assessment of student learning in the education major ... · end of the student teaching semester....

Assessment of Student Learning

In the Education Major

Annual Report

Submitted July 2014

Learning Goals in the Education Major driven by our Unit’s Conceptual Framework:

Develop professional educators who:

1. engage in active learning

2. create communities of learning

3. facilitate learning for others

4. collaborate with others

Assessment methods:

1. Illinois tests of academic proficiency, which now can be replaced by a composite score of

22 on the ACT PlusWriting; subject area content exam for which one is becoming

licensed; Assessment of the Professional Teacher; edTPA, the national exam comprising

3 ten minute video clips with written reflection..

2. grade point averages cumulative, as well as disaggregated for content major, and

professional education coursework

3. Embedded Signature Assessments

4. Various program assessments 1-6 (PAs)

5. evaluation and assessment of professional dispositions (revised to include ISBE Code of

Ethics; now in Academic Alert system)

6. internship evaluation materials, including reflective journals

7. student teaching evaluation materials, including reflective journals and plan books

8. Feedback forms from cooperating teachers, university supervisors and teacher candidates

NOTE: The assessment methods are administered on a continual basis to each student. The

following explains how each assessment method was administered, data compiled, and

analyzed during the current year. Results of the analysis are discussed in the section titled

‘Trends and Improvements’.

1. ICTS (Illinois Certification Testing System) is a standardized set of tests that each student

takes throughout their preparation program.

a. Administration: The first test, Test of Academic Proficiency, is taken during the

Freshmen year. Each of the four subareas of the test must be passed (240 points) in

order to be admitted to the School of Education. Starting in July of 2012, the ISBE

began accepting the ACT Plus Writing exam if the score was 22 or higher. We

now recommend that students take the ACTPlus Writing instead of the TAP.

b. The second test, Content Area Exam, is taken at the end of the Junior year. The test

must be passed in order to be admitted to Student teaching.

c. The third test, the Assessment of Professional Teaching, is taken at the end of

student teaching. The test must be passed in order to be certified in the state of

Illinois.

d. We are piloting a fourth, newly required test, the edTPA. It will become

consequential after September 1, 2015. This new test consists of 3 ten minute

video clips of the candidate teaching during student teaching semester. The video

clips are accompanied by written reflection and analysis.

e. Data from the tests is compiled in Banner by the Office Manager. Each student has

a School of Education record set. The test results are recorded in to Banner to

create the student record as the student moves toward certification.

f. The results of the test scores are analyzed after each administration as well as

yearly by the individual School of Education programs. Scores are analyzed after

each administration to see if the student will progress forward. The scores are

analyzed yearly by the programs to address any changes needed in course

curriculum.

2. Grade Point Averages are collected for each student every semester. This is a compilation

of grades that they receive in completed coursework.

a. Administration of the gpa runs through the Banner system and is compiled by the

registrar’s office at the end of each semester.

b. The student record is set up so that the gpa data is aggregated cumulatively and

then disaggregated by content program and professional education courses.

c. We analyze the gpa data in three ways. We look at the cumulative gpa (2.7

minimum) to make certain that the student is progressing satisfactorily for overall

completion of the licensure program. We look at the gpa in the students content

area to see if they are making satisfactory progress in their content knowledge. If

they are not maintaining a high enough gpa in their content (2.7), they may not be

mastering their desired content knowledge field of teaching. We also analyze the

professional education gpa. If the student is doing well in their content area classes

but are not performing satisfactorily in the education courses, then the student may

not have the dispositions to become a teacher.

3. Embedded Signature Assessments are summative and authentic professional education

assessments occurring in professional education courses from Education 120 up through

Education 488.

a. Administration of the ESAs occur by the professor, throughout the sequence of

professional education courses. Each assessment is given as an assignment in the

course. The nature of the assignment correlates with the Illinois Professional

Teaching Standards in order to measure the extent of the student’s knowledge,

skills, and understanding of the IPTS as well as scaffolds the knowledge and skills

needed to complete the edTPA.

b. When the ESA is complete, it is put in to the LiveText data base management

system by the student. The ESA is graded by the professor using a rubric that is in

LiveText. The assessment is also evaluated by the student using a self-reflection

process within LiveText. The student self-reflects on their demonstration of the

four learning goals of the School of Education. Once the professor submits the

graded rubric in Livetext, the data for that particular ESA is compiled in the

School of Education LiveText database. The LiveText data base holds every

graded rubric for every ESA on every teacher education candidate.

c. Analysis of the ESA data is ongoing. We analyze individual student data to see if

they are making satisfactory progress toward final certification. Each group of

faculty that teach and administer an ESA in the professional education courses

meet during the summer to revise the assignments and the grading rubric according

to the changing objectives and course goals. We have revised a number of ESAs in

the past year because of our aligning of curriculum and instruction to the IPTS and

the new exam edTPA. This alignment necessitated a revision of assessments as

well.

4. Program Assessments 1-6 are summative and authentic content area assessments occurring

in the major content area courses.

a. Administration of the program assessments occurs by the professor, throughout the

sequence of major content courses. Each assessment is given as an assignment in

the course. The nature of the assignment correlates with the National Specialized

Professional Association (SPA) Standards in order to measure the extent of the

student’s knowledge, skills, and understanding of the National SPA standards.

b. When the Program Assessment is complete, it is put in to the LiveText data base

management system by the student. The PA is graded by the professor using a

rubric that is in LiveText. The assessment is also evaluated by the student using a

self-reflection process within LiveText. The student self-reflects on their

demonstration of the four learning goals of the School of Education. Once the

professor submits the graded rubric in Livetext, the data for that particular PA is

compiled in the School of Education LiveText database. The LiveText data base

holds every graded rubric for every MA on every teacher education candidate.

c. Analysis of the PA data is ongoing. We analyze individual student data to see if

they are making satisfactory progress toward final certification. Each group of

faculty that teach and administer a PA in the major content courses meet during the

summer to revise the assignments and the grading rubric according to the changing

objectives and course goals.

5. Evaluation of Professional Dispositions: the evaluation includes the development and

demonstration of professional, interpersonal and affective dispositions. This assessment

was designed by the School of Education to measure professional qualities required of

teachers that are separate from content knowledge and skills. They are aligned to the State

of Illinois Code of Ethics.

a. Administration of the Disposition Assessment occurs throughout the program. The

dispositions are now a part of the official internship evaluation form, which every

classroom teacher uses for every internship and for student teaching evaluation.

Students are instructed in the dispositions and how to self-evaluate during the ED

170 internship process. During the administration of the disposition assessment,

along with the rest of the internship evaluation process, students engage in a self-

evaluation of their dispositions using the assessment form and dialoguing with

faculty and field placement classroom teachers. This serves as a formative

evaluation of dispositions through-out the program. Faculty also give written

feedback on the assessment form. If there are disposition deficiencies displayed by

any education student in any education or major content area course or at any time

during a field placement experience, the professor completes an electronic

Academic Alert through MUOnline, clicking the ‘other’ button and writing an

explanation of the disposition deficiency. The Director of the School of Education

receives all academic alerts given to all education students.

b. Data can now be efficiently and formally collected. The Disposition Essay is a

formally collected, documented and analyzed part of the Disposition assessment

system. The Disposition Essay has now been moved to ED 488 and is a reflective

and self-evaluative piece that allows the teacher candidate to explore their own

dispositions and the areas they may identify for growth as they transition in to their

professional lives. Now that the dispositions are a formal part of the internship

evaluation form, they are administered online to the classroom teacher in the field.

The classroom teacher, together with the professor or university supervisor,

completes the internship evaluation form, which includes the disposition criteria.

The form is submitted in to Livetext where the data can be collated and a report

can be run for viewing and analysis.

c. Analysis of the disposition assessment occurs within our Unit Assessment System.

Dispositions are reviewed and evaluated during the Application to the School of

Education process. Any deficiency forms that may be submitted for a student are

filed in the students’ paper file in the School of Education office. If two deficiency

forms are filed on the same person, then the Director of the School of Education

meets with the candidate to formulate a remediation plan. Now that we can collect

disposition measures from each of the internship evaluation forms, we can access

the data electronically and view the results. We have integrated the assessment of

dispositions more thoroughly into the field experiences, pre-student teaching

internships and student teaching. We are asking cooperating teachers to evaluate

dispositions within the context of what is expected in the various internships. The

disposition deficiency forms and system has changed slightly. Professors submit an

academic deficiency through MU-Online, the Director of the School of Education

now receives all academic deficiencies on every Education major. The changes we

have made are a result of NCATE consultation and national trends.

6. Student Teaching Evaluation is the rubric that is used by the University supervisor, the

Cooperating teacher and the student teacher. This evaluation measures a candidate’s

effectiveness in the classroom, their knowledge, skills, and dispositions, as well as

demonstration of all IPTS and National SPA standards. The student teaching evaluation

form has been revised to align to the IPTS.

a. The Student teaching evaluation is administered once at midterm and once at the

end of the student teaching semester. The University supervisor, cooperating

teacher and student teacher each complete an evaluation form independently.

There is a conference at midterm and at final discussing the contents of the

evaluation forms. The final narrative report is compiled collaboratively between

the University supervisor and the Cooperating teacher and is shared with the

student teacher. We have now put all of these evaluation forms online. The form is

distributed as a website link in an e-mail. The Cooperating Teacher and the

University Supervisor evaluate the Student teacher using an evaluation form;

submit it online and the results go in to the Livetext database. A report of results

can now be run for examination and analysis.

b. Data collection consists of the student teacher evaluation forms being collected

electronically in to the Livetext database. The grade is entered in to the student’s

Banner record set. The results are now more easily tabulated and analyzed.

Beginning in August, 2014, we will implement the new Livetext Field Experience

Module (FEM) which will allow all field internship data to be directly collected in

to Livetext and downloaded in to Banner. We received training in August, 2013,

but personnel was unwilling to implement the system.

c. Analysis of the student teaching data is ongoing. We revised the evaluation tool

and added addendums to the evaluation form for each content area, to better

measure national content standards. As a Unit, we have analyzed the data from the

student teaching evaluation forms to determine what areas of student teaching our

candidates are doing well on and what areas they are struggling with. We analyze

this data in our yearly department retreat as well as with our Community Advisory

Committee.

2013-2014: Data Trends and Improvement Plans and Plans for Changes and Revisions

Courses, Curriculum and Assessments we have revised because of the new IPTS and our

alignment of courses to the standards and preparation for new national exam edTPA:

We created Embedded Signature Assessments (ESAs)

The former Candidate Assessments (CAs) have now been replaced and will, henceforth, be

known as Embedded Signature Assessments (ESAs). The ESAs will no longer be numbered; they

will be called by name to eliminate confusion as we continue to revise and update in the future.

ESAs are formative assessments embedded throughout a program from the first year through the

senior year. They are the build-up to the edTPA which will become a consequential national

licensure requirement in Fall, 2015. ESAs are embedded in coursework, and every candidate,

regardless of major, will complete all ESAs. A formal scoring criterion exists to compare across

programs, among groups of students, etc. We can aggregate the data for different purposes.

ESAs are used by more than one instructor. If an ESA is embedded in a particular course, each

professor is expected to teach this particular assignment, use the assessment tool, and submit the

ESA to LiveText. All ESAs will be recorded in LiveText. The difference between a course

assessment and the ESA is that the ESA must be taught in the course designated by the School of

Education (SOE). However, the instructors of that particular course may require other

assignments based on their personal philosophies and learning goals. Those course assignments

will not be submitted to LiveText.

All ESAs, when totaled together, should meet all of the new Illinois Professional Teaching

Standards (IPTS). Those were revised in 2010 and were required to be implemented in fall of

2013.

The Committee on Teacher Education Programs (CTEP) voted to eliminate some of the CAs last

academic year, 2011-2013. As a result, CTEP recognized the need to develop some new ESAs.

Three new ESAs were initially developed, based on the work that each candidate will need to

complete for the edTPA. The edTPA is the Teacher Performance Assessment which every

candidate will be required to submit in his/her student teaching semester. The edTPA is very

much like our current Teacher Work Sample (TWS) which puts us in a good position compared to

some of our peer institutions.

The edTPA has several components. One consists of an academic language component, a specific

rubric that addresses how well candidates write and speak about what they are doing in the

classroom. The other is a video component where candidates video a portion of their student

teaching experience, upload it, and analyze it.

This Spring 2014 group of traditional student teachers will pilot the edTPA project. Every

candidate, regardless of major, will complete the edTPA instead of the TWS. A second pilot

group will teach in the Fall of 2014; this group will include PACE student teachers so both of our

programs are prepared to submit the edTPA in Spring 2015. We will transition completely to the

edTPA in Spring 2015 (our current juniors will submit it) and will go live that semester. Pearson

Evaluation Systems will assess the submissions and evaluate their edTPAs.

ESA: Context for Learning

This ESA will be embedded in the traditional ED120, PACE ED170, and Music Education

ME251 courses. It will require candidates to study contextual factors that determine teachers’

decision-making. It will provide evidence of knowledge of students and the ability to identify and

summarize important factors related to student learning and the school environment. This is the

first step in any internship or teaching situation before they can begin planning, instruction or

assessment (PIA). They must be able to understand the contextual factors in the classroom and

the people within it.

Overview of the tasks:

Reflect on the features of the classroom that impact the cooperating teacher’s planning,

instruction, and assessment

Provide descriptive information regarding the placement (necessitating communication

with the cooperating teacher)

Describe important features of the class which would affect the cooperating teacher’s

instructional decisions

This is the context commentary straight from the edTPA. Those words are chosen because they

are specific to the edTPA. If candidates are introduced to this language as freshmen, and it is

developed in methods courses in the sophomore year, and further developed in the junior and

senior years, they will become very comfortable with the academic language. The edTPA will

require them to understand their context, analyze it, and write comments about it. What they

write in their senior years will differ greatly from their freshmen years.

ESA: Effective Teaching Cycle

This ESA will be embedded in junior level courses for all Education majors in ED336 (ECE),

ED312 (ELED), ED321 (secondary and K-12), and ME341 (Music Education). This ESA

presents the opportunity to begin taking what they understand about contextual information and

applying it -- Planning, Instruction, and Assessment (PIA) -- with one short video clip.

Much of the language is pulled from the edTPA handbook. The learning segment (topic) follows

from start to finish – planning, instruction, and assessment. As a group, we must determine how

we will introduce the academic language determined by the edTPA.

Candidates turn in their context commentary, their lesson plan, any instructional and assessment

materials they use, one video clip, and their instruction commentary. To assess student learning,

candidates will choose three students from the class and submit their work samples, any criteria or

rubrics the candidates use, and their commentary for the assessment. The term “learning segment”

is used throughout the edTPA; we might call it a topic. From the planning, through the

instruction and the assessment, is considered the learning segment.

By this course, each candidate will have possession of the edTPA handbook for their major. That

will be a reference guide for the instructors and the candidates as they prepare for the edTPA. We

must discuss “academic language” and how we introduce and develop it in each specific program

(functions, forms and fluency) according to Pearson and Stanford. The functions are the tasks.

The forms are the words within the methods (compare, contrast, analyze, etc.). Fluency is the

ability to use the functions and forms in the correct context in their language/writing. It includes

the academic language of the disciplines, as well as the educational academic language.

This ESA includes understanding context, planning and instructing a lesson, using the video

commentary, writing commentary based on what they see in their instruction. The edTPA

consists of the 10-15 minute clip and what candidates say about it in their instructional

commentary. The edTPA may require a second clip that highlights their ability to use academic

language in the classroom, as well as their commentary on that clip. The maximum number of

minutes allowed is 15 minutes per video and no more than two videos.

The lesson plan template is approved by the SOE but adjusted for specific courses. We would like

to add accommodation and differentiation to the template. Each prompt has a specific number of

pages that are allowed; no more pages will be accepted by Pearson. Fifteen rubrics exist for the

edTPA: five for planning, five for instruction, and five for assessment. Each one focuses on one

subject. If we were to take the five planning rubrics from each of the three areas, we could

condense them into one page for a total of three rubrics.

Candidates are not allowed to submit planning and commentary to our professors for editing.

They could do that in the pre-student teaching semester, in ED406/ED425, but not during the

student teaching semester in ED488. The courses ED406/ED425 currently take the candidates to

the point of lesson planning for the TWS, but they will now traverse the entire process of the

edTPA in those two classes. Ed406/ED425 will continue to evolve as we build the edTPA into

our program.

ESA: The Teaching Portfolio

This ESA which will be used in ED406/ED425 during fall 2013 semester to prepare for the

edTPA launch next spring 2014. It essentially replaces the TWS.

This is the local assessment practice of the edTPA handbook – similar to the TWS handbook.

The checklist assists candidates in organization and in determining what materials they will

submit to Pearson. Lesson plans will not exceed four pages for the edTPA.

Ongoing CTEP work for the 2014-2015 Academic Year:

1. Program Assessments and rubrics need to be revised.

2. Pilot in-house edTPA with class of 2015, preparing first consequential class for fall 2015.

3. Begin revisions of Unit’s Conceptual Framework

4. Begin timeline and action steps for next CAEP Continual Improvement Initiative visit in

2017,

Assessment in the Major for Elementary Education and Early Childhood

Preliminary trends that can be identified as a result of viewing data from selected

assessments:

1. Assessment of Content Knowledge

a. Describe the process which ensures that candidates are receiving and

demonstrating their developing content knowledge they will be responsible to

teach.

Students complete Candidate Assessment 3 (CA3) - Child Case Study during fall

semester of their sophomore year. The CA3 is part of the course ED 232 – Early

Childhood Development. As students complete the case study, they apply theory

and aspects of development to their observations of a specific child. The goal is

for students to understand how developmental theory informs a child’s

development and the influences of development from Bronfrenbrenner’s

Ecological Model. The areas they address in the case study are the major domains

of development (physical & health, cognitive, language, social & relationships,

emotional, moral and aesthetic).

b.

b. Provide a related rubric or scoring guide

Not Proficient (1 pt)

Marginal (2 pts) Proficient (3 pts) Commendable (4 pts)

Context of Learning (1, 8%) MTS.1B

There are few or no explicit statements and expansion regarding Specific topics emphasized in the assignment instructions and weak reflection and self-assessment.

The author includes few developmental theories/categories and does not adequately situate the data (the case study comes across as a series of theoretical statements as opposed to a more holistic description and explanation of the participant [two or more omissions]).

The author includes all of the required developmental theories/categories but does not situate all of the data. (the case study is, for the most part, a holistic description and explanation of the participant [one omission]).

The author includes all of the required Developmental theories/categories and the case study creates a holistic description and explanation of the participant [one omission]).

Views on Learning (1, 8%) MTS.1C

There are few or no explicit statements regarding how the participant engages in learning or views his or her development.

The author includes decontextualized or unsupported examples of the participants’ views on learning making it difficult for the reader to construct a holistic portrait of the participant (two or more decontextualized/ unsupported examples).

The author includes decontextualized or unsupported examples of the participants’ views on learning thus limiting the reader to infer ideas about the participants’ view of his or her development (one decontextualized/ unsupported examples).

The author includes a thick description of the participants’ views on learning affording the reader a holistic view of the participant.

Theory (1, 8%) MTS.2B

There are few references to theory and the study is a series of unsupported or ambiguous questions making it difficult to ascertain the participant’s development in specific

There are references to theory but either there is misunderstanding on the part of the author or the questions asked do not allow the participant adequate possibility to

There are references to theory but either there is misunderstanding on the part of the author or the questions asked do not allow the participant adequate possibility to

The author both references and adequately explains theory in light of the participant’s experiences. This is evidenced through both the case study and the constructed interview

Official CA3-Case Study Rubric



theoretical categories.

provide a clear answer resulting in fragmented portrait of the participant (two or more instances regarding theory and three or more instances regarding questions).

provide a clear answer resulting in fragmented portrait of the participant (one instance regarding theory and two instances regarding questions).

questions.

Synthesis (1, 8%) MTS.2D

The author does not attempt or omits the reflections portion of the case study.

The author attempts to reflect upon the case data but does so primarily through description as opposed to synthesis of the data, or the author only provides a partial synthesis of the data (two or more instances).

The author reflects upon the case data but does so through description as opposed to synthesis of the data, or the author only provides a partial synthesis of the data (one instance).

The author provides a well constructed synthesis that affords the reader a holistic description of the participant.

Prior Knowledge (1, 8%) MTS.3C

The author does not provide a means for the participant to express “extra-theoretical” ideas (i.e., the questions asked of the participant do not ask about personal experiences, triumphs, and/or challenges).

The author provides a partial insight into the participants “life-world” But does not adequately connect these ideas with other data in the case study (two or more instances).

The author provides a adequate insight into the participants “life-world” But does not connect these ideas with other data in the case study (one instance).

The author provides a deep insight into the participant through the questions asked and interpreted data.

Cognitive Process (1, 8%) MTS.6A

The author does not include an explanation of the required teaching episode.

The author includes a description of the required teaching episode

The author includes a description of the required teaching episode

The author includes an adequate description and explanation of




but does not contextualize the example within the various learning theories studied in class and does not connect the teaching/learning interaction with learning theory.

but does not contextualize the example within the various learning theories studied in class or does not connect the teaching/learning interaction with learning theory.

his or her teaching episode and situates it within course content.

Perspective (1, 8%) MTS.7B

The Author Does not include a “thick description” of the participant’s views on both his or her schooling or other areas of development.

The author does not consistently include a thick description of the participant’s perspective on either his or her schooling or other areas of development (Two or more omissions).

The author includes a thick description of the participant’s perspective on either his or her schooling or other areas of development with one exception.

The author includes a thick description of various perspectives important to the participant thus ensuring an adequate portrait for the reader..

Age / Developmental Level (1, 8%) MTS.7C

The author is not sensitive to the age/developmental level of the participant in regards to the language used during the interview and the language used precluded the participant from providing expansive responses.

The author is not sensitive to the age/developmental level of the participant in regards to the language used during the interview or the language used precluded the participant from providing expansive responses (two or more instances).

The author is sensitive to the age/developmental level of the participant in regards to the language used during the interview but the language used precluded the participant from providing expansive responses (one instance).

The author is sensitive to the age/developmental level of the participant and asks appropriate questions that afford the participant the opportunity to most fully expand and explain his or her unique perspective.

Communication (1, 8%) IL-CAS.CLA.2.A IL-CAS.CLA.2.B MTS.7D

Numerous spelling and/or grammatical errors.

Two or more syntactical, spelling and/or grammatical error.

One syntactical, spelling and/or grammatical error

All Responses are well communicated in terms of syntax, spelling, and grammar.




Reflection on Professional Growth (1, 8%) MTS.10A

Responses do not consistently show reflective thinking.

The case study, while providing an adequate portrait of the participant is lacking in reflection insofar as the author does not connect the participant’s responses with his or her current thinking on teaching and learning (two or more instances).

The case study, while providing an adequate portrait of the participant is lacking in reflection insofar as the author does not connect the participant’s responses with his or her current thinking on teaching and learning (one instance).

The author’s reflections include numerous connections to both his or her and the participant’s experiences and are also situated in light of the author’s thinking about teaching and learning.

Reflection on Standards & Themes (1, 8%) MTS.10A

The author’s reflection does not include organizing themes or related standards and indicators. No examples are given.

The author’s reflection includes one organizing theme with at least one relevant standard and indicators. No specific examples are given.

The author’s reflection includes two organizing themes with relevant standards and indicators with related specific examples from the paper that illustrate the themes and standards.

The author’s reflections addresses 3 or 4 organizing themes and two standards and indicators. Specific examples from the paper are used to illustrate themes an standards.

Format (1, 8%) The paper does not follow the formatting instructions described on the assignment sheet.

The paper follows some of the formatting instructions described on the assignment sheet (two or more errors).

The paper follows most of the formatting instructions described on the assignment sheet (one error).

The paper follows all of the formatting instructions described on the assignment sheet.

c. Provide a data table of candidate scores/results including the number of candidates

who took the assessment, the range and mean of the scores and the pass rate. Do

not include individual candidate names as the data must summative.


Rubric: Official CA3 ECE Assessment

Not

Proficient

(1 pts)

Marginal

(2 pts)

Proficient

(3 pts)

Commendable

(4 pts)

Withdrew

(0 pts)

Changed

Major

(0 pts)

Failed

Course

(0 pts)

Mean Mode Stdev

Contexts of

Development &

Learning 0 1 1 19 0 0 1 3.682 4.000 0.924

Views on

Development &

Learning 0 2 3 16 0 0 1 3.500 4.000 0.989

Theories of Child

Development 4 1 8 8 0 0 1 2.818 3.000 1.230

Synthesis 0 1 7 13 0 0 1 3.409 4.000 0.937

Applications of

Prior Professional

Knowledge 0 1 4 16 0 0 1 3.545 4.000 0.940

Awareness of

Children's

Cognitive

Processes

0 0 5 16 0 0 1 3.591 4.000 0.887

Professional,

Family, & Personal

Perspectives 0 1 6 14 0 0 1 3.455 4.000 0.940

Age /

Developmental

Level 0 0 2 19 0 0 1 3.727 4.000 0.862

General Reflection

on Professional

Growth 0 0 4 17 0 0 1 3.636 4.000 0.881

Reflection on

Standards &

Themes 2 0 2 17 0 0 1 3.455 4.000 1.157

Professional Level

of Communication 13 2 4 2 0 0 1 1.682 1.000 1.103

Format 0 0 4 17 0 0 1 3.636 4.000 0.881

Contexts of Development

& Learning

MTS-1B, NAEYC-1.2, NAEYC-2.1

1 (4

%) 1 (4

%) 19 (86%) 1 (4%)

Views on Development &

Learning

MTS-1C, NAEYC-1.1

2 (9%) 3 (13%) 16 (72%) 1 (4

%)

Theories of Child

Development

MTS-2B, NAEYC-1.1, NAEYC-1.2,

NAEYC-5.4

4 (18%) 1 (4

%) 8 (36%) 8 (36%) 1 (4

%)

Synthesis

MTS-2D, NAEYC-1.1, NAEYC-1.2,

NAEYC-3.3, NAEYC-5.1

1 (4

%) 7 (31%) 13 (59%) 1 (4

%)

Applications of Prior 1 (4

%) 4 (18%) 16 (72%) 1 (4

%)

Professional Knowledge

MTS-3C, NAEYC-3.2, NAEYC-4.2

Awareness of Children's

Cognitive Processes

MTS-6A, NAEYC-3.2, NAEYC-3.3,

NAEYC-5.1

5 (22%) 16 (72%) 1 (4

%)

Professional, Family, &

Personal Perspectives

MTS-7B, NAEYC-2.2, NAEYC-3.4,

NAEYC-4.1

1 (4

%) 6 (27%) 14 (63%) 1 (4%)

Age / Developmental

Level

MTS-7C, NAEYC-1.1, NAEYC-4.1

2 (9%) 19 (86%) 1 (4

%)

General Reflection on

Professional Growth

MTS-10A, NAEYC-5.1, NAEYC-5.4

4 (18%) 17 (77%) 1 (4

%)

Reflection on Standards

& Themes

MTS-10A, NAEYC-5.1, NAEYC-5.4

2 (9%) 2 (9%) 17 (77%) 1 (4

%)

Professional Level of

Communication

IL-CAS-CLA.2.A, IL-CAS-CLA.2.B,

MTS-7D, NAEYC-5.2

13 (59%) 2 (9%) 4 (18%) 2 (9%) 1 (4

%)

Format 4 (18%) 17 (77%) 1 (4

%)

Not

Proficien

t

Margina

l Proficien

t Commendabl

e Withdre

w Change

d Major

Failed

Cours

e

Inter-rater Summary

Page, Georgette Quigg, Claudia Mean Stdev

Contexts of Development & Learning 3.222 4.000 3.611 0.550

Views on Development & Learning 3.000 3.846 3.423 0.598

Theories of Child Development 2.222 3.231 2.726 0.713

Synthesis 3.222 3.538 3.380 0.224

Applications of Prior Professional Knowledge 3.111 3.846 3.479 0.520

Awareness of Children's Cognitive Processes 3.333 3.769 3.551 0.308

Professional, Family, & Personal Perspectives 3.222 3.615 3.419 0.278

Age / Developmental Level 3.333 4.000 3.667 0.471

General Reflection on Professional Growth 3.333 3.846 3.590 0.363

Reflection on Standards & Themes 2.778 3.923 3.350 0.810

Professional Level of Communication 2.667 1.000 1.833 1.179

Format 3.222 3.923 3.573 0.496

d. Provide a discussion of data results

The data show that there are two areas of concern. The first area is Theories of

Development and Learning. Students complete this case study as sophomores.

This is their first introduction to theory. Students continue to revisit theories of

child development in other courses throughout their program of study. The second

area of concern is Professional Level of Communication. The case study is a long

document (typically 30 pages). Many students score low in this area of the rubric

due to their lack of editing and writing skills. Writing skills continue to be an area

of concern for a number of our early childhood education students.

2. Initial Program Assessment of Candidates’ Ability to Plan Instruction

a. Provide a concise description of the assessment, including when it is given and

how it fits into the system of assessing 1- Candidates Ability to Plan Instruction

(for Initial Programs); or 2- Candidates’ Ability to Plan an Appropriate

Environment (for Advanced Programs).

Candidates Ability to Plan Instruction (for Initial Programs)

Candidate Assessment 7 (CA7) – Long-Range Instructional Planning and Design

involves long-range instructional planning for a specific grade level in the content

area of Social Studies. This assessment takes place during the spring semester in

their junior year in the course ED 336 – Math & Science Methods. The long-range

plan demonstrates the teacher candidate’s ability to engage in curriculum mapping

using scope and sequence strategies while correlating the content’s curriculum to

the Illinois State Goals and the Illinois State Learning Standards. Teacher

candidates will begin to learn how to plan at all stages of instruction– long-range

planning, unit planning, and lesson planning. At the same time, the expectation is

that this assessment will prepare the student to be formally assessed on the first

component of instructional design, which is long-range planning.


Official CA7-Long Range Planning Rubric


Marginal (2 pts)

Proficient (3 pts)

Commendable (4 pts)


Marginal (2 pts)

Proficient (3 pts)

Commendable (4 pts)

Academic Calendar: Timeline & Important Dates (1, 20%) MTS.4J MTS.4K

Timeline is incomplete. Timeline is not logically organized in weekly increments. Few important dates are included; key dates are not considered in the planning. Timeline is not aligned to the district’s academic calendar.

A semester long or an incomplete year-long timeline is used. Timeline is not consistently organized in a weekly format. Some important dates are identified, but several key dates are not considered in the planning. Timeline is not appropriately aligned to the district’s calendar.

A year-long timeline is used, but…Some dates are not organized weekly. Most important dates are identified and considered in the planning. Timeline is aligned to the district’s calendar used by the candidate.

Year-long timeline for the appropriate school district is used. All dates for the academic year are outlined weekly (Monday-Friday). All important dates (e.g., achievement testing, holidays, days not in session, etc.) are identified and considered in the planning and transition from one chapter or unit to the next. Timeline is aligned to the district’s calendar used by the candidate.

Academic Calendar: Scope and Sequence/ District Calendar & Planning Calendar (1,

20%) MTS.4J MTS.4K

Little to no instructional time is provided for the goals and standards. Few, if any, goals/ILS/B-PD are addressed. Number of

Insufficient instructional time provided for addressing the goals/ILS/B-PD. Number of weeks allotted to cover each B/PD is not

Sufficient instructional time is provided for addressing most goals/ILS/B-PD. Number of weeks allotted to cover each B/PD is

Sufficient instructional time is provided for each goal/standard and benchmarks &/or performance descriptors as planned within the context of the various topics related to the


Marginal (2 pts)

Proficient (3 pts)

Commendable (4 pts)

weeks allotted to cover each B/PD is not included. (Time frames are missing.) A copy of the district’s academic calendar is not provided. Copies of monthly planning calendars are missing.

included consistently. (A few time frames are included.) A copy of the district’s academic calendar is provided. Copies of monthly planning calendars are missing.

included most of the time. (Most time frames are included.) A copy of the academic calendar for the district used is not provided. Copies of the monthly planning calendars are provided.

curricular area. Appropriate number of weeks allotted to cover each B/PD is included. All time frames are included as number of weeks. Lengths of time frames for each unit of study are logical and provide enough time to adequately address the topics necessary. A copy of the academic calendar for the district used is provided. Candidate also includes detailed copies of the monthly calendars from which he or she planned the curriculum.

Illinois Learning Goals & Standards: Goals (depending on number of goals in the subject area) & Standards

Only one of the Illinois Learning Goals for the curricular area is included but not written/ coded correctly.

Only one of the Illinois Learning Goals for the curricular area is included but is not written/coded correctly.

A couple or most Illinois Learning Goals for the curricular area are included and written/coded correctly. Most ILS for each goal are

All Illinois Learning Goals for the curricular area are included and written/coded correctly. All ILS for each goal are included and are written/coded correctly. All standards


Marginal (2 pts)

Proficient (3 pts)

Commendable (4 pts)

(ILS) (1, 20%) MTS.2E MTS.4A MTS.4K

Few of the ILS are included and written/coded correctly. Few, if any, of the ILS correlate to the appropriate goal.

Some ILS for each goal are included and written/coded correctly. Some correlate to the appropriate goal.

included and written/coded correctly. Most correlate to the appropriate goal.

correlate to the appropriate goal.

Curriculum Mapping: Textbook Alignment (1, 20%) MTS.1F MTS.4A MTS.4B MTS.4J MTS.4K

Textbook is scantily aligned with goals and standards.

Incomplete textbook alignment; some chapters and page numbers provided; chapter titles/topics not included.

Comprehensive textbook alignment with goals and standards by chapter and page numbers; some chapter titles/topics included but they are vague.

Comprehensive textbook alignment (or key curriculum resources) with the Illinois Learning Goals and Standards by chapter and page numbers (including descriptive chapter titles and key curriculum topics) as applicable.

Curriculum Mapping: Instructional Resources & Supplemental Materials (1, 20%) MTS.1F MTS.4A MTS.4B MTS.4J MTS.4K

Supplemental materials are not identified.

Supplemental materials are minimally identified (or only identified for the specific unit the candidate is

Supplemental materials are identified for some other areas of the curriculum besides the candidate’s own unit.

Supplemental materials are clearly identified for units throughout the entire curriculum, including the candidate’s own unit.


Marginal (2 pts)

Proficient (3 pts)

Commendable (4 pts)

creating).

c. Provide a data table of candidate scores/results including the number of candidates

who took the assessment, the range and mean of the scores and the pass rate. Do

not include individual candidate names as the data must summative.

Rubric: Official CA7 Assessment

Rubric: Official CA7 Assessment

Failed

Cours

e

(0.000

pts)

Change

d

Majors

(0.000

pts)

Withdre

w

(0.000

pts)

Not

Proficie

nt

(1.000

pts)

Margin

al

(2.000

pts)

Proficie

nt

(3.000

pts)

Commendab

le

(4.000 pts)

Mea

n

Mod

e

Stde

v

Academic

Calendar:

Timeline &

Important

Dates

0 0 0 0 0 0 2

4.00

0

4.00

0

0.00

0

Academic

Calendar:

Scope and

Sequence/

District

Calendar &

Planning

Calendar

0 0 0 0 0 0 2

4.00

0

4.00

0

0.00

0

Illinois

Learning

Goals &

0 0 0 0 0 0 2

4.00

0

4.00

0

0.00

0

Standards:

Goals

(depending

on number

of goals in

the subject

area) &

Standards

(ILS)

Unit Titles 0 0 0 0 0 0 2

4.00

0

4.00

0

0.00

0

Curriculum

Mapping:

Content

0 0 0 0 0 0 2

4.00

0

4.00

0

0.00

0

Curriculum

Mapping:

Textbook

Alignment

0 0 0 0 0 0 2

4.00

0

4.00

0

0.00

0

Curriculum

Mapping:

Instructional

Resources &

Supplement

al Materials

0 0 0 0 0 0 2

4.00

0

4.00

0

0.00

0

Workmanshi

p 0 0 0 0 0 0 2

4.00

0

4.00

0

0.00

0

Academic

Calendar: Timeline

& Important Dates

ACEI-3.a, MTS-4J, MTS-4K

2 (100%)

Academic

Calendar: Scope

and Sequence/

District Calendar &

Planning Calendar

ACEI-3.a, MTS-4J, MTS-4K

2 (100%)

Illinois Learning

Goals & Standards:

Goals (depending

on number of goals

in the subject area)

& Standards (ILS)

ACEI-2.a, ACEI-2.b, ACEI-

2.c, ACEI-2.d, ACEI-2.e,

ACEI-2.i, MTS-4A, MTS-4B,

MTS-4K

2 (100%)

Unit Titles 2 (100%)

Curriculum

Mapping: Content

2 (100%)



ACEI-2.i, ACEI-3.a, ACEI-5.b,

IL-ISBE-LA-2D, MTS-1F,

MTS-4A, MTS-4B, MTS-4J, MTS-4K Curriculum

Mapping: Textbook

Alignment

ACEI-1, ACEI-2.a, ACEI-2.b,

ACEI-2.c, ACEI-2.d, ACEI-2.e,

ACEI-2.i, MTS-1F, MTS-4A,

MTS-4B, MTS-4J, MTS-4K,

MTS-4Q

2 (100%)

Curriculum

Mapping:

Instructional

Resources &

Supplemental

Materials



ACEI-2.i, ACEI-3.a, ACEI-5.b, IL-ISBE-LA-2D, MTS-1F,

MTS-4A, MTS-4B, MTS-4J,

MTS-4K

2 (100%)

Workmanship 2 (100%)

Failed

Course Changed

Majors Withdrew

Not

Proficient Marginal Proficient Commendable


Each Early Childhood candidate taking this assessment during the 2012-2013

academic year performed commendably. This demonstrates that the Early

Childhood candidates are prepared and performed well with short and long term

planning.

3. Clinical Practice Assessment

a. Provide a concise description of the assessment, including when it is given and

how it fits into the system of assessing Clinical Practice.

The final student teaching evaluation reflects students’ skills and knowledge in

preparation for their work as professional early childhood educators. It is the

summative assessment that is completed at the end of student teaching in the final

semester of their program of study. This assessment is the same tool that is used to

assess students in all four clinical experiences (freshman through senior year).


Teacher Candidate__________________________ Date ________________

Subject/Grade Level ________ School _____________ District _________

Evaluation by: ____ Teacher Candidate ____ Cooperating Teacher ____ MU Supervisor

INDICATORS OF EXCELLENCE IN TEACHING AND LEARNING . . . P E M NP NA

MILLIKIN UNIVERSITY

EVALUATION OF STUDENT TEACHING:

Early Childhood

Midterm ______ Final ________

Directions: Indicate the student teacher’s performance using the following rating scale:

P = Proficient The student teacher is proficient, responds positively to all assistance and performs well.[A or A-]

E = Evolving Student teacher shows developing proficiency, making progress along growth frontiers. [B-range]

M = Marginal The student is partly proficient, requires considerable assistance and performs unevenly. A rating of M may lead to an action plan. [C-range]

NP = Not Proficient The student does not show needed proficiency, does not respond effectively to assistance and performs poorly. A rating of NP may lead to an action plan and an unsatisfactory grade.

NA = Not applicable Does not apply at the time of this evaluation.

SH

OW

S E

VID

EN

CE

OF

AC

TIV

E L

EA

RN

ING

Understands subject taught, including different viewpoints in teaching content. MTS 1A & 1F NAEYC

4c

Enthusiastically and effectively creates learning experiences that engage students. MTS 1 NAEYC 1abc, 4bc

Anticipates and adjusts for common misunderstandings of the discipline. MTS 1I NAEYC 1a, 4b

Uses a variety of explanations and examples of key ideas that helps students understand concepts.

MTS 1J NAEYC 4c

Uses classroom observation, information about students, pedagogical knowledge and research to reflect on, evaluate and revise practice. MTS 10D NAEYC 3abc

Actively seeks and collaboratively shares a variety of instructional resources with cooperating teacher.

MTS 10G NAEYC 5b

CR

EATE

S C

OM

MU

NIT

Y O

F LE

AR

NER

S

Analyzes individual and class performance to meet learners’ cognitive, social, emotional, and physical needs at appropriate developmental level. MTS 2F NAEYC 3abc

Introduces concepts and principles in various ways to meet the diverse needs of students. MTS 2H

NAEYC 4c

Respects individual differences. MTS 3F NAEYC 5b

Uses cultural diversity and individual student experiences to enrich instruction. MTS 3I NAEYC 2c

Uses a wide range of instructional strategies and technologies to meet students’ diverse needs. MTS 3J

NAEYC 2c

Maintains classroom discipline that maximizes learning. MTS 5E & 5F NAEYC 4b

Analyzes the classroom environment to make decisions that enhance social relationships, student motivation and engagement. MTS 5H NAEYC 3abc

Models accurate, effective communication to convey ideas and information, to ask and answer

questions. MTS 7E NAEYC 1c, 4b

Creates opportunities for students to use effective written, verbal, nonverbal and visual communication. MTS 7G NAEYC 1a, 4bcd

Communicates positive expectations to students for their learning and behavior; provides constructive

feedback; practices effective listening, group facilitation and conflict resolution strategies. MTS 7H & 7K NAEYC 1ac

FA

CIL

ITA

TE

S L

EA

RN

ING

Creates plans with a variety of activities appropriate to the discipline, curriculum goal and the learning

needs and styles of students. MTS 4K & 4L & 4M NAEYC 1b, 4bcd

Lesson plans are grammatically correct and communicative. MTS 4B NAEYC 5b

Develops plans in response to students’ current life experiences and future career and work experiences. MTS 4N NAEYC 1b, 2a, 4a

Uses teaching resources and instructional technology effectively. MTS 4Q & 4R NAEYC 4d

Uses teaching and learning strategies that promote critical thinking, problem solving and creative

performances. MPS 6F NAEYC 5d

Monitors and adjusts strategies in response to learner feedback. MTS 6G & 8F NAEYC 3abc

Uses formal and informal assessments to evaluate the understanding, progress and performance of

learners. MTS 8G NAEYC 3abcd

Uses accurate records to monitor and assess student performance and communicates student

performance to students, parents and colleagues. MTS 8I & 8J NAEYC 3abcd

Oral Communication: Uses appropriate grammar and spelling, pronounces words clearly and precisely,

varies pitch and tone according to the situation. Core LA S 2A-F

INDICATORS OF EXCELLENCE IN TEACHING AND LEARNING . . . P

E M NP NA

CO

LL

AB

OR

AT

ES

Works with other colleagues to achieve student success. MTP 9G & 9H

Works with parents/guardians from diverse home and community situations to promote student learning. MTS 9J

Writes sensitively when writing to parents and students. MPS 9E.

Assumes responsibility by taking appropriate initiative, following through on projects, and managing

school resources with care. MTS 9D & 9E

Time management: Plans ahead, understands the big picture, is punctual and willing to take time before and after school needed to collaborate. MTS 11B

Follows school policy & codes of professional conduct: Maintains professional distance with students

and parents; respects students’ privacy rights and recognizes that sexually suggestive behavior between student and teacher is prohibited. MTS 11G & 11H

Contributes knowledge and expertise about teaching and learning to the profession. MTS 11F

DISPOSITIONAL DEVELOPMENT: P = proficient in the area; E = evolving, making progress; M = marginal and needs improvement; not consistent; NP = not proficient and needs improvement

INDICATORS OF EXCELLENCE IN TEACHING AND LEARNING . . .

P

E

M

NP

DIS

PO

SIT

ION

S

Professional Development: The teacher candidate...

Meets obligations and deadlines.

Meets expectations for attendance.

Presents a professional image appropriate to the setting.

Shows evidence of thought and care in preparation of materials.

Affective Development: The teacher candidate…

Approaches academic and personal issues in a positive and productive manner.

Demonstrates ethical and honest behavior.

Interpersonal Development: The teacher candidate…

Uses conventions of standard English in writing and speaking.

Respects the values and opinions of others/appreciates human diversity.

Accepts and uses constructive criticism.

Functions effectively in a variety of group roles.

Please comment on the strengths and weaknesses of the dispositions of this teacher candidate: ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Grade recommendation (at this time) _________

(Millikin Grades = A, A-, B+,B, B-,C+,C,C-,D+, D, D-, F)

Describe below this student teacher’s major strengths and areas needing improvements:

Occasionally students who are proficient in student teaching also show a commendable performance in some areas -- one beyond which is typically found in a novice. Has this student been commendable in any area? Please describe.

Evaluator’s Signature _____________________________________________________________________________

If you have questions please contact the Education Department: 217-424-6244

- 26 -

c. Provide a data table of candidate scores/results including the number of candidates who took the

assessment, the range and mean of the scores and the pass rate. Do not include individual

candidate names as the data must summative.

The numbers indicated in each section of the rubric below show the number of Early Childhood teacher

candidates in the 2012-2013 academic year scoring proficient, evolving, marginal, not proficient, or not

applicable.

Millikin University Early Childhood Student Teaching Rubric

INDICATORS OF EXCELLENCE IN TEACHING AND LEARNING . . . P E M NP NA

SH

OW

S E

VID

EN

CE

OF

AC

TIV

E L

EA

RN

ING

Understands subject taught, including different viewpoints in teaching content. MTS 1A & 1F NAEYC

4c

15 5

Enthusiastically and effectively creates learning experiences that engage students. MTS 1 NAEYC

1abc, 4bc

18 2

Anticipates and adjusts for common misunderstandings of the discipline. MTS 1I NAEYC 1a, 4b 14 6

Uses a variety of explanations and examples of key ideas that helps students understand concepts. MTS 1J NAEYC 4c

19 1

Uses classroom observation, information about students, pedagogical knowledge and research to

reflect on, evaluate and revise practice. MTS 10D NAEYC 3abc

19 1

Actively seeks and collaboratively shares a variety of instructional resources with cooperating teacher. MTS 10G NAEYC 5b

19 1

CR

EATE

S C

OM

MU

NIT

Y O

F LE

AR

NER

S

Analyzes individual and class performance to meet learners’ cognitive, social, emotional, and physical

needs at appropriate developmental level. MTS 2F NAEYC 3abc

18 2

Introduces concepts and principles in various ways to meet the diverse needs of students. MTS 2H

NAEYC 4c

19 1

Respects individual differences. MTS 3F NAEYC 5b 20

Uses cultural diversity and individual student experiences to enrich instruction. MTS 3I NAEYC 2c 19 1

Uses a wide range of instructional strategies and technologies to meet students’ diverse needs. MTS 3J

NAEYC 2c

19 1

Maintains classroom discipline that maximizes learning. MTS 5E & 5F NAEYC 4b 19 1

Directions: Indicate the student teacher’s performance using the following rating scale:

P = Proficient The student teacher is proficient, responds positively to all assistance and performs well.[A or A-]

E = Evolving Student teacher shows developing proficiency, making progress along growth frontiers. [B-range]

M = Marginal The student is partly proficient, requires considerable assistance and performs unevenly. A rating of M may lead to an action plan. [C-range]

NP = Not Proficient The student does not show needed proficiency, does not respond effectively to assistance and performs poorly. A rating of NP may lead to an action plan and an unsatisfactory grade.

NA = Not applicable Does not apply at the time of this evaluation.

- 27 -

Analyzes the classroom environment to make decisions that enhance social relationships, student

motivation and engagement. MTS 5H NAEYC 3abc

17 3

Models accurate, effective communication to convey ideas and information, to ask and answer questions. MTS 7E NAEYC 1c, 4b

20

Creates opportunities for students to use effective written, verbal, nonverbal and visual

communication. MTS 7G NAEYC 1a, 4bcd

20

Communicates positive expectations to students for their learning and behavior; provides constructive feedback; practices effective listening, group facilitation and conflict resolution strategies. MTS 7H &

7K NAEYC 1ac

17 3

FA

CIL

ITA

TE

S L

EA

RN

ING

Creates plans with a variety of activities appropriate to the discipline, curriculum goal and the learning needs and styles of students. MTS 4K & 4L & 4M NAEYC 1b, 4bcd

19 1

Lesson plans are grammatically correct and communicative. MTS 4B NAEYC 5b 20

Develops plans in response to students’ current life experiences and future career and work

experiences. MTS 4N NAEYC 1b, 2a, 4a

16 2 2

Uses teaching resources and instructional technology effectively. MTS 4Q & 4R NAEYC 4d 20

Uses teaching and learning strategies that promote critical thinking, problem solving and creative

performances. MPS 6F NAEYC 5d

17 3

Monitors and adjusts strategies in response to learner feedback. MTS 6G & 8F NAEYC 3abc 18 2

Uses formal and informal assessments to evaluate the understanding, progress and performance of learners. MTS 8G NAEYC 3abcd

15 5

Uses accurate records to monitor and assess student performance and communicates student

performance to students, parents and colleagues. MTS 8I & 8J NAEYC 3abcd

16 3 1

Oral Communication: Uses appropriate grammar and spelling, pronounces words clearly and precisely, varies pitch and tone according to the situation. Core LA S 2A-F

20

INDICATORS OF EXCELLENCE IN TEACHING AND LEARNING . . . P

E M NP NA

CO

LL

AB

OR

AT

ES

Works with other colleagues to achieve student success. MTP 9G & 9H 20

Works with parents/guardians from diverse home and community situations to promote student

learning. MTS 9J

11 4 5

Writes sensitively when writing to parents and students. MPS 9E. 14 2 4

Assumes responsibility by taking appropriate initiative, following through on projects, and managing school resources with care. MTS 9D & 9E

18 1 1

Time management: Plans ahead, understands the big picture, is punctual and willing to take time

before and after school needed to collaborate. MTS 11B

20

Follows school policy & codes of professional conduct: Maintains professional distance with students and parents; respects students’ privacy rights and recognizes that sexually suggestive behavior between

student and teacher is prohibited. MTS 11G & 11H

20

Contributes knowledge and expertise about teaching and learning to the profession. MTS 11F 19 1

- 28 -

DISPOSITIONAL DEVELOPMENT: P = proficient in the area; E = evolving, making progress; M = marginal and needs improvement; not consistent; NP = not proficient and needs improvement

INDICATORS OF EXCELLENCE IN TEACHING AND LEARNING . . .

P

E

M

NP

DIS

PO

SIT

ION

S

Professional Development: The teacher candidate...

Meets obligations and deadlines. 20

Meets expectations for attendance. 20

Presents a professional image appropriate to the setting. 20

Shows evidence of thought and care in preparation of materials. 20

Affective Development: The teacher candidate…

Approaches academic and personal issues in a positive and productive manner. 20

Demonstrates ethical and honest behavior. 20

Interpersonal Development: The teacher candidate…

Uses conventions of standard English in writing and speaking. 20

Respects the values and opinions of others/appreciates human diversity. 20

Accepts and uses constructive criticism. 20

Functions effectively in a variety of group roles. 20

Please comment on the strengths and weaknesses of the dispositions of this teacher candidate: __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


The data show the vast majority of students reach proficiency by the end of their student teaching

in most of the areas being evaluated. The data also show that a few students are still evolving in

the areas of classroom discipline and in being able to adjust the curriculum in teaching situations

when children do not understand. We expect that novice teachers would have a few indicators

that are evolving as these young teachers are involved in a rigorous clinical experience. None of

our Early Childhood teacher candidates scored in the Marginal or Not Proficient range in any

category. One of the changes we have made for this 2012-2013 academic year, in our junior

methods courses, is to give our students more teaching experiences in elementary education

classrooms as preparation for student teaching. This was in response to student feedback and the

data from student teaching evaluations.

4. Initial Program Assessment of Candidates’ Impact on Student Learning or on Advanced Program

Assessment of Candidates’ Ability to Provide a Supportive Environment for Student Learning

a. Provide a concise description of the assessment, including when it is given and how it fits into

the system of assessing 1- Candidates Impact on Student Learning (for Initial Programs); or 2-

Candidates’ Ability to Provide a Supportive Environment for Student Learning (for Advanced

Programs).

Candidates Impact on Children’s Learning (for Initial Programs)

The Teacher Work Sample provides the teacher candidates the opportunity to demonstrate their

ability to plan, implement, and evaluate a standards-based unit of instruction for a specific class

of children and to facilitate learning for all children.

- 29 -

The Teacher Work Sample is a culminating experience in the School of Education program that

requires students to synthesize what they have learned in their classes and internships and

provides evidence of their learning. The Teacher Work Sample is completed as part of students’

student teaching experience in their last semester of their program of study.


Phase 1: Designing and Planning the Unit of Instruction [ED406 or ED425]

1. CONTEXT OF

LEARNING

Write a description of the community, school district,

school, learning space, and students that comprise the

context for learning and teaching. Examine implications

2. UNIT LEARNER GOALS

Select a topic for the unit, identify unit learner goals,

align them with the Il Learning Standards and write a

justification for each unit learning goals.

3. ASSESSMENT PLAN

Develop a plan for pre- and post-assessing each unit

learning goal, as well as daily lesson objectives; use a

variety of assessments, including authentic assessments.

4. DESIGN FOR

INSTRUCTION

Create daily lesson plans that address the unit learner

goals; prepare a chart or table that represents the unit

learner goals, standards, lesson objectives, lesson

activities, accommodations, and assessments.

Phase 2: Teaching the Unit of Instruction and Reflecting on the Process

(Education 488 and ED476, 477, or 478)

5. INSTRUCTIONAL

DECISION MAKING

Pre-assess unit learner goals, modify lessons and unit

based on pre-assessment; teach the lessons to your

students; maintain a log of instructional decisions

including modifications for individual students or the

whole class; post-assess; reteach when needed.

6. SELECTION OF

STUDENT WORK

Select representative samples of student work as related

to analyze, discuss, and use in your presentation.

7. ANALYSIS OF

STUDENT LEARNING

Analyze all assessment data (pre-, post-, and formative)

and report in your paper and peer presentation the extent

to which students reached learner goals and standards.

Analyze individual students and subgroups’ progress.

Determine which unit learner outcomes were met.

8. REFLECTION AND

SELF-EVALUATION

Reflect on the effectiveness of planning and teaching in

relation to the standards and learner goals. Make

suggestions for improving your teaching. Plan for

continued professional growth.

9. REFLECTION ON

ORGANIZING THEMES

AND STANDARDS

Reflect on how the assignment assisted you to

demonstrate the organizing themes; reflect, in addition,

on relevant standards, providing specific examples of

how your unit illustrates the standards.

- 30 -

RUBRIC

NOT PROFICIENT MARGINAL PROFICIENT COMMENDABLE

Global Rating 10 points 14 points 17 points 20 points

Context of Learning

10%; MTS- 2B; 2C;

2D; 2E; 2F; 2G; 2H; 2I; 3G; 3K; 3L; 3M;

3N; 4A; 5B; 9B; 11P

Minimal – Incomplete – No

information regarding:

• Community • School District

• School

• Classroom • Implications

Adequate information

regarding:


• School


Good information regarding:

• Community

• School District • School

• Classroom

• Implications

Comprehensive information

regarding:


• School


Learning Goals 10%; MTS: 4A; 4B;

4C; 4I; 4J

Incomplete or missing

evidence that goals reflect:

• Significance, challenge, and variety

• Clarity

• Developmentally and contextually appropriate

for students

• Justification that includes level and kind

of objectives, rationale

for including chosen goals and scope and

sequence of curriculum

• Alignment with state standards

Minimal evidence that goals

reflect:


• Clarity


for students

• Justification that includes level and kind of

objectives, rationale for

including chosen goals and scope and sequence

of curriculum.


Good evidence that goals

reflect:


• Clarity


for students

• Justification that includes level and kind

of objectives, rationale

for including chosen goals and scope and

sequence of curriculum.


Strong evidence that goals

reflect:


• Clarity


for students

• Justification that includes level and kind of

objectives, rationale for

including chosen goals and scope and sequence of

curriculum.


Assessment Plan

10%; MTS 4A; 4I; 4K; 8B; 8C; 8E

Minimal – Incomplete – No

information regarding: • Valid and reliable tests

• Pre and Post Tests

• Formative • Summative

• Authentic • Aligned with

Goals/Standards/

Performance Descriptors

Adequate information

regarding: • Valid and reliable tests




Goals/Standards/


Good information regarding:

• Valid and reliable tests • Pre and Post Tests

• Formative

• Summative • Authentic

• Aligned with Goals/Standards/


Comprehensive information

regarding: • Valid and reliable tests




Goals/Standards/


Design for

Instruction

10%; MTS 4A; 4B;

4C; 4D; 4E; 4F; 4G; 4H; 4I; 4J; 4K; 4L;

4M; 4N; 4O; 4P; 4Q;

4R; 4S; 8I; 8J; 8O

Utilizing information in the Context of Learning and

Pre-test there is minimal –

incomplete no use of ILS: • Goals

• Standards

• Performance Descriptors • Objectives

• Stages

• Assessment •

Modifications/Accommod

ations • Reflection

• Lesson Planning

Utilizing information in the Context of Learning and Pre-

test there is an adequate use

of ILS: • Goals

• Standards


• Stages

• Assessment •

Modifications/Accommoda

tions • Reflection

• Lesson Planning


test there is good use of ILS:

• Goals • Standards

• Performance Descriptors

• Objectives • Stages

• Assessment

• Modifications/Accommod

ations

• Reflection • Lesson Planning


test there is a comprehensive

use of ILS: • Goals

• Standards


• Stages

• Assessment •

Modifications/Accommoda

tions • Reflection

• Lesson planning

Instructional

Decision Making

10%; MTS-3C; 1K;

4D; 6A; 6D; 6E; 6F; 6L; 6M; 6O; 6P; 9H

Minimal – Incomplete – No: • Identification and

description of 3

subgroups and rationale for selection

• Identification and

description of 3 students and rationale for selection

• Pre-test drives revisions

of curriculum • Reference collaboration

with cooperating teacher

and university supervisor

Adequate: • Identification and

description of 3 subgroups

and rationale for selection • Identification and

description of 3 students

and rationale for selection • Pre-test drives revisions

of curriculum

• Reference collaboration with cooperating teacher


Good: • Identification and

description of 3

subgroups and rationale for selection

• Identification and

description of 3 students and rationale for selection

• Pre-test drives revisions

of curriculum • Reference collaboration

with cooperating teacher


Comprehensive: • Identification and

description of 3 subgroups

and rationale for selection • Identification and

description of 3 students

and rationale for selection • Pre-test drives revisions

of curriculum

• Reference collaboration with cooperating teacher


- 31 -

Analysis of Student

Learning 10%; MTS 2G; 2I; 3C;

3D; 4R; 6F; 6H; 8L;

8M; 8O; 8P; 8Q, 8L

Minimal – Incomplete – No:

• Analysis of Pre/Post, Formative, Summative,

Authentic assessments w/

rubric disaggregated by class/subgroups/identified

students

• Data shows evidence of learning using prose

• Utilization of graphs and

charts • Daily Journal analysis

on each lesson facilitation

for class/subgroups/students.

Adequate:



rubric disaggregated by class/subgroups/identified

students

• Data shows evidence of learning using prose

• Utilization of graphs and

charts • Daily Journal analysis on

each lesson facilitation for

class/subgroups/students.

Good:


Authentic assessments

w/ rubric disaggregated by

class/subgroups/identifie

d students • Data shows evidence of

learning using prose

• Utilization of graphs and charts

• Daily Journal analysis

on each lesson facilitation for

class/subgroups/

students

Comprehensive:



rubric disaggregated by class/

subgroups/identified

students • Data shows evidence of

learning using prose

• Utilization of graphs and charts

• Daily Journal analysis on

each lesson facilitation for class/subgroups/ students

Reflection

Self-evaluation

10%; MTS 3C; 3D;

3E; 4C; 4D; 4H; 4I; 4L; 5D; 5K; 5L; 6E;

10E

Minimal/Incomplete/No discussion of :

• Reasons for success

• Reasons for lack of success

• How teacher performance

impacted student learning • Appropriateness of

Learning Goals • Pacing for challenging

and reinforcing student

learning • How the TWS has

impacted your

professional behavior and enhanced your

development

• Professional plan for improvement

Adequate discussion of : • Reasons for success

• Reasons for lack of

success • How teacher performance

impacted student learning

• Appropriateness of Learning Goals

• Pacing for challenging and reinforcing student

learning

• How the TWS has impacted your

professional behavior and

enhanced your development

• Professional plan for

improvement

Good discussion of : • Reasons for success


success • How teacher

performance impacted

student learning • Appropriateness of

Learning Goals • Pacing for challenging

and reinforcing student

learning • How the TWS has

impacted your

professional behavior and enhanced your

development

• Professional plan for improvement

Comprehensive discussion of:: • Reasons for success


success • How teacher performance

impacted student learning

• Appropriateness of Learning Goals

• Pacing for challenging and reinforcing student

learning

• How the TWS has impacted your

professional behavior and

enhanced your development

• Professional plan for

improvement

Reflection of the

Four Themes-

Standards &

Examples

10%; MTS 1B; 1H;

1L; 5L; 5P; 5R; 9H; 9J; 9I; 10A; 10B

Minimal – incomplete – no:

• Reflection in terms of

the four organizing themes, MTS/Indicators,

and give examples that

are aligned with selected themes and standards.

Adequate:

• Reflection in terms of the

four organizing themes, MTS/Indicators, and give

examples that are aligned

with selected themes and standards.

Good:

• Reflection in terms of

the four organizing themes, MTS/Indicators,

and give examples that

are aligned with selected themes and standards.

Comprehensive:

• Reflection in terms of the

four organizing themes, MTS/Indicators, and give

examples that are aligned

with selected themes and standards.

Selection and

Characteristics of

Students Work

Samples

10%; MTS 8E

Displays minimal to no:

• Range of student ability

• Modes within the classroom

• Range of knowledge

• Student growth • Student challenge

• Assessment

Displays little:





• Assessment

Displays some:





• Assessment

Displays a comprehensive:

• Full range of student

abilities • Diverse modes within the

classroom

• Complete range of knowledge

• Student growth

• Student challenge • Authentic Assessment

Grammar

Spelling 10%; MTS 7E; 7I

• Pervasive syntax,

grammar, and spelling errors

• Multiple syntax,


• Minimal syntax,


• No syntax, grammar,

and spelling errors

b. Provide a data table of candidate scores/results including the number of candidates who took the

assessment, the range and mean of the scores and the pass rate. Do not include individual candidate

names as the data must summative.

Title 2012-2013 Early Childhood Education TWS and Student teacher Analysis

Rubric: Official CA 10 Assessment

- 32 -

Failed

Course

(0 pts)

Changed

Major

(0 pts)

Withdrew

(0 pts)

Not

Proficient

(1 pts)

Marginal

(2 pts)

Proficient

(3 pts)

Commendable

(4 pts) Mean Mode Stdev

Context of Learning 0 0 0 0 0 3 7 3.700 4.000 0.458

Learning Goals 0 0 0 0 0 1 10 3.909 4.000 0.287

Assessment Plan 0 0 0 0 0 4 7 3.636 4.000 0.481

Design for Instruction 0 0 0 0 2 2 7 3.455 4.000 0.782

Instructional Decision Making 0 0 0 0 0 2 9 3.818 4.000 0.386

Analysis of Student Learning 0 0 0 0 2 1 8 3.545 4.000 0.782

Reflection Self-Evaluation 0 0 0 1 1 1 8 3.455 4.000 0.988

Reflection of the Four Themes -

Standards & Examples 0 0 0 0 0 2 9 3.818 4.000 0.386

Selection and Characteristics of

Students Work Samples 0 0 0 0 2 3 6 3.364 4.000 0.771

Conventions: Grammar, Spelling 0 0 0 0 1 4 6 3.455 4.000 0.656

Context of Learning

ACEI-5.a, ACEI-5.c, MTS-11P, MTS-2B, MTS-2C,

MTS-2D, MTS-2E, MTS-2F, MTS-2G, MTS-2H, MTS-2I,

MTS-3G, MTS-3K, MTS-3L, MTS-3M, MTS-3N, MTS-

4A, MTS-5B, MTS-9B

3 (30%) 7 (70%)

Learning Goals

ACEI-1, MTS-4A, MTS-4B, MTS-4C, MTS-4I, MTS-4J

1 (9%) 10 (90%)

Assessment Plan

ACEI-4, MTS-4A, MTS-4I, MTS-4K, MTS-8B, MTS-8C,

MTS-8E

4 (36%) 7 (63%)

Design for Instruction

ACEI-3.a, ACEI-3.b, ACEI-3.c, ACEI-3.d, ACEI-3.e,

MTS-4A, MTS-4B, MTS-4C, MTS-4D, MTS-4E, MTS-4F,

MTS-4G, MTS-4H, MTS-4I, MTS-4J, MTS-4K, MTS-4L,

MTS-4M, MTS-4N, MTS-4O, MTS-4P, MTS-4Q, MTS-

4R, MTS-4S, MTS-8I, MTS-8J, MTS-8O

2 (18%) 2 (18%) 7 (63%)

Instructional Decision Making

ACEI-1, ACEI-3.a, ACEI-3.b, ACEI-3.c, ACEI-3.d,

ACEI-3.e, ACEI-4, IL-ISBE-LA-3F, IL-ISBE-LA-3G, IL-

ISBE-TECH-8B, MTS-1K, MTS-3C, MTS-4D, MTS-6A,

MTS-6D, MTS-6E, MTS-6F, MTS-6L, MTS-6M, MTS-

6O, MTS-6P, MTS-9H, NSTA-1.A, NSTA-1.B, NSTA-1.D, NSTA-2.A, NSTA-2.B, NSTA-3.A, NSTA-3.B, NSTA-5.A,

NSTA-6.A, NSTA-6.B, NSTA-7.A, NSTA-7.B

2 (18%) 9 (81%)

Analysis of Student Learning

ACEI-1, ACEI-4, ACEI-5.a, ACEI-5.b, ACEI-5.d, IL-

ISBE-LA-3B, IL-ISBE-TECH-2C, IL-ISBE-TECH-2D,

IL-ISBE-TECH-5C, IL-ISBE-TECH-5H, MTS-2G, MTS-

2I, MTS-3C, MTS-3D, MTS-4R, MTS-6F, MTS-6H, MTS-

8L, MTS-8M, MTS-8O, MTS-8P, MTS-8Q, NSTA-10.C,

NSTA-8.B, NSTA-8.C

2 (18%) 1 (9%) 8 (72%)

Reflection Self-Evaluation

ACEI-5.a, ACEI-5.b, ACEI-5.c, ACEI-5.d, MTS-10E,

MTS-3C, MTS-3D, MTS-3E, MTS-4C, MTS-4D, MTS-

4H, MTS-4I, MTS-4L, MTS-5D, MTS-5K, MTS-5L, MTS-

6E

1 (9%) 1 (9%) 1 (9%) 8 (72%)

Reflection of the Four Themes -

Standards & Examples

ACEI-1, ACEI-5.a, ACEI-5.b, ACEI-5.c, ACEI-5.d,

MTS-10A, MTS-10B, MTS-1B, MTS-1H, MTS-1L, MTS-

5L, MTS-5P, MTS-5R, MTS-9H, MTS-9I, MTS-9J

2 (18%) 9 (81%)

Selection and Characteristics of 2 (18%) 3 (27%) 6 (54%)

- 33 -

Students Work Samples

ACEI-1, ACEI-3.b, ACEI-3.c, IL-ISBE-LA-1G, MTS-8E,

NSTA-8.A, NSTA-8.B, NSTA-8.C Conventions: Grammar, Spelling

IL-ISBE-LA-2A, IL-ISBE-LA-2C, MTS-7E, MTS-7I

1 (9%) 4 (36%) 6 (54%)

Failed

Course Changed

Major Withdrew

Not

Proficient Marginal Proficient Commendable

Inter- rater Summary

Warnick, Kathryn yokel, marilyn Mean Stdev

Context of Learning 3.250 4.000 3.625 0.530

Learning Goals 4.000 3.857 3.929 0.101

Assessment Plan 3.000 4.000 3.500 0.707

Design for Instruction 2.750 3.857 3.304 0.783

Instructional Decision Making 3.750 3.857 3.804 0.076

Analysis of Student Learning 3.250 3.714 3.482 0.328

Reflection Self-Evaluation 2.750 3.857 3.304 0.783

Reflection of the Four Themes - Standards & Examples 4.000 3.714 3.857 0.202

Selection and Characteristics of Students Work Samples 3.750 3.143 3.446 0.429

Conventions: Grammar, Spelling 3.000 3.714 3.357 0.505

d Provide a discussion of data results

The vast majority of our ECE students are commendable or proficient on the Teacher Work

Sample Assessment. Program changes were made from first to second semester to enable students

to get to know the children in their classes before designing a plan for instruction and assessment.

This change was the result of feedback from students and supervisors. We also increased the time

students were in the classroom setting for the first semester from 40 to 60 hours. The data show

students were more successful after these changes were made.

The data also show that a few students are still evolving in the areas of classroom discipline and in

being able to adjust the curriculum in teaching situations when students do not understand.

5. Assessment of Dispositions

a. Provide a concise description of the assessment, including when it is given and how it fits into the

system of assessing Dispositions.

Early childhood education students have four internship experiences prior to student teaching.

The first internship is during students’ freshman year and gives students their initial experience in

a school setting. Students experience their second internship during sophomore year when they

gain experiences with infants and toddlers as well as an experience with a developmental

therapist. The third internship is during students’ junior year and gives them an experience in a

- 34 -

public preschool setting with children ages 3-5. The fourth internship experience is in their

placement for future student teaching. Students have the opportunity to work with their students

in a K-3rd grade setting before they begin student teaching. These internship experiences give

students a range of experiences that prepare them to work with an age range of children, (birth to

age eight), as an early childhood educator.

This dispositional assessment is used in the School of Education for all four internship experiences

as well as student teaching and is completed by the cooperating teacher.


P E M NP NA

Professional Development: The intern...

Meets obligations and deadlines

Meets expectations for attendance

Presents a professional image appropriate to the setting

Shows evidence of thought and care in preparation of materials

Affective Development: The intern…

Approaches academic and personal issues in a positive and

productive manner

Demonstrates ethical and honest behavior

Interpersonal Development: The intern…

Uses conventions of standard English in writing and speaking

Respects the values and opinions of others/appreciates human

diversity

Accepts and uses constructive criticism

Functions effectively in a variety of group roles

c. Provide a data table of candidate scores/results including the number of candidates who took the

assessment, the range and mean of the scores and the pass rate. Do not include individual

candidate names as the data must summative.

P E M NP NA

Professional Development: The intern...

Meets obligations and deadlines 41 3 1

Meets expectations for attendance 41 4

Presents a professional image appropriate to the setting 42 3

Shows evidence of thought and care in preparation of materials 40 5

Affective Development: The intern…

Approaches academic and personal issues in a positive and

productive manner

40 5

Demonstrates ethical and honest behavior 45

Interpersonal Development: The intern…

Uses conventions of standard English in writing and speaking 40 4 1

Respects the values and opinions of others/appreciates human

diversity

44 1

Accepts and uses constructive criticism 41 4

Functions effectively in a variety of group roles 36 9


The data show that early childhood students in their internships and student teaching continue to

demonstrate proficiency in dispositional areas. Student ratings are overwhelmingly positive with

the majority being rated proficient in most areas.

- 35 -

Appendices included below:

1. Unit Assessment System Checkpoints

2. Candidate Portfolio Artifacts

3. Candidate Assessments

4. Disposition Assessment Policy and Form

5. Student Teaching Evaluation Form

- 36 -

UNIT ASSESSMENT SYSTEM

ADMISSION TO THE

SCHOOL OF EDUCATION

(ASE)

ADMISSION TO STUDENT TEACHING (AST)

COMPLETION OF

PROGRAM (CP)

Completion of 24 credit hours (12

for transfer students)

Admission/Retention to the School

of Education (all criteria must still

be met)

Admission/Retention to the School

of Education (all criteria must still

be met)

Satisfactory Education Internship

Evaluation (ED170/172 or ME341)

Major G.P.A. as defined by

department and professional

education GPA of 2.7 or above

Successful Student Teaching

Experience

(Grade of B- or better in

ED476/477/478 or ME470/471, as

evidenced through Student

Teaching Evaluation criteria)

Successful Completion of (ED120/

ED205)

Passing Score on Content Area

Test

Successful Completion of all ESAs

(ED488/ME470/ME471)

Successful Completion of the

following Embedded Signature

Assessment: Context for Learning


following Embedded Signature

Assessments: Effective Teaching

Cycle and The Teaching Portfolio


edTPA

Cumulative G.P.A. of 2.7 Minimum of 140 Pre-Student

Teaching Internship Hours (3/4

within certification level sought

and at least one multicultural

placement as defined on

evaluation)

Completion of Program

coursework

Passing Score on Illinois Test of

Academic Proficiency or 22 on

ACT Plus Writing

Department and Director of SOE

Approval

Passing Score on Assessment of

Professional Teaching Test

C or higher for IN150

C or higher for IN151

C or higher in all MPSL courses

filed with ISBE for the Elementary

and Early Childhood General

Education major

Disposition Assessment (no more

than one unremediated disposition

deficiency on file)

Legal & Ethical Conduct Form and

Certified Background Check

Departmental, SLAD, and Director

of SOE recommendations

- 37 -

Required Artifacts for Candidate Portfolio

Phase I Candidate Assessments

(Admission to School of Education)

Phase II Embedded Signature

Assessments

(Program Completion)

Resume Resume

Professional Growth Narrative Professional Growth Narrative

ESA: Context for Learning

Case Study

Classroom Management & Discipline Plan

Philosophy of Teaching & Learning

Effective Teaching Cycle

Functional Behavioral Analysis

Literacy in the Content Areas Unit

The Teaching Portfolio

Entry in to the Profession

6 Program assessments (PAs)

- 38 -

Embedded Signature Assessments (All candidates, regardless of program, MUST successfully complete each

assessment and include it in their Candidate Portfolios)

# Embedded Signature ASSESSMENT TITLE COURSE(S) SYSTEM

LEVEL

Professional Growth Narrative and Context for Learning ED120 /ED 205 ASE

Case Study ED200/ED201 CP

Classroom Management & Discipline Plan ED310 CP

Philosophy of Teaching & Learning ED310 CP

Effective Teaching Cycle ED 336/

ED203/ED321/ME341

CP

Functional Behavioral Analysis ED216 CP

Literacy in the Content Areas unit EN 302/ED305/ED435 CP

The Teaching Portfolio

Entry in to the Profession

ED488/ME470/ME471

ED488/ME470/ME471

CP

- 39 -

assessment of student learning in the education major ... · end of the student teaching semester....

Documents