1 

 

 

 

BIOLA UNIVERSITY

School of Education

13800 Biola Avenue

La Mirada, CA 90639

Commission on Teaching Credentialing

Common Standards

November 2009

Program Contact: June Hetzel, Ph.D., Dean of Education, or

Deborah Taylor, Ph.D., Director of Teacher Education

Phone #: 562-944-0351, ext. 5674 or ext. 5653

E-mail: june.hetzel@biola.edu or deborah.taylor@biola.edu

Note to Reader: The standard is italicized throughout with responses in normal type.

  2 

Standard 1: Educational Leadership

The institution and education unit create and articulate a research-based vision for educator preparation that is responsive to California's adopted standards and curriculum frameworks.

Response:

The vision of Biola University’s School of Education is “to equip a generation of influential educators, focused on God's calling, devoting their strengths, gifts, and scholarship, to meet the needs of diverse students and to advance the Kingdom of God.” Our educational unit believes that societal transformation emerges within the context of education, as individuals and communities are changed in the context of relationships with caring teachers who mentor students’ intellectual, social, psychological, and spiritual well-being in the context of schools, families, and communities. Our undergraduate and graduate teacher preparation programs focus primarily on content & pedagogy as well as diversity and differentiation; whereas, our graduate degrees in education build upon the same, with the addition of a focus on leadership and change.

Biola University’s teacher preparation programs are built around the California Commission on Teacher Credentialing Standards and curriculum frameworks. Teacher Preparation courses require candidates to access state standards and frameworks, utilizing state-approved textbooks to develop lessons and units that center around these adopted standards.

Evidence: Course Syllabi

Societal Transformation 

Content and Pedagogy 

Diversity and Differentiation 

Leadership and Change 

  3 

Our research-based vision includes seven measurable outcomes for our program that align with the standards and Teacher Performance Expectations. Along with the CalTPAs and key assignments that measure candidate proficiency in Teacher Performance Expectations, our faculty collaborated over a four-month period to develop seven program outcomes that distinctly reflect Biola University School of Education’s mission and vision for teacher preparation. Candidates are expected to demonstrate the following seven learning outcomes:

1. Committed to Living Out God’s Calling as a Christian Educator

Key Assignments: Called to Teach Paper #1 (301/519)

Called to Teach Paper #2 (ST Application)

These assignments measure TPEs 12, 13 and provide practice in writing reflections.

2. Dedicated to Students’ Optimum Development for God’s Ultimate Glory

Key Assignments: Student Profile Data (420/520; 425/525)

Designing & Teaching a Lesson (420/520; 425/525)

These assignments measure TPE 6, 8 and provide practice in gathering relevant data on students.

3. Engage in Experiences with Cross-Cultural and Special Populations to Appreciate Diversity

Key Assignment: EL Shadowing Assignment (341/541)

This assignment measures TPE 7, 8 and provides practice in making adaptations for students.

4. Capable of Applying Developmental and Learning Theories to Solve Educational Challenges

Key Assignment: Case Study Paper (330/526)

This assignment measures TPE 13 and provides practice in writing analytical reflections.

5. Implement Content Standards Instruction Effectively

Key Assignment: Progress Monitoring Lesson Reflection (430/505; 435/506)

This assignment measures TPE 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9 and provides practice in coordinating instruction with standards.

  4 

6. Skilled at Designing and Implementing Appropriate and Effective Learning Strategies

Key Assignment: Unit Plan Assignment (430/505; 435/506)

This assignment measures TPE 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 and provides practice in long-range lesson planning.

7. Devoted to Creating a Positive Learning Environment

Key Assignment: Classroom Management Plan (330/526)

This assignment measures TPE 5, 7, 8, 10, 11 and provides practice in connecting learning theory with classroom procedures.

Evidence:

Electronic Documents Assessment Files in Front Office Posted Program Outcomes (e.g., Conference Room) Program Outcomes, Website, etc. Course Syllabi

The vision provides direction for programs, courses, teaching, candidate performance and experiences, scholarship, service, collaboration, and unit accountability.

The way that the vision provides direction for programs, courses, teaching, candidate performance and experiences is through the intentional connection between TPEs, course assignments, key assignments, and field experiences in order to prepare the candidate to make as seamless a transition as possible into the teaching profession at the conclusion of his or her teacher preparation program. Collaboration occurs and decisions are made in the context of a professional learning community, within the monthly Teacher Preparation Committee meetings, as well as within sub-committees (e.g., Liberal Studies Committee, Single Subject meetings) and task force groups (e.g., English Language Learners, Special Needs Learners, and Assessment).

Our vision also provides direction for faculty service and collaboration, as each faculty member is involved in collaboration with one another and with a variety of school districts and school sites. The leadership team (Dean, Graduate Chair, Undergraduate Chair) work collaboratively with one another and with faculty, shaping unit accountability through learning outcomes and data collection that align with the vision. The teacher preparation committee leadership ensures direct accountability of the scope and sequence of the teacher preparation courses by requiring committee approval of any modifications to key assignments, as well as regular submission of candidate data. After data is submitted, group discussion occurs with the entire teacher preparation faculty. In the context of this rich discussion, key stakeholders have opportunity to assist colleagues in refining learning activities that will promote best practices within candidate

  5 

performance. Coupled with these discussions, administrators and master teachers from local school sites provide input for programmatic improvement within the context of surveys and discussions at a community event each semester. When modifications are required to help our candidates attain Teacher Performance Expectations, we invite input through a variety of venues such as: task force analysis, California Council on Teacher Education (CCTE), BTSA-IHE Collaborative meetings, communication with school site personnel, subcommittee discussions, and intentional research projects related to the area of improvement.

The vision also provides a framework for faculty scholarship and research, and gives us ways to measure our program’s effectiveness, thus ensuring accountability for the teacher preparation unit. For example, Dr. Claire Sibold, our reading professor recently conducted a research study entitled, ““Multiple Subject Candidates Preparedness to Teach Reading and Subsequent Programmatic Changes.” to measure the effectiveness of candidate performance in reading fieldwork placements, which relied on feedback from master teachers interviews, observations by the professor/researcher, and self-reflections by candidates. Another example would be a research study conducted by an alumna and doctoral candidate at Biola University and other similar institutions in Spring 2009 entitled, “Teacher Education Programs and Data-Driven Decision Making: Are We Preparing our Pre-Service Teachers to be Data and Assessment Literate?” These research projects provided invaluable feedback regarding the assessment strand of our program and highlighted the need to utilize more case studies to assist students in achieving success in TPE 3, and CalTPA 3 – Assessing Learning.

The faculty, instructional personnel, and relevant stakeholders are actively involved in the organization, coordination, and governance of all professional preparation programs.

The School of Education faculty, instructional personnel, and relevant stakeholders are actively involved in the organization, governance, and coordination of Biola University’s Professional Preparation Program including, but not limited to, the following ways:

1) Monthly Teacher Preparation Meetings (includes full-time faculty, adjunct faculty teaching teacher preparation coursework, credential analyst, field placement coordinator, director, dean, TPA Coordinator)

2) Monthly School of Education Meetings (includes all full-time members of the School of Education)

3) Bi-Annual Community Meetings at Biola (includes local administrators, local teachers, students in program, university supervisors, Director of Teacher Preparation)

4) Off Site BTSA-IHE Collaboratives, Cluster Four (includes LaRie Colosimo, Regional Director; Gay Roby, Regional Director; Deborah Taylor, Director of Teacher Education; Melinda Soto, Manager of Credentialing and Advising; Jamie Stunkard, Credential Analyst; local school district representatives)

5) Quarterly Student Teacher Supervisor Meetings (includes Director of Teacher Education, Student Teaching and Field Placement Coordinator, Student Teacher Seminar Professors, and all university employed student teaching supervisors)

6) Quantitative and Qualitative Feedback: Surveys of master teachers and principals are collected and analyzed once per semester. Master teachers and supervisors provide written evaluation each semester on every teacher candidate in a field assignment or

  6 

student teaching placement. Student teachers complete a Self-assessment of Readiness to Teach survey at the conclusion of student teaching, as well as providing written feedback on their university supervisor and master teachers’ effectiveness as a mentor.

The culmination of key stakeholder input from all of these sources is collected, discussed, and analyzed at the University Supervisor meetings, Teacher Preparation Committee meetings, and Leadership Team meetings.

Unit leadership has the authority and institutional support needed to create effective strategies to achieve the needs of all programs and represents the interests of each program within the institution.

Unit leadership (including Dean, Chairs, Director, and Coordinators) has the authority to collaboratively create effective strategies to achieve the needs of the teacher preparation program. Decisions are made on a regular basis for program improvement at Teacher Preparation meetings. Agenda and minutes of all meetings, data analysis, and rationale for programmatic changes are carefully recorded in meeting binders.

Biola University provides the School of Education unit with an annual budget of 1.1 million dollars. The School of Education leadership has representation on Biola University’s Council of Instructional Deans, the Undergraduate Chairs Meeting, and the Graduate Studies Committee. Voice for all key stakeholders is utilized in the context of appropriate lines of authority. Additionally, School of Education has faculty representation on many critical university committees such as: Undergraduate Curriculum Committee, Diversity Leadership Committee, General Education Council, University Personnel Committee, Research and Development Committee, and the Graduate Studies Committee.

Evidence:

View minutes of meeting binders View agenda of meetings with the Provost.

The education unit implements and monitors a credential recommendation process that ensures that candidates recommended for a credential have met all requirements.

Response:

Candidates in the Teacher Preparation Program receive regular communication, from admissions to program completion, regarding the multiple and single subject program completion requirements. This includes presentations from our credential analysts in each teacher preparation course and a checklist to ensure that candidates bring all of the appropriate documents for their credential application.

Biola University’s School of Education requires all candidates to make an appointment with a credential analyst in order to be recommended for a California Commission-approved Teaching Credential. The candidate must provide: official transcripts verifying posting of their accredited

  7 

baccalaureate or higher degree; official scores reports of passage of CBEST, CSET (if not using a waiver program for SS), and RICA (MS only); evidence of completing a subject matter waiver program by providing a letter on official letterhead from the university (SS only and if not using the CSET); evidence of completion of Biola University’s professional preparation program through official transcripts; approved U.S. History course verified on official transcripts or passage of U.S. Constitution exam verified by official letter; current CPR certification (infant, child, and adult); and verification of the passage of all four CalTPAs on the Biola University student data base. After verification of all of the above, credential analysts formally recommend the candidate for his/her California Teaching Credential.

  8 

Standard 2: Unit and Program Assessment and Evaluation

The education unit implements an assessment and evaluation system for ongoing program and unit evaluation and improvement. The system collects, analyzes, and utilizes data on candidate and program completer performance and unit operations. Assessment in all programs includes ongoing and comprehensive data collection related to candidate qualifications, proficiencies, and competence, as well as program effectiveness, and is used for improvement purposes.

Standard 2 Response

The education unit implements an assessment and evaluation system for ongoing program and unit evaluation and improvement.

Candidate Assessment:

Content Knowledge is measured through exams, such as the CBEST, CSET, and RICA as well as overall GPA.

Teacher Performance Expectations are measured through a) Key Assignments, b) CalTPAs, c) e-Portfolios, d) Candidate Fieldwork Experience Evaluations, e) Professional Dispositions and Competencies Evaluation Forms, f) Mid Evaluation of the Teacher Candidate during student teaching, and g) Final Evaluation of Teacher Candidate at completion of student teaching.

Candidates also complete a Self-Assessment of Readiness to Teach at the end of their student teaching. This data is triangulated with the TPA data and key assignments for ongoing program improvement.

Quality of Professors, Student Teacher Supervisors, Cooperating Teachers, and Master Teachers:

Quality of Professors in Program is measured through Initial Hiring process, Annual Review Process, Student Reviews (i.e., IDEA evaluation), Curriculum Vitae, and Peer and Administrative Observations.

Quality of Student Teacher Supervisors is measured through Master Teacher’s Evaluation of the Supervisor, Student Teacher’s Evaluation of the Supervisor, and ongoing recommendation of the Director of Teacher Education.

Quality of Master Teachers in the Field is assessed through Student Teacher Evaluation of the Master Teacher, Supervisor Evaluation of the Master Teacher, and ongoing recommendation of school and district administration.

Quality of the Cooperating Teachers in the Fieldwork Placement occurs through utilizing the Candidate Evaluation of the Cooperating Teacher and Administrative approval for placements.

  9 

Quality of Field Placements:

Quality of the field placements is assessed initially through the screening of the Student Teacher and Field Placement Coordinator as she interacts by phone and email with the local schools and district offices. Additionally, School Profiles are filled out by supervisors for student teaching placements. An evaluation of the Master Teacher by both the Student Teacher Supervisor and the Credential Candidate occurs with every student teacher placement.

Finally, there are site visitations by university personnel each year. Personnel that visit the sites include the Student Teacher/Field Placement Coordinator, University Supervisors, Professors, Director of Teacher Education, and Dean. Between all of these personnel, every school is visited at least once per year.

The system collects, analyzes, and utilizes data on candidate and program

completer performance and unit operations.

Title II reports summarize program completer information. These data are analyzed for general trends by the Director of Teacher Education, the Manager of Credentialing and Advising, and the Dean of Education.

The TPA Coordinator summarizes the summative TPA performance data and brings the data to the Teacher Preparation Committee meetings. In addition to the holistic scores of 1, 2, 3, and 4, the TPA Coordinator also collects and collaboratively analyzes candidate weaknesses as described by the TPA assessors on the ROEs. This data is collectively analyzed in administrative meetings for biennial reports, and at the Teacher Preparation Meetings.

Evidence:

Title II Reports Biennial Report Teacher Preparation Agenda and Minutes

Assessment in all programs includes ongoing and comprehensive data collection related to candidate qualifications, proficiencies, and competence, as well

as program effectiveness,

Biola University has the following teacher preparation programs: MS and SS preliminary credential, early childhood permits (assistant and associate permits – in first year of program), and we are currently applying for the new Clear Credential program. Each program has formative and summative assignments within the program that measure candidate qualifications, proficiencies, and competencies. Analysis of program data occurs each semester as faculty and staff analyze summative data of program effectiveness and use data for improvement purposes.

Key Assignments are summarized by professors each semester and brought to the Teacher Preparation Committee for discussion and evaluation. Results are kept in the Key Assignment Data File in the front office and discussion can be found in Teacher Preparation Committee Minutes for the MS and SS programs. We are in the process of transitioning key assignments to Task Stream for more systematic submission, analysis, and recordkeeping. Our

  10 

and is used for improvement purposes.

current challenge with using the paper system for key assignments is that we have gaps in data collection.

Content Knowledge is measured through exams, such as the CBEST, CSET, and RICA as well as overall GPA.

Teacher Performance Expectations are measured through a) Key Assignments, b) TPAs, c) e-Portfolios, d) Candidate Fieldwork Experience Evaluations, e) Professional Dispositions and Competencies Evaluation Forms, f) Mid Evaluation of the Teacher Candidate during student teaching, and g) Final Evaluation of Teacher Candidate at completion of student teaching.

Students also complete a Self-Assessment of Readiness at the end of their student teaching. This data is triangulated with the CalTPA data and key assignments

Additionally, at the end of every teacher preparation course, the professor fills out a Professional Dispositions and Competencies Evaluation, discussing the results with the teacher candidate as needed. The professor and student signatures and dates verify date of reviewing the evaluation and/or discussion of the evaluation. By utilizing the same dispositions evaluation within each teacher preparation course, we are able to track strengths, progress, and concerns for each candidate.

With all data collection, results are summarized and presented to committee. The committee analyzes the general trends of the data and discusses how to use the data to determine candidate qualifications, proficiencies, competence, and overall program effectiveness. Then, utilizing the discussion of the data, in context of what we know in the latest research related to areas of needed improvement, we assign task forces to analyze further and make recommendations. Over the last couple of years, the three main task forces have been: ELLs, special needs, and assessment. Teacher Preparation Agenda and Minutes show evidence of these task forces and resulting programmatic changes.

We are currently rewriting the Clear Credential Program according to the new standards. Data will be collected and analyzed on regular basis. Evidence for this will be seen in the future (after approval and implementation) in the agenda and minutes of the Graduate Studies Committee within the School of Education.

The School of Education was also just approved in Spring 2009 for the Assistant and Associate Early Childhood Permits. As we implement this program, data collection of key assignments will occur and be analyzed for program quality and improvement in the appropriate subcommittee.

  11 

Standard 3: Resources

The institution provides the unit with the necessary budget, qualified personnel, adequate facilities and other resources to prepare candidates effectively to meet the state-adopted standards for educator preparation. Sufficient resources are consistently allocated for effective operation of each credential or certificate program for coordination, admission, advisement, curriculum and professional development, instruction, field-based supervision and/or clinical experiences, and assessment management. Sufficient information resources and related personnel are available to meet program and candidate needs. A process that is inclusive of all programs is in place to determine resource needs.

The institution provides the unit with the necessary budget, qualified personnel, adequate facilities and other resources to prepare candidates effectively to meet the state-adopted standards for educator preparation.

Facilities Resources

Biola University provides the School of Education with a 1.1 million dollar budget for all current programs, including funding for ten qualified full-time faculty and administrators, six full-time staff, and approximately a dozen part-time adjunct faculty. Biola currently houses the School of Education in two portable buildings. In the long-range plan, Biola University plans to remodel the adjacent Bardwell Hall for the School of Education. Single subject majors are housed and supported through the School of Arts and Sciences budget. All teacher preparation candidates have access to additional university facilities, such as computer labs, library, curriculum lab, science labs, etc.

Sufficient resources are consistently allocated for effective operation of each credential or certificate program for coordination, admission, advisement, curriculum and professional development, instruction, field-based supervision and/or clinical experiences, and assessment management.

Personnel Resources

Biola University currently provides total budget allocation for operations and salaries to support the effective operations of each of our credential and certificate programs.

Admissions: At the undergraduate level, our two full-time credential analysts support the admissions process through receiving applications, reviewing applications with the Director of Teacher Education, and final approvals at the Teacher Preparation Committee. The Director of Teacher Education has a 5-unit release for teacher preparation activities as well as a 10th month salary.

At the graduate level, we have 23 hours per week for a Graduate Admission Counselor coming from two different budgets (13 hours from general SOE budget; 10 additional hours provided through the new Early Childhood Certificate Program budget) to support the acceptance and enrollment of new students in the graduate credential and certificate programs. The Graduate Chair

has a 5-unit release for directing graduate studies and for supporting acceptance of credential candidates at the graduate level, as well as

  12 

a 10th month salary.

Advisement: We have two full-time staff members who support advisement, including the Manager of Credentialing and Advising and the Credential Analyst. Additionally, the Student Teaching/ Field Placement Coordinator advises in the area of field placement. All full-time faculty are expected to post 8 hours of office hours/ advising per week, unless they are in their first year of teaching at Biola.

Curriculum and Instruction: Biola University recently transitioned the Department of Education to a School of Education to strengthen the leadership structure. We now have a full-time Dean, two Chairs, a Director of Teacher Education (currently the Undergraduate Chair), a Liberal Studies Coordinator, and a TPA Coordinator. We have a total of 10 full-time administrators /faculty. We have approximately 10-12 active adjuncts each semester.

Professional Development: The SOE has approximately $1,000 per full-time faculty member per academic year to support conference attendance and research opportunities. Additionally, faculty have access to university-wide Research & Development grants, as well as two full-time grant writers to support faculty in developing research projects. The university provides a broad level of faculty development support in technology and online education through the offices of the Associate Provost and Human Resources. In addition, the university supports faculty research luncheons 3-4 times per semester and the School of Education hosts 3 in-house faculty research luncheons per year.

Field-based Supervision and Clinical Experiences: Biola University supports a full-time 12-month Student Teaching and Field Placement Coordinator. The responsibilities include placement of teacher candidates in their 25-hour introductory field experience, their 35-hour teaching reading field experience, their 60-hour curriculum field experience, and their culminating student teaching placements. The Student Teaching and Field Placement Coordinator distributes payment of a $90 honorarium to each master teacher for serving as a mentor to our student teachers.

Biola University also supports approximately 10 active part-time student teacher supervisors each semester. Full-time faculty also rotate through the supervisory process for student teachers. The university compensates the supervisors, providing one-unit credit per two student teachers. Salaries are appropriately based upon

  13 

degrees and experience.

The university also provides funding each semester for the Master Teacher/Student Teacher Reception, the Student Teaching Banquet, the Brown Bag Luncheon for the Supervisors, and the Dinner/Supervisor Meeting. Operating budget includes funds for mileage reimbursement for school visitations of all personnel; materials, such as duplication of forms, master teacher folders, supervisor folders, and student teacher folders; and refreshments/meals for meetings on an ongoing basis.

Assessment Management: Biola University provides a full-time TPA Coordinator who teaches one 4-unit course per semester and gives the rest of her energies to TPA coordination. In addition to her full-time salary, she also receives a 10th month compensation for responsibilities such as: disaggregation of TPA data, advising and remediation for candidates, facilitation of Task Stream, and TPA assessor support. The TPA Coordinator utilizes the services of the full-time administrative assistant as well as her team of 10-12 fully-trained assessors. Biola University provides funding (stipend and mileage) for adjunct faculty assessors involved in TPA training. Assessors are compensated for each TPA assessed ($50 for CalTPAs 1, 2, and 3; $60 for CalTPA 4).

Assessment of the entire unit is a collaborative venture between the Director of Teacher Education, the TPA Coordinator, the Dean, and the Committee on Teacher Preparation and occurs primarily during Teacher Preparation meeting discussion, Leadership Team meetings, and collaborative meetings as necessary.

Sufficient information resources and related personnel are available to meet program and candidate needs.

The Library serves Biola University as the central information resource facility, supporting all undergraduate and graduate programs with extensive resources, regardless of format or location, and a wide variety of services. For a complete overview of the Library and its services, see http://www.biola.edu/library/. Opened the fall of 2001, our state of the art, 98,000 square foot, tri-level Library, located on the campus quad, integrates traditional print, modern online electronic, multimedia and audio-visual resources. In an environment that respects the privacy of the individual scholar and facilitates dynamic, interactive, collaborative learning groups, our flexible Library will serve the University for many decades.

There is a two-story, keyboard free, quiet, current periodical reading room with mezzanine, and 24 group study rooms on the upper and lower levels. The technology-rich instruction room serves 48 students in a class setting at 24 computer workstations, which are available for individual students when not used for group

  14 

instruction. Further, an adaptive technology room provides private individual and small group access for those requiring magnification, voice recognition and oral transcription, or other computer based assistance. The local area network in the Information Commons allows up to 32 simultaneous users. Further, the Media Center provides 15 dedicated multimedia viewing and listening stations. The summer of 2009, preparations are underway to add 40 to 60 additional networked computer workstations for individual and group work in a variety of configurations. The building provides space for over 900 additional individual study stations at carrels, tables and casual lounge reading seats most of which are equipped with data and power connections for laptop computer use as well as wireless network service throughout the building. The upper-level study terrace and the middle-level Giumarra Court offer more than 100 outdoor study spaces, and an upper level 12-seat coffee and food court provides an informal setting for study, fellowship and nutrition breaks with both cable and wireless network connectivity. In addition, the Library houses two computer classrooms managed by IT: a PC classroom with 35 work stations and a MAC classroom with 25 stations, which are available for individuals or groups when not in use as classrooms during hours posted at the doors.

With respect to the Library's support of the School of Education, several spreadsheets, available upon request, analyze the collection with a focus on education. These spreadsheets show specific subject areas and the distribution of the age of the items by date of publication. This gives a sense of the relative currency of the collection for each indicated area. For example, nearly 16% of the 11,413 titles in Education were published after 1999.

The first spreadsheet is "World Cat Analysis--Subjects & Dates" which shows that of the 244,073 items in our online catalog, nearly 5% (4.68%) are specific to Education. This spreadsheet shows that education is supported at a level comparable to several other subjects, with a total of 11,413 items.

The second is "Education" which shows how the 11,413 items in the online catalog are distributed among the key subject areas for education with the strongest areas of support being for Early Childhood and Primary Education with nearly 10% of the education items, School Administration and Organization with over 11% of the items, Special Aspects of Education with over 24% of the items, and Theory and Practice of Education with over 27% of the items.

The third is "Early Childhood Expanded" which shows how the 2,278 items for ECE, Preschool, Kindergarten and Primary

  15 

Education are distributed among the various subject areas. Together these areas account for nearly 20% of the total Education Collection.

The fourth is "Special Aspects of Education Expanded" which shows how the 2,778 items for a range of education subjects are distributed. Together they comprise nearly 25% (24.34%) of the Education Collection with the principal areas being Education of the Exceptional, Gifted & Handicapped (20%) of the Special Aspects category and Moral Education comprising over 15% of this category.

The fifth is "Education Theory & Practice" which shows how the 3,133 items for a range of subjects are distributed together comprising over 27% of all the Education Collection.

Other areas, from Psychology, Temperament and Character development, adds only 33 items, Child Psychology adds 429 items and Developmental Psychology adds another 106 items in areas of interest to the School of Education.

Finally, the seventh spreadsheet is "Teacher Education" which shows how the 390 items are distributed among the Education & Training of Teachers, Professional Aspects for Teachers, and Teacher Education and Professional development.

With respect to fund allocations for the acquisition of new materials in support of the School of Education, from since 1993, Education has received $95,771 for the purchase of monographs and audiovisual materials.

Allocation for 1993-2006 = $65,859 (Average of $5,066 per year)

Allocation for 2006-2007 = $ 8,712

Allocation for 2007-2008 = $10,000

Allocation for 2008-2009 = $11,200

Funding for 2009-2010 currently set at $10,000. The commitment to support the programs of the School of Education is growing on average nearly doubling in the last three years. This funding does not include reference books, most e-books, databases or print and online journal resources.

A team of qualified librarians is available to assist our candidates as

  16 

they have need to conduct research or access library holdings. Evidence: SOE electronic documents room, Library holdings

A process that is inclusive of all programs is in place to determine resource needs.

The Dean of the School of Education is the primary budget administrator for the SOE programs. However, budgetary decisions regarding the multiple subject, single subject, and fifth year programs are made with input from chairs, faculty, and staff as needs arise. The budgetary requests are due on October 1 of each academic year and approvals are communicated by January of the same academic year. When starting new programs, SOE may apply for seed monies from the administration of the university (e.g., funds for the Early Childhood program were given to SOE for the Fall 2009 start up). Currently, multiple subject, single subject, and fifth year programs are within the general SOE budget, but Early Childhood has a separate budget.

  17 

Standard 4: Faculty and Instructional Personnel

Qualified persons are employed and assigned to teach all courses, to provide professional development, and to supervise field-based and/or clinical experiences in each credential and certificate program.

Instructional personnel and faculty have current knowledge in the content they teach, understand the context of public schooling, and model best professional practices in teaching and learning, scholarship, and service. They are reflective of a diverse society and knowledgeable about diverse abilities, cultural, language, ethnic and gender diversity. They have a thorough grasp of the academic standards, frameworks, and accountability systems that drive the curriculum of public schools. They collaborate regularly and systematically with colleagues in P-12 settings/college/university units and members of the broader, professional community to improve teaching, candidate learning, and educator preparation.

The institution provides support for faculty development.

The unit regularly evaluates the performance of course instructors and field supervisors, recognizes excellence, and retains only those who are consistently effective.

Qualified persons are employed and assigned to teach all courses, to provide professional development, and to supervise field-based and/or clinical experiences in each credential and certificate program.

Biola University has a rigorous faculty application process that includes extensive written responses to employment application questions, references, essay on educational philosophy, a series of interviews (minimally Dean, Chair, Faculty, Provost and President interviews), and close examination of curriculum vitae and transcripts. For all SOE faculty appointments, a high priority is placed upon their experience in P-12 schools as well as their research, presentation, and publication records.

The same rigorous process is required for adjunct and university supervisors, with the exception of the President/Provost interview. However, there is less emphasis on research, presentations, and publications, and more emphasis on practical classroom experience.

Evidence:

website, faculty application, personnel files Instructional personnel and faculty have current knowledge in the content they teach, understand the context of public schooling, and model best professional practices in teaching and learning, scholarship, and service.

Curriculum vitae, faculty load sheets, and annual reviews demonstrate instructional personnel’s current involvement in public schooling and up-to-date research on best practices. As part of the evaluation process, we require that faculty model the best professional practices in their courses. This is verified through chair and peer observations. Examples of our faculty’s involvement with public schools are as follows:

Dr. Claire Sibold visits the schools where her reading students are

  18 

placed, consults, and does classroom observations. She also regularly participates in school literacy events and periodically supervises student teachers.

Dr. Virginia Johnson also has periodically supervised student teachers.

Dr. Fred Ramirez regularly volunteers in local public school classrooms and is a member of the Community Site Council for his local public school district.

Dr. Deborah Taylor, Director of Teacher Education, regularly participates in district meetings; meets with student teachers, master teachers, and principals; and recently volunteered her time tutoring for Kidworks in Santa Ana. She also hosts the “Master Teacher/Student Teacher Tea” each semester which includes collaboration of students, teachers, Master Teachers, Administrators, and University Student Teacher Supervisors.

Janet Brazeal, TPA Coordinator and Curriculum Professor, assisted with La Mirada High School/Biola University Literacy Initiative this last spring and also facilitated an event for Maple Elementary School fifth graders in Fullerton to promote higher education for minorities.

Gwen Botka serves on the School Site Council for Placentia Yorba Linda School Unified School District and also substitute teaches for grades K-8.

Jenna Stein supervises student teachers and chaperones for Temple City Unified School District’s extra curricular events.

Dr. Robin LaBarbera is actively involved in boards for Opportunities Schools in Orange County, shadowing studies with students with disabilities, and has periodically supervised student teachers.

Phil Taylor supervises several secondary student teachers each year at a variety of local public schools.

Dr. June Hetzel has facilitated a four-year literacy initiative with La Mirada High School, has participated in ELD training at the La Mirada Norwalk Unified School District Office, has initiated a tutoring partnership with Gardenhill Elementary, and continues to meet with principals, participates in school “walk throughs,” meets with area administrators, and so forth. She has participated in

  19 

“Principal for the Day” events as well as “Career Day” speaking engagements in public schools.

Dr. Tim Stranske is coordinating with district and state officials as he rewrites the new Clear Credential Program. He is involved with public schools in Burundi and serves as the ACSI liaison with private schools in the area. Dr. Stranske worked with Waite Middle School to facilitate a tutoring program for students, involving our teacher candidates.

Evidence:

Personnel files, promotion applications, annual reviews They are reflective of a diverse society and knowledgeable about diverse abilities, cultural, language, ethnic and gender diversity.

Of our 16 full-time and part-time teaching faculty, 56.3% are Anglo, 6.3% are Asian, 12.5% are African American, and 25% are Latino. Our faculty is 62.5% female and 37.5% male.

Approximately 50% of our faculty have conducted specialized research in areas related to diversity. Dr. Fred Ramirez has published regularly in the Multicultural Education Journal and regularly conducts research related to diversity and its impact on families as well as special education. Dr. Robin LaBarbera has recently published articles on learning disabilities and autism. Her experiences teaching in Papua New Guinea, Watts, and Uganda help her to provide our candidates with a rich understanding of the impact of culture on learning. Dr. Deborah Taylor recently completed her doctoral dissertation entitled, “Factors that Motivate Faculty in Christian Postsecondary Institutions to Adapt Their Behavior and Pedagogy to Become More Culturally Competent” and is currently working on a grant to publish these findings. She also published an article in Educational Leadership on gender differences and incorporates this research in her courses. Dr. Deborah Taylor and Dr. Claire Sibold specialize in multicultural children’s literature and infuse this content throughout the literacy courses in the teacher preparation program. Jennifer Canillas Stein regularly speaks at conferences and consults school districts in the area of English Learners and brings her knowledge of Spanish, Mandarin, and Hindi languages into her course that instructs candidates in strategies to teach linguistically diverse students. Dr. June Hetzel recently co-authored a book entitled The Literacy Gaps: Building Bridges for English Language Learners and Standard English Learners (Corwin, 2009).

They have a thorough grasp of the academic standards, frameworks, and accountability systems

Faculty who teach in the teacher preparation program demonstrate their thorough knowledge of academic standards and frameworks as they model the incorporation of standards in all lesson and unit planning materials. Additionally, they model the importance of

  20 

that drive the curriculum of public schools. They collaborate regularly and systematically with colleagues in P-12 settings/college/university units and members of the broader, professional community to improve teaching, candidate learning, and educator preparation.

using assessment to drive instruction. For example, standards, frameworks and assessment systems are incorporated throughout assignments within the entire scope and sequence of the teacher preparation program.

Some of the ways that our faculty regularly and systematically collaborate with members of the broader professional community include:

• BSTA-IHE Regional Collaboratives • Board of Institutional Reviewers for California (BIR) • California Council of Teacher Educators (CCTE) • Independent California Colleges and Universities Council

on Education of Teachers (ICCUCET) • Kwis Elementary School Partnership (Hacienda La Puente

School District) • Norwalk/La Mirada BTSA Collaborative • La Mirada High School/Biola Partnership • Gardenhill Elementary Partnership • America Reads Tutoring Program • CABE, NABE, IRA, CRA, OCRA

The institution provides support for faculty development.

The SOE has approximately $1,000 per full-time faculty member per academic year to support conference attendance and research opportunities. Additionally, faculty have access to university-wide Research & Development grants, as well as two full-time grant writers to support faculty in developing research projects. The university provides a broad level of faculty development support in technology and online education through the offices of the Associate Provost and Human Resources. In addition, the university supports faculty research luncheons 3-4 times per semester and the School of Education hosts 3 in-house faculty research luncheons per year.

The unit regularly evaluates the performance of course instructors and field supervisors, recognizes excellence, and retains only those who are consistently effective.

Evaluation of Course Instructors: All course instructors are evaluated each semester on the IDEA evaluation, which measures the achievement of identified learning outcomes. Additionally, faculty are provided with summaries of the effective teaching strategies that they have employed as well as several target areas to increase or improve. Peer and administrator evaluations are a required element of the annual cycle and required for promotion. Chairs meet individually with each teaching faculty member during each academic year to examine data regarding teaching effectiveness, course modifications and improvements, and goals for the next review cycle. If a faculty member does not demonstrate teaching effectiveness, the contract is not renewed.

  21 

Evaluation of Field Supervisors: The Student Teacher Supervisors are evaluated formally through an evaluation from the Master Teacher and an evaluation from the Student Teacher. The Student Teacher and Field Placement Coordinator compiles each supervisor’s set of student evaluations and each set of master evaluations. The Director of Teacher Preparation and the Student Teacher Supervisor receives the compilations of these two separate evaluations each semester. The compilations are then used for self-assessment and feedback by the Student Teacher Supervisor as well as a point of dialogue between the Director of Teacher Education and the Supervisor. Additionally, the Director of Teacher Education also informally assesses the Student Teacher Supervisors through ongoing dialogue via email, telephone, and supervisory meetings (three per semester). When difficulties occur, meetings take place between the Director(s) of Teacher Education and the supervisor in question, including dialogue and contracts for improvement.

Quality performance of the Student Teacher Supervisors are recognized through the Master Teacher Reception and the Student Teacher Celebration Banquet where the Dean and Director of Teacher Education publically acknowledge field supervisors for their important contribution to the development of our teacher education candidates. This includes public introductions of each individual, a tea, a dinner, and verbal accolades. Additionally, at the Student Teacher Supervisor meetings, we provide a meal and graciously thank them for their work. Additionally, privately, the supervisors are acknowledged for the quality of their work via their evaluation compilations and appreciation notes from the Director of Teacher Education.

Quality performance of the professionals in the field (e.g., master teachers) are recognized through the Master Teacher Reception celebration where they are publicly asked to stand, thanked, and applauded for their work by Biola’s student teachers, supervisors, staff, faculty, and administration. Additionally, the master teachers receive a thank you letter and a $90 stipend that they are paid for their services. The University Student Teacher Supervisors also provide a small thank you note and token of appreciation each semester.

Cooperating Teachers receive an introductory and thank you letter for their services with every field placement in Biola’s Teacher Preparation Program. During the spring, the Student Teacher/Field Placement Coordinator sends a thank you letter to all campus administrators that provide Biola’s fieldwork experience.

  22 

Standard 5: Admission

In each professional preparation program, applicants are admitted on the basis of well-defined admission criteria and procedures, including all Commission-adopted requirements.

Biola University’s undergraduate candidates are admitted on the basis of well-defined admission criteria, including submitted complete application, three recommendations, transcripts to verify a minimum 2.75 GPA, verification of registration for the CBEST exam, application fee, and approval of a Teacher Preparation Subcommittee.

Biola University’s graduate candidates are admitted on the basis of well-defined admission criteria, including; submission of complete application, three recommendations, transcripts to verify GPA (minimum 2.75 cum) and bachelor’s degree from an accredited institution, passage of the CBEST exam, application fee, verification of Certificate of Clearance, Chair interview and approval, and approval of Graduate Admissions. Biola University’s graduate teacher preparation for multiple and single subject credentials also requires candidates to have passed at least one CSET subtest for admission or evidence of completion of a state-approved subject matter waiver program. However, exceptions are made for candidates who meet all other university and program criteria, with the understanding that the CSET must be passed at the time of application for student teaching. Additionally, in rare cases, an exception may be made for the CBEST as well.

Multiple measures are used in an admission process that encourages and supports applicants from diverse populations.

Biola University is situated in Los Angeles, a diverse environment that welcomes candidates from diverse backgrounds. At both the undergraduate and graduate level, multiple approaches are taken to encourage diverse populations to consider Biola University as their school of choice. Some of those measures include: admissions representatives visit high schools, churches, and community colleges with diverse populations. School of Education representatives also visit community college career and education fairs to recruit applications from a diverse population. Biola University hosts several events each semester where students from diverse backgrounds are invited to campus for tours, meals, classroom observations, dorm visits, and information sessions on the various majors, including education.

The unit determines that admitted candidates have appropriate pre-professional experiences and personal characteristics, including sensitivity to California's diverse population, effective communication skills, basic academic skills, and prior experiences that suggest a strong potential for professional effectiveness.

Pre-professional experiences, personal characteristics, and sensitivity to California’s diverse population are determined through the application and references at the undergraduate level and graduate level. Additionally, effective communication skills are determined at the undergraduate level through students’ participation in their prerequisite course (as verified by their professor) and at the graduate level through their Chair interview, as well as through their written application. Basic academic skills are determined through formal transcripts verifying GPA as

  23 

well as through test scores. Information on previous experiences is asked on the undergraduate application and in the graduate interview.

Evidence:

UG: Professional Education Program Application and References GRAD: Biola University Application, Interview Protocol, and References Biola University Catalog Biola University Website

  24 

Standard 6: Advice and Assistance

Qualified members of the unit are assigned and available to advise applicants and candidates about their academic, professional and personal development, and to assist each candidate’s professional placement.

As candidates are accepted into the teacher credential program, they are assigned advisors who can assist them with academic, professional, and personal development. Advisors include full-time faculty, CCTC-certified credential analysts, and the full-time Field Placement Coordinator. Appointments are made through the Education Secretary and at any given time, candidates may call or email and have several options for advisement. (See appointment handbook.)

Each academic advisor has been provided with an advising handbook that is updated regularly with any new legislative or program requirements. The Manager of Credentialing and Advising provides updates and ongoing advising training at the monthly SOE meetings so that advisors have access to the latest academic and credential information to pass on to their assigned advisees. Because the same advisor works with a candidate throughout their entire credential program, the advising relationship includes mentoring about the candidate’s personal and professional development, as well as their academic progress.

Appropriate information is accessible to guide each candidate's attainment of all program requirements.

Program information is accessible to every candidate via the website, Biola University catalog, and program sheets. Additionally, credential analysts visit each teacher preparation course every semester to provide education updates and program sheets/requirements for each stage of their preparation program. Advising handbooks are provided to each advisor, along with regular updates so that accurate information is distributed to candidates by their advisor. Candidates also have access through their University email account to the School of Education Folder, which provides access to: testing information, application information, program advisement, teaching opportunities, and opportunities to post questions to the School of Education which are answered on a daily basis. Candidates who failed to earn a passing score on any CalTPA may meet with the TPA Coordinator at any time for personalized remediation and support. In addition, if a candidate fails a TPA twice, they are required to enroll in an independent study with the TPA Coordinator before submitting their third and final submission.

The institution and/or unit provide support and assistance to candidates and only retains candidates who are suited for entry or advancement in the education profession. Evidence regarding candidate progress and performance is consistently utilized to guide advisement and assistance efforts.

There are several measures that the unit provides to determine whether or not candidates are suited for entry or advancement in the education profession. These measures include: Professional Dispositions and Competencies Evaluations in each teaching methodology course; tracking of GPA throughout the program; progress in CalTPA performance; fieldwork evaluations from master teachers, cooperating teachers, and university supervisors; progress in

  25 

attaining appropriate TPEs via key assignments; as well as the student teaching interview and final evaluations. Evidence regarding candidate progress is consistently utilized to guide advisement and assistance efforts. Data is accessed via the School of Education database, student file, and Task Stream (starting Fall 2009).

Candidates who struggle to meet one or more of these program standards are offered the opportunity to meet with a faculty mentor who will support them toward achievement of the required program outcomes, or help them to consider other possible career options.

Evidence:

School of Education database Student files Forms: Professional Disposition Evaluation, Fieldwork Evaluations for all methodology classes, student teaching evaluation, interview protocols for student teaching.

  26 

Standard 7: Field Experience and Clinical Practice

The unit and its partners design, implement, and regularly evaluate a planned sequence of field-based and clinical experiences in order for candidates to develop and demonstrate the knowledge and skills necessary to educate and support all students effectively so that P-12 students meet state-adopted academic standards.

The fieldwork placements in Biola University’s teacher preparation program have been carefully sequenced so that candidates experience increasingly complex and rigorous fieldwork experiences that allow them to develop and demonstrate the appropriate skills to effectively support P-12 students.

LEDU 301/SEED 519: In this pre-requisite course, candidates are placed in a classroom for 25 hours. Within this placement, candidates observe and report on the following: the relationship between state academic content standards and instruction, classroom management strategies, the effective use of technology in a classroom, and the teacher’s legal obligations. Based on their fieldwork experience, candidates also report on the relationship between student learning, engagement, and assessment and how an effective teacher utilizes self-reflection to make instructional adjustments. Additionally, candidates formulate a special needs review based on the specific needs of a particular student in their fieldwork placement.

LEDU 420/425 SEED 520/525: In the elementary or secondary reading course, candidates are placed in a classroom for 35 hours. During this placement, they assume more classroom responsibility such as: administering reading inventories and reading assessments, working with small groups of students, and teaching 2 or more lessons to the entire class. They also work with an identified English learner and a special needs student, gathering specific data and making accommodations to a lesson that they will submit for CalTPA 2.

LEDU 430/435 SEED 505/506: In the elementary or secondary curriculum course, candidates are placed in a classroom for 60 hours. Candidates assume even greater classroom responsibility. They will teach 4 lessons to the entire class, differentiate their instruction, and administer an assessment to the class. As part of CalTPA 3, candidates work with an identified English learner and an identified special needs student, gathering specific data and making accommodations to the assessment and analyzing the results of the assessment.

For each credential and certificate program, the unit collaborates with its partners regarding the criteria for selection of school sites, effective clinical personnel, and site-based supervising personnel.

For all public school fieldwork placements, Biola University’s teacher preparation program requires that cooperating and master teachers are experienced, highly recommended by school principals, and fully CCTC- and ELL-authorized. School sites are selected based on collaborative partnerships that Biola has developed with surrounding school districts. The field placement coordinator contacts the school administrator and reviews the above criteria with each placement request. She also verifies that the class in which our candidate will be placed is

  27 

diverse, includes English learners, and special needs students. At the beginning of the semester, the candidate and professor verify that the placement does indeed meet the aforementioned criteria. Additionally, university faculty, staff, and supervisors conduct regular visits to these campuses and provide ongoing feedback regarding the climate and characteristics of the site so that we can place our candidates in the most appropriate settings for their growth and development.

When arranging the student teaching placements, the requirements for the site-based supervisors (master teachers) are even more rigorous. In addition to being CCTC- and ELL-authorized, each master teacher must have a minimum of 3 years teaching experience at their current grade level in order to be considered a quality mentor for our candidates. Each teacher candidate and university supervisor completes an evaluation on the master teacher at the conclusion of the placement and these are reviewed by the Student Teaching Placement Coordinator and used as the basis for future requests and placements.

Field-based work and/or clinical experiences provide candidates opportunities to understand and address issues of diversity that affect school climate, teaching, and learning, and to help candidates develop research-based strategies for improving student learning.

Field placements are sought in diverse settings within a 30-minute radius of Biola University. Most of these schools reflect the diversity of the Los Angeles region and of the specific neighborhood of the school. English learners are present in every selected public school classroom, and our candidates gain a great deal of experience in understanding their backgrounds and developing the teaching strategies to effectively address their learning needs and help them achieve the state academic content standards. Embedding the Cal-TPA in three of the courses that include fieldwork has increased our candidates’ ability to use research-based strategies to improve student learning by gathering specific information on their focus students, identifying appropriate assessments, making accommodations to their instructional and assessment procedures, and analyzing the results of their assessments to make better informed instructional decisions. Many districts have commented that our candidates are among the best-prepared student teachers that they have witnessed, and consequently, many of them have been hired, even in this challenging job market, either as long-term substitutes or as contracted teachers.

  28 

Standard 8: District-Employed Supervisors

District-employed supervisors are certified and experienced in either teaching the specified content or performing the services authorized by the credential. A process for selecting supervisors who are knowledgeable and supportive of the academic content standards for students is based on identified criteria.

Response:

The “Student Teaching Agreements” specifically require employees that provide direct supervision and instruction to student teachers to hold valid teaching credentials, other than provisional credentials, issued by the California Commission on Teacher Credentialing authorizing them to serve as classroom teachers. Teachers must be credentialed in the appropriate subject area. Additionally, Cooperating Teachers for methodology classes must be fully credentialed, ELL-authorized, and have at least three years teaching experience in the grade level. Additionally, required diversity in the student population at the field site must include an English Language Learner and Special Needs Student (GATE identified, IEP, or 504 Plan) in order for students to appropriately complete TPA requirements.

Supervisors are trained in supervision, oriented to the supervisory role, evaluated and recognized in a systematic manner.

The Director of Teacher Preparation meets quarterly with university supervisors and provides ongoing training in supervision skills and the unique characteristics of the supervisory role. In order to train the district-employed supervisors, we utilize our university supervisors who have undergone this training. Each supervisor is required to make an introductory visit to each master teacher to orient them to Biola’s requirements, which includes evaluation forms, lesson plan templates, and schedule for the candidate to assume classroom responsibility. During this initial meeting, the university supervisor provides their contact information and answers any questions that the district-employed supervisor might have. Throughout the semester, the university supervisor visits the student teacher approximately every 9-10 days and is in constant communication with the master teacher through email and telephone.

Quality performance of the district-employed supervisors is recognized through the Master Teacher Reception celebration where they are served refreshments, publicly asked to stand, thanked, and applauded for their work by Biola’s student teachers, supervisors, staff, faculty, and administration. Additionally, the master teachers receive a thank you letter and a $90 stipend that they are paid for their services. The University Student Teacher Supervisors also provide a small thank you note and token of appreciation each semester.

  29 

Standard 9: Assessment of Candidate Competence

Candidates preparing to serve as professional school personnel know and demonstrate the professional knowledge and skills necessary to educate and support effectively all students in meeting the state adopted academic standards.

Assessments indicate that candidates meet the Commission-adopted competency requirements, as specified in the program standards. (Common Standards Glossary 1)

Candidates demonstrate knowledge, skills, and abilities that are required for each of their programs. For the MS and SS candidates, subject matter competency/knowledge is measured through exam or coursework (e.g., U.S. Constitution; CBEST; CSET, waiver programs; familiarity with the California frameworks as determined through course assignments). Candidates’ knowledge, skills and abilities, including teacher performance expectations, are measured through CalTPAs, RICA (MS only), and key assignments that measure Biola’s University Teacher Education Program seven outcomes. Candidates are expected to demonstrate the following seven learning outcomes:

1. Committed to Living Out God’s Calling as a Christian Educator

Key Assignments: Called to Teach Paper #1 (301/519)

Called to Teach Paper #2 (ST Application)

These assignments measure TPEs 12, 13 and provide practice in writing reflections.

2. Dedicated to Students’ Optimum Development for God’s Ultimate Glory

Key Assignments: Student Profile Data (420/520; 425/525)

Designing & Teaching a Lesson (420/520; 425/525)

These assignments measure TPE 6, 8 and provide practice in gathering relevant data on students.

3. Engage in Experiences with Cross-Cultural and Special Populations to Appreciate Diversity

Key Assignment: EL Shadowing Assignment (341/541)

This assignment measure TPE 7, 8 and provide practice in making adaptations for students.

4. Capable of Applying Developmental and Learning Theories to Solve Educational Challenges

  30 

Key Assignment: Case Study Paper (330/526)

This assignment measures TPE 13 and provides practice in writing analytical reflections.

5. Implement Content Standards Instruction Effectively

Key Assignment: Progress Monitoring Lesson Reflection (430/505; 435/506)

This assignment measures TPE 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9 and provides practice in coordinating instruction with standards.

6. Skilled at Designing and Implementing Appropriate and Effective Learning Strategies

Key Assignment: Unit Plan Assignment (430/505; 435/506)

This assignment measures TPE 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 and provides practice in long-range lesson planning.

7. Devoted to Creating a Positive Learning Environment

Key Assignment: Classroom Management Plan (330/526)

This assignment measures TPE 5, 7, 8, 10, 11 and provides practice in connecting learning theory with classroom procedures.