student learning assessment report · folder under assessment. ... the intern also uses the same...

Academic Year : 2011-2012 Program: Catholic School Leadership Program

STUDENT LEARNING ASSESSMENT REPORT

SUBMITTED BY: SISTER PATRICIA EARL, AND ALICE YOUNG

DATE: 10.1.13

BRIEFLY DESCRIBE WHERE AND HOW ARE DATA AND DOCUMENTS USED TO GENERATE THIS REPORT BEING STORED:

Data is collected each semester from the Director of the Catholic School Leadership Program who is responsible for seeing that data

This data is compiled in the Education Database on the “S” drive of the School of Education and Human Services in the Education

folder under Assessment. The database is managed by the Clinical Experiences Coordinator for Education, Ms. Caitlan McDaniel

and is password controlled. Only Dr. Lisa Turissin, the Chair of the Department, Dr. Alice Young, the Assistant Chair of Education,

and Ms. McDaniel have access. Ms. McDaniel is responsible for the compilation of reports and to aid in the analysis of the data

collected. Ms. McDaniel has recently completed Access training to ensure that database is managed properly

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

List all of the program’s learning outcomes: (regardless of whether or not they are being assessed this year)

These outcomes have been revised since the last report; last reporting date may be inconsistent with prior records.


Learning Outcome Year of Last

Assessment

Year of Next

Planned

Assessment

demonstrate high moral, ethical, and legal standards in their relationships with students, faculty, and parents;

2012 2015

exhibit an effective and caring attitude that seeks to develop the whole child intellectually, physically, emotionally, socially, and spiritually;

2007 2013

exemplify a love of teaching, appreciation for diversity, respect for the unique gifts and talents of all, and understand the importance of integrating the values of faith;

2010 2014

demonstrate effective problem solving skills, tools of inquiry, and analytical abilities that generate multiple solutions for practical decision-making that can affect the school, student development, the parish, and the wider community;

2012 2015

employ appropriate and effective instructional and budget planning processes and leadership strategies that impact the curriculum and assessment of all students;

2008 2013

understand supervision evaluation strategies for faculty/staff growth and development;

2012 2014

understand basic legal issues and demonstrate knowledge of resources related to safe and effective management of student, faculty, and school issues.

2008 2013


Describe how the program’s outcomes support Marymount’s Mission, Strategic Plan, and relevant school plan:

This program is designed to prepare candidates for school administration in public and private schools. It also provides the Catholic values and

perspectives essential to fostering Catholic unity and identity within a school community. In addition to developing competencies in educational

leadership, the program focuses on the Church’s history, teaching, and moral perspectives while encouraging participants’ own faith and

spiritual growth.

Provide a brief description of the assessment process used including strengths, challenges and planned improvements:

The assessment process of the Catholic School Leadership program (CSLP) is built on 5 critical assignments and the internship experience (ED

593) of the program. The following courses - ED 582, 583, 584, 587 and 591 - have each identified one assignment that represents the broad

purpose of the course and focuses on the standards for school leadership as set by the Interstate School Leaders Licensure Consortium (ISLLC)

Standards which have recently been developed by the Council of Chief State School Officers in collaboration with the National Policy Board on

Educational Administration (NPBEA) to help strengthen preparation programs in school leadership. The Program in Educational Leadership uses

the ISLLC standards as a requirement for the student's Learning Portfolio. The assignments are part of the normal curriculum of the course. The

instructor first scores the assignment based on the criteria set for the class and then re-scores the assignment in light of the ISLLC standards.

The score, based on ISLLC standards, is then forwarded to the Director of the Catholic School Leadership Program who compiles the data, and

forwards it to the Clinical Coordinator for Education who then enters results into the database. The internship of the CSLP is the capstone of the

program and three evaluations are part of the assessment system. Both the On-site Supervisor and the University Supervisor complete the same

evaluation that focuses on the behaviors of the student (intern). The intern also uses the same form for a self-evaluation which is then discussed

at the time of the internship visit. The student also completes a portfolio that is submitted to the Director of the CSLP. The ratings for these

instruments or documents are gathered by the CSLP Director.

Describe how the program implemented its planned improvements from last year:

http://coe.fgcu.edu/faculty/valesky/Portfolios.html


From the Program Review completed in 2012, the following two recommendations are applicable to the Catholic School Leadership

Program:

From faculty discussion, there was an increased emphasis in ED 582 and ED 583 on the importance of high moral, ethical, and legal standards in

candidates’ relationships with students, faculty, and parents as it is developed in course content

The Coordinator of the Catholic School Leadership Program reviewed the course content, for ED 584. In addition, a review of the scoring rubrics

for the Critical Assignments with both professors since the scores for ED 584 seem overall to be lower than expected and the scores for ED 587

show no variation with all candidates receiving a score of 4.

Provide a response to last year’s University Assessment Committee review of the program’s learning assessment report:

(List each recommendation and provide a specific response to each).

There were no recommendation from last year’s report from the UAC


Outcome and Past Assessment

Learning Outcome 1: As caring professional graduates will exhibit an effective and caring attitude that seeks to develop the whole child

intellectually, physically, emotionally, socially, and spiritually;

Is this outcome being reexamined? x Yes No

If yes, give a brief summary of previous results (including trends) and any changes made to the program.

Assessment Activity

Outcome Measures

Explain how student

learning will be measured

and indicate whether it is

direct or indirect.

Performance Standard

Define and explain acceptable

level of student performance.

Data Collection

Discuss the data collected and student population

Analysis

1) Describe the analysis process.

2) Present the findings of the analysis

including the numbers participating and

deemed acceptable.

Critical Assignments for ED 582, 583, and 584 on Standards 1,4,5(Direct)

Critical Assignment Ratings

for ISLLC Standards 1 - School

Vision of Learning, 4 -

Community Involvement, 5 -

Ethical and Moral

Professionalism from the

Critical Assignment will be at

an aggregated mean of 3.5

out of a possible 4

Means

for

Students

n= 14

ISLLC

Standard

1

ISLLC

Standard

4

ISLLC

Standard

5

ED 582 3.8 4 4

ED 583 3.82 3.93 4

ED 584 3.5 3.86 4

1. The Critical Assignments for

ED 582 ,ED 583, & ED 584 are

scored in relation to each of the

7 the ISLLC Standards based

on a 4 point scale with 4

indicating Exceeds, 3 Meets, 2

Developing, and 1

Unsatisfactory.

2. Of the 15 students who

graduated in 2013, aggregate

means were above the targeted

mean. In the area ISLLC

Standard #1 from ED 584, all

were above acceptable ratings


On-site advisor Evaluations (Indirect)

Aggregated ratings from On-

Site Advisors on criteria

statements dealing with

caring professionals,

community involvement and

, and sensitivity to diversity

will be at 3.5

On-Site Advisors ratings for:

caring professionals 3.78

Community

involvement

3.68

Sensitivity to diversity 3.84

1. The on-Site Advisor Evaluation

is scored in relation to each of

the 7 the ISLLC Standards

based on a 4 point scale with 4


Developing, and 1

Unsatisfactory, as well as the

Conceptual Framework of the

Department of Education which

includes being a caring

professional, critical thinker

and effective practitioner.

2. All 15 students were

significantly above the

Aggregate rating in each of the

areas.

Interpretation of Results

Extent this Learning Outcome has been achieved by students (Use both direct and indirect measure results):

ISLLC Standards 1 - School Vision of Learning, 4 - Community Involvement, and 5 - Ethical and Moral Professionalism from the

Critical Assignment met the aggregated rating for all but 3 students and these students met the Acceptable level. On-Site Advisors

criteria statements dealing with caring professionals, ability to work with staff, communicate with faculty, and relate to students and

spiritual relationships were also met by all students at an Aggregated rating. University Supervisor rated all ISLLC Standards 1 -


School Vision of Learning, 4 - Community Involvement, 5 - Ethical and Moral Professionalism from the Critical Assignment very

favorably.

Program strengths and opportunities for improvement relative to assessment of outcome:

The syllabus for each of these courses (ED 582,ED 583, & ED 584) is focused on developing candidates ability to demonstrate high

moral, ethical, and legal standards in their relationships with students, faculty, and parents through community building,

administration community build and curriculum design and implementation as indicated by the data. In addition, qualitative data

analysis of the candidates’ progress reports, On-site advisor Evaluations, and University Supervisor Evaluations does indicate a strong

perception of students’ ability to high moral, ethical, and legal standards in their relationships with students, faculty, and parents,

especially in a Catholic School. The University Supervisor Evaluations and the Portfolio Evaluations at the end of the program also

show students are highly motivated and engaged in on-going and life-long development of high moral, ethical and legal standards. The

student interaction on the Discussion Board is an added program strength in that all students give evidence of these qualities as they

work through the various topics and issues for discussion.

Discuss planned curricular or program improvements for this year based on assessment of outcome:

Based on positive past performance as well as the current evaluation, the Coordinator of the Catholic School Leadership Program will

continue to emphasize the importance of high moral, ethical, and legal standards in candidates’ relationships with students, faculty,

and parents as it is developed in course content in ED 582, ED 583, and ED 584 since this is where there were still a few students at

the Acceptable level, while also maintaining its importance in working with the interns and in advising the On-Site Advisors of the

types and kinds of experiences that are needed. There will be an increased use of Case Studies so that candidates have more

opportunities to relate theory to practice and, thus, have more opportunities to demonstrate high moral, ethical, and legal standards in

candidates’ relationships with students, faculty, and parents.



Learning Outcome 2: As critical thinkers professional graduates will understand basic legal issues and demonstrate knowledge of resources

related to safe and effective management of student, faculty, and school issues.;

Is this outcome being reexamined? x Yes No


In the past, while all students met the standards at 3.0 or higher, we wanted to raise the performance for Standard 3 –

Managerial Leadership and Standard 6 – Larger School Context. While maintaining the objectives established by the VDOE,

effort was made to involve candidates in more case studies for more managerial experience and apply this to the larger

school experience.

Assessment Activity

Outcome Measures

Explain how student learning

will be measured and indicate

whether it is direct or indirect.


Define and explain acceptable

level of student performance.

Data Collection

Discuss the data collected and student

population

Analysis


2) Present the findings of the analysis including

the numbers participating and deemed

acceptable.

Critical Assignments for ED

587 and 591

(Direct)

Aggregated means for ISLLC

Standards # 3 0 Managerial

Leadership & 6 Larger School

Context for these Critical

Means

ISLLC

Standard 3

ISLLC

Standard 6

1.The Critical Assignments for ED 591

& ED 587 are scored in relation to

each of the 7 the ISLLC Standards


Assignments will be 3.5 or

higher

ED 591 3.77 4

ED 587 3.93 3.8



Developing, and 1 Unsatisfactory.

2.Of the 15 students who graduated in

2013, aggregate means were above the

targeted mean.

On-Site Supervisor Evaluations

(Indirect)

Aggregated means for criteria

statements dealing with Legal

Issues will be at 3.0 or higher

for all exiting candidates.

On-Site rating for:

Response to Legal Issues 3.75

Problem Analysis 3.79

Decision Making 3.63

1. The on-Site Advisor Evaluation is scored

in relation to each of the 7 the ISLLC

Standards based on a 4 point scale with 4

indicating Exceeds, 3 Meets, 2 Developing,

and 1 Unsatisfactory, as well as the

Conceptual Framework of the Department

of Education which includes being a caring

professional, critical thinker and effective

practitioner.

2.All 15 students were significantly above

the Aggregate rating in each of the areas.

University Supervisor’s

Evaluation


Standards # 3 & 6 for these

Critical Assignments will be

3.0 or higher

University Supervisor’s rating for:

ISLLC Standard #3 3.47

ISLLC Standard #6 . 3.72

1.The University Supervisor Evaluation is

scored in relation to each of the 7 the ISLLC








practitioner.

2.All 15 students were significantly above

the Aggregate rating in each of the areas.



Direct measure results indicate that students far exceeded the expected goal. Indirect measures from the On-Site Supervisor and the

University Supervisor also exceeded the expected goal.


One of the programs’ strengths is that each of these professors has recent experience in the role of elementary or secondary

administration. They bring many real experiences to engage students in solving real life issues, especially related to School Law ( ED

587) and School Finance and Marketing (ED 591). Their experience is current so they can help students to become more confident

in managerial skills. They are also ale to broaden candidates experience to see the impact of decisions on the larger school context.

In addition, the candidates in the program are either principals coming back to get this degree or younger teachers identified for

future leadership potential. In addition, candidates have come from across the U.S. as well as Paris and Uganda. As a result, all

candidates benefit either from others’ experience or from enthusiasm of those seeking this role in the schools. In both courses,

candidates have some hands-on experiences; namely, revising their own school handbooks and doing case studies or legal in-

baskets to respond to issues related to school law. In addition, candidates learn how to prepare a five-year plan for marketing and

finances and do an actual budget. Though the scores are very good, I think the scores related to ED 587 may be somewhat inflated

because the professor works so closely with candidates that they all do well with the handbook updates and thus the score in all but

one student is a 4 for Exceeds Expectations. Additional dialogue with professors on the scoring rubric may help to create more

diversity in the scoring.



Looking to the future, we will work on providing more dialogue with professors on the purpose of scoring the major assignments. In

addition, professors will continue to stay current on all aspects of school law (public, private, and canon or Church law) and use Case

Studies or legal in-baskets that address current school issues that have legal ramifications. They will also continue to improve best

practices in developing financial plans and creating sound budgets related to current economic conditions. This may help future

administrators to develop creative ways to offer a Catholic education to all those who want it without having to put the price of

Catholic elementary and secondary educaton out of the reach of the average person.



Learning Outcome 3: As effective practitioners, graduates will employ appropriate and effective instructional and budget planning processes and leadership strategies that impact the curriculum and assessment of all students;

Is this outcome being reexamined? Yes x No


Assessment Activity

Outcome Measures

Explain how student learning

will be measured and

indicate whether it is direct or

indirect.


Define and explain

acceptable level of student

performance.

Data Collection

Discuss the data collected and

student population

Analysis


2) Present the findings of the analysis including the

numbers participating and deemed acceptable.


583 and 591

(Direct)


Standard # 2 Growth & ISLLC

Standard 6 Larger School

Context for these Critical

Assignments will be 3.5 or

higher

Means

ISLLC

Standard

2

ISLLC

Standard

3

ED 583 3.8 3.87

ED 591 4 3.73

1.The Critical Assignments for ED 583 and ED 591

are scored in relation to each of the 7 ISLLC


indicating Exceeds, 3 Meets, 2 Developing, and 1

Unsatisfactory as well as the Conceptual

Framework of the Department of Education which

includes being a caring professional, critical

thinker and effective practitioner.


2.All 15 students were significantly above the

Aggregate rating in each of the areas.

On-Site Supervisor

Evaluations (Indirect)

Aggregated means for criteria

statements dealing with

Organizational and Task

Performance, Ability to gather

information and Critical thinking

Skills will be at 3.5 or higher for

all exiting candidates

On-Site rating for:

Organizational and Task

Performance

3.89

Ability to gather

information

3.73

Critical thinking Skills 3.82

1. The On-Site Advisor Evaluation is scored








practitioner.

2. All 15 students either achieved the

aggregated mean or significantly scored

above it in each of the areas.



Based on a goal of 3.5, the results of both direct and indirect measures of candidate’ scores show that they were significantly above

the goal in relation to ISLLC Standard 2(advocating nurturing school culture conducive to growth in student learning and staff

professional growth) and ISLLC Standard 6 (influencing the larger school context).



In both ED 583 – School administration and Supervision and ED 591 – School Finance and Marketing, candidates learn how to

nurture and develop a school culture conducive to student learning and professional growth (St. #2). In ED 583, Case Studies,

Discussion, and a final project, candidates review a variety of administrative theories to see which approaches work best in given

situation. Theories relate to leadership, organization, motivation, and change among other elements to foster student leaning and

professional growth. In ED 591, working with budgets and five year plans helps candidates look realistically at the financial elements

needed to promote the growth.

In ED 583 and ED 591, candidates look at the larger school picture to understand how to influence and respond to the political, social,

economic, legal and cultural elements for student success. In ED 583 appropriate theories of administration are reviewed and

discussed and then applied through Case Studies, discussion, and a final project. In ED 591, candidates deal with practical issues for

student success related to finance, budget, salary, tuition, and long-range planning, as well as elements of marketing. They create a

real budget and also develop a five year plan. This hands-on project is invaluable to their future success as administrators.


In ED 583 and ED 591, the Director and faculty will take a closer look at ways to enhance the school culture and instructional

program through the use of more Case Studies, and Discussion Board topics that address Standards 2 and 6. In addition, we will look

more closely at real time issues related to the influence of the political, social, economic, legal, and cultural context. This will include

students’ bringing some of these current trends to Discussion Board, and looking for Case Studies that will assist them in developing a

broader school context.


A complete student learning assessment report includes appendix of rubrics,

survey questions, or other relevant documents and information.


Appendices

Appendix A - ISLLC Standards

Appendix B - Catholic School Leadership Program Appendix C - CRITICAL ASSIGNMENT SCORING RUBRIC

Appendix D - On-Site Advisor Evaluation of Student Intern

Appendix E - Marymount University Supervisor Evaluation of Student Intern

APPENDIX A:

Interstate School Leaders Licensure Consortium (ISLLC) Standards

Standard 1.0: Candidates who complete the program are educational leaders who have the knowledge and ability to promote the success of all

students by facilitating the development, articulation, implementation, and stewardship of a school or district vision of learning supported by

the school community.


students by promoting a positive school culture, providing an effective instructional program, applying best practice to student learning, and

designing comprehensive professional growth plans for staff.



students by managing the organization, operations, and resources in a way thatpromotes a safe, efficient, and effective learning environment.


students by collaborating with families and other community members, responding to diverse community interests and needs, and mobilizing

community resources.


students by acting with integrity, fairly, and in an ethical manner.


students by understanding, responding to, and influencing the larger political, social, economic, legal, and cultural context.

Standard 7.0: Internship. The internship provides significant opportunities for candidates to synthesize and apply the knowledge and practice

and develop the skills identified in Standards 1-6 through substantial, sustained, standards-based work in real settings, planned and guided

cooperatively by the institution and school district personnel for graduate credit.


Appendix B - Catholic School Leadership Program

Critical Assignments

ED 582 – Building School Community Relations

Cumulative Project

ED 583 – Administration in the Schools

Final Reflective Essay

ED 584 – Advanced Curriculum for Educational Leadership

Reflective Paper

ED 591 –School Finance and Development

Financial Plan

ED 587 – School Law

Development/Revision of School Handbooks


ADDITIONAL COURSES TO BE REPRESENTED IN THE PORTFOLIO

FOR THE CATHOLIC SCHOOL LEADERSHIP PROGRAM

ED 581 – Foundations of American Education for Leadership

ED 586 – Issues in School administration

ED 588 –School Leadership and Supervision

ED 589 – Ethical and Moral Development

ED 592 – Administrative Issues in Special Education

ED 593 – Project, Thesis, or Internship


Appendix C - CRITICAL ASSIGNMENT SCORING RUBRIC

Name:__________________________________________ Critical Assignment for ED _____________

Though this culminating assignment for this course primarily addresses ELCC Standard # __________, the following scale shows the

candidate’s level of achievement on all standards that apply.

CSLP Critical Assignments

Standard Example Does

Not Provide

Evidence of

Standard

1 point

Example Provides

Evidence of

Developing

Toward Standard

2 points

Example

Provides

Evidence of

Meeting

Standard

3 points

Example

Provides

Evidence of

Exceeding

Standard

4 points

NA

Standard does

not apply to

this

assignment

1. School Vision of Learning – Candidates

demonstrate the knowledge and ability to develop,

articulate, implement, and steward a school vision of

learning and can also promote community

involvement in that school vision. 582


2. Professional Growth – Candidates demonstrate

knowledge and ability to promote student success by

promoting a positive school culture, providing an

effective instructional program, applying best

practice to student learning, and designing

comprehensive professional growth plans for staff.

584

3. Managerial Leadership – Candidates are

educational leaders who have the knowledge and

ability to promote student success by managing the

organization, operations, and resources in a way that

promotes a safe, efficient, and effective learning

environment. 591

4. Community Involvement – Candidates are


ability to promote student success by collaborating

with families and other community members,

responding to diverse community interests and

needs, and mobilizing community resources. 583


5. Ethical and Moral Professionalism – Candidates

are educational leaders who have the knowledge and

ability to promote student success by acting with

integrity, fairly, and in an ethical manner.

587

6. Larger Educational Context – Candidates are


ability to promote student success by understanding,

responding to, and influencing the larger political,

social, economic, legal, and cultural context. 591

7. Internship – Candidates demonstrate abilities to

synthesize and apply the knowledge and practice and

develop skills through substantial, sustained,

standards-based work in real settings, planned and

guided by the institution and school district

personnel. 593


Appendix D - Marymount University

Catholic School Leadership Program

ED 593 – Internship, Thesis, Project

On-Site Advisor Evaluation of Student Intern

Student: _________________________ Student ID Number: ___________________

School site: ___________________________________________________________________

School Site Supervisor (s): ______________________________________________________

Position: ____________________________ Phone: ______________________

Using the chart below, please evaluate the performance of the student who has interned in your school. Please mail this form to Sr. Patricia

Helene Earl, IHM, Ph.D., Director Catholic School Leadership Program, Marymount University, 2807 North Glebe Road, Arlington, VA 22207.

Any questions, please call me at 703-284-1517.

Observed Performance Exceeds

Expectations

Meets

Expectations

Developing Unsatisfactory Unable to

observe

Caring Professional

Demonstrates morals, ethics


Spiritual leadership

Builds Faith Community

Community Involvement

Interpersonal Relations

Sensitivity to Diversity

Effective Practitioner

Punctuality/Attendance

Ability to Delegate

Professional Attire

Organization & Task performance

Ability to Gather Information

Initiative & Responsibility

Motivation

Ability to Evaluate

Response to Legal/Ethical Issues

Written Communication


Oral Communication

Ability to Work with Staff

Ability to Cope with Stress

Ability to Communicate with Faculty

Ability to Relate to Students

Range of Interests

Use of Technology

Seeks Professional Development

Critical Thinking Skills

Problem Analysis

Decision Making Skills

Ability to Use Supervision

Knowledge of Concepts, Skills

In addition to being correlated with the Virginia Standards for licensure, Marymount’s Catholic School Leadership Program is also correlated with

the ELCC Standards. Please evaluate this intern according to these standards:



Expectations

(4)

Meets

Expectations

(3)

Developing

(2)

Unsatisfactory

(1)

Unable

to

observe

Standard 1.0: Candidates

who complete the program

are educational leaders who

have the knowledge and

ability to promote the

success of all students by

facilitating the

development, articulation,

implementation, and

stewardship of a school or

district vision of learning

supported by the school

community.


Expectations

Meets

Expectations

Developing Unsatisfactory Unable

to

observe








promoting a positive school

culture, providing an

effective instructional

program, applying best

practice to student learning,

and designing

comprehensive professional

growth plans for staff.


Expectations

Meets

Expectations


to

observe







managing the organization,

operations, and resources

in a way that promotes a

safe, efficient, and effective


learning environment.


Expectations

Meets

Expectations


to

observe







collaborating with families

and other community

members, responding to

diverse community

interests and needs, and

mobilizing community

resources.


Expectations

Meets

Expectations


to

observe








acting with integrity, fairly,

and in an ethical manner.


Expectations

Meets

Expectations


to

observe







understanding, responding

to, and influencing the

larger political, social,

economic, legal, and

cultural context.


Expectations

Meets

Expectations


to

observe


Standard 7.0: Internship.

The internship provides

significant opportunities for

candidates to synthesize

and apply the knowledge

and practice and develop

the skills identified in

Standards 1-6 through

substantial, sustained,

standards-based work in

real settings, planned and

guided cooperatively by the

institution and school

district personnel for

graduate credit.

The Catholic School administrator should be prepared in roles of spiritual, educational, and managerial leadership. Guiding a school that is

first of all Christ-centered, the administrator should also be prepared in areas related to curriculum development, human resource

management and finance, staff development, student discipline, and school and community relations, including building the faith

community. In light of these areas of responsibility, please comment on the following:

The intern’s strengths:

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Areas for continued professional development.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Evidence of the intern’s spiritual leadership.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Any other aspects of the student’s internship performance.


______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

Signature of School Site Supervisor

________________________________________________________________

Signature of Intern

________________________________________________________________

Date of Meeting between School Site Supervisor and Intern


Appendix E - Marymount University



Marymount University Supervisor Evaluation of Student Intern

Student: _________________________ Student ID Number:___________________

School site: ___________________________________________________________________


Position: ____________________________ Phone: ______________________

Using the chart below, please evaluate the performance of the student who has interned in your school. Please mail this form to Sr. Patricia

Helene Earl, IHM, Ph.D., Director Catholic School Leadership Program, Marymount University, 2807 North Glebe Road, Arlington, VA 22207.



Expectations

Meets

Expectations

Developing Unsatisfactory Unable to

observe

Caring Professional

Demonstrates morals,

ethics









Ability to Delegate

Professional Attire

Organization & Task

performance

Ability to Gather

Information

Initiative & Responsibility

Motivation

Ability to Evaluate

Response to Legal/Ethical


Issues


Oral Communication

Ability to Work with Staff

Ability to Cope with Stress

Ability to Communicate

with Faculty


Range of Interests

Use of Technology

Seeks Professional

Development


Problem Analysis


Ability to Use Supervision

Knowledge of Concepts,


Skills

In addition to being correlated with the Virginia Standards for licensure, Marymount’s Catholic School Leadership Program is also correlated with

the ELCC Standards. Please evaluate this intern according to these standards:


Expectations

Meets

Expectations


to

observe







facilitating the development,

articulation, implementation,

and stewardship of a school

or district vision of learning

supported by the school

community.


Expectations

Meets

Expectations


to

observe








promoting a positive school

culture, providing an

effective instructional

program, applying best

practice to student learning,

and designing

comprehensive professional

growth plans for staff.


Expectations

Meets

Expectations


to

observe







managing the organization,


operations, and resources in

a way that promotes a safe,

efficient, and effective



Expectations

Meets

Expectations


to

observe







collaborating with families

and other community

members, responding to

diverse community interests

and needs, and mobilizing

community resources.


Expectations

Meets

Expectations


to


observe







acting with integrity, fairly,

and in an ethical manner.


Expectations

Meets

Expectations


to

observe







understanding, responding

to, and influencing the larger

political, social, economic,


legal, and cultural context.


Expectations

Meets

Expectations


to

observe

Standard 7.0: Internship. The

internship provides

significant opportunities for

candidates to synthesize and

apply the knowledge and

practice and develop the

skills identified in Standards

1-6 through substantial,

sustained, standards-based

work in real settings,

planned and guided

cooperatively by the

institution and school district

personnel for graduate

credit.

The Catholic School administrator should be prepared in roles of spiritual, educational, and managerial leadership. Guiding a school that is

first of all Christ-centered, the administrator should also be prepared in areas related to curriculum development, human resource


management and finance, staff development, student discipline, and school and community relations, including building the faith

community. In light of these areas of responsibility, please comment on the following:


______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________


______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________



______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________


______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

Signature of Marymount Supervisor

_________________________________________________________

Date of Meeting between Marymount Supervisor and Intern

STUDENT LEARNING ASSESSMENT REPORT SUBMITTED BY: ALICE YOUNG DATE: OCTOBER 1, 2013 BRIEFLY DESCRIBE WHERE AND HOW ARE DATA AND DOCUMENTS USED TO GENERATE THIS REPORT BEING STORED: Summative Data are collected each semester from the following: Capstone Experience: Student Teaching Seminar (sections - ED 570A for PK-6 students, ED 570B for Secondary students, ED 570D for ESL students, and ED 570SE for Special Education students) for the Student Learning Assessment Report. This data is compiled in the Education Database on the “S” drive of the School of Education and Human Services in the Education folder under Assessment. The database is managed by the Clinical Experiences Coordinator for Education, Ms. Caitlan McDaniel and is password controlled. Only Dr. Lisa Turissini, the Chair of the Department, Dr. Alice Young, the Assistant Chair of Education, and Ms. McDaniel have access. Ms. McDaniel is responsible for the compilation of reports and to aid in the analysis of the data collected. Ms. McDaniel has recently completed Access training to ensure that database is managed properly.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Teacher Education on the graduate level at Marymount University is an initial licensure program for persons who wish to enter the teaching profession after they have completed an undergraduate degree. The student learning outcomes are the same for all teacher education students whether they are seeking to become teachers in the elementary (PK-6), secondary (6-12 in content areas of English, mathematics, history/social studies, biology, chemistry, physic or earth science) or special education (General Curriculum K-12). When exiting (graduating) our programs, students are expected to effectively enter the classroom and assume all the duties of a full time teacher. The assessment system for the Teacher Education Programs in the Education Department plays an essential role, not only for internal accountability but also for the requirements of our accrediting body, the National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE), and to satisfy the requirements of our programs to maintain approval by the Virginia Department of Education. We gather data at an entry level by requiring basic skills testing via the PRAXIS I MATH and Virginia Communication and Language Assessment (VCLA) scores, and a minimum GPA and ensure that all students prior to student teaching have passed licensure examinations as required by the VA Department of Education. This information is either stored in Marymount’s Colleague system or in the Department’s database. We focus the gathering of formative assessment data through our “critical assignments”. Each program (elementary, secondary, and Special Education) has identified 5 “critical assignments” that are part of the normal curriculum to evaluate, not only for the course, but in light of nationally accepted new teacher standards. This assessment data is considered developmental and it is not part of the data used for this institutional assessment report. Finally, we focus the gathering of summative assessment data on the products and evaluations of the capstone experience: Student Teaching Seminar. Since the ultimate outcome for teacher education students is their performance in the classroom, all data gathered for determining student learning outcomes is derived from the data collected during student teaching. This averages for the various criteria statements is calculated for each program (ESL, PK-6, SEC, and SPED) . Since we believe that our entry data and formative assessment data are developmental in nature, we use the summative data gathered during student teaching to make judgments about students and their ability to meet the Outcome Statements that have been set by the Department.

The Outcomes Statements support the conceptual framework of the Teacher Education Program and have been collaboratively developed by full-time faculty, University supervisors, and other stakeholders in teacher education systems.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Please note that Learning Outcomes were revised during the 2010-2011 academic year and may not align with the last Assessment Report submitted (Fall 2010). List all of the program’s learning outcomes: (regardless of whether or not they are being assessed this year)

Learning Outcome Year of Last Assessment

Year of Next Planned Assessment

make instructional decisions based on student behavior, the context of the

classroom, and assessment data

2012 2014

use a variety of problem solving strategies to meet the needs of their students 2012 2014

demonstrate a thorough understanding of content, human development, and

pedagogy

2012 2014

effectively implement instruction and assessment with appropriate

pedagogical methods

2009 2013

exhibit a love of teaching, appreciation of diversity, and respect for all

persons in the educational setting

2009 2013


Learning Outcome Strategic Plan

make instructional decisions based on their student

behavior, the context of the classroom, and assessment

data

Offer rigorous, cohesive, integrated undergraduate and graduate curricula that produces superior graduates able to succeed in their positions and communities

use a variety of problem solving strategies to meet the

needs of their students


demonstrate a thorough understanding of content, human

development, and pedagogy


effectively implement instruction and assessment with

appropriate pedagogical methods


exhibit a love of teaching, appreciation of diversity, and

respect for all persons in the educational setting

Foster Student’s Global Perspective Strengthen Marymount’s Catholic Identity


Student Teaching Seminar is considered the culminating experience for all students completing teaching licensure programs. Student teachers are assessed using the following measures during the experience:

Portfolio Evaluations: The Professional Teaching Portfolio documents the student teacher’s professional achievements and abilities as a teacher. Evidence for the Portfolio may come from course work, documents from the student teaching experience, or documents from other professionally related experiences. Student teachers indicate on the rubric the evidence that supports each standard. The Portfolio Rubric is based on the Interstate Teachers Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) standards that have wide acceptance in the professional community. All full time faculty members participate in the portfolio evaluation system. Each semester a percentage of Portfolios are scored by two faculty members and the information gathered is used to help ensure reliability of evaluation.

Teacher Work Sample: The Teacher Work Sample (TWS) assignment requires candidates to pre-assess students, make data-based instructional decisions to design and teach an effective sequence of lessons, employ meaningful classroom post-assessments, analyze, and reflect on the experiences. The purpose of this assignment is to evaluate the degree of impact on student learning. The Teacher Work Sample is evaluated by the full-time faculty using a standardized rubric. Each semester a percentage of the Teacher Work Samples are scored by two faculty members and the information gathered is used to help ensure reliability of evaluation

The University Supervisor Evaluation: Supervisors recommend a student teaching grade based on the formal observations, and communications and interactions with both the cooperating teacher and the student teacher. This recommended grade is strongly considered by the professor of record instructing student teaching seminar but is not the only measure used to determine the final grade Student Teaching Seminar grade. Supervisors meet regularly for training and discussion to ensure consistency across evaluations.

Cooperating Teacher Evaluation: During student teaching, cooperating teachers complete evaluations of the student teachers at the mid-point and at the final week of the student teaching placement.


The department conducted a review of the curriculum to determine the opportunities students have to work with data analysis prior to student teaching. Each program (PK-6, SPED, and SEC) chose two courses that specifically provide instruction and practice interpretation and analysis of student learning gains analysis.

o ED 557 and ED 558 and ED 559 o ED 527 and Ed 537 o Ed 523 and ED 539

During the student teaching seminar that focuses on the Teacher Work Sample assignment, a model of a “targeted” analysis is provided for each program on the Student Teaching Blackboard site.

More time was spent during student teaching seminar to instruct students on the analysis of student gains. The department reviewed each program and identify specific courses that not only teach lesson plan writing, but teach students to

make decisions about lesson planning based on data collected from students - o ED 557 o ED 537 o ED 555 and ED 556

Faculty involved with helping students develop their Professional Portfolio created and provided on the Blackboard Student

Teaching site a listing of possible pieces of evidence that a student teacher may use to support knowledge of human development.

Provide a response to last year’s University Assessment Committee review of the program’s learning assessment report: (List each recommendation and provide a specific response to each).

No recommendations were given in response to the last report.

Outcome and Past Assessment Learning Outcome 1: As effective practitioners, graduates will effectively implement instruction and assessment with appropriate

pedagogical methods Is this outcome being reexamined? X Yes No When this learning outcome was examined in 2008, we were performing at the “Acceptable” level; however, scores on direct measures were not at the targeted level. The following changes were implemented regarding this outcome:

All programs underwent a Curriculum Mapping process in the summer of 2009 to ensure that the knowledge, understandings, and

skills necessary in the K-12 are appropriate for use in assessment data and assessment measures, in all courses taught to Teacher

Education students.

Formative assessment measures were revisited to provide remediation avenues for students at risk who are not able to perform at the

acceptable level. Candidate progress reports are being prepared for students at risk to be successful and effective teachers and role models.

The ESL faculty has consulted ESL school personnel regarding current practices in assessment.

Assessment Activity

Outcome Measures Explain how student learning will be measured and indicate whether it is direct or indirect.

Performance Standard Define and explain acceptable level of student performance.

Data Collection Discuss the data collected and student

population

Analysis 1) Describe the analysis process.

2) Present the findings of the analysis including the numbers participating and

deemed acceptable. Student learning is

measured by the scores

from the following

Portfolio Standards:

Standard #4 –

Instructional

Strategies:

Standard #7 -

Instructional

Planning Skills

Standard #8 -

Assessment of

Student Learning –

Direct Measure s

DEFINED –

Standard #4: The teacher

understands and uses a

variety of instructional

strategies to encourage

learners to develop deep

understanding of content

areas and their connections,

and to build skills to apply

knowledge in meaningful

ways.


plans instruction that

supports every student in

meeting rigorous learning

goals by drawing upon

Collection: Full-time faculty members score full portfolios at the end of the fall and spring semesters. The scores are averaged per student, then by licensure program, and the total group.

Programs Std. #4

Std. #7

Std. #8

ESL 3.13 3.56 3.65

PK-6 n=

3.78 3.68 3.7

SEC n= 3.5 3.6 3.55

SPED N= 3.46 3.7 3.76

Total n =

1) Teacher candidates per licensure program were averaged as groups and then as a total n for the 2012-2013 academic year (which includes students’ portfolio scores from 2 semesters).

2) The aggregate mean for STDs 4, 7, and 8 in PK-6, and SPED were met at the acceptable level. However, one student in the SEC program did not meet the “Acceptable” rate target for Standard #4.

knowledge of content

areas, curriculum, cross-

disciplinary skills, and

pedagogy, as well as

knowledge of learners and

the community context.


understands and uses

multiple methods of

assessment to engage

learners in their growth,

to monitor learner

progress, and to guide

the teacher’s and

learner’s decision

making.

Acceptable Level: Aggregated ratings from Portfolio evaluations for these Standards will be at 3.5 or higher for all candidates. A rating of 3 out of 4 is considered “Acceptable” on the rubric.

Teacher Work Sample (Criteria Statements #3-

Assessment Plan and #4

Instructional Design) –

Direct Measure

DEFINED –

Teacher Work Sample

ratings will be at a targeted

aggregated mean of 3.5 out

of a possible 4 for all

candidates on Criteria

Statement #5- Instructional

Design. However, a rating of

3 out of 4 is considered

“Acceptable” on the rubric

Collection: Full-time faculty members score Teacher Work Samples at the middle of the fall and spring semesters. The scores are averaged per student, then by licensure program, and the total group.

Program Criteria Area: Assessment Plan

Critical Area: Instructional Design

ESL 3.4 3.5

PK-6 n=

3.4 3.55

SEC n= 3.6 3.8

SPED N=

3.25 3.41

1) Teacher candidates per licensure program were averaged as groups and then as a total n for the 2012-2013 academic year (which includes students’ TWS scores from 2 semesters). 2) 11 of the 12 students met the targeted score of 3.5 or above on the Criteria Area

Student learning is measured by the analysis of Cooperating Teacher (CT) Evaluation criteria: Effective Practitioner Criteria Statements #3 and #4 This is an Indirect Measure.

Criteria Statement #3:

Uses a variety of

learning activities and

teaching strategies to

meet individual and

group needs.


Demonstrates

assessment/diagnostic

skills. Uses a variety of

evaluative techniques

appropriate to stated

objectives.

Acceptable Level: Aggregated ratings from Portfolio evaluations for these Standards will be at 3.5 or higher for all candidates. A rating of 3

Collection: Cooperating Teachers complete a rating on each student teacher at the midpoint and the end of his/her placement in either the fall and spring semesters. The scores are averaged per student, then by licensure program, and the total group.

Program Criteria Statement #3

Critical Statement #4

ESL 3.38 3.75

PK-6 n=

3.85 3.82

SEC n= 3.76 3.76

SPED N=

3.82 3.82

1) Cooperating Teacher evaluation criteria evaluation #3 and #4 were analyzed by licensure program and as a total n for the 2012-2013 academic year (which includes Cooperating Teacher rating scores from 2 semesters).

2) All 12 teacher candidates scored higher than the targeted mean.

out of 4 is considered “Acceptable” on the rubric.

Student learning is measured by the University Supervisor (US) Evaluation criteria: Effective Practitioner Criteria Statements #3 and #6. This is an Indirect Measure.

As an Effective Practitioner,

students

#3: Implements instructional

sequences that clearly convey

content and expectations

while employing a variety of

instructional methods and

strategies that differentiates

instruction and assessment to

meet the needs of all students.

#6: use a variety formal and

informal assessment

techniques effectively in order

to evaluate student learning

gains and use assessment data

to guide instruction and

support individual growth.

Acceptable Level: Aggregated ratings from Portfolio evaluations for these Standards will be at 3.5 or higher for all candidates. A rating of 3 out of 4 is considered “Acceptable” on the rubric

Collection: University Supervisors complete a rating on each student teacher at the midpoint and the end of his/her placement in either the fall and spring semesters. The scores are averaged per student, then by licensure program, and the total group.



ESL 3.75 3.88

PK-6 n=

3.77 3.87

SEC n= 3.91 3.94

SPED N=

3.27 3.73

1) University Supervisor evaluation criteria evaluation #2 was analyzed by licensure program and as a total n for the 2012-2013 academic year (which includes University Supervisor rating scores from 2 semesters).

2) All programs rated above the targeted mean score on this criteria statement


Extent this Learning Outcome has been achieved by students (Use both direct and indirect measure results): Based on both the direct and indirect measure results except for one Secondary student. While all teacher candidates have completed assignments and field experiences throughout their programs that related to this learning outcome, for most student teachers, this is the first time in their programs that they are expected to be fully responsible for instruction and assessment in a classroom and we are extremely pleased with this outcome. The scores are considerably higher than they were the last time this outcome was evaluated.


1) Strengths - While all teacher candidates have completed assignments and field experiences throughout their programs that related to

this learning outcome, for most student teachers, this is the first time in their programs that they are expected to be fully responsible for instruction and assessment in a classroom and we are extremely pleased with this outcome. The scores are considerably higher than they were the last time this outcome was evaluated

2) . Opportunity for improvement - Discuss planned curricular or program improvements for this year based on assessment of outcome:

ESL Previously, in ED 563 students used the book "50 strategies for teaching ELLs" to select one strategy for an oral presentation. Now in the final week of class, they will list the dozen strategies they have or will implement in their lesson plans. Additionally, during the final week of class, they will make a list of the dozen assessment strategies they have or will implement in their lesson plans. In a lesson plan for ED 563, ESL candidates will now write a short reflection about their content-based (Math, Science, or Social Studies) lessons to describe their planning of the content appropriateness given the students' age-based cognitive development.

GRADUATE PK6 Students will focus on strengthening their lesson plans by incorporating interactive teaching using the SMART Board and I-Pads. (ED 558/559/569) ED 557 will emphasize planning assessments to meet unit objectives .

GRADUATE SECONDARY

Students will increase their ability to analyze pre-assessment data to improve lesson planning through class discussion, case study and/or group project. (537)

GRADUATE SPECIAL EDUCATION

Candidates in Ed 523 conduct extensive case studies with readers who struggle with literacy due to learning disability administering multiple inform assessments (e.g. IRI, running records) and use data to create individualized and personalized literacy activities and lesson plans. Candidates in ED 549 will locate, read, analyze, and discuss a published study about how a researcher used quasi-experimental design used to improve a student’s targeted behavior.

Outcome and Past Assessment Learning Outcome 2: As caring professionals, graduates will exhibit a love of teaching, appreciation of diversity, and respect for all

persons in the educational setting Is this outcome being reexamined? X Yes No


Assessment Activity



Data Collection Discuss the data collected and student population


2) Present the findings of the analysis including the numbers

participating and deemed acceptable.

Student learning is measured by the analysis of Standard 10 of the Student Teaching Portfolio. This is a Direct Measure.

Standard Defined: The

student seeks appropriate

leadership roles and

opportunities to take

responsibility for student

learning, to collaborate

with learners, families,

colleagues, other school

professionals, and

community members to

ensure learner growth,

and to advance the

profession. Acceptable Level: Aggregated ratings on the portfolio standards are set at 3.5 or higher for all candidates. A rating of 3 out of 4 is considered “Acceptable” on the rubric


Program Portfolio Standard 10

ESL n= 3.25

PK- n=

3.5

SEC n= 3.15 SPED n=

3.38


2) The PK-6 teacher candidates met the targeted mean level on this standard and the SPED and SEC students met the acceptable rating.

Student learning is measured by the analysis of Cooperating Teacher (CT) Evaluation

Standards Defined: Criteria Statement #5 -

Demonstrates an

appreciation of diversity

Collection: Cooperating Teachers complete a rating on each student teacher at the midpoint and the end of his/her placement in either the fall and spring semesters. The scores are

1) Teacher candidates per licensure program were averaged as groups and then as a total n for the

criteria: Caring Professional – Criteria Statements. These are an Indirect Measures.

& a respect for

individuals.

Criteria Statement #7 -

Appears to enjoy children

and teaching. Acceptable Level: Aggregated ratings from Cooperating Teacher Evaluations on criteria statements dealing with candidates ability problem solve and plan instruction for individual needs (the biggest problem facing teachers) will be targeted at 3.5 or higher for all exiting candidates However, a rating of 3 out of 4 is considered “Acceptable” on the rubric

averaged per student, then by licensure program, and the total group. .

Program

Criteria Statement #5


ESL 4 4

PK-6 n= 3.95 3.7

SEC n= 3.94 4 SPED n= 4 4

2011-2012 academic year (which includes students’ TWS scores from 2 semesters). 2) PK-6 met the targeted mean for this standard. The SEC programs still achieved a mean score at the acceptable level. One student in the SPED program had a score below the acceptable range.

Student learning is measured by the University Supervisor (US) Evaluation criteria: Caring Professional - Criteria Statement 5 is an Indirect Measure.

A Standard Defined: Exemplifies a dedication to

teaching, an appreciation of

diversity, a respect for

individual backgrounds and

talents, and

positive relationship toward

integration and inclusiveness. Acceptable Level: Aggregated ratings from University Supervisors’ evaluations on criteria statements dealing with candidates’ ability to demonstrate effective problem solving skills that generate multiple



ESL 4

PK-6 n=

4

Sec n= 4

SPED n= 4

1) Cooperating Teacher evaluation criteria evaluation #3 was analyzed by licensure program and as a total n for the 2011-2012 academic year (which includes Cooperating Teacher rating scores from 2 semesters).

2) All programs scored above the targeted mean for both criteria.

solutions will be targeted at 3.5 or higher for all exiting candidates. However, a rating of 3 out of 4 is considered “Acceptable” on the rubric ggregated ratings from University Supervisors’ evaluations on criteria statements dealing with candidates’ knowledge of subject matter and their ability to share that content with their students will be targeted at 3.5 or higher for all exiting candidates. However, a rating of 3 out of 4 is considered “Acceptable” on the rubric


Extent this Learning Outcome has been achieved by students (Use both direct and indirect measure results): Based on both the direct and indirect measure results, this learning outcome # 2 was achieved at the “acceptable” level by 20/21 student teachers and by most at the “targeted” level. Since student teachers are developing from pre-service teachers to potential in-service teachers we are satisfied with these results. While all teacher candidates have completed assignments and field experiences throughout their programs that related to this learning outcome, for most student teachers, this is the first time in their programs that they are expected to be fully responsible for instruction and assessment in a classroom. Program strengths and opportunities for improvement relative to assessment of outcome: Strengths: According to the feedback given by cooperating teachers and university supervisors who observe and work with the student teachers in the classroom, the student teachers are able to demonstrate problem solving strategies and decision making competencies while in the most important arena - the classroom.

Opportunities for improvement: The direct measure, Teacher Work Sample, requires that student teachers plan and implement instruction based on data that they collect from the context of the classroom and pre-assessment of planned objectives. This means that they must look at the challenges of the classroom before and as they teach. Student teachers may not be adequately explaining or describing these measures and their decisions in the written document that is the Teacher Work Sample. Twenty out of twenty-one students did meet the acceptable level of performance. Discuss planned curricular or program improvements for this year based on assessment of outcome:

Program Planned Improvement that would impact Outcome #2: Teacher Candidates exhibit a love of teaching, appreciation of diversity, and respect for all persons in the educational setting

ESL

GRADUATE PK6 Students will increase the support provided to the military families and their children during events held at Fort Belvoir Elementary School: STEM festival, summer STEM camp and tutoring. (558/559/569)

GRADUATE SECONDARY

Encourage attendance at DC’s National Book Festival for prof. dev. each September to preview new children’s literature for diverse populations and to support children’s love of reading and improved literacy. (537)

GRADUATE SPECIAL EDUCATION

Conduct extensive and intensive field placement assignments interacting with students one-one-one or in small groups in special education settings. Candidates plan and conduct “getting to know you” activity to discover their student’s interests, hobbies, etc. (ED 509, 523)

A complete student learning assessment report includes appendix of rubrics,

survey questions, or other relevant documents and information.

PROFESSIONAL PORTFOLIO Overview: The Professional Teaching Portfolio documents the candidate’s professional achievements and abilities as a teacher. Evidence for the Portfolio may come from course work, documents from the student teaching experience, or documents from other professionally related experiences. The Portfolio is organized in a tabbed loose-leaf notebook and is presented to an evaluation team at the end of the student teaching experience. Student teachers indicate on the rubric the evidence that supports each standard. The foundation for the Portfolio Rubric is the INTASC (Interstate New Teachers Assessment and Support Consortium) standards that have wide acceptance in the professional community. All full time faculty members participate in the portfolio evaluation system. Each fall an inter-rater reliability study is completed to help ensure reliability of evaluation. Target ratings are given a numerical score of 4, Acceptable ratings are given a score of 3, Developing ratings are given a score of 2, and Ineffective ratings are given a score of 1. Student Directions: Your Professional Portfolio provides evidence of your ability to meet national standards. The rubric that is used for evaluation of this portfolio is based on InTASC (Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium) standards that are widely accepted as benchmarks for new teachers. Student teachers must receive a 2.75 – 4.0 on the professional portfolio. Failure to do so may lower the student teaching grade or lead to an unsuccessful student teaching experience. Please use the following guidelines for formatting your portfolio:

I. Portfolio Purpose and Overview

a. Your Professional Portfolio provides evidence of your ability to meet InTASC standards based upon your experience in the MU teacher education program

b. An Electronic Portfolio is required in Powerpoint (a slide for each standard) c. Be selective on what is included d. Be sure what you include is YOUR work – not just random copies e. Keep it easy to navigate

II. Standards

a. Standards are be divided into ten slides - one for each standard (I-X) b. Each standard will include TWO pieces of evidence of your professional work (from student teaching, coursework,

volunteer work, field experience, substitute teaching) that supports your ability to meet that particular standard, for a TOTAL of 20 pieces of evidence. Remember you can also cross reference a third piece of evidence to improve a standard.

c. On the template provide a title for each document and supply a 2 to 3 sentence description describing how the document addresses the Standard

d. All documents must be from the time you have been in the education program. However, most evidence should come from your student teaching experience.

e. Your Teacher Work Sample and Unit Plan need to be included as evidence but cannot support more than 3 standards. III. Examples of types of possible evidence

a. Sets of lesson plans b. Teacher Work Sample (REQUIRED) c. Unit Plan (REQUIRED) d. Unit Planning Grid with corresponding lesson plans e. Letters to parents f. Reflective journal g. Case studies h. Self made exams or assessments i. Running Records j. Lesson plan portfolio k. Evaluations, transcripts, test results, recommendations, or other professional assessments that support competency as a

new teacher may be also used as evidence for particular standards. l. Projects you have completed

i. Student work (ALL REFERENCES TO STUDENT, SCHOOL, AND TEACHER NAMES MUST BE ELIMINATED)

IV. Organization

a. Hyperlink each document to the template and ensure that all links work properly b. Check spelling throughout c. Be sure each standard includes two pieces of evidence d. You may reference a third piece of evidence to support each standard e. You are required to have your e-portfolio peer reviewed with reviewer’s name & email address listed

V. Submission

a. Save your completed E-portfolio on a flash drive that is clean (nothing else on it) b. Label your flash drive with your name/program c. Place your flash drive AND 2 copies of the portfolio scoring sheet in a clear ziplock sandwich bag d. In permanent marker, list the following on the bag: Your name, grad or undergrad, ESL/Special Ed/Pk-6 or Secondary,

PDS/Reston or main campus, and the name of your peer-reviewer

VI. Appendixes

a. Resume (one page)

b. Philosophy of Education (two pages) c. Self-assessment

VII. Evaluation

a. This is a PASS/FAIL assignment based on a 0-4.0 scale An overall 3.0 average or higher is passing. You must pass in order to successfully complete student teaching.

b. 1-2 faculty members score the portfolio c. The portfolio must be handed in on the due date/time set d. The portfolio score is also taken into consideration for the final student teaching grade

PORTFOLIO EVALUATION RUBRIC

Standard #1: Content Knowledge The teacher understands the central concepts, tools of inquiry, and structures of the

discipline(s) he or she teaches and creates learning experiences that make these aspects

Teacher Candidate:_____________Level:_________Program:_______Date:_________ Rater #: _____

of the discipline accessible and meaningful for learners to assure mastery of the content.

1 2 3 4

Ineffective Developing Acceptable Target The teacher candidate

does not provide any

evidence that supports

her/his achievement of

this standard.

The teacher candidate

provides 1 document of



this standard.


provides 2 documents of

evidence that support


this standard.



evidence that

exceptionally support the

achievement of this

standard.

Link 1:

Purpose:

Link 2:

Purpose:

Rater Comments:

Standard #2: Learner Development The teacher understands how learners grow and develop, recognizing that patterns of learning and

development vary individually within and across the cognitive, linguistic, social, emotional, and

physical areas, and designs and implements developmentally appropriate and challenging learning

experiences.

1 2 3 4





this standard.





this standard.





this standard.



evidence that


achievement of this

standard.

Link 1:

Purpose:

Link 2:

Purpose:

Rater Comments:

Standard #3: Learning Differences The teacher uses understanding of individual differences and diverse cultures and communities to

ensure inclusive learning environments that enable each learner to meet high standards.

1 2 3 4





this standard.





this standard.





this standard.



evidence that


achievement of this

standard.

Link 1:

Purpose:

Link 2:

Purpose:

Rater Comments:

Standard #4: Instructional Strategies The teacher understands and uses a variety of instructional strategies to encourage learners to develop

deep understanding of content areas and their connections, and to build skills to apply knowledge in

meaningful ways.

1 2 3 4





this standard.





this standard.





this standard.



evidence that


achievement of this

standard.

Link 1:

Purpose:

Link 2:

Purpose:

Rater Comments:

Standard #5: Learning Environments The teacher works with others to create environments that support individual and collaborative

learning, and that encourage positive social interaction, active engagement in learning, and self

motivation.

1 2 3 4





this standard.





this standard.





this standard.



evidence that


achievement of this

standard.

Link 1:

Purpose:

Link 2:

Purpose:

Rater Comments:

Standard #6: Application of Content The teacher understands how to connect concepts and use differing perspectives to engage learners in

critical thinking, creativity, and collaborative problem solving related to authentic local and global

issues.

1 2 3 4





this standard.





this standard.





this standard.



evidence that


achievement of this

standard.

Link 1:

Purpose:

Link 2:

Purpose:

Rater Comments:

Standard #7: Planning for Instruction The teacher plans instruction that supports every student in meeting rigorous learning goals by

drawing upon knowledge of content areas, curriculum, cross-disciplinary skills, and pedagogy, as well

as knowledge of learners and the community context.

1 2 3 4





this standard.





this standard.





this standard.



evidence that


achievement of this

standard.

Link 1:

Purpose:

Link 2:

Purpose:

Rater Comments:

Standard #8: Assessment The teacher understands and uses multiple methods of assessment to engage learners in their growth,

to monitor learner progress, and to guide the teacher’s and learner’s decision making.

1 2 3 4





this standard.





this standard.





this standard.



evidence that


achievement of this

standard.

Link 1:

Purpose:

Link 2:

Purpose:

Rater Comments:

Standard #9: Professional Learning and Ethical Practice The teacher engages in ongoing professional learning and uses evidence to continually evaluate his/her

practice, particularly the effects of her/his choices and actions on others (learners, families, other

professionals, and the community), and adapts practice to meet the needs of each learner.

1 2 3 4





this standard.





this standard.





this standard.



evidence that


achievement of this

standard.

Link 1:

Purpose:

Link 2:

Purpose:

Rater Comments:

Standard #10: Leadership and Collaboration The teacher seeks appropriate leadership roles and opportunities to take responsibility for student

learning, to collaborate with learners, families, colleagues, other school professionals, and community

members to ensure learner growth, and to advance the profession.

1 2 3 4





this standard.





this standard.





this standard.



evidence that


achievement of this

standard.

Link 1:

Purpose:

Link 2:

Purpose:

Rater Comments

Overall

Presentation of

Portfolio

1

2

3

4

Ineffective Developing Acceptable Target

Philosophy Link:

Resume Link:

Self-Assessment

Link:

Overall Rater Comments:

Standard Score

Standard 1

Standard 2

Standard 3

Standard 4

Standard 5

Standard 6

Standard 7

Standard 8

Standard 9

Standard 10

Total Score

Average

Overview: The Teacher Work Sample (TWS) assignment requires candidates to design and teach an effective sequence of lessons, employ meaningful classroom assessments, and analyze and reflect on the experiences. The purpose of this assignment is to evaluate the degree of impact on student learning. The Teacher Work Sample is evaluated by the Professor of Record for student teaching using a standardized rubric. A rating of 4 indicates a meeting of targeted expectations on the criteria, a rating of 3 indicates an acceptable evidence of meeting the criteria, a rating of 2 indicates developing evidence toward expectations, and a score of 1 indicates unacceptable evidence toward the criteria. Student Directions: (Found in the Student Teaching Handbook)

The Goal - The teacher candidate will design and deliver an effective sequence of lessons, employ meaningful classroom assignments, and analyze and reflect on his or her experiences. A successful teacher education candidate should have impact on student learning. The purpose of this assignment is to evaluate the degree of impact on student learning by examining:

Your ability to design and deliver a multiple-lesson instructional sequence Your ability to develop challenging, meaningful classroom activities and assignments Your students' pre-test to post-test learning gains. Your ability to analyze and reflect on your student teaching experience to promote your own professional growth

The Assignment - You are required to teach a multiple-lesson instructional sequence. You will describe the learning context and any specific instructional adaptations you made to meet the learning needs of individual students. Your instructional goals should be based on your state or district content standards. Your learning objectives will include outcomes representing a range from knowledge through evaluation (i.e. Bloom's Taxonomy). Additionally, you will create an assessment plan including, but not limited to, measures of student performance before (pre-assessment) and after (post-assessment) your instructional sequence. Finally, you need to analyze and reflect on your instructional design, educational context, and degree of learning gains demonstrated by your students.

The following are required for completion of this assignment 1. Learning Goals and Objectives for the Sequence of Lessons 2. Contextual Information and Learning Environment Adaptations 3. Assessment Plan 4. Instructional Design and Implementation 5. Analysis of Learning Results 6. Reflection on Teaching and Learning 7. Supportive Documentation

Marymount University’s Teacher Work Sample has been adapted from the work of Emporia State University, The Renaissance Partnership for Improving Teacher Quality Project, the Louisiana Department of Education, and Western Oregon University Further Directions and Explanation of TWS

Learning Goals and Objectives - List and describe all the general goals for this series of lessons in this instructional sequence. Objectives or goals should include outcomes representing a range from knowledge through evaluation (i.e. Bloom's Taxonomy). Be sure to include the knowledge, skills, and reasoning ability students will gain if your learning goals are met and the standards (VA SOLs or other curriculum standards) from which these goals and objectives are based. Remember, general objectives should be:

Clearly stated Developmentally appropriate Aligned with state or district standards Described in terms of student performance and stated in behavioral terms

These are not descriptions of activities for students, but what you expect your students to learn during the series of lessons. Contextual Information and Learning Environment Adaptations A. Contextual information:

What are the important characteristics of your students and your classroom (i.e. the learning context)? Your description will include as much of the following information that is relevant and accessible: Number of students in school and classroom, Ethnic/cultural/gender make-up Previously demonstrated academic performance/ability, Developmental characteristics, District/community/classroom environmental considerations Students with special needs

B. Learning Environment Adaptations What influences did the above factors have on your selection and adaptation activities? Describe the specific learning needs of individual students that require you to substantially adapt your instruction. Note: you should use a table to illustrate the relationship between Part A and Part B above. Example:

Adaptations Contextual Factor Lesson Implementation

Provide mixed gender grouping during cooperative learning activities, 2 shy girls need extra encouragement

Gender: 12 boys 13 girls Lessons #3, 5 & 8

The 3 below sometimes require peer or adult assistance and 2 of the 6 above are in the gifted program. I provided challenging activities utilizing higher levels of thinking

Achievement: overall 3 below, 17 at grade level, 5 above grade level more time

Lessons #2, 3, 6, &7

Provided audio tapes to support main ideas of unit Visually impaired student All lessons

Assessment Plan A. Describe your pre-assessment method(s) (determination of student knowledge and skills prior to instruction). If you used a pre-test,

attach a copy to this form. If you used an activity, attach a copy of the directions, as well as, the rubric used to measure student performance. B. Describe your post-assessment methods(s): i.e. how you determined student knowledge and skills after instruction. If you used, a post-test, attach a copy. If you used an activity or assignment, attach a copy of the directions, as well as, the rubric used to measure student performance. C. Describe what else you did informally and formally during the course of the unit to assess student understanding and progress. D. How do you know that your work sample objectives, pre-assessment, instruction, and post-assessment were aligned (consistent with each other)? Remember, good educational practice requires that pre-assessments and post-assessments are closely aligned. Instructional Design and Implementation A. Pre-assessment Analysis

What did you learn about the prior knowledge/skills/abilities of the students in your class as individuals and as a whole? Apart from looking at your class as a whole (class average, median score, etc), it is important to see how various individual

subgroups performed both in the pre-assessment and post assessment. Provide a desegregation of data by selecting subgroups of individuals (e.g. gender, low prior knowledge vs. high prior knowledge, ESL vs. native speakers) and analyzing the pre-assessment data.

How did your analysis of the pre-assessment data influence how designed the learning activities for your class as a whole? For the students in the subgroup? Be specific.

B. Design for Instruction: Provide specific lesson plans for the instruction that you implemented in order to help students meet the general objectives of this series of lessons. All lesson plans should follow the general format found in Marymount's Student Teacher Handbook or one agreed to by your supervisor. Be certain that your plans include adaptations for subgroups and individuals based on pre-assessment and/or contextual factors. Reflections should be included with each individual lesson. Provide all handouts and any rubrics or scoring guides that are relevant to any lesson. C. Sequence of Lessons: Provide a brief outline (schedule) of the daily topics and basic instructional design of the series of lessons. Analysis of Learning Results A. Conduct a critical analysis of your pre-assessment to post-assessment data.

What did the analysis of your learning results tell you about the degree to which each of your learning objective(s) were achieved for your class as a whole?

What did your analysis of each subgroup of students (if applicable) tell you about the degree to which each of your learning objective(s) were achieved? Discuss the specific evidence from the pre and post assessment data to support your answer. Make sure you address and evaluate the learning of all students.

B. Do you believe the post assessment results accurately reflect the degree of learning students demonstrated during daily classroom activities? Explain. C. What can be done to help students who did not accomplish/master the objectives?

Self-Evaluation and Reflection A. What did you learn about yourself as a teacher? B. What worked well and what did not? C. Why were students successful? And why did students struggle? D. What would you do differently next time? E. What new knowledge and skills should you acquire to become more effective and how will you do this? F. How has this teacher work sample helped you learn about teaching?

Supportive Evidence

A. Graphs and tables that represent the data that you have used in your analysis that provide clear representation of learning gains for individuals, groups, and the whole class should be present.

B. Lesson Plans for individual lessons with instructional materials are required. C. Tests, rubrics, or scoring guides that are part of your assessment plan should be provided. D. Only include student work as needed to provide explanation of how rubrics or scoring guides are used. Teacher Work Sample – Evaluation Rubric

Task Not Present (0)

Unacceptable (1)

Developing (2)

Acceptable (3)

Target (4)

Goals and Objectives Objectives are vague or not in evidence.

Objectives are: clearly stated aligned with curriculum standards appropriate and significant .

Contextual Data Adaptations Descriptions are vague and adaptations are minimal or absent.

Data shows knowledge of: students’ characteristics students’ skills school and community Adaptations are: appropriate specific tied to instruction

Assessment Plan Minimal plans for pre and post assessment are provided.

Pre/post assessment plans are: clearly stated detailed aligned with each objectives aligned with instruction varied

Instructional Design Lesson plans do not provide evidence of

Instructional design: aligns with learning goals

appropriate learning experiences for either students or objectives.

offer relevant learning experiences provides accurate presentation of

content uses a variety of instructional methods takes into account the contextual

information, adaptation plans, and pre-assessment data

provides a meaningful and developmental sequence of lesson plans

Analysis of Learning Analysis is weak and inadequate. No discussion of subgroup achievement is provided.

Analysis of the learning gains: focuses on learning goals offers a clear and accurate presentation

of learning gains for all students and subgroups

explains learning gains or lack of provides specific remediation

Self-Evaluation Minimal reflections are given.

Reflections: are specific and focus on the impact of

the experience on student learning are present in lesson plans provide a general reflection of the

impact of teaching Supportive documentation Minimal attachments or

relevant attachments are provided.

Relevant instructional materials and relevant graphs and tables that show student data and analysis are provided.

COOPERATING TEACHER EVALUATIONS

Overview - During student teaching, cooperating teachers are asked to rate candidates on a total of 22 statements that are tied to Marymount’s conceptual framework. Targeted Expectations ratings are given a numerical score of 4, Acceptable Expectation ratings are given a score of 3, Developing Toward Expectation ratings are given a score of 2, and Does Not Meet Expectations ratings are given a score of 1.

Cooperating Teacher Instructions Formative Assessment - Student teachers need frequent verbal and written feedback about their teaching behaviors. It is important that they know which of their teaching behaviors had positive impact on the classroom and which of their teaching behaviors had negative impact on the classroom. They also need your help learning to reflect on their teaching behaviors and to independently assess

themselves. Many cooperating teachers keep a small notebook to jot down feedback and questions for the student teacher while they are teaching.

Summative Assessment - Marymount asks that you complete the attached evaluation two times during the time the student teacher is working with you. Once should be about mid-way during the experience and the other at the end of the student teaching experience. The evaluation form should serve as a guide at the mid-point of the experience for setting goals and determining experiences for the final weeks of the experience. Please remember that the student teacher could easily be your colleague next year. For the final evaluation , care should be taken to provide an accurate and specific description of the student teacher's competencies, as it will become a part of the student's file. Confer with the university supervisor regarding any concerns or problems prior to the setting of a grade for the course.

Evaluation Descriptions: TB = Demonstrates Targeted professional Behaviors - indicates that the student teacher shows behaviors that would be

expected of a competent and effective first year teacher who can work independently AB = Demonstrates Acceptable professional Behaviors - indicates that the student teacher shows behaviors that would be

expected of first year teacher but may need continued growth to work independently DB = Demonstrates Developing professional Behaviors - indicates that you believe the student teacher is not able to perform

independently in this area but can perform in an acceptable manner with support N = Does Not demonstrate acceptable behaviors – indicates that the student teacher is not able to perform in a manner that

would be acceptable NA = Not applicable at present time - Although this would be acceptable at mid-point in the experience, it is important that all

student teachers have experiences in all areas before the end of the semester, and that the cooperating teacher is able to render an evaluation in all areas.

In the narrative section of the evaluation, please focus on strengths and growth areas.

COOPERATING/MENTOR TEACHER EVALUATION FORM

Student Teacher/Intern: School:

Grade/Subject Area: Mid-Term ____ Final _____

TB = Demonstrates Targeted professional Behaviors

AB = Demonstrates Acceptable professional Behaviors

DB = Demonstrates Developing professional Behaviors

N = Does Not demonstrate acceptable behaviors

NA = Not applicable at present time

As an Effective Practitioner, the Student Teacher/Intern: TB AB DB N NA

1. Demonstrates effective daily lesson planning and unit or long range planning.

2. Establishes objectives appropriate to the level(s) of the students and the school’s

curriculum guidelines and effectively implements instruction.

3. Uses a variety of learning activities and teaching strategies to meet individual and

group needs.

4. Demonstrates assessment/diagnostic skills. Uses a variety of evaluative techniques

appropriate to stated objectives.

5. Demonstrates the ability to develop and maintain records of student progress.

6. Creates a learning climate that encourages active engagement in learning and self-

motivation.

7. Is effective as a manager of classroom behavior and handles disruptive situations.

8. Communicates effectively with appropriate verbal and written language.

As a Caring Professional, the Student Teacher/Intern:

1. Demonstrates high moral and ethical conduct.

2. Establishes wholesome relationships with all students based on respect for individuals.

3. Promotes and maintains a positive emotional climate within the classroom.

4. Models and encourages development of self-control and self-direction among students.

5. Demonstrates an appreciation of diversity & a respect for individuals.

6. Works to develop respectful relationships with parents.

7. Appears to enjoy children and teaching.

As a Critical Thinker, the Student Teacher/Intern :

1. Demonstrates knowledge of the concepts and skills of subject matter.

2. Connects content with students’ lives, prior knowledge, and experience.

3. Analyzes student achievement and behaviors and makes adjustments to increase

student success and motivation.

4. Reflects on personal teaching behaviors, classroom context and student differences to

support growth for all students.

5. Demonstrates effective problem solving and decision making strategies.

6. Takes responsibility for professional development and self-reflection.

As a Fellow Teacher, the Student Teacher/Intern: TB AB DB N

NA

1. Is reliable, dependable, and punctual.

2. Perseveres in the face of difficulties.

3. Responds positively to suggestions, criticism, and evaluation.

4. Shows initiative and willingness to assume responsibility.

5. Is well groomed and professionally dressed.

6. Relates well with other teachers and school personnel.

7. Relates well with parents.

Narrative Report:

_________________________________ ____________________________

Cooperating/Mentor Teacher’s Signature Date

_________________________________ ____________________________

Student Teacher/Intern’s Signature Date

UNIVERSITY SUPERVISOR FINAL EVALUATIONS Overview - University supervisors base their evaluation on the five formal observations of the student teacher’s teaching, on informal observations, on reflective journal writing, and in consultation with the cooperating teaching. Ratings on the Summative Evaluation form are as follows: a) Targeted Expectations ratings are given a numerical score of 4, b) Acceptable Expectation ratings are given a score of 3, c) Developing Toward Expectation ratings are given a score of 2, and d) Does Not Meet Expectations ratings are given a score of 1. University Supervisor recommends a grade based on the following criteria. A final grade of "A" indicates the student teacher: is ready for full-time teaching and is expected to succeed independently, has achieved at least an average overall rating of “3- Acceptable” in each conceptual framework category on the summative evaluation

form, is able to teach well in all content/grade levels observed, interacts with both students and colleagues in an effective and professional manner, and is recommended for any teaching vacancy in his/her field without reservation. A final grade of "B" indicates the student teacher: has potential to succeed in teaching with continued growth, has one conceptual framework rating area deemed "2 - Developing" on summative evaluation form, demonstrates evidence of independent teaching ability in some content/grade levels, but at a consistent level of quality teaching at the

end of student teaching, and should be considered among a group of other candidates for any teaching vacancy in his/her teaching field.

A final grade of "C" indicates the student teacher: is questionable in the ability to perform in the classroom independently, even with continued growth, and is expected to need

additional support, has two conceptual framework rating areas deemed as "2-Developing", or one area rated "1 - Unacceptable", is able to provide quality teaching but not on a regular basis, or in some but not all content/grade levels, and would only be recommended for a teaching vacancy with substantial reservations.

A final grade of “F” indicates the student teacher: is not yet ready to perform in the classroom independently, has two conceptual framework areas rated as " 1 - Unacceptable" on summative evaluation is not yet able to provide quality teaching on a regular basis, would not be recommended for a teaching vacancy, and

Marymount University can not recommend licensure unless Student Teaching is repeated.

Supervisors may further define a grade by adding a plus (+) or a minus (-), although “A+” is not a recognized grade.

UNIVERSITY SUPERVISOR STUDENT TEACHING SUMMARY REPORT

Student: ______________________________________ Semester Student Teaching:__________________

1st Placement School/System:___________________________________ Dates___/___/___to___/___/___ Cooperating/Mentor

Teacher:_________________________Grade level/Subject Area Taught:___________

2nd

Placement School/System:___________________________________ Dates___/___/___to___/___/___ Cooperating/Mentor


RECOMMENDATION:

Overall Summative Assessment:

Demonstrates Targeted Professional Behaviors for a Beginning Teacher ________

Demonstrates Acceptable Professional Behaviors for a Beginning Teacher ________

Demonstrates Developing Professional Behaviors for a Beginning Teacher ________

Does Not Demonstrate Acceptable Behaviors for a Beginning Teacher ________

Supervisor Grade: __________

Narrative Report:

____________________________ ____________ _____________________________ ___________

University Supervisor’s Signature Date Student Teacher/Intern’s Signature Date

Effective Practitioner, the Student Teacher/Intern: STUDENT TEACHING/INTERN

SUMMARY REPORT CONTINUED:

Does Not Demonstrate

Acceptable Behaviors

1

Demonstrates Developing

Behaviors

2

Demonstrates Acceptable

Behaviors

3

Demonstrates Targeted

Behaviors

4

Overall

Rating

Employs effective planning

processes to meet curriculum goals

and objectives for local, state, and

national standards.

Lesson plans and units are

submitted late or are vague and

usually require substantial

revisions. Presentations tend to

be aimless and

disoriented. Lessons lack

clarity and direction. Students

tend to be confused about

expectations.

Plans are usually prepared

on time and include

necessary

components. Procedural

emphasis is on teacher

behavior, not student

involvement. Presentations

are basically clear but stand

as individual entities. Little

diversity in instructional

strategies. Goals and

objectives are not shared

with students.

Clear and concise plans are

prepared

regularly. Instructional

procedures are designed to

include most learners. Plans

identify VA's SOLs or

school’s POSs.

Presentations fit sequence of

instruction well. Students

understand explanations and

directions. Employs some


methods.

Planning is done in advance

& teacher sets expectations

for student

learning. Provisions for

individual and group

differences and interests are

evident. Learning

experiences & materials are

varied and appropriate for

the students, discipline, and

VA's SOLs or POSs.

Writes and implements lesson

plans that include strategies for

differentiation based on students’

prior knowledge and student

needs.

Does not plan or provide for

differentiation of instruction or

assessment. Curriculum

standards are not addressed.

Accommodates for some

special populations, but not

consistently. Curriculum

standards are identified only

for formal observations.

Modifies materials and/or

instruction to accommodate

LD, ESL, GT, and other

special classroom

populations. Individual

lessons are tied to school

system’s stated curriculum.

Uses a wide variety of

strategies for differentiation

of instruction consistently

providing multiple

accommodations for all

student populations. Long

range planning goals and

objectives are connected to

state and local standards.

Implements instructional


content and expectations while

employing a variety of



instruction and assessment to meet

the needs of all students.

Fails to perceive relationship

between pupil progress and

instructional

procedures. Students receive

little or no feedback on their

progress. Makes little use of

evaluation techniques.

Primarily relies on

evaluation techniques of

cooperating teacher. Pupil

progress usually discussed

briefly in terms of general

goals. Seldom modifies

instruction on basis of pupil

performance.

Evaluates students on

specific objectives and

builds on evaluation

techniques of cooperating

teacher. Provides systematic

feedback to students and

alters instruction when

warranted.

Uses various evaluation

techniques on a continuous

basis to determine pupil

progress toward general

goals and specific

objectives. Adjusts

instructional procedures as

needed. Encourages student

self assessment/evaluation.

As an Effective Practitioner, the Student Teacher/Intern: STUDENT TEACHING/INTERN SUMMARY



1


Behaviors

2


Behaviors

3


Behaviors

4

Overall

Rating

Applies individual and

group behavior strategies

to create an organized

learning environment that

encourages positive social

interaction, active

engagement in learning,

and self motivation and

employ appropriate

behavioral interventions.

Classroom is chaotic and

disorganized. Permits

distractions and misbehavior to

continue. Expectations seem to

be vague and known only to

student teacher. Expects others

to handle discipline problems.

Materials and time are

sufficiently organized most

of the time. Normally

responds to classroom

problems and student

needs. Has a general idea of

acceptable classroom

conduct, but tends to over

rely on the use of discipline

techniques.

Classroom climate positive

with most students on

task. Materials and time are

adequately organized. Is

capable of handling most

disruptions and uses overt

or discipline techniques

only as a last resort.

Management of time and

materials help provide a

positive learning

environment. Clearly

communicates expectations

and works with students to

establish rules. Treats all

students with respect.

Positive reinforcement and

a variety of non-punitive

measures are employed to

ensure a productive and

positive classroom

environment.

Conveys ideas clearly and

sufficiently on the oral and

written levels and use

technology to enhance

instruction and the learning

experience.

Main ideas usually presented

in confusing manner and

directions are

unclear. Questions are

ambiguous or too

difficult. Makes errors in

spelling, writing, and

speaking. Use of non-standard

English is apparent.

Communication of ideas is

occasionally hampered by

vocabulary not understood

by students or by lack of

examples. Directions

frequently need elaboration

for clarity. Verbal and

written skills are acceptable.

Transmits key ideas

verbally although other

means used

occasionally. Students are

seldom confused about

responsibilities. Good

questioning strategies are

used. Some use of

technology is evident in

classroom instruction and

communication.

Is able to convey ideas

clearly succinctly in all

forms. Skillfully uses a

variety of communication

modes, including effective

questioning. Provides an

outstanding model of oral

and written expression.

Technology is incorporated

as appropriate

Communicates effectively

with the educational

community

(parents/guardians, school

support staff, educational

community) and use


those communications.

Technology is not Minimal or

no contact with parents and

community and/or

communication is confusing or

ambiguous. Technology is not

used or used ineffectively.

Minimal or slow response

with parents and community

and/or communication is

ambiguous. Technology is

not used or used

ineffectively.

Communication with

parents and community is

adequate and seldom

confusing. Technology is

sometimes used as a

communication tool.

Communication is clear,

appropriate, and punctual.

Technology is used in a

variety of formats to

enhance and sustain

communication.

use a variety formal and

informal assessment

techniques effectively in

order to evaluate student

learning gains and use

assessment data to guide

instruction and support

individual growth.

Little or no formal or informal

assessment is used and/or

assessment data is not used to

guide instruction or support

students’ growth. Also,

inappropriate assessment is

included.

Formal and informal

assessment is seldom used

and/or assessment data is

seldom used to guide

instruction or support

students’ growth. Lack of

variety in assessment

techniques.

Formal and informal

assessment is used to guide

instruction. A few

assessment techniques are

employed.

A variety of formal and

informal assessment

techniques are utilized to

effectively evaluate student

learning gains. Assessment

data is regularly used to

guide instruction and


Effective Practitioner, the Student Teacher/Intern: Average _____________________ STUDENT TEACHING/INTERN

As a Caring Professional, the Student Teacher/Intern: Average ___________ STUDENT TEACHING/INTERN



1


Behaviors

2


Behaviors

3


Behaviors

4

Overall

Rating

Demonstrates high moral and

ethical behaviors (eg. fairness,

integrity, honesty, respect, and

responsibility) that permeate all

educational work and relations

within the school setting.

Must be reminded of school

and university policies

regarding responsibilities.

Little or disrespectful contact

with parents, school personnel,

and community.

Occasionally does not

follow school and university

policies. Demonstrates

minimal regard for culture

and values of students,

parents, and community.

Contacts with school

community impersonal.

Follows code of conduct

and policies established by

school, university, and

profession. Shows an

appreciation and respect for

the culture and values of

school community.

Actions are guided by

careful consideration of

what is best for individual

students. Works to be part

of the school and

community and actively

works to better the lives of

students.

Establishes a wholesome

relationship with each individual

student that fosters mutual respect

and exhibits an effective, caring

attitude

Has difficulty establishing

positive relationship with

students. Classroom

environment is stifling or

chaotic.

Teacher-pupil relations tend

to be impersonal and

formal.

Is courteous and respectful

of students and their

families. Has good rapport

with all students.

Students and families are

aware of respect and

concern. Works to create a

community of learners in

the classroom where

students show concern and

respect for peers.

Demonstrates self-control and Frequently loses control and Occasionally expresses Maintains a calm and kind Influences students to

promote a positive emotional

climate that provides a role model

for their students' total behavior

expresses anger or frustrations

in the classroom, to parents, or

in the school community.

anger and frustrations in the

classroom, to parents, or to


manner when dealing with

students and parents and the

school community.

exhibit positive behaviors

that reduce tension and

stress in the classroom.

Works to establish a

classroom environment

that stimulates curiosity

and a desire to learn.

Exemplifies a dedication to


diversity, a respect for individual

backgrounds and talents, and


integration and inclusiveness.

Appears disinterested and

insensitive to pupil's personal

or learning.

Students’ needs and

interests are seldom taken

into account. Classroom

environment is teacher

oriented.

Is positive about

experiences with

students. Classroom

environment is pleasant,

conducive to learning, and

student oriented.

Enthusiasm and joy in

teaching is

evident. Individual pupil

differences are respected.

Is friendly, concerned, and

highly interested in pupil's

welfare but maintains a

professional status.

Does Not Demonstrate Acceptable

Behaviors

1


Behaviors

2


Behaviors

3


Behaviors

4

Overall

Rating

Demonstrates exceptional

knowledge of the concepts,

tools of inquiry, & structures

of subject matter with the

ability to connect content to

students' life, prior

knowledge,& experience.

Subject matter competence

inadequate. Conveys

misinformation to students.

Content knowledge sufficient

to teach grade level. Seldom

extends beyond the

textbook. Uses a separate,

fragmented curriculum.

Above average

understanding of subject

matter. Researches areas as

needed. Integrates

curriculum and ties content

to world events when

appropriate.

Exceptional background in

subject matter. Seeks and

uses supplementary

information often. Connects

content with students' life and

with prior knowledge and

across the curriculum.

Demonstrates perceptive and

analytical abilities that

impact student learning and

development

Is unable to determine the forces

that impact student learning

Recognizes some issues and

forces that contribute to

student learning, but does not

adjust teaching behaviors to

accommodate

Identifies forces inside and

outside the classroom that

impacts student learning and

works to optimize the


Analyzes the classroom

environment and adapts

teaching behavior to best

meet individual student

strengths and needs.

Reflects on classroom

context, student learning, &

individual student differences

to support intellectual, social,

and personal growth for all

students.

Reflections limited to assigned

tasks and show little thought.

Reflection limited to narrative

descriptions or judgmental

statements. Interprets

classroom achievement and

behavior in general terms.

Written and oral reflections

are frequent and show

careful and deliberate

thought. Focus of reflection

is on individual lesson or

incidents.

Reflection is consistently

evident. Focuses on

interpretation and analysis of

student data. Reflection is

incorporated into teaching

practices.

Demonstrates effective

problem solving skills that

generate multiple solutions

and evaluate potential and

actual outcomes for practical

decision-making.

Ignores problems that occur in the

classroom.

Must seek help for most

problems that occur in the

classroom. Solutions are

limited to standard practices

and policies.

Handles most problems of

the classroom without help.

Is able to evaluate

effectiveness of decisions

and make adjustments to

teaching practices.

Anticipates many classroom

problems and creatively tries

to prevent problems. Seeks

outside help when needed.

Decisions based on best

interest of students.

Seeks a variety of avenues

that extend beyond the

minimum for professional

development and takes

responsibility for

development & self-

reflection.

No outside professional

development activities or

participation in school or

community activities.

Limited participation in

school or community’s

professional growth activities.

Active participation in

professional development

activities of the school.

Member of professional &

community organizations.

Active participation in school,

community, and professional

organizations. Acts upon new

information and skills gained

from professional

development.

STUDENT LEARNING ASSESSMENT REPORT SUBMITTED BY: ALICE YOUNG DATE: OCTOBER 1, 2013 BRIEFLY DESCRIBE WHERE AND HOW ARE DATA AND DOCUMENTS USED TO GENERATE THIS REPORT BEING STORED: Summative Data are collected each semester from the following: Capstone Experience: Student Teaching Seminar (sections - ED 460, ED 460E, ED 460S) for the Student Learning Assessment Report. This data is compiled in the Education Database on the “S” drive of the School of Education and Human Services in the Education folder under Assessment. The database is managed by the Clinical Experiences Coordinator for Education, Ms. Caitlan McDaniel and is password controlled. Only Dr. Lisa Turissini, the Chair of the Department, Dr. Alice Young, the Assistant Chair of Education, and Ms. McDaniel have access. Ms. McDaniel is responsible for the compilation of reports and to aid in the analysis of the data collected. Ms. McDaniel has recently completed Access training to ensure that database is managed properly.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Teacher Education on the undergraduate level at Marymount University is an initial licensure program for completing bachelor’s degrees. Students preparing for the elementary or special education classroom major in Multi-disciplinary Studies (MDS) and those preparing to teach art, biology, English, mathematics or history/social studies major in their content area. The student learning outcomes are the same for all teacher education students whether they are seeking to become teachers in the elementary (PK-6), secondary (6-12 in content areas of art, biology, English, mathematics, history/social studies) or special education (General Curriculum K-12). When exiting (graduating) our programs, students are expected to effectively enter the classroom and assume all the duties of a full time teacher. The assessment system for the Teacher Education Programs in the Education Department plays an essential role, not only for internal accountability but also for the requirements of our accrediting body, the National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE), and to satisfy the requirements of our programs to maintain approval by the Virginia Department of Education. We gather data at an entry level by requiring basic skills testing via the PRAXIS I MATH and Virginia Communication and Language Assessment (VCLA) scores, and a minimum GPA and ensure that all students prior to student teaching have passed licensure examinations as required by the VA Department of Education. This information is either stored in Marymount’s Colleague system or in the Department’s database. We focus the gathering of formative assessment data through our “critical assignments”. Each program (elementary, secondary, and Special Education) has identified 5 “critical assignments” that are part of the normal curriculum to evaluate, not only for the course, but in light of nationally accepted new teacher standards. This assessment data is considered developmental and it is not part of the data used for this institutional assessment report. Finally, we focus the gathering of summative assessment data on the products and evaluations of the capstone experience: Student Teaching Seminar. Since the ultimate outcome for teacher education students is their performance in the classroom, all data gathered for determining student learning outcomes is derived from the data collected during student teaching. . Since we believe that our entry data and formative assessment data are developmental in nature, we use the summative data gathered during student teaching to make judgments about students and their ability to meet the Outcome Statements that have been set by the Department.

The Outcomes Statements support the conceptual framework of the Teacher Education Program and have been collaboratively developed by full-time faculty, University supervisors, and other stakeholders in teacher education systems.






2012 2014

use a variety of problem solving strategies to meet the needs of their students 2012 2014


pedagogy

2012 2014


pedagogical methods

2009 2013



2009 2013


Learning Outcome Strategic Plan

make instructional decisions based on their

student behavior, the context of the classroom,

and assessment data


use a variety of problem solving strategies to

meet the needs of their students


demonstrate a thorough understanding of

content, human development, and pedagogy


effectively implement instruction and

assessment with appropriate pedagogical

methods


exhibit a love of teaching, appreciation of

diversity, and respect for all persons in the

educational setting

Foster Student’s Global Perspective Strengthen Marymount’s Catholic Identity



Portfolio Evaluations: The Professional Teaching Portfolio documents the student teacher’s professional achievements and abilities as a teacher. Evidence for the Portfolio may come from course work, documents from the student teaching

experience, or documents from other professionally related experiences. Student teachers indicate on the rubric the evidence that supports each standard. The Portfolio Rubric is based on the Interstate Teachers Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) standards that have wide acceptance in the professional community. All full time faculty members participate in the portfolio evaluation system. Each semester a percentage of Portfolios are scored by two faculty members and the information gathered is used to help ensure reliability of evaluation.

Teacher Work Sample: The Teacher Work Sample (TWS) assignment requires candidates to pre-assess students, make data-based instructional decisions to design and teach an effective sequence of lessons, employ meaningful classroom post-assessments, analyze, and reflect on the experiences. The purpose of this assignment is to evaluate the degree of impact on student learning. The Teacher Work Sample is evaluated by the full-time faculty using a standardized rubric. Each semester a percentage of the Teacher Work Samples are scored by two faculty members and the information gathered is used to help ensure reliability of evaluation




The department conducted a review of the curriculum to determine the opportunities students have to work with data analysis prior to student teaching. Each program (PK-6, SPED, and SEC) chose two courses that specifically provide instruction and practice interpretation and analysis of student learning gains analysis.

o ED 357 and ED 358 o ED 327 and Ed 337 o Ed 323 and ED 339

During the student teaching seminar that focuses on the Teacher Work Sample assignment, a model of a “targeted” analysis is provided for each program on the Student Teaching Blackboard site.

More time was spent during student teaching seminar to instruct students on the analysis of student gains.

The department reviewed each program and identified specific courses that not only teach lesson plan writing, but teach students to make decisions about lesson planning based on data collected from students -

o ED 357 o ED 337

o ED 310 and ED 311

Faculty involved with helping students develop their Professional Portfolio created and provided on the Blackboard Student Teaching site a listing of possible pieces of evidence that a student teacher may use to support knowledge of human development.

In the November and April department meetings, faculty (all who rate Professional Portfolios) discussed appropriate evidence for ESL students to present that will document knowledge of content for their area.



Outcome and Past Assessment Learning Outcome 1: As effective practitioners, graduates will effectively implement instruction and assessment with appropriate

pedagogical methods Is this outcome being reexamined? X Yes No When this learning outcome was examined in 2009, were performing at the “Acceptable” level; however, scores on direct measures were not at the targeted level. The following changes were implemented regarding this outcome:

The Undergraduate BA programs in the secondary programs placed an emphasis on the use of assessment data and record keeping to

guide instruction by implementing the course ED 250.

All programs underwent a Curriculum Mapping process in the summer of 2009 to ensure that the knowledge, understandings, and

skills necessary in K-12 are appropriate for use in assessment data and assessment measures, in all courses taught to Teacher

Education students.

Formative assessment measures were revisited to provide remediation avenues for students at risk who are not able to perform at the

acceptable level. Candidate progress reports are being prepared for students at risk to be successful and effective teachers and role models.

Assessment Activity




population



deemed acceptable. Student learning is

measured by the scores

from the following

Portfolio Standards:

Standard #4 –

Instructional

Strategies:

Standard #7 -

Instructional

Planning Skills

Standard #8 -

Assessment of

Student Learning –

Direct Measure s

DEFINED –


understands and uses a


strategies to encourage

learners to develop deep

understanding of content

areas and their connections,

and to build skills to apply

knowledge in meaningful

ways.


plans instruction that

supports every student in

meeting rigorous learning


Programs Std. #4

Std. #7

Std. #8

SPED n= 2

3.5 3.8 3.5

PK-6 n= 8

4.0 3.75 3.75

SEC n= 2 2.5 3.5 3.8

Total n = 12

3.67 3.75 3.71


2) The aggregate mean for STDs 4, 7, and 8 in PK-6, and SPED were met at the acceptable level. However, one student in the SEC program did not meet the “Acceptable” rate target for Standard #4.

goals by drawing upon

knowledge of content

areas, curriculum, cross-

disciplinary skills, and

pedagogy, as well as

knowledge of learners and

the community context.


understands and uses

multiple methods of

assessment to engage

learners in their growth,

to monitor learner

progress, and to guide

the teacher’s and

learner’s decision

making.

Acceptable Level: Aggregated ratings from Portfolio evaluations for these Standards will be at 3.5 or higher for all candidates. A rating of 3 out of 4 is considered “Acceptable” on the rubric.

Teacher Work Sample (Criteria Statements #3-

Assessment Plan and #4

Instructional Design) –

Direct Measure

DEFINED –

Teacher Work Sample

ratings will be at a targeted


of a possible 4 for all

candidates on Criteria

Statement #5- Instructional

Design. However, a rating of

3 out of 4 is considered

“Acceptable” on the rubric


Program Criteria Area: Assessment Plan

Critical Area: Instructional Design

SPED n= 2

4 4

PK-6 n= 8 3.81 3.50 SEC n= 2 3.5 3.25 Total n = 12 3.79 3.54

1) Teacher candidates per licensure program were averaged as groups and then as a total n for the 2012-2013 academic year (which includes students’ TWS scores from 2 semesters). 2) 11 of the 12 students met the targeted score of 3.5 or above on the Criteria Area

Student learning is measured by the analysis of Cooperating Teacher (CT) Evaluation criteria: Effective Practitioner Criteria Statements #3 and #4 This is an Indirect Measure.


Uses a variety of

learning activities and

teaching strategies to

meet individual and

group needs.


Demonstrates

assessment/diagnostic

skills. Uses a variety of

evaluative techniques

appropriate to stated

objectives.

Acceptable Level: Aggregated ratings from Portfolio evaluations for these Standards will be




SPED n= 2

4 4

PK-6 n= 8 3.8 3.8

SEC n= 2 3.5 3.5

Total n = 12 3.88 3.88

1) Cooperating Teacher evaluation criteria evaluation #3 and #4 were analyzed by licensure program and as a total n for the 2012-2013 academic year (which includes Cooperating Teacher rating scores from 2 semesters).


at 3.5 or higher for all candidates. A rating of 3 out of 4 is considered “Acceptable” on the rubric.

Student learning is measured by the University Supervisor (US) Evaluation criteria: Effective Practitioner Criteria Statements #3 and #6. This is an Indirect Measure.

As an Effective Practitioner,

students

#3: Implements instructional


content and expectations

while employing a variety of



instruction and assessment to

meet the needs of all students.

#6: use a variety formal and

informal assessment

techniques effectively in order

to evaluate student learning

gains and use assessment data

to guide instruction and


Acceptable Level: Aggregated ratings from Portfolio evaluations for these Standards will be at 3.5 or higher for all candidates. A rating of 3 out of 4 is considered “Acceptable” on the rubric




SPED n= 2

4 4

PK-6 n= 8 3.89 4 SEC n= 2 3.5 4 Total n = 12 3.63 4


2) All programs rated above the targeted mean score on this criteria statement


Extent this Learning Outcome has been achieved by students (Use both direct and indirect measure results): Based on both the direct and indirect measure results all students, except for one Secondary student, met targeted levels.


1) Strengths - While all teacher candidates have completed assignments and field experiences throughout their programs that related to

this learning outcome, for most student teachers, this is the first time in their programs that they are expected to be fully responsible for instruction and assessment in a classroom and we are extremely pleased with this outcome. The scores are considerably higher than they were the last time this outcome was evaluated

2) . Opportunity for improvement - Discuss planned curricular or program improvements for this year based on assessment of outcome:

Program Planned Improvement that would impact Learner Outcome #1: Teacher Candidates can effectively implement instruction and assessment with appropriate pedagogical methods

UNDERGRADUATE PK6 ED 357 will emphasize creating an assessment plan to meet unit objectives. ED 358 will focus on strengthening their lesson plans by incorporating interactive teaching using the SMART Board and I-Pads.

UNDERGRADUATE SECONDARY

Students will increase their ability to analyze pre-assessment data to improve lesson planning through class discussion, case study and/or group project. (ED 337)

UNDERGRADUATE SPECIAL EDUCATION

Candidates in ED 323 conduct extensive case studies with readers who struggle with literacy due to learning disability administering multiple inform assessments (e.g. IRI, running records) and use data to create individualized and personalized literacy activities and lesson plans.

Candidates in ED 349 will locate, read, analyze, and discuss a published study about how a researcher used quasi-experimental design used to improve a student’s targeted behavior.

Outcome and Past Assessment Learning Outcome 2: As caring professionals, graduates will exhibit a love of teaching, appreciation of diversity, and respect for all

persons in the educational setting Is this outcome being reexamined? X Yes No

If yes, give a brief summary of previous results (including trends) and any changes made to the program. The Department met in the summer of 2009 and developed a curriculum mapping with emphasis on the components of critical assignments (formative

assessment). Dispositional Statements were added to Critical Assignment rating system (formative assessment from 5 courses in each program) and

was implemented from January, 2010.

Assessment Activity

Outcome Measures Explain how student learning

will be measured and indicate whether it is direct or

indirect.

Performance Standard Define and explain acceptable level

of student performance.






Standard Defined: The

student seeks appropriate

leadership roles and

opportunities to take

responsibility for student

learning, to collaborate with

learners, families,

colleagues, other school

professionals, and

community members to

ensure learner growth, and to

advance the profession. Acceptable Level: Aggregated ratings on the portfolio standards are set at 3.5 or higher for all candidates. A rating of 3 out of 4 is considered “Acceptable” on the rubric


Program Portfolio Standard 10

SPED n= 2

3.8

PK-6 n= 8

3.4

SEC n= 2 2.5 Total n = 12 3.35


2) All students except one SEC student met acceptable or above ratings. With only 2 students completing student teaching in undergraduate secondary program the data does not reflect the program.

Student learning is measured by the analysis of Cooperating

Standards Defined: Criteria Statement #5 -

Demonstrates an

Collection: Cooperating Teachers complete a rating on each student teacher at the midpoint and the end of his/her

1) Cooperating Teacher evaluation criteria evaluation #3 was analyzed by licensure

Teacher (CT) Evaluation criteria: Caring Professional – Criteria Statements. These are an Indirect

Measures.

appreciation of diversity & a

respect for individuals.

Criteria Statement #7 -

Appears to enjoy children

and teaching. Acceptable Level: Aggregated ratings from Cooperating Teacher Evaluations on criteria statements dealing with candidates ability problem solve and plan instruction for individual needs (the biggest problem facing teachers) will be targeted at 3.5 or higher for all exiting candidates However, a rating of 3 out of 4 is considered “Acceptable” on the rubric

placement in either the fall and spring semesters. The scores are averaged per student, then by licensure program, and the total group.



SPED n= 2

4 4

PK-6 n= 8 4 4 SEC n= 2 3.0 4 Total n = 12 3.7 4

program and as a total n for the 2012-2013 academic year (which includes Cooperating Teacher rating scores from 2 semesters).

2) All teacher candidates scored higher than the targeted mean for Caring Professional except for the 2 SEC students who both scored at the acceptable level for Criteria Statement #5

Student learning is measured by the University Supervisor (US) Evaluation criteria: Caring Professional - Criteria Statement 5 is an Indirect Measure.

A Standard Defined: Exemplifies a dedication to





integration and inclusiveness. Acceptable Level: Aggregated ratings from University Supervisors’ evaluations on criteria statements dealing with candidates’ ability to demonstrate effective problem solving skills that generate multiple solutions will be targeted at 3.5 or higher for all exiting candidates. However, a

Collection: University Supervisors complete a rating on each student teacher at the midpoint and the end of his/her placement in either the fall and spring semesters. The scores are averaged per

student, then by licensure program, and the total group.


SPED n= 2 3.25

PK-6 n= 8

4

Sec n= 2 4

Total n = 12 3.86

1) University Supervisor evaluation criteria was analyzed by licensure program and as a total n for the 2012-2013 academic year (which includes University Supervisor rating scores from 2 semesters).

2) All programs rated above the targeted mean score on this criteria statement with the exception of the two students in the SPED program. These student’s score did meet the acceptable range.

rating of 3 out of 4 is considered “Acceptable” on the rubric aggregated ratings from University Supervisors’ evaluations on criteria statements dealing with candidates’ knowledge of subject matter and their ability to share that content with their students will be targeted at 3.5 or higher for all exiting candidates. However, a rating of 3 out of 4 is considered “Acceptable” on the rubric


Extent this Learning Outcome has been achieved by students (Use both direct and indirect measure results): Based on both the direct and indirect measure results, this learning outcome # 2 was achieved by most at the “targeted” level. One Secondary student did not reach acceptable on one rating. Program strengths and opportunities for improvement relative to assessment of outcome: Strengths: According to the feedback given by cooperating teachers and university supervisors who observe and work with the student teachers in the classroom, the student teachers do demonstrate an appreciation and respect for their students and families and do show a positive attitude toward teaching Opportunities for improvement: With low enrollment programs, it is necessary to look at individual students rather than the average score for given criteria statements on assessment instruments. What is obvious, was that one of our Secondary Education students did poorly on the Professional Portfolio. The larger concern is a poor scoring from Cooperating Teachers for even one student on Criteria Statement #5 of “Demonstrates an appreciation of diversity & a respect for individuals.” The Department and the advisors in the undergraduate secondary program should focus on dispositional behaviors early in the student’s program.


Program Planned Improvement that would impact Outcome #2: Teacher Candidates exhibit a love of teaching, appreciation of diversity, and respect for all persons in the educational setting

UNDERGRADUATE PK6 Monitor dispositional behaviors closely and counsel with students who may be struggling understanding the importance of this behavior for teachers Provide guidance with Portfolio development with Undergraduate Students

UNDERGRADUATE SECONDARY

Monitor dispositional behaviors closely and counsel with students who may be struggling understanding the importance of this behavior for teachers Provide guidance with Portfolio development with Undergraduate Students Encourage attendance at DC’s National Book Festival for prof. dev. each September to preview new children’s literature for diverse populations and to support children’s love of reading and improved literacy. (ED 337)

UNDERGRADUATE SPECIAL EDUCATION

Conduct extensive and intensive field placement assignments interacting with students one-one-one or in small groups in special education settings. Candidates plan and conduct “getting to know you” activity to discover their student’s interests, hobbies, etc. (PSY 341, ED 323)

A complete student learning assessment report includes appendix of rubrics, survey questions, or other relevant documents and information.





II. Standards









IV. Organization


V. Submission



VI. Appendixes

a. Resume (one page)

b. Philosophy of Education (two pages) c. Self-assessment

VII. Evaluation

a. This is a PASS/FAIL assignment based on a 0-4.0 scale. An overall 3.0 average or higher is passing. You must pass in order to successfully complete student teaching.







1 2 3 4





this standard.





this standard.





this standard.



evidence that


achievement of this

standard.

Link 1:

Purpose:

Link 2:

Purpose:

Rater Comments:




experiences.

1 2 3 4





this standard.





this standard.





this standard.



evidence that


achievement of this

standard.

Link 1:

Purpose:

Link 2:

Purpose:

Rater Comments:



1 2 3 4





this standard.





this standard.





this standard.



evidence that


achievement of this

standard.

Link 1:

Purpose:

Link 2:

Purpose:

Rater Comments:



meaningful ways.

1 2 3 4





this standard.





this standard.





this standard.



evidence that


achievement of this

standard.

Link 1:

Purpose:

Link 2:

Purpose:

Rater Comments:



motivation.

1 2 3 4





this standard.





this standard.





this standard.



evidence that


achievement of this

standard.

Link 1:

Purpose:

Link 2:

Purpose:

Rater Comments:



issues.

1 2 3 4





this standard.





this standard.





this standard.



evidence that


achievement of this

standard.

Link 1:

Purpose:

Link 2:

Purpose:

Rater Comments:




1 2 3 4





this standard.





this standard.





this standard.



evidence that


achievement of this

standard.

Link 1:

Purpose:

Link 2:

Purpose:

Rater Comments:




1 2 3 4





this standard.





this standard.





this standard.



evidence that


achievement of this

standard.

Link 1:

Purpose:

Link 2:

Purpose:

Rater Comments

Overall

Presentation of

Portfolio

1

2

3

4


Philosophy Link:

Resume Link:

Self-Assessment

Link:


Standard Score

Standard 1

Standard 2

Standard 3

Standard 4

Standard 5

Standard 6

Standard 7

Standard 8

Standard 9

Standard 10

Total Score

Average


The Goal - The teacher candidate will design and deliver an effective sequence of lessons, employ meaningful classroom assignments, and

analyze and reflect on his or her experiences. A successful teacher education candidate should have impact on student learning. The purpose of this assignment is to evaluate the degree of impact on student learning by examining:




Marymount University’s Teacher Work Sample has been adapted from the work of Emporia State University, The Renaissance Partnership for Improving Teacher Quality Project, the Louisiana Department of Education, and Western Oregon University

Further Directions and Explanation of TWS Learning Goals and Objectives - List and describe all the general goals for this series of lessons in this instructional sequence. Objectives or goals should include outcomes representing a range from knowledge through evaluation (i.e. Bloom's Taxonomy). Be sure to include the knowledge, skills, and reasoning ability students will gain if your learning goals are met and the standards (VA SOLs or other curriculum standards) from which these goals and objectives are based. Remember, general objectives should be:










Lessons #2, 3, 6, &7


Assessment Plan A. Describe your pre-assessment method(s) (determination of student knowledge and skills prior to instruction). If you used a pre-test, attach a copy to this form. If you used an activity, attach a copy of the directions, as well as, the rubric used to measure student performance. B. Describe your post-assessment methods(s): i.e. how you determined student knowledge and skills after instruction. If you used, a post-test, attach a copy. If you used an activity or assignment, attach a copy of the directions, as well as, the rubric used to measure student performance. C. Describe what else you did informally and formally during the course of the unit to assess student understanding and progress. D. How do you know that your work sample objectives, pre-assessment, instruction, and post-assessment were aligned (consistent with each other)? Remember, good educational practice requires that pre-assessments and post-assessments are closely aligned. Instructional Design and Implementation A. Pre-assessment Analysis

What did you learn about the prior knowledge/skills/abilities of the students in your class as individuals and as a whole?

Apart from looking at your class as a whole (class average, median score, etc), it is important to see how various individual subgroups performed both in the pre-assessment and post assessment. Provide a desegregation of data by selecting subgroups of individuals (e.g. gender, low prior knowledge vs. high prior knowledge, ESL vs. native speakers) and analyzing the pre-assessment data.







Supportive Evidence




Unacceptable (1)

Developing (2)

Acceptable (3)

Target (4)






Pre/post assessment plans are: clearly stated detailed aligned with each objectives aligned with instruction

varied

Instructional Design Lesson plans do not provide evidence of appropriate learning experiences for either students or objectives.

Instructional design: aligns with learning goals offer relevant learning experiences provides accurate presentation of










the experience on student learning are present in lesson plans provide a general reflection of the impact

of teaching

Supportive documentation Minimal attachments or relevant attachments are provided.



Overview - During student teaching, cooperating teachers are asked to rate candidates on a total of 22 statements that are tied to

Marymount’s conceptual framework. Targeted Expectations ratings are given a numerical score of 4, Acceptable Expectation ratings are given a score of 3, Developing Toward Expectation ratings are given a score of 2, and Does Not Meet Expectations ratings are given a score of 1.

Cooperating Teacher Instructions Formative Assessment - Student teachers need frequent verbal and written feedback about their teaching behaviors. It is important that they know which of their teaching behaviors had positive impact on the classroom and which of their teaching behaviors had negative impact on the

classroom. They also need your help learning to reflect on their teaching behaviors and to independently assess themselves. Many cooperating teachers keep a small notebook to jot down feedback and questions for the student teacher while they are teaching.

Summative Assessment - Marymount asks that you complete the attached evaluation two times during the time the student teacher is working with you. Once should be about mid-way during the experience and the other at the end of the student teaching experience. The evaluation form should serve as a guide at the mid-point of the experience for setting goals and determining experiences for the final weeks of the experience. Please remember that the student teacher could easily be your colleague next year. For the final evaluation, care should be taken to provide an accurate and specific description of the student teacher's competencies, as it will become a part of the student's file. Confer with the university supervisor regarding any concerns or problems prior to the setting of a grade for the course.

Evaluation Descriptions:

TB = Demonstrates Targeted professional Behaviors - indicates that the student teacher shows behaviors that would be expected of a competent and effective first year teacher who can work independently

AB = Demonstrates Acceptable professional Behaviors - indicates that the student teacher shows behaviors that would be expected of first year teacher but may need continued growth to work independently

DB = Demonstrates Developing professional Behaviors - indicates that you believe the student teacher is not able to perform independently in this area but can perform in an acceptable manner with support

N = Does Not demonstrate acceptable behaviors – indicates that the student teacher is not able to perform in a manner that would be acceptable

NA = Not applicable at present time - Although this would be acceptable at mid-point in the experience, it is important that all student teachers have experiences in all areas before the end of the semester, and that the cooperating teacher is able to render an evaluation in all areas.















group needs.





motivation.





















NA








Narrative Report:

_________________________________ ____________________________


_________________________________ ____________________________



form, is able to teach well in all content/grade levels observed, interacts with both students and colleagues in an effective and professional manner, and is recommended for any teaching vacancy in his/her field without reservation. A final grade of "B" indicates the student teacher: has potential to succeed in teaching with continued growth, has one conceptual framework rating area deemed "2 - Developing" on summative evaluation form, demonstrates evidence of independent teaching ability in some content/grade levels, but at a consistent level of quality teaching at the end

of student teaching, and should be considered among a group of other candidates for any teaching vacancy in his/her teaching field.

A final grade of "C" indicates the student teacher: is questionable in the ability to perform in the classroom independently, even with continued growth, and is expected to need additional

support, has two conceptual framework rating areas deemed as "2-Developing", or one area rated "1 - Unacceptable", is able to provide quality teaching but not on a regular basis, or in some but not all content/grade levels, and would only be recommended for a teaching vacancy with substantial reservations.

A final grade of “F” indicates the student teacher:

is not yet ready to perform in the classroom independently,

has two conceptual framework areas rated as " 1 - Unacceptable" on summative evaluation

is not yet able to provide quality teaching on a regular basis,

would not be recommended for a teaching vacancy, and







2nd



RECOMMENDATION:







Narrative Report:

____________________________ ____________ _____________________________ ___________


Academic Year : 2011-2012 Program: Undergraduate Teacher Education – MDSPK-6, MDSSPED and

Secondary in content areas (History, Math, English, Art, & Biology)





1


Behaviors

2


Behaviors

3


Behaviors

4

Overall

Rating




national standards.





be aimless and

disoriented. Lessons lack

clarity and direction. Students

tend to be confused about

expectations.


on time and include

necessary

components. Procedural

emphasis is on teacher

behavior, not student

involvement. Presentations

are basically clear but stand

as individual entities. Little

diversity in instructional

strategies. Goals and

objectives are not shared

with students.


prepared

regularly. Instructional

procedures are designed to

include most learners. Plans

identify VA's SOLs or

school’s POSs.

Presentations fit sequence of

instruction well. Students

understand explanations and

directions. Employs some


methods.



for student

learning. Provisions for

individual and group

differences and interests are

evident. Learning

experiences & materials are

varied and appropriate for

the students, discipline, and

VA's SOLs or POSs.





needs.













special classroom







providing multiple


















instructional

procedures. Students receive

little or no feedback on their

progress. Makes little use of

evaluation techniques.

Primarily relies on







performance.








warranted.





goals and specific

objectives. Adjusts







1


Behaviors

2


Behaviors

3


Behaviors

4

Overall

Rating






interaction, active



employ appropriate


















techniques.


with most students on

task. Materials and time are








positive learning










positive classroom

environment.






experience.



directions are

unclear. Questions are

ambiguous or too


spelling, writing, and








Transmits key ideas


means used

occasionally. Students are

seldom confused about












speaking. Use of non-standard

English is apparent.

written skills are acceptable.

used. Some use of



communication.



as appropriate



community



community) and use




informal assessment






individual growth.



community and/or










included.





not used or used

ineffectively.

Formal and informal







techniques.

Communication with


adequate and seldom


sometimes used as a

communication tool.

Formal and informal


instruction. A few


employed.





enhance and sustain

communication.


informal assessment












Behaviors


Behaviors


Behaviors

Overall

Rating



1 2 3 4

demonstrates high moral and











and community.















school community.





of the school and



students.





attitude



students. Classroom


chaotic.



formal.




with all students.





the classroom where


respect for peers.

Demonstrates self-control and




Frequently loses control and




Occasionally expresses




Maintains a calm and kind



school community.

Influences students to
















or learning.





oriented.

Is positive about

experiences with

students. Classroom

environment is pleasant,

conducive to learning, and

student oriented.


teaching is

evident. Individual pupil







Behaviors


Behaviors


Behaviors


Behaviors

Overall

Rating



1 2 3 4









inadequate. Conveys




extends beyond the

textbook. Uses a separate,

fragmented curriculum.

Above average



needed. Integrates



appropriate.



uses supplementary








development







accommodate
















students.













incidents.


evident. Focuses on




practices.






decision-making.


classroom.





and policies.



Is able to evaluate



teaching practices.











responsibility for

development & self-

reflection.

















from professional

development.

Marymount University Assessment Committee

Review Guidelines for Student Learning Assessment Report

Report from Academic Year:

2011-12

Program:

Administration & Supervision K-12 (Catholic School Leadership)

Critical Area 1 – Learning Outcomes

Learning Outcomes Met Partially Met Not met

Learning outcomes are present x □ □

Points to consider for comments

States learning outcomes in terms of what a student should be able to do (e.g. synthesize, create, develop)

States learning outcomes in measurable terms

Establishes an appropriate level for program learning outcomes (e.g. learning outcomes are at appropriate level on Bloom’s taxonomy for a program learning outcome)

Illustrates support of Marymount’s and the school’s mission

Comments The first 2 learning outcomes are clearly stated in terms of what a student should be able to do; perhaps outcome 3 could be worded differently—student can “demonstrate an understanding” rather than “understand.” The outcomes are stated in measurable terms, are appropriate, and support the school’s mission.

Critical Area 2 – Assessing Learning Outcomes

Outcome Measures Met Partially Met Not met

Measures provided for each outcome x □ □ Points to consider in comments

Makes evident connection between measures and learning outcomes

Uses direct and indirect measures appropriately

Identifies performance standards for each measure

Includes copy of instruments in appendix (rubrics, survey questions, or other relevant documents)

Comments The measures, a mix of direct and indirect, are clearly connected to the learning outcomes. Performance standards are identified and copies of the relevant instruments are included.

Collection of student work and responses Met Partially Met Not met

Collects student work and responses for each measure x □ □ Points to consider in comments

Identifies origin of student work and responses (e.g. class numbers, portfolio, survey)

Identifies how student work and responses were collected

Identifies who collected student work and responses

Identifies number of participants

Illustrates that procedures are appropriate for outcome

Comments The origin, collection, etc. are clearly described for each measure. The procedures seem appropriate.



Analysis Met Partially Met Not met

Analyzes results of each measure given for each outcome x □ □ Points to consider in comments

Explains how student work was evaluated

Provides data summary (narrative, charts, tables)

Describes who evaluated student work included in assessment report

Addresses any previous lessons learned, if applicable

Comments Analyses seem appropriate. Good job of presenting data results in tables.

Critical Area 3: Improving the curriculum using assessment

Using assessment to make improvements Met Partially Met Not met

Presents recommendations for improvement for each outcome based on assessment results x □ □ Points to consider in comments

Discusses strengths and opportunities relative to the outcome

Draws conclusions related to data

Provides recommendations for improvement that follow from conclusions

Comments The discussions of strengths and opportunities, along with the conclusions drawn, seem appropriate. The recommendations for improvement seem specific and actionable.

Implementing improvements Met Partially Met Not met

Implements improvements from previous year’s assessment report □ x □ Points to consider in comments

Provides concrete evidence of how improvements from previous assessment activity were implemented

Gives explanation for not implementing planned improvements, if applicable

Comments Some improvements from previous assessment activity were implemented.

Addressing recommendations Met Partially Met Not met

Addresses UAC’s recommendations from previous year x □ □ Points to consider in comments

Addresses all UAC recommendations regarding last year’s report, if applicable

Gives explanation for not implementing recommendations, if applicable

Comments According to the report, no recommendations were given by UAC in response to the previous report.



SUMMARY Overall Comments about Assessment Report

Overall the report was clear, thorough, and substantial. The report addressed all of the critical areas.

x Report Accepted as Submitted

□ Revisions required to accept report this year

1

2

3

4

Recommendations for next year’s assessment process

1

2

3

4




2011-12

Program:

Teacher Education (Graduate)









Comments Outcomes #2 and 5 – more focused Flowchart – excellent view of the connection between the university, school, and program








Comments The measures, a mix of direct and indirect, are clearly connected to the learning outcomes. Performance standards are identified and copies of the relevant instruments are included. The explanation of the instruments is very good—e.g., the overview of the professional teaching portfolio and directions to students that accompany the portfolio evaluation rubric.

















Comments Analyses are thoughtful and thorough.









Implements improvements from previous year’s assessment report □ □ □ Points to consider in comments





Addresses UAC’s recommendations from previous year □ □ □ Points to consider in comments







Overall the report was clear, thorough, and substantial. Continue the good work.



1

2

3

4


1

2

3

4




2011-12

Program:

Teacher Education (Undergraduate)









Comments The 3 learning outcomes assessed are appropriate and clearly stated in measurable terms. The description of the program’s support of the mission is clear.








Comments The measures, a mix of direct and indirect, are clearly connected to the learning outcomes. Performance standards are identified and copies of the relevant instruments are included. The explanation of the instruments is very good—e.g., the overview of the professional teaching portfolio and directions to students that accompany the portfolio evaluation rubric.

















Comments Analyses are thoughtful and thorough.









Implements improvements from previous year’s assessment report □ □ □ Points to consider in comments





Addresses UAC’s recommendations from previous year □ □ □ Points to consider in comments







Overall the report was clear, thorough, and substantial. The follow chart used to illustrate the connection between the university, school, and program could be used as a model for other programs.



1

2

3

4


1

2

3

4


STUDENT LEARNING ASSESSMENT REPORT SUBMITTED BY: SISTER PATRICIA EARL, SHANNON MELIDEO, AND ALICE YOUNG DATE: 10.03.12 BRIEFLY DESCRIBE WHERE AND HOW ARE DATA AND DOCUMENTS USED TO GENERATE THIS REPORT BEING STORED:

Data is collected each semester from the Director of the Catholic School Leadership Program who is responsible for seeing that data

This data is compiled and managed by the Clinical Coordinator for Education, Ms. Tamala Amissah in the Education Database on

the “S” drive of the School of Education and Human Services in the Education folder under Assessment. The database is password

controlled and only the Chair of the Department, Ms. Amissah, and the Associate Dean of the SEHS have access. Ms. Amissah is

responsible for the compilation of reports and assists in the analysis of the data collected.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

List all of the program’s learning outcomes: (regardless of whether or not they are being assessed this year) These outcomes have been revised since the last report; last reporting date may be inconsistent with prior records.


Year of Next Planned

Assessment

demonstrate high moral, ethical, and legal standards in their relationships with students,

faculty, and parents;

2009 2012

exhibit an effective and caring attitude that seeks to develop the whole child

intellectually, physically, emotionally, socially, and spiritually;

2007 2013

exemplify a love of teaching, appreciation for diversity, respect for the unique gifts and

talents of all, and understand the importance of integrating the values of faith;

2010 2013

demonstrate effective problem solving skills, tools of inquiry, and analytical abilities

that generate multiple solutions for practical decision-making that can affect the school,

2009 2012


student development, the parish, and the wider community;

employ appropriate and effective instructional and budget planning processes and

leadership strategies that impact the curriculum and assessment of all students;

2008 2013

understand supervision evaluation strategies for faculty/staff growth and development;

2010 2013

understand basic legal issues and demonstrate knowledge of resources related to safe

and effective management of student, faculty, and school issues.

2008 2012


This program is designed to prepare candidates for school administration in public and private schools. It also provides the Catholic

values and perspectives essential to fostering Catholic unity and identity within a school community. In addition to developing

competencies in educational leadership, the program focuses on the Church’s history, teaching, and moral perspectives while

encouraging participants’ own faith and spiritual growth. Provide a brief description of the assessment process used including strengths, challenges and planned improvements:

The assessment process of the Catholic School Leadership program (CSLP) is built on 5 critical assignments and the internship

experience (ED 593) of the program. The following courses - ED 582, 583, 584, 587 and 591 - have each identified one assignment

that represents the broad purpose of the course and focuses on the standards for school leadership as set by the Interstate School

Leaders Licensure Consortium (ISLLC) Standards which have recently been developed by the Council of Chief State School Officers

in collaboration with the National Policy Board on Educational Administration (NPBEA) to help strengthen preparation programs in

school leadership. The Program in Educational Leadership uses the ISLLC standards as a requirement for the student's Learning

Portfolio. The assignments are part of the normal curriculum of the course. The instructor first scores the assignment based on the

criteria set for the class and then re-scores the assignment in light of the ISLLC standards. The score, based on ISLLC standards, is

then forwarded to the Director of the Catholic School Leadership Program who compiles the data, and forwards it to the Clinical

Coordinator for Education who then enters results into the database. The internship of the CSLP is the capstone of the program and

three evaluations are part of the assessment system. Both the On-site Supervisor and the University Supervisor complete the same

evaluation that focuses on the behaviors of the student (intern). The intern also uses the same form for a self-evaluation which is then




discussed at the time of the internship visit. The student also completes a portfolio that is submitted to the Director of the CSLP. The

ratings for these instruments or documents are gathered by the CSLP Director. Describe how the program implemented its planned improvements from last year: From the Program Review completed in Spring of 2011, the following two recommendations are applicable to the Catholic School Leadership Program:

1. A faculty member with expertise in instructional technology was hired in 2011-2012. This education faculty member provided

technology training last year to the education faculty and will continue to do so in 2012-2013 for faculty and students.

2. A partnership breakfast was held in June 2012 to strengthen partnerships with private, public, and parochial schools and a

meeting was planned for Fall 2012 to further develop a partnership with the Arlington Dioceses schools. Provide a response to last year’s University Assessment Committee review of the program’s learning assessment report: (List each recommendation and provide a specific response to each).

From the University Assessment Committee Review in 2010: There were no specific recommendations made. All Outcomes were “met.”



Learning Outcome 1: As caring professional graduates will demonstrate high moral, ethical, and legal standards in their

relationships with students, faculty, and parents; Is this outcome being reexamined? x Yes No

If yes, give a brief summary of previous results (including trends) and any changes made to the program. Previous results showed that students met the aggregated mean. Minor changes were made in ED 582 and ED 583 to meet

revised licensure requirements of the Virginia Department of Education in 2009. However, the major change came in

communicating with On-Site Advisors the importance of helping candidates to develop these qualities in the day to day work

of the internship. In addition, the collection of data was refined and reporting methods were improved in order to provide a

more detailed analysis.

Assessment Activity

Outcome Measures Explain how student

learning will be measured and indicate whether it is

direct or indirect.





deemed acceptable.

Critical

Assignments for

ED 582 and

583(Direct)

Critical Assignment

Ratings for ISLLC

Standards 1 - School

Vision of Learning, 4 -

Community Involvement,

5 - Ethical and Moral

Professionalism from the

Critical Assignment will be

at an aggregated mean of

3.5 out of a possible 4

Means

for

Students

n= 14

ISLLC

Standard

1

ISLLC

Standard

4

ISLLC

Standard

5

ED 582 3.71 3.71 3.71

ED 583 4 4 4

1. The Critical Assignments for

ED 582 and ED 583 are scored

in relation to each of the 7 the

ISLLC Standards based on a 4

point scale with 4 indicating

Exceeds, 3 Meets, 2

Developing, and 1

Unsatisfactory.

2. Of the 14 students who

graduated in 2012, in ED 582,

10 were above the aggregated


level for Standards 1, 4 & 5 and

4 students were at an

Acceptable rating. All students

in ED 583 scored a 4.00 rating

in STDs 4 & 5.

On-site advisor

Evaluations

(Indirect)

Aggregated ratings from

On-Site Advisors on

criteria statements dealing

with caring professionals,

ability to work with staff,

communicate with faculty,

and relate to students will

be at 3.0

On-Site Advisors ratings for:

caring professionals 3.93

ability to work with

staff

3.93

communicate with

faculty

3.75

relate to students 3.82

1. The on-Site Advisor Evaluation

is scored in relation to each of

the 7 the ISLLC Standards



Developing, and 1





professional, critical thinker





areas.

University

Supervisor

Evaluation

(Indirect)

Aggregated ratings from

University Supervisor

ISLLC Standards 1 -

School Vision of Learning,

4 - Community

Involvement, 5 - Ethical

and Moral Professionalism

from the Critical

Assignment will be at an


University Supervisors ratings for:

Means

n= 14

ISLLC

Standard

I

ISLLC

Standard

4

ISLLC

Standard

5

3.85 3.63 3.90

3. The University Supervisor

Evaluation is scored in relation

to each of the 7 the ISLLC

Standards based on a 4 point

scale with 4 indicating Exceeds,

3 Meets, 2 Developing, and 1






of a possible 4 professional, critical thinker





areas.



ISLLC Standards 1 - School Vision of Learning, 4 - Community Involvement, and 5 - Ethical and Moral Professionalism from the

Critical Assignment met the aggregated rating for all but 3 students and these students met the Acceptable level. On-Site Advisors

criteria statements dealing with caring professionals, ability to work with staff, communicate with faculty, and relate to students and

spiritual relationships were met by all students at an Aggregated rating also. University Supervisor rated all ISLLC Standards 1 -

School Vision of Learning, 4 - Community Involvement, 5 - Ethical and Moral Professionalism from the Critical Assignment very

favorably. Program strengths and opportunities for improvement relative to assessment of outcome:

The syllabus for each of these courses (ED 582 & ED 583) is focused on developing candidates ability to demonstrate high moral,

ethical, and legal standards in their relationships with students, faculty, and parents through administration and community building as

indicated by the data. In addition, qualitative data analysis of the candidates’ progress reports, On-site advisor Evaluations, and

University Supervisor Evaluations does indicate a strong perception of students’ ability to high moral, ethical, and legal standards in

their relationships with students, faculty, and parents, especially in a Catholic School. The University Supervisor Evaluations and the

Portfolio Evaluations at the end of the program also show students are highly motivated and engaged in on-going and life-long

development of high moral, ethical and legal standards. The student interaction on the Discussion Board is an added program strength

in that all students give evidence of these qualities as they work through the various topics and issues for discussion.



Based on positive past performance as well as the current evaluation, the Coordinator of the Catholic School Leadership Program will

emphasize the importance of high moral, ethical, and legal standards in candidates’ relationships with students, faculty, and parents as

it is developed in course content in ED 582 and ED 583, since this is where there were still a few students at the Acceptable level,

while also maintaining its importance in working with the interns and in advising the On-Site Advisors of the types and kinds of

experiences that are needed.


Outcome and Past Assessment Learning Outcome 2: As effective practitioners graduates will demonstrate effective problem solving skills, tools of inquiry, and

analytical abilities that generate multiple solutions for practical decision-making that can affect the school, student development, the

parish, and the wider community; Is this outcome being reexamined? x Yes No


Candidates seeking licensure now take and pass the School Leaders Licensure assessment (SLLA) with a 98-99% pass rate. To insure

this continues, a summer seminar session was created to help students prepare for the SLLA test and sharpen their understanding of

the types of questions in order to sharpen their critical thinking skills and enable them to demonstrate their understanding and

Response to Legal Issues, Problem Analysis and Decision Making as they relate to the management of safe and effective school issues

in very brief and concise terms. An increased use of case studies and legal in-baskets assists them in demonstrating effective problem

solving skills, tools of inquiry, and analytical abilities that generate multiple solutions for practical decision-making that can affect the

school, student development, the parish, and the wider community. Though the scores exceed the anticipated goal, the University

Supervisor worked with On-site Advisers through discussion of expectations and improved rubrics to improve intern experience in

this area as well.

Assessment Activity




population


2) Present the findings of the analysis including the numbers participating and deemed

acceptable. Critical Assignments for

ED 587 and 591

(Direct)

Aggregated means for

ISLLC Standards # 3 0

Managerial Leadership &

6 Larger School Context

for these Critical

Assignments will be 3.5

or higher

Means

N=14 ISLLC

Standard 3

ISLLC

Standard 6

ED 591 4.00 4.00

ED 587 4.00 4.00

1. The Critical Assignments for ED

587 and ED 591 are scored in

relation to each of the 7 the

ISLLC Standards based on a 4


Exceeds, 3 Meets, 2 Developing,

and 1 Unsatisfactory.


2. All 14 students exceeded the

Aggregated ratings in each of

these areas.

On-Site Supervisor



criteria statements

dealing with Legal Issues

will be at 3.0 or higher

for all exiting candidates.

On-Site rating for:

Response to Legal Issues 3.63

Problem Analysis 3.77

Decision Making 3.70

1. The on-Site Advisor Evaluation is

scored in relation to each of the 7 the

ISLLC Standards based on a 4 point

scale with 4 indicating Exceeds, 3

Meets, 2 Developing, and 1




includes being a caring professional,

critical thinker and effective

practitioner.

2. All 14 students were significantly

above the Aggregate rating in each of

the areas.

University Supervisor’s

Evaluation


ISLLC Standards # 3 & 6

for these Critical

Assignments will be 3.0

or higher

University Supervisor’s rating for:

ISLLC Standard

#3

3.75

ISLLC Standard

#6

3.79

1.The University Supervisor Evaluation

is scored in relation to each of the 7

the ISLLC Standards based on a 4


Exceeds, 3 Meets, 2 Developing, and

1 Unsatisfactory, as well as the



includes being a caring professional,

critical thinker and effective

practitioner.


2. All 14 students were significantly

above the Aggregate rating in each of

the areas.


Extent this Learning Outcome has been achieved by students (Use both direct and indirect measure results): ELCC Standards # 3 0 Managerial Leadership & 6 Larger School Context for these Critical Assignments indicated all students

exceeded the Aggregated rating. This is indicative of a strong understanding of the application of the statements.

Program strengths and opportunities for improvement relative to assessment of outcome: In Ed 587, students engage in case studies related to legal issues in daily school events. They also do legal in-baskets and analyze

various court cases related to school issues. A most valuable experience is their final project (Critical Assignment) in which they

review and revise their own school parent-student handbook and faculty handbook, applying legal standards and theory in their

revisions. Even with the online delivery of this course, students engage lively with the professor and receive on-going feedback on

their handbook revisions. Discussion Board allows students to demonstrate knowledge and share in the collective review of issues to

enable candidates to use resources and become aware of practical ways to insure a safe and effective school climate and effective

management that is sensitive to legal issues. These students have mastered the skills related to ED587.

In ED 591, students must utilize the knowledge and concepts of resources related to safe and effective management of school issues.

They are required to create a school budget, as well as create a five- year plan as part of the final project (critical assignment). Topics

related to effective management, budget, and issues of finance and of development are topics discussed in the Discussion Board. The

dialog exchange helps students to sharpen their methods of inquiry and grow in their knowledge and application of concepts and

theories related to finance and development. Under the current economical conditions, these students seemed to have mastered the

concept and its application well.

Through the internship experience, students have the opportunity to apply the knowledge and skills addresses in this goal in real day to

day events. While scores are very high in relation to this Learning Outcome, effective problem solving skills, tools of inquiry, and


analytical abilities that generate multiple solutions for practical decision-making that can affect the school, student development, the

parish, and the wider community are life-ling skills that can always be fine tuned

Discuss planned curricular or program improvements for this year based on assessment of outcome: Since the core content of these courses is designed to meet the Virginia Department of Education requirements for licensure, there are

no major curricular improvements planned at this time. The important need will be to stay current with changing issues and continue

to offer opportunities for candidates to deepen these Managerial Skills (Standard 3) and adapt them to the Larger School Context

(Standard 6)



Learning Outcome 3: As critical thinkers graduates will understand supervision evaluation strategies for faculty/staff

growth and development;

Is this outcome being reexamined? Yes x No


Assessment Activity



indirect.


Define and explain acceptable level of student

performance.

Data Collection Discuss the data collected and

student population


2) Present the findings of the analysis including the numbers participating and deemed acceptable.


584 and 587

(Direct)


ISLLC Standards # 3

Managerial Leadership & 6

Larger School Context for

these Critical Assignments

will be 3.5 or higher

Means

ISLLC

Standard

3

ISLLC

Standard

6

ED 584 3.07 3.14

ED 587 4.00 4.00

1. The Critical Assignments for ED 584 and

ED 587 are scored in relation to each of the

7 ISLLC Standards based on a 4 point scale

with 4 indicating Exceeds, 3 Meets, 2

Developing, and 1 Unsatisfactory.

2. In ED 584, the majority of students did not

meet the aggregated mean for Standard 3 or

6. However, all candidates were Acceptable

with 3 candidates above the aggregated

mean with a score of 4. In ED 587, 14

candidates exceeded the Aggregated mean

in each of these areas.

On-Site Supervisor



criteria statements dealing

with Legal Issues will be at

3.0 or higher for all exiting

candidates.

On-Site rating for:

Ability to Evaluate 3.79

Ability to Supervise 3.50

1. The On-Site Advisor Evaluation is scored









practitioner.

2. All 14 students either achieved the

aggregated mean or significantly scored

above it in each of the areas. University Supervisor’s

Evaluation


ISLLC Standards # 3 & 6 for

these Critical Assignments

will be 3.0 or higher

University Supervisor’s rating for: ISLLC Standard #3 3.75

ISLLC Standard #6 3.79

1. The University Supervisor Evaluation is

scored in relation to each of the 7 the

ISLLC Standards based on a 4 point scale

with 4 indicating Exceeds, 3 Meets, 2

Developing, and 1 Unsatisfactory, as well

as the Conceptual Framework of the

Department of Education which includes

being a caring professional, critical thinker


2. All 14 students were significantly above the

Aggregated mean in each of the standards.


Extent this Learning Outcome has been achieved by students (Use both direct and indirect measure results): ISLLC Standards # 3 Managerial Leadership & # 6 Larger School Context for the Critical Assignments for ED 584 were below the

aggregated mean but still Acceptable for all students. The aggregated mean for the On-Site Advisor Evaluation and the University

Supervisor evaluation were significantly above the targeted score. ISLLC Standards # 3 Managerial Leadership & # 6 Larger School

Context for the Critical Assignments for ED 587 exceeded the aggregated mean. The same is true for both the On-Site Advisor

evaluation and the University Supervisor evaluation.


Program strengths and opportunities for improvement relative to assessment of outcome: For ED 584, there is a significant difference in the scores related to ISLLC Standards # 3 Managerial Leadership & # 6 Larger School

Context between the Critical Assignment scores and the actual application. However, this addresses the reality that between the time

of taking the course in the first fall of work and doing an internship prior to graduation, candidates developed as critical thinkers able

to understand supervision evaluation strategies for faculty/staff growth and development and ultimately apply them in real

experiences.

For ED 587, there was a significant similarity or correlation between the Critical Assignment scores and the scores given by the On-

Site Advisor and the University Supervisor. All exceeded the aggregated means, showing that candidates not only grasped the content

but were also able to apply this in real situations.

Discuss planned curricular or program improvements for this year based on assessment of outcome: Since the core content of these courses is designed to meet the Virginia Department of Education requirements for licensure, there are

no major curricular improvements planned at this time. However, the Coordinator of the Catholic School Leadership Program will

review the course content, especially for ED 584. In addition, a review of the scoring rubrics for the Critical Assignments with both

professors will highlight expectations since the scores for ED 584 seem overall to be lower than expected and the scores for ED 587

show no variation with all candidates receiving a score of 4.



Appendices

Appendix A - ISLLC Standards



Appendix D - On-Site Advisor Evaluation of Student Intern

Appendix E - Marymount University Supervisor Evaluation of Student Intern

APPENDIX A:

Interstate School Leaders Licensure Consortium (ISLLC) Standards

Standard 1.0: Candidates who complete the program are educational leaders who have the knowledge and ability to promote the

success of all students by facilitating the development, articulation, implementation, and stewardship of a school or district vision of

learning supported by the school community.


success of all students by promoting a positive school culture, providing an effective instructional program, applying best practice to

student learning, and designing comprehensive professional growth plans for staff.


success of all students by managing the organization, operations, and resources in a way thatpromotes a safe, efficient, and effective



success of all students by collaborating with families and other community members, responding to diverse community interests and

needs, and mobilizing community resources.



success of all students by acting with integrity, fairly, and in an ethical manner.


success of all students by understanding, responding to, and influencing the larger political, social, economic, legal, and cultural

context.

Standard 7.0: Internship. The internship provides significant opportunities for candidates to synthesize and apply the knowledge and

practice and develop the skills identified in Standards 1-6 through substantial, sustained, standards-based work in real settings,

planned and guided cooperatively by the institution and school district personnel for graduate credit.



Critical Assignments

ED 582 – Building School Community Relations

Cumulative Project

ED 583 – Administration in the Schools

Final Reflective Essay

ED 584 – Advanced Curriculum for Educational Leadership

Reflective Paper

ED 591 –School Finance and Development

Financial Plan

ED 587 – School Law

Development/Revision of School Handbooks

ADDITIONAL COURSES TO BE REPRESENTED IN THE PORTFOLIO

FOR THE CATHOLIC SCHOOL LEADERSHIP PROGRAM

ED 581 – Foundations of American Education for Leadership

ED 586 – Issues in School administration

ED 588 –School Leadership and Supervision

ED 589 – Ethical and Moral Development

ED 592 – Administrative Issues in Special Education

ED 593 – Project, Thesis, or Internship



Name:__________________________________________ Critical Assignment for ED _____________

Though this culminating assignment for this course primarily addresses ELCC Standard # __________, the following scale

shows the candidate’s level of achievement on all standards that apply.

CSLP Critical Assignments

Standard Example

Does Not

Provide

Evidence of

Standard

1 point

Example

Provides

Evidence of

Developing

Toward

Standard

2 points

Example

Provides

Evidence of

Meeting

Standard

3 points

Example

Provides

Evidence of

Exceeding

Standard

4 points

NA

Standard does

not apply to

this

assignment

1. School Vision of Learning – Candidates

demonstrate the knowledge and ability to

develop, articulate, implement, and steward a

school vision of learning and can also promote

community involvement in that school vision.

582

2. Professional Growth – Candidates

demonstrate knowledge and ability to promote

student success by promoting a positive school

culture, providing an effective instructional

program, applying best practice to student

learning, and designing comprehensive

professional growth plans for staff.

584


3. Managerial Leadership – Candidates are


ability to promote student success by managing

the organization, operations, and resources in a

way that promotes a safe, efficient, and effective

learning environment. 591

4. Community Involvement – Candidates are


ability to promote student success by

collaborating with families and other community

members, responding to diverse community

interests and needs, and mobilizing community

resources. 583

5. Ethical and Moral Professionalism –

Candidates are educational leaders who have the

knowledge and ability to promote student success

by acting with integrity, fairly, and in an ethical

manner.

587

6. Larger Educational Context – Candidates

are educational leaders who have the knowledge

and ability to promote student success by

understanding, responding to, and influencing the

larger political, social, economic, legal, and

cultural context. 591


7. Internship – Candidates demonstrate abilities

to synthesize and apply the knowledge and

practice and develop skills through substantial,

sustained, standards-based work in real settings,

planned and guided by the institution and school

district personnel. 593


Appendix D - Marymount University



On-Site Advisor Evaluation of Student Intern

Student: _________________________ Student ID Number: ___________________

School site: ___________________________________________________________________


Position: ____________________________ Phone: ______________________

Using the chart below, please evaluate the performance of the student who has interned in your school. Please mail this form

to Sr. Patricia Helene Earl, IHM, Ph.D., Director Catholic School Leadership Program, Marymount University, 2807 North

Glebe Road, Arlington, VA 22207.



Expectations

Meets

Expectations

Developing Unsatisfactor

y

Unable

to

observe

Caring Professional

Demonstrates morals, ethics








Ability to Delegate

Professional Attire

Organization & Task performance

Ability to Gather Information

Initiative &

Responsibility


Motivation

Ability to Evaluate

Response to Legal/Ethical Issues


Oral Communication

Ability to Work with

Staff

Ability to Cope with

Stress

Ability to Communicate with Faculty


Range of Interests

Use of Technology

Seeks Professional Development


Problem Analysis


Ability to Use

Supervision

Knowledge of Concepts, Skills

In addition to being correlated with the Virginia Standards for licensure, Marymount’s Catholic School Leadership Program is also

correlated with the ELCC Standards. Please evaluate this intern according to these standards:


Expectations

(4)

Meets

Expectations

(3)

Developing

(2)

Unsatisfactory

(1)

Unable

to

observe

Standard 1.0:

Candidates who

complete the program


are educational leaders

who have the

knowledge and ability

to promote the success

of all students by

facilitating the

development,

articulation,

implementation, and

stewardship of a school

or district vision of

learning supported by



Expectations

Meets

Expectations


to

observe

Standard 2.0:

Candidates who



who have the



of all students by

promoting a positive

school culture,

providing an effective

instructional program,

applying best practice

to student learning,

and designing


comprehensive

professional growth

plans for staff.


Expectations

Meets

Expectations


to

observe

Standard 3.0:

Candidates who



who have the



of all students by

managing the

organization,

operations, and

resources in a way that

promotes a safe,




Expectations

Meets

Expectations


to

observe

Standard 4.0:

Candidates who



who have the




of all students by

collaborating with

families and other

community members,

responding to diverse

community interests

and needs, and


resources.


Expectations

Meets

Expectations


to

observe

Standard 5.0:

Candidates who



who have the



of all students by

acting with integrity,

fairly, and in an ethical

manner.


Expectations

Meets

Expectations


to

observe

Standard 6.0:

Candidates who




who have the



of all students by

understanding,

responding to, and

influencing the larger

political, social,


cultural context.


Expectations

Meets

Expectations


to

observe

Standard 7.0:

Internship. The

internship provides

significant

opportunities for

candidates to

synthesize and apply

the knowledge and

practice and develop




standards-based work

in real settings,

planned and guided




graduate credit.


The Catholic School administrator should be prepared in roles of spiritual, educational, and managerial leadership. Guiding a

school that is first of all Christ-centered, the administrator should also be prepared in areas related to curriculum

development, human resource management and finance, staff development, student discipline, and school and community

relations, including building the faith community. In light of these areas of responsibility, please comment on the following:


____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________


____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________


____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________


____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________


____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

____________________

________________________________________________________________

Signature of School Site Supervisor

________________________________________________________________

Signature of Intern

________________________________________________________________

Date of Meeting between School Site Supervisor and Intern


Appendix E - Marymount University



Marymount University Supervisor Evaluation of Student Intern

Student: _________________________ Student ID Number:___________________

School site: ___________________________________________________________________


Position: ____________________________ Phone: ______________________

Using the chart below, please evaluate the performance of the student who has interned in your school. Please mail this form

to Sr. Patricia Helene Earl, IHM, Ph.D., Director Catholic School Leadership Program, Marymount University, 2807 North

Glebe Road, Arlington, VA 22207.



Expectations

Meets

Expectations

Developing Unsatisfactor

y

Unable to

observe

Caring Professional

Demonstrates morals,

ethics








Ability to Delegate

Professional Attire

Organization & Task

performance

Ability to Gather

Information


Initiative &

Responsibility

Motivation

Ability to Evaluate

Response to

Legal/Ethical Issues


Oral Communication

Ability to Work with

Staff

Ability to Cope with

Stress

Ability to Communicate

with Faculty

Ability to Relate to

Students

Range of Interests

Use of Technology

Seeks Professional

Development


Problem Analysis


Ability to Use

Supervision

Knowledge of Concepts,

Skills

In addition to being correlated with the Virginia Standards for licensure, Marymount’s Catholic School Leadership Program is also

correlated with the ELCC Standards. Please evaluate this intern according to these standards:

Observed Performance Exceeds Meets Developing Unsatisfactory Unable


Expectations Expectations to

observe

Standard 1.0:

Candidates who



who have the



of all students by

facilitating the

development,

articulation,

implementation, and

stewardship of a school

or district vision of

learning supported by



Expectations

Meets

Expectations


to

observe

Standard 2.0:

Candidates who



who have the



of all students by

promoting a positive

school culture,


providing an effective

instructional program,

applying best practice

to student learning,

and designing

comprehensive

professional growth

plans for staff.


Expectations

Meets

Expectations


to

observe

Standard 3.0:

Candidates who



who have the



of all students by

managing the

organization,

operations, and

resources in a way that

promotes a safe,




Expectations

Meets

Expectations


to

observe

Standard 4.0:


Candidates who



who have the



of all students by

collaborating with

families and other

community members,

responding to diverse

community interests

and needs, and


resources.


Expectations

Meets

Expectations


to

observe

Standard 5.0:

Candidates who



who have the



of all students by

acting with integrity,

fairly, and in an ethical

manner.



Expectations

Meets

Expectations


to

observe

Standard 6.0:

Candidates who



who have the



of all students by

understanding,

responding to, and

influencing the larger

political, social,


cultural context.


Expectations

Meets

Expectations


to

observe

Standard 7.0:

Internship. The

internship provides

significant

opportunities for

candidates to

synthesize and apply

the knowledge and

practice and develop





standards-based work

in real settings,

planned and guided




graduate credit.

The Catholic School administrator should be prepared in roles of spiritual, educational, and managerial leadership. Guiding a

school that is first of all Christ-centered, the administrator should also be prepared in areas related to curriculum

development, human resource management and finance, staff development, student discipline, and school and community

relations, including building the faith community. In light of these areas of responsibility, please comment on the following:


____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________


____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________



____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________


____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________

________________________________________________________________

Signature of Marymount Supervisor

_________________________________________________________

Date of Meeting between Marymount Supervisor and Intern

STUDENT LEARNING ASSESSMENT REPORT SUBMITTED BY: SHANNON MELIDEO DATE: OCTOBER 1, 2012

BRIEFLY DESCRIBE WHERE AND HOW ARE DATA AND DOCUMENTS USED TO GENERATE THIS REPORT BEING STORED: Summative Data are collected each semester from the following: Capstone Experience: Student Teaching Seminar (sections - ED 570A, ED 570B, ED 570D and ED 570SE) for the Student Learning Assessment Report. This data is compiled in the Education Database on the “S” drive of the School of Education and Human Services in the Education folder under Assessment. The database is managed by the Clinical Experiences Coordinator for Education, Ms. Tamala Amissah and is password controlled. Only Dr. Shannon Melideo, the Chair of the Department, Dr. Alice Young, the Associate Dean of the SEHS, and Ms. Amissah have access. Ms. Amissah is responsible for the compilation of reports and to aid in the analysis of the data collected.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Teacher Education on the graduation level at Marymount University is an initial licensure program for persons who wish to enter the teaching profession after they have completed an undergraduate degree. The student learning outcomes are the same for all graduate teacher education students whether they are seeking to become teachers in the elementary (PK-6), secondary (6-12 in content areas of English, mathematics, physics, earth science, biology, chemistry or history/social studies), special education (General Curriculum K-12) or ESL (K-12). When exiting (graduating) our programs, students are expected to effectively enter the classroom and assume all the duties of a full time teacher. The assessment system for the Teacher Education Programs in the Education Department plays an essential role, not only for internal accountability but also for the requirements of our accrediting body, the National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE), and to satisfy the requirements of our programs to maintain approval by the Virginia Department of Education. We gather data at an entry level by requiring basic skills testing via the GRE, PRAXIS I MATH and Virginia Communication and Language Assessment (VCLA) scores, a minimum GPA, and an interview for admission. We focus the gathering of formative assessment data through our “critical assignments”. Each program (elementary, secondary, ESL, and Special Education) has identified 5 “critical assignments” that are part of the normal curriculum to evaluate, not only for the course, but in light of nationally accepted new teacher standards. This assessment data is considered developmental and it is not part of the data used for this institutional assessment report. Finally, we focus the gathering of summative assessment data on the products and evaluations of the capstone experience: Student Teaching Seminar. Since the ultimate outcome for teacher education students is their performance in the classroom, all data gathered for determining student learning outcomes is derived from the data collected during student teaching

. Since we believe that our entry data and formative assessment data are developmental in nature, we use the summative data gathered during student teaching to make judgments about students and their ability to meet the Outcome Statements that have been set by the Department. The Outcomes Statements support the conceptual framework of the Teacher Education Program and have been collaboratively developed by full-time faculty, University supervisors, and other stakeholders in the teacher education systems. List all of the program’s learning outcomes: (regardless of whether or not they are being assessed this year) Please note that Learning Outcomes were revised during the 2010-2011 academic year and may not align with the last Assessment Report submitted (Fall 2010).


Year of Next Planned

Assessment analyze content, behavior, and data for instructional decision making 2007-2008 2012-2013

reflect on the context of the classroom and the outcomes of their students 2009-2010 2013-2014

use strategic problem solving to support the development of all learners; 2009-2010 2012-2013

demonstrate a thorough understanding of content, human development, and pedagogy 2009-2010 2012-2013

use communication, technology, management, and pedagogical skills to implement instruction and assessment

2007-2008 2013-2014

exhibit high ethical standards, respectful attitudes, and a dedication to teaching 2006-2007 2013-2014

Describe how the program’s outcomes support Marymount’s Mission, Strategic Plan, and relevant school plan: The following graphic display shows how the Student Learning Outcomes support the Mission, the University Strategic Plan, and the School of Education and Human Services Strategic Plan. There are real and logical connections between all four levels.

Marymount University’s Mission: Marymount University is an independent Catholic university that emphasizes academic excellence at the undergraduate and graduate levels. Committed to the liberal arts tradition, the University combines a foundation in the arts

and sciences with career preparation and opportunities for personal and professional development. Marymount is a student-centered learning community that values diversity and focuses on the education of the whole person, promoting the intellectual,

spiritual, and moral growth of each individual. Scholarship, leadership, service, and ethics are hallmarks of a Marymount education.

University Strategic

Plan

Enhancing the intellectual experience

Capitalizing on the region’s rich resources

Building community Honoring the values and traditions of

Marymount’s Catholic heritage

School Strategic

Plan

A. Promote inquiry-based learning

A. Build and enhance academic programs that align with the

region’s history, culture, and economy

D. Use the internet and other technologies

effectively to connect (with each other)

A. Emphasize student’s intellectual, spiritual,

and moral growth through the curriculum

Student Learning

Outcomes

Analyze content,

behavior, and data

for instructional decision

making

Use strategic problem solving

to support

the develop-ment of

all learners

Demon-strate a

thorough understan

ding of content, human

develop-ment, and pedagogy

reflect on the context of the classroom and the outcomes of their

students

use communication, technology,

management, and pedagogical skills to

implement instruction and assessment

exhibit high ethical standards, respectful

attitudes, and a dedication to teaching

Provide a brief description of the assessment process used including strengths, challenges and planned improvements: Student Teaching Seminar is considered the culminating experience for all students completing teaching licensure programs. Student teachers are assessed using the following measures during the experience:

Portfolio Evaluations: The Professional Teaching Portfolio documents the student teacher’s professional achievements and abilities as a teacher. Evidence for the Portfolio may come from course work, documents from the student teaching experience, or documents from other professionally related experiences. Student teachers indicate on the rubric the evidence that supports each standard. The Portfolio Rubric is based on the Interstate Teachers Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) standards that have wide acceptance in the professional community. All full time faculty members participate in the portfolio evaluation system. Each fall an inter-rater reliability study is completed to help ensure reliability of evaluation.

Teacher Work Sample: The Teacher Work Sample (TWS) assignment requires candidates to pre-assess students, make data-based instructional decisions to design and teach an effective sequence of lessons, employ meaningful classroom post-assessments, analyze, and reflect on the experiences. The purpose of this assignment is to evaluate the degree of impact on student learning. The Teacher Work Sample is evaluated by the full-time faculty using a standardized rubric.




1. The Education Department reviewed course sequencing and will continue to do so every year. In planning the course schedule the department chair made sure there were at least 3 courses available to each program so that graduate students could attend full time is so desired. 2. The department currently has a weekend cohort, a PDS, and an online program. Frontloading the classroom management course was a significant change for all main campus programs in 2011-2012.

3. A faculty member with expertise in instructional technology was hired in 2011-2012. This education faculty member provided technology training last year for faculty and will continue to do so in 2012-2013 for faculty and students. The Rowley Hall renovations have enabled faculty to teach in classrooms with instructional technology. The department will examine present technologies in the courses. 4. A partnership breakfast was held in June 2012 to strengthen partnerships with private, public, and parochial schools and a meeting was planned for Fall 2012 to further develop a partnership with the Arlington Dioceses schools.


There were no recommendations given in the previous year’s response.

Outcome and Past Assessment Learning Outcome 1: As critical thinkers graduates can analyze content, behavior, and data for instructional decision making Is this outcome being reexamined? x Yes No

If yes, give a brief summary of previous results (including trends)? and any changes made to the program. When this learning outcome was examined in 2010, overall students performed at targeted levels. No changes have been made that would impact the results of this outcome.

Assessment Activity



direct or indirect.

Performance Standard Define and explain

acceptable level of student performance.


population


2) Present the findings of the analysis including the numbers participating

and deemed acceptable.


Standard Defined: The teacher understands and uses formal and informal assessment strategies to evaluate and ensure the continuous intellectual, social, and physical development of his/her learners Acceptable Level: Targeted Portfolio Ratings for Assessment of Student Learning (Standard 8) will be at a targeted aggregated mean of 3.5 out of a possible 4. However, a rating of 3 out of 4 is considered “Acceptable” on the rubric.


Student Population by Licensure Program

Std. 8

ESL n= 6 3.50

SPED n= 11 3.77

PK-6 n= 24 3.57

Sec n= 8 3.44

Total n = 49 3.59


2) The aggregate mean for STD 8 in PK-6, ESL and SPED were met at the targeted level. However, SEC program did meet the “Acceptable” rate target. Overall, all 49 teacher candidates met the targeted aggregated mean.

Student learning is measured by the total score of the Teacher Work Sample, Part 5 - Analysis of learning, and Part 6 – Reflections. These are Direct Measures.

Standard Defined: The Teacher Work Sample is a comprehensive assignment that shows the teacher candidate’s ability to analyze content, behavior, and data for instructional decision making. Therefore an overall average is used in addition to two sub-criteria that directly measure the teacher candidate’s deeper analysis of the complete teaching and learning cycle. Acceptable Level: Teacher Work Sample (TWS) ratings will be at an aggregated mean of 3.5 out of a possible 4 for the Total Score and in Criteria Areas: Analysis of Learning and Reflections. A rating of 3 out of 4 is considered “Acceptable” on the rubric


Teacher Work Sample

Total Score

Criteria Area: Analysis of learning

Criteria Area: Reflections

ESL n= 6 3.53 3.33 3.75

SPED n= 11

3.65 3.58 3.88

PK-6 n= 24

3.50 3.36 3.58

Sec n= 8 3.51 3.44 3.56

Total n = 49

3.57 3.44 3.68

1) Teacher candidates per licensure program were averaged as groups and then as a total n for the 2011-2012 academic year (which includes students’ TWS scores from 2 semesters). 2) All 49 students met the targeted score of 3.5 or above on the total TWS score and Criteria Area: Reflections. Scores for the sub-criteria: analysis of learning showed a slight dip in the rating. Yet, all scores for all students’ scores met at least the acceptable level.

Student learning is measured by the analysis of Cooperating Teacher (CT) Evaluation criteria: Critical Thinker #3. This is an Indirect Measure.

Standard Defined: The teacher candidate analyzes student achievement and behaviors and makes adjustments to increase student success and motivation. Acceptable Level: Aggregated ratings from Cooperating Teacher Evaluations on criteria statements dealing with analysis that impact teaching will be at a targeted score of 3.5 for all candidates. However, a rating of 3 out of 4 is considered “Acceptable” on the rubric.


Criteria Statement from CT Evaluation Instrument: Analyzes student achievement and behaviors and makes adjustments to increase student success and motivation

ESL n= 6 3.70

SPED n= 11

3.83

PK-6 n= 24

3.22

SEC n= 8 3.88

Total n = 49

3.65


2) The ESL, SEC and SPED students scored higher than the targeted mean. The PK-6 teacher candidates scored below the targeted score yet still scored above the acceptable rating.

Student learning is measured by the University Supervisor (US) Evaluation criteria: Critical Thinker #2. This is an Indirect Measure.

Standard Defined: The teacher candidate will demonstrate their perceptive and analytical abilities that impact student learning and development. Acceptable Level: Aggregated ratings from University Supervisors’ evaluations on criteria statements that impact student learning and development will be at 3.5 or higher for all candidates. A rating of 3 out of 4 is considered “Acceptable” on the rubric.


Criteria Statement from US Evaluation Instrument: Will demonstrate their perceptive and analytical abilities that impact student learning and development

ESL n= 6 3.83

SPED n= 11

3.58

PK-6 n= 24

3.76

SEC n= 8

3.82

Total n = 49

3.74


2) All programs rated above the targeted mean score on this criteria statement.


Extent this Learning Outcome has been achieved by students (Use both direct and indirect measure results): Based on both the direct and indirect measure results, this learning outcome # 1 was achieved at the “acceptable” level by all student teachers and by most at the “targeted” level. Since student teachers are developing from pre-service teachers to future in-service teachers we are satisfied with these results. While all teacher candidates have completed assignments and field experiences throughout their programs that related to this learning outcome, for most student teachers, this is the first time in their programs that they are expected to be fully responsible for instruction and assessment in a classroom. Program strengths and opportunities for improvement relative to assessment of outcome:

1) Strengths - As indicated by the cooperating teacher and the university supervisor, student teachers appear to demonstrate their analytical skills in the classroom. The ratings on both of these indirect measures were above the target for all groups of student

teachers, except for the Elementary (PK-6) by the cooperating teachers. Additionally, the reflectivity area of the Teacher Work Sample indicated a high level of competency for this direct measure. Reflectivity on the Teacher Work Sample focuses on the student teacher’s ability to analysis his or her own behaviors and how those influenced the achievement of his or her pupils.

2) Opportunity for improvement - The lowest indicator for analysis is on the Teacher Work Sample in the area of “Analysis”. This indicator focuses on the student teacher’s ability to view learning gains for his or her individual pupils. Learning gains is the numerical difference between a pre-assessment score and post assessment scores. Student teachers are charged to offer a clear and accurate presentation of learning gains for all students and subgroups, explains learning gains or lack thereof and to offer specific remediation based on this analysis. In this area, all subgroups of student teachers, except the Special Education students, were below target. . More time will be spent during student teaching seminar to instruct students on the analysis of student gains.


The department will conduct a review of the curriculum to determine the opportunities students have to work with data analysis prior to student teaching. Each program (ESL, PK-6, SPED, and SEC) will choose two courses that specifically provide instruction and practice interpretation and analysis of student learning gains analysis.

During the student teaching seminar that focuses on the Teacher Work Sample assignment, a model of a “targeted” analysis will be provided for each program.

More time will be spent during student teaching seminar to instruct students on the analysis of student gains.

Outcome and Past Assessment Learning Outcome 2: As critical thinkers, graduates will use strategic problem solving to support the development of all learners. Is this outcome being reexamined? X Yes No If yes, give a brief summary of previous results (including trends) and any changes made to the program. When this Learning Outcome was assessed for the 2009-2010 academic year, all students met the “Acceptable” rating or were above the targeted rating on both the direct and indirect measure results. No particular changes have been made that address this learning outcome.

Assessment Activity



direct or indirect.

Performance Standard Define and explain

acceptable level of student performance.






Standard Defined: The Teacher Candidate uses Multiple Instructional Strategies to encourage students’ development of critical thinking, problem solving and performance skills Acceptable Level: Aggregated ratings on the portfolio standards are set at 3.5 or higher for all candidates. A rating of 3 out of 4 is considered “Acceptable” on the rubric


Portfolio Standard #4 Uses Multiple Instructional Strategies to encourage students’ development of critical thinking, problem solving and performance skills

ESL n= 6 3.50

SPED n= 11 3.64

PK-6 n= 24 3.63

SEC n= 8 3.63

Total n = 49 3.61


2) All 49 teacher candidates met the targeted aggregated mean.

Student learning is measured by the total score of the Teacher Work Sample, Part #5. This is a

Standard Defined: The Teacher Candidate uses a variety of instructional methods

Collection: Full-time faculty members score Teacher Work Samples at the middle of the fall and spring semesters. The scores are averaged per student, then by licensure program, and the

1) Teacher candidates per licensure program were averaged as groups and then as a total n for the 2011-2012

Direct Measure. Acceptable Level: Teacher Work Sample ratings will be at a targeted aggregated mean of 3.5 out of a possible 4 for all candidates on Criteria Statement #5- Instructional Design. However, a rating of 3 out of 4 is considered “Acceptable” on the rubric

total group. Teacher Work Sample Criteria Area: Uses a variety of instructional methods

ESL n= 6 3.33

SPED n= 11 3.58

PK-6 n= 24 3.41

SEC n= 8 3.44

Total n = 49 3.56

academic year (which includes students’ TWS scores from 2 semesters). 2) SPED met the targeted mean for this standard. The remainder of the programs still achieved a mean score at the acceptable level.

Student learning is measured by the analysis of Cooperating Teacher (CT) Evaluation criteria: Critical Thinker #5 and Effective Practitioner #3. This is an Indirect Measure.

Standards Defined: The Teacher Candidate demonstrates effective problem solving and decision making strategies. The Teacher Candidate uses a variety of learning activities and teaching strategies to meet individual and group needs. Acceptable Level: Aggregated ratings from Cooperating Teacher Evaluations on criteria statements dealing with candidates ability problem solve and plan instruction for individual needs (the biggest problem facing teachers) will be targeted at 3.5 or higher for all exiting candidates However, a rating of 3 out of 4 is considered “Acceptable” on the rubric


Criteria Statements from CT Evaluation Instrument

Demonstrates effective problem solving and decision making strategies (CTCT5)

Uses a variety of learning activities and teaching strategies to meet individual and group needs (CTEP3)

ESL n= 6 3.83 3.83

SPED n= 11 3.33 3.56

PK-6 n= 24 3.65 3.75

SEC n= 8 3.75 3.78

Total n = 49 3.63 3.73


2) The ESL, SEC. and Pk-6 students scored higher than the targeted mean for CTCT5. The SPED students mean was below the targeted mean range yet within the acceptable range. All programs scored above the targeted mean for CTEP3.

Student learning is measured by the University Supervisor (US) Evaluation criteria: Critical Thinker. This is an Indirect Measure.

Standard Defined: The Teacher Candidate demonstrates effective problem solving skills that generate multiple solutions while evaluating potential and actual outcomes for practical decision-making. Acceptable Level: Aggregated ratings from University Supervisors’ evaluations on criteria statements dealing with candidates’ ability to demonstrate effective problem solving skills that generate multiple solutions will be targeted at 3.5 or higher for all exiting candidates. However, a rating of 3 out of 4 is considered “Acceptable” on the rubric


Criteria Statement from US Evaluation Instruments

demonstrates effective problem solving skills that generate multiple solutions while evaluating potential and actual outcomes for practical decision-making

ESL n= 6 3.75

SPED n= 11 3.45

PK-6 n= 24

3.89

SEC n= 8 3.63

Total n = 49 3.73

1) University Supervisor evaluation criteria evaluation was analyzed by licensure program and as a total n for the 2011-2012 academic year (which includes University Supervisor rating scores from 2 semesters).

2) ESL, PK-6, and SEC rated above the targeted mean score on this criteria statement. While SPED was just below the target mean rating, the students’ mean scores still fell within the acceptable range.


Extent this Learning Outcome has been achieved by students (Use both direct and indirect measure results): Based on both the direct and indirect measure results, this learning outcome # 2 was achieved at the “acceptable” level by all student teachers and by most at the “targeted” level. Since student teachers are developing from pre-service teachers to potential in-service teachers we are satisfied with these results. While all teacher candidates have completed assignments and field experiences throughout their programs that related to this learning outcome, for most student teachers, this is the first time in their programs that they are expected to be fully responsible for instruction and assessment in a classroom.

Program strengths and opportunities for improvement relative to assessment of outcome: Strengths: According to the feedback given by cooperating teachers and university supervisors who observe and work with the student teachers in the classroom, the student teachers are able to demonstrate problem solving strategies and decision making competencies while in the most important arena - the classroom. Mean scores for all sub-groups are above the targeted score by cooperating teachers and only dip slightly for Special Education student teachers with their University supervisors. Opportunities for improvement: The direct measure, Teacher Work Sample, requires that student teachers plan and implement instruction based on data that they collect from the context of the classroom and pre-assessment of planned objectives. This means that they must look at the challenges of the classroom before and as they teach. Student teachers may not be adequately explaining or describing these measures and their decisions in the written document that is the Teacher Work Sample. Although all did meet the acceptable level of performance, only SPED student teachers met the target. Discuss planned curricular or program improvements for this year based on assessment of outcome:

The department will review each program and identify specific courses that not only teach lesson plan writing, but teach students to make decisions about lesson planning based on data collected from students.

Student teachers will be given model Teacher Work Samples to provide guidance in writing better instructional plans and goals.


Learning Outcome 3: As critical thinkers, graduates will demonstrate a thorough understanding of content, human development, and pedagogy Is this outcome being reexamined? X Yes No This learning outcome has been revised since the time it was examined. In 2005-2006 the outcome only included a thorough understanding of content. When the Education Learning Outcomes were revised in 2010, there was a collapsing of several outcomes and the result was a broadening of this particular one to include knowledge of human development and pedagogy.

Assessment Activity



direct or indirect.



Analysis 1) Describe the analysis

process. 2) Present the findings of the analysis including the

numbers participating and deemed acceptable.

Student learning is measured by the analysis of Standard 1, 2 and 7 of the Student Teaching Portfolio. This is a Direct Measure.

Standard Defined: Standard 1 focuses on knowledge of content, Standard 2 focuses on human development, and Standard 7 focuses on the ability to plan instruction (appropriate pedagogy) Acceptable Level: Aggregated ratings on the portfolio standards are set at 3.5 or higher for all candidates. A rating of 3 out of 4 is considered “Acceptable” on the rubric


Standard 1

Standard 2

Standard 7

ESL n= 6 3.08 3.33 3.33

SPED n= 11 3.64 3.23 3.82

PK-6 n= 24

3.7 3.44 3.7

SEC n= 8 3.63 3.38 3.56

Total n = 49 3.49 3.38 3.66


2) Overall, the SPED, PK-6 and SEC teacher candidates met the targeted aggregated means. The ESL teacher candidates did meet the acceptable level and their score did bring the total n aggregate mean to just below the targeted level though well within the acceptable level.

Student learning is measured by the analysis of Cooperating Teacher (CT) Evaluation criteria: This is an Indirect Measure.

Standards Defined: The Teacher Candidate demonstrates knowledge of the concepts and skills of subject matter and Connect content with students’ lives, prior knowledge, and experience. Acceptable Level: Aggregated ratings from Cooperating Teacher Evaluations on criteria statements dealing with candidates ability problem solve and plan instruction for individual needs (the biggest problem facing teachers) will be targeted at 3.5 or higher for all exiting candidates However, a rating of 3 out of 4 is considered “Acceptable” on the rubric

Collection: Cooperating Teachers complete a rating on each student teacher at the midpoint and the end of his/her placement in either the fall and spring semesters. The scores below are from the final evaluation. The scores are averaged per student, then by licensure program, and the total group.


Demon-strates knowledge of the concepts and skills of subject matter

Connect content with students’ lives, prior knowledge, and experience

ESL n= 6 3.83 3.83

SPED n= 11 3.56 3.33

PK-6 n= 24

3.74 3.70

SEC n= 8 3.75 3.63

Total n = 49 3.72 3.63


2) All teacher candidates scored higher than the targeted mean. The SPED students mean was below the targeted mean range yet within the acceptable range. All programs scored above the targeted mean for both criteria.


Standard Defined: The Teacher Candidate demonstrates exceptional knowledge of the concepts, tools of inquiry, & structures of subject matter with the ability to connect content to students' life, prior knowledge, and experience. Acceptable Level: Aggregated ratings from University Supervisors’ evaluations on criteria statements dealing with candidates’ ability to demonstrate effective problem solving skills that generate multiple solutions will be targeted at 3.5 or higher for all exiting candidates. However, a rating of 3 out of 4 is considered “Acceptable” on the rubric

Collection: University Supervisors complete a rating on each student teacher at the midpoint and the end of his/her placement in either the fall and spring semesters. The scores are averaged per student, then by licensure program, and the total

group.


Demonstrates exceptional knowledge of the concepts, tools of inquiry, & structures of subject matter with the ability to connect content to students' life, prior knowledge,& experience.

ESL n= 6 3.67

SPED n= 11 3.55

PK-6 n= 24

3.61

SEC n= 8 3.88

Total n = 49 3.65

1) University Supervisor evaluation was analyzed by licensure program and as a total n for the 2011-2012 academic year (which includes University Supervisor rating scores from 2 semesters).

2) All programs rated above the targeted mean score on this criteria statement.


Extent this Learning Outcome has been achieved by students (Use both direct and indirect measure results): Based on both the direct and indirect measure results, this learning outcome # 3 was achieved at the “acceptable” level by all student teachers and by most at the “targeted” level. Since student teachers are developing from pre-service teachers to potential in-service teachers we are satisfied with these results. While all teacher candidates have completed assignments and field experiences throughout their programs that related to this learning outcome, for most student teachers, this is the first time in their programs that they are expected to be fully responsible for instruction and assessment in a classroom.

Program strengths and opportunities for improvement relative to assessment of outcome: Strengths: Again while working in the field, student teachers demonstrate to their cooperating teachers their knowledge of content, human development and pedagogy. All aggregate scores for student teachers in these areas from those who are watching them work in the classroom are above the target set by the program. Opportunities for improvement: Obviously, student teachers have difficulty documenting the knowledge of human development in their Portfolio. All subgroups fell below target, although within the acceptable range. Students in the ESL endorsement area also had difficulty documenting knowledge of subject matter. This could be explained simply by their endorsement area. The general education teacher is considered the “content” expert and the ESL teacher works primarily with English acquisition and creating experiences to provide background and vocabulary. ESL student teachers may be unclear how to document their specific knowledge of content for their field or raters may be looking at this standard only through the eyes of a general education teacher. Discuss planned curricular or program improvements for this year based on assessment of outcome:

Faculty involved with helping students develop their Professional Portfolio will create a listing of possible pieces of evidence that a student teacher may have to support knowledge of human development.

At a department meeting, faculty (all who rate Professional Portfolios) will discuss appropriate evidence for ESL students to present that will document knowledge of content for their area.


APPENDICES





II. Standards

a. Standards are be divided into ten slides - one for each standard (I-X) b. Each standard will include TWO pieces of evidence of your professional work (from student teaching, coursework, volunteer work,

field experience, substitute teaching) that supports your ability to meet that particular standard, for a TOTAL of 20 pieces of evidence. Remember you can also cross reference a third piece of evidence to improve a standard.




a. Sets of lesson plans b. Teacher Work Sample (REQUIRED) c. Unit Plan (REQUIRED) d. Unit Planning Grid with corresponding lesson plans e. Letters to parents f. Reflective journal g. Case studies h. Self made exams or assessments i. Running Records j. Lesson plan portfolio k. Evaluations, transcripts, test results, recommendations, or other professional assessments that support competency as a new

teacher may be also used as evidence for particular standards. l. Projects you have completed

i. Student work (ALL REFERENCES TO STUDENT, SCHOOL, AND TEACHER NAMES MUST BE ELIMINATED) IV. Organization


V. Submission

a. Save your completed E-portfolio on a flash drive that is clean (nothing else on it) b. Label your flash drive with your name/program c. Place your flash drive AND 2 copies of the portfolio scoring sheet in a clear ziplock sandwich bag d. In permanent marker, list the following on the bag: Your name, grad or undergrad, ESL/Special Ed/Pk-6 or Secondary, PDS/Reston or

main campus, and the name of your peer-reviewer

VI. Appendixes

a. Resume (one page) b. Philosophy of Education (two pages) c. Self-assessment

VII. Evaluation



Portfolio Template:

Standard #1: Content Knowledge The teacher understands the central concepts, tools of inquiry, and structures of the discipline(s) he or she teaches and creates learning experiences that make these aspects of the discipline accessible and meaningful for learners to assure mastery of the content.

1 2 3 4

Ineffective Developing Acceptable Target The teacher candidate does

not provide any evidence that supports her/his achievement

of this standard.

The teacher candidate provides 1 document of

evidence that supports her/his achievement of this standard.

The teacher candidate provides 2 documents of

evidence that support her/his achievement of this standard.


evidence that exceptionally support the achievement of

this standard.

Link 1: Purpose:

Link 2: Purpose: Rater Comments:

Standard #2: Learner Development The teacher understands how learners grow and develop, recognizing that patterns of learning and development vary individually within and across the cognitive, linguistic, social, emotional, and physical areas, and designs and implements developmentally appropriate and challenging learning experiences.

1 2 3 4

Ineffective Developing Acceptable Target The teacher candidate does

not provide any evidence that supports her/his achievement


evidence that supports her/his


evidence that support her/his


evidence that exceptionally

of this standard. achievement of this standard. achievement of this standard. support the achievement of this standard.

Link 1: Purpose: Link 2: Purpose:

Rater Comments:

Standard #3: Learning Differences The teacher uses understanding of individual differences and diverse cultures and communities to ensure inclusive learning

environments that enable each learner to meet high standards.

1 2 3 4

Ineffective Developing Acceptable Target The teacher candidate does not provide any

evidence that supports her/his achievement of

this standard.

The teacher candidate provides 1 document of evidence that supports her/his achievement of

this standard.


evidence that support her/his achievement of

this standard.

The teacher candidate provides 2 documents of evidence that exceptionally support the

achievement of this standard.


Rater Comments:

Standard #4: Instructional Strategies The teacher understands and uses a variety of instructional strategies to encourage learners to develop deep understanding of

content areas and their connections, and to build skills to apply knowledge in meaningful ways.

1 2 3 4

Ineffective Developing Acceptable Target The teacher

candidate does not provide any evidence that supports her/his achievement of this

standard.

The teacher candidate provides 1 document

of evidence that supports her/his


The teacher candidate provides 2 documents

of evidence that support her/his


The teacher candidate provides 2 documents of evidence that exceptionally support the achievement of this

standard.

Link 1: Purpose:


Standard #5: Learning Environments The teacher works with others to create environments that support individual and collaborative learning, and that encourage

positive social interaction, active engagement in learning, and self motivation.

1 2 3 4






this standard.


this standard.


this standard.


Link 1: Purpose:

Link 2: Purpose:

Rater Comments:

Standard #6: Application of Content The teacher understands how to connect concepts and use differing perspectives to engage learners in critical thinking,

creativity, and collaborative problem solving related to authentic local and global issues.

1 2 3 4



this standard.


this standard.



this standard.




Rater Comments:

Standard #7: Planning for Instruction The teacher plans instruction that supports every student in meeting rigorous learning goals by drawing upon knowledge of

content areas, curriculum, cross-disciplinary skills, and pedagogy, as well as knowledge of learners and the community context.

1 2 3 4



this standard.


this standard.



this standard.



Link 1: Purpose:


Standard #8: Assessment The teacher understands and uses multiple methods of assessment to engage learners in their growth, to monitor learner

progress, and to guide the teacher’s and learner’s decision making.

1 2 3 4








this standard. this standard. this standard.

Link 1: Purpose:


Standard #9: Professional Learning and Ethical Practice The teacher engages in ongoing professional learning and uses evidence to continually evaluate his/her practice, particularly the effects of her/his choices and actions on others (learners, families, other professionals, and the community), and adapts practice

to meet the needs of each learner.

1 2 3 4



this standard.


this standard.



this standard.



Link 1: Purpose:


Standard #10: Leadership and Collaboration The teacher seeks appropriate leadership roles and opportunities to take responsibility for student learning, to collaborate with

learners, families, colleagues, other school professionals, and community members to ensure learner growth, and to advance the profession.

1 2 3 4



this standard.


this standard.



this standard.



Link 1: Purpose:

Link 2: Purpose:

Rater Comments: Portfolio Scoring Sheet

Overall Presentation of

Portfolio

1

2

3

4


Philosophy Link:

Resume Link:

Self-Assessment Link:


Standard Score Standard 1

Standard 2

Standard 3

Standard 4

Standard 5

Standard 6

Standard 7

Standard 8

Standard 9

Standard 10

Total Score

Average

TEACHER WORK SAMPLE Overview: The Teacher Work Sample (TWS) assignment requires candidates to design and teach an effective sequence of lessons, employ meaningful classroom assessments, and analyze and reflect on the experiences. The purpose of this assignment is to evaluate the degree of impact on student learning. The Teacher Work Sample is evaluated by the Professor of Record for student teaching using a standardized rubric. A rating of 4 indicates a meeting of targeted expectations on the criteria, a rating of 3 indicates an acceptable evidence of meeting the criteria, a rating of 2 indicates developing evidence toward expectations, and a score of 1 indicates unacceptable evidence toward the criteria. Student Directions: (Found in the Student Teaching Handbook)






Marymount University’s Teacher Work Sample has been adapted from the work of Emporia State University, The Renaissance Partnership for Improving Teacher Quality Project, the Louisiana Department of Education, and Western Oregon University Further Directions and Explanation of TWS Learning Goals and Objectives - List and describe all the general goals for this series of lessons in this instructional sequence. Objectives or goals should include outcomes representing a range from knowledge through evaluation (i.e. Bloom's Taxonomy). Be sure to include the knowledge, skills, and reasoning ability students will gain if your learning goals are met and the standards (VA SOLs or other curriculum standards) from which these goals and objectives are based. Remember, general objectives should be:









Achievement: overall 3 below, 17 at grade level, 5 above grade level

Lessons #2, 3, 6, &7

more time









B. Do you believe the post assessment results accurately reflect the degree of learning students demonstrated during daily classroom activities? Explain. C. What can be done to help students who did not accomplish/master the objectives? Self-Evaluation and Reflection A. What did you learn about yourself as a teacher? B. What worked well and what did not? C. Why were students successful? And why did students struggle? D. What would you do differently next time? E. What new knowledge and skills should you acquire to become more effective and how will you do this? F. How has this teacher work sample helped you learn about teaching?

Supportive Evidence




Unacceptable (1)

Developing (2)

Acceptable (3)

Target (4)




Data shows knowledge of: students’ characteristics students’ skills school and community Adaptations are: appropriate

specific tied to instruction


Pre/post assessment plans are: clearly stated detailed aligned with each objectives aligned with instruction varied













of teaching











2nd



RECOMMENDATION:







Narrative Report:

____________________________ ____________ _____________________________ ___________


Effective Practitioner, the Student Teacher/Intern: STUDENT TEACHING/INTERN SUMMARY REPORT

Does Not Demonstrate Acceptable Behaviors

1

Demonstrates Developing Behaviors

2

Demonstrates Acceptable Behaviors

3

Demonstrates Targeted Behaviors

4

Overall Rating

Employs effective planning processes to meet curriculum goals and objectives for local, state, and national standards.

Lesson plans and units are submitted late or are vague and usually require substantial revisions. Presentations tend to be aimless and disoriented. Lessons lack clarity and direction. Students tend to be confused about expectations.

Plans are usually prepared on time and include necessary components. Procedural emphasis is on teacher behavior, not student involvement. Presentations are basically clear but stand as individual entities. Little diversity in instructional strategies. Goals and objectives are not shared with students.

Clear and concise plans are prepared regularly. Instructional procedures are designed to include most learners. Plans identify VA's SOLs or school’s POSs. Presentations fit sequence of instruction well. Students understand explanations and directions. Employs some variety of instructional methods.

Planning is done in advance & teacher sets expectations for student learning. Provisions for individual and group differences and interests are evident. Learning experiences & materials are varied and appropriate for the students, discipline, and VA's SOLs or POSs.

Writes and implements lesson plans that include strategies for differentiation based on students’ prior knowledge and student needs.

Does not plan or provide for differentiation of instruction or assessment. Curriculum standards are not addressed.

Accommodates for some special populations, but not consistently. Curriculum standards are identified only for formal observations.

Modifies materials and/or instruction to accommodate LD, ESL, GT, and other special classroom populations. Individual lessons are tied to school system’s stated curriculum.

Uses a wide variety of strategies for differentiation of instruction consistently providing multiple accommodations for all student populations. Long range planning goals and objectives are connected to state and local standards.

Implements instructional sequences that clearly convey content and expectations while employing a variety of instructional methods and strategies that differentiates instruction and assessment to meet the needs of all students.

Fails to perceive relationship between pupil progress and instructional procedures. Students receive little or no feedback on their progress. Makes little use of evaluation techniques.

Primarily relies on evaluation techniques of cooperating teacher. Pupil progress usually discussed briefly in terms of general goals. Seldom modifies instruction on basis of pupil performance.

Evaluates students on specific objectives and builds on evaluation techniques of cooperating teacher. Provides systematic feedback to students and alters instruction when warranted.

Uses various evaluation techniques on a continuous basis to determine pupil progress toward general goals and specific objectives. Adjusts instructional procedures as needed. Encourages student self assessment/evaluation.

As an Effective Practitioner, the Student Teacher/Intern: STUDENT TEACHING/INTERN SUMMARY REPORT CONTINUED:


1


2


3


4

Overall Rating

Applies individual and group behavior strategies to create an organized learning environment that encourages positive social interaction, active engagement in learning, and self motivation and employ appropriate behavioral interventions.

Classroom is chaotic and disorganized. Permits distractions and misbehavior to continue. Expectations seem to be vague and known only to student teacher. Expects others to handle discipline problems.

Materials and time are sufficiently organized most of the time. Normally responds to classroom problems and student needs. Has a general idea of acceptable classroom conduct, but tends to over rely on the use of discipline techniques.

Classroom climate positive with most students on task. Materials and time are adequately organized. Is capable of handling most disruptions and uses overt or discipline techniques only as a last resort.

Management of time and materials help provide a positive learning environment. Clearly communicates expectations and works with students to establish rules. Treats all students with respect. Positive reinforcement and a variety of non-punitive measures are employed to ensure a productive and positive classroom environment.

Conveys ideas clearly and sufficiently on the oral and written levels and use technology to enhance instruction and the learning experience.

Main ideas usually presented in confusing manner and directions are unclear. Questions are ambiguous or too difficult. Makes errors in spelling, writing, and speaking. Use of non-standard English is apparent.

Communication of ideas is occasionally hampered by vocabulary not understood by students or by lack of examples. Directions frequently need elaboration for clarity. Verbal and written skills are acceptable.

Transmits key ideas verbally although other means used occasionally. Students are seldom confused about responsibilities. Good questioning strategies are used. Some use of technology is evident in classroom instruction and communication.

Is able to convey ideas clearly succinctly in all forms. Skillfully uses a variety of communication modes, including effective questioning. Provides an outstanding model of oral and written expression. Technology is incorporated as appropriate

Communicates effectively with the educational community (parents/guardians, school

Technology is not Minimal or no contact with parents and community and/or communication is confusing or

Minimal or slow response with parents and community and/or communication is

Communication with parents and community is adequate and seldom confusing. Technology is

Communication is clear, appropriate, and punctual. Technology is used in a variety of formats to

support staff, educational community) and use technology to enhance those communications. use a variety formal and informal assessment techniques effectively in order to evaluate student learning gains and use assessment data to guide instruction and support individual growth.

ambiguous. Technology is not used or used ineffectively.

Little or no formal or informal assessment is used and/or assessment data is not used to guide instruction or support students’ growth. Also, inappropriate assessment is included.

ambiguous. Technology is not used or used ineffectively.

Formal and informal assessment is seldom used and/or assessment data is seldom used to guide instruction or support students’ growth. Lack of variety in assessment techniques.

sometimes used as a communication tool.

Formal and informal assessment is used to guide instruction. A few assessment techniques are employed.

enhance and sustain communication. A variety of formal and informal assessment techniques are utilized to effectively evaluate student learning gains. Assessment data is regularly used to guide instruction and support individual growth.

Effective Practitioner, the Student Teacher/Intern: Average _____________________ STUDENT TEACHING/INTERN SUMMARY

REPORT CONTINUED:



1


2


3


4

Overall Rating

demonstrates high moral and ethical behaviors (eg. fairness, integrity, honesty, respect, and responsibility) that permeate all educational work and relations within the school setting.

Must be reminded of school and university policies regarding responsibilities. Little or disrespectful contact with parents, school personnel, and community.

Occasionally does not follow school and university policies. Demonstrates minimal regard for culture and values of students, parents, and community. Contacts with school community impersonal.

Follows code of conduct and policies established by school, university, and profession. Shows an appreciation and respect for the culture and values of school community.

Actions are guided by careful consideration of what is best for individual students. Works to be part of the school and community and actively works to better the lives of students.

Establishes a wholesome relationship with each individual student that fosters mutual respect and exhibits an effective, caring attitude

Has difficulty establishing positive relationship with students. Classroom environment is stifling or chaotic.

Teacher-pupil relations tend to be impersonal and formal.

Is courteous and respectful of students and their families. Has good rapport with all students.

Students and families are aware of respect and concern. Works to create a community of learners in the classroom where students show concern and respect for peers.

Demonstrates self-control and promote a positive emotional climate that provides a role model for their students' total behavior

Frequently loses control and expresses anger or frustrations in the classroom, to parents, or in the school community.

Occasionally expresses anger and frustrations in the classroom, to parents, or to the school community.

Maintains a calm and kind manner when dealing with students and parents and the school community.

Influences students to exhibit positive behaviors that reduce tension and stress in the classroom. Works to establish a classroom environment that stimulates curiosity and a desire to learn.

Exemplifies a dedication to teaching, an appreciation of diversity, a respect for individual backgrounds and talents, and positive relationship toward integration and inclusiveness.

Appears disinterested and insensitive to pupil's personal or learning.

Students’ needs and interests are seldom taken into account. Classroom environment is teacher oriented.

Is positive about experiences with students. Classroom environment is pleasant, conducive to learning, and student oriented.

Enthusiasm and joy in teaching is evident. Individual pupil differences are respected. Is friendly, concerned, and highly interested in pupil's welfare but maintains a professional status.


1


2


3


4

Overall Rating


Subject matter competence inadequate. Conveys misinformation to students.

Content knowledge sufficient to teach grade level. Seldom extends beyond the textbook. Uses a separate, fragmented curriculum.

Above average understanding of subject matter. Researches areas as needed. Integrates curriculum and ties content to world events when appropriate.

Exceptional background in subject matter. Seeks and uses supplementary information often. Connects content with students' life and with prior knowledge and across the curriculum.

Demonstrates perceptive and analytical abilities that impact student learning and development

Is unable to determine the forces that impact student learning

Recognizes some issues and forces that contribute to student learning, but does not adjust teaching behaviors to accommodate

Identifies forces inside and outside the classroom that impacts student learning and works to optimize the learning environment.

Analyzes the classroom environment and adapts teaching behavior to best meet individual student strengths and needs.

Reflects on classroom context, student learning, & individual student differences to support intellectual, social, and personal growth for all students.

Reflections limited to assigned tasks and show little thought.

Reflection limited to narrative descriptions or judgmental statements. Interprets classroom achievement and behavior in general terms.

Written and oral reflections are frequent and show careful and deliberate thought. Focus of reflection is on individual lesson or incidents.

Reflection is consistently evident. Focuses on interpretation and analysis of student data. Reflection is incorporated into teaching practices.

Demonstrates effective problem solving skills that generate multiple solutions and evaluate potential and actual outcomes for practical decision-making.

Ignores problems that occur in the classroom.

Must seek help for most problems that occur in the classroom. Solutions are limited to standard practices and policies.

Handles most problems of the classroom without help. Is able to evaluate effectiveness of decisions and make adjustments to teaching practices.

Anticipates many classroom problems and creatively tries to prevent problems. Seeks outside help when needed. Decisions based on best interest of students.

As a Critical Thinker, the Student Teacher/Intern: Average

Seeks a variety of avenues that extend beyond the minimum for professional development and takes responsibility for development & self-reflection.

No outside professional development activities or participation in school or community activities.

Limited participation in school or community’s professional growth activities.

Active participation in professional development activities of the school. Member of professional & community organizations.

Active participation in school, community, and professional organizations. Acts upon new information and skills gained from professional development.

Academic Year : 2011-2012 Program: Graduate Teacher Education




Cooperating Teacher Instructions Formative Assessment - Student teachers need frequent verbal and written feedback about their teaching behaviors. It is important that they know which of their teaching behaviors had positive impact on the classroom and which of their teaching behaviors had negative impact on the classroom. They also need your help learning to reflect on their teaching behaviors and to independently assess themselves. Many cooperating teachers keep a small notebook to jot down feedback and questions for the student teacher while they are teaching.











Student Teacher/Intern: School: Grade/Subject Area: Mid-Term ____ Final _____ TB = Demonstrates Targeted professional Behaviors AB = Demonstrates Acceptable professional Behaviors DB = Demonstrates Developing professional Behaviors N = Does Not demonstrate acceptable behaviors NA = Not applicable at present time



2. Establishes objectives appropriate to the level(s) of the students and the school’s curriculum guidelines and effectively implements instruction.

3. Uses a variety of learning activities and teaching strategies to meet individual and group needs.

4. Demonstrates assessment/diagnostic skills. Uses a variety of evaluative techniques appropriate to stated objectives.



6. Creates a learning climate that encourages active engagement in learning and self-motivation.














3. Analyzes student achievement and behaviors and makes adjustments to increase student success and motivation.

4. Reflects on personal teaching behaviors, classroom context and student differences to support growth for all students.




As a Fellow Teacher, the Student Teacher/Intern: TB AB DB N NA








Narrative Report:

STUDENT LEARNING ASSESSMENT REPORT SUBMITTED BY: SHANNON MELIDEO DATE: OCTOBER 1, 2012 BRIEFLY DESCRIBE WHERE AND HOW ARE DATA AND DOCUMENTS USED TO GENERATE THIS REPORT BEING STORED: Summative Data are collected each semester from the following: Capstone Experience: Student Teaching Seminar (sections - ED 460, ED 460E, ED 460S) for the Student Learning Assessment Report. This data is compiled in the Education Database on the “S” drive of the School of Education and Human Services in the Education folder under Assessment. The database is managed by the Clinical Experiences Coordinator for Education, Ms. Tamala Amissah and is password controlled. Only Dr. Shannon Melideo, the Chair of the Department, Dr. Alice Young, the Associate Dean of the SEHS, and Ms. Amissah have access. Ms. Amissah is responsible for the compilation of reports and to aid in the analysis of the data collected.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Teacher Education on the undergraduate level at Marymount University is an initial licensure program for persons who wish to enter the teaching profession after they have completed an undergraduate degree. The student learning outcomes are the same for all graduate teacher education students whether they are seeking to become teachers in the elementary (PK-6), secondary (6-12 in content areas of art, English, mathematics, history/social studies) or special education (General Curriculum K-12). When exiting (graduating) our programs, students are expected to effectively enter the classroom and assume all the duties of a full time teacher. The assessment system for the Teacher Education Programs in the Education Department plays an essential role, not only for internal accountability but also for the requirements of our accrediting body, the National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE), and to satisfy the requirements of our programs to maintain approval by the Virginia Department of Education. We gather data at an entry level by requiring basic skills testing via the PRAXIS I MATH and Virginia Communication and Language Assessment (VCLA) scores, and a minimum GPA. We focus the gathering of formative assessment data through our “critical assignments”. Each program (elementary, secondary, and Special Education) has identified 5 “critical assignments” that are part of the normal curriculum to evaluate, not only for the course, but in light of nationally accepted new teacher standards. This assessment data is considered developmental and it is not part of the data used for this institutional assessment report. Finally, we focus the gathering of summative assessment data on the products and evaluations of the capstone experience: Student Teaching Seminar. Since the ultimate outcome for teacher education students is their performance in the classroom, all data gathered for determining student learning outcomes is derived from the data collected during student teaching . Since we believe that our entry data and formative assessment data are developmental in nature, we use the summative data gathered during student teaching to make judgments about students and their ability to meet the Outcome Statements that have been set by the Department. The Outcomes Statements support the conceptual framework of the Teacher Education Program and have been collaboratively developed by full-time faculty, University supervisors, and other stakeholders in teacher education systems.






2009-2010 2012-2013

use a variety of problem solving strategies to meet the needs of their students 2009-2010 2012-2013


pedagogy

2005-2006 2012-2013


pedagogical methods

2007-2008 2013-2014



2008-2009 2013-2014

Describe how the program’s outcomes support Marymount’s Mission, Strategic Plan, and relevant school plan: The following graphic display shows how the Student Learning Outcomes support the Mission, the University Strategic Plan, and the School of Education and Human Services Strategic Plan. There are real and logical connections between all four levels.

Marymount University’s Mission: Marymount University is an independent Catholic university that emphasizes academic

excellence at the undergraduate and graduate levels. Committed to the liberal arts tradition, the University combines a foundation in

the arts and sciences with career preparation and opportunities for personal and professional development. Marymount is a student-

centered learning community that values diversity and focuses on the education of the whole person, promoting the intellectual,

spiritual, and moral growth of each individual. Scholarship, leadership, service, and ethics are hallmarks of a Marymount education.

University

Strategic

Plan

Enhancing the intellectual experience Capitalizing on

the region’s rich

resources

Building

community

Honoring the values

and traditions of

Marymount’s Catholic

heritage

School

Strategic

Plan

A. Promote inquiry-based learning

A. Build and

enhance academic

programs that align

with the region’s

history, culture, and

economy

D. Use the internet

and other

technologies

effectively to

connect (with each

other)

A. Emphasize student’s

intellectual, spiritual, and

moral growth through the

curriculum

Student

Learning

Outcomes

make

instructional

decisions

based on

student

behavior, the

context of the

classroom,

and

assessment

data

use a

variety of

problem

solving

strategies

to meet the

needs of

their

students

Demon-

strate a

thorough

under-

standing

of

content,

human

develop-

ment, and

pedagogy

effectively

implement

instruction

and

assessment

with

appro-

priate

pedagog-

ical

methods

exhibit a love of teaching,

appreciation of diversity,

and respect for all

persons in the educational

setting



Portfolio Evaluations: The Professional Teaching Portfolio documents the student teacher’s professional achievements and abilities as a teacher. Evidence for the Portfolio may come from course work, documents from the student teaching experience, or documents from other professionally related experiences. Student teachers indicate on the rubric the evidence that supports each standard. The Portfolio Rubric is based on the Interstate Teachers Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) standards that have wide acceptance in the professional community. All full time faculty members participate in the portfolio evaluation system. Each fall an inter-rater reliability study is completed to help ensure reliability of evaluation.

Teacher Work Sample: The Teacher Work Sample (TWS) assignment requires candidates to pre-assess students, make data-based instructional decisions to design and teach an effective sequence of lessons, employ meaningful classroom post-assessments, analyze, and reflect on the experiences. The purpose of this assignment is to evaluate the degree of impact on student learning. The Teacher Work Sample is evaluated by the full-time faculty using a standardized rubric.




1. The Undergraduate Teacher Licensure Advisory Board, which consists of faculty from the Education Department, Arts and Sciences, external education professionals, and alumni met in spring 2012. The Advisory Board discussed the low enrollment of students in the secondary education programs. The Board also noticed a slight increase in all the areas. Recruitment was discussed. The Art Ed program was planned for a program revision. 2. The Education Department reviewed course sequencing and will continue to do so every year. In planning the course schedule the department chair made sure there were at least 3 courses available to each program so that graduate students could attend full time is so desired.

3. The department currently has a weekend cohort, a PDS, and an online program. Frontloading the classroom management course was a significant change for all main campus programs in 2011-2012. 4. A faculty member with expertise in instructional technology was hired in 2011-2012. This education faculty member provided technology training last year for faculty and will continue to do so in 2012-2013 for faculty and students. The Rowley Hall renovations have enabled faculty to teach in classrooms with instructional technology. The department will examine present technologies in the courses. 5. A partnership breakfast was held in June 2012 to strengthen partnerships with private, public, and parochial schools and a meeting was planned for Fall 2012 to further develop a partnership with the Arlington Dioceses schools. Provide a response to last year’s University Assessment Committee review of the program’s learning assessment report: (List each recommendation and provide a specific response to each).


Outcome and Past Assessment Learning Outcome 1: As effective practitioners, graduates will make instructional decisions based on student behavior, the context of the classroom, and assessment data Is this outcome being reexamined? X Yes No When this learning outcome was examined in 2010, overall students performed at targeted levels. No changes have been made that would impact the results of this outcome.

Assessment Activity




population



deemed acceptable. Student learning is measured by the analysis of Standard 8 of the Student Teaching Portfolio. This is a Direct Measure.

Portfolio Standard Defined: The teacher understands and uses formal and informal assessment strategies to evaluate and ensure the continuous intellectual, social, and physical development of his/her learners Acceptable Level: Targeted Portfolio Ratings for Assessment of Student Learning (Standard 8) will be at a targeted aggregated mean of 3.5 out of a possible 4. However, a rating of 3 out of 4 is considered “Acceptable” on the rubric.


Total All Programs

Std. 8

SPED n= 1 2.5

PK-6 n= 17

3.38

SEC n= 3 3.33

Total n = 21 3.33


2) The aggregate mean for STD 8 in PK-6, and SEC were met at the acceptable level. However, one student in the SPED program did not meet the “Acceptable” rate target.

Student learning is measured by the total score of the Teacher Work Sample, Part 5 - Analysis of learning, and Part 6 – Reflections. These are Direct Measures.

Standard Defined: The Teacher Work Sample is a comprehensive assignment that shows the teacher candidate’s ability to analyze content, behavior, and data for instructional decision making. Therefore an overall average is used in addition to two sub-criteria that directly measure the teacher candidate’s deeper analysis of the complete teaching and learning cycle. Acceptable Level: Teacher Work Sample (TWS) ratings will be at an aggregated mean of 3.5 out of a possible 4 for the Total Score and in Criteria Areas: Analysis of Learning and Reflections. A rating of 3 out of 4 is considered “Acceptable” on the rubric


Teacher Work Sample

Total Score

Criteria Area: Analysis of learning

Critical Area: Reflections

SPED n= 1

3.36 2.50 3.53

PK-6 n= 17

3 3.24 4

Sec n= 3

3.51 3.3 4

Total n = 21

3.38 3.21 3.62

1) Teacher candidates per licensure program were averaged as groups and then as a total n for the 2011-2012 academic year (which includes students’ TWS scores from 2 semesters). 2) All of the 21 students met the targeted score of 3.5 or above on the Criteria Area: Reflections. Scores for the sub-criteria: analysis of learning and the overall rating showed a slight decrease in the ratings. While the teacher candidates didn’t seem to struggle with reflections about the TWS project they did seem to have more difficulty with analyzing learning.

Student learning is measured by the analysis of Cooperating Teacher (CT) Evaluation criteria: Critical Thinker #3. This is an Indirect Measure.

Standard Defined: The teacher candidate analyzes student achievement and behaviors and makes adjustments to increase student success and motivation. Acceptable Level: Aggregated ratings from Cooperating Teacher Evaluations on criteria statements dealing with analysis that impact teaching will be at a targeted score of 3.5 for all candidates. However, a rating of 3 out of 4 is considered “Acceptable” on the rubric. .


Criteria Statement from CT Evaluation Instrument: Analyzes student achievement and behaviors and makes adjustments to increase student success and motivation )

SPED n= 1

4.00

PK-6 n= 17

3.82

Sec n= 3

4.00

Total n = 21

3.86



Student learning is measured by the University Supervisor (US) Evaluation criteria: Critical Thinker #2. This is an Indirect Measure.

Standard Defined: The teacher candidate will demonstrate their perceptive and analytical abilities that impact student learning and development. Acceptable Level: Aggregated ratings from University Supervisors’ evaluations on criteria statements that impact student learning and development will be at 3.5 or higher for all candidates. A rating of 3 out of 4 is considered “Acceptable” on the rubric.


Criteria Statement from US Evaluation Instrument: Will demonstrate their perceptive and analytical abilities that impact student learning and development

SPED n= 1

3.00

PK-6 n= 17

3.76

Sec n= 3

4.00

Total n = 21

3.90


2) All programs rated above the targeted mean score on this criteria statement with the exception of one student in SPED. Twenty out of Twenty-one students scored high on this criteria.


Extent this Learning Outcome has been achieved by students (Use both direct and indirect measure results): Based on both the direct and indirect measure results, this learning outcome # 1 was achieved at the “acceptable” level by all student teachers and by most at the “targeted” level. Since student teachers are developing from pre-service teachers to potential in-service teachers we are satisfied with these results. While all teacher candidates have completed assignments and field experiences throughout their programs that related to this learning outcome, for most student teachers, this is the first time in their programs that they are expected to be fully responsible for instruction and assessment in a classroom. Program strengths and opportunities for improvement relative to assessment of outcome:

1) Strengths - As indicated by the cooperating teacher and the university supervisor, student teachers appear to demonstrate their analytical skills in the classroom. The ratings on both of these indirect measures were above the target for all groups of student teachers. Additionally, the reflectivity area of the Teacher Work Sample indicated a high level of competency for this

direct measure. Reflectivity on the Teacher Work Sample focuses on the student teacher’s ability to analysis his or her own behaviors and how those influenced the achievement of his or her pupils.

2) Opportunity for improvement - The lowest indicator for analysis is on the Teacher Work Sample in the area of “Analysis”. This indicator focuses on the student teacher’s ability to view learning gains for his or her individual pupils. Learning gains is the numerical difference between a pre-assessment score and post assessment scores. Student teachers are charged to offer a clear and accurate presentation of learning gains for all students and subgroups, explains learning gains or lack thereof and to offer specific remediation based on this analysis.


The department will conduct a review of the curriculum to determine the opportunities students have to work with data analysis prior to student teaching. Each program (ESL, PK-6, SPED, and SEC) will choose two courses that specifically provide instruction and practice interpretation and analysis of student learning gains analysis.

During the student teaching seminar that focuses on the Teacher Work Sample assignment, a model of a “targeted” analysis will be provided for each program.

More time will be spent during student teaching seminar to instruct students on the analysis of student gains.

Outcome and Past Assessment Learning Outcome 2: As critical thinkers, graduates will be able to use a variety of problem solving strategies to meet the needs of their students Is this outcome being reexamined? X Yes No

If yes, give a brief summary of previous results (including trends) and any changes made to the program. When this Learning Outcome was assessed for the 2009-2010 academic year, all students met the “Acceptable” rating or were above the targeted rating on both the direct and indirect measure results. No particular changes have been made that address this learning outcome.

Assessment Activity








Standard Defined: The Teacher Candidate uses Multiple Instructional Strategies to encourage students’ development of critical thinking, problem solving and performance skills Acceptable Level: Aggregated ratings on the portfolio standards are set at 3.5 or higher for all candidates. A rating of 3 out of 4 is considered “Acceptable” on the rubric

Collection: Full-time faculty members score full portfolios at the end of the fall and spring semesters. The scores are averaged per student, then by licensure program, and the total group. Portfolio Standard #4 Uses Multiple Instructional Strategies to encourage students’ development of critical thinking, problem solving and performance skills

SPED n= 1 3.00

PK-6 n= 17

3.56

SEC n= 3 3.33

Total n = 21 3.50


2) The PK-6 teacher candidates met the targeted mean level on this standard and the SPED and SEC students met the acceptable rating. All 21 teacher candidates met the targeted aggregated mean.

Student learning is measured by the total score of the Teacher Work Sample, Part #5. This is a Direct Measure.

Standard Defined: The Teacher Candidate uses a variety of instructional methods


1) Teacher candidates per licensure program were averaged as groups and then as a total n for the 2011-2012 academic year

Acceptable Level: Teacher Work Sample ratings will be at a targeted aggregated mean of 3.5 out of a possible 4 for all candidates on Criteria Statement #5- Instructional Design. However, a rating of 3 out of 4 is considered “Acceptable” on the rubric

Teacher Work Sample Criteria Area: Uses a variety of instructional methods

SPED n= 1 2.5

PK-6 n= 17 3.56

SEC n= 3 3.33

Total n = 21 3.24

(which includes students’ TWS scores from 2 semesters). 2) PK-6 met the targeted mean for this standard. The SEC programs still achieved a mean score at the acceptable level. One student in the SPED program had a score below the acceptable range.

Student learning is measured by the analysis of Cooperating Teacher (CT) Evaluation criteria: Critical Thinker #5 and Effective Practitioner #3. This is an Indirect Measure.

Standards Defined: The Teacher Candidate demonstrates effective problem solving and decision making strategies. The Teacher Candidate uses a variety of learning activities and teaching strategies to meet individual and group needs. Acceptable Level: Aggregated ratings from Cooperating Teacher Evaluations on criteria statements dealing with candidates ability problem solve and plan instruction for individual needs (the biggest problem facing teachers) will be targeted at 3.5 or higher for all exiting candidates However, a rating of 3 out of 4 is considered



Demon-strates effective problem solving and decision making strategies

Uses a variety of learning activities and teaching strategies to meet individual and group needs

SPED n= 1 4.00 4.00

PK-6 n= 17 3.88 3.82

SEC n= 3 4.00 4.00

Total n = 21 3.86 3.82


2) All programs scored above the targeted mean for both criteria.

“Acceptable” on the rubric.


Standard Defined: The Teacher Candidate demonstrates effective problem solving skills that generate multiple solutions while evaluating potential and actual outcomes for practical decision-making. Acceptable Level: Aggregated ratings from University Supervisors’ evaluations on criteria statements dealing with candidates’ ability to demonstrate effective problem solving skills that generate multiple solutions will be targeted at 3.5 or higher for all exiting candidates. However, a rating of 3 out of 4 is considered “Acceptable” on the rubric.



demonstrates effective problem solving skills that generate multiple solutions while evaluating potential and actual outcomes for practical decision-making

SPED n= 1 3.00

PK-6 n= 17

3.94

Sec n= 3 4.00

Total n = 21 3.45

1) University Supervisor evaluation criteria evaluation was analyzed by licensure program and as a total n for the 2011-2012 academic year (which includes University Supervisor rating scores from 2 semesters).

2) ESL, PK-6, and SEC rated above the targeted mean score on this criteria statement. While SPED was below the target mean rating, the students’ mean scores still fell within the acceptable range.


Extent this Learning Outcome has been achieved by students (Use both direct and indirect measure results): Based on both the direct and indirect measure results, this learning outcome # 2 was achieved at the “acceptable” level by 20/21 student teachers and by most at the “targeted” level. Since student teachers are developing from pre-service teachers to potential in-service teachers we are satisfied with these results. While all teacher candidates have completed assignments and field experiences throughout their programs that related to this learning outcome, for most student teachers, this is the first time in their programs that they are expected to be fully responsible for instruction and assessment in a classroom.

Program strengths and opportunities for improvement relative to assessment of outcome: Strengths: According to the feedback given by cooperating teachers and university supervisors who observe and work with the student teachers in the classroom, the student teachers are able to demonstrate problem solving strategies and decision making competencies while in the most important arena - the classroom. Opportunities for improvement: The direct measure, Teacher Work Sample, requires that student teachers plan and implement instruction based on data that they collect from the context of the classroom and pre-assessment of planned objectives. This means that they must look at the challenges of the classroom before and as they teach. Student teachers may not be adequately explaining or describing these measures and their decisions in the written document that is the Teacher Work Sample. Twenty out of twenty-one students did meet the acceptable level of performance. Discuss planned curricular or program improvements for this year based on assessment of outcome:

The faculty teaching ED 357 (Social Studies Methods and the Creative Arts) for the PK-6 students, ED327S (Curriculum Design: Secondary Education) for all Secondary Students , and ED 323 (Literacy Instruction: Diagnosis and Corrective Strategies) for Special Education Students will focus on providing instruction and experiences for students that help them plan and implement instruction based on data that they collect from the context of the classroom and pre-assessment of planned objectives.

Student teachers will be given model Teacher Work Samples to provide guidance in writing better instructional plans and goals.

Outcome and Past Assessment Learning Outcome 3: As critical thinkers, graduates will demonstrate a thorough understanding of content, human development, and pedagogy Is this outcome being reexamined? X Yes No


This learning outcome has been revised since the time it was examined. In 2005-2006 the outcome only included a thorough understanding of content. When the Education Learning Outcomes were revised in 2010, there was a collapsing of several outcomes and the result was a broadening of this particular one to include knowledge of human development and pedagogy.

Assessment Activity



indirect.

Performance Standard Define and explain acceptable level

of student performance.


Analysis 1) Describe the

analysis process. 2) Present the findings

of the analysis including the numbers



Standard Defined: The Teacher Candidate understands the central concepts, tools of inquiry, and structures of the discipline(s) he or she teaches and can create learning experiences that make these aspects of subject matter meaningful for students. Acceptable Level: Aggregated ratings on the portfolio standards are set at 3.5 or higher for all candidates. A rating of 3 out of 4 is considered “Acceptable” on the rubric


SPED n= 1

3.00

PK-6 n= 17

3.41

Sec n= 3

3.00

Total n = 21

3.33


2) All programs met the acceptable level with none in the targeted aggregated mean.

Student learning is measured by the analysis of Cooperating Teacher (CT) Evaluation criteria: Critical Thinker and Effective Practitioner. These are an Indirect Measures.

Standards Defined: The Teacher Candidate demonstrates knowledge of the concepts and skills of subject matter and Connect content with students’ lives, prior knowledge, and experience. Acceptable Level: Aggregated ratings from Cooperating Teacher Evaluations on criteria statements dealing with candidates ability problem solve and plan instruction for individual needs (the biggest problem facing teachers) will be targeted at 3.5 or higher for all exiting candidates However, a rating of 3 out of 4 is considered “Acceptable” on the rubric



Demonstrates knowledge of the concepts and skills of subject matter

Connect content with students’ lives, prior knowledge, and experience

SPED n= 1 4.00 4.00

PK-6 n= 17

3.76 3.88

Sec n= 3 4.00 4.00

Total n = 21 3.81 3.90


2) All teacher candidates scored higher than the targeted mean for Critical Thinker.


A Standard Defined: The Teacher Candidate demonstrates exceptional knowledge of the concepts, tools of inquiry, & structures of subject matter with the ability to connect content to students' life, prior knowledge, and experience. Acceptable Level: Aggregated ratings from University Supervisors’ evaluations on criteria statements dealing with candidates’ ability to demonstrate effective




SPED n= 1 2.00

PK-6 n= 17

3.82

Sec n= 3 4.00

Total n = 21 3.95

1) University Supervisor evaluation criteria was analyzed by licensure program and as a total n for the 2011-2012 academic year (which includes University Supervisor rating scores from 2 semesters).

2) All programs rated above the targeted mean

problem solving skills that generate multiple solutions will be targeted at 3.5 or higher for all exiting candidates. However, a rating of 3 out of 4 is considered “Acceptable” on the rubric ggregated ratings from University Supervisors’ evaluations on criteria statements dealing with candidates’ knowledge of subject matter and their ability to share that content with their students will be targeted at 3.5 or higher for all exiting candidates. However, a rating of 3 out of 4 is considered “Acceptable” on the rubric

score on this criteria statement with the exception of one teacher candidate in the SPED program. This student’s score did not meet the acceptable range.

Interpretation of Results Extent this Learning Outcome has been achieved by students (Use both direct and indirect measure results): Based on both the direct and indirect measure results, this learning outcome # 3 was achieved at the “acceptable” level by 20/21 student teachers and by most at the “targeted” level. Since student teachers are developing from pre-service teachers to potential in-service teachers we are satisfied with these results. While all teacher candidates have completed assignments and field experiences throughout their programs that related to this learning outcome, for most student teachers, this is the first time in their programs that they are expected to be fully responsible for instruction and assessment in a classroom.

Program strengths and opportunities for improvement relative to assessment of outcome: Strengths: Again while working in the field, student teachers demonstrate to their cooperating teachers their knowledge of content, human development and pedagogy. All aggregate scores for student teachers in these areas from those who are watching them work in the classroom are above the target set by the program.

Opportunities for improvement: One Special Education major performed below the acceptable range. This student was coached and improved his/her work by the completion of the semester. The Secondary students seemed to also struggle with demonstrating knowledge of content. Discuss planned curricular or program improvements for this year based on assessment of outcome:

Faculty involved with helping students develop their Professional Portfolio will create a listing of possible pieces of evidence that a student teacher may have to support knowledge of human development.

At a department meeting, faculty (all who rate Professional Portfolios) will discuss appropriate for students to present that will document knowledge of content for their area.





b. An Electronic Portfolio is required in Powerpoint (a slide for each standard)

c. Be selective on what is included d. Be sure what you include is YOUR work – not just random copies e. Keep it easy to navigate

II. Standards









IV. Organization

a. Hyperlink each document to the template and ensure that all links work properly b. Check spelling throughout c. Be sure each standard includes two pieces of evidence d. You may reference a third piece of evidence to support each standard

e. You are required to have your e-portfolio peer reviewed with reviewer’s name & email address listed V. Submission



VI. Appendixes

a. Resume (one page) b. Philosophy of Education (two pages) c. Self-assessment

VII. Evaluation







1 2 3 4





this standard.





this standard.





this standard.



evidence that


achievement of this

standard.

Link 1:

Purpose:

Link 2:

Purpose:

Rater Comments:





experiences.

1 2 3 4





this standard.





this standard.





this standard.



evidence that


achievement of this

standard.

Link 1:

Purpose:

Link 2:

Purpose:

Rater Comments:



1 2 3 4





this standard.





this standard.





this standard.



evidence that


achievement of this

standard.

Link 1:

Purpose:

Link 2:

Purpose:

Rater Comments:



meaningful ways.

1 2 3 4





this standard.





this standard.





this standard.



evidence that


achievement of this

standard.

Link 1:

Purpose:

Link 2:

Purpose:

Rater Comments:



motivation.

1 2 3 4





this standard.





this standard.





this standard.



evidence that


achievement of this

standard.

Link 1:

Purpose:

Link 2:

Purpose:

Rater Comments:



issues.

1 2 3 4





this standard.





this standard.





this standard.



evidence that


achievement of this

standard.

Link 1:

Purpose:

Link 2:

Purpose:

Rater Comments:




1 2 3 4





this standard.





this standard.





this standard.



evidence that


achievement of this

standard.

Link 1:

Purpose:

Link 2:

Purpose:

Rater Comments:




1 2 3 4





this standard.





this standard.





this standard.



evidence that


achievement of this

standard.

Link 1:

Purpose:

Link 2:

Purpose:

Rater Comments

Overall

Presentation of

Portfolio

1

2

3

4


Philosophy Link:

Resume Link:

Self-Assessment

Link:


Standard Score

Standard 1

Standard 2

Standard 3

Standard 4

Standard 5

Standard 6

Standard 7

Standard 8

Standard 9

Standard 10

Total Score

Average







Marymount University’s Teacher Work Sample has been adapted from the work of Emporia State University, The Renaissance Partnership for Improving Teacher Quality Project, the Louisiana Department of Education, and Western Oregon University

Further Directions and Explanation of TWS Learning Goals and Objectives - List and describe all the general goals for this series of lessons in this instructional sequence. Objectives or goals should include outcomes representing a range from knowledge through evaluation (i.e. Bloom's Taxonomy). Be sure to include the knowledge, skills, and reasoning ability students will gain if your learning goals are met and the standards (VA SOLs or other curriculum standards) from which these goals and objectives are based. Remember, general objectives should be:










Lessons #2, 3, 6, &7



Supportive Evidence




Unacceptable (1)

Developing (2)

Acceptable (3)

Target (4)






Pre/post assessment plans are: clearly stated detailed aligned with each objectives aligned with instruction

varied













of teaching






Cooperating Teacher Instructions Formative Assessment - Student teachers need frequent verbal and written feedback about their teaching behaviors. It is important that they know which of their teaching behaviors had positive impact on the classroom and which of their teaching behaviors had negative impact on the

classroom. They also need your help learning to reflect on their teaching behaviors and to independently assess themselves. Many cooperating teachers keep a small notebook to jot down feedback and questions for the student teacher while they are teaching.






















group needs.





motivation.





















NA








Narrative Report:

_________________________________ ____________________________


_________________________________ ____________________________






2nd



RECOMMENDATION:







Narrative Report:

____________________________ ____________ _____________________________ ___________








1


Behaviors

2


Behaviors

3


Behaviors

4

Overall

Rating




national standards.





be aimless and disoriented.

Lessons lack clarity and

direction. Students tend to be

confused about expectations.


on time and include

necessary components.

Procedural emphasis is on

teacher behavior, not

student involvement.

Presentations are basically

clear but stand as individual

entities. Little diversity in

instructional strategies.

Goals and objectives are not

shared with students.


prepared regularly.

Instructional procedures are

designed to include most

learners. Plans identify

VA's SOLs or school’s

POSs. Presentations fit

sequence of instruction

well. Students understand

explanations and directions.

Employs some variety of

instructional methods.



for student learning.

Provisions for individual

and group differences and

interests are evident.

Learning experiences &

materials are varied and

appropriate for the students,

discipline, and VA's SOLs

or POSs.





needs.













special classroom







providing multiple


















instructional procedures.

Students receive little or no

feedback on their progress.

Makes little use of evaluation

techniques.

Primarily relies on







performance.








warranted.





goals and specific

objectives. Adjusts







1


Behaviors

2


Behaviors

3


Behaviors

4

Overall

Rating






interaction, active



employ appropriate


















techniques.


with most students on task.









positive learning










positive classroom

environment.






experience.



directions are unclear.

Questions are ambiguous or too


spelling, writing, and speaking.

Use of non-standard English is








Transmits key ideas


means used occasionally.

Students are seldom

confused about












apparent. written skills are acceptable.

used. Some use of



communication.



as appropriate



community



community) and use




informal assessment






individual growth.



community and/or










included.





not used or used

ineffectively.

Formal and informal







techniques.

Communication with


adequate and seldom


sometimes used as a

communication tool.

Formal and informal


instruction. A few


employed.





enhance and sustain

communication.


informal assessment












Behaviors


Behaviors


Behaviors

Overall

Rating



1 2 3 4

demonstrates high moral and











and community.















school community.





of the school and



students.





attitude



students. Classroom


chaotic.



formal.




with all students.





the classroom where


respect for peers.

Demonstrates self-control and




Frequently loses control and




Occasionally expresses




Maintains a calm and kind



school community.

Influences students to
















or learning.





oriented.

Is positive about

experiences with students.

Classroom environment is

pleasant, conducive to

learning, and student

oriented.


teaching is evident.

Individual pupil







Behaviors


Behaviors


Behaviors


Behaviors

Overall

Rating



1 2 3 4









inadequate. Conveys




extends beyond the textbook.

Uses a separate, fragmented

curriculum.

Above average



needed. Integrates



appropriate.



uses supplementary








development







accommodate
















students.













incidents.


evident. Focuses on




practices.






decision-making.


classroom.





and policies.



Is able to evaluate



teaching practices.











responsibility for

development & self-

reflection.

















from professional

development.

student learning assessment report · folder under assessment. ... the intern also uses the same...

Documents