Certifications: K-8 Elementary and Primary Specialist … · Web viewto create the explicit 5...

University of Arkansas at Little RockCollege of Education and Health Professions (CEHP)

School of Education (SOE)

Elementary Education K-6 BSE Assessment Plan for 2016-2017

Submitted 3/16/2018

Preparers: John Burgin, Anne Lindsay, Katina Leland, Anarella Cellitti, Bruce Smith

Contact: [email protected] 501 569-8943

Table of ContentsSection I: PROGRAM DESCRIPTIONSection II: KEY ASSESSMENTS & RELATIONSHIP TO CAEP STANDARDSSection III: DESCRIPTION OF KEY ASSESSMENTS, DATA & ANALYSISSection IV: COMMUICATION WITH STAKEHOLDERS

SECTION I: PROGRAM DESCRIPTION1. School of Education Mission: Preparing professionals to teach, lead and innovate in a diverse society. The School of Education has as a primary mission to prepare K-12 classroom teachers and higher education leaders within Arkansas as well as the region. The mission of the School of Education is to make scholarly and professional contributions to the communities in central Arkansas as well as the academic community more broadly. We commit our combined resources and expertise to promoting best practices in the broad range of educational contexts we represent as well as to the discovery and communication of knowledge in the field of education. We are dedicated to promoting and supporting learning communities that are diverse and equitable and that approach problem solving with both innovation and collaboration.

2. Description of any state or institutional policies that may influence the application of standards: The Arkansas Department of Education changed the licensure area of UALR’s education program from Pre K-4th (ECED) grade to K-6 (ELEM). The first group of ELEM candidates were admitted in the spring of 2015 and graduated in the spring of 2017. Therefore, we only have data for one semester for the year 2016-17. When our program changed from ECED to ELEM, our standards changed to The Counsel for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP). Subsequently our “key assessments” have been edited and aligned with the latest CAEP standards.

3. Description of field and clinical experiences required for the program:

Block Course Hrs. Field/Clinical Experience Age/Grade1 ELEM 2200 Field Exp. I 14 days x

7 hrs. = 9814 full days; Large group read alouds, other book activities, story telling w/ELEM 2301 Children’s Lit; 10 literacy projects associated with ELEM 2303 Emergent Lit.

K or 1

2 ELEM 3200 Field Exp. II 14 days x7 hrs. = 98

14 full days; Teaching and assessment project assigned in ELEM 3301 Integrated Lit. & Lang. I, ELEM 3302 Social Studies, ELEM 3300 Building Learning Environments

Grades 2 or 3

3 ELEM 4200 Field Exp. III 14 days x7 hrs. = 98

14 full days; Literacy projects from ELEM 4301 Integrated Lit and Lang II;Two Assessment projects from ELEM 4300

Grades 4, 5 or 6

3 SPED 4301 Ed. Except Learners

42 hrs. Complete case study, parent interview Grades 4, 5 or 6

4 ELEM 4600Internship I

82 days x7 hrs. = 578

16.5 full weeks (equivalent) –Includes one week teaching with full responsibility for all assessing, planning, teaching, and communications

Grades K, 1, 2 or 3

mailto:[email protected]

Block Course Hrs. Field/Clinical Experience Age/Gradewith school and community under supervision of cooperating teacher and university supervisor

5 ELEM 4901Internship II

82 days x7 hrs. = 578

14 full weeks--Includes one week teaching with full responsibility for all assessing, planning, teaching, and communications with school and community under supervision of cooperating teacher and university supervisor

Grades 4, 5, or 6

4. Description of the criteria for admission retention, and exit from the program:A. Admission to the program will only be considered if the student has completely met the following requirements:

1. Formal admission to UALR.2. Completion of English Composition 1311 and 1312 with a grade of C or better; completion of

Mathematics 1302 or 1315 with a grade of C or better.3. Completion of a total of all core education requirements (35 hours) with a cumulative average

of 2.7 or better.4. Submission of required scores on all sections of the Praxis Core exam (Reading = 156; Writing

= 162; Math = 150)B. Retention in the program. Once admitted, students are required to:

1. Maintain a 2.7, with at least a C in all professional courses (this includes all courses on the licensure/degree plan).

2. In addition, students' professional skills and dispositions will be evaluated throughout the program.

3. The identification of a problem in any aspect of a student’s performance will result in the convening of a professional development conference. Areas of concern will be addressed and a timeline for remedying them will be specified, and a follow up conference will be scheduled. If the concerns remain, a student may be removed from the program at the time of the follow up conference.

4. During Block III students are required to apply for admission to internship. Students must be recommended by the program for admission. Concerns with students' previous performance may result in students not being recommended for internship.

C. Exit from the Program1. A GPA of 2.7 and completion of all courses on the degree plan with a minimum grade of C.2. Passing scores on the Praxis Elementary Ed. Multiple Subjects (Math, reading, science, and

social studies), and Praxis Principles of Learning and Teaching.3. State Police and FBI record check

5. Program of Study: The Elementary program of study for initial licensure (85 hours) is organized around five sequential blocks of courses that candidates take in order, and a “floating block” of courses that is completed as time allows. Candidates graduate with a total of 120 hrs. The ELEM assessment system includes unit wide assessments and assessments unique to the program. ELEM candidates upload key assessment artifacts into an electronic portfolio called Chalk & Wire (C&W) that are then scored by program faculty. Artifacts are submitted to an "iLab" table of contents that is common to all the programs in the College of Education, and to an ELEM table of contents that covers the program's eight unique assessments. Scored documents are collected after a series of gateways: 1) Entry (Block I), 2) Intermediate (Block III), 3) Professional (Block IV), and 4) Capstone (Block V). Reports are generated by C&W in order to inform program decision making.

Floating Block: 10 hrs. Block I: 17 hrs. Block II: 17 hrs.HHPS 3330 Teaching PK-5 PE (3 hrs.)HIST 4355 Arkansas History (3 hrs.)MUED 3232 Elementary Classroom Music (2 hrs.)ARED 3245 Art for Elementary Teachers (2 hrs.)

ELEM 2200 Field Exp. I Grades K-2 (2 hrs.)ELEM 2300 Foundations of Elem. Ed. (3 hrs.)ELEM 2301 Children’s Literature (3 hrs.)ELEM 2302 Child Growth & Dev. (3 hrs.)ELEM 2303 Emergent Literacy (3 hrs.)ELEM 2304 Integrated Science I (3 hrs.)

ELEM 3200 Field Exp. II Grades 3-4 (2 hrs.)ELEM 3300 Building Learning EnvironmentsELEM 3301 Integrated Lit & Lang. I (3 hrs.)ELEM 3302 Social Studies Methods (3 hrs.)TCED 4300 Math Methods K-3 (3 hrs.)LANG 4324 Teach People Other Cult. (3 hrs.)

Block III: 17 hrs. Block IV: 12 hrs. Block V: 12 hrs.ELEM 4200 Field Exp. III Grades 5-6 (2 hrs.)ELEM 4300 Assessment Methods K-6 (3 hrs.)ELEM 4301 Integrated Lit & Lang. II (3 hrs.)ELEM 4302 Integ. Science II (3 hrs.)MATH 3382 Math Methods II (3 hrs.)SPED 4301 Ed. Exceptional Learners (3 hrs.)

ELEM 4304 Internship Seminar I (3 hrs.)ELEM 4600 Internship I Grades K-3 (6 hrs.)ELEM 4305 Collaboration w/ Families (3 hrs.)

ELEM 4306 Internship Seminar II (3 hrs.)ELEM 4900 Internship II Grades 4-6 (9 hrs.)

6. Candidate Information:

Early Childhood Ed. 2015-2016/Elementary Ed. 2016-2017Academic Year # Candidates Enrolled in

the Program# Program

Completers1

2015-2016 104 312016-2017 101 39

7. Faculty Information:

Faculty Member

Highest Degree, Field, & University2 Faculty Rank3 Teaching or other professional experience in P-12 schools4

Burgin, John Ph.D. University of Arkansas, Fayetteville in Curriculum and Instruction

Associate Professor

PK –kindergarten teacherReading specialist grades 1-6 (18 years)Director, K-4 Sum program (9 yrs)Licenses are current

Cellitti, Mirtha A.

Ph.D. University of South Carolina, Columbia in Early Childhood Education

Associate Professor

Elementary and Secondary Teaching Certificates, 5 years as pre-k teacher, 5 years as a high school teacherPreschool license in Venezuela, elementary license in Venezuela

Leland, Katina M.

Ed.D. University of Mississippi in Curriculum and Instruction

Associate Professor

Certification: Elementary Teaching (K-8) Current. Teaching/Professional Experience: 1 year as kindergarten teacher, 4 years as 1st grade teacher, 1 year as Literacy CoachClinical Supervision (Aug. 2011-present)

Lindsay, Anne C.

Ph.D. University of VictoriaIn ECE Language Arts

Associate Professor

Certifications: K-8 Elementary and Primary SpecialistPermanent license from Ontario, CanadaClinical Supervision P-4 (2000-present)

1

2

3

4

SECTION II: KEY ASSESSMENTS & RELATIONSHIP TO CAEP STANDARDS

1. Elementary Ed. Key Assessments:

Assessment Type ofAssessment

Administered FacultyMember

1 Praxis Elementary Ed. Multiple Subjects Standardized test Before completion of program Burgin2 Praxis Principles of Learning and Teaching Standardized test Before completion of program Burgin3 Lesson plan/Unit Plan Project First semester of internship Leland4 TESS Clinical Evaluation Second semester of internship Burgin5 Teaching work sample/Student Learn Project Project Second semester of internship Cellitti6 Teaching Philosophy/Professional Dev. Plan Essay Second semester of internship Cellitti7 Case study Project Third semester of 5 semester program Smith8 Parent Interview Project Third semester of 5 semester program Smith

2. CAEP K-6 Elementary Teacher Standards:

STANDARD 1 - Understanding and Addressing Each Child’s Developmental and Learning Needs

Candidates use their understanding of child growth and development, individual differences, and diverse families, cultures and communities to plan and implement inclusive learning environments that provide each learner with equitable access to high quality learning experiences that engage and enable each learner to meet high standards. They work collaboratively with families, colleagues and other professionals to gain a full perspective on learners’ strength and needs and how to motivate their learning.

1.a - Candidates know how each learner grows and develops, recognizing that patterns of development and learning vary individually within and across cognitive, linguistic, social, emotional, ethical, and physical domains; they regularly assess individual development and learning and use these data to plan and implement developmentally appropriate and challenging learning experiences and environments that take into account individual learners’ strengths and needs in each developmental domain.

#1 #2 #3 #4

#5 #6 #7 #8

TESS Domain 1

1.b - Candidates use their understanding of individual differences and diverse families, cultures, and communities to plan and implement inclusive learning experiences and environments that address learners’ needs and build on learners’ strengths, prior knowledge and experiences, abilities, talents, language, culture, family and community values, allowing them to advance as they demonstrate their mastery.

#1 #2 #3 #4

#5 #6 #7 #8

TESS Domain 1

1.c - Candidates work respectfully and reciprocally with families, colleagues, and other professionals to gain insight into each child in order to maximize his/her development and learning. They respect families’ beliefs, norms, and expectations and take responsibility for working collaboratively with families in setting and meeting challenging yet reachable developmental and learning goals for their children.

#1 #2 #3 #4

#5 #6 #7 #8

STANDARD 2 - Understanding and Applying Content and Curricular Knowledge for Te ac h i ng

Candidates demonstrate and apply understandings of major concepts, skills, and practices, as they interpret disciplinary curricular standards and related expectations within and across literacy, mathematics, science, and social studies for grades K-6.

2.a – Candidates demonstrate and apply the elements of literacy (phonological awareness; phonics; #1 #2

comprehension; fluency; vocabulary; critical thinking; and writing) critical for purposeful print or digital communication, as presented in the rationale for the CAEP Literacy Content for Elementary (K-6) Teachers.

#3 #4#5 #6

#7 #8

2.b - Candidates demonstrate and apply understandings of major mathematics concepts, algorithms, procedures, applications and mathematical practices in varied contexts, and connections within and among mathematical domains (Number and Operations, Operations and Algebraic Thinking, Measurement and Data [both Statistics and Probability] and Geometry) as presented in the rationale for the CAEP Mathematics Content for Elementary (K-6) Teachers.

#1 #2 #3 #4

#5 #6 #7 #8

2.c - Candidates demonstrate and apply understandings and integration of the three dimensions of science and engineering practices, cross-cutting concepts, and major disciplinary core ideas, within the major content areas of science (Life, Physical and Earth and Space Sciences and Engineering, Technology and Applications of Science) as presented in the rationale for the CAEP Science Content for Elementary (K-6) Teachers.

#1 #2 #3 #4

#5 #6 #7 #8

2.d - Candidates demonstrate understandings, capabilities, and dispositions associated with the central concepts and tools in Civics, Economics, Geography, and History, within a framework of informed inquiry (Developing question and planning inquiries; Applying disciplinary concepts and tools; Evaluating sources and using evidence; and Communicating conclusions and taking informed action) as presented in the rationale for the CAEP Social Studies Content for Elementary (K-6) Teachers.

#1 #2 #3 #4

#5 #6 #7 #8

2.e - Candidates demonstrate understandings of developmental and differentiated learning, curricular standards, practices, the language of the disciplines, assessment, and learning progressions as they relate and connect to content knowledge for teaching. Such connections, which include digital learning opportunities, are made within and across core disciplines, as well as are informed by the knowledge base and practices of other content areas, such as the fine and performing arts, at the K-6 levels.

#1 #2 #3 #4

#5 #6 #7 #8TESS Domain 1

STANDARD 3 – Assessing, Planning, and Engaging Learners for Instruction

Candidates plan and adapt instructional sequences to promote a full range of competencies for every learner based on knowledge of each child, educational goals, instructional practices, disciplinary knowledge, and student assessment. Candidates establish social norms for classroom learning and implement activities to generate motivation and engagement for academic achievement. Candidates justify their selection of goals, assessments and instructional strategies for colleagues as needed.

3.a - Candidates design, compose, select, adapt and administer formative assessments to gather data on student learning and engagement. Candidates administer assessments appropriately for various purposes including accountability, program evaluation, monitoring student learning and behavior, providing grades, and identifying students’ needs. From assessments, collegial collaboration and reflection, candidates identify what learners should know and be able to do.

#1 #2 #3 #4

#5 #6 #7 #8TESS Domain 1&3

3.b - Candidates continually monitor, guide and revise instruction using data from formative assessments including essays, reports, presentations, problem solving, portfolios and tests of basic cognitive competencies. Candidates also use summative assessment data to guide instruction. They also use all assessment sources to provide detailed, task-specific feedback to learners about their achievement and engagement.

#1 #2 #3 #4


3.c - Candidates plan sequenced learning experiences to meet their goals based on educational goals and what they know about their students’ current needs and capabilities. They plan to provide appropriate instructional strategies, resources, materials, and learning environments that address learners’ individual strengths and needs within the classroom. Candidates demonstrate effective time management, allocating the optimal balance of teacher instruction, engaged student learning, and assessment. Candidates make plans for ongoing assessments of their lesson effectiveness and each student learner’s understanding.

#1 #2 #3 #4


3.d - Candidates differentiate instruction to address the needs of each child through explicit planning and design. They plan sequences of learning activities to improve both basic competencies and higher order learning by scaffolding learners’ performance in increasingly complex texts, tasks and internet resources. Candidates design learning activities to optimize academic access and engagement for every child.

#1 #2 #3 #4


3.e - Candidates manage their classrooms effectively by involving children in designing social norms that assure safety, positive interpersonal interactions, and mutual respect. Candidates establish a consistent, organized, and respectful learning environment in which the norms, routines, and procedures for student behavior are positively stated and explicitly taught. Candidates construct and maintain a productive learning environment by adapting classroom procedures to each learner’s cognitive and motivational needs.

#1 #2 #3 #4


3.f - Candidates assess and build children’s motivations and engagement in learning by forming explicit plans to share control with students, make school learning relevant, sustain collaborative activities, and regulate cognitive challenge. They link academic work to learners’ interests, and assure that children perceive the personal benefits and values of school learning.

#1 #2 #3 #4

#5 #6 #7 #8TESS Domain 1&2

STANDARD 4 - Supporting Each Child’s Learning Using Effective Instruction

Candidates make informed decisions about instruction guided by knowledge of children and assessment of students’ learning that result in the use of a variety of effective instructional practices. Candidates deliver instruction using a cohesive sequence of lessons and employing these instructional practices. They use explicit instruction and effective feedback as appropriate, and use whole class discussions to support and enhance children’s learning. Candidates use flexible grouping arrangements, including small group and individual instruction to support effective instruction and improved student learning.

4.a - Candidates use a variety of instructional practices that are designed to foster extended learner engagement, collaborative activity, and appropriate cognitive challenges to support the learning of every child.

#1 #2 #3 #4

#5 #6 #7 #8

4.b - Candidates teach a cohesive sequence of lessons to ensure the learning of every learner. They teach lessons that support children’s deep learning of discipline specific content, skills, and strategies; that build upon the previous lesson’s goals to develop deeper knowledge through learner inquiry; and, as part of a coherent series, offer learners opportunities to practice and master knowledge, skills and strategies as they explore disciplinary content knowledge.

#1 #2 #3 #4

#5 #6 #7 #8

4.c - Candidates explicitly teach content, strategies, and skills to make clear what a learner needs to do or think about while learning academic content. They make connections to prior knowledge and skills and focus instruction on the steps that lead to the new knowledge or skill. They also focus on strategic use of examples to build understanding and address misunderstandings, careful use of language, highlighting core

#1 #2 #3 #4


ideas, and making the candidate’s thinking visible while modeling and demonstrating.

4.d - Candidates provide positive and constructive feedback to guide children’s learning, increase motivation, and improve engagement, leading to improved learning and behavior.

#1 #2 #3 #4


4.e - Candidates lead whole class discussions in which the candidate and learners collaboratively investigate specific content, strategies, or skills. Candidates and all learners contribute orally, listen actively, respond respectfully, and learn from others’ contributions. Candidates use strategies to ensure the equitable participation of every learner in discussions.

#1 #2 #3 #4


4.f - Candidates organize and manage effective small group instruction that is used to differentiate teaching to meet the learning needs of each child by providing more focused, intensive instruction. Candidates provide opportunities for learners to take ownership, develop self-direction, and become actively engaged in the learning process.

#1 #2 #3 #4


4.g - Candidates organize and manage individual instruction that is used to provide targeted, focused, intensive instruction that improves or enhances each child’s learning

#1 #2 #3 #4


Standard 5- Developing as a Professional

Candidates are committed to the learning and development of every child through effective communication, participation in collaborative learning environments, reflective self-study and professional development, and involvement in their professional community.

5.a - Candidates use a variety of communication strategies to interact with learners, families, and colleagues, which heighten and promote shared learning for each child

#1 #2 #3 #4

#5 #6 #7 #8

5.b - Candidates work collaboratively with colleagues, mentors, and school leaders demonstrating self-motivation, knowledge of current education policies and pedagogy, and the ability to establish and work toward common goals that directly influence every learner’s development and achievement.

#1 #2 #3 #4


5.c - Candidates build and implement a personal professional development plan based on the ongoing analysis of children’s learning, self-reflection, professional ethics, current research and contemporary best practice.

#1 #2 #3 #4

#5 #6 #7 #8

5.d - Candidates understand how children’s learning is enhanced through participation in learning communities such as, local, state, and national professional organizations and related professional networks and participate in such forums for their own continuing professional development.

#1 #2 #3 #4

#5 #6 #7 #8

TESS Domain 4

SECTION III: DESCRIPTION OF KEY ASSESSMENTS, DATA & ANALYSIS

Assessment 1 (Content Knowledge): Praxis Elementary Ed. K-6 Multiple Subjects #5001 (Math, Reading & Language Arts, Science, and Social Studies)

1.1 Description of assessment: Praxis Elementary Education K-6: Multiple Subjects #5001 is designed to assess the content knowledge elementary teachers must have in order to support children’s learning in the content areas. The test consists of 210 multiple-choice questions, each of which pertains to one of 4 content areas: reading and language arts, mathematics, social studies, and science. Questions assess whether the test taker knows the major concepts, skills, and tools of inquiry in the content areas, can apply knowledge of the content areas in the context of children’s learning; knows the structure of the content areas, and knows how the content areas are interrelated. The test does not emphasize knowledge of pedagogy, though some questions are framed in the context of children’s learning. Passing of this test is required for completion of the program. This test is required by the state for elementary education candidates to be licensed.

1.2 Description of how this assessment aligns with standards: The praxis exam aligns with CAEP standard 2 – Understanding and applying content and curricular knowledge for teaching. It assesses candidates’ knowledge in the areas of reading & language arts (2a), math (2b), social studies (2d), and science (2c).

1.3 Candidate data: Subtest #5002 Reading & Language Arts

Administration Date State/Agency/InstitutionTotal

N Mean score # passing Percent passingJAN-2017 to DEC-2017 All Test Takers 21073 168.36 § §

Arkansas State Dept Education - AI 630 168.68 544 86.35University of Arkansas Little Rock - AI 25 166.40 22 88.00

Subtest #5003 Mathematics




Subtest #5004 Social Studies




Subtest #5005 Science


N Mean score PercentJAN-2017 to DEC-2017 All Test Takers 21595 166.96 100.00

Arkansas State Dept Education - AI 682 165.23 100.00

University of Arkansas Little Rock - AI 24 164.29 100.00

1.4 Data Analysis: Typically candidates take the praxis content knowledge during internship I (Block IV of V). In this way they have time to retake the test or tests before graduation if they do not pass the first time. Consequently, the number of test takers does not always match the number of graduates, and may capture candidates from other blocks of the program. Nonetheless, by running an analysis of test scores for the calendar year 2017, we can capture all of the graduates for spring 2017, and create a window into the achievements of our candidates in general.

Although it is not uncommon for candidates to take one or more of the subtests multiple times, 100% of our spring 2017 candidates passed the praxis content knowledge test, were recommended for licensure by the state, and graduated with a degree in elementary education.

In the area of Reading & Language Arts, our candidates’ mean of 166.40 is comparable to the state (168.68) and national (168.36) average of test takers. Our pass rate of 88% is higher than the state average of 86.35%.

On the subtest for mathematics, our candidates mean score (172.32) was higher than the national average (171.45), and comparable to the state average (172.32), and our pass rate is significantly higher than the state (92.86% vs. 87.86%).

The scores of UALR candidates on the social studies subtest (164.59) were higher than both the state (161.01) and national (163.93) averages, and our pass rate (88.89%) was significantly higher than the state average (74.26%).

On the praxis science subtest, UALR candidates (164.29) scored lower than the state (165.23) and national (166.96) average, but the differences were not significant. Science was the subtest that UALR candidates were most likely to take more than once. Consequently, we have analyzed the content of our two science methods courses, and made changes to more closely align the content to the praxis exam.

Assessment 2: Praxis Principles of Learning and Teaching (PLT)

2.1 Description of assessments: Praxis Principles of Learning and Teaching K-6 (#5622) consists of 70 selected response questions and 4 constructed response items related to two case histories. The purpose of the test is to assess a new teacher’s knowledge and understanding of educational practices foundational to beginning a career as a teacher. The test content assesses key indicators of the beginning educator’s knowledge of topics such as human development, learning processes, instructional processes, diverse learners, educational psychology, and professional issues.

2.2 Description of how this assessment aligns with standards: Praxis PLT addresses CAEP standard 1a Understanding and Addressing Each Child’s Developmental and Learning Needs

2.3 Candidate data:




2.4 Data Analysis: UALR ELEM candidates have a solid foundation of understanding human development, learning processes, instructional processes, diverse learners, educational psychology, and professional issues. Specifically (1a), candidates are able to “assess individual development and learning and use these data to plan developmentally appropriate and challenging leaning experiences.” One hundred percent of our candidates passed the exam and averaged above both the state and national average.

Assessment 3 (Plan, Implement Appropriate Teaching and Learning Experiences):

3.1 Description of assessment: The planning assignment is created and implemented during the fourth semester of the ELEM program. During the fourth and fifth semesters of the program, candidates complete two terms of internship, one semester in a K-3 classroom and the other in a 4-6 classroom. This assessment is designed to align with the Council for the Accreditation of Education Preparation (CAEP) standards 3a, 3b, 3c, 4b, and 4c. The assessment requires candidates to plan five consecutive days of rigorous and comprehensive lessons in a single content area. It also requires them to document reflections of student learning throughout the implementation of the lessons.

3.2 Description of how this assessment aligns with standards: The planning assignment includes evaluation of the ELEM program standards that address planning, teaching, assessment, and reflection. To score proficient on this planning assignment, candidates must administer assessments for monitoring student learning (CAEP 3a) daily to determine if students have met an acceptable score for the assigned learning goal. In addition to assessing student learning, candidates must also revise instruction using analytical data from the assessments (CAEP 3b) before proceeding to implement the next day’s lesson. When planning instruction and reflecting on daily assessments, candidates must create appropriate lessons that include developmentally appropriate instructional strategies, resources, materials, and learning environments that address learners’ diverse strengths and needs within the classroom (CAEP 3c). Candidates must plan and implement lessons that follow a cohesive sequence to ensure the learning of every student (CAEP 4b). During the implementation of the planning assignment, candidates must explicitly teach content, strategies, and skills to make clear what a learner needs to do or think about while learning academic content (CAEP 4c).

3.3 Brief Analysis of Data: The project consists of three parts: Introduction of Current Placement, 1 Week of Comprehensive Plans including learning objective(s), sequence for teaching, daily assessment, reflections, revisions to succeeding lessons, and the Overall Reflection once the plans are implemented. Upon completion of the assignment, candidates were instructed to submit their work through the Chalk and Wire Assessment portal. Then, the instructor analyzed the assignment using the attached scoring guide with a rating of Does Not Meet Expectations (1-5), Meets Expectations (6-9), and Exceeds Expectations (10) using the CAEP standards (3a, 3b, 3c, 4b, 4c). The overall reflection section of the project was scored using a scoring guide with the rating of Does Not Meet Expectations (1-9), Meets Expectations (10-14), and Exceeds Expectations (15).

3.4 Interpretation of How Data Provides Evidence for Meeting Standards: To address the CAEP standards used in the Planning Assignment, candidates were required to create and implement an explicit 5 consecutive day lesson plan reflecting on the outcome of the execution of the daily lesson and revising as needed before proceeding to the succeeding lesson. Prior to implementing the Planning Assignment, candidates were asked to provide a description of the students in their field classroom. This description included: students’ level of ability, cultural and linguistic contexts, relationships with parents, economic conditions of average class population, and how the cooperating teacher supports diverse family characteristics and uses family members as resources in the classroom. This information was used to help candidates be aware of the diverse needs of the candidates in their classrooms so they could plan

developmentally appropriate instructional strategies, resources, materials, and learning environments that addressed learners’ individual strengths and needs within the classroom (3c). Candidates were instructed to create the explicit 5 consecutive day lesson plan using a detailed format that included: an anticipatory set, direct instruction, guided instruction, independent practice, closure, and assessment to enhance the students’ understanding of the learning (4b; 4c). Candidates were required to plan and administer a daily assessment to evaluate student learning (3a). Once the lesson was taught, candidates analyzed the results of the assessment and teacher observations then determined if revisions were needed for the succeeding day’s lesson plan to ensure effective student learning (3b; 4b).

3.5 Assessment Tool: Plan & Implement Learning Experiences Project

1. Introduction of Current Placement

Write an introduction detailing your current placement with a minimum of a paragraph addressing the following: Cooperating Teacher-his/her years of experience in all grade levels and educational/professional background (degrees held, etc.), number of years teaching current grade level and how long they have taught in current school, their guidance approach, their typical rapport with the students; and their teaching style (whether traditional or constructivist, etc.).

Planning – what part of planning you are responsible for, methods you and your CT use for planning and assessment, how you feel about this planning process, and if you could change it, what would you change?

Teaching - how much are you currently teaching and what are you responsible for teaching? Discuss all of your teaching duties.

School- including location/district, the average socioeconomic status of students in the school (not district), specific literacy models or curricular programs used in the school (e.g. Journeys, Harcourt Trophies basal literacy series, Houghton Mifflin math books, etc.).

Children in the class-knowledge about the make-up of the students in your classroom including various levels of ability, cultural and linguistic contexts (think about different languages, cultures, etc.) , the children’s relationships with parents, economic conditions of average class population (e.g. free and reduced lunch, homeless, middle class, ability to obtain resources, etc.) , and how the CT supports these diverse family characteristics and use family members as resources in the classroom (e.g. parent volunteers in the classroom, etc.) .

2. Daily Plans (standards, objectives, materials, procedures, and assessment) with Reflections

In this section, include… 1 weekly lesson plan written for 1 Component of Literacy (e.g. Writing, Language, 1 Guided

Reading Group, Science, or Social Studies) with daily reflections OR 1 weekly lesson plan written for Math with daily reflections This planning assignment should demonstrate your ability to plan and think about the details

required to develop lessons that emphasize features such as (a) adaptations to individual, developmental, cultural differences; (b) knowledgeable application of subject matter knowledge; (c) use of effective and appropriate strategies for teaching young children; and (d) attention to

effects on the learning of young children. TECHNOLOGY RESOURCES SHOULD BE IMPLEMENTED!

Daily Lesson Plan TemplateMonday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday

CCS

Objective

Materials

Technology

Group setting

Anticipatory setting

Direct Instruction

Guided Practice

Independent Practice

Work for early finishers

Closure

Assessment

Daily Observations Mond

ayTuesd

ayWednes

dayThursd

ayFriday

Personal Glows

Personal Grows

Students Needing Interventions

Comments from CT

Revisions to Succeeding Lessons Monday Tuesday Wednesda

yThursda

yFriday

… for Tuesday

… for Wednesday

… for Thursday

… for Friday

… for the following week

Revisions for the following lesson.

List interventions that will be implemented with specific students.

Assessment: Discuss how you will assess this lesson. {e.g. teacher observation, paper and pencil assessment, checklist, etc.} You must state what you are looking for in the assessment (e.g.

paper/pencil assessment to determine if student can separate syllables correctly; OR teacher observation to determine if student spelled word correctly on dry-erase board).

Reflection (completed after the lesson has been implemented): Discuss the observations from today’s lesson. What did you observe your students do? You can discuss students as a group and/or individual students. Discuss successes and weaknesses of the lesson. Also, discuss students who need interventions. {You should use a clipboard daily to record observations.}

Plan for tomorrow: Based on the reflection of today’s lesson, what do you plan to do tomorrow? Can you implement the next lesson as planned or do you need to make changes? Also, discuss interventions that you will implement with students who did not meet the objective from the previous day. {Justify if no changes need to be made to tomorrow’s lesson.}

3.Overall ReflectionIn this section, include a detailed reflection addressing the following:How did you feel about this entire planning process?Elaborate on how this process required you to think in more detail than you typically do when planning? What were some of the reoccurring themes you noticed in your plan modifications?What are some of the things that stand out in your mind that worked or did not work throughout this process?Please give any suggestions you may have in how to improve this assignment in an effort to strengthen your planning and teaching skills.

3.6 Scoring Guide:ELEM 4304: Internship Seminar I Assessment 3-Planning Rubric

ITEM DOES NOT MEET1-5

MEETS EXPECTATIONS6-9

EXCEEDS EXPECTATIONS10

Introduction-10 points

(CAEP 3c)

Introduction detailing your current placement does not provide adequate information (as described in your “Specific Guidelines and Directions” Section) about your Cooperating Teacher, Planning, Teaching, School, Children in your classroom.

Adequate introduction detailing your current placement. Provides adequate information (as described in your “Specific Guidelines/Directions” Section) about your Cooperating Teacher, Planning, Teaching, School, Children in your classroom.

Thorough introduction detailing your current placement. Provides detailed information (as described in your “Specific Guidelines/Directions” Section) about your Cooperating Teacher, Planning, Teaching, School, Children in your classroom.

Grammar, punctuation, and spelling5 points

DOES NOT MEET1-2



Numerous word choice, grammar and punctuation errors are displayed throughout the assignment.

A few word choice, grammar and punctuation errors. Lacks depth.

Exemplary use of conventions of English.

Comprehensive Planning-70 Points

DOES NOT MEET1-5

MEETS EXPECATIONS6-9


10 points( CAEP 3c)

Lesson plan seldom provides appropriate instructional strategies, resources, materials, and learning environments that address the strengths and needs of the learners within the classroom.

Lesson plan provides some appropriate instructional strategies, resources, materials, and learning environments that address the strengths and needs of the learners within the classroom.

Lesson plan consistently provides appropriate instructional strategies, resources, materials, and learning environments that address the strengths and needs of the learners within the classroom.

10 points(CAEP 3b)

Daily assessment is seldom utilized to guide teaching and management methods to be used in succeeding lessons.

Daily assessment is somewhat utilized to guide teaching and management methods to be used in succeeding lessons.

Daily assessment is consistently utilized to guide teaching and management methods to be used in succeeding lessons.

10 points(CAEP 3a)

Daily observations from the candidate and CT seldom explicitly describe the glows and grows of the lesson and address students who need interventions.

Daily observations from the candidate and CT somewhat explicitly describe the glows and grows of the lesson and address students who need interventions.

Daily observations from the candidate and CT consistently explicitly describe the glows and grows of the lesson and address students who need interventions.

10 points(CAEP 3b)

Revisions to succeeding lessons and student interventions are seldom discussed.

Revisions to succeeding lessons and student interventions are somewhat discussed.

Revisions to succeeding lessons and student interventions are consistently discussed.

10 points( CAEP 4b)

5 day lesson plan seldom includes a cohesive sequence of lessons explicitly describing anticipatory set, direct instruction, guided practice, independent practice, closure, and assessment to ensure effective student learning.

5 day lesson plan includes a few cohesive sequences of lessons explicitly describing anticipatory set, direct instruction, guided practice, independent practice, closure, and assessment to ensure effective student learning.

5 day lesson plan consistently includes a cohesive sequence of lessons explicitly describing anticipatory set, direct instruction, guided practice, independent practice, closure, and assessment to ensure effective student learning.

10 points(CAEP 4c)

Daily observations are seldom provided to discuss evaluation of assessment and how to address students’ misconceptions in succeeding lessons.

Daily observations are sometimes provided to discuss evaluation of assessment and how to address students’ misconceptions in succeeding lessons.

Daily observations are consistently provided to discuss evaluation of assessment and how to address students’ misconceptions in succeeding lessons.

10 points(CAEP 3a)

Plans seldom demonstrate use of observation, documentation, and other appropriate assessment tools and approaches.

Most plans demonstrate use of observation, documentation, and other appropriate assessment tools and approaches.

Plans consistently demonstrate use of observation, documentation, and other appropriate assessment tools and approaches.

Overall Reflective Summary-15 points

(CAEP 3a, 3b, 3c, 4b, 4c)

DOES NOT MEET1-9



Does not provide adequate personal reflection over the planning process. The reflection includes: How did you feel about this entire process? Elaborate on how this process required you to think in more detailed than you typically do when planning? What were some of the reoccurring themes you noticed in your plan modifications? What are some of the things that stand out in your mind that worked or did not work throughout the process? Suggestions for improving this assignment in an effort to strengthen your planning and teaching skills?

Adequate personalreflection over the planningprocess. The reflectionincludes: How did you feelabout this entire process?Elaborate on how thisprocess required you tothink in more detailed thanyou typically do whenplanning? What were someof the reoccurring themesyou noticed in your planmodifications? What aresome of the things thatstand out in your mind thatworked or did not workthroughout the process?Suggestions for improvingthis assignment in an effortto strengthen your planningand teaching skills?

Detailed personal reflection over the planning process. The reflection includes: How did you feel about this entire process? Elaborate on how this process required you to think in more detailed than you typically do when planning? What were some of the reoccurring themes you noticed in your plan modifications? What are some of the things that stand out in your mind that worked or did not work throughout the process? Suggestions for improving this assignment in an effort to strengthen your planning and teaching skills?

TOTAL

3.6 Candidate Data: The first cohort of ELEM candidates completed the planning assignment during fall 2017 semester. After evaluating the introduction section of the planning assignment, 100% of the candidates provided adequate information describing their cooperating teacher's background, the cooperating teacher's planning process, their teaching responsibilities, the school, and the children within their classroom (3c). All candidates demonstrated their ability to plan and implement an explicit comprehensive lesson plan including: anticipatory set, direct instruction, guided practice, independent practice, closure, and assessment, observation notes, and revisions to succeeding lessons based on assessment results (3a, 3b, 3c, 4b, 4c). Out of the 15 candidates in the cohort, 13% exceeded the expectations of planning and implementing an explicit comprehensive plan by providing explicit instructions and reflections continually during the week. Candidates also provided detailed responses to the summative analysis of the planning assignment. Most, 93%, of the candidates exceeded expectations by submitting thorough responses about the following: thoughts about the planning process, thinking in

more detail contrasted to other planning, things that did or did not work during the process, modifications in the future planning, and suggestions for improving the assignment to strengthen planning and teaching skills (3a, 3b, 3c, 4b, 4c). Only 7% of the cohort did not exceed expectations on this section of the assignment.

Assessment 4: Internship Evaluation (TESS):

4.1 Description of the Assessment: Candidates complete two semesters of internship, one in a K-3 classroom (16.5 weeks) and the other in a 4-6 classroom (16.5 weeks). Each candidate is formally observed teaching by a university supervisor at least once per month, and a written formative observation is completed each time. At the end of each semester a summative evaluation is completed collaboratively between the cooperating teacher and the university supervisor and is reviewed with the candidate. The evaluation instrument used for these summative evaluations is based on the Teacher Excellence Support System (TESS) evaluation instrument used by the state for evaluation of all in-service teachers. This instrument is organized into four domains: 1. Planning and Preparation, 2. The Classroom Environment, 3. Instruction, and 4. Professional Responsibilities.

4.2. Description of how this assessment aligns with standards: The TESS assessment instrument enables supervisors to evaluate candidates’ degree of mastery of CAEP standards 1, 3, 4, and 5. In Standard 1: Understanding and addressing each child’s developmental level and learning needs, components 1a and 1b are clearly addressed by the internship evaluation TESS Domain #1 Planning & Preparation. Candidates are assessed and evaluated based on their ability to plan lessons that are developmentally appropriate, inclusive, and build on learner’s strengths, prior knowledge, and culture.

CAEP Standard 3—Assessing, planning, and engaging learners for Instruction (components 3a, 3b, 3c, 3d, 3e, and 3f) are addressed by TESS domains 1, 2, & 3. Domain 1 assesses candidates’ ability to plan sequenced learning experiences (3c) that differentiates instruction to address the needs of each child (3d); their ability to design and administer formative assessments (3a); and their ability to monitor, guide, and revise instruction using data (3b). Likewise, TESS Domain 2 assesses candidates’ ability to build children’s motivation by making school learning relevant (3f), and their ability to design social norms that assure positive interpersonal interactions (3e).

CAEP Standard 4 – Supporting each child’s learning using effective instruction (components 4, a, 4b, 4c, 4d, 4e, & 4f) directly correlates with TESS Domain 3 Instruction. Domain 3 assesses candidates’ ability to use a variety of activities that engage students (4a) and explicitly teach content knowledge (4c). Candidates learn to provide learners with opportunities to practice and master knowledge, skills, and strategies (4b) while providing feedback (4d) in large groups (4d), small groups (4e), and one-on-one (4g).CAEP Standard 5 – Developing as a professional, components 5b is an important part of TESS Domain 4. Candidates’ ability to work collaboratively with colleagues, mentors, and school leaders is assessed and evaluated.

4.3 Assessment Tool: The TESS domains and components are included with the presentation of results in the form of mean scores for our Intern II candidates.

4.4 Scoring Guide: Directions for Intern Evaluation

Scores:1 = Unsatisfactory; 2 = Basic/Developing; 3 = Meets Expectations; 4 = Exceeds Expectations

A. A score of “4” is reserved for exceptional performance on an element, and unusual for a teacher candidate.

B. Candidates are expected to obtain scores of “2” or “3” in Internship I (with the exception of dispositional elements in Domain D) as they are understood to be at the “Basic” or “Developing” level.

C. Our expectations are that candidates should be “Meeting Expectations” by the completion of Internship II (NOT Internship I).

D. Scores of 1.5, 2.5, or 3.5 are all acceptable.E. Use of N/A can be used where appropriate. F. A score of “1” on any single element constitutes a letter grade deduction on the Internship

Evaluation and a Professional Development conference will be held with the candidate.G. Multiple scores of “1” constitute an “F” on the Internship Evaluation.

Conversion Scale from Intern Evaluation to UALR GradeA B C

INTERN I 2.7 2.3 2.29 AND BELOWINTERN II 3.0 2.7 2.69 AND BELOW

4.5 Candidate Data:

Mean Domain 1: Planning and Preparation2.93 1a: Demonstrating knowledge of content and pedagogy3.21 1b: Demonstrating knowledge of students2.96 1c: Selecting instructional outcomes3.14 1d: Demonstrating knowledge of resources3.00 1e: Designing coherent instruction3.18 1f: Assessing student learning3.07 Overall Mean Domain 1

Scoring: 1 = Unsatisfactory 2 = Basic/Developing 3 = Meets Expectations 4 = Exceeds Expectations

Mean Domain 2: The Classroom Environment3.11 2a: Designing an environment of respect and rapport2.96 2b: Establishing a culture for learning3.04 2c: Managing classroom procedures3.14 2d: Managing student behavior2.93 2e: Organizing physical space3.15 Overall Mean Domain 2

Mean Domain 3: Instruction3.11 3a: Communicating with students2.96 3b: Using questioning and discussion techniques3.04 3c: Engaging students in learning3.14 3d: Using Assessment in Instruction2.93 3e: Demonstrating flexibility and responsiveness3.04 Overall Mean Domain 3

1 = Unsatisfactory 2 = Basic/Developing 3 = Meets Expectations 4 = Exceeds Expectations

Mean Domain 4: Professional Responsibilities

3.18 4a: Reflecting on teaching in terms of accuracy and use in further teaching3.25 4b: Maintaining accurate records3.32 4c: Communicating with families3.36 4d: Participating in a professional community3.29 4e: Developing and growing professionally3.29 4f: Demonstrating professionalism3.28 Overall Mean Domain 4

1 = Unsatisfactory 2 = Basic/Developing 3 = Meets Expectations 4 = Exceeds Expectations

4.6 Data Analysis: Overall the mean scores of our candidates in each domain was over a “3” and therefore “Meets Expectations.” Within the individual components, only three means were under a “3” (Domain 1a 2.93; Domain 1c 2.96; Domain 3b 2.96), but the differences were insignificant. Individually 78% made an “A;” 7% made a “B;” and 14% made a “C” as a grade for their internship II semester. With over 85% of our students making either an “A” or “B,” our rate of successful completion of internship was excellent. Likewise, none of the mean scores of individual domains and components suggest that program revisions are needed.

Assessment 5 Teaching Work Sample/Student Learning Project:

5.1 Description of assessment: The assignment for assessment 5 is completed in the candidates’ final semester of internship. For this assignment candidates chose one content area, either language arts or math, and select 2 focus children that are below grade level. Candidates them plan and implement interventions to carry out with the select children. As candidates select interventions for the content areas they collect copies of assessments of the 2 children. In the assignments candidates provide evidence for each child learning and progress. Candidates construct a table that summarized the children’s learning after 10 interventions are implemented. Candidates explain interventions adaptations, assessments used, and how assessments were used to plan subsequent interventions. In addition, candidates report how feedback was used to informed children of their own learning as well as to inform parents of children’s progress. After completing 10 interventions candidates turn in the assignment to the instructor for revision and feedback. Then candidates complete another 10 interventions for a total of 20 interventions for children in a 14-week period. The candidates submit a final version of the completed project to the instructor with a reflection about their own teaching effectiveness.

5.2 Description of how this assessment aligns with standards: This assignment requires candidates to use their understanding of to all CAEP K-6 Elementary Teacher Standards. However, its major focus is on Standard 3 (Assessing, Planning, and Engaging Learners for Instruction) and Standard 4 (Supporting Each Child’s Learning Using Effective Instruction).

This assignment is designed to give candidates experiences with multiple methods and uses of assessment. It is designed to help candidates recognized and learn to track how their teaching impacts children’s learning. It also provides opportunities to understand how to use documentation and to focus on individual children’s learning needs. It assists candidates in understanding and practicing the use of assessments in guiding the teacher’s decision-making process. It provides an opportunity to consider how to communicate assessments with children, families, and possible other professionals. It also includes a component focusing on reflection on teaching effectiveness such that the teacher understand that they must continually use evidence to evaluate his/her practice and to consider its effects on various stakeholders and adapts practice accordingly.

5.3 Brief analysis of the data findings: Candidates’ scores are recorded for each item of the rubric on a scale of 0 through 20 in five different components. For every component a grade of 0 is considered Unacceptable, 5 is considered Basic, 10 is considered Proficient and a grade of 20 is considered Distinguished. The project is evaluated twice, the first draft and the final draft. Candidates are given the opportunity to revise their interventions and to make revisions after receiving feedback from instructors and peers before a final submission of the interventions.

5.4 Assessment Tool: Internship provides candidates with multiple opportunities to demonstrate their growth in teaching effectiveness. Teaching effectiveness is understood as the effects on learning of children with specific reference to the goals and objectives for that learning. Furthermore, it involves providing learning opportunities for children with different developmental characteristics. Teaching effectiveness is grounded in the continuous assessment of children’s growth as individuals. Effective assessment is understood as grounded in the goals for children’s learning. Its purpose is to provide feedback to the teacher about how children’s learning is progressing for these goals and to guide subsequent planning of teaching to maximize learning outcomes. Assessment that will accomplish these purposes will need to be varied depending on what information the teacher needs. It needs to be systematic and requires thoughtful reflection for it to inform teaching and so learning. Finally, good assessment requires the skills to communicate with sensitivity and knowledge with children and families about assessment result. This assignment should span though out the semester. It should be sufficient length as the purpose of the assignment is to demonstrate the effects of candidates’ teaching on children’s learning. The assignment will be based on documentation of either math or literacy. Decisions as to content area and time span will be decided jointly by candidates’ CT, candidates, and the faculty member teaching the Internship Seminar II. Candidates will follow the planning – teaching – analysis cyclical process taught in Internship Seminar I, but this assignment focuses specifically on the effects of candidates’ teaching on children’s learning and the use of this information in future planning.

Specific Guidelines1. In consultation with the CT, candidates decide which content area you will work on for this

assignment.

2. Using the Arkansas Teaching Standards candidates will identify the particular concepts, skills etc. that will be the objectives of your lessons.

3. Candidates will plan lessons according to the format learned in Internship Seminar I.

4. Design or choose an assessment that will serve as a pre-test or pre-assessment and one that will serve as a post-test or post-assessment for objectives.

5. As lessons are planed choose and/or design a variety of assessments that will assess children’s growth in understanding of the objectives of the lessons.

6. For each of the assessments formulate a rubric using objectives.

7. Identify 2 children from whom you will collect work samples. Select two children that typically are low level performers. Do not select a child who is frequently absent.

8. Compile a summary of background information on your 2 focus children including gender, home language, cultural information, and special needs.

9. Carry out pre-test or pre-assessment on all children and collect the data from the 2 focus children. If student scores a very high or perfect score on the pretest, you must modify r lesson plans and the assessments accordingly.

10. Teach the lessons/interventions, make assessments, modifying daily lesson plans based on daily assessment information to help children learn the objectives identified.

11. Collect work samples from the 2 focus children.

12. If a modification of a lesson/intervention or an assessment is necessary, make note of the reasons for the modifications and keep copies of the original and the revised versions.

13. Carry out post-test or post-assessment data and collect the data for 2 focus children.

Assignment ComponentsA. Title: Title should include subject, grade level, school and cooperating teacher.B. Description of children: Brief descriptions of the 2 focus children.C. Objectives. Objectives for the 20 interventions should include the Arkansas Benchmarks. D. Lesson plansE. Feedback to students and parentsF. Summary of assessment information

5.5 Scoring Guide for Effects on Student Learning (Teacher Work’s sample)

Standard Unacceptable 0 Basic 5 Proficient 10 Distinguished 20 Total

Assessment Demonstrates minimal or no understanding and use of multiple methods of assessment to engage learners in their own growth, to monitor learner progress, and to guide the teacher's and learner's decision making.

Demonstrates limited understanding and use of multiple methods of assessment to engage learners in their own growth, to monitor learner progress, and to guide the teacher's and learner's decision making.

Demonstrates emerging understanding and use of multiple methods of assessment to engage learners in their own growth, to monitor learner progress, and to guide the teacher's and learner's decision making.

Demostrastes comprehensive understanding and use of multiple methods of assessment to engage learners in their own growth, to monitor learner progress, and to guide the teacher's and learner's decision making.

Planning Demonstrates minimal or no ability to plan 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.

Demonstrates limited ability to plan 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.

Demonstrates emerging ability to plan 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.

Demonstrates comprehensive ability to plan 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.

Instructional Strategies

Demonstrates minimal or no understanding and use of 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.

Demonstrates limited understanding and use of 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.

Demonstrates emerging understanding and use of 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.

Demonstrates comprehensive understanding and use of 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.

Elements More than 4 elements are missing or are inappropriately reported.

Three elements are missing or are inappropriately reported.

Two or less elements are missing or are inappropriately reported

All elements are included and are appropriately reported.

Grammar/ Presentation

Documents had more than 5 grammar and spelling error. Narrative is confusing and difficult to follow.

Documents had no grammar and spelling error. Narrative is clear and easy to follow.

Total

5.6 Candidate Data Effects on Student Learning: Data for the reporting demonstrate that all of our candidates are passing this assessment. Since students are able to turn in the project at the midway point, corrections are redirections of the project assist the candidate in obtaining maximum benefit of this experience. As such, data indicate that our candidates are meeting the requirements of CAEP K-6 Elementary Teacher Standards standard 3 and 4.

Assessment 6 Philosophy Statement:

6.1 Description of assessment: The assignment for assessment 6 is completed in the candidates’ final semester of internship. For this assignment candidates will compose a teaching philosophy statement that includes: conception of teaching and learning, learner’s development, learner’s differences, learning environments, professional learning, and ethical practices. The statement demonstrates that candidates have been reflective and purposeful about the teaching profession. In addition, the teaching philosophy conveys teaching values, beliefs, goals, and provides a set of criteria and/or standards to judge the quality of teaching.

6.2 Description of how this assessment aligns with standards: This assignment requires candidates to use their understanding of to all CAEP K-6 Elementary Teacher Standards. However, its major focus is on Standard 5 (Developing as a Professional). This assignment is designed to give candidates the opportunity to become aware and reflect on their practice in light of research in the field, professional ethics standards, and resources available for professional learning and growth. Candidates continually evaluate the effects of their professional belief sand decisions on students, families and other professionals.6.3 Brief analysis of the data findings: Candidates’ scores are recorded for each item of the rubric on a scale of 0 through 20 in five different components. For every component a grade of 0 is considered Unacceptable, 5 is considered Basic, 10 is considered Proficient and a grade of 20 is considered Distinguished.

6.4 Assessment Tool: This assignment requires candidates to use their understanding of to all Arkansas Standards. However, its major focus is on Standard 5 (Professionalism). Internship provides candidates with multiple opportunities to demonstrate your understanding of the teaching profession.

Specific Guidelines1. There is no required content, set format, or right or wrong way to write a teaching statement.2. Make the length suit the context. Generally, they are 1–2 pages.3. Use present tense and the first person, in most cases.4. Avoid technical terms and use broadly understood language and concepts.5. Include teaching strategies and methods to help people “see” you in the classroom. Include

specific examples of your teaching strategies, assignments, discussions, etc.6. Make personal and unique. Your teaching philosophy should describe yourself as a person who is

intentional about teaching practices and committed to the teaching career.

Assignment ComponentsThe assignment should include statements about you believes and how that affects your teaching in the following areas.

A. Learner’s DevelopmentB. Learner’s Differences C. Learning Environments D. Professional Learning and development E. Ethical Practices

6.5 Scoring Guide for Philosophy Statement:

Standard Unacceptable 0 Basic 5 Proficient 10 Distinguished 20

Learner’s Development

Demonstrates minimal or no understanding of 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.

Demonstrates limited understanding of 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.

Demonstrates emerging understanding of 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.

Demonstrates comprehensive understanding of 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.

Learner’s Differences

Demonstrates minimal or no use of understanding of individual differences and diverse cultures and communities to ensure inclusive learning environments that enable each learner to meet high standards.

Demonstrates limited use of understanding of individual differences and diverse cultures and communities to ensure inclusive learning environments that enable each learner to meet high standards.

Demonstrates emerging use of understanding of individual differences and diverse cultures and communities to ensure inclusive learning environments that enable each learner to meet high standards.

Demonstrates comprehensive use of understanding of individual differences and diverse cultures and communities to ensure inclusive learning environments that enable each learner to meet high standards.

Learning Environments

Displays minimal or irrelevant knowledge of student differences (i.e. development, interests, culture, abilities/disabilities) that may affect learning.

Demonstrates limited ability to work with others to create environments that support individual and collaborative learning, and that encourage positive social interaction, active engagement in learning, and self-motivation.

Demonstrates emerging ability to work with others to create environments that support individual and collaborative learning, and that encourage positive social interaction, active engagement in learning, and self-motivation.

Demonstrates comprehensive ability to work with others to create environments that support individual and collaborative learning, and that encourage positive social interaction, active engagement in learning, and self-motivation.

Professional Learning and development

Displays minimal or irrelevant professional learning and provided no evidence or minimal evidence of plans to continually evaluate his/her practice, particularly the effects of his/her choices and actions on others (learners, families, other professionals, and the community:, and provide no evidence to adapt practices to meet the needs of each learner.

Displays ongoing professional learning and provided evidence of plans to continually evaluate his/her practice, particularly the effects of his/her choices and actions on others (learners, families, other professionals, and the community:, and provide evidence to adapt practices to meet the needs of each learner.

Ethical Practices

Displays minimal or irrelevant knowledge of Ethical Practices that may affect her teaching. (confidentiality, due process, etc.)

Demonstrates limited knowledge of Ethical Practices that may affect her teaching. (confidentiality, due process, etc.)

Demonstrates emerging ability to recognized ethical dilemas and conflicts of interests while working with others to create environments that support children, families, and colleagues.

Demonstrates comprehensive ability to address ethical dilemmas and conflicts of interests while working with others to create environments that support children, families, and colleagues.

Grammar/ Presentation

Documents had more than 5 grammar and spelling errors. Narrative is confusing and difficult to follow.

Documents had no grammar and spelling error. Narrative is clear and easy to follow.

Total

6.6 Data Analysis: Data for the reporting demonstrate that all of our candidates are passing this assessment at least at the proficient level. As such, data indicate that our candidates are meeting the requirements of CAEP K-6 Elementary Teacher Standards 5.

Assessment 7 Case Study:

7.1 Description of assessment: In this assignment candidates make multiple observations of a child with exceptionalities who is placed in a general education classroom, resource room, self-contained special education room, or a special needs center and documenting these observations. It also involves planning activities for the child based on the documented observations and creating a professional presentation of the child study. The child study also requires the candidates to demonstrate their knowledge of ethical and legal issues.

7.2 Description of how this assessment aligns with standards: The case study assignment addresses CAEP standard 1 – Understanding and addressing each child’s developmental and learning needs. Specifically, component 1b Understanding individual differences to plan inclusive learning experiences and environment that address learners’ needs and build on learners’ strengths and prior knowledge; and component 1c working with colleagues and other professionals to maximize his/her development and learning.

7.3 Brief analysis of the data findings: As a group, the 29 2016-17 candidates met expectations in terms of providing useful information about the student with special needs, the educational setting in which they observed the student, the school environment and community, and resources used and available (Mean = 2.37, SD=0.55). They met standards in obtaining useful information in the observation with appropriate observation methods (Mean = 2.39, SD=0.69). Finally, they met expectations in reflecting on the experience in ways that provided useful recommendations for future interventions and for their development in teaching the student, as well as other future students with special needs, in the future (Mean = 2.25, SD=0.44).

7.4 Interpretation of how data provide evidence for meeting standards: As a group, the candidates provided appropriate information about the student(s) with exceptionalities and the educational situation

and adequately described appropriate observation methods they used and the legal and ethical issues, especially those involving confidentiality, were upheld during the observation and in the write-up of the case study. Raw observation data was presented (as described in the assignment sheet) and the observation narratives were readable and provided a descriptive picture of the student(s), places, and events. The narrative made sense and provided enough information to adequately understand the people and the program and the events observed. The narrative was presented either chronologically or thematically (or both), but presented a realistic portrayal of the student(s) and the educational program. When interpretations were made, they were marked or worded as the observer’s interpretations. Meanings and interpretations were in line with the professional knowledge base. Legal and ethical issues, especially those involving confidentiality, were upheld. Their reflections on the observation experience presented relevant, and understandable connections with the observational data presented. Meanings and explanations of what took place flowed with the statements of possible teaching and management methods to be used in the future. These proposed future methods represented best practices in the professional knowledge base and were connected to accepted professional theories. Meanings and interpretations attempted to understand people and events in a meaningful way.

7.5 Assessment Tool: The major goal of the observation requirement is for you to be able to “ground” the knowledge that you are learning in class discussions and readings in the practical world in which people with disabilities live and learn. While knowledge about teaching students with disabilities is very important, I do want you to also learn some important skills of observation as well. Most crucial for me is that you begin to try to use observation in attempting to “walk a mile” in the shoes of the individual(s) with disabilities that you are observing. Almost every major approach to helping students with disabilities now suggests that this ability to understand the student from his or her point of view is a crucial beginning step in assisting the student to develop and learn in meaningful and beneficial ways.

Your first step in the observation is to find a site in which to observe. As I said in class, I do not care as much about the site as I do about your observation. But, in some way you need to be observing an individual or individuals with disabilities or special needs in some sort of learning situation.

If I were you, I would take some notes during the observation to help you remember. But, the more actively involved you are in the setting, the harder this will be. One good method is to use a chart in which at certain time intervals you jot down the time, the activity or what is going on, and comments or questions that you may have. Make a chart like this:

Time Activity Comment/Question

This chart will help you remember what you saw and it will also help you to focus your observations and to notice possible patterns of behavior.

Once you get away from the observation and have some time, you can write an expanded narrative of the event(s) that you witnessed. After you have done this it is now time to attempt to interpret what you have observed.

Use these “questions” and statements to help you focus your interpretation and write up of your observation experience:What happened during my observation, in terms of the individual(s) with special needs, that especially interested me?Why does this interest me?

Why did it happen? What are some explanations for what happened what the kid(s) did or didn’t do?How would I feel, what would I be thinking, if I were him/her?How would I feel, what would I be thinking, if I was the other kids, the teacher/adult in charge?Based on what I observed, is this the way that they seemed to feel and think about it?What could I do to find out what was really happening, what they were really feeling?What do I need to learn to help me to better understand what was happening?What can I take from this observation that will help me in the future?

Observation Assignment RubricConduct an observation in an educational setting which involves of an individual with a disability for at least ten (10) hours. The observation must be written up and must include an introduction which summarizes pertinent case information and a reflective summary in which you describe your thoughts and feelings about the experience (100 points).

EXEMPLARY EXCEEDS

EXPECTATIONSMEETS EXPECTATIONS UNSATISFACTORY

IntroductionSummarizes pertinent information about the student(s) and situation, methods used, and place/time of observation(s).(20 pts)

An especially clear, pertinent, and meaningful summary about the student(s) with exceptionalities and the educational situation, which exceptionally sets up the observation data. Exemplary observation methods are used and legal and ethical issues, especially those involving confidentiality, are highly maintained and explained.

Clear and pertinent information about the student(s) with exceptionalities and the educational situation nicely sets up the interview data. Good observation methods are used and legal and ethical issues, especially those involving confidentiality, are appropriately maintained and explained.

Appropriate information about the student(s) with exceptionalities and the educational situation sets up the observation data. Appropriate observation methods are used and legal and ethical issues, especially those involving confidentiality, are upheld.

Information summary is inadequate, unnecessary, and/or inappropriate and does not adequately set up the observation data. Inappropriate observation methods are used and legal and ethical issues, especially those involving confidentiality, are not upheld.

Observation Data:Descriptions of people, places, and events during observation(s).(45 pts)

Raw observation data is exceptionally presented (as described in the assignment sheet) and the observation narrative is a highly readable, descriptive picture of the student(s), places, and events. Narrative makes a good holistic sense and provides exceptionally pertinent information for a good, meaningful understanding of the people and the program and the events observed. The narrative is exceptionally presented either chronologically or thematically (or both), but presents a good, meaningful, and realistic portrayal of the student(s) and the educational program. If interpretations are made, they are clearly marked or worded as the observer’s interpretation. Meanings and interpretations are exceptionally in-line with the professional knowledge base. Legal and ethical issues, especially those involving confidentiality, are strictly upheld.

Raw observation data is presented (as described in the assignment sheet) and the observation narrative is a readable, descriptive picture of the student(s), places, and events. Narrative makes good sense and provides good information for a good understanding of the people and the program and the events observed. The narrative is well-presented either chronologically or thematically (or both), but presents a good and realistic portrayal of the student(s) and the educational program. If interpretations are made, they are marked or worded as the observer’s interpretation. Meanings and interpretations are well in-line with the professional knowledge base. Legal and ethical issues, especially those involving confidentiality, are upheld.

Raw observation data is presented (as described in the assignment sheet) and the observation narrative is a readable, descriptive picture of the student(s), places, and events. Narrative makes sense and provides enough information to adequately understand the people and the program and the events observed. The narrative is presented either chronologically or thematically (or both), but presents a realistic portrayal of the student(s) and the educational program. If interpretations are made, they are marked or worded as the observer’s interpretation. Meanings and interpretations are in line with the professional knowledge base. Legal and ethical issues, especially those involving confidentiality, are upheld.

Raw observation data is either not presented or it is incomplete, inadequate or not understandable. Observation narrative is inadequate, inappropriate, unrealistic, or not readable or understandable. The narrative does not make sense or does not provide enough information to understand people, places, or events. Interpretations made are not clearly marked as coming from the observer. Meanings and interpretations are inappropriate or unprofessional and not in line with the professional knowledge base. Legal and ethical issues are not upheld.

EXEMPLARY EXCEEDS EXPECTATIONS

MEETS EXPECTATIONS UNSATISFACTORY

Reflective summary of observation:

(30 pts)

Highly salient, relevant, and understandable connections with the observations. Meanings and explanations of what took place flow exceptionally well with the explanations and reflective statements of possible teaching and management methods to be used in the future based on the observations and interpretations. These methods represent best practices in the professional knowledge base and are well-connected to accepted professional theories. Meanings and interpretations are an exceptional attempt to understand people and events in a highly meaningful way.

Salient, relevant, and understandable connections with the observations. Meanings and explanations of what took place flow well with the statements of possible teaching and management methods to be used in the future based on responses. These methods represent best practices in the professional knowledge base and are connected to accepted professional theories. Meanings and interpretations attempt to understanding people and events in a significantly meaningful way.

Relevant, and understandable connections with the observations. Meanings and explanations of what took place flow with the statements of possible teaching and management methods to be used in the future based on responses. These methods represent best practices in the professional knowledge base and are connected to accepted professional theories. Meanings and interpretations attempt to understand people and events in a meaningful way.

No statements, or statements do not connect with the observations. Meanings and explanations of what took place do not flow with the statements of possible teaching and management methods to be used in the future. Or, the statements do not represent best practices in the professional knowledge base and are not connected to accepted professional theories. Meanings and interpretations do not attempt to understand people and events in a meaningful way.

Standard Formal English (5 pts)

Exemplary use of conventions of English, unless “errors” are part of natural observation.

No word use, grammar, or punctuation errors, unless they were part of natural observation.

A few word choice, grammar and punctuation errors which are not from observation.

Numerous word choice, grammar and punctuation errors which are not from observation.

7.6 Candidate Data (N=28)

Candidate Intro Data ReflectionStandard

Formal English

1 2 2 2 2

2 2 2 2 2

3 2 2 2 2

4 3 2 2 2

5 2 2 2 2

6 2 2 2 2

7 2 2 2 2

8 2 2 2 2

9 2 4 3 2

10 2 2 2 2

11 2 2 2 2

12 3 2 2 2

13 2 2 2 2

14 2 2 2 2

15 2 2 2 2

16 2 3 3 2

17 3 3 3 3

18 3 4 3 3

19 2 2 2 2

20 2 2 2 2

22 2 2 2 2

23 3 3 3 2

24 2 2 2 2

25 3 3 2 2

26 2 2 2 2

27 2 2 2 2

28 4 4 3 3

29 3 3 3 3

MEAN 2.32 2.39 2.25 2.14

STDEV 0.55 0.69 0.44 0.36

MAX 4 4 3 3

MIN 2 2 2 2

Name 28 28 28 281=unsatisfactory; 2=meets expectations; 3=exceeds expectations; 4=exemplary

Assessment 8: Parent Interview:

8.1 Description of the assessment: In SPED 4301 Teaching Students with Exceptionalities during block III, ELEM candidates must identify a student with special needs who is receiving special education services, obtain parent permission, and conduct an interview of the parent or parents using existing questions (see below). The candidate then creates a write-up of the interview, including an introduction of the student with special needs, parents, and other pertinent information, the transcript of interview responses, recommendations for future intervention efforts based on the responses, and a reflection of the experience, focusing on new understandings to guide future teaching. The interview assignment is graded using a scoring rubric (see below).

8.2 Description of how this assessment aligns with standards: The parent interview assignment aligns with CAEP Standard 1 – Understand and addressing each child’s developmental and learning needs, components 1b and 1c. By interviewing the parents of a special needs child candidates develop their understanding of individual differences and diverse families (1b), gain insight into special needs children, work collaboratively with families in setting and meeting challenging learning goals for their children (1c).

8.4 Assessment Tool: Conduct an interview with a parent/guardian of an individual with disabilities and/or with the individual with disabilities. The interview should be transcribed and must include an introduction which summarizes pertinent case information about the family, recommendations for future interventions, and a reflective summary in which you describe your thoughts and feelings about the experience (100 points).

1. What is your name and your relationship to the child?2. How old is your child and what school/grade/classroom is he/she in?3. Who lives in your household and what are their relationships to the child?4. If there are other children in the household, explain how they relate to each other.5. What significant changes have occurred in the household that might impact the child’s learning? For

examples, divorce, death, etc.6. Could you give me a little background information about your family, such as home language, cultural

values, ethnicity?7. When your child exhibits mistaken or inappropriate behavior, how do you expect it to be handled?8. How does your culture perceive children with disabilities?9. What, if any, cultural challenges have you faced in dealing with your child’s disability?10. How long has your child been receiving special education services?

11. What is your child’s identified disability and how was it identified?12. How has this news impacted your family?13. Do you have any cultural or religious beliefs that should be considered when offering services to you

and your family?14. What are some of the community resources that your family utilizes?15. What was it like when you first received formal notice that your child may need special education

services?16. What was your first special education conference like? What do you especially remember?17. What do you remember about it that was positive?18. What do you remember about it that was negative?19. How have the other conferences been the same?…different?20. Do you feel like you have had input as an IEP/IPP/IFSP team member? Have you been listened to

and treated with respect? Please elaborate.21. Do you feel that family and friends included in the IEP/IPP/IFSP meeting were listened to and treated

with respect? Please elaborate.22. Were these meetings conducted in your native language?23. Could all parties in the meeting understand the language? Please elaborate.24. Did the others use terms or language that you did not understand? If so, what did you do about that?25. Do you feel the school advocates for your child? If so, how?26. What would you like to have different at a conference?27. How do you prefer to communicate with your child’s teacher regarding your ideas in how to enhance

your child’s education?28. How did your child’s teacher communicate with you about your child’s needs? (informal

communication, formal, letters, brochures, phone calls, emails, etc.)29. Did the school suggest community support services for the child and family? (For example, free

clinics, parent centers, legal services, parent advocates, etc.)30. What is your child’s transitional plan?31. How was your child’s transitional plan communicated to you?32. Were family members and other people who are involved in your child’s life involved in the

transitional plan?33. How does your child’s team demonstrate respect for your values, beliefs, and expectations of

services?34. What is your impression of the necessary paperwork completed in the team meeting?35. Were family members, friends, and professionals who play a significant role in your child’s life

included in the first special education meeting? 36. As a future teacher, what advice would you give me in terms of dealing with parents of children with

disabilities?37. How do you feel that we could better involve families/communities in children’s education?38. What input did family members, friends, professionals who play a significant role in your child’s life

provide on how to better involve them in his/her education?39. Can you think of ways that you feel the school could better support your family?

Reflection: What did you think about the interview? What are some things that surprised you? What are some things that the parent(s) said that really made you think? How could this interview help you in terms of this class and your future profession? If you are not a parent, how could this interview help you in terms of becoming a parent? If you are a parent, how did this parent differ from you in his/her responses?

8.5 Scoring guide for parent interview: Parent Interview Assignment Scoring Rubric

EXEMPLARY5

EXCEEDS EXPECTATIONS

4

MEETS EXPECTATIONS

3

NEEDS IMPROVEMENT2

UNSATISFACTORY

1IntroductionSummarizes pertinent case information about the family, methods used, and place/time of interview.(20 pts)

An especially clear, pertinent, and meaningful case summary about the family and situation, which exceptionally sets up the interview data. Exemplary interview methods are used and legal and ethical issues, especially those involving confidentiality, are highly maintained and explained.

Clear and pertinent case information about the family and situation nicely sets up the interview data. Good interview methods are used and legal and ethical issues, especially those involving confidentiality, are appropriately maintained and explained.

Appropriate case information about the family and situation sets up the interview data. Appropriate interview methods are used and legal and ethical issues, especially those involving confidentiality, are upheld.

Case information summary is minimally adequate, and provides only scant information to set up the interview data.

Case information summary is inadequate, unnecessary, and/or inappropriate and does not adequately set up the interview data. Inappropriate interview methods are used and legal and ethical issues, especially those involving confidentiality, are not upheld.

Interview Data:Transcription of the interview responses to questions.(45 pts)

All questions were asked and all responses were recorded appropriately, with no summaries, paraphrasing, or corrections made. If interpretations were made (say due to an ambiguous or inarticulate response), they are clearly marked or worded as interviewer’s interpretation. But, there were good attempts at probing or following-up or clarifying to attain appropriate response to question or to seek further information or clarification. Extra questions are asked that are extremely appropriate and follow interview content and add important data.

All questions were asked and all responses were recorded appropriately, with no summaries, paraphrasing, or corrections made. If interpretations were made (say due to an ambiguous or inarticulate response), they are clearly marked or worded as interviewer’s interpretation. But, there were obvious attempts at probing or following-up or clarifying to attain appropriate response to question or to seek further information or clarification. Extra questions are asked which are appropriate and add important data to the interview.

All questions were asked and all responses were recorded appropriately, with no summaries, paraphrasing, or corrections made. If interpretations are made (say due to an ambiguous or inarticulate response), they are marked or worded as interviewer’s interpretation.

Almost all of the questions were asked, though several are not, and there are minimally adequate responses provided. It is difficult to ascertain if the responses were exact or even approximate transcriptions.

Several questions were not asked and/or all responses were not recorded appropriately. Blank questions were not explained. Summaries, paraphrasing, corrections, or interpretations were made and/or not clearly marked or worded as if interviewee’s response or origin is uncertain.

Reflective summary of interview:

(30 pts)

Highly salient, relevant, and understandable connections with the interviewee’s responses and situation. Meanings and explanations of what was said flow exceptionally well with the statements of possible teaching and management methods to be used in the future based on responses. These methods represent best practices in the professional knowledge base and are well-connected to accepted professional theories

Salient, relevant, and understandable connections with the interviewee’s responses and situation. Meanings and explanations of what was said flow well with the statements of possible teaching and management methods to be used in the future based on responses. These methods represent best practices in the professional knowledge base and are connected to accepted professional theories

Relevant, and understandable connections with the interviewee’s responses and situation. Meanings and explanations of what was said flow with the statements of possible teaching and management methods to be used in the future based on responses. These methods represent best practices in the professional knowledge base and are connected to accepted professional theories

Reflections are made, but are minimal and while suggestive of important learnings, not especially meaningful, and fail to extend the basic explanations to future teaching and management methods.

No statement or statements do not connect with the interviewee’s responses or situation. Meanings and explanations of what was said do not flow with the statements of possible teaching and management methods to be used in the future. Or, the statements do not represent best practices in the professional knowledge base and are not connected to accepted professional theories

Standard Formal English (5 pts)

Exemplary use of conventions of English, unless “errors” are part of interviewees natural responses.

No word use, grammar, or punctuation errors, unless they were part of interviewee’s natural responses.

Just a few word choice, grammar and punctuation errors which are not from interviewee.

Barely passable grammar and punctuation errors that are not from interviewee.

Numerous word choice, grammar and punctuation errors which are not from interviewee.

8.6 Candidate Data: Student Introduction Interview Data Recommendation Reflection Standard

Formal English

1 3 3 3 3 3

2 3 5 5 5 3

3 4 4 3 5 3

4 4 3 5 4 3

5 3 3 3 3 3

6 3 3 3 3 3

7 3 3 3 3 3

8 3 4 3 3 3

9 4 3 4 4 3

11 4 3 4 4 3

12 3 3 3 3 3

13 3 3 3 3 3

14 3 3 3 3 3

15 3 3 3 3 3

16 4 3 3 3 3

17 3 3 3 4 3

18 3 3 4 4 3

19 3 3 3 3 3

20 3 3 3 3 3

21 3 3 3 3 3

22 3 3 3 3 3

23 3 3 3 3 3

24 3 3 3 3 3

25 5 4 5 5 4

26 4 3 3 3 3

27 3 3 3 3 3

28 3 3 3 3 3

29 2 3 2 2 3

30 3 3 3 3 3

31 4 4 5 5 3

32 5 5 5 5 4

MEAN 3.32 3.26 3.39 3.45 3.06

STDEV 0.65 0.58 0.80 0.81 0.25

MAX 5 5 5 5 4

MIN 2 3 2 2 3

N 31 31 31 31 31

8.7 Data Analysis: As a group, the 2016-17 candidates meet expectations for gathering appropriate information from parents of students with disabilities that appear to lead to appropriate recommendations for future interventions and also lead them to reflect on the interview in ways that will help them develop better understandings to guide their future development as teachers of students with special needs. Specifically, the candidates provided adequate overviews of the child, family, and circumstances. These introductions provided adequate knowledge and understanding of characteristics of the child, family structure, and community resources that have been utilized.

Legal and ethical issues, especially those involving confidentiality, were upheld. Adequate effort was made to draw on parental feedback and the value of the role of parents to engage the family in the interview process. All questions were asked and all responses were recorded appropriately, with no summaries, paraphrasing, or corrections made. If interpretations were made of ambiguous or inarticulate responses, they were marked or worded as the interviewer’s interpretation. There were some attempts at probing or following-up to obtain appropriate responses to questions.

Some extra questions were asked that were appropriate and followed interview content and added meaningful data. Evidence indicated some effort in building a positive relationship with the family to gain knowledge about the child. They also included some recommendations to assist in the child’s development and learning in the future. Recommendations represented best practices and were connected to accepted professional theories. They also included some strategies to support and empower families. These recommendations represented best practices and were connected to accepted professional theories. They also included some suggestions about possible services and resources to involve families and communities in their child’s development and learning in the future. These recommendations represented best practices and were connected to accepted professional theories. Most recommendations reflected respect for families and would promote reciprocal relationships with parents. The recommendations also represented and had understandable connections with the parent/guardian’s responses in the interview and with the circumstances described in the interview.

Their reflections on the experience provided adequate explanations of how this interview process assisted their development of new understandings of children with disabilities and their parents and families. Evidence also exhibited adequate efforts to find out about possible resources/services that they could utilize in their future teaching.

SECTION IV: COMMUICATION WITH STAKEHOLDERS

1. Description of ELEM efforts to communicate with stakeholders: ELEM faculty solicit feed back from stakeholders each semester in two ways: Cooperating teaching training, and an Exit Survey of our graduates before graduation.

1.2 Cooperating teachers training each semester. During this meeting assessment results are shared with teachers and principals who host field and intern students. Then breakout sessions are held by each program in the School of Education. During these sessions stakeholders are asked to provide programs with ideas to improve the program. Feedback from K-6 Cooperating Teachers in the spring of 2017 is listed below.

Suggested Midterm & Final Summative Evaluation instead of only one at the end TESS Evaluation should be used from novice perspective, not teacher of record Use Bloomboard Resources with midterm evaluation to address areas of concern Enhance Technology Savvy Interns lack ability to follow the standards; seem to rely on curriculum map Remind field and intern candidates to meet principal on the first day of field Remind field and intern candidates to email principal and CT to introduce themselves prior to first day via

email (discussed in orientation, will be reiterated) Include more differentiated instruction in coursework Be more explicit with components of lesson plan (addressed in Seminar)

Request that Science field assignments correlate with instruction currently being taught in the classroom Question about AEA insurance for field and interns Candidates need to show ethic of care for students and be sympathetic and empathetic to their needs

(observation from principal-----of a graduate of the program) GLOWS: candidates’ confidence, candidates’ rapport with students, faculty, and staff, candidates’

assertiveness, and candidates’ preparation

1.2 Graduates Exit Survey: In spring 2017, the Educator Preparation Program Assessment Committee (EPPAC) developed a new exit survey based on the INTASC standards and the new School of Education vision and mission that was developed and approved in the fall 2016 semester. The new exit survey was administered to the those initial licensure candidates who were graduating in May 2017. In an effort to increase the response rate of the survey, we administered the survey to completers at graduation during the lengthy wait time prior to the beginning of the ceremony. Since everyone who graduated in the Spring 2017 semester did not attand and walk in graduation, we also developed an online survey using survey monkey and sent emails to those completers who did not attend graduation. Below, we present data from the exit survey.

For each of the following items, how well prepared were you…?

1 = not prepared, 2 = somewhat prepared, 3 = adequately prepared, and 4 = exceptionally prepared.

Entire Group

Mean(SD)Range

n

ELEMMean(SD)

Rangen

MCEDMean(SD)

Rangen

TCEDMean(SD)

Rangen

SPED Mean(SD)

Rangen

Not ListedMean(SD)

Rangen

1. In understanding how learners grow and develop and how to teach in developmentally appropriate ways? INTASC St 1

3.81(0.40)142

3.92(0.29)112

3.86(0.317

3.38(0.52)18

3.50(0.71)02

4.00(0.00)013

2. In making effective and appropriate accommodations for learners with culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds? INTASC St 2

3.69(0.60)242

3.92(0.29)112

3.71(0.49)17

3.00(0.93)28

3.50(0.71)02

3.92(0.28)113

3. In making effective and appropriate accommodations for learners with exceptional needs, including those with disabilities and gifts and talents? INTASC St 2

3.74(0.54)242

3.83(3.9)112

3.71(0.49)17

3.38(0.52)18

3.50(0.71)02

3.92(0.28)113

4. In creating educational environments that encourage positive social interaction, active engagement in learning, and self- motivation? INTASC St 3

3.95(0.22)142

3.92(0.29)112

4.00(0)07

3.88(0.35)18

4.00(0.00)02

4.00(0.00)013

5. In the main concepts, tools of inquiry, and structures of the discipline(s) you will teach? INTASC St 4

3.83(0.44)242

3.83(3.9)112

4.00(0)07

3.88(0.35)18

3.00(1.41)02

3.85(0.38)113

6. In the appropriate use of professional standards in your teaching, such as aligning plans to the Arkansas Curriculum Frameworks, Common Core State Standards, and your content area Specialized Professional Association?INTASC St 4

3.88(0.33)142

3.92(0.29)112

3.86(0.317

3.63(0.52)18

4.00(0.00)02

4.00(0.00)013

7. In taking the content you will teach and create learning experiences that are accessible and meaningful for learners to assure mastery of the content? INTASC St 4

3.88(0.33)142

3.83(3.9)112

4.00(0)07

3.75(0.46)18

3.50(0.71)02

4.00(0.00)013

8. In connecting concepts and using differing perspectives to engage learners in critical thinking, creativity, and collaborative problem solving related to authentic local and global issues? INTASC St 5

3.88(0.33)142

3.92(0.29)112

3.86(0.317

3.63(0.52)18

4.00(0.00)02

4.00(0.00)013

9. In using multiple methods of assessment to engage learners in their own growth, to monitor learner progress, and to guide your students’ and your own decision making?

3.80(0.49)241

3.83(3.9)112

3.83(0.41)16

3.50(0.54)18

3.50(0.71)02

4.00(0.00)013

INTASC St 6

10. In planning for instruction that supports every student in meeting rigorous learning goals? INTASC St 7

3.76(0.49)241

3.83(3.9)112

3.83(0.41)16

3.25(0.71)28

4.00(0.00)02

3.92(0.28)113

11. In using a variety of instructional strategies that supports meaningful learning for all students? INTASC St 8

3.78(0.42)141

3.83(3.9)112

3.67(0.52)16

3.50(0.54)18

3.50(0.71)02

4.00(0.00)013

12. In continually evaluating your practice and seek professional development experiences for ongoing professional growth? INTASC St 9

3.85(0.36)141

3.92(0.29)112

4.00(0)06

3.50(0.54)18

4.00(0.00)02

3.92(0.28)113

13. In effectively communicating with the diverse learning community (teachers, administrators, staff, parents, other community members, etc.)? INTASC St 10

3.80(0.46)241

3.92(0.29)112

3.83(0.41)16

3.38(0.74)28

4.00(0.00)02

3.92(0.28)113

14. In seeking appropriate leadership roles and opportunities in collaborating with other professionals, learners, families, and community members to advance the profession? INTASC St 10

3.78(0.42)141

3.83(3.9)112

3.83(0.41)16

3.38(0.74)28

4.00(0.00)02

3.92(0.28)113

15. In using technology appropriately in planning your lessons, while teaching your lessons, and in assessing student learning?SOE Goals and CAEP

3.80(0.51)241

3.92(0.29)112

4.00(0)06

3.38(0.74)28

4.00(0.00)02

3.85(0.38)113

16. In being innovative in your teaching?INTASC St 10; SOE Vision

3.80(0.40)141

3.83(3.9)112

4.00(0)06

3.50(0.54)18

3.50(0.71)02

3.92(0.28)113

Open Response Question #1: What did you most like about the program?All the field experience

Cognitive understanding and the need for cooperative teaching were the two most significant things I learned

Communication and willingness to help

Dr. Hayn was incredibly supportive and an excellent resource

experience

Faculty and their help

flexibility in scheduling

I "heart" the professors!

I liked it all

I liked their sharing of past experiences in teaching

Internship and Dr. Burgin. He's awesome.

It is over :-)

Leland

meeting new people

Our professors taught from experience about things that work

Staff/teachers were willing to work with students

The best thing about the program for me were specific classes that I took that I felt really prepared me for going into my own classroom. Nearly all of

these were on-campus classes where the instructors were engaged and provided a multitude of teaching examples and tips from time in their own

classrooms. I never received the same interaction or learned as much from online classes because it was difficult to ever reach the level of engagement

that I got from in person classes. Lundon, Dr. Hune, and Dr. Hayn were three of the instructors that stood out to me most and offered invaluable support.

I was also glad to gain Dr. Hughes as an advisor because she helped me feel more at ease and more informed about my place in the program.

The connection my professors made with students. I felt like I would ask them anything and learned a whole lot.

The depth that the program went into to prepare me for the classroom.

the experience in classrooms

The experienced professors

The integrity of my peers and professors

The people Being in schools early and often Not being under control of the secondary Ed peeps Having “Professor Y” control everything.

The professors are EXTREMELY helpful

The professors really prepare us well for our fields and provide many resources

Very knowledgeable in Special Education. Effective feedback. Shared experiences.

Working with my content area.

Open Response Question #2: How can we make the program better?"Professor X" needs to go

86 "Professor X"

Communication! I felt that I had to move my degree forward and frequently felt confused about requirements.

Fix the financial department and better communication

I spent at least 3 years in the program and the overall feel during most of that time was that the program was in obvious turmoil

IEP training

It's great!

Keep the Uteach program. Shut down the math / sciences secondary Ed programs like you were supposed to do so UALRTeach could do what it was

supposed to do. Stop playing the politics game and worry and take care of your students for once. I really want to write more. I'm so fed up with

UALR in general. Done.

Less essay tests

Let Dr. Burgin teach everything

Make the process less confusing for students. There seemed to be too many people that didn't communicate effectively within the department.

more available staff and more ease through the program

More hands-on classroom experience

More online options

N/A

N/A it's awesome!

notification of changes could be better and staff needs to be on one accord

Pay interns :-)

Teach more curriculum.

You cannot

Certifications: K-8 Elementary and Primary Specialist … · Web viewto create the explicit 5...

Documents

Transcript of Certifications: K-8 Elementary and Primary Specialist … · Web viewto create the explicit 5...