assessment report spring 2013 – spring 2016 · totals 3.25 (n=36) 3.34 (n=105) 3.42 (n=45) 3.42...

ASSESSMENT REPORT

SPRING 2013 – SPRING 2016

1

UAFS School of Education Conceptual Framework

The Conceptual Framework derives from the School of Education mission, “Professionals United to Ensure Continuous Learning and Success.” The Framework is informed by two major sources of research in best practices for educators; InTASC (Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium) and Charlotte Danielson’s Framework for Teaching. InTASC is a program of the Chief State School Officers (CCSSO). The Arkansas Department of Education adopted the InTASC 2011 Model Core Teaching Standards, which were developed by InTASC, as the Arkansas Teaching Standards (ATS). The Conceptual Framework synthesizes the concepts from these models to represent the UAFS School of Education expectations for teacher candidates. The UAFS School of Education Intended Candidate Outcomes (ICOs) are aligned with the InTASC Standards, which are the Arkansas Teacher Standards (ATS). The ICOs are also aligned with the Danielson Framework for Teaching (FFT) and edTPA. The Framework structure begins at the center, as the dominant feature is the teacher’s “Focus on Student Learning.” All of a teacher’s decisions should be made through an analytical thought process that considers the best approaches to student learning. The concentric blue rings also represent overall expectations. Thus, technology and communication skills and sound ethical practice are evident in all teaching decisions. Within the concentric structure, the Framework divides into four quadrants. The first quadrant ensures that teachers consider student development, student differences, and the learning environment during instruction and interactions with students. The second quadrant considers the teacher’s need for deep and broad content knowledge and an understanding of how to connect the content in a manner that engages learners in higher level thinking. The third quadrant delineates the instructional practice through the integration of assessment, planning, and instructional strategies in a coordinated manner. The final quadrant sets expectations for the teacher’s professional learning, ethical practice, and leadership roles. Additionally, this quadrant emphasizes the importance of collaboration with learners, families, colleagues, and community leader to ensure learner growth.

2

Assessment Report for Spring 2013 – Spring 2016

Table of Contents Section I Organized by Gates Introduction to Assessment System………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………....3 Table 1: Gate 3 – Structured Team Interview for Admission to Teacher Education Program ……...……………………………………………………………..4 Table 2: Gate 3 – Cumulative GPA Upon Admission to Teacher Education Program…………………………………………………………………………….5 Table 3: Gate 3 – Composite ACT Mean upon Admission to Teacher Education Program…………………………………………………………………….....5 Table 4: Gate 3 – Praxis Core/ACT Mean Scores for Those Admitted to the Teacher Education Program……………………………………………………….6 Table 5: Gates 3, 4, 6 – Self-Evaluation of Dispositions………………………………………………………………………………………………………..7-11 Table 6: Gates 4, 6 – Candidate’s Reflection Upon Lesson Planning…………………………………………………………………………………………12-15 Table 7: Gate 4 – Diversity Case Study Performance……………………………………………………………………………………………………………..16 Table 8: Gates 4, 6 – Intended Candidate Outcomes (ICOs) by Clinical Practice Supervisors and University Supervisors………………………………….17-23 Table 9: Gates 3, 4, 6 – Candidate Dispositions Combined from Selected Courses…………………………………………………………………………..24-27 Table 10: Gates 4, 6 – Pilot edTPA Assignments for Practicum I, Practicum II and Internship (Local Evaluations) ………………………………………..28-30 Table 11: Gates 4, 6 – edTPA Tasks 1-3: Percentage of Students Scoring Basic, Proficient and Distinguished (Local Evaluations) ……………………….31-33 Table 12: Gate 6 – Pilot edTPA Assignments for Internship (External Evaluations)……………………………………………………………………………..34 Table 13: Gate 5 – Internship Placement Interview Results……………………………………………………………………………………………………….35 Table 14: Gate 7 – Evaluation of the Internship Experience (Placement Site Evaluation by Intern)……………………………………………………………..36 Table 15: Gate 7 – Evaluation of the Internship Experience (University Supervisor Evaluation by Intern)……………………………………………………...37 Table 16: Gate 7 – UAFS School of Education Exit Interview……………………………………………………………………………………………………38 Table 17: Gate 7 – Student Advising Questionnaire Completed After Internship………………………………………………………………………………...39 Table 18: Gate 7 – Graduate and Employer Surveys…………………………………………………………………………………………………………..40-44 Table 19: Gates 3, 5, 7 – Mean Cumulative GPA for Entry, Exit and Area of Specialization……………………………………………………………………45 Table 20: Gate 5 – Mean Praxis II Content Knowledge Exam Results…………………………………………………………………………………………...46 Table 21: Gate 5 – Mean Praxis II Pedagogy Exam Results……………………………………………………………………………………………………...46 Table 22: Gates 4, 5, 6 – Danielson FFT Formative Observation Results (Practicum II)…………………………………………………………………….47-49 Table 23: Gates 6 – Danielson FFT Formative Observation Results (Internship)…………………………………………………………………………….50-52 Table 24: Gate 6 – Danielson FFT Summative Observation Results (Internship)…………………………………………………………………………….53-55 Table 25: Survey to Clinical Supervisor/Mentor Teacher and University Supervisor..………………………………………………………………………56 Table 26: Novice Teacher Survey Results…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….57-58 Table 27: Graduates’ Impact on Student Learning Data (Employer Survey)…………………………………………………………………………………….59 Table 28: Impact on Student Learning (Graduate Survey)……………………………………………………………………………………………………….60 Table 29: Impact on Student Learning (Employer Survey 3-years After Graduation) …………………………………………………………………………..61 Table 30: Impact on Student Learning (Graduate Survey 3-years After Graduation)……………………………………………………………………………62

3

Spring 2013 – Spring 2016 Assessment System Report Section I Organized by Gates Introduction to Assessment System The SOE assessment system measures candidate knowledge, skills, and dispositions derived from professional, state, and institutional standards. The expectation is for candidates to demonstrate competency in all ten InTASC standards and the four quadrants of Danielson’s Framework for Teaching (FFT). Candidates must clear a series of gates as they move through the program. By successfully meeting the requirements at each gate, candidates meet designated standards and complete their program. Multiple assessment measures provide support for the process and provide continual feedback data for analysis at each level. A report is compiled semi-annually for the faculty, Teacher Education Council, and other professional advisory entities to analyze and provide input for the Teacher Education Program and the College of Education as a whole. The report is structured around the assessment gates in order to provide clear feedback and connection to the assessment system. In general, the Unit’s assessment system is based upon the following scale: 0 = Unsatisfactory; 1 = Basic; 2 = Proficient; 3 = Distinguished. All assessments, academic and non-academic, have been aligned to CAEP components, InTASC standards and Danielson FFT components.

4

GATE 3: Admission to the TEP While candidates are assessed throughout their programs, certain gates require assessments that only occur once to satisfy a criterion for the gate. Tables 1-4 are for gate 3 (admission to the Teacher Education Program). Table 1: GATE 3: Structured Team Interview for Admission to the Teacher Education Program for Spring 2013 – Spring 2016 (Form #2) EPP-Created Assessment Sp13 Fa13 Sp14 Fa14 Sp15 Fa15 Sp16 1. Imagine that you are teaching a student: (choose one) (a) How will you handle a student who is confused with instruction? (b) How will you ensure a student follows the classroom rules? (c) How will you respond to difficult questions from the student? (d) How will you motivate the student to value learning? CAEP 1.3, 1.5, 2.3; InTASC 1, 3, 4, 5, 8; Danielson 3c 2.03 1.76 1.94 1.76 1.61 1.77 1.63 2. Have you ever had experiences with children? What did you learn from these experiences? Describe the experience(s). CAEP 1.1, 1.4; InTASC 1, 3, 4, 7; Danielson 2a 2.03 1.92 1.97 1.78 1.83 1.81 1.73 3. Identify two characteristics that you possess which will enable you to be an effective teacher. Tell why you selected these characteristics. CAEP 1.2. 1.3, 1.5; InTASC 9; Danielson 4a, 4e 2.15 1.95 1.83 1.96 1.88 1.99 1.97 4. What were the qualities of a teacher that you admired as a student and why did you admire these qualities? CAEP 1.2. 1.3, 1.5; InTASC 9; Danielson 4a, 4e 2.10 1.92 1.94 1.91 1.70 1.92 1.89 5. Why did you choose your teaching interest area? (indicate your choice of major) CAEP 1.2. 1.3, 1.5; InTASC 9; Danielson 4a, 4e 1.97 1.98 1.97 1.94 1.67 1.92 1.87 6. What current technology do you use that could be used in your future classroom? How would you use technology to improve your instruction and

how would this improve student achievement? CAEP 1.3, 1.5, 2.3; InTASC 1, 3, 4, 5, 8; Danielson 3c 2.03 1.82 1.80 1.85 1.68 1.88 1.79 7. Describe an instance in which you have led others. CAEP 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.5; InTASC 9, 10; Danielson 4d, 4f 2.15 1.95 2.05 1.87 1.67 1.80 1.70 8. How do you see yourself as a learner? Address ethical and professional behaviors within your response. CAEP 1.2, 1.3, 1.5; InTASC 9; Danielson 4e 1.92 1.82 1.83 1.86 1.54 1.78 1.81 9. Language and communication skills. CAEP 1.2, 1.3, 1.5; InTASC 9, 10; Danielson 4f 2.05 1.87 1.91 2.00 2.05 1.93 2.04 10. Professional behavior(s). CAEP 1.2, 1.3, 1.5; InTASC 9, 10; Danielson 4f 2.21 1.99 2.05 2.04 1.91 2.01 1.93 11. Professional appearance. CAEP 1.2, 1.3, 1.5; InTASC 9, 10; Danielson 4f 2.23 2.16 2.14 2.28 2.39 2.15 2.07

Successful Interview Instruments Successful with Conditions Instruments Unsuccessful Interview Instruments Sp13= 27 Fa13= 60 Sp14= 32 Sp13= 0 Fa13= 3 Sp14= 0 Sp13= 0 Fa13= 0 Sp14= 0 Fa14= 75 Sp15= 39 Fa15= 84 Fa14= 1 Sp15= 4 Fa15= 1 Fa14= 0 Sp15= 0 Fa15= 0 Sp16=44 Sp16=3 Sp16=0

Note: Scores based on SOE scale of 0=Unsatisfactory, 1=Basic, 2=Proficient and 3=Distinguished

5

Table 2: GATE 3: Cumulative GPA Mean Upon Admission to Teacher Education Program for Spring 2013 – Spring 2016 Program: Sp13 Fa13 Sp14 Fa14 Sp15 Fa15 Sp16 Early Childhood Education (P-4) 3.03 (N=15) 3.33 (N=36) 3.48 (N=24) 3.36 (N=18) 3.40 (N=18) 3.41 (N=20) 3.35 (N=7) Elementary Education (K-6) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 3.53 (N=4) 3.55 (N=16) Middle Level (4-8) 3.63 (N=14) 3.30 (N=21) 3.28 (N=9) 3.33 (N=19) 3.22 (N=6) 3.14 (N=8) 3.28 (N=4) Music Education – Instrumental and Vocal (P-8 and 7-12) N/A 3.55 (N=10) 3.83 (N=2) 3.74 (N=2) 3.53 (N=2) 3.16 (N=1) 3.60 (N=3) Secondary Biology (7-12) N/A 3.00 (N=2) N/A 3.30 (N=3) N/A 3.25 (N=2) 3.64 (N=1) Secondary English (7-12) 3.43 (N=3) 3.29 (N=14) 3.31 (N=2) 3.50 (N=6) 3.37 (N=6) 3.37 (N=7) 3.23 (N=6) Secondary Social Studies (7-12) 3.15 (N=3) 3.25 (N=9) 3.06 (N=4) 3.25 (N=7) 3.30 (N=7) 3.39 (N=5) 3.33 (N=1) Secondary Mathematics (7-12) 3.00 (N=1) 3.53 (N=9) 3.56 (N=4) 3.59 (N=2) 3.39 (N=2) 3.15 (N=2) 3.30 (N=4) Spanish (K-12) N/A 3.46 (N=4) N/A 3.26 (N=4) N/A 3.15 (N=2) N/A Totals 3.25 (N=36) 3.34 (N=105) 3.42 (N=45) 3.42 (N=61) 3.37 (N=41) 3.28 (N=51) 3.40 (N=42)

Note: GPA based on 4.0 scale, including all classes completed prior to admission to Teacher Education Program

Table 3: GATE 3: Composite ACT Mean Upon Admission to Teacher Education Program for Spring 2013 – Spring 2016 Program: Sp13 Fa13 Sp14 Fa14 Sp15 Fa15 Sp16 Early Childhood Education (P-4) 24 (N=12) 22 (N=38) 23 (N=23) 24 (N=18) 23 (N=18) 22 (N=20) 20 (N=4) Elementary Education (K-6) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 22 (N=4) 22 (N=8) Middle Level (4-8) 23 (N=14) 23 (N=21) 22 (N=9) 24 (N=19) 22 (N=6) 22 (N=8) 24 (N=2) Music Education – Instrumental and Vocal (P-8 and 7-12) N/A 25 (N=10) 23 (N=2) 24 (N=2) 29 (N=2) 21 (N=1) 28 (N=3) Secondary Biology (7-12) N/A 28 (N=2) N/A 26 (N=3) N/A 26 (N=2) 20 (N=1) Secondary English (7-12) 25 (N=2) 25 (N=15) 23 (N=2) 25 (N=6) 25 (N=6) 25 (N=7) 22 (N=4) Secondary Social Studies (7-12) 25 (N=1) 25 (N=10) 23 (N=3) 25 (N=7) 22 (N=7) 23 (N=5) 20 (N=1) Secondary Mathematics (7-12) 28 (N=1) 24 (N=9) 30 (N=4) 27 (N=2) 26 (N=2) 24 (N=2) 25 (N=2) Spanish (K-12) N/A 22 (N=4) N/A 18 (N=4) N/A 25 (N=2) N/A Totals 25 (N=30) 24 (N=109) 23 (N=43) 24 (N=61) 24 (N=41) 22 (N=51) 23 (N=25) Note: GPA based on 4.0 scale, including all classes completed prior to admission to Teacher Education Program

6

Table 4: Gate 3: Praxis Core or Qualifying ACT Scores for Tests of Reading, Writing and Math (ADE Cut Scores or Above) Praxis Core/Qualifying ACT Scores Results: Candidates must possess basic skills in writing, reading, and mathematics. Therefore, all must successfully complete these three sections of the Praxis Core Exam or have qualifying ACT scores prior to formal admission to the teacher education program. Table 4 details average Praxis Core/Qualifying ACT scores for those admitted to the teacher education program from spring 2013 to spring 2016. This information indicates that candidates admitted to the teacher education program possess skills in mathematics, reading, and writing necessary for success in teaching. Spring 2013 Fall 2013 Spring 2014 Fall 2014 Spring 2015 Fall 2015 Spring 2016

AR Required

Score Admitted Candidates N=34 N=107 N=45 N=61 N=41 N=51 N=41 PC Mathematics 181

179

178

170

154 172 169 150

PC Reading 179

179

180

183

180 175 179 156

PC Writing 176

177

174

172

170 170 168 162

ACT Scores:

24 Composite

ACT Mathematics 25 (N=4) 25 (N=9) 25 (N=14) 25 (N=10) 22 ACT Reading 28 (N=4) 28 (N=11) 28 (N=14) 28 (N=11) 22 ACT Writing 27 (N=1) 25 (N=1) 28 (N=1) 30 (N=1) 22

7

Tables 5-6: GATES 3, 4, 6: Teacher Candidate Self-Evaluations of Dispositions for Spring 2013 (LiveText Form 11/Revised LiveText Form 11 for Interns) EPP-Created Assessment Candidates must maintain a 2.75 GPA with only “C” or better grades, satisfactorily produce assigned edTPA tasks in Practicum I, Practicum II, and Internship and maintain professional behavior. To address dispositions, knowledge, and skills, candidates are assessed across the college and TEP with the following instruments. By assessing candidates at multiple points throughout their program, we will be able to look at transition points and specific elements of the program. Candidates are required to self-assess their dispositions four times (table 5) and their lesson plans three times (table 6). The following tables highlight the longitudinal ability of the assessment system and demonstrate how candidates are progressing with regard to each of the stated instruments. Table 5: GATES 3, 4, 6: Self-Evaluations of Dispositions for Spring 2013 (LiveText Form 11/Revised LiveText Form 11 for Interns) EPP-Created Assessment

Course Checkpoint Gate 3 Pract I EC/Ml and Sec

Pract II EC/Ml and Sec

Intern EC/Ml and Sec

The teacher candidate: N=119 N=82 45/37 N=45 12/33 N=70 32/38 1. understands and values the discipline(s) he or she teaches.

CAEP 1.3, 1.5,InTASC 4; Danielson 1a 1. Collaboration – The act of working with another person or group in order to achieve or do

something. CAEP 1.1, 1.2; InTASC 10; Danielson 4d 2.82 2.90 2.93/2.86 2.84 2.92/2.82 2.99 2.97/3.0

2. is willing to utilize multiple teaching methodologies.. CAEP 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 2.3; InTASC 1,3,4,5, 8; Danielson 3a, 3b, 3c, 3e

2. Reflection – serious thought or consideration CAEP 1.2, 1.3, 1.5; InTASC 9; Danielson 4a 2.94 2.90 2.96/2.84 2.96 3.0/2.94 2.99 3.0/2.97

3. is committed to planning effective units of curriculum CAEP 1.1, 1.5, 2.3; InTASC 4; Danielson 1e

3. Integrity - The ability to demonstrate truthfulness to oneself and to others; demonstrate moral excellence, trustworthiness, professional and ethical behavior in all activities and dealings with university faculty, peers, students, teachers, and school personnel. CAEP 1.2, 1.3, 1.5; InTASC 9, 10; Danielson 4b, 4e, 4f 2.88 2.83 2.87/2.78 2.96 3.0/2.94 2.94 2.97/2.92

4. is committed to providing a classroom environment for all students to learn. CAEP1.1, 1.3, 1.4; InTASC 1, 3, 4, 5, 7; Danielson 2a, 2b, 2c, 2d, 2e

4. Learning Initiative - The power or ability to begin or to follow through energetically with a plan or task for learning. CAEP 1.1; InTASC 1, 2, 6, 7; Danielson 1b, 1c, 1d, 1e, 1f 2.95 2.84 2.96/2.70 2.87 3.0/2.82 2.93 2.97/2.89

5. is committed to a democratic school environment. CAEP 1.1, 1.4; InTASC 1, 3, 4, 7; Danielson 2a

5. Responsibility - The act of being accountable for a duty or task that one is required or expected to do. CAEP 1.2, 1.3, 1.5; InTASC 9, 10; Danielson 4e, 4f 2.96 2.88 2.91/2.84 2.96 3.0/2.94 2.90 2.97/2.84

6. values continuous educational improvement. CAEP 1.2, 1.3, 1.5; InTASC 9, 10; Danielson 4e

6. Respect - Due regard for the feelings, wishes, rights, or traditions of others. CAEP 1.1, 1.4; InTASC 1, 3, 4, 7; Danielson 2a 2.92 2.90 2.91/2.89 2.98 3.0/2.97 2.91 3.0/2.84

7. is committed to integrity, ethical behavior, and professionalism. CAEP 1.2, 1.3, 1.5; InTASC 9, 10; Danielson 4b, 4e, 4f

7. Diversity - Differences among groups of people and individuals based on ethnicity, race, socioeconomic status, gender, exceptionalities, language, religion, sexual orientation, and geographical area. CAEP 1.1, 1.2, 1.4; InTASC 1, 3, 4, 7, 10; Danielson 2a, 4c 2.95 2.93 2.89/2.97 2.91 3.0/2.88 2.99 2.97/3.0

8

8. believes that close cooperation and collaboration with parents are critical. CAEP 1.1, 1.2; InTASC 10; Danielson 4c 2.91 2.78 2.76/2.81 2.87 2.75/2.91

9. shows promptness. CAEP 1.2, 1.3, 1.5; InTASC 9, 10; Danielson 4f 2.62 2.77 2.87/2.65 2.82 2.92/2.79

10. shows appropriate dress and grooming. CAEP 1.2, 1.3, 1.5; InTASC 9, 10; Danielson 4f 2.78 2.93 2.93/2.92 2.89 2.75/2.94

11. has a positive attitude. CAEP 1.2, 1.3, 1.5; InTASC 9, 10; Danielson 4f 2.82 2.84 2.82/2.86 2.96 3.0/2.94

12. is caring and respectful of others. CAEP 1.2, 1.3, 1.5; InTASC 9, 10; Danielson 4f 2.98 2.88 2.93/2.81 2.98 3.0/2.97

13. demonstrates professional writing in all assignments. CAEP 1.2, 1.3, 1.5; InTASC 9, 10; Danielson 4f 2.69 2.68 2.80/2.54 2.62 2.42/2.70

14. demonstrates professional oral communication skills. CAEP 1.2, 1.3, 1.5; InTASC 9, 10; Danielson 4f 2.62 2.73 2.87/2.57 2.71 2.75/2.70

Scale: 0 = Never; 1 = Occasionally; 2 = Often; 3 = Always Intern Scale: 1=Emerging; 2=Proficient; 3=Advanced (Revised Form 11)

Table 5: GATES 3, 4, 6: Self-Evaluation of Dispositions for Fall 2013 (Revised LiveText Form 11 for Gate 3) EPP-Created Assessment




The teacher candidate displays: N=146 N=69 25/44 N=71 41/30 N=35 16/19 1. Collaboration – The act of working with another person or group in order to achieve or do something. CAEP 1.1, 1.2; InTASC 10; Danielson 4d 1. understands and values the discipline(s) he or she teaches. CAEP 1.3, 1.5,InTASC 4; Danielson 1a

1.84 2.90 2.8/2.95 2.94 2.93/2.97 2.94 2.88/3.0

2. Reflection – serious thought or consideration CAEP 1.2, 1.3, 1.5; InTASC 9; Danielson 4a 2. is willing to utilize multiple teaching methodologies. CAEP 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 2.3; InTASC 1,3,4,5, 8; Danielson 3a, 3b, 3c, 3e

1.95 2.87 2.88/2.86 2.93 2.93/2.93 2.94 2.88/3.0

3. Integrity - The ability to demonstrate truthfulness to oneself and to others; demonstrate moral excellence, trustworthiness, professional and ethical behavior in all activities and dealings with university faculty, peers, students, teachers, and school personnel. CAEP 1.2, 1.3, 1.5; InTASC 9, 10; Danielson 4b, 4e, 4f 3. is committed to planning effective units of curriculum. CAEP 1.1, 1.5, 2.3; InTASC 4; Danielson 1e

1.91 2.81 2.8/2.82 2.90 2.88/2.93 2.91 2.81/3.0

4. Learning Initiative - The power or ability to begin or to follow through energetically with a plan or task for learning. CAEP 1.1; InTASC 1, 2, 6, 7; Danielson 1b, 1c, 1d, 1e, 1f 4. is committed to providing a classroom environment for all students to learn. CAEP1.1, 1.3, 1.4; InTASC 1, 3, 4, 5, 7; Danielson 2a, 2b, 2c, 2d, 2e

1.99 2.93 2.92/2.93 2.94 2.90/3.0 2.89 2.81/2.95

5. Responsibility - The act of being accountable for a duty or task that one is required or expected to do. CAEP 1.2, 1.3, 1.5; InTASC 9, 10; Danielson 4e, 4f 5. is committed to a democratic school environment. CAEP 1.1, 1.4; InTASC 1, 3, 4, 7; Danielson 2a

1.95 2.96 3.0/2.93 2.99 2.98/3.0 2.94 2.88/3.0

6. Respect - Due regard for the feelings, wishes, rights, or traditions of others. CAEP 1.1, 1.4; InTASC 1, 3, 4, 7; Danielson 2a 6. values continuous educational improvement. CAEP 1.2, 1.3, 1.5; InTASC 9, 10; Danielson 4e

1.97 2.86 2.76/2.91 2.89 2.90/2.87 2.89 2.88/2.89

7. Diversity - Differences among groups of people and individuals based on ethnicity, race, socioeconomic status, gender, exceptionalities, language, religion, sexual orientation, and geographical area. CAEP 1.1, 1.2, 1.4; InTASC 1, 3, 4, 7, 10; Danielson 2a, 4c

2.00 2.99 3.0/2.98 3.0 3.0/3.0 2.97 2.94/3.0

9

7. is committed to integrity, ethical behavior and professionalism. CAEP 1.2, 1.3, 1.5; InTASC 9, 10; Danielson 4b, 4e, 4f 8. believes that close cooperation and collaboration with parents are critical. CAEP 1.1, 1.2; InTASC 10; Danielson 4c 2.83 2.8/2.84 2.93 2.93/2.93 2.69 2.81/2.58

9. shows promptness. CAEP 1.2, 1.3, 1.5; InTASC 9, 10; Danielson 4f 2.88 3.0/2.82 2.92 2.93/2.90 2.86 2.88/2.84 10. shows appropriate dress and grooming. CAEP 1.2, 1.3, 1.5; InTASC 9, 10; Danielson 4f 2.99 3.0/2.98 2.97 3.0/2.93 2.97 2.94/3.0 11. has a positive attitude. CAEP 1.2, 1.3, 1.5; InTASC 9, 10; Danielson 4f 2.88 2.92/2.86 2.97 2.98/2.97 2.94 2.88/3.0 12. is caring and respectful of others. CAEP 1.2, 1.3, 1.5; InTASC 9, 10; Danielson 4f 2.99 3.0/2.98 2.99 2.98/3.0 2.94 2.94/2.95 13. demonstrates professional writing in all assignments. CAEP 1.2, 1.3, 1.5; InTASC 9, 10; Danielson 4f 2.38 2.24/2.45 2.49 2.41/2.6 2.54 2.44/2.63

14. demonstrates professional oral communication skills. CAEP 1.2, 1.3, 1.5; InTASC 9, 10; Danielson 4f 2.38 2.48/2.32 2.56 2.56/2.57 2.51 2.50/2.53

Gate 3 Scale: 1=Emerging; 2=Proficient; 3=Advanced (Revised Form 11) Practica and Intern Scale: 0 = Never; 1 = Occasionally; 2 = Often; 3 = Always

Table 5: GATES 3, 4, 6: Self-Evaluation of Dispositions for Spring 2014 (Revised LiveText Form 11) EPP-Created Assessment




The teacher candidate displays: N=82 N=56 21/35 N=49 24/25 N=64 38/26 1. Collaboration – The act of working with another person or group in order to achieve or do something. CAEP 1.1, 1.2; InTASC 10; Danielson 4d 1.65 2.64 2.67/2.63 2.69 2.83/2.56 2.75 2.76/2.73

2. Reflection – serious thought or consideration CAEP 1.2, 1.3, 1.5; InTASC 9; Danielson 4a 1.63 2.61 2.43/2.71 2.76 2.79/2.72 2.83 2.87/2.77 3. Integrity - The ability to demonstrate truthfulness to oneself and to others; demonstrate moral excellence, trustworthiness, professional and ethical behavior in all activities and dealings with university faculty, peers, students, teachers, and school personnel. CAEP 1.2, 1.3, 1.5; InTASC 9, 10; Danielson 4b, 4e, 4f

1.64 2.89 2.95/2.86 2.92 2.92/2.92 2.92 2.92/2.92





1.62 2.73 2.86/2.66 2.82 2.88/2.76 2.79 2.82/2.76

Scale: 1=Emerging; 2=Proficient; 3=Advanced

10

Table 5: GATES 3, 4, 6: Self-Evaluation of Dispositions for Fall 2014 (Revised LiveText Form 11) EPP-Created Assessment Course Checkpoint Gate 3 Pract I EC/Ml and

Sec Pract II EC/Ml and

Sec Intern EC/Ml and

Sec The teacher candidate displays: N=121 N=62 28/34 N=72 20/52 N=33 17/16 1. Collaboration – The act of working with another person or group in order to achieve or do something. CAEP 1.1, 1.2; InTASC 10; Danielson 4d 2.55 2.27 2.29/2.26 2.63 2.70/2.60 2.82 2.94/2.69


2.65 2.61 2.61/2.62 2.81 2.80/2.81 2.94 2.94/2.94





2.59 2.50 2.57/2.44 2.67 2.70/2.65 2.76 2.82/2.69


Table 5: GATES 3, 4, 6: Self-Evaluation of Dispositions for Spring 2015 (Revised LiveText Form 11) EPP-Created Assessment Course Checkpoint Gate 3 Pract I EC/Ml and





2.61 2.65 2.50/2.89 2.71 2.80/2.63 2.80 2.89/2.76





2.56 2.55 2.36/2.88 2.55 2.64/2.46 2.72 2.79/2.69


11

Table 5: GATES 3, 4, 6: Self-Evaluation of Dispositions for Fall 2015 (Revised LiveText Form 11) EPP-Created Assessment Course Checkpoint Gate 3 Pract I EC/Ml and





2.62 2.74 2.60/2.81 2.72 2.79/2.65 2.88 3.0/2.75





2.50 2.57 2.47/2.62 2.65 2.71/2.58 2.88 3.0/2.5


Table 5: GATES 3, 4, 6: Self-Evaluation of Dispositions for Spring 2016 (Revised LiveText Form 11) EPP-Created Assessment Course Checkpoint Gate 3 Pract I EC/Ml and





2.47 2.79 2.82/2.75 2.82 2.72/2.89 2.88 2.95/2.75





2.45 2.63 2.55/2.75 2.64 2.61/2.67 2.72 2.70/2.75


12

Table 6: Gates 4, 6: Candidate’s Reflection Upon Lesson Planning for Spring 2013 (LiveText Form 12) EPP-Created Assessment Course Checkpoint Pract I EC/ Ml and Sec Pract II

EC/Ml and Sec Intern

EC/Ml and Sec

N=82 45/37 N=45 12/33 N=70 32/38 1. Objectives, content, and resources used in the lesson matched the State Curriculum Standards. CAEP 1.1, 1.2, 1.5, 2.3; InTASC 1,4, 10; Danielson 1c, 1e, 3d 2.73 2.91/2.51 2.64 2.83/2.58 2.87 2.78/2.95

2. I provided sufficient evidence to demonstrate that students’ prior knowledge was considered. CAEP 1.1, 2.3; InTASC 1, 2, 7; Danielson 1b 2.63 2.87/2.35 2.60 2.83/2.52 2.66 2.78/2.55

3. I exhibited introduction and development of a concept or procedure, small group instruction, emphasis upon higher order thinking, use of technology, and class discussions. CAEP 1.3, 1.5; InTASC 1, 3, 4, 5, 8; Danielson 1a, 1e, 3b, 3c, 3e

2.45 2.69/2.16 2.53 2.75/2.45 2.61 2.59/2.63

4. I managed the classroom to ensure highly effective use of the five elements. CAEP 1.4; InTASC 3; Danielson 2c, 2d 2.56 2.67/2.43 2.53 2.67/2.48 2.64 2.56/2.71

5. My reflection upon the components of the lesson contains significant depth and specificity. CAEP 1.2, 1.3, 1.5; InTASC 9; Danielson 4a 2.67 2.87/2.43 2.76 2.83/2.73 2.67 2.75/2.61

6. I provided evidence of student work with feedback and reflection on the process. CAEP 1.2, 1.3 1.5; InTASC 6, 9; Danielson 3d, 4a, 4b 2.61 2.82/2.35 2.60 2.83/2.52 2.79 2.81/2.76

7. My oral and written communications had very few to no errors. CAEP 1.2, 1.3, 1.5; InTASC 9, 10; Danielson 4f 2.56 2.78/2.30 2.62 2.83/2.55 2.74 2.63/2.84

Scale: 0 = Absent; 1 = Present but weak; 2 = Good with most; 3 = Excellent with all.

Table 6: Gates 4, 6: Candidate’s Reflection Upon Lesson Planning for Fall 2013 (LiveText Form 12) EPP-Created Assessment Course Checkpoint Pract I EC/ Ml and Sec Pract II


EC/Ml and Sec




2.38 2.40/2.38 2.57 2.60/2.54 2.49 2.29/2.62






13



EC/Ml and Sec




2.23 2.38/2.17 2.25 2.45/2.16 2.54 2.62/2.44





Scale: 0 = Absent; 1 = Present but weak; 2 = Good with most; 3 = Excellent with all. Table 6: Gates 4, 6: Candidate’s Reflection Upon Lesson Planning for Fall 2014 (LiveText Form 12) EPP-Created Assessment

Course Checkpoint Pract I EC/ Ml and Sec Pract II EC/Ml and


Sec N=61 28/33 N=76 21/55 * * 1. Objectives, content, and resources used in the lesson matched the State Curriculum Standards. CAEP 1.1, 1.2, 1.5, 2.3; InTASC 1,4, 10; Danielson 1c, 1e, 3d 2.28 2.32/2.24 2.57 2.81/2.47 * *

2. I provided sufficient evidence to demonstrate that students’ prior knowledge was considered. CAEP 1.1, 2.3; InTASC 1, 2, 7; Danielson 1b 2.15 2.18/2.12 2.36 2.52/2.29 * *


2.10 2.11/2.09 2.32 2.43/2.27 * *

4. I managed the classroom to ensure highly effective use of the five elements. CAEP 1.4; InTASC 3; Danielson 2c, 2d 2.13 2.11/2.15 2.38 2.33/2.40 * *

5. My reflection upon the components of the lesson contains significant depth and specificity. CAEP 1.2, 1.3, 1.5; InTASC 9; Danielson 4a 2.15 2.25/2.06 2.63 2.81/2.56 * *

6. I provided evidence of student work with feedback and reflection on the process. CAEP 1.2, 1.3 1.5; InTASC 6, 9; Danielson 3d, 4a, 4b 2.13 2.36/1.94 2.30 2.57/2.20 * *

7. My oral and written communications had very few to no errors. CAEP 1.2, 1.3, 1.5; InTASC 9, 10; Danielson 4f 2.28 2.39/2.18 2.51 2.76/2.42 * *

Scale: 0 = Absent; 1 = Present but weak; 2 = Good with most; 3 = Excellent with all. *Due to transitions in the position of Coordinator of Assessment, no data was gathered on this assessment during the fall 2014 internship.

14



EC/Ml and Sec




2.18 2.04/2.44 2.47 2.64/2.26 2.50 2.67/2.39






Table 6: Gates 4, 6: Candidate’s Reflection Upon Lesson Planning for Fall 2015 (LiveText Form 12) EPP-Created Assessment Course Checkpoint Pract I EC/ Ml and Sec Pract II


EC/Ml and Sec




2.26 2.15/2.32 2.38 2.48/2.27 2.45 2.56/2.29






15



EC/Ml and Sec




2.22 2.09/2.42 2.30 2.35/2.26 2.53 2.53/2.53






16

Table 7: Gate 4: Diversity Case Study Performance for Spring 2013 – Spring 2016/ EPP-Created Assessment While diversity is woven throughout the program, a checkpoint for gate 4 is that teacher candidates satisfactorily analyze a case study for appropriate practices dependent upon the type of diversity presented in the case study (Table 7).

Course Combined ECED 3053 SPED 3022 Sp13 Fa13 Sp14 Fa14 Sp15 Fa15 Sp16

N=58 N= N= N=56 N=43 N=58 N=39 1. Demonstrates an understanding of students with disabilities CAEP 1.1, 1.2, 1.5, 2.3; InTASC 1, 2, 4, 7; Danielson 1b, 1c, 1d, 1e

2.41 * * 2.14 2.07 1.98 1.97

2. Framing the response to a scenario concerning special needs CAEP 1.1, 1.2, 2.3; InTASC 1, 2, 7; Danielson 1b, 1d

2.41 * * 2.14 2.35 2.14 1.92

3. Designing modifications and adaptations for students with needs CAEP 1.1, 1.5, 2.3; InTASC 1, 4; Danielson 1c, 1e

2.41 * * 2.14 2.33 2.11 2.10

4. Applicability of modifications to the classroom CAEP 1.1, 1.4; InTASC 3; Danielson 2e

2.41 * * 2.14 2.14 2.05 2.00

5. Justification from modification or approach CAEP 1.1, 1.5, 2.3; InTASC 4; Danielson 1e

2.41 * * 2.14 2.47 2.09 1.90

6. Demonstrates an understanding of diversity CAEP 1.1, 1.2, 1.4; InTASC 3, 10; Danielson 2a, 4c

2.41 * * 2.14 2.19 2.10 1.82

7. Provides a climate where students can appreciate diversity CAEP 1.1, 1.3, 1.4; InTASC 3; Danielson 2a, 2b

2.41 * * 2.14 1.98 2.21 1.97

Note: 0 = Unsatisfactory; 1 = Basic; 2 = Proficient; 3 = Distinguished. *Due to transitions in leadership at the SOE, no data was gathered for this assessment during Fall 2013 and Spring 2014

17

Table 8: GATES 4 & 6: Intended Candidate Outcomes for Spring 2013 Evaluated by Clinical Supervisors/Mentor Teachers first 3 columns, last column interns evaluated by UAFS Supervisors/ EPP-Created Assessment The candidates are assessed by cooperating teachers or Unit faculty four times with a combination of two instruments (tables 8 & 9). The following tables contain the results from the assessment instruments that either the clinical supervisor/mentor teacher or the university supervisor/course instructors complete on candidates.

Checkpoint Gate 4 Gate 4 Gate 6 Gate 6 Course Pract I Pract II Intern/Mentor Intern/Supv

InTASC STANDARDS N=81 N=45 N=70 N=70 1.The teacher understands how learners grow and develop, recognizing that patterns of learning and development vary individually within and across the cognitive, linguistic, social, emotional, and physical areas, and designs and implements developmentally appropriate and challenging learning experiences. CAEP 1.1, 1,3, 1.5, 2.3; Danielson 1b, 1e, 3c

2.42 2.36 2.53 2.64

2. The teacher uses understanding of individual differences and diverse cultures and communities to ensure inclusive learning environments that enable each learner to meet high standards. Danielson 1b 2.47 2.44 2.53 2.63

3. The teacher works with others to create environments that support individual and collaborative learning, and that encourage positive social interaction, active engagement in learning, and self-motivation. CAEP 1.1, 1.3, 1.4, 2.3; Danielson 2a, 3c

2.63 2.56 2.66 2.70

4. The teacher understands the central concepts, tools of inquiry, and structures of the discipline(s) he or she teaches and creates learning experiences that make these aspects of the discipline accessible and meaningful for learners to assure mastery of the content. CAEP 1.3, 1.5, 2.3; Danielson 1a, 1e, 3c

2.58 2.49 2.61 2.61

5. The teacher understands how to connect concepts and use differing perspectives to engage learners in critical thinking, creativity, and collaborative problem solving related to authentic local and global issues. CAEP 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 2.3; Danielson 3a, 3c, 3e

2.53 2.44 2.50 2.63

6. The teacher understands and uses multiple methods of assessment to engage learners in their own growth, to monitor learner progress, and to guide the candidate’s and learner’s decision making. CAEP 1, 2; Danielson 1f, 3d 2.46 2.49 2.53 2.57

7. The teacher plans instruction that supports every student in meeting rigorous learning goals by drawing upon knowledge of content areas, curriculum, cross-disciplinary skills, and pedagogy, as well as knowledge of learners and the community context. CAEP 1.1, 1.5, 2.3; Danielson 1b, 1e

2.54 2.42 2.44 2.61

8. The teacher understands and uses a variety of instructional strategies to encourage learners to develop deep understanding of content areas and their connections, and to build skills to apply knowledge in meaningful ways. CAEP 1,3, 1.5, 2.3; Danielson 3b, 3c

2.54 2.56 2.59 2.63

9. The teacher engages in ongoing professional learning and uses evidence to continually evaluate his/her practice, particularly the effects of his/her choices and actions on others (learners, families, other professionals, and the community), and adapts practice to meet the needs of each learner. CAEP1.2, 1.3, 1.5; Danielson 4a, 4e, 4f

2.59 2.49 2.60 2.70

10. The teacher seeks appropriate leadership roles and opportunities to take responsibility for student learning, to collaborate with learners, families, colleagues, other school professionals, and community members to ensure learner growth, and to advance the profession. CAEP1.1, 1.2,1.3, 1.5, Danielson 4c, 4d, 4f

2.51 2.49 2.49 2.67

Note: 0 = Unsatisfactory; 1 = Basic; 2 = Proficient; 3 = Distinguished. Intended Candidate Outcomes for Spring 2013 Interns Evaluated by University Supervisors is the last column above. The Clinical and University Supervisors evaluated the Interns for Intended Candidate Outcomes on LiveText to disaggregate the data beginning Spring 2009. After the SWOT analysis by CAEP consultant, Lance Tomei, it was determined that this InTASC assessment would not be sufficient, as it was merely a checklist. In Summer 2015, this form was revised to use the Danielson FFT Components, and targets of performance were identified at each level of assessment.

18

Table 8: GATES 4 & 6: Intended Candidate Outcomes for Fall 2013 Evaluated by Clinical Supervisors/Mentor Teachers first 3 columns, last column interns evaluated by UAFS Supervisors/ EPP-Created Assessment



2.38 2.36 2.32 2.19



2.62 2.49 2.59 2.44


2.45 2.47 2.44 2.39


2.40 2.39 2.29 2.28



2.50 2.47 2.50 2.31


2.48 2.49 2.59 2.33


2.53 2.53 2.50 2.36


2.53 2.43 2.56 2.36

Note: 0 = Unsatisfactory; 1 = Basic; 2 = Proficient; 3 = Distinguished. Intended Candidate Outcomes for Fall 2013 Interns Evaluated by University Supervisors is the last column above. The Clinical and University Supervisors evaluated the Interns for Intended Candidate Outcomes on LiveText to disaggregate the data beginning Spring 2009. After the SWOT analysis by CAEP consultant, Lance Tomei, it was determined that this InTASC assessment would not be sufficient, as it was merely a checklist. In Summer 2015, this form was revised to use the Danielson FFT Components, and targets of performance were identified at each level of assessment.

19

Table 8: GATES 4 & 6: Intended Candidate Outcomes for Spring 2014 Evaluated by Clinical Supervisors/Mentor Teachers first 3 columns, last column interns evaluated by UAFS Supervisors/ EPP-Created Assessment



2.50 2.50 2.55 2.56



2.60 2.71 2.66 2.70


2.58 2.69 2.58 2.65


2.45 2.54 2.45 2.57



2.58 2.58 2.52 2.67


2.48 2.60 2.55 2.67


2.57 2.72 2.72 2.75


2.56 2.63 2.67 2.70


20

Table 8: GATES 4 & 6: Intended Candidate Outcomes for Fall 2014 Evaluated by Clinical Supervisors/Mentor Teachers first 3 columns, last column interns evaluated by UAFS Supervisors/ EPP-Created Assessment



2.34 2.46 2.69 2.23



2.51 2.60 2.75 2.30


2.56 2.58 2.78 2.33


2.39 2.54 2.75 2.37



2.49 2.58 2.72 2.40


2.46 2.50 2.78 2.53


2.58 2.44 2.81 2.33


2.44 2.50 2.78 2.27

Note: 0 = Unsatisfactory; 1 = Basic; 2 = Proficient; 3 = Distinguished. Intended Candidate Outcomes for Fall 2014 Interns Evaluated by University Supervisors is the last column above. The Clinical and University Supervisors evaluated the Interns for Intended Candidate Outcomes on LiveText to disaggregate the data beginning Spring 2009. After the SWOT analysis by CAEP consultant, Lance Tomei, it was determined that this InTASC assessment would not be sufficient, as it was merely a checklist. In Summer 2015, this form was revised to use the Danielson FFT Components, and targets of performance were identified at each level of assessment.

21

Table 8: GATES 4 & 6: Intended Candidate Outcomes for Spring 2015 Evaluated by Clinical Supervisors/Mentor Teachers first 3 columns, last column interns evaluated by UAFS Supervisors/ EPP-Created Assessment



2.56 2.41 2.56 2.29



2.68 2.60 2.64 2.40


2.63 2.53 2.61 2.38


2.66 2.41 2.54 2.49



2.73 2.53 2.52 2.56


2.63 2.45 2.61 2.47


2.78 2.60 2.60 2.40


2.78 2.52 2.63 2.35


22

Table 8: GATES 4 & 6: Intended Candidate Outcomes for Fall 2015 Evaluated by Clinical Supervisors/Mentor Teachers first 3 columns, last column interns evaluated by UAFS Supervisors (Revised Form, to reflect Danielson’s FFT) Proprietary Assessment


DANIELSON FFT Components Aligned with InTASC and CAEP Standards N=57 N=53 N=42 N=39 1a: Demonstrating knowledge of content and pedagogy CAEP 1.1, 1.3, 1.5; InTASC 4 1.84 2.26 2.29 2.05 1b: Demonstrating knowledge of students CAEP 1.1, 2.3; InTASC 1, 2, 7 1.61 2.45 2.50 2.46 1c: Setting instructional outcomes CAEP 1.1; InTASC 1 1.72 2.19 2.21 2.18 1d: Demonstrating knowledge of resources CAEP 1.1, 1.2; InTASC 10 1.74 2.23 2.38 2.15 1e: Designing coherent instruction CAEP 1.1, 1.5, 2.3; InTASC 4 1.68 2.25 2.19 2.13 1f: Designing student assessments CAEP 1.1, 1.2, 1.3; InTASC 6 1.39 1.94 2.14 2.18 2a: Creating an environment of respect and rapport CAEP 1.1, 1.4, 1.5; InTASC 1, 3, 4, 7 2.04 2.53 2.48 2.44 2b: Establishing a culture for learning CAEP 1.3, 1.4; InTASC 3 1.63 2.36 2.45 2.05 2c: Managing classroom procedures CAEP 1.4; InTASC 3 1.54 2.09 2.12 2.13 2d: Managing student behavior CAEP 1.1, 1.4; InTASC3 1.53 2.11 2.12 2.15 2e: Organizing physical space CAEP 1.1, 1.4; InTASC 3 1.25 1.89 2.26 2.33 3a: Communicating with students CAEP 1.1, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5; InTASC 5 1.88 2.26 2.38 2.26 3b: Using questioning and discussion techniques CAEP 1.1, 1.3, 1.5, 2.3; InTASC 8 1.72 2.15 1.95 2.10 3c: Engaging students in learning CAEP 1.1, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 2.3; InTASC 1, 3, 4, 5, 8 1.82 2.32 2.26 2.03 3d: Using Assessment in Instruction CAEP 1.1, 1.2, 1.3; InTASC 6 1.35 2.00 2.14 2.05 3e: Demonstrating flexibility and responsiveness CAEP 1.1, 1.3, 1.5, 2.3; InTASC 8 1.56 2.28 2.31 2.18 4a: Reflecting on Teaching CAEP 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.5; InTASC 9 1.19 2.02 2.43 2.33 4b: Maintaining Accurate Records CAEP 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5; InTASC 9 0.54 1.15 2.10 2.15 4c: Communicating with Families CAEP 1.1, 1.2; InTASC 10 0.14 0.66 1.57 1.97 4d: Participating in a Professional Community CAEP 1.1, 1.2; InTASC 10 0.35 1.06 2.21 2.26 4e: Growing and Developing Professionally CAEP 1.1, 1.2. 1.3, 1.5; InTASC 9 0.49 1.32 2.21 2.21 4f: Showing Professionalism CAEP 1.1, 1.2. 1.3, 1.5; InTASC 9 1.54 2.17 2.40 2.38 Note: 0 = Unsatisfactory; 1 = Basic; 2 = Proficient; 3 = Distinguished. Intended Candidate Outcomes for Fall 2015 Interns Evaluated by University Supervisors is the last column above. The Clinical and University Supervisors evaluated the Interns for Intended Candidate Outcomes in LiveText to disaggregate the data beginning Spring 2009. The form was revised to reflect the domain components of Danielson’s Framework in Summer 2015. Target levels of performance were identified at the two formative levels of Practicum I and II, as well as the summative levels of internship. There are two summative assessments during internship, to demonstrate inter-rater reliability. The faculty members were trained, to refine the use of the instrument. .

23

Table 8: GATES 4 & 6: Intended Candidate Outcomes for Spring 2016 Evaluated by Clinical Supervisors/Mentor Teachers first 3 columns, last column interns evaluated by UAFS Supervisors (Revised Form, to reflect Danielson’s FFT) Proprietary Assessment


DANIELSON FFT Components Aligned with InTASC and CAEP Standards N=58 N=45 N=66 N=42 1a: Demonstrating knowledge of content and pedagogy CAEP 1.1, 1.3, 1.5; InTASC 4 2.12 2.13 2.39 2.38 1b: Demonstrating knowledge of students CAEP 1.1, 2.3; InTASC 1, 2, 7 2.28 2.04 2.56 2.45 1c: Setting instructional outcomes CAEP 1.1; InTASC 1 1.95 2.18 2.33 2.29 1d: Demonstrating knowledge of resources CAEP 1.1, 1.2; InTASC 10 2.12 2.24 2.45 2.43 1e: Designing coherent instruction CAEP 1.1, 1.5, 2.3; InTASC 4 2.22 2.04 2.35 2.29 1f: Designing student assessments CAEP 1.1, 1.2, 1.3; InTASC 6 1.67 1.82 2.21 2.26 2a: Creating an environment of respect and rapport CAEP 1.1, 1.4, 1.5; InTASC 1, 3, 4, 7 2.40 2.40 2.55 2.40 2b: Establishing a culture for learning CAEP 1.3, 1.4; InTASC 3 2.17 2.18 2.39 2.33 2c: Managing classroom procedures CAEP 1.4; InTASC 3 1.83 2.02 2.32 2.21 2d: Managing student behavior CAEP 1.1, 1.4; InTASC3 1.98 1.89 2.27 2.17 2e: Organizing physical space CAEP 1.1, 1.4; InTASC 3 1.81 2.00 2.30 2.31 3a: Communicating with students CAEP 1.1, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5; InTASC 5 2.31 2.20 2.39 2.31 3b: Using questioning and discussion techniques CAEP 1.1, 1.3, 1.5, 2.3; InTASC 8 2.10 1.91 2.18 2.26 3c: Engaging students in learning CAEP 1.1, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 2.3; InTASC 1, 3, 4, 5, 8 2.22 2.20 2.35 2.26 3d: Using Assessment in Instruction CAEP 1.1, 1.2, 1.3; InTASC 6 1.71 1.80 2.23 2.17 3e: Demonstrating flexibility and responsiveness CAEP 1.1, 1.3, 1.5, 2.3; InTASC 8 2.10 2.11 2.32 2.29 4a: Reflecting on Teaching CAEP 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.5; InTASC 9 1.91 2.13 2.45 2.36 4b: Maintaining Accurate Records CAEP 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5; InTASC 9 1.14 1.13 2.23 2.29 4c: Communicating with Families CAEP 1.1, 1.2; InTASC 10 0.52 0.47 1.68 2.17 4d: Participating in a Professional Community CAEP 1.1, 1.2; InTASC 10 0.88 0.91 2.11 2.33 4e: Growing and Developing Professionally CAEP 1.1, 1.2. 1.3, 1.5; InTASC 9 1.12 0.96 2.17 2.38 4f: Showing Professionalism CAEP 1.1, 1.2. 1.3, 1.5; InTASC 9 2.12 2.20 2.41 2.38 Note: 0 = Unsatisfactory; 1 = Basic; 2 = Proficient; 3 = Distinguished. Intended Candidate Outcomes for Spring 2016 Interns Evaluated by Supervisors is the last column above. The Clinical and University Supervisors evaluated the Interns for Intended Candidate Outcomes on LiveText to disaggregate the data beginning Spring 2009. The form was revised to reflect the domain components of Danielson’s Framework in Summer 2015. Target levels of performance were identified at the two formative levels of Practicum I and II, as well as the summative levels of internship. There are two summative assessments during internship, to demonstrate inter-rater reliability. The faculty members were trained, to refine the use of the instrument.

24

Table 9: GATES 3, 4, & 6: Candidate Dispositions Combined from selected Courses – Spring, 2013-Spring, 2014/ EPP-Prepared Assessment Positive dispositions are critical for candidates to be successful. Dispositions are assessed in every class taught in the SOE and TEP. Therefore some students might be assessed by more than one faculty member in a particular semester. Due to the nature of the scale, frequencies are presented rather than mean in Table 9. Candidates are assessed as demonstrating appropriate, inappropriate, or none displayed.

DISPOSITIONS *Inappropriate Appropriate None Displayed The teacher candidate: Sp13

Intro. Sp13 All

Fa13 Intro.

Fa13 All

Sp13 Intro.

Sp13 All

Fa13 Intro.

Fa13 All

Sp13 Intro.

Sp13 All

Fa13 Intro.

Fa13 All

1.understands and values the discipline(s) he or she teaches CAEP 1.3, 1.5,InTASC 4; Danielson 1a 1 24 0 11 212 1232 248 1258 2 21 0 16 2. is willing to utilize multiple teaching methodologies CAEP 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 2.3; InTASC 1,3,4,5,6, 8; Danielson 3a, 3b, 3c, 3e 1 9 0 5 211 1239 248 1260 3 29 0 20 3. is committed to planning effective units of curriculum CAEP 1.1, 1.5, 2.3; InTASC 4; Danielson 1e 2 13 0 4 211 1239 246 1254 2 25 2 27 4. is committed to providing a classroom environment for all students to learn CAEP1.1, 1.3, 1.4; InTASC 1, 2, 3, 4, 7; Danielson 2a, 2b, 2c, 2d, 2e 1 14 0 8 211 1233 248 1257 3 30 0 20 5. is committed to a democratic school environment CAEP 1.1, 1.4; InTASC 1, 3, 4, 7; Danielson 2a 1 5 0 3 212 1240 248 1256 2 32 0 26 6. values continuous educational improvement CAEP 1.2, 1.3, 1.5; InTASC 9; Danielson 4e 1 12 0 7 212 1232 248 1254 2 33 0 24 7. is committed to integrity, ethical behavior, and professionalism CAEP 1.2, 1.3, 1.5; InTASC 9, 10; Danielson 4b, 4e, 4f 4 25 1 28 211 1232 247 1240 0 20 0 17 8. believes that close cooperation and collaboration with parents are critical CAEP 1.1, 1.2; InTASC 10; Danielson 4c 1 6 0 3 212 1222 230 1228 2 49 18 54

EXHIBITS PROFESSIONAL BEHAVIOR 9. shows promptness. CAEP 1.2, 1.3, 1.5; InTASC 9, 10; Danielson 4f 3 61 7 44 211 1206 241 1227 1 10 0 14 10. shows appropriate dress and grooming. CAEP 1.2, 1.3, 1.5; InTASC 9, 10; Danielson 4f 1 12 0 4 204 1234 248 1268 10 31 0 13 11. has a positive attitude. CAEP 1.2, 1.3, 1.5; InTASC 9, 10; Danielson 4f 1 9 1 8 214 1254 247 1261 0 14 0 16 12. is caring and respectful of others. CAEP 1.2, 1.3, 1.5; InTASC 9, 10; Danielson 4f 2 11 1 9 213 1248 247 1261 0 17 0 15

COMMUNICATION SKILLS *Unsatisfactory Basic Proficient Distinguished

The teacher candidate demonstrates professional : Sp13 Intro. Sp13 All

Fa13 Intro.

Fa13 All

Sp13 Intro.

Sp13 All

Fa13 Intro.

Fa13 All

Sp13 Intro.

Sp13 All

Fa13 Intro.

Fa13 All

Sp13 Intro.

Sp13 All

Fa13 Intro.

Fa13 All

13. content in all writing assignments . CAEP 1.2, 1.3, 1.5; InTASC 9, 10; Danielson 4f 0 11 0 4 24 200 19 145 174 877 164 854 16 179 9 117 14. mechanics in all writing assignments. CAEP 1.2, 1.3, 1.5; InTASC 9, 10; Danielson 4f 1 13 0 4 25 216 22 165 180 893 166 895 8 144 4 56 15. oral communication skills. CAEP 1.2, 1.3, 1.5; InTASC 9, 10; Danielson 4f 1 6 0 5 24 212 17 124 169 888 160 886 11 146 14 103 * Students who received two “Inappropriate” or “unsatisfactory” for any of the fifteen questions are referred to their advisor as described in the assistance policy contained in the policy and procedures manual. A Plan of Action must be completed if students receive three “Inappropriate” or “unsatisfactory” for any of the fifteen questions.

25

Table 9: GATES 3, 4, & 6: Candidate Dispositions Combined from selected Courses – Spring-Fall, 2014 (Revised Rubric) EPP-Prepared Assessment DISPOSITIONS *Emerging Proficient Advanced The teacher candidate displays the following dispositions: Sp14

Intro. Sp14 All

Fa14 Intro.

Fa14 All

Sp14 Intro.

Sp14 All

Fa14 Intro.

Fa14 All

Sp14 Intro.

Sp14 All

Fa14 Intro.

Fa14 All

1. COLLABORATION: The act of working with another person or group in order to achieve or do something.... CAEP 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.5; InTASC 9, 10; Danielson 4c, 4d, 4f

1 6 1 16 109 886 109 927 0 133 0 194

2. REFLECTION: Serious thought or consideration.... CAEP 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.5; InTASC 4, 9; Danielson 1e, 4a 1 7 0 6 109 887 109 889 0 129 1 241

3. INTEGRITY: The ability to demonstrate truthfulness to oneself and to others; demonstrate moral excellence, trustworthiness, professional and ethical behavior in all activities and dealings with university faculty, peers, students, teachers, and school personnel.... CAEP 1.2, 1.3, 1.5; InTASC 9, 10; Danielson 4b, 4e, 4f

1 8 0 3 109 844 109 952 0 175 1 181

4. LEARNING INITIATIVE: The power or ability to begin or to follow through energetically with a plan or task for learning.... CAEP 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 2.3; InTASC 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10; Danielson 1a, 1e, 1f, 3c, 3d, 4e

1 22 2 32 109 892 107 919 0 112 1 190

5. RESPONSIBILITY: The act of being accountable for a duty or task that one is required or expected to do.... CAEP 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.5; InTASC 9, 10; Danielson 4c, 4d, 4e, 4f

17 105 12 99 93 756 78 745 0 162 20 296

6. RESPECT: Due regard for the feelings, wishes, rights, or traditions of others.... CAEP 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 2.3, InTASC 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10; Danielson 1b, 1e, 1f, 2a, 2b, 2d, 3a, 3b, 3c, 4a, 4c, 4f

1 7 0 4 109 838 110 869 0 180 0 263

7. DIVERSITY: Differences among groups of people and individuals based on ethnicity, race, socioeconomic status, gender, exceptionalities, language, religion, sexual orientation, and geographical area. ...1 (0%) 109 (99%) CAEP 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 2.3; InTASC 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10; Danielson 1b, 1e, 1f, 2a, 2b, 2d, 3a, 3b, 3c, 4a, 4c, 4f

1 5 0 1 109 875 110 981 0 142 0 154

Note: 1=Emerging; 2=Proficient; 3=Advanced * Before allowed to intern, a candidate must demonstrate a Proficient or above on the Disposition Rating Scale in each identified disposition. Candidates are tracked by number of reports and by level of proficiency each semester. See table on Page 69 of Candidate Manual to view the responses taken whenever a candidate receives Emerging.

INTER-RATER SUMMARY Mean Stdev Mean Stdev Mean Stdev Mean Stdev Sp14

Intro. Sp14 Intro.

Sp14 All

Sp14 All

Fa14 Intro

Fa14 Intro

Fa14 All

Fa14 All

1. COLLABORATION: The act of working with another person or group in order to achieve or do something.... 1.995 .007 2.145 .196 1.95 .021 2.270 .351 2. REFLECTION: Serious thought or consideration.... 1.995 .007 2.154 .190 2.015 .021 2.290 .310 3. INTEGRITY: The ability to demonstrate truthfulness to oneself and to others; demonstrate moral excellence, trustworthiness, professional and ethical behavior in all activities and dealings with university faculty, peers, students, teachers, and school personnel.... 1.995 .007 2.180 .253 2.015 .021 2.250 .296 4. LEARNING INITIATIVE: The power or ability to begin or to follow through energetically with a plan or task for learning.... 1.995 .007 2.110 .193 1.985 .021 2.198 .318 5. RESPONSIBILITY: The act of being accountable for a duty or task that one is required or expected to do.... 1.911 .125 2.076 .237 2.077 .016 2.289 .353 6. RESPECT: Due regard for the feelings, wishes, rights, or traditions of others.... 1.995 .007 2.187 .253 2.000 .000 2.313 .320 7. DIVERSITY: Differences among groups of people and individuals based on ethnicity, race, socioeconomic status, gender, exceptionalities, language, religion, sexual orientation, and geographical area. ...1 1.995 .007 2.147 .273 2.000 .000 2.226 .304

26

Table 9: GATES 3, 4, & 6: Candidate Dispositions Combined from selected Courses – Spring-Fall, 2015 (Revised Rubric) EPP-Prepared Assessment DISPOSITIONS *Emerging Proficient Advanced The teacher candidate displays the following dispositions: Sp15

Intro. Sp15 All

Fa15 Intro.

Fa15 All

Sp15 Intro.

Sp15 All

Fa15 Intro.

Fa15 All

Sp15 Intro.

Sp15 All

Fa15 Intro.

Fa15 All

1. COLLABORATION: The act of working with another person or group in order to achieve or do something.... CAEP 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.5; InTASC 9, 10; Danielson 4c, 4d, 4f

2 22 8 12 77 598 59 643 0 245 2 152

2. REFLECTION: Serious thought or consideration.... CAEP 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.5; InTASC 4, 9; Danielson 1e, 4a 0 7 0 5 79 563 53 629 0 295 13 171

3. INTEGRITY: The ability to demonstrate truthfulness to oneself and to others; demonstrate moral excellence, trustworthiness, professional and ethical behavior in all activities and dealings with university faculty, peers, students, teachers, and school personnel.... CAEP 1.2, 1.3, 1.5; InTASC 9, 10; Danielson 4b, 4e, 4f

0 6 0 4 79 604 66 642 0 255 0 159

4. LEARNING INITIATIVE: The power or ability to begin or to follow through energetically with a plan or task for learning.... CAEP 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 2.3; InTASC 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10; Danielson 1a, 1e, 1f, 3c, 3d, 4e

5 26 6 27 74 641 60 669 0 198 0 116

5. RESPONSIBILITY: The act of being accountable for a duty or task that one is required or expected to do.... CAEP 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.5; InTASC 9, 10; Danielson 4c, 4d, 4e, 4f

11 76 10 66 66 532 39 606 2 257 19 172

6. RESPECT: Due regard for the feelings, wishes, rights, or traditions of others.... CAEP 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 2.3; InTASC 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10; Danielson 1b, 1e, 1f, 2a, 2b, 2d, 3a, 3b, 3c, 4a, 4c, 4f

0 13 0 1 79 583 47 629 0 269 19 174

7. DIVERSITY: Differences among groups of people and individuals based on ethnicity, race, socioeconomic status, gender, exceptionalities, language, religion, sexual orientation, and geographical area. ...1 (0%) 109 (99%) CAEP 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 2.3; InTASC 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10; Danielson 1b, 1e, 1f, 2a, 2b, 2d, 3a, 3b, 3c, 4a, 4c, 4f

0 5 0 1 79 594 44 646 0 265 22 156

Note: 1=Emerging; 2=Proficient; 3=Advanced * Before allowed to intern, a candidate must demonstrate a Proficient or above on the Disposition Rating Scale in each identified disposition. Candidates are tracked by number of reports and by level of proficiency each semester. See table on Page 69 of Candidate Manual to view the responses taken whenever a candidate receives Emerging.

INTER-RATER SUMMARY Mean Stdev Mean Stdev Mean Stdev Mean Stdev Sp15

Intro. Sp15 Intro.

Sp15 All

Sp15 All

Fa15 Intro

Fa15 Intro

Fa15 All

Fa15 All

1. COLLABORATION: The act of working with another person or group in order to achieve or do something.... 1.975 .000 2.418 .415 1.900 .178 2.198 .354 2. REFLECTION: Serious thought or consideration.... 2.00 .000 2.498 .415 2.227 .284 2.276 .397 3. INTEGRITY: The ability to demonstrate truthfulness to oneself and to others; demonstrate moral excellence, trustworthiness, professional and ethical behavior in all activities and dealings with university faculty, peers, students, teachers, and school personnel.... 2.00 .000 2.453 .400 2.000 .000 2.337 .375 4. LEARNING INITIATIVE: The power or ability to begin or to follow through energetically with a plan or task for learning.... 1.937 .000 2.322 .402 1.893 .152 2.159 .364 5. RESPONSIBILITY: The act of being accountable for a duty or task that one is required or expected to do.... 1.886 .000 2.378 .413 2.129 .046 2.327 .420 6. RESPECT: Due regard for the feelings, wishes, rights, or traditions of others.... 2.000 .000 2.476 .408 2.339 .480 2.396 .398 7. DIVERSITY: Differences among groups of people and individuals based on ethnicity, race, socioeconomic status, gender, exceptionalities, language, religion, sexual orientation, and geographical area.

assessment report spring 2013 – spring 2016 · totals 3.25 (n=36) 3.34 (n=105) 3.42 (n=45) 3.42...

Documents