1

Belmont University DEPARTMENT of EDUCATION

Annual Assessment Report Academic Year 2006-2007

Submitted to

The Teacher Education Council

Dr. Trevor Hutchins, Associate Dean hutchinst@mail.belmont.edu

(615) 460-6233 Dr. Joy Kimmons, Chair

kimmonsj@mail.belmont.edu (615) 460-6235

1900 Belmont Boulevard Nashville, TN 37212-3757

Website: http://belmont.edu/education

Master of Arts in Teaching

Internship/Student Teaching

Methods

Methods

Professional Core

Professional Core

II

NN

TT

AA

SS

CC

SS

tt

aa

nn

dd

aa

rr

dd

ss

SS

tt

aa

nn

dd

aa

rr

dd

ss

II

NN

TT

AA

SS

CC

Continued

Reflective

Professional

Practice

 

Foundations

Master of Education

Program Emphasis

Learning Communities

Core

Program Emphasis

Learning Communities

Core

NN

BB

PP

TT

SS

NN

BB

PP

TT

SS

Continued

Reflective

Professional

Practice

 

Thesis

Foundations

Building Together for Excellence in Education

2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Table # Name Page

1 Data Collection by Gateways within the Initial Program Components 2 Program Components for the Advanced Program, M.Ed. 3 Program Completers/Enrolled by Program, 2006-2007 4 Master of Education Enrollment 5 Quality of Entering Freshman 6 Quality of Post-Baccalaureate Entrants 7 GPAs by Gateway 8 Title II Institutional Report, 2005-2006 9 Title II Institutional Aggregate and Summary Pass-Rates 10 PRAXIS Detailed Scores for Elementary Content Knowledge, 2005-2006 11 Portfolio, Interview, and Course-based Assessments on Content

Knowledge 12 Content Assessment for Special Education, 2005-2006 13 PRAXIS Music Content Knowledge, 2005-2006 14 Pedagogical Content Knowledge 15 SPED Lesson Planning and Delivery: Management Planning 16 Montessori Performance Assessments 17 PRAXIS Detailed Scores for Early Childhood Education, 2005-2006 18 SPED Pre Information and Lesson Evaluation 19 SPED Professionalism/Dispositions 20 Student Teacher Evaluations, 2006-2007 21 CBA Gateways 3 & 4 for SPED Candidates 22 Quality of Advanced Completers on Admission 23 Assessment Gateways for Advanced Program

3

Vision and Mission of Belmont University and the Unit

The Department of Education’s Conceptual Framework is consistent with Belmont University’s vision to be a “premier teaching university bringing together the best of liberal arts and professional education in a Christian community of learning and service.” The university's slogan states, "Belmont University: From Here to Anywhere.” This statement argues against the old saying that "It's not where you start; it's where you finish.” Rather, the university embraces the notion that where you finish depends significantly on where you start. Excellence is expected at Belmont University where all programs are firmly grounded in a liberal arts core curriculum (The BELL Core). This general education seeks to help students develop sophisticated rhetorical skills, critical thinking, and an understanding and enriched appreciation of the arts, humanities, religion, social sciences, and natural sciences. Students are also required to participate in the Convocation and Cultural Life Program. As a graduation requirement for all undergraduate students, Belmont’s Convocation program reinforces Belmont's unique mission of providing "an academically challenging education that enables men and women of diverse backgrounds to engage and transform the world with disciplined intelligence, compassion, courage, and faith.” The Unit is defined as the faculty in the Department of Education. The Department of Education is part of the School of Education within the College of Arts and Sciences. The College of Arts and Sciences includes four schools: Education, Humanities, Sciences, and Social Sciences. There is a national search underway for a new dean of the College of Arts and Sciences. Dr. Mike Pinter is currently serving as the CAS interim dean.

Governance and Accountability

The governing body of the Department of Education is the Teacher Education Council (TEC). The 56-member council includes Unit faculty, Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences (ex officio), Provost (ex officio), other Belmont faculty and staff, school faculty, central office personnel from the PreK-12 sector, current Belmont students, Belmont alumni, representatives from the State Department of Education, State Board of Education, and the Tennessee Education Association (TEA). The council meets a minimum of four times a year.

Conceptual Framework

Embracing the university's vision, the Department of Education's Conceptual Framework is symbolized in the motto: Building Together for Excellence in Education. Building Together represents our constructivist philosophy for teaching and learning and our collaborative practices. Excellence in Education represents established standards of best practice, including Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (INTASC), National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE), State of Tennessee Teacher Licensure Standards, Tennessee Instructional Technology Standards, and the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards (NBPTS). The Arc de Triomphe symbolizes building a structure with passageways to Continued Reflective Professional Practice.

Purpose and Goals

4

Our purpose is to provide the knowledge, skills, and experiences for a person to pursue a life-long commitment to quality learning and teaching and reflective professional practice. The purpose and vision of the Department of Education are supported through the following goals:

1. Develop skills for effective teaching of prospective teachers for pre-kindergarten, elementary, middle, and secondary schools.

2. Provide a Conceptual Framework reflecting what is known about how learners learn best. 3. Promote Christian values and ethics as they relate to teaching students from various

cultures and backgrounds. 4. Emphasize application of sound educational principles. 5. Provide opportunities for extensive fieldwork. 6. Provide a basis for life-long development as an educator.

The TEC is responsible for overseeing and assessing all aspects of the teacher preparation unit and programs at Belmont University. Each Spring the TEC receives an Annual Assessment report and, if needed, makes recommendations to the unit and/or licensure program policies. (Note: The NCATE Institutional Report served as the Assessment Report for 2005-2006) The assessment principles guiding the TEC program Assessment System include:

• Unit and program assessments are collaborative efforts between and among the university community, preK-12 schools, and state and national agencies and organizations;

• The Department of Education’s Conceptual Framework reflects Belmont University’s philosophy of teacher preparation at the initial and advanced levels;

• The Conceptual Framework undergirds all aspects of the unit and its programs; • Unit and program goals and objectives are based upon national and state standards; • Rubrics for unit and program objectives are clearly stated and published; and • The TEC conducts an annual assessment of the unit and programs, and makes changes in

policies if necessary.

Initial Programs The Department of Education offers licensure programs in early childhood, middle, secondary, and K-12 education at both the undergraduate and graduate levels. The curricula leading to licensure consist of three major components: Professional Core, Methods, and Student Teaching/Internship. The Professional Core includes approximately 80 hours of field experience in a variety of school settings. The PreK-4 license is now PreK-3, and the 5-8 licensure is now 4-8. Candidates with a secondary license are qualified to teach in grades 7-12 in their specific academic major area. Candidates with a K-12 license are qualified to teach K-12 in art, health, music, special education, physical education, school social work, or theatre and drama. The School of Music is a fully accredited institutional member of the National Association of Schools of Music (NASM), and the National Association of Schools of Art and Design (NASAD) accredit the Department of Art. Undergraduate candidates must carry a major in another discipline along with their education major (or minor, if completing the 4 + 1 Program), and must meet the same academic standards as all other students completing that major.

5

Master of Arts in Teaching (M.A.T.) candidates may complete the program part-time, or as an internship. Part-time candidates complete the Professional Core (15 hours), Methods Courses (6-15 hours), and Student Teaching (15 hours). Student teaching consists of two nine-week placements within the semester. One placement must be in a diverse school setting. Full-time M.A.T. candidates typically complete the Professional Core (15 hours) and Internship (30 hours). Intern candidates are required to spend all day in a classroom with a mentor teacher for two full semesters. University faculty and classroom teachers collaboratively teach the method competencies. Using reflective teaching, some methods are taught by the mentor within the context of the classroom; other methods are taught during seminars/courses by university and/or school faculty during or after school hours. Interns complete the Professional Core (15 hours), and then move into full-time teaching for one year while completing methods courses (30 hours). Interns, including Montessori Graduate Interns, hold the Tennessee Alternative D license during their internship year. As first-year teachers, Interns follow the same daily schedule and calendar as their mentor teachers. Interns gradually assume increasing responsibility for teaching, having a major teaching responsibility for at least 8 weeks each semester. Interns participate in seminars with university and PreK-12 faculty to focus on application and analysis of teaching knowledge. School mentors observe and confer with interns on a daily basis. The school principal, using Tennessee’s Framework for Evaluation and Professional Growth, evaluates interns each semester.

Belmont also offers a Master of Arts in Teaching (M.A.T.) with an emphasis in Special Education or an emphasis in Montessori Education. The Montessori program offers Montessori Accreditation Council of Teacher Education/American Montessori Society (MACTE/AMS) certification in early childhood education (ages 2 ½-6). There are three tracks in the Montessori Program:

1. Candidates seeking an M.A.T., a Montessori Early Childhood Diploma/Certification, and a State Licensure (PreK-3). Requirements: 39 credit hours, including a one-year internship, comprehensive exams, 6 week placement in a grade 1-3 classroom

2. Candidates seeking an M.A.T. and a Montessori Diploma/Certification. Requirements: 39 credit hours (9 credit hrs. of core education courses, 30 credited hrs. of Montessori, including a one-year internship) and comprehensive exams

3. Candidates seeking only a Montessori Diploma certification. Requirements: 30 undergraduate credit hours, including a one-year internship, comprehensive exams [Note: This track is offered through University College and candidates are accepted as degree-seeking undergraduates]

The K-12 Modified Special Education program is designed and taught through a consortium with Lipscomb University. Candidates complete the Special Education Core Courses (6 hours), Special Education Methods Courses (21 hours), Professional Education Block Courses (15 hours), and Student Teaching (15 hours). The Tennessee Department of Education allows the option to substitute two/three years of classroom instruction on an alternative license in a Tennessee Approved School with university supervision within the area of desired licensure in lieu of student teaching. M.A.T. candidates with an emphasis in special education electing to take this option will complete the Special Education Core Courses (6 hours), begin the

6

university-supervised classroom instruction while completing their Methods Courses (21 hours), complete the Professional Education Block Courses (15 hours), and complete the Research in Action component of Student Teaching (3 hours). To date, all initial licensure special education candidates have elected this option. This option will be referred to as Special Education Option 2 for this report and the more traditional student teaching option referred to as Special Education Option 1.

Advanced Programs Belmont University offers the Master of Education (M.Ed.) and Master of Music (Music Education Major-M.M.E.). As is the case in almost every university, the M.M.E. at Belmont University is managed and taught entirely within the School of Music and has no formal relationship with the Department of Education. The restructured M.Ed. program begins this Fall. The Learning Communities program title will change to Learning and Organizational Change (LOC), and an additional track will include Organizational Leadership and Communication (OLC). Another track in University Student Services and Administration (USS) is approved by the university, however, additional faculty have not been approved to begin offering these courses. All three tracks share a common 12-hour core that broadly investigates learning in the context of organizational communities in a variety of settings. The LOC track includes the option for a Reading Specialist add-on endorsement, however, the other two tracks are not designed as an advanced program for teachers. As part of the Unit’s advanced programs, candidates have the option to add an additional area of endorsement to an existing professional teaching license. As of this report, three candidates have completed the Master of Arts in Teaching special education component, resulting in the addition of a special education endorsement. Candidates completed the Special Education Core Courses (6 hours), Special Education Methods Courses (21 hours), and Research in Action (3 hours). The Reading Specialist Program began in Summer 2007 with a current enrollment of four candidates.

Unit Assessment System

The unit has an assessment system that collects and analyzes data on applicant qualifications, candidate and graduate performance, and unit operations to evaluate and improve the unit and its programs. The Unit’s Conceptual Framework includes five Program Components: Foundations, Professional Core, Methods, Internship/Student Teaching, and M.A.T. Within each Program Component is a Gateway that comprises our Assessment System for initial candidates. Gateways include multiple sources of data collected from internal and external sources as illustrated in Table 1 lists the data collected at each gateway for all initial licensure candidates. The five Gateways that comprise the Assessment System include:

• Gateway 1: Entrance into the University • Gateway 2: Admission to Teacher Education • Gateway 3: Entrance to Final Phase of Professional Practice (enter Student Teaching or

2nd semester Internship) • Gateway 4: Entrance Reflective Professional Practice (exit Student Teaching/Internship) • Gateway 5: Continued Reflective Professional Practice

7

Table 1: Data Collection by Gateways within the Initial Program Components

Component Gateways Data Collected Master of Arts

in Teaching Gateway 5

Continued Reflective Professional Practice • Employment Data • Graduate Surveys • Principal Surveys

Internship or Student Teaching

Gateway 4

Reflective Professional Practice (end of Student Teaching or Internship)

• Praxis II • Disposition Checklist • Summative Evaluations (Candidate, Mentor,

Supervisor) • Intern Program Evaluations • Action Research Project* • Oral Exam (Montessori only) • Practical Exam (Montessori only) • Comprehensive Exam II (Montessori) • Gateway 4 Checklist (Montessori) Performance-based Assessments • Post Lesson Evaluation • Portfolio Assessments (Standards 1-10)

Methods Gateway 3

Final Phase of Professional Practice (enter Student Teaching or final semester of Internship)

• GPA by Major • GPA Overall • EDU GPA • Disposition Checklist • Summative/Formative (Montessori) • Practical Exams (Montessori) Perforfmance-based Assessments • Portfolio Assessment (Standards 1-10) • Interview Assessment (Standards 1-10) Artifacts • Literacy in Action (Literacy)* • Unit Plan (Literacy) • Program Case Study (Early Childhood Methods) • Practicum Notebook (SPED)

Professional Core Gateway 2

Admission to Teacher Education Program

• GPA by Major • GPA Overall • EDU GPA • Disposition Checklist by Candidate Performance-based Assessments • Portfolio Assessment (Standards 1, 6, 9) • Interview Assessment (Standards 1, 6, 9) • Comprehensive Exam I (Montessori) • Practical Exams (Montessori) • Portfolio Assessment (Standards 1/9, SPED)* Artifacts:

• Case Study (Child/Human Development) • Teaching Opportunity (Child/Human

Development) • Article Summary (Foundations/Con’t Issues) • Group Project (Ed. Psy./Adv. Ed. Psy. • Research Paper (Ed. Psy./Adv. Ed. Psy.) • Practicum Reports (Ed. Psy./Adv. Ed. Psy.) • Philosophy, Autobiography, Goals • PowerPoint Project • Lesson Plan*/Unit Plan (Diverse Learners)* • Practicum Notebook (SPED)

Foundations Gateway 1

Admission to University

• ACT, SAT • HS GPA • HS Rank % • Postbaccs: UG GPA, MAT or GRE • Letter of Intent • Transcript Analysis

*Performance-based data currently assessed in hard copy form. Electronic assessments began in Spring 2007

8

Each candidate progressing toward a teaching licensure through Belmont University must successfully complete a portfolio review at Gateways 2, 3, and 4, and successfully pass a teacher education interview at Gateways 2 and 3. The interview for Gateway 4 was replaced with a poster session presentation of an action research project demonstrating evidence of student learning. Candidates complete a disposition checklist during each Program Component. Any faculty having concerns regarding candidate dispositions are expected to complete a disposition form on the candidate. The form is forwarded to the department chair and a copy is kept in the candidate’s file. Any candidate receiving 2 or more concerns from faculty are sent a letter by the chair requesting a meeting to resolve any issues and/or concerns. All documentation is kept in the candidate files, and beginning Fall 2007, an additional file will include all letters sent to candidates. During the 2006-2007 academic year, two candidates received disposition letters. One candidate repeated three credit hours of coursework and received additional faculty support during the internship. The second candidate withdrew from the program.

The Advanced Programs follow the same Conceptual Framework and Gateways as the Initial Licensure Programs, however, the Table 2 presents the Program Components specific to the Advanced Program, M.Ed. Table 2: Program Components for the Advanced Program, M.Ed.

Component Gateways Data Collected Masters of Education Gateway 5

Continued Reflective Professional Practice

Graduate Surveys

Thesis Gateway 4

Reflective Professional Practice (Thesis Defense)

Thesis Defense

Focus Area Prospectus Gateway 3

Final Phase of Professional Practice

(Thesis Proposal Defense)

Thesis Proposal

Learning Communities Core

Gateway 2

Admission to Candidacy

• EDU GPA • Focus Area Prospectus

Foundations Gateway 1

Admission to University

• UG GPA, MAT, GRE, or GMAT • Letter of Intent • References

9

Enrollment Data Table 3: Program Completers/Enrolled by Program, 2006-2007

Program Name

Award Level

Program Level

Typical Number of Hours

Program Completers 2005-2006

Program Completers 2006-2007*

Number of Enrolled

Candidates Fall 2008

Early Childhood PreK-4

B.A. B.S. B.F.A. B.M. M.A.T.

Initial 144 29 22 28

Middle Grades 5-8

B.A. B.S. B.F.A. B.M. M.A.T.

Initial 144 4 5 5

Post-Bacc. M.A.T.M.M.E.

Initial 30-45 46 40 73

Internship M.A.T. Initial 30-45 10 18 21 Undergrad B.A.

B.S. B.F.A. B.M.

Initial 134-155 8 4 97

7-12 Licensure

English B.A M.A.T.

Initial 140 2 7 9

French B.A. M.A.T

Initial 137 0 0 0

Spanish B.A M.A.T

Initial 137 0 1 5

German B.A. M.A.T

Initial 137 0 0

Latin B.A. M.A.T.

Initial 138 0 0 0

Math. B.A. B.S. M.A.T.

Initial 138 2 2 7

Biology B.A. B.S. M.A.T.

Initial 135 0 0 8

Chemistry B.A. B.S. M.A.T.

Initial 140 0 0 2

Physics B.A. B.S. M.A.T.

Initial 139 0 0 1

History B.A. M.A.T.

Initial 140 6 3 7

Gov. B.A. B.S. M.A.T.

Initial 140 1 0 0

Psy. B.A. B.S. M.A.T.

Initial 140 0 1 0

10

Sociology B.A. M.A.T.

Initial 137 0 0 0

Speech Comm.

B.A. B.S. M.A.T.

Initial 137 0 2

K-12 Programs Visual Arts B.F.A.

M.A.T. Initial 155 5 3 15

Physical Education

B.S. M.A.T.

Initial 144 4 1 1

Vocal Music K-12

B.M. M.M.E.

Initial 138 22 ? 3

Instru. Music K-12

B.M. M.M.E.

Initial 138 5 ? 4

School Social Work P-12

B.A. Initial 134 0 0 2

Health B.S. M.A.T.

Initial 143 3 0 0

Theater and Drama

B.A. M.A.T.

Initial 149 2 1 4

Revised or New Programs Early Childhood PreK-3

B.A. B.S. B.F.A.B.M. M.A.T.

Initial 144 0 3 56

Middle Grades 4-8

B.A. B.S. B.F.A. B.M. M.A.T.

Initial 144 0 0 10

Special Education Modified K-12

M.A.T. Initial Adv.

39 3 ? 18

Reading Specialist PreK-12

M.Ed. Adv. 18/21 0 0 0

*Program Completers pending 2006-2007 Title II Institutional Report Table 4: Master of Education Enrollment, 2007

Track Enrollment LOC 16 OLC 2

Reading Specialist

4

MME 9

11

Evidence of Content Knowledge

Table 5: Quality of Entering Freshman

Year Group n* HS Graduating Class Rank %

Mean HS GPA

ACT SAT

EDUCATION 6 82.7 3.51 24.4 965 2003-2004 UNIVERSITY 603 81.0 3.47 24.7 1,130 EDUCATION 20 71.60 3.33 22.60 1,008 2004-2005 UNIVERSITY 731 76.96 3.50 25.23 1,152 EDUCATION 18 83.65 3.64 24.75 1,157 2005-2006 UNIVERSITY 790 76.98 3.50 25.30 1,167 EDUCATION 32 85.26 3.72 25 1,204 2006-2007 UNIVERSITY 764 78.71 3.55 26 1,175 EDUCATION 36 77.72 3.57 24 1,150 2007-2008 UNIVERSITY 800 76.12 3.50 26 1,163

Table 6: Quality of Post-Baccalaureate Entrants

Year n Mean MAT Mean GRE 2003-2004 87 53 *

2004-2005* 115 50.3 901.62 2005-2006 64 403.35** 925.86 2006-2007 54 411.15 1005.24

Summer 2007 79 394 964.87 Table 7: Mean EDU GPA (2005-2006)

Gateway Undergraduates (n=6) Graduates (n=30) Gateway 2 (n=6) 3.25 (n=30) 3.58 Gateway 3 (n=4) 3.23 (n=21) 3.82

(2006-2007) Gateway Undergraduates (n=) Graduates (n=)

Gateway 2 Gateway 3

Note: GPA data not previously reported for Gateway 4 Table 8: Title II Institutional Report, 2005-2006 Type of Assessment Assessment

Number # Taking

Assessment # Passing

Assessment Institutional

Pass-Rate Statewide Pass-Rate

Professional Knowledge Elementary School: Content Knowledge

0014 13 13 100 99

Principles Of Learning And Teaching (Plt) 7-12

0524 15 15 100 99

Principles Of Learning And Teaching (Plt) K-6

0522 14 14 100 99

12

Academic Content Early Childhood Education 0020 12 11 92 99 Reading Across Curriculum: Elementary

0201 13 13 100 100

Table 9: Title II Institutional Aggregate and Summary Pass-Rates

YEAR OF LICENSURE

PRAXIS II TEST BELMONT PASS RATE %

STATE PASS RATE %

2002-2003 Professional Knowledge 100 97 Academic Content 95 95 Other Content 100 98

Summary (n=22) 95 95

2003-2004 Professional Knowledge 98 98 Academic Content 94 96 Other Content N/A N/A

Summary (n=53) 92 96 2004-2005 Professional Knowledge 100 98 Academic Content 94 99 Other Content N/A N/A

Summary (n=32) 94 97 2005-2006 data unavailable Table 10: PRAXIS Detailed Scores for Elementary Content Knowledge, 2005-2006

Test Category

Institution Average %

Correct

State-Wide Average %

Correct

National Average %

Correct Language Arts 83 80 79 Mathematics 72 66 68 Social Studies 63 64 64

Science 63 64 64

N=

In addition to GPA and test score data of candidate content knowledge, the Unit conducts the following performance-based assessments linked specifically to candidate content knowledge.

• Portfolio Assessments (Gateways 2, 3, 4), specifically INTASC Standard 1 • Interview Assessments (Gateways 2, 3), specifically INTASC Standard 1 • Course-based Performance Assessments linked to INTASC Standard 1 (Gateway 2),

specifically, Teaching Opportunity, Research Paper, Group Project, Philosophy, Autobiography, and Goals; Article Summary

• Literacy Unit Plan • Summative Evaluations in clinical experiences, specifically indicator III.C (Knowledge of

the Subject)

13

• Principal Surveys (INTASC 1: Knowledge of the Subject Matter) • Graduate Surveys (INTASC 1: Knowledge of the Subject Matter)

Assessments used throughout this report are based on a four-point scale (Not observed/Needs attention; Below Expectations; At Expectation; Above Expectation). Portfolio and Interview assessments are reported by Gateways. Table 11 provides a summary of the data collected on content knowledge for each of the assessments. “Indicators” refers to the specific indicators for INTASC standard 1.

Table 11: Portfolio, Interview, and Course-based Assessments on Content Knowledge

Assessment n Mean Portfolio-GW2

2004-2005 11 3.6 2005-2006 29 2.91 2006-2007

Interview-GW2 2004-2005 11 3.27 2005-2006 18 3.08 2006-2007 26 2.87

Portfolio-GW3 2004-2005 9 3.78 2005-2006 60 2.85 2006-2007

Interview-GW3 2004-2005 9 3.78 2005-2006 9 3.20 2006-2007 27 3.51

Portfolio-GW4* 2004-2005 10 3.29 2005-2006 13 3.8 2006-2007

Teaching Opportunity (Indicators DEI)

Fall 2005 10 3.63 Fall 2006 25 3.73

Research Paper (Indicators ABCDEFGI)

Spring 2006 31 3.81 Fall 2006 19 3.74

PowerPoint Project

Spring 2006 25 3.96

Fall 2006 30 3.9

Group Project (Indicators ABM)

Fall 2005 16 3.94

14

Spring 2006 28 3.79

Philosophy, Autobiography, & Goals (Indicators A-M)

Spring 2006 29 3.64 Fall 2006 53 3.63

Article Summary (Indicators AE)

2005-2006 232** 3.89** Fall 2006 55** 3.93**

Literacy Unit Plan (Indicators CEHIJK)

Fall 2006 5 3.0

Summative Evaluations (Indicator III C)

Spring 2005 26 3.7 Fall 2005 11 3.5

Spring 2006 19 3.8 Principal Survey

INTASC 1: Knowledge of Subject Matter

Fall 2005 3 4.0 Graduate Follow-up Survey

INTASC 1: Knowledge of Subject

Fall 2005 4 3.5 *Gateway 4 only includes Portfolio data; Poster presentations replace Gateway 4 Interviews **Represents the total number of articles reviews, not total number of candidates Special Education. Candidates preparing to work in schools as Special Educators know and demonstrate the content, pedagogical, and professional knowledge, skills, and dispositions necessary to help all students learn. The following assessments indicate, in part, that candidates meet professional, state, and institutional standards. Table 12: Content Assessment for SPED, 2005-2006

Assessment n Mean Praxis II – 0353

2005/06 17 162 EDU Final Exam

2005/06 18 3.222 Music Education. Candidates preparing to work in schools as music teachers know and demonstrate the content, pedagogical, and professional knowledge, skills, and dispositions necessary to help all students learn. The School of Music is responsible for admission, retention,

15

degree programs, and graduation requirements for the major in Music Education. Music Education majors are admitted through the same process as all music majors at Belmont. Besides meeting university admission expectations, an audition and basic musicianship test are required. Upon admission to the university and School of Music, a Music Theory placement test and a Piano placement test are also required. Students in the Music Education program are retained with the same attention and methods as all other music majors and are advised by one of the Music Education faculty to fulfill the requirements for a Tennessee music teaching license, the general education core of Belmont University, and the accreditation standards of the National Association of Schools of Music (NASM). Music Education faculty work jointly with the leadership of the School of Education to verify that all state required competencies are met through the degree curriculum (NASM Report, 2006-2007) Table 13: PRAXIS Music Content Knowledge, 2004 – 2005

Test Category

Institution Average %

Correct

State-Wide Average % Correct

National Average % Correct

Music History and Literature 62 63 63 Music Theory 71 65 66 Performance 66 66 69

Music Learning, K-12 79 68 66

Professional Practices 79 68 66

n=12

Evidence of Pedagogical Content Knowledge Table 14: Pedagogical Content Knowledge Special Education. Pedagogical content knowledge and skills for Special Education candidates are demonstrated through lesson and management planning and delivery. Following are the performance-based assessments for 2006-2007: Table 15: SPED Lesson Planning and Delivery; Management Planning and Delivery, 2006-2007

Assessment n Mean Gateway 3

Lesson Planning 2005/06 13 3.3

Lesson Delivery 2005/06 13 3.4

16

Management Planning 2005/06 13 3.3

Management Delivery 2005/06 13 3.4

Gateway 4 Lesson Planning

2005/06 13 3.7 Lesson Delivery

2005/06 13 3.8 Management Planning

2005/06 13 3.6 Management Delivery

2005/06 13 3.8 Montessori Education. A comprehensive course of study that provides integrated academic and practicum experiences on established competencies developed by the Montessori Accreditation Council for Teacher Education (MACTE). These standards are aligned with the INTASC standards. The Outcomes/Achievement measures chosen by Belmont University’s Montessori Program to demonstrate competencies of graduates include eight different general assessment measures. These measures include:

1. Written Assignments 2. Albums 3. Material Making 4. Use of Material 5. Observation of Student 6. Written Exams 7. Practical Exams 8. Research Projects

The following table provides one example of the type of data available through LiveText using the assessment rubrics. Table 16: Montessori Performance Assessments (Reading Logs/Research Paper) Reading Logs (n=5)

Accuracy and Thoroughness 5 3.6 Clarity 5 3.6

Mechanics 5 3.0 Research Paper (n-20)

Completeness 20 4.0 Citations 20 3.6

Review 20 3.9 Reflection 20 3.6

Mechanics/Language/Spelling/Syntax 20 3.8

17

Evidence of Professional and Pedagogical Knowledge and Skills for Teacher Candidates

Candidates reflect a thorough understanding of professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills delineated in professional, state, and institutional standards. After candidates complete the Professional Core courses, they move into the Methods component of the conceptual framework. The Methods component is designed to further develop the understanding of theories, concepts, and principles of teaching mathematics, literacy, social studies, science, health, physical education, and art to early childhood, and 4-8 students. Secondary and K-12 licensure candidates complete methods courses taught by faculty in their subject areas.

This content and pedagogical knowledge is evident through the completion of tasks assigned during the courses linked to the INTASC standards. They are prepared to apply this knowledge in extensive, practical applications in a classroom setting. Candidates are required to reflect on their experiences in a daily journal and complete a number of performance-based tasks/projects to demonstrate their attainment of the required INTASC standards. Candidates have opportunities to plan instructional activities, adapt curriculum, and work with learners from different cultures, socioeconomic status, and different abilities. Evaluation feedback and assessment of candidate performance by school mentors and university faculty is continuous throughout the semester including observations of candidate participation/teaching, daily journals, and assigned tasks. The internship and student teaching experience also provide candidates with multiple opportunities to develop meaningful learning experiences to facilitate learning for all students. Candidates reflect on their practice through their journals, meeting and planning with mentor teachers, collaborating with their supervisors and directors of student teaching and internship, and discussions with faculty and colleagues during weekly seminars. During this component of the program, candidates are also required to develop a greater understanding of the social contexts of children, including family, school, and the community to improve student learning. An action research project is presented at the end of the semester demonstrating candidate impact on student learning. Performance-based assessments for professional and pedagogical knowledge collected during the Student Teaching/Internship component include summaries on all 10 INTASC standards for each assessment.

Table 17 provides the PRAXIS scores for Early Childhood Education indicating that our candidates have a good understanding of professional and pedagogical skills.

Table 17: PRAXIS Detailed Score for Early Childhood Education, 2004 – 2005 Test Category

Institution Average %

Correct

State-Wide Average %

Correct

National Average %

Correct Nature of Growth/Development 73 72 71 Factors that Influence Individual Growth/Development

72 73 71

Applications of Developmental and Curriculum Theory

63 66 63

Planning and Implementing Curriculum

74 76 75

Evaluating/Reporting Student Progress and Effectiveness of Instruction

73 76 76

18

Understanding Professional and Legal Responsibilities

87 80 78

2005-2006 report is not available; n=33

Special Education. Candidates demonstrate pedagogical knowledge and skills through pre information and lesson evaluations. Table 18 reflects the data reported for 2006-2007.

Table 18: SPED Pre Information and Lesson Evaluation, 2006-2007

Assessment n Mean Gateway 3

Pre Information 2005/06 13 3.2

Lesson Evaluation 2005/06 13 3.2

Gateway 4 Pre Information

2005/06 13 3.5 Lesson Evaluation

2005/06 13 3.5

The internship and student teaching experience provides candidates with multiple opportunities to develop meaningful learning experiences to facilitate learning for all students. Candidates reflect on their practice through their journals, meeting and planning with mentor teachers, collaborating with their supervisors and directors of student teaching and internship, and discussions with faculty and colleagues during weekly seminars. During this component of the program, candidates are also required to develop a greater understanding of the social contexts of children, including family, school, and the community to improve student learning. An action research project is presented at the end of the semester demonstrating candidate impact on student learning.

Evidence of Dispositions for All Candidates

Candidates work with students, families, and communities in ways that reflect the dispositions expected of professional educators as delineated in professional, state, and institutional standards. Candidates recognize when their own dispositions may need adjusting and are able to develop plans to do so.

Dispositions for undergraduate teacher education candidates are part of the goals in the BELL Core that seeks to foster habits of reflective thought and actions that incorporate personal moral commitment, an enriched understanding of the Christian faith, and the consequences of individual decisions in an interdependent world. Standards addressing dispositions are embedded in the INTASC standards, infused and assessed throughout the Teacher Education Program, and modeled by the faculty. For example, candidates are expected to demonstrate INTASC dispositions during the Teacher Education and Student Teacher Interviews. As a "caring" institution, we expect our candidates to demonstrate a caring disposition. The Foundations/Contemporary Issues course introduces a professional code of ethics and

19

responsibilities. Throughout all Teacher Education courses, candidates acquire knowledge of the social contexts of learners and dispositions necessary to be a reflective professional educator. Dispositions are also reflected in candidate interactions with school personnel, university faculty, students, peers, parents, and support personnel. They must not only demonstrate dispositions in their personal interactions, but must also reflect on them in their journals and portfolio.

The dispositional ratings on the checklist include:

1. Attendance and Punctuality 2. Initiative 3. Work Habits 4. Oral Communication Skills 5. Written Communication Skills 6. Critical Thinking Skills 7. Quality of Work 8. Collegiality 9. Respect

10. Interactions with professors, field work personnel and children—if applicable

11. Professional dress during field work—if applicable

12. Attitude toward learners--if applicable

13. Commitment to excellence in teaching--if applicable

Special Education. Dispositions for special education candidates are assessed throughout the program. Table 19 provides the 2006-2007 assessment data for dispositions. Table 19: SPED Professionalism/Dispositions

Assessment n Mean Gateway 3

2005/06 13 3.5 Gateway 4

2005/06 13 3.54

Evidence of Student Learning for Teacher Candidates

At the heart of our mission, and central to our conceptual framework is the preparation of candidates to have positive impacts on student learning. The Teacher Education Program requires candidates to provide evidence of student learning. Authentic assessment of student learning is introduced in the Professional Core courses, PDS/Methods, and Student Teaching. For example, assessment strategies are presented in Educational Psychology, assessment strategies for diverse learners are emphasized in the Meeting the Needs of Diverse Learners, and assessment related to development issues are emphasized in Child/Human Development. Candidates are given opportunities to implement these strategies throughout their methods courses and student teaching. Candidates are expected to collect and analyze data related to student learning in their unit and lesson plans during both of these clinical experiences. They must also demonstrate modifications made to meet individual learner needs. Candidates also videotape and reflect on a lesson addressing student learning.

20

The internship and student teaching experience provides candidates with multiple opportunities to develop meaningful learning experiences to facilitate learning for all students. Candidates reflect on their practice through their journals, meeting and planning with mentor teachers, collaborating with their supervisors and directors of student teaching and internship, and discussions with faculty and colleagues during weekly seminars. During this component of the program, candidates are also required to develop a greater understanding of the social contexts of children, including family, school, and the community to improve student learning. An action research project is presented at the end of the semester demonstrating candidate impact on student learning.

Table 20: Student Teacher Evaluations, 2005-2006 Fall 05 (n=11)

(total observations=48) Spring 06 (n=19) (total observations=109)

Personal Qualities 3.71 3.85 Planning 3.44 3.62 Instructional Skills 3.53 3.66 Evaluation Skills 3.49 3.60 Classroom Management 3.53 3.63 Professional Qualities 3.71 3.93 Overall Placement 1 3.56 3.76 Overall Placement 2 3.59 3.70 Special Education. Candidates are assessed specifically related to course-based outcomes. . Following are the data for 2005-2006:

Table 21: CBA Gateways 3 and 4, 2005-2006

Assessment n Mean CBA Gateway 3

2005/06 13 2.8 CBA Gateway 4

2005/06 13 3.3 Advanced Programs at Belmont University The following data sources are used to determine the performance of advanced candidates: Table 22: Quality of advanced completers on admission Program N GPA GRE Miller U/G

21

M.Ed. 2 3.25 1500 MAT SPED 1 3.28 36 Montessori 1 3.7 MM – Mus Ed 9 XXX 1000+ 400+