cehs.unl.edu folio... · web viewnational mean la & sec. english 5039 168 24 23 1 95.83 177.58...

Nebraska Department of Education Rule 24 ReportENGLISH LANGUAGE ARTS

(Content Area)Educator Preparation Content Program Review

Name of institution University of Nebraska-Lincoln

Date Submitted 3.20.2017

Contact Person Thomas Wandzilak

Phone/Fax 402-472-8626

Email [email protected]

Folio type: X Regular Mini Advanced Program

1

Program(s) Covered by this Folio Press tab in last column to add rows

Endorsement(s) Type Grade Level Program Level

List EndorsementsField 7-12 Baccalaureate

Master’sEnglish Language Arts, Grades 7-12

Is the endorsement offered at more than one site? Yes X NoIf yes, list additional sites where endorsement is offered:

Institution Accreditation Status: X National X StateIs this a Nationally Accredited Program? X Yes No

If Yes, list Accrediting Organization: CAEP Attach National Letter to Cover Sheet

Report to the Nebraska Department of EducationUniversity of Nebraska—Lincoln

Folio Initial Level—June 2017

2

INTRODUCTION AND WELCOMEThe purpose of this section is to provide general background information on the University of Nebraska-Lincoln and the College of Education and Human Sciences. In addition, information is provided on the teacher education program, admission and retention standards the field experiences in which student participate, and information on the key assessments used in Section 2 concerning data that have been collected in support of our programs.

Here is a list of websites that can provide some additional information on the university, the college, and our teacher education program:

http://www.unl.edu/This is the University of Nebraska-Lincoln website.

https://bulletin.unl.edu/undergraduate/This is the link for the undergraduate bulletin.

https://bulletin.unl.edu/undergraduate/college/Education+%26+Human+SciencesThis is the link for the College of Education and Human Sciences section in the Undergraduate Bulletin.

http://www.unl.edu/gradstudies/bulletinThis is the link for the Graduate Bulletin.

http://cehs.unl.edu/The is the link for the website for the College of Education and Human Sciences

http://cehs.unl.edu/ssc/undergraduate-advising/This is the link for our program sheets for all of the programs offered through the College of Education and Human Sciences. Program sheets will also be available for multiple years.

3

http://cehs.unl.edu/ssc/undergraduate-advising/

http://cehs.unl.edu/

http://www.unl.edu/gradstudies/bulletin

https://bulletin.unl.edu/undergraduate/college/Education+%26+Human+Sciences

https://bulletin.unl.edu/undergraduate/

http://www.unl.edu/

If you have any questions, feel free to contact Tom Wandzilak, Certification Officer, College of Education and Human Sciences at:

402-472-8626 or [email protected]

SECTION 1: CONTEXTUAL INFORMATION NARRATIVE

SECTION 1A: ENDORSEMENT PROGRAM/CONTEXTUAL INFORMATION

The link to the Rule 20 Folio is:http://cehs.unl.edu/cehs/nde/Rule20.pdf

Mission Statement ion StatementThe University of Nebraska-Lincoln (UNL), chartered by the Legislature in 1869, is the part of the University of Nebraska system that serves as both the land-grant and the comprehensive public University for the State of Nebraska.

Through its three primary missions of teaching, research, and service, UNL is the state's primary intellectual center providing leadership throughout the state through quality education and the generation of new knowledge. UNL's graduates and its faculty and staff are major contributors to the economic and cultural development of the state. UNL attracts a high percentage of the most academically talented Nebraskans, and the graduates of the University form a significant portion of the

4

http://cehs.unl.edu/cehs/nde/Rule20.pdf

business, cultural, and professional resources of the State. The quality of primary, secondary, and other post-secondary educational programs in the state depends in part on the resources of UNL for curricular development, teacher training, professional advancement, and enrichment activities involving the University's faculty, museums, galleries, libraries, and other facilities. UNL provides for the people of the state unique opportunities to fulfill their highest ambitions and aspirations, thereby helping the state retain its most talented youth, attract talented young people from elsewhere, and address the educational needs of the nontraditional learner.

The University of Nebraska-Lincoln has been recognized by the Legislature as the primary research and doctoral degree granting institution in the state for fields outside the health professions. Through its service and outreach efforts the University extends its educational responsibilities directly to the people of Nebraska on a state-wide basis.

The College of Education and Human SciencesThe College of Education and Human Sciences (CEHS) was founded on August 18, 2004, by Teachers College and The College of Human Resources and Family Sciences with each founding college contributing extensive history and tradition. The College of Education and Human Sciences offers excellent educational advancement to both undergraduate and graduate students, serving approximately 2,800 undergraduates and 1,000 graduate students each year.

Education courses first became a part of the University curriculum in 1895 with the organization of a Department of Education designed to prepare students for teaching careers. On Valentine’s Day, 1908, the Board of Regents established a Teachers College. Since that time, the College has been highly respected for its programs preparing teachers, administrators, and specialists for the education of children, youth, and adults. The quality of these programs is reflected in outstanding educational leadership in communities across the state and in the nation in teaching, administration, communication disorders, special education, and educational psychology.

Teacher Education Programs

5

Teacher education programs are found in five departments in CEHS as well as in two other colleges on campus. The College of Fine and Performing Arts (CFPA) oversees Music Education whereas Agriculture Education, Horticulture Education, and Industrial Technology are located in the College of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources. Even though these programs are housed outside of CEHS, they must comply with state rules and regulations tied to teacher education. The majority of the teacher education programs are located in the Department of Teaching, Learning and Teacher Education (TLTE). There are currently 40 endorsement areas offered at the undergraduate and graduate levels through the University. Options exist for students to complete initial teacher certification and teaching endorsements at the undergraduate and graduate levels. All programs leading to an initial teaching certificate will also require the completion of an undergraduate or graduate degree. Individuals interested in adding one or more teaching endorsements may do so without pursuing a degree.

1B. STANDARDS OF ADMISSION, RETENTION, TRANSITION, AND COMPLETION

Admission to the University of Nebraska-LincolnAdmission to the University is based on a student’s demonstrated academic preparation for University-level work (see Appendix—Table 1). Admission standards to the University are established by the University of Nebraska Board of Regents and apply to all new, first time degree-seeking students. This includes freshman as well as transfer students. The admission standards apply to general admission to the University as well as admission to the College of Education and Human Sciences.

Admission to the Teacher Education Program (TEP)Admission to the College of Education and Human Sciences does not guarantee admission to a teacher education program. Admission to the advanced phases of teacher education is selective and, in some endorsements, highly competitive. Selection to a TEP is based upon the following criteria:

1. Completion of at least 30 credit hours (Elementary Education) or 42 credit hours (Secondary Education) with a minimum 2.5 GPA.

6

2. Completion of TEAC 331 or 430 or 431 or 434 or 437 or 496 (3 hrs.) or approved course, and EDPS 250 or 251 with a 2.5 cumulative average in the two classes, no grade lower than a C.

3. Documentation of proficiency in reading, writing, and mathematics through successful completion of a basic skills examination that meets the Nebraska Department of Education competency requirement.

4. Completion of one course in communication studies selected from COMM 109, 205, 209, 210, or 341, or an approved substitute.

5. Faculty recommendations.6. Demonstration of attaining particular learning outcomes in the program.7. Completion of a personal and professional fitness self-disclosure form.

Admission to Student TeachingAll students who are candidates for an appropriately endorsed Nebraska Teacher’s certificate are required to student teach. Students who plan to student teach in the fall semester must complete the student teaching application form and submit it by the preceding March 1 to the Director of Field Experiences in 104 Henzlik Hall; students planning to student teach in the spring semester must apply by the preceding October 1. The basic program for student teaching provides for a full-day experience on a semester basis. Students enrolled in an elementary education dual major will complete requirements for student teaching in both majors. Admission to student teaching requires the following:

1. Matriculation in a teacher education program in the College of Education and Human Sciences, the Graduate College, or dual matriculation in the College of Education and Human Sciences and another college.

2. Admission to a teacher education program.3. Senior standing (89 hours or more) with a minimum cumulative GPA of 2.75.4. Application for and completion of a senior check.5. Minimum average of 2.5 in each endorsement area (in the case of Middle Grades Endorsement, a

2.5 in each academic area) with no grade below C.

7

6. A minimum grade point average of 2.5 in pre-professional and professional education courses with no grade below a C in pre-professional education courses and no grade below a C+ in professional education courses.

7. Completion of a criminal history check that will be conducted by an independent party (lab fee required).

Retention1. Must maintain a minimum cumulative GPA of 2.75.2. Must maintain a minimum average of 2.5 in each endorsement area (in the case of Middle Grades

Endorsement, a 2.5 in each academic area) with no grade below C.3. Must maintain a minimum grade point average of 2.5 in pre-professional and professional

education courses with no grade below a C in pre-professional education courses and no grade below a C+ in professional education courses.

4. Must meet student teaching application deadlines.5. Must meet criminal history requirements at all times.

Transition PointsA summary of the transition points can be found in the Appendix in Table 2.

Requirements to Complete the Teacher Education Program1. Successful completion of student teaching.2. Successful completion of all remaining courses as identified in the senior check with grades

meeting the minimum requirements as identified in the “Admission to Student Teaching” section as described above.

3. Satisfy any additional requirements as described under teacher education in the undergraduate bulletin.

4. Address all financial obligations tied to the University of Nebraska-Lincoln.5. Apply for the degree.

8

The Student Advising Sheet for the program(s) associated with this Folio can be found at:http://cehs.unl.edu/ssc/undergraduate-advising

1C. FIELD EXPERIENCES

The link to the Rule 20 Folio is:http://cehs.unl.edu/cehs/nde/Rule20.pdf

Field experience “courses” can be divided into the following areas:Early Childhood, Inclusive, Elementary Education, Elementary Education/Mild Moderate Disabilities, and Secondary Education. Practicum experiences at the 200 level are initial experiences in the schools for our students. They can be placed in a classroom with a teacher at the appropriate grade level for their respective content area. Secondary students are placed individually in middle grades or secondary classrooms whereas elementary students are placed in pairs in elementary classrooms. In all instances university students have opportunities to work with K-12 learners individually or in small groups. In some instances, they may be given full-class opportunities to work with learners. Students completing 397 level practica have expanded responsibilities where they will have greater classroom responsibilities that will include the teaching of multiple lessons as a requirement for the experience as well as teacher assistant roles during each day. The 497 experience is student teaching where the university student takes on more and more responsibilities that would be equivalent to those taken on by the classroom teacher. These responsibilities include, but are not limited to, the preparation of lesson plans and materials for teaching and assessment, the teaching of classes, grading formative and summative materials, working with students after class, attending staff/faculty meetings, and speaking with parents where necessary, all under the guidance of a cooperating teacher. Please see Table 3 in the Appendices for a summary of the Field Experience hour requirements associated with each practicum course and the related endorsements.

1D. PROGRAM COMPLETERS

TW AND NMS TO PROVIDE THESE NUMBERS

9

http://cehs.unl.edu/cehs/nde/Rule20.pdf

http://cehs.unl.edu/ssc/undergraduate-advising

Table 4 – Program Completers

Program Completers and Level – Content AreaAcademic Year Number of Endorsement Program Completers

Bac Post BacAlternate

Route Masters

Ed. Specialis

t PhD

2014 to 20 15 4 0 0

2015 to 20 16 1 0 2

10

SECTION 2: ENDORSEMENT PROGRAM KEY ASSESSMENTS AND RELATED DATA

ARTIFACT 1Table 5

Summary Table of Endorsement Program Key AssessmentsREGULAR FOLIOS

Name of Assessmentused for the following areas:

Type or Form of Assessment

Brief Description of Assessment, including indicated information obtained from Assessment

When Assessment is Administered

Specific Items

1Content-Praxis II or GPA

Cumulative GPASummative

Numerical computation of grades based on quality points earned divided by credit hours completed

Ongoing—throughout one’s college career. Cumulative GPA is what is reported.

Specific to content area

11

Praxis II Comparison to a Standard

For elementary students, this test has been used to document one being highly qualified (minimum score of 159) for No Child Left Behind.For secondary students, we piloted results for the 2014-2015 academic year. Results will be used as a requirement fro teacher certification at all levels starting September 1, 2015.

Just before or during clinical practicum (student teaching)


CEHS Student Teaching Instrument

Summative This instrument consists of 14 items that is completed by the student teacher supervisor and cooperating teacher on the basis of one being proficient, basic or unsatisfactory on each item.

At the end of the Clinical Experience

Item 1

12

Administrator Survey

Summative This is a 21-item instrument that is completed by school administrators at the end of a candidate’s first year of teaching. It is now administered by the Nebraska Department of Education.

In March/April at the end of the candidate’s first year of teaching

Standards 4.1, 4.2, 4.3

Candidate Teacher Survey

Summative This is a 23-item instrument that is completed by program completers at the end of the first year of teaching. It is administered by the College of Education and Human Sciences at UN-L.


Items 1 & 2

2 Content - Knowledge

Cumulative GPA Summative Numerical computation of grades based on quality points earned divided by credit hours completed

Ongoing—throughout one’s college career. Cumulative GPA is what is reported.


Praxis II Comparison to a Standard

For elementary students, this test has been used to

Just before or during clinical practicum (student teaching)


13

document one being highly qualified (minimum score of 159) for No Child Left Behind.For secondary students, we piloted results for the 2014-2015 academic year. Results will be used as a requirement fro teacher certification at all levels starting September 1, 2015.




Item 1


Summative This is a 21-item instrument that is completed by school


Standards 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, 5.1, 5.2

14

administrators at the end of a candidate’s first year of teaching. It is now administered by the Nebraska Department of Education.




Item 14

3 Learner/Learning Environments




Items 2 & 3

Administrator Summative This is a 21-item In March/April at Standards

15

Survey instrument that is completed by school administrators at the end of a candidate’s first year of teaching. It is now administered by the Nebraska Department of Education.

the end of the candidate’s first year of teaching

1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 3.1, 3.2, 3.3




Items 3 & 4

4 Instructional Practices - Knowledge


Summative This instrument consists of 14 items that is completed by the student teacher supervisor and cooperating teacher on the basis of one being proficient, basic or


Items 2, 3, & 6

16

unsatisfactory on each item.




Standards 7.1, 7.2, 7.3, 8.1, 8.2, 8.3




Items 7, 8, 9, 16, 17 & 20

5 Instructional Practices - Effectiveness


Summative This instrument consists of 14 items that is completed by the student teacher supervisor and cooperating teacher on the


Items 2, 3, & 5

17

basis of one being proficient, basic or unsatisfactory on each item.




Standards 6.1, 6.2




Item 10

6 Professional Responsibility


Summative This instrument consists of 14 items that is completed by the student


Items 12 & 14

18

teacher supervisor and cooperating teacher on the basis of one being proficient, basic or unsatisfactory on each item.




Standards 9.1, 9.2, 9.3, 9.4, 10.1, 10.2




Items 12 & 15

7 Overall Proficiency


Summative This is a 21-item instrument that

In March/April at the end of the

Standard

19

is completed by school administrators at the end of a candidate’s first year of teaching. It is now administered by the Nebraska Department of Education.

candidate’s first year of teaching

11.1




Item 23

8 Optional Assessment

20

REQUIRED RULE 24 FOLIO APPENDICES

Table 1UNL Admission Requirements

English 4 units of EnglishAll units must include intensive reading and writing experience

Mathematics 4 units of mathematicsMust include Algebra I, II. Geometry and one additional unit that builds on a knowledge of algebra or geometry.

Natural Science

3 units of natural sciencesIncluding at least 2 units selected from biology, chemistry, physics, and earth sciences. One of the units must include laboratory instruction.

Social Studies

3 units of social studiesAt least one unit of American and/or world history and one additional unit of history, American government and/or geography

Foreign Language

2 units of foreign languageMust include 2 units of the same foreign language. Students who are unable to take two years of foreign language in high school may still qualify for admission. Such students will be required to take two semesters of foreign language at the University of Nebraska. These students are required to complete 16 units of academic courses for admission.

21

Class Rank or ACT/SAT

For assured admission you must also graduate in the upper half of your class, or have an ACT composite score of 20 or higher, or an SAT combined score of 950. All freshman applicants under the age of 23 are required to submit an official ACT or SAT score.

Transfer For assured admission, in addition to completion of core course requirements, you must also show a C average (2.0 on a 4.0 scale) for your cumulative grade point average and a C average on your most recent term of college enrollment

Table 2Major Transition Points

Acceptance into University(Prior to Freshman year)

Acceptance into Teacher Education program(Sophomore year)

Acceptance into Student Teaching(Semester before Student Teaching)

Program Completion/Graduation(After Student Teaching)

-- Completion of specific number of

--Credit hour minimum--Minimum

-- Admission to TEP-- Credit Hour /overall 2.75 GPA minimum

-- 120 + credit hours-- successful

22

high school units.-- Appropriate ACT /SAT score

grades in specific courses-- PPST-- Faculty recommendations-- Completion of Prof. & Personal Fitness Form-- Criminal History check

-- 2.5 GPA in content areacourses, no grade below a C--2.5 GPA in Prof. ed – specific grade requirements for methods courses-- Criminal History check

completion of Student Teaching-- Maintain GPA minimum requirements-- Completion of a senior check --Met all financial obligations-- Apply for degree

23

Table 3Summary Table of Practicum and Clinical Experiences

Course

Cr

Days/Wk

Hrs/Day

Weeks

Total Hrs

ELED

Sec. Ed.

ELED/SPED

ECE Unif

ELED/ECE

TEAC 297A

1 2 3 14 84 84 84 84 84

297B 2 2 7 14 140 140 140 140EDPS 297

1 2 1 14 25

397A 3 2 7 14 196 196 196 196497A 1

25 8 16 640 640 640 640

297 1 2 1 10 20 20397 3 5 2 12 120 12

0397D 3 2 8 15 240 240497 1

25 8 16 640 64

0497A 6 5 8 40 400 400SPED 397

3 3 4 12 144 120

SPED 496Y

1 2 4 14 56 56

497M 9 5 8 10 400 400CYAF 270L

2 1 4 14 52 52 52

271L 1 1 3 12 36 36 36

24

374L 1 1 3 15 45 45 45497A 9 5 4 16 320 320 320Total -- ----- -------

---------- ------- 106

0780

1340 1473

1513

Instruments Used in Key Assessments:

In order to view the instruments used for the different surveys the provided data for this report, go to the “Instruments” folder at the State Approval website and select each of the following:

Student Teaching Final Evaluation used in Fall 2014–Spring 2015—All Program Completers

Student Teaching Final Evaluation used in Fall 2015–Spring 2016—All Program Completers

NDE First-Year Administrator Survey

First-Year Teacher Survey

SECTION 2: KEY ASSESSMENTS AND FINDINGS — Artifact 2

1. Content Knowledge Below are the measures used specifically for addressing the content knowledge of teacher candidates at the University of Nebraska–Lincoln:

Table 1A Grade Point Average in the Content Area and Cumulative GPA

25

Year Endorsement

Subject Area/Content GPA

Cumulative GPA Total Students

2014-2015

Secondary Education

3.49 3.56 95

Content area

2015-2016

Secondary Education 3.54250 3.55747 108Content area

Table 1BGrade Point Average in the Content Area and Cumulative GPA

Year Code Subject Area/Content GPA

Cumulative GPA

Total Students

Notes

ENGL 3.79 3.78 15 EnglishLART 3.63 3.67 4 Language ArtsSPEN ( 3.44 3.54 1 English and Speech ( old program)

2015-16ELAT 3.80000 3.68300 1 English/language ArtsENGL 3.66375 3.65475 12 English

Table 2APraxis II – September 2014 – August 2015

Pass Rate Based on Nebraska Cut Score

26

Praxis II – September 2014 – August 2015Pass Rate Based on Nebraska Cut Score

Endrsmnt

Test #

Cut Score

UN-L N

UN-L # Passing

UN-L # Failing

UN-L %age Pass

UN-L Mean

State N

State %age Pass

State Mean

National N

National %age

National Mean

LA & Sec. English

5039 168 22 18 4 81.82 175.86

109

76.15 173.33

2831

75.27 173.28

Table 2BPraxis II – September 2015 – August 2016

Pass Rate Based on Nebraska Cut ScoreEndrsmnt

Test #

Cut Score

UN-L N

UN-L # Passing

UN-L # Failing

UN-L %age Pass

UN-L Mean

State N

State %age Pass

State Mean

National N

National %age

National Mean

LA & Sec. English

5039 168 24 23 1 95.83 177.58

130

89.23 176.12

2943

76.79 173.51

Response From College of Education & Human Sciences Student Teaching Instrument Teacher Candidate Summative Evaluation on Subject Matter Knowledge for the 2014-2015 Academic Year for Teaching in General (Item 1).

Table 3A

27

Item 1: Subject Matter Knowledge for Teaching in General 2014-2015

Subject Area ScoringYear

# Item Endorsement Unsatisfactory

Basic Proficient Grand Total

2014- 2015

1 Subject Matter Knowledge for Teaching in general. Demonstrates capacity to make content knowledge accessible to students.

English/Language Arts (ELAT)

0 0.00% 0 0.00%

2 100.00%

2

Response From College of Education & Human Sciences Student Teaching Instrument Teacher Candidate Summative Evaluation for the 2015-2016 Academic Year on Subject Matter Knowledge for Teaching (Item 3—Table 3B)—LIVETEXT version.

Table 3BItem 3: Subject Matter Knowledge for Teaching in General

2015-2016Subject Area Scoring

Year

# Item Endorsement Unacceptable

Emergent

Sufficient Advanced Grand Total

28

Responses From First Year Administrator Survey: Preparation of Candidate to Teach Content Area.

Table 4Standards 4.1, 4.2, and 4.3—Content Knowledge

Indicator Endorsement Rare Occasional Frequent Consistent Grand

Information Total

4.1 --Theteacher understands thecentral concepts, tools of inquiry, and structuresof the discipline(s) s/he teaches.

2014-2015English Language Arts 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 100.00

% 1

Content (Subject Area) Endorsements 0.00% 3 5.08%

17

28.81%

39

66.10% 59

English Language Arts

0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 100.00%

1

4.2 Theteacher

2014-2015 Rare Occasional

Frequent Consistent

Total

29

creates learningexperiences that make these aspects of thediscipline accessible and meaningful for studentsto assure mastery of content.

English Language Arts 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 100.00

% 0 0.00% 1

Content (Subject Area) Endorsements 0.00% 3 5.08%

24

40.68%

32

54.24% 59

2015-2016Rare

Occasional Frequent

Consistent

Total


0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 100.00%

1

Total

4.3 Theteacher integrates NebraskaContent Standards and/or professional standardswithin instruction.


Frequent Consistent

Total


% 0 0.00% 1

Total 1 0.68% 1 14.29%

52

35.14%

83

56.08%

148

2015-2016Rare

Occasional Frequent

Consistent

Total


0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 100.00%

1

Total 1 0.69% 3 2.07% 5 34.48 9 62.76 145

30

0 % 1 %

Responses From First Year Candidate Survey: Items Related to Preparation to Teach Content Knowledge (Item 1) and Prepared to Teach Content Area (Item 2).

Table 5Item 1: Prepared to Teach Content Area

Year # Item Endorsement

Strongly Disagree

Disagree

Neither Agree nor Disagree

Agree Strongly Agree

Grand Total

2014 - 2015

1 I am well prepared to teach in my content area.


0 0.00% 0

0.00% 0 0.00% 2 100.

00% 0 0.00% 2


Year # Item Endorsement Strongly Disagree

Disagree



Grand

Total2014 -

2 I am confident in

English/Language Arts

0 0.00%

0 0.00%

1 50.00%

1 50.00%

0 0.00%

2

31

2015

my level of subject matter knowledge.

(ELAT)

Narrative: Within Section 2, Parts 1-6, emergent trends are evident across the data. First Secondary English Education students’ cumulative GPA meet and exceed all Secondary Education majors’ GPAs. Secondary English Education majors’ GPAs range from 3.54 to 3.78 across endorsement areas. In terms of Praxis II results, improvement is evident between years 2014 and 2015, where 81.82 % passed in 2014 and 95.83 passed in 2015. Regarding first year administrator reporting exhibited in Table 4, competencies reflecting preparedness to teach reflect mostly consistent ability to enact productive learning processes across years 2014-2015 and 2015-2016. Regarding first year teacher self-reporting on preparedness to teach, the data trends reflect consistent agreement regarding preparedness to teach.

2. Content Area See Tables 1-6 from Content Area #1 above (first 8 tables in that section)

Table 7Responses From First Year Administrator Survey: Application of Content

Indicator Endorsement Rare Occasional Frequent Consistent Grand Information Total5.1 The teacher candidate understands how to connect concepts


% 1

2015-2016Rare

Occasional Frequent

Consistent

Total

English 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 100.00 1

32

across disciplines

Language Arts %

Responses From First Year Candidate Survey: Items Related to Teaching Subject Matter Materials in Ways Meaningful to Learners (Item 14).


Year # Item Endorsement Strongly

Disagree

Disagree



Grand

Total2014 - 2015

14

I teach subject matter in ways that are meaningful to learners.


0 0.00%

0 0.00%

0 0.00% 2 100.00%

0 0.00% 2

2015-2016

14

I teach subject matter in ways that are meaningful to learners.

ELAT 0 0.00%

0 0.00%

4 30.77%

6 46.15%

3 23.08%

13

Narrative: Within Section 2 “Content Area,” Tables 7-8, the First Year Administrator Survey reveals consistency in connecting concepts across disciplines. Table 8 reflecting candidate self-assessment confirms consistent agreement regarding the ability to teach in ways that are meaningful to learners

33

(roughly 60% agree/strongly agree). A total of 30.77% neither agree nor disagree in response to that category. Clearly the majority of recent graduates assessed reflect administrator and have self-confidence in their capacity to enact effective teaching and learning processes.

3. Learner/Learning Environments

Response From College of Education & Human Sciences Student Teaching Instrument Teacher Candidate Summative Evaluation on Planning for Learning for the 2014-2015 Academic Year (Item 2—Table 9A).

Table 9AItem 2: Subject Planning for Learning


Year # Item Endorsement Unsatisfactory


2014- 2015

2 Demonstrates capacity to create useable lesson and unit plans that are based upon knowledge of the discipline, students, and

ELANG 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 100.00%

1

34

curricular goals


0 0.00% 0 0.00% 2 100.00%

2

Response From College of Education & Human Sciences Student Teaching Instrument Teacher Candidate Summative Evaluation for the 2015-2016 Academic Year on Planning for Learning (Item 4—Table 9B)—LIVETEXT version.

Table 9BItem 4: Planning for Learning


Year


Emergent


2015- 2016

4 Planning for learning:Creates usable lessons and unit plans based on knowledge of the discipline,


0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 7 100.00%

7

35

students, and curricular goals

Response From College of Education & Human Sciences Student Teaching Instrument Teacher Candidate Summative Evaluation for the 2014-2015 Academic Year on Instructional Enactment (Item 3—Table 10A).

Table 10AItem 3: Instructional Enactment



Unsatisfactory


2014- 2015

3 Demonstrates Capacity to implement, modify, and adapt plans that are responsive to students and curricular goals

ELANG 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 100.00%

1

36

Language Arts (ELAT)

0 0.00% 0 0.00% 2 100.00%

2

Table 10BItem 5: Responsive Teaching


Year


Emergent


2015- 2016

5 Responsive Teaching:Skillfully implements lessons that are flexible


0 0.00% 1 14.29%

2 28.57% 4 57.14% 7

37

and intentional to meet individual student needs

Table 11Standards 1.1, 1.2, and 1.3: Student Development

Indicator Endorsement Rare Occasional Frequent Consistent Grand Information Total

1.1 The teacher understands how students grow and develop.

2014-2015English Language Arts 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 100.00

% 0 0.00% 1

2015-2016Rare

Occasional Frequent

Consistent Total


0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 100.00%

0 0.00% 1

1.2 The teacher recognizes that patterns of learning and development vary individually within and across the

2014-2015Rare

Occasional Frequent

Consistent Total


% 0 0.00% 1

2015-2016 Rare Occasiona Frequent Consisten Total

38

cognitive, linguistic, social, emotional, and physical areas.

l tEnglish Language Arts

0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 100.00%

1

Total 2 1.37% 8 5.48% 60

41.10%

76

52.05%

146

1.3 The teacher implements developmentally appropriate and challenging learning experiences.

2014-2015Rare

Occasional Frequent

Consistent Total


% 0 0.00% 12015-2016

RareOccasiona

l FrequentConsisten

t TotalEnglish Language Arts

0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 100.00%

1

Table 12Standards 2.1 and 2.2: Learning Differences

Indicator Endorsement Rare Occasional Frequent Consistent Grand Information Total2.1 The teacher understands individual differences and diverse cultures and communities


% 0 0.00% 1English Language Arts

0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 100.00%

1

39

Total 1 0.68% 13

8.84% 49

33.33%

84

57.14%

147

2.2 The teacher ensures inclusive learning environments that enable each student to meet high demands


Frequent Consistent

Total


% 0 0.00% 12015-2016 Rare Occasion

alFrequent Consisten

tTotal


0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 100.00%

1

Table 13Standards 3.1 and 3.2: Learning Environments

Indicator Endorsement Rare Occasional Frequent Consistent Grand Information Total3.1 The teacher works with others to create environments that support individual and collaborative learning.


% 12015-2016

RareOccasiona

l FrequentConsisten


0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 100.00%

1

3.2 The teacher creates


Frequent Consistent

Total

40

environments that encourage positive social interaction, active engagement in learning, and self-motivation.


% 0 0.00% 1

2015-2016Rare

Occasional Frequent

Consistent Total


0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 100.00%

1

3.3 The teacher manages student behavior to promote a positive learning environment.


Frequent Consistent

Total


% 0 0.00% 1

2015-2016Rare

Occasional Frequent

Consistent Total


0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 100.00%

0 0.00% 1

Responses From First Year Candidate Survey: Items Related to Student Learning: Understands How Learners Learn (Item 3), and Adapts to Developmental Strategies of Learners (Item 4).

Table 14Item 3: Understands How Learners Learn


Strongly Disagree

Disagree



Grand Total

2014 - 2015

3 I positively impact the learning and

English/Language Arts 0

0.00%

0 0.00%

1 50.00%

150.00%

00.00%

2

41

development of all students.

(ELAT)

2015-2016

3 I positively impact the learning and development of all students.

ELAT 0 0.00%

0 0.00%

2 15.38%

8 61.54% 3 23.08% 13

Table 15Item 4: Adapts to Developmental Strategies of Learners


Disagree



Grand Total

2014 - 2015

4 I adapt to different developmental stages of learners.


00.00% 0

0.00%

0

0.00%

2100.00%

00.00%

2

2015-2016

4 I adapt to different developmental stages of learners

ELAT 0 0.00%

0 0.00%

1 7.69% 9 69.23%

3 23.08%

13

Narrative:Across Tables 9A-15 documenting College of Education & Human Sciences Student Teaching Instrument Teacher Candidate Summative Evaluation on Planning for Learning trends reflect consistently positive outcomes for UNL’s Secondary English Education graduates. Planning for Learning and Instructional Enactment in both 2014-2015 and 2015-2016 reflects proficient and advanced rankings. In the area,

42

“Responsive Teaching,” roughly 86% assessed earned sufficient or advanced rankings; 14.29% earned emergent scores. In terms of categories reflecting the graduate’s ability to individualize and differentiate instruction based upon a range of developmental differences, results continued to reflect frequent or consistent ability to effectively adapt to students’ individual needs; whereas, roughly 7% occasionally or rarely demonstrated these competencies. Within the areas of collaboration and facilitating positive learning climate, the candidates earned either frequent or consistent scores. Tables 14 and 15 involved first year teacher self-assessments regarding positive student impacts.The vast majority reported “agree” or “strongly agree”; 15.38% and 7.69% reported neutral responses.

43

4. Instructional Practices–Candidate Knowledge and SkillsResponse From College of Education & Human Sciences Student Teaching Instrument Teacher Candidate Summative Evaluation for the 2014-2015 Academic Year on Planning for Learning, Instructional Enactment (Item 2—Table 16A)

Table 16AItem 2: Subject Planning for Learning




2014- 2015

2 Demonstrates capacity to create useable lesson and unit plans that are based upon knowledge of the discipline, students, and curricular goals

ELANG 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 100.00%

1


0 0.00% 0 0.00% 2 100.00%

2

44

Table 16BItem 4: Planning for Learning


Year


Emergent


2015- 2016

4 Planning for learning:Creates usable lessons and unit plans based on knowledge of the discipline, students, and curricular goals


0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 7 100.00%

7

45

Response From College of Education & Human Sciences Student Teaching Instrument Teacher Candidate Summative Evaluation for the 2014-2015 Academic Year on the Learning Environment (Item 3).





2014- 2015


ELANG 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 100.00%

1


0 0.00% 0 0.00% 2 100.00%

2

Response from College of Education & Human Sciences Student Teaching Instrument Teacher Candidate Summative Evaluation on Planning for Learning for the 2015-2016 Academic Year on Responsive Teaching (Item 5—Table 17B)—LIVETEXT version.

Table 17B

46

Item 5: Responsive Teaching2015-2016



Emergent


2015- 2016

5 Responsive Teaching:

Skillfully implements lessons that are flexible and intentional to meet individual student needs


0 0.00% 1 14.29%

2 28.57% 4 57.14% 7

Response From College of Education & Human Sciences Student Teaching Instrument Teacher Candidate Summative Evaluation for the 2014-2015 Academic Year on the Learning Environment (Item 6—Table 18A).

Table 18AItem 6: Learning Environment




201 6 Learning ELANG 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 100.00 1

47

4- 2015

Environment. Demonstrates capacity to create classroom communities that invite students’ engagement and learning, encourages positive social interaction and self-motivation.

%


0 0.00% 0 0.00% 2 100.00%

2

Response From College of Education & Human Sciences Student Teaching Instrument Teacher Candidate Summative Evaluation on Planning for Learning for the 2015-2016 Academic Year on Learning Culture (Item 10—Table 18B)—LIVETEXT version.

Table 18B—Item 10: Learning Culture2015-2016

Subject Area ScoringYea # Item Endorsement Unaccepta Emerge Sufficient Advanced Gran

48

r ble nt d Total

2015- 2016

10

Learning Culture:Creates classroom communities that invite student engagement and learning and encourage positive social interactions.


0 0.00% 0 0.00%

2 28.57% 5 71.43% 7

Responses From First Year Administrator Survey: Items related to Planning for Instruction (Standards 7.1, 7.2, and 7.3) and Instructional Strategies (Standards 8.1, 8.2, and 8.3)

Table 19Standards 7.1, 7.2, and 7.3: Planning for Instruction

Indicator Endorsement Rare Occasional Frequent Consistent Grand Information Total7.1 The teacher plans instruction that supports every student in meeting rigorous learning goals.


% 1


Frequent Consistent

Total

49


0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 100.00%

0 0.00% 1

7.2 The teacher candidate draws upon knowledge of content areas, curriculum, cross-disciplinary skills, technology, and pedagogy.


Frequent Consistent

Total


% 0 0.00% 12015-2016

RareOccasiona

l FrequentConsisten


0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 100.00%

0 0.00% 1

7.3 The teacher draws upon knowledge of students and the community context.


Frequent Consistent

Total


% 0 0.00% 12015-2016

RareOccasiona

l FrequentConsisten


0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 100.00%

1

Table 20Standard 8.1, 8.2, and 8.3: Instructional Strategies

Indicator Endorsement Rare Occasional Frequent Consistent Grand Information Total8.1 The teacher understands a variety of

2014-2015English Language Arts

0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 100.00%

0 0.00% 1

50

instructional strategies. 2015-2016

RareOccasional Frequent

Consistent Total


0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 100.00%

1

8.2 The teacher uses a variety of instructional strategies to encourage students to develop deep understanding of content areas and their connection and to build skills to apply knowledge in meaningful ways.


Frequent Consistent

Total


% 0 0.00% 12015-2016

RareOccasiona

l FrequentConsisten


0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 100.00%

1

8.3 The teacher utilizes available technology for instruction and assessment.


Frequent Consistent

Total


% 0 0.00% 12015-2016

RareOccasiona

l FrequentConsisten


0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 100.00%

1

Responses From First Year Candidate Survey: Items Related to Creating Effective Instructional Plans (Item 7), Working Effectively as Part of an Instructional Planning Team (Item 8), Classroom Management (Item 9), Instruction Requires Problem Solving or Critical Thinking

51

Skills (Item 16), Instruction is Adapted to the Needs of Learners With Special Needs (Item 17), and Use of Multiple Methods to Teach (Item 20).

Table 21Item 7: Create Effective Instructional Plans


Disagree



Grand Total

2014 - 2015

7 I create effective instructional plans.


0 0.00%0 0.00

%0

0.00%2 100.00

%0

0.00%2

2015-2016

7 I create effective new lesson plans

ELAT 1 7.69% 1 7.69%

0 0.00% 5 38.46%

6 46.15%

13

Table 22Item 8: Work Effectively as a Part of an Instructional Team


Strongly Disagree

Disagree



Grand Total

2014 - 2015

8 I work effectively as part of an instructional planning team.


00.00%

00.00%

0

0.00%

2100.00%

0

0.00%

2

2015-

8 I work effectively as

ELAT 1 7.69%

1 7.69%

2 15.38% 3 23.08%

7 53.85%

13

52

2016 part of an instructional team

Table 23Item 9: Manages Classroom Management


Strongly Disagre

e

Disagree



Grand

Total2014 - 2015

9 I apply effective methods to manage the classroom environment.

English/Language Arts (ELAT) 0 0.00

% 1 50.00% 0 0.00% 1 50.00

% 0 0.00% 2

2015-2016

9 I apply effective methods to manage the classroom environment

ELAT 1 7.69%

3 23.08%

3 23.08% 4 30.77%

2 15.38% 13

Table 24Item 16: Instruction Requires Student Problem Solving and/or Critical Thinking Skills


Strongly Disagre

e

Disagree



Grand Total

2014 - 2015

16

My instruction requires student problem solving and/or critical thinking skills.


0

0.00% 0 0.00

% 0 0.00% 2 100.00% 0 0.00% 2

2015 1 My instruction ELAT 1 7.69 0 0.00 2 15.38% 6 46.15 4 30.77 13

53

-2016

6 requires student problem solving and/or critical thinking skills

% % % %

Table 25Item 17: Adapt Instruction to Meet Needs of Learners With Special Needs


Strongly Disagree

Disagree



Grand Total

2014 - 2015

17

I adapt my instruction to the needs of learners with special needs.


0

0.00% 0 0.00

% 0 0.00% 2 100.00% 0 0.00% 2

2015-2016

17

I adapt my instruction to the needs of learners with special needs.

ELAT 0 0.00%

0 0.00%

1 7.69% 8 61.54%

4 30.77%

13

Table 26Item 20: Use Multiple Methods to Teach


Disagree



Grand Total

2014 2 I use English/ 0 0.00% 0 0.00 0 0.00% 1 50.00 1 50.00 2

54

- 2015

0 multiple methods to teach.

Language Arts (ELAT)

% % %2015-2016

20

I use multiple methods to teach

ELAT 0 0.00% 1 7.69%

0 0.00% 9 69.23%

3 23.08%

13

Narrative: Regarding Tables 16A through Table 26, involving response from College of Education & Human Sciences Student Teaching Instrument Teacher Candidate Summative Evaluation for the 2014-2015 Academic Year on Planning for Learning, Instructional Enactment, data reflect distinctively positive trends. In the areas of creating usable lessons and unit plans based on knowledge of the discipline, students, and curricular goals, data reflect advanced competencies. Although high degrees of skillfulness are reflected in planning competencies, data changes slightly when considering translating competencies—implementing plans that are flexible and intentional to meet individual student needs. Roughly 86% still rank in the sufficient and advanced categories; 14.29% in emergent. Regarding the ability to foster positive and productive learning environments, data trends continue to reflect some sufficient indicators with the majority ranking consistently in this area. In terms of working effectively with an instructional team, results diversify some. Although the majority score in strongly agree/agree categories (53.85% strongly agree, 23% agree), 15.38% score in neither agree nor disagree, 7.69% disagree, and 7.69% strongly disagree. Predictably, data reflect more diversification in the area of effectively facilitating classroom management, where roughly half either agree or strongly agree, and half are neutral or disagree.

5. Instructional Practices—Assessment That Demonstrates Effects or Impact on P-12 Student Learning

55

Response From College of Education & Human Sciences Student Teaching Instrument Teacher Candidate Summative Evaluation for the 2014-2015 Academic Year on Planning for Learning (Item 2—Table 27A).

Table 27AItem 5: Planning for Learning




2014- 2015

2 Demonstrates capacity to create useable lesson and unit plans that are based upon knowledge of the discipline, students, and curricular goals

ELANG 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 100.00%

1


0 0.00% 0 0.00% 2 100.00%

2

56

Response From College of Education & Human Sciences Student Teaching Instrument Teacher Candidate Summative Evaluation on Planning for Learning for 2015-2016 Academic Year on Planning for Learning (Item 4—Table 27B). LIVETEXT version.

Table 27B Item 4: Planning for Learning


Year


Emergent


2015- 2016

4 Planning for learning:Creates usable lessons and unit plans based on knowledge of the discipline, students, and curricular goals


0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 7 100.00%

7

57

Response From College of Education & Human Sciences Student Teaching Instrument Teacher Candidate Summative Evaluation for the 2014-2015 Academic Year on Instructional Enactment (Item 3—Table 28A).





2014- 2015


ELANG 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 100.00%

1


0 0.00% 0 0.00% 2 100.00%

2

Response From College of Education & Human Sciences Student Teaching Instrument Teacher Candidate Summative Evaluation on Planning for Learning for 2015-2016 Academic Year on Responsive Teaching (Item 5—Table 28B)—LIVETEXT version.

Table 28B

58

Item 5: Responsive Teaching2015-2016



Emergent


2015- 2016

5 Responsive Teaching:

Skillfully implements lessons that are flexible and intentional to meet individual student needs


0 0.00% 1 14.29%

2 28.57% 4 57.14% 7

Response From College of Education & Human Sciences Student Teaching Instrument Teacher Candidate Summative Evaluation for the 2014-2015 Academic Year on Classroom Interaction with Students (Item 5—Table 29A).

Table 29AItem 5: Classroom Interaction With Students




2014-

5 Demonstrate a

ELANG 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 100.00%

1

59

2015

capacity to interact with learners in supportive and constructive ways


0 0.00% 0 0.00% 2 100.00%

2

Response From College of Education & Human Sciences Student Teaching Instrument Teacher Candidate Summative Evaluation on Planning for Learning for the 2015-2016 Academic Year on Relationships with Students (Item 7—Table 29B)—LIVETEXT version.

Table 29BItem 7: Relationships With Students


60

Year


Emergent


2015- 2016

7 Relationships with Students: Develops and Maintains rapport with individual and groups of students


0 0.00% 0 0.00% 2 28.57% 5 71.43% 7

Responses From First Year Administrator Survey on Assessment (Items 6.1 and 6.2).

Table 30Standard 6.1 and 6.2: Assessment

Indicator Endorsement Rare Occasional Frequent Consistent Grand Information Total6.1 The teacher understands multiple methods of assessment


% 0 0.00% 12015-2016

RareOccasiona

l FrequentConsisten


0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 100.00%

1

6.2 The teacher uses multiple methods of

2014-2015Rare

Occasional Frequent

Consistent Total

English 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 100.00 0 0.00% 1

61

assessment to engage students in their own growth, to monitor student progress, and to guide the teacher candidate’s and student’s decision making.

Language Arts %2015-2016

RareOccasiona

l FrequentConsisten


0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 100.00%

1

Responses From First Year Candidate Survey: Items Related to Assessment: Create Effective Assessments to Measure Learning (Item 10).

Table 31 Standard 10: Creates Effective Assessments to Measure Learning


Strongly Disagree

Disagree



Grand Total

2014 - 2015

10

I create effective assessments to measure learning.

English/Language Arts (ELAT) 0

0.00%

00.00%

0

0.00%

2100.00%

0

0.00%

2

2015-2016

10

I create effective assessments to measure learning

ELAT 0 0.00%

1 7.69%

1 7.69% 8 61.54%

3 23.08%

13

Narrative:

62

Tables 27A to 31 continue to consider planning for learning and instructional enactment competencies through response from College of Education & Human Sciences Student Teaching Instrument Teacher Candidate Summative Evaluation for the 2014-2015 Academic Year on Planning for Learning. Again, trends reflect positively, especially in the areas of planning for learning. As noted in Tables 16A-26, data diversify some—while still reflecting the majority trending positively—in the areas of teaching responsiveness and adaptation of those plans. Regarding assessment, data predictably diversify slightly, where roughly 85% remain in the agree to strongly agree categories and few fall into the neutral or disagree categories. Enacting the teaching and assessment process are complex skills gained with additional immersive practice.

63

6. Professional Responsibility

Response From College of Education & Human Sciences Student Teaching Instrument Teacher Candidate Summative Evaluation for the 2014-2015 Academic Year on Collaborative Relationships (Item 12—Table 32A).

Table 32AItem 12: Collaborative Relationships and Professional Conduct




2014- 2015

12

Collaborative Relations and Professional Conduct. Demonstrates a capacity to work with other practitioners to improve teaching for the benefit of students’ learning.

ELANG 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 100.00%

1


0 0.00% 0 0.00% 2 100.00%

2

64

Response From College of Education & Human Sciences Student Teaching Instrument Teacher Candidate Summative Evaluation on Planning for Learning for 2015-2016 Academic Year on Collaborative Relations and Professional Conduct (Item 13—Table 32B). LIVETEXT version.

Table 32BItem 13: Collaborative Relations and Professional Conduct


Year


Emergent


2015- 2016

13

Collaborative Relations and Professional Conduct:Uses effective communication and consultation techniques with other professionals and families for the benefit of student learning


0 0.00% 0 0.00% 3 42.86% 4 57.14% 7

65

Response From College of Education & Human Sciences Student Teaching Instrument Teacher Candidate Summative Evaluation Relationships for the 2014-2015 Academic Year on Reflection and Professional Growth (Item 14—Table 33A).

Table 33AItem 14: Reflection and Professional Growth




2014- 2015

14

Reflection and Professional Growth. Demonstrates capacity to continually evaluate how choices and actions affect students and others in the learning

ELANG 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 100.00%

1

66

community and actively seeks opportunities to grow professionally.


0 0.00% 0 0.00% 2 100.00%

2

Response From College of Education & Human Sciences Student Teaching Instrument Teacher Candidate Summative Evaluation for the 2015-2016 Academic Year—Reflective Practices and Professional Growth (Item 14–Table 33B)—LIVETEXT version.

Table 33BItem 14: Reflective Practices and Professional Growth


Year


Emergent


2015- 2016

14

Reflective Practices and Professional Growth:Continually evaluates how choices and actions affects


0 0.00% 0 0.00% 2 40.00% 3 60.00% 5

67

students and others in the learning community, makes necessary adjustments and actively seeks opportunities to grow professionally

Responses From First Year Administrator Survey: Items Related to Professional Learning and Ethical Practice (Standards 9.1, 9.2, 9.3, and 9.4) and Leadership and Collaboration (Standards 10.1 and 10.2).

Table 34Standards 9.1, 9.2, 9.3, and 9.4: Professional Learning and Ethical Practice

Indicator Endorsement Rare Occasional Frequent Consistent Grand Information Total9.1 The teacher engages in ongoing professional learning.


% 0 0.00% 12015-2016 Rare Occasiona

lFrequent Consistent Tota

l

68


0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 100.00%

1

9.2 The teacher models ethical professional practice.

2014-2015Rare

Occasional Frequent Consistent

Total


% 0 0.00% 12015-2016

RareOccasiona

l Frequent ConsistentTota

lEnglish Language Arts

0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 100.00%

1

9.3 The teacher uses evidence to continually evaluate his/her practice, particularly the effects of his/her choices and actions on others (students, families, other professionals, and the community), and adapts practice to meet the needs of each student.

2014-2015Rare


Total


% 0 0.00% 1

2015-2016Rare


Total


0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 100.00%

0 0.00% 1

9.4 The teacher models professional dispositions for teaching.

2014-2015Rare


Total


% 0 0.00% 1

69

2015-2016Rare


Total


0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 100.00%

1

Table 35Standards 10.1 and 10.2: Leadership and Collaboration

Indicator Endorsement Rare Occasional Frequent Consistent Grand

Information Total

10.1 The teacher seeks opportunities to take responsibility for student learning


% 0 0.00% 12015-2016

RareOccasion

al FrequentConsisten


0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 100.00%

1

Responses From First Year Candidate Survey: Items Related to Professional Responsibility: Works Effectively With Parents (Item 12) and Takes Advantage of Opportunities to Grow Professionally (Item 15).

Table 36Item 12: Works Effectively with Parents


Disagree



Grand Total

70

2014 - 2015

12

I work effectively with parents


0.00%0 0.00

%2

100.00%0 0.00

%0

0.00%2

2015-2016

12

I work effectively with parents

ELAT 1 7.69% 1 7.69%

4 30.77% 5 38.46%

2 15.38%

13

Table 37Item 15: Takes Advantage of Opportunities to Grow Professionally


Strongly Disagree

Disagree



Grand Total

2014 - 2015

15

I take advantage of opportunities to grow professionally.


00.00% 0

0.00%

00.00%

2 100.00%

00.00%

2

2015-2016

15

I take advantage of opportunities to grow professionally

ELAT 0 0.00%

0 0.00%

0 0.00% 7 53.85%

6 46.15%

13

Narrative: Tables 32A through 37 feature response from College of Education & Human Sciences Student Teaching Instrument Teacher Candidate Summative Evaluation for the 2014-2015 and 2015-2016 Academic Year on Collaborative Relationships reflects clearly positive trends, reflecting sufficient or advanced

71

competencies. Concomitantly, positive trends are exhibited in the theme of reflective practices, where all rank in sufficient or advanced categories. Both the administrative survey and first year candidate survey align with frequent or consistent results in this category. Of special note is the parent communication category. First year candidates report they neither agree nor disagree with the statement, “I work effectively with parents.” When considering the overarching final category, “I take advantage of opportunities to grow professionally, all first year teacher candidates report either agree or strongly agree.”

72

7. Overall Proficiency

Response to Administrative Survey: Items on Impact of Student Learning and Development (Standard 11.1)

Table 38 Standard 11.1: Impact of Student Learning and Development

Indicator Endorsement Rare Occasional Frequent Consistent Grand Information Total11.1 The teacher positively impacts the learning and development for all students


% 0 0.00% 1

2015-2016Rare


Total


0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 100.00%

1

Responses From First Year Candidate Survey: Items Related to Overall Proficiency: I Am an Excellent Teacher (Item 23).

Table 39Item 23: I Am an Excellent Teacher


Disagree



Grand Total

73

2014 - 2015

23

I am an excellent teacher.


0.00%0 0.00

%0

0.00%2 100.00

%0 0.00

%2

2015-2016

23

I am an excellent teacher

ELAT 1 7.69% 2 15.38%

6 46.15% 4 30.77%

0 0.00%

13

Narrative:Regarding teaching proficiency overall, the administrative survey reflects frequent ability to impact learning and development of all students positively. First year candidates self-report more varying responses in response to the category, “I am an excellent teacher.” Within the 2015-2016 year, none strongly agree, 30.77% agree, 46.15% neither agree nor disagree, 15.38% disagree, and 7.69% strongly disagree. Given the complex nature of first-year teaching, it stands to reason results in this category would vary.

SECTION 3: USE OF RELATED DATA AND INFORMATION FOR CONTINUOUS PROGRAM IMPROVEMENT OF ENDORSEMENT PROGRAM — Artifact 3

Artifact 3: Provide a narrative

Artifact 3.Provide a narrative interpretation/summary of the assessment data from the institution’s perspective. Although data are not required for Mini-Folios, any institutional analysis and summary statements regarding these programs should be addressed and included.

3-5 Page Summary Narrative:The University of Nebraska-Lincoln offers a 2-year Secondary English Education program that functions in a junior and senior cohort structure and reflects Backwards Design (Wiggins & McTighe, 2005). The program model aims to advance students' leadership abilities and professional efficacy. Junior and senior cohort cross-talk opportunities, periodic metacognition around leadership development and professional

74

skills acquisition, job shadowing, an informal ELL practicum involving digital storytelling, the development of a capstone e-portfolio, and a new classroom observation protocol comprise program enhancements developed within the last 5 years. These innovations (or "enabling skills") build toward a capstone presentation delivered to colleagues, mentors, family, and friends in celebration of students' evolution as "transformative intellectuals" (Giroux, 1988) or scholar-practitioners. Reviewing data confirms additional field experiences, and collaborative opportunities with peers and classroom colleagues will further enhance our students’ first-year induction period.

Seven programmatic innovations aimed at creating coherence and enhanced first-year induction were created over the last 5 years:

Across our English Education cohort courses; Among our program graduates and current students; Between Lincoln Public Schools and the University of Nebraska, Lincoln’s English Education

program. With Nebraska Writing Project teachers and leaders

Artifact 1:Essay Prompts for English Education Application

University of Nebraska, Lincoln

Part OneChoose a piece of your own writing up to 1,000 words and in an author’s note not to exceed 500 words, elaborate on one of the following:

1) How does this piece reflect your larger approach to writing?2) How does this piece illustrate a learning moment for you?3) What does this piece say about your stance/identity as a prospective English teacher?

75

Part TwoChoose one of the following three essay prompts and respond in 1,000 words or fewer.

1) How do you conceptualize the discipline of English? In other words, what are we doing when we teach the range of things you would consider to be the content of English? In your answer, feel free to comment on the way you see this field changing or the ways in which you might challenge the current parameters as you see them. Why teach the discipline of English? To what end?

2) Linda Christensen, a secondary teacher in Portland, Oregon and mentor for Rethinking Schools and the National Writing Project, writes:

I believe we need to create a pedagogy of joy and justice. When Michael writes a stunning essay on language policy in Native American boarding schools, there is joy because he finally nails this form of academic writing, but there is also justice in talking back to years of essays filled with red marks and scarred with low grades. There is joy because he’s learned a craft that he felt beyond his reach: there’s justice because Michael and his classmates learned to question policies that award or deny status based on race or class.

Write a response to Christensen’s belief statement in which you articulate your own sense of the teaching issues she raises.

Artifact 2Rubric for Application Materials and Interview

NB: All English Education faculty are present for interviews and evaluate each applicant using the rubric below. These interviews typically take 2 full days.

Criteria for Evaluating Application MaterialsSelection into the secondary English endorsement area is highly selective and based on an assessment of your “Professional Promise” as evidenced by your application materials and interview. The criteria for evaluating your “Professional Promise” includes the degree to which you display the following:

76

1. Academic Preparation & Potential for Success within the Program 0 1 2 3 4The candidate displays exemplar academic progress and achievement, as evidenced by having taken a range of liberal arts courses as well as courses in the discipline of English, including literature, writing, rhetoric, linguistics, and literacy; attaining a GPA that is commensurate with the expectations of a professional program endorsement in Secondary English; and involvement in nonclassroom academic experiences (e.g., study abroad, U-Care work, student organizations).

2. Personal Attributes in Relation to Collaboration & Professionalism 0 1 2 3 4The candidate displays an understanding of the value of collaboration with peers and colleagues, desires to engage with a variety of ideas about approaches to teaching and learning secondary English, and demonstrates professional behavior, including appropriate dress, presentation, writing mechanics, etc.

3. Commitment to the Profession of Teaching 0 1 2 3 4The candidate shows an understanding of the profession of teaching beyond personal experience as a student and can offer a well thought-out, reflective explanation and rationale for his/her desire to become a teacher. This explanation should extend beyond naming or listing personal experiences; instead, it should link the work of being a teacher to broader principles and socio-political contexts.

4. Commitment to the Discipline of English and the Language Arts 0 1 2 3 4The candidate displays an understanding of the scope of English Studies, including imaginative literatures and the cultures they represent; rhetorical practices of writing and speaking for public engagement; and the multiplicity of textual genres and language forms in the 21st century. The candidate displays thoughtful and reflective awareness as receiver, analyzer, and producer of texts. S/he articulates a professional commitment to the use of at least some aspects of English Studies for engagement with cultural issues and agency for social improvement.

5. Commitment to Working with Diverse Youth 0 1 2 3 4The candidate makes visible an understanding of youth beyond personal experiences and can articulate a thoughtful, reflective set of commitments and reasons for wanting to work with diverse secondary-aged

77

people—ones that extend beyond talking about teaching and the discipline of English.

Artifact 4:Writing Partnerships and Collaborations

~Online Writing PartnershipCourse: Composition Theory and PracticeTiming: First semester of program

~From Dr. Robert Brooke’s syllabusFor ten weeks of the course (September 10-November 23), you will also share and respond to writing in an online writing exchange with five to six secondary students. We are partnering with three secondary classes taught by experienced Nebraska Writing Project Teacher Consultants. We’ll talk with these three teachers in class 31 August, before the online writing exchange begins. We will Meet & Greet the students from the three classes during the second week of the exchange (Wednesday, September 23 11:00-12:00, with Writing Marathon for those who can stay till 2:00). During the exchange, all members of your group (you included) will post weekly pieces.

Artifact 4, Continued:Additional Writing Partnerships

~Teaching Writing: Giving Feedback to Local High School StudentsCourse: Methods ITiming: Second semester of program

One of our recent graduates teaches American Literature at a local high school. We envisioned a collaboration in which the first year cohort in Methods 1 would gain experience responding to her students' developing drafts. The high school students revised a significant piece of writing—their favorite throughout the term—for final submission. The first year cohort responded to two students'

78

works; prior to their response, our partnering teacher visited Methods class to share perspectives on writing assessment in preparation for responding. The high school students completed author's notes, which allowed direct and helpful connections with the Methods students. Our partnering teacher observed her students' writing motivation escalated in anticipation of the university students' feedback, which allowed experience with an authentic audience beyond the teacher.

~Teaching Writing: Giving Feedback to Local High School StudentsCourse: Methods IITiming: Third semester of program

Another of our recent graduates teaches a regular-tracked American Literature class at Lincoln High, one of the most culturally and linguistically diverse schools in the city. This teacher brings drafts of her students’ “District Common Assessment” (DCA) essay on A Raisin in the Sun for second year Methods students to read, discuss, and give feedback. We coordinate this visit in conjunction with Methods students’ reading Teaching Writing That Matters by Chris Gallagher and Amy Lee. The week following our recent graduate’s visit, she comes again to let the class know how their feedback was received and to pass out handwritten thank you notes from her students to the UNL pre-service teachers.

Artifact 5Reading Partnerships

North Star PartnershipCourse: Reading Theory and PracticeTiming: First semester of program

79

North Star Partnership: Students as Experts ~From Dr. Rivera-Mueller’s syllabus

A significant part of our work will be informed by a reading partnership with Lori Svatora’s English 11 students at North Star High School. Lori Svatora is the chair of North Star’s English Department and a great teacher-mentor. We will visit Lori’s class five times during the semester to engage in a variety of reading experiences. Prior to our first visit to North Star, Lori will visit our class to share insights into the English 11 course and the teaching of reading and literature. At the conclusion of our work, we will host the high school students on campus to celebrate our partnership. In this joint venture, we are looking to the students at North Star as experts in the reading experiences of young people. We are joining them as fellow readers.

Artifact 6:Informal Induction Experiences: Cohort Cross-Talk & Field Contacts

University Classroom VisitsAt critical moments in a cohort’s development, we invite pre and in-service English Educators beyond the student’s current pathway to offer mentoring.

a) Second Year Practicum Student Visits: At the culmination of the first year cohort’s fall term, second year cohort colleagues are invited to share perspectives on a panel about their first immersive practicum teaching experience. The visiting students engage metacognition about their growth, adjustments transitioning from programmatic to field experience, aspects of preparation they are finding most valuable, goals for continued growth, and offer advice.

b) Early Career Program Graduates Visit Methods I: As the first year cohort learns Backwards Design unit development, recent program graduates who are practicing teachers return to address similar metacognition detailed, share their Methods 1 and subsequent Backwards Design unit projects, and workshop the first year cohort’s developing unit projects.

80

Field Experience Classroom Visits

a) Job Shadowing: During spring semester of their first year, the new cohort is paired with second year cohort colleagues who are now student teaching. The first year cohort visits the student teachers’ classroom at least three times throughout the term and engages active observation reflections. During each visit, the student teachers meet with their first year cohort mentees during a plan period to address questions, discuss growth and challenges, and consider the “behind the scenes” work for which teachers are responsible.

b) The ELL Informal Practicum

2015 marked the University of Nebraska-Lincoln’s Secondary English Education Program’s first opportunity to engage an ELL cross-institutional collaboration with the local school district, Lincoln Public Schools. The initial project was supported by an interdepartmental grant made available through a university-wide department teaching award. The goal of the semester-long project was to provide essential field experience serving linguistically diverse student populations and offer additional instructional support for ELLs through a digital writing project. At the time, middle school teachers from Culler, Goodrich, and Park middle schools (the middle schools with highest ELL attendance) were preparing their students for district persuasive writing assessments. The first-year English Education students visited their assigned middle school classrooms 8-10 times to support individual writing progress and group digital products. The long-term relationship building and project development experiences culminated on campus—where all of the middle school students (over 200) joined us for a sharing and celebration of their finished products, interaction with UNL faculty, campus tour, and lunch at a dorm’s dining hall. For many students, this was the first deep exposure to a college context.

Artifact 7: Teaching for Multidimensional Thinking:A Program Field Assessment

By the end of students’ formal preparation at UNL, pre-service teachers should consistently demonstrate

81

the capacity to plan for and operationalize critical, creative, ethical, and caring thinking in the classroom. To help pre-service teachers actualize these valued teaching practices, Dr. Lauren Gatti and Dr. Sarah Thomas devised a new classroom observation protocol intended to build more coherence between program and field experiences As such, each lesson will reflect a teacher’s commitment toward manifesting these priorities.

82

cehs.unl.edu folio... · web viewnational mean la & sec. english 5039 168 24 23 1 95.83 177.58...

Documents