SOUTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY COLLEGE · Web viewIn required methods courses 4 [Assessment of student teaching] Student Teaching Observation Report aligned with CEC standards. Candidates

Special Education Eight Key Assessments

Eight key assessments are being submitted as evidence for meeting the CEC standards. For each assessment, the type or form of the assessment and when it is administered in the program are indicated. The competencies on each assessment are introduced at stage I, reinforced at stage II and mastered at stage III of the Special Education Program.

Name of Assessment Type or Form of Assessment

When the Assessment Is Administered

1 [Licensure assessment] PRAXIS II Education of Exceptional Students: Core

Content Knowledge (0353)

Prior to student teaching and stage II of the admission and monitoring process.

2 Content knowledge In Special Education Content Observation Rubric During stage II and stage III-Student

Teaching and Capstone Course.

3 [Assessment of candidate ability to plan Instruction]Lesson Plans are aligned with CEC standards.

Candidates develop four culturally sensitive lesson plans in the area of concentration/discipline. Instruction in technology and the principles of teaching and learning are integrated throughout each lesson.

In required methods courses

4 [Assessment of student teaching] Student Teaching Observation Report aligned with CEC standards.

Candidates are observed by both an on-site supervising cooperating teacher and a program supervisor during the student teaching semester. All points of focus in the observation report are aligned with CEC Standards.

Student Teaching semester: either fall or spring of the senior year

5

[Assessment of candidate effect on student learning] Teacher Work Sample aligned with CEC standards.

Similar to a unit of study in a content area, candidates are assessed on contextual factors (learning goals, an assessment plan, a design for instruction, instructional decision making, and self evaluation and reflection. Candidates teach a portion of the unit in a classroom.

ED 425: Application and Assessment in Specialized Methods (This course is required in the semester prior to student teaching.)

6 Portfolio Summative Evaluation

The Portfolio is designed to be comprehensive in nature and the artifacts are developed around all of the CEC Standards. They are collected in key courses at stages I, II, III, and IV of the Admissions and Monitoring Process.

Student Teaching semester: either fall or spring of the senior year in ED 430 where the competencies are mastered.

7Additional assessment that addresses CEC standards (required)] Dispositional Survey aligned with CEC standards, communication Additional

ED 425 and ED 430 Dispositions are mastered at stage III and are assessed during student teaching.

8 Alumni-Follow-up Survey and the Senior Exit Survey

The Alumni-Follow-up survey and the Senior Exit Survey are aligned to the Units Conceptual Framework and the CEC Standards.

The senior exit survey is administered either fall or spring of the senior year in ED 430 where the competencies are mastered.

1

Council for Exceptional Children EDUCATION ASSESSMENT #1 – PRAXIS II

1. Description of Assessment

The Praxis II: Special Education: Teaching Students with Learning disabilities (0371) is required by the State of South Carolina for certification in Special Education. The Special Education: Teaching Students with learning disabilities examination is designed for examinees that plan to teach learning disabled students, at any grade level from preschool through grade 12. The 50 multiple-choice questions assess the knowledge and understanding of the principles and other factors related to the teaching of students with learning disabilities. Some of these questions are based on a case study of about 500 words that relates to the teaching of students. There are two parts to the Special Education: Teaching Students with learning disabilities test. Part A covers Factors Other than Direct Instruction that Influence the Education of Students with Learning disabilities and Part B covers Delivery of Services to Students with Learning disabilities.

2. Alignment with CEC Standards

Praxis II Test Categories CEC StandardsFactors Other than Direct Instruction that Influence the Education of Students with Learning disabilitiesBasic concepts 2, 3, and 5Definitions/terminology 1Delivery of Services to Students with Learning disabilities

Conceptual approaches 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9Professional roles/issues/literature 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10Assessment 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 8, and 10Placement and program issues 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 8, and 10Curriculum and instruction 2, 3, 4, 7, and 8How to manage the learning environment 1, 5, 7, 8, 9, and 10

3. Summary of Data Findings

South Carolina State University requires candidates to pass Praxis II prior to student teaching; therefore, the pass rate for this assessment is 100%. According to the data collected from 2007-2008, the undergraduate completers consistently scored within the above average performance range in all test categories.

4. Interpretation of how the data provides evidence for meeting standards

On the content area exercise on the PRAXIS II, the special education majors’ scores are cited in the 3rd quartile. The PRAXIS II is aligned to the CEC Standards and provides information on the special education candidates’ (3) content knowledge and skills which indicate that the teacher education candidates fall within the above average range on the content exercises. This is

2

evidenced that our candidates have obtained the content knowledge necessary to teach K-12 grade students in a variety of settings.

ASSESSMENT #2 – CONTENT KNOWLEDGE RUBRIC


University supervisors and cooperating teachers use a rubric to assess the candidates’ content knowledge during their student teaching experience. The items in this rubric are based on CEC Standards. Standards place emphasis on the fact that candidates understand the importance of each content area in teaching children with learning disabilities. Candidates must know the key concepts, inquiry tools, and structure of each content area according to CEC Standards. Additionally, CEC Standards highlight the importance of candidates having the ability to identify resources to expand their understanding and apply the content in varied inclusive settings.

2. Alignment with CEC Standards (See rubric below)

Association for Special Education International Standards

Linked to EP, RD and HP

and ADEPT

Evidence in

Planning

Evidence in

Teaching

Evidence in

Producing the

Intended Student

LearningStandard 1: Foundations

EP, RD, HP and APS 1,

2, 3 & 4

□ 1

□ 2

□ 3

□ No

□ 1

□ 2

□ 3

□ No

□ 1

□ 2

□ 3

□ No

1.1 Special educators understand the field as an evolving and changing discipline based on philosophies, evidence-based principles and theories, relevant laws and policies, diverse and historical points of view, and human issues that have historically influenced and continue to influence the field of special education and the education and treatment of individuals with exceptional needs both in school and society.Standard 2. Standard 2: Development and Characteristics of Learners


2, 3

□ 1 □ 2□ 3□ No

□ 1□ 2□ 3□ No

□ 1□ 2□ 3

□ No2.1 Special educators know and demonstrate respect for their students first as unique human beings.Standard 3. Individual Learning Differences

EP, RD, HP and APS 3,4, 5, 6, 7, 8 & 9

□ 1 □ 2□ 3 □ No

□ 1 □ 2□ 3 □ No

□ 1 □ 2□ 3 □ No

3.1 Special educators understand the effects that an exceptional condition can have on an individual’s learning in school and throughout life. Special educators understand that the beliefs, traditions, and values across and within cultures can affect relationships among and between students, their families, and the school community.Standard 4.0: Standard 4: Instructional Strategies

EP, RD, HP and APS 10

□ 1□ 2□ 3□ No

□ 1□ 2□ 3□ No

□ 1□ 2□ 3□ No

4.1 Special educators’ posses a repertoire of evidence-based instructional strategies to individualize instruction for individuals with learning disabilities. Special educators select, adapt, and use these instructional strategies to promote challenging learning results in general and special curricula and to appropriately modify learning environments for individuals with learning disabilities.

3

Standard 5: Learning Environments and Social Interactions EP, RD, HP and APS 10

□ 1 □ 2□ 3 □ No

□ 1 □ 2□ 3 □ No

□ 1 □ 2□ 3 □ No 5.1 Special educators actively create learning environments for

individuals with learning disabilities that foster cultural understanding, safety and emotional well being, positive social interactions, and active engagement of individuals with .Standard 6: Language


□ 1 □ 2□ 3 □ No

□ 1 □ 2□ 3 □ No

□ 1 □ 2□ 3 □ No

6.1 Special educators understand typical and atypical language development and the ways in which exceptional conditions can interact with an individual’s experience with and use of language. Special educators use individualized strategies to enhance language development and teach communication skills to individuals with learning disabilities.Standard 7: Instructional Planning EP, RD, HP

and APS 10□ 1 □ 2□ 3 □ No

□ 1 □ 2□ 3 □ No

□ 1 □ 2□ 3 □ No 7.1 Individualized decision-making and instruction is at the center

of special education practice. Special educators develop long-range individualized instructional plans anchored in both general and special curricula.Standard 8: Assessment EP, RD, HP

and APS 10□ 1 □ 2□ 3 □ No

□ 1 □ 2□ 3 □ No

□ 1 □ 2□ 3 □ No8.1 Assessment is integral to the decision-making and teaching of

special educators and special educators use multiple types of assessment information for a variety of educational decisions.Standard 9: Professional and Ethical Practice EP, RD, HP

and APS 6□ 1 □ 2□ 3 □ No

□ 1 □ 2□ 3 □ No

□ 1 □ 2□ 3 □ No9.1 Special educators are guided by the profession’s ethical and

professional practice standards. Special educators practice in multiple roles and complex situations across wide age and developmental ranges.Standard 10: Collaboration


□ 1 □ 2□ 3 □ No

□ 1 □ 2□ 3 □ No

□ 1 □ 2□ 3 □ No

10.1 Special educators routinely and effectively collaborate with families, other educators, related service providers, and personnel from community agencies in culturally responsive ways.


University supervisors and cooperating teachers conduct four formal observations of student teachers during their thirteen-week internship. A four-level rating criteria is used: needs improvement, developing competence, competent, and not observed. Although the university supervisors and cooperating teachers rated the candidates’ knowledge of content independently, A consensus is derived on the final rating. All teacher candidates were rated as “competent”.

Assessment 2 – Attachment AContent Observation Rubric

SPECIAL EDUCATION CONTENT OBSERVATION RUBRIC

Candidate: ________________ School: _________________ Subject/leve1(s): _____________

Evaluator: ___________________________ Dates covered: From__________ To___________

4

For each observation, evaluate the intern for each CEC standard to indicate (a) evidence in planning, (b) evidence in teaching, and (c) evidence in producing intended student learning. Record your evaluation by checking the appropriate box. Use the following scale:

1= Needs Improvement 2= Developing Competency 3= Competent No= Not ObservedN=2

Association for Special Education International Standards

Linked to EP, RD and HP

and ADEPT

Evidence in

Planning

Evidence in

Teaching

Evidence in

Producing the

Intended Student

LearningStandard 1: Foundations


2, 3 & 4

□ 1

□ 2

x 3

□ No

□ 1

□ 2

x 3

□ No

□ 1

□ 2

x 3

□ No

1.1 Special educators understand the field as an evolving and changing discipline based on philosophies, evidence-based principles and theories, relevant laws and policies, diverse and historical points of view, and human issues that have historically influenced and continue to influence the field of special education and the education and treatment of individuals with exceptional needs both in school and society.Standard 2. Standard 2: Development and Characteristics of Learners


2, 3

□ 1 □ 2x 3 □ No

□ 1 □ 2x 3 □ No

□ 1 □ 2x 3 □ No

2.1 Special educators know and demonstrate respect for their students first as unique human beings.

Standard 3. Individual Learning DifferencesEP, RD, HP and APS 3,4, 5, 6, 7, 8 & 9

□ 1 □ 2x 3 □ No

□ 1 □ 2x 3 □ No

□ 1 □ 2x 3 □ No

3.1 Special educators understand the effects that an exceptional condition can have on an individual’s learning in school and throughout life. Special educators understand that the beliefs, traditions, and values across and within cultures can affect relationships among and between students, their families, and the school community.Standard 4.0: Standard 4: Instructional Strategies


□ 1 □ 2x 3 □ No

□ 1 □ 2x 3 □ No

□ 1 □ 2x 3 □ No

4.1 Special educators’ posses a repertoire of evidence-based instructional strategies to individualize instruction for individuals with learning disabilities. Special educators select, adapt, and use these instructional strategies to promote challenging learning results in general and special curricula and to appropriately modify learning environments for individuals with learning disabilities.Standard 5: Learning Environments and Social Interactions EP, RD, HP

and APS 10□ 1 □ 2x 3 □ No

□ 1 □ 2x 3 □ No

□ 1 □ 2x 3 □ No

5.1 Special educators actively create learning environments for individuals with learning disabilities that foster cultural understanding, safety and emotional well being, positive social interactions, and active engagement of individuals with learning disabilities.Standard 6: Language


□ 1 □ 2x 3 □ No

□ 1 □ 2x 3 □ No

□ 1 □ 2x 3 □ No

6.1 Special educators understand typical and atypical language development and the ways in which exceptional conditions can interact with an individual’s experience with and use of language. Special educators use individualized strategies to enhance language development and teach communication skills to individuals with learning disabilities.

5

Standard 7: Instructional Planning EP, RD, HP and APS 10

□ 1 □ 2x 3 □ No

□ 1 □ 2x 3 □ No

□ 1 □ 2x 3 □ No

7.1 Individualized decision-making and instruction is at the center of special education practice. Special educators develop long-range individualized instructional plans anchored in both general and special curricula.Standard 8: Assessment EP, RD, HP

and APS 10□ 1 □ 2x 3 □ No

□ 1 □ 2x 3 □ No

□ 1 □ 2x 3 □ No

8.1 Assessment is integral to the decision-making and teaching of special educators and special educators use multiple types of assessment information for a variety of educational decisions.

Standard 9: Professional and Ethical Practice EP, RD, HP and APS 6

□ 1 □ 2x 3 □ No

□ 1 □ 2x 3 □ No

□ 1 □ 2x 3 □ No

9.1 Special educators are guided by the profession’s ethical and professional practice standards. Special educators practice in multiple roles and complex situations across wide age and developmental ranges.Standard 10: Collaboration


□ 1 □ 2x 3 □ No

□ 1 □ 2x 3 □ No

□ 1 □ 2x 3 □ No

10.1 Special educators routinely and effectively collaborate with families, other educators, related service providers, and personnel from community agencies in culturally responsive ways.

4. Interpretation of how the Data Provides Evidence that the CEC standards were met

The rubric used for this assessment is based on the CEC Standards, which focuses on the content knowledge that candidates should possess. Based on the data, the Special Education candidates demonstrated a strong understanding of content knowledge and can apply knowledge, skills and dispositions in a variety of diverse settings. CEC Standards were met at the competent level.

6

ASSESSMENT #3 – LESSON PLAN RUBRIC


Candidates write lesson plans in all methods classes, and a standardized lesson plan format is used in all Special Education classes at each stage of the Admission and Monitoring Process. Candidates must align their lessons with the South Carolina Curriculum Standards. The lesson plans must include appropriate objectives and procedures that support the standards and objectives. Some of the other evaluation criteria include an engaging introduction that effectively activates prior knowledge and accommodations for differences in rates of learning, learning styles, diversity, and special needs. The university supervisors and cooperating teachers collect the data on lesson plans during the student teaching experience, Stage III of our transition point.


SOUTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY (Program Area: Special Education)

Key Assessment # 3LESSON PLAN RUBRIC

Criteria Evaluation

Competent 3

Developing Competence

2

Needs Improvement1

Score

SC Curricular Standards; CEC 7

Lesson and assessments are aligned with the South Carolina Curriculum Standards.

The standards are identified in general terms, but are aligned with the lesson or assessments.

The standards are vague and not aligned with the lesson or assessments.

Instructional Objectives; CEC 7

Concise statements of what students are expected to demonstrate. The statements follow the ABCD and taxonomies of learning formats.

The statements are vague and not in the ABCD and taxonomies of learning formats.

Statements of what students are expected to demonstrate are not in the ABCD and taxonomies of learning formats.

Lesson Plan Language, Grammar, Punctuation, Spelling; CEC 6

Language particularly descriptive; all portions complete, thoroughly developed and clearly written; and no grammatical or mechanical errors.

Sufficient detail so another teacher could implement lesson; all portions completed and clearly written; a few grammatical and mechanical errors.

Detail lacking (another teacher would have difficulty implementing lesson); portions missing, poorly written, unclear; several grammatical and mechanical errors.

7

Citations of Sources of Ideas (optional); CEC 6

Sources cited using publication format (APA, for example).

All sources cited so another teacher could locate sources.

Sources not cited or not cited with enough detail.

Procedures; CEC 7

Procedures provide detailed information on the preparation, implementation, and integration of instruction

Procedures provide vague information on the preparation, implementation, and integration of instruction

Procedures provided no information on the preparation, but not the implementation or integration instruction

Modeling Behaviors; CEC 4 & 7

Several examples include demonstrations on how students are to go about completing the lesson that includes detailed description about incorporating diverse

Few examples of how students are to go completing the about completing the lesson. No accommodations for diverse learning styles.

No examples are provided of how students are to go about completing the lesson.

Guided and Independent Practices; CEC 7

Opportunities are provided for guided and/or on guided independent practice.

Opportunities are guided for independent studies practice only.

Limited opportunities guided or independent practice.

Variety of Strategies; CEC 7

Used a variety of strategies that allowed the learners to be actively engaged in the learning.

The learners are actively engaged in the learning, but limited strategies were used.

Limited strategies were used and the learners were not actively engaged in the learning.


University supervisors and cooperating teachers assess candidates in the area of lesson planning during the student teaching process. According to the data at mid-term, the candidates received a competent rating in instructional planning, objectives, guided and independent practices, and materials. All other components of the lesson plan rubric are in the developing competency and needs improvement range.


Key Assessment # 3LESSON PLAN RUBRIC

N=1

Criteria Evaluation

Competent 3


2

Needs Improvement

1Score

SC Curricular Standards; CEC 7 Complete citation of SC No SC standard is

cited and/or 3.0

8

Instructional Planning

standards

Standards match content area

Grade level and ability noted

Complete citation of SC standards

Standards do not match content area

Grade level and ability noted

Content area omittedand/or Grade level and ability omitted, and/or standards do not match content area

Instructional Objectives; CEC 4,7

Concise, clear, objective, measurable statements of what students are expected to know and learn

Objectives reflect an individual’s abilities and needs children with exceptional learning needs are included

The objectives follow the ABCD and taxonomies of learning formats1

General non-objective, immeasurable statements of what students are expected to know and learn

Objectives reflect an individual’s abilities and needs

The objectives fail to follow the ABCD and taxonomies of learning formats

Objectives do not reflect planning for children with exceptional learning needs

No objectives 3.0

Lesson Plan Format, Language, Grammar, Punctuation, SpellingCEC 6

All 8 sections complete, thoroughly developed and clearly written; and no grammatical or mechanical errors, easily followed.

5 to 7 sections completed; 2 to 4 grammatical and mechanical errors, easily followed

0-4 sections completed; more than 5 grammatical and mechanical errors

2.5

Procedures; CEC 3, 4, 7

All 5 sections completed; detailed information on the preparation, implementation, integration and individualization of instruction, easily followed

3-4 of the sections completed; sufficient detail on the preparation, implementation, integration and individualization of instruction such that another teacher could follow

Most sections of the procedures are incomplete; insufficient detail on the implementation, integration, and individualization of instruction; unable to be followed

2.5

Modeling Behaviors; CEC 3, 4, 8, 10

Examples of the skill or knowledge which students are expected to learn are indicated in clear, concise detail; demonstrations to be used are indicated in clear, concise, detail; clear, concise detailed description about incorporating diverse and multiple strategies and assessments for culturally

Examples of the skill or knowledge which students are expected to learn are indicated in sufficient detail; demonstrations to be used are indicated in sufficient detail; sufficient detailed description about incorporating diverse and multiple strategies and assessments for culturally and

Minimal to no examples of the skill or knowledge which students are expected to learn; minimal to no demonstrations to be used are indicated; minimal to no description about

2.0

9

and linguistically diverse students

linguistically diverse students

incorporating diverse and multiple strategies and assessments for culturally and linguistically diverse students

Guided and Independent Practices; CEC 3, 6

Opportunities are provided for guided and independent practice

Opportunities for either guided or independent practice only.

No opportunities for guided or independent practice. 3.0

Variety of strategies encompassing the Awareness of Different Learning Styles, Rates of Learning and Abilities of culturally and linguistically diverse students CEC 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 10,

Used a variety of strategies appropriate for students’ abilities, roles and learning styles to actively engage them that provided for differences in learning styles, rates of learning and abilities especially for culturally and linguistically diverse students

Strategies provided limited attention to differences in learning styles and rates of learning, especially for culturally and linguistically diverse students

Strategies do not address learning styles were not addressed

2.5

Assessment; CEC 8, 9

Clearly written and detailed description of how standards and objectives and students will be assessed; assessments appropriate for the ability, developmental level and background of culturally and linguistically diverse students

sufficiently written description of how standards and objectives and students will be assessed; assessments appropriate for the ability, developmental level and background of culturally and linguistically diverse students

vaguely written description of how standards and objectives and students will be assessed; assessments inappropriate for the ability, developmental level and background of culturally and linguistically diverse students

1.5

Materials CEC 4, 6, 7

All materials needed for lesson are listed to enhance critical thinking, objectives, and activities for culturally, and linguistically diverse student

Some materials needed for lesson are listed to enhance critical thinking, objectives, and activities for culturally, and linguistically diverse student

No materials needed for lesson are listed

3.0

Reflection; CEC 9, 10

The teaching experience is clearly analyzed. The strengths and weaknesses of the lesson are identified along with suggestions to adjust and improve practice

The teaching experience is clearly analyzed. The strengths and weaknesses of the lesson are identified, but does not include suggestions to adjust and improve practice

No reflection is given.

2.0

TOTAL POINTS 23 /30

10

__ Overall Rating X Competent (34-39 Points) — Developing Competence (28-33 Points) — Needs Improvement (0-27 Points)

4. Interpretation of how the Data Provides Evidence that the CEC standards were met

The rubric used for this assessment is based on the CEC Standards, which focuses on the content knowledge that candidates should possess. Based on the data, the special education candidate demonstrated further needed help in CEC Curriculum Standards 7-Instructional Planning; CEC 8- Assessment; and CEC 10- Collaboration, Reflection and Evaluation.

However, requiring our candidates to pass this test to be eligible to enroll in student teaching ensures that our candidates possess mastery of instruction and assessment strategies; student development and learning, including diversity in student populations; communication techniques; and issues related to the teaching profession and larger community. However, further assistance in developing activities and experiences in varied inclusive classes maybe conducted by the college supervisor and the Office of Clinical Experience for teacher candidates who may demonstrate weaknesses at various transitional points. The fact that the mean and median scores for this candidate were higher than the state required minimum score is further indication of candidate mastery of this professional knowledge. However, application of skills in a variety of settings were required and provided through additional training, activity sessions, and further application at varied school sites.

11

ASSESSMENT #4 -- ADEPT


South Carolina’s system for Assisting, Developing, and Evaluating Professional Teaching (ADEPT) grew out of the knowledge that good teaching is important to student achievement. The primary focus of ADEPT is a set of expectations for what teaching professionals should know, be able to do, and assume responsibility for accomplishing on an ongoing basis. These expectations are called ADEPT Performance Standards. There are ten ADEPT Performance Standards, and they are grouped into the following four domains:

Domain 1: PlanningAPS 1 Long-Range PlanningAPS 2 Short-Range Planning of InstructionAPS 3 Planning Assessments and Using Data

Domain 2: InstructionAPS 4 Establishing and Maintaining High Expectations for LearnersAPS 5 Using Instructional Strategies to Facilitate LearningAPS 6 Providing Content for LearnersAPS 7 Monitoring, Assessing, and Enhancing Learning

Domain 3: Classroom EnvironmentAPS 8 Maintaining an Environment That Promotes LearningAPS 9 Managing the Classroom

Domain 4: ProfessionalismAPS 10 Fulfilling Professional Responsibilities

Each Performance Standard contains a set of key elements. The key elements are crucial to the standards.

As aforementioned, the ADEPT system focuses on teacher performance through three key processes: assisting, developing, and evaluating. During the initial phase of their careers, candidates enrolled in teacher education programs focus on developing the knowledge, skills, and dispositions that are central to the ADEPT Performance Standards. ADEPT Standards are

12

among the state accreditation requirements for college and university teacher education programs.

New teachers receive assistance, which is intended to promote their successful transition into professional practice. The third stage of ADEPT, formal evaluation, is successfully achieved by most teachers. The primary focus of the fourth stage, informal evaluation, is continuous professional growth.

ADEPT was chosen as one of our eight assessments because of the central role we have in preparing candidates who are developing the knowledge, skills, and dispositions that are necessary to be successful in the ADEPT process. Hence, the ADEPT system is highlighted in all of our classes. Our candidates are evaluated by the ADEPT instrument during their student teaching experience.


The ADEPT instrument has been revised to make it Special Education-specific. The alignment highlights the key elements within each Performance Standard.

SOUTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITYADEPT Summative Evaluation

Key Assessment # 4

Domain 1. Planning APS 1 Long-Range Planning RatingMet Not Met

CEC 1 l. A The student teacher obtains student information, analyzes this information to determine the learning needs of all students, and uses this information to guide instructional planning.Comments:

CEC 2 1. B The student teacher establishes appropriate standards-based long-range learning and developmental goals for all students.Comments:

CEC 3 & 4

1. C The student teacher identifies and sequences instructional units in a manner that facilitates the accomplishment of the long-range goals.Comments:

CEC 8 1.D The student teacher develops appropriate processes for evaluating and recording students’ progress and achievement.Comments:

CEC 5 1. E The student teacher plans appropriate procedures for managing the classroom.Comments:

Domain 1: Planning APS 2 Short-Range Planning of Instruction RatingMet Not Met

CEC 4 & 7

2. A The student teacher develops unit objectives that facilitate student achievement of appropriate academic standards and long-

13

range learning and developmental goals.Comments:

CEC 4 & 7

2. B The student teacher develops instructional plans that include content, strategies, materials, and resources that are appropriate for the particular students.Comments:

CEC 4 2. C The student teacher routinely uses student performance data to guide short-range planning of instruction.Comments:

Domain 1: Planning APS 3: Planning Assessments and Using Data RatingMet Not Met

CEC 8 3. A The student teacher develops/selects and administers a variety of appropriate assessments.Comments:

CEC 8 3. B At appropriate intervals, the student teacher gathers and accurately analyzes student performance data and uses this information to guide instructional planning.Comments:

CEC 8 3. C The student teacher uses assessment data to assign grades (or other indicators) that accurately reflect student progress and achievement. Comments:

Domain 2: Instruction APS 4: Establishing and Maintaining High Expectations for Learners

RatingMet Not Met

CEC 5 4. A The student teacher establishes, communicates, and maintains high expectations for student achievement.Comments:

CEC 5 4. B The student teacher establishes, communicates, and maintains high expectations for student participation.Comments:

CEC 5 4. C The student teacher helps students assume responsibility for their own participation and learning.Comments:

Domain 2: Instruction APS 5: Using Instructional Strategies to Facilitate Learning

RatingMet Not Met

CEC 4 5. A The student teacher uses appropriate instructional strategies.Comments:

CEC 4 5. B The student teacher uses a variety of instructional strategies.Comments:

CEC 4 5. C The student teacher uses instructional strategies effectively.Comments:

14

Domain 2: Instruction APS 6: Providing Content for Learners RatingMet Not Met

CEC 6 & 9

6. A The student teacher demonstrates a thorough command of the discipline that he or she teaches.Comments:

CEC 6 & 9

6. B The student teacher provides appropriate content.Comments:

CEC 6 & 9

6. The student teacher structures the content to promote meaningful learning.Comments:

Domain 2: Instruction APS 7: Monitoring, Assessing, and Enhancing Learning RatingMet Not Met

CEC 8 7. A The student teacher continually monitors student learning during instruction by using a variety of informal and formal assessment strategies.Comments:

CEC 8 7. B The student teacher enhances student learning by using information from informal and formal assessments to guide instruction.Comments:

CEC 8 7. C The student teacher enhances student learning by providing appropriate instructional feedback to all students.Comments:

Domain 3: Environment APS 8: Maintaining an Environment That Promotes Learning

RatingMet Not Met

CEC 5 8. A The student teacher creates and maintains the physical environment of his or her classroom as a safe place that is conducive to learning.Comments:

CEC 5 8. B The student teacher creates and maintains a positive affective climate in his or her classroom.Comments:

CEC 9 8. C The student teacher creates and maintains a culture of learning in his or her classroom.Comments:

Domain 3 Environment APS 9 Managing the Classroom RatingMet Not Met

CEC 9 9. A The student teacher manages student behavior appropriately.Comments:

CEC 9 9. B The student teacher makes maximal use of instructional time.Comments:

CEC 9 9. C The student teacher manages essential non instructional routines in an efficient manner.Comments:

15

Domain 4: APS 10: Fulfilling Professional ResponsibilitiesProfessionalism

RatingMet Not Met

CEC 10 10. A The student teacher is an advocate for the students.Comments:

CEC 10 10. B The student teacher works to achieve organizational goals in order to make the entire school a positive and productive learning environment.Comments:

CEC 9 10. C The student teacher is an effective communicator.Comments:

CEC 9 10. D The student teacher exhibits professional demeanor and behavior.Comments:

CEC 10 10. E The student teacher is an active learner.Comments:

SOUTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY

ADEPT Summative EvaluationStudent Teacher __________________________ School _____________________________

Date _______ University Supervisor _____________________ Cooperating Teacher ________________

ADEPT Performance Standards for Student TeachersADEPT Performance Standards for Student Teachers Consensus Judgment

DomainDomain

ADEPTADEPT PerformancePerformance Standards inStandards in the Domainthe Domain

TotalTotal KeyKey

ElementsElements in thein the

DomainDomain

NumberNumber of Keyof Key

ElementsElements MetMet in the in the DomainDomain

DOMAINDOMAINMETMET

DOMAINDOMAINNOT METNOT MET

Domain 1: Planning

APS 1APS 2APS 3

11 x> 10 < 9

Domain 2: Instruction

APS 4APS 5APS 6APS 7

12 x> 11 < 10

Domain 3: Classroom Environment

APS 8APS 9 6 x

> 5 < 4

Domain 4: Professionalism APS 10 5 x

> 4 < 3

16

Overall JudgmentOverall JudgmentAn overall judgment of met indicates that the student teacher achieves the criterion level in all four domains at the time of the final evaluation.

MetMet Not MetNot Met

X

University Supervisor Date

Cooperating Teacher Date

Student Teacher’s signature: By signing below, I verify that I have received the results of this summative evaluation. My signature does not necessarily imply that I agree with these results.

Student Teacher

Date


The Special Education candidate is evaluated by the ADEPT instrument during the student teaching experience. The university supervisor and cooperating teacher conduct formal observations four times during the thirteen-week internship. After the university supervisor and cooperating teacher have conducted their observations, they will meet to discuss their independent ratings and reach a consensus on the final score/s. The performance levels are “met” or “not met.” According to the data from 2007-2008, the candidate received a rating of 100% of “met.”

4. Interpretation of how Data Provides Evidence that the CEC Standards were met.

According to the data from 2007-2008, our candidate consistently received a 100% consensus judgment of “met.” Hence, the alignment of the CEC Standards with the key elements of the 10 ADEPT Performance Standards and the 100% ratings of “met” provide strong evidence that our candidates are proficient in all of the CEC Standards.

17

ASSESSMENT #5 – UNIT WORK SAMPLE


Successful teacher candidates support learning by designing a teacher work sample that employs a range of strategies that builds on each student’s strengths, needs, and prior experiences. Teacher candidates provide credible evidence to show their ability to facilitate learning by identify contextual factors, learning goals, designing instructional plans and assessment instruments. In addition, analysis of students learning allows the teacher candidate to reflect on the lesson and complete a self evaluation to make decision to enhance the learning process.

The Special Education Teacher Candidate complete professional clinical experience at The Special Center located in Orangeburg School district No. 5, Orangeburg, South Carolina. Information about the district included the community’s demographic information, mission of the district, classroom organization, and student characteristics. A pretest was administered to give the Teacher Candidate first had knowledge about the student’s ability enrolled in the specific course, i.e., Integrated Special and Engineering. This information allowed the Teacher Candidate to write lesson plans, plan strategies, and activities that would address the various learning styles located in the classroom. Emphasis was place on making sure all levels of Bloom’s Taxonomy would be implemented during the clinical experience. The post-test was administer to assess the instruction and measure the students; comprehension/mastery of the objective of the lesson. It also allowed the teacher candidate to reflect on the positive teaching attributes, and to do a self evaluation to enhance the learning experience.

2. Alignment with CEC Standards (See rubric on the following page)

Key Assessment # 5Summative Assessment

Unit Work Sample RubricSpecial Education

Section 1: TWS Standard: The teacher uses information about the learning/teaching context and student individual differences to set learning goals, plan instruction and assess learning.

Effective Performer =EP; Reflective Decision-RD and Humanistic Practitioner=HP

Rating Competent Developing Needs Improvement Score

18

Indicator 3 Competence2 1

Knowledge of Community, School and Classroom Factors (CEC 1; ADEPT 1, EP and RD).

Teacher displays a comprehensive understanding of the characteristics of the community, school, and classroom that may affect learning in the Special Education diverse classroom.

Teacher displays some knowledge of the characteristics of the community, school, and classroom that may affect learning in the Special Education diverse classroom.

Teacher displays minimal, irrelevant, or biased knowledge of the characteristics of the community, school, and in the Special Education diverse classroom.

Knowledge of Characteristics of Students (CEC 1; ADEPT 1, EP and RD).

Teacher displays general & specific understanding of student differences (e.g., development, interests, culture, abilities/disabilities) that may affect learning in the Special Education diverse classroom.

Teacher displays general knowledge of student differences (e.g., development, interests, culture, abilities/disabilities) that may affect learning in the Special Education diverse classroom.

Teacher displays minimal, stereotypical, or irrelevant knowledge of student differences (e.g. development, interests, culture, abilities/disabilities) in the Special Education diverse classroom.

Knowledge of Students’ Varied Approaches to Learning (CEC 1; ADEPT 1, EP and RD).

Teacher displays general & specific understanding of the different ways students learn (e.g., learning styles, learning modalities) that may affect learning in the Special Education diverse classroom.

Teacher displays general knowledge about the different ways students learn (e.g., learning styles, learning modalities) in the Special Education diverse classroom.

Teacher displays minimal, stereotypical, or irrelevant knowledge about the different ways students learn (e.g., learning styles, learning modalities) in the Special Education diverse classroom.

Knowledge of Students’ Skills And Prior Learning (CEC 1; ADEPT 1, EP and RD).

Teacher displays general & specific understanding of students’ skills and prior learning that may affect learning in the Special Education diverse classroom.

Teacher displays general knowledge of students’ skills and prior learning that may affect learning in the Special Education diverse classroom.

Teacher displays little or irrelevant knowledge of students’ skills and prior learning in the Special Education diverse classroom.

Implications for Instructional Planning and Assessment (CEC 1; ADEPT 1, EP and RD).

Teacher provides specific implications for instruction and assessment based on student individual differences and community, school, and classroom characteristics in the Special Education diverse classroom.

Teacher provides general implications for instruction and assessment based on student individual differences and community, school, and classroom characteristics in the Special Education diverse classroom.

Teacher does not provide implications for instruction and assessment based on student individual differences and community, school, and classroom characteristics OR provides inappropriate implications in the Special Education diverse classroom.

19

Instructional ObjectivesRubric

Special Education

TWS Standard: The teacher sets significant, challenging, varied and appropriate learning goals.


Rating Indicator

Competent 3


2

Needs Improvement1 Score

Significance, Challenge and Variety (CEC 2; ADEPT 1, EP and RD).

Objectives reflect several types or levels of learning and are significant and challenging for high school diverse settings.

Objectives reflect several types or levels of learning but lack significance or challenge for high school diverse settings.

Goals reflect only one type or level of learning for high school diverse settings.

Clarity (CEC 2; ADEPT 1, EP and RD).

Most of the goals are clearly stated as learning outcomes for high school diverse settings.

Some of the goals are clearly stated as learning outcomes for high school diverse settings.

Goals are not stated clearly and are activities rather than learning outcomes for high school diverse settings.

Appropriateness For Students (CEC 2; ADEPT 1, EP and RD).

Most objectives appropriate for the development; pre-requisite knowledge, skills, experiences; and other student needs in high school diverse settings.

Some goals are appropriate for the development; pre- requisite knowledge, skills, experiences; and other student needs in high school diverse settings.

Goals are not appropriate for the development; pre-requisite knowledge, skills, experiences; or other student needs in high school diverse settings.

Alignment with National, State or Local Standards (CEC 2;

Most of the goals are explicitly aligned with national, state or local

Some goals are aligned with national, state or local standards in high

Goals are not aligned with national, state or local standards in high

20

ADEPT 1, EP and RD). standards in high school diverse settings.

school diverse settings. school diverse settings.

21

Assessment Plan Rubric

Special Education

Section 3: TWS Standard: The teacher uses multiple assessment modes and approaches aligned with learning goals to assess student learning before, during and after instruction.


Rating Indicator

Competent 3


2


Alignment with Learning Goals and Instruction (CEC 3; ADEPT 1, EP and RD).

Each of the learning goals is assessed through the assessment plan; assessments are congruent with the learning goals in content and cognitive complexity for high school diverse settings.

Some of the learning goals are assessed through the assessment plan, but many are not congruent with learning goals in content and cognitive complexity for high school diverse settings.

Content and methods of assessment lack congruence with learning goals or lack cognitive complexity for high school diverse settings.

Clarity of Criteria and Standards for Performance (CEC 3; ADEPT 1, EP and RD).

Assessment criteria are clear and are explicitly linked to the learning goals for high school diverse settings.

Assessment criteria have been developed, but they are not clear or are not explicitly linked to the learning goals for high school diverse settings.

The assessments contain no clear criteria for measuring student performance relative to the learning goals for high school diverse settings.

Multiple Modes and Approaches (CEC 3; ADEPT 1, EP and RD).

The assessment plan includes multiple assessment modes (including performance assessments, lab reports, research projects, etc.) and assesses student performance throughout the instructional sequence for high school diverse settings.

The assessment plan includes multiple modes but all are either pencil paper based (i.e. they are not performance assessments) and/or do not require the integration of knowledge, skills and reasoning ability for high school diverse settings.

The assessment plan includes only one assessment mode and does not assess students before, during, and after instruction for high school diverse settings.

22

Technical Soundness (CEC 3; ADEPT 1, EP and RD).

Assessments appear to be valid; scoring procedures are explained; most items or prompts are clearly written; directions and procedures are clear to students in high school diverse settings.

Assessments appear to have some validity. Some scoring procedures are explained; some items or prompts are clearly written; some directions and procedures are clear to students in high school diverse settings.

Assessments are not valid; scoring procedures are absent or inaccurate; items or prompts are poorly written; directions and procedures are confusing to students in high school diverse settings.

Adaptations Based on the Individual Needs of Students (CEC 3; ADEPT 1, EP and RD).

Teacher makes adaptations to assessments that are appropriate to meet the individual needs of most students in high school diverse settings.

Teacher makes adaptations to assessments that are appropriate to meet the individual needs of some students in high school diverse settings.

Teacher does not adapt assessments to meet the individual needs of students or these assessments are inappropriate for high

school diverse settings.

Design for Instruction Rubric

Special EducationSection 4: TWS Standard: The teacher designs instruction for specific learning goals, student characteristics and needs, and learning contexts. Effective Performer =EP; Reflective Decision-RD and Humanistic Practitioner=HP

Rating Indicator

Competent 3


2


Alignment with Instructional Objectives (CEC 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10).

All lessons are explicitly linked to learning goals. All learning activities, assignments and resources are aligned with learning goals. All learning goals are covered in the design for high school diverse settings.

Most lessons are explicitly linked to learning goals. Most learning activities, assignments and resources are aligned with learning goals. Most learning goals are covered in the design for high school diverse settings.

Few lessons are explicitly linked to learning goals. Few learning activities, assignments and resources are aligned with learning goals, Not all learning goals are covered in the design for high school diverse settings.

Accurate Representation of Content (CEC 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10).

Teacher’s use of content is accurate. Focus of the content is congruent with the big ideas or structure of the discipline for high school diverse

Teacher’s use of content appears to be mostly accurate. Shows some awareness of the big ideas or structure of the discipline for high school diverse settings.

Teacher’s use of content appears to contain numerous inaccuracies. Content seems to be viewed more as isolated skills and

23

settings. facts rather than as part of a larger conceptual structure for high school diverse settings.

Lesson and Unit Structure (CEC 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10).

All lessons within the unit are logically organized and are useful in moving students toward achieving the learning goals for high school diverse settings.

The lessons within the unit have some logical organization and appear to be somewhat useful in moving students toward achieving the learning goals for high school diverse settings.

The lessons within the unit are not logically organized organization (e.g., sequenced) for high school diverse settings.

Use of a Variety of Instruction, Activities, Assignments and Resources (CEC 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10).

Significant variety across instruction, activities, assignments, and/or resources. This variety makes a clear contribution to learning in high school diverse settings.

Some variety in instruction, activities, assignments, or resources but with limited contribution to learning in high school diverse settings.

Little variety of instruction, activities, assignments, and resources. Heavy reliance on textbook or single resource (e.g., work sheets) in high school diverse settings.

Use of Contextual Information and Data to Select Appropriate and Relevant Activities, Assignments and Resources (CEC 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10).

Most instruction has been designed with reference to contextual factors and pre-assessment data. Most activities and assignments are productive and appropriate for each student in high school diverse settings.

Some instruction has been designed with reference to contextual factors and pre- assessment data. Some activities and assignments appear productive and appropriate for each student in high school diverse settings.

Instruction has not been designed with reference to contextual factors and pre- assessment data. Activities and assignments do not appear productive and appropriate for each student in high school diverse settings.

Use of Special (CEC 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10).

Teacher integrates appropriate special education that makes a significant contribution to teaching and learning in high school diverse settings.

Teacher uses special education but it does not make a significant contribution to teaching and learning OR teacher provides limited rationale for not using special education in high school diverse settings.

Special Education is inappropriately used OR teacher does not use special education and no (or inappropriate) rationale is provided in high school diverse settings.

24

Instructional Decision-Making

Rubric Special Education

Section 5: TWS Standard: The teacher uses on-going analysis of student learning to make instructional decisions.


Rating Indicator

Competent 3


2


Sound Professional Practice (CEC 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10).

Most instructional decisions are pedagogically sound (i.e., they lead to student learning) in high school diverse settings.

Instructional decisions are mostly appropriate, but some decisions are not pedagogically sound in high school diverse settings.

Many instructional decisions are inappropriate and not pedagogically sound in high school diverse settings.

Modifications Based on Analysis of Student Learning (CEC 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10).

Appropriate modifications of the instructional plan are made to address individual student needs. These modifications are informed by the analysis of student learning/performance, best practice, or contextual factors. Include explanation of why the modifications would improve student progress in high school diverse settings.

Some modifications of the instructional plan are made to address individual student needs, but these are not based on the analysis of student learning, best practice, or contextual factors in high school diverse settings.

Teacher treats class as “one plan fits all” with no modifications in high school diverse settings.

Congruence Between Modifications and Instructional Objectives (CEC 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10).

Modifications in instruction are congruent with Instructional Objectives in high school diverse settings.

Modifications in instruction are somewhat congruent with learning goals in high school diverse settings.

Modifications in instruction lack congruence with learning goals in high school diverse settings.

25

Analysis of Student Learning Rubric Special Education

Section 6: TWS Standard: The teacher uses assessment data to profile student learning and communicate information about student progress and achievement.

Rating Indicator

Competent 3


2


Clarity and Accuracy of Presentation (CEC 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10).

Presentation is easy to understand and contains no errors of representation in high school diverse settings.

Presentation is understandable and contains few errors in high school diverse settings.

Presentation is not clear and accurate; it does not accurately reflect the data in high school diverse settings.

Alignment with Learning Goals (CEC 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10).

Analysis is fully aligned with learning goals and provides a comprehensive profile of student learning for the whole class, subgroups, and at least two individuals in high school diverse settings.

Analysis of student learning is partially aligned with learning goals and/or fails to provide a comprehensive profile of student learning relative to the goals for the whole class, subgroups, and two individuals in high school diverse settings.

Analysis of student learning is not aligned with learning goals for high school diverse settings.

Interpretation of Data CEC 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10).

Interpretation is meaningful, and appropriate conclusions are drawn from the data for high school diverse settings.

Interpretation is technically accurate, but conclusions are missing or not fully supported by data for high school diverse settings.

Interpretation is inaccurate, and conclusions are missing or unsupported by data for high school diverse settings.

Evidence of Impact on Student Learning (CEC 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10).

Analysis of student learning includes evidence of the impact on student learning in terms of number of students who achieved and made progress toward each instructional objectives in high school diverse settings.

Analysis of student learning includes incomplete evidence of the impact on student learning in terms of numbers of students who achieved and made progress toward learning goals in high school diverse settings.

Analysis of student learning fails to include evidence of impact on student learning in terms of numbers of students who achieved and made progress toward learning goals in high school diverse settings.

Value Added

26

Reflection and Self-EvaluationRubric

Section 7: TWS Standard: The teacher analyzes the relationship between his or her instruction and student learning in order to improve teaching practice.

Rating Indicator

Competent 3


2


Interpretation of Student Learning (CEC 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10).

Uses evidence to support conclusions drawn in “Analysis of Student Learning” section. Explores multiple hypotheses for why some students did not meet instructional objectives in high school diverse settings.

Provides evidence but no (or simplistic, superficial) reasons or hypotheses to support conclusions drawn in “Analysis of Student Learning” section in high school diverse settings.

No evidence or reasons provided to support conclusions drawn in “Analysis of Student Learning” section in high school diverse settings.

Insights Effective Instruction and Assessment (CEC 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10).

Identifies successful and unsuccessful activities and assessments and provides plausible reasons (based on theory or research) for their success or lack thereof in high school diverse settings.

Identifies successful and unsuccessful activities or assessments and superficially explores reasons for their success or lack thereof (no use of theory or research) in high school diverse settings.

Provides no rationale for why some activities or assessments were more successful than others in high school diverse settings.

Alignment Among Goals, Instruction and Assessment (CEC 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10).

Logically connects instructional objectives instruction, and assessment results in the discussion of student learning and effective instruction in high school diverse settings.

Connects learning goals, instruction, and assessment results in the discussion of student learning and effective instruction, but misunderstandings or conceptual gaps are present in high school diverse settings.

Does not connect learning goals, instruction, and assessment results in the discussion of student learning and effective instruction and/or the connections are irrelevant or inaccurate in high school diverse settings.

Implications for Future Teaching (CEC 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10).

Provides ideas for redesigning learning goals, instruction, and assessment and explains why these modifications would improve student learning in

Provides ideas for redesigning learning goals, instruction, and assessment but offers no rationale for why these changes would improve student learning in high

Provides no ideas or inappropriate ideas for redesigning learning goals, instruction, and assessment in high school diverse settings.

27

high school diverse settings.

school diverse settings.

Implications for Professional Development (CEC 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10).

Presents a small number of professional learning goals that clearly emerge from the insights and experiences described in this section. Describes specific steps to meet these objectives in high school diverse settings.

Presents professional learning goals that are not strongly related to the insights and experiences described in this section and/or provides a vague plan for meeting the goals in high school diverse settings.

Provides no professional learning goals or goals that are not related to the insights and experiences described in this section in high school diverse settings.


The UWS is completed during the student teaching experience. Two professors, including a university supervisor, review the Work Samples and rate them by using a 3-level scale which consists of “needs improvement,” “developing competence,” and “competent.” During the 2007-2008 semesters, the Special Education candidate received a rating of “competent” in the areas of contextual factors, instructional objectives, assessment plan, design for instruction, instructional decision-maker, analysis of student learning, and reflection and self-evaluation. Assessment 5 must provide data on the impact that candidates have on student learning. Thus, one rating indicator of “analysis of student learning” that offers additional evidence in this area has been highlighted. The rating indicator is “evidence of impact on student learning.” This criterion shows 100% of the candidates had a positive impact on student learning.

Key Assessment # 5Summative Assessment

Unit Work Sample RubricSpecial Education

Section 1: TWS Standard: The teacher uses information about the learning/teaching context and student individual differences to set learning goals, plan instruction and assess learning.

Effective Performer =EP; Reflective Decision-RD and Humanistic Practitioner=HPASSESSMENT #5

SOUTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITYCLINICAL EXPERIENCES, EVALUATION & CERTIFICATION

UNIT WORK SAMPLE RUBRIC ASSESSMENT #5

Student Teacher Name___________________ __ Date of Review

28

School

Grade Level(s)/Subject area(s)_ ____________________ Academic Year Spring 08

Dates of unit From__________ to __________ Numbers of Lesson in Unit

University Supervisor George L, Johnson, Jr. Ph.D. Cooperating Teacher Frances Waddell

UWS SECTION I: Unit Topic or Title : Romeo and Juliet

1.C The student teacher identifies and sequences instructional units in a manner that facilitates the accomplishment of the long-range goals.

In this context, an instructional unit is a set of integrated lessons that is designed to accomplish learning objectives related to a curricular theme, an area of knowledge, or a general skill or process. Consistent with relevant federal, state, and local curriculum and/or academic standards, the teacher’s instructional units provide for appropriate coverage of the key themes, concepts, skills, and standards related to the subject area(s) and are designed to expose students to a variety of intellectual, social, and cultural perspectives. The sequence of the teacher’s units (as presented through timelines, curriculum maps, planning and pacing guides, and so forth) follows a logical progression, with an appropriate amount of time allocated to each instructional unit. CEC, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10

Judgment : The Information: x Met Met with Weakness Not Met

Comments:The teachers’ instructional units provided for appropriate coverage of the key themes, concepts, skills, and standards related to the subject area(s) and were designed to expose students to a variety of intellectual, social, and cultural perspectives. The sequence of the teacher’s units (as presented through timelines, curriculum maps, planning and pacing guides, and so forth) followed a logical progression, with an appropriate amount of time allocated to each instructional unit.

2 out of 2 met standard

UWS SECTION II: CONTEXTUAL FACTORS

29

1.A The student teacher obtains student information, analyzes this information to determine the learning needs of all students, and uses this information to guide instructional planning.

The student teacher began the long-range planning process by gaining a thorough understanding of students’ prior achievement levels, learning styles and needs, cultural and socioeconomic backgrounds, and individual interests. The student teachers gathered this information from a variety of sources, including student records (e.g., permanent records, individualized education programs) and individuals such as other teachers, special-area professionals, administrators, service providers, parents, and the students themselves. From this information, the teachers identified the factors that were likely to impact student learning. The student teachers then used this information to develop appropriate plans for meeting the diverse needs of their students. CEC 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 8, 9, 10

Judgment : The Information: xMet Met with Weakness Not Met

Comments:

The student teachers began their long-range planning process by gaining a thorough understanding of students’ prior achievement levels, learning styles and needs, cultural and socioeconomic backgrounds, and individual interests. They gathered this information from a variety of sources, including student records (e.g., permanent records, individualized education programs) and individuals such as other teachers, special-area professionals, administrators, service providers, parents, and the students themselves. From this information, the teachers identified the factors that were likely to impact student learning. The teachers used this information to develop appropriate plans for meeting the diverse needs of their students.


UWS SECTION III: PART A: Describe the unit objectives and their correlated standards or expectations.

2.A The teacher develops unit objectives that facilitate student achievement of appropriate academic standards and long-range learning and developmental goals.

The student teachers’ objectives defined what the students should know (i.e., the factual, conceptual, procedural, and/or meta-cognitive knowledge) and be able to do (e.g., the cognitive processes—remembering, understanding, applying, analyzing, evaluating, and/or creating) upon completing the unit. The student teachers’ objectives were student-oriented, explicit, and assessable statements of intended learning outcomes. There was a clear connection between the unit objectives and grade-level academic standards (or, for

30

preschool children or students with severe disabilities, between the unit objectives and appropriate developmental and/or functional expectations). The unit objectives were consistent with the long-range goals, assessment results from previous instructional units, state and local curriculum guidelines, individualized education programs (IEPs), and the needs and interests of the students. The unit objectives were logically linked to previous and future learning objectives. CEC 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9,


Comments:

The student teachers’ objectives did not define what the students should have known (i.e., the factual, conceptual, procedural, and/or meta-cognitive knowledge) or tell what they would be able to do (e.g., the cognitive processes—remembering, understanding, applying, analyzing, evaluating, and/or creating) upon completing the unit. The student teachers; objectives were student-oriented, explicit, and assessable statements of intended learning outcomes. There was a clear connection between the unit objectives and grade-level academic standards. The unit objectives were consistent with the long-range goals, assessment results from previous instructional units, state and local curriculum guidelines, individualized education programs (IEPs), and the needs and interests of the students. The unit objectives were logically linked to previous and future learning objectives.

2 out of 2 met standards

UWS SECTION III: PART B: Describe and/or attaches the assessments for each unit objective. Include descriptions of any necessary accommodations. For each assessment, include the evaluation criteria (i.e., describe and or attach appropriate scoring rubics, observation checklist, rating scales, item weights, and the like. Note: Attachments must be clearly labels to indicate their relationship to the elements in the table.

3.A The teacher develops/selects and administers a variety of appropriate assessments.

The assessments used by the teachers were technically sound indicators of students’ progress and achievement in terms of the unit objectives, the grade-level (or individually determined) academic standards, and the student achievement goals. The assessments aligned with the learning objectives and the instruction in terms of the type(s) of knowledge (i.e., factual, conceptual, procedural, and/or meta-cognitive) and the cognitive processes (i.e., remembering, understanding, applying, analyzing, evaluating, and/or creating). The teachers were not overly reliant on commercially produced assessments, but when they used them, they were careful to ensure that any necessary modifications were made. Assessment materials were free of content errors, and all assessments included verbal and/or written directions, models, and/or prompts that clearly defined what the students were expected to do. The assessments were appropriate for the ability and developmental levels of the students in the class. The teachers provided appropriate

31

accommodations for individual students who required them in order to participate in assessments. CEC 1, 8, 10


Comments:

The assessments used by the teacher were sound indicators of students’ progress and achievement in terms of the unit objectives. The assessments aligned with the learning objectives and standards, while the instructions, and were reflective of the type(s) of knowledge (i.e., factual, conceptual, procedural, and/or meta cognitive) and the cognitive processes (i.e., remembering, understanding, applying, analyzing, evaluating, and/or creating)


3.C The teacher uses assessment data to assign grades (or other indicators) that accurately reflect student progress and achievement.

The teachers made decisions about student performance, progress, and achievement on the basis of explicit expectations that clearly aligned with the learning objectives and achievement goals, the assessments, and the students’ level of ability. The teachers may have presented his or her evaluation criteria in the form of scoring rubrics, vignettes, grading standards, answer keys, rating scales, and the like. Assessments were weighted on the basis of the relative importance of each in determining overall progress and achievement. The teachers maintained accurate, current, well-organized, and confidential records of assessment results. The teachers used available information technology to store and assist with the analysis of student data. CEC 2, 3, 4, 7, 8


Comments:

The teachers made decisions about student performance, progress, and achievement on the basis of explicit expectations that somewhat aligned with the learning objectives and achievement goals, the assessments, and the students’ level of ability. The teachers presented their evaluation criteria in the form of scoring rubrics, and grading standards. Assessments were appropriately weighted on the basis of the relative importance of each in determining overall progress and achievement. The teachers maintained accurate, current, well-organized, and confidential records of assessment results. The teachers used available information technology to store and assist with the analysis of student data.


32

UWS SECTION III: PART C: After administering the pre-assessment(s), analyze student performance relative to the unit objectives. Attach one or more clearly labeled tables, graphs, or charts that depict the results of the pre-assessment(s) in a format that allows you to find patterns of student performance relative to each objective. Summarize the results of the pre-assessment(s) and describe the implications of these results on instruction.

3.B At appropriate intervals, the teacher gathers and accurately analyzes student performance data and uses this information to guide instructional planning.

The teacher routinely obtains student baseline data, analyzes the data to determine student learning needs, and uses this information to develop appropriate instructional plans. At appropriate intervals throughout instruction, the teacher analyzes student performance on informal assessments (e.g., individual and group performance tasks, quizzes, assignments) and formal assessments (e.g., tests, projects, portfolios, research papers, performances) to determine the extent to which both individual students and groups of students are progressing toward accomplishing the learning objectives. On the basis of these analyses, the teacher determines the impact of instruction on student learning and makes appropriate decisions about the need to modify his or her instructional plans. CEC 2, 3, 4, 7, 8


Comments:


UWS SECTION III, PART D: Describe the key instructional activities, strategies, materials, and resources (including instructional technology), and indicate the unit objectives (numbered according to the order in which they are listed in UWS Section III, Part A) that are addressed.

2.B The teacher develops instructional plans that include content, strategies, materials, and resources that are appropriate for the particular students.

The content of the teacher’s instructional plans is drawn from multiple sources that are accurate and current and is applicable to the students’ grade-level academic standards, instructional needs, ability and developmental levels, and interests. The sources of the content expose students to a variety of intellectual, social, and cultural perspectives as appropriate. The teacher selects a variety of instructional strategies and materials in order to present content in formats that accommodate learning differences and that translate into real-life contexts for the students. Instructional technology is included as appropriate. The instructional strategies are logically sequenced and include sufficient opportunities for

33

initial learning, application and practice, and review. The strategies lead the students to increasingly higher levels of thinking and problem solving. They promote active student engagement during both independent and collaborative learning tasks, and they provide opportunities for the teacher and students to vary their roles in the instructional process (e.g., instructor, facilitator, coach, audience). CEC 2, 3, 4, 5, 7


Comments:


UWS SECTION IV: ANALYSIS OF STUDENT LEARNINGOnce you have completed the unit, analyze all of your assessments and determine your students’ progress relative to the unit objectives. Attach clearly labeled tables, graphs, or charts that depict student performance for the entire class, for one selected subgroups, and for at least two individual students. For each visual representation, provide a descriptive narrative that summarizes your analysis of student progress and achievement. Finally, explain the ways in which you have assigned student grades (or other indicators of student performance), and include a description of the ways in which these results have been recorded as well as how and to whom they have been reported.


The teacher routinely obtains student baseline data, analyzes the data to determine student learning needs, and uses this information to develop appropriate instructional plans. At appropriate intervals throughout instruction, the teacher analyzes student performance on informal assessments (e.g., individual and group performance tasks, quizzes, assignments) and formal assessments (e.g., tests, projects, portfolios, research papers, performances) to determine the extent to which both individual students and groups of students are progressing toward accomplishing the learning objectives. On the basis of these analyses, the teacher determines the impact of instruction on student learning and makes appropriate decisions about the need to modify his or her instructional plans. CEC 2, 3, 4, 7, 8

Judgment : The Information: xMet x Met with Weakness Not Met

Comments:

1 met standard 1 met standard with weakness

34

3.C The teacher uses assessment data to assign grades (or other indicators) that accurately reflect student progress and achievement.

The teacher makes decisions about student performance, progress, and achievement on the basis of explicit expectations that clearly align with the learning objectives and achievement goals, the assessments, and the students’ level of ability. The teacher may present his or her evaluation criteria in the form of scoring rubrics, vignettes, grading standards, answer keys, rating scales, and the like. Assessments are appropriately weighted on the basis of the relative importance of each in determining overall progress and achievement. The teacher maintains accurate, current, well-organized, and confidential records of assessment results. The teacher uses available information technology to store and assist with the analysis of student data. CEC 8


Comments:

2out of 2 met standard

UWS SECTION V: REFLECTION AND ASSESSMENTReflect on and describe the relationship between your students’ progress and achievement and your teaching performance. If you were o teach this unit again to the same group of students, what, if anything, would you do differently, and why?


The teacher routinely obtains student baseline data, analyzes the data to determine student learning needs, and uses this information to develop appropriate instructional plans. At appropriate intervals throughout instruction, the teacher analyzes student performance on informal assessments (e.g., individual and group performance tasks, quizzes, assignments) and formal assessments (e.g., tests, projects, portfolios, research papers, performances) to determine the extent to which both individual students and groups of students are progressing toward accomplishing the learning objectives. On the basis of these analyses, the teacher determines the impact of instruction on student learning and makes appropriate decisions about the need to modify his or her instructional plans. CEC 8

Judgment : The Information: xMet x Met with Weakness Not Met

Comments:

35

1 met standard1 met standard with weakness

2.C The teacher routinely uses student performance data to guide short-range planning of instruction.

The teacher develops lesson and unit plans on the basis of accurate conclusions that he or she has drawn from analyses of the particular students’ prior performance (i.e., their behavior, progress, and achievement). CEC 2, 3, 4, 7, 8, 9


Comments:


4. Interpretation of how Data Provides Evidence that the CEC Standards were met

On item 3.B, “At appropriate intervals, the teacher gathers and accurately analyzes student performance data and uses this information to guide instructional planning,” the candidate received a 1 out of 1 Met Rating. This indicates that CEC Standards 7 and 8 demonstrated more assistance from the College Supervisor and the Office of Clinical Experiences. After additional guidance, modeling and experiences were provided the candidate received a “Met Rating” from both observers. On All other items and according to the data, the candidate consistently met the established criteria in the UWS. Thus, we believe the candidate have the ability to assess students, plan instruction based on assessment results, evaluate students following instruction, and present the data in a comprehensible manner. Additionally, based on the data, the CEC Standards were met inclusively.

36

ASSESSMENT #6 – PORTFOLIO

1. Description of AssessmentA portfolio is a compilation of works, records, and accomplishments that teacher candidates prepare for a specific purpose to demonstrate their learning, performances, and contribution.

The Special Education Teacher Candidate completed a portfolio for the Spring 2008 Semester. The portfolio contained the following artifacts: purpose, Philosophy Statement, Professional Growth Testimony, Resume, Degree Audit, Praxis Scores, Program of Study, INTASC Principles, ADEPT Standards, Special Education Standards, Application Standards, ADEPT Performance dimension 1 – 10 documentations.


DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

SOUTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY CEC PORTFOLIO EVALUATION

Undergraduate - (Stage III – ED 430) Candidate

Candidate _______________________________ School ________________________________Professor of ED 430 __________________________ Field Supervisor__________________________Semester ___________________________________ Date __________________________________

Evaluation Criteria Competent DevelopingCompetence

NeedsImprovement

Score

3 2 1Table of Contents, Purpose, Philosophy, and Personal Data (including a resume, test scores, and curriculum ledger) (EP)

The candidate has clearly included a table of contents and purpose as well as his/her philosophy and personal data.

Most of the categories/artifacts are included in the table of contents. The purpose, philosophy and personal data are somewhat sketchy.

Most of the categories/artifacts are not included in the table of contents. The purpose, philosophy and personal data are quite sketchy.

Selection of Artifacts that Address the Outcomes Established by the Department of Education (DOE) -- Effective Performer (EP), Reflective Decision Maker

All artifacts are clearly related to the Outcomes established by the DOE.

Most artifacts are related to the Outcomes established by the DOE.

Most artifacts are not related to the Outcomes.

37

(RM) and Humanistic Practitioner (HP)Selection of Artifacts that Address the CEC 1-10, INTASC, EEDA and ADEPT Standards (EP)

All artifacts are clearly related to the CEC, INTASC, and ADEPT Standards.

Most artifacts are related to the CEC, INTASC, and ADEPT Standards.

Most artifacts are not related to state and national standards.

A Rationale Attached to Artifacts that Relates to the CEC 4, INTASC, EEDA or ADEPT Standards (EP)

Presents a strong rationale for artifacts that clearly relates to a national or state standard.

Presents a rationale for some artifacts that partially relates to national or state standards.

A rationale is not included for most of the artifacts.

Knowledge of Subject Matter (EP)CEC 4; INTASC 1, 2, 5 & 6; EEDA; APS 6

The artifacts clearly demonstrate that the candidate has an understanding of the subject matter.

The candidate has some understanding of the subject matter.

The candidate’s knowledge of subject matter is beginning to develop.

Long- and Short-range Planning Related to the South Carolina Curriculum Standards (EP)CEC 7; INTASC 7; EEDA; APSs 1 & 2

Long- and short-range planning is clearly related to the SC Curriculum Standards.

Most long- and short-range planning is related to the SC Curriculum Standards.

Most planning is not related to the SC Curriculum Standards.

Lesson Plans (EP)CEC 7; INTASC 7; EEDA; APS 2

The candidate designed a variety of well-organized activities that clearly support the objective(s) of each lesson.

Most of the activities follow an organized sequence, but do not always support the objective(s).

Most of the activities do not follow an organized sequence or support the objective(s).

Unit Work Sample (EP)CEC 9; INTASC 8; EEDA; APS 3

The candidate designed a Unit Work Sample that includes all seven teaching processes.

Some of the teaching processes were not included and/or the quality is poor.

Many of the teaching processes were not included and/or the quality is poor.

Assessment Strategies(EP) CEC 8; INTASC 8; EEDA; APS 3

The candidate uses a variety of appropriate assessment strategies to monitor student progress.

Most of the lessons include some type of assessment.

Most of the lessons do not include strategies to assess student progress.

Use of Technology (EP)CEC 7; INTASC 6; EEDA; APS 9

Artifacts show sufficient integration of technology in lessons.

Artifacts show the use of technology in most lessons.

Artifacts show some use of technology.

Use of Content and Prior Knowledge, Experiences, and Feedback (RM) (HP)CEC 1; INTASC 3, 4, 5, 6 & 7; APSs 7 & 8

The activities clearly reflect a strong relationship between new content and children’s prior knowledge, experiences and feedback.

Most of the activities show that children’s prior knowledge, experiences and feedback were considered.

Most of the activities do not reflect the use of children’s prior knowledge, experiences and feedback.

Awareness of Culture, Interests, and Abilities of Children (RM) (HP)CEC 3; INTASC 7 & 10; APSs 1, 2, 4 & 8

The lessons and activities clearly reflect the candidate’s awareness of children’s cultural heritage, interests, and abilities.

Most of the lessons and activities reflect the candidate’s understanding of different cultures, interests, and abilities.

Most of the lessons and activities do not reflect an understanding of different cultures, interests, and abilities.

Awareness of Different Learning Styles (RM) (HP)CEC 3; INTASC 2, 3 & 7; EEDA; APS 1 & 3

The artifacts clearly reflect planning and assessing with consideration for different learning styles.

Most of the artifacts reflect the consideration of different learning styles.

Most of the artifacts do not reflect an understanding of different learning styles.

Developmental Learning for Disabled Students (EP)CEC 2; INTASC 2; EEDA; APSs 1, 2 & 5

All artifacts designed for or completed by pre-k – 12th grade students during Pre-STEP and student teaching experiences are appropriate and reflect a sound understanding of developmental characteristics of elementary students.

Most of the artifacts for pre-k – 12th grade students are developmentally appropriate.

Most of the artifacts for pre-k – 12th grade students are developmentally inappropriate.

Involving Families in The artifacts clearly reflect the There is some evidence of the There is little or no

38

Children’s Development and Learning (RM) (HP)CEC 10; INTASC 3, 7 & 10; EEDA; APSs 1 & 10

candidate’s understanding of the importance of involving families in children’s development and learning.

importance of involving families.

evidence of the importance of involving families.

Reflections (RM)CEC 1; INTASC 9; EEDA; APS 10

All reflections illustrate the ability to effectively critique work and identify areas for improvement.

Most of the reflections illustrate the ability to effectively critique work and identify areas for improvement.

Most reflections do not illustrate the ability to effectively critique work or identify areas for improvement.

Professional Growth and Development (RM)CEC 9; INTASC 9; EEDA; APS 10

The artifacts clearly reflect the candidate’s understanding of the importance of engaging in continual learning and improvement.

There is some evidence of the importance of engaging in continual learning.

There is little or no evidence of engaging in continual learning.

Well Organized (EP); CEC 9; INTASC 10; EEDA; APS 10

Everything is easily found. Some organization, but artifacts are not easily found.

Poorly organized

Work Samples from Pre-k - 12th Grade Students (EP) (RM) (HP); CEC 1; INTASC 3, 4, 5, 6 & 7; EEDA; APSs 5 & 6

A variety of artifacts are included.

More than one type of artifact Only one type of artifact

Total ________ Evaluation Scale:Competent: 40-48Developing Competence: 31-39 Needs Improvement: 0-30

___________________________ ___________________________ ____________________________University Supervisor Cooperating Teacher Student Teacher


During the student teaching process, a cooperating teacher and university supervisor rate each candidate’s portfolio. A three-level rating criteria is used which consist of “needs improvement,” “developing competence,” and “competent.” Ratings of “developing competence” and “competent” are necessary for successful performance. The evaluation criteria are aligned with the CEC Standards. According to the 2007-2008 data, the Special Education candidate received a rating of “competent.”

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

SOUTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY CEC PORTFOLIO EVALUATION

Undergraduate - (Stage III – ED 430) Candidate

Candidate _____________________ School _______________________Professor of ED 430 _Dr. Janice Owens Field Supervisor_Dr. George JohnsonSemester __Spring 2008 Date _April 30, 2008

39

Evaluation Criteria Competent DevelopingCompetence

NeedsImprovement

Score

3 2 1Table of Contents, Purpose, Philosophy, and Personal Data (including a resume, test scores, and curriculum ledger) (EP)

The candidate has clearly included a table of contents and purpose as well as his/her philosophy and personal data.

Most of the categories/artifacts are included in the table of contents. The purpose, philosophy and personal data are somewhat sketchy.

Most of the categories/artifacts are not included in the table of contents. The purpose, philosophy and personal data are quite sketchy.

3 3

Selection of Artifacts that Address the Outcomes Established by the Department of Education (DOE) -- Effective Performer (EP), Reflective Decision Maker (RM) and Humanistic Practitioner (HP)

All artifacts are clearly related to the Outcomes established by the DOE.

Most artifacts are related to the Outcomes established by the DOE.

Most artifacts are not related to the Outcomes.

3 3

Selection of Artifacts that Address the CEC, INTASC, EEDA and ADEPT Standards (EP)

All artifacts are clearly related to the CEC, INTASC, and ADEPT Standards.

Most artifacts are related to the CEC, INTASC, and ADEPT Standards.

Most artifacts are not related to state and national standards.

3 3

A Rationale Attached to Artifacts that Relates to the CEC 4, INTASC, EEDA or ADEPT Standards (EP)

Presents a strong rationale for artifacts that clearly relates to a national or state standard.

Presents a rationale for some artifacts that partially relates to national or state standards.

A rationale is not included for most of the artifacts.

2.5 2

Knowledge of Subject Matter (EP)CEC 4; INTASC 1, 2, 5 & 6; EEDA; APS 6

The artifacts clearly demonstrate that the candidate has an understanding of the subject matter.

The candidate has some understanding of the subject matter.

The candidate’s knowledge of subject matter is beginning to develop.

3 3

Long- and Short-range Planning Related to the South Carolina Curriculum Standards (EP)CEC 7; INTASC 7; EEDA; APSs 1 & 2

Long- and short-range planning is clearly related to the SC Curriculum Standards.

Most long- and short-range planning is related to the SC Curriculum Standards.

Most planning is not related to the SC Curriculum Standards.

3 3

Lesson Plans (EP)CEC 7; INTASC 7; EEDA; APS 2

The candidate designed a variety of well-organized activities that clearly support the objective(s) of each lesson.

Most of the activities follow an organized sequence, but do not always support the objective(s).

Most of the activities do not follow an organized sequence or support the objective(s).

3 3

Unit Work Sample (EP)CEC 9; INTASC 8; EEDA; APS 3

The candidate designed a Unit Work Sample that includes all seven teaching processes.

Some of the teaching processes were not included and/or the quality is poor.

Many of the teaching processes were not included and/or the quality is poor.

3 3

Assessment Strategies(EP) CEC 8; INTASC 8; EEDA; APS 3

The candidate uses a variety of appropriate assessment strategies to monitor student progress.

Most of the lessons include some type of assessment.

Most of the lessons do not include strategies to assess student progress.

23

Use of Technology (EP)CEC 7; INTASC 6; EEDA; APS 9

Artifacts show sufficient integration of technology in lessons.

Artifacts show the use of technology in most lessons.

Artifacts show some use of technology. 2 1

Use of Content and Prior Knowledge, Experiences, and Feedback (RM) (HP)CEC 1; INTASC 3, 4, 5, 6 & 7; APSs 7 & 8

The activities clearly reflect a strong relationship between new content and children’s prior knowledge, experiences and feedback.

Most of the activities show that children’s prior knowledge, experiences and feedback were considered.

Most of the activities do not reflect the use of children’s prior knowledge, experiences and feedback.

3

2

40

Awareness of Culture, Interests, and Abilities of Children (RM) (HP)CEC 3; INTASC 7 & 10; APSs 1, 2, 4 & 8

The lessons and activities clearly reflect the candidate’s awareness of children’s cultural heritage, interests, and abilities.

Most of the lessons and activities reflect the candidate’s understanding of different cultures, interests, and abilities.

Most of the lessons and activities do not reflect an understanding of different cultures, interests, and abilities.

3 3

Awareness of Different Learning Styles (RM) (HP)CEC 3; INTASC 2, 3 & 7; EEDA; APS 1 & 3

The artifacts clearly reflect planning and assessing with consideration for different learning styles.

Most of the artifacts reflect the consideration of different learning styles.

Most of the artifacts do not reflect an understanding of different learning styles.

2.5

3

Developmental Learning for Disabled Students (EP)CEC 2; INTASC 2; EEDA; APSs 1, 2 & 5

All artifacts designed for or completed by pre-k – 12th grade students during Pre-STEP and student teaching experiences are appropriate and reflect a sound understanding of developmental characteristics of elementary students.

Most of the artifacts for pre-k – 12th grade students are developmentally appropriate.

Most of the artifacts for pre-k – 12th grade students are developmentally inappropriate.

3 3

Involving Families in Children’s Development and Learning (RM) (HP)CEC 10; INTASC 3, 7 & 10; EEDA; APSs 1 & 10

The artifacts clearly reflect the candidate’s understanding of the importance of involving families in children’s development and learning.

There is some evidence of the importance of involving families.

There is little or no evidence of the importance of involving families.

3

3

Reflections (RM)CEC 1; INTASC 9; EEDA; APS 10

All reflections illustrate the ability to effectively critique work and identify areas for improvement.

Most of the reflections illustrate the ability to effectively critique work and identify areas for improvement.

Most reflections do not illustrate the ability to effectively critique work or identify areas for improvement.

1 1

Professional Growth and Development (RM)CEC 9; INTASC 9; EEDA; APS 10

The artifacts clearly reflect the candidate’s understanding of the importance of engaging in continual learning and improvement.

There is some evidence of the importance of engaging in continual learning.

There is little or no evidence of engaging in continual learning. 2

2

Well Organized (EP); CEC 9; INTASC 10; EEDA; APS 10

Everything is easily found. Some organization, but artifacts are not easily found.

Poorly organized 2 3

Work Samples from Pre-k - 12th Grade Students (EP) (RM) (HP); CEC 1; INTASC 3, 4, 5, 6 & 7; EEDA; APSs 5 & 6

A variety of artifacts are included.

More than one type of artifact

Only one type of artifact3

3

Average2.68 2.63

Evaluation Scale:Competent: 2.1-3.0 Developing Competence: 1.1-2.0 Needs Improvement: 0.0-1.0

___________________________ ___________________________ ____________________________


41

During the period highlighted by the data, the candidates received an average rating of 2.65 indicating “competent.” Based on the alignment of the evaluation criteria for the portfolio with the CEC Standards, all of the standards were met.

ASSESSMENT 7 – DISPOSITION SURVEY

1.Description of Assessment

The Dispositional survey Instrument monitors a candidate’s teacher dispositions and is linked to the Department of Teacher Education Special Education Program outcomes and CEC Standards (1-9). The specific items listed to CEC Standards appear on the Disposition Survey. A goal of the instrument is to create a discussion about and guidance on appropriate teacher dispositions for the pre-clinical and clinical teacher candidates. The candidate, supervising teacher and the college supervisor complete the form together and the completed form should be included in the teacher candidate’s portfolio.

2. Alignment with CEC Standards (See rubric on the following page)

42

SOUTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITYSPECIAL EDUCATION CANDIDATE DISPOSITION SURVEY

ASSESSMENT #7

Evaluated by: Candidate _______________________ Self _________________ School _______________________Evaluated by: Advisor: ________________________ Evaluated by: Principal _________________________________________Evaluated by: Cooperating Teacher ______________ Evaluated by: University Supervisor _______ Semester ___________ Date _________

CEC STANDARDS DISPOSITION DEVELOPING COMEPETENCE

(1)

NEEDS IMPROVEMENT (2)

COMPETENCE (3)

CEC 4 and 7 1. Committed to presenting accurate content to students through instructional strategies and instructional planning.

Presents content that contains few errors and addresses some content standards.

Makes numerous errors in content. Presents inaccurate material that is not knowledge or standards based.

Lessons are knowledge based and address all standards for Pre K-12 grade levels. Subject matter content is accurate.

CEC 5, 6 and 7 2. Appreciates and plans for Pre K-12 grade level students that reflect diverse learning styles and varying abilities through learning environments and social interactions, language and instructional planning.

Presents lessons that consider several, but not all styles of learning, cognition, and exceptionalities.

Presents lessons that address one learning style. Exceptionalities are not considered.

Presents lessons that consider the learning styles and abilities of all Pre K-12 grade level students.

CEC 5 and 6 3. Realizes the importance of and practices effective communication though social Interactions.

Makes some errors in writing and speaking. Occasionally corrects students’ grammar.

Makes numerous grammatical errors in writing and speaking. Does not correct student’s grammatical errors.

Uses and requires students to use correct grammar in writing and speaking.

CEC 4 and 9 4. Assumes the responsibility to stay abreast of current research and best practices (including technology) in order to make a difference in entire lives of Pre K-12 grade level students through professional and ethical practice and instructional

Decisions made demonstrate little research and best practices. Technology is used occasionally.

No effort made to used best practice, research or technology in making decisions about Pre K-12 grade level students’ learning.

Decisions made are based on research, best practices and effective use of technology and other materials.

43

strategies.CEC 9 and 10 5. Exhibits a professional

demeanor including appearance, punctuality, and effective problem solving skills through professional and ethical practice.

Exhibits well groomed appearance, but is not always professionally dressed. Occasionally late in arriving and submitting assignments. Is sometimes unable to handle problems professionally.

Is unprofessional in appearance and grooming. Arrives and presents assignments late and/or incomplete. Does not demonstrate the ability to solve problems.

Exhibits well groomed professional appearance. Is prompt in arrival and presents assignments, reports, etc. in a timely fashion. Demonstrates effective problem solving skills.

CEC 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, 4.4, 4.5 and 4.6

6. Places importance on using reflection and feedback in making decisions about Pre K-12 grade level student learning.

Uses Pre K-12 grade level student data to plan instruction, but does not consider the effectiveness of instruction.

Does not consider student data, interests, or abilities in planning instruction. Does not analyze effectiveness of instruction.

Uses Pre K-12 grade level students’ data, interests, and abilities to make decision about content and delivery of instruction. Analyzes the effectiveness of instruction.

CEC 2.2, 7.3, 5.4 and 10.1

7. Values (use of self-evaluation and reflection in professional growth.

Progress noted in self-evaluation and professional growth.

Does not engage in self-evaluation to determine (effect his/her actions have on others. Shows no progress in professional growth.

Demonstrates continuous analysis of self evaluation and examination of the effect of actions on others, which results in improvements of decision making skills and growth as a professional.

CEC 6.4 and 8.5 8. Appreciates diverse cultures and customs of Pre K-12 grade level students.

Sometimes considers backgrounds and interests of the Pre K-12 grade level student in lessons.

Materials presented do not consider the Pre K-12 grade level students’ backgrounds and interests. Shows no interest in customs cultures of other people.

Always incorporates the Pre K-12 grade level students’ backgrounds and interests to enhance lessons. Models respect and accepts students’ customs and cultures.

CEC 4.4, 9.3 and 10.2 9. Committed to fostering positive interactions among Pre K-12 grade level students and families from diverse cultures.

Shows some concern about fostering positive interactions among Pre K-12 grade level students and families from diverse cultures.

Indifferent toward fostering positive interactions among Pre K-12 grade level students and families from diverse cultures.

Fosters a courteous and cooperative relationship among Pre K-12 grade level students and families from diverse cultures.

CEC 5.1, 5.2, 5.3, 5.4, 5.5, 5.6, 5.7, 5.8, 5.9 and 5.10

10. Holds belief that foster ethical practice.

Occasionally makes decisions, which go against the acceptable sense of right and wrong and a professional code of ethics.

Displays difficulty in determining right and wrong. Has no knowledge of a professional code of ethics.

Makes decisions based on an acceptable sense right and wrong. Abides by a professional code of ethics.

44


Data reported in Assessment Attachment (7) indicated that the 2 initial teacher education candidate demonstrated desirable dispositional qualities. For the 20 items linked to CEC Standards 100% of the candidates evidenced all of the dispositional outcomes linked to CEC Standards. For the remaining 1 item, 100% of the candidates demonstrated the qualities of this disposition. The data can be generalized to report that the Special Education candidate demonstrate positive dispositional outcomes.

SOUTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITYSPECIAL EDUCATION CANDIDATE DISPOSITION SURVEY

ASSESSMENT #7

Evaluated by: Candidate _______________________ Self _________________ School _The Special Center_Evaluated by: Advisor: Dr. George Johnson Evaluated by: Principal _______________________Evaluated by: Cooperating Teacher ______________ Evaluated by: University Supervisor _______ Semester Spring 2008 Date 04/30/08

N=2CEC STANDARDS DISPOSITION NEEDS IMPROVEMENT

(1)DEVELOPING COMPETENCE

(2)

COMPETENCE (3)

CEC 4 and 7 1. Committed to presenting accurate content to students through instructional strategies and instructional planning.

Makes numerous errors in content. Presents inaccurate material that is not knowledge or standards based.

Presents content that contains few errors and addresses some content standards.

Lessons are knowledge based and address all standards for Pre K-12 grade levels. Subject matter content is accurate.

CEC 5, 6 and 7 2. Appreciates and plans for Pre K-12 grade level students that reflect diverse learning styles and varying abilities through learning environments and social interactions, language and instructional planning.

Presents lessons that address one learning style. Exceptionalities are not considered

.Presents lessons that consider several, but not all styles of learning, cognition, and exceptionalities.

Presents lessons that consider the learning styles and abilities of all Pre K-12 grade level students.

45

CEC 5 and 6 3. Realizes the importance of and practices effective communication though social Interactions.

Makes numerous grammatical errors in writing and speaking. Does not correct student’s grammatical errors

.Makes some errors in writing and speaking. Occasionally corrects students’ grammar.

Uses and requires students to use correct grammar in writing and speaking.

CEC 4 and 9 4. Assumes the responsibility to stay abreast of current research and best practices (including technology) in order to make a difference in entire lives of Pre K-12 grade level students through professional and ethical practice and instructional strategies.

No effort made to use best practice, research or technology in making decisions about Pre K-12 grade level students’ learning.

Decisions made demonstrate little research and best practices. Technology is used occasionally.

Decisions made are based on research, best practices and effective use of technology and other materials.

CEC 9 and 10 5. Exhibits a professional demeanor including appearance, punctuality, and effective problem solving skills through professional and ethical practice.

Is unprofessional in appearance and grooming. Arrives and presents assignments late and/or incomplete. Does not demonstrate the ability to solve problems.

Exhibits well groomed appearance, but is not always professionally dressed. Occasionally late in arriving and submitting assignments. Is sometimes unable to handle problems professionally.

Exhibits well groomed professional appearance. Is prompt in arrival and presents assignments, reports, etc. in a timely fashion. Demonstrates effective problem solving skills.

CEC 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, 4.4, 4.5 and 4.6

6. Places importance on using reflection and feedback in making decisions about Pre K-12 grade level student learning.

Does not consider student data, interests, or abilities in planning instruction. Does not analyze effectiveness of instruction

Uses Pre K-12 grade level student data to plan instruction, but does not consider the effectiveness of instruction. .

Uses Pre K-12 grade level students’ data, interests, and abilities to make decision about content and delivery of instruction. Analyzes the effectiveness of instruction.

CEC 2.2, 7.3, 5.4 and 10.1

7. Values (use of self-evaluation and reflection in professional growth.

Does not engage in self-evaluation to determine (effect his/her actions have on others. Shows no progress in professional growth.

Progress noted in self-evaluation and professional growth.

Demonstrates continuous analysis of self evaluation and examination of the effect of actions on others, which results in improvements of decision making skills and growth as a professional.

CEC 6.4 and 8.5 8. Appreciates diverse cultures and customs of Pre K-12 grade level students.

Materials presented do not consider the Pre K-12 grade level students’ backgrounds and interests. Shows no interest in customs cultures of other people.

Sometimes considers backgrounds and interests of the Pre K-12 grade level student in lessons.

Always incorporates the Pre K-12 grade level students’ backgrounds and interests to enhance lessons. Models respect and accepts students’

46

customs and cultures. CEC 4.4, 9.3 and 10.2

9. Committed to fostering positive interactions among Pre K-12 grade level students and families from diverse cultures.

Indifferent toward fostering positive interactions among Pre K-12 grade level students and families from diverse cultures.

Shows some concern about fostering positive interactions among Pre K-12 grade level students and families from diverse cultures.

Fosters a courteous and cooperative relationship among Pre K-12 grade level students and families from diverse cultures.

CEC 5.1, 5.2, 5.3, 5.4, 5.5, 5.6, 5.7, 5.8, 5.9 and 5.10

10. Holds belief that foster ethical practice.

Displays difficulty in determining right and wrong. Has no knowledge of a professional code of ethics.

Occasionally makes decisions, which go against the acceptable sense of right and wrong and a professional code of ethics.

Makes decisions based on an acceptable sense right and wrong. Abides by a professional code of ethics.

Needs Improvement _____________________Developing Competence _________________

Competence ________X___________________Directions: Please check each item which describes the candidate’s level of performance. This survey is administered three times to the teacher education candidate and lire candidate uses this survey for self-evaluation 1. Self-Evaluation in Introduction ED: 199 2. Upon admittance to teacher Education Program Signature __ 3. Upon completion of Student Teaching Date _____12-13-2008________________


Dispositional survey data is reported for candidates’ enrolled in practicum and completing their program in Fall 2007 and Spring 2008. The 20 survey items are related to 7 CEC Standards (1-7). For 10 of the items, 100% of the candidates evidenced demonstration of all the qualities of the outcome.


Data reported in Assessment Attachment indicated that the initial teacher education candidate demonstrated desirable dispositional qualities. For the 10 items linked to CEC Standards 100% of the candidates evidenced all of the dispositional outcomes linked to CEC Standards.

47

4. How data provides evidences for “meeting standards”

Dispositional survey data is reported for candidates’ enrolled in practicum and completing their program in Spring 2007. The 10 survey items are related to the CEC Standards (1-10), the candidate evidenced demonstration of all the qualities of the outcome.

48


Key Assessment # 8: FOLLOW-UP SURVEY (Alumni)


A survey of recent graduates of the College of Humanities, Education and Social Sciences was conducted in the summer of 2007. The program completes this survey every three years. The survey was mailed to candidates who had graduated within three past 5 years. The return rate for the survey was moderate at 40%. The Special Education Program collects data on program completers. The alumni survey is used for this purpose. The survey consists of 20 items that focus on how well the Special Education Program prepares graduates to implement successful teaching. A 5-level Likert scale is used and contains the following ratings: poorly, moderately, adequately, very well, and exceptionally.

2. Alignment with CEC Standards are in the chart below. A. Please circle the appropriate response. Your gender: male female Your ethnicity: African- Caucasian Hispanic Native- Other American American What year did you graduate from South Carolina State University? _______________ From which program did you graduate? ____Undergraduate ____ MAT ____ MED Circle your highest degree. BS BA MAT MED ED.S. ED.D PH.D Are you employed? ___ Yes ___ No If yes, with whom? ____________________ (School or Agency)In what state are you employed? ___________________________________________ B. Please rate how well the Special Education Program prepared you to perform the following activities. Use the scale below: Poorly= 1 Moderately= 2 Adequately= 3 Very Well= 4 Exceptionally= 5

Unit Outcomes (Effective Performer --EP, Reflective Decision Maker –RDM &

The Special Education Program prepared me to:

49

Humanistic Practitioner, HP); CEC, INTASC and ADEPT StandardsEP; CEC 7; INTASC 2, 4; APSs 1, 2, & 5

1. Relate students’ development to planning and organizing educational activities.

1 2 3 4 5

EP; CEC 8; INTASC 8; APS 3

2. Use diagnostic test, observation, and student records to assess student learning needs.

1 2 3 4 5

EP; CEC 1-3;INTASC 7, APS 6

3. Identify causes of school or classroom misbehavior and employ techniques for correction.

1 2 3 4 5

EP; CEC 6; INTASC 1; APSs 1, 2, 5 & 6

4. Use effective oral and written communication skills. 1 2 3 4 5

EP; CEC 1-5; INTASC 1; APSs 1, 2, 5 & 6

5. Exhibit knowledge of the subject matter. 1 2 3 4 5

EP; CEC 7 & 8; INTASC 7; APSs 1 & 2

6. Demonstrate flexibility in adjusting plans to deal with unplanned events in the classroom.

1 2 3 4 5

EP &HP; CEC 5; INTASC 5, 6, 7 & 10; APS 4

7. Hold high but reasonable expectation for students. 1 2 3 4 5

EP; CEC 5 & 6; INTASC 5; APS 9

8. Manage the school, classroom, and maximize instructional time.

1 2 3 4 5

EP; CEC7; INTASC 4; APS 5

9. Use critical thinking and problem solving skills. 1 2 3 4 5

HP; CEC 5, INTASC 3, 7 & 10; APSs 8 & 10

10. Express ideas in a logical and clear manner. 1 2 3 4 5

HP; CEC 2, 3, 4; INTASC 3, 7 & 10; APS 6

11. Value the commonalities and differences of students. 1 2 3 4 5

EP & HP; CEC 2, 3, & 4; INTASC 3, 7 & 10; APS 6

12. Provide content that promotes respect and acceptance of all cultures.

1 2 3 4 5


13. Stimulate students’ interests and value their ideas. 1 2 3 4 5

HP; CEC 5, 6, & 7; INTASC 3; APS 1

14. Work effectively with exceptional and diverse students. 1 2 3 4 5

HP; CEC 10; INTASC 5 & 10; APSs8 & 10

15. Develop and maintain good relations with parents of students. 1 2 3 4 5


16. Develop and maintain good relations with the school and district staff.

1 2 3 4 5

EP; CEC 5, 5 & 7; INTASC 4; APS 5

17. Use technology in the delivery of instruction. 1 2 3 4 5


18. Participate as an active member of professional organizations. 1 2 3 4 5

EP; CEC 8, & 9; INTASC 9; APS 10

19. Keep abreast of best practices. 1 2 3 4 5

RDM; CEC 1- 10; INTASC 9; APS 10

20. Make decisions based on reflection and best practice. 1 2 3 4 5

COMMENTS:

SOUTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF EDUCATION HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES

50

FOLLOW-UP SURVEY ASSESSMENT #8

N=37 A. Please circle the appropriate response:

GenderFemale Male

33(89%) 4(11%)African-

AmericanCaucasian Hispanic Native

AmericanOther

35(95%) 2(5%)Year Complete Bachelor’s Degree

2007 2006 2005 20044(11%) 12(32%) 16(43%) 5(14%)

Are You Employed?Yes No

37 (100%)B. How well did the Counselor Education Program prepare you to perform the following activities?

Exceptional5

Very Good4

Adequately3

Moderately2

Poorly1

1. Relate students’ development to planning and organizing educational activities.33(89%) 4(11%) 0 0 0

2. Use diagnostic test, observation, and student records to assess student learning. 30(81%) 7(19%) 0 0 0

3. Identify causes of school or classroom misbehavior and employ techniques for correction.

25(68%) 12(32%) 0 0 04. Use effective oral and written communication skills.

29(78%) 8(22%) 0 0 05. Exhibit knowledge of the subject matter.

33(89%) 3(8%) 0 0 06. Demonstrate flexibility in adjusting plans to deal with unplanned events in the classroom.

30(81%) 7(19%) 0 0 07. Hold high but reasonable expectation for students.

34(92%) 3(8%) 0 0 08. Manage the school, classroom, and maximize instructional time.

24(65%) 13(35%) 0 0 09. Use critical thinking and problem solving skills.

31(84%) 6(16%) 0 0 010. Express ideas in a logical and clear manner.

32(86%) 5(14%) 0 0 0

51

11. Value the commonalities and differences of students. 34(92%) 3(8%) 0 0 0

12. Provide content that promotes respect and acceptance of all cultures.34(92%) 3(8%) 0 0 0

13. Stimulate students’ interests and value their ideas.32(86%) 5(14%) 0 0 0

14. Work effectively with exceptional and diverse students.29(78%) 8(22%) 0 0 0

15. Develop and maintain good relations with parents of students.32(86%) 4(11%) 0 0 0

16. Develop and maintain good relations with the school and district staff. 29(78%) 8(22%) 0 0 0

17. Use special in the delivery of instruction.26(70%) 10(27%) 0 0 0

18. Participate as an active member of professional organizations.32(86%) 5(14%) 0 0 0

19. Keep abreast of best practices.36(97%) 1(2%) 0 0 0

20. Make decisions based on reflection and best practice.36(97%) 1(2%) 0 0 0

**Note: % of error is + 1%.

Open ended responses:

I enjoyed and was given all the tools necessary in becoming competent in my area of study. Best wishes to the Department.

After one year reflecting on the past year to improve the next year.

My overall experience at SCSU was great. I learned many things that will help me to become an effective teacher.

I am a second year teacher and I am thankful for the opportunities that were given to me as a collegian. The Education Dept. did a great job in preparing my fellow teachers and myself for the future as teachers.

I believe SCSU fully prepared me for my career in education; however I think that more classroom experience with students and teachers would truly benefit the candidates. (Prior to the student teaching experience) candidates should be encouraged to begin taking the required assessment within their freshman year. Again I am pleased with the training I received and encourage future educators to attend SCSU and gain future employment with Calhoun county public schools.

52

Summary For the items, 100% of the alumni provided a rating of “exceptional or very good” indicating their abilities to demonstrate the qualities of the outcomes. For example, the alumni indicated that in a variety of settings in the different places that they work, they are able to demonstrate at a competent level the following standards (a) responsible for learning the following content (CEC 1-7); (b) believes all children are capable of learning (CEC 4, 6, and 7); (c) established an environment of respect (CEC 1, 6, and 7); (d) demonstrate concern for diversity (CEC 7); (e) use diverse teaching strategies (CEC 7); (f) listen and promote discourse (CEC 4); (g) encourage participation in governance (CEC 4 and 7); (h) relates lessons to personal interest (CEC 6 and 7); use special (CEC 1-7); (i) incorporates community resources (CEC 5); (j) understands the value of assessment (CEC 1 and 7); (k) understands the expectations of professional behavior and the ethics of teaching (CEC 1 and 7); (l) solicits input and feedback (CEC 2, 3, and 4);(m) is enthusiastic about content (CEC 6); and evidences a commitment to scholarship (CEC 1, 4, 6, and 7).


According to the data from the follow-up survey, our alumni clearly believe they were prepared well by our Special Education Program. Additionally, based on the alignment of the 20 items with the CEC Standards, all standards were met.

53

Documents

SOUTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY COLLEGE · Web viewIn required methods courses 4 [Assessment of student teaching] Student Teaching Observation Report aligned with CEC standards. Candidates