200 } catch (e) { 2201 2202 } 2203 } 2204 2205 buildEditorParent(); 2206</script>
2206 2207 2208 2209<!-- Load jQuery --> 2210
2211<script type="text/javascript" id='d-js-jquery' 2212 src="https://static.cdn-website.com/libs/jquery/jquery-3.7.0.min.js"></script>
2212 2213 2214<!-- End Load jQuery --> 2215 2216 2217<!-- Injecting site-wide before scripts --> 2218 2219<!-- End Injecting site-wide to the head --> 2220 2221 2222
2223<script> 2224 var _jquery = window.$; 2225 2226 var jqueryAliases = ['$', 'jquery', 'jQuery']; 2227 2228 jqueryAliases.forEach((alias) => { 2229 Object.defineProperty(window, alias, { 2230 get() { 2231 return _jquery; 2232 }, 2233 set() { 2234 console.warn("Trying to over-write the global jquery object!"); 2235 } 2236 }); 2237 }); 2238 window.jQuery.migrateMute = true; 2239</script>
2239 2240 2241 2242 2243
2244<script> 2245 window.cookiesNotificationMarkupPreview = 'null'; 2246</script>
2246 2247 2248<!-- HEAD RT JS Include -->
2249<script id='d-js-params'> 2250 window.INSITE = window.INSITE || {}; 2251 window.INSITE.device = "desktop"; 2252 2253 window.rtCommonProps = {}; 2254 rtCommonProps["rt.ajax.ajaxScriptsFix"] =true; 2255 rtCommonProps["rt.pushnotifs.sslframe.encoded"] = 'aHR0cHM6Ly97c3ViZG9tYWlufS5wdXNoLW5vdGlmcy5jb20='; 2256 rtCommonProps["runtimecollector.url"] = 'https://rtc.multiscreensite.com'; 2257 rtCommonProps["performance.tabletPreview.removeScroll"] = 'false'; 2258 rtCommonProps["inlineEditGrid.snap"] =true; 2259 rtCommonProps["popup.insite.cookie.ttl"] = '0.5'; 2260 rtCommonProps["rt.pushnotifs.force.button"] =true; 2261 rtCommonProps["common.mapbox.token"] = 'pk.eyJ1IjoiZGFubnliMTIzIiwiYSI6ImNqMGljZ256dzAwMDAycXBkdWxwbDgzeXYifQ.Ck5P-0NKPVKAZ6SH98gxxw'; 2262 rtCommonProps["common.mapbox.js.override"] =false; 2263 rtCommonProps["common.here.appId"] = 'iYvDjIQ2quyEu0rg0hLo'; 2264 rtCommonProps["common.here.appCode"] = '1hcIxLJcbybmtBYTD9Z1UA'; 2265 rtCommonProps["isCoverage.test"] =false; 2266 rtCommonProps["ecommerce.ecwid.script"] = 'https://app.multiscreenstore.com/script.js'; 2267 rtCommonProps["common.resources.dist.cdn"] =true; 2268 rtCommonProps["common.build.dist.folder"] = 'production/6813'; 2269 rtCommonProps["common.resources.cdn.host"] = 'https://static.cdn-website.com'; 2270 rtCommonProps["common.resources.folder"] = 'https://static.cdn-website.com/mnlt/production/6813'; 2271 rtCommonProps["common.fonts.api.v2.url"] = 'https://irp.cdn-website.com/fonts/css2?family='; 2272 rtCommonProps["feature.flag.runtime.backgroundSlider.preload.slowly"] =true; 2273 rtCommonProps["feature.flag.runtime.newAnimation.enabled"] =true; 2274 rtCommonProps["feature.flag.runtime.newAnimation.jitAnimation.enabled"] =true; 2275 rtCommonProps["feature.flag.sites.google.analytics.gtag"] =true; 2276 rtCommonProps["feature.flag.runOnReadyNewTask"] =true; 2277 rtCommonProps["isAutomation.test"] =false; 2278 rtCommonProps["booking.cal.api.domain"] = 'api.cal.com'; 2279 2280 2281 rtCommonProps['common.mapsProvider'] = 'mapbox'; 2282 2283 rtCommonProps['common.mapsProvider.version'] = '0.52.0'; 2284 rtCommonProps['common.geocodeProvider'] = 'mapbox'; 2285 rtCommonProps['server.for.resources'] = ''; 2286 rtCommonProps['feature.flag.lazy.widgets'] = true; 2287 rtCommonProps['feature.flag.single.wow'] = false; 2288 rtCommonProps['feature.flag.disallowPopupsInEditor'] = true; 2289 rtCommonProps['feature.flag.mark.anchors'] = true; 2290 rtCommonProps['captcha.public.key'] = '6LffcBsUAAAAAMU-MYacU-6QHY4iDtUEYv_Ppwlz'; 2291 rtCommonProps['captcha.invisible.public.key'] = '6LeiWB8UAAAAAHYnVJM7_-7ap6bXCUNGiv7bBPME'; 2292 rtCommonProps["images.sizes.small"] =160; 2293 rtCommonProps["images.sizes.mobile"] =640; 2294 rtCommonProps["images.sizes.tablet"] =1280; 2295 rtCommonProps["images.sizes.desktop"] =1920; 2296 rtCommonProps["modules.resources.cdn"] =true; 2297 rtCommonProps["import.images.storage.imageCDN"] = 'https://irp.cdn-website.com/'; 2298 rtCommonProps["feature.flag.runtime.inp.threshold"] =150; 2299 rtCommonProps["feature.flag.performance.logs"] =false; 2300 rtCommonProps["site.widget.form.captcha.type"] = 'g_recaptcha'; 2301 rtCommonProps["friendly.captcha.site.key"] = 'FCMGSQG9GVNMFS8K'; 2302 rtCommonProps["cookiebot.mapbox.consent.category"] = 'marketing'; 2303 rtCommonProps["termly.mapbox.consent.category"] = 'performance'; 2304 // feature flags that's used out of runtime module (in legacy files) 2305 rtCommonProps["platform.monolith.personalization.dateTimeCondition.popupMsgAction.moveToclient.enabled"] =true; 2306 2307 window.rtFlags = {}; 2308 rtFlags["unsuspendEcwidStoreOnRuntime.enabled"] =true; 2309 rtFlags["scripts.widgetCount.enabled"] =true; 2310 rtFlags["fnb.animations.tracking.enabled"] =true; 2311 rtFlags["ecom.ecwidNewUrlStructure.enabled"] = false; 2312 rtFlags["ecom.ecwid.accountPage.emptyBaseUrl.enabled"] = true; 2313 rtFlags["ecom.ecwid.accountPage.repeatOrderRedirect.enabled"] = false; 2314 rtFlags["ecom.ecwid.pages.links.disable.listeners"] = true; 2315 rtFlags["ecom.ecwid.oldStore.keepScrollOnLoad.enabled"] = true; 2316 rtFlags["ecom.ecwid.storefrontV3.enabled"] = false; 2317 rtFlags["ecom.monolith.legacy.js.api.disabled.for.new.sites"] = false;
2318 rtFlags["geocode.search.localize"] =false; 2319 rtFlags["feature.flag.runtime.newAnimation.asyncInit.setTimeout.enabled"] =false; 2320 rtFlags["twitter.heightLimit.enabled"] = true; 2321 rtFlags["runtime.lottieOverflow"] =false; 2322 rtFlags["runtime.monitoring.sentry.ignoreErrors"] = ""; 2323 rtFlags["streamline.monolith.personalization.supportMultipleConditions.enabled"] =false; 2324 rtFlags["flex.animation.design.panel.layout"] =true; 2325 rtFlags["runtime.cwv.report.cls.enabled"] =false; 2326 rtFlags["runtime.cwv.report.lcp.enabled"] =false; 2327 rtFlags["runtime.lcp.preload.selfheal.enabled"] =true; 2328 rtFlags["runtime.lcp.preload.bootstrap.enabled"] =true; 2329 rtFlags["runtime.lcp.preload.monitor.enabled"] =true; 2330 rtFlags["runtime.customwidget.heightpin.enabled"] =true; 2331 rtFlags["runtime.video.widget.lazy.enabled"] =true; 2332 rtFlags["contact.form.useActiveForm"] =true; 2333 rtFlags["contact.form.custom.errors.enabled"] =true; 2334 rtFlags["runtime.ssr.productStore.internal.observer"] =true; 2335 rtFlags["runtime.ssr.productCustomizations"]
2335=true; 2336 rtFlags["runtime.ssr.runtime.filter-sort.newFilterSortWidgetWithOptions.enabled"] =true; 2337 rtFlags["runtime.ssr.ssrSlider.jumpThreshold.enabled"] =true; 2338 rtFlags["editor.widget.form.a11y"] =true; 2339</script>
vendor: 1 bytes, line 2339
2339
2340<script src="https://static.cdn-website.com/mnlt/production/6813/_dm/s/rt/dist/scripts/d-js-one-runtime-unified-desktop.min.js" id="d-js-core"></script>
2340 2341 2342<!-- End of HEAD RT JS Include --> 2343 2344 2345 2346 2347 2348 2349 2350 2351 2352 2353 2354
2354<script src="https://static.cdn-website.com/mnlt/production/6813/_dm/s/rt/dist/scripts/d-js-jquery-migrate.min.js" ></script>
2354 2355 2356 2357 2358 2359
2360<script> 2361 2362 $(window).bind("orientationchange", function (e) { 2363 $.layoutManager.initLayout(); 2364 2365 }); 2366 $(document).resize(function () { 2367 2368 }); 2369</script>
2369 2370 2371 2372 2373 2374 2375 2376 2377 2378 2379 2380 2381 2382 2383 2384 2385 2386 2387 2388
2389<script type="text/javascript" id="d_track_sp"> 2390 ;(function(p,l,o,w,i,n,g){if(!p[i]){p.GlobalSnowplowNamespace=p.GlobalSnowplowNamespace||[]; 2391 p.GlobalSnowplowNamespace.push(i);p[i]=function(){(p[i].q=p[i].q||[]).push(arguments) 2392 };p[i].q=p[i].q||[];n=l.createElement(o);g=l.getElementsByTagName(o)[0];n.async=1; 2393 n.src=w;g.parentNode.insertBefore(n,g)}}(window,document,"script","//d32hwlnfiv2gyn.cloudfront.net/sp-2.0.0-dm-0.1.min.js","snowplow")); 2394 window.dmsnowplow = window.snowplow; 2395 2396 dmsnowplow('newTracker', 'cf', 'd32hwlnfiv2gyn.cloudfront.net', { // Initialise a tracker 2397 appId: '9beebeba' 2398 }); 2399 2400 // snowplow queries element styles so we wait until CSS calculations are done. 2401 requestAnimationFrame(() => { 2402 dmsnowplow('trackPageView'); 2403 _dm_insite.forEach((rule) => { 2404 // Specifically in popup only the client knows if it is shown or not so we don't always want to track its impression here 2405 // the tracking is in popup.js 2406 if (rule.actionName !== "popup") { 2407 dmsnowplow('trackStructEvent', 'insite', 'impression', rule.ruleType, rule.ruleId); 2408 } 2409 window?.waitForDeferred?.('dmAjax', () => { 2410 $.DM.events.trigger('event-ruleTriggered', {value: rule}); 2411 }); 2412 }); 2413 }); 2414</script>
2414 2415 2416 2417 2418<div style="display:none;" id="P6iryBW0Wu"></div> 2419 2420<!-- photoswipe markup --> 2421 2422 2423 2424 2425 2426 2427 2428 2429 2430<!-- Root element of PhotoSwipe. Must have class pswp. --> 2431<div class="pswp" tabindex="-1" role="dialog" aria-hidden="true"> 2432 2433 <!-- Background of PhotoSwipe. 2434 It's a separate element as animating opacity is faster than rgba(). --> 2435 <div class="pswp__bg"></div> 2436 2437 <!-- Slides wrapper with overflow:hidden. --> 2438 <div class="pswp__scroll-wrap"> 2439 2440 <!-- Container that holds slides. 2441 PhotoSwipe keeps only 3 of them in the DOM to save memory. 2442 Don't modify these 3 pswp__item elements, data is added later on. --> 2443 <div class="pswp__container"> 2444 <div class="pswp__item"></div> 2445 <div class="pswp__item"></div> 2446 <div class="pswp__item"></div> 2447 </div> 2448 2449 <!-- Default (PhotoSwipeUI_Default) interface on top of sliding area. Can be changed. --> 2450 <div class="pswp__ui pswp__ui--hidden"> 2451 2452 <div class="pswp__top-bar"> 2453 2454 <!-- Controls are self-explanatory. Order can be changed. --> 2455 2456 <div class="pswp__counter"></div> 2457 2458 <button class="pswp__button pswp__button--close" data-auto="pswp-close" title="Close (Esc)"></button> 2459 2460 <button class="pswp__button pswp__button--share" data-auto="pswp-share" title="Share"></button> 2461 2462 <button class="pswp__button pswp__button--fs" title="Toggle fullscreen"></button> 2463 2464 <button class="pswp__button pswp__button--zoom" title="Zoom in/out"></button> 2465 2466 <!-- Preloader demo http://codepen.io/dimsemenov/pen/yyBWoR --> 2467 <!-- element will get class pswp__preloader--active when preloader is running --> 2468 <div class="pswp__preloader"> 2469 <div class="pswp__preloader__icn"> 2470 <div class="pswp__preloader__cut"> 2471 <div class="pswp__preloader__donut"></div> 2472 </div> 2473 </div> 2474 </div> 2475 </div> 2476 2477 <div class="pswp__share-modal pswp__share-modal--hidden pswp__single-tap"> 2478 <div class="pswp__share-tooltip"></div> 2479 </div> 2480 2481 <button class="pswp__button pswp__button--arrow--left" title="Previous (arrow left)"> 2482 </button> 2483 2484 <button class="pswp__button pswp__button--arrow--right" title="Next (arrow right)"> 2485 </button> 2486 2487 <div class="pswp__caption"> 2488 <div class="pswp__caption__center"></div> 2489 </div> 2490 2491 </div> 2492 2493 </div> 2494 2495</div> 2496<div id="fb-root" 2497 data-locale="en"></div> 2498<!-- Alias: 9beebeba --> 2499<div class="dmPopupMask" id="dmPopupMask"></div> 2500<div id="dmPopup" class="dmPopup" data-auto="popup"> 2501 <div class="dmPopupCloseWrapper"> <div class="dmPopupClose dm-common-icons-close oneIcon" data-auto="popup-close" onclick="dmHidePopup(event);"></div> </div> 2502 <div class="dmPopupTitle"> <span></span> Share by:</div> 2503 <div class="data"></div> 2504</div>
2504<script id="d_track_personalization"> 2505 window?.waitForDeferred?.('dmAjax', () => { 2506 // Collects client data and updates cookies used by smart sites 2507 window.expireDays = 365; 2508 window.visitLength = 30 * 60000; 2509 $.setCookie("dm_timezone_offset", (new Date()).getTimezoneOffset(), window.expireDays); 2510 setSmartSiteCookiesInternal("dm_this_page_view","dm_last_page_view","dm_total_visits","dm_last_visit"); 2511 }); 2512</script>
vendor: 1 bytes, line 2512
2512
2513<script type="text/javascript"> 2514 2515 Parameters.NavigationAreaParams.MoreButtonText = 'MORE'; 2516 2517 Parameters.NavigationAreaParams.LessButtonText = 'LESS'; 2518 Parameters.HomeLinkText = 'Home'; 2519 </script>
2519 2520<!-- End Script tags --> 2521<!-- Site Wide Html Markup --> 2522<!-- Site Wide Html Markup --> 2523</body> 2524</html>
Line numbers count LF bytes from the start of the resource, as the search results do. Vendor segments are library code the classifier recognised; they are stored but not indexed. Bytes are shown as Latin1 characters, one per byte.