Student Learning Assessment Program - EIU Sci TC.docx · Web viewHistorical Thinking assignment, 62.5% (n=8) received ratings of “meets” (2), “occasionally exceeds” (2), and

Laughlin-Schultz/SOS/1

STUDENT LEARNING ASSESSMENT PROGRAMSUMMARY FORM AY 2013-2014

Degree andProgram Name:

Submitted By:

Social Science Studies is an interdisciplinary major in which students choose one specialization area (GEG, PLS, PSY, or SOC) and take coursework in it as well as all the other areas and history. All majors graduate with licensure in social science for grades 9-12 and take a sequence of education courses that culminates with student teaching. Along with the History with Teacher Licensure degree, Social Science Studies is part of a broader Social Science Teaching program.

PART ONEWhat are the learning objectives?

How, where, and when are they assessed?

What are the expectations? What are the results? Committee/ person responsible? How are results shared?

1. Broad Content Knowledge in HistorySocial Science Studies majors will know and understand the standard content of U.S. and world civilizations. Specific content knowledge is mandated in the Illinois Core Standards for Social Science Teachers and broad thematic knowledge is indicated in the National Council for the Social Studies (NCSS) Ten Thematic Strands.

Scores on the History Common Core section of Content Area Tests Scores attained on the appropriate Illinois Certification Testing System (ICTS) Content Area Tests (CAT): 113 (GEG); 117 (PLS); 118 (PSY); and 121 (SOC/ANT). The CAT is typically taken the semester prior to student teaching, and each concentration includes the History Common Core.

A minimum of 80% of 2013-2014 test takers will receive a 240 or higher on the History Common Core section. All program completers must have achieved passing composite scores of 240 or higher on their CAT, but it is possible to pass the overall test but score below 240 in history.

ICTS CAT score results on the History CC were:Test 113- GEG (n=0)Test 117-PLS (n=3)1. 2262. 2153. 254Test 118-PSY (n=1)1. 235Test 121-SOC/ANT (n=1)1. 224

None of the test takers passed the History CC. See Appendix B for full data.

Test Score results are monitored by Associate Dean Doug Bower in CEPS, the History department advisor, and the Social Science Teaching Coordinator. Both the advisor and coordinator keep running spreadsheets that are updated each time the content test is given, and the Associate Dean produces reports of test data each October. Test results are shared with

B.A. in Social Science Studies

Please complete a separate worksheet for each academic program (major, minor) at each level (undergraduate, graduate) in your department. Worksheets are due to CASA this year by June 13, 2014. Worksheets should be sent electronically to [email protected] and should also be submitted to your college dean. For information about assessment or help with your assessment plans, visit the Assessment webpage at http://www.eiu.edu/~assess/ or contact Karla Sanders in CASA at 581-6056.

Bonnie Laughlin-Schultz

http://www.eiu.edu/~assess/

mailto:[email protected]


NCSS ten themes survey data on history-based themes. This data is gathered at two program points: during SOS 3400 and during student teaching.

Point 1. During SOS 3400 students complete a portfolio that included four lesson plans. These were reviewed by the Teacher Education Committee in the History department and assessed. Ratings are: “does not meet”; “occasionally meets”; “meets”; “occasionally exceeds”; and “exceeds.” See appendix B for description of the themes.

Point 2. Cooperating teachers of all 2013-2014 student teachers were surveyed over student teacher knowledge of each of the NCSS ten themes. The same survey instrument as in point 1 was used.

At point 1, a minimum of 75% of portfolio submissions will receive ratings of “meets,” “occasionally exceeds,” or “exceeds” (3, 4, or 5) on the NCSS ten themes evaluation form. (The n does not always equal thetotal number, as reviewers can mark N/A for history-related themes. Data is gathered anonymously it represents both History with Teacher Licensure and Social Science Studies majors.)

At point 2, a minimum of 90% of program completers will receive ratings of “meets,” “occasionally exceeds,” or “exceeds” (3, 4, or 5) on the NCSS ten themes evaluation form. (The n does not always equal thetotal number, as reviewers can mark N/A for history-related themes. Data is gathered anonymously it

Theme 2: 100% (n=12) earned ratings of 3, 4, or 5.Theme 8: 100% (n=12) earned ratings of 3, 4, or 5.Theme 9: 91.6% (n=12) earned ratings of 3, 4, or 5.

Theme 2: 100% (n=12) earned ratings of 3, 4, or 5.Theme 8: 100% (n=12) earned ratings of 3, 4, or 5.Theme 9: 91.6% (n=12) earned ratings of 3, 4, or 5.

the SOS Program Committee in meetings held once per semester.

The Social Science teaching coordinator gathers data for the NCSS ten themes survey at two program points and then shares data with the Social Science Studies program and curriculum committees in meetings held once per semester. Data is also shared with CEPS in preparation for accreditation by NCSS.

The Social Science teaching coordinator gathers data for the NCSS ten themes survey at two program points and then shares data with the Social Science Studies program and curriculum committees in meetings held once per semester. Data is also shared with CEPS


represents both History with Teacher Licensure and Social Science Studies majors.)

in preparation for accreditation by NCSS.

2. Specialist Content KnowledgeSocial Science Studies majors will demonstrate expert knowledge in their area of specialization within the social sciences. Social Science Studies majors are broadly prepared to teach all social studies, but they choose one area of specialization—geography, political science, psychology, or sociology-anthropology—in which they take more intensive coursework.

Scores on the concentration sections of Content Area Tests Scores attained on the appropriate Illinois Certification Testing System (ICTS) Content Area Tests (CAT): 113 (GEG); 117 (PLS); 118 (PSY); and 121 (SOC/ANT). The CAT is typically taken the semester prior to student teaching.

Student learning within their concentration is also assessed within the major departments outside of the interdisciplinary Social Science Studies program. For example, GEG concentrators are assessed for goals covered within assignments in GEG 1200G, GEG 3025, and GEG 3420.

A minimum of 80% of 2013-2014 test takers will receive a 240 or higher on the section(s) keyed to their concentration. All Social Science program completers must have achieved passing composite scores of 240 or higher on their CAT, but it is possible to pass the overall test but score below 240 in the concentration area(s). Included in the results are the total test score as well as the score for the concentration area(s).

Test 113- GEG (n=0 )Total World GEGN/ATest 117-PLS (n=3)Tot PS(3) US/IL govt(4)1. 245 241 2442. 235 206 2443. 251 264 194Test 118-PSY (n=1)Tot HumanDev(3) Personality(4)

1. 251 274 272Test 121-SOC/ANT (n=1)Total SOC(3) ANT(4)1. 248 265 244

Only 60.0% of test takers passed all areas of their concentration. See Appendix B for full data.

Test Score results are monitored by Associate Dean Doug Bower in CEPS, the History department undergraduate advisor, and by the Social Science Teaching Coordinator. Both the undergraduate advisor and social science teaching coordinator keep running spreadsheets that are updated each time the content test is given, and the Associate Dean produces reports of test data from the previous year each October. Test results are shared and discussed with the Social Science Studies Program Committee in meetings held once per semester.

3. Broad Content Knowledge in Social ScienceSocial Science Studies majors will know and understand the standard content of economics, geography, political

Scores on the Social Science Foundations section of Content Area Tests Scores attained on the appropriate Illinois Certification Testing System (ICTS) Content Area Tests (CAT): 113 (GEG); 117 (PLS); 118 (PSY); and 121

A minimum of 80% of 2013-2014 test takers will receive a 240 or higher on the Social Science Foundations section. All Social Science program completers must have achieved passing composite

Test 113- GEG (n=0)N/ATest 117-PLS (n=3)1. 2522. 2453. 266Test 118-PSY (n=1)1. 235

Test Score results are monitored by Associate Dean Doug Bower in CEPS, the History undergraduate advisor, and by the Social Science Teaching Coordinator. Both the


science, psychology, and sociology-anthropology as described in the Illinois Core Standards for Social Science Teachers and as indicated in the National Council for the Social Studies Ten Thematic Strands.

(SOC/ANT). The CAT is typically taken the semester prior to student teaching.

NCSS ten themes survey data on broad social science themes. This data is gathered at two program points: during SOS 3400 and during student teaching.

Point 1. During SOS 3400 students complete a portfolio that included four lesson plans. These were reviewed by the Teacher Education Committee in the History department and assessed. Ratings are: “does not meet”; “occasionally meets”; “meets”; “occasionally exceeds”; and “exceeds.” See appendix B for description of the themes and data.

Point 2. Cooperating teachers of all 2013-2014 student

scores (240 or higher) on their concentration’s CAT, but it is possible to pass the overall test but score below 240 in non-concentration areas.

At point 1, a minimum of 80% of portfolio submissions will receive ratings of “meets,” “occasionally exceeds,” or “exceeds” (3, 4, or 5) on the NCSS ten themes evaluation form. (The n does not always equal thetotal number, as reviewers can mark N/A. Data is gathered anonymously it represents both History with Teacher Licensure and Social Science Studies majors.)

At point 2, a minimum of 90% of program completers

Test 121-SOC/ANT (n=1)1. 251

80.0% of test takers passed the Social Science Foundations segment. See Appendix B for full data.

Theme 1: 100% (n=12) earned ratings of 3, 4, or 5.Theme 3: 90% (n=10) earned ratings of 3, 4, or 5.Theme 4: 100% (n=6) earned ratings of 3, 4, or 5.Theme 5: 100% (n=6) earned ratings of 3, 4, or 5.Theme 6: 91.6% (n=12) earned ratings of 3, 4, or 5.Theme 7: 100% (n=7) earned ratings of 3, 4, or 5.Theme 10: 90.9% (n=11) earned ratings of 3, 4, or 5.

Theme 1: 90.9% (n=12) earned ratings of 3, 4, or

advisor and coordinator keep spreadsheets that are updated each time the test is given, and the Associate Dean produces reports of test data each October. Test results are shared with the Social Science Studies Program Committee in meetings held once per semester.

The Social Science teaching coordinator gathers data for the NCSS ten themes survey at both program points and then shares data with the Social Science Studies program and curriculum committees in meetings held once per semester. Data is also shared with CEPS in preparation for accreditation by NCSS.


teachers were surveyed over student teacher knowledge of each of the NCSS ten themes. The same survey instrument as in point 1 was used.

will receive ratings of “meets,” “occasionally exceeds,” or “exceeds” (3, 4, or 5) on the NCSS ten themes evaluation form. . (The n does not always equal the total number, as reviewers can mark N/A. Data is gathered anonymously it represents both History with Teacher Licensure and Social Science Studies majors.)

5.Theme 3: 90% (n=10) earned ratings of 3, 4, or 5.Theme 4: 100% (n=6) earned ratings of 3, 4, or 5.Theme 5: 83.30% (n=9) earned ratings of 3, 4, or 5.Theme 6: 91.6% (n=12) earned ratings of 3, 4, or 5.Theme 7: 100% (n=7) earned ratings of 3, 4, or 5.Theme 10: 90.9% (n=11) earned ratings of 3, 4, or 5.

4. Effective Planning for Instruction & AssessmentSocial Science majors will effectively plan for instruction, developing objectives that are tied to appropriate learning goals and standards; designing appropriate instructional strategies and lessons to build content understanding and support learning needs of students; integrating attention to literacy into instruction; and planning how to assess student learning. (UG: Critical Thinking; Writing and Critical

Four lesson plans are submitted as part of Department Approval Portfolio, and they are rated on a variety of criteria by members of the History Department Teacher Education Committee. Each student is given a score between 0 and 10 by each of the three members of the History Department Teacher Education Committee, and the average of the scores will be reported here.

75% of students submitting lesson plans within the department assessment portfolio (DAP) will receive an average score of 8 or above, and at least 40% will earn scores of 9 or 10.

75% (n=4) of SOS students earned scores of 8 or higher, and 50% earned scores of 9 or 10.

The Teacher Education Committee for Social Science and History assesses the portfolios and communicates midterm conditional approval of all students applying for student teaching to CEPS and, specifically, to Associate Dean Doug Bower. All instructors of SOS 3400 are part of the Teacher Education Committee, and in assessing portfolio s/he/they discover areas in which students need to improve and adapt


Reading)

In departmental methods (SOS 3400) students are required to submit a unit plan to Livetext for the CEPS unit assessment, and SOS 3400 instructors rate the unit plans on a rubric developed by the Unit Assessment Committee in consultation with Associate Dean Doug Bower. Eleven criteria are then assessed using a five-point rubric; see appendix D for full data and criteria. (Data shown represents both HIS-TL and SOS majors.)

A minimum of 80% of submissions will receive ratings of “meets,” “occasionally exceeds,” or “exceeds” (3, 4, or 5) in all eleven criteria.

100% (n=4) of SOS submissions received ratings of “meets,” “occasionally exceeds,” or “exceeds” (3, 4, or 5) in all eleven criteria.

instruction accordingly.

SOS 3400 instructors complete the rubrics on Livetext, and data is used for both program and unit assessment. CEPS Associate Dean Doug Bower monitors and uses this data for unit assessment and accreditation, while the Social Science teaching coordinator monitors it for programmatic assessment, using data gathered to improve assignments in SOS 3400 and bringing pertinent data to the attention of the Social Science Studies program and curriculum committee meetings each semester.

5. Implementing Instruction and Engaging Students in LearningSocial science teaching majors will demonstrate professional teaching competency by planning, organizing, effectively presenting, and reflecting upon social studies lessons that are designed to reach a diverse group of learners.

Data is gathered at two separate program points.

Micro-Teaching: Students enrolled in SOS 3400 teach a lesson (what we call microteaching modules) during the semester. The instructor use a 20-item microteaching checklist to assess the effectiveness of student presentation skills,

A minimum of 80% of students will receive a score of 160 or higher (out of 200) on the MT checklist. This means that microteaching modules were presented in a clear, articulate, and organized manner and will have used

100% (n=4) of SOS students earned scores of 160 or higher.

The Social Science teaching coordinator and undergraduate advisor are the instructors of record for this course, and they communicate frequently about problems with any microteaching. If problems persist or become severe, the


(UG: Speaking/Listening; Responsible Citizenship)

including appropriate use of technology, incorporation of effective teaching strategies, classroom management and presence, and connection between goals and lesson itself as well as a reflective component.

Student Teaching Evaluation: Student teachers are assessed for their ability to use diverse strategies to plan and execute effective instruction. Student teachers are evaluated on 18 different elements of instructional planning in the “diverse strategies” section of the student teaching evaluation form. Note: Data from 2014 is not yet available, so the data used is the 2013 ISBE data.

instructional technology and research-based strategies.

A minimum of 75% of social science student program completers will receive ratings of “meets” through “exceeds” on the “diverse strategies” components of the Student Teaching Evaluation form. Ratings are: “does not meet”; “occasionally meets”; “meets”; “occasionally exceeds”; and “exceeds.” Note: This % is lower than for HIS-TL students because the number of SOS majors is lower.

80% (n=5) of SOS majors earned ratings of “meets” through “exceeds,” with 100% of students receiving “meets” through “exceeds” in 15 of 18 categories. See Appendix C for complete data (broken down by various SOS concentrations).

Social Science teaching coordinator can withhold approval for student teaching and communicates with CEPS Associate Dean Doug Bower and Student Teaching.

Cooperating teachers and student teaching supervisors from the Department of Student Teaching (CEPS) conduct the assessment. The Chair of the Department of Student Teaching, the Associate Dean of CEPS, and the coordinator of Social Science Teaching monitor assessment results, sharing with other department chairs and committees when data is troubling or indicates broad programmatic issues.

6. Assessing Student Learning and Reflecting Upon Instruction Social science teaching majors will be reflective teachers, understanding the variety of learning needs in their classroom; planning assessments (formative and summative) to monitor and

At present reflection upon planning and implementation has been incorporated into the lesson and unit plan assignments in SOS 3400. In the future data will be available from both the practice edTPA done prior to SOS 3400 in SED 3330/EDP 3331 and the edTPA

Students will begin to incorporate reflection into lesson planning, submitting rationales in all lesson and unit plans. A specific rubric will be added for SOS 3400 assignments in 2014-2015 so that student competency can be assessed at multiple program points.

N/A N/A


support student learning; and adapting classroom instructional strategies in response to assessment data. In doing this they also demonstrate aspects of global citizenship, particularly understanding of diversity and respect for the needs of all learners.(UG: Writing and Critical Reading; Quantitative Reasoning; Responsible Citizenship)

completed during student teaching. Six of the 15 edTPA rubrics focus on assessment and reflection upon/use of assessment data. (See the list in part III below.) I would also like to incorporate data and information from a focus group of practicing teachers alums.

7. WritingSocial science teaching majors will demonstrate the ability to write effectively. (UG: Writing and Critical Reading)

The ability to write clearly is one element that is assessed in the Department Approval Portfolio for Student Teaching, and students are rated on a scale of 1-5 by each of the three members of the History Department Committee on Teacher Education. Scores of the three reviewers will be averaged and reported in the data here.

100% of students submitting unit and lesson plans within the department assessment portfolio (DAP) will receive an average score of 3 or above, and at least 50% will earn scores of 4 or 5.

100% (n=4) of SOS students earned ratings of 3 or above, and 75% earned scores of 4 or 5.

Concerns with student writing are first addressed by asking students to re-submit the portfolio. If problems persist, the social science teaching coordinator communicates issues with approval of all student teachers to CEPS Associate Dean Doug Bower and to Student Teaching.

8. Critical Thinking and Social Studies Literacy SkillsSocial science teaching majors will demonstrate the ability to incorporate historical thinking (a subset of critical thinking) and discipline-specific literacy development into their

In fall 2013, social studies literacy and historical thinking rubrics were piloted in SOS 3400 to assess student ability to incorporate literacy work and to teach with primary documents. SOS 3400 instructors assessed student performance using two five-point rubrics created

A minimum of 80% of students enrolled in SOS 3400 will receive ratings of “meets” through “exceeds” on the “Critical Thinking and Social Studies Literacy” portion of the rubrics used to assess lesson plans in SOS 3400.

On the Planning for Social Studies Literacy assignment, 100% (n=11) received ratings of “meets” (7), “occasionally exceeds” (3), and “exceeds” (1).

On the Teaching

The Social Science teaching coordinator gathers data in both SOS 3400 and in tabulating the exit surveys and then shares data with the Social Science Studies program and curriculum committees


teaching and align lessons with Common Core Histor/Social Studies literacy standards. (UG: Critical Thinking; Writing and Critical Reading)

by the Social Science Teaching coordinator: (1) Planning for Social Studies Literacy and (2) Teaching Historical Thinking. Both rubrics included specific assessments of Critical and Historical Thinking, and full data is in Appendix F.

An exit survey of program completers was also piloted in 2013-2014, and it contained a specific question of how EIU prepared respondents to teach historical thinking.

Respondents should indicate that SOS 3400 assignments helped identify key tenets of historical thinking and assisted them in developing abilities to teach such skills.

Historical Thinking assignment, 62.5% (n=8) received ratings of “meets” (2), “occasionally exceeds” (2), and “exceeds” (1).

Some students identified specific courses (including SOS 3400) that prepared them to teach historical thinking, but the answers to this question were so varied that I cannot really extrapolate any conclusions.

in meetings held once per semester. Consultation with department chairs in HIS, PLS, GEG, and SOC is part of this process and is designed to improve disciplinary-specific instruction in the social studies. Information is also shared with CEPS in meetings about Common Core alignment and preparation of students for edTPA.

9.ProfessionalismSocial science teaching majors will demonstrate professional dispositions and responsibilities.(UG: Responsible Citizenship)

Dispositions surveys done at multiple points throughout the professional education sequence (including departmental methods and student teaching) rate students on 5 dispositions:• Interaction with students (IWS)• Professional and ethical practices (PEP)• Effective communication (EC)• Planning for teaching and student learning(PTSL)• Sensitivity to diversity and equity (SDE)

A minimum of 90% of SOS 3400 students will receive ratings of “meets” through “exceeds” in all five components of the dispositions evaluation instruments. (Ratings are: “does not meet”; “occasionally meets”; “meets”; “occasionally exceeds”; and “exceeds.”)

All student teachers will receive ratings of “acceptable” or higher.

100% of students (n=15) were rated as “meets” through “exceeds” on all dispositional elements. See Appendix E for full dispositions data.

This data comes from LiveText and is an integral part of the CEPS-History Department-Social Science Studies Committee assessment loop. If problems exist, the social science teaching coordinator communicates issues with approval of any students applying for student teaching to CEPS Associate Dean Doug Bower.


PART TWODescribe your program’s assessment accomplishments since your last report was submitted. Discuss ways in which you have responded to the CASA Director’s comments on last year’s report or simply describe what assessment work was initiated, continued, or completed.

The learning goals for the program were overhauled in 2012-2013, and we revised them slightly this year, tweaking descriptions, incorporating the revised university learning goals, and working to highlight new Common Core and edTPA skillsets. In 2013-2014, we continued to revise and re-envision the broader social science teaching program and to adapt to changes in teacher preparation in Illinois and to improve our curriculum and student performance. We were particularly focused on recruitment this year and improving communication with (and retention of) current majors, and we also focused on revisions to SOS 3400, social science teaching methods. We worked to integrate Common Core learning goals into the course, focusing especially on preparing future teachers to address disciplinary-specific literacy, historical thinking, and the Common Core ELA subset of History/Social Studies reading strands. Literacy assignments were embedded into SOS 3400 and the departmental approval portfolio (DAP), and rubrics were created in order to provide feedback to students and to gather data for programmatic assessment. Additionally, we worked to incorporate the disciplinary lenses that the Common Core (and NCSS’s C3 framework) require, and in consultation with program committee members from Geography, History, Political Science, Psychology, and Sociology, discussed how to better incorporate disciplinary learning into SOS 3400. Faculty members from four different disciplines made presentations in the class, and a variety of measures to better incorporate multiple disciplines will be developed in future years. We added a more extensive unit plan to SOS 3400 in spring 2013 as a pilot, and it was strengthened and aligned more with the edTPA standards in 2013-2014 and submitted as the culmination of SOS 3400. Data from it is included in the report above. Finally, emphasis was also placed on preparing students to reflect upon their teaching and to offer research-based rationales for teaching strategy. This skill is something that good teachers possess and it is also central to edTPA, the new performance assessment required for teacher licensure in Illinois beginning in fall 2015. In 2013-2014 much work to incorporate asking students to write rationales for teaching decisions and to use assessment data in making decisions; data from edTPA work in multiple points in the program will be used for future assessment reports.

To address areas of concern in the response to the Student Learning Assessment Program report from last year, we continued to clarify learning objectives, working on defining historical thinking and improving the objectives that pertain to critical thinking and literacy, two areas which are becoming more and more critical to teacher training in the era of the Common Core. We worked to gather data at various points in the program, adding assessment of NCSS ten themes knowledge prior to student teaching, piloting a student teacher exit survey, and trying to draw data from various program points whenever possible. I am making plans for a future focus group of graduates; in my second year as social science teaching coordinator, I have identified a small group of graduates and soon-to-be graduates who will form the core of a focus group that can grow over time. Instead of just offering information about the program in retrospect, this focus group will also serve as a resource, connecting me to what is going on in secondary classrooms.

PART THREESummarize changes and improvements in curriculum, instruction, and learning that have resulted from the implementation of your assessment program. How have you used the data? What have you learned? In light of what you have learned through your assessment efforts this year and in past years, what are your plans for the future?


Student performance on many goals continues to be strong—most students (and all History with Teacher Licensure students in the broader Social Science Teaching program) passed the Content Test, and students’ performance on the Department Portfolio, Ten Themes assessments, and Student Teaching was strong. Two areas of concern emerge in the data above. The first deals with content knowledge goals 1-3 and performance on the content test, particularly in its assessment of historical knowledge. In 2013-2014, of the five social science studies majors to who took the content test, four of five passed the overall test, but none of them passed the History section, and two (including the one who failed the test) did not pass all areas of their concentration. I do not believe that this reflects their overall knowledge, for coursework is strong and they display historical content knowledge in designing lesson plans and a unit plan in SOS 3400 and in student teaching. For the specialist knowledge, again I do not think the content tests is broadly representative, particularly as one student failed it all together and appears to have taken it too early in the program—and it is hard to know how much can actually be learned when the n is so small. However, this is not a small issue. In 2014-2015, we will begin to offer a content test preparation session each semester. We will also undertake a full curriculum review in fall 2014.

The second area where students lag relates to disciplinary-specific literacy (how to think like a geographer, historian, etc.) and our goals relating to future performance on edTPA, particularly student ability to reflect on teaching and cite research-based strategies and approaches. Data from the SOS 3400 rubrics that pertains to critical thinking and literacy reveal that students perform lower in these categories than in other categories on the rubric (see Appendix F for an example), and SOS 3400 students were particularly weak in teaching historical thinking. I expect that this trend will change over time, particularly as CEPS is building more work on Common Core, disciplinary literacy, and academic vocabulary into their professional education sequence and as we work to strengthen the program overall. We have begun revising the SOS 3400 curriculum to include more work on disciplinary specific literacy and edTPA preparation. In 2013-2014 we added several weeks devoted to literacy and historical thinking, and we brought in guests from Political Science, Geography, and Sociology to speak to those disciplinary perspectives. Over time we hope to build modules on the various disciplines that comprise social science teaching (ECN, GEG, HIS, PLS, PSY, and SOC-ANT). This summer I will create a model for HIS to share with the other departments. The hardest component of edTPA, according to nationwide pilot data shared with us in meetings in CEPS, is the reflective commentaries that students write about their lesson planning, implementation, and assessment. We incorporated rationales into lesson planning and microteaching in SOS 3400, with students writing paragraph-length justifications of their choices of teaching strategies and implementation. Student performance on these rationales was not systematically assessed; rather, I wanted to use this year to feel out how students were doing and to think carefully about how to assess this performance in the future. For next year we will revise the microteaching module and unit plan assignment to further reflect edTPA reflective teaching goals and to create an assessment apparatus for both of those. We will also look at revising the Department Approval Portfolio process to incorporate reflection upon teaching. edTPA is tied to the cycle of effective teaching, building student learning through a cycle of planning, instructional delivery, assessment, and use of assessment data to improve instruction. We should get data from the 2013-2014 pilot as well as next year. In fall 2015, students will be required to take and pass the official edTPA and we will receive data on their overall performance as well as sub-scores on 15 rubrics that will allow us to pinpoint areas of program weakness. The rubrics will cover the following: Planning for History/Social Studies Instruction; Planning to Support Varied Student Learning Needs; Using Knowledge of Students to Inform Teaching and Learning; Identifying and Supporting Language Demands; Planning Assessments to Monitor and Support Student Learning; Learning Environment; Engaging Students in Learning; Deepening Student Learning; Subject-Specific Pedagogy; Analyzing Teaching Effectiveness; Analysis of Student Learning; Providing Feedback to Guide Learning; Student Use of Feedback; Analyzing Students’ Language Use and History/Social Studies Learning; and Using Assessment to Inform Instruction. I have begun incorporating edTPA language into objectives above, and expect to continue to do so. For goal four, for example, edTPA data will eventually become part of our assessment program.


Finally, over the past year, it has become increasingly obvious that more concentrated work with social science teaching majors is needed, and preferably, earlier in the program. Simply put, students are expected to graduate knowing much more about pedagogy and teaching disciplinary-specific literacy in order to successfully tackle the Common Core and, as important, the new Danielson model of teacher evaluation that has been legally mandated statewide. To that end, I drew up a sketch for a new course and consulted with the History department curriculum committee to refine it. We then presented to both the History department and Social Science Studies program committee a preliminary proposal for a new course, SOS ####: Introduction to Social Science Teaching, that will allow me to introduce students to all of these issues earlier in the program. I will begin the formal course approval process through COTE, etc., in fall 2014 and we hope to begin offering the class in fall 2015. SOS #### is a one-credit course that would be taken prior to practicum by all History with Teacher Licensure and Social Science Studies majors. This course would provide an introduction to social science education research/theory; the various disciplinary perspectives of all social sciences; edTPA and reflective teaching; and the secondary classroom setting. This once-a-week course will allow us to introduce students to social science disciplinary thinking and teaching methods before they undertake practicum—where now they will do a practice edTPA. The addition of this course will mean that students have a three-step process in which to build their teaching methods and ability to reflect upon their teaching choices (central to success on edTPA) prior to student teaching: SOS ####, Practicum, and finally, our capstone SOS 3400. In terms of assessment, it will provide another point in which we can gather data.


Appendix A. NCSS Ten Themes Data, 2013-2014

NCSS Thematic Strand Explanation1 Culture elements of culture; similarities and differences among cultural groups across time, place2 Time, Continuity, and Change historical roots3 People, Places, and Environments geography, regional studies, world cultures; location, regions, interaction w/

environment4 Individual Development and Identity human growth, behavior, perception; social, political, cultural impact on identity5 Individuals, Groups, and Institutions role of institutions; change over time & cultural place; individual in institutional change6 Power, Authority, and Governance purposes/function of govt; rights/responsibilities of citizens7 Production, Distribution, & Consumption economics – production/distribution questions; market decisions; scarcity8 Science, Technology, and Society tech change in history; influence of technology/science; global access9 Global Connections10 Civic Ideals and Practices civic ideals; civic participation; democratic ideals; rights/responsibilities; world policy

Lesson Plans/DAP Assessment, 2013-2014

1. Culture

2. Time, Cont, and Change

3. People, Places, Env

4. Indiv Deve/Identity

5. Individuals, Grps, Institutions

6. Power, Authority, Govt

7. Production, Distrib, Consump

8. Science, Tech, Society

9. Global Connections

10. Civic Ideals/Practices

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

N/ADoes not meetOccasionally MeetsMeets StandardsOccas ExceedsExceeds



Student Teaching Ten Themes Evaluations, 2013-2014

1. Culture

2. Time, Cont, and Change

3. People, Places, Env

4. Indiv Deve/Identity

5. Individuals, Grps, Institutions

6. Power, Authority, Govt

7. Production, Distrib, Consump

8. Science, Tech, Society

9. Global Connections

10. Civic Ideals/Practices

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

N/ADoes not meetOccasionally MeetsMeets StandardsOccas ExceedsExceeds


Appendix B. Content Test Scores, 2013-2014

GEG test (113) No students took the GEG content test in 2013-2014.

PLS test (117)PLS test 117 SSfd HISc

cPLS conc, thought and comp govt

US_Ilgovt

Name P/F Date Total 1 2 3 4HHHHHHHHH P 11/16/2013 245 252 226 241 244HHHHHHHHH F 4/12/2014 235 245 215 206 244HHHHHHHHH P 4/12/2014 251 266 254 264 194

PSY test (118)PSY test 118 SSfd HIScc Human Dev/Behavior Personalities, Theories, & Mental HealthName P/F Date Total 1 2 3 4HHHHHHH P 7/6/2013 251 240 235 274 272

SOC test (121)SSfd HISc

cSOC ANT

Name P/F Date Total 1 2 3 4HHHHHHHHH P 2/8/2014 248 251 224 265 244


Appendix C. Student Teaching Assessment, 2013 ISBE Report (GEG, PLS, and PSY concentrations; no SOC student teachers)

SOS—GEGDiverse Strategies-1)Clarity and suitability of goals and objectives

1 (100%)

Diverse Strategies-2) Integration of goals and objectives

1 (100%)

Diverse Strategies-3) Resources for teaching and students

1 (100%)

Diverse Strategies-4) Learning activities 1 (100%)

Diverse Strategies-5) Instructional materials and resources

1 (100%)

Diverse Strategies-6) Instructional groups 1 (100%)

Diverse Strategies-7) Lesson and unit structure 1 (100%)

Diverse Strategies-8) Congruence of assessment with instructional goals and objectives

1 (100%)

Diverse Strategies-9) Criteria and standards 1 (100%)

Diverse Strategies-10) Used student needs in planning

1 (100%)

Diverse Strategies-11) Directions and procedures 1 (100%)

Diverse Strategies-12) Levels of questions and response time

1 (100%)

Diverse Strategies-13) Discussion techniques 1 (100%)

Diverse Strategies-14) Student participation 1 (100%)

Diverse Strategies-15) Feedback to students 1 (100%)

Diverse Strategies-16) Management of transitions 1 (100%)

Diverse Strategies-17) Management of materials 1 (100%)

Diverse Strategies-18) Classroom arrangement and accessibility

1 (100%)

SOS—PLS


Diverse Strategies-1)Clarity and suitability of goals and objectives

2 (100%)

Diverse Strategies-2) Integration of goals and objectives

2 (100%)

Diverse Strategies-3) Resources for teaching and students

2 (100%)



2 (100%)

Diverse Strategies-6) Instructional groups 1 (50%) 1 (50%)



2 (100%)



2 (100%)

Diverse Strategies-11) Directions and procedures 1 (50%) 1 (50%)


2 (100%)



Diverse Strategies-15) Feedback to students 1 (50%) 1 (50%)




2 (100%)

SOS—PSYDiverse Strategies-1)Clarity and suitability of goals and objectives

1 (100%)

Diverse Strategies-2) Integration of goals and 1 (100%)


objectivesDiverse Strategies-3) Resources for teaching and students

1 (100%)



1 (100%)

Diverse Strategies-6) Instructional groups 1 (100%)



1 (100%)



1 (100%)

Diverse Strategies-11) Directions and procedures 1 (100%)


1 (100%)



Diverse Strategies-15) Feedback to students 1 (100%)




1 (100%)

Does Not Meet Standard Occasionally Meets Meets Standard Occasionally Exceeds Exceeds Standard


Appendix D. Unit Plan Assessment Data, 2013-2014This data is gathered by CEPS from SOS 3400 instructors, and it includes both History with Teacher Licensure and Social Science Studies majors. Since the data reflects a course taken by all social science teaching majors in both programs, the data is not separated out by degree.

Fall 2013, SOS 3400


Spring 2014, SOS 3400


Appendix E. Dispositions DataSOS 3400, 2013-2014This data includes both History with Teacher Licensure and Social Science Studies majors. Since the data reflects a course taken by all social science teaching majors in both programs, the data is not separated out by degree.Fall 2013

Spring 2014


Appendix F. Disciplinary-Specific Critical Thinking and Literacy DataPlanning for Social Studies Literacy, 2013-2014 Note: Fall 2013 students worked on this assignment in pairs, while most spring 2014 students submitted it individually.

Goals

ContentKnow

Instr. St

rat

Resource

s

CritTh

ink/Lite

racy

Effort/

Engag

emen

t0123456789

ExceedsOccas ExceedsMeets StandardsOccasionally MeetsDoes not meet

Teaching Historical ThinkingNote: All students completed this assignment in pairs, and each pair is represented ONCE in the data that follows.

Goals

Content K

nowledge

Connections/A

nalysis

Instruc S

trateg

ies

CritTh

inking/L

iterac

y

Effort/

Enga

gemen

t0

1

2

3

4

ExceedsOccasionally ExceedsMeets StandardsOccasionally Does Not MeetDoes Not Meet

Documents

Student Learning Assessment Program - EIU Sci TC.docx · Web viewHistorical Thinking assignment, 62.5% (n=8) received ratings of “meets” (2), “occasionally exceeds” (2), and