Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium

Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium
Name	Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium
Abbreviation	INTASC
Formation	1987
Type	Consortium
Purpose	Teacher standards and assessment
Headquarters	Denver, Colorado
Parent organization	Council of Chief State School Officers

Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium The Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium produced a set of model standards for beginning teachers used across United States states and territories, intended to align preparation with classroom practice and licensure. It involved collaboration among state chief school officers, educator preparation programs, teacher unions, and accrediting bodies to create a common framework for teacher performance, assessment, and professional development.

Overview

The consortium offered model standards articulating expectations for beginning teachers, emphasizing planning, instruction, assessment, and professional collaboration across settings such as K–12 education districts, teacher preparation programs at institutions like Stanford University, Teachers College, Columbia University, and state universities. Key partners included policy organizations such as the Council of Chief State School Officers, accreditation agencies like the National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education, and professional associations including the American Federation of Teachers, National Education Association, and content-specific groups like the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics and National Science Teachers Association. The standards informed licensure policy across jurisdictions including California, New York, Texas, and Florida.

History and Development

INTASC emerged in 1987 through an initiative led by the Council of Chief State School Officers and influenced by national conversations involving actors such as the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, researchers at institutions like University of Michigan and Vanderbilt University, and leaders from the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education. Early drafts drew on prior work including standards from the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards and federal reports such as those from the U.S. Department of Education and commissions like the National Commission on Excellence in Education. Revisions in the 1990s and a comprehensive update in 2011 responded to research by scholars affiliated with Harvard Graduate School of Education, University of Wisconsin–Madison, and think tanks like the Brookings Institution.

Standards and Framework

The model standards described core propositions and performance outcomes addressing content knowledge, instructional design, assessment literacy, and professional growth, resonating with competency frameworks used by organizations such as the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards and accreditation criteria from the Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation. The framework integrated principles found in curriculum documents from the Common Core State Standards Initiative and assessment research from entities like the Educational Testing Service and RAND Corporation. It emphasized culturally responsive practice referenced by scholars from Teachers College, Columbia University and assessment strategies linked to work at Peabody College, Vanderbilt University and the University of Chicago.

Implementation and State Adoption

States adopted INTASC-based standards through policy actions by governors and state legislatures, influenced by chief education officers and organizations including the National Governors Association, Education Commission of the States, and state departments such as the California Department of Education and New York State Education Department. Implementation involved teacher preparation programs at universities like University of California, Los Angeles, Ohio State University, and University of Texas at Austin, and certification processes coordinated with unions such as the National Education Association and school districts like Chicago Public Schools and Los Angeles Unified School District. Funding and federal incentives intersected with programs like the Teacher Incentive Fund and initiatives connected to the Every Student Succeeds Act.

Impact and Evaluation

Evaluations by researchers at centers such as RAND Corporation, American Institutes for Research, and university-based labs assessed alignment between preparation, practice, and student learning outcomes measured by assessments administered by agencies like Educational Testing Service. Studies examined teacher retention in districts such as Houston Independent School District and student achievement trends similar to analyses undertaken by the National Bureau of Economic Research. Accreditation outcomes tied to standards affected programs reviewed by the Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation and reporting to entities like the U.S. Department of Education.

Criticism and Controversies

Critiques from scholars at University of Pennsylvania and advocacy groups including Teach For America critics and union representatives questioned the portability of uniform standards across diverse contexts like rural Alaska, urban New York City, and suburban Fairfax County Public Schools. Debates involved scholars connected to Columbia University and policy analysts from the Heritage Foundation and Center for American Progress about assessment validity, over-reliance on standardized measures, and implications for academic freedom in teacher preparation programs at institutions such as Boston University and University of Michigan. Legal and political disputes engaged state legislatures in Florida and Tennessee over licensure changes.

Related Programs and Initiatives

INTASC standards intersected with a range of initiatives including the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards certification, accreditation by the Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation, federal initiatives like the Teacher Incentive Fund, state reforms aligned with the Common Core State Standards Initiative, and professional development networks such as the Network for Transforming Educator Preparation. Other connected efforts included research partnerships with the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, policy work at the Brookings Institution, and comparative studies by international organizations like the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.

Category:Education in the United States