UCM TEMPLATE FOR DESE CERTIFICATION … · Web view• Write competency-based objectives that state the learning and performance outcomes expected of secondary school students. •

BSE Social Studies 1

Program ReportFor

Social Studies Education

Spring, 2009

Prepared by:Dr. Paul Rorvig

Associate Professor of HistoryCoordinator of the Social Studies Education Program

[email protected]

http://www.ucmo.edu/


TABLE OF CONTENTS

DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAM.................................................................................................3

CHARACTERISTICS OF PROGRAM CANDIDATES.........................................................12Table 1: Size of ProgramTable 2: Demographics of ProgramTable 3: Candidate Persistence

CERTIFICATION PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS...............................................................16

COURSE LIST.............................................................................................................................20Table 4: Course Offerings

MATRICES..................................................................................................................................22

DESCRIPTION OF FIELD EXPERIENCES...........................................................................27

DIVERSE CLASSROOM...........................................................................................................30

DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAM ASSESSMENT SYSTEM..................................................31

ASSESSMENT DATA.................................................................................................................38Table 5: CBASE ScoresTable 6: Praxis Scores

TECHNOLOGY..........................................................................................................................51

FACULTY....................................................................................................................................52

PROGRAM RESOURCES.........................................................................................................56

APPENDICES:

APPENDIX A - SYLLABI..................................................................................................57APPENDIX B - COURSE/COMPETENCY MATRIX...................................................58APPENDIX C - 4-YEAR PLAN.........................................................................................62APPENDIX D - CATALOG PAGES, COURSE DESCRIPTIONS...............................67APPENDIX E - PROGRAM ASSESSMENT SYSTEM - COPIES OF

ASSESSMENTS, INSTRUCTIONS, SCORING RUBRICS...............69APPENDIX F- PROGRAM ASSESSMENT DATA TABLES....................................112


DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAM

Introduction

Social Studies education, on one level, is a prescribed course of study designed to train future social studies teachers. Students in the program will take a variety of social science courses in the disciplines of Anthropology, Economics, Geography, History, Political Science, Psychology, and Sociology as well the requisite education curriculum. Upon completion of the requirements, the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE) will initially certify the graduate to teach social studies in the secondary schools (grades 9-12).

On another level, Social Studies education has a broader social mission. According to the National Council for the Social Studies (NCSS)—the main professional organization for the social studies educator—the primary purpose of Social Studies education is the promotion of civic competence among young students. The task of the Social Studies education program is to prepare future teachers to be able, in the words of the NCSS, “to help young people develop the ability to make informed and reasoned decisions for the public good as citizens of a culturally diverse, democratic society in an interdependent world.” (Expectations of Excellence, 12).

To accomplish these goals, the Social Studies program at the University of Central Missouri will provide its majors with the course work necessary to acquire the knowledge (social science content) and the skills (education theory and methods) to succeed as a classroom teacher of social studies. The social science course work consists of 60 credit hours (20 courses) and the education course work consists of 28 credit hours (11 courses).

1. Location of Certification Program:

The Social Studies Education Program is housed in the Department of History and Anthropology. The program, however, requires coursework from several departments across several colleges. The coursework in content involves three colleges and five departments. In the College of Arts, Humanities, and Social Sciences, social studies majors take courses in three departments: (1) Department of History and Anthropology, (2) Department of Geography, and (3) Department of Political Science. In the College of Health and Human Services, courses are taken from the Department of Sociology and Social Work. In the Harmon College of Business Administration, the courses are from the Department of Economics and Finance.

Coursework in pedagogy involves two colleges and two departments. In the College of Arts, Humanities, and Social Sciences, courses are taken from the Department of History and Anthropology. In the College of Education, it is the Department of Educational Foundations and Literacy.

2. Type of Degree earned by Completers:

Completers of the Social Studies major will earn a Bachelor of Science in Education (BSE in Social Studies).


3. Type of Program:

Graduates with a BSE in Social Studies are qualified to apply for initial Missouri certification to teach secondary social studies (9-12).

4. Requirements for the Degree:

To fulfill the requirements for the degree, the social studies education major must complete a program of study that includes coursework in content (social sciences) and pedagogy. Listed below are the specific requirements as found in the 2008 Undergraduate Catalogue.

Department of History and AnthropologyStatement of Policy

A course with a grade lower than a “C” will not be allowed to fulfill a major or minor requirement in any program offered by the Department of History and Anthropology.To be recommended for student teaching by the Department of History and Anthropology, a student with a major or minor in social studies must achieve at least a 2.50 GPA in all social science courses taken at UCM.

AccreditationThe Social Studies program is accredited by the National Council for the Social Studies located at 8555 16th Street, Silver Springs, MD 20910; phone 301-588-1800.

SOCIAL STUDIESMajor, Bachelor of Science in Education Degree Certification to teach social studies in grades 9-12. (41-264)

The graduate with a Bachelor of Science in Education degree with a major in Social Studies will use the knowledge and skills obtained in the program to:

• Explain the methodologies and themes of the disciplines comprising the social sciences.• Write competency-based objectives that state the learning and performance outcomes

expected of secondary school students.• Apply content learned in university social science courses to develop social studies

lessons based upon NCSS (National Council for the Social Studies) themes for secondary school students.

• Plan, develop, and write a complete social studies teaching unit for social science courses taught at the secondary school level.

• Demonstrate through the use of questioning strategies and learning activities the ability to teach higher order thinking skills.

• Present controversial issues to secondary school students so that different points of view are properly represented and fairly evaluated.


Sem. HoursMAJOR REQUIREMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60

• SOSC 3010 Writing in the Social Sciences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3• SOSC 4050 The Social Studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3• HIST 1350 History of the U. S. to 1877 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3• HIST 1351 History of the U. S. from 1877 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3• POLS 1510 American Government . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3• POLS 2511 State Government . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3• GEOG 2212 World Geography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3• ECON 1010 Principles of Macroeconomics . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3• SOC 1800 General Sociology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Electives from the following . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6• HIST 2400 History of the Early World . . . . . . . . . . . . 3• HIST 2401 History of the Early Modern World . . . . . 3

o or• HIST 2401 History of the Early Modern World . . . . . . 3• HIST 2402 History of the Modern World . . . . . . . . . . 3• Upper-level elective in SOC or ANTH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3• Upper-level electives in American history . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6• Upper-level elective in world history . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6• Upper-level elective in geography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3• Upper-level electives in at least two of the following:• GEOG, HIST, POLS, SOC, ANTH, or ECON . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

The program must include at least one course that focuses on a non-western society, nation or region or on the non-western world. A list of the courses which fulfill this requirement is available from the History and Anthropology Department and on file with the Academic Advisers.

GENERAL EDUCATION REQUIREMENTS (page 42) In the major, HIST 1350, ECON 1010, SOC 1800 fulfill 9 s.h. of Div. II B; in the professional education requirements,ICAP 4468 fulfills 3 s.h. of Div. IV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

HIST 1350 Div. II B orHIST 1351 Div. II B (required) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3PSY 4230 Psy. of Adolescence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Secondary Education students will be allowed to substitute PSY 4230 to fulfill 3 s.h. in Div. III and must have one course in a physical or earth science and one in a biological science in Div. II A. If elected, HIST 2402 fulfills 3 s.h. of Div. II D.

PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION REQUIREMENTS (page 113) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28PSY 4200 Psy. of Except. Children (required) . . . . . . . 2

MINIMUM TOTAL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .124


5. Number of Hours/Semesters/ Years to Complete:

Currently, the hours required for graduation are 124. This includes 60 in the content area and 28 in education. The remaining hours are part of the General Education Program. A candidate can complete the program in eight semesters or four academic years. A recommended course of study for the BSE in Social Studies, which fits this timeframe, is located in Appendix C (4-Year Plan).

6. Size of the Certification Program:

The size of the program can be viewed in three ways. First is the number of declared secondary social studies education majors. From 2002-2003 to 2007-2008, the average yearly number of majors has been 133 students, ranging from a low of 115 to a high of 144. Second is the number of secondary social studies education majors admitted yearly to the teacher education program. From 2002-2003 to 2007-2008, the average has been 20 students, ranging from a low of 14 to a high of 26. Third is the number of yearly graduates in the program. From 2002-2003 to 2007-2008, the average has been 19 students, ranging from a low of 14 to a high of 26 (see Table 1 below).

7. Certification Program History:

To get a sense of the current state of the secondary social studies program, a brief history is provided. The University of Central Missouri was founded in 1871 as a two-year institution, created originally for educator preparation. Today it is a multi-faceted, multi-college institution serving more than 10,000 students at the undergraduate and graduate level. The name of the institution has changed four times, each time signifying expansion of the university mission. The most recent change occurred in 2006, when the name became the University of Central Missouri. This reflects the newly defined mission of becoming a nationally recognized university that delivers a world class education. The importance of teacher education has remained a consistent focus of the university through its evolution. In 2000, during his opening State of the University remarks, President Patton reaffirmed teacher education as the first of four cornerstones of the university. UCM has an excellent reputation in Missouri and the region for educator preparation and is the longest continuously NCATE-accredited public institution in the state.

Since our 2002 site visit, a number of developments have occurred at the state and institutional level that have affected our educator preparation program. The Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE) revised its standards for initial teacher preparation and will continue to review and revise content-specific standards on a rotating basis. The Missouri Standards for Teacher Education Programs (MoSTEP) are based on the 10 INTASC standard areas and includes an 11th standard addressing classroom use of technology. DESE has also aligned standards in the various certification areas with those of national Specialized Professional Associations (SPAs). In 2005, DESE revised the MoSTEP Standards for Secondary Social Studies. These are the standards which all social studies education programs must address to insure DESE accreditation. The social studies MoSTEP standards are closely aligned with National Council for the Social Studies (NCSS) Standards. Beginning in the 1990s, the State of Missouri strongly recommended a required portfolio assessment based on DESE standards for all


educator preparation programs; consequently, all UCM programs used candidate portfolios as a primary summative assessment measure. In 2005, DESE removed the undergraduate portfolio requirement. The Professional Education Faculty voted in 2006 to remove the portfolio as a program assessment required by the Unit. The Social Studies program subsequently dropped the portfolio as an assessment instrument, relying instead on both Unit-wide and program specific assessments to demonstrate student competency.

The University's Unit-level assessment system for undergraduate teacher education candidates includes a variety of measures and markers required at transition points in the program. The standards-based assessment system was developed around DESE's MoSTEP standards for initial certification. UCM Professional Education Faculty designed the assessments and scoring rubrics. All assessments use a similar Likert-type scale (Does Not Meet, Progressing, Meets, Exceeds) with standards-based scoring rubrics. In addition, the theme of the UCM Conceptual Framework – the Reflective Practitioner – is replicated in items across several of the measures. Data generated by the Unit assessments is reviewed annually by faculty. Results are used for decision-making and program improvement, as well as to inform candidates of their progress.

An additional institutional issue influencing the social studies program's implementation of NCSS and DESE standards—specifically who observes and evaluates student teachers—are the frequent changes in university administration. Since 1999, UCM has had three presidents, four provosts, and five deans for the College of Arts, Humanities, and Social Sciences. Not only is continuity of leadership a problem, but making a case for hiring more history faculty who can assist in the program is made more difficult as institutional memory and priorities change with each turnover in administration.

8-9. How the Program Integrates and is Coherent with the Unit’s Conceptual Framework and How Certification Program, Course Outcomes, Field Experiences, and Student Evaluations (both course and clinical) are Aligned to the Professional Knowledge Base on Which the Unit’s Beliefs and Goals are Constructed:

The unit's conceptual framework revolves around the belief that "the Central educator is a competent, caring, reflective practitioner committed to the premise that all can learn." The Teacher Education Program (TEP) seeks to inculcate this principle in its student candidates during their preparation to become professional educators. To facilitate this development and eventuality, the program and its faculty members strive (1) to ground candidates in sound educational theory; (2) to build and advance content knowledge; (3) to assist the acquisition of appropriate instruction strategies/methods; and (4) to instill the behaviors and attitudes required of entry-level education professionals. To achieve these goals, the program has established a prescribed plan of study involving course work in education, in the content discipline, and in field and clinical experiences.

At the core of this endeavor is the concept of the teacher as reflective practitioner, one who can think analytically, practically, and creatively. To think analytically involves thinking and reflecting critically about the knowledge base; to think practically entails thinking and reflecting critically about integrating course content into the knowledge base, applying knowledge to P-12 classroom practice, and refining ones personal philosophy of teaching; to think creatively


necessitates thinking and reflecting critically about the teaching/learning process, integrating and refining knowledge and skills, applying knowledge and skills to P-12 classroom practice, and revisiting/revisiting the knowledge base.

As undergraduate teacher education candidates move through the prescribed course of study, they acquire a basic understanding of the core knowledge base. They are now prepared to take and benefit from the higher-level teacher education courses. In these courses, candidates expand their "expert knowledge" in three areas: (1) content or subject matter knowledge, (2) pedagogical knowledge—strategies for instruction and assessment of student learning, and (3) pedagogical content knowledge – instruction and assessment strategies for specific content areas. Activities throughout the teacher education course sequence build upon the core knowledge base by continued modeling, observation, and practical application activities and assessments.

How then does the social studies program connect to the unit's conceptual framework? The primary way is in the advancement of the three areas of expert knowledge. First, the content-specific course work required for the social studies major—20 social science courses—builds upon the subject matter content that candidates possess upon entering the program as evidenced by our assessment instruments that measure content knowledge. Second, the core education courses housed in the Department of History and Anthropology develop both general pedagogical knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge as evidenced by our assessment instruments that measure pedagogy. In these social studies content education courses—the Social Studies (SoSc 4050), Methods of Teaching Social Studies (SoSc 4074), Field Experience II (SoSc 4020)—candidates complete assignments that require analytical, practical, and creative thinking.

In SoSc 4050, the focus is upon lesson preparation and demonstrating that our social studies majors possess the capacity to provide instruction in the disciplines comprising the field of social studies. Students prepare six lessons addressing national and state content standards in the areas of history, economics, geography, civics, psychology/sociology, and science/technology. Any lesson that fails to exceed or meet expectations must be revised. All this work in lesson planning culminates with the teaching of an actual twenty to twenty-five minute lesson. The micro-teaching assignment concludes with a thirty-minute meeting with the course instruction to evaluation the student’s teaching. Each student brings to that meeting a written reflection which forms the basis for the discussion. This dovetails nicely with the unit’s commitment to the idea of teacher as reflective practitioner.

In SoSc 4074, the focus is upon unit preparation and demonstrating that social studies majors can create a coherent unit of study over a social studies topic. Students are encouraged in consultation with their district supervisor to choose a topic that they will actually teach while completing their student teaching. In this way, students will receive immediate feedback and thus be able to reflect upon both the planning and implementation of a unit.

In SoSc 4020, the focus is upon critically assessing the practices of their district supervisor. Working from a list of prescribed questions covering a variety of teacher practices, students observe 25-hours in the social studies classroom of their district supervisor. The students write


an analytical report reflecting upon the good and bad practices that they observed. This assignment, then, requires the students to assume the role of reflective practitioner.

These three courses and their primary assignments will assist the pre-service social studies teachers in fulfilling the ideas of the unit’s conceptual framework. Additionally, they will aid students in accepting and fulfilling what the National Council for the Social Studies cites as the most important responsibility of the social studies teacher: the promotion of civic competence among the young through the acquisition of the appropriate knowledge, skills, and attitudes needed to assume, in the words of Thomas Jefferson, the office of citizen.

10. Authority to Offer the Program:

The program has been approved by the University through its curriculum process, by the Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE), and by the Missouri Department of Higher Education’s Coordinating Board (CBHE).

11. Advisory Body Responsible for the Program:

The Professional Education Faculty (PEF) shall be the representative body of the Teacher Education Program (TEP) for the entire University. The role of the PEF shall be to review, support, and implement the conceptual framework of the Teacher Education Program at the University of Central Missouri. Membership in PEF shall include all full-time Central faculty who (a) teach one or more classes in the teacher education program, (b) supervise field experiences or student teaching, (c) advise teacher education students, or (d) serve as chairs in departments that include PEF members. At the request of the Dean, department chairs identify members of the PEF in the fall of each year, using the qualifications above. The Teacher Education Council (TEC) is the Executive Board of the PEF and serves in an advisorycapacity to review and recommend on policy, programs, curricular, and programmatic assessment matters related to the Teacher Education Program. The TEC serves the PEF and is representative of the PEF. The TEC reports to the Dean of the College of Education in his/her capacity as the University's official unit head.

At the department level, the faculty member designated the Coordinator of the Social Studies program is responsible for continuous review of the program and for making recommendations to the department curriculum committee. After changes are made and approved by the department, they are forwarded for approval to the college curriculum committee and then to the Teacher Education Council (TEC).

12. Recent Revisions or Changes to the Program:

Since the last site visit, the secondary social studies program has undergone some changes in personnel and program. In personnel, Dr. Sara Sundberg, a historian with secondary social studies certification and secondary teaching experience, joined the History and Anthropology faculty and now assists Dr. Paul Rorvig, Coordinator of the Social Studies program. She assumed the duties previously performed by Dr. Yvonne Johnson.


In program, the number of credit hours in social science content increased from 57 to 60. Secondary social studies education majors now are required to take an extra upper level 3-hour world history course. The decision to add this requirement came in the wake of a recommendation of the National Council for the Social Studies (NCSS) that social studies education programs needed to offer and require non-western coursework. Four social science disciplines offer approved non-western courses: anthropology, geography, history, and political science. Of the four, history has the most offerings. The addition of an Asian historian, Dr. Sean Kim in 2005-06, now allows the History and Anthropology Department to offer nonwestern courses in Asian, Middle Eastern, and African history.

Two further program changes involve the portfolio and the degree name. At the strong insistence of DESE, the UMC education program had adopted the portfolio as a unit-wide assessment to demonstrate competency in the eleven MoSTEP standards. When DESE in 2005 removed the undergraduate portfolio requirement, the Professional Education Faculty (PEF) voted in 2006 to no longer mandate the portfolio as a unit assessment. The social studies program retained an abbreviate version of the portfolio for the fall semester of 2006 but subsequently dropped it as a program assessment the next semester. The program now relies instead on both unit-wide and program specific assessments to demonstrate student competency.

The remaining change involved a revision of the degree name. Prior to the 2008-09 academic year, students who wanted to teach social studies at the secondary level sought a BS in Education degree in Social Studies. This was a Functional Major. That has now changed. The “Functional” has been removed. Students now earn a Major, BS in Education degree in Social Studies. The requirements for the degree and the number of credit hours needed to earn the degree have not change, only the degree name has.

Currently, there are two proposed changes working their way through the university curriculum process. These changes are in response to accreditation requirements of the Social Studies Education SPA (the National Council for the Social Studies). In the years between our previous NCATE accreditation (2001) and the current one underway (2008-09), the NCSS clarified the content expectations for each of the ten social studies content standards. Based upon this publication and information received at the NCSS national conference, we knew that the program would be lacking in two standards—Economics (#7) and Science, Technology, and Society (#8).

The NCSS “expects [pre-service social studies] candidates to understand the basic concepts of micro- and macro-economics.” We knew that our students received the concepts of macroeconomics in ECON 1010 (Principles of Macroeconomics), a required course. We could not make that claim with microeconomics. The Praxis II Social Studies Content Exam is accepted by the NCSS as evidence that pre-service social studies teachers know content. Economics is one of the six content areas tested. We have established a benchmark that 80% of our social studies candidates will correctly answer at least 50% of the questions asked in each of the six content areas. The only content area that our students failed to reach this benchmark was economics, where our benchmark rate was 77.9%. Based upon this data and the NCSS expectation that all social studies candidates take course work in the basic concepts of


microeconomics, we are adding ECON 1011 (Principles of Microeconomics) to the required courses for the Social Studies degree.

The NCSS also “expects [pre-service social studies] candidates to understand the manner by which science and technology have enhanced or threatened the development of human society.” Originally back in 2001, we proposed, and the NCSS accepted, that the grades our social studies majors received in whichever of the four courses they took to fulfill the Technology requirement in the General Education Program would be used to demonstrate content knowledge in this standard. When the NCSS announced its clarification of the content standards, it made clear that “educational technology application courses do not meet the expectations of this standard.” As a result, we devised a short, specific assignment that all social studies majors would complete in SOSC 4050 to provide evidence that “some” content in this standard was required. Upon reflection, we realized the assignment did not do justice to the STS standard. That is why we are requiring CTE 2000 (Technology and Society) for all social studies majors. The course description fits the standard perfectly and thus provides our pre-service social studies candidates with the content depth currently lacking. The changes, when approved, will go into effective with the academic year 2009-2010.

13. National Recognition:

The secondary social studies program maintained its accreditation from NCATE following the most recent review in 2008. The program’s report was submitted in January of 2008 and was reviewed by representatives of the National Council for the Social Studies (NCSS), the SPA for social studies, during the summer of 2008. Based upon that review, the social studies program received national recognition, the top category.


CHARACTERISTICS OF PROGRAM CANDIDATES

1. Number of Candidates – Admitted and Completed for Each Year:

Table 1 below provides data on the number of candidates admitted to the program each academic year and the number who complete the degree in that academic year. During these six years, 119 social studies students were admitted to the teacher education program, an average of approximately 20 students per year. Half the time admissions fell below the average and half the time they exceeded the average. Social studies students, as a general rule, gain admission to the teacher education program a year prior to their student teaching semester. As a result, the number of completers in any given year will be similar, though not exact, to the number admitted to the program in the previous academic year. During the six years under review, 115 social studies students completed the degree, an average of 19 per year. In three of those years, the completers were below the average, while in the other three years the completers exceeded the average.

2. Number of “Home-Grown” versus “Transfer” Completers:

During the six years in question, 115 social studies completed their degrees. A comparison shows that 62 completers started at another institution and transferred to UCM to finish their degrees, while 52 completers started and finished their entire program at UCM.

Table 1. Size of ProgramYear # Admitted # Completers #Transfer #All UCM2002-03 24 15 10 52003-04 15 26 11 152004-05 26 20 6 102005-06 23 24 14 112006-07 14 16 12 52007-08 17 14 9 6

Please note: The number of completers does not necessarily match the totals for transfer and all UCM in any given year. Part of the discrepancy is that the latter two columns refer to the number of student teachers in a given year. Most will graduate in that year but some won’t do so until the next year (e.g. 2004-05).

3. Diversity:

As Table 2 shows, the number of social studies candidates who student teach in any given year (the cohort) are overwhelmingly white (except for one black student) and nearly twice as likely to be male (63% to 37%) than female.


Table 2. Demographics of ProgramY

ear

Mal

e

Fem

ale

Whi

te

Bla

ck

His

pani

c Asi

an

Oth

er

TO

TA

L

2002-03 8 7 152003-04 18 8 262004-05 12 4 162005-06 12 13 252006-07 13 4 1 172007-08 8 7 15

4. Entrance Test Scores (College C-Base):

In 1985, the General Assembly of the State of Missouri enacted broad policy changes to improve the quality of education in Missouri's elementary and secondary schools. Section 168.400 of the "Excellence in Education Act of 1985" (HB 463) stipulates that candidates for entry into state-approved teacher education programs in Missouri colleges and universities must achieve a satisfactory rating in specified subject areas. The State Board of Education established cut-off scores on the College BASE of 235 or higher in each of the four subjects covered by College BASE (English, mathematics, science, and social studies) and in the writing cluster within English (Rule 5 CSR 80-805.20). College BASE, a criterion-referenced academic achievement examination, evaluates knowledge and skills in English, mathematics, science, and social studies, usually after a student completes a college-level core curriculum. Developed to provide colleges with an accurate assessment of academic progress, College BASE emphasizes concepts and principles derived from course materials. This exam fills the gap between generalized aptitude tests used for college entrance and specialized department exams. As a broad-based achievement test, College BASE assesses basic and enduring knowledge in each of the four subject areas and provides performance rankings in higher order thinking skills (interpretive, strategic, and adaptive reasoning abilities). College BASE responds to national concern about the quality of undergraduate education and meets increasing demands for accountability and standardized assessment at the college level. In addition, the exam fulfills mandated requirements for a test with cut-off scores for admitting candidates into upper-level coursework including state-approved teacher education programs. The focus is to provide a broadly based achievement test that can accurately assess a specified level of attainment common to many colleges and universities.

Undergraduate students must have passed all sections of the College-BASE for Teachers examination administered by the Testing Services in order to be admitted to the Teacher Education program at UCM. Thus, all candidates admitted to the program have met this requirement.

http://www.ucmo.edu/x8078.xml


5. Oral Communication Verification:

One of the requirements for admission to the Teacher Education Program is passing an oral communications course with a grade of C or better. Thus, all candidates admitted to the program have met this requirement.

6. Entrance GPA:

One of the requirements for admission to the Teacher Education Program is a minimum GPA of 2.5 on a 4-point scale. This GPA must be met in three ways: (a) all coursework in the content area of the major, (b) all coursework in education classes, and (c) overall cumulative grade point. Thus, all candidates admitted to the program have met this requirement.

7. Further Entrance Requirements Established by the Unit or the Program:

All social studies majors go through a systematic process in order to graduate with a BSE in social studies and be licensed by the Department of Secondary and Elementary Education (DESE) to teach secondary social studies. That process involves admission, retention, and exit. The Coordinator of the Social Studies program plays a crucial role as the content area advisor who assists students in tracking progress, completing required tasks, and meeting program deadlines.

The first benchmark in the Teacher Education Program (TEP) is Admission to Teacher Education. For most students, this takes place after completing approximately two years of their program. Candidates must (1) complete an application, (2) show evidence of a minimum of 48 semester hours of college credit with a minimum cumulative GPA of 2.5 on a 4-point scale, (3) complete specific introductory courses with a grade of C or higher, (4) obtain a recommendation from the department representing their major area of study (for social studies, it is the Department of History and Anthropology), (5) pass all sections of the College Basic Academic Subjects Examination for Teachers (CBASE), and (6) pass a criminal history background check.

To receive the department's recommendation, candidates must meet with the Coordinator of the Social Studies program to begin tracking their progress through the program (see the Social Studies Worksheet in the program of study section). An interview with the coordinator and another faculty member is then scheduled if the candidate has satisfied three requirements: (1) a social science GPA of at least the 2.5 minimum, (2) completion of at least one half of the twenty social sciences courses required for the major, and (3) completion of at least two upper level (3000-4000) social science courses. The purpose of the interview is not to grill candidates over the content of their social science course work, but to find out what they know about the profession of teaching and the field of social studies. We see the interview as part of the advising process. If we discover gaps in knowledge or understanding, we recommend ways to address those weaknesses.

At the conclusion of the interview, the two faculty members discuss their appraisal of the candidate and then complete the required recommendation form, which includes a brief written


evaluation of the candidate’s performance. The candidate then meets with the Coordinator of the Social Studies program to review the recommendation, which the student then submits to the Certification Office.8. Persistence to Graduation:

As noted above, an average of 20 social studies education students are admitted to the Teacher Education Program yearly and an average of 19 social studies education candidates will graduate and be certified yearly. These numbers indicate that once a pre-service teacher had been admitted to the Teacher Education Program, the likelihood of finishing the degree and becoming certified to teach within the next year to year and a half is extremely high (90%+).

Table 3. Candidate PersistenceYear # Admitted # Graduated2002-03 24 152003-04 15 262004-05 26 202005-06 23 242006-07 14 162007-08 17 14


CERTIFICATION PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS

1. Description of Admission Process/Requirements:

The process and requirements for admission to the Teacher Education Program as it pertains to the social studies candidates is discussed above. See #7 under the section entitled “Characteristics of Program Candidates.”

2. Description of Required Courses:

Candidates for the BS in Education degree (Social Studies) are required to take courses in the following categories: (a) General Education, (b) Content, and (c) Professional Education.

Candidates, as a general rule, start their university education by taking coursework to fulfill General Education requirements. Several of those courses are also specific content requirements for the BSE in Social Studies. These courses, then, in combination with the other required content courses provide candidates with a common content foundation which will be added to as candidates take further electives in social studies content (see the Course List section below for a more detailed discussion of the course offerings in the content area). Furthermore, there are other General Education courses that candidates will take that are not content specific but are required for admission to the Teacher Education Program (a psychology course, a math course, an oral communication course, and a composition course).

Candidates will also take required coursework in professional education. These courses are sequenced, some being taken prior to admission to the Teacher Education Program and some after admission. In both circumstances, candidates will complete a field experience component that introduces the candidates to the teacher side of the classroom. The purpose of these education courses is to develop pedagogical knowledge and skills. All this coursework in content and pedagogy will culminate with student teaching during the professional semester.

3. Syllabi for Required Courses:

See Appendix A for the syllabi.

4. Relationship of the Course to the Appropriate MoSTEP Standards and SubjectSpecific Competencies:

See Appendix B for Competency Crosswalk.

5. Options for Completing the Certification Process:

Currently, to be certified to teach Secondary Social Studies in Missouri, the undergraduate candidate must complete the BSE in Social Studies. However, it is possible to achieve certification in Secondary Social Studies without an undergraduate education degree. If one possesses an undergraduate degree, one can become certified through an alternative route. This entails completing content and education coursework to meet institutional and DESE standards.


UMC offers a Masters of Arts in Teaching that permits students to earn a Masters degree while achieving certification in social studies. That program is housed in the College of Education.

6. Describe the Advisement Process:

All social studies majors go through a systematic process in order to graduate with a BSE in social studies and be licensed by the Department of Secondary and Elementary Education (DESE) to teach secondary social studies. That process involves admission, retention, and exit.

The Coordinator of the Social Studies program, a faculty member of the Department of History and Anthropology, has primary responsibility for advisement. This entails tracking student progress to insure the completion of required tasks and program deadlines. Consequently, all social studies education majors are assigned to the Coordinator for advisement. The average number of declared social studies major, as compiled over the past six academic years, is 133 students. The majority of these advisees does not see the Coordinator during the first two years of university work and rely instead upon advisement offered at the College level. It is during the latter part of the second or the beginning of the third year that those students who remain declared social studies education major will seek out the Coordinator. In large measure, this becomes a necessity because students need departmental approval to be admitted to the Teacher Education Program.

At the first meeting, the Coordinator starts a file on the prospective social studies education student utilizing the Social Studies Advisement Worksheet (see Appendix C for a copy of the worksheet). This permits both advisor and advisee to readily see what has been taken, what is being taken, and what remains to be taken. This worksheet, then, becomes the primary document for tracking progress toward completion of the degree. The Coordinator is assisted by one other member of the department. This colleague does not advise students but does assist the Coordinator in conducting the departmental interview, approving candidates seeking admission to the Teacher Education Program and recommending candidates to student teach during the Professional Semester. The Coordinator also works closely with the Director of Teacher Certification, and faculty and staff in the Department of Curriculum and Instruction to insure comprehensive advisement.

The department’s advisement procedures dovetail closely with those of the Teacher Education Program and provide valuable input at the benchmark points in the program.

The first benchmark in the Teacher Education Program (TEP) is Admission to Teacher Education. For most students, this takes place after completing approximately two years of their program. Candidates must (1) complete an application, (2) show evidence of a minimum of 48 semester hours of college credit with a minimum cumulative GPA of 2.5 on a 4-point scale, (3) complete specific introductory courses with a grade of C or higher, (4) obtain a recommendation from the department representing their major area of study (for social studies, it is the Department of History and Anthropology), (5) pass all sections of the College Basic Academic Subjects Examination for Teachers (CBASE), and (6) pass a criminal history background check.


To receive the department's recommendation, candidates must meet with the Coordinator of the Social Studies program to begin tracking their progress through the program (as detailed above). An interview with the coordinator and another faculty member is then scheduled if the candidate has satisfied three requirements: (1) a social science GPA of at least the 2.5 minimum, (2) completion of at least one half of the twenty social sciences courses required for the major, and (3) completion of at least two upper level (3000-4000) social science courses. The purpose of the interview is not to grill candidates over the content of their social science course work, but to find out what they know about the profession of teaching and the field of social studies. We see the interview as part of the advising process. If we discover gaps in knowledge or understanding, we recommend ways to address those weaknesses. The second benchmark is Admission to the Professional Education Semester and Student Teaching. At this point candidates must (1) be admitted to the TEP (2) apply by December 1 for Fall student teaching, or May 1 for Spring (3) have completed a minimum of 90 semester hours, including all prerequisite courses (4) have a minimum 2.5 GPA on all work attempted, all courses taken at UCM, and all courses in the field of certification (5) receive a satisfactory appraisal, including a Disposition Assessment, from each department or area in which student teaching is requested (6) show evidence of computer proficiency (7) obtain a doctor’s certificate or evidence of good heath (if required by district) and (8) have earned a minimum of six semester hours of credit at UCM prior to student teaching. Candidates also must take the state-required Praxis Exam prior to student teaching.

In the semester prior to their student teaching semester, all social studies candidates must receive departmental approval to student teach. An evaluation form will be sent to all faculty who teach social science courses that social studies majors could take in fulfillment of the twenty-course social studies content requirement. Each faculty member appraises each candidate's readiness to student teach choosing one of the following recommendations: (1) approve without reservation, (2) approve with reservations (requires the university supervisor to monitor closely), or (3) not recommend. Each evaluator must provide a written explanation for any rating given in category 2 or 3. The Coordinator of the Social Studies program evaluates the results, investigating those cases where candidates receive anything less than approval without reservations. Once a final determination is made, each candidate will meet with the coordinator to discuss the department's recommendation and the department's completion of a formative dispositions assessment (a unit-wide assessment instrument) on the candidate. The third benchmark is completion of the degree and certification. Candidates who received a grade of C or higher in student teaching, as assigned by the student’s University Supervisor, shall be deemed to have successfully met all criteria for exit from the Student Teaching Program. To receive their Bachelor's Degree, candidates must complete all required coursework with a 2.5 GPA, and meet all departmental requirements (no grade lower than a C in the social science courses taken to fulfill the twenty-course requirement). Endorsement for initial teaching certification requires completion of the bachelor’s degree and all other university and DESE criteria, including (1) minimum overall GPA of 2.5, (2) minimum GPA of 2.5 in the certification subject area (secondary social studies) and in all professional education courses, (3) no grade lower than a C in professional education courses, and (4) passing score of 152 on the Praxis II examination for Social Studies content.


7. Checklist for Graduation/Program Completion:

See Appendix C for the Social Studies Advisement Worksheet, which is used to track the progress of each candidate toward completion of the degree.


COURSE LIST

The secondary Social Studies education major requires 60-credit hours of social studies content coursework (twenty courses). Thirty-three credit hours (eleven courses) are explicitly mandated; that is all majors must take these eleven courses. The remaining 27-credit hours (nine courses) can be met through a variety of courses, meaning that students have choice within designated categories. With this in mind, we have chosen to list only those eleven courses that all social studies education majors must take. The catalogue pages with the course descriptions for those eleven courses can be found in Appendix D. The offerings (semester, schedule, format, and instructors) for those eleven courses can be found directly below in Table 4 (Course Offerings).

Table 4: Course OfferingsCourse Semester Schedule Format Instructors

Fall

Win

ter

Sum

mer

Day

Eve

ning

Wee

kend

Cam

pus

CSC

Onl

ine

ITV

Hyb

rid

SoSc 3010: Writing in the Social Sciences X X X X

Carol Heming, Mary Ellen Rowe, Eric Tenbus

SoSc 4050: The Social Studies X X X X

Paul Rorvig

SoSc 4074: Methods of Social Studies X X X X

Paul Rorvig

Hist 1350: US Survey to 1877 X X X X

Mary Ellen Rowe, Sara Sundberg

Hist 1351: US Survey from 1877 X X X X X X X

Dan Crews, Delia Gillis, Paul Rorvig, Jon Taylor, Eric Tenbus, Kyle Anderson, Dean Dohrman, Margaret Herron, Michael Penrod, Vivian Richardson

Pols 1510: American Government X X X X X X

Sharlene Bax, John Hancock, Akis Kalaitzidis, James Staab, Gregory Streich

Pols 2511: State Government X X X X

Sharlene Bax

Econ 1010: Macroeconomics X X X X X X X

Kim Andrews, Chris Azevedo, Catherine


Chambers, Mihaela Craioveanu, John Crooker, Robert Johnson, Peggy Kugler, Amy Wilson

Geog 2212: World Geography X X X X X X

Keshav Bhattarai, Ho Seop Cha, Li Liu, Michael Penrod, Corey Werner

Soc 1800: General Sociology X X X X X X

Karen Bradley, Donald Cripps, Robert Fernquist, Kamel Ghozzi, Yuh Hu, Musa Ilu, Mary Kelly, Gerald McCannon, Catherine Sarantakos

Hist 2400: Early World X X X Dan CrewsHist 2401: Early Modern World X X X X

Carol Heming

Hist 2402: Modern World X X X X X

Carol Heming, Sean Kim, Eric Tenbus


MATRICES

See the following information which compares DESE requirements and UCM requirements in the following three areas: (1) General Education, (2) Professional Competencies, and (3) Subject Specific Competencies. The comparison shows that social studies education majors take course work which addresses the competencies in all three areas. See also the Competency Crosswalk in Appendix B.

“General Education Requirements” for the Social Studies MajorSecondary Education (Grades 9-12)

Comparison between DESE & CentralAcademic Year 2008-09

DESE requirements for certification Central requirements for So.St. Edu. Major

Humanities *2 courses Humanities **3 courses

Must include at least 1 course from 12 courses offered2 of nine fields

Communication Skills *3 courses Communication Skills **3 courses

English (2 courses) English (3 courses offered)Oral Communication (1 course) Oral Communication (2 courses offered)

Social Science *3 courses Social Science **3 courses

US History (1 course) US History (3 courses offered)US Government (1 course) US Government (2 courses offered)Other Social Science (1 course) Other Social Science (5 courses offered)

Natural Science *2 courses Natural Science ***2 courses

Physical or Earth Science (1 course) Physical or Earth Science (3 course offered)Biological Science (1 course) Biological Science (4 courses offered)

Lab: 1 of the above 2 courses Lab: 3 courses offered

Mathematics *1 course Mathematics ***1 course(3 courses offered)

Technology *1 course(4 courses offered)

Cultural Interaction **1 course


(8 courses offered)

Personal Interaction ****3 hours(9 courses offered)

*All courses must be a minimum of two *Courses are either 2 or 3 credit hours. credit hours. **Courses are all 3 credit hours.

***Courses are either 3 or 4 credit hours.****Courses are either 1 or 3 credit hours.


“Professional Requirements” for the Social Studies MajorSecondary Education (Grades 9-12)

Comparison between DESE & CentralAcademic Year 2008-09

DESE requirements for certification Central requirements for So.St. Edu. Major

Foundations of Teaching 8 hours Foundations of Teaching 11 hours

Sec. Methods & Techniques 8 hours Sec. Methods &Techniques 9 hours

Clinical Experiences 10 hours Clinical Experiences 11 hours

Minimum Total Semester Hours: 26 hours Minimum Total Semester Hours: 31 hours

University of Central MissouriSecondary EducationB.S. in Ed.Minimum Required Semester Hours: 31

Foundations of Teaching

EdCI 2100 Foundations of Education & Field Experience 3 hoursPsy 2240 Educational Psychology 3 hoursPsy 4200 Exceptional Child 2 hoursPsy 4230 Psychology of Adolescence 3 hours

Secondary Methods & Techniques

EdCI 4210 Teaching of Reading in Secondary Schools 2 hoursEdCI 4300 Education Measurement & Evaluation 2 hoursEdCI 3500 Sec. Teaching & Behavioral Management 3 hoursSoSc 4074 Methods of Teaching Social Studies 2 hours

Clinical Experiences

EdCI 3550 Practicum in Secondary Instruction 1 hourSoSc 4020 Secondary Field Experience II 1 hourEdCI 4595 Student Teaching Secondary I 5 hoursICap 4468 Student Teaching Secondary II 4 hours


“Content Requirements” for Social Studies Major (Grades 9-12)Comparison between DESE & Central

Academic Year 2008-09

DESE requirements for certification Central requirements for SoSt. Edu. Major

U. S. History 12 hours U. S. History 12 hours

World History 8 hours World History 12 hours

Political Science 6 hours Political Science 6 hours

Economics 3 hours Economics 3 hours

Geography 3 hours Geography 6 hours

Behavioral Science 6 hours Behavioral Science 6 hours

Electives 0-2 hours Electives 9 hours

Social Science 6 hours

Minimum Total Semester Hours: 40 Minimum Total Semester Hours: 60

University of Central MissouriSocial Studies Major, B. S. in Ed. Degree(Certification to teach social studies in grades 9-12)Minimum Required Semester Hours: 60

SoSc 3010 Writing in the Social Sciences 3 hoursSoSc 4050 The Social Studies 3 hoursHist 1350 History of the US to 1877 3 hoursHist 1351 History of the US from 1877 3 hoursPolS 1510 American Government 3 hoursPolS 2511 State Government 3 hoursGeog 2212World Geography 3 hoursEcon 1010Principles of Macroeconomics 3 hoursSoc 1800 General Sociology 3 hours

Hist 2400 History of the Early World 3 hoursHist 2401 History of the Early Modern World 3 hours

orHist 2401 History of the Early Modern World 3 hoursHist 2402 History of the Modern World 3 hours


Upper Level Elective in Soc. or Anth. 3 hoursUpper Level Elective in U. S. History 6 hoursUpper Level Elective in World History 6 hoursUpper Level Elective in Geography 3 hoursUpper Level Electives in at least two of the following: Geog, Hist, PolS, Anth, or Econ. 9 hours

*At least one course must focus on a non-western society, nation, or region or on the non-western world. A list of possible course offerings is available from the History & Anthropology Department.


DESCRIPTION OF FIELD EXPERIENCES

1-3. Type-Locations-Supervision:

All BSE secondary social studies students participate in a number of field and clinical experiences. Prior to student teaching, students take part in three such courses: Foundations of Education (EdCI 2100), Practicum in Secondary Instruction (EdCI 3550), and Field Experience II (SoSc 4020). In combination with student teaching, these experiences provide students with the opportunity to observe and participate in actual classrooms. These experiences are spread throughout the students' program of study and require increased involvement as their content and pedagogical skills advance.

In EdCI 2100, which is generally taken during the sophomore year, students complete 30 hours of field experience. Students find their own placements, although they are encouraged to go to a geographical area (urban, suburban, or rural) that is different than their personal high school experience. The intent is to expose them to the work of teachers and to the diverse population of students they will teach. In EdCI 3550, which is taken the semester prior to student teaching, students do 50 hours of field experience. The instructor of EdCI 3550 places students in the available high schools with teachers in their content area. The students are expected to co-teach with their assigned classroom teacher and thus receive practical experience in the management of student behavior and in the planning and delivery of instruction. In SoSc 4020, which is taken the first four weeks of the student teaching semester, students are responsible for 25 hours of field experience in the classroom of the teacher under whom they will do their student teaching (the district supervisor). With a set of prescribed questions as guidance, students observe their teacher's management skills and instructional methods. They then write an analytical report critically assessing and reflecting upon their teacher's practice.

The final, and ultimate clinical experience, is student teaching which covers the last twelve weeks of the student teaching semester. Students are placed with a cooperating teacher (district supervisor) based upon the following criteria: The teacher should (1) be a full-time staff member of the school district, (2) have at least three years of teaching experience, (3) have been employed by the cooperating school district for at least one year prior to acceptance of a student teacher, (4) be fully certified and teaching within the requested area of certification, (5) have demonstrated teaching competency and the ability to work successfully with others, (6) be working toward a graduate degree, or otherwise demonstrated unusual teaching competency, and (7) feel completely free to accept or reject a student teacher.

Student teachers, because the first four weeks have been spent in the Social Studies methods course (SoSc 4074) and in Field Experience II (SoSc 4020), are already familiar with the school, their district supervisor, and the students in their classrooms. Over twelve weeks, the student teachers will be monitored by their district and university supervisors. The latter will conduct at least four visits, completing formative evaluations and conferencing with the student teacher and the district supervisor at each site visit. At the end of student teaching, the district and university supervisors will consult in completing all summative evaluations. Input from the student teacher will be sought and the final evaluations will then be shared with the student teacher.


Normally, the university supervisor is a faculty member within the department in which the major is housed and the person who teaches the discipline specific methods course. For the social studies education program, this is not the case. Dr. Rorvig, an associate professor of history and former high school teacher with certification in social studies, is unable to do this because of staffing shortages within the Department of History and Anthropology. He currently teaches a full load of two history and two social studies courses each semester. As a result, all social studies student teachers are observed by adjuncts. These adjuncts are usually not social studies certified and are predominately former elementary teachers with some having administrative experience. The program acknowledges this deficiency. There is no way, given the student and course demands upon the department, to fix this problem in the short-term. This difficulty, nonetheless, must be considered in context. Although the university supervisor is not certified in classroom teacher must meet to have a student teacher, they are highly qualified to mentor and evaluate student teachers.

4. Evaluations:

The evaluation instruments and scoring guides for the field experiences fall into two categories: (1) those that have been developed by the unit and utilized in those courses administered by Department of Education and (2) those developed by the content area (social studies) and utilized in the courses administered by the Department of History and Anthropology. For the instruments and scoring guides, see Appendix E.

5. Documentation of Impact on K-12 Student Achievement:

Description: All social studies education majors will be evaluated during the student teaching semester as to the impact their instruction has upon student learning. After teaching a lesson in the content area, the effectiveness of the instruction is assessed. Three unit-wide instruments – formative, summative, and reflection—are used to measure the impact and improve upon future teaching.

The specific lesson that social studies candidates teach is drawn from a unit that they have prepared during the student teaching semester. This unit may or may not be the same one that was completed for SoSc 4074 (Methods of Social Studies). The lesson’s content is left up to the student and thus will not address all the MoSTEP social studies competencies. Nonetheless, the assessments for determining the impact upon student learning do show that our social studies candidates are capable of using a variety of assessment instruments and methods in their teaching and can reflect upon how their practice impacts student learning.

Analysis of Data: The three instruments used to measure impact upon student learning have been employed in the field since the fall semester of 2005. In the six semesters or three academic years for which data exists, fifty-five candidates student taught. Data exists from all three instruments for fifty-three of the students. We have established two target benchmarks: (1) that 100% of the cohort receives a rating of meets or exceeds on each instrument and (2) that a rating of 2.50 be achieved on each instrument. The data shows that the target rating of 2.50 has been reached for all three instruments and in all three academic years, while the target rating of 100% has been met for two instruments (formative and summative) in two academic years and


for one instrument (reflection) in only one academic year. In those years when the target rating of 100% was not achieved, the percentage in each case always exceeded 90%.

Based upon these results, our social studies education students have demonstrated that they have the ability to design varied assessment strategies, to implement those strategies in the classroom, to use assessment data to modify instruction, and to reflect upon their impact upon student learning.

For the assessment instruments, see Appendix E; for the assessment data tables, see Appendix F. 6. Handbooks and Other Documents Received or Available to Candidates:

The unit provides two handbooks for all pre-service student teachers: the Teacher Education Handbook and the Student Teaching Handbook. These give the candidates essential information about the teacher education program and the student teaching semester. The unit also has a specific handbook for those who supervise student teachers in the field, the Cooperative Teacher Handbook.


DIVERSE CLASSROOM

As part of the greater UCM community, the teacher education programs recognize the importance of the institution’s commitment to diversity and to UCM’s core values. The motto of the unit’s conceptual framework, “Committed to the premise that all can learn,” applies that general concept in an instructional context. The conceptual framework further defines the diversity-related competencies of our candidates, as introduced in the core teacher education curriculum, mastered during student teaching, and evaluated by the unit assessment system for initial candidates. Each program has identified specific ways in which knowledge and skills to help all students learn will be incorporated into coursework and field experiences.

One way in which the BSE – Social Studies attempts to address the issue of diversity in its subject matter content is through the non-western requirement. Every social studies education student must complete at least one course that focuses on the non-western world. This stipulation came from a recommendation of the National Council for the Social Studies (NCSS) and the National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE). In response, the social studies program developed a list of courses in anthropology, geography, history, and political science which are non-western. Students now have twenty-four courses from which to choose. In a world and a society which is growing increasingly diverse, students are well served by courses that allow them to study and learn about cultures and people so different from their own experience. As the NCSS notes in one of its publications (Expectations of Excellence), “the primary purpose of social studies is to help young people develop the ability to make informed and reasoned decisions for the public good as citizens of a culturally diverse, democratic society in an interdependent world.” (emphasis added) Those pre-service students, then, who choose social studies education as a profession are cognizant of the changes underway at home and abroad and the need to prepare their students for the diverse world that awaits them.


DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAM ASSESSMENT SYSTEM

There exists a unit-wide assessment system at UCM. During the college career of teacher education candidates, they will be assessed in a variety of ways, at various times using these instruments. Among the key assessments are those that evaluate dispositions, unit-lesson planning, impact upon student learning, and student teaching. The data, when collected, is forwarded to content area coordinators in each program for review. Although these assessment instruments are useful and important, and are indeed utilized for this report, the Social Studies program relies heavily upon a series of discipline-specific, performance-based assessments. These were internally developed in the wake of previous DESE and NCATE accreditation visits and thus closely align with the state's MoSTEP standards and the NCSS's content standards.

What follows is a description of the many assessments that are used by the Social Studies program.

1. Performance Benchmarks:

a. Acceptance to Program : Candidates must (1) complete an application, (2) show evidence of a minimum of 48 semester hours of college credit with a minimum cumulative GPA of 2.5 on a 4-point scale, (3) complete specific introductory courses with a grade of C or higher, (4) obtain a recommendation from the department representing their major area of study (for social studies, it is the Department of History and Anthropology), (5) pass all sections of the College Basic Academic Subjects Examination for Teachers (CBASE), and (6) pass a criminal history background check.

b. Acceptance to Field Experience : There are two places where field experience courses occur: prior to and after admission to the program. The field experience prior to admission (EdCI 2100) requires no special requirements except that one enrolls in EdCI 2100. The two courses taken after admission (SoSc 4020 and EdCI 4595) are taken during the professional semester and thus require approval to student teach, which is discussed next.

c. Acceptance to Student Teaching : At this point candidates must (1) be admitted to the TEP (2) apply by December 1 for Fall student teaching, or May 1 for Spring (3) have completed a minimum of 90 semester hours, including all prerequisite courses (4) have a minimum 2.5 GPA on all work attempted, all courses taken at UCM, and all courses in the field of certification (5) receive a satisfactory appraisal, including a Disposition Assessment, from each department or area in which student teaching is requested (6) show evidence of computer proficiency (7) obtain a doctor’s certificate or evidence of good heath (if required by district) and (8) have earned a minimum of six semester hours of credit at UCM prior to student teaching. Candidates also must take the state-required Praxis Exam prior to student teaching.

d. Graduation : Candidates who received a grade of C or higher in student teaching, as assigned by the student’s University Supervisor, shall be deemed to have successfully met all criteria for exit from the Student Teaching Program. To receive their Bachelor's Degree, candidates must complete all required coursework with a 2.5 GPA, and meet all departmental requirements (no grade lower than a C in the social science courses taken to fulfill the twenty-course requirement).


e. Recommendation for Certification : Endorsement for initial teaching certification requires completion of the bachelor’s degree and all other university and DESE criteria, including (1) minimum overall GPA of 2.5, (2) minimum GPA of 2.5 in the certification subject area (secondary social studies) and in all professional education courses, (3) no grade lower than a C in professional education courses, and (4) passing score of 152 on the Praxis II examination for Social Studies content.

2. Entrance Assessments:

There are two entrance assessments that are conducted by faculty members of the Social Studies Education Program. The first is during admission to the education program and consists of an interview of the prospective candidate. To receive the department's recommendation, candidates must meet with the Coordinator of the Social Studies program to begin tracking their progress through the program. An interview with the coordinator and another faculty member is then scheduled if the candidate has satisfied three requirements: (1) a social science GPA of at least the 2.5 minimum, (2) completion of at least one half of the twenty social sciences courses required for the major, and (3) completion of at least two upper level (3000-4000) social science courses. The purpose of the interview is not to grill candidates over the content of their social science course work, but to find out what they know about the profession of teaching and the field of social studies. We see the interview as part of the advising process. If we discover gaps in knowledge or understanding, we recommend ways to address those weaknesses.

The second assessment is when the social studies candidate seeks departmental approval for student teaching. An evaluation form will be sent to all faculty who teach social science courses that social studies majors could take in fulfillment of the twenty-course social studies content requirement. Each faculty member appraises each candidate's readiness to student teach choosing one of the following recommendations: (1) approve without reservation, (2) approve with reservations (requires the university supervisor to monitor closely), or (3) not recommend. Each evaluator must provide a written explanation for any rating given in category 2 or 3. The Coordinator of the Social Studies program with the assistance of the other social studies faculty member evaluates the results, investigating those cases where candidates receive anything less than approval without reservations. Once a final determination is made, each candidate will meet with the coordinator to discuss the department's recommendation and the department's completion of a formative dispositions assessment (a unit-wide assessment instrument) on the candidate.

3. Content Assessments:

The Social Studies Program relies upon two assessments to evaluate the content competency of its pre-service teachers: (1) the Praxis Exam and (2) Course Grades.

Praxis Exam: The Praxis Exam for secondary social studies is Social Studies: Content Knowledge (test code 0081). DESE requires all teacher education candidates to pass the Praxis in their content area. The passing score for the Social Studies Praxis is 152. Our focus is on the overall Praxis score and the specific content sub-scores. We evaluate the overall score in two ways: (1) the passing rate (how many score 152 or above) and (2) where that score falls within


the three performance ranges. We analyze the subscores in two ways also: (1) the passing rate in each subscore area and (2) where those subscores fall within the three performance ranges. In all four areas, our benchmark is 80%. We want 80% of the cohort to have an overall score of 152 or above, 80% to have an overall score that falls within the average and above average range, 80% to answer fifty percent of the questions in each sub-score category, and 80% to have subscores that fall within the average and above range.

See Appendix F for the data tables.

Course Grades: Every social studies education major must complete a prescribed course of study consisting of 60-credit hour (20 courses) of social science course work. Certain courses of the twenty are required of all social studies education majors. We have chosen to use those required course grades in two ways: (1) to demonstrate content competency in the content standards of NCSS (the 10 NCSS thematic standards) and (2) to demonstrate content competency in the content standards of DESE (the 8 MoSTEP Social Studies Subject Competencies). In both areas, recognizing that social studies education majors must earn at least a grade of C in order for the course to count, our benchmark for each standard is a course GPA of 3.00. For the purposes of this review, we will submit only the courses addressing the DESE content competencies.

See Appendix F for the data tables.

4. Pedagogy Assessments:

The Social Studies Education Program relies upon three assessments to evaluate how well our pre-service social studies candidates can teach social studies content: (1) the NCSS Lesson Plan assessment, (2) the Unit Project assessment, and (3) the Social Studies Content Insert assessment.

NCSS Lesson Plans: The NCSS lesson plans are compiled by all social studies education majors in the required course SoSc 4050 (The Social Studies). The assignment required students to prepare five lessons following a prescribed format that addresses the NCSS content standards. An additional sixth lesson is prepared in completion of a Science, Technology, and Society (STS) assignment. Our belief is that the daily lesson plan is the foundation of preparation. If pre-service teachers can demonstrate the capacity to provide instruction in the social studies through the preparation of a variety of lessons tied to the NCSS standards (and corresponding to MoSTEP subject standards), then they will be well positioned to succeed in the classroom. The assignment has been in use since the spring semester of 2001. It has evolved since its inception from eight lessons rated on a 5-pt. scale to its present composition of six lessons on a 4-pt. scale. Each lesson is aligned with a specific standard or standards. As a result, all ten NCSS content standards and six of the eight MoSTEP standards are addressed.

Here’s how each lesson aligns with the NCSS and MoSTEP standards respectively: Lesson #1 = Standard #1/2 Standard #3 Lesson #2 = Standard #7 Standard #5 Lesson #3 = Standard #4/5 Standard #7 Lesson #4 = Standard #3/9 Standard #6


Lesson #5 = Standard #6/10 Standard #2/4 Lesson #6 = Standard #8 None

We have established two target benchmarks for this assessment: (1) that 80% of the cohort achieve a rating of 3 (meets) or 4 (exceeds) on each lesson and (2) that in each lesson category a rating of 3.00 is achieved. Any lesson that fails to receive a rating of meets or exceeds, must be revised and resubmitted until that lesson achieves the required benchmark. It should be noted that the 80% benchmark is less than the 100% benchmark set for the Unit’s assessments. The reason is two-fold. First, the NCSS Lesson Plan assignment is a departmental assessment. Second, the NCSS Lesson Plan assignment is usually completed one to two semesters prior to student teaching. Because it is not a field experience assessment, students don’t have the benefit of consistent and long-term classroom teaching and reflection when writing these six lessons. A less stringent, perhaps more reasonable, benchmark was therefore chosen.

See Appendix E for a copy of the assessment, instructions, and scoring rubrics; see Appendix F for the data tables.

Unit Project: The Unit Project is completed by all social studies education majors in the required course SoSc 4074 (Methods of Teaching Social Studies). The assignment requires students to prepare a coherent series of lessons over a unit of study that will be taught during the student teaching semester. The choice of the unit topic is done in consultation with the district supervisor in whose classroom the student will complete student teaching. The national and state subject standards that each unit addresses cannot be determined ahead of time by the social studies method instructor. It is therefore difficult to claim that in every semester or academic year that all ten NCSS standards and six of the eight MoSTEP standards are addressed in each student’s unit or are met collectively. Nonetheless, it can be claimed that over the course of fifteen semesters—the first semester in which this project was assigned was the fall of 2001—all national and state standards have been addressed. We have chosen not to align this assessment with specific national and state standards, but instead to present the data as evidence that our social studies education majors possess the capacity to provide instruction in the social studies.

We have established two target benchmarks for this assessment: (1) that 80% of the students achieve ratings of 3 (meets) or 4 (exceeds) on the unit and (2) that the collective rating for the units in each semester is at least 3.00. It should be noted that the 80% benchmark is less than the 100% benchmark set for the Unit’s assessments. The reason is two-fold. First, the Unit Project is a departmental assessment. Second, the Unit Project is completed prior to student teaching, therefore not a field experience assessment, when students have not had the benefit of consistent classroom teaching and reflection.


Social Studies Content Insert: All social studies education majors must be evaluated during the student teaching semester as to their performance in the classroom. One aspect of that evaluation is the teaching of social studies content. The generic form used to evaluate all student teachers contains a brief section for the assessment of content knowledge. The language, however, is


content general and not aligned with the state’s subject content specific standards for pre-service teachers (MoSTEP Standards). To assess more accurately a student candidate’s abilities to teach social studies content, a content specific assessment instrument was created, which was aligned with both state and national subject matter standards. In concert, during the student teaching semester, the university and district supervisors will complete this evaluation form. This form was first used during the spring semester of 2006 and as a result, we have five semesters of data.

The Social Studies Content Insert seeks to address two sets of social studies standards: Those of DESE (the state) and those of NCSS (the national). As a result, the instrument does double duty. The primary emphasis, however, is upon the state’s subject specific social studies standards. This reflects a revision of the state standards in spring 2005 to align them more closely with the national content standards of NCSS. The state has designated eight social studies content competencies. Most of them align neatly with corresponding NCSS content standards. As a result, social studies education programs in Missouri can create a content specific assessment instrument that can kill two birds with one stone.

The following provides the alignment of the MoSTEP social studies standards with the NCSS content standards as published by Department of Secondary and Elementary Education (DESE):

Social studies as a field of study (NCSS 1.1 – 1.10) Principles expressed in documents shaping constitutional democracy in the United States

(NCSS 1.10) Continuity and change in the history of Missouri, the United States and the World (NCSS

1.2) Principles and processes of governance systems (NCSS 1.6 & 1.10) Economic concepts and principles (NCSS 1.7) Major elements of geographical study and analysis (NCSS 1.3) Relationships of individuals and groups to institutions and cultural traditions (NCSS 1.1,

1.4, 1.5, 1.8, & 1.9) Social science tools and inquiry (no specific NCSS standard)

We have established two target benchmarks: (1) that 100% of the cohort receive a rating of meets or exceeds in each of the eight content standards and (2) that a rating score of 2.50 in each of the eight content standards.


5. Field Placement Assessments:

The Social Studies Education Program has available several assessments that evaluate the performance of its social studies majors while in the field. These include: (1) Unit/Lesson Plan, (2) Dispositions, (3) Impact upon Student Learning, and (4) Student Teaching Evaluation.


Unit-Lesson Plan:

The Unit-Lesson Plan Assessment is a unit-wide assessment. The assessment is completed during the student teacher semester. The student is responsible for preparing a unit for evaluation and teaching a lesson from the unit. The unit may or may be the same one that the student teacher prepared in completion of the unit project assignment in SoSc 4074. In putting together the requirements and components of the NCSS Lesson Plan assignment and the Unit Project assignment (see above), we tried to incorporate most of what is found in the Unit-Lesson Plan assessment. Both the Department’s and Unit’s assessments, then, are similar in what they look for and similar in how they measure the work of the students. The main difference is that the Department’s assessments are evaluated prior to student teaching, while the Unit’s assessments are completed during student teaching. The Unit’s assessments are rated on a 3-point scale, while the Department’s assessments are on a 4-point scale.

We have established two target benchmarks: (1) that 100% of the units/lessons receive a rating of meets or exceeds and (2) that the collective rating for the units/lessons is at least 2.50.


Dispositions:

The Disposition Assessment is a unit-wide assessment. The instrument evaluates the pre-service teacher on twelve attitudes. The disposition assessment is first done during EdCI 2100, then repeated at the time of approval to student teach, and completed as a summative evaluation during student teaching. We focus on the summative assessment. Like other Unit assessments, this instrument has a 3-point rating system (exceeds, meets, progressing, doesn’t meet, not observed).

We have established two target benchmarks: (1) that 100% of the social studies student teachers receive a rating of meets or exceeds in each of the twelve disposition categories and (2) that the collective rating for each of the twelve dispositions is at least 2.50.


Impact upon Student Learning:

The Impact upon Student Learning is a unit-wide assessment. The instrument is used to measure the impact that instruction has upon the learning of students in the classroom. All social studies education majors will teach a lesson in the content area during the student teaching semester. Three Unit-wide instruments—formative, summative, and reflection—are used to measure impact and improve future teaching. Each instrument uses a 3-point rating system.


We have established two target benchmarks: (1) that 100% of the social studies student teachers receive a rating of meets or exceeds in each of the three instruments and (2) that the collective rating for each instrument is at least 2.50.


Student Teaching Evaluation:

The Student Teaching Evaluation is a unit-wide assessment. The instrument measures the performance of the social studies student teacher according to the MoSTEP Standards for Pre-service Teachers. There are eleven standards designed to measure the candidate in three areas: content knowledge, pedagogical skills, and dispositions. The instrument employs a 3-point scale.

The Social Studies program sees this assessment as the penultimate evaluation. Student teaching is the culmination of the education program. This is when pre-service teachers draw upon all that has been learned in content and pedagogy courses in order to demonstrate that they possess the knowledge, skills, and dispositions to succeed in the social studies classroom. We therefore see the summative evaluation of the student teaching experience as the true and best measure of whether or not a pre-service teacher can show competency in the MoSTEP standards. Prior to the fall semester of 2005, we utilized the Candidate Portfolio as the main evidence of competency in the MoSTEP pre-service standards. Once the Unit removed the portfolio as a required unit assessment, the Social Studies program has relied solely upon the Student Teaching Evaluation to provide evidence of the competency of our social studies students in the eleven MoSTEP standards.

We have established two target benchmarks: (1) that 100% of the social studies student teachers receive a rating of meets or exceeds in each of the eleven MoSTEP standards and (2) that the collective rating for each of the eleven standards is at least 2.50.

See Appendix E for a copy of the assessment, instructions, and scoring rubrics; see Appendix F for the data tables. 6. TEAC Student Surveys:

For copies of the TEAC Student Surveys, see the Education Document Center (EDC).

7. TEAC Employer Surveys:

For copies of the TEAC Employer Surveys, see the Education Document Center (EDC).


ASSESSMENT DATA - 4.4

1. C-BASE:

As discussed earlier, the College BASE Exam is a state-mandated education requirement. To be admitted to any teacher education program, candidates must achieve a passing score in each of the four subject areas and the writing component. Its value to the social studies program is limited because it is an entrance exam and not an exit exam. It doesn’t tell us what our graduates know at the end of our program, only what they have learned prior to being admitted. As such, it tells us that our pre-service candidates do have minimal competency in five tested areas. We would expect, or at least hope, that those students who are social studies education majors would score well on the social studies section. The data shows that this is indeed true. The highest score of our social studies students is in the social studies section. This tells us that prior to admission to the teacher education program; they possess satisfactory knowledge in social studies and should add to that knowledge while completing the course work for the BSE in Social Studies. Table 5: CBASE Scores

Yea

r

# Stud

ents

Pass

Rat

e

1st T

ime

Pass

Rat

e

# T

otal

A

ttem

pts Average Subtest Scores

English Writing Science Math Social Studies

2002-03 55 92.7% 81.8% 1.15 308.5 305.2 316.5 312.6 349.52003-04 72 93.1% 77.8% 1.24 297.5 293.4 303.0 304.1 333.92004-05 54 92.6% 81.5% 1.35 303.6 299.5 300.1 300.8 331.42005-06 60 88.3% 70.0% 1.45 303.5 295.5 294.6 297.9 335.82006-07 62 96.8% 80.6% 1.27 310.0 301.8 311.9 312.5 352.12007-08 65 92.3% 76.9% 1.20 307.4 305.7 313.0 313.6 346.4

2. Cumulative GPA:

The table below provides the cumulative GPA for two groups of social studies education students: (1) the grades of those upon entry into the teacher education program and (2) the grades of those who complete the degree requirements and graduate with a BSE – Social Studies.

The data shows that the grades of the social studies education candidates improve after entry into the program. This may be the result of several factors. First, students have completed almost all of their general education courses by the time of entry. That means that the majority of the courses remaining are in the social studies major. The grades should improve as a result. Second, social studies candidates enter the teacher education program usually a year or a year and a half away from student teaching. The maturity of students nearly three years after entry into college may therefore be a factor in better academic performance.


Entering GPA Graduating GPAMajor 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007Social

Studies 3.05 2.80 2.88 2.83 2.91 2.99 3.28 3.32 3.34 3.19 3.32 3.26

3. Performance in Clinical Practice:

Unit-Lesson Plans:

This assessment instrument has been employed in the field since the fall semester of 2005. We thus have three years of data covering 54 student teachers. Data for two student teachers is missing. We have established two target benchmarks: (1) that 100% of the units-lessons receive a rating of meets or exceeds and (2) that the collective rating for the units and lessons is at least 2.50.

An analysis of the data shows that our social studies education students have met the first target benchmark for lessons twice and for the unit once. The second target benchmark of a 2.50 rating has been met every year in each category. Although the first target benchmark was not achieved every year, the goal of 100% of all student teachers meeting or exceeding expectations is a lofty goal, one for which the program strives. But at the same time, we realize that perfection (100% rating) is extremely hard to obtain. We note that in those years in which our students fell short, the rating in every case exceeded 90 percent. Given these numbers, we are confident in concluding that our social studies candidates leave our program able to plan and present social studies content for the social studies classroom.

See Appendix E for a copy of the assessment, instructions, and scoring rubrics; see Appendix F for the data tables. Dispositions:

This assessment instrument has been employed in the field since the fall semester of 2005. We have three years of data covering 54 student teachers (data is missing for two student teachers). Because of the nature of the data (12 dispositions over three years), we chose to look at the cumulative numbers rather than a year-by-year analysis. We set two target benchmarks: (1) that 100% of the social studies student teachers receive a rating of meets or exceeds in each of the twelve disposition categories and (2) that the collective rating for each of the twelve dispositions is at least 2.50.

An analysis of the data reveals that our social studies student teachers met the first target benchmark twice (2 out of 12 dispositions) and the second target benchmark ten times (10 out of the 12 dispositions). Despite missing the first target benchmark ten times, a closer analysis shows that in all ten cases the percentage that met or exceeded was above 95 percent. Not a single student received a rating of “doesn’t meet.” All those that failed to reach the standard were judged as “progressing.” Another look at the second target benchmark—the 2.50 rating—shows that the two dispositions below the mark (dispositions #6 and #12) came in with ratings


above 2.45. These two are obviously not where we want them; however, they are extremely close and therefore, are not cause for undue alarm. Nonetheless, they do merit attention.

We will address this in two ways. First, during the formative disposition meeting between the program coordinator and the student, which occurs the semester prior to student teaching when the student seeks department approval to student teach, the coordinator will stress that these are two attitudes where weakness has been seen. Second, during the social studies methods course (SoSc 4074)—taken during the first five weeks of the student teaching semester—the instructor will emphasize the importance of these two dispositions. Overall, we are generally pleased with the attitudes of our social studies student teachers and believe the data supports our sentiment.

See Appendix E for a copy of the assessment, instructions, and scoring rubrics; see Appendix F for the data tables. Student Teaching Evaluation:

The current Student Teaching Evaluation went into use the fall semester of 2005. We have data for three years covering 55 student teachers (data is missing for one student). Because of the nature of the data (11 competencies for 55 students over three years), we chose to look at the cumulative numbers rather than a year-by-year analysis. We set two target benchmarks: (1) that 100% of the social studies student teachers receive a rating of meets or exceeds in each of the eleven standards and (2) that the collective rating for each of the eleven standards is at least 2.50. Our analysis of the data reveals that our social studies student teachers met the first target benchmark four times (4 out of the 11 standards) and the second target benchmark nine times (9 out of the 11 standards). Despite missing the first target benchmark seven times, a closer analysis shows that in all seven cases the percentage that met or exceeded was above 90 percent. Not a single student received a rating of “doesn’t meet.” All those, and there were 16, who failed to reach the standard were judged as “progressing.” Given that the target benchmark is the ideal, the fact that 90% of all our student teachers either met or exceeded expectations in all the MoSTEP standards is solid evidence of their competency. A second look at the second target benchmark—the 2.50 rating—shows that the two competencies beneath the mark (standard 1.2.3 and standard 1.2.6) had ratings above 2.40. These two are obviously not where we want them, but once again they are extremely close.

As noted in an earlier section on the Student Teacher Evaluation, we did not make this assessment instrument the sole measure of meeting the eleven MoSTEP standards until the spring of 2007. There was a time we used the Student Portfolio exclusively (prior to the fall of 2005) and then in concert with the Student Teaching Evaluation (fall 2005 through fall 2006). During the time of its usage, the Portfolio was set up on a Pass-Fail basis. Students assembled artifacts of their work which they believed demonstrated competency in each of the eleven MoSTEP standards. Each artifact was accompanied by a written cover sheet spelling out where/when the artifact was created, how the document met the standard, and the impact the artifact had upon their understanding of the standard. Students submitted their portfolios for review during the student teaching semester. The Coordinator of the Program evaluated each


portfolio. Those that did not pass in all standards had to be revised and resubmitted. This continued until the portfolio finally measured up to expectations.

The data available (covering eleven semesters from the fall 2001 through the fall 2006) shows that 118 student teachers had portfolios approved (average of eleven portfolios per semester). Data that would tell how many submissions were made by every student before receiving approval is not available. We cannot therefore provide any statistical information on first-time pass rates. We also don’t know with certainty whether any students never passed the portfolio. There were several (probably less than five) who didn’t have the portfolio complete when graduation occurred. All, however, eventually did make the necessary revisions. The table below provides some data.

Portfolios Social

Studies2001-

022002-

032003-

042004-

052005-

06Fall

2006 TotalsPassing # 20 18 29 19 25 7 118

Part of the reason for dropping the portfolio as a departmental assessment was the challenge that the project posed for both students and coordinator. As mentioned, the portfolio was completed and submitted during the student teaching semester. Student teaching is difficult enough. The additional burden of the portfolio was troublesome. Moreover, the value of the exercise—although not without merit—seemed contrived. We maintained, and still do, that the ultimate test of an educational student’s mastery of the MoSTEP standards is the student teaching experience. Here is where content knowledge, pedagogical skills, and professional dispositions are put to the test in the daily caldron of the classroom. That is why we use the Student Teaching Evaluation as the sole assessment instrument for evaluating the social studies candidates’ mastery of the state’s pre-service teaching standards. See Appendix E for a copy of the assessment, instructions, and scoring rubrics; see Appendix F for the data tables.

4. Exit Exam (Praxis):

The Praxis Exam for Social Studies is the most important content assessment for the Social Studies Program. First, our graduates cannot be certified to teach social studies in Missouri without achieving a passing score of 152. Second, the scores—the overall score and the six subscores—tell us how well our candidates know the specific content areas and thus give us valuable feedback about the course of study the degree requires.

We have established two target benchmark areas focusing on the overall score and the subscores. We evaluate the overall score in two ways: (1) the passing rate (how many score 152 or above) and (2) where that score falls within the three performance ranges. We analyze the subscores in two ways also: (1) the passing rate in each subscore area and (2) where those subscores fall within the three performance ranges. In all four areas, our benchmark is 80%. We want 80% of the cohort to have an overall score of 152 or above, 80% to have an overall score that falls within


the average and above average range, 80% to answer fifty percent of the questions in each sub-score category, and 80% to have subscores that fall within the average and above range.

Analysis of the data collected since the fall of 2002 (6 academic years) indicates that our social studies candidates (114) are meeting all four target benchmarks.

Overall Passing Rate: A total of 114 students have taken the Praxis. A total of 106 have passed. This is a pass rate 93.0%, which is above our benchmark of 80%.

Overall Performance Range: Of the 114 social studies candidates who have taken the Praxis, eighteen (15.8%) had scores below the average performance range, seventy-five (65.8%) fell within the average performance range, and twenty-one (18.4%) scored above the average performance range. The total for those scoring within and above the average performance range is 84.2%, which is above the 80% target benchmark.Sub-Score Passing Rate: We have sub-scores for 110 students in the cohort. In each of the six sub-score content areas, which correspond to eight of the ten NCSS content standards and six of the eight MoSTEP content standards, the students scored above the 80% target benchmark except for economics.

Sub-Score Performance Range: An examination of each sub-score category shows that in all cases, more than 80% of the cohort scored in the average and above performance range. When all the sub-score categories are combined, only 8.6% of all sub-scores were below the average performance range, while 91.4% were average and above.

Based upon these results, our Praxis scores indicate that our social studies education majors are acquiring through the prescribed course of study the content knowledge expected of a prospective pre-service teacher and required by the NCSS and DESE content standards. Only in the content area of economics is there concern because the passing rate in that sub-score category is slightly below the 80% target benchmark (76.4%).

In addition to the data table below, see Appendix F for the data tables mentioned directly above.

Table 6: Praxis Scores

Yea

r

# Stud

ent

s Pass

R

ate

1st T

ime

Pass

R

ate

Average Subtest Scores1/2HistoryUS/Wd

3Govern

4Geog

5Econ

6BehavScience

2002-03 15 14 13 19.0/17.7 15.2 12.9 12.3 9.42003-04 26 24 22 17.8/18.4 14.1 13.6 10.7 9.02004-05 16 13 13 18.4/16.2 12.7 11.6 10.4 8.62005-06 25 23 21 18.2/18.7 13.7 12.8 10.8 8.32006-07 17 17 17 18.9/20.0 14.9 13.4 12.3 8.62007-08 15 15 14 17.9/19.1 14.9 12.0 10.7 7.8

5. Course Grades:

A second assessment method that the Social Studies Program uses to evaluate the content knowledge of our candidates is course grades in the content area. Every social studies education


major must complete a prescribed course of study consisting of 60-credit hour (20 courses) of social science course work. Certain courses of the twenty are required of all social studies education majors. These eleven courses match up with all eight MoSTEP Social Studies Subject Competencies. As with Praxis Exam, the data from these course grades will tell us how well our candidates know required content.

We have chosen to display the data in two ways: (1) a table showing all eight MoSTEP standards and the courses that address each one and the grade distribution in each course and category since the academic year 2002-03 and (2) a table showing the yearly GPA for each of the eight MoSTEP standards and the totals for the entire six years. In both areas, recognizing that social studies education majors must earn at least a grade of C in order for the course to count, our benchmark for each standard is a course GPA of 3.00.

The selected required courses align with the eight state social studies content standards. The alignment in each case is relatively clear. The following provides a brief description of what courses meet what standards and why.

Standard 1.2.1.1.1 (Social Studies as a Field of Study): This standard requires that students learn the definition and purposes of social studies, the major themes or concepts of the disciplines making up the social studies, and how to integrate knowledge across the social studies and between the social studies and other disciplines. The course SoSc 4050 (The Social Studies) was created after NCSS evaluation in the 1990s. The course has evolved since then and in its current form fulfills this standard as described.

Standard 1.2.1.1.2 (Principles Expressed in Documents Shaping Constitutional Democracy in the United States): Social studies students complete course work in this standard primarily through the two US history surveys (Hist 1350 & 1351) and through two political science courses on American and state government (Pols 1510 & 2511).

Standard 1.2.1.1.3 (Continuity and Change in the History of Missouri, the United States and the World): All social studies students must complete course work in history. All are required to take the two US history surveys (Hist 1350 & 1351) and two world history surveys (choose from Hist 2400, 2401, & 2402).

Standard 1.2.1.1.4 (Principles and Processes of Governance Systems): All social studies students must complete course work in political science. All must complete a course on national government (Pols 1510) and on state government (Pols 2511). In combination, these two courses address the content required of this standard.

Standard 1.2.1.1.5 (Economic Concepts and Principles): All social studies students must take course work in economics. All must complete a single economics course (Econ 1010) on macroeconomics.

Standard 1.2.1.1.6 (The Major Elements of Geographical Study and Analysis): All social studies students must take course work in geography. All must take Geog 2212 which surveys the geography of the world and the principles underlying geographic development.

Standard 1.2.1.1.7 (Relationships of Individuals and Groups to Institutions and Cultural Traditions): All social studies students must take course work in sociology. All must complete Socs 1800 which focuses on understanding the behavior of people in various relations and social on settings and on the basic concepts and subfields of sociology.


Two other social science disciplines that also address parts of this standard are anthropology and psychology. Social studies candidates are not required to take an introductory course in either area. They may, but are not required, to take an anthropology course of their choosing. They do take several education psychology courses but we chose not to include any of them in this standard.

Standard 1.2.1.1.8 (Social Science Tools and Inquiry): This standard requires social studies research paper based upon primary sources. The course SoSc 3010 (Writing in the Social Sciences) is designed to achieve these learning objectives and thus fulfills the content requirements of this standard.

Based upon these results, the course grades indicate that our social studies education majors are acquiring through these required courses, the content knowledge that sufficiently addressed the DESE MoSTEP content standards. We note, however, several interesting facts worthy of consideration. First, all of the content standards met the 3.00 GPA benchmark every year except on two occasions. Economics (Standard 5) earned a 2.93 one year and Social Studies Inquiry (Standard 8) finished one year at 2.95. This is not that surprising when one realizes that the two lowest GPA standards were in those two areas (3.01 and 3.15 respectively). This reflects in part that these two courses (Econ 1010 and SoSc 3010) are viewed as difficult and challenging. Nonetheless, when one considers the total GPA for each year (all eight standards) and the total GPA for each standard over six years, the rating exceeds the target benchmark of 3.00. Second, the rating for History 2401 failed to reach the 3.00 benchmark, coming in at 2.97. We have no definitive explanation other than those who teach this course tend to have high expectations and reputations for being tough graders. That in itself is not a cause for alarm. The course, when combined with the other two world history surveys that students can take (they must two), produces an overall rating of 3.14. With this in mind, we are confident that our social studies education students are learning and demonstrating state content competencies in the required social studies core courses. See Appendix F for the data tables.

6. Candidate Performance Assessments:

NCSS Lesson Plan:

The data for the NCSS Lesson Plan assessment, as it is now configured, covers two and a half years (5 semesters). Forty-seven students completed these six lessons while taking the required course SoSc 4050 (The Social Studies). Each of the six lessons corresponds to social studies content standards created by NCSS and DESE (for more information on how the lessons match national and state standards, see “Pedagogy Assessments” in the section entitled Description of Program Assessment System). We established two target benchmarks for this assessment: (1) that 80% of the cohort achieve a rating of 3 (meets) or 4 (exceeds) on each lesson and (2) that in each lesson category a rating of 3.00 is achieved.

The data shows that for every lesson, save one, the students achieved the benchmarks. The overall numbers show 84.9% of all lessons met or exceeded expectations with a rating score of 3.31, well above the 3.00 target.


The aggregate data therefore demonstrates that our social studies education majors possess the capacity to plan instruction in the social studies. Because each lesson is tied to a specific NCSS standard or standards, and these in turn match up with DESE content standards, our students can clearly write lessons for the many disciplines that comprise the field of social studies. In one category, however, the data reveals a problem. In lesson #1, students failed to meet either target benchmark with only 70.2% achieving ratings of 3 (meets) or 4 (exceeds) and an overall rating of 2.94. The reason, we maintain, is that this lesson is the first completed of the six. Even though students submit a practice lesson prior to lesson #1 and have that lesson evaluated, they traditionally do not rise to the standards expected in this first lesson. Learning how to write a lesson that satisfies expectations takes effort and time. The fact that subsequent lessons do meet the target benchmarks is evidence that students acquire the necessary skills in lesson preparation. Furthermore, to insure that students strive to meet the standards, any lesson that fails to receive a rating of 3 (meets) or 4 (exceeds) must be revised and resubmitted until that lesson receives that rating. Because of these stipulations, we believed our social studies education meet the pedagogical and professional standards for effectively planning classroom-based instruction.


Unit Project: The Unit Project has been the central assignment in SoSc 4074 (Methods of Teaching Social Studies) since the spring semester of 2001. The data below covers the six year period from the fall 2002 through the spring 2008. During that time 115 student teachers completed the Unit Project assignment. We set two target benchmarks: (1) that 80% of the units earn a rating of meets or exceeds and (2) that the collective rating of the units is at least 3.00.

Our analysis of the data reveals that in all years both target benchmarks were met. For the first benchmark, the percentage of units meeting the target ranged from 84.6% to 93.3%, with two years within the 90% range and four years within the 80% range. For the second benchmark, the collective score of the units ranged from 3.15 to 3.73, with three at or below 3.25 and three above 3.25. Overall, 88.7% of all the units met the 80% threshold with a combined rating of 3.30.

The aggregate data therefore demonstrates that our social studies education majors possess the capacity to plan instruction in the social studies as evidenced by reaching the two target benchmarks. We note, however, that thirteen (13) students failed to produce units that met or exceeded standards. Twelve (12) created units assessed as progressing, which, although not optimal, is generally acceptable. Only one (1) failed to meet even that standard. In this instance the student, despite extensions and assistance, had personal issues outside the classroom which affected his performance on what is a rather extensive and demanding assignment. When considered in totality, however, the data shows that our social studies majors meet the pedagogical and professional standards set by DESE for effectively planning classroom-based instruction.



Social Studies Insert:

The social studies content insert, as now configured, has been in used since the spring semester of 2006. In the five semesters of its use, forty-seven students have been evaluated. Data exists for forty students. Seven of the assessments are missing; forty-five are complete. We have established two target benchmarks: (1) that 100% of the cohort receive a rating of meets or exceeds in each of the eight content standards and (2) that a rating score of 2.50 in each of the eight content standards.

Our analysis of the data reveals that the first target benchmark was achieved for five of the eight content standards and the second target benchmark was reached for three of the eight content standards. Those three standards, which failed to reach the 100% threshold, did achieve ratings over 90 percent. The five standards falling short of the 2.50 rating all had scores above 2.40, except one. Standard five, which deals with economics, had a 2.34.

Based upon these results, our social studies education majors have demonstrated the ability to teach socials studies content effectively during the student teaching experience. This would indicate that not only do our majors possess appropriate content knowledge, but also the pedagogical skills and dispositions to impart that knowledge successfully. Having praised our efforts to produce such stellar students, we must note that the evaluation of our candidates during student teaching is not done by any faculty member from the Department of History and Anthropology. In fact, most of our university supervisors are not social studies certified. We fully recognize the problem but because of staffing shortages it is simply impossible to send faculty from our department. Through appropriate training of university supervisors and carefully constructed assessment instruments, we hope to lessen the impact of this deficiency. Moreover, the district supervisors, who in fact are responsible for filling out the content-specific form, are properly certified. Furthermore, this assessment must be placed within the larger context of all the assessments. Our record of success for reaching and surpassing the target benchmarks in all other assessments is evidence of a solid program of teacher education preparation.


7. Results from TEAC Student and Employer Surveys:

The Social Studies Program has, quite frankly, not made extensive use of the TEAC surveys. In part that was because the survey of student teachers did not break down the results according to content area. As a result, we had no way of knowing how our social studies students evaluated their educational experience and the education program. This changed with the 2008 TEAC survey. In the survey of first and second year teachers, the data has been presented by content major since 2004. One questions of particular importance is how social studies students view the advice and counseling received at the department level. This directly involves the work done by


Dr. Paul Rorvig (Coordinator of the Program) and Dr. Sara Sundberg. The survey of all students teaches shows that they have consistently rated such advisement between 4.0-4.2 (on a 5-point scale) since 2004. This doesn’t directly help our program. This was rectified with the 2008 survey. That survey revealed that social studies student teachers rated our departmental advisement as 4.8. That provides seemingly sound evidence that our majors believe that the advisement process and system is effective. We look forward to future surveys to see if this is a trend or an aberration.

8. Documentation of Candidate Impact on p-12 Learning:

The three instruments used to measure impact upon student learning have been employed in the field since the fall semester of 2005. In the six semesters or three academic years for which data exists, fifty-five candidates student taught. Data exists from all three instruments for fifty-three of the students. We have established two target benchmarks: (1) that 100% of the cohort receives a rating of meets or exceeds on each instrument and (2) that a rating of 2.50 be achieved on each instrument.

The data shows that the target rating of 2.50 has been reached for all three instruments and in all three academic years, while the target rating of 100% has been met for two instruments (formative and summative) in two academic years and for one instrument (reflection) in only one academic year. In those years when the target rating of 100% was not achieved, the percentage in each case always exceeded 90%. Based upon these results, our social studies education students have demonstrated that they have the ability to design varied assessment strategies, to implement those strategies in the classroom, to use assessment data to modify instruction, and to reflect upon their impact upon student learning.

For the assessment instruments, see Appendix E; for the assessment data tables, see Appendix F.

9. How Unit and Program Data is Used to Analyze and Used to Strengthen the Program:The movement to use performance-based outcomes as the measure of candidate and program competency has gained traction in the education community over the past decade. At the state and national levels this has resulted in both DESE and NCSS changing their standards and expectations. This was quite evident when our education program faced NCATE accreditation in 2002. In the wake of that NCATE visit, the Unit made significant modifications in how candidates would be assessed. Many of the unit-wide assessments now in use were developed over the summer of 2005 and piloted during the 2005-06 school year.

The Social Studies program has traveled the same path. We submitted our initial review in January 2001. The reviewers did not approve the program for national recognition. Based upon their critique, a rejoinder was put forward in October 2001 which sought to address the weaknesses found in the program. At the core of that rejoinder was the creation and eventual implementation of a series of assessments—several of which are still in use today—tied directly to candidate performance. In accordance with NCSS guidelines, we annually collected and analyzed the data produced by our assessment instruments. The expectation was that the data would provide evidence that our social studies candidates met the NCSS standards for content (knowledge of the subject matter) and pedagogy (ability to teach that subject matter). We also


expected that the data would reveal weaknesses in these two areas, thus necessitating corrective measures. We were not wrong in either case.

The purpose of this section is to discuss the results of our analysis. We will examine both the strengths and weaknesses in our program as it relates to (1) content knowledge, (2) professional knowledge, skill, and dispositions, and (3) student learning. In a nutshell, the program's strengths reside in #1 and #2; our weakness is in #3.

1. Content Knowledge:

The results of the Praxis exam assessment and the course grades assessment provide solid evidence that our social studies candidates are acquiring the requisite content knowledge needed to be a high school social studies teacher. The Praxis stands as the most important external assessment for determining content competency and state licensure. When a social studies program has a pass rate of 93.0%, has 84.2% of all candidates score in the average and above average performance range, and has 91.4% of all the sub-scores in the average and above average performance range, it would be fair to conclude that it has a sound program of study. Moreover, when course grades reveal that for six academic years in all social science content areas, as measured by the DESE content standards, the target benchmark of 3.00 was exceeded, except on two occasions, it would be equally reasonable to draw the same conclusion. As we tell our prospective social studies candidates, the course work required to earn the BSE in social studies will equip you to teach content.

At the same time, the data from these assessments tell us that there are some deficiencies in content knowledge which must be addressed. As we noted when discussing changes under way in the program and as a result of the NCSS accreditation review conducted last spring, NCSS 1.8—Science, Technology, and Society—is one. Back in 2001-02, reviewers pointed out that our program needed to provide evidence that our candidates were acquiring content in standard 1.8. There was no single course in which this standard was the central focus nor was there a single required course that had a unit of study or assignment covering the theme. We thought that we could correct this by using course grades from the four courses needed to satisfy the general education technology requirement. But when NCSS made it clear that education technology application courses would not meet the standard, we created the STS project (Assessment 7). Although worthy, this assignment does not do justify to the standard. Consequently, after discussions with faculty in Department of Career and Technology Education, the course Technology and Change (CTE 2000) will become required for social studies majors beginning the 2009-10 academic year (once it completes the curriculum process) The course "explores the nature of technology, technological systems found in all cultures, the control of technology, and implications for change." (UCM 2007 undergraduate catalogue, 111). This course would be true to the intent of standard 1.8.

The Praxis data also reveals a slight but significant problem in one of the content areas. In all the sub-score categories on the Praxis exam, our candidates scored above the target benchmark of 80% passing except for economics (standard 1.7 for NCSS and standard 1.2.1.1.5 for DESE). Although the passing rate was close to the benchmark (76.4%), it gave us reason to pause. Why is this content area the only one below the benchmark? Besides the commonly held belief that


economics is simply a hard subject, a better reason, perhaps, might be that just one economics course (Macro) is required. To address this deficiency, the Micro economics course (Econ 1011) will be a requirement beginning in 2009-10 (once the proposal clears the curriculum process).

2. Professional and pedagogical knowledge, skill, and dispositions:

NCSS has always stressed that social studies education majors must demonstrate the capacity to provide instruction in the social studies. NCSS reviewers made this point empathically during their last review of our program. Performance-based assessments are a must. Consequently, we have made lesson and unit planning a central part of our social studies curriculum as evidenced by the NCSS Lesson Plan Assessment and the Unit Project Assessment which we got up and running soon after the last review, and the more recent addition of the Social Studies Content Insert and the Unit’s Unit-Lesson Plan Assessment. The data from these assessments show conclusively that our social studies candidates have the knowledge, skills, and dispositions to plan and deliver instruction in the many disciplines that make up the social studies.

In every NCSS content oriented standard (1.1-1.10), save one, the candidates met the target benchmark for lesson planning. Nearly 85% of lessons met or exceeded expectations. Similarly, the data for unit planning shows that 88.7% of all the units met or exceeded expectations and did so with an overall rating of 3.30. The Unit’s assessment instrument showed similar numbers with 96.3% of units and 98.1% of the lessons meeting or exceeding expectations. The data from the social studies content insert confirms this finding because 98.1% of the lessons taught by student teachers met or exceeded expectations. We feel confident that the instruction candidates receive about planning in our social studies courses is a strength of our program. To insure its continuation, any lesson prepared for the NCSS Lesson Plan assignment which fails to meet or exceed expectations (a rating of 3 or 4) must be revised until it reaches the target benchmark.

3. Student learning:

Although the data does not show there is a major problem in this area, there is concern that the program has been slow to recognize and incorporate the concepts embedded in the principle of assessing the impact of instruction upon student learning. In fact, the data derived from the Impact Upon Student Learning instruments indicate that when student learning is assessed, regardless of when in the student teaching semester, our candidates met or exceeded expectations over 95% of the time. Why, then, the concern?

Several reasons come to mind. First, the instruments employed are unit-wide assessments, not ones that were internally developed. They are used to assess candidates during the student teaching semester. No one from the department supervises our candidates. As a result, we do not have familiarity with the instruments. Thus, we may lack understanding and even some confidence in how they work in practice and how the data derived from them demonstrates NCSS or DESE content standards.

Second, NCSS standards, and some DESE, are content-centered. All evaluative instruments must ultimately align with this content. On the surface this appears to be a manageable task. Candidates teach content and do so utilizing a variety of instruction methods or strategies. Then


they examine the outcomes of their instruction and determine whether their pupils learned the social studies content that was taught. The crux of that effort is the assessment methods and tools used by the candidates. The unit-wide assessment instruments—formative evaluation, summative evaluation, and candidate reflection—all look for, indeed expect, candidates to use a variety of informal and formal assessment strategies to determine student learning and then to reflect upon the impact their instruction has upon student learning. What is problematic is how the data from the assessment instruments can be solidly tied to the NCSS and DESE content standards. There seems to be a disconnect which may ultimately go back to the fact that departmental members are not in the field using these assessment instruments.

The question that this raises is basic: What is the social studies program systematically doing to assist its candidates in assessing the impact that their instruction has upon student learning? The key word is systematic. In the three required social studies courses, there are several things being done that deal with student learning. In teaching how to write lessons, which is done in the course The Social Studies, the value of measurable learning objectives in assessment is stressed. A learning objective tells students what the teacher wants them to be able to do. The teacher must therefore decide the assessment method that will be employed to determine whether students learned the material. Moreover, all lesson plans must include an assessment section explaining how the lesson will be informally and formal assessed. In the social studies methods course, considerable time is spent discussing questioning strategies and techniques. Of particular importance is how oral questioning can be employed as an informal way to assess student learning. Equally valuable is the ability to write questions which target specific mental operations that pupils must perform in answering. As part of the unit project for the methods course, candidates create a test over the content of their unit which would in theory provide them with feedback as to the success of their instruction. Unfortunately, all these pieces, although valuable in assisting candidates in the development of assessment skills, are not in themselves systematically assessed as to their impact upon student learning. This is because it is virtually impossible to assess the impact upon student learning of these assessment skills when there are no "real high school students" to teach in the social studies courses. Candidates must wait for student teaching.

This, then, is the problem facing the social studies program. How can the instructional activities used in the social studies courses to teach candidates about assessment be themselves systematically assessed as to the impact they will have upon student learning when our candidates employ them during their student teaching? The data and standards demand an answer.


TECHNOLOGY

1. Describe How/Where Candidates are Taught to Integrate Technology into TheirClassrooms and Teaching:

UCM has been designated the technology school and students at UCM have access to a range of technology that will serve their future classroom needs. One of the General Education requirements is in the area of technology. All students must complete one course from an approved list of four. This requirement exposes students to the use of technology and the management of information derived from the most current technological information systems. This skill is specifically furthered for the pre-service teacher in EdCI 3500, which is the designated technology course that all secondary education majors must complete. In SoSc 4050, all social studies education majors finish the semester by teaching a short lesson to their classmates. In this micro-teaching assignment, students are encouraged to integrate technology into their lesson. The classroom is equipped with a Web-ready, multi-media computer system. As a result, virtually every lesson employs some technology, ranging from power-point presentations to short online video clips. During field experiences, students learn what technology is available in the various secondary social studies classrooms in area schools and they learn what in-service instruction is available to high school faculty. As a result, BSE – Social Studies candidates are technologically savvy and well versed in the ways that technology can be integrated into the classroom and into their teaching. In large measure, students today literally grow up with technology. They are comfortable with its uses and not hesitant to employ it. It is truly part of their culture.

2. Describe How University Content and Education Faculty Use Technology:

The increasing use of technology in society has, not surprisingly, found its way into academia. Those who teach content and education courses have available a wide variety of technology that can be utilized to enhance instruction. Virtually every classroom is equipped with Web-ready, multi-media computer systems. Moreover, faculty can use the university Blackboard system to manage every course that they teach, thereby providing students a convenient repository for information and materials. Numerous training sessions for employing the many features of Blackboard are offered on a regular basis. Additionally, as new technologies applicable to the classroom are introduced, their use is encouraged by the university through a variety of informational and training opportunities. As a result, one can state that UCM both encourages and supports the faculty use of technology.

3. Describe How Candidates are Required to Use Technology:

See section 1 directly above.


FACULTY

1. Collaboration and Formal Communication:

Two faculty members in the Department of History and Anthropology, Dr. Paul Rorvig and Dr. Sara Sundberg, are responsible for the secondary social studies education program. Dr. Rorvig, as the Coordinator of the program, shoulders the greater responsibility. Dr. Sundberg’s responsibilities are much less, though no less important. The two collaborate in ways both formal and informal. Formally, both share in the responsibility of recommending social studies students for admission to the teacher education program and for admission to student teaching. In both cases, there is a prescribed procedure for managing these requests which requires close collaboration. Informally, the two converse frequently about the program and the many concerns that arise over the course of an academic year. These informal discussions assist in determining the issues or problems that should be brought to the attention of the department and also what recommendations or proposals are put before the department for consideration. Essentially, the two serve as the liaisons to the department, charged with keeping the department informed about the social studies education program, which is the largest major in the department, and developments in the College of Education.

2. Content Faculty:

The faculty which teach courses in content that social studies education majors may take are housed in three colleges and five departments (for more specific information, see section #1 [Location of Certification Program] in “Description of Program”). Thus, in a very broad but real sense, all carry responsibility for the preparation of future teachers. Those who teach history shoulder the greatest responsibility because 24-credit hours (8 courses) out of the 60-credit hours (20 courses) required in the content area are in the discipline of history. Moreover, two more courses, totaling 6-credit hours and designated as social science (SoSc 3010 and SoSc 4050), are housed in the Department of History and Anthropology and taught by history faculty. The result is that fifty percent of the required coursework in content comes from a single department and that explains why the major is housed in that department.

The teaching of social studies pedagogy for the social studies major is done in three courses which are offered in both the fall and spring semesters: (1) SoSc 4050 (The Social Studies), (2) SoSc 4020 (Field Experience II), and (3) SoSc 4074 (Methods of Teaching Social Studies). Dr. Rorvig is the only faculty member who teaches these courses.

3. Professional Faculty:

The Professional Education Faculty (PEF) shall be the representative body of the Teacher Education Program (TEP) for the entire University. The role of the PEF shall be to review, support and implement the conceptual framework of the Teacher Education Program at the University of Central Missouri. Membership in PEF shall include all full-time Central faculty who (a) teach one or more classes in the teacher education program, (b) supervise field experiences or student teaching, (c) advise teacher education students, or (d) serve as chairs in departments that include PEF members. At the request of the Dean, department chairs identify


members of the PEF in the fall of each year, using the qualifications above. Membership in the PEF is required for all persons who serve on the Teacher Education Council. Based upon this criterion, only two members of the Department of History and Anthropology are in the PEF: (1) Dr. Paul Rorvig – standards a, b, c and (2) Dr. John Sheets - standard d. As will be discussed below, Dr. Rorvig does not supervise any student teachers. The department relies upon adjuncts chosen by the Office of Student Teaching to perform this responsibility.

4. Summary Table of Program Faculty’s Scholarly Activity:

See the individual vitae on file in the Education Document Center (EDC).

5. Individual Professional Development Activities:

See the individual vitae on file in the Education Document Center (EDC).

6. Student Teaching Supervision Responsibilities:

As noted previously, the two faculty members in the Department of History and Anthropology (Dr. Paul Rorvig and Dr. Sara Sundberg) with responsibility for the Social Studies Education program do not supervise any social studies student teachers. This reflects staffing inadequacies within the department. Both Dr. Rorvig and Sundberg carry full four-course teaching loads every semester (12-credit hours). Dr. Rorvig teaches two history and three social studies courses, while Dr. Sundberg teaches all history courses. Dr. Sundberg also serves as the Director of the Department’s Graduate History Program and receives a one-course release every spring for that service. As a result, adjuncts hired by the Office of Student Teaching supervise all secondary social studies student teachers. Most of these adjuncts are not certified in secondary social studies, although as former elementary teaches many have a minor in social studies. The department recognizes that these circumstances are not ideal, but given staffing and budgetary constraints, a permanent solution is beyond reach for the short term.

7. Advising Responsibilities:

As noted previously, the advisement of secondary social studies education students rests primarily with the Coordinator of the Social Studies Education program, Dr. Paul Rorvig. He is well-versed in degree and certification requirements and available to answer questions ranging from transfer credits to course scheduling. All social studies majors are encouraged to meet with the Coordinator as soon as possible in their college careers, particularly if a transfer student. The reason is the need to create a working file on each student which begins with the Social Studies Advisement Worksheet. This worksheet allows the tracking of a student’s academic progress. This insures the completion of degree requirements in a timely fashion by providing the Coordinator with critical information to better advice students about future deadlines and procedures.

The number of students who declare secondary social studies education as their major varies from year to year. The average over the last six academic years is 133 students. The Coordinator will not see all these students in a given semester or year. In fact, for the first two


years in college, most students will rely upon the advisement centers found in each of the Colleges of the university. For social studies education majors this will be the advisement center for the College of Arts, Humanities, and Social Sciences located in the Martin building. As a general rule, students will transition from college-level advisement to department-level advisement during the latter part of their second year or first part of their third year in school. This is driven in large measure by the need to secure departmental approval for admission to the Teacher Education Program. At this point, the Coordinator starts a file on the student. The Coordinator maintains in his office approximately 50 active student files. He will see these students on a fairly regular basis, usually once a semester, but increasingly so as they matriculate through the final stages of the program.

8. Process by Which Program Evaluates Teaching:

All members of the Department of History and Anthropology are evaluated in some form every semester and academic year (student evaluations, peer evaluation, and chair evaluation). Because Dr. Rorvig is the only department member who teaches the social studies pedagogy courses, his evaluations provide feedback as to the effectiveness of the social studies education program. The student evaluations are especially valuable, particularly those of the students who have just completed student teaching. The most important question asked these students is what they wished they had been taught. Rarely is it content. The overriding concern is pedagogy – How to do things in the classroom. Some of the issues fall within the purview of the College of Education and its courses (i.e.: classroom management), while some are specific to the teaching of social studies. Either way, the Social Studies Program uses this information to improve the three social studies pedagogy courses that the department offers. Consequently, these courses have undergone a steady evolution as student concerns have been evaluated and some incorporated into the course curriculum.

A good example is the place of the lecture in the social studies classroom. Many student teachers felt ill-prepared to lecture given the emphasis placed upon cooperative learning in their education courses. Yet, when they got in the field, they found that the lecture could not be totally avoided. As a result, a segment of the Social Studies Methods course (SoSc 4074) is now devoted to the social studies lecture – how to organize content and how to deliver that content effectively. In both cases, students learn pedagogical techniques and then apply or practice those techniques using social studies content. This approach allows Dr. Rorvig to evaluate what he teaches every semester in each course and to adjust, if needed, the curriculum to the concerns of the most recent cohort of student teachers. The thinking is that not every concern merits a change in the curriculum but if there is a persistent pattern of concern, a change may be warranted. The fact that these courses have indeed evolved in part because of student recommendations is testimony to the value of this reflective process.

9. Involvement in Beginning Teacher Assistance Program:

Through the College of Education and its centers, UCM's faculty and staff provide a variety of supports for first- and second-year teachers. The Missouri Center for Career Education oversees two teacher induction programs for the Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, Division of Career Education: the New Teacher Institute and the Missouri statewide


career education mentoring program. The New Teacher Institute is both an induction program to help new career education teachers adapt to the classroom and the first course of required college course work to receive a Missouri secondary career education teaching certificate. The statewide mentoring program pairs new career educators with a qualified mentor in their area of instruction for a two-year mentoring relationship. The Central Regional Professional Development Center supports the school districts in 14 west-central Missouri counties by providing high quality professional development to beginning educators. The Center provides both beginning teacher assistant programs and mentor training. The Center also partners with University departments and faculty to offer a Beginning Teacher Workshop each spring. Beginning in the Fall of 2008, the College of Education has also hosted a blog for graduates and first- and second-year teachers in the RPDC area.

10. Description of Training/Orientation Efforts for Part-Time Faculty:

The Social Studies Education Program has no training or orientation for part-time faculty. The reason is that no part-time faculty are hired to teach any of the social studies pedagogy courses. All are taught by a full-time member of the department who is the coordinator of the program. Adjuncts, however, are hired to observe social studies student teachers in the field. The choice and the training of these part-time faculty are done through the College of Education and specifically the Office of Student Teaching.


PROGRAM RESOURCES

As the Department of History and Anthropology is housed in the College of Arts, Humanities, and Social Sciences, most of the resources to support the BSE-Social Studies are provided by the Department of History and Anthropology and the College of Arts, Humanities, and Social Sciences. Those faculty members from the department who are directly involved in the social studies program in both teaching and advising are paid from funds coming from the Department of History and Anthropology and the College of Arts, Humanities, and Social Sciences. The adjuncts hired by the Office of Student Teaching to supervise social studies student teachers, however, are paid with monies from the College of Education. All classrooms in the Wood building that are assigned to the department are now multi-media and internet ready. The Department of History and Anthropology works closely with College of Education, and certainly office professionals and professional staff provide unit support to the Department of History and Anthropology and to other departments which house BSE programs. Data for reports, such as this one, are generated, collected and disseminated by the College of Education. In sum, while most of the resources to support the BSE-Social Studies are provided by the Department of History and Anthropology and the College of Arts, Humanities, and Social Sciences, the College of Education provides significant support to the BSE program. It is a cooperative endeavor.


Appendix A

Syllabi

Located in the Education Document Center


Appendix B

Course/Competency Matrix


Social Studies EducationStandards and Competency Crosswalk for

MoSTEP Standards for Teacher Education Programs

COURSE

STANDARD

1.2.1 1.2.2 1.2.3 1.2.4 1.2.5 1.2.6 1.2.7 1.2.8 1.2.9 1.2.10 1.2.11SoSc 4050:The Social Studies

I/M/A I/M/A I/M/A I/A I/A I/A

SoSc 4074:SS Methods M/A I/M/A I/M/A I/A I/A I/ASoSc 4020: Field Exp. II M/AEdCI 4595Student Tchg.

M/A M/A M/A M/A M/A M/A M/A M/A M/A M/A M/A

Note: I (Introduced) – The standard is included in the course syllabus and outline, generally at the awareness/recognition/recall levels of understanding. M (Mastered - The course provides candidates with the opportunity to demonstrate standard-based knowledge and skills in actual or simulated settings. A (Assessed) - Candidates knowledge and skills are formally or informally evaluated during this course using a variety of strategies (e.g. tests, observations, graded assignments).

Content Standards (next page)


Social Studies EducationStandards and Competency Crosswalk for

Social Studies 9-12 Education Competencies

REQUIRED COURSES THAT

ALL SOCIAL STUDIES

EDUCATION MAJORS MUST

TAKE

1.Social Studies as a Field of Study

2.Principles Expressed in Documents Shaping Constitutional Democracy in the United States

3.Continuity & Change in the History of Missouri, the United States, & the World

4.Principles & Processes of Governance Systems

5.Economic Concepts & Principles

6.The Major Elements of Geographical Study & Analysis

7.Relationships of Individuals & Groups to Institutions & Cultural Traditions

8.Social Science Tools & Inquiry

SoSc 3010:Writing in the Social Sciences

I/M/A

SoSc 4050:The Social Studies I/M/AHist 1350:US Survey to 1877 I/M/A I/M/A I/M/AHist 1351:US Survey from 1877

I/M/A I/M/A I/M/A

Pols 1510:Am. Government I/M/A I/M/APols 2511:State Government I/M/A I/M/A

Geog 2212:World Geography I/M/A


Econ 1010:Macroeconomics I/M/A

Soc 1800:General Sociology I/M/A

Hist 2400:Early World I/M/AHist 2401:Early Modern World

I/M/A

Hist 2402:Modern World I/M/ANote: I (Introduced) – The standard is included in the course syllabus and outline, generally at the awareness/recognition/recall levels of understanding. M (Mastered - The course provides candidates with the opportunity to demonstrate standard-based knowledge and skills in actual or simulated settings. A (Assessed) - Candidate knowledge and skills are formally or informally evaluated during this course using a variety of strategies (e.g. tests, observations, graded assignment)


Appendix C – 4-Year Plan and Advisement Worksheet


Four-Year Academic PlanSocial Studies Major, BS in Ed. Degree

University of Central Missouri. Your schedule may vary. Current or prospective Central Missouri students should contact the Department of History and Anthropology for further information or guidance.

Freshman Year – First Semester Hrs. Freshman Year – Second Semester Hrs.HIST 1350 History of the US to 18773 HIST 1351 History of the US from 1877 3SOC 1800 General Sociology 3 ECON 1010 Principles of Macroeconomics 3General Education Science 3-4 POLS 1510 American Government 3 (or Math)ENGL 1020 Composition I 3 General Education Math (or Science) 3-4General Education 3 ENGL 1030 Composition II 3Semester Total 15-16 Semester Total 15-16AE 1400 Freshman Seminar*

Sophomore Year – First Semester Hrs. Sophomore Year – Second Semester Hrs.HIST 2401 Hist - Early Modern World 3 HIST 2400 Hist – Early World or 3EDCI 2100 Foundations of Education 3 HIST 2402 Hist – Modern World*** and Field Experience Upper-Level Elective in GEOG for major 3EDCI 2240 Educational Psychology 3 General Education 8General Education 3Semester Total 15 Semester Total 17

Take the College BASE exam the semester following completion of 15 hour set of General Education courses. This test must be taken no later than the semester in which you have earned a total of 75 credit hours.

Junior Year – First Semester Hrs. Junior Year – Second Semester Hrs.SOSC 3010 Writing in Social Sciences3 HIST Upper-Level Electives**** 6HIST Upper-Level Electives**** 6 Upper-Level Elective in SOC or ANTH 3PSY 4200 Psy of Exceptional Child 2 PSY 4230 Psy of Adolescence 3EDCI 4300 Ed Measurement & Eval 2 EDCI 4210 Teaching Reading in Sec School 2General Education 3 General Education 3Semester Total 16 Semester Total 17

Students must pass all five areas of the C-BASE for Teachers Exam as a prerequisite for admission to the Teacher Education Program and prior to taking 4000-level Education courses.

Senior Year – First Semester Hrs. Senior Year – Second Semester Hrs.Upper-Level Electives in Major** 3 SOSC 4020 Secondary Field Experience II 1EDCI 3500 Sec Teaching & Behavioral Mgt 3 EDCI 4595 Student Teaching Secondary I 5EDCI 3550 Practicum in Sec Instruction 1 ICAP 4468 Student Teaching Secondary II 4


Semester Total 16 Semester Total 12

Social Studies Major, BS in Education Degree – 124 hours

*AE 1400 (1 hr) is highly recommended for academic success. AE 1400 is a free choice elective.

**Students choose upper-level electives from at least two of the following prefixes: GEOG, HIST, POLS, SOC, ANTH, or ECON.

***If selected, HIST 2402 will fulfill 3 hours of General Education Division II Area D. ****See catalogue for a list of History classes to fulfill the upper-level electives in

American History and World History requirements. This program must include at least one course that focuses on a non-western society,

nation, or region or on the non-western world. A list of the courses which fulfill this requirement is available from the Department of History and Anthropology and is on file with the academic advisors.

A 15-block of General Education courses in Math, Written Communication, History or Political Science, and Science must be completed in the first four semesters to prepare for the C-BASE exam. These courses are indicated on the plan in bold italics.

See the current catalogue for complete statement of academic policies, leveling, and prerequisites. Time to degree and course sequencing will be dependent upon Planned Placement in math, reading, and writing.


Social Studies MajorB. S. in Education Degree

(revised spring 06)

Student Name _____________________________ Student Number _____________Applicable Catalogue ________ Meeting Dates _______________

COURSE HOURS SEMESTER GRADE

MAJOR REQUIREMENTSSoSc 3010 (Writing in SS) 3 __________ _____ A ____ = ____ x 4 = ____SoSc 4050 (The SS) 3 __________ _____Hist 1350 (US to 1877) 3 __________ _____ B ____ = ____ x 3 = ____Hist 1351 (US after 1877) 3 __________ _____PolS 1510 (Am Gov) 3 __________ _____ C ____ = ____ x 2 = ____PolS 2511 (State Gov) 3 __________ _____Geog 2212 (World Geo) 3 __________ _____ D ____ = ____ x 1 = ____Econ 1010 (Princ of Eco) 3 __________ _____Soc 1800 (Gen Soc) 3 __________ _____ F ____ = ____ x 0 = ____

WORLD SEQUENCE ______ (Pts)/_____ (Hrs)Hist ______ 3 __________ _____Hist ______ 3 __________ _____ GPA ______ Date ________

UPPER ELECTIVES (3000-4000 level)Hist ______ (US) 3 __________ _____Hist ______ (US) 3 __________ _____Hist ______ (World) 3 __________ _____Hist ______ (World) 3 __________ _____Geog ______ 3 __________ _____Soc or Anth ______ 3 __________ _____

UPPER ELECTIVES (3000-4000 level)______________ 3 __________ _____ (in at least two of the ______________ 3 __________ _____ following: Geog, Hist, ______________ 3 __________ _____ Pol Sc, Soc, Anth, Econ)

TOTALS: 60 Hours (20 courses x 3 hours)

NON REQUIRED SS ELECTIVES Social Science Courses______________ 3 __________ _____ required: 20 ______________ 3 __________ _____ completed: ___________________ 3 __________ _____ in progress: __________________ 3 __________ _____ remaining: _____


Non Western Requirement: _____________ Admission to Teacher Education: _____________GPA of 2.5 in Social Sciences: ___________ Intended Semester of Student Teaching: ________ Praxis Score ______ Sub-Scores ________ Intent to Student Teach Form signed: ____________Special Memos Required: ________________________________________________________

EDU. COURSES HOURS SEMESTER GRADE EdCI 2100 (Foundations) 3 ___________ ______EdCI 2240 (Ed. Psy) 3 ___________ ______Psy 4200 (Exceptional Child) 2 ___________ ______Psy 4230 (Psy of Adolescence) 3 ___________ ______EdCI 4300 (Measure & Eval) 2 ___________ ______EdCI 4210 (Teaching Reading) 2 ___________ ______EdCI 3500 (Sec. Teach-Behav Man) 3 ___________ ______EdCI 3550 (Practicum) 1 ___________ ______

PROFESSIONAL SEMESTERSoSc 4074 (SS Methods) 2 ___________ _______ Education CoursesSoSc 4020 (Field Ex II) 1 ___________ _______ required: 12EdCI 4595 (St. Teach Secondary I) 5 ___________ _______ completed: ____ICAP 4468 (St. Teach Secondary II) 4 ___________ _______ in progress: ____

remaining: ____

NOTE THE FOLLOWING REQUIREMENTS:

EdCI 2100 & EdCI 2240 should be taken concurrently during the Sophomore YearPsy 4200 do not take EdSp 2100 insteadEdCI 4210, EdCI 3500, & EdCI 3550 cannot be taken before admission to teacher education programEdCI 3500 & EdCI 3550 must be taken the semester prior to student teaching semester

Planning Worksheet

How long before I can student teach?

Social Science: _____ courses = _____ hours Current Semester _______ Education: _____ courses = _____ hours # of Semesters needed _____Gen Edu: _____ courses = _____ hours Student Teaching Semester _______TOTAL _____ courses = _____ hours

The Professional Semester (12 hrs): __________. One Semester before Student Teaching ( hrs): ___.*SoSc 4074 (2): Methods of Teaching *EdCI 3500 (3): Sec Teaching &

Social Studies Behavior Management*SoSc 4020 (1): Secondary Field Experience II *EdCI 3550 (1): Practicum in Secondary *EdCI 4595 (5): Student Teaching Secondary I * Instruction*Icap 4468 (4): Student Teaching Secondary II *


Appendix D – Catalogue Pages, Course Descriptions


The following content courses are the required courses that all secondary social studies education majors must take. They are arranged in the order that they address the Social Studies 9-12 Education Competencies from Standard 1 to Standard 8.

SOSC 4050 The Social Studies* (3) The “structures” of the disciplines and practice in redesigning university course work for high school lessons. *Not available for graduate credit.

POLS 1510 American Government (3) The nature, philosophical bases, development, functions, structure, and processes of the government and politics of the United States and of Missouri. Emphasis on and analysis of the nature and development of the provisions and principles of the Constitution of the United States and of Missouri.

POLS 2511 State Government (3) Administrative, legislative, and judicial activities of state governments and their relationships to national and local governments with special emphasis on state and local governments in Missouri.

HIST 1350 History of the United States to 1877 (3) Survey of U.S. history from the age of exploration to 1877.

HIST 1351 History of the United States from 1877 (3) Survey of U.S. history from 1877 to present.

HIST 2400 History of the Early World (3) A survey of ancient and medieval civilizations from earliest times to 1300. Particular emphasis will be placed upon political, economic, social, and religious developments and achievements.

HIST 2401 History of the Early Modern World (3) World civilization from 1300 to 1800. Special emphasis will be given to economic contact and cultural clashes among European, Asian, American, and African civilizations.

HIST 2402 History of the Modern World (3) A survey of modern world civilization since 1800. Special attention will be given to industrialization, democratization, imperialism, global wars, and modernization of the non-western world.

ECON 1010 Principles of Macroeconomics (3) An introduction to principles underlying the operation of modern industrial countries. Special attention is given to the determinants of income and employment.

GEOG 2212 World Geography (3) A survey of the world's major regions, examining their unique peoples, cultures, economies, and physical environments.

SOC 1800 General Sociology (3) Explores the relationships of individuals, groups, and society in the context of changing social institutions. Addresses basic concepts and subfields in sociology.

SOSC 3010 Writing in the Social Sciences (3) Practicum in writing in the social sciences. Prerequisite: completion of General Education Div. I A.


Appendix E – Program Assessment System – Copies of Assessments, Instructions, Scoring Rubrics


Content:

Praxis Exam:

There are no assessment instruments, instructions, or scoring guides for this assessment.

Course Grades:

There are no assessment instruments, instructions, or scoring guides for this assessment.


Pedagogy Assessments:

NCSS Lessons:

Components of an Effective Lesson Plan(revised fall 05)

A lesson plan must provide evidence that the pre-service social studies teacher has the capacity to provide instruction in the social studies. To insure this competency, all lesson plans will follow a prescribed format. The common format will demonstrate that the pre-service teacher can systematically plan, write student objectives, and explain instructional activities.

Objectives must be written in student-centered style. must be express in measurable terms using strong verbs and clear language. must be aligned with appropriate state & national standards.

Planning must provide evidence of the materials, resources, and equipment needed to teach the lesson. must provide evidence of the time required to implement each phase of the lesson. must provide evidence of some type of evaluation of the lesson.

Instruction must include a start phase that will engage and interest students in the day’s lesson. must include a development phase that will explain the activities that will develop the

specific knowledge, skills, or attitudes. must include a close phase that will wrap up the day’s lesson and set the stage for the next class.

Each lesson will be assessed on a 4-point scale: Four: A lesson that exceeds expectations (excellent) Three: A lesson that meets expectations (good) Two: A lesson that shows progress toward expectations (adequate) One: A lesson that does not meet expectations (inadequate) Zero: Does not submit (failure)

Rubric: Exceeds: Lesson plan creatively addresses all components; expertly delineates all information

needed to determine alignment, quality of planning; and appropriateness of activities; could be implemented as written by a substitute teacher.

Meets: Lesson plan addresses all components; clearly delineates all information needed to determine alignment, quality of planning, and appropriateness of activities; could be implemented as written.

Progressing: Lesson plan fails to address one of the critical components; or addresses each component with insufficient information to assess alignment, quality of planning; and appropriateness of activities; could be implemented as written.


Does not meet: Lesson plan fails to address two or more critical components; lacks sufficient information to assess alignment, quality of planning, and appropriateness of activities; or could not be implemented as written.

Social Studies Lesson Plan Format(revised fall 05)

Cover Sheet: See the samples for guidance1. Your name/school/course/semester/instructor2. Title of your lesson/days required to teach the lesson3. Context of your lesson (course, grade level, & class length)4. NCSS themes addressed in your lesson5. Show-Me Standards (GLEs) addressed in your lesson

Lesson Title (in bold type and centered)

Purpose (in bold type): What is it that you want to teach your student this day? Remember that purpose is teacher-centered (To teach students … ).

Objectives (in bold type): What is it that you want students to be able to do at the conclusion of the lesson? Remember that objectives are student-centered (Upon completion of the lesson, students should be able to … ).

Resources (in bold type): What materials will you and your students need to complete this day’s lesson? Remember to list all resources needed to prepare and implement your lesson.

The next part of your lesson page is the most important part because it is here that you lay out in detail how you intend to teach your lesson. You should provide a step-by-step explanation. You must break your lesson down into three parts (start, development, & close). Be sure to establish HOW MUCH TIME you intend to spend on each instructional activity. Remember that the total time should add up to the amount of time available for your class period.

Start (in bold type): How will you begin your lesson? This section deals with how you will introduce your lesson to your students. Therefore, think of ways that you can engage and interest them in the material that you intend to teach and the objectives you hope to achieve. You need to state the anticipatory set or activities or question(s) you intend to use to begin your lesson.

Development (in bold type): How will your lesson unfold? Be specific and detailed in explaining exactly what you and your students will be doing during this time. The number of activities you do is up to you. It would be advantageous to devote a paragraph to each activity. Be sure to include any handouts that you might use (overhead, worksheet, map) and the outline of any lecture you would give.

Close (in bold type): How will you conclude your lesson? Consider carefully how you will achieve closure and construct a bridge to the next day’s lesson or material.


Assessment (in bold type): How will you assess your students over the day’s lesson? This section describes how you will determine (formally or informally) whether or not you achieved your goals for this class. If you use some kind of assessment instrument, be sure to include a copy.

Acknowledgement (in bold type): Did you receive, rely, or consult any source(s) for the actual plan of the lesson? If so, you need to recognize the assistance by listing who and/or what. It may be a teacher or a web site. Failure to do so will result in a grade of zero (0) for the lesson.

NCSS Lesson Plan AssignmentSoSc 4050: Spring 2009

Instructions: Each student will have to develop five lesson plans over the course of the semester. These lesson plans will indicate your capacity to prepare instruction in the Social Science disciplines. The lessons will require you to address in some fashion the ten NCSS themes. The lessons or learning experiences that you develop should be targeted for the level you intend to teach (secondary or middle school). In the preparation of these five lessons, follow the Social Studies Lesson Format. Doing so will make assessment of this assignment less difficult.

The Five Lessons:

Lesson #1: Prepare a lesson that addresses both NCSS themes #1 and #2 (due February 10)

Lesson #2: Prepare a lesson that addresses NCSS theme #7 (due February 17)

Lesson #3: Prepare a lesson that addresses either NCSS theme #4 or #5 (due March 5)

Lesson #4: Prepare a lesson that addresses both NCSS themes #3 and #9 (due March 12)

Lesson #5: Prepare a lesson that addresses both NCSS themes #6 and #10 (due March 26)

Each lesson will be assessed as to the quality of the planning, the explanation of the activities, and the coverage of the appropriate NCSS theme(s). A quantitative evaluation scale (0-4) will be employed, as specified on the handout explaining the format and components of the social studies lesson.

4 = Excellent (exceeds expectations) 3 = Good (meets expectations) 2 = Adequate (progressing) 1 = Inadequate (does not meet expectations) 0 = Failure (did not submit)


Any lesson that fails to achieve a rating of three (3) must be revised and resubmitted. This process will continue until the lesson receives a rating of three (3) or better.

In preparation of these lessons, you should strive to create lessons that reflect the course work that you have taken. With that in mind, no more than two of your lessons can be based upon lessons found on the Internet. That means, then, that two of your lessons may be drawn (but don’t have to be) from Internet sources that you consulted. If you do so, be sure to cite the source in the acknowledge section of the lesson plan.


NCSS Lesson Plan Score Sheet

SoSc 4050 NCSS Lesson: _______________.Spring 2009 Scoring Summary

Name: ____________________________________.

_____ Cover (1)

_____ Purpose (2)

_____ Objectives (5)

_____ Resources (1)

_____ Start (6)

_____ Development (9)

_____ Close (3)

_____ Assessment (1)

_____ Acknowledgement (1)

_____ Time (1)

_____ TOTAL (30) _____ Scoring Scale = _______________.

Internet source? Y or N


Unit Project:

Social Studies 4074: Unit Project Spring Semester 2009 (revised f07)

The Unit Project will consist of six sections: Title page Context page Unit page Matrix page Lesson pages Assessment pages

Title Page (centered):

"Title of Your Project"

Your Name

Social Studies 4074, Spring 2009

Context Page:

The Course: What course are you teaching?

The Grade Level: What is the grade level of the students you are teaching?

The Unit: What is the subject of the unit you are teaching?

The Timeframe: How long will this unit last (class periods)?

The Class Length: How long is each class period?

The Textbook(s): What is the textbook, if any, you are using? (xerox the text’s title/author page)

The Standards: What NCSS Standards and Show Me Standards does this unit address? (only list the broad numbers)

Unit Page

Title of Your Project (in bold type, centered)

Purpose (in bold type): To teach students … a purpose should be no longer than 3-4 lines single-spaced a purpose is broad and general and provides direction


Objectives (in bold type): Upon completion of this unit, a student should be able to … you should have no more than 15 objectives for the entire unit remember to state your unit objectives in behavioral terms using strong verbs group your unit objectives into three categories: LOT, HOT, and Affective you must have at least 5 LOT, 5 HOT, and 2 Affective behind each unit objective in parentheses tell what NCSS standard and Show-Me

Standard is being addressed (broad numbers only)

Matrix Page (will be used to mark your activities for each lesson)

Lesson Pages (each day's lesson should start on a new page):

How many lessons do I need to do?

If you have 50-minute periods, you must do 6-8 lessons. If you have 75-minute or 90-minute periods, you must do 5-7 lessons The testing day doesn’t count as a lesson.

Lesson #: Lesson Title(in bold type and centered)

Purpose (in bold type): What is it that you want to teach your students this day? Remember that purpose is teacher-centered (To teach students … ).

Objectives (in bold type): What is it that you want your students to be able to do at the conclusion of the lesson? Remember that objectives are student-centered (Upon completion of the lesson, students should

be able to …). In parentheses after each daily objective, tell what NCSS Standard and Show-Me

Standard (GLE) is being addressed (specific number & letter information required)

Resources (in bold type): What materials will you and the students need to complete this day’s lesson? Remember to list all resources needed to prepare and implement your lesson (books,

videos, overheads, websites, and handouts).

The next section of your lesson page is the most important part because it is here that you lay out in detail how you intend to teach your lesson. You should provide a step-by-step explanation. You must break your lesson down into three parts (Start, Development, & Close). Important: Be sure to tell how much time you intend to spend on each activity; remember that the total time should add up to the amount of time available for your class period.

Start (in bold type): How will you begin your lesson?


This section deals with how you will introduce your lesson to your students. Therefore, think of ways that you can engage and interest them in the material that you intend to teach and the objectives you hope to achieve.

You need to explain the anticipatory set, activity (ies), or question(s) you intend to use to begin your lesson.

Be sure to consider how you can utilize your students’ prior knowledge.

Development (in bold type): How will your lesson unfold? Be specific and detailed in explaining exactly what you and your students will be doing

during this time. What you do should be sequential, manageable, and develop specific knowledge and skills.

In addition to your “start” activity, identify and describe at least 2 different activities for each 50-minute lesson and at least 3 different activities for each 75 or 90-minute lesson. Devote a separate paragraph for each activity.

Important: Be sure to include any handouts that you might use (overhead, worksheet, map). If you plan on a lecture as part of the activity, include an outline of your lecture.

Close (in bold type): How will you conclude your lesson? Carefully consider how you plan to end your lesson so that key concepts are reviewed and

reinforced and so that a clear linkage or tie-in with the next lesson is established.

Assignment (in bold type): Will you have any assignment that students must do? This section should describe what your students would need to do for the next class

meeting or beyond. Be sure to specify. It is always wise when giving a writing assignment or project that you prepare a handout that would provide students with the specific requirements.

Assessment (in bold type): How will you assess your students over the day’s lesson? This section should describe how students would be assessed (formally and/or informally)

over the lesson. If you use a formal assessment instrument, be sure to include it.

Acknowledgement (in bold type): Did you receive, rely, or consult any source(s) for the plan of this lesson? If so, you need to recognize the assistance by listing who and/or what. It may be a teacher

or a web site. Failure to do so will result in a grade reduction for the project.

Repeat this format for each lesson (six to eight lessons for 50-minute periods or five to seven lessons for 75-minute or 90-minute periods)


Assessment Pages: Your project must close with an instrument (exam) to evaluate what your students have learned. That exam will consist of specific types of questions. Be sure to tie the questions back to your unit and lesson objectives. You must include a separate answer key.

Objective questions: 10 true-false questions 10 matching questions 10 multiple-choice questions 10 no-choice questions (i.e.: What is the capital city of Missouri?)

Subjective questions: 3 questions, each requiring a one-paragraph answer (short answer) 2 questions, each requiring a multi-paragraph answer (long essay)

Requirements:

1. The project must be typed. 2. The project must be turned in Monday, February 16. A late project will be docked a letter

grade for each school day it is late, unless prior arrangements have been made. 3. The project must be done according to a prescribed format, discussed above.4. The project, to be properly evaluated by me, must include all materials that your students will

read or receive. That means copies of all textbook pages and all handouts.5. The project must be placed inside a three-ring binder. One will be displayed in class. Do not

place your lessons in plastic shelves. Do use tabs to set off each lesson.6. The scoring (grading) is detailed in the attached rubric.


Social Studies 4074: Unit Project Scoring SheetTotal Points Possible: 100 (revised f07)

STUDENT: _________________________. UNIT TITLE: ____________________________.

COURSE TAUGHT: __________________________. CLASS LENGTH: ____________. SEMESTER: Spring 2009 .

Lesson #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7 #8

Scoring Components: Title (1)

Basics (10): Purpose (1)

Lessons (50): Objectives (5)

Unit (30): Resources (1)

Exam (10): Start (5)

Subtotal: _________. Development (10)

Mechanics: _______. Close (3)

TOTAL: ________. Assignment (1)

Letter Grade: ____. Assessment (1)

Acknowledge (1)

Time (1)

TOTALS:

Unit Assessment Instrument (the exam):True-False (5) Multiple Choice (10) Short Answer (6) Answer Key (13)Matching (5) Completion (5) Essay (6) Totals:

Summative Evaluation for the Unit Project

90-100 points = Excellent Instruction Unit = Exceeds


The instruction unit creatively addresses all elements of an effective plan with extensive, expertly written implementation information.

80-89 points = Good Instruction Unit = MeetsThe instruction unit addresses all elements of an effective plan, clearly delineating all information needed for implementation.

70-79 points = Adequate Instructional Unit = ProgressingThe instructional unit addresses most components of an effective plan with sufficient information to implement, or addresses all components with some information.

60-69 points = Inadequate Instructional Unit = Does not meetThe instructional unit addresses fewer than half of the components listed above, or fails to provide information needed to implement.

0-59 points = Failing Instructional Unit = Does not meetThe instructional unit poorly addresses most of the components listed above, or fails to provide critical information needed to implement.

The Breakdown on the Four Scoring Components:

Basics (10 pts.):

Folder (1): three-ring binder with pockets = 1 pt. Title Page (1): required information = 1 pt.

Context Page (4): required information = 1 pt.; textbook title page xeroxed = 1 pt.; standards = 2 pts.

Matrix Page (2): marked correctly = 2 pts.

Unit Page (7): purpose = 1 pt.; objectives = 4 pts.; standards = 2 pts.

This section will total 15 points. Your score will be determined by totaling your points, converting to a percentage, and then multiplying 10 by that percentage.

Lessons (50 pts):

Each lesson totals 30 points. Your score will be determined by totaling the score for all your lessons, converting that to a percentage, and then multiplying 50 by that percentage.

Unit (30 pts):

Sequence – Do the lessons present a clear logical sequence? (5)


Appropriateness – Are the lessons & activities developmentally appropriate for the students taught? (5)

Alignment – Does the unit align with national and state standards? (5)

Technology – Is technology integrated into the instruction and learning? (5)

Methodology – Are multiple instructional methods used to reach a variety of student learning styles? (5)

Accommodation – Are there any accommodations made for student needs? (5)

Assessment – Is there a variety of assessment strategies employed? (5)

Resources – Are outside resources/materials used? (5)

The unit section will total 40 points. Your score will be determined by totaling your score out of 40, converting to a percentage, and then multiplying 30 by that percentage.

Exam (10):

The exam section will total 50 points. Your score will be determined by totaling your score out of 50, converting to a percentage, and then multiplying 10 by that percentage.

Mechanics:

For every four errors in spelling, punctuation, and grammar, one-half point will be deducted up to a total of 10 points. It’s important to proofread your work.



STUDENT TEACHER CONTENT FORM: Social Studies

The criteria used herein are based upon standards established by the Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE), as found in the Discipline Specific Competencies for Social Studies Teachers, and by the National Council for the Social Studies (NCSS), as found in Expectations of Excellence: Curriculum Standards for Social Studies.

Student Teacher: ___________________________ Student ID:______________ Sem/Yr____________

School: ___________________________________ Subject/Grade: ______________________________District Supervisor(s): _______________________ University Supervisor:________________________Observation Dates: _____________________________________________________________________

Social Studies as a field of study (1.2.1.1.1): Understands the definitions and purposes of social studies; the major themes/concepts drawn from the social studies (the 10 NCSS themes); and how to integrate knowledge across the social studies and between the social studies and other disciplines. Addresses NCSS themes #1-10

Not observed Does not meet

Progressing Meets Exceeds

Comments:

Principles Expressed in Documents Shaping Constitutional Democracy in the United States (1.2.1.1.2): Understands basic government documents; the civic ideals and democratic principles implicit in those basic documents; how events (past and present) have been shaped by democratic ideals and efforts to implement them; and how to illustrate and explore citizenship. Addresses NCSS theme #10



Comments:


Continuity and Change in the History of Missouri, the United States and the World (1.2.1.1.3): Understands key historical concepts; how the past shapes the present; how and why history is seen from varying perspectives; the link between decisions and consequences; and examples of the interaction and interdependence of science, technology, and society. Addresses NCSS theme #2



Comments:

Principles and Processes of Governance Systems (1.2.1.1.4): Understands different types of government and institutional systems; the effects of political theories and philosophies; the role and impact of citizen participation; and how various institutions, communities, and nations are constituted. Addresses NCSS themes #6 & 10 (please circle the appropriate themes addressed)



Comments:

Economic Concepts and Principles (1.2.1.1.5): Understands economic systems; economic choices; economic interdependence; role of technology in the economy; wider consequences of economic decisions; and roles and impact of governments on the economy. Addresses NCSS theme #7



Comments:

Major Elements of Geographical Study and Analysis (1.2.1.1.6): Understands application and use of geographic tools; locales, regions, nations, and the world relative to location, size, climate, and geology; interaction between physical geography and culture, history, politics, and economics; relationships between human systems and the environment; and how international events affect individuals and groups. Addresses NCSS theme #3



Comments:


Relationships of Individuals and Groups to Institutions and Cultural Traditions (1.2.1.1.7): Understands basic cultural and sociological ideas and concepts; how to recognize and use cultural universals to analyze cultures; similarity of basic human needs and the diverse ways those needs are met; how diverse individuals, groups, institutions, and cultures interact and change over time; the tensions inherent when conflict arises; and psychological concepts and theories. Addresses NCSS themes #1, 4, 5, 8, & 9 (please circle the appropriate themes addressed)



Comments:

Social Science Tools and Inquiry (1.2.1.1.8): Understands how to frame a research question; use various methods of inquiry; use data sources and collection techniques; interpret, classify, analyze, and evaluate data; and formulate and report findings/conclusions.



Comments:

Summative Comments:

________________________ __________

Student’s Signature Date

___________________________ __________

Evaluator’s Signature Date

Duplicate: Original to Clinical Services, copy to student.


Instructions to Supervisor:

This social studies content form seeks to address two sets of social studies standards: Those of DESE (the state) and those of the NCSS (the national). The primary emphasis is placed upon the standards established by DESE for pre-service social studies teachers. These standards were recently revised in spring 2005 to align more closely with the national standards of the NCSS.

The state has designated eight specific social studies content competencies; the national has adopted ten social studies themes. Below is a chart briefly describing each of the ten NCSS themes. Most of the eight state standards (#2 through #7) line up neatly with a corresponding national standard. State competency #8 does not align with any national standard, while state competency #1 aligns with all ten national standards in the sense that pre-service social studies teachers know the ten themes. Only two state competencies (#4 and #7) address multiple national standards. When you observed either of these two state competencies during instruction, as noted on the assessment form, please circle those NCSS standards that you believe are addressed.

The NCSS Themes: Content of the NCSS Themes

#1 Culture Understanding of the basic concepts of anthropology

#2 Time, Continuity, and Change Understanding of the history of the US, western civilization, and non-western society

#3 People, Places, and Environments Understanding of the basic concepts of geography

#4 Individual Identity and Development Understanding of the basic concepts of psychology

#5 Individuals, Groups, and Institutions Understanding of the basic concepts of sociology

#6 Power, Authority, and Governance Understanding of the basic concepts of political science

#7 Production, Distribution, and Consumption Understanding of the basic concepts of micro- and macro-economics

#8 Science, Technology, and Society Understanding that science and technology have enhanced or threatened the development of human society

#9 Global Connections Understanding that our planet has been exposed to an ever-increasing human interdependence in a world


made smaller by improvements in communication, transportation, and trade.

#10 Civic Ideals and Practice Understanding of the basic concepts of citizenship in a democratic society

Standard Not Observed Does not meet Progressing Meets ExceedsContent Knowledge

Not Observed Makes serious mistakes in concepts or principles being taught. Does not provide opportunities for student inquiry. Does not incorporate interdisciplinary learning or relate content to a global perspective. Does not make content relevant to students.

Makes some mistakes in content, but tries to correct them. May have some difficulty elaborating or clarifying ideas or relationships among concepts. Provides minimal opportunity for student inquiry. Attempts to incorporate interdisciplinary learning or relate content to a global perspective. Makes some content relevant to students.

Makes few or no mistakes and displays competence in teaching content to students. Has alternative explanations and can usually address student questions well. Regularly provides opportunities for student inquiry appropriate to the discipline. Incorporates interdisciplinary learning and relates content to a global perspective. Makes content relevant to students.

Shows strong knowledge, creativity, and considerable flexibility when teaching content to students. Consistently provides opportunities for student inquiry, including a variety of appropriate discipline-related tools. Consistently incorporates interdisciplinary learning and relates content to a global perspective. Regularly organizes instruction in personal contexts that are relevant and meaningful to students.

Student Teaching RubricEvaluation Rubric



Field Placement Assessments: Unit-Lessons:

INSTRUCTIONAL UNIT PLAN EVALUATION

Student Teacher __________________________Student ID _________________ Major Code ______School _________________________________Subject/Grade_______________________________District Supervisor(s)______________________University Supervisor ________________________

Instructional Unit Plan = a logically planned sequence of instructional events designed to result in a specific set of learner outcomes.

An effective Unit Plan: Presents a clear, logical sequence of five or more lessons (not including pre- and post-

assessment activities) Builds on assessment of prior student knowledge and skills Reflects developmentally appropriate skills for the students in the group Demonstrates sound principles of thinking and learning Aligns clearly with Missouri Show Me Standards, Grade Level Expectations (GLEs),

and/or Functional Standards Includes outside resources and materials to supplement, reinforce, or extend standard

curriculum Integrates technology to enhance instruction and facilitate learning Relates instructional content to appropriate real world applications Incorporates multiple methods to present content in multiple ways and provide

opportunities for different student response modes Employs various assessment strategies (i.e., formative, summative, and reflective

activities). Accommodates various learning styles and needs of students, including those from

diverse cultural backgrounds; those with special education needs; and English-language learners.

Does not meet Progressing Meets ExceedsThe unit addresses fewer than half of the components listed above, or fails to provide information needed to implement.

The instructional unit addresses most components of an effective plan with sufficient information to implement, or addresses all components with some information.

The instructional unit addresses all elements of an effective plan, clearly delineating all information needed for implementation.

The instruction unit creatively addresses all elements of an effective plan, with extensive, expertly written implementation information.

Comments:


Lesson Plan = a discrete instructional event that contributes to development of learner knowledge and skills necessary to achieve specified unit outcomes.

An effective Lesson Plan: Describes concrete, measurable student objectives, aligned with appropriate standards Provides evidence of teacher planning:

o Materialso Equipmento Resourceso Accommodationso Time required o Evaluation plan (formative, summative, & reflective)

Outlines the following instructional activities:o Lesson introduction : Activates students’ prior knowledge, provides a rationale for

the lesson, and immediately engages students in learning.o Lesson procedures : Includes the sequential, manageable instructional steps that

develop the specified knowledge and skills.o Lesson closure : Reviews and reinforces key concepts.o Evaluation : Incorporates formative, summative, and reflective activities, as

appropriate throughout the lesson.

Does not meet Progressing Meets ExceedsLesson plans fail to address two or more critical components above; lack sufficient information to assess alignment, quality of planning, and appropriateness of activities; or could not be implemented as written.

Lesson plans fail to address one of the critical components above; or address each component with insufficient information to assess alignment, quality of planning, and appropriateness of activities; could be implemented as written.

Lesson plans address all components above; clearly delineate all information needed to determine alignment, quality of planning, and appropriateness of activities; could be implemented as written.

Lesson plans creatively address all components above; expertly delineate all information needed to determine alignment, quality of planning, and appropriateness of activities; could be implemented as written by a substitute teacher.

Comments:____________________________ _______________Student’s Signature Date ____________________________ _______________Evaluator’s Signature Date


ASSESSMENT: Instructional Unit Plan and Assessment

PURPOSE: To demonstrate teacher candidate ability to plan effective instruction and to use formative, summative and reflective assessment strategies to facilitate achievement of predetermined learning outcomes by P-12 students.

IMPLEMENTATION PLAN:

The FormAll teacher candidates must demonstrate the ability to develop an instructional unit and related lesson plans. They must also demonstrate the ability to design and implement varied assessment strategies, to implement those strategies in the classroom, to use assessment data and other feedback to modify instruction to help all students master predetermined learning outcomes, and to reflect on their impact on P-12 student learning. The assessment instrument has been developed to align with INTASC and Missouri State Standards, as well as with UCM’s Conceptual Framework. The scoring rubric provides a narrative description of the criteria for determining how to rate each item using the scale Does Not Meet, Progressing, Meets, and Exceeds. A copy of the form will be provided to the student, with the original going to Clinical Services.

Guidelines for ScoringEvery teacher candidate should meet the criteria for all five parts of the assessment (Unit Plan, Lesson Plan, Formative, Summative, Reflection) by the end of the student teaching semester. The graduated ratings are designed to demonstrate developmental progress and skill development during the student teaching experience. Not Observed may be used to indicate that behavior related to a standard was not observed or not applicable in a specific situation. The rating Does Not Meet is used to describe a candidate who does not demonstrate the knowledge, skills, or dispositions expected. Progressing is intended to represent a student who has mastered some but not all of the components skills described in the rubric. To achieve a rating of Meets, a candidate must satisfy each of the required components in the rubric. Exceeds is used for a candidate who meets all of the required standards and performs in some ways beyond the skill level normally expected for an entry-level educator. NOTE: The rating Not Observed may not be used for this assessment.

Timeline for Administration/Analysis/Dissemination of ResultsThe Instructional Unit Plan and Assessment form will be completed during student teaching by the University Supervisor. Candidates will select an instructional unit developed for their student teaching assignment that includes at least five lessons or sessions they believe meet the criteria for an effective unit/lesson plan including formative and summative assessment activities. They will teach the unit, conduct formative and summative assessment, and complete a written reflection on the impact of instruction on P-12 student learning outcomes, following the format provided in the scoring rubric. As part of this assessment, the candidate is required to note how many students were present during the unit and how many met the unit’s instructional objectives. This information can be recorded on page 4. While this evaluation instrument may be used to provide formative data, it is designed to be used primarily as a summative instrument during the student teaching semester. A student who does not meet all criteria may try again on


the supervisor’s next visit. Supervisors concerned about a candidate who appears unlikely to achieve a rating of at least Meets in all five areas by the end of student teaching will notify Clinical Services immediately. One copy of each form will be given to the student, with summative comments and recommendations for ongoing professional development (required in areas not marked Meets or Exceeds). The original copy of the last set of forms completed during student teaching will go to Clinical Services, along with a copy of the candidate’s reflection on that unit.

Data will be aggregated as well as disaggregated by major/certification area each semester and disseminated to PEF representatives for each certification area. Trends related to interrater reliability or subject area will be identified and referred to PEF or TEC for discussion. Program level data will be reviewed at least one time per year to identify areas of strength and need for program improvement.

Dispositions:

TEACHER CANDIDATE DISPOSITIONS ASSESSMENT

Teacher Candidate ________________________Student ID _________Date_____________________Major/Minor _____________________________Major Code ________Time of completion □ EDCI 2100 □ Adm to Teacher Ed □ Student Teaching SemesterCompleted by □ University Faculty/Advisor □ Cooperating Teacher □ University Supervisor □ Student

Disposition 1: Commits to high expectations for all students, and values the ability/capacity for each student to learn. (INTASC 1,2,3,4,5,6,7; MoSTEP 1,2,3,4,5,6)

Not observed Does not meet Progressing Meets Exceeds

Comments:

Disposition 2: Values student ability to apply concepts learned to performance activities. (INTASC 1,2,3,4,5,7; MoSTEP 1,2,3,4,5,6)


Comments:


Disposition 3: Commits to the development of critical thinking skills (e.g., problem solving, analysis, etc.). (INTASC 1,2,3,4,6; MoSTEP 1,2,3,5,7)


Comments:

Disposition 4: Commits to seeking out, developing, and continually refining teaching practices that generate more learning for students. (INTASC 9; MoSTEP 3,6,8)


Comments:

Disposition 5: Commits to development of lessons that are interesting and engaging through a variety of instructional strategies to accommodate all learners, including those from diverse backgrounds, experiences, and cultures (e.g., use of technology, grouping, motivating materials). (INTASC 1,2,3,4,5,6; MoSTEP 1,2,3,5,6,7)


Comments:

Disposition 6: Commits to making appropriate adaptations and accommodations for students with diverse needs (e.g., use of technology). (INTASC 1,2,3,5,6,8; MoSTEP 1,2,3,6,7,8)


Comments:

Disposition 7: Appreciates and promotes acceptance of self-discipline, responsibility, and self-esteem. (INTASC 2,5,6; MoSTEP 2,6,7)


Comments:


Disposition 8: Commits to a positive and enthusiastic attitude for teaching and learning to inspire self and others. (INTASC 9; MoSTEP 9)


Comments:

Disposition 9: Believes students and colleagues should be treated and should treat other with kindness, fairness, patience, dignity, and respect. (INTASC 5,6,9,10; MoSTEP 6,7,9,10)


Comments:

Disposition 10: Commits to relationships with school colleagues, parents, and educational partners in the larger community to support student learning and well being. (INTASC 10; MoSTEP 10)


Comments:

Disposition 11: Assesses the effects of choices and actions on others and actively seeks out opportunities to grow professionally in order to promote learner outcomes. (CF)


Comments:

Disposition 12: Fulfills professional responsibilities consistent with building and district expectations and policies concerning appearance, punctuality, attendance, and timely and accurate paperwork completion.


Comments:Reviewed _________________________ ______________________________ _______________ (Student signature) (Faculty/Supervisor signature) (Date reviewed)


ASSESSMENT: Dispositions Assessment

PURPOSE: To demonstrate teacher candidate behaviors and attitudes related to the dispositions required of entry-level educational professionals.


The FormsThe Dispositions Assessment process includes both formative and summative data recorded on the Teacher Candidate Dispositions Assessment Form. The items on the instrument have been developed to align with INTASC and Missouri State Standards as well as with UCM’s Conceptual Framework. The scoring rubric provides a narrative description of the criteria for determining how to rate each item using the scale Not Observed, Does Not Meet, Progressing, Meets, and Exceeds.

Guidelines for ScoringEvery teacher candidate should meet the criteria for each of the standard areas by the end of the student teaching semester. The graduated ratings are designed to demonstrate developmental progress and skill development during the student teaching experience. A rating of Not Observed may be used to indicate that behavior related to a standard was not observed or not applicable in a specific situation. These ratings will not be included numerically in data analysis. The rating Does Not Meet is used to describe a candidate who does not demonstrate the knowledge, skills, or dispositions expected. Progressing is intended to represent a student who has mastered some but not all of the components skills described in the rubric. To achieve a rating of Meets, a candidate must satisfy each of the required components in the rubric. Exceeds is used for a candidate who meets all of the required standards and performs in some ways beyond the skill level normally expected for an entry-level educator.

Timeline for Administration/Analysis/Dissemination of ResultsThe Teacher Candidate Dispositions Assessment will be completed at a minimum of two points during the student’s program of study at UCM: (1) attached to the TE-16 Candidate Appraisal by the Academic Department prior to the Professional Education Semester, and (2) at the end of student teaching by the University Supervisor after consultation with the district supervisor(s). The primary purpose of the developmental feedback will be to assist teacher candidates in improving their performance in any areas not rated Meets or Exceeds. A supervisor concerned about a candidate who appears unlikely to achieve a rating of at least Meets in all areas by the end of student teaching will notify Clinical Services immediately. One copy of each form will be given to the student, with comments and recommendations for ongoing professional development (required in areas not marked Meets or Exceeds). The formative disposition assessment should be completed by one or more department faculty knowledgeable about the student, attached to the TE-16 form, and sent to Clinical Services. The forms completed during student teaching will be submitted to Clinical Services by the University Supervisor.

Unit data will be aggregated as well as disaggregated by major/certification area each semester and disseminated to PEF representatives for each certification area. Trends related to interrater reliability or subject area will be identified and referred to PEF or TEC for discussion. Program


level data will be reviewed at least one time per year to identify areas of strength and need for program improvement.


ASSESSMENT: Instructional Unit Plan and Assessment

PURPOSE: To demonstrate teacher candidate ability to plan effective instruction and to use formative, summative and reflective assessment strategies to facilitate achievement of predetermined learning outcomes by P-12 students.


The FormAll teacher candidates must demonstrate the ability to develop an instructional unit and related lesson plans. They must also demonstrate the ability to design and implement varied assessment strategies, to implement those strategies in the classroom, to use assessment data and other feedback to modify instruction to help all students master predetermined learning outcomes, and to reflect on their impact on P-12 student learning. The assessment instrument has been developed to align with INTASC and Missouri State Standards, as well as with CMSU’s Conceptual Framework. The scoring rubric provides a narrative description of the criteria for determining how to rate each item using the scale Does Not Meet, Progressing, Meets, and Exceeds. A copy of the form will be provided to the student, with the original going to Clinical Services.

Guidelines for ScoringEvery teacher candidate should meet the criteria for all five parts of the assessment (Unit Plan, Lesson Plan, Formative, Summative, Reflection) by the end of the student teaching semester. The graduated ratings are designed to demonstrate developmental progress and skill development during the student teaching experience. Not Observed may be used to indicate that behavior related to a standard was not observed or not applicable in a specific situation. The rating Does Not Meet is used to describe a candidate who does not demonstrate the knowledge, skills, or dispositions expected. Progressing is intended to represent a student who has mastered some but not all of the components skills described in the rubric. To achieve a rating of Meets, a candidate must satisfy each of the required components in the rubric. Exceeds is used for a candidate who meets all of the required standards and performs in some ways beyond the skill level normally expected for an entry-level educator. NOTE: The rating Not Observed may not be used for this assessment.

Timeline for Administration/Analysis/Dissemination of ResultsThe Instructional Unit Plan and Assessment form will be completed during student teaching by the University Supervisor. Candidates will select an instructional unit developed for their student teaching assignment that includes at least five lessons or sessions they believe meet the criteria for an effective unit/lesson plan including formative and summative assessment activities. They will teach the unit, conduct formative and summative assessment, and complete a written reflection on the impact of instruction on P-12 student learning outcomes, following the


format provided in the scoring rubric. As part of this assessment, the candidate is required to note how many students were present during the unit and how many met the unit’s instructional objectives. This information can be recorded on page 4. While this evaluation instrument may be used to provide formative data, it is designed to be used primarily as a summative instrument during the student teaching semester. A student who does not meet all criteria may try again on the supervisor’s next visit. Supervisors concerned about a candidate who appears unlikely to achieve a rating of at least Meets in all five areas by the end of student teaching will notify Clinical Services immediately. One copy of each form will be given to the student, with summative comments and recommendations for ongoing professional development (required in areas not marked Meets or Exceeds). The original copy of the last set of forms completed during student teaching will go to Clinical Services, along with a copy of the candidate’s reflection on that unit.

Data will be aggregated as well as disaggregated by major/certification area each semester and disseminated to PEF representatives for each certification area. Trends related to interrater reliability or subject area will be identified and referred to PEF or TEC for discussion. Program level data will be reviewed at least one time per year to identify areas of strength and need for program improvement.


Formative Evaluation of Instruction = ongoing checks for student understanding during instruction to provide students with feedback on their progress and to allow the candidate to better tailor learning experiences to meet student learning needs

Does not meet Progressing Meets ExceedsDoes not incorporate formative assessment activities into lessons; or fails to align activities with predetermined learning goals; does not provide feedback to students or only provides corrective feedback; does not adapt instruction to learner needs.

Incorporates formative assessment activities but uses a limited repertoire of approaches; aligns activities with predetermined learning goals; assessment activities occur at least once during the lesson, perhaps at the end; provides some feedback to students; attempts to adapt instruction to learner needs.

Uses varied assessment modes and approaches appropriate for the lesson; aligns activities with predetermined learning goals; uses assessment in logical places in the lesson; provides feedback to students on progress and mastery; uses data and feedback to adapt instruction to learner needs.

Creatively uses varied assessment modes and approaches that are seamlessly integrated at natural points within the lesson; aligns activities with learning goals; provides ongoing feedback and encouragement to students; uses data and feedback to adapt instruction to learner needs smoothly during the course of the lesson.

Comments:


Summative Evaluation of Instruction = a measure of student performance against prior knowledge and predetermined learner outcomes at the conclusion of a unit of instruction. It is also used to evaluate impact of instruction on individual learners and the group as a whole and to improve ongoing instruction through candidate reflection.

Does not meet Progressing Meets ExceedsFails to conduct summative assessment or uses a limited sample of items to determine mastery or non-mastery; fails to compare mastery to predetermined learner outcomes and/or prior knowledge and skills; does not provide feedback in a timely fashion; moves on to the next content unit prior to evaluation of student data

Uses a single method or approach to assessment; only partially able to measure student mastery against both predetermined learner outcomes and prior knowledge and skills; scores and returns papers, but provides limited individual feedback to students; either moves on without all students reaching mastery or reteaches even though not all students need additional practice

Uses varied methods, modes and approaches appropriate to the lesson; measures student mastery against both predetermined learner outcomes and prior knowledge and skills; provides timely feedback to students on progress and skill mastery; evaluates the impact of instruction on students as a group and individually; develops remedial or reteaching plan if needed

Creatively uses varied methods, modes and approaches appropriate to the lesson; measures student mastery against both predetermined learner outcomes and prior knowledge and skills based on thorough knowledge of individual student needs and abilities; constantly evaluates the impact of instruction on students as a group and individually; develops plan for remedial/reteaching and extension activities

Comments:

Please complete:

Number of students in the class

Number of students who met lesson/unit objectives


Reflection = the process of evaluating the impact of instruction on student learning to guide future instructional decisions.

Does not meet Progressing Meets ExceedsFails to articulate how pre- and post assessments were selected or developed and aligned with learning goals; fails to describe communication strategies; fails to describe how formative activities were selected and used; fails to describe how formative student progress data and other feedback were used to revise the instructional plan; does not analyze students’ progress or difficulty, or does so only at the group level; incompletely describes planned follow-up activities for students who were unsuccessful; fails to describe what adjustments they would make if they were going to teach this lesson to the same group of students; fails to identify opportunities for professional growth

Selects pre- and post assessments from curriculum or does not conduct pre-assessment; assessment partially or poorly aligned with learning goals; describes minimal communication strategies; describes minimal formative activities; attempts to describe use of formative student progress data and other feedback to revise the instructional plan; analyzes students’ progress or difficulty in a superficial way; provides a general description of planned follow-up activities for students who were unsuccessful; briefly describes what adjustments they would make if they were going to teach this lesson to the same group of students; describes minimal opportunities for professional growth

Articulates how pre- and post assessments were selected or developed and aligned with learning goals; describes how verbal nonverbal and media communication techniques were used to foster active inquiry, collaboration, and supportive classroom interaction; describes how formative activities were selected and used; describes how formative student progress data and other feedback were used to revise the instructional plan; analyzes students’ progress or difficulty; provides a detailed description of planned follow-up activities for students who were unsuccessful; describes what adjustments they would make if they were going to teach this lesson to the same group of students; identifies opportunities for future professional growth to improve

Clearly articulates how pre- and post assessments were selected or developed and aligned with prioritized learning goals; describes multiple communication strategies and their impact on student learning; describes how formative activities provided evidence of student progress and active engagement; describes how formative student progress data and other feedback were used to revise instruction during the lesson; analyzes students’ progress or difficulty in terms of relevant developmental and learning theories; provides a detailed description of planned follow-up activities for students who were unsuccessful; describes what adjustments they would make if they were going to teach this lesson to the same group of students; articulates a


student learning thorough professional development plan

Comments:

____________________________ _______________Student’s Signature Date

____________________________ _______________Evaluator’s Signature Date

Please attach a copy of the summative assessment used and the candidate’s reflection.


Student Teaching Evaluation: ASSESSMENT: Student Teacher Evaluation

PURPOSE: To demonstrate teacher candidate competency on the knowledge, skills and dispositions required of entry-level educational professionals.


The FormsThe Student Teacher Evaluation process includes both formative and summative data recorded on the Formative Student Teacher Observation Form and the Summative Student Teacher Evaluation Form. The items on both instruments have been developed based on INTASC and Missouri State Standards and organized under the major headings of Knowledge, Skills, and Dispositions. The scoring rubric provides a narrative description of the criteria for determining how to rate each item using the scale: Not Observed, Does Not Meet, Progressing, Meets, and Exceeds. Both forms will be completed, with the original going to Clinical Services and a copy to the student. Most areas of teacher certification have developed content-specific rating scales and rubrics. When available, the content attachment will be completed in conjunction with the summative evaluation to assess candidate competencies specific to the area of certification based on relevant SPA and/or DESE standards.

Guidelines for ScoringEvery teacher candidate should meet the criteria for each of the standard areas by the end of the student teaching semester. The graduated ratings are designed to demonstrate developmental progress and skill acquisition during the student teaching experience. A rating of Not Observed may be used to indicate that behavior related to a standard was not observed or not applicable in a specific lesson. These ratings will not be included numerically in data analysis. The rating Does Not Meet is used to describe a candidate who does not demonstrate the knowledge, skills, or dispositions expected. Progressing is intended to represent the candidate who has mastered some but not all of the components skills described in the rubric. To achieve a rating of Meets, a candidate must satisfy each of the required components in the rubric. Exceeds is used for a candidate who meets all of the required standards and performs in some ways beyond the skill level normally expected for an entry-level educator. NOTES: (1) A candidate may not be scored as Meets or Exceeds under Content Knowledge (Standard 1.2.1) unless he or she has achieved Meets or Exceeds on the relevant content-specific attachment. (2) Any standard receiving a rating of either Does Not Meet or Exceeds must include a written statement explaining the cause(s) of the rating.

Timeline for Administration/Analysis/Dissemination of ResultsThe Formative Student Teacher Observation will be completed by the University Supervisor on each observation visit to the student teaching site. Verbal feedback and a copy of the form should be provided to the teacher candidate immediately following the visit if possible or within two working days if scheduling does not permit immediate debriefing. The primary purpose of the developmental feedback will be to assist a teacher candidate in improving performance in any area not rated Meets or Exceeds. A supervisor concerned about a candidate who appears unlikely to achieve a rating of at least Meets in all areas by the end of student teaching will notify Clinical Services immediately. The District Supervisor may also elect to conduct


formative observations; however, this documentation is not required. The Summative Evaluation will be completed by the University Supervisor, the District Supervisor/ Cooperating Teacher, and the Teacher Candidate during the last 5-10 days of the student teaching semester. The District Supervisor will also complete the content-specific attachment rating candidate performance on standards related to their area of certification. The University Supervisor is responsible for assigning the student teaching grade. One copy of each form will be given to the student, with summative comments and recommendations for ongoing professional development (required in areas not marked Meets or Exceeds). The original of each form will go to Clinical Services.

Unit data will be aggregated as well as disaggregated by major/certification area each semester and disseminated to PEF representatives for each certification area. Trends related to interrater reliability or subject area will be identified and referred to PEF or TEC for discussion. Program level data will be reviewed at least one time per year to identify areas of strength and need for program improvement.


Standard Not Observed

Does not meet Progressing Meets Exceeds

Content Knowledge

Not Observed

Makes serious mistakes in concepts or principles being taught. Does not provide opportunities for student inquiry. Does not incorporate interdisciplinary learning or relate content to a global perspective. Does not make content relevant to students.

Makes some mistakes in content, but tries to correct them. May have some difficulty elaborating or clarifying ideas or relationships among concepts. Provides minimal opportunity for student inquiry. Attempts to incorporate interdisciplinary learning or relate content to a global perspective. Makes some content relevant to students.

Makes few or no mistakes and displays competence in teaching content to students. Has alternative explanations and can usually address student questions well. Regularly provides opportunities for student inquiry appropriate to the discipline. Incorporates interdisciplinary learning and relates content to a global perspective. Makes content relevant to students.

Shows strong knowledge, creativity, and considerable flexibility when teaching content to students. Consistently provides opportunities for student inquiry, including a variety of appropriate discipline-related tools. Consistently incorporates interdisciplinary learning and relates content to a global perspective. Regularly organizes instruction in personal contexts that are relevant and meaningful to students.

Learners and Learning

Not Observed

Does not create learning opportunities that reflect theories of learning or support the intellectual, social, and personal development of

Plans limited learning opportunities that reflect theories of learning and support the intellectual, social and personal development of

Plans and implements learning opportunities that reflect theories of learning and actively supports the intellectual, social and

Skillfully plans and implements learning opportunities that reflect theories of learning and actively nurtures the intellectual, social and


students. Does not relate new information to students’ prior knowledge. Does not encourage student responsibility.

students. Attempts to relate new information to students’ prior knowledge. Encourages limited student responsibility.

personal development of students. Relates new information to students’ prior knowledge. Encourages student responsibility.

personal development of students. Assists students in relating new information to students’ existing schema.



Curriculum Not Observed

Demonstrates consistently poor short and long-range planning skills. Does not relate plans and activities to state and national standards. Does not evaluate and adjust plans to meet student needs and state standards.

Creates lesson and unit plans but activities are not always cohesive or aligned with curriculum goals or needs and abilities of students. Fails to consistently evaluate and adjust plans according to student needs and state standards.

Creates good lesson and unit plans with activities that are cohesive, aligned with appropriate curriculum goals, and consistent with needs and abilities of most students. Evaluates and adjusts plans according to student needs and state standards.

Creates extremely effective lesson and unit plans with diverse activities showing strong knowledge of students’ capabilities and needs as well as knowledge of subject and curricular goals. Systematically evaluates and adjusts plans to meet student needs and state standards.

Planning Instruction

Not Observed

Is unable to effectively employ a range of strategies, materials and technology to teach the subject effectively. Does not engage

Employs a limited range of strategies, materials and technology to teach the subject effectively. Only occasionally engages students in

Demonstrates the ability to effectively design and employ a range of strategies, materials and technology to teach the subject. Usually

Demonstrates a highly creative ability to effectively design and employ a range of strategies, materials and technology to teach the subject. Engages


students in active learning that promotes the development of critical thinking, problem solving, and learning.

active learning that promotes the development of critical thinking, problem solving, and learning.

engages students in active learning that promotes the development of critical thinking, problem solving, and learning.

students in active learning that promotes the development of critical thinking, problem solving, and learning.



Classroom Management

Not Observed

Does not demonstrate an understanding of research-supported practices for motivating students or for managing behavior. Has difficulty engaging students in learning activities. Does not maintain an orderly classroom or effectively manage student behavior. Classroom environment does not encourage active participation and promote positive social

Demonstrates an understanding of research-supported practices for motivating students and for managing behavior. Has some success engaging students in learning activities. Has established classroom rules and some routines, but does not consistently manage student behavior in all situations. Some class activities encourage active participation and promote positive social

Consistently models research-supported practices for motivating students and for managing behavior. Often stimulates students’ interest and enthusiasm. Has established classroom rules and routines, effectively manages student behavior in most situations. Varied class activities encourage active participation and promote positive

Consistently and enthusiastically models research-supported practices for motivation and behavior management. Student enthusiasm and engagement levels are consistently high across a variety of activities. Established classroom rules and routines effectively prevent student mis-behavior and redirect potential problem behaviors. Classroom environment encourages active


interaction. interaction. social interaction.

participation and promotes positive social interaction and self-management.



Communication Not Observed

Does not model effective verbal/nonverbal communication. Does not demonstrate sensitivity to cultural, gender, intellectual, and physical ability differences during classroom communication and in responses to students’ communications. Does not support or expand learner expression in speaking, writing, listening, and other media. Does not use a variety of media communication tools.

Attempts to model effective verbal/nonverbal communication. Sometimes demonstrates sensitivity to cultural, gender, intellectual, and physical ability differences during classroom communication and in responses to students’ communications. Attempts to support and/or expand learner expression in speaking, writing, listening, and other media. Sometimes uses a variety of media communication tools.

Consistently models effective verbal/nonverbal communication. Consistently demonstrates sensitivity to cultural, gender, intellectual, and physical ability differences during classroom communication and in responses to students’ communications. Consistently supports and expands learner expression in speaking, writing, listening, and other media. Consistently uses a variety of media communication tools.

Skillfully models effective verbal/nonverbal communication. Skillfully demonstrates sensitivity to cultural, gender, intellectual, and physical ability differences during classroom communication and in responses to students’ communications. Skillfully supports and expands learner expression in speaking, writing, listening, and other media. Skillfully uses a variety of media communication tools.




Assessment Not Observed

Assessment strategies and tools are not aligned with instruction, are poorly designed, or not valid for measuring student achievement and growth. Assessment activities are limited in number, type or scope. Reflection on assessment data does not result in changes in planning or instruction.

Assessment tools are limited, but aligned with instruction and tend to focus on knowledge acquisition and convergent responses. Some variety in assessment measures, including authentic assessment and those requiring higher-level thinking. Reflects on assessment data and demonstrates willingness and ability to make instructional changes based on results.

Assessment tools are aligned with instruction, with increasing emphasis on understanding, reasoning, and divergent responses. Uses a variety of appropriate measures to assess attitudes, understanding and skill development as well as content knowledge. Regularly uses informal and formal assessment data to match instruction to student needs, plan alternative strategies, and achieve desired student outcomes.

Encourages self-assessment, in addition to using a variety of appropriate assessment tools that emphasize understanding, reasoning and divergent responses. Uses assessment information to inform, motivate, and direct student learning. Flexibly realigns and differentiates instruction based on assessment data to assist all students in achieving the desired outcomes.

Technology Not Observed

Seldom or never uses technology and media communications to support learning by students.

Occasionally uses available, appropriate informational and instructional technology to support

Regularly and effectively uses available, appropriate informational and instructional technology to

Integrates instructional technology to achieve goals related to the ability of students to know and use


learning by students.

support learning by students and to enhance productivity.

technology to maximize student learning. Effectively uses technology to facilitate assessment of student learning and to enhance personal productivity and professional practice.



Diversity Not Observed

Seldom varies instruction to address developmental and learning style differences among students. Rarely relates content to the things that are personally relevant to students.

Considers differences among students in planning and instruction by varying instruction to address different learning styles and student interests. Makes some personally-relevant connections meaningful to students.

Considers differences among students by varying instruction and by targeting students with distinctly different needs for particular attention, using specialized services when appropriate. Makes many personally relevant connections meaningful to students.

Shows considerable ability in identifying differences among students and planning instruction to meet the specific needs and interests of individuals as well as the general needs of the group, including accessing specialized services when appropriate. Regularly organizes instruction in personal contexts that are relevant


and meaningful to students.

Reflective Practitioner

Not Observed

Does not use self-assessment and problem solving strategies for reflecting on one’s own practices. Does not reflect on teacher influences on students’ growth and learning. Does not seek resources for professional development. Does not use professional ethical standards.

Occasionally uses self-assessment and problem solving strategies for reflecting on one’s own practices. Is developing the ability to reflect on teacher influences on students’ growth and learning. Only attends mandated professional development activities. Is aware of, but shows lapses of judgment in using professional ethical standards.

Uses self-assessment and problem solving strategies for reflecting on one’s own practices. Demonstrates the ability to reflect on teacher influences on students’ growth and learning. Attends mandated and voluntary activities, but does not seek out additional resources for professional development. Uses appropriate judgment in applying professional ethical standards.

Regularly uses self-assessment and problem solving strategies for reflecting on one’s own practices. Plans activities based on knowledge of teacher influences to maximize students’ growth and learning. Actively seeks out professional development resources and activities. Models ethical behavior and positively influences the ethical behaviors of others.



Professional Relationships

Not Observed

Does not foster relationships with school colleagues, parents, and educational partners in the larger community.

Interacts with school colleagues and parents, but does not yet foster relationships with educational

Interacts with school colleagues, parents, and educational partners in the larger community foster

Seeks constructive interactions with school colleagues, parents, and educational partners in the larger


Does not participate in activities to enhance a positive learning environment. Is not aware of students in distress or seek appropriate help for them. Does not work collaboratively with families, school personnel and community resources to help students reach their full potential.

partners in the larger community. Rarely participates in activities to enhance a positive learning environment. Is aware of students in distress, but does not seek appropriate help for them. Does not go beyond working collaboratively with school personnel to help students reach their full potential.Does not consider families and community resources as part of the process.

relationships support student learning and well being. Participates in activities to enhance a positive learning environment. Is aware of students in distress, seeks appropriate help for them. Works collaboratively with families, school personnel and community resources to help students reach their full potential.

community to foster relationships that support student learning and well being. Plans activities that enhance a positive learning environment. Is aware of students in distress and situations that cause student distress and seeks appropriate help or prevention for them. Initiates activities that require collaborative work with families, school personnel and community resources to help students reach their full potential.


Appendix F – Program Assessment Tables


Content Assessments:

Praxis Exam:

Praxis II Overall Passing Results (N = 114 Students)Fall 2002 - Spring 2008 ( 6 years/12 semesters)

Academic Years (6) N # Passing PercentAverage

Score2002-2003 15 14 93.3% 1712003-2004 26 24 93.1% 1682004-2005 16 13 81.3% 1622005-2006 25 23 92.0% 1662006-2007 17 17 100.0% 1692007-2008 15 15 100.0% 170

1006Totals 114 106 93.0% 168

Target = 80% passing rate

Praxis II Overall Score Results (N = 114 Students)Fall 2002 - Spring 2008 (6 years/12 semesters)

Performance Range N <155 155-179 >179Academic Years (6) Below Average Above2002-2003 15 1 11 32003-2004 26 3 19 42004-2005 16 6 9 52005-2006 25 5 14 62006-2007 17 0 14 32007-2008 15 3 7 5

Totals 114 18 75 21Percent 100% 15.8% 65.8% 18.4%

Target = 80% average & above 84.2%


Praxis II Subscore Results (110 students)Fall 2002 - Spring 2008 (6 years/12 semesters)

Performance Range Below Percent Average Percent Above Percent N Target SubScore (Standard)US History (1.2) 11 10.0% 71 64.5% 28 25.5% 110 90.0%World History (1.2) 12 10.9% 72 65.5% 26 23.6% 110 89.1%Government (1.6/1.10) 5 5.0% 78 70.9% 27 24.5% 110 95.5%Geography (1.3) 7 6.4% 76 69.1% 27 24.5% 110 93.6%Economics (1.7) 13 11.8% 74 67.3% 23 20.9% 110 88.2%Beh. Scs. (1.1/1.4/1.5) 9 8.2% 84 76.4% 17 15.5% 110 91.8%

Totals (110 x 6 = 660) 57 8.6% 455 68.9% 148 22.4% 660 91.4%

Total number of student teachers = 114Total number of missing subscores = 4 Total numbers of subscores available = 110

Target: 80% of subscores average & above

Praxis II Subscore Results (N = 110 students)Fall 2002- Spring 2008 (6 years/12 semesters)

Standard 1.1/1.4/1.5 1.2 1.2 1.3 1.6/1.10 1.7 1.8 1.9

Category Beh. Scs.US

Hist.Wld. Hist. Geog. Gov/Civ. Econ. NA NA

Sub-Scores29 28 1


27 3 3 26 1 25 2 6 24 6 3 23 4 5 22 5 7 21 12 11 20 10 13 2 19 12 5 2 518 17 8 1 8 117 13 11 4 13 216 7 11 10 12 215 6* 9* 18 10 414 4 7 14 13 1013 1 4 2 12 13 1312 6 4 3 15 19 1511 11 1 4 16 3* 1910 15 1 6* 7 15*9 23 6 3 108 25 3 1 67 17* 2 1 56 4 1 15 5 24 1 23 1210

N 110 110 110 110 110 110Total 996 2079 2042 1421 1566 1189

Average 8.8 18.9 18.6 12.9 14.2 10.8

Passing 99 97 95 98 98 84Passing % 90.0% 88.2% 86.4% 89.1% 89.1% 76.4%

Total number of student teachers = 114 Total number of missing subscores = 4 Total number of subscores available = 110

Passing: 50% of the highest raw score possible in each test category (* = passing score)Target: 80% pass rate in each subscore test category


Course Grades:

Social Studies Content Course GradesMoSTEP Social Studies Content CompetenciesFall 2002 - Spring 2008 (6 academic years)

Year 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 RatingTarget (3.00)

Standard#1 (SS) 3.46 3.24 3.43 3.16 3.39 3.20 3.29 100%#2 (Dem) 3.30 3.48 3.23 3.22 3.45 3.26 3.33 100%#3 (Hist) 3.09 3.32 3.2 3.04 3.38 3.24 3.21 100%#4 (Gov) 3.43 3.48 3.21 3.26 3.44 3.33 3.36 100%#5 (Econ) 3.00 3.07 3.00 3.04 3.00 2.93 3.01 83.3%#6 (Geog) 3.50 3.46 3.43 3.08 3.11 3.26 3.29 100%#7 (Soc) 3.60 3.42 3.31 3.56 3.38 3.26 3.43 83.3%#8 (SS Tools) 3.26 3.28 3.25 2.95 3.16 3.00 3.15 83.3%

Total 3.28 3.37 3.25 3.16 3.35 3.21 3.27 100%

Total number of student teachers = 114 during these six years

Target Rating: 3.00 for each standard

Course Grades


MoSTEP Social Studies CompetenciesFall 2002 - Spring 2008 (6 years/12 semesters)

STANDARD 1: Social Studies as a Field of Study A (4) B (3) C (2) D (1) F (0) N Total RatingSoSc 4050 50 48 16 0 0 114 376 3.29

STANDARD 2: Principles Expressed in Documents A (4) B (3) C (2) D (1) F (0) N Total RatingUS Hist 1350 51 46 18 0 0 115 378 3.28US Hist 1351 55 40 20 0 0 115 380 3.30Pols 1510 59 44 12 0 0 115 392 3.40Pols 2511 54 44 17 0 0 115 382 3.32Totals 219 134 67 0 0 460 1532 3.33

STANDARD 3: Continuity and Change in History A (4) B (3) C (2) D (1) F (0) N Total RatingUS Hist 1350 51 46 18 0 0 115 378 3.28US Hist 1351 55 40 20 0 0 115 380 3.30US Totals 106 86 38 0 0 230 758 3.29World Hist 2400 19 14 9 0 1 43 136 3.16World Hist 2401 25 47 28 0 0 100 297 2.97World Hist 2402 51 25 21 0 0 97 321 3.30World Totals 95 86 58 0 1 240 754 3.14History Total 201 172 96 0 1 470 1512 3.21

STANDARD 4: Principles & Processes of Governance Systems A (4) B (3) C (2) D (1) F (0) N Total RatingPols 1510 59 44 12 0 0 115 392 3.4Pols 2511 54 44 17 0 0 115 382 3.32Totals 130 99 56 0 0 230 774 3.36

STANDARD 5: Economic Concepts & A (4) B(3) C (2) D (1) F (0) N Total Rating


PrinciplesEcon 1010 36 45 34 0 0 115 342 3.01

STANDARD 6: Geographical Study & Analysis A (4) B (3) C (2) D (1) F (0) N Total RatingGeog 2212 51 46 17 0 0 114 376 3.29

STANDARD 7: Individuals, Groups, Institutions & Culture A (4) B (3) C (2) D (1) F (0) N Total RatingSoc 1800 68 29 18 0 0 115 395 3.43

Standard 8: Social Science Tools & Inquiry A (4) B (3) C (2) D (1) F (0) N Total RatingSoSc 3010 43 46 23 0 1 113 356 3.15

Target: 3.00 Rating


Pedagogy Assessments:

NCSS Lessons:

NCSS Lesson Plans (Spring 2006-Spring 2008 = 5 Semesters)Standard 1.1/1.2 1.3/1.9 1.4/1.5 1.6/1.10 1.7 1.8Ratings4 (exceeds) 15 27 32 27 27 193 (meets) 18 14 12 15 13 192 (progressing) 10 6 2 5 4 31 (does not meet) 4 0 0 0 3 60 (did not submit) 0 0 1 0 0 0

N 47 47 47 47 47 47 282Total 138 162 168 163 158 145 934Rating 2.94 3.45 3.57 3.47 3.36 3.09 3.31

Target (3 or 4) 33 41 44 42 40 38 238Percent 70.2% 87.2% 93.6% 89.4% 85.1% 80.9% 84.9%


Unit Project:

Unit Project Results (N = 115 students)Fall 2002 - Spring 2008 (6 years/12 semesters)

Ratings 4 3 2 1 0 N Total RatingTarget

# Percent2002-03 12 2 1 0 0 15 56 3.73 14 93.3%2003-04 10 12 3 0 1 26 82 3.15 22 84.6%2004-05 6 8 2 0 0 16 52 3.25 14 87.5%2005-06 10 12 3 0 0 25 82 3.28 22 88.0%2006-07 8 8 2 0 0 18 62 3.44 16 88.9%2007-08 4 10 1 0 0 15 48 3.20 14 93.3%Totals 50 52 12 0 1 115 380 3.30 102 88.7%

Target = 80% of students meet or exceedsTarget = Rating of 3.00

Rating of 4 = ExceedsRating of 3 = MeetsRating of 2 = ProgressingRating of 1 = Does not meetRating of 0 = Does not submit



Social Studies Content InsertMoSTEP Social Studies CompetenciesSpring 2006 - Spring 2008 (5 semesters)

Ratings Exceeds Meets Progressing Doesn't meet

Not Observed N Total Rating

Target (2 or 3) Percent

Standard

#1 (SS)19

(47.5%) 21 (52.5%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 40 99 2.48 40 100%

#2 (Dem)16

(47.1%) 18 (52.9%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 6 (15.0%) 34 84 2.47 34 100%

#3 (Hist)21

(52.5%) 14 (35.0%) 3 (7.5%) 0 (0.0%) 2 (5.0%) 38 92 2.42 35 92.1%

#4 (Gov)20

(50.0%) 20 (50.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 40 100 2.50 40 100%

#5 (Econ)12

(30.0%) 23 (57.5%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 5 (12.5%) 35 82 2.34 35 100%

#6 (Geog)18

(45.0%) 17 (42.5%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 5 (12.5%) 35 88 2.51 35 100%

#7 (Soc)19

(47.5%) 18 (45.0%) 0 (0.0%) 1 (2.5%) 2 (5.0%) 38 93 2.45 37 97.4%#8 (SS Tools)

22 (55.0%) 14 (35.0%) 1 (2.5%) 0 (0.0%) 3 (7.5%) 37 95 2.57 36 97.3%

Total147

(45.9%) 145 (45.3%) 4 (1.3%) 1 (0.3%) 23 (7.2%) 297 735 2.47 292 98.3%

Total number of student teachers = 47 during these five semestersTotal number of Social Studies inserts missing = 7 from these five semesters.Total number of responses possible for each standard = 40N = the number of ratings for each standard minus "not observed" category

Target Rating: 2.50 for each standardTarget Percentage: 100% meets or exceeds


Field Experience Assessments:

Unit-Lessons:

UNIT PLANS for SOCIAL STUDIESFall 2005-Spring 2008 (3 years)

Year 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 TotalRatingExceeds (3) 17 (77.3%) 9 (52.9%) 10 (66.7%) 36 (66.7%)Meets (2) 4 (18.2%) 8 (47.1%) 4 (26.7%) 16 (29.6%)Progressing (1) 1 (4.5%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 1 (1.9%)Does not meet (0) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 1 (6.7%) 1 (1.9%)

N 22 17 15 54Rating (3-pt scale) 2.77 2.53 2.53 2.61

Rating (2 or 3) 21 of 22 17 of 17 14 of 15 52 of 54Percent 95.5% 100.0% 93.3% 96.3%

Target: 2.50 ratingTarget: 100% meets or exceeds

LESSON PLANS for SOCIAL STUDIESFall 2005-Spring 2008 (3 years)

Year 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 TotalRatingExceeds (3) 16 (72.7%) 10 (58.8%) 10 (66.7%) 36 (66.7%)Meets (2) 6 (27.3%) 7 (41.2%) 4 (26.7) 17 (31.5%)Progressing (1) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 1 (6.7%) 1 (1.9%)Does Not Meet (0) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%)

N 22 17 15 54Rating (3-pt scale) 2.73 2.59 2.60 2.65

Rating (2 or 3) 22 of 22 17 of 17 14 of 15 53 of 54Percent 100% 100% 93.3% 98.1%



Dispositions:

Teacher Candidate Dispositions Assessment Fall 2005- Spring 2008 (3 years/6 semesters)

Ratings Exceeds Meets Progres s ing Does n't meet Not Obs erved N Total Rating Target (2 or 3) Percent

Dis pos iti on

#1 31 (57.4%) 22 (40.7%) 1 (1.9%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 54 138 2.56 53 98.1%

#2 32 (59.3%) 22 (40.7%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 54 140 2.59 54 100%

#3 32 (59.3%) 21 (38.9%) 1 (1.9%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 54 139 2.57 53 98.1%

#4 31 (57.4%) 21 (38.9%) 2 (3.7%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 54 137 2.53 52 96.3%

#5 38 (70.4%) 14 (25.9%) 2 (3.7%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 54 144 2.67 52 96.3%

#6 28 (52.8%) 22 (41.5%) 4 (7.5%) 0 (0.0%) 1 (1.9%) 53 132 2.49 50 94.3%

#7 34 (63.0%) 18 (33.3%) 1 (1.9%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 54 139 2.57 53 98.1%

#8 35 (64.8%) 18 (33.3%) 1 (1.9%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 54 142 2.63 53 98.1%

#9 38 (70.4%) 16 (29.6%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%0 0 (0.0%) 54 146 2.70 54 100%

#10 29 (54.7%) 23 (43.4%) 1 (1.9%) 0 (0.0%) 1 (1.9%) 53 134 2.53 52 98.1%

#11 28 (51.9%) 25 (46.3%) 1 (1.9%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 54 135 2.50 53 98.1%

#12 12 (50.0%) 11 (45.8%) 1 (4.2%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 24 59 2.46 23 95.8%

Tota l 368 (59.5%) 233 (37.7%) 15 (2.4%) 0 (0.0%) 2 (0.3%) 616 1588 2.57 601 97.6%

Tota l number of s tudent teachers = 56 during thes e s ix semes ters

Tota l number of dis pos ition forms mi ss i ng = 2 from these s ix s emesters .

Tota l number of res ponses poss i ble for each dispos ition = 54 (except #12, which was not included until s pri ng 2007)

N = the number of ratings for each dis pos i tion minus "not observed" category

Target Rati ng: 2.50 for each dispos itionTarget Percenta ge: 100% meets or exceeds



P-12 IMPACT UPON STUDENT LEARNING: Summative EvaluationFall 2005-Spring 2008 (3 years)

Year 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 TotalRatingExceeds (3) 17 (73.9%) 8 (53.3%) 10 (66.7%) 35 (66.0%)Meets (2) 6 (26.1%) 7 (46.7%) 4 (26.7%) 17 (32.1%)Progressing (1) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 1 (6.7%) 1 (1.9%)Does not meet (0) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%)

N 23 15 15 53Rating (3-pt scale) 2.74 2.53 2.60 2.64

Rating (2 or 3) 23 of 23 15 of 15 14 of 15 52 of 53Percent 100.0% 100.0% 93.3% 98.1%


P-12 IMPACT UPON STUDENT LEARNING: ReflectionFall 2005-Spring 2008 (3 years)

Year 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 TotalRatingExceeds (3) 15 (68.2%) 10 (58.8%) 8 (57.1%) 33 (62.3%)Meets (2) 6 (27.3%) 7 (41.2%) 5 (35.7%) 18 (34.0%)Progressing (1) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%)Does Not Meet (0) 1 (4.5%) 0 (0.0%) 1 (7.1%) 2 (3.8%)

N 22 17 14 53Rating (3-pt scale) 2.73 2.59 2.60 2.59

Rating (2 or 3) 21 of 22 17 of 17 13 of 14 51 of 53Percent 96% 100% 92.9% 96.2%



Student Teaching Evaluation:

Student Teacher Evaluations Fall 2005- Spring 2008 (3 years/6 semesters)

Ratings Exceeds Meets Progres s ing Does n't meet Not Obs erved N Total Rating Target (2 or 3) Percent

Standards

Knowledge

1.2.1 43 (78.2%) 12 (21.8%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 55 153 2.78 55 100.0%

Ski l l s

1.2.2 35 (63.6%) 20 (36.4%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 55 145 2.63 55 100%

1.2.4 38 (69.1%) 16 (29.1%) 1 (1.8%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 55 147 2.67 54 98.2%

1.2.5 36 (65.5%) 16 (29.1%) 3 (5.4%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 55 143 2.60 52 94.6%

1.2.6 28 (50.9%) 23 (41.8%) 4 (7.3%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 55 134 2.43 51 92.7%

1.2.7 36 (65.5%) 18 (32.7%) 1 (1.8%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 55 145 2.63 54 98.2%

1.2.8 33 (60.0%) 22 (40.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 55 143 2.6 55 100.0%

1.2.11 39 (70.9%) 16 (29.1%) 0 (0.0%0 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 55 149 2.7 55 100.0%

Dis pos iti ons

1.2.3 28 (50.9%) 25 (45.5%) 2 (3.6%) 0 (0.0%0 0 (0.0%) 55 136 2.47 53 96%

1.2.9 34 (63.0% 16 (29.6%) 4 (7.4%) 0 (0.0%) 1 (1.8%) 54 138 2.55 50 92.6%

1.2.10 36 (65.5%) 18 (32.7%) 1 (1.8%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 55 145 2.63 54 98.2%

Tota l 387 (65.5%) 202 (33.4%) 16 (2.7%) 0 (0.0%) 1 (0.001%) 604 1578 2.61 588 97.3%

Tota l number of s tudent teachers = 56 during thes e s ix semes ters

Tota l number of dis pos ition forms mi ss i ng = 1 from these s ix s emesters .

Target Rati ng: 2.50 for each dispos itionTarget Percenta ge: 100% meets or exceeds