EPP Assessments - samford.edu · No plan for record Appropriate and multiple strategies to assess student learning are used (paper and pencil tests, observational Assessment planning

EPP Key Assessments

1

EPP Assessments Table of Contents Table 1. Initial Assessments Standards Alignment ....................................................................................................................................................... 2

Table 2. edTPA Standards Crosswalk ............................................................................................................................................................................. 3

Table 3. Initial Assessments Rubric Alignment .............................................................................................................................................................. 4

Table 4. List of Proprietary Assessments ..................................................................................................................................................................... 16

Table 5. Initial Programs Assessment Transitions and Adjustments ........................................................................................................................... 20

Table 6. Key Assessments with Transition Points ........................................................................................................................................................ 24

Appendix InTASC & Alabama Core Teaching Standards ............................................................................................................................................. 27

EPP Key Assessments

2

Table 1.

INITIAL ASSESSMENTS STANDARDS ALIGNMENT

CAEP Key Assessment Alabama Core Teaching

Standards

InTASC CAEP

Praxis Core 4,5 4,5 1.1, 1.2,1.3, 3.4

Field Experience 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10 1.1,1.2,1.3,1.4,1.5,2.3, 3.4

Planning 7, 1 1, 2, 6, 7 1.2, 3.1, 3.4

Student Learning 6, 10 9, 6, 7 1.1, 1.2, 1.5

Additional EPP Wide

Assessments

EDA Dispositions 9 9 1.1, 2.3

edTPA (beginning fall, 2018) 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6,

7, 8, 9

See below 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 3.3, 3.5,

3.6

EPP Key Assessments

3

Table 2.

EPP Key Assessments

4

Table 3.

INITIAL ASSESSMENTS RUBRIC ALIGNMENT CHART

CAEP/

InTASC

Key

Assessment

Key Assessment

Rubric Row

0 1 2

1 Learner &

Learning

Planning (R2)

2. Planning to Support

Varied Student Learning

Needs

There is no evidence of

planned supports.

OR

Candidate does not

attend to ANY

INSTRUCTIONAL

requirements in IEPs and

504 plans. Planned

supports are loosely tied

to learning objectives or

the central focus of the

learning segment.

Planned supports are

superficially aligned with

learning outcomes (e.g.,

some lessons address

additional outcomes or

miss key outcomes

related to the central

focus) are limited or

missing do not address

any IEP/504 instructional

requirements


tied to learning

objectives and the

central focus with

attention to the

characteristics of the

class as a whole.


aligned with learning

outcomes are

appropriate for the

needs of the whole

class

Planned supports are tied to

learning objectives and the

central focus. Supports

address the needs of

specific individuals or

groups with similar needs.

Supports include specific

strategies to identify and

respond to common

developmental

approximations or

misconceptions.

All from Proficient and…


designed to scaffold

learning for a variety of

students (e.g., English

learners, struggling readers,

underperforming or gifted

students) identify and

respond to developmental

approximations or potential

misconceptions

2 Internship Eval

(R4) PLANNING #4:

Plans for appropriate

formative and

summative

assessment(s) that

allow students to

No evidence (or minimal

evidence) of planning

using formative or

summative or

standardized assessment.

No plan for record

Appropriate and

multiple strategies to

assess student learning

are used (paper and

pencil tests,

observational

Assessment planning

reflects sophisticated use of

multiple assessments. On-

going assessments as well

as formative and summative

or standardized assessments

EPP Key Assessments

5

show mastery of the

lesson’s central focus

and learning

objectives (e.g.,

opportunities for

students to summarize

or share what they

learned). Plans for

maintaining a record

of student

performance.

keeping or analysis of

data. Assessments do not

match the lesson

objectives and/or CCRS.

Learning opportunities

are not based on pre-

assessments and students'

developmental levels.

checklists, etc.)

regularly. Planned

assessments are

appropriate for the

lesson and/or the

CCRS. Some analysis

of results is noted.

Student progress is

recorded and formative

and summative, or

standardized

assessment results are

used to make

subsequent changes to

lesson plans. Learning

opportunities are based

on pre-assessment and

students' developmental

levels.

are used in many contexts.

Record keeping provides

detailed information on

students and can be

transformed into a format

that is accessible to others

(e.g.,

parents/administrators).

Learning opportunities are

based on pre-assessment

and students' developmental

levels.

3 Content Planning (R1) 1. Planning for

Literacy Learning

Candidate’s plans for

instruction focus solely

on literacy skills without

connections to any

essential literacy strategy

for comprehending or

composing text.

OR

There are significant

content inaccuracies that

will lead to student

misunderstandings. OR

Standards, objectives,

and learning tasks and

materials are not aligned

with each other.



instruction build on

each other to support

learning of the essential

literacy strategy for

comprehending OR

composing text with

clear connections to

related skills.

Learning tasks are


outcomes build

skills/facts/procedures

and the essential

literacy strategy (but

may be unbalanced)


instruction build on each

other within a meaningful

context that supports

learning of the essential

literacy strategy for

comprehending OR

composing text with clear

AND consistent

connections to related

skills.

Candidate’s plans build an

authentic connection

between reading and

writing.

Candidate explains how

s/he will use learning tasks

EPP Key Assessments

6

instruction support

student learning of skills

with vague connections

to the essential literacy

strategy for

comprehending OR

composing text.

Learning tasks are

candidate-directed focus

on skills/facts

/procedures/conventions

limit students’

opportunities to develop

the essential literacy

strategy include

consistent, significant

content errors are not


outcomes

and materials to lead

students to independently

apply the essential literacy

strategy AND related skills.

All from Proficient and…

Learning Tasks are

sequenced in a learning

progression across lessons

build connections between


strategy and

skills/facts/procedures

/conventions support

students to apply

skills/strategy and

understand the relationship

between reading/writing

4 Student

Learning (R2) 2. Providing Feedback

to Guide Further

Learning:

What type of feedback

does the candidate

provide to focus

students?

Feedback is unrelated to

the learning objectives

OR is developmentally

inappropriate. OR

Feedback contains

significant content

inaccuracies.

OR

No feedback is provided

to one or more focus

students. Feedback is

general and addresses

needs AND/OR strengths

related to the learning

objectives.

General feedback on

needs AND/OR strengths

Feedback is specific

and addresses either

needs OR strengths

related to the learning

objectives

Specific feedback

connected to objectives

(e.g., “As you explain

the context, remember

to include ”)

Feedback addresses

strengths OR needs

Feedback is specific and

addresses both strengths

AND needs related to the

learning objectives.

Feedback for one or more

focus students

provides a strategy to

address an individual

learning need OR

makes connections to prior

learning or experience to

improve learning.

Specific feedback addresses

strengths AND needs

At least one focus student

EPP Key Assessments

7

(e.g., “Good detail!”)

Unequal feedback given

(e.g., 1 sample with

feedback and 1 sample

without)

No relation to objectives

or analysis

Feedback is inaccurate

(e.g., numerous or

essential items are

marked incorrect when

correct or vice versa)

receives feedback to

address a specific learning

need or feedback to connect

to previous learning.

5 Internship Eval

(R7) INSTRUCTION

#7: Provides learning

experiences that allow

students to form

connections between

the specific subject

area and other

disciplines (e.g., how

and why these

connections are

important).

Connections are not

made or made

infrequently. The teacher

candidate fails to plan for

the integration of

knowledge from other

content areas (including,

reading, writing, and

mathematics) into the

lesson. The teacher

candidate only deals with

the "how" and not the

"why" of the learning

experience.

Many lessons contain

aspects that enable

students to make

connections with their

prior or future learning

in other subjects or

disciplines. The teacher

candidate plans for and

integrates content from

other disciplines into

the lesson (including,

reading, writing, and

mathematics). The

teacher candidate deals

with not only the "how"

but the "why" of the

learning experience.

Connections to prior and

future learning in other

subject areas are routinely

made. Interdisciplinary

instruction is frequent

(including, reading, writing,

and mathematics). The

teacher candidate deals with

the "how" and "why" of the

learning experience.

Students make application

of the content to real-world

examples.

6 Instructional

Practice

Planning (R3) 3. Using Knowledge

of Students to Inform

Teaching and

Learning

Candidate’s justification

of learning tasks is either

missing OR represents a

deficit view of students

and their backgrounds.

Candidate justifies

learning tasks with

Candidate justifies why

learning tasks (or their

adaptations) are

appropriate using

examples of students’

prior academic learning

OR personal, cultural,

Candidate justifies why

learning tasks (or their

adaptations) are appropriate

using examples of students’

prior academic learning

AND personal, cultural, or

community assets.

EPP Key Assessments

8

limited attention to

students’ prior academic

learning OR personal,

cultural, or community

assets.

Justification for plans

includes superficial

descriptions of students’

prior learning OR lived

experiences/assets

pervasively negative

portrayal of students’

backgrounds, educational

experiences, or

family/community

characteristics (e.g.,

exclusive focus on

student needs or gaps

without acknowledging

strengths)

or community

assets.

Candidate makes

superficial connections

to research and/or

theory. Candidate

makes superficial

connections to research

and/or theory.


includes concrete,

specific connections

between tasks and prior

learning (academic OR

lived

experiences/assets)

surface-level discussion

of theory or research

Candidate makes

connections to research

and/or theory.

Candidate’s justification is

supported by principles

from research and/or

theory.


includes concrete, specific

connections between tasks

and prior learning

(academic AND lived

experiences/assets)

grounded discussion of

theory or research (e.g.,

goes beyond “name

dropping”)

7 Internship Eval

(R10) INSTRUCTION

#10: Uses a variety of

instructional

strategies, including,

demonstration and

direct and indirect

instruction to actively

engage all students.

The teacher candidate

rarely demonstrates the

use of multiple strategies

to engage students in

lessons. Only one

instructional approach is

used in the lesson(s). The

teacher candidate does

not use effective

demonstrations or link

learning tasks to lesson

objectives/standards.


effectively and

frequently employs

multiple instructional

strategies to engage

students. At least three

instructional

approaches including

direct and indirect

instructional formats

are used in the lesson.


uses effective

demonstrations and

links learning tasks


effectively and consistently

employs multiple

instructional strategies

(more than three) including

both direct and indirect

approaches to engage all

students. The teacher

candidate uses multiple

demonstrations during the

lesson and links all learning

tasks to specific lesson

objectives/standards.

EPP Key Assessments

9

directly to lesson

objectives.

8 Internship Eval

(R13) INSTRUCTION

#13: Ethically uses a

variety of assessments

to demonstrate and

check for student

learning and to

modify instruction to

provide feedback to

students (e.g.,

unbiased assessments

to accommodate needs

of diverse learners).

Involves students in

monitoring their

progress.


does not use or makes

minimal use of

assessment (informal

observations as well as

planned assessments)

during instruction. The

teacher candidate cannot

demonstrate his/her

impact on student

learning. The teacher

candidate does not use

assessment to inform

instruction, provide

feedback, or

communicate student

progress. The teacher

candidate makes no use

of self or peer

assessment.


frequently and ethically

uses assessment

(informal observations

as well as planned

assessments that are

free of bias) to

demonstrate student

learning, to make

modifications during


feedback to students,

and to communicate

student progress.

Students use the results

of assessment/feedback

to guide their learning.


uses a variety of

assessments including

guided self and peer

assessments.


consistently and ethically

uses a variety of assessment

strategies (informal


planned assessments that

are free of bias) to

demonstrate student

learning, to make


instruction for all students,

provide feedback to

students, and to

communicate student

progress. Students actively

use the results of

assessment/feedback to

guide their learning.

Multiple sources of

evidence demonstrate that

instruction has been

modified based on an

analysis of assessment

results.

9 Professional

Responsibility

Internship Eval

(R19) PROFESSIONALISM

#19: Engages in

collaborative activities

with students, parents,

supervisors, and

colleagues.


does not attend

mandatory collaborative

meetings (e.g., school-

wide, departmental,

grade-level,

extracurricular, or

IEP/Section 504

meetings). The teacher

candidate does not


participates in

mandatory

collaborative meetings

(e.g., school-wide,

departmental, grade-

level, extracurricular, or

IEP/Section 504

meetings) to facilitate

student learning and


participates in the school's

professional development

activities, and actively

participates as a

contributing member in

collaborative meetings

(e.g., school-wide,

departmental, grade-level,

extracurricular, or

EPP Key Assessments

10

engage in collaborative

planning with

supervisors, students,

parents, and/or

colleagues.

growth. The teacher

candidate engages in

collaborative planning

with supervisors,

students, parents,

and/or colleagues.

IEP/Section 504 meetings)

to facilitate student learning

and growth. The teacher

candidate engages in

extensive collaborative

planning with supervisors,

parents, and/or colleagues.


volunteers for additional

duties/responsibilities

within the school setting.

10 Internship Eval


#20: Maintains an

appropriate level of

professional ethics in

terms of personal

conduct, academic

integrity, emotional

maturity, and legal

mandates/school

policy (e.g.,

IEP/Section 504

accommodations


displays frequent and/or

significant problems in

the school setting in any

one of the following

areas: personal conduct,

academic integrity,

emotional maturity, and

legal mandates and

school policy.


displays acceptable

behavior in the school

setting in each of the

following areas:

personal conduct,

academic integrity,

emotional maturity, and

legal mandates and

school policy.


consistently displays

exemplary personal

conduct, academic integrity,

and emotional maturity in

the school setting. The

teacher candidate adheres to

local,

state, and national policies

and legal mandates.

11 Diversity Internship Eval


#22: Communicates in

ways that demonstrate

sensitivity to all

students by using

non-biased strategies

and methods during

instruction.


demonstrates

insensitivity to

differences among

students by such

behaviors as dividing

students by gender,

making inappropriate

comments (throw like a

girl, etc.), and failing to

account for cultural,


consistently

demonstrates sensitivity

to all students by using

non-biased methods to

divide students into

groups, accounts for

ethnic and cultural

differences by allowing

students some decision

making during the

The teacher candidate not

only demonstrates

sensitivity to all students,

but also actively encourages

the acceptance of these

differences among students

by carefully planning

appropriate learning

experiences.

EPP Key Assessments

11

ethnic, or ability

differences in classes

(e.g., failure to include

students with special

needs into activities).

lesson, and includes all

students in the class

regardless of ability.

12 Internship

Eval (R3) PLANNING #3:

Plans for adaptations

to accommodate for

differences in

individual needs,

abilities and interests.

Is able to

provide a rationale for

adaptations, and

lesson plans reflect

high student

expectations.


does not plan or

minimally plans for

adaptation for individual

differences

(needs/abilities/interests).

Instruction is not

individualized and a "one

size fits all" approach is

taken. The teacher

candidate uses one

instructional

model/approach

throughout the lesson.

Most plans include

instructional

adaptations for

individual differences

(all ability levels) based

on differing abilities for

at least one student.

Student needs (e.g.,

motivation or interest)

are addressed in plans.


can articulate an

appropriate rationale

for adaptations and

plans include high and

realistic expectations

for students. The

teacher candidate uses


models/approaches

throughout the lesson to

account for variations

in abilities, interest and

prior experiences.

Plans routinely reflect

sophisticated adaptations

for abilities (all levels) and

needs (interests and

motivation) with a sound

rationale. Adaptations are

provided for students with

identified disabilities as

well as others who are

English Language Learners

or who have learning

problems or are gifted. The

teacher candidate uses


models/approaches

throughout the lesson to

account for variations

abilities, interest and prior

experiences. Plans include

high and realistic

expectations for students.

Students are given multiple

choices within practice

tasks based on individual

differences.

13 Research Student

Learning (R4) 4. Analyzing Students'

Language Use and

Literacy Learning

Candidate identifies

student language use that

is superficially related or

unrelated to the language

demands (function,

vocabulary, and

Candidate explains and

provides evidence of

students’ use of

the language function

AND

one or more additional



students’ use of

the language function,

vocabulary, AND

additional language

EPP Key Assessments

12

additional demands).

OR

Candidate’s description

or explanation of

language use is not

consistent with the

evidence submitted.

Candidate describes how

students use only one

language demand

(vocabulary, function,

syntax, or discourse).

Lists use of only one

language demand

(unction, vocabulary,

syntax, discourse)

Lists language use that is

not connected to

identified demands (e.g.,

identifies language use of

grammar when demands

are about summarizing

information)

language demands

(vocabulary, syntax,

discourse).

Explains and provides

evidence of students’

use of the language

function


evidence of students’

use of at least one more

language demand

(vocabulary, syntax,

discourse)

demand(s) (syntax,

discourse)

in ways that develop

content understandings.



language use and content

learning for students with

varied needs.

Explains and provides the

language function,

vocabulary, and syntax or

discourse


evidence for students with

varied needs

Language use clearly

supports content

understandings

14 Internship Eval

(R13) INSTRUCTION

#13: Ethically uses a

variety of assessments

to demonstrate and

check for student

learning and to

modify instruction to

provide feedback to

students (e.g.,

unbiased assessments

to accommodate needs

of diverse learners).

Involves students in


does not use or makes

minimal use of

assessment (informal


planned assessments)

during instruction. The

teacher candidate cannot

demonstrate his/her

impact on student

learning. The teacher

candidate does not use

assessment to inform


frequently and ethically

uses assessment

(informal observations

as well as planned

assessments that are

free of bias) to

demonstrate student

learning, to make



feedback to students,

and to communicate


consistently and ethically

uses a variety of assessment

strategies (informal


planned assessments that

are free of bias) to

demonstrate student

learning, to make


instruction for all students,

provide feedback to

students, and to

EPP Key Assessments

13

monitoring their

progress.


feedback, or

communicate student

progress. The teacher

candidate makes no use

of self or peer

assessment.

student progress.

Students use the results

of assessment/feedback

to guide their learning.


uses a variety of

assessments including

guided self and peer

assessments.

communicate student

progress. Students actively

use the results of

assessment/feedback to

guide their learning.

Multiple sources of

evidence demonstrate that

instruction has been

modified based on an

analysis of assessment

results.

15 21st Century Student

Learning (R5) 5. Using Assessment

to Inform Instruction:

How does the

candidate use the

analysis of what

students know and are

able to do to plan next

steps in instruction?

Next steps do not follow

from the analysis.

OR

Next steps are not

relevant to the learning

objectives assessed.

OR

Next steps are not

described in sufficient

detail to understand

them. Next steps

primarily focus on

changes to teaching

practices that are

superficially related to

student learning needs,

for example, repeating

instruction, pacing, or

classroom management

issues.

Next steps:

Do not make sense (e.g.,

students need more

support on apply the

essential literacy strategy

Next steps propose

general support that

improves student

learning related to

assessed learning

objectives.

Next steps are loosely

connected with research

and/or theory.

Next steps generally

attend to whole class

needs in relation to

content (e.g., “use a

Venn diagram to

support comparing and

contrasting characters”)

Discussions of

research/theory are

surface level

Next steps provide targeted

support to individuals or

groups to improve their

learning relative to


strategy OR

related skills.

Next steps are connected

with research and/or theory.

Next steps provide targeted

support to individuals AND

groups to improve their

learning relative to


strategy AND

related skills.

Next steps are justified with

principles from research

and/or theory.

Strategic support for

individuals and/or groups

related to subject- specific

EPP Key Assessments

14

and candidate focuses

next steps on vocabulary

definitions)

Are not aligned to

learning objectives

Present vague

information (e.g., “will

provide more support for

objectives”)

knowledge

Next steps are grounded in

research/theory

16 Internship Eval

(R12) INSTRUCTION

#12: Utilizes open-

ended, probing

questions to expand

student learning and

encourage students to

engage in critical

thinking and problem

solving.

Students have limited

opportunities (less than

three) to problem solve,

explore, or be involved

in critical thinking

activities during the

lesson.


asks questions, poses

scenarios, provides

examples, and uses a

variety of instructional

formats such as asking

students probing

questions and

encouraging students to

engage in critical

thinking and problem

solving.

The teacher candidate asks

higher order questions

requiring students to

synthesize and apply

information in authentic

environments. Students

actively engage in critical

thinking and problem-

solving during the lesson.

17 Technology Internship Eval

(R11) INSTRUCTION

#11:

Integrates technology

media into

instructional activities

and actively engages

students in the use of

this technology.


does not integrate any

form of technology into

teaching and learning

activities or the degree of

technology integration is

superficial or incidental

to the lesson(s) (e.g.,

uses a computer to type

lesson plans, shows a

video or uses an

overhead projector).


integrates at least one

form of technology

media during teaching

and learning activities,

and P-12 students are

engaged with using the

technology during

learning activities (e.g.,

P-12 students use

multimedia software,

spreadsheet for data

analysis, digital video,

or assistive technology


integrates at least one form

of technology media during

teaching and learning

activities, and P-12 students

are extensively engaged

with the technology during

learning activities (e.g., P-

12 students use multimedia

software to create

presentations; P-12 students

use spreadsheet/graphing

software to analyze data; P-

12 students use digital

video to tell a story; P-12

EPP Key Assessments

15

during learning

activities).

students with special

needs/ESL use assistive

technology to meet

curricular objectives).

18 CCRS Internship Eval

(R1) PLANNING #1:

Develops learning

objectives which are

appropriate for the

subject and grade

level and are

connected

appropriately to the

CCRS; and are

measurable and

identify criteria for

mastery.

Objectives are

inappropriate for the

subject

area/developmental level

of learners by being

either too difficult or too

easy for students.

Objectives are not stated

in measurable terms, do

not include criteria,

and/or are not

appropriately connected

to the College and Career

Ready Standards

(CCRS).

Objectives are

appropriate for subject

area/developmental

level of learners, are

connected appropriately

to the College and

Career Ready Standards

(CCRS), and provide

appropriate challenges

for students (tasks are

neither too easy nor too

difficult). Objectives

are measurable and

objectives identify

criteria.

Objectives are appropriate

for the subject

area/developmental level of

learners, are explicitly

connected to the College

and Career Ready

Standards (CCRS), and

provide appropriate

challenges for students

(tasks are neither too easy

nor too difficult).

Objectives incorporate

multiple domains of

learning or content areas.

Objectives are measurable

and each contains criteria

for mastery.

19 Internship Eval

(R6) INSTRUCTION

#6:

Demonstrates a deep

knowledge of content

and implements

effective instruction

for students using

appropriate CCRS,

including

opportunities for

students to practice

content- specific

academic

language/vocabulary

Knowledge of content is

minimal and instruction

is not adequate to meet

the CCRS. Objectives or

learning tasks are not

linked to and are

inappropriate for the

identified CCRS.


demonstrates a deep

knowledge of his/her

content field.

Objectives, instruction,

and practice tasks can

be directly linked to the

identified CCRS.

Chosen class content,

instructional approach,

and learning tasks can

be linked to student

mastery of the CCRS.

The depth of knowledge of

content area is exceptional.

Lessons reflect an in-depth

knowledge of the content in

the discipline. Lessons

extend the requirements of

the standards through

instructional and learning

tasks. Standards are

thoroughly addressed

within all lessons and

mastery of lesson content

can lead students to

demonstrate mastery of the

CCRS.

EPP Key Assessments

16

Table 4.

List of Proprietary Assessments: Praxis and edTPA

Praxis: Purpose: Praxis Core is an assessment used to measure basic academic skills in reading, writing, and mathematics for candidate’s unconditional admission into initial teacher certification programs. Praxis content assessments are used to measure specific content knowledge of candidates entering the teaching profession. Technical Studies: https://www.ets.org/praxis/institutions/about/fairness/

edTPA: Purpose: edTPA is a performance assessment to help determine if new teachers are ready to enter the profession with the skills necessary to help all of their students learn. It is intended to be used for teacher licensure and to support state and national program accreditation, and to support program renewal. edTPA is a subject-specific assessment with versions in 27 different teaching fields covering Early Childhood, Elementary, Middle Childhood and Secondary. edTPA includes a review of a teacher candidate’s authentic teaching materials as the culmination of a teaching and learning process that documents and demonstrates each candidate’s ability to effectively teach subject matter to all students. Technical Studies: https://scale.stanford.edu/teaching/edtpa

ESEC (Class B)

Proprietary Assessment When Taken

Test 5002: Elementary Education: Reading Language Arts After Core and General Education courses

Test 5003: Elementary Education: Mathematics After Core and General Education courses

Test 5004: Elementary Education: Social Studies After Core and General Education courses

Test 5005: Elementary Education: Science After Core and General Education courses

Test 5204: Teaching Reading After Junior 2 courses

Test 5025: Early Childhood: Content & Knowledge After Junior 2 courses

Test 5354: Special Education: Core Knowledge and Applications Test After Senior 1 courses

edTPA Elementary Education

Internship

Elementary (Class B & Alt. A)


Test 5002: Elementary Education: Reading & Language Arts Subtest After Core and General Education courses (Class B) Admissions Requirement (Alt. A)

Test 5003: Elementary Education: Mathematics Subtest After Core and General Education courses (Class B)

https://www.ets.org/praxis/institutions/about/fairness/

https://scale.stanford.edu/teaching/edtpa

EPP Key Assessments

17

Admissions Requirement (Alt. A)

Test 5004: Elementary Education: Social Studies Subtest

After Core and General Education courses (Class B) Admissions Requirement (Alt. A)

Test 5005: Elementary Education: Science Subtest

After Core and General Education courses (Class B) Admissions Requirement (Class A)

Test 5204: Teaching Reading After Junior 2 courses (Class B) Prior to internship semester (Alt. A)

edTPA Elementary Education

Internship

Collaborative (K-6) (6-12) (Alt. A Only)

Test 5002: Elementary Education: Reading & Language Arts Subtest Admissions Requirement

Test 5003: Elementary Education: Mathematics Subtest Admissions Requirement

Test 5004: Elementary Education: Social Studies Subtest Admissions Requirement

Test 5005: Elementary Education: Science Subtest Admissions Requirement

Test 5354: Special Education: Core Knowledge and Applications Test Prior to internship semester

edTPA Special Education

Internship

Secondary Content Area

Proprietary Assessment

When Taken

Biology Test 5235: Biology: Content Knowledge


English Language Arts Test 5038 English Language Arts: Content Knowledge


French (Class B only) Test 5174 French: World Language

After Core and General Education courses (Class B)

EPP Key Assessments

18

General Science (Alt. A only) Test 5435: General Science: Content Knowledge


German (Class B Only) Test 5183: German: World Language

After Core and General Education courses (Class B)

History Social Science Test 5081: Social Studies: Content Knowledge


History Test 5941: World and U.S. History: Content Knowledge


Mathematics Test 5161: Mathematics: Content Knowledge


Spanish Test 5195: Spanish Content Knowledge


EdTPA Biology: Secondary Science

English/Language Arts: Secondary English-Language Arts French: World Language (Class B Only)

General Science: Secondary Science (Alt. A. Only) German: World Language (Class B Only)

History: Secondary History/Social Studies History/Social Science: Secondary History/Social Studies

Spanish: World Language Mathematics: Secondary Math

Internship

P-12 Content Area


French (Class B Only) Test 5174 French: World Language


EPP Key Assessments

19

German (Class B Only) Test 5183: German: World Language


Music: Instrumental and Choral Test 5113: Music: Content Knowledge


Physical Education: Physical Education (Alt. A Only) Test 5091: Physical Education: Content Knowledge


Spanish (Class B Only) Test 5195: Spanish: Content Knowledge


EdTPA French: World Language

German: World Language Music: Performing Arts

Physical Education: Physical Education Spanish: World Language

Internship

EPP Key Assessments

20

Table 5.

INITIAL PROGRAMS ASSESSMENT TRANSITION

Assessment(s) Action Recommended Based on Data

Interpretation(s)

Party

Responsible for

Action

Timeline for Action

Implementation / Resources

Needed

Evidence for

Evaluating Action

Current Status

March 19, 2019

CAEP Key

Assessment

Planning

Validity and Reliability studies were

conducted on this assessment. Based on

the results, program directors determined

that this assessment would be better

suited as an instructional project rather

than a Key Assessment. Additionally,

EPP faculty desired an assessment that

incorporated both the written and

performance instead of separating them

into two assessments. Program directors

also wanted an assessment that could

serve as a measure of progression. The

Planning Assessment is a comprehensive

project and candidates in all initial

programs were not able to complete

multiple projects. The EPP made the

decision to replace the Planning and Field

experience assessments with a more

comprehensive work sample that would

demonstrate both planning and

implementation and could better

demonstrate candidate progression.

Department

Chairs, program

directors and

Assessment

Committee

The decision to replace the

assessment will need to be

approved by the Assessment

Committee. There will be a

transition period during the

2019-2020 academic year

where the new instrument

will be piloted, and the

previous assessment will be

phased out.

The previous

assessment will be

completely phased out

by spring, 2020.

During the 2019-2020

academic year both the

old and new

assessment will be

administered.

Technical studies for

the instrument

included in the SSR

standard 5.

Developing a new EPP

CAEP Key Assessment that

will replace the Planning

and Field Experience

Assessments. While this is

not a completely new

assessment, the instrument

used to assess the written

and performance combined

work sample is new.

EPP Key Assessments

21

CAEP Key

Assessment

Student

Learning

EdTPA became compulsory for the state

of Alabama in fall, 2018. With the

addition to this comprehensive project,

program directors determined that the

Student Learning Assessment was similar

and redundant. As a result, the EPP made

the decision to adopt EdTPA as a Key

Assessment beginning fall, 2019 pending

approval from the assessment committee.

Validity and reliability testing was

completed on this assessment.

Department

Chairs, Program

Directors,

Assessment

Committee

Approval from the

Assessment Committee is

required to approve this

decision before this

assessment can be removed

as a Key Assessment. This

decision will be official after

the committee meeting in

May 2019.

This assessment will

be phased out as a key

assessment prior to the

start of the 2019-2020

academic year. The

EPP wanted one full

academic year of

EdTPA data once it

became consequential

before transitioning.


the instrument

included in the SSR

standard 5.

Replacing this assessment

with EdTPA. Assessment

Committee decision

pending.

CAEP Key

Assessment

Field

Experience

Validity and Reliability studies were

conducted on this assessment. EPP

program directors determined that this

assessment was more of a snapshot of a

candidate’s performance rather than a

holistic view of candidates’ s knowledge

and abilities. EPP faculty concluded an

assessment that incorporated both the

written and performance pieces instead of

separating the two assessments was

needed. The EPP made the decision to

replace the Field Experience assessments

with a more comprehensive work sample

that would demonstrate both planning and

implementation. The Field Experience

Assessment will continue to serve as an

observation tool across initial programs,

Program directors,

department chairs,

Assessment

Committee

Assessment Committee is

required to approve this

decision before this

assessment can be removed

as a Key Assessment. Since

this assessment will continue

across initial programs, EPP

faculty will continue to

collect data at various

transition points.

This assessment will

be in transition during

the 2019-2020

Academic Year.


the instrument

included in the SSR

standard 5.

Replacing this assessment

with the EPP created

assessment Planning for

Effective Instruction.

EPP Key Assessments

22

however it will no longer serve as a Key

Assessment.

Proposed

EPP Created

CAEP Key

Assessment

Planning for

Effective

Instruction

Based on data collected from the Field

Experience and Planning Assessments,

EPP faculty determined that it was

necessary to create a project that would

assess both performance as well as

planning and could be administered prior

to and during internship at key transition

points to demonstrate candidate progress.

All initial programs already require

candidates to write and teach lessons

during field placements, so this

assessment is not entirely new. The new

assessment will provide a comprehensive

view of the candidate’s knowledge and

abilities with regard to planning and

instruction in various contexts and at

multiple program transition points. Prior

to implementing this assessment EPP

faculty typically assessed the

performance and written lesson separately

without a deeper examination of both the

performance and written plan. A video

lesson component will be a part of the

project to allow for multiple assessors to

view candidates’ work. Since some

initial programs are in a compressed time

frame, an assessment that can be

implemented at various points is

desirable. All initial programs have

Program directors,

department chairs,

EPP faculty,

clinical educators,

candidates and P-

12 Practitioners.

The assessment rubric is in

development and will be

ready to implement fall, 2019

upon approval of the

assessment committee.

Validity, Reliability

and Fairness testing to

be conducted spring,

2019.

The outline for the project

has been developed and will

be ready to implement fully

fall, 2019 pending

Assessment Committee

approval.

EPP Key Assessments

23

candidates complete written lessons,

video lessons and observations so a

combined work sample with a written

lesson and performance piece was a

logical transition and has already been in

place across all initial programs for many

years. The lesson plan format and

expectations remain the same but a new

rubric is in development.

EdTPA EdTPA will be adopted to replace the

Student Learning Assessment because the

projects are very similar. Based on

preliminary data (limited due to piloting

the assessment) the results seem

promising. EdTPA became consequential

fall 2018. EPP faculty determined that

one full data cycle was needed before

transitioning to a Key Assessment.

Program directors,

faculty, EdTPA

Coordinator,

Assessment

Committee,

Department

Chairs, EPP

Faculty

EdTPA will officially become

a Key Assessment fall, 2019

pending Assessment

Committee approval

https://scale.stanford.edu/teachi

ng/edTPA/supporting-docs

EPP faculty will continue

to assess EdTPA data to

determine if scores are a

predictor of completer

success.

Spring, 2019 will be the

first semester that a large

group of candidates will be

submitting the project.

EDA

Dispositions

Instrument

This assessment was piloted fall, 2018.

EPP faculty will review the data summer,

2019 to assess the instrument’s

appropriateness for all initial programs.

EPP faculty needed a more valid and

reliable measure of dispositions. The

previous instrument did not meet the

sufficiency criteria for measuring validity

and reliability. Therefore, the assessment

was replaced with the EDA and it will

continue to be administered at key

transition points.

Program directors,

clinical educators

and EPP faculty

The assessment was

implemented fall, 2018.

https://www.watermarkinsig

hts.com/educator-

disposition-assessment/

https://scale.stanford.edu/teaching/edtpa/supporting-docs

https://scale.stanford.edu/teaching/edtpa/supporting-docs

https://www.watermarkinsights.com/educator-disposition-assessment/



EPP Key Assessments

24

Table 6. Key Assessments with Transition Points

Title of Assessment When

Administered

Row InTASC CAEP AL Technical

Information Praxis II Scores Prior to

Internship

Total/

Domain

Content

Knowledge

1.1 Initial Available from

ETS

Samford Planning Assessment TP 3 Row 1 Content

Knowledge

1.1 Initial EPP Created

Technical

Studies

conducted by

EPP Row 2 The Learner

and Learning

Diversity Initial

Row 3 Instructional

Practice

Research Initial

Samford Student Learning Assessment TP 3 Row 2 Content

Knowledge

1.1 Initial EPP Created

Technical

Studies

conducted by

EPP Row 4 Instructional

Practice

Research Initial

Row 5 Instructional

Practice

21st

Century

Initial

Field Experience TP 2 & 3 Row 1 Instructional

Practice

CCRS Initial EPP Created

Technical

Studies

conducted by

EPP Row 4 The Learner

and Learning

CCRS Initial

EPP Key Assessments

25

Row 6 Content

Knowledge

CCRS Initial

Row 7 Content

Knowledge

1.1 Initial

Row 10 Instructional

Practice

1.1 Initial


Practice

Technology Initial

Row 12 Professional

Responsibility

21st

Century

Initial


Practice

Research Initial

Row 19

(Div)

Professional

Responsibility

Diversity Initial

Row 20 Professional

Responsibility

1.1 Initial

Row 22 The Learner

and Learning

Diversity Initial

OLD Disposition Assessment (through AY

2017-2018)

TP Row 1 The Learner

and Learning

Diversity Initial Fall 2018 on -

established by

UoTampa.

Older data

developed In-

house. Row 2 The Learner

and Learning

Diversity Initial

Row 8 Content

Knowledge

1.1 Initial

Row 12 Professional

Responsibility

21st

Century

Initial


Practice

Diversity Initial

EPP Key Assessments

26

Row 19 Professional

Responsibility

Research Initial

NEW EDA Disposition Assessment

(beginning AY 2018-2019)

TP 1, 2, 3 Row 5 Content

Knowledge

1.1 Initial U Of Tampa

Row 6 The Learner

and Learning

Diversity Initial

Row 7 Professional

Responsibility

21st

Century

Initial

Employer Survey Completion See

alignment

n/a 4 Initial Available from

ALSDE;

Alignment done

in-house

Completer Survey Completion

4 Initial Available from

ALSDE;

Alignment done

in-house

EPP Key Assessments

27

Appendix InTASC

Learner and Learning Standard #1: Learner Development. The teacher understands how learners grow and develop, recognizing that patterns of learning and

development vary individually within and across the cognitive, linguistic, social, emotional, and physical areas, and designs and implements

developmentally appropriate and challenging learning experiences.

Standard #2: Learning Differences. The teacher uses understanding of individual differences and diverse cultures and communities to ensure

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

Standard #3: Learning Environments. The teacher works with others to create environments that support individual and collaborative learning,

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

Content Standard #4: Content Knowledge. The teacher understands the central concepts, tools of inquiry, and structures of the discipline(s) he or she

teaches and creates learning experiences that make the discipline accessible and meaningful for learners to assure mastery of the content.

Standard #5: Application of Content. The teacher understands how to connect concepts and use differing perspectives to engage learners in

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

Instructional Practice Standard #6: Assessment. The teacher understands and uses multiple methods of assessment to engage learners in their own growth, to

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

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

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

context. Standard #8: Instructional Strategies. The teacher understands and uses a variety of instructional strategies to encourage learners to

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

EPP Key Assessments

28

Professional Responsibility Standard #9: Professional Learning and Ethical Practice. The teacher engages in ongoing professional learning and uses evidence to continually

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

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

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

learning, to collaborate with learners, families, colleagues, other school professionals, and community members to ensure learner growth, and

to advance the profession.

Alabama Core Teaching Standards Standard 1: Learner Development

The candidate understands how learners grow and develop, recognizing that patterns of learning and development vary individually within

and across the cognitive, linguistic, social, emotional, and physical areas, and designs and implements developmentally appropriate and

challenging learning experiences.

Standard 2: Learning Differences The candidate uses understanding of individual differences and diverse cultures and communities to ensure inclusive learning environments

that enable each learner to meet high standards.

Standard 3: Learning Environments The candidate works with others to create environments that support individual and collaborative learning, and that encourage positive

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

Standard 4: Content Knowledge The candidate understands the central concepts, tools of inquiry, and structures of the discipline(s) he or she teaches and creates learning

experiences that make these aspects of the discipline accessible and meaningful for learners to assure mastery of the content.

Standard 5: Application of Content The candidate understands how to connect concepts and use differing perspectives to engage learners in critical thinking, creativity, and

collaborative problem solving related to authentic local and global issues.

Standard 6: Assessment

EPP Key Assessments

29

The candidate understands and uses multiple methods of assessment to engage learners in their own growth, to monitor learner progress,

and to guide the candidate’s and learner’s decision making.

Standard 7: Planning for Instruction The candidate plans instruction that supports every student in meeting rigorous learning goals by drawing upon knowledge of content areas,

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

Standard 8: Instructional Strategies The candidate understands and uses a variety of instructional strategies to encourage learners to develop deep understanding of content

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

Standard 9: Professional Learning and Ethical Practice The candidate engages in ongoing professional learning and uses evidence to continually evaluate his/her practice, particularly the effects of

his/her choices and actions on others (learners, families, other professionals, and the community) and adapts practice to meet the needs of

each learner.

Standard 10: Leadership and Collaboration The candidate seeks appropriate leadership roles and opportunities to take responsibility for student learning, to collaborate with learners, families, colleagues, other school professionals, and community members to ensure learner growth, and to advance the profession.

EPP Key Assessments

30

Documents

EPP Assessments - samford.edu · No plan for record Appropriate and multiple strategies to assess student learning are used (paper and pencil tests, observational Assessment planning