NCATE Standard 1 Report


Standard 1: Candidate Knowledge, Skills, and Professional Dispositions

Candidates preparing to work in schools as teachers or other school professionals know and demonstrate the content knowledge, pedagogical content knowledge and skills, pedagogical and professional knowledge and skills, and professional dispositions necessary to help all students learn. Assessments indicate that candidates meet professional, state, and institutional standards.

Directions When Programs Have Been Reviewed Nationally or by a Similar State Review

To reduce burden and duplication, units have fewer reporting requirements for Standard1 when programs have been submitted for national review or similar state review. These review processes cover many of the elements in Standard 1. For programs that have been submitted for national review or similar state review, units are asked to report in the IR only the following information:

   State licensing test data for Element 1a (content knowledge for teacher candidates) and Element 1e (knowledge and skills for other school professionals)

   Assessment Data for Element 1c (professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills)

   Assessment data for Element 1g (dispositions)

   Results of follow-up studies of graduates and employers (all standards elements)

Because program standards do not generally cover general professional knowledge and skills nor professional dispositions, the unit must respond to all of the prompts in Elements 1c (Professional and Pedagogical Knowledge and Skills for Teacher Candidates) and 1g (Professional Dispositions for All Candidates) regardless of whether programs have been submitted for national or state review.

The prompts for each element in the IR include reminders of when data for these programs need not be included. The term "similar state review" refers to state review processes that require institutions to submit assessments and assessment data for evaluation and/or approval. For more information on "similar state review," click on the HELP button at the top right corner of your screen.

1a. Content Knowledge for Teacher Candidates. [In this section the unit must address (1) initial teacher preparation programs at the undergraduate and graduate levels and, if the institution offers them, (2) licensure and non-licensure graduate programs for teachers who already hold a teaching license.]

1a.1. What are the pass rates of teacher candidates in initial teacher preparation programs on state tests of content knowledge for each program and across all programs (i.e., overall pass rate)? Please complete Table 4 or upload your own table at Prompt 1a.5 below. [This information could be compiled from Title II data submitted to the state or from program reports prepared for national review.] 

As reflected in the data table, the pass rate for all of the Undergraduate Initial Programs for the reporting period is 100%.  The La DOE requires passage of the Praxis exams as a part of the certification requirements. GSU requires passage of the Praxis exams for the completion of the GSU Teacher Preparation program. The candidates from the initial programs are very knowledgeable of their content as indicated by the 100% passage rate across all undergraduate initial programs. Table 4 outlines the Initial Teacher Candidate Praxis Pass Rate for 2006-2007; 2007-2008; 2008-2009) (See Exhibit__1a1-1______

Table 4a

Pass Rates on Content Licensure Tests for Initial Teacher Preparation Program Completers

For Period: 2006-2009

Program

Name of Licensure Test

# of Test Takers

% Passing State Licensure Test

B. S. Elementary Education(1-5)

Praxis II: Elementary Education Content Knowledge 2008-2009

Praxis II: PLT Elementary**
2008-2009

Praxis II: Elementary Education Content Knowledge 2007-2008

Praxis II: PLT Elementary**
2007-2008

Praxis II: Elementary Education Content Knowledge 2006-2007

Praxis II: PLT Elementary**
2006-2007

9

9

12

12

11

11

100%

100%

100%

100%

100%

100%

B. S. Special Education (Mild/Moderate Elem. Dual)

Education of Exceptional Students(CORE CK) 2008-2009

Education of Exceptional Students (MTMD)
2008-2009

Praxis II: PLT
2008-2009

Education of Exceptional Students: (CORE CK) 2007-2008

Education of Exceptional Students:(MTMD)
2007-2008

Praxis II:PLT
2007-2008

Education of Exceptional Students CORE CK) 2006-2007

Education of Exceptional Students(MTMD) 2006-2007

Praxis II: PLT
2006-2007

2

2

2

3

3

3

2

2

2

100%

100%

100%

100%

100%

100%

100%

100%

100%

Kinesiology B. S. (Pedagogy K-12 Health and Physical Education)

PLT (7-12) **
2006-2007

Physical Education: Content Knowledge2006-2007

PLT (7-12)**
2007-2008

Physical Education: Content Knowledge2007-2008

PLT (7-12)**
2008-2009

Physical Education: Content Knowledge2008-2009

5

5

4

4

2

2

100%

100%

100%

100%

100%

100%

B.S. Early Childhood Education PK-3

Praxis II: Early Childhood Education (0020)2006-2007

PLT(PK-3)**
2006-2007

Praxis II: PLT **
2008-2009

Early Childhood (0521)
2008-2009

NOTE: (No teacher candidates took the test 2007-2008)

3

3

4

4

100%

100%

100%

100%

B.S. Social Studies Education 6-12

Praxis II-(0081)-Social Studies: Content Knowledge Interpretation of Material 
2006-2007

Praxis II: PLT **
 2006-2007

Content Knowledge Interpretation of Material 2007-2008

Praxis II: PLT**
2007-2008

NOTE: (No candidates took the test 2008-2009.)

5

 

5

2

2

0

100%

 

100%

100%

100%

0

B.S. English Education 6-12

Praxis II (0041) English Language, Literature, and Composition: Content Knowledge) Pedagogy
2008-2009

Praxis II: PLT**
2008-2009

Content Knowledge Pedagogy
2006-2007

Praxis II: PLT**
2006-2007

2007-2008
NOTE: (No candidates took the test during 2007-2008.)

2

 

2

2

2

0

100%

 

100%

100%

100%

0

B.S. Math Education 6-12

Praxis II-Mathematics: Content Knowledge  (0061) 2006-2007

Praxis II:PLT**

NOTE: (No teacher candidates took the test during 2007-2008 and 2008-2009)

1

1

100 %

100%

B.S. Music Education Instrumental

 K-12

Praxis II-Music Education: Instrumental
2006-2007

Praxis II: PLT**
2006-2007

Vocal
2006-2007

Praxis II-Music Education
2007-2008-Instrumental

Praxis II: PLT**
2007-2008

Praxis II-Music Education
2008-2009-Instrumental

Praxis II: PLT**
2008-2009

Vocal
2008-2009

NOTE: (No candidates took the Vocal tests during the reporting period.)

2

2

0

5

5

2

2

0

100%

100%

0

100%

100%

100%

100%

0

B.S. Art Education K-12

2006-2007

2007-2008

2008-2009

NOTE: No candidates took the tests during the reporting period.

0

0

0

0

0

0

** This is the test for Principles of Learning and Teaching. The outcomes are discussed for pedagogical content knowledge in 1.b and 1.c on following pages.

    Initial Teach GSU candidates demonstrate content knowledge through success on general and content specialty Praxis assessments. Candidates in the Special Education component must demonstrate knowledge in an academic discipline as well as in special education pedagogical content knowledge and skills.  Data that reflect candidates’ pass rates for the years 2006 – 2009 are recorded in Table 4 b entitled, Pass Rates on Content Licensure Tests for Initial Teacher Preparation.   (Exhibit 1a1-2Table 4 Pass Rates on Content Licensure Tests for Initial Teacher Preparation)

Table 4 b Pass Rates on Content Licensure Tests for Teach GSU Candidates

2006 -2009 Pass Rates, Praxis II

Period

Name of Test

# of Test Takers
Overall Pass Rates

Summer 2006

Elementary Education:  Content Knowledge (0014)Middle School Mathematics (0069)
Middle School Social Studies(0089)
PLT**

16 (100%)

2 (100%)
1 (100%)
19 (100%)

Summer 2007

Elementary Education:  Content Knowledge (0014)
English Language, Literature, and Composition: Content Knowledge (0041)
English Language, Literature, and Composition: Pedagogy (0043)
Social Studies: Content Knowledge (0081)
Social Studies: Interpretation of Materials (0083)
PLT**

3 (100%)

1 (100%

1(100%)
1(100%)
1(100%)
7(100%)
_

Summer 2008

Elementary Education:  Content Knowledge (0014)
Middle School Social Studies(0089)
PLT**

8(100%)
4 (100%)
12 (100%)

Summer 2009

Elementary Education:  Content Knowledge (0014)
Middle School Mathematics (0069)
PLT**

9(100%)
1(100%)
10(100%

** PLT is the Praxis examination in Principles of Learning and Teaching, and is discussed at 1.b.1 for pedagogical content knowledge and skills.

1a.2 (Programs Not Nationally Reviewed) What data from other key assessments indicate that candidates in initial teacher preparation programs demonstrate the content knowledge delineated in professional, state, and institutional standards? [Data for initial teacher preparation programs that have been nationally reviewed or reviewed through a similar state review do not have to be reported here. Summarize data here only for programs not already reviewed. A table summarizing these data could be attached at Prompt 1a.5 below.]

 The Unit has fifteen active Initial Undergraduate Programs (BA or BS) and five Advanced Programs: M. Ed.- C&I (implemented fall 2009); M.Ed. SP ED (implemented fall 2009); M.Ed.-Educational Leaders Level I; and Ed.D. in C&I and in EDL. Additionally, the Unit offers a post-baccalaureate alternative certification program, Teach GSU, for certification in elementary education (grades 1-5) and in special education (M/M 1-12). Three of the programs (ELEM ED 1-5, SP ED, M/M Elementary Dual, and Kinesiology K-12 HPED) that were reviewed in fall 2007 received National Recognition with condition. These will be resubmitted in March 2010 for review. There were 3 programs that were recently reviewed and received national recognition with Condition. These were Social Studies, English, and ECE. The programs needing further development are Mathematics, Science, and EDL. At this point none of the SPA reports submitted in October 2009 were returned “not recognized”. The responses to those are in progress. The initial programs are nationally reviewed with the exception of the following: music, art, and the alternative certification program, Teach GSU. 

Data from other key assessments that demonstrate the content knowledge of music, art (no program completers during the report period) and Teach GSU include course grades, grade point average, Teacher Candidate/Intern Evaluation, and Electronic Portfolios (that are evaluated by the university supervisor and their cooperating supervising teacher). For example content assessment with ED 452 Advanced Seminar Methods includes subject matter knowledge within the lesson plan. The evaluation rubric for the report years indicates the mean performance for all baccalaureate candidates was 4.52 on a 5 point scale (Exhibit 1a2.1). 

The music candidates complete the course Senior Recital 412, a required performance demonstration of content. The candidates are evaluated by the Instrumental Music Education Rubric or the Vocal Music Education Rubric based on their area of specialization.  From fall 2006 to Fall 2009 the candidates had a mean score of 3.5-3.8 on a 4.0 scale for items on the rubric (Exhibit 1a2-2). The ratings indicate that the candidates know the content and how to apply the content knowledge to techniques. The music majors also compiled Electronic portfolios which included examples of their work on the field while completing their student teaching experience (Exhibit 1a2-3). The Teacher Candidate/Intern Evaluation reflects the degree of knowledge in planning, classroom management, instruction, and professional development based on the LCET. The assessment is used to help determine the candidates’ knowledge of content as related to the ability to deliver instruction (Exhibit1a2-4). The course grades include music courses in the Music Department and content based courses in the Department of C&I.  For example, the content based course assessments include the Written Lesson Plan data and the Technology Infused Lesson Plan data (Exhibit 1a2-5). The data reflect that the candidates demonstrate exemplary content knowledge on both of the lesson plan assessments. No art majors completed the program during the target years.

Content knowledge (CK) is also assessed at Transition Point 2 in the units’ assessment system. Individuals seeking admission to Teach GSU must have a bachelor’s degree, a minimum of 2.50 GPA or higher on a 4.00 scale, pass Praxis Pre-Professional Skills Test in reading (score of 174), writing (score of 173), and mathematics(score of 172), pass content specific examinations for Elementary Grades 1-5 (0014-ELEM ED CK) or SP ED M/M 1-12  (0014-ELEM ED CK, 0069-Middle School (MS) Mathematics, 0439-MS Science, 0089-MS Social Studies, 0049-MS ELA 6-12 Core Content Area Exams). In order to exit the program, candidates must receive an exemplary or fully acceptable rating on all CK competencies outlined in the Teach GSU final evaluation instrument (Exhibit 1a2-6).

 


1a.3. (Programs Not Nationally Reviewed) What data from key assessments indicate that advanced teacher candidates demonstrate an in-depth knowledge of the content knowledge delineated in professional, state, and institutional standards? [Data for advanced teacher preparation programs that have been nationally reviewed or reviewed through a similar state review do not have to be reported here. Summarize data here only for programs not already reviewed. A table summarizing these data could be attached at Prompt 1a.5 below.]

The Unit currently offers three masters degree programs, one of which has been nationally reviewed (Educational Leadership), and the other two were implemented for fall 2009 (M.Ed. in Curriculum and Instruction and M.Ed in Special Education). Key assessments for the recently implemented programs have been identified and are components of the Comprehensive Assessment System, but have no reportable data.

In the LEC program, content in Curriculum and Instruction and Educational Leadership is measured  through the eight (8) core courses in three ways, to include the following:

  1. Signature assessments used for each course. Analysis indicated that a score of “2” or higher on a 3 point rubric for scoring signature assessments on core courses was achieved (Exhibit 1a3-1).
  2. Course Grades. Analysis showed all (n = 19) candidates scored a grade of “B” or higher in each of the core courses (Exhibit 1a3-2).
  3. Comprehensive Exam. There is a 100% pass rate on the comprehensive exam (written and oral). Students are required to successfully complete this exam before they are eligible to graduate. The examination specifications consist of a six-hour written component and a two-hour oral component.
1a.4. What do follow-up studies of graduates and employers indicate about graduates' preparation in the content area? If survey data are being reported, what was the response rate? [A table summarizing the results of follow-up studies related to content knowledge could be attached at Prompt 1a.5 below. The attached table could include all of the responses to your follow-up survey to which you could refer the reader in responses on follow-up studies in other elements of Standard 1.]

Follow up surveys of graduates included two specific items on content knowledge.

  1. “Knowledge of Subject Matter”: Aggregated data from the report years indicate that 5% of the program completers were very satisfied with their content knowledge preparation.
  2. “Vocabulary terminology and facts in variety of fields of knowledge.”  Aggregated data from the report years indicate that 71.4% of the program completers were very satisfied with their content knowledge (Exhibit 1a4-1).

The Employers’ Survey includes one item specific to candidates’ knowledge.

  1. “Knowledge of Subject Area”: Aggregate data from the report years indicate that 66.7% of employers strongly agree that graduates are competent in their subject matter disciplines.

1a.5 (Optional Upload for Online IR) Tables, figures, and a list of links to key exhibits related to the content knowledge of teacher candidates may be attached here. [Because BOE members should be able to access many exhibits electronically, a limited number of attachments (0-5) should be uploaded.]

1b. Pedagogical Content Knowledge and Skills for Teacher Candidates. [In this section the unit must address (1) initial teacher preparation programs at the undergraduate and graduate levels and, if the institution offers them, (2) licensure and non-licensure graduate programs for teachers who already hold a teaching license.]

1b.1. (Programs Not Nationally Reviewed) What data from key assessments indicate that candidates in initial teacher preparation programs demonstrate the pedagogical content knowledge and skills delineated in professional, state, and institutional standards? [Data for initial teacher preparation programs that have been nationally reviewed or reviewed through a similar state review do not have to be reported here. Summarize data here only for programs not already reviewed. A table summarizing these data could be attached at Prompt 1b.4 below.]

 In Table 4, the candidates also demonstrate pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) and skills through mastery of the Praxis II (PLT) exam. Candidates’ performance on the Instruction and Assessment component of the PLT exam (Instructional Strategies, Planning Instruction, Assessment Strategies), indicate that their performance is within average, 2008-2009, 83.3% scored within avg. performance, 5.6 % scored above avg. performance; 2007-2008, 70% scored within avg. performance, 10 % scored above avg. performance; 2006-2007, 61.5% scored within avg. performance, 15.4% scored above avg. performance. The Students as Learners component of the PLT exam also serves to measure the pedagogical knowledge. Data summaries across target years for that component follow: 2008-2009, 72.2% scored within avg performance, 16.7% scored above avg performance; 2007-2008, 75% scored within avg performance, & 2006-2007, 53.8% scored within avg performance (Exhibit 1b1-1).

The art & music teacher candidates in the initial program must take a series of courses that focus on PCK and skills. Key assessments focus on PCK in: ED 453 (Written Lesson Plan and On-Site Lesson Plan Delivery); Ed 402 (Technology Infused Lesson Plan). In these courses candidates plan and implement an instructional lesson that they present at the partnership school. Reading courses (ED 303 & ED 322) provide opportunities for candidates to demonstrate PCK and skills. In 2006-2009 a music candidate completed ED 322, Fall 2008. On a key assessment for that course (Technology Infused Project) a candidate scored 90%, above the level of mastery score. Summer 2008, two candidates in music completed ED 303. On a key assessment (Literature-Based Word Recognition Skills Presentation) for that course, a candidate scored 80% and another scored 95% (Exhibit 1b1-2). Candidates designed and implemented instructional lessons, selected and utilized resources and assessments that met the diverse learner needs of students in their classes (Exhibit 1b1-3).

Music & art candidates complete ED 303 and 322. Candidates demonstrate PCK needed to help promote literacy learning across the curriculum. Mean scores of music candidates in ED 322 indicate candidates were knowledgeable about the course content. Scores follow: Fall 2009-95; Fall 2008-98.6; Fall 2007-80.4; Fall 2006 -99.5 (Exhibit b1-4). In ED 303, a key assessment that relates to content knowledge is the Article Critique assignment. The mean scores reflect candidates make excellent connections to content knowledge as related to current trends and strategies that are reflected in their articles. The scores follow: Sp 2009-89.0; Sum 2009-92.6; Sp 2008-95.2; and S 2007 84.6. 

For Teach GSU candidates, grades in curriculum courses measure PCK. Completers attained a grade of 3.0+ (4.0 scale) in all required pedagogical content courses. Scores for final grades earned in content courses required for ELEM certification ranged between 3.56 and 4.0 and SPED certification ranged between 3.00 and 4.00 (Exhibit 1b1). 100% of the completers in both certification areas met minimum expectation in all core pedagogical content courses for the reporting period.

Teach GSU candidates evidenced mastery of PCK and skills by passing Praxis II PLT examinations before exiting the program. Praxis II PLT data reflect a 100% pass rate for reporting period (Exhibit 1b1-6; Exhibit 2a.2.1; Exhibit 1c17).

Teach GSU candidates acquire and demonstrate necessary PCK and skills through required clinical/internship experiences in Transition Point 2 (Exhibit 1b-1-2; Exhibit 1b-1-3; Exhibit 2a.2.1). EDPT 452 & EDPT 453 are field based courses taken during their internship (Exhibit 1a-2-3).

Teach GSU candidates demonstrate PCK and skills through development and implementation of lesson plan artifacts required for EDPT 412 and EDPT 329 courses. Data indicate that 100% of candidates met target or acceptable expectations on lesson plan components (Exhibit1b1-7; Exhibit 1b1-8).

 


1b.2. (Programs Not Nationally Reviewed) What data from key assessments indicate that advanced teacher candidates know and apply theories related to pedagogy and learning, are able to use a range of instructional strategies and technologies, and can explain the choices they make in their practice. [Data for advanced teacher preparation programs that have been nationally reviewed or reviewed through a similar state review do not have to be reported here. Summarize data here only for programs not already reviewed. A table summarizing these data could be attached at Prompt 1b.4 below.]

There are no key assessment data because the M.ED in Curriculum and Instruction was initiated in fall 2009.  The M.Ed. in Special Education Mild/Moderate was also implemented in fall 2009.

 

LEC candidates in both Ed. D. programs in Curriculum and Instruction and Educational Leadership are required to complete 15 hours of Foundations Core courses. They include: LECF 700, Introduction to Doctoral Research; LECF 701, Applied Statistical Analyses; LECF 702, Evaluation Theory and Practice; LECF 703, Qualitative Research in Education, and LECF 704, Sociocultural and Diversity Issues. Candidates must score a “2” or higher on the 3 point rubric used to score signature assessment from these courses (Exhibit 1b2-1). Candidates must also achieve a passing score on the preliminary examination, which is designed to measure candidates’ competence in: 1) educational foundations, 2) research, 3) statistics, and 4) general professional knowledge. All candidates have scored a “2” or higher on their assessments. All candidates have also passed the preliminary examination in the history of the program, with the exception of 3 candidates.

 


1b.3. What do follow-up studies of graduates and employers indicate about graduates' preparation in pedagogical content knowledge and skills? If survey data have not already been reported, what was the response rate? [If these survey data are included in a previously attached table, refer the reader to that attachment; otherwise, a table summarizing the results of follow-up studies related to pedagogical content knowledge and skills could be attached at Prompt 1b.4 below.]

Follow-up studies for Teach GSU completers and initial BS/BA graduates provide information about their preparation in pedagogical content knowledge.

One specific item on the follow-up survey relates to pedagogical knowledge: “Awareness of different cultures and ways of life in the curriculum”.  Results on this item over the report years indicated that 40% of the graduates were very satisfied and 60% were satisfied with this aspect of their pedagogical knowledge preparation.

Employer follow-up surveys for the initial program graduates have two specific items related to pedagogical content knowledge.  The results for those items follow.

  1. “An awareness of different cultures and ways of life in the curriculum”.  Results for the report years for this item reveal that 83.3% of the employers strongly agreed and 16% agreed that graduates demonstrate this aspect of pedagogical content knowledge.
  2. “An understanding of abilities, limitations, interests, and values of individuals”.  Results for the report years for this item reveal that 66.7 % of the employers strongly agreed and 33.3% agree that graduates demonstrate this aspect of pedagogical content knowledge (Exhibit 1b3-1).

1b.4. (Optional Upload for Online IR) Tables, figures, and a list of links to key exhibits related to the pedagogical content knowledge of teacher candidates may be attached here. (Because BOE members should be able to access many exhibits electronically, a limited number of attachments (0-5) should be uploaded.)

1c. Professional and Pedagogical Knowledge and Skills for Teacher Candidates. [In this section the unit must address (1) initial teacher preparation programs at the undergraduate and graduate levels and, if the institution offers them, (2) licensure and non-licensure graduate programs for teachers who already hold a teaching license.]

1c.1. What data from key assessments indicate that candidates in initial teacher preparation and advanced teacher preparation programs demonstrate the professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills delineated in professional, state, and institutional standards to facilitate learning? [A table summarizing these data could be attached at Prompt 1c.5 below.]

Initial teacher preparation program candidates complete several key assessments to demonstrate the extent of their professional/pedagogical knowledge/skills in facilitating student learning. These key assessments include the On-Site Lesson Plan Delivery (Exhibit 1c1-1) in ED 452, & ED 453. Both are taken prior to Student Teaching.

Initial candidates take ED 455, which includes 3 key assessments: Teacher Candidate/Internship Evaluation (TCIE), Impact on Student Learning, & the Electronic Portfolio.  Results are displayed in Exhibit 1c1-2.  For example, in ED 455 the Impact on Student Learning Assessment, candidates effectively apply research to classroom instruction. The rubric is comprised of 3 major components on a 4 point scale: Assessment Design, Data Analysis, Directed Questions. Summaries of mean score performances shown in Exhibit 1c1-3.

 The TCIE provides further documentation of performance. Another key assessment that provides support for this element is the On-Site Lesson Plan Delivery activity. Results reflected in Exhibit 1c1-4.

Initial candidates take Reading/Literacy courses to demonstrate content knowledge and skills in reading. ECE candidates take ED 217, ED 325 ED 431, and ED 304. ELEM candidates take ED 303, ED 304, ED 325, and ED 431. SEC candidates take ED 322. To determine the impact of the candidates’ performance (according to course grades) in reading courses, with their performance  on the Praxis exam (ELEM Content 0014), the course avg of the  Reading grades of ELEM candidates was compared to their ELEM Praxis exam score (Reading component). Exhibit 1c1-5 shows that the majority of the ELEM candidates scored well above avg on the ELEM content Exam. All teacher candidates take ED 328 to review high stakes test data to enhance the teaching-learning process. The total class had a mean score of 83.3 (Exhibit 1c1-6).

These courses, signature assessments, and data support that candidates demonstrate the competencies identified for the La Standards for reading. Candidates’ scores on the PRAXIS exam demonstrate they are very knowledgeable of appropriate professional & pedagogical skills. A component of this examination provides assessments of facilitation of student learning. Candidate performance on section IV Students as Learners segment of Praxis are shown in Exhibit 1c1-7.

Data from the following key assessments indicate that Teach GSU candidates demonstrate professional and pedagogical knowledge & skills to support P-12 student learning: 1.) In Transition Point 2 candidates complete nine semester hours of PCK  related coursework during the summer school session. The courses are specific to the candidates’ area of certification. Data for the reporting period indicate that the average course grades range between 3.00 and 4.0. 100% of the candidates enrolled in the ELEM or SPED courses met minimum expectation (Exhibit 1a-2-1; Exhibit 1b-1-2). Candidates must develop lesson plan artifacts for practicum/internship courses (Exhibit 1c1-8). Data of the Written Lesson Plan Evaluation Form indicates that 100% of the candidates are competent in the development and implementation of the components of the lesson plan design.

In Transition Point 3 EDPT 452 and EDPT 453, candidates demonstrate ability to plan, develop, and implement on site lessons and assess student learning outcomes through completion of the Practicum/Internship and the Professional Portfolio. Scores ranged between 3.28 and 3.71 for reporting years. Candidates received target or acceptable ratings in: Planning, Management, Instruction and Professional Development. Scores for the Electronic Portfolio Presentation ranged between 3.14 and 5.00. Candidates received excellent or target ratings in: organization, content, visuals, mechanics, and delivery (Exhibit 1c1-9).

In the LEC program C&I candidates must complete 24 hours of core courses and must score a “2” or higher on the “3” point rubric for signature assessment for these courses.


1c.2. What data from key assessments indicate that candidates in initial teacher preparation programs consider the school, family, and community contexts and the prior experiences of students; reflect on their own practice; know major schools of thought about schooling, teaching, and learning; and can analyze educational research findings? If a licensure test is required in this area, how are candidates performing on it? [A table summarizing these data could be attached at Prompt 1c.5 below.]

For initial BS/BA candidates key assessments on lesson delivery (3 key components), PLT (Subcategory II and I), and on portfolio items (Professional Development Sub- component) provide data indicating that candidates develop competencies in considering school, family, and community contexts and prior student experiences; know major school of thought about schooling, teaching, and learning; and analyze educational research findings. The results of these key assessments are provided in 1c2-1and indicate that the candidates demonstrate the competencies at acceptable levels.

The key assessments for Teach GSU candidates and their performance on these assessments are also shown in Table 1c.5.  In summary, these initial candidates demonstrate the competencies measured by the key assessment instruments.

The data from the Impact on Student Learning Assessment, the Student Teacher Portfolio and the Student Teacher Evaluations provide evidence that the initial teacher candidates are involved in a variety of experiences that help them to work with the family and community while participating in the Student Teaching experience.  They also have numerous opportunities to apply and transfer “major schools of thought” about teaching and learning as they plan and implement the Written lesson Plan, the Technology Infusion Lesson Plan, and the On-Site Delivery Lesson.  Afterwards they have an opportunity to review and reflect on the assessments of their University professor and their on-site cooperating teacher.  The results of the licensure test (Principles of Learning and Teaching which was referenced previously) demonstrate that the candidates have a strong understanding of the knowledge, skills, and dispositions that are related to promoting effective teaching and learning. Candidates also have numerous opportunities to analyze educational findings as they review current journals (Article Critiques) and other publications to help prepare numerous course projects and assignments such as the lesson plans and the Student Teacher Portfolio.  They also have opportunities to review educational research findings (that relate to selecting and using appropriate resources, designing effective instructional planning and delivery, selecting and using multiple measures of assessments, providing for accommodations, technology integration, promoting Reading/Literacy skills across the curriculum) and make connections between major schools of thought and teaching and learning as they prepare for the licensure exams.

During the Practicum/Internship, Teach GSU candidates are provided with opportunities to apply theoretical concepts and principles to classroom settings.  They also implement research-based best practices and methodologies that serve as a catalyst for enhancing learning outcomes of diverse student populations.  An analysis of the Impact on Student Learning data indicate a mean score range of 3.36  - 3.40 on a 4 point scale in the following areas: assessment design (mean scores 3.40 – 3.48), data, analysis (mean score 3.36 – 3.40), and directed questions (mean score 3.36 – 3.40 over a three year period of 2007 – 2009.


1c.3. What data from key assessments indicate that advanced teacher candidates reflect on their practice; engage in professional activities; have a thorough understanding of the school, family, and community contexts in which they work; collaborate with the professional community; are aware of current research and policies related to schooling, teaching, learning, and best practices; and can analyze educational research and policies and explain the implications for their own practice and the profession? [A table summarizing these data could be attached at Prompt 1c.5 below.]

There are no key assessment data for advanced teacher candidates because the M.ED in Curriculum and Instruction and the M.Ed. in Special Education were initiated in fall 2009. 

 


1c.4. What do follow-up studies of graduates and employers indicate about graduates' preparation related to professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills? If survey data have not already been reported, what was the response rate? [If these survey data are included in a previously attached table, refer the reader to that attachment; otherwise, a table summarizing the results of follow-up studies related to professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills could be attached at Prompt 1c.5 below.]

Over the report period, follow up studies of initial candidates provide data on 3 items assessing completers’ preparation for professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills.  The items along with assessment data for each are presented here.

  1.  “Skills and techniques directly applicable to a job”
    20% of the completers indicated that they were very satisfied with the preparation for this competence, while 80% indicated they were satisfied with preparation for this element.
  2. ”Ability to utilize technology in the instructional process”
    6% of the completers reported that they were very satisfied, 20% were dissatisfied     with their preparation in this professional knowledge and skills competence.
  3. “ Ability to write clearly, correctly, and effectively”
    40% of the completers were very satisfied with their preparation in this professional knowledge and skills competence, while 80% were satisfied.

Follow up studies of employers provide data on 7 items assessing program completers’ preparation for professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills.  The items and the assessment data for each are presented here.

  1.  “Skills and techniques directly applicable to a job”
    67. 7% of the employers indicated they strongly agree that program completers demonstrated skills and techniques directly applicable to a job, while 33% agreed.
  2. “The ability to develop and adapt practices that address diverse learning styles” 83.3% of the employers indicated they strongly agree that program completers demonstrated the ability to develop and adapt practices that address diverse leaning styles, while 16.7% agreed.
  3. “The experiences in relating to other people”
    66.7% of the employers indicated they strongly agree program completers demonstrated experiences in relating to other people, while 33.3% agreed.
  4. “Understanding of abilities, limitations, interests and values of individuals”
    66,7% of the employers indicated that program completers demonstrated an understanding of abilities, limitations, interests, and values of individuals, while 33.3% agreed.
  5. “The ability to use effective and oral communication skills”
    66.7% of the employers indicated they strongly agreed program completers demonstrated the ability to use effective oral communication skills.
  6. “The ability to use a wide range of knowledge in professional practice”
    66.7% of the employers indicated that they strongly agreed program completers demonstrated the ability to use a wide range of knowledge practice while 33% agreed.
  7. “Ability to utilize technology in the instructional process”
    66.7% of the employers indicated that they strongly agreed program completers demonstrated the ability to use a wide range of knowledge practice while 33% agreed. 


1c.5. (Optional Upload) Tables, figures, and a list of links to key exhibits related to the professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills of teacher candidates may be attached here. [ Because BOE members should be able to access many exhibits electronically, a limited number of attachments (0-5) should be uploaded.]

1d. Student Learning for Teacher Candidates. [In this section the unit must address (1) initial teacher preparation programs at the undergraduate and graduate levels and, if the institution offers them, (2) licensure and non-licensure graduate programs for teachers who already hold a teaching license.]

1d.1. (Programs Not Nationally Reviewed) What data from key assessments indicate that candidates in initial teacher preparation programs can assess and analyze student learning, make appropriate adjustments to instruction, monitor student learning, and develop and implement meaningful learning experiences to help all students learn? [Data for initial teacher preparation programs that have been nationally reviewed or reviewed through a similar state review do not have to be reported here. Summarize data here only for programs not already reviewed. A table summarizing these data could be attached at Prompt 1d.4 below.]

(Programs Not Nationally Reviewed)What data from key assessments indicate that candidates in initial teacher preparation programs can assess and analyze student learning, make appropriate adjustments to instruction, monitor student learning, and develop and implement meaningful learning experiences to help all students learn?

The data from the key assessments that are included in Ed 455-Student Teaching demonstrate that the initial teacher candidates (art and music included) can assess and analyze student learning.  These key assessments include: Impact on Student Learning, Student Teacher Portfolio, Teacher Candidate/Internship Evaluation. During the 2009 semester, (on a scale from 1-unacceptable-4-Target), 2 of the music candidates received 3 (acceptable) on each of the three components of the rubric.  These components are Assessment Design, Data Analysis, and Directed Questions (Exhibit 1d1-1). No art education candidates during this timeframe.

Candidates in the Teach GSU program demonstrate that they can analyze and utilize assessment results to enhance instructional planning and to increase student learning through required competencies in the EDPT 452: Educational Practicum and Internship I and EDPT 453: Educational Practicum and Internship II courses (Exhibit 1d1-2).

 


1d.2. (Programs Not Nationally Reviewed) What data from key assessments indicate that advanced teacher candidates demonstrate a thorough understanding of the major concepts and theories related to assessing student learning; regularly apply them in their practice; analyze student, classroom, and school performance data; make data-driven decisions about strategies for teaching and learning; and are aware of and utilize school and community resources that support student learning? [Data for advanced teacher preparation programs that have been nationally reviewed or reviewed through a similar state review do not have to be reported here. Summarize data here only for programs not already reviewed. A table summarizing these data could be attached at Prompt 1d.4 below.]

 Programs for advanced teacher candidates in the M. Ed. in Curriculum and Instruction were implemented fall 2009, as was the M.Ed. in Special Education. Key assessments for these programs are included in the Assessment System, however, there are no reportable data yet.

Licensure test passage requirement was not implemented until Cohort 3 entered the M.Ed. in Educational Leadership in fall 2009.

1d.3. What do follow-up studies of graduates and employers indicate about graduates' ability to help all students learn? If survey data have not already been reported, what was the response rate? [If these survey data are included in a previously attached table, refer the reader to that attachment; otherwise, a table summarizing the results of follow-up studies related to the ability to help all students learn could be attached at Prompt 1d.4 below.]

Follow-up survey results for the initial program reveal that 75% of completers are very satisfied with their preparation and ability to help all students learn. Survey results reveal that 83.3% of employers are very satisfied with initial program completers’ ability to help all students learn (Exhibit 1a-4-1).

 


1d.4. (Optional Upload for Online IR) Tables, figures, and a list of links to key exhibits related to student learning may be attached here. [Because BOE members should be able to access many exhibits electronically, a limited number of attachments (0-5) should be uploaded.]

1e. Knowledge and Skills for Other School Professionals

1e.1. What are the pass rates of other school professionals on licensure tests by program and across all programs (i.e., overall pass rate)? Please complete Table 5 or upload your own table at Prompt 1e.4 below.

Licensure test passage requirement was not implemented until Cohort 3 entered the M.Ed. in Educational Leadership in fall 2009.

1e.2. (Programs Not Nationally Reviewed) What data from other key assessments indicate that other school professionals demonstrate the knowledge and skills delineated in professional, state, and institutional standards? [Data for programs for other school professionals that have been nationally reviewed or reviewed through a similar state review do not have to be reported here. Summarize data here only for programs not already reviewed. A table summarizing these data could be attached at Prompt 1e.4 below.]

  Candidates in the LEC program in Educational Leadership must complete 24 hours of core courses and must score a “2” or higher on the “3” point rubric for the signature assessment from these courses: 1) LECF 700-Introduction to Doctoral Research, 2) LECF 701-Applied Statistical Analyses, 3) LECF 702- Evaluation Theory and Practice, 4) LECF 703- Qualitative Research in Education and 5) LECF 704- Sociocultural and Diversity Issues. Additionally, candidates must pass the comprehensive examination that is designed to measure student competence in 1) educational research, 2) research, 3) statistics, and 4) general professional knowledge. Candidates in the Ed. Leadership program have all scored a 2.68 (89%) or higher on their signature assessments and have passed the comprehensive examination (Exhibit1e2-1).

 


1e.3. What do follow-up studies of graduates and employers indicate about the knowledge and skills of other school professionals? If survey data are being reported, what was the response rate? [A table summarizing the results of follow-up studies related to knowledge and skills could be attached at Prompt 1e.4 below. The attached table could include all of the responses to your follow-up survey to which you could refer the reader in responses on follow-up studies in other elements of Standard 1.]

The first cohort of candidates in the Masters Degree program for Educational Leaders will be administered the follow-up survey in Spring 2010.  The employer surveys will be administered after graduates have been employed in leadership roles for two years.

 


1e.4. (Optional Upload for Online IR) Tables, figures, and a list of links to key exhibits related to the knowledge and skills of other school professionals may be attached here. [Because BOE members should be able to access many exhibits electronically, a limited number of attachments (0-5) should be uploaded.]

1f. Student Learning for Other School Professionals

1f.1. (Programs Not Nationally Reviewed) What data from key assessments indicate that candidates can create positive environments for student learning, including building on the developmental levels of students; the diversity of students, families, and communities; and the policy contexts within which they work? [Data for programs for other school professionals that have been nationally reviewed or reviewed through a similar state review do not have to be reported here. Summarize data here only for programs not already reviewed. A table summarizing these data could be attached at Prompt 1f.3 below.]

Candidates in the LEC program for both Curriculum and Instruction and Educational Leadership are required to work with diverse students through experiences in the following courses: 1) LECF 704 Sociocultural Diversity, 2) LECL 721 Effective Teaching and Learning and 3) LECF 702 Program Evaluation (Exhibit 1f1-1).

1f.2. What do follow-up studies of graduates and employers indicate about graduates' ability to create positive environments for student learning? If survey data have not already been reported, what was the response rate? [If these survey data are included in a previously attached table, refer the reader to that attachment; otherwise, a table summarizing the results of follow-up studies related to the ability to create positive environments for student leaning could be attached at Prompt 1f.3 below.]

Follow-up studies and employer surveys will be administered 2010 for graduates of the M.Ed. in Educational Leadership and after the graduate has been in a leadership role for the employer survey.

 


1f.3. (Optional Upload for Online IR) Tables, figures, and a list of links to key exhibits related to other school professionals' creation of positive environments for student learning may be attached here. [Because BOE members should be able to access many exhibits electronically, a limited number of attachments (0-5) should be uploaded.]

1g. Professional Dispositions for All Candidates. [Indicate when the responses refer to the preparation of initial teacher candidates, advanced teacher candidates, and other school professionals, noting differences when they occur.]

1g.1. What professional dispositions are candidates expected to demonstrate by completion of programs?

The Unit has identified a set of dispositions that are common across all programs. These dispositions are based on the Conceptual Framework, Louisiana Components of Effective Teaching and other state and national standards. Moreover, the dispositions are applicable to both initial and advanced candidates. Dispositions are as follows:

3.1 Display positive self-awareness
3.2 Practice a positive attitude and mutual respect toward students, parents, and colleagues
3.3 Display sensitivity to diverse learning styles and multiple intelligences
3.4 Demonstrate sensitivity to the many facets of diversity
3.5 Organize school, family, and community partnerships
3.6 Influence the development of healthy mental, physical, and social lifestyles
3.7 Display a commitment to the improvement of student learning and school improvement
3.8 Display a classroom climate that is conducive to learning.

1g.2. How do candidates demonstrate that they are developing professional dispositions related to fairness and the belief that all students can learn? [A table summarizing these data could be attached at Prompt 1g.5 below.]

Six of the expected dispositions relate to fairness and the belief that all students can learn.  Candidates respond to the Dispositions Inventory and the results for those dispositions relevant to fairness and that all students can learn are included in the results table (Table 1.g.2 Mean Disposition Scores for the 6 Relevant Dispositions).

The data clearly indicate that candidates demonstrate appropriate dispositions for fairness and belief that all students can learn.  The mean scores on each item range from 4.61 to 4.71 on the five point scale.

 


1g.3. What data from key assessments indicate that candidates demonstrate the professional dispositions listed in 1.g.1 as they work with students, families, colleagues, and communities? [A table summarizing these data could be attached at Prompt 1g.5 below.]

Candidate responses on the Dispositions Inventory include one item indicating demonstrating of the professional dispositions appropriate in working with students, families, colleagues, and communities.  The candidate responses  to “Engage in collaborations and partnerships”show a mean score of 4.6 on a five point scale.

 Additional assessments of student teaching and internships include items related to the dispositions of candidates.  A summary of ratings for applicable items follows:

  1. Adheres to professional protocol.       Rating: Acceptable
  2. Demonstrates competency.                 Rating: Acceptable
  3. Demonstrates cooperative attitude.    Rating: Acceptable
  4. Collaborates with stakeholders.          Rating: Acceptable
  5. Acts ethically.                                     Rating: Acceptable

These items are rated by the university supervisor.

Candidates’ disposition in the Educational Leaders Level I Masters program are measured in the signature piece from various courses (i.e. EDLD 504, EDLD 505, EDLD 510) within the program. The candidates’ ability to apply and articulate with students, families, colleagues and the larger context are measured.

1g.4. What do follow-up studies of graduates and employers indicate about graduates'

demonstration of professional dispositions? If survey data have not already been reported, what was the response rate? [If these survey data are included in a previously attached table, refer the reader to that attachment; otherwise, a table summarizing the results of follow-up studies related to professional dispositions could be attached at Prompt 1g.5 below.]

Follow-up studies of program completers for the report period include a dispositions item as follows.

”Ability to withhold judgment, raise questions and examine contrary views”

Results on this item indicate that 20% were very satisfied with their ability to demonstrate this disposition, while 80% were satisfied. (see Exhibit 1c.4)

Folliow-up Studies of Employers utilize two dispositions items.  The items and the ratings for each follow.

 “Ability to withhold judgment, raise questions and examine contrary views”

 67% of employers strongly agreed that graduates displayed this disposition, while 33% agreed.

 “Ability to think and act independently”

 66.7% of the employers strongly agree that graduates displayed this disposition, while 33.3% agree.(Exhibit1g4-1)

In the Educational Leaders Level I Master’s program, a follow-up Survey will be administered Spring 2010 to candidates who completed the first cohort in fall 2009.   Surveys will be administered to all program candidates at the completion of each two year term.  The employer surveys will be administered after graduates have been employed in leadership roles for two years.

1g.5. (Optional Upload for Online IR) Tables, figures, and a list of links to key exhibits related to professional dispositions may be attached here. [Because BOE members should be able to access many exhibits electronically, a limited number of attachments (0-5) should be uploaded.]