TEAC Inquiry Brief Proposal - ACU Blogs · TEAC Inquiry Brief Proposal College of Education and...
110
TEAC Inquiry Brief Proposal College of Education and Human Services Department of Teacher Education Inquiry Proposal Authors: Sam Stewart, EdD, Assistant Professor of Teacher Education Dana Kennamer Pemberton, PhD, Department Chair and Professor of Teacher Education April 1, 2011
Transcript of TEAC Inquiry Brief Proposal - ACU Blogs · TEAC Inquiry Brief Proposal College of Education and...
TEAC
Inquiry Brief Proposal
College of Education and Human Services
Department of Teacher
Education
Inquiry Proposal Authors:
Sam Stewart, EdD, Assistant Professor of Teacher Education
Dana Kennamer Pemberton, PhD, Department Chair and Professor of
Teacher Education
April 1, 2011
ii
Table of Contents
I. Program Overview .................................................................................................................... 1
II. Claims and Rationale .............................................................................................................. 10
Program Claims ................................................................................................................ 10
Assessments and Rationale ............................................................................................... 14
III. Methods of Assessment .......................................................................................................... 16
Claim 1: Knowledge of Human Development.................................................................. 16
Claim 2: Student Diversity................................................................................................ 17
Claim 3: Effective, Coherent Instruction and Assessment ............................................... 18
Claim 4: Factors That Impact Student Learning ............................................................... 18
Claim 5: Classroom Climate ............................................................................................. 18
Claim 6: Manage Student Behavior .................................................................................. 19
Claim 7: Effective Communication .................................................................................. 19
Claim 8: Engage Students ................................................................................................. 20
Claim 9: Use of Technology ............................................................................................. 20
Claim 10: Varied Assessments ......................................................................................... 21
Claim 11: Family Interaction ............................................................................................ 21
Claim 12: Professional Development ............................................................................... 22
Claim 13: Legal and Ethnical Requirements .................................................................... 22
Claim 14: Christian Principles .......................................................................................... 22
Claim 15: Knowledge of Subject Matter. ......................................................................... 23
IV. Results ..................................................................................................................................... 24
TExES PPR ....................................................................................................................... 24
TExES Content Exams ..................................................................................................... 28
GPA................................................................................................................................... 29
E-Portfolio......................................................................................................................... 30
Showcase Presentation Scores .......................................................................................... 30
Student-Teaching Evaluations and Grades ....................................................................... 30
V. Discussion and Plan ................................................................................................................ 32
Inquiry Plans Based on Preliminary Findings .................................................................. 33
Evidence-Based Decisions ................................................................................................ 35
Program Changes to Be Monitored................................................................................... 37
Summary ........................................................................................................................... 37
References ..................................................................................................................................... 38
Appendices
A. Quality Control System and Internal Audit ...................................................................... 39
B. Institutional Norms Comparison ....................................................................................... 51
C. Abilene Christian University Faculty Qualifications ........................................................ 60
D. Program Requirements...................................................................................................... 60
iii
E. Inventory of Status of Evidence From Measures and Indicators for TEAC Quality
Principle 1 ......................................................................................................................... 80
F. Assessments and Rubrics .................................................................................................. 83
List of Tables
1 Certifications and Majors in the Abilene Christian University Teacher Education
Program ............................................................................................................................... 4
2 Demographic Enrollment in the Abilene Christian University Teacher Education
Program, 2010-2011 ........................................................................................................... 5
3 Domains, Competencies, and Indicators from the Abilene Christian University
Teacher Candidate Handbook .......................................................................................... 12
4 Claims Alignment ............................................................................................................. 14
5 Claims and Assessments ................................................................................................... 16
6 TExES PPR by Administration Format, Program, and Statewide Averages With
Number of ACU Candidates Tested ................................................................................. 25
7 Percentage of Questions From PPR Answered Correctly, by Claim and Program
Competency ...................................................................................................................... 27
8 TExES Content Area Exam Results, Program and State Averages and Comparisons
for 2010 Completers ......................................................................................................... 28
9 Overall, Education, and Content Field GPAs for 2010 Completers ................................. 29
1
I. Program Overview
Abilene Christian University (ACU), a private comprehensive university, was founded in
1906. It is affiliated with the Churches of Christ and is one of the largest private universities in
the Southwest. Enrollment for the 2010-2011 academic year included 3,806 undergraduates and
922 graduate students from 50 states and territories and 42 countries.
The mission of the university is to educate students for Christian service and leadership
throughout the world. This mission is achieved through:
exemplary teaching, offered by a faculty of Christian scholars that inspires a commitment
to learning;
significant research, grounded in the university’s disciplines of study, that informs issues
of important to the academy, church, and society; and
meaningful service to society, the academic disciplines, the university, and the church,
expressed in various ways, by all segments of the ACU community.
The university is committed to innovation and to excellence. U.S. News and World
Report consistently ranks ACU both a “Best College” and a “Best College Buy” in its annual
ranking of colleges and universities. ACU’s application of technology has also been acclaimed
by industry and higher education experts around the world as an example of forward thinking
institutions. For example, in the fall of 2008, ACU became the first university to initiate a mobile
learning program, providing an Apple iPhone or iPod Touch to all incoming freshman to
integrate technology and learning in and out of the classroom. In recognition of this innovation,
U.S. News & World Report named ACU in 2009 as one the universities that “everyone should be
watching.”
In the fall of 2010, ACU launched a new, integrated core curriculum. This is an ambitious
and innovative initiative that has the potential to transform the general education curriculum of
the university. The courses in ACU’s Common Core are designed to help students explore “big
2
questions” through its team-taught and interdisciplinary courses. Within this Common Core is a
set of five interdisciplinary courses:
The Question of Truth – The Cornerstone Course: How do I know?
The Question of Identity – Integrated Course 1: Who am I?
The Question of Community – Integrated Course 2: Who is “the other?”
The Question of Transcendence – Integrated Course 3: Where is God?
The Question of Vocation – The Capstone Course: How do I live?
ACU has a strong commitment to undergraduate research. This is reflected in the recent
establishment of the Office of Undergraduate Research, Undergraduate Research Travel Grants,
and the annual Undergraduate Research Festival, now in its 3rd year. In addition, the university’s
Quality Enhancement Plan, which is part of the 2011 reaffirmation process with the Southern
Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS), is a university-wide initiative for developing
students’ research literacy, regardless of major or goals for pursuing graduate study.
The university includes the colleges of Arts and Sciences, Biblical Studies, Business
Administration, and Education and Human Services. Also included in the university are the
School of Information Technology and Computing, the School of Social Work, the Honors
College, the Graduate School, the Graduate School of Theology, and the Patty Hanks Shelton
School of Nursing.
The Department of Teacher Education resides in the College of Education and Human
Services. When the college was first established, the department was named Curriculum and
Instruction. This was changed to the Department of Teacher Education in 2009. Other
departments assigned to this college are Social Work, Graduate Studies in Education,
Communication Sciences and Disorders, and Exercise Science and Health.
3
The College of Education and Human Services was established in Fall 2006. Previously,
the Education Department was included in the College of Arts and Sciences. The Education
Department was the flagship department for this major reorganization. Prior to the establishment
of the College of Education and Human Services, graduate and undergraduate programs in
education were included in the same department. As part of the restructuring of the college,
Teacher Education and Graduate Studies in Education became separate departments.
The ACU Teacher Education Program is administered by the Department of Teacher
Education and includes all students seeking teacher certification. The program is approved by the
State of Texas to certify students in 24 areas and includes students from three colleges and 15
academic departments. See Table 1 for a list of all certifications and majors in the Teacher
Education Program.
Current enrollment in the Teacher Education Program includes about 440 students. This
number reflects all students with declared majors that include teacher certification and is not
exclusive to students with majors that officially reside in the Department of Teacher Education.
The number of admitted students is about half of the number of total students. Students typically
apply for admission to the program in the sophomore year. In the 2010 Title II report, 236
students were admitted to program with the demographics shown in Table 2.
The establishment of the Department of Teacher Education in 2006 reflected more than a
simple change in organizational structure. The Teacher Education Program was identified
institutionally as an area of strategic investment. First, the university provided new facilities for
the department. This facility provides expanded space for curriculum resources, student research,
and engagement with current technologies.
4
Table 1
Certifications and Majors in the Abilene Christian University Teacher Education Program
Certification Major Advising department
EC-6 Generalist BS: Early Childhood/Elem Teacher Education
EC-6 ESL Generalist BS: Early Childhood/Elem Teacher Education
EC-12 Special
Education
BS: All-level Special Ed. Teacher Education
4-8 Language Arts BS: Middle School Language Arts Teacher Education
4-8 Mathematics BS: Middle School Mathematics Mathematics
4-8 Science BS: Middle School Science Teacher Education
4-8 Social Studies BS: Middle School SS Teacher Education
8-12 English/Language
Arts/Reading
BS: High School ELA or
BA: English with Certification
Teacher Education or
English
EC-12 Art BFA: Art with Teaching
Concentration
Art and Design
8-12 Mathematics BS: Mathematics for High School
Teacher Certification
Mathematics
8-12 Life Science BS: High School – Life Science Biology
8-12 Physical Science BS: High School – Physical
Science
Chemistry and Biochemistry
8-12 Chemistry BS: Chemistry – Chemistry
Education Track
Chemistry and Biochemistry
EC-12 Spanish BA: Spanish Teacher Certification Foreign Languages
8-12 History BS: History History
8-12 Social Studies BS: Social Studies for Teachers History
8-12 Technology
Applications
BS: Convergent
Journalism/Multimedia Teacher
Certification
Journalism
8-12 Computer
Education
New Degree Under Development Will be advised through the
School of Information
Technology and Computing
6-12 Journalism BS: Convergent
Journalism/Multimedia Teacher
Certification
Journalism
8-12 Math/Physics BS: Physics/Mathematics Physics
6-12 Business
Education
BS: Interdisciplinary Studies Teacher Education and Business
6-12 Speech BS: Interdisciplinary Studies Teacher Education and
Journalism
EC-12 Music BM: All-Level Teacher
Certification
Music
EC-12 Theatre BFA: Theatre for Teacher
Certification
Theatre
EC-12 Physical
Education
5
Table 2
Demographic Enrollment in the Abilene Christian University Teacher
Education Program, 2010-2011
Demographic Number of students
Gender
Male 42
Female 194
Ethnicity
Hispanic 16
American Indian or Alaska Native 2
Black or African American 6
Asian 1
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander 1
White 205
Two or more races 5
In addition to new facilities, the Teacher Education Department is truly a new program.
As part of the 2006 restructuring, the department made strategic and significant changes in
personnel. Of the 10 current full-time faculty members, only two have been with the university
for more than 4 years. Four are in their 4th year, one is in the 3rd year, two are in the 2nd year,
and one is in the 1st year. For all practical purposes, this is a new faculty. For this reason, only
one faculty member—the chair of the department—is tenured. The chair is providing support and
mentoring for all tenure-track faculty so that they will be successful in achieving this important
designation.
This new faculty has engaged in significant and collaborative curriculum revision and
alignment. In the spring of 2008 the faculty developed the current program competencies,
aligned with the competencies of the Texas Examination of Educator Standards (TExES)
Pedagogy and Professional Responsibilities (PPR) framework, with the addition of Competency
14 to reflect our institutional faith commitment. All courses were collaboratively evaluated to
6
determine where and at what level (introduction, conceptual mastery, or application) the
competencies were addressed. This process was repeated in the fall of 2011.
The curriculum revision and alignment process represents only part of the program
transformation over the last 4 years. The faculty has developed a cohesive and coherent program
with a shared conceptual framework. The Teacher Education Handbook has been collaboratively
developed to outline for our teacher candidates the program structure, benchmarks, and
philosophy. A conceptual framework that articulates the faculty’s commitment to continuous
reflection and improvement was collaboratively developed as well. A summary of this
framework follows:
Be Transformed: ACU Teacher Education Conceptual Framework
Do not conform any longer to the pattern of this world,
but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. – Romans 12:2
The ACU Teacher Education conceptual framework, “Be transformed,” communicates
our shared vision for preparing responsive professional educators who demonstrate
scholarship, relationship, and professional engagement. It provides direction for our
program courses, clinical experiences, assessment, and service. This framework guides
our practice and is informed by our faith commitment that teaching is a ministry. As
such, we are called to continual personal and professional growth and transformation.
Scholarship. Scholarship encompasses both the mastery of knowledge and skills and the
disposition of being a lifelong learner. Our teacher candidates value learning. They have
an understanding of pedagogy as well as content. They comprehend the distinctive
qualities of learners, including their sociocultural contexts and the learning process.
Candidates are equipped to continuously expand their expertise through participation in
professional development and personal reflection. They are prepared to think critically
about their practice, reflect on the strengths and needs of their students, and adjust their
instruction accordingly.
Relationships. Effective teachers establish and maintain relationships with learners, their
families, communities, and other professionals. Our teacher candidates engage in
collaborative activities with colleagues and community stakeholders in order to meet
students’ needs. They seek opportunities to share ideas and to invite feedback from peers.
They communicate effectively and professionally and are guided by principles of
personal and professional integrity.
7
Engagement. Engagement in professional activity allows teachers to enact knowledge in
practice. Our teacher candidates understand and demonstrate the connection between
theory and classroom application. Candidates employ teaching methods that are informed
by seminal research and theories, as well as current and emergent understandings of the
learning process. They apply their knowledge of learners and learning and continually
refine their pedagogy as they reflect on challenges they encounter. (ACU Teacher
Education Program, 2010)
This document reflects and informs our practice. Our commitment to scholarship is seen
in the increased participation of our undergraduates in research. The university launched the
Undergraduate Research Festival in 2009. Teacher education students won second place in the
Social Sciences division in 2009 and first place in this division in 2010. The following is a list of
undergraduate research completed in the last 4 years by students in Teacher Education outside of
course requirements:
The Conceptual Fluency and Automaticity in Basic Math Fact Skills of Elementary
Students;
Primary Language Phonemic Awareness Assessment and Intervention for English
Language Learners, presented at the 2007 National Association for the Education of
Young Children Annual Conference;
Implementing Positive Behavior Supports in a Fourth Grade Classroom;
Guiding the Writing Process in the Primary Grade Classroom;
Improving Literacy in Kindergarten Children Through Journal Writing;
Writing with the Six Traits: Supporting the Writing Process in a Title 1 Second Grade
Classroom;
Self-Efficacy in First Year Teachers;
Molding Minds: Classroom Management and Positive Discipline, presented at the 2008
Consortium for State Organizations in Texas Teacher Education Conference;
Building Automaticity With Math Facts, presented at the 2008 Consortium for State
Organizations in Texas Teacher Education Conference;
Monkey Sea, Monkey Do: Using Student Research as a Discipline Strategy With Gifted
Children, presented at the 2008 Consortium for State Organizations in Texas Teacher
Education Conference;
8
Children First: A Study of Strategy, Achievement, Motivations and the Teacher’s Role in
the Classroom;
International Partnerships for Teacher Training: Teaching English as a Second
Language in an International School in China, presented at the 2009 National
Conference of the Association of Teacher Educators;
Cooperative Learning in a Competitive Classroom Culture: How Will Students Respond?
Teacher Reflection and the Use of Classroom Assessment to Inform Instruction, which
won second place in the 2009 ACU Undergraduate Research Festival;
Factors That Influence the Major and/or Profession Choice of Juniors, Seniors, and
Faculty at Abilene Christian University;
What I Learned About Teaching in China, presented at the 2010 Future Educators of
America Conference;
The Importance of Effective Professional Development, which won first place in the 2010
ACU Undergraduate Research Festival;
Book selection: Implications for readers and reading instruction;
University Student Perception of Academic Challenge;
Kindergartners Using Video Streaming to make Learning Come Alive: Teachers, Teacher
Candidates, and Teacher Educators Learning Together, presented at the March 2011
International Society for Technology in Education Conference;
Mobile Devices in a Project-Based Physics Classroom: Developing NETS-S, presented at
the March 2011 meeting and to be presented at the June 2011 meeting of the International
Society for Technology in Education; and
Student Perception of Academic Challenge, a study in progress this semester.
The faculty invests significantly in mentoring relationships with students through formal
and informal experiences. We have a commitment to travel with our students in order to engage
with them in professional development experiences together—as co-learners rather than
professor and student. The program benchmarks provide for structured and intentional one-on-
one conversations about professional dispositions. Faculty members frequently invite students
into their homes for informal book talks or mentoring conversations.
9
Active engagement in learning through intentionally designed field experiences and
technology integration has been an area of intentional program improvement in the last 4 years.
We have significantly increased and more carefully structured opportunities for our teacher
candidates to engage in the field. New partnerships with local schools have provided contexts for
our candidates to engage meaningfully with prekindergarten through Grade 12 learners.
In the fall of 2010 the program received a gift of $675,000 from AT&T to support
initiatives in technology integration. The faculty is committed to model meaningful integration
of technology in their own teaching and also to provide opportunities for our candidates to utilize
technology for instructional planning and delivery. In the 2009 Texas Education Agency site
visit, the program received commendations for the integration of technology and was invited to
participate in an upcoming documentary highlighting programs that demonstrate excellence in
this area.
The ACU Teacher Education faculty engages in continuous, collaborative, and rigorous
reflection on their scholarship and practice. The program structures for our students the
discipline of professional reflection throughout coursework and through the e-portfolio process.
It is our commitment to continuous reflection that motivated the faculty to pursue national
accreditation. In evaluating the options for national accreditation, it became clear that TEAC’s
commitment to inquiry was a fit for our program. The faculty has been actively involved in the
process from the selection of an accreditation body process to the approval of the Inquiry Brief
Proposal. They unanimously support the submission of this document for consideration.
10
II. Claims and Rationale
This section of the proposal presents the ACU Teacher Education Program’s claims along
with the rationale for the assessments we propose to use to support the claims.
Program Claims
The ACU Teacher Education Program makes the following 15 claims about the program
candidates who are recommended for licensure. The claims are aligned with TEAC Quality
Principle (QP) 1 and its cross-cutting themes and the TExES Domains and Competencies. The
first 13 claims mirror the 13 TExES PPR Competencies. Claim 14 is a program competency that
our department added to align with our university mission. Claim 15 is specific to our
candidates’ content knowledge and is aligned with TEAC QP 1.1, but there is not a
corresponding Program Competency at this time.
Claim 1. ACU teacher education candidates apply knowledge of human developmental
processes in the planning of instruction (QP1.2).
Claim 2. ACU teacher education candidates design learning experiences and assessments
that reflect an understanding of student diversity (QP1.4.2).
Claim 3. ACU teacher education candidates design effective and coherent instruction and
assessment based on appropriate learning goals and objectives (QP1.2).
Claim 4. ACU teacher education candidates understand learning processes and factors
that impact student learning (QP1.2).
Claim 5. ACU teacher education candidates establish an emotionally and physically safe
classroom climate (QP1.3).
Claim 6. ACU teacher education candidates organize the learning environment to
manage student behavior (QP1.3).
11
Claim 7. ACU teacher education candidates use effective communication in teaching and
learning (QP1.3).
Claim 8. ACU teacher education candidates provide appropriate instruction that actively
engages students in the learning process (QP1.3).
Claim 9. ACU teacher education candidates effectively incorporate the use of technology
in the classroom (QP1.4.3).
Claim 10. ACU teacher education candidates utilize varied assessments to monitor
student learning, provide feedback and adjust instruction (QP1.3).
Claim 11. ACU teacher education candidates understand the importance of family and
interact appropriately and effectively with families (QP1.3).
Claim 12. ACU teacher education candidates learn to learn by pursuing professional
development opportunities and effectively interacting with other members of the educational
community (QP1.4.1).
Claim 13. ACU teacher education candidates understand and adhere to legal and ethical
requirements for educators (QP1.3).
Claim 14. ACU teacher education candidates appropriately evaluate how Christian
principles can appropriately inform professional development and practice (QP1.3).
Claim 15. ACU teacher education candidates demonstrate thorough knowledge of
subject matter (QP1.1).
As previously mentioned, the ACU Teacher Education Program is organized around the
TExES Domains and Competencies for the PPR Exam, which is required for teacher certification
in Texas. The ACU teacher education faculty has taken the four domains and the 13
competencies measured by the TExES PPR Exam and developed our Program Competencies. To
12
assist candidates and faculty, we added indicators of growth toward proficiency. For future
reference in this brief, we will use the term Program Competencies to refer to the competencies
measured by the TExES PPR. See Table 3.
Table 3
Domains, Competencies, and Indicators from the Abilene Christian University Teacher
Candidate Handbook
Competency Indicator
Domain I: Designing instruction & assessment
Competency 1: The teacher applies
knowledge of human developmental
processes in the planning of instruction
(QP1.2).
Identifies and describes developmental characteristics of students
Design lessons that are developmentally appropriate.
Competency 2. The teacher designs
learning experiences and assessments
that reflect an understanding of student
diversity (QP1.4.2).
Identifies and describes the dimensions of diversity represented in
the classroom context (Gender, race/ethnicity, exceptionality,
language, socioeconomic status, etc.)
Designs lessons that incorporate varied strategies for presentation
and application
Competency 3. The teacher designs
effective and coherent instruction and
assessment based on appropriate
learning goals and objectives (QP1.2).
Uses appropriate criteria, such as the Texas Assessment of
Knowledge & Skills, to evaluate learning goals and objectives
Links objectives, instruction and assessment in lesson plans with
clarity
Includes clearly stated and measurable objectives in lesson plans
Demonstrates understanding of subject content and presents it with
accuracy
Competency 4. The teacher understands
learning processes and factors that
impact student learning (QP1.2).
Draws on student’s prior knowledge to establish relevance
Promotes higher order thinking and problem solving in lessons
Uses a variety of motivational strategies to interest students and to
secure cooperation
Domain II: Creating a positive, productive classroom climate
Competency 5. The teacher establishes an
emotionally and physically safe
classroom climate (QP1.3).
Arranges space and materials for safety and effective learning
Interacts positively and respectfully with students
Competency 6. The teacher organizes the
learning environment to manage student
behavior (QP1.3).
Establishes clear expectations for behavior and learning
Establishes procedures, routines, and manages transitions
Paces lessons and activities to engage students
13
Competency Indicator
Domain III: Implementing instruction & assessment
Competency 7. The teacher uses effective
communication in teaching and learning
(QP1.3).
Communicates directions and procedures with clarity, utilizing
multiple modalities
Provides clear definitions for new concepts and terms
Models effective and accurate use of oral and written language
Articulates learning objectives for students
Demonstrates sensitivity to differences (cultural, gender,
intellectual, and physical) in classroom communication and in
responses to students
Competency 8. The teacher provides
appropriate instruction that actively
engages students in the learning process
(QP1.3).
Provides instruction that addresses multiple intelligences and
varied learning styles
Designs activities that actively involve all students
Implements effective collaborative learning experiences
Engages students through effective questioning and discussions
Competency 9. The teacher effectively
incorporates the use of technology in
the classroom (QP1.4.3).
Selects technology that enhances instruction and supports learning
outcomes
Incorporates technology for instruction and assessment as
appropriate for age level and/or content area
Competency 10. The teacher utilizes
varied assessments to monitor student
learning, provide feedback and adjust
instruction (QP1.3).
Creates and/or selects assessments tied to instructional objectives
Communicates assessment results to the students
Adjusts instruction based on assessment
Domain IV: Professional roles & responsibilities
Competency 11. The teacher understands
the importance of family and interacts
appropriately and effectively with
families (QP1.3).
Utilizes appropriate resources and strategies to enhance family
involvement in student learning
Reflects professionalism and respect for ALL families in
conversations
Competency 12. The teacher pursues
professional development opportunities
and effectively interacts with other
members of the educational community
(QP1.4.1).
Collaborates with peers and other professionals
Interacts respectfully with peers and other professionals
Participates in professional development
Engages in self-reflection and assessment to identify strengths and
areas for growth
Competency 13. The teacher understands
and adheres to legal and ethical
requirements for educators (QP1.3).
Adheres to the Code of Ethics and Standard Practices for Texas
Educators
Maintains appropriate confidentiality in all communication
Demonstrates honesty and integrity in coursework, professional
development and field experiences
Demonstrates high level of character by adherence to University
Code of Conduct
Domain V: Integrating faith with professional practice
Competency 14. The teacher evaluates how
Christian principles can appropriately
inform professional development and
practice (QP1.3).
14
It should be noted that we have added a fifth domain and a 14th competency to our
Program Competencies that are not part of the TExES domains and competencies. Claim 15 is
not matched to a Program Competency as currently written; thus, there are 15 claims for TEAC
accreditation and 14 Program Competencies. Table 4 aligns the claims to state and TEAC
domains and competencies.
Table 4
Claims Alignment
Assessments and Rationale
To assess our claims we propose to use the departmental e-portfolio process and rubric, a
showcase presentation process and rubric, our process and rubric for evaluating student teachers,
grades and grade-point averages (GPA), and results from the TExES PPR and the TExES content
area exams. Table 5 in Section III illustrates which assessments will be used for each claim.
When using the e-portfolio and showcase as assessments, and the TExES PPR, we will only be
using the part of the assessments specific to claims.
Claim
TEAC Quality
Principle
Program
domain
Program
Competency
State
domain
State
competency
1 1.2 I 1 I 1
2 1.4.2 I 2 I 2
3 1.2 I 3 I 3
4 1.2 I 4 I 4
5 1.3 II 5 II 5
6 1.3 II 6 II 6
7 1.3 III 7 III 7
8 1.3 III 8 III 8
9 1.4.3 III 9 III 9
10 1.3 III 10 III 10
11 1.3 IV 11 IV 11
12 1.4.1 IV 12 IV 12
13 1.3 IV 13 IV 13
14 1.3 V 14 NA NA
15 1.1 NA NA NA NA
15
The teacher education faculty was involved in the development of the e-portfolio
assessment rubric, showcases assessment rubric, and the student-teaching assessment rubric. We
took care to make sure that the assessments were aligned with program competencies. Because
of the care taken in development of our assessment instruments, we are at this point confident
they are credible, reliable, and valid measures of candidate competence to enter the teaching
profession. Our confidence is strengthened by the careful way our assessors are informed and
trained to use our process and instruments. In developing our full brief, we will collect evidence
to test our confidence through empirical methods.
We believe GPA is a valid and reliable measure as it is a reflection of the candidate’s
achievement in content field classes or specific courses that serve as a basis for some claims. Our
confidence is based on our departmental grading policies, which are based on mastery of content
demonstrated by student performance and products that are indicators of achievement. We have
peer reviewed our syllabi and grading policies to eliminate nonachievement evaluation factors
from our course grading policies.
We accept the TExES PPR and content exams as valid and reliable because they were
developed by the Educational Testing Service in collaboration with the Texas Education Agency.
We have no reason to doubt the validity and reliability of these scores. We will, however, test
our confidence in these measures as we prepare our brief through empirical procedures described
elsewhere in this proposal.
16
III. Methods of Assessment
This section will give a detailed description of how we propose to provide evidence for
each claim. We plan to report assessment results in our first brief for completers from Academic
Years 2011-2015. The scores will be disaggregated by certification level and/or content field.
We will use e-portfolio assessment, showcases assessments, student-teaching evaluations, GPA,
TExES PPR examination results, and TExES content examination scores as measures for our
claims. Table 5 illustrates the assessments used for each claim.
Table 5
Claims and Assessments
Claim E-portfolio Showcase Student
teaching GPA TExES
PPR TExES
content 1 X X 2 X X 3 X X 4 X X 5 X X 6 X X 7 X X X 8 X X X 9 X X 10 X X X 11 X X 12 X X 13 X X 14 X X 15 X X
Claim 1: Knowledge of Human Development
ACU teacher education candidates apply knowledge of human developmental processes
in the planning of instruction (QP1.2). For Claim 1, we propose to use our e-portfolio assessment
score for Program Competency 1 coupled with the TExES PPR for results for Program
Competency 1. The e-portfolio assessment is valid as it specifically addresses this claim. One
17
independent study directly addressing the issue of the validity of portfolio assessments for
preservice teachers found that the validity of portfolio assessment for evaluating achievement
related to competencies is high. (Meeus, Van Petegem, & Engels, 2009).
We propose to establish reliability by annually selecting a sample of five secondary and
five elementary e-portfolios to check for interrater reliability. We will be looking for 70%
agreement with no more than1 point of variance on the check. If we do not achieve those results,
we will collaborate to see if we can identify the reason for the discrepancy and retrain raters or
revise the rubric as necessary.
The TExES PPR results can be obtained by competency by printing individual results for
each candidate. We propose to collect data on candidates’ performance and look for an overall
average of 75% correct for Program Competency 1. We will also disaggregate the data by
certification level. We propose to report results in our full brief in tables. Should we fail to
achieve an overall average of 75% for Program Competency 1 or for any certification level, we
will review our curriculum and adjust as needed.
Claim 2: Student Diversity
ACU teacher education candidates design learning experiences and assessments that
reflect an understanding of student diversity (QP1.4.2). For Claim 2 we propose to use our e-
portfolio assessment score for Program Competency 2 coupled with the TExES PPR for results
for Program Competency 2. We propose to carry out the same studies for reliability and validity
as we described under Claim 1. Should the overall percentage or the percentage for any
certification level be below 75%, we will review and revise our curriculum as needed.
18
Claim 3: Effective, Coherent Instruction and Assessment
ACU teacher education candidates design effective and coherent instruction and
assessment based on appropriate learning goals and objectives (QP1.2). For Claim 3 we propose
to use our e-portfolio assessment score for Program Competency 3 coupled with the TExES PPR
for results for Program Competency 3. We propose to carry out the same studies for reliability
and validity as we described under Claim 1. Should the overall percentage or the percentage for
any certification level be below 75%, we will review and revise our curriculum as needed.
Claim 4: Factors That Impact Student Learning
ACU teacher education candidates understand learning processes and factors that impact
student learning (QP1.2). For Claim 4 we propose to use our e-portfolio assessment score for
Program Competency 4 coupled with the TExES PPR results for Program Competency 4. We
propose to carry out the same studies for reliability and validity as we described under Claim 1.
Should the overall percentage or the percentage for any certification level be below 75%, we will
review and revise our curriculum as needed.
Claim 5: Classroom Climate
ACU teacher education candidates establish an emotionally and physically safe
classroom climate (QP1.3). For Claim 5 we propose to use our e-portfolio assessment score for
Program Competency 5 coupled with the TExES PPR results for Program Competency 5. We
propose to carry out the same studies for reliability and validity as we described under Claim 1.
Should the overall percentage or the percentage for any certification level be below 75%, we will
review and revise our curriculum as needed.
19
Claim 6: Manage Student Behavior
ACU teacher education candidates organize the learning environment to manage student
behavior (QP1.3). For Claim 6, we propose to use our e-portfolio assessment score for Program
Competency 5 coupled with the TExES PPR results for Program Competency 5. We propose to
do the same studies for reliability and validity as we described under Claim 1. Should the overall
percentage or the percentage for any certification level be below 75%, we will review and revise
our curriculum as needed.
Claim 7: Effective Communication
ACU teacher education candidates use effective communication in teaching and learning
(QP1.3). For Claim 7 we propose to use our e-portfolio assessment score for Program
Competency 7 coupled with the TExES PPR results Program Competency 7. We propose to do
the same studies for reliability and validity as we described under Claim 1. Should the overall
percentage or the percentage for any certification level be below 75%, we will review and revise
our curriculum as needed.
In addition to the e-portfolio ratings and TExES PPR scores, we propose to report the
scores of candidates’ final student-teaching observation record for the appropriate section. The
student-teaching observation record section “Communication With Students” is valid as it
specifically addresses this claim. To establish reliability, we propose to train all student-teacher
supervisors in using this instrument by scoring student teachers who have been filmed while
teaching. We expect to have 70% agreement on each item under this section with no more than 1
point variance on any item. If we achieve less than the expected agreement, we will retrain as
necessary or rewrite the rubrics to enhance clarity.
20
Claim 8: Engage Students
ACU teacher education candidates provide appropriate instruction that actively engages
students in the learning process (QP1.3). For Claim 8 we propose to use our e-portfolio
assessment score for Program Competency 8 coupled with the TExES PPR results for Program
Competency 8. We propose to do the same studies for reliability and validity as we described
under Claim 1. Should the overall percentage or the percentage for any certification level be
below 75%, we will review and revise our curriculum as needed.
In addition to the e-portfolio rating and TExES PPR scores, we propose to report the
scores of candidates’ final student-teaching observation record for the section “Knowledge and
Instruction,” as this portion of the observation instrument specifically addresses this claim. To
establish reliability, we propose to train all student-teacher supervisors in using this instrument
by scoring student teachers who have been filmed while teaching. We expect to have 70%
agreement on each item under this section with no more than 1 point variance on any item. If we
achieve less than the expected agreement, we will retrain as necessary and/or improve the clarity
of the rubric.
Claim 9: Use of Technology
ACU teacher education candidates effectively incorporate the use of technology in the
classroom (QP1.4.3). For Claim 9 we propose to use our e-portfolio assessment score for
Program Competency 9 coupled with the TExES PPR results for Program Competency 9. We
propose to do the same studies for reliability and validity as we described under Claim 1. Should
the overall percentage or the percentage for any certification level be below 75%, we will review
and revise our curriculum as needed.
21
Claim 10: Varied Assessments
ACU teacher education candidates utilize varied assessments to monitor student learning,
provide feedback, and adjust instruction (QP1.3). For Claim 10 we propose to use our e-portfolio
assessment score for Program Competency 10 coupled with the TExES PPR scores for Program
Competency 10. We propose to do the same studies for reliability and validity as we described
under Claim 1. Should the overall percentage or the percentage for any certification level be
below 75%, we will review and revise our curriculum as needed.
In addition to the e-portfolio and TExES PPR scores, we propose to report the scores of
candidates’ final student-teaching observation record for the section called “Assessment,” as this
portion of the observation instrument specifically addresses this claim. To establish reliability,
we propose to train all student-teacher supervisors in using this instrument by scoring student
teachers who have been filmed while teaching. We expect to have 70% agreement on each item
under this section with no more than 1 point variance on any item. If we achieve less than the
expected agreement, we will retrain as necessary. If we achieve less than the expected
agreement, we will review and revise our curriculum as needed.
Claim 11: Family Interaction
ACU teacher education candidates understand the importance of family and interact
appropriately and effectively with families (QP1.3). For Claim 11 we propose to use our e-
portfolio assessment score for Program Competency 11 coupled with the TExES PPR scores for
Program Competency 11. We propose to do the same studies for reliability and validity as we
described under Claim 1. Should the overall percentage or the percentage for any certification
level be below 75%, we will review and revise our curriculum as needed.
22
Claim 12: Professional Development
ACU teacher education candidates learn to learn by pursuing professional development
opportunities and effectively interacting with other members of the educational community
(QP1.4.1). For Claim 12 we propose to use our e-portfolio assessment score for Program
Competency 12 coupled with the TExES PPR results for Program Competency 12. We propose
to do the same studies for reliability and validity as we described under Claim 1.
Claim 13: Legal and Ethnical Requirements
ACU teacher education candidates understand and adhere to legal and ethical
requirements for educators (QP1.3). For Claim 13 we propose to use our e-portfolio assessment
score for Program Competency13 coupled with the TExES PPR results for Program
Competency13. We propose to do the same studies for reliability and validity as we described
under Claim 1. Should the overall percentage or the percentage for any certification level be
below 75%, we will review and revise our curriculum as needed.
Claim 14: Christian Principles
ACU teacher education candidates appropriately evaluate how Christian principles can
appropriately inform professional development and practice (QP1.3). For Claim 14 we propose
to use our e-portfolio assessment score for Program Competency 14 coupled with the Showcase
Presentation scores for this competency. We propose to do the same studies for reliability and
validity as we described under Claim 1 for the e-portfolio score on this competency.
The Showcase scores will be recorded for this competency for all panelists rating the
candidate’s presentation. We will check for interrater reliability on a random sample of 10
presentations; should we find that we have less than 70% agreement, we will review the rubric’s
criteria and retrain as necessary in the rating process.
23
Claim 15: Knowledge of Subject Matter
ACU teacher education candidates demonstrate thorough knowledge of subject matter
(QP1.1). For Claim 15 we propose to use the content GPAs and their TExES Content Exam
results for program completers. The TExES Content Exams have been developed by the
Educational Testing Service in collaboration the Texas Education Agency for each content field
that candidates can certify. We accept the exams as reliable and valid because they were
professionally developed.
Research has shown that college GPA is a strong predictor of student success on
certification exams (Meeus et al., 2009) and gives a credible, although imperfect, measure of
student achievement (Zumwalt & Craig, 2005). We will perform a correlation analysis between
content scores and the candidates’ GPA for their content field. We propose to report the data by
content field and expect a positive correlation between scores on the content exams and GPA.
24
IV. Results
Our department has undergone major changes in the past 4 years, both in terms of faculty
and the program itself. As we do not have data at this time to sufficiently substantiate our claims,
we are submitting to TEAC this Inquiry Brief Proposal to convince the panel that we are on track
to preparing a high-quality brief in 5 years. We will offer preliminary data when possible and
also outline how we will collect, analyze, and compile data for the future. Some of the data we
offer in the proposal may look different when we file our first Inquiry Brief.
TExES PPR
The TExES PPR is currently administered as separate exams for each of the following
grade-level certifications: EC-4, EC-6, EC-12, 4-8, and 8-12. In addition, the exams are
administered in two formats, a paper-based test and a computer-assisted test. We anticipate that
in the near future the state will change to one exam that will serve all grade-level certifications,
which will make reporting the data easier. We are reporting our results for the 2010 completion
year (tests taken between September 1, 2009, and August 31, 2010) by certification level and
type of test separately in tables. The reports include results for the total test and the Program
Domains. The data being reported in the Proposal is disaggregated by certification level and
whether the test was paper based or computer administered, down to performance by domain.
The results are being reported as average scaled scores with a range of 100-300 and a minimum
passing score of 240 (see Table 6). This information was obtained from the Texas Education
Agency specific to ACU.
25
Table 6
TExES PPR by Administration Format, Program, and Statewide Averages With Number of ACU
Candidates Tested
Test Passing score Program average Statewide average
CAT EC-4 (N = 35)
Total test 240 263.3 249.8
Domain I 240 263.0 250.9
Domain II 240 264.7 254.6
Domain III 240 260.5 245.0
Domain IV 240 261.9 252.7
Paper EC-4 (N = 6)
Total test 240 255.2 247.3
Domain I 240 263.7 247.8
Domain II 240 252.3 248.5
Domain III 240 254.8 247.7
Domain IV 240 241.8 247.6
CAT EC-6 (N = 7)
Total test 240 273.1 261.3
Domain I 240 271.0 261.4
Domain II 240 272.3 260.8
Domain III 240 268.7 260.7
Domain IV 240 270.3 262.0
Paper EC-6 (N = 2)
Total test 240 260.0 258.3
Domain I 240 254.0 258.5
Domain II 240 262.0 258.4
Domain III 240 262.0 258.9
Domain IV 240 262.5 258.8
CAT 4-8 (N = 6)
Total test 240 273.8 263.8
Domain I 240 277.8 264.9
Domain II 240 261.0 263.7
Domain III 240 276.3 262.8
Domain IV 240 267.7 263.0
Paper 4-8 (N = 1)
Total test 240 269.0 258.4
Domain I 240 273.0 259.8
Domain II 240 260.0 258.7
Domain III 240 278.0 258.9
Domain IV 240 249.0 257.1
CAT 8-12 (N = 9)
Total test 240 270.1 257.0
Domain I 240 267.0 255.7
Domain II 240 265.7 256.2
Domain III 240 260.5 245.0
26
Test Passing score Program average Statewide average
Domain IV 240 269.9 257.8
Paper 8-12 (N = 2)
Total test 240 276.0 252.4
Domain I 240 277.0 252.8
Domain II 240 264.0 252.5
Domain III 240 279.0 252.3
Domain IV 240 259.5 252.3
CAT EC-12 (N = 16)
Total test 240 265.1 258.6
Domain I 240 266.0 257.8
Domain II 240 260.1 258.2
Domain III 240 265.9 258.1
Domain IV 240 255.9 257.4
Paper EC-12 (N = 7)
Total test 240 257.9 247.0
Domain I 240 259.1 248.5
Domain II 240 256.0 250.1
Domain III 240 254.9 246.8
Domain IV 240 257.0 247.3
As can be seen from the data, candidates who complete our program consistently achieve
passing scores and on average score above the state averages in the total test results and in most
of the individual domains. Results for Domain I support Claims 1-4, results from Domain 2
support Claims 5 and 6, results from Domain III support Claims 7-10, and results from Domain
IV support Claims 11-13 (see Table 4 for claims alignment.) Data from previous years are not
included in this proposal as we do not have the statewide averages and scores by domain
available. Auditors may request to see data from previous years that are archived by the state
from the ACU Certification Officer.
Our overall pass rate for the TExES PPR Exams for Completion Year 2010 is 99%, with
87 of 88 candidates passing. Of those passing, all but two passed on the first attempt and the one
who did not pass did not retake the exam. We had three program completers who chose not to
take certification exams.
27
We possess reports from previous years that establish that the ACU Teacher Education
Program has a history of success on the PPR exams. In 2009 our pass rate on the PPR was 98%,
and in 2008 our pass rate was 99%. It should be noted that in both years there was one student
who did not pass and might have passed in future attempts.
As stated in Sections II and III, our proposal is to disaggregate the data by Program
Competency and by certification level. This reporting practice will give specific and credible
data to validate Claims 1-13. For the purposes of this proposal, we selected a random sample of
2010 completers and disaggregated the data by TEAC claim and Program Competency. Table 7
gives the results by percent of questions answered correctly by Program Competency and
therefore by Claim. As can be seen in Table 7, the sample group got less than 80% correct on
Claims 6, 10, and 13. These are areas of concern that we will discuss in detail in Section V of the
Proposal.
Table 7
Percentage of Questions From PPR Answered Correctly,
by Claim and Program Competency
Claim Competency Percentage correct
1 1 83.10
2 2 85.51
3 3 85.96
4 4 84.91
5 5 88.68
6 6 79.10
7 7 87.30
8 8 89.61
9 9 85.11
10 10 74.60
11 11 93.85
12 12 82.54
13 13 76.92
28
TExES Content Exams
TExES Content Exams test the candidates’ knowledge for the content area of certification
and serves to validate Claim 15. Our pass rate on the 2010 content area exams is 100%, per the
State Board of Educator Certification. We are reporting our 2010 overall results per certification
area. Results are compiled from reports from the Texas Education Agency Texas Teacher
Certification reports for Abilene Christian University for exams taken between September 1,
2009, and August 31, 2010 (see Table 8). Specific reports for all areas were not generated and
therefore not available. We hope to be able to provide more complete data as the state works to
improve its reporting systems.
Table 8
TExES Content Area Exam Results, Program and State Averages and Comparisons for 2010
Completers
Content area
Program
average
Statewide
average
N
tested
n
passed
n scoring at or above
statewide average
Art 280.0 264.9 2 2 2
English Lang. Arts and
Reading 4-8
276.0 256.9 1 1 1
English Lang. Arts and
Reading 8-12
273.0 253.3 3 3 3
ESL Generalist EC-4 272.0 259.9 1 1 1
ESL Supplemental 251.0 234.2 6 6 6
Generalist EC-4 268.9 247.5 34 34 31
Generalist EC-6 272.7 241.7 6 6 6
History 8-12 262.0 237.5 1 1 1
Life Science 8-12 251.0 234.2 2 2 2
Mathematics 4-8 264.3 245.2 4 4 4
Mathematics 8-12 260.5 231.9 2 2 2
Music EC-12 258.3 248.1 8 8 7
PE EC-12 262.4 252.5 11 11 9
Science 4-8 263.0 239.2 1 1 1
Social Studies 4-8 265.0 251.2 1 1 1
Social Studies 8-12 257.0 241.2 2 2 2
SPED EC-12 265.0 244.5 1 1 1
Total 86 86 80 Note. Passing score = 240.
29
The performance of our candidates on the exams shown in Table 8 illustrates a mastery
of content as they scored on average, well above the minimum passing score and the statewide
averages in their content field. Our pass rate in content field exams for 2010 was 100%. The pass
rate for 2009 was 99% and for 2008 was 100%.
GPA
Content GPA is being reported to substantiate Claim 15. As can be seen from Table 9,
content GPAs are consistently above 3.0. In the instances where they are not, only one or two
students are in the calculations. GPA coupled with TExES content exam results indicated that
our program completers know their content.
Table 9
Overall, Education, and Content Field GPAs for 2010 Completers
Content area Content field GPA Number of completers
All Completers 3.50 93
EC-4 3.46 35
EC-6 3.64 7
ESL Generalist EC-4 3.69 2
Art EC-12 3.77 2
English Lang. Arts 4-8 3.66 1
English Lang. Arts 8-12 3.68 6
History 8-12 3.75 1
Life Science 8-12 2.96 2
Math 4-8 3.35 6
Math 8-12 2.80 2
Music EC-12 3.57 10
PE EC-12 3.58 11
Science 4-8 2.77 1
Social Studies 8-12 2.93 3
Spanish 3.82 2
SPED EC-12 4.00 2 Note. ACU requires a 2.7 GPA for each content field.
30
E-Portfolio
E-portfolio completion and scoring serve as documentation for Claims 1-14. Our
processes for implementing and scoring the e-portfolio continue to evolve and are described in
Section III of this Inquiry Brief Proposal. Auditors will have access to candidate files and their
scored rubrics.
All candidates demonstrate a minimum score of 2 in all competencies, which requires
“appropriate development toward proficiency.” Any competency reflection receiving less than a
2 is not acceptable and must be revised and resubmitted. Auditors may view e-portfolios that
have been previously submitted for review when visiting. They also may view scoring rubrics
contained in candidate folders.
Showcase Presentation Scores
As stated in the Methods section, Showcase Presentations will be used as evidence for
Claim 14. We are revising our data collection system to be able to provide documentable
evidence from the Showcase evaluations to support our claim. Grades for the overall Showcase
Presentations are currently available in the grade records of Elementary (EDUC 411/431) and
Secondary (EDUC 412/432) Block courses. For the full Inquiry Brief we will report Showcase
scores specific to how our candidates performed on Claim 14.
Student-Teaching Evaluations and Grades
Student-teaching grades are determined by the candidate’s performance as assessed by
the university supervisor as per the Teaching Observation Rubric located in Appendix F. Due to
all but the final assessment being formative and our emphasis for striving toward proficiency and
mastery, we expect all candidates to achieve an A or B. In order to receive an A or B as an
overall grade, students cannot receive any score below a 2 on the rubric, which is considered
31
proficient. Student-teaching grades are used as evidence to support Claims 7, 8, and 10 in this
Proposal. In the full Brief the student-teaching observation scores will be disaggregated to be
specific to Claims 7, 8, and 10. For the purposes of this Inquiry Brief Proposal, grades are broken
down for the fall 2010 semester: 17 students earned an A and 2 students received a B. In Section
V of this proposal, we will discuss the results reported in Section IV.
32
V. Discussion and Plan
The evidence reported in Section IV supports the 15 claims of the ACU Teacher
Education Department. Each claim is supported by at least two measures of student learning.
Based on the evidence, we are strongly confident in 12 of our claims (Claims 1-5, 7-9, 11, 12,
and 15). On Claims 1-5, 7-9, 11, and 12 all candidates have scored a 2 or 3 as per the e-portfolio
rubric, which indicates that they are on target to being professionally proficient. In addition, the
average percentage of questions answered correctly by the representative sample reported in
Table 7 on the TExES PPR Examination was above 80% on each of these claims.
Our confidence in Claim 15, that our candidates have learned their content, is strong,
based on the GPAs of our completers in their content field coupled with their scores on the
TExES Content Examinations. Our department has a policy of no Ds or Fs in content courses
and requires a minimum content GPA of 2.7 (recently raised to 2.75 for student admitting to the
program this year) for the completers reported on in this Proposal. Average GPAs for 2010
program completers are reported in Table 9, where it can be seen that all content fields achieved
the required GPA and in most instances, the average GPAs for certifications were well over 3.0.
Table 8 reports the average scores of our program completers by content field. The results
reported in Table 8 illustrate that our candidates are not only meeting the minimum score
requirements for their content field but also on average scoring above the state average.
Claims 6, 10, and 13 are supported by our evidence, but our level of confidence is weaker
and bears investigation by our department. Candidates did achieve a 2 or 3 on their e-portfolios
on each of these claims, but when we disaggregated the TExES PPR Examination data by
Program Competency (claim), it became evident that our candidates are not performing as well
as we would like.
33
As we conducted our internal audit, we found that some of our program completers’ files
were not complete. E-portfolio scores, dispositions conversation documentation, and student-
teaching evaluations were missing in one or two files of the 10 that were audited. We also
discovered that we need to develop a better way of documenting our August Experience that is
required of all of our candidates. These findings and plans are addressed in Appendix A.
Inquiry Plans Based on Preliminary Findings
Claim 6. ACU teacher education candidates organize the learning environment to
manage student behavior. Our candidates correctly answered on average 79% of the questions
pertaining to Claim 6 on the TExES PPR Examination. As a general rule our target score on all
claims has been 75%, and this score is above the target. However, the score is lower than
candidates’ average scores on most of the claims and has come up in exit interviews with
program completers when asked what they felt least prepared for going into student teaching.
Some questions do arise when considering these data. Would the scores have been better
if our candidates took the TExES PPR Examination after student teaching? Our practice is to
encourage candidates to take the examination prior to student teaching once they have scored
75% or better on a practice examination.
The obvious question is whether we need to revise our curriculum or perhaps the
sequence curriculum offered to better prepare them to address classroom management issues
prior to entering student teaching and/or prior to candidates taking the examination? As a
department we are discussing how we want to approach the issue of classroom management.
Historically, we have taught our candidates assertive discipline techniques of classroom
management. Philosophically, this approach does not mesh well with the instructional methods
34
that we espouse, as we are promoting student-centered approaches in the classroom and focus on
meeting student needs rather than meeting the needs of the teacher.
We recognize that we need to inquire about Claim 6 more deeply and adjust to meet the
needs of our candidates so that they are better prepared to manage student behavior. To do this
we plan to analyze candidates’ performance on the TExES Practice Examination specific to this
claim to see if we can identify specific issues that we need to address with our candidates. We
will report our findings in our first full Brief and in our first annual report to TEAC.
Claim 10. ACU teacher education candidates utilize varied assessments to monitor
student learning, provide feedback, and adjust instruction. Our candidates’ TExES PPR
scores are lower on Claim 10 than on any other. Our sample of candidates on average answered
74.6% of questions pertaining to this claim correctly. We are concerned about this result and
plan to incorporate more instruction about assessing student learning into courses that are
currently being taught. We plan to monitor our candidates’ performance on Claim 10 in the
TExES PPR and to examine more critically the candidates’ performance on this claim in the e-
portfolio.
To help us better adjust our instruction on Claim 10, we plan to analyze TExES Practice
Examination Data for current and future candidates more closely to see if we can identify in
more detail what our candidates need in order to be better prepared. We will report our findings
in the first full Brief and in our first annual report to TEAC.
Claim 13. ACU teacher education candidates understand and adhere to legal and
ethical requirements for educators. Claim 13 has been hard for our candidates to document in
the e-portfolio with artifacts, as currently few assignments are directly related to this claim. We
need to investigate how we can provide more opportunities for candidates to have more
35
documentation of development for proficiency to Claim 13. This may more explicit instruction
and candidate developed products as part of current courses related to this claim.
Currently, all candidates receive instruction related to ethics and legal requirements for
teachers in the introductory course for the program, EDUC 211. They take the TExES PPR and
prepare their e-portfolio 2 to 3 years later. We will review our scope and sequence and see if we
can identify ways to reinforce prior learning and to build on the foundation laid for this claim in
EDUC 211 in other courses in the professional education sequence.
In addition, we will analyze TExES PPR Practice Examination results of current and
future candidates to see if we can identify particular questions and thus particular topics that we
need to address in our instruction to better prepare our candidates. We will report our findings in
the first full Brief and in our first annual report to TEAC.
Evidence-Based Decisions
Our program has been evolving in a direction that has brought us to the point of applying
for TEAC accreditation. We have deconstructed and rebuilt the program in the past 4 years to
increase rigor and to be able to confidently make the claims that we have made. As we have
evolved, we have developed an increased sensitivity to evidence of our students’ learning in
making decisions about our program
Changes that have taken place based on evidence similar to what we have reported in this
Proposal include instituting an e-portfolio process so that we can have a method for our
candidates to reflect on their learning and for us to have accountability measure to help us reflect
on and revise our curriculum and processes for the Teacher Education Program. The e-portfolio
process and rubric have been revised several times over the past 3 years based on faculty
observations and feedback from candidates. For instance, our initial approach was for our
36
candidates to show that they were proficient as teachers by producing artifacts related to each
claim. We soon discovered that our expectations were not realistic for candidates just finishing
their preparation program. We have this year changed to identifying specific assignments from
each of the courses in the professional education sequence that should be used as artifacts in the
e-portfolio. The candidates near the end of program then reflect on what they have learned and
how what they have learned is applicable in future practice.
In the past few years we have required two submissions of the e-portfolio requiring
candidates to have artifacts for and reflect on all 14 Program Competencies each time. We
realized that this was to some degree redundant and that some of the Program Competencies
were more related to theory and others to actual practice. Based on that realization, this year we
require candidates taking the Block sequence, just prior to student teaching, to submit their
portfolio for Program Competencies 1-6, 13, and 14 and student teachers to submit their e-
portfolio for Program Competencies 7-12.
Two years ago, we revised our student-teaching observation rubric and evaluation tool to
help us look more closely at specific areas of student teachers’ performance in the delivery of
instruction. We also changed student teaching from a pass–fail course to a graded experience.
This has led to greater accountability for our student teachers, and requiring the documentation
from supervising teachers has increased supervisors’ accountability.
While these changes have improved our student teaching evaluations and the quality of
the feedback we give our candidates, it is still not appropriate for all instructional models that our
student teachers may be implementing, such as project-based learning. We need to continue to
refine our processes and develop additional tools that are more appropriate for more student-
centered approaches to teaching.
37
Program Changes to Be Monitored
This year there have been changes to the program of study for certification in Art, Music,
Theater, and Physical Education. Music education candidates will see an increase in the
professional education coursework required through the Teacher Education Department. The
Theater, Art, and Physical Education program requirements for professional education
coursework have decreased. We will monitor our data closely to see the effects that these
changes have on our candidates’ performance on our assessment measures.
Summary
The preparation of this Proposal has been productive, as the data have illuminated very
specific areas where we need to improve. It has also reinforced our belief that the path our
department is pursuing is serving our candidates well and that they are well prepared for the
teaching profession. We will continue to analyze data and make program and curriculum
adjustments based on data.
38
References
Abilene Christian University. (2010). Teacher Education Program teacher candidate handbook
Available from http://www.acu.edu/academics/cehs/programs/teachereducation/
documents/handbookAugust2010rev.pdf
Educational Testing Service & the State Board for Educator Certification, Texas Education
Agency. (2010). Texas Educator Certification Program. Available from http://www.texes
.ets.org/tecprogram/
Meeus, W., Van Petegem, P., & Engels, N. (2009). Validity and reliability of portfolio
assessment in pre-service teacher education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher
Education, 34(4), 401-413.
Texas Higher Education Assessment. (2010). Program overview. Available from http://www
.thea.nesinc.com/TA12_overview.asp
Zumwalt, K., & Craig E. (2005). Teachers’ characteristics: Research on the indicators of quality.
In M. Cochran-Smith & K. M. Zeichner (Eds.), Studying teacher education: The report of
the AERA panel on research and teacher education (pp. 157-269). Mahwah, NJ:
Erlbaum.
39
Appendix A. Quality Control System and Internal Audit
On February 23, 2011, we conducted an internal audit to examine the quality control
system of our program. Participating in the audit were the following faculty members: Julie
Douthit, Dennis Cavitt, Jill Scott, Sheila Delony, Stephanie Talley, and Sam Stewart. Our
primary entry point was 10 candidate files pulled from the previous year’s completers. We asked
our certification officer to select files that represented elementary, secondary, and all-levels
certifications from program completers for Academic Year 2010. We reviewed the files to see if
they contained all the proper documentation that the candidates had successfully met all program
requirements. We also contacted support services on our campus to see if any of the candidates
in the audit had received services.
A second entry point was our audit of course syllabi. We audited nine syllabi and selected
four courses, checking with the registrar to see that each course had received all the appropriate
approvals through the approval process. A third entry point was when we checked vitas of each
full-time faculty member and two adjunct faculty members for their qualifications to make sure
that all faculty members are qualified for their assigned teaching responsibilities.
A fourth and final entry point was our comparison with two other departments from our
college in the university, Social Work and Communication Disorders. The two departments were
chosen as both programs can lead to professional licensure and the data from those programs was
available through the Dean of the College of Education and Human Services. This comparison
includes facilities and resources for the departments, student evaluations of faculty members
teaching courses, and graduation requirements for the departments. Results from this comparison
are presented in Table B-1 in Appendix B.
40
Results from these inquiries are described under the appropriate headings to follow. We
listed candidates first as we strive to be a student-centered department. The audit trail is
illustrated in Figure A-1.
Description of the Quality Control System
The quality control system for the Teacher Education Department at ACU is
multifaceted. Candidates must meet admission requirements for the program, maintain a 2.75
GPA in their overall studies and in their content field, complete a specified program of studies
for their content and certification, and receive their degree; then, they can be certified. There is
an extensive course and program of studies review and approval process that requires the
department to receive approval from the College of Education and Human Services Academic
Council and then from the University Undergraduate Academic Council for curricular changes.
Our department is reviewed annually by a visiting committee of current practicing professionals
in education. We are also reviewed periodically by the Texas Education Agency. At this time the
university is undergoing re-accreditation and review by the SACS. Finally, there is a thorough
screening and interview process for all full-time faculty members.
Figure A1. Audit trail.
Randomly Selected
Candidate Files Met Admission
Requirements
Writing
Sample
August
Experience
GPA, Overall
and Content Support
Services
Student Teaching
Evaluations
Program
Completion
and/or
Graduation
THEA
Scores
tHEA
GPA
Application
Faculty
Facilities and
Resources
Curriculum
Syllabi
Catalog
Descriptions
Course and
Program
Approval
Student Evaluations
Goals and Performance
Reviews Selection Procedures
Tenure and Promotion
Technology in Classrooms Classroom Space Office Space
Salaries
42
A new Teacher Education Council is being formed at the time of the writing of this
Proposal and will be a key component of our quality control system in the future. This council
will ultimately be responsible to the state of Texas for all issues related to teacher certification.
The council will include representatives from all departments that offer degrees including
certification. The functions of this council are to be as follows:
Serve as an advisory body to the provost and to the president regarding all matters
relating to teacher education.
Maintain an inventory of teacher education programs at ACU.
Review and act upon all revisions to existing degrees in the Teacher Education
Program and proposed new Teacher Education degrees.
Review program or course changes applying only to a Teacher Education Degree,
which are then forwarded to the UUAC.
Review all correspondence from the Texas Education Agency relating to matters
involving certification requirements and changes in the standards for the approval of
the various teacher education programs.
Report to advisors and chairs of academic departments participating in the Teacher
Education Program once each semester.
Candidates (QP 2.3.3)
To be admitted to the Teacher Education Program, candidates must do the following:
1. Complete and submit an application for admission into the Teacher Education
Program.
2. Be enrolled in or have completed the first 45 semester hours of credit.
3. Successfully complete with a C or better 12 hours in the candidate’s chosen content
field.
4. Have a minimum GPA of 2.7 (2.75 or higher in the content field).
5. Complete 6 hours of University Core English with no grade lower than a C. (In order
to maintain admission status the candidate must earn a C or better in all core English
courses.)
6. Pass all three sections of the Texas Higher Education Assessment (THEA) test, with a
score on the reading section of 260 or higher, a score on the math section of 230 or
43
higher, and a score on the writing section of 240 or higher. Students may retake the
THEA once if the required level is not earned in the first administration. Acceptance
of scores from a third administration of the THEA are subject to review by the
Teacher Education Admissions Committee.
7. Be enrolled in or successfully complete (C or better) EDUC 211 - Educational
Foundations and Multicultural Perspectives. (If admitted before completion of EDUC
211, admission will be contingent upon completing the course with a C or better. In
the event that the student does not complete this course successfully, admission to the
program will be suspended until this requirement is fulfilled.)
8. Successfully complete the ACU Teacher Education formal writing sample
administered in EDUC 211.
9. Successfully complete first submission of the Teacher Education e-portfolio as
described in the ACU Teacher Education Program Student Handbook.
10. Successfully complete the Teacher Education Dispositions Review as described in the
ACU Teacher Education Program Student Handbook.
11. Declare a major that includes certification.
12. Receive approval from the Teacher Education Admissions and Review Committee.
An interview with the committee may be required.
All initial applications are reviewed by the Department Head to determine whether each
applicant has met the requirements for admission to the program After admission, candidates are
audited annually by the Department Certification Officer and the Department Program Advisor
to see that they are maintaining the appropriate GPA. Departmental benchmarks such as
Dispositions Reviews and e-portfolio reviews are the responsibility of the faculty who submit the
appropriate documentation for inclusion in candidates’ files.
Our internal audit included one candidate who was placed on program probation due to
GPA dropping below our required minimum. The candidate was able to raise the GPA to
program standards and was able to complete the program. Another reviewed candidate made a D
in an education course, which the student later repeated successfully. We no longer place
candidates on probation, but exit them from the program when they fall below required
44
minimums for maintaining admitted status into the program. Candidates can reapply for
admission when they have regained to appropriate status. They are then subject to all program
requirements in place at the time of readmission.
Candidates admitted to the program have all the student supports available to the student
body as a whole. The university requires faculty to maintain office hours when they are available
to provide support to candidates.
During the internal audit, we checked to see if any of the candidates screened had
qualified for and received assistance through campus support services, and none had. Although
none of the audited candidates did receive support through campus support services, we do have
candidates who qualify and receive support. Seven of the audited students were advised through
the Teacher Education Department and three were advised through other departments on
campus. All candidates seeking certification have access to the Teacher Education Department’s
academic advisor, even when they are advised through another department.
Our audit revealed that we need to do a better job of documenting e-portfolio scores,
Showcase Presentation scores, and dispositions evaluations for our candidates. E-portfolio scores
were missing from four files, disposition documentation was missing from two files, and a
student-teaching evaluation was missing from one file. To this point we had not been keeping
Showcase Presentation scores in candidate files, and it was decided we would need to do this in
the future as evidence for TEAC claims. We plan to review and revise our record-keeping
strategies for each of the above. We also discovered that he only official record of August
Experience completion was the grade in the grade book for Block students. Candidates who
completed August Experience as part of student teaching had no official documentation of
completion of the task.
45
Curriculum (QP 2.3.1)
The university has a thorough procedure for reviewing and approving the curriculum.
Courses and program changes are approved by the Department Head, Dean of the College of
Education and Human Services, the College of Education and Human Services Academic
Council, the University Undergraduate Academic Council, and the Provost. As part of our audit
we checked on the approval of four courses: READ 322, EDUC 211, SPED 371, and EDUC 221.
All four courses have gone through the approval process with documentation available in the
Registrar’s Office.
Our department reviewed syllabi from 13 of our courses as a group on February 11, 2011.
We checked syllabi for required content and found all to comply with department and university
policy. We also looked at grading policies as stated in the syllabi to see if they complied with
department policy as not to allow bonus or extra credit work and that factors for grading
decisions were based on candidate achievement. One course allowed for participation points, and
after a discussion about our grading policies, changes were made to the grading policy for the
course to comply with department policy. A few other minor changes were suggested in some
cases, and the adjustments were made for future courses. Our review of the current university
catalog found that some minor changes needed to be made to more accurately describe the
content of SPED 371, and the process for making those changes has been started.
Faculty (QP 2.3.2)
Qualifications for faculty and procedures for appointment of faculty are available in
Chapter 2 of the faculty handbook. Faculty members in the department understand the
procedures, which have been reviewed in faculty meetings and are discussed in annual
performance reviews with the Department Head. In our department, faculty members are
46
included in the screening process for new candidates. The department is currently conducting a
search for anticipated positions, and the procedures comply with university policy.
The information presented in Appendix C lists our faculty qualification as obtained from
their curriculum vitae. Our faculty’s qualifications were recently reviewed by the SACS, and all
faculty members were found to be qualified to teach the courses assigned.
Full-time faculty members submit annual goals in the areas of teaching, scholarship, and
service. Their performance is reviewed annually by the Teacher Education Department Head. A
report with the faculty members’ reflection on goals and the comments of the Department Head
is kept on file.
Each semester for each course, students are asked questions specific to the teacher for the
course. The average results of the student responses are recorded in Table B-1 in Appendix B. As
part of the internal audit, we were able to obtain average results from two other departments,
Social Work and Communication Disorders, in our university. Our faculty ratings by students
were very similar to the ratings for faculty in the other two departments. The comparisons can be
seen in Table B-2 in Appendix B.
Tenure and promotion guidelines for faculty are clearly delineated in the faculty
handbook for the university. We currently have one tenured faculty member and three others
who are on a tenure track. In addition, we have two faculty who are doctoral candidates; once
they complete their programs, they will also be placed on a tenure track. The remainders of the
faculty are qualified based on their master’s degrees, professional licensures, and their
professional experience. Faculty members’ qualifications can be seen in Appendix C.
47
Resources 2.3.4
The Teacher Education Department moved into a newly remodeled facility five years
ago. There is wireless access throughout the building, and each classroom has a dual-platform
computer station for the teacher. There is also a document camera, projector, VHS and DVD
player, and connections for laptops to connect to projection system. Up to now, two classrooms
had Promethean Boards; as this document is being written, Promethean Boards are being
installed in each classroom. Each full-time faculty member is provided an office, and the two
adjuncts share an office. When compared to the facilities of the departments used in the
comparison, our classrooms are better equipped. The internal audit found no issues with facilities
and resources that were of concern.
Questions Resulting From Internal Audit
1. Do we need a Teacher Education Admissions and Review Committee? In practice,
admission decisions are made by the Department Head. Only in cases where a candidate requests
to take the THEAfor a third time does a committee become involved. The committee usually is
composed of the Department Head and two faculty members. There are no standing
appointments for the committee.
2. Do we need to maintain Showcase Presentation scores in candidate files? It was
decided that we do need to maintain candidate scores on the Showcase Presentation. We will do
this by placing the score sheets from each of the raters in the candidate’s file. This will make the
data necessary for future Briefs and reports to TEAC readily accessible.
3. Do we need to have candidates complete the entire e-portfolio in Block prior to student
teaching? We had recently decided to have student teachers update their e-portfolio for Program
Competencies 7-12, as those competencies required the candidates to put what they had learned
48
in the program into practice. Having pre-student-teaching candidates complete the entire
portfolio prior to student teaching was a large work requirement for candidates to prepare and
instructors to score at the end of the semester. It was decided to have Block students complete
the e-portfolio for Program Competencies 1-6, 13, and 14. Student teachers will complete the e-
portfolio for Program Competencies 7-12.
4. What assignments from courses should serve as artifacts for Program Competencies?
This question re-emerged as part of the internal audit conversation. The faculty used Google
Docs to post each major assignment from their courses in the document by the Program
Competency that the assignment best matched. Through this alignment effort, we hope to
identify curricular weaknesses and make sure that each Program Competency is being adequately
addressed.
5. Should participation points be factored into grading decisions by faculty teaching in
the professional education sequence? This question arose while we were auditing syllabi. After a
good deal of instruction, it was decided that we as a department would not factor participation
points into grading decisions. This decision was based on the departmental philosophy that
grades should be reflective of mastery content and should not be used to motivate students to
attend class and participate in discussions.
6. How can we best document that all students complete the August Experience
requirement of the program? August Experience is a requirement for our candidates in their final
year of preparation to return to campus before classes start and to participate in the opening of
the local public schools. There are assignments that are associated with the experience but are
only used for grading purposes in the Block classes. Candidates who are in their student-teaching
semester must complete the assignments, but their scores are not recorded anywhere. It was
49
decided that two faculty members, one from elementary and one from secondary, would develop
a set of common assignments for the experience and make recommendations to the faculty on
how best to document the experience for all candidates. The recommendations are to be
presented prior to the beginning of the Fall 2011 semester.
7. Can we develop a student-teaching evaluation instrument that is appropriate for more
student-centered approaches to instruction such as project-based learning? We hope to develop
this in the future as we increase our emphasis on project-based learning at the secondary
certification level.
Conclusions and Discussions
The Quality Control System, as stated in the description, is multifaceted. Mechanisms
such as the Annual Visiting Committee and the university’s approval process for course and
program changes are working well. These mechanisms serve as a catalyst for us to continue to
review and revise our program. We had a site visit from the Texas Education Agency in 2010,
and our department was found to be in 100% compliance with state regulations. The Visiting
Committee’s findings and the Texas Education Agency’s findings are on file in the Department
Heads’ office.
One area that we found that we need to improve on is in our documentation of
requirements for program completion by the candidates. This responsibility falls to faculty
members, who must make sure they collect all required documentation and get it to the
certification officer for the department. Knowing that we will be filing annual reports and a full
Brief for TEAC in the future will increase our diligence in maintaining our paper trail of
documentation.
50
As a result of our internal audit, new discussion about revising our student-teacher
evaluation process has begun. Our current system of evaluation is designed for a teacher-
centered approach, while our program is promoting student-centered instruction in the
professional education sequence.
While our audit did reveal that we need to improve some of our quality control
documentation, overall the system is working well. Our facilities, curriculum, and faculty serve
our candidates well, and we have the capacity to provide a quality program that produces quality
professionals.
51
Appendix B. Institutional Norms Comparison
Table B-1
Institutional Norms Comparison
Dimension
Teacher Education
(TE) Program
Institutional
norm Difference TE Program
3.1.1 Curriculum
criteria
a. Credits to
graduate
128-132 128 Graduation requirements are
basically the same throughout the
university.
b. Grade
requirement
No Ds or Fs in
content area and a
2.75 GPA
2.0 0.75, or 19% Our GPA requirements are more
rigorous than the institutional
norm, due to our department
serving as a professional licensure
program.
c. Number of
credits in the
major
A minimum of 30
in endorsement
area
Major 30
3.1.2 Faculty Criteria
(Full-time Fall 2009
data)
a. Proportions of
terminal degrees
45% 82% -37% Less than institutional norm. The
department was essentially
reconstituted in 2007. All of our
faculty are qualified based on
having a master’s degree and
professional experience in the
classroom. Two faculty members
are working on their doctorates.
b. Sex
Female 73% 34% 39% More than institutional norm. The
gender makeup of the department
is reflective of the profession.
Male 27% 66% -39% Less than institutional norm. The
gender makeup of the department
is reflective of the profession.
c. Faculty of color 0% 9% We have been consistent with
institutional norms but currently
have no one of color serving as
faculty.
d. Balance of
academic rank
52
Dimension
Teacher Education
(TE) Program
Institutional
norm Difference TE Program
Professor (1) 9%
25%
-16%
Less than institutional norm. In
2006 our department experienced
a major turnover in faculty with
new faculty members being
recruited directly from working in
public and private schools.
Associate
professor
0 31% -31% Less than institutional norm due
to 2006 turnover. Those that are at
the assistant professor level are in
the promotion track.
Assistant
professor (4) 36% 28% 8% Less than institutional norm due
to 2006 turnover.
Instructor (6) 55% 16% 39% More than institutional norm. Two
are working on doctorates to get
on the tenure track. All are experts
in their field due to experience.
e. Salary means
Professor Personally
identifiable $77,852
Associate
professor $62,529
Assistant
professor $54,164 $54,603 -439, or -1% Less than institutional norm due
to years experience at the
university.
Instructor $46,034 $45,564 470, or 1% more than institutional norm due
to years experience at the
university.
f. Workload 12 hrs 12 hrs 0 Same
g. Promotion/tenure
standards Portfolio required Portfolio
required Same
3.1.3 Faculty Criteria
a. Office space Each full-time
faculty allocated
office
b. Allocated
classroom space Classrooms are
assigned by the
department head.
c. Type of
classrooms Classrooms are
dual-platform
equipped with
document
cameras,
projectors,
whiteboards, and
(some)
Promethian.
Classrooms
are dual-
platform
equipped with
document
cameras,
projectors,
whiteboards.
Same
53
Dimension
Teacher Education
(TE) Program
Institutional
norm Difference TE Program
d. Support facilities Office space
provided for
support staff.
Office space
provided for
support staff.
Same
3.1.4 Fiscal/
Administrative
Criteria
a. Number of
administrators 1 Varies
b. Number of
support staff 3 Varies More support due to professional
licensure requirements and the
need to maintain records.
c. Per student
expenditure (FTE) Unable to
calculate exact
expenditure
$7,302 Though we are unable to calculate
the exact expenditure, Teacher
Education has been a targeted area
for investment and growth for the
past 4 years.
3.1.5 Student Support
Criteria
a. Advisement 100% 100%
b. Academic
tutoring Same accessibility Same
accessibility Same
c. Financial aid Same accessibility
as student body as
a whole to
institutional
financial aid plus
access to endowed
scholarships
designated to
teacher education
Same
accessibility to
institutional
financial aid,
although
departments
and colleges
have endowed
scholarships
for designated
programs
d. Career placement Same accessibility Same
accessibility Same
e. Media/tech Same accessibility Same
accessibility Same
Recruiting and
Admissions
a. Sex (Fall 2010)
Male 22% 46% -24% We have seen some increase in
male enrollment, but enrollment is
representative of the profession.
Female 78% 54% 24% The percentages are representative
of the profession.
54
Dimension
Teacher Education
(TE) Program
Institutional
norm Difference TE Program
b. Students of color 5.33% 16% -10.67% A significant portion of the
university students of color are
international students who often
lack the English skills necessary
to be successful in the Teacher
Education Program.
c. Catalogue
accuracy Revised annually Revised
annually
d. Other recruiting
information Teacher Education
Program promoted
on web and
professionally
developed
brochures.
Programs
promoted on
web and with
brochures.
Teacher Education is an area of
investment over the last 4 years.
3.1.6 Student
Feedback (Summary
based on Fall 2010
results, on Likert scale
from 1 (strongly
disagree) to 5 (strongly
agree)
One formal
complaint within
the last year due to
student not
successfully
completing student
teaching. Course
evaluations are
confidential and
not used to
compare teachers
and/or
departments.
Data not
available.
Course
evaluations are
confidential
and not used to
compare
teachers and/or
departments.
N/A
Made me aware of
the grading
system
4.50
Was enthusiastic
about the subject 4.76
Was well prepared. 4.53
Explained the
course material
clearly
4.37
Answered students’
questions 4.58
Was accessible to
me. 4.61
Was interested in
students 4.70
The teacher served
as a Christian role
model.
4.72
I would recommend
this teacher to
other students.
4.58
55
Table B-2
Comparison on Teacher Education Department With Departments of Social Work and
Communication Disorders
Dimension
Teacher Education
(TE) Program Social Work Communication Comments
3.1.1 Curriculum
criteria
a. Credits to
graduate
128-132 128 128 More credits are required in
some certifications in
Teacher Education due to
content and professional
education preparation
requirements
b. Grade
requirement
No Ds or Fs in
content area and a
2.75 GPA
2.0 GPA 2.75 overall GPA;
3.0 in major
Our GPA requirements are
more rigorous than the
institutional norm, due to our
department serving as a
professional licensure
program.
c. Number of
credits in the
major
Endorsement area
30 36 48 While at least 30 hours are
required in certification area,
most of the programs of study
leading to certification are
70+ hours. This information
is available in the University
Catalog.
3.1.2 Faculty Criteria
a. Proportions of
terminal degrees
45% 100%
(SOCW
master’s is
considered
terminal)
80%
b. Sex
Female 73% 25% 80%
Male 27% 75% 20%
c. Faculty of color 0% 12.5% 0%
d. Balance of
academic rank
Professor (1) 9% (2) 25%
Associate
professor (2) 25% (1) 20%
Assistant
professor (4) 36% (4) 50% (4) 80% Those at the assistant
professor level will be
eligible for tenure and
promotion after 6 years of
service.
56
Dimension
Teacher Education
(TE) Program Social Work Communication Comments
Instructor (6) 55% Only faculty members with
terminal degrees are on
tenure track positions and
eligible for promotion.
e. Salary means
Professor Personally
identifiable Personally
identifiable
Associate
professor Personally
identifiable Personally
identifiable
Assistant
professor $54,164 $56,179 $57,025 The differences can be
accounted for due to the
length of service of faculty
members.
Instructor $46,034
f. Workload 12 hrs 12 hrs 12 hrs
g. Promotion/tenure
standards Portfolio required Portfolio
required Portfolio required
3.1.3 Faculty Criteria
a. Office space Each full-time
faculty allocated
office
Each full-
time faculty
allocated
office
Each full-time
faculty allocated
office
b. Allocated
classroom space Classrooms are
assigned by the
department head.
Classrooms are
assigned by the
department head.
c. Type of
classrooms Classrooms are
dual-platform
equipped with
document
cameras,
projectors,
whiteboards, and
(some)
Promethian.
Classrooms
are equipped
w/
projectors,
PCs,
chalkboards,
and
document
cameras
2 classrooms - PC
platform equipped
with document
camera, projector,
laptop connection;
whiteboards, WIFI
A physical examination of the
facilities for the 3 programs
will reveal that currently the
facilities for the Teacher
Education Program are as
good as or better than those
for the other two
departments.
d. Support facilities Office space
provided for
support staff.
Office space
provided for
support
staff.
Office space
provided for
support staff.
3.1.4 Fiscal/
Administrative
Criteria
a. Number of
administrators 1 1 1
b. Number of
support staff 3 1 1
c. Per student
expenditure (FTE) Unknown Unknown Unknown
57
Dimension
Teacher Education
(TE) Program Social Work Communication Comments
3.1.5 Student Support
Criteria
a. Advisement 100% 100% 100%
b. Academic
tutoring Available through
institution Available
through
institution
Available through
institution
c. Financial aid Same accessibility
as institution plus
access to Teacher
Ed endowed
scholarships
Available
through
institution
Same accessibility
as institution plus
access to
approximately 3
scholarships
d. Career placement Available through
institution Available
through
institution
Available through
institution
e. Media/tech Available through
institution Available
through
institution
Available through
institution
Recruiting and
Admissions
a. Sex
Male 22% Not
available 2.7%
Female 78% Not
available 97.3%
b. Students of color 5.33% Unknown Unknown
3.1.6 Student
Feedback (Summary
based on Fall 2010
results, on Likert scale
from 1 (strongly
disagree) to 5 (strongly
agree)
One formal
complaint within
the last year due to
student not
successfully
completing student
teaching. Course
evaluations are
confidential and
not used to
compare teachers
and/or
departments.
Student evaluations for all 3
programs are comparable
with no significant
differences
Made me aware of
the grading
system
4.50 4.51 4.70
Was enthusiastic
about the subject 4.76 4.59 4.77
Was well prepared. 4.53 4.23 4.66
Explained the
course material
clearly
4.37 4.23 4.57
58
Dimension
Teacher Education
(TE) Program Social Work Communication Comments
Answered students’
questions 4.58 4.50 4.74
Was accessible to
me. 4.61 4.53 4.80
Was interested in
students 4.70 4.69 4.80
The teacher served
as a Christian role
model.
4.72 4.55 4.85
I would recommend
this teacher to
other students.
4.58 4.51 4.78
Table B-3
References to Institutional Documents for Each Requirement
TEAC requirements for quality
control of capacity (3.2) Program reference to documentation for each requirement
3.2.1 Curriculum
Document showing credit hours
required in the subject matter are
tantamount to academic major.
Document showing credit hours
required in pedagogical subjects are
tantamount to academic minor.
Catalog for Teacher Education Courses and Requirements:
http://www.acu.edu/catalog/2011_12/departments/cehs/teachered.html
Also see Appendix D
3.2.2 Faculty
Majority of the faculty have a terminal
degree (major or minor) in the areas of
course subjects they teach.
See Appendix C
Additional documentation will be provided upon request by the Office of
Institutional Effectiveness, Dr. Tom Milholland.
3.2.3 Facilities
Documents showing appropriate and
adequate resources. See Appendix A (p. 47)
Additional documentation will be provided upon request by the Office of
Institutional Effectiveness, Dr. Tom Milholland.
3.2.4 Fiscal and Administrative
Documents attesting to the financial
health of the institution. Documentation will be provided upon request by the Office of
Institutional Effectiveness, Dr. Tom Milholland.
Documents showing program
administrators are qualified for their
positions.
See Appendix C
Documents showing resources are
adequate to administer the program. Documentation will be provided upon request by the Office of
Institutional Effectiveness, Dr. Tom Milholland.
3.2.5 Student Support
Documents showing the adequate
student support services. Student Support Services:
http://www.acu.edu/academics/trio/alpha/programs/sss/
59
TEAC requirements for quality
control of capacity (3.2) Program reference to documentation for each requirement
Documents showing the dropout and
completion rates.
Spreadsheets available from Department Certification Officer,
Department Chair, or Sam Stewart.
3.2.6 Policies
Documents showing an academic
calendar is published. Academic Calendar:
http://www.acu.edu/catalog/2011_12/acuonline/calendar.html
Documents showing a grading policy is
published and accurate. Teacher Education Handbook (p. 32):
http://www.acu.edu/academics/cehs/programs/teachereducation/
documents/handbookAugust2010rev.pdf
Documents showing there is a
procedure for students’ complaints to
be evaluated.
Teacher Education Handbook:
http://www.acu.edu/academics/cehs/programs/teachereducation/
documents/handbookAugust2010rev.pdf
Catalog, Legal and Other Notices:
http://www.acu.edu/catalog/2011_12/universityinfo/aboutacu.html#Leg
al
60
Appendix C. Abilene Christian University Faculty Qualifications
Name (year
of
appointment)
Terminal
degree
Certifications and/or
experience
Number of
scholarly
publications and
presentations
2008-date
Area of
expertise/
specialization
Program
contribution
Dana
Kennamer
Hood
Ph.D.
University
of Texas,
2001
1 Book Chapter
1Co-Authored
Book
3 International
Peer Reviewed
Presentations
6 National Peer
Reviewed
Presentations
5 National
Invited
Presentations
1 State Peer
Reviewed
Presentation
1 State Peer
Reviewed
Presentation
Early Childhood
Education,
Children’s
Ministry,
Spiritual
Development in
Children
Department
Chair,
Professor.
Teaches 2
courses (EACH
451 and EACH
466)
Mitzi Adams
(2010)
M.A.
Western
Governors
University,
2010
18 years in public
schools teaching, 1 year
teaching in private
schools and 6 years
teaching pre-school in
private settings.
1 National Peer
Reviewed
Presentation
Elementary
Education, Math
Education.
Instructor
Directs field
placements for
pre-student
teaching
interns. Teaches
2 courses
(EDUC 211 and
EDUC 470)
Dennis Cavitt
(2007)
M.S. ACU,
1987, M.Ed.,
Tarleton
State
University,
2000
Ed.D.
Candidate,
Texas Tech
University
Expected
Graduation
May 2012
Licensed Specialist in
School Psychology,
TEA Mid-Management
Administrator. 20 years
in public schools as
LSSP and administrator.
1 Regional Peer
Reviewed
Presentation
1 State Peer
Reviewed
Presentation
Special Education,
School
Psychology,
Autism,
Differentiated
Instruction,
Instructor
Teaches 4
courses. (SPED
371 2 sections,
SPED 481,
SPED 485)
61
Name (year
of
appointment)
Terminal
degree
Certifications and/or
experience
Number of
scholarly
publications and
presentations
2008-date
Area of
expertise/
specialization
Program
contribution
Sheila
Delony
(2008)
Assistant
Professor
Ph.D., Texas
Tech
University,
2008
6 years in public schools
as elementary classroom
teacher and 1 year as a
reading coach.
1 national peer
reviewed
journal article
1 state peer
reviewed
journal article
3 national peer
reviewed
presentations
1 state peer
reviewed
presentation
Reading,
elementary
education,
improving
instructional
practices through
coaching.
Teaches 3
courses (READ
363, READ 460
2 sections) and
maintains
partnerships
with local
elementary
schools.
Julie Douthit
Instructor
M.Ed.,
University
of North
Texas, 1991
3 years public school
teaching elementary and
10 years private school
teaching prekindergarten
1 state peer
reviewed
presentation
Elementary
education,
curriculum &
instruction
methods
Teaches 4
courses (READ
464, EDUC
331, EDUC 411
and EDUC 431)
Karan Duawe
(2010)
Assistant
Professor
Ed.D., Texas
Tech
University,
2010
22 years public school
service as an elementary
teacher, librarian, and
instructional specialist
1 national peer
reviewed
presentation
Children’s
literature,
women in
educational
leadership,
teaching children
of poverty
Directs student-
teaching field
placements
(EDUC 490)
Dana
Mayhall
(2007)
Adjunct
Instructor
M.Ed.,
Tarleton
State
University,
1993
20 years public school
experience as
elementary, middle and
alternative school
teacher and elementary
and middle school
principal.
2 state-invited
presentations
Middle school Teaches 2
courses,
supervises
student
teachers.
(EDUC 211 and
EDUC 335)
Billie
McConnell
(2009)
Assistant
Professor
Ed.D.,
Pepperdine
University,
2010
14 years in private
Christian education as
head of school,
principal, director of
instructional technology,
athletic director, coach,
and teacher; 14 years in
corporate and school in-
service technology
training; Certified
Technical Trainer
2 international
peer reviewed
presentations
1 national peer
reviewed
presentation
1 national
invited
presentation
1 state invited
presentation
Educational
technology,
educational
reform
Teaches 4
courses. (EDUC
221, EDUC
412, EDUC
432, and EDUC
490)
62
Name (year
of
appointment)
Terminal
degree
Certifications and/or
experience
Number of
scholarly
publications and
presentations
2008-date
Area of
expertise/
specialization
Program
contribution
Jenn Rogers
(2009)
Instructor
M.Ed.,
Hardin-
Simmons
University,
2009
1 state invited
presentation
Early childhood
education,
counseling and
human
development,
behavior skills
and modification
Teaches 4
courses (EDUC
323, EACH
451, EACH
466, EDUC
490)
Jill Scott
(2010)
Adjunct
Instructor
Ph.D.,
University
of Texas
35 years in public
schools as a special
education consultant,
administrator and
teacher; 13 years college
teaching as an adjunct
and teacher assistant.
1 national peer
reviewed
presentation
Early childhood
education, early
literacy, literacy,
special
education,
teacher
education,
educational
administration
and reform.
Teaches 1 class
(SPED 371) and
field work with
Reagan
Elementary.
Sam Stewart
(2007)
Assistant
Professor
Ed.D.,
William
Howard Taft
University,
2007
29 years experience as a
teacher, counselor,
principal and district
office administrator.
1 national peer
reviewed
journal
publication
1 international
peer reviewed
presentation
2 national peer
reviewed
presentations
2 national
invited
presentations
2 state peer
reviewed
presentations
secondary
education and
administration,
assessment
grading and
reporting
practices
Teaches 4
courses (EDUC
211, EDUC
412, EDUC
432, READ
322)
Stephanie
Talley
Instructor
M.Ed.,
Abilene
Christian
University,
2007;
doctoral
student,
Texas Tech
University
13 years experience
teaching elementary
(kindergarten, Grades 3
& 5)
1 international
peer reviewed
presentation
3 national peer
reviewed
presentations
1 state peer
reviewed
presentation
Early language
and literacy,
English language
learners
Teaches 4
courses (EACH
363, EDUC
250, EDUC
411,EDUC 432)
63
Appendix D. Program Requirements
Admission Requirements
In accordance with Texas state law, the ACU Teacher Education Program has established
the following criteria for admission. Before taking more than 6 hours EDUC, a student must first
be admitted to the Teacher Education Program. To be admitted to the Teacher Education
Program, a student must do the following:
To be admitted to the Teacher Education Program, candidates must do the following:
1. Complete and submit an application for admission into the Teacher Education
Program.
2. Be enrolled in or have completed the first 45 semester hours of credit.
3. Successfully complete with a C or better 12 hours in the candidate’s chosen content
field.
4. Have a minimum GPA of 2.7 (2.75 or higher in the content field).
5. Complete 6 hours of University Core English with no grade lower than a C. (In order
to maintain admission status the candidate must earn a C or better in all core English
courses.)
6. Pass all three sections of the THEA test, with a score on the reading section of 260 or
higher, a score on the math section of 230 or higher, and a score on the writing
section of 240 or higher. Students may retake the THEA once if the required level is
not earned in the first administration. Acceptance of scores from a third
administration of the THEA are subject to review by the Teacher Education
Admissions Committee.
7. Be enrolled in or successfully complete (C or better) EDUC 211 - Educational
Foundations and Multicultural Perspectives. (If admitted before completion of EDUC
211, admission will be contingent upon completing the course with a C or better. In
the event that the student does not complete this course successfully, admission to the
program will be suspended until this requirement is fulfilled.)
8. Successfully complete the ACU Teacher Education formal writing sample
administered in EDUC 211.
9. Successfully complete first submission of the Teacher Education e-portfolio as
described in the ACU Teacher Education Program Student Handbook.
64
10. Successfully complete the Teacher Education Dispositions Review as described in the
ACU Teacher Education Program Student Handbook.
11. Declare a major that includes certification.
12. Receive approval from the Teacher Education Admissions and Review Committee.
An interview with the committee may be required.
Any exemptions or modification to the above requirements due to special circumstances
must be requested through the chair of the Department of Teacher Education. All requests will be
reviewed and must be approved by the Teacher Education Admissions and Review Committee.
In addition, admission to Teacher Education is not the final step in the process. In order to
remain in the program the prospective teacher must continue to meet the GPA requirement
(2.75). Approval to take Education Block classes (411/412 and 431/432) and to enroll in student
teaching must be obtained from the Teacher Education Admissions and Review Committee
before enrolling in those classes.
English Language Proficiency Assessment Requirement
International students with primary languages other than English must demonstrate
English language proficiency by obtaining an official TOEFL score of at least 600 (computer-
based score of 250, iBT of 100).
Additional Requirements for Maintaining Program Admission
In order to remain in the Teacher Education Program, an overall GPA of 2.75, 2.75 in the
content field, and continued approval of the Teacher Education Admissions Committee must be
maintained. A grade of C or better is required for all majors courses.
Junior and senior transfer students must take the THEA and be admitted to the Teacher
Education Program during their first semester at Abilene Christian University to continue in
professional education course work. Arrangements to take the THEA should be made as quickly
as possible by contacting the Office of Career and Academic Development.
65
Note: A candidate who does not have an overall GPA of 2.75 or higher may be
conditionally admitted to the program if all other admissions criteria are met and if all of the
following are true:
an overall GPA of 2.75 or higher in the last 60 hours;
a GPA of 2.75 in the teaching content field;
no university disciplinary actions filed, academic or otherwise;
a formal letter of request submitted to the admissions committee describing the
candidate’s academic history and articulating motivations for wanting to enter the
teaching profession; and
an interview with the Teacher Education Admissions Committee.
Courses, Titles, and Descriptions
EDUC 211 Education Foundations and Multicultural Perspectives (3-0-3), fall,
spring. A foundation course in professional education, including an introduction to serving
students in multicultural settings and an orientation to the teacher education program. Includes
observation in preK-12 classroom. Required as the first course of the teacher education
sequence, must be taken in residence. Prerequisite: sophomore standing.
EDUC 221 Educational Psychology (3-0-3), fall, spring, summer. An introduction to
theories of development, learning, motivation, memory and intelligence. May be used to satisfy
University Requirement. Prerequisite: Sophomore standing
EDUC 250 Literature for Children (3-0-3), fall, spring, summer. A content reading
course covering traditional and contemporary children's books and other materials. Studies of
major authors, illustrators, and genres are emphasized, along with applications for teaching
literacy skills to children. Limited to students seeking EC-4, 4-8, or EC-12 Special Education
certification.
66
EDUC 312 Field Experience in Guidance and Development (3-0-3), summer. Provides
an opportunity for intentional reflection on personal beliefs about and skills in teaching through
extended experiences with children in diverse education and/or ministry settings. During the
summer, students admitted to the Teacher Education Program provide children summer teaching
services that are directly related to the teaching profession. Prerequisites: Department Chair
approval; Admission to the Teacher Education Program; and summer employment, internship, or
volunteer placement working directly with students or school aged children.
EDUC 323 Integrated Math and Science: PreK-2 (3-0-3), fall, spring. Study of the
development and teaching of mathematics and science concepts in early childhood. Emphasis
will be placed on integrating mathematics and science concepts in the curriculum and in aligning
this curriculum with state and national standards.
EDUC 331 Teaching Social Studies in Pre K - Grade 8 (3-0-3), fall, spring. Designed
to prepare the preservice teacher to teach the social studies curriculum for age 3 through Grade 8.
The focus will be on learning the content of the curriculum as outlined by the state of Texas. In
part, students will make practical application teaching an appropriate segment of the social
studies curriculum. Prerequisites: EDUC 211 and Admission to Teacher Education Program
required.
EDUC 335 Teaching in the Middle School (3-0-3), fall. An overview of the historical
development of the middle school and a thorough discussion of adolescent psychology. Analyzes
middle grades content in language arts, math, social studies and science. Includes shadow study
experiences at a middle school and is required for any 4-8 teaching certificate. Prerequisites:
EDUC 211 and 221. Admission to Teacher Education Program required.
67
EDUC 411 Elementary Curriculum, Materials, and Media (3-0-3), fall, spring. A
field-based course designed to present basic elementary curriculum including lesson planning
and the development, organization, and use of teaching materials. Prerequisites: EDUC 211, 331;
READ 363. Must be taken concurrently with EDUC 431 in the semester before student teaching.
Admission to Teacher Education Program required. Fee required.
EDUC 412 Secondary Curriculum and Media (3-0-3), fall, spring. A field-based
course designed to present basic principles of curriculum development coordinated with textbook
use and lesson planning. Presents the Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills and an
introduction to supporting media. Prerequisites: EDUC 211, 221; READ 322. Must be taken
concurrently with EDUC 432. Should be taken semester before student teaching. Admission to
Teacher Education Program required. Fee required.
EDUC 431 Elementary Management and Methods (3-0-3), fall, spring. A study of
classroom management and discipline, motivation, and a variety of teaching strategies. Requires
45 hours of field work in the classroom. Prerequisites: EDUC 211, 331; READ 363. Must be
taken concurrently with EDUC 411. Should be taken semester before student teaching.
Admission to Teacher Education Program required.
EDUC 432 Secondary Management and Methods (3-0-3), fall, spring. A concentrated
study of classroom management, motivation, leadership, curriculum, and planning. Requires 45
hours of field work in the classroom. Prerequisites: EDUC 211, 221; READ 322. Must be taken
concurrently with EDUC 412. Should be taken semester before student teaching. Admission to
Teacher Education Program required.
EDUC 470 Teaching Mathematics in Elementary Grades 3-6 (3-0-3), fall, spring,
summer. A study of techniques of teaching mathematics with various teaching innovations.
68
Prerequisites: EDUC 211; MATH 237, 148. Admission to Teacher Education Program
required.
EDUC 476 Effective Teaching Strategies for English Language Learners (3-0-3),
fall, spring. Develops skills for helping English language learners in elementary school,
including a review of underlying social and multicultural contexts, English language concepts,
types of ESL programs, and instructional objectives and techniques. Prerequisites: EDUC 211,
and EACH 363 or READ 363
EDUC 490 Student Teaching (1-0-6),* fall, spring. The culmination of the preservice
teacher preparation program, student teaching includes teaching and related experiences in
schools. Requires one semester of all-day student teaching (14 weeks). If taken outside the
Abilene area, fee will be required. In order to complete the requirements of Teacher Education, a
grade of B or better must be earned. Failure to earn a B or better will result in removal from
Teacher Education. Prerequisites: Admission to Teacher Education Program and approval of
Student Teaching Committee.
EACH 363 Early Language and Literacy (3-0-3), fall, spring. Addresses
developmental issues and teaching strategies related to oral language and early literacy
development. Explores developmentally appropriate, research-based strategies for promoting
children's literacy learning from age 3 through early primary. Topics include oral language
development, phonological awareness, early phonics and emergent literacy. Also included are
strategies to provide communication and language supports for young children with
developmental challenges and strategies for teaching children with limited English proficiency in
the early childhood classroom. Prerequisites: EDUC 211, EDUC 250, and admission to Teacher
Education Program required.
69
EACH 451 Guidance in Early Childhood (2-2-3), fall, spring. Fundamental principles
underlying behavior and methods of working with young children. Concurrent enrollment in
EACH 466 required. Prerequisites: EDUC 211, 323 and admission to Teacher Education
Program.
EACH 466 Education of Young Children (3-0-3), fall, spring. A required course for
students certifying in age 3 through Grade 4. A study of theory and practice in the education of
young children. Includes 30 hours of field experience in public schools. Concurrent enrollment
in EACH 451 required. Prerequisites: EDUC 211, 323, and admission to Teacher Education
Program.
READ 322 Reading in Secondary Content Areas (3-0-3), fall, spring. Designed to
analyze reading skills involved in secondary content areas, including techniques of teaching
study skills, improving comprehension, and vocabulary growth. Prerequisites: EDUC 211 and
221. Admission to Teacher Education Program required.
READ 363 Foundations of Reading (3-0-3), fall, spring. Introduces current reading
theory, practice, and approaches in developmental reading, age 3 through Grade 12.
Prerequisites: EDUC 211. Admission to Teacher Education Program required.
READ 460 Reading Assessment and Instruction (3-0-3), fall, spring. A field-based
course emphasizing informal and observational assessment approaches to correction of reading
problems, age 3 through Grade 12. Prerequisites: EDUC 211; READ 363. Admission to Teacher
Education Program required.
READ 464 Reading-Writing Connection (3-0-3), fall, spring, summer. A study of the
related language arts taught in the elementary school. Prerequisites: EDUC 211, Read 363.
Admission to Teacher Education Program required. Same as READ 564.
70
READ 480 Problems in Reading (3-0-3), fall, spring. A course designed for students
certifying to teach age 3 through grade 12. Individual tutoring of children is required. Should be
taken near the end of the program. Prerequisite: READ 363. Admission to Teacher Education
Program required.
SPED 371 Teaching Students with Special Needs (3-0-3), fall. Provides prospective
teachers with an introduction to teaching students with disabilities. State and federal laws,
regulations, policies and procedures for identifying and teaching students with disabilities in
schools will be addressed. Students will gain knowledge in effective strategies and resources for
teaching students with special needs. A writing-intensive course. Prerequisites: EDUC 211.
Admission to Teacher Education Program required.
SPED 374 Emotional and Behavioral Disorders in Children (3-0-3), summer. A study
of social and emotional deviance in children including intervention and prevention strategies.
Same as PSYC 374.
SPED 477 Teaching Students With High Incident Disabilities (3-0-3), fall. A survey
of teaching children and adolescents with learning disabilities. Required for students seeking
certification in special education. Same as READ 477. Prerequisite: EDUC 211 and SPED 371.
SPED 481 Teaching Students With Low Incident Disabilities (3-0-3), spring. A study
of adapted and modified curriculum for special education students. 25 hours of field experiences
are included. Prerequisite: SPED 371. Admission to Teacher Education Program required.
SPED 485 Assessment and Behavior in Special Education (3-0-3), spring. Equips the
prospective special education teacher with knowledge and skill in assessing the strengths and
needs of students with disabilities and in addressing behavioral issues in special education.
Prerequisite: SPED 371.
71
SPED 488 Programs and Services in Special Education (3-0-3), fall. Students will
gain understanding and skill in instructional programming, resource application, collaboration
and administration of special education. Prerequisite: SPED 371.
University Requirements for all Bachelor’s Degrees
http://www.acu.edu/catalog/2010_11/universityinfo/universityrequirements.html
Certification Degree Plans
http://www.acu.edu/catalog/2010_11/departments/cehs/teachered.html
72
Table D-1
Program Option Requirements That Address Quality Principle I and State Subject Matter and
Pedagogical Standards for Middle School Language Arts
TEAC
Quality
Principle I
components
Required
courses
Field work
requirements
Admissions
requirements Portfolio
requirements
Exit
requirements
State
standard
number
1.1 Subject
matter
knowledge
72 hours in
major and
education
courses
2.75 GPA in
at least 45
hours and
meet
department
cut scores for
THEA in
writing,
reading and
math
TExES Exam
for each
content area
1.2
Pedagogical
knowledge
EDUC 221,
250, 335,
412/432,
476, READ
322, SPED
371
10 hrs in
EDUC 211,
40 hrs in
EDUC 412,
August Exp
40hrs
Artifacts and
reflections for
Competencies
1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 8,
9, 10
TExES
Professional
Practices and
Pedagogy
Exam
1, 2, 3, 4,
7, 8, 9,
10
1.3 Caring
and effective
teaching skill
EDUC 221,
250, 335,
412/432,
476, READ
322, SPED
371
10 hrs in
EDUC 211,
40 hrs in
EDUC 412,
August Exp
40hrs
Artifacts and
reflections for
Competencies
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7,
11, 13, 14
1, 2, 3, 4,
5, 7, 11,
13, 14
1.4.1 Cross-
cutting
theme:
Learning
how to learn
EDUC 221,
412, READ
322, EDUC
335,
CORE 110 for
incoming
class 2010.
10 hrs in
EDUC 211,
40 hrs in
EDUC 412
Artifacts and
reflections for
Competency
12
12
1.4.2 Cross-
cutting
theme:
Multicultural
perspectives
EDUC 211,
EDUC 335,
CORE 120,
220
10 hrs in
EDUC 211,
August Exp
40hrs.
Artifacts and
reflections for
Competencies
2, 7
2, 7
1.4.3 Cross-
cutting
theme:
Technology
READ 322,
EDUC 221,
412
40 hrs in
EDUC 412 Artifacts and
reflections for
Competency 9
9
73
Table D-2
Program Option Requirements That Address Quality Principle I and State Subject Matter and
Pedagogical Standards for Middle School Science, Social Science, and Math
TEAC
Quality
Principle I
components
Required
courses
Field work
requirements
Admissions
requirements Portfolio
requirements
Exit
requirements
State
standard
number
1.1 Subject
matter
knowledge
72 hours in
major and
education
courses
2.75 GPA in at
least 45 hours
and meet
department cut
scores for THEA
in writing,
reading and
math
TExES
Exam for
each content
area
1.2
Pedagogical
knowledge
EDUC 221,
READ 322,
EDUC 335,
EDUC
412/432,
SPED 371
10 hrs in
EDUC 211,
40 hrs in
EDUC 412,
August Exp
40 hrs
Artifacts and
reflections for
Competencies
1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 8,
9, 10
TExES
Professional
Practices and
Pedagogy
Exam
1, 2, 3, 4,
7, 8, 9,
10
1.3 Caring
and effective
teaching skill
EDUC 211,
221, 412, 432,
READ 322,
SPED 371
10 hrs in
EDUC 211,
40 hrs in
EDUC 412,
August Exp
40 hrs
Artifacts and
reflections for
Competencies
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7,
11, 13, 14
1, 2, 3, 4,
5, 7, 11,
13, 14
1.4.1 Cross-
cutting
theme:
Learning
how to learn
EDUC 221,
412, READ
322, EDUC
335, CORE
110 for
incoming
class 2010.
10 hrs in
EDUC 211,
40 hrs in
EDUC 412
Artifacts and
reflections for
Competency
12
12
1.4.2 Cross-
cutting
theme:
Multicultural
perspectives
EDUC 211,
EDUC 335,
CORE 120,
220
10 hrs in
EDUC 211,
August Exp
40 hrs.
Artifacts and
reflections for
Competencies
2, 7
2, 7
1.4.3 Cross-
cutting
theme:
Technology
READ 322,
EDUC 221,
412
40 hrs in
EDUC 412 Artifacts and
reflections for
Competency
9
9
74
Table D-3
Program Option Requirements That Address Quality Principle I and State Subject Matter and
Pedagogical Standards for All Levels Art, Music, Theater, Spanish, and Exercise Science
TEAC
Quality
Principle I
components
Required
courses
Field work
requirements
Admissions
requirements Portfolio
requirements
Exit
requirements
State
standard
number
1.1 Subject
matter
knowledge
75 hours in
major and
education
courses
2.75 GPA in
at least 45
hours and
meet
department
cut scores
for THEA
in writing,
reading and
math
TExES
Exam for
each content
area
1.2
Pedagogical
knowledge
EDUC 221,
413, 433,
SPED 371
10 hrs in
EDUC 211,
August Exp
40 hrs
Artifacts and
reflections for
Competencies
1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 8,
9, 10
TExES
Professional
Practices and
Pedagogy
Exam
1, 2, 3, 4,
7, 8, 9, 10
1.3 Caring
and effective
teaching skill
EDUC 211,
221, 413, 433,
SPED 371
10 hrs in
EDUC 211,
August Exp
40 hrs
Artifacts and
reflections for
Competencies
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7,
11, 13, 14
1, 2, 3, 4,
5, 7, 11,
13, 14
1.4.1 Cross-
cutting
theme:
Learning
how to learn
EDUC 221,
413, CORE
110 for
incoming class
2010
10 hrs in
EDUC 211
Artifacts and
reflections for
Competency 12
12
1.4.2 Cross-
cutting
theme:
Multicultural
perspectives
EDUC 211,
CORE 120,
220
10 hrs in
EDUC 211,
August Exp
40 hrs.
Artifacts and
reflections for
Competencies
2, 7
2, 7
1.4.3 Cross-
cutting
theme:
Technology
EDUC 221 Artifacts and
reflections for
Competency 9
9
75
Table D-4
Program Option Requirements That Address Quality Principle I and State Subject Matter and
Pedagogical Standards for Secondary Certifications (Biology, Chemistry, Physical Science,
English, History, Social Studies, Math, Physics, and Journalism)
TEAC
Quality
Principle I
components
Required
courses
Field work
requirements
Admissions
requirements Portfolio
requirements
Exit
requirements
State
standard
number
1.1 Subject
matter
knowledge
72 hours in
major and
education
courses
2.75 GPA in
at least 45
hours and
meet
department
cut scores
for THEA
in writing,
reading and
math
TExES
Exam for
each content
area
1.2
Pedagogical
knowledge
EDUC 221,
READ 322,
EDUC
412/432, SPED
371
10 hrs in
EDUC 211,
August Exp
40 hrs
Artifacts and
reflections for
Competencies
1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 8,
9, 10
TExES
Professional
Practices and
Pedagogy
Exam
1, 2, 3, 4,
7, 8, 9, 10
1.3 Caring
and effective
teaching skill
EDUC 211,
221, 412, 432,
READ 322,
SPED 371
10 hrs in
EDUC 211,
40 hrs in
EDUC 412,
August Exp
40 hrs
Artifacts and
reflections for
Competencies
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7,
11, 13, 14
1, 2, 3, 4,
5, 7, 11,
13, 14
1.4.1 Cross-
cutting
theme:
Learning
how to learn
EDUC 221,
412, READ
322, CORE
110 for
incoming class
2010.
10 hrs in
EDUC 211,
40 hrs in
EDUC 412
Artifacts and
reflections for
Competency 12
12
1.4.2 Cross-
cutting
theme:
Multicultural
perspectives
EDUC 211,
CORE 120,
220
10 hrs in
EDUC 211,
August Exp
40 hrs.
Artifacts and
reflections for
Competencies
2, 7
2, 7
76
TEAC
Quality
Principle I
components
Required
courses
Field work
requirements
Admissions
requirements Portfolio
requirements
Exit
requirements
State
standard
number
1.4.3 Cross-
cutting
theme:
Technology
READ 322,
EDUC 221,
412
40 hrs in
EDUC 412
Artifacts and
reflections for
Competency 9
9
Table D-5
Program Option Requirements That Address Quality Principle I and State Subject Matter and
Pedagogical Standards for All Levels Special Education
TEAC
Quality
Principle I
components
Required
courses
Field work
requirements
Admissions
requirements Portfolio
requirements
Exit
requirements
State
standard
number
1.1 Subject
matter
knowledge
72 hours in
major and
education
courses
2.75 GPA in
at least 45
hours and
meet
department
cut scores
for THEA
in writing,
reading and
math
TExES
Exam for
each content
area
1.2
Pedagogical
knowledge
READ 322,
363, 460, 464,
480 EDUC
221, 331,
412/432, 470
SPED 371,
374, 477, 481,
485, 488,
EACH 363,
476.
10 hrs in
EDUC 211,
40 hrs in
EDUC 412,
August Exp
40 hrs
Artifacts and
reflections for
Competencies
1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 8,
9, 10
TExES
Professional
Practices and
Pedagogy
Exam
1, 2, 3, 4,
7, 8, 9, 10
77
TEAC
Quality
Principle I
components
Required
courses
Field work
requirements
Admissions
requirements Portfolio
requirements
Exit
requirements
State
standard
number
1.3 Caring
and effective
teaching skill
READ 322,
363, 460, 464,
480 EDUC
221, 331,
412/432, 470
SPED 371,
374, 477, 481,
485, 488,
EACH 363,
476.
10 hrs in
EDUC 211,
40 hrs in
EDUC 412,
August Exp
40 hrs
Artifacts and
reflections for
Competencies
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7,
11, 13, 14
1, 2, 3, 4,
5, 7, 11,
13, 14
1.4.1 Cross-
cutting
theme:
Learning
how to learn
EDUC 221,
412, READ
322, EDUC
335, CORE
110 for
incoming class
2010.
10 hrs in
EDUC 211,
40 hrs in
EDUC 412
Artifacts and
reflections for
Competency 12
12
1.4.2 Cross-
cutting
theme:
Multicultural
perspectives
EDUC 211,
EDUC 335,
CORE 120,
220
10 hrs in
EDUC 211,
August Exp
40 hrs.
Artifacts and
reflections for
Competencies
2, 7
2, 7
1.4.3 Cross-
cutting
theme:
Technology
READ 322,
EDUC 221,
412
40 hrs in
EDUC 412
Artifacts and
reflections for
Competency 9
9
78
Table D-6
Program Option Requirements That Address Quality Principle I and State Subject Matter and
Pedagogical Standards for Elementary Level Certification
TEAC
Quality
Principle I
components
Required
courses
Field work
requirements
Admissions
requirements Portfolio
requirements
Exit
requirements
State
standard
number
1.1 Subject
matter
knowledge
76 hours in
major
2.75 GPA in
at least 45
hours and
meet
department
cut scores
for THEA
in writing,
reading and
math
TExES
Exam for
each content
area
1.2
Pedagogical
knowledge
EDUC
221,250, 331,
411/431, 470,
476, SPED
371, EACH
363, 451, 466,
READ 363,
460, 464, 480
10 hrs in
EDUC 211,
40 hrs in
EDUC 412,
August Exp
40 hrs
Artifacts and
reflections for
Competencies
1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 8,
9, 10
TExES
Professional
Practices and
Pedagogy
Exam
1, 2, 3, 4,
7, 8, 9, 10
1.3 Caring
and effective
teaching skill
EDUC 221,
250, 331,
411/431, 470,
476, SPED
371, EACH
363, 451, 466,
READ 363,
460, 464, 480
10 hrs in
EDUC 211,
40 hrs in
EDUC 412,
August Exp
40 hrs
Artifacts and
reflections for
Competencies
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7,
11, 13, 14
1, 2, 3, 4,
5, 7, 11,
13, 14
1.4.1 Cross-
cutting
theme:
Learning
how to learn
EDUC
221,250, 331,
411/431, 470,
476, SPED
371, EACH
363, 451, 466,
READ 363,
460, 464, 480
for incoming
class 2010.
10 hrs in
EDUC 211,
40 hrs in
EDUC 412
Artifacts and
reflections for
Competency 12
12
79
TEAC
Quality
Principle I
components
Required
courses
Field work
requirements
Admissions
requirements Portfolio
requirements
Exit
requirements
State
standard
number
1.4.2 Cross-
cutting
theme:
Multicultural
perspectives
EDUC 211,
CORE 120,
220
10 hrs in
EDUC 211,
August Exp
40 hrs.
Artifacts and
reflections for
Competencies
2, 7
2, 7
1.4.3 Cross-
cutting
theme:
Technology
EDUC 221,
411
40 hrs in
EDUC 412
Artifacts and
reflections for
Competency 9
9
80
Appendix E. Inventory of Status of Evidence From Measures and Indicators for TEAC
Quality Principle 1
Type of evidence
(Note: items under
each category are
examples. Program
may have more or
different evidence)
Available and in the Briefa Not available and not in the Brief
Relied on Reasons for including
the results in the Brief,
location in Brief
Not relied on Reasons for not
relying on this
evidence,
location in Brief
For future use
Reasons for
including in
future Briefs
Not for future use
Reasons for not
including in future
Briefs
Grades 1. Student grades and
GPAs
Yes. GPAs in content
areas are relied on in the
Proposal to give
evidence of content
knowledge.
Scores on standardized tests 2. Student scores on
standardized
license or board
examinations
Yes, Texas requires
exams for certification
and the competencies
measures align with our
program competencies.
3. Student scores on
undergraduate
and/or graduate
admission tests of
subject matter
knowledge and
aptitude
No THEA scores are
relied on for
admission
decisions but are
not used as
evidence of claims
in this Proposal, as
there is no direct
tie between the
exams and the
claims.
4. Standardized
scores and gains of
the program
graduates’ own
pupils
No Currently not
available from the
state.
Yes, state
accountability
will likely
require this in
the future
Ratings 5. Ratings of
portfolios of
academic and
clinical
accomplishments
Yes, the ratings are used
as formative and
summative assessments
for the program.
6. Third-party rating
of program’s
students
No Currently not
available
81
Type of evidence
(Note: items under
each category are
examples. Program
may have more or
different evidence)
Available and in the Briefa Not available and not in the Brief
Relied on Reasons for including
the results in the Brief,
location in Brief
Not relied on Reasons for not
relying on this
evidence,
location in Brief
For future use
Reasons for
including in
future Briefs
Not for future use
Reasons for not
including in future
Briefs
7. Ratings of in-
service, clinical,
and PDS teaching
No Our current
candidates are
seeking initial
certification and
are not teachers of
record
Possibly, if a 5th
year master’s
program leading
to certification
is added.
8. Ratings of
college/university
supervisors,
practice teachers’
work samples.
Yes, we have
standardized our
evaluation procedures;
this is where we can
access whether
candidates can apply
what they have learned
in program. Artifacts
(work samples) are a
requirement in the e-
portfolio requirements
for student teaching.
Rates
9. Rates of
completion of
courses and
program
No Rates of completion
are not reported in
state reports and are
not directly related to
our claims.
10. Graduates’ career
retention rates
No We can only get data
for candidates who
teach in Texas and the
data does not reflect
teachers who teach in
private school settings
or teachers who
transition out of
classroom into
leadership and other
non-instructional
roles.
11. Graduates’ job
placement rates
No Data not available.
Significant percentage
of candidates who
teach in private
schools and out of
Texas.
12. Rates of
graduates’
professional
advanced study
No Data not available
82
Type of evidence
(Note: items under
each category are
examples. Program
may have more or
different evidence)
Available and in the Briefa Not available and not in the Brief
Relied on Reasons for including
the results in the Brief,
location in Brief
Not relied on Reasons for not
relying on this
evidence,
location in Brief
For future use
Reasons for
including in
future Briefs
Not for future use
Reasons for not
including in future
Briefs
13. Rates of
graduates’
leadership roles
No Data not available
14. Rates of
graduates’
professional
service activities
No Data not available
Case studies and alumni competence
15. Evaluations of
graduates by their
own pupils
No Data not available
16. Alumni self-
assessment of their
accomplishments
Yes, Texas certification
application survey
17. Third-party
professional
recognition of
graduates (e.g.,
NBPTS)
No Data used for
marketing purposes
only
18. Employers’
evaluations of
program graduates
No Texas Education
Agency principal
survey was piloted
in Spring 2010 but
did not clearly
identify the
certification
institution
Yes, when the
state refines the
process
19. Graduates’
authoring of
textbooks,
curriculum
materials, etc.
No Data not available
20. Case studies of
graduates’ own
pupils’ learning
and
accomplishment
No Data not available
aAssessment results related to TEAC Quality Principle I that the program faculty uses elsewhere must be included in
the Brief. Evidence that is reported to the institution or state licensing authorities, or alluded to in publications,
websites, catalogs, and the like must be included in the Brief. Therefore, Title II results, grades (if they are used for
graduation, transfer, admission), admission test results (if they are used), hiring rates (if they are reported elsewhere)
would all be included in the Brief.
83
Appendix F. Assessments and Rubrics
Student-Teaching Application E-Portfolio Rubric
3 – Exceptional development toward professional proficiency
Reflects on personal professional growth relevant to the competency indicators as
represented by the artifacts included
Demonstrates open and honest self-appraisal, including strengths and challenges
Effective and accurate use of professional language
Makes clear personal application to future practice
Writing is coherent and focused
Strong use of writing conventions (No more than 2-3 minor errors)
*Note: ALL of the above criteria must be met in order to earn a score of 3 for a competency.
2 – Appropriate development toward professional proficiency
Reflects on personal professional growth relevant to the competency indicators as
represented by the artifacts included
Effective and accurate use of professional language
Application to future practice is vague or general
Writing is coherent and focused
Adequate use of writing conventions (No more than 4-5 minor errors)
1 – Inadequate development toward professional proficiency (any of the following will result in a
score of 1)
Discussion does not connect to competency
Reflection is overly brief or shallow
Does not use professional language or includes inaccuracies
Inadequate use of writing conventions (more than 5 errors)
84
Program Completion E-Portfolio Rubric
3 – Exceptional development toward professional proficiency
Reflects on personal professional growth relevant to the competency indicators as
represented by the artifacts included
Demonstrates open and honest self-appraisal, including strengths and challenges
Effective and accurate use of professional language
Makes clear personal application to future practice
Writing is coherent and focused
Strong use of writing conventions (No more than 2-3 minor errors; Error count
includes a total of errors present in reflection statement(s) and artifact(s) within the
competency combined.)
Artifact represents the candidate’s own work
*Note: ALL of the above criteria must be met in order to earn a score of 3 for a competency.
2 – Appropriate development toward professional proficiency
Reflects on personal professional growth relevant to the competency indicators as
represented by the artifacts included
Effective and accurate use of professional language
Application to future practice is vague or general
Writing is coherent and focused
Adequate use of writing conventions (No more than 4-5 minor errors; Error count
includes a total of errors present in reflection statement(s) and artifact(s) within the
competency combine.)
Artifact represents the candidate’s own work
1 – Inadequate development toward professional proficiency (any of the following will result in a
score of 1)
Discussion does not connect to competency
Reflection is overly brief or shallow
Does not use professional language or includes inaccuracies
Inadequate use of writing conventions
85
E-PORTFOLIO SCORING SHEET
Candidate:____________________________________
Score: Date: Reviewer:
1st Review:
2nd Review:
3rd Review
SCORING CRITERIA:
3 -- Expected level of
proficiency 2 -- Appropriate development
toward proficiency
1 -- Inadequate development
toward proficiency Reflects on personal professional
growth relevant to the competency
indicators as represented by the
artifacts included
Reflects on personal professional
growth relevant to the competency
indicators as represented by the
artifacts included
Reflection is overly brief, shallow,
or not included
Demonstrates open and honest self-
appraisal, including strengths and
challenges
Effective and accurate use of
professional language
Effective and accurate use of
professional language
Does not use professional language
or includes inaccuracies
Makes clear personal application to
future practice
Application to future practice is
vague or general
Writing is coherent and focused Writing is coherent and focused Discussion does not connect to
competency
Strong use of writing conventions
(No more than 2-3 minor errors;
Error count includes a total of
errors present in reflection
statement(s) and artifact(s) within
the competency combined.)
Adequate use of writing
conventions. (No more than 4-5
minor errors; Error count includes
a total of errors present in
reflection statement(s) and
artifact(s) within the competency
combined.)
Inadequate use of writing
conventions (more than 5 errors)
Artifact represents candidate's own
work
Artifact represents candidate's own
work
Artifact does not represent the
candidate's own work
All of above criteria must be met in
order to earn a score of 3 for a
competency.
Competency 1 -- The teacher applies knowledge of human developmental processes in the planning of instruction.
• Identifies and describes developmental characteristics of students. • Design lessons that are developmentally appropriate.
Review 1: Score: 3 2 1 Comments:
Review 2: Score: 3 2 1 Comments:
Review 3: Score: 3 2 1 Comments:
86
Competency 2 -- The teacher designs learning experiences and assessments that reflect an understanding of student diversity.
• Identifies and describes the dimensions of diversity represented in the classroom context (Gender, race/ethnicity, exceptionality, language, socioeconomic status, etc.) • Designs lessons that incorporate varied strategies for presentation and application
Review 1: Score: 3 2 1 Comments:
Review 2: Score: 3 2 1 Comments:
Review 3: Score: 3 2 1 Comments:
Competency 3 -- The teacher designs effective and coherent instruction and assessment based on appropriate learning goals and objectives.
• Uses appropriate criteria, such as the TEKS, to evaluate learning goals and objectives • Links objectives, instruction and assessment in lesson plans with clarity • Includes clearly stated and measurable objectives in lesson plans • Demonstrates understanding of subject content and presents it with accuracy
Review 1: Score: 3 2 1 Comments:
Review 2: Score: 3 2 1 Comments:
Review 3: Score: 3 2 1 Comments:
Competency 4 -- The teacher understands learning processes and factors that impact student learning.
• Draws on student’s prior knowledge to establish relevance • Promotes higher order thinking and problem solving in lessons • Uses a variety of motivational strategies to interest students and to secure cooperation
Review 1: Score: 3 2 1 Comments:
Review 2: Score: 3 2 1 Comments:
Review 3: Score: 3 2 1 Comments:
Competency 5 -- The teacher establishes an emotionally and physically safe classroom climate.
• Arranges space and materials for safety and effective learning • Interacts positively and respectfully with students
Review 1: Score: 3 2 1 Comments:
Review 2: Score: 3 2 1 Comments:
Review 3: Score: 3 2 1 Comments:
Competency 6 --The teacher organizes the learning environment to manage student behavior.
• Establishes clear expectations for behavior and learning • Establishes procedures, routines, and manages transitions • Paces lessons and activities to engage students
Review 1: Score: 3 2 1 Comments:
Review 2: Score: 3 2 1 Comments:
Review 3: Score: 3 2 1 Comments:
87
Competency 7 -- The teacher uses effective communication in teaching and learning.
• Communicates directions and procedures with clarity, utilizing multiple modalities • Provides clear definitions for new concepts and terms • Models effective and accurate use of oral and written language • Articulates learning objectives for students • Demonstrates sensitivity to differences (cultural, gender, intellectual, and physical)
Review 1: Score: 3 2 1 Comments:
Review 2: Score: 3 2 1 Comments:
Review 3: Score: 3 2 1 Comments:
Competency 8 -- The teacher provides appropriate instruction that actively engages students in the learning process.
• Provides instruction that addresses multiple intelligences and varied learning styles • Designs activities that actively involve all students • Implements effective collaborative learning experiences • Engages students through effective questioning and discussions
Review 1: Score: 3 2 1 Comments:
Review 2: Score: 3 2 1 Comments:
Review 3 Score: 3 2 1 Comments:
Competency 9 -- The teacher effectively incorporates the use of technology in the classroom.
• Selects technology that enhances instruction and supports learning outcomes • Incorporates technology for instruction and assessment as appropriate for age level and/or content area
Review 1: Score: 3 2 1 Comments:
Review 2: Score: 3 2 1 Comments:
Review 3: Score: 3 2 1 Comments:
Competency 10 -- The teacher utilizes varied assessments to monitor student learning, provide feedback and adjust instruction.
• Creates and/or selects assessments tied to instructional objectives • Communicates assessment results to the students • Adjusts instruction based on assessment
Review 1: Score: 3 2 1 Comments:
Review 2: Score: 3 2 1 Comments:
Review 3: Score: 3 2 1 Comments:
Competency 11 -- The teacher understands the importance of family and interacts appropriately and effectively with families.
• Utilizes appropriate resources and strategies to enhance family involvement in student learning • Reflects professionalism and respect for ALL families in conversations
Review 1: Score: 3 2 1 Comments:
Review 2: Score: 3 2 1 Comments:
Review 3: Score: 3 2 1 Comments:
88
Competency 12 -- The teacher pursues professional development opportunities and effectively interacts with other members of the educational community.
• Collaborates with peers and other professionals • Interacts respectfully with peers and other professionals • Participates in professional development • Engages in self-reflection and assessment to identify strengths and areas for growth
Review 1: Score: 3 2 1 Comments:
Review 2: Score: 3 2 1 Comments:
Review 3: Score: 3 2 1 Comments:
Competency 13 -- The teacher understands and adheres to legal and ethical requirements for educators.
• Adheres to the Code of Ethics and Standard Practices for Texas Educators • Maintains appropriate confidentiality in all communication • Demonstrates honesty and integrity in coursework, professional development and field experiences • Demonstrates high level of character by adherence to University Code of Conduct
Review 1: Score: 3 2 1 Comments:
Review 2: Score: 3 2 1 Comments:
Review 3: Score: 3 2 1 Comments:
Competency 14 -- The Christian teacher appropriately integrates faith with professional development and practice.
• Applies Biblical principles in interactions with students, parents, and school personnel • Evaluates educational theories and practices applying a Christian perspective
Review 1: Score: 3 2 1 Comments:
Review 2: Score: 3 2 1 Comments:
Review 3: Score: 3 2 1 Comments:
89
Showcase Rubric
E-PORTFOLIO SHOWCASE
SCORINGCRITERIA
Note: The presence of any indicator at the Unsatisfactory level
will result in a score of 1 for that category.
UNSATISFACTORY – 1
(Below Performance Standards)
PROFICIENT -- 2
(Sufficient Demonstration of
Criteria)
ADVANCED -- 3
(Demonstrates Exceptional
Performance)
Competency Connections
Artifact 1 ______
Artifact 2 ______
Artifact 3 ______
Artifact 4 ______
Artifact 5 ______
Tie between the artifact and
the competency is not clear, artifact is very limited and/or
artifact not included
Artifact does not reflect the candidate’s own work
Reflection is overly brief, shallow or not included
Does not use professional
language
Inadequate use of grammar
and/or spelling
Clear link between artifact
and competency
Adequate and accurate use of
professional language
Reflection demonstrates clarity of thought and
developing depth
In addition to meeting the
PROFICIENT criteria …
Demonstrates strong use of professional language
Reflection demonstrates
depth of thought
Describes clearly to how
learning represented will
affect future practice
Structure and Organization
Introduction
Organization of ideas
Closure
Length requirement
TIME:
No formal introduction or
introduction had lacked clarity
Ideas lacked a logical
progression
Did not include a planned
closure
Presentation was overly brief
or extended beyond allotted time
Introduction was clear and
appropriate
Ideas were separated into a
logical progression
Included an effective closure
Time requirement was met for specific assignment
(neither too long or too short)
In addition to meeting the
PROFICIENT criteria …
Clever attention getting introduction or an
imaginative preview
Ideas connected by effective transitions; logical
throughout; creative pattern
Conclusion tied presentation together and left audience
with memorable message
Vocal Expression
Rate and Volume of Speech
Pitch, Articulation and
Pronunciation
Speaker was hard to hear or understand
Voice or tone distracted from purpose of presentation
Excessive use of verbal fillers
Speaker was easy to hear and understand
Tone was conversational, but with purpose
Voice sounded natural,
neither patterned nor monotone
Speaker pronounced words clearly, correctly and with
minimal verbal fillers
In addition to meeting the
PROFICIENT criteria …
Speaker was enjoyable to hear; used expression and
emphasis
Speaker used voice to engage
and connect with the audience
Physical Characteristics
Eye Contact, Posture,
Gestures, Movement, Attire
Little eye contact with audience
Poor or slouchy posture
Movements were stiff or
unnatural
Attire was inappropriate for
audience
Strong eye contact with entire audience
Posture conveyed confidence
Gestures and movements
were natural and effective
Attire was appropriate for
audience and purpose
In addition to meeting the
PROFICIENT criteria …
Posture was commanding and purposeful
Attire was chosen to enhance
presentation
Appropriateness of Content
and Language
For audience, purpose,
and assignment
Speaker used inappropriate
language, content or examples for this audience
Speaker did not demonstrate a clear understanding of the
assignment or purpose of
presentation
Did not protect
confidentiality
Speaker obviously
considered the audience and used appropriate language
and examples
Speaker displayed a clear
understanding of assignment
requirements and content
Speaker understood purpose
of presentation
Protects confidentiality
In addition to meeting the
PROFICIENT criteria …
Examples and words were creative and well chosen for
presentation purpose
90
Overall Impact
Energy, Enthusiasm, Sincerity
Originality/Creativity
Speaker appeared bored by
the message or presented without conviction
Speaker demonstrated desire
to have audience listen, understand and remember
In addition to meeting the
PROFICIENT criteria …
Overall presentation was creative and engaging
Features
Multimedia, Visuals and/or
Audio
Materials detracted from
content or purpose, were of
such low quality as to discredit speaker and/or were
not included
Did not provide hard copies
Materials added, did not
detract from presentation
Materials used were quality products; easy to see and/or
hear
Provided appropriate hard
copies for reviewers
In addition to meeting the
PROFICIENT criteria …
Speaker creatively integrated a
variety of strategies to enhance
the presentation
91
Dispositions Rubric
Effective Communication (EF)
Disposition
Developing
Proficiency- 3
Lacking in
Proficiency - 2
Unacceptable -
1 Not Observed
Oral Expression
Communicates orally
in an effective,
positive, respectful
manner that is
grammatically correct.
At times, communicates
in a less respectful way
and/or contains some
grammatical errors.
Frequently,
communicates
orally in
manner that is
not effective,
positive or
speech contains
frequent
grammatical
errors.
Written Expression
Communicates in
writing in an effective,
positive manner that is
free of grammar and
spelling errors.
At times, written
communication is less
effective, positive, or
contains errors in
grammar/spelling.
Written
communication
is ineffective,
negative
and/or contains
frequent
errors in
grammar/spellin
g.
Tact/Judgment
Uses tact and
judgment
that demonstrates
professional and
positive
communication.
At times, lacks tact and/or
uses poor judgment
in communication.
Communication
is frequently
thoughtless or
insensitive to
others' feelings
and opinions.
Interaction with
Peers
Consistently interacts
with peers in a
professional and
positive manner.
Interacts with peers in a
manner that is not
professional, but is not
negative.
Frequently,
interacts with
peers in a
manner that is
not professional
and/or is often
negative.
EF Score: Total Score:
Comments:
92
Reflective Practice (RP)
Response to
Feedback
Responds to feedback
in a receptive manner
and is highly motivated
to try to implement
suggestions.
At times demonstrates
resistance to feedback
Does not respond to
feedback in a receptive or
positive manner or is not
willing to implement
suggestions
Personal
Reflection
Demonstrates a strong
sense of personal
awareness and can
articulate how specific
experiences have
contributed to personal
and professional
growth.
At times, demonstrates
a
limited sense of
personal
awareness and/or
struggles to articulate
how past experiences
have
contributed to personal
and professional
growth.
Unable to reflect on how
personal experiences have
contributed to the personal and
professional growth or the lack
thereof.
Problem
Solving
Demonstrates thought
and independence in
in solving problems.
At times, lacks
expected level of
thought and/or
independence in solving
problems.
Frequently demonstrates over-
reliance on others to help
solve problems.
Self-
Efficacy
Communicates a sense of
responsibility for all
learners and identifies
factors under the
teacher’s control to
impact success
At times expresses a
belief that factors
outside the teacher’s
control prevent
opportunities to
positively impact the
learner
Frequently describes learners
and/or families using biased,
hopeless or negative language,
attributing blame for failure
only to factors outside of the
teacher’s control
RP Score: Total Score:
Comments:
Professionalism (P)
Disposition Proficient - 3
Lacking in
Proficiency-2 Unacceptable-1 Not Observed
Attendance
Attends all classes,
meetings, and
appointments unless
absolutely
unavoidable.
Provides
documentation
when applicable.
Meets the minimum
attendance
expectations in
classes. Absences are
often avoidable,
demonstrating a
limited commitment
to professional
development.
Absences in classes,
meetings, and
appointments are
excessive.
93
Punctuality
Arrives to class and
other commitments
at the scheduled
time.
Occasionally arrives
at class and other
commitments later
than the scheduled
time.
Frequently arrives at class and
other commitments later than
the scheduled time.
Personal
Appearance
Consistently adheres
to stated dress code.
Dresses modestly
and appropriately for
the learning context.
Requires occasional
direction in
complying with dress
code. Dress is
occasionally
inappropriate for the
learning context.
Frequently ignores the
stated dress code and/or
dresses immodestly or
inappropriately for the
learning context.
Values Learning
Values and
demonstrates
enthusiasm about
knowledge, content
and experiences
presented in
program.
At times, does not
appear interested in
course content and/or
other learning
experiences.
Openly demonstrates a
negative attitude about course
content and/or other learning
experiences.
Collegiality
Seeks opportunities
to share ideas. Seeks
assistance from and
collaborates with
colleagues in an
appropriate manner.
Complies when
expected to
collaborate and learn
from others, but does
not seek these
opportunities.
Frequently resists
opportunities to share,
collaborate or learn from
others.
Sensitivity and
Awareness
Does not seek undue
attention.
At times, calls
inappropriate
attention to self.
Frequently draws
inappropriate attention to self,
interrupts or dominates
conversation.
Acceptance
Values the
perspectives of
individuals from
diverse experiential
backgrounds.
Considers opinions
of others
with an open mind.
Is at times unaware
of the perspectives of
others and/or
occasionally
expresses closed
opinions.
Ignores and/or is openly
disrespectful of the
backgrounds, experiences,
and/or opinions of others.
P Score Total Score:
Comments:
94
Emotional Maturity (EM)
Disposition Proficient - 3 Lacking in Proficiency-2 Unacceptable-1 Not Observed
Reliability/
Dependability
Exhibits reliability and
dependability in all
coursework as well as
in all field experiences.
Occasionally fails to fulfill
obligations in coursework.
Frequently fails to fulfill
obligations in coursework
and/or fails to complete field
experience requirements.
Self-
Initiative/
Independence
Demonstrates self-
initiative and
independence in all
coursework as well as
all field experiences.
Generally needs some
additional encouragement
or assistance in coursework
and/or field experiences.
Is overly dependent on others
in coursework and/or field
experiences.
Balanced
Lifestyle
Protects all aspects of
personal health
(physical, spiritual,
emotional) to
ensure fulfillment of
academic and
professional
commitments.
At times makes unhealthy
lifestyle choices that
interfere with the ability to
fulfill commitments.
Frequently makes lifestyle
choices that negatively affect
personal health and/or
prevent the fulfillment of
commitments.
Conflict
Management
Identifies and accepts
personal responsibility
in conflict/problem
situations. Initiates
communication to
resolve conflicts.
Accepts personal
responsibility in conflict/
problem situations only
when approached, but is
then willing to work
toward resolution.
Does not recognize personal
responsibility in
conflict/problem situations
and/or is not receptive to
efforts toward resolutions.
Flexibility
Accepts less than ideal
situations when
necessary and adapts
appropriately to change
and/or unexpected
events.
Exhibits moderate
frustration when faced with
less than ideal situations
and/or unexpected events.
Frequently complains and/or
expresses strong frustration if
faced with difficult situations
and/or unexpected events.
Emotional
Constancy
Acts from a positive
frame of reference and
maintains emotional
control. Expresses and
responds to emotions
appropriately.
Occasionally acts from a
negative frame of reference
and/or expresses emotions
in a less than ideal manner.
Is frequently negative and/or
expresses emotions in an
inappropriate manner.
EM Score Total Score:
Comments:
95
Integrity * Failure to demonstrate proficiency in any area of this category may result in dismissal from the ACU Teacher
Education Program at any point in program.
Disposition Proficient - 3 Lacking in Proficiency-2 Unacceptable-1 Not Observed
Integrity of
Speech
Protects confidentiality,
avoids derogatory
language and profanity
and demonstrates
sensitivity in all
conversations.
NA
Fails to protect
confidentiality and/or uses
derogatory language and
profanity or demonstrates
insensitivity in conversation.
Ethical
Behavior
Adheres to the ACU
Policy of Academic
Integrity, ACU Student
Conduct and the Texas
Educator Code of
Ethics.
NA
Fails to adhere to the ACU
Policy of Academic Integrity,
ACU Student Conduct or the
Texas Educator Code of
Ethics.
Sobriety and
Abstinence
Avoids abuse of
addictive substances
and behaviors and/or
provides evidence of
active recovery as
indicated by the
Teacher Education
Admissions
Committee.
NA
Fails to avoid abuse of
addictive substances and
behaviors or does not provide
evidence of active recovery.
I Score Total Score:
Comments:
Indicate the context for this review: (Circle one)
Teacher Education Application Student Teaching Application Program Completion Additional Review
Note: If this is an additional review, please provide a description of the context of concern below. A Formal Review of Concern is recommended.
_____________________________ _____________________________ _________________
Candidate Signature Printed Name Date
_____________________________ _____________________________ _________________
Reviewer’s Signature Printed Name Date
96
Writing Sample Rubric
Your writing sample will be assessed in two areas: writing development and language use. If you
earn a score lower than the required level in either category, a repeat administration of the
writing sample will be required before admission to Teacher Education can be granted.
Required minimum passing scores:
Writing Development – 48 Language Use – 29
Quality & development of ideas (x5) Grammar (x2)
Organization & relevance (x5) Sentence Structure (x2)
Wording & phrasing (x3) Punctuation (x2)
Spelling (x2)
Writing Development
Quality & Development of Ideas (x5)
5 points Articulates one clear, well-focused topic. The main idea stands out and is
supported by detailed information.
4 points Main idea is clear, but the supporting information is general.
3 points Main idea is somewhat clear, but there is need for more supporting information.
Some information is not connected to the main idea.
2 points Main idea lacks clarity. There is a seemingly random collection of information.
1 point Main idea is confusing. There is a lack of connection between information.
Organization & Relevance (x5)
5 points Proper paragraphing; support and elaboration of ideas; flow of thought; and clear
focus are present.
4 points Paper contains three elements of organization, though relevance is maintained.
3 points Paper contains one or two elements of organization and/or relevance is lost.
2 points No elements of organization are present with little relevance.
1 point No elements of organization are present and there is no relevance.
Wording & Phrasing (x3)
5 points Writer chooses variety of words to appropriately convey thoughts and uses proper
phrasing.
97
4 points Writer uses some variety in wording. One or two phrasing changes would
improve the paper.
3 points Little variety in word choice is evident or some awkward phrasing makes the
paper less reader-friendly.
2 points Words are non-descript or boring, or phrasing makes ideas in paper hard to
decipher.
1 point Wording and phrasing makes the ideas in the paper impossible to decipher.
Language Use
Grammar (x2)
5 points Writer makes no mistakes in grammar.
4 points Writer makes one to two errors in grammar.
3 points Writer makes three to four errors in grammar.
2 points Writer makes five to six errors in grammar.
1 point Writer makes seven or more errors in grammar.
Sentence Structure/Syntax (x2)
5 points Writer makes no mistakes in syntax.
4 points Writer makes one to two errors in syntax.
3 points Writer makes three to four errors in syntax.
2 points Writer makes five to six errors in syntax
1 point Writer makes seven or more errors in syntax.
Punctuation (x2)
5 points Writer makes no mistakes in punctuation.
4 points Writer makes one to two errors in punctuation.
3 points Writer makes three to four errors in punctuation.
2 points Writer makes five to six errors in punctuation.
1 point Writer makes seven or more errors in punctuation.
98
Spelling (x2)
5 points Writer makes no mistakes in spelling.
4 points Writer makes one to two errors in spelling.
3 points Writer makes three to four errors in spelling.
2 points Writer makes five to six errors in spelling.
1 point Writer makes seven or more errors in spelling.
Note: This rubric has been adapted from the Teacher Education Admissions Writing Sample
Rubric of the Indiana University East School of Education. Permission to use the rubric has been
granted by the Dean of the School of Education at Indiana University East.
99
Student-Teaching Observation Rubric
3 points
Above Targeted
Development Toward Proficiency
2 points
Meets Targeted
Development Toward Proficiency
1 point
Below Targeted
Development Toward Proficiency
0 points
Unsatisfactory
Development Toward Proficiency
KNOWLEDGE &
INSTRUCTION
Builds depth
*appropriate focus
*establishes relevance The lesson is clearly
connected to prior
and/or future
knowledge at the
beginning of the
lesson.
The lesson is
connected to prior and/or future
knowledge.
The lesson is not
connected to prior and/or future
knowledge.
The reason the objective is important
to the student is clearly set at the start of the
lesson. Students are
included in the discussion.
The reason the objective is important
to the student is set at the start of the lesson.
An attempt is made to establish relevancy.
The statement comes at an inappropriate time in
the lesson.
(Sequencing)
The reason the objective is important
to the student is not established.
The student teacher provides real-life
examples that are clear applications to the
lesson.
The student teacher provides real-life
examples in an attempt to make a connection
to the lesson.
The student teacher does not provide real-
life examples.
*responding to student response
with effective questioning and discussion techniques
The student teacher uses questioning skills
in such a way as to engage students in the
discussion. Questions
are open-ended, higher order questions. The
teacher probes and
prompts to check for understanding.
The student teacher uses questioning skills
in such a way as to engage students in the
discussion. He/She
prompts and probes to check for
understanding.
The student teacher uses closed ended
questions during discussions. Checking
for understanding is
limited.
The student teacher does not use effective
questioning skills to engage students or
check for
understanding.
creates opportunities for and
effectively solicits student participation
The student teacher is highly successful in
implementing motivational strategies
by which students are
engaged. The student teacher is aware of
reluctant students and
works to engage those students.
The student teacher is adequately successful
in implementing motivational strategies
by which students are
engaged. The student teacher is somewhat
aware of reluctant
students and, when recognized, works to
engage those students.
The student teacher is not successful in
implementing motivational strategies
by which students are
engaged. He/She is seldom aware of
reluctant students and
is inconsistent in engaging those
students.
The student teacher does not attempt to
implement motivational strategies by which
students are engaged.
He/She is not aware of reluctant students and,
therefore, does not
attempt to engage those students.
uses a variety of teaching
materials and methods The student teacher
employs diverse methods, activities, and
materials during the
course of the lesson to ensure maximized
learning for all students
The student teacher
provides for some diversity either through
methods, activities, or
materials during the course of lesson.
Portions of the learning
are maximized.
The student teacher
provides for some diversity either through
methods, activities, or
materials during the course of lesson.
Portions of the learning
are maximized.
The student teacher
does not vary the presentation of the
teaching methods,
activities, or materials during the course of
lesson.
100
3 points
Above Targeted
Development
Toward Proficiency
2 points
Meets Targeted
Development
Toward Proficiency
1 point
Below Targeted
Development
Toward Proficiency
0 points
Unsatisfactory
Development
Toward Proficiency
demonstrates knowledge of
content The student teacher exhibits a rich depth of
knowledge as he/she guides the instruction.
Correct use of content
specific vocabulary and conceptual
understanding of
content supports the instruction.
The student teacher exhibits an adequate
depth of knowledge as he/she guides the
instruction. The
student teacher correctly uses content
specific vocabulary
most of the time and has a good conceptual
understanding of the
content.
The student teacher is confused or unsure of
knowledge needed to appropriately guide the
instruction. Incorrect
use of content specific vocabulary reflects
unpreparedness.
The student teacher exhibits a shallow depth
of knowledge as he/she guides the instruction.
Use of content specific
vocabulary is either absent or incorrect.
Conceptual
understanding of content is lacking.
teaches critical attributes of the
concept The student teacher has a clear understanding
of the critical attributes
and focuses instruction on these attributes.
The student teacher understands most of
the critical attributes of
the content and focuses instruction on these
attributes.
The student teacher has a clear understanding
of some of the critical
attributes and focuses instruction on these
attributes.
The student teacher does not have a clear
understanding of the
critical attributes, nor does he/she keep
instruction connected to
these attributes.
maximizes amount of time
available for student learning The student teacher
paces the lesson appropriately, allotting
appropriate times for lesson focus,
instruction, guided
practice, and independent practice.
Transitions are smooth
providing for time on task to be maximized.
Students work toward
achieving lesson objectives.
The student teacher
paces the lesson so that the time allotted for
lesson focus, instruction, guided
practice, and
independent practice are balanced fairly
well. Transitions are
fairly smooth, with some time lost. A
general sense of
working toward a clear objective remains
evident.
The student teacher
paces the lesson loosely. Times allotted
for lesson focus, instruction, guided
practice, and
independent practice are not well defined.
Transitions are
somewhat chaotic, with loss of time on task
having a negative
impact on student achievement of lesson
objective.
The student teacher
paces the lesson loosely. Times allotted
for lesson focus, instruction, guided
practice, and
independent practice are not well defined.
The student teacher
loses control of the class during transition
times, and students lose
the focus of the lesson objective.
sequences to provide appropriate flow of lesson
The sequencing of instruction is well
planned to maximize student learning.
The sequencing of instruction is somewhat
planned. Student learning is maintained.
The sequencing of instruction is disrupted
and does not flow well. Student learning is
challenged by "out-of-
order" instruction.
Evidence of a well thought out sequence
for instruction is lacking. Achieving
lesson objectives is
difficult because of confused
flow of sequence.
closes lesson The student teacher clearly closes his/her
lesson. Many students
provide thorough feedback during a
closing discussion that
clearly demonstrates a full understanding of
the connection between
the lesson activities and the objectives of
the lesson.
The student teacher adequately closes
his/her lesson. The
students provide adequate feedback
during the closing that
demonstrates a general understanding of the
connection of the
lesson activities with the objectives of the
lesson.
The student teacher clearly closes his/her
lesson. The students
are not provide thorough feedback
during the closing that
clearly demonstrates a clear understanding of
the connection of the
lesson activities with the objectives of the
lesson.
The student teacher clearly closes his/her
lesson. The students
provide thorough feedback during the
closing that clearly
demonstrates a clear understanding of the
connection of the lesson
activities with the objectives of the lesson.
101
3 points
Above Targeted
Development
Toward Proficiency
2 points
Meets Targeted
Development
Toward Proficiency
1 point
Below Targeted
Development
Toward Proficiency
0 points
Unsatisfactory
Development
Toward Proficiency
COMMUNICATION WITH
STUDENTS
uses accurate language/grammar
during delivery of lesson The student teacher demonstrates a
command of the English Language in
the delivery of her
lesson and in her communication with
students.
The student teacher demonstrates a strong
use of the English Language, with few
errors in grammar or
word usage.
The student teacher demonstrates an fair
use of the English Language, with some
noticeable errors in
grammar or word usage.
The student teacher demonstrates a poor use
of the English Language, with many
errors in grammar and
word usage.
provides clear instructions Clear directions are
provided at the appropriate times,
allowing for a smooth
transition into the activity.
Adequate directions are
provided. The timing in delivering
instructions has
allowed for some confusion.
Fair directions are
provided. The timing in delivering
instructions has
allowed for confusion.
Poor directions are
provided. Students are not confident in what
they have been assigned
to do.
projects enthusiasm The student teacher sets the tone for the
lesson with her energy
and enthusiasm. Students are interested
and engaged in the lesson. The student
teacher sustains this
energy, keeping her students attentive and
involved throughout
the entire lesson.
The student teacher sets the tone for the
lesson with her
enthusiasm. Most students are interested
and engaged in the lesson.
The student teacher demonstrates a fair
amount of enthusiasm
as she teaches, but it is not sustained
throughout the lesson.
The student teacher does not demonstrate an
enthusiasm. Students
are bored or disconnected.
interacts appropriately with
students The student teacher has
clearly established
him/herself as teacher.
The interactions
between student teacher and students
reflect a professional
and appropriate relationship.
The student teacher is
making obvious strides
in establishing
him/herself as teacher.
The interactions between student
teacher and students
generally reflect a professional and
appropriate
relationship.
The student teacher is
inconsistent with the
role of teacher The
students are sometimes
confused in their understanding of the
role of the student
teacher.
The student teacher has
not established
him/herself as teacher.
The interactions
between student teacher and students reflect an
un professional and
inappropriate relationship.
reinforces correct responses and
provides corrective feedback The student teacher is consistent in
acknowledging student
contributions to classroom discussions.
The student teacher is
masterful in providing corrective, yet sensitive
feedback, making sure
that inaccurate contributions are
explored in ways to
establish accurate conceptual
understanding.
The student teacher is somewhat consistent in
acknowledging student
contributions to classroom discussions.
The student teacher is
somewhat sensitive in providing corrective
feedback, making sure
that inaccurate contributions are
explored in ways to
establish accurate conceptual
understanding.
The student teacher is inconsistent in
acknowledging student
contributions to classroom discussions.
The student teacher is
fairly sensitive in providing corrective
feedback, making sure
that inaccurate contributions are
explored in ways to
establish accurate conceptual
understanding.
The student teacher is does not acknowledge
student contributions to
classroom discussions. The student teacher is
not sensitive in
providing corrective feedback. The student
teacher does not make
sure that inaccurate contributions are
explored in ways to
establish accurate conceptual
understanding.
uses very few distracting fillers
(uh, okay, um, like, etc…) The student teacher is
comfortable in front of the classroom.
Delivery of the lesson
is free from distracting fillers.
The student teacher is
somewhat comfortable in front of the
classroom. Delivery of
the lesson is somewhat free from distracting
fillers.
The student teacher is
somewhat comfortable in front of the
classroom, however
delivery of the lesson contains some
distracting fillers.
The student teacher is
not comfortable in front of the classroom.
Delivery of the lesson
is filled with distracting fillers.
102
3 points
Above Targeted
Development
Toward Proficiency
2 points
Meets Targeted
Development
Toward Proficiency
1 point
Below Targeted
Development
Toward Proficiency
0 points
Unsatisfactory
Development
Toward Proficiency
supports verbal communication
w/appropriate visual materials The student teacher consistently supports
communication with a variety of graphic aids
to enhance student
comprehension. Graphic aids are neat,
easy to read, and free
from error.
The student teacher supports
communication with occasional graphic aids
to enhance student
comprehension. Graphic aids are free
from error.
Graphic aids used are not easy to read and
have some errors.
No graphic aids were used.
uses non-verbal cues to
reinforce and redirect The student teacher consistently uses
his/her eyes, hand
signals, proximity, and or other non-verbal
cues to maintain
student participation.
The student teacher generally uses his/her
eyes, hand signals,
proximity, and or other non-verbal cues to
maintain student
participation.
The student teacher occasionally uses
his/her eyes, hand
signals, proximity, and or other non-verbal
cues to maintain
student participation.
The student teacher does not use non-verbal
cues to maintain student
participation.
is courteous, supportive, and
respectful of all students The student teacher
consistently interacts with all students in a
respectful way. The
student teacher responds to a challenge
with calmness and consistency.
The student teacher is
generally respectful in his/her interactions.
The student teacher is
somewhat respectful in his/her interactions
with students. There is
some evidence of frustration, negativity,
or sarcasm toward some students.
The student teacher
does not interact with all students in a
respectful way.
CLASSROOM
MANAGEMENT
manages materials, supplies, and
transitions
The use of materials and/or supplies has
been very well planned
to support smooth
transitions from
delivery of instruction
to activity or independent practice.
Transitions are well
established. Students are successful in
navigating transition
times efficiently.
The use of materials and/or supplies has
been well planned to
support smooth
transitions from
delivery of instruction
to activity or independent practice.
Transitions are fairly
well established. Students are fairly
successful in
navigating transition times efficiently.
The planning of the use of materials and/or
supplies has been
poorly planned.
Transitions from
delivery of instruction
to activity or independent practice
are awkward or chaotic.
Materials management routines are not well
established. Some
students exhibit difficulty in navigating
transition times
efficiently.
The use of materials and/or supplies has not
been planned.
Transitions from
delivery of instruction
to activity or
independent practice have not been thought
out. Students are not
successful in navigating transition times
efficiently.
clearly states behavior
expectations early and as needed Behavior expectations are clearly stated at the
beginning of the lesson
and as needed before times of transition to
guided practice,
independent practice, and following
completion of lesson.
Students clearly understand what is
expected.
Behavior expectations are stated, but the
timing (before start of
lesson, before transition times) is not
consistent. Students
are generally clear about what is expected.
Behavior expectations are stated at times that
are random and/or
disruptive throughout the lesson as a reaction
to misconduct.
The student teacher does not state behavior
expectations. Students’
behavior is a disruption to the learning process.
103
3 points
Above Targeted
Development
Toward Proficiency
2 points
Meets Targeted
Development
Toward Proficiency
1 point
Below Targeted
Development
Toward Proficiency
0 points
Unsatisfactory
Development
Toward Proficiency
implements planned behavior
management strategies The student teacher uses established
behavior management strategies. Student
response indicates the
management strategies have been well
established and
consistently used.
The student teacher uses behavior
management strategies. Student response
indicates the
management strategies have been adequately
established and used
fairly consistently.
The student teacher uses established
behavior management strategies. Student
response indicates the
management strategies have been established,
but inconsistently used.
There is no evidence that behavior
management strategies have been established.
Student response
indicates the management strategies
have not been well
established or consistently used.
utilizes appropriate physical
proximity
The student teacher
freely moves about the
room. He/She prevents
or minimizes most
potential disruptions using this strategy of
proximity.
The student teacher
moves about the room.
He/She prevents or
minimizes many
potential disruptions using this strategy of
proximity.
The student teacher
moves about the room
only a little. He/She
prevents or minimizes
only some potential disruptions using this
strategy of proximity.
The student teacher
remains in one place as
he/she instructs. Lack
of proximity promotes
disruptions and off-task behavior.
reinforces desired behavior The student teacher
consciously gives attention and positive
feedback to desired
behaviors. The student teacher effectively
elicits desired
behaviors most of the time through positive
reinforcement.
The student teacher
gives some attention and positive feedback
to desired behaviors.
The student teacher elicits desired
behaviors through
positive reinforcement.
The student teacher
gives little attention and positive feedback
to desired behaviors.
The student teacher elicits desired
behaviors little of the
time through positive reinforcement.
The student teacher
does not consciously give attention and/or
positive feedback to
desired behaviors. The student teacher does not
elicit desired behaviors
through positive reinforcement.
is aware of and responds to
student behavior during
instruction
The student teacher demonstrates a keen
sense of awareness of most student behavior
during delivery of his/her lesson. The
student teacher
responds to behavior, positive or negative,
while keeping the
lesson moving and students engaged.
The student teacher demonstrates an
awareness of student behavior during
delivery of his/her lesson. The student
teacher responds to
some behavior. Disruptions are
minimal and do not
negatively impact learning.
The student teacher demonstrates some
awareness of student behavior during
delivery of his/her lesson. The student
teacher does not
respond to some behavior that needs
attention. Disruptions
do have somewhat of a negative impact on
learning.
The student teacher does not demonstrate an
awareness of student behavior and/or does
not attempt to redirect the negative behavior.
keeps students on task The student teacher is well aware of on- and
off-task behavior. He/She keeps on-task
students very well
focused while successfully bringing
off-task students back
to the lesson.
The student teacher is aware of on- and off-
task behavior. He/She keeps on-task students
fairly well focused
while working to bring off-task students back
to the lesson.
The student teacher is somewhat aware of on-
and off-task behavior. He/She is somewhat
successful in re-
focusing off-task students.
The student teacher is not aware of on- and
off-task behavior.
manages wait time well The student teacher masterfully uses “wait
time”, consistently
allowing for plenty of thinking, processing,
and response time for
most students.
The student teacher uses “wait time”, often
allowing for plenty of
thinking, processing, and response time for
students.
The student teacher occasionally uses “wait
time”, allowing for
plenty of thinking, processing, and
response time for some
students.
The student teacher does not use wait time.
104
3 points
Above Targeted
Development
Toward Proficiency
2 points
Meets Targeted
Development
Toward Proficiency
1 point
Below Targeted
Development
Toward Proficiency
0 points
Unsatisfactory
Development
Toward Proficiency
demonstrates equity and
consistency in student interactions
Student response to the student teacher reflects
that he/she has been equitable in a
consistent manner with
all students. The student teacher has
clearly established
relationships with the students that are
emotionally safe and
predictable.
Student response to the student teacher reflects
that he/she has been equitable in a fairly
consistent manner with
all students. The student teacher has
established
relationships with the students that are
emotionally safe sand
predictable.
Student response to the student teacher reflects
that he/she has been somewhat equitable in
interactions with
students. The student teacher has established
relationships with the
students that are somewhat emotionally
safe and predictable.
Student response to the student teacher reflects
that he/she has not been equitable or consistent
in interactions with
students. The student teacher has not
established
relationships with the students that are
emotionally safe or
predictable.
ASSESSMENT
monitors and adjusts to ensure
learning objectives are met
The student teacher
continually checks for student understanding
via observation and/or
questioning. Adjustments to
instruction based on
observation of student understanding are
highly effective.
The student teacher
sometimes checks for student understanding
via observation and/or
questioning. Adjustments to
instruction based on
observation of student understanding are
effective.
The student teacher
randomly checks for student understanding
via observation and/or
questioning. Adjustments to
instruction based on
observation of student understanding are
somewhat effective.
The student teacher
does not check for student understanding
via observation and for
clarification through questioning.
Adjustments to
instruction based on observation of student
understanding are not
effective.
provides opportunity for re-
learning and re-evaluation
The student teacher
provides for the needs of all students by
including opportunities
for re-learning and re-evaluation as needed.
The student teacher
provides for the needs of most students by
including opportunities
for re-learning and re-evaluation as needed.
The student teacher
provides for the needs of some students by
including opportunities
for re-learning and re-evaluation as needed.
The student teacher
does not provide for the needs of his/her
students by including
opportunities for re-learning and re-
evaluation as needed.
reinforces student learning
through the assessment activity
The student teacher
continually reinforces student learning during
independent practice.
He/She uses the students’ independent
work time to support
students in the application of the
lesson.
The student teacher
generally reinforces student learning during
independent practice.
He/She uses some of the students’
independent work time
to support them in the application of the
lesson.
The student teacher
reinforces some students’ learning
during independent
practice. He/She uses the students’
independent work time
fairly well to support them in the application
of the lesson.
The student teacher
does not reinforce student learning during
independent practice.
He/She does not use the students’ independent
work time to support
them in the application of the lesson.
plans for a direct link between
the assessment and stated
objective
The assessment
activity is clearly linked to the stated
objective.
The assessment activity
is somewhat linked to the stated objective.
The assessment activity
is loosely linked to the stated objective.
The assessment activity
is not linked to the stated objective.
PROFESSIONAL
APPEARANCE
maintains a professional appearance
The student teacher’s dress is modest,
professional, and clearly differentiates
between the role of the
student and the role of the teacher.
The student teacher’s dress is generally
modest and professional. It
differentiates between
the role of the student and the role of the
teacher.
The student teacher’s dress is questionably
modest and/or professional. It does
not clearly differentiate
between the role of the student and the role of
the teacher.
The student teacher’s dress is not modest
and/or professional. It does not differentiate
between the role of the
student and the role of the teacher.
105
ACU Teaching Observation Record
Student Teacher: ________________________________________Cooperating Teacher: __________________________________
School:_____________________________Date: ____________Time: _______ Grade/Subject:_______________# Students _____
3 2 1 0
Key: Above Meets Below Unsatisfactory
Development Toward Development Toward Development Toward Development Toward
Proficiency Proficiency Proficiency Proficiency
KNOWLEDGE AND INSTRUCTION The student teacher:
1. builds depth by:
a. beginning with an appropriate focus 3 2 1 0________________________________________
b. establishing relevance early 3 2 1 0________________________________________
c. responding to student response with
effective discussion techniques 3 2 1 0________________________________________
soliciting student participation 3 2 1 0________________________________________
2. uses a variety of teaching materials and methods 3 2 1 0________________________________________
3. demonstrates knowledge of content 3 2 1 0________________________________________
4. teaches critical attributes of concept 3 2 1 0________________________________________
5. paces lesson appropriately 3 2 1 0________________________________________
6. sequences appropriately to provide appropriate flow of lesson 3 2 1 0________________________________________
7. closes lesson 3 2 1 0________________________________________
COMMUNICATION WITH STUDENTS The student teacher:
8. uses accurate language/grammar during delivery of lesson 3 2 1 0________________________________________
9. provides clear instructions 3 2 1 0________________________________________
10. projects enthusiasm 3 2 1 0________________________________________
11. interacts appropriately with students 3 2 1 0________________________________________
12. reinforces correct responses and provides corrective feedback 3 2 1 0________________________________________
13. uses very few distracting fillers (uh, okay, um, like, etc…) 3 2 1 0________________________________________
14. supports verbal communication w/appropriate visual materials 3 2 1 0________________________________________
15. uses non-verbal cues to reinforce and redirect 3 2 1 0________________________________________
16. is courteous, supportive, and respectful of all students 3 2 1 0________________________________________
CLASSROOM MANAGEMENT The student teacher:
17. manages materials, supplies, and transitions 3 2 1 0_________________________________________
18. states behavior expectations 3 2 1 0_________________________________________
19. implements planned behavior management strategies 3 2 1 0_________________________________________
20. utilizes appropriate physical proximity 3 2 1 0_________________________________________
21. reinforces desired behavior 3 2 1 0_________________________________________
22. is aware of and responds to student behavior during instruction 3 2 1 0_________________________________________
23. keeps students on task 3 2 1 0_________________________________________
24. manages wait time well 3 2 1 0_________________________________________
25. consistently demonstrates equity in student interactions 3 2 1 0_________________________________________
ASSESSMENT The student teacher:
26. monitors and adjusts to ensure learning objectives are met 3 2 1 0__________________________________________
27. reinforces student learning through the assessment activity 3 2 1 0__________________________________________
28. plans for a direct link between the assessment and stated objective 3 2 1 0__________________________________________
PROFESSIONAL APPEARANCE
29. maintains a professional appearance 3 2 1 0 _________________________________________
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS:_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
Signatures _________________________________________________ ______________________________________________
Student Teacher Supervisor
106
Student-Teaching Observation Grade Scale and Procedures
Teacher candidates will be observed a minimum of four times during the semester. If a teacher
candidate has two placements, then there will be a minimum of two observations in each
placement.
The observation form provides for 96 possible points. Expectations for each of the teaching
observations are as follows:
Lesson 1: If a score of “1” is earned in any area for the first observation, the teacher candidate
will meet with the supervisor and a plan of action will be determined. Continuing improvement
on the evaluation is expected.
Lesson 2: If a score of “1” is earned in any area for the second observation, the teacher
candidate will meet with the supervisor and another plan of action will be determined. A
minimum of 1 additional observation will be required. Continued growth and improvement is
expected as the student teacher strengthens his/her abilities as an instructor.
Lesson 3: If a score of “1” is earned in any area for the third observation, the student teaching
grade will be a “D”. A modified completion plan will be determined for the teacher candidate in
order to minimize disruption to the classroom teacher and his/her students. Certification will be
withheld from any teacher candidate earning a “D” in student teaching.
If the teacher candidate is in the second placement, this observation will be the first of that
placement. If a score of “1” is earned in any area for this observation, the teacher candidate will
meet with the supervisor and another plan of action will be determined. An additional
observation will be required within a week. If a “1” is earned on that additional observation, the
student teaching grade will be a “D”. A modified completion plan will be determined for the
teacher candidate in order to minimize disruption to the classroom teacher and his/her students.
Certification will be withheld from any teacher candidate earning a “D” in student teaching.
Lesson 4: The teacher candidate is expected by this point to perform above the targeted level of
proficiency in 2/3 of the evaluated areas. Teacher candidates are expected to perform at a
minimal level of “meets targeted level of proficiency” in all areas by this evaluation.
The grade for student teaching will be determined by the last observation. The observation scores
will not be averaged. If a 5th
observation is desired it will be granted based upon the availability
of time. In the event a 5th
observation is required, the highest grade the candidate is eligible to
earn is a B. If a “1” is earned at the 5th
observation, a grade of “D” will be assigned in student
teaching and certification will be withheld from the teacher candidate.
107
A B D F
85+ points 64-84 points 51-63 points Less than 50 points
Minimum of 21 3’s,
no 1’s
no 1’s Minimum of 12 2’s
