The UED’s updated template agreement with school partners addresses the grounds for removing a candidate from a clinical experience and the process for removal in section 2d and section 3b. In section Section 2d, the agreement states:
“District has ultimate control over its sites and may immediately terminate participation in the program of any of the students enrolled in the program where required by an emergency involving health and safety; and in all other (non-emergency) instances, District shall consult with the University before taking any action to terminate the participation of a student.”
The agreement in Section 3b states,
“The University has authority to withdraw, suspend or terminate a participating student from the program for academic deficiencies, behavioral violations or other sufficient reason subject to applicable procedures afforded to the student teacher/teacher candidate. The District may unilaterally suspend a student’s participation in the program at the District for behavioral or other conduct that, in its good faith judgment, constitutes a threat to the health or safety of District personnel or pupils. The District liaison will consult with the University liaison before suspending a student teacher’s participation, except where consultation is not reasonably possible under the circumstances.”
Grounds for Removal
Teacher candidates are expected to demonstrate at least beginning levels of competence and exhibit conduct in the best interests of their future students, UED learning community, the school community, the university community and the profession during field experience placements. However, for the rare cases when a candidate is not performing or behaving to expectations, the following grounds and process for removal are proactively provided to teacher candidates, cooperating teachers and university supervisors before an experience begins by the UED Director of Field Experiences. In essence, there are three main grounds for removal: 1) emergency situations involving health and safety, 2) cases of unprofessional or unethical conduct, or 3) unsatisfactory performance negatively impacting students’ learning.
General Process for Removal
In rare circumstances when grounds for removal surface, a teacher candidate may need to be removed from a clinical/field experience or a student teaching placement. First and foremost, the school partner/cooperating teacher has the right to terminate a placement after sharing concerns with the Director of Field Experiences. When the cooperating teacher or school administrator is not as certain about the need for a candidate to be removed from their placement but concerns are expressed about the candidate's performance or dispositions, the candidate is placed on a professional development plan and must demonstrate improvement by agreed upon timelines in order to remain in the placement.
If a teacher candidate is removed from a clinical experience by UED based on unacceptable behaviors observed by the cooperating teacher, the university supervisor or others, the Director of Field Experience will contact the cooperating teacher and the school principal to inform them of the withdrawal or removal.
The cooperating teacher and/or the university supervisor may be called upon to join the Director of Field Experience to discuss reasons for removal with the teacher candidate and make certain that the teacher candidate understands the inappropriateness of his/her behavior so there is a reflection and learning component to the process.
Process for Removal–Unsatisfactory Performance
In the case of a teacher candidate demonstrating unsatisfactory performance related to demonstrating attainment of the Standards of Effective Practice, the candidate is first provided with clear information from their university supervisor and cooperating teacher about what is unsatisfactory and what they need to demonstrate instead. With input by the cooperating teacher, a Professional Development Plan is written up by the university supervisor and/or Director of Field Experiences with a timeline for the candidate to demonstrate satisfactory performance. If not, the candidate is informed they may be removed from their placement and/or not pass student teaching.
When the need for removal is considered and decided, the cooperating teacher and university supervisor are called upon to assist in documenting how the candidate did not meet expectations of the PDP as reasons for the removal and the Director of Field Experiences communicates the decision to the candidate.
In the event the issue is not resolved or the teacher candidate appeals, this case is brought to the attention of the Chair and Dean to determine the course of action to take. Beyond the UED Dean, a student has a right to appeal consistent with University policies and procedures.
Finally, if the affected student is dissatisfied, s/he can reach out to the PELSB, the external authority for resolving disputes. Under MN Statute 122A.09, subp. 4(c): The board must adopt rules to approve teacher preparation programs. The board, upon the request of a post-secondary student preparing for teacher licensure or a licensed graduate of a teacher preparation program, shall assist in resolving a dispute between the person and a post-secondary institution providing a teacher preparation program when the dispute involves an institution’s recommendation for licensure affecting the person or the person’s credentials. At the board’s discretion, assistance may include the application of chapter 14. A successful appeal at any stage does not necessarily mean the candidate is allowed to return to the same school and cooperating teacher, but would result in a different placement.
Please wait...
