Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
P a g e | 1
NEBRASKA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONTeacher Preparation Content Program Review
Institution: Chadron State College
Date Submitted: Summer 2012
Contact Person: Richard Bird
Phone: 308-432-6326 Fax: 308-432-6429
Email: [email protected]
Content Group/Area: ArtAnd/orEndorsements and Grade level: Art(K-12)
Program Level: X Initial Advanced
Is the program offered at more than one site? Yes X No
If yes, lit the sites at which the program is offered:
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
Type of Certificate: X Teaching Administrative Special Services
Accreditation Status: X NCATE X State TEAC Regional
Specialty Program Area Recognition ( if applicable):
Program Report Status: X Initial Review Rejoinder Response to Condition
X
XX
X
X X X
X X X X
X X X
P a g e | 2
Section 1: Contextual Information
Introduction
Institutional Overview
Chadron State College, which began as a Nebraska State Normal School in 1911, remains the only four-year institution of higher education in western Nebraska. In 1964 the institution enhanced its mission and the name was changed to Chadron State College (CSC). The college has experienced numerous changes and continual growth over their millennium.
Though small in number, early graduates represented education to a young, rugged, and rural society. Today, the college prepares students for much more than teacher education. The institutional role, mission, and objectives cover comprehensive college curricula, which includes basic and advanced programs. Teacher education remains, however, a central component. In 2010, for example, almost 30% of our student-body pursued degrees in teaching. These students are primarily from Chadron State’s expansive rural service region, which encompasses 26 counties and approximately 34,700 square miles.
Total institutional enrollment, as of fall 2010, now stands at 2,759 students, of which 64% are full-time. The majority of these students, approximately 61%, are Nebraskans. Traditional students, students under 23 years of age and single, make up the majority of the enrollment. Generally, students are first-generation and are from small rural high schools with graduating classes of 100 students or less. Non-traditional students, students over 23 years of age or married, comprise 41% of our full-time undergraduate enrollment, the majority of which are women.
Due to the expanse of our coverage area, Chadron State offers its courses, via interactive telecommunications, to two locations, Scottsbluff and North Platte, Nebraska, in addition to face-to-face instruction at these sites.
Institutional Charge, Vision and Mission Statements
Statutory charge Priorities for Nebraska State Colleges, as established by the state legislature and reported in the 2006 Coordinating Commission for Postsecondary Education Comprehensive Statewide Plan for Postsecondary Education, are:
First instructional priority is the provision of baccalaureate general academic, occupational, and education degree programs;
Second instructional priority is to provide master's programs in education and other disciplines authorized by statute or by the Commission;
Third priorities are applied research, public service activities, and continuing education activities that serve their geographic service areas.
The Commission further defines CSC’s programmatic service as a Master's (comprehensive) College/University I Carnegie classification. Chadron State College's programmatic service area includes baccalaureate level liberal arts, occupational degree programs and professional degree programs in education.
The primary focus of Chadron State College's educational programs is high quality, comprehensive undergraduate programs leading to baccalaureate degrees in arts and sciences, business, and teacher education, all of which are enhanced by a coherent general education program.
P a g e | 3
Chadron State College’s new baccalaureate degree programs will reflect the needs of its service area and the priorities of the State College Board of Trustees.
Chadron State College offers the Master of Education, the Master of Organizational Management, and the Master of Business Administration degrees. http://www.ccpe.state.ne.us/PublicDoc/CCPE/
Like Peru and Wayne State Colleges (the other two institutions within the Nebraska State College system), Chadron State is a regional institution dedicated to teaching, scholarship, and community service, and serves a defined, geographical region.
Institutional vision and mission statements The vision and mission as established by the faculty, professional staff, and administration at Chadron State College are:
Vision Chadron State College aspires to be a premiere institution of higher education in the western high plains states, innovatively pursuing excellence in teaching, scholarship, and service.
MissionChadron State College will enrich the quality of life in the region by providing
educational opportunities, research, service, and programs that contribute significantly to the vitality and diversity of the region.
The vision and mission set the focus for the future of the institution and aid in the development of the strategic plan which will guide us into a continuous state of improvement, and is designed to meet the needs of the region we serve.
Institutional Strategic Plan
Chadron State College has four outcome initiatives and twenty accompanying actions to achieve the initiatives set forth in the plan. The strategic plan for 2011 and beyond is as follows:
1. Initiative One: Streamlined, Relevant, High-Impact Learning Experiences Action (1) Revise Essential Learning Program (General Studies) Action (2) Create integrated and interdisciplinary programs Action (3) Implement experiential learning for college seniors Action (4) Expand student literacy to all areas of technology and media Action (5) Create co-curricular experiences that emphasize leadership, engagement,
civic responsibility and positive human interaction Action (6) Refine and redefine course delivery models Action (7) Promote standards of quality for courses and teaching Action (8) Establish a technology-supported, collaborative and creative teaching and
learning center to provide appropriate resources and tools to create high-impact learning experiences
2. Initiative Two: Competitive, Customer-focused Delivery of Services in Support of Teaching and Learning
P a g e | 4
Action (9) Develop a campus-wide definition and process for student advising and schedule building
Action (10) Initiate a review of internal service gaps and establish a plan to improve communication and timely completion of services
Action (11) Review all campus services for relevance and efficiency Action (12) Initiate a review of internal service gaps with respect to academic computing
services Action (13) Establish a deliberate collaborative process to improve communication and
effective teamwork across all areas of the college
3. Initiative Three: Optimal Use of Limited Human and Physical Resources
Action (14) Based on the campus-wide review of services for relevance and efficiency (#11above) reallocate human resources more effectively according to mission-critical processes and functions as opposed to historical silos
Action (15) Implement a system of assessment and accountability for ensuring quality of mission critical functions
Action (16) Differentiate and streamline the role and responsibilities of faculty and staff Action (17) Initiate a digital document and self-service plan for process flow
improvement, accountability, document storage and retrieval, and paper reduction
4. Initiative Four: Increased Revenue
Action (18) Re-allocate one or more existing personnel lines to focus exclusively on market development
Action (19) Develop internal support for grant-writing Action (20) Build on fundraising momentum developed during the Vision
2011Comprehensive CampaignLink to Strategic Plan
Education Unit Mission/Philosophy
Chadron State College’s professional preparation programs are designed to produce “Visionary Leaders for Lifelong Learning”.
Mission
The mission of the Chadron State College Education Unit, founded on educating Visionary Leaders, is committed to creating diverse educational environments that are thoughtfully structured to provide opportunity for the success of all learners, now and for the future.
To accomplish the mission, CSC provides teacher, administrator, and counselor candidates with deliberate and appropriate educational experiences. Knowledge, skills, and dispositions are developed through extensive classroom and field-based interactions. Candidates have opportunities to develop their own professional philosophy and teaching style while learning to meet the needs of learners in authentic educational settings. This is accomplished with a vision that embraces tradition, innovation, and the strength of diversity, always with an eye to the future.
P a g e | 5
Philosophically, Education Unit faculty members act upon a set of beliefs that reflect the importance placed on the preparation of qualified professional educators who will meet the learning needs of all children in P-12 educational settings. To this end, unit faculty members are dedicated to the development of Visionary Leaders. The Education Unit believes the educator’s role is to facilitate learning. This facilitation is accomplished by creating opportunities for all learners to actively engage and participate in their learning environment, and to process knowledge delivered through methods appropriate to their individual learning style. The model is based, to a great extent, on the constructivist theory of learning.
Description of the Education Unit – Organization and Structure
The Education Unit is comprised of the Education Department and other campus departments providing teacher certification endorsement coursework at the initial and advanced levels. Campus departments offering endorsements are: Applied Sciences; Business; Counseling, Psychology, and Social Work; Education; English and Humanities; Health, Physical Education, and Recreation; Library Services; Mathematical Sciences; Music; Physical and Life Sciences; Social and Communication Arts; and Visual and Performing Arts. Link to CSC Organizational Chart
The CSC Department of Education houses the initial programs for Elementary Education, Early Childhood Education, Early Childhood Unified Education, and Special Education, as well as advanced programs in Reading Specialist, Educational Administration, and Curriculum and Instruction. (Curriculum and Instruction is not an endorsement program but rather an advanced, professional master’s degree.) The Education Department holds the major responsibility for providing professional teacher education curriculum.
The Education Unit is led by the unit head, the Academic Dean for Professional Licensure. The responsibilities of the academic dean include administrative oversight for program licensures and education programs. The dean serves as Chair of the Teacher Education Committee which includes teacher educators from each of the departments providing endorsement areas, and faculty teaching the professional teacher education programs. This committee is at the frontline for recommendation of policy, curriculum and procedures, and, also reviews assessment data and makes recommendations for change in curriculum, program and assessment processes. Membership of the Teacher Education Committee also includes one student and two public school representatives.
At Chadron State College, curricular changes at the initial and advanced levels are initiated within the departments and then presented to the Teacher Education Committee for advisement input. Initial level curriculum changes for all programs are presented to the Faculty Senate’s Academic Review Committee for final approval. Advanced level/ graduate program changes are presented to the Faculty Senate’s Graduate Council, for final approval. The major function of these committees is to see that changes align with CSC and Nebraska State College System policies.
The Education Unit offers teacher education programs to distant, outreach sites located in North Platte and Scottsbluff, Nebraska, and in Sheridan, Wyoming. The predominant initial education program at these sites is Elementary Education, where candidates may complete their entire pre-service curriculum. These programs operate cooperatively with the community colleges in their corresponding
P a g e | 6
locations. At the advanced level, distant, outreach programs are also offered in North Platte and Scottsbluff, Nebraska, for the School Counseling program. Through a combination of on-line delivery and face-to-face delivery, students may complete these programs at the distance sites, enabling Chadron State to better meet the needs of the region.
The Education Unit also offers secondary level, post-baccalaureate certification course programs at these distant, outreach sites and on the main campus. Initial and advanced program course delivery may be offered and received via interactive television (ITV), on-line, or through face-to-face instructional formats.
The Unit
The Teacher Education Unit offers certification programs aligned with state and national standards. Chadron State College offers twenty-eight initial endorsement programs, four initial supplemental endorsements, and four advanced endorsements. The following endorsements are currently in the phase-out stage: Specialist -Superintendent, secondary field -Industrial Education Technology, supplemental - Skilled and Technical Science Education, and supplemental - Driver Education. Certification programs offered through the Unit are:
Initial Level Programs (Bachelor of Science Degree (BS))
Secondary Education (7-12) o Art (K-12)o Basic Business (6-12) (4-9)o Biology (7-12)o Business Marketing and Information Technology Education (6-12)o Chemistry (7-12)o Coaching (7-12)o Earth Science (7-12)o Educational Library Media (K-12)o English (7-12)o Family and Consumer Sciences Education (7-12) (4-9)o Health (7-12)o Health and Physical Education (K-12)o History (7-12)o Industrial Technology Education (6-12)o Language Arts (7-12) (4-9)o Mathematics (7-12) (4-9)o Music (K-12)o Natural Science (7-12) (4-9)o Physical Education (K-6) (7-12)o Physical Science (7-12)o Physics (7-12)o Social Science (7-12) (4-9)
o Theatre (7-12)o Vocal Music (K-8)
Middle Grades (4-9) Elementary Education (K-8)
P a g e | 7
Early Childhood (B-3) Early Childhood Unified Education (B-3) Mild/Moderate Disabilities (K-12)
Advanced Level Programs (Masters of Science Degree (MS))
Educational Administrationo School Principal; (K-12) (K-6) (4-9) (7-12) Endorsemento Special Education Coordinator; (K-12) Non-endorsement
School Counseling; (K-12) (K-6) (7-12) Curriculum and Instruction; Non-endorsement
o Secondary Educationo Elementary Fieldo Elementary Generalist
Reading Specialist; (K-12) Endorsement (non-degree seeking)
In the 2010-2011 academic year, at the initial level, education majors numbered 604. Of these, 125 were part-time students. At the advanced level, 164 of the 180 students were enrolled part-time. For the 2010-2011 academic year 82 students graduated at the advanced level. This represented approximately 55% of the institutions advanced degrees granted.
Unit Field Experience Requirements
All initial level candidates must complete 100 - 125 clock hours of classroom observation/participation within a classroom setting prior to their student teaching capstone experience; this number varies between Secondary and Elementary level programs, respectively. Pre-service field experience hours are required at all levels throughout the program, culminating with the student teaching field experience. Field experiences and their respective hourly requirements are listed below.
EDUC 131: Introduction to Teaching -- 10 clock hours of classroom observation PSYC 231: Educational Psychology -- 15 clock hours of classroom observation EDUC 300/320: Education Observation & Participation:
o EDUC 300: 75 clock hours for secondary candidates, and o EDUC 320: 100 clock hours for elementary candidateso EDUC 480/490: Student Teaching – 40 hours per week, over 16 weeks (1
semester)
See Chadron State College General Catalog for written evidence.
At the advanced level, the endorsement for Educational Administration requires 250 hours of field experience. The School Counseling endorsement program requires 450 hours of field experience for K-6 endorsement; 450 hours of field experience for 7-12 endorsement; and 900 hours for K-12 endorsement. See Chadron State College General Catalog for written evidence.
Program Transition/Gateway Points: Admission, Retention and Exit
(Initial and Advanced Programs)
P a g e | 8
Initial Level Gateways At the initial level candidates are provided basic information about program gateways (transition points) and assessments. The information is outlined and available online, in the Teacher Education Handbook and the CSC General Catalog 2011-2013 as well as in several education courses, e.g., EDUC 131: Intro to Teaching; EDUC 300/320: Observation & Participation. Five (5) transition points (gateways) serve as a guide for the candidates. A summary of these transitions/gateways is below.
Gateway 1: Admission to Chadron State College
Chadron State College admits all graduates of accredited Nebraska high schools and qualified out-of-state students. Upon admission to CSC students must: (1) complete the ACT or SAT exam and have official scores sent directly to the CSC Admissions Office; (2) have official high school/college transcripts sent; (3) submit application form and fee. Advisors are assigned to all students who gain entry into the college. Candidates enrolling in teacher education programs of study have, as their primary advisors, faculty from either the Education Department (Elementary and Special Education programs) or the department responsible for the endorsement (Middle Grades and Secondary Education programs).
Transfer students work through the START Office (Student Transition and Registration Team) to have their transcripts evaluated for CSC General Studies program requirements. Following the evaluation, the candidate is assigned an advisor. Transfer students who have completed an Associate’s Degree from an accredited institution are given credit for the CSC General Studies program requirements with the exception of six (6) credit hours of upper division level courses (Ethics and a global and social/cultural awareness course). An evaluation is then conducted related to the teacher education program core competencies as described in the conceptual framework document.
Gateway 2: Pre-Admission to Teacher Education Program
Pre-Admission program requirements, students/candidates must: (1) complete EDUC 131: Introduction to Teaching with at least a grade of “C” or better; (2) submit the Education Dossier; (3) submit proof of a current background check and a notarized statement pertaining to criminal history and mental fitness, “Felony and Mental Oath Statement”; and (4) submit application form, including a record of the above listed documents.
Gateway 3: Admission to Teacher Education Program (Candidacy)
Prior to admission to the Teacher Education Program and enrollment in EDUC 300 or 320: Observation & Participation, students/candidates must: (1) pass standardized basic skills proficiency test (Praxis I/PPST) with minimum scores of 170 in reading, 172 in writing, and 171 in mathematics; (2) submit application form; (3) complete coursework with at least a 2.5 grade point average on a four-point scale; (4) earn a “C” or above in English composition and oral communication (ENG 135, ENG136, and CA 125) or equivalent courses; (5) earn a grade of “C” or above in all professional education core coursework; and (6) submit proof of a current background check and a notarized statement pertaining to criminal history and mental fitness, “Felony and Mental Oath Statement”. Students/Candidates who meet all pre-requisites may register for EDUC 300 or 320 Observation & Participation (field experience 75-125 hours). At this point students are fully admitted into the Education Program and officially become “candidates.”
Gateway 4a: Admission to Semester I of the Professional Year (Block)
P a g e | 9
Prior to admission to Semester I of the Professional Year (Block), the candidates must: (1a) elementary-level candidates must complete Elementary endorsement area and at least 50% of another endorsement(s) and/or a supporting minor(s); (1b) secondary-level candidates must complete Professional Education coursework and at least 75% of secondary content endorsement; and (1c) middle-level candidates must complete all of the professional education courses and at least 15 of the 18 required credit hours for the first content area of specialization, and at least 12 of the 18 credit hours of the second specialization; All candidates must (2) complete EDUC 300 or 320 with a grade of “C” or above (75/125 hours of verified field experience); (3) earn a GPA of 2.50 for all coursework and in each endorsement and/or supporting minor; (4) complete 90 credit hours and must meet residency requirements; (5) present five (5) faculty recommendations; (6) be recommended by the department faculty of the endorsement(s) area(s); (7) submit a revised Education Dossier; (8) submit proof of a current background check and a notarized statement pertaining to criminal history and mental fitness, “Felony and Mental Oath Statement”; and (9) submit the Application to the Professional Year form.
Gateway 4b: Admission to Semester II of the Professional Year (Teacher Internship)
Prior to placement in Semester II of the Professional Year (Teacher Internship/student teaching), candidates must: (1) complete Semester I of the Professional Year (Block) with a grade of “C” or above in all courses; and (2) submit proof of a current background check and a notarized statement pertaining to criminal history and mental fitness, “Felony and Mental Oath Statement.”
Gateway 5: Graduation, Certification and Entry to the Profession
Upon graduation, candidates will have met all the teacher certification requirements for Nebraska licensure. These requirements are: (1) submission of the Application for Graduation to the Registrar’s Office; (2) completion of the Teacher Intern (student teaching) experience with a minimum GPA of 2.5 (State of Nebraska requirement); (3) complete all CSC degree requirements; and (4) submit application for a teaching certificate. (See Initial Gateway Table.)
Advanced Level Gateways. At the advanced level candidates are provided the gateway information online in the CSC Graduate Catalog 2011-2013 and at the CSC Graduate website http://www.csc.edu/graduate/index.csc). The candidates must proceed through the following four (4) transition (gateway) points:
Gateway 1: Admission to Graduate Study
Chadron State College admits all candidates for the Master of Education degree who hold a Bachelor’s degree in Education from accredited colleges and universities. In addition the candidate must: (1) have earned an undergraduate GPA of 2.75 or have completed 12 graduate hours at CSC with a GPA of 3.25 or higher; and (2) submit an application for admission to graduate study. (The Graduate Record Examination (GRE) is required for the Masters of Education in Curriculum and Instruction, Science focus).
Gateway 2: Admission to Graduate Status (filing Plan of Study)
Admission to Graduate Status requires completion of a Plan of Study within the first 9-18 hours of graduate coursework. Candidates must maintain a 3.00 GPA or higher.
Gateway 3: Application for Oral Examination
P a g e | 10
Application must be made for the Oral Examination for the Master’s Degree. The candidate must: (1) submit the application form; (2) complete the majority of coursework and practicum requirements as described by each department and college policy; (3) maintain a minimum GPA of 3.00 for all program coursework; (4) meet all college requirements for credit hours and residency; and (5) be enrolled in course work necessary to complete the degree. The student must complete the degree program within a period of seven years from the year the student completed his or her graduate course applicable toward their degree.
Gateway 4: Application for Graduation and Conferring of Degree
Candidate must: (1) complete and submit application for graduation; (2) prepare and present a professional portfolio document in the area of concentration; (3) complete all requirements successfully as stated on the plan of study; and (4) pass a final oral examination.
See Advanced Programs Gateway Table.
Key Program Assessments
Initial Level Key Assessments. Consistent with each program gateway (cited above) are specific program key assessments. Table for Key Assessments for Initial Programs-Attachment C as well as the CSC Assessment Plan for Initial Programs are presented in each endorsement folio. As the tables illustrate, the key assessments cover content knowledge; pedagogical and professional knowledge, skill and dispositions; and effects on student learning. Multiple assessments are applied for each assessment target.
Advanced Level Key Assessments. Advanced level assessments for the Educational Administration, School Counseling, and Curriculum and Instruction are presented in the Table of Key Assessment Advanced Programs- Attachment C. The assessments address content knowledge, pedagogical and professional knowledge, skills and disposition, and effects on student learning. Multiple assessments are applied to each key area for these programs in the CSC Assessment Plan for Advanced Programs.
Explanation of the Conceptual Framework -Developing Visionary Leaders for Lifelong Learning
The term “visionary,” in the context of the model, implies a forward looking, far-seeing, positive, and open-minded approach to learning. The Education Unit at Chadron State College prepares candidates to provide visionary leadership within the high plains educational settings and to educational environments beyond this region. The model supports and compliments the Chadron State College Vision and Mission.
The model for “Developing Visionary Leaders for Life Long Learning” is depicted by three interlocking circles, each representing an interrelated area of the curriculum, for the initial level: General Studies, Specialty Studies, and Professional Studies. The General Studies curriculum is designed to provide candidates with a broad liberal studies background, while the Specialty Studies curricula is comprised of the content coursework in each teaching endorsement area offered at Chadron State College. The Professional Studies curriculum is comprised of those core education courses taught by Education
P a g e | 11
Department faculty. These Professional Studies courses emphasize the pedagogical knowledge, skills, and dispositions candidates use to effectively teach P-12 students. At the graduate (advanced) level, the “Visionary Leader” model continues to build on the pedagogical knowledge, skills, and dispositions developed for the candidate’s academic and professional career. The General Studies represents the core master’s program (research and inquiry); Specialty Studies describes the specialized content necessary for the degree; and the Professional Studies encompasses the practical and field based learning’s demonstrated by the candidate. At the advanced level, Specialty and Professional Studies often are blended into the same courses and experiences.
The Professional Studies circle of the model embraces the seven components that make up the conceptual framework for the Unit. These components are: Assessment, Communication, Human Relations/Diversity, Methodology/Technology, Professionalism, Thinking Skills, and Leadership. These seven components are interwoven throughout the unit’s professional preparation programs and form the basis of the constructivist approach in preparing candidates to become Visionary Leaders. The seven components are introduced and developed within the first three years of the initial candidate’s educational program, and serve as the basis for each of the unit’s key assessments. Advanced level candidates receive their introduction to the components during the EDCI 631 Introduction to Graduate Studies course. Following are the seven components of the Visionary Leader Model and their respective student outcome statements. (The colors of each conceptual framework component will be used throughout the folio to visually link CSC’s Conceptual Framework to key assessment data displays.)
Assessment. Successful candidates will understand both formal and informal strategies to assess the learner’s intellectual, social, and physical development. The candidate will be able to design and assess learning activities utilizing the data collected from those assessment measures to make instructional and/or curricular decisions to improve student learning.
Communication. Successful candidates will demonstrate effective communication skills with all constituents, while respecting diversity and engaging students in the learning enterprise through motivation and constructive learning applications.
Human Relations/Diversity. Successful candidates will develop and maintain a physically inclusive and emotionally safe classroom environment conducive to effective learning, which encourages the voicing of student concerns, embraces elements of diversity, and exhibits an understanding of child growth and development.
Methodology/Technology. Successful candidates will demonstrate the active willingness to model and use skills and knowledge to promote learning activities that are consistent with identified
P a g e | 12
learning objectives, using varied methodological and technology driven modalities. Similarly, candidates are constructing their own beliefs about effective teaching practices.
Professionalism. Successful candidates will demonstrate conduct befitting a professional educator, to include the following dispositions: regular self-reflection; positive ethical behavior; respectful attitude; proper mode of dress; effective classroom management skills; appropriate knowledge of subject matter; and seeks the opportunity to grow professionally.
Thinking Skills. Thinking skills apply to all subjects and to student learning at all levels. Candidates at all levels will recognize and demonstrate activities that elicit critical thought beyond recall and comprehension.
Leadership. Successful candidates recognize and demonstrate leadership traits that promote the engagement of individuals in a professional and ethical manner to lead toward common goals.
Candidate Proficiencies Aligned with Professional and State Standards
In applying the seven components of the Visionary Leader model with their associated outcomes, candidates meet the professional standards for the Nebraska Department of Education and National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education preparing educators and other professional school personnel for initial and advanced programs. The matrix shown in Section II will illustrate the alignment of the Nebraska Standard to the individual endorsements offered at Chadron State College.
Section 2: Key Assessments and Findings
This section will describe the results for the art endorsement for content; pedagogical and professional knowledge, skills, and dispositions as related to the Chadron State College conceptual framework; and effects on student learning. The section will also briefly discuss the comparison of the art education candidates to the other art majors at Chadron State College.
Content Knowledge
Content knowledge (subject matter) is assessed with three measures: the grade point average (GPA) calculated on the endorsement curriculum content, the content area assessment score provided by the endorsement area faculty based on the program’s specialized performance measures, and the candidate’s performance during student teaching relative to content knowledge. Grade point average in the endorsement area is checked prior to the candidate’s
P a g e | 13
admission to the Professional Year. (See Initial Program Gateway Table , Table for Key Assessments for Initial Programs, and CSC Assessment Plan for Initial Programs .)
The Content Area Assessment for Secondary/Specialized Endorsements spreadsheet represents the average content knowledge performance scores from fall 2007 through spring 2011. The spreadsheet displays the three assessments used for content: (a) endorsement content grade point average (GPA) and the standard deviation, (b) the content area assessment score average and standard deviation from the endorsement department faculty, and (c) the content knowledge question/rating from the Teacher Intern Checklist (TIC) score average and standard deviation from the teacher internship (student teaching) experience provided by the cooperating teacher, the college supervisor, and the candidate. “TIC Content ?” refers to the Teacher Intern Checklist rating which is the knowledge assessment for the student teaching experience. The cooperating teacher is the P-12 teacher who is working with the candidate within the school. The supervisor is the college faculty observing the candidate during the internship. “Self” refers to the candidate’s assessment of his or her performance.
For art education candidates, the content area assessment score is based on a faculty recommendation utilizing the Content Area Assessment Rubric . Determination of this content score comes from a culminating senior art show completed by each candidate and evaluated by the entire art faculty. This senior art show shows progression and growth on the candidate’s content knowledge and content skill. The process begins in the freshman year with a survey in which the candidate is interviewed as to their background in all areas of art. After completion of sixty credit hours, the candidate is interviewed again as to development of knowledge and skills and progression toward graduation. By the senior art show, the faculty can determine growth (change) as well as the degree of knowledge content and skill content in art.
Section 2: Table 1 illustrates the content scores for art candidates, uses averages and standard deviations on a 4-point scale, and shows the average content knowledge scores for all non-Praxis II endorsement area education candidates. The content area score average for art candidates is 2.75 (.48) while the average content score for secondary candidates is 3.49 (.38). This is a fairly significant difference. However, part of this difference is due to the low number of art candidates (6) as compared to 160 for the total content area score. Another reason for this difference is that the art program examines content knowledge as well as content skill. A student may have the knowledge content, but not the content skill at the level expected by the faculty. For art candidates, the multiyear average for (a) the GPA within the endorsement courses is 3.45 (.17), (b) the content area assessment score average is 2.75 (.48), and (c) the candidate internship content knowledge score averages are: 3.50 (.71) from cooperating teachers, 4.00 (.00) from college supervisors, and 3.33 (.52) from candidates. The overall GPA course average for art candidates at 3.43 (.32) is at about the same level as all secondary candidates. The education GPA course average of 3.77 (.19) for art candidates is at about the same level as the average
P a g e | 14
secondary candidate, which is 3.76 (.22). Also, the GPA within the endorsement courses at 3.45 (.17) is on the same level as the average secondary candidate at 3.58 (.29).
The art endorsement candidates perform at approximately the same knowledge level as the art studio majors. However, the skill level is greater in the studio art majors. Part of this difference is due to the requirements for the education endorsement which requires more breadth in content knowledge, while the non-education art major requires more depth.
Section 2: Table 1Art Candidates’ and all Candidates’ Content Knowledge Scores
Overall GPA @ Graduation
Education Courses GPA
Endorsement Content GPA
Content Area Assessment Score
TIC Content ? Cooperating Teacher
TIC Content ? Supervisor
TIC Content ? Self
Art Total Spring 2008- Spring 2011 N = 6
Average 3.43 3.77 3.45 2.75 3.50 4.00 3.33
SD 0.32 0.19 0.17 0.48 0.71 0.00 0.52
Endorsement Content Areas (K-12; K-8; 7-12) Total Fall 2007 - Spring 2011 N = 160; N = 175 with Fall 2007 (Fall 2007, used a 5-point scale)
Average 3.56 3.76 3.58 3.49 3.75 3.83 3.67
SD 0.29 0.22 0.29 0.38 0.38 0.26 0.39
Scale: 4—Advanced (A-level), 3—Proficient (B-level), 2—Progressing (C-level), 1/0 Unacceptable (D/F level). Teacher Intern Checklist Question/Rating (TIC ?): The intern’s overall knowledge of his/her subject matter. Fall 2007 data are not included in the calculation as those scores were calculated on the previously used 5-point scale.
For complete data sets use the following link: Art Key Assessment Content Knowledge KSD –Art Content Tab 1
Pedagogical and Professional Knowledge, Skills, and Dispositions
Developmental Key Assessments Results for the Total Candidate Group Pedagogical and professional knowledge, skills, and dispositions are measured as part of CSC’s Visionary Leader Conceptual Framework during EDUC 131 Introduction to Teaching, PSCY 231 Educational Psychology, and EDUC 300/320 Observation and Participation prior to the Professional Year. Key program assessments are embedded into each of these courses. The key assessments are built around a clinical experience at each level, and feature an internal and external evaluator model. Professional education courses include pedagogical knowledge; thus, education course GPA is a measure of pedagogical knowledge. This measure is described in the previous section. Candidates must pass professional education courses with a “C” or above as described in the Initial Programs Gateway Table. (See Initial Program Gateway Table , Table for Key
P a g e | 15
Assessments for Initial Programs, and CSC Assessment Plan for Initial Programs). Results for each key assessment follow.
Freshman Level—EDUC 131 Introduction to Teaching Cooperating P-12 teachers and EDUC 131 professors evaluated freshman level students/candidates on their clinical experiences. Students/candidates at this level are not divided by endorsement or program, as many have not declared a specialization. Cooperating teachers’ ratings are related to student/candidate’s demonstrated behaviors in professionalism and dispositions. Professors’ ratings are based on the cooperating teachers’ ratings and the student/candidate’s performance on the Observation Report. (Assignment information and both assessment rubrics may be found by going to the following links: Disposition Survey-Evaluator, Disposition Survey-Self, Observation Report, Online Instructions, Plans, Teacher Evaluations, Observation Do’s & Don’ts , Personal & Professional Fitness Oath Statement .)
Cooperating teachers rate CSC students/candidates much higher than EDUC 131 professors. Cooperating teachers’ ratings range from 3.73 (.51) for Communication to 3.86 (.39) for Attendance. All ratings fall into the Proficient (3) level. Professors consider these ratings, but also evaluate the student/candidate’s report of the observation experience. The report describes other dimensions relating to course content and skills. Professors’ ratings range from 2.77 (.76) for Methodology/Technology to 3.00 (.86) for Human Relations/Diversity. Ratings generally are at the Progressing (2) level, except Human Relations/Diversity. Overall, cooperating teachers’ rating of students/candidates is 3.80 (.36); overall professors’ rating of students/candidates is 2.86 (.83). The ratings are higher and the variability is much lower for cooperating teachers’ ratings than it is for professors’ ratings. This difference may indicate CSC students/candidates performance is more positive and more uniform in the schools than it is on the classroom observation report assignment. (See Section 2: Table 2 below.)
Section 2: Table 2EDUC 131 Intro to Teaching Cooperating Teacher’s and Professors’ Summary Data
EDUC 131 Intro to Teaching Summary Data--Fall 2007- Summer 2011
Cooperating Teachers’ Evaluation Professors’ Evaluation from Observation Report
Coo
pera
tion
App
eara
nce
Att
itude
Com
mun
icat
ion
Att
enda
nce
Ale
rtne
ss
Ave
rage
SD
Lea
ders
hip
Ass
essm
ent
Com
mun
icat
ion
Hum
an
Rel
atio
ns/
Met
hodo
logy
/ T
echn
olog
y
Prof
essi
onal
ism
Thi
nkin
g Sk
ills
Ave
rage
SD
P a g e | 16
Average Grand Total N = 752
3.81 3.76 3.84 3.73 3.86 3.82 3.80 2.88 2.70 2.9
4 3.00 2.77 2.92 2.82 2.86
SD 0.43 0.47 0.40 0.51 0.39 0.42 0.3
6 0.87 0.74 0.88 0.86 0.76 0.87 0.81 0.83
Scale: 4—Advanced (A-level), 3—Proficient (B-level), 2—Progressing (C-level), 1/0 Unacceptable (D/F level).
For complete data sets use the following links: EDUC 131 Professors Tables-Charts and EDUC 131 Cooperating Teachers Tables-Charts
Sophomore Level—PSYC 231 Educational Psychology Cooperating P-12 teachers and PSYC 231 professors evaluate sophomore level students/candidates on their clinical experiences. Students/candidates at this level are not divided by endorsement or program, as many have not declared a specialization. Cooperating teachers’ ratings are related to student/candidate’s demonstrated behaviors in professionalism and dispositions. Professors’ ratings are based on the cooperating teachers’ ratings and the student/candidate’s performance on the Observation Report. (Assignment information and both assessment rubrics may be found by going to the following links: Disposition Survey-Evaluator, Disposition Survey-Self, Personal & Professional Fitness Oath Statement, Classroom Checklist, Observation/Rating Rubric, Observation Do’s & Don’ts, Observation Report, Online Instructions, Teacher Evaluation.
Cooperating teachers rate CSC students/candidates about the same as PSYC 231 professors. Cooperating teachers’ ratings range from 3.09 (.41) for Communication to 3.21(.30) for Attendance. All ratings fall into the Proficient (3) level. Professors consider these ratings, but also evaluate the student/candidate’s report of the observation experience. The report describes other dimensions relating to course content and skills. Professors’ ratings range from 3.09 (.96) for Leadership to 3.18 (.98) for Thinking Skills. Ratings are at the Proficient (3) level. Average scores are very similar, but the variability is much lower for cooperating teachers’ ratings than it is for professors’ ratings. This difference may indicate CSC students/candidates’ performance is more uniform in the schools than it is on the classroom observation report assignment. (See Section 2: Table 3 below.)
Section 2: Table 3PSYC 231 Educational Psychology Cooperating Teacher’s and Professors’ Summary Data
PSYC 231 Educational Psychology Summary Data--Fall 2007- Summer 2011
Cooperating Teachers’ Evaluation Professors’ Evaluation from Observation Report
P a g e | 17
Coo
pera
tion
App
eara
nce
Att
itude
Com
mun
icat
ion
Att
enda
nce
Ale
rtne
ss
Ave
rage
SD
Lea
ders
hip
Ass
essm
ent
Com
mun
icat
ion
Hum
an
Rel
atio
ns/
Met
hodo
logy
/ T
echn
olog
y
Prof
essi
onal
ism
Thi
nkin
g Sk
ills
Ave
rage
SD
Average Grand Total N = 526
3.14 3.13 3.16 3.093.2
1 3.16 3.77 3.09 3.143.1
2 3.13 3.14 3.13 3.18 3.13
SD 0.37 0.41 0.37 0.410.3
0 0.360.4
4 0.96 0.960.9
7 0.96 0.97 0.99 0.98 0.97
Scale: 4—Advanced (A-level), 3—Proficient (B-level), 2—Progressing (C-level), 1/0 Unacceptable (D/F level)
For complete data sets use the following links: PSYC 231 Cooperating Teachers Tables-Charts and PSYC 231 Professors Tables-Charts
Junior Level—EDUC 300/320 Observation and Participation Cooperating P-12 teachers evaluate junior level candidates on their clinical experiences. EDUC 300/320 Observation and Participation professors did not complete an evaluation, but they did grade the candidate and conducted an informal exit interview. (In the future the professor will complete the same evaluation rubric as the cooperating teacher.) Candidates at this level are divided by program for data purposes, and they are admitted into the Teacher Education program. Cooperating teachers’ ratings are related to candidate’s demonstrated behaviors in professionalism and dispositions. (Assignments and rubrics may be found by going to the following links: Disposition Survey-Evaluator, Disposition Survey-Self, Evaluation Form, Data, Handbook, Syllabus, Written Assignment, Personal & Professional Fitness Oath Statement, and Verification Form.)
Section 2: Table 4 describes the cooperating teachers’ ratings. Cooperating teachers’ ratings range from 3.62 (.62) for Communication and Thinking Skills to 3.85 (.35) for Human Relations Diversity. All ratings fall into the Proficient (3) level.
Section 2: Table 4EDUC 300/320 Observation & Participation Cooperating Teacher’s and Professors’ Summary Data
EDUC 300/320 Observation & ParticipationSummary Data by Conceptual Framework Dimensions Spring 2008 – Spring 2011
P a g e | 18
Lea
ders
hip
Ass
essm
ent
Com
mun
icat
ion
Hum
an
Rel
atio
ns/D
iver
sity
Met
hodo
logy
/ T
echn
olog
y
Prof
essi
onal
ism
Thi
nkin
g Sk
ills
Ave
rage
Stan
dard
Dev
iatio
n
Elementary Grand Average N = 194 3.76 3.75 3.64 3.87 3.67 3.84 3.62 3.76 3.76
Elementary Grand SD 0.44 0.45 0.52 0.33 0.49 0.39 0.51 0.44
Middle Grades Grand Average N = 3 3.94 3.83 3.50 4.00 3.83 3.75 3.50 3.78
Middle Grades SD 0.12 0.37 0.47 0.00 0.37 0.42 0.50 0.30
Secondary Grand Average N = 181 3.73 3.73 3.64 3.81 3.63 3.79 3.65 3.73
Secondary Grand SD 0.49 0.47 0.54 0.42 0.55 0.47 0.52 0.48
Grand Average Total N = 378 3.75 3.74 3.62 3.85 3.65 3.81 3.62 3.74Grand SD 0.44 0.46 0.52 0.35 0.51 0.43 0.52 0.45
Scale: 4—Advanced (A-level), 3—Proficient (B-level), 2—Progressing (C-level), 1/0 Unacceptable (D/F level)
For complete data sets use the following links: EDUC 300/320 O and P CF Charts
Professional Year (Semester II) Key Assessment Results The teacher internship (student teaching experience) is the culminating performance assessment for the candidates for pedagogical and professional knowledge, skills, and dispositions. The full data sets compare all candidate completers from Chadron State College, which includes the elementary, middle grades and secondary candidates so the reader can compare all candidate completers. The specific information for candidates in the mathematics endorsement is also presented within this discussion of the pedagogical and professional knowledge, skills, and dispositions.
Candidates may have two different placement experiences. If the student has different grade levels, the experiences will reflect two different levels. If the candidate has two areas of study, the experiences are reflective of two different endorsement areas. Generally, the elementary and middle school candidates have two placements, for level and for endorsement area, respectively. Secondary candidates, unless they have two endorsements, generally have one placement experience.
First experience findings reflect the first 8-week experience of all elementary education candidates who have two, 8-week placements. Elementary placements are at a primary and an intermediate level. Elementary education candidates who have an additional endorsement would have a placement in that endorsed area as one of the 8-week placements. The only time an elementary education candidate would have a special methods supervisor rating is if they have an additional subject endorsement (K-8 vocal music, K-8 physical education, etc.). Secondary education candidates generally have one, 16-week placement. Therefore, secondary candidates’ ratings would be submitted at the end of their experience and be included in the second
P a g e | 19
experience data set. If a secondary candidate has two placements for different grade levels or for multiple endorsements, then there would be an additional summative rating included in the first experience data.
The pedagogical knowledge, skill and professional dispositions are examined in light of the conceptual framework components of Leadership, Professionalism, Communication, Human Relations/Diversity, Communication, Thinking Skills, Assessment, and Methods/Technology. Elements within these components establish the rubric, Teacher Intern Checklist (TIC), for determining performance quality.
Findings for the Total Candidate Group during the Professional Year Semester II
First Experience First experience grand averages for conceptual framework (CF) pedagogical and professional knowledge (K) items as rated by cooperating teachers range from 3.61 for Thinking Skills to 3.81 for Professionalism. College supervisors’ knowledge ratings range from 3.50 for Thinking Skills to 3.66 for Professionalism. Special methods supervisors’ knowledge ratings range from 3.40 for Thinking Skills to 3.73 for Professionalism. Candidates’ self-evaluation rating for Methodology/Technology is lowest at 3.49; while the highest rating is 3.83 for Professionalism. Across the board, there is a general spread of scores from .43 to .60 (standard deviation).
First experience grand averages for CF skills (S) by cooperating teachers range from 3.58 for Communications to 3.80 for Professionalism. College supervisors’ skills ratings range from 3.44 for Assessment to 3.62 for Professionalism. Special methods supervisors’ ratings range from 3.28, Methodology to 3.57, Professionalism. Candidates’ self-evaluation ratings range from 3.46 for Assessment to 3.83 for Professionalism. Standard deviations range from .43 to .68 across all evaluator groups.
First experience grand averages for CF dispositions (D) by cooperating teachers range from 3.66, Assessment to 3.79, Human Relations/Diversity. College supervisors’ ratings range from 3.54, Thinking Skills to 3.69, Professionalism. Special methods supervisors’ disposition ratings range from 3.54 for Methodology/Technology to 3.73 for a tie between Professionalism and Human Relations/Diversity. Less deviation is seen in disposition ratings with a range in standard deviations from .42 to .56.
Grand averages for all combined CF pedagogical and professional knowledge (K) items are: 3.70 (cooperating teachers), 3.58 (college supervisors), 3.59 (special methods supervisors), and 3.65 (candidates’ self-evaluation. Standard deviations for combined knowledge elements are fairly similar (.50, .54, .53, .50, respectively). Grand averages for all combined CF skills (S) items are: 3.67 (cooperating teachers), 3.51 (college supervisors), 3.43 (special methods supervisors), and 3.60 (candidates’ self-evaluation). Standard deviations for combined skills items are more spread out (.52, .58, .65, .53, respectively). Grand averages for all combined CF
P a g e | 20
dispositions (D) items are: 3.72 (cooperating teachers), 3.62 (college supervisors), 3.62 (special methods supervisors), and 3.67 (candidates’ self-evaluation). Standard deviations for combined dispositions items are virtually the same (.49, .52, .51, .50, respectively).
Overall, even though grand averages for pedagogical and professional knowledge, skills, and dispositions rate above 3.40, skills rate slightly lower than either pedagogical and professional knowledge or dispositions by all rater groups. Rater groups (P-12 cooperating teachers, college supervisors, special methods supervisors, and candidates’ self-evaluation) exhibit very similar standard deviations (.45, .50, .51, and .44). The lowest individual average rating is 3.34 for Thinking Skills (S) by special methods supervisors, and the highest individual rating average is 3.83 for Professionalism pedagogical and professional knowledge (K) by candidates’ self-evaluation.
For the first experience, scores from cooperating P-12 teachers (CT) tend to be higher on all conceptual framework items for pedagogical and professional knowledge, skills, and dispositions than those from college supervisors (CS), special methods supervisors (SMS), and candidates’ self-evaluation (C). This finding is consistent with Dr. Lorie Hunn’s 2009 study, “Field Experience Supervision: A Comparison of Cooperating Teachers and College Supervisors’ Evaluations of Student Teachers.” For complete breakdown of first experience Teacher Intern Checklist (TIC) data by conceptual framework dimension (pedagogical and professional knowledge, skills, and dispositions) and by program groups, see 1 st Experience TIC Assessment All Data spreadsheet.
Second experience. Second experience Grand averages for Conceptual Framework (CF) pedagogical and professional knowledge (K) items as rated by cooperating teachers range from 3.75 for Thinking Skills and Assessment to 3.89 for Human Relations/Diversity. College supervisors’ knowledge ratings range from 3.76 for Thinking Skills to 3.86 for Professionalism. Special methods supervisors’ knowledge ratings range from 3.63 for Thinking Skills and Assessment to 3.80 for Leadership and Professionalism. Candidates’ self-evaluation rates Methodology/Technology and Technology lowest at 3.70; while their highest rating is 3.92 for Professionalism. Across the board there is a general spread of scores from .28 to .56 (standard deviation).
Second experience grand averages for CF skills (S) by cooperating teachers range from 3.63 for Assessment to 3.81 for Professionalism. College supervisors’ skills ratings range from 3.69 for Communication to 3.80 for Professionalism and Human Relations/Diversity. Special methods supervisors’ ratings range from 3.33, Assessment to 3.79, Professionalism. Candidates’ self-evaluation ratings range from 3.64 for Assessment to 3.90 for Professionalism. Standard deviations range from .30 to .63 across all evaluator groups.
P a g e | 21
Second experience grand averages for CF dispositions (D) by cooperating teachers range from 3.70, Assessment to 3.83, Human Relations/Diversity. College supervisors’ ratings range from 3.78, Thinking Skills to 3.87, Professionalism. Special methods supervisors’ disposition ratings range from 3.63 for Assessment to 3.87 for Professionalism. Less deviation is seen in disposition ratings with a range in standard deviations from .35 to .49.
Grand averages for all combined CF pedagogical and professional knowledge (K) items are: 3.80 (cooperating teachers), 3.79 (college supervisors), 3.70 (special methods supervisors), and 3.81 (candidates’ self-evaluation). Standard deviations for combined knowledge elements are fairly similar (.43, .42, .47, .41, respectively). Grand averages for all combined CF skills (S) items are: 3.72 (cooperating teachers), 3.74 (college supervisors), 3.53 (special methods Supervisors), and 3.58 (candidates’ self-evaluation). Standard deviations for combined skills items are more spread out (.49, .46, .53, .44, respectively). Grand averages for all combined CF dispositions (D) items are: 3.78 (cooperating teachers), 3.83 (college supervisors), 3.76 (special methods supervisors), and 3.82 (candidates’ self-evaluation). Standard deviations for combined dispositions items are virtually the same (.44, .39, .43, .39, respectively).
Overall, even though grand averages for pedagogical and professional knowledge, skills, and dispositions rate above 3.53, skills rate slightly lower than either knowledge or dispositions by all rater groups. Rater groups (P-12 cooperating teachers, college supervisors, special methods supervisors, and candidates’ self-evaluation) exhibit very similar standard deviations (.40, .39, .41, and .35). The lowest individual average rating was 3.33 for Assessment skills (S) by special methods supervisors, and the highest individual rating average is 3.92 for Professionalism pedagogical and professional knowledge (K) and dispositions (D) by candidates’ self-evaluation.
Special methods supervisors tend to have the lowest average ratings with the largest standard deviation. Unlike the first experience data, cooperating teachers rate grand average skills items and dispositions slightly lower than did college supervisors; however, the standard deviation of the cooperating teachers is slightly higher than the college supervisors. Candidates’ self-evaluation for the second experience is slightly higher than the other rater groups. Overall, the ratings for the second experience tend to be higher than the first experience ratings, with smaller standard deviations. This seems to indicate that candidates improved from the first experience to the second, if they had two, 8-week experiences, and/or the ratings at the end of a 16-week experience were higher than those at the end of the first 8-week experience. he smaller standard deviation indicates more consistency of ratings between candidates and raters in the second experience. For complete breakdown of second experience Teacher Intern Checklist (TIC) data by conceptual framework dimension (pedagogical and professional knowledge, skills, and dispositions) and by program groups, see 2 nd Experience TIC Assessment All Data spreadsheet.
P a g e | 22
Art Knowledge, Skills, and Dispositions as rated on the Teacher Intern Checklist The candidates are rated by the cooperating teacher within the P-12 school, a college supervisor from the Education Department, a college special methods teacher educator from department housing the art (Visual and Performing Arts), and the candidate themselves. Section 2: Table 5 displays the results for art candidates for the reporting period of fall 2007 through spring 2011; data are calculated on spring 2008 through spring 2011 data only, as the Teacher Intern Checklist moved from a 5-point scale to a 4-point scale. Art candidates consistently are preforming at the Proficient (3) level for knowledge, skill and dispositions. The areas of greatest strength for the art candidates are Professionalism and Methodology/Technology. The weaker areas are Assessment as rated by the special methods supervisors in skills and dispositions, and Communication as rated by the cooperating teachers. The results indicate that these candidates are performing at a Proficient (3) level on Leadership, Communication, Professionalism, Human Relations/Diversity, Thinking Skills, Assessment, and Methodology/Technology. For complete data sets use the following link: Art Key Assessment Content Knowledge KSD –Art Content Tabs 1-4
Section 2: Table 5Art Candidates’ Scores for Knowledge, Skills, and Dispositions on the Conceptual Framework during Teacher Internship (Student teaching)
Knowledge Skills Dispositions
Coo
pera
ting
P-12
T
each
er
Col
lege
Sup
ervi
sor
Spec
ial M
etho
ds
Supe
rvis
or
Self-
Eva
luat
ion
Coo
pera
ting
P-12
T
each
er
Col
lege
Sup
ervi
sor
Spec
ial M
etho
ds
Supe
rvis
or
Self-
Eva
luat
ion
Coo
pera
ting
P-12
T
each
er
Col
lege
Sup
ervi
sor
Spec
ial M
etho
ds
Supe
rvis
or
Self-
Eva
luat
ion
Art Grand Average N = 6 3.60 3.76 3.57 3.66 3.68 3.63 3.43 3.42 3.79 3.83 3.48 3.52
Art Grand SD 0.13 0.19 0.29 0.36 0.20 0.31 0.29 0.48 0.14 0.24 0.21 0.49
Scale (4=Advanced, 3= Proficient, 2=Progressing, 1/0=Unacceptable)
Section 2: Table 6 illustrates the total means and standard deviation for the sets of evaluators (cooperating teacher, college supervisor from the Education Department, special methods teacher educator from the discipline, and the candidate). Generally, the college supervisors from the Education Department rate the candidates slightly higher than the cooperating teachers, special methods supervisors, or the candidates themselves. All sets of evaluators’ total scores fall within the Proficient (3) level. For complete data sets use the following link: Art Key Assessment Content Knowledge KSD –Art Content Tabs 1-4
Section 2: Table 6
P a g e | 23
Overall Scores for Teacher Internship (Student teaching) as rated by Cooperating Teacher, College Supervisor, Special Methods Supervisor, and Candidate
Endorsement, N Cooperating Teacher College Supervisor Special Methods Supervisor
Candidate Self -Evaluation
Art, N = 6 Average/SD
3.69 (.13) 3.74(.21) 3.48 (.26) 3.54 (.42)
Scale: 4—Advanced (A-level), 3—Proficient (B-level), 2—Progressing (C-level), 1/0 Unacceptable (D/F level)
Effects on P-12 Student Learning
Student learning resulting from candidate performance is measured through a “teacher work sample.” This section describes the assignment and instrument for completing the teacher work sample as well as the results for both the elementary and secondary candidates.
Assignment and Evaluation Instruments
Teacher work sample data are gathered on several criteria, including Table of Contents; Instructional Setting/Context; Assessment Plan (pre-test/post-test, description of data, and display of data); Instructional Plans; Decision Making and Self-reflection/Evaluation; and Professional Presentation. Table of Contents and Professional Presentation are considered procedural elements and are indicators of overall quality. See Teacher Work Sample Assignment and Teacher Work Sample Grading Rubric.
The Instructional Setting/Context section is related to the candidate’s ability to research and present pertinent community, school, class, and individual contextual information. This informational section shows the candidate’s ability to discern important factors that may impact instruction. Contextual information assigned to prompt candidates to become sensitive to group or individual diversity factors.
The three elements of the Assessment Plan demonstrate the candidate’s ability to plan an instructional-assessment sequence, including congruent pre- and post-tests. The candidate demonstrates his or her skills in aggregating and disaggregating data. Candidates are evaluated based on their ability to show both whole class and individual progress in an effective manner. Additionally, candidates have the freedom to display other types of analysis, such as comparisons of multiple sections of courses or a breakdown of results by item or objective.
The Instructional Plans section is evaluated based on the completeness of lessons plans, including the candidate’s ability to modify lesson plans based on the pre-test data. Candidates demonstrate the use of formative assessments as part of instruction.
P a g e | 24
The final section, Decision Making and Self-reflection/Evaluation, is evaluated based on the degree to which candidates understand the process of making decisions based on the use of data. Candidates also demonstrate their ability to analyze and reflect upon their own instructional and assessment practices. The overall goals of the teacher work sample are to guide candidates through the data-driven instructional process, and ultimately, to evaluate the candidate’s impact on P-12 student learning.
Results for Elementary Education
Elementary education results indicate scores ranging from 2.98 (1.05) for Instructional Plans to 3.74 (.44) for Instructional Setting/Context (scores on a 4-point scale: 4—Advanced (A-level), 3—Proficient (B-level), 2—Progressing (C-level), 1/0 Unacceptable (D/F level). These results are surprising as candidates have the most experience and practice in developing lesson/instructional plans. The Instructional Plan standard deviation of 1.05 indicates a relatively wide variation of scores on this criterion. The scores in the assessment plan area are higher than might be expected, as this is an area that is relatively new to candidates and an area that candidates have had less hands-on experience. Candidates demonstrate a moderately high ability to make decisions and reflect on the data-driven instructional experience with a score of 3.34 (.69). Overall, elementary education candidates perform at a Proficient (3) level on the Teacher Work Sample from fall 2007-spring 2011. See full data set for Teacher Work Sample Elementary Summary.
Section 2: Table 7Elementary Candidates Teacher Work Sample--Fall 2007 through Spring 2011
Tab
le o
f C
onte
nts
Inst
ruct
iona
l
Pre-
/Pos
t-te
sts
Des
crip
tion
of
Dis
play
Inst
ruct
iona
l Pl
ans
Dec
isio
n M
akin
g,
Self-
Ref
lect
ion/
E
valu
atio
n
Prof
essi
onal
Average
/ SD
Elementary TWS Fall 2007 - Spring 2011 TotalsGrand Average Total N = 184; missing n = 5 3.61 3.74 3.30 3.12 3.37 2.98 3.34 3.10 3.32
Grand SD 0.62 0.44 0.73 0.79 0.83 1.05 0.69 0.76 0.53
Scale: 4—Advanced (A-level), 3—Proficient (B-level), 2—Progressing (C-level), 1/0 Unacceptable (D/F level)
Results for Secondary Education
Secondary education results indicate scores ranging from 3.09 (1.02) for Instructional Plans to 3.54 (.76) for Instructional Setting/Context (scores on a 4-point scale: 4—Advanced (A-level), 3—Proficient (B-level), 2—Progressing (C-level), 1/0 Unacceptable (D/F level). Secondary education results are more uniform, but Instructional Plan is still lower than might be expected. The Instructional Plan standard deviation indicates a relatively wide variation of
P a g e | 25
scores on this criterion. The scores in the assessment plan area were fairly consistent and higher than might be expected, as this is an area that is relatively new to candidates and an area that candidates have had less hands-on experience. Candidates demonstrate a moderately high ability to make decisions and reflect on the data-driven instructional experience with a score of 3.25 (.86). Overall, secondary education candidates perform at a Proficient (3) level on the Teacher Work Sample from fall 2007-spring 2011. Art candidates are included in the secondary education data set. See full data set for Teacher Work Sample Secondary Summary.
Section 2: Table 8Secondary Candidates Teacher Work Sample--Fall 2007 through Spring 2011
Tab
le o
f C
onte
nts
Inst
ruct
iona
l
Pre-
/Pos
t-te
sts
Des
crip
tion
of
Dis
play
Inst
ruct
iona
l Pl
ans
Dec
isio
n M
akin
g,
Self-
Ref
lect
ion/
E
valu
atio
n
Prof
essi
onal
Average/ SD
Secondary TWS Fall 2007 - Spring 2011 TotalsGrand Average Total N = 170; missing n = 8 3.65 3.54 3.28 3.15 3.19 3.09 3.25 3.05 3.27
Grand SD 0.81 0.76 0.76 0.85 0.99 1.02 0.86 0.87 0.67
Scale: 4—Advanced (A-level), 3—Proficient (B-level), 2—Progressing (C-level), 1/0 Unacceptable (D/F level)
Results for All Candidates
Results for elementary and secondary education Teacher Work Sample are consistent for both elementary and secondary programs (Middle grade endorsement candidates are included in the Block group of their choice.). Scores fall within the Proficient (3) level, except for Instructional Plans for elementary education with an average of 2.98 (1.05). A relatively high standard deviation is noted in several areas for both programs.
Section 2: Table 9 All Candidates - Teacher Work Sample--Fall 2007 through Spring 2011
Tab
le o
f
Inst
ruct
iona
l Se
ttin
g/C
onte
xt
Pre-
/Pos
t-te
sts
Des
crip
tion
of
Dis
play
Inst
ruct
iona
l Pl
ans
Dec
isio
n M
akin
g, S
elf-
Ref
lect
ion/
Prof
essi
onal
Average/ SD
Elementary & Secondary TWS Fall 2007 - Spring 2011 TotalsGrand Average Total N = 354; missing n = 13 3.47 3.56 3.35 3.14 3.23 3.02 3.23 3.08 3.26
Grand SD 0.82 0.77 0.80 0.96 1.14 1.05 0.86 0.93 0.74
Scale: 4—Advanced (A-level), 3—Proficient (B-level), 2—Progressing (C-level), 1/0 Unacceptable (D/F level)
P a g e | 26
Follow up Studies
Follow-up studies are conducted annually. Graduates who have completed a full year of teaching and their employers are surveyed. The return on the mailed surveys has been low; however, the data do provide some information for the unit. As shown on Section 2: Table 10 Conceptual Framework Summary as Measured by Follow up Survey, the areas of strength as identified by the graduating candidates are knowledge, skill and dispositions for Leadership and Communication. The areas identified by the graduating candidates as weaker are knowledge, skill and dispositions for Assessment and Methodology/Technology. The employers in general rate the graduating candidates lower than the candidates rate themselves. The employers’ areas of strength are dispositions in most categories and Assessment knowledge. The weaker areas as identified by the employers are Thinking Skills knowledge, Human Relations/Diversity skill, and Assessment skill. For complete data set for initial program follow up study see Initial Program Follow-up Survey Summary and Initial Program Follow-up Survey form.
Section 2: Table 10Conceptual Framework Summary as Measured by Follow up Survey
Kno
wle
dge
Self
Kno
wle
dge
Em
ploy
er
Skill
s Sel
f
Skill
s Em
ploy
er
Dis
posi
tion
Self
Dis
posi
tion
Em
ploy
er
Sel
f Sur
vey
Ave
rage
Self
Surv
ey S
D
Em
ploy
er S
urve
y A
vera
ge
Em
ploy
er S
urve
y SD
Grand Average Assessment Spring 2008-Spring 2010 N =240 ; returned graduate = 29; employer = 12 3.55 3.55 3.34 3.27 3.31 3.18 3.40 0.18 3.33 0.20Grand SD Assessment Spring 2008 – Fall 2010 0.62 0.50 0.71 0.62 0.65 0.72 0.59 0.26 0.53 0.28Grand Average Methodology/ Technology Spring 2008 – Fall 2010 N = 240; returned candidate = 4; employer = 1 3.25 4.00 3.38 4.00 4.00 3.31 0.06 4.00 0.00Grand SD Methodology/ Technology Spring 2008 – Fall 2010 0.35 0.53 0.44 0.09Grand Average Professionalism Spring 2008 – Fall 2010 N = 240; returned candidate = 4; employer = 1 3.25 4.00 3.38 4.00 4.00 3.31 0.06 4.00 0.00Grand SD Professionalism Spring 2008 – Fall 2010 0.35 0.53 0.44 0.09Grand Average Leadership Spring 2008 – Fall 2010 N = 240; returned candidate = 4; employer = 1 3.75 4.00 3.50 4.00 3.88 4.00 3.71 0.22 4.00 0.00Grand SD Leadership Spring 2008 – Fall 2010 0.35 0.71 0.18 0.41 0.31Grand Average Human Relations/Diversity Spring 2008 – Fall 2010 N = 240; returned candidate = 4; employer = 1 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 0.00 4.00 0.00Grand SD Human Relations/Diversity Spring 2008 – Fall 2010 0.00 0.00 0.00Grand Average Communication Spring 2008 – Fall 2010 N = 240; returned candidate = 4; employer = 1 4.00 3.75 4.00 4.00 3.75 0.00 4.00 0.00Grand SD Communication Spring 2008 – Fall 2010 0.35 0.35 0.00
P a g e | 27
Grand Average Thinking Skills Spring 2008 – Fall 2010 N = 240; returned candidate = 4; employer = 1 4.00 4.00 3.88 4.00 3.88 0.00 4.00 0.00Grand SD Thinking Skills Spring 2008 – Fall 2010 0.18 0.18 0.00
Scale: 4—Advanced (A-level), 3—Proficient (B-level), 2—Progressing (C-level), 1/0 Unacceptable (D/F level)
Candidate Proficiency
Data resulting from the Teacher Intern Checklist (TIC) demonstrate the candidates’ performance during student teaching (Section 2: Table 11). Content knowledge is rated by the candidates’ cooperating P-12 teachers, college supervisors, and the candidates during student teaching. Specific group ratings are reported in the previous Content Knowledge section. Overall, content knowledge during student teaching rates at the Proficient (3) level. First experience ratings reported are: cooperating P-12 teachers 3.67 (.55), college supervisors 3.64 (.50), special methods supervisors 3.68 (.57), and candidates 3.57 (.52). Second experience ratings reported are: cooperating P-12 teachers 3.72 (.49), college supervisors 3.78 (.41), special methods supervisors 3.76 (.44), and candidates 3.74 (.45).
Section 2: Table 11
Content Area/Subject Matter Knowledge as Measured by Teacher Intern Checklist
Content Area/Subject Matter Knowledge as Measured by Teacher Intern Checklist
Education Groups
1st Experience 2nd Experience
Coo
pera
ting
P-12
T
each
er
Col
lege
E
duca
tion
Supe
rvis
or
Col
lege
Spe
cial
M
etho
ds
Supe
rvis
or
Self-
Eva
luat
ion
Coo
pera
ting
P-12
T
each
er
Col
lege
E
duca
tion
Supe
rvis
or
Col
lege
Spe
cial
M
etho
ds
Supe
rvis
or
Self-
Eva
luat
ion
Grand Elementary & Secondary Content Area/Subject Matter Knowledge as measured by Teacher Intern Checklist Spring 2008-Spring 2011
Grand Average N = 336 3.67 3.64 3.68 3.57 3.72 3.78 3.76 3.74
Grand SD 0.55 0.50 0.57 0.52 0.49 0.41 0.44 0.45Scale: 4—Advanced (A-level), 3—Proficient (B-level), 2—Progressing (C-level), 1/0 Unacceptable (D/F level)
Complete elementary and secondary program comparisons, including elementary sites and secondary traditional and post-baccalaureate candidates may be viewed in the TIC Content Area Knowledge spreadsheet.
Cooperating teachers, college supervisors, and candidates rate candidate performance during student teaching on each of the knowledge, skill, and dispositions reflected in the conceptual framework. Specific results are described in the Pedagogical and Professional Knowledge, Skills, and Dispositions section; summary results are reported in Section 2: Table 12. Overall, pedagogical and professional knowledge, skills, and dispositions during student teaching rate at the Proficient (3) level. Pedagogical and professional knowledge ratings range
P a g e | 28
from 3.76 (.50) from cooperating teachers to 3.65 (.35) from special methods supervisors. Skills rated from 3.71 (.55) from cooperating teachers to 3.57 (.41) special methods supervisors. Dispositions rated from 3.75 (.51) from cooperating teachers to 3.70 (.33) special methods supervisors. Overall, the averages are nearly the same and are very consistent.
Section 2: Table 12
Pedagogical and Professional Knowledge, Skills, and Dispositions as Measured by Teacher Intern Checklist
Summary -- 1st Experience & 2nd Experience
Knowledge Skills Dispositions
Total Conceptual Framework Dimensions
Coo
pera
ting
P-12
T
each
er
Col
lege
Sup
ervi
sor
Spec
ial M
etho
ds
Supe
rvis
or
Self-
Eva
luat
ion
Coo
pera
ting
P-12
T
each
er
Col
lege
Sup
ervi
sor
Spec
ial M
etho
ds
Supe
rvis
or
Self-
Eva
luat
ion
Coo
pera
ting
P-12
T
each
er
Col
lege
Sup
ervi
sor
Spec
ial M
etho
ds
Supe
rvis
or
Self-
Eva
luat
ion
Grand KSD Average All Groups Spring 2008 - Spring 2011 N = 336 3.76 3.70 3.65 3.69 3.71 3.62 3.57 3.65 3.75 3.72 3.70 3.71Grand KSD SD Spring 2008 - Spring 2011 N = 336 0.50 0.49 0.35 0.51 0.55 0.54 0.41 0.53 0.51 0.47 0.33 0.50
Scale: 4—Advanced (A-level), 3—Proficient (B-level), 2—Progressing (C-level), 1/0 Unacceptable (D/F level)
Complete elementary and secondary program comparisons, including elementary sites and secondary traditional and post-baccalaureate candidates may be viewed in the 1 st and 2 nd TIC Program Summaries spreadsheets.
Candidates’ ability to measure student growth and their effects on student learning are reported in the Effects on P-12 Student Learning section and summarized below in Section 2: Table 9. Results for all candidates fall within the Proficient (3) level. A relatively high standard deviation is noted.
Section 2: Table 9 All Candidates - Teacher Work Sample--Fall 2007 through Spring 2011
Tab
le o
f
Inst
ruct
iona
l Se
ttin
g/C
onte
xt
Pre-
/Pos
t-te
sts
Des
crip
tion
of
Dis
play
Inst
ruct
iona
l Pl
ans
Dec
isio
n M
akin
g, S
elf-
Ref
lect
ion/
Prof
essi
onal
Average/ SD
Elementary & Secondary TWS Fall 2007 - Spring 2011 TotalsGrand Average Total N = 354; missing n = 13 3.47 3.56 3.35 3.14 3.23 3.02 3.23 3.08 3.26
Grand SD 0.82 0.77 0.80 0.96 1.14 1.05 0.86 0.93 0.74
Scale: 4—Advanced (A-level), 3—Proficient (B-level), 2—Progressing (C-level), 1/0 Unacceptable (D/F level)
P a g e | 29
Additional Assessments
In the fall of 2011 and spring of 2012 a separate assessment of candidate dispositions was piloted in EDUC 131. This assessment has been added due to a few candidates displaying professional dispositions below desired proficiency levels. The Unit faculty determined that candidates need continual and more direct awareness of their professional dispositions. This instrument is designed to be given at several levels of development and is designed to encourage self-reflection. This assessment will be expanded to other key assessment levels (PSYC 231 Educational Psychology, EDUC 300/320 Observation and Participation, and the Professional Year). No data is included as no fall 2007- spring 2011completers are included in this data. (See Disposition Survey-Evaluator and Disposition Survey-Self forms.)
Section 3 – Program Improvement
Faculty members within art have made changes to the curriculum and course content due to content assessments. The Education Unit faculty which includes a representative of each endorsement area have made changes in (a) the pedagogical and professional knowledge skills and dispositions based on assessment data, state and national standards, and on evidence of best practices as well as (b) the effects on P-12 student learning assessment.
Content Knowledge
The data indicates the curriculum provides extensive exposure to the media in art but lacks some of the depth needed to help candidates feel confident in their ability in a one-person art program in a school district. Additional changes in the last few years are (a) expansion of the craft offerings, (b) expansion of the field based experiences for the candidates so that they can see applications of knowledge, and (c) utilizing a peer exposure system so beginning and advanced students/candidates have greater interaction within the laboratories.
The Chadron State College Teacher Education Committee voted to adopt the Praxis II exam from ETS as the content score beginning in 2011/2012. The Committee includes members of the Education Department faculty, at least one representative of content disciplines offering endorsements, a student, and representatives of P-12 teachers/administrators. The Praxis II will replace the content rubric score.
Pedagogical and Professional Knowledge, Skills, and Dispositions
Changes made to the professional education program due to the data results over the past five years include enhancing the assessment portion of the upper level courses associated with standards and assessment of student learning. Faculty members have aligned course content and learning outcomes to the State of Nebraska standard performance measures.
P a g e | 30
In general, faculty has increased field experiences to provide candidates with more direct experience in working with children/students. Faculty members have increased field experience exposure to diverse populations to better help candidates learn to work successfully with the ever-changing demographics of P-12 students. A specific example is an increased emphasis on understanding and meeting the needs of English limited language learners. The unit has developed and is implementing an updated technology plan to enhance candidate skill development utilizing technology to enhance student learning.
Effects on Student Learning
Faculty members have analyzed results each year; continuous efforts are being made to improve both instruction relating instructional planning, assessment techniques, and use of data to improve instruction. Additionally, the way the teacher work sample is assigned to candidates was examined. The assignment is given in a Professional Development Workshop (PDW). It was determined that regional sites need to have the instruction given in-person by the same individual(s) rather than through videotape or communicated by written assignment. Viewing a videotape of the presentation is still the back-up method for those who might be absent or for candidates in the Post-Baccalaureate program. Post-Baccalaureate candidates may not have convenient access to the PDW. Additionally, the assignment procedures and deadlines were adjusted for spring 2012. Results were mixed; candidates felt the deadline was too soon in the semester. Results and procedures will be continually monitored.
Faculty is making a stronger effort to help candidates understand the value of the teacher work sample assignment. The vital relationship between pre-assessment of student knowledge and skills, instructional planning, and subsequently, post-assessment of student learning cannot be over-emphasized. The upper division professional courses for methods will be including more concepts related to standards, assessment of learning, and improvement of instruction.
P a g e | 31
Chadron State CollegeChadron, NE 69337
Art Advising TemplateBACHELOR OF EDUCATION
Year 1: Summer Term Fall Semester Spring Semester
ART 131 Drawing I 3 ART 136 Figure Drawing I 3ART 133 Design Fund. 3 ART 230 Design Fund. II 2EDUC 131 Intro to Teaching 3 EDUC 224 Media Support 2General Studies 6 General Studies 9
Total Credits: 15 Total Credits 16
Year 2: Summer Term Fall Semester Spring Semester
General Studies 3 ART 228 Ceramics I 3 ART 225 Printmaking I 3ART 229 Intro to Graphics 3 ART 227 Sculpture I 3ART 232 Painting I 3 ART 223 or 323 Photo 3ART 338 Art History I 3 SPED 230 Intro to Exec Learner3General Studies 1 General Studies 1PSYC 231 Ed. Psychology 3 SPED 334 Instr. In Diverse 2
Total Credits 3 Total Credits 15 Total Credits 15
Year 3: Summer Term Fall Semester Spring Semester
General Studies 6 ART 339 Art History II 3 ART 340 20th Century 3ART Upper 2D/3D Elect 3 ART 334 Art for Elem/Middle 3ART 321A or B Glass I 3 General Studies 6EDUC 300 O & P 1 ART Upper 2D/3D Elect 3General Studies 6
Total Credits 6 Total Credits 16 Total Credits 15
Year 4: Summer Term Fall Semester Spring Semester
General Studies 3 EDUC 411s 412s 414s 415 418s 5 EDUC Student Teaching16EDUC 431 A 3SPED 412 Practices & Strategies 1
P a g e | 32
ART 412 Senior Thesis 1ART Upper 2D/3D Elect. 3General Studies 3
Total Credits 3 Total Credits 16 Total Credits 16
TOTAL CREDITS TO GRADUATE___136___
P a g e | 33
New Program Rule 24 Matrix Revised Program Table of Alignment of Standards and Assessments
Name of Institution: Chadron State CollegeDate Submitted:
Endorsement: Art Grade Levels: K-12Total Hours Required by Rule 24: 52 Program Hours Required by Institution: 54 Endorsement Type: Field
Endorsement Program Requirements: Nebraska teacher education institutions offering this endorsement program must have on file, within the institution, a plan which identifies the courses and the course completion requirements which the institution utilizes to grant credit toward completion of this endorsement.
(For additional lines in each section, please go to the end of the row and press the tab key.)
006.06D Certification Endorsement Requirements:The endorsement shall require 52 semester hours in art. This shall include coursework which addresses preparation for teaching art to kindergarten, elementary, middle school, and secondary-aged students.
Candidate Proficiencies
Course #, Title, and Credits Course Assessment(s) Key Program Assessment(s) Content Knowledge
Pedagogical Knowledge
Skills Dispositions P-12 Student Learning
ART 131 Drawing I…3
ART 133 Design Fundamentals…3
ART 136 Figure Drawing I…3
ART 225 Printmaking…3
ART 227 Sculpture I…3
ART 228 Ceramics I…3
ART 229 Intro to Graphic Design…3
ART 230 Design in Fundamentals II…2
ART 232 Painting I…3
ART 321 (a or B) Glass I…3
ART 323 or 223 Creative Photography or Intro to Photography...3
ART 334 Art for the Elementary Teacher…3
ART 338 Art History Survey I…3
ART 339 Art History Survey II…3
ART 340 20th Century Art History…3
ART 412 Senior Thesis…1
Plus 9 Hours of Art Elective from the following:
ART 325 Printmaking II…3
ART 331 Watercolor…3
ART 332 Painting II…3
ART 337 Sculpture II…3
33 Rule24 March2007 Version
P a g e | 34
ART 421 Glass II…3
ART 428 Ceramics II…3
Total Hours: 54 Plus EDUC 431A Secondary Methods…3
Standard/Description
A. Demonstrate knowledge and an understanding of the content of art, including being able to:1. Demonstrate studio skills and an understanding of their own art making processes, qualities, and techniques using
different media, styles, and form of expression;2. Make meaningful interpretations and judgments about their own artworks and the works of other artists through written
and oral discussions;3. Demonstrate an understanding of the cultural and historical contexts surrounding works of art;4. Demonstrate knowledge and an understanding of aesthetic and artistic purposes of art, including philosophical and
ethical issues related to the visual arts;5. Demonstrate knowledge and an understanding of contemporary art and the art world;6. Describe the value of studying artworks from popular culture, folk cultures, and other cultural groups;7. Demonstrate knowledge and an understanding of the use of traditional and new technologies within the visual arts and art
education, including computer graphics, computer software, and the Internet within the visual arts and educational settings; and,
8. Identify the multiple contexts in which art exists such as museums, galleries, and alternative educational settings, as well as within their own unique communities.
Candidate Proficiencies
Course #, Title, and Credits Course Assessment(s) Key Program Assessment(s)
Content Knowledge
Pedagogical Knowledge
Skills Dispositions P-12 Student Learning
ART 131 Drawing I…3 Projects, Critiques X XART 133 Design Fundamentals…3 Projects, Critiques X X
ART 230 Design in Fundamentals II…3 Projects, Critiques X XART 232 Painting I…3 Projects, Critiques, Discussions, Analysis X X
ART 239 Elements of Art…3 (General Studies Required) Tests, Discussions, Observations XART 340 20th Century Art History…3 Tests, Discussions, Papers X
ART 338 Art History Survey I…3 Tests, Discussions, Papers XART 339 Art History Survey II…3 Tests, Discussions, Papers X
ART 412 Senior Thesis…1 Exhibit, Portfolio, Production X XART 323 Creative Photography…3 Projects, Critiques X X
Standard/Description
B. Select appropriate instructional content, including being able to:1. Demonstrate an understanding of the range of learning opportunities that a comprehensive approach to art education
provides for students of various cultures, ages, abilities, and developmental levels; and,2. Develop instruction which makes traditional, popular, and contemporary art worlds accessible to students.
Candidate Proficiencies
Course #, Title, and Credits Course Assessment(s) Key Program Assessment(s)
Content Knowledge
Pedagogical Knowledge
Skills Dispositions P-12 Student Learning
ART 334 Art for the Elementary Teacher…3 Projects, Discussions, Papers X X X X X
EDUC 431 a Secondary Art Methods...3 Projects, Discussions, Paper X X X X X
34 Rule24 March2007 Version
P a g e | 35
Standard/Description
C. Demonstrate knowledge and an understanding of student characteristics, abilities, and learning styles, including being able to:1. Demonstrate an understanding of artistic development as a complex multidimensional process affected by physiological,
experiential and social factors;2. Demonstrate an understanding that established stages of artistic development in terms of both art making and response
to art are general rather than specific and that each student, regardless of age, progresses on an individual basis in achieving art competencies; and,
3. Demonstrate a repertoire of teaching strategies appropriate to the needs of all students, including those with different learning styles, and special needs.
Candidate Proficiencies
Course #, Title, and Credits Course Assessment(s) Key Program Assessment(s)
Content Knowledge
Pedagogical Knowledge
Skills Dispositions P-12 Student Learning
ART 334 Art for the Elementary Teacher…3 Projects, Papers, Presentations, Observation
X X X X X
EDUC 431 a Secondary Art Methods...3 Projects, Papers, Presentations, Observation
X X X X X
Standard/Description
D. Observe students in the classroom with sensitivity toward individual approaches and responses to art, including being able to:1. Gather and use information through formal conferences and informal conversations with students, their families, other
teachers, counselors, school psychologists and administrators to gain greater understanding of student needs; and,2. Provide for differences in artistic and aesthetic responses of students to works of art and to the varying artistic and
aesthetic values of different cultures.
Candidate Proficiencies
Course #, Title, and Credits Course Assessment(s) Key Program Assessment(s)
Content Knowledge
Pedagogical Knowledge
Skills Dispositions P-12 Student Learning
ART 334 Art for the Elementary Teacher…3 Lesson Plans, Papers, Projects, Discussions
X X X X X
EDUC 431 a Secondary Art Methods...3 Lesson Plans, Papers, Projects, Classroom Visits
X X X X X
Standard/Description
E. Plan appropriate instruction, including being able to:1. Facilitate students in creating, experiencing, and understanding art which is relevant to their life activities and interests;2. Insure that students have the physical, cognitive and emotional maturity to accomplish a task safely before allowing them
access to any potentially hazardous materials or tools; and,3. Develop challenging but realistic instruction experiences that are appropriate to individual levels of cognitive, artistic,
emotional and physical development.
Candidate Proficiencies
Course #, Title, and Credits Course Assessment(s) Key Program Assessment(s)
Content Knowledge
Pedagogical Knowledge
Skills Dispositions P-12 Student Learning
ART 225 Printmaking I…3 Projects, Critiques X XART 223 Intro to Photography…3 Projects, Critiques X X
ART 228 Ceramics I…3 Projects, Critiques X XART 227 Sculpture…3 Projects, Critiques X X
ART 323 Painting…3 Projects, Critiques X XART 321 Glass…3 Projects, Critiques X X
35 Rule24 March2007 Version
P a g e | 36
ART 334 Art for the Elementary Teacher…3 Lesson Plans, Projects, Peer Teaching, Papers
X X X X X
EDUC 431 a Secondary Art Methods…3 Lesson Plans, Projects, Peer Teaching, Papers
X X X X X
Standard/Description
F. Develop curriculum which reflects the goals and purposes of art education, including being able to:1. Develop curricular goals which reflect the necessity for students to have unique, informed and enriching experiences
creating and responding to art, including the work of established artists and peers;2. Make curricular decisions with consideration of national, state, and local curriculum standards and frameworks;3. Organize, structure, and pace in-depth learning experiences in the classroom;4. Develop short- and long-term instructional units as components of a comprehensive, sequential curriculum;5. Demonstrate the inter-relatedness of curriculum, instruction, and assessment;6. Describe curriculum resources produced by museum education departments and other publishers; and,7. Select appropriate resources to implement one’s own and district curricular goals
Candidate Proficiencies
Course #, Title, and Credits Course Assessment(s) Key Program Assessment(s)
Content Knowledge
Pedagogical Knowledge
Skills Dispositions P-12 Student Learning
ART 334 Art for the Elementary Teacher…3 Lesson Plans, Projects, Curriculum Plans, Papers
X X X X X
EDUC 431 a Secondary Art Methods...3 Lesson Plans, Projects, Curriculum Plans, Papers
X X X X X
Standard/Description
G. Develop curriculum which reflects an understanding of the breadth, depth, and purposes of art, including being able to:1. Develop curriculum reflecting a breadth and depth understanding of art history, artists, and diverse cultures;2. Develop curriculum that encompasses different forms of theoretical and philosophical approaches to art by making
theories of art accessible to students;3. Select works of art to support one’s own teaching goals;4. Evaluate the content of the art curriculum with regards to individual and societal issues; and,5. Provide student experiences in art which increase their understanding of historical, critical and aesthetic concepts.
Candidate Proficiencies
Course #, Title, and Credits Course Assessment(s) Key Program Assessment(s)
Content Knowledge
Pedagogical Knowledge
Skills Dispositions P-12 Student Learning
ART 338 Art History Survey I…3 Tests, Papers, Discussions X X
ART 339 Art History Survey II…3 Tests, Papers, Discussions X XART 340 20th Century Art History…3 Tests, Papers, Discussions X X
ART 334 Art for the Elementary Teacher…3 Lesson Plans, Papers, Projects, Presentations
X X X X X
EDUC 431 a Secondary Art Methods...3 Lesson Plans, Papers, Projects, Presentations
X X X X X
Standard/Description
H. Develop curriculum which is inclusive of the goals, values and purposes of education, the community and society, including being able to:
1. Articulate how the art curriculum coordinates with the school, district and state curriculum guidelines; NAEA Goals; and National Standards;
2. Plan and implement art curriculum which is aligned with the Nebraska K-12 curriculum framework in visual arts;
Candidate Proficiencies
36 Rule24 March2007 Version
P a g e | 37
3. Describe how art interrelates with reading, writing, mathematics, science, and the social sciences;4. Adapt, change, modify and select from a range of curricular options based on student needs;5. Develop instructional units appropriate for all students;6. Incorporate learning experiences that require higher order and critical thinking skills thereby enhancing student problem
solving abilities;7. Develop curriculum which provides opportunities for students to learn to work cooperatively as well as individually;8. Communicate the variety of career options associated with the visual arts and their value in relation to civic, social and
economic issues to students, parents, and the community at large; and,9. Communicate the goals of the art curriculum to others.
Course #, Title, and Credits Course Assessment(s) Key Program Assessment(s)
Content Knowledge
Pedagogical Knowledge
Skills Dispositions P-12 Student Learning
ART 334 Art for the Elementary Teacher…3 Lectures, Papers, Lesson Plans, Presentations
X X X X X
EDUC 431 a Secondary Art Methods...3 Lectures, Papers, Lesson Plans, Presentations
X X X X X
ART 239 Elements of Art…3 Exams, Papers, Projects X XART 232 Painting I…3 Exams, Papers, Projects X X
ART 322 Graphic Design I…3 Exams, Papers, Projects X XART 325 Printmaking II…3 Exams, Papers, Projects X X
ART 229 Intro to Graphic Design…3 Exams, Papers, Projects X XART 412 Senior Thesis…1 Presentations, Projects X X
Standard/Description
I. Promote student learning and growth in the content of art, including being able to:1. Implement a comprehensive approach to art education that integrates art production, art history, aesthetics and art
criticism;2. Create instruction compatible with students’ backgrounds, understandings, ages, and levels of development;3. Provide students opportunities to experiment with and expand their repertoires of media and techniques in their art
making and to see the connections between their own approaches and those used by other artists;4. Facilitate students in recognizing multiple ways that art elements and principles are used to create visual compositions
which express ideas, themes, and subjects;5. Facilitate students in learning to solve representational problems using different strategies such as working from memory
and experience, with visual narratives, and from observation; using source material such as words, art and other references; working with different styles for greater expressiveness; and working symbolically and metaphorically;
6. Provide students opportunities to engage in the meaningful exploration, analysis, interpretation, and judgment of art, including making connections between the meanings in the world of art and in their own lives;
7. Provide students opportunities to become familiar with the history of art, specific artists and art forms of various cultures; and,
8. Engage students in thoughtful oral and written inquiry into the nature of art, including different forms of theoretical and philosophical approaches to art.
Candidate Proficiencies
Course #, Title, and Credits Course Assessment(s) Key Program Assessment(s)
Content Knowledge
Pedagogical Knowledge
Skills Dispositions P-12 Student Learning
ART 131 Drawing I…3 Projects, Critiques X XART 133 Design Fundamentals…3 Projects, Critiques X X
ART 136 Figure Drawing I…3 Projects, Critiques X XART 225 Printmaking…3 Projects, Critiques X X
37 Rule24 March2007 Version
P a g e | 38
ART 227 Sculpture I…3 Projects, Critiques X X
ART 228 Ceramics I…3 Projects, Critiques X XART 229 Intro to Graphic Design…3 Projects, Critiques X X
ART 230 Design in Fundamentals II…2 Projects, Critiques X XART 232 Painting I…3 Projects, Critiques X X
ART 321 (a or B) Glass I…3 Projects, Critiques X XART 323 or 223 Creative Photography or Intro to Photography...3 Projects, Critiques X X
ART 334 Art for the Elementary Teacher…3 Lesson Plans, Projects, Presentations X X X X XART 338 Art History Survey I…3 Papers, Exams X X
ART 339 Art History Survey II…3 Papers, Exams X XART 239 Elements of Art….3 Tests, Papers, Projects X X
ART 340 20th Century Art History…3 Papers, Exams X XART 412 Senior Thesis…1 Projects, Critiques X X
Plus 9 Hours of Art Elective from the following: X XART 325 Printmaking II…3 Projects, Critiques X X
ART 331 Watercolor…3 Projects, Critiques X XART 332 Painting II…3 Projects, Critiques X X
ART 337 Sculpture II…3 Projects, Critiques X XART 421 Glass II…3 Projects, Critiques X X
ART 428 Ceramics II…3 Projects, Critiques X XTotal Hours: 54 Plus EDUC 431A Secondary Methods…3 Projects, Discussions, Papers X X
Standard/Description
J. Create effective instructional environments conducive to student learning, including being able to:1. Create a physically, emotionally, and intellectually safe environment for all students, including those with special needs;2. Create an instructional environment which reflects a respect for diversity;3. Promote principles of fairness and equity;4. Manage a classroom that allows for simultaneous activities that take place daily in today’s diverse and changing
classrooms;5. Provide opportunities for students to take responsibility for their own learning, to inquire into the subject, and to learn and
think in independent and productive ways; and,6. Integrate a variety of instructional resources to enhance learning for all students.
Candidate Proficiencies
Course #, Title, and Credits Course Assessment(s) Key Program Assessment(s)
Content Knowledge
Pedagogical Knowledge
Skills Dispositions P-12 Student Learning
ART 228 Ceramics I…3 Projects, Critiques X XART 225 Printmaking I…3 Projects, Critiques X X
ART 412 Senior Thesis…1 Projects, Critiques X XART 239 Elements of Art…3 Papers, Exams X X
38 Rule24 March2007 Version
P a g e | 39
ART 229 Intro to Graphic Design…3 Projects, Critiques X X
ART 338 Art History Survey I…3 Exams, Papers, Presentations X XART 339 Art History Survey II…3 Exams, Papers, Presentations X X
ART 340 20th Century Art History…3 Exams, Papers, Presentations X XART 334 Art for the Elementary Teacher…3 Projects, Papers, Presentations, Lesson
PlansX X X X X
Standard/Description
K. Evaluate one’s own teaching practices and make appropriate modifications and adjustments, including being able to:1. Describe current developments in teaching and schooling at local, state, and national levels; and,2. Utilize classroom research to improve the quality of art instruction in their classrooms.
Candidate Proficiencies
Course #, Title, and Credits Course Assessment(s) Key Program Assessment(s)
Content Knowledge
Pedagogical Knowledge
Skills Dispositions P-12 Student Learning
ART 334 Art for the Elementary Teacher…3 Lesson Plans, Projects, Presentations X X X X X
EDUC 431 a Secondary Art Methods...3 Lesson Plans, Projects, Presentations X X X X X
Standard/Description
L. Collaborate with other teaching and administrative professionals; including being able to:1. Identify issues and art resources that can be explored in an interdisciplinary manner with other teachers.
Candidate Proficiencies
Course #, Title, and Credits Course Assessment(s) Key Program Assessment(s)
Content Knowledge
Pedagogical Knowledge
Skills Dispositions P-12 Student Learning
ART 334 Art for the Elementary Teacher…3 Lesson Plans, Projects, Presentations X X X X XEDUC 431 a Secondary Art Methods...3 Lesson Plans, Projects, Presentations X X X X X
Standard/Description
M. Conduct meaningful and appropriate assessments of student learning, including being able to:1. Develop a repertoire of assessment strategies consistent with instructional goals, teaching methods, and individual
student needs to more accurately assess skills and understandings central to the content of art;2. Use multiple methods of assessment, both formal and informal, formative and summative, and a range of assessment
strategies such as portfolios, journals, class critiques and discussions;3. Use assessment as a joint venture through which both student and teacher understanding is enhanced;4. Create fair and equitable assessments to assess higher-order thinking and problem solving as well as individual skills,
knowledge, and understandings;5. Assess higher-order thinking and problem solving as well as discrete skills, knowledge, and understandings;6. Provide for the individuality of students and individual responses to assignments;7. Provide for all students an equal opportunity to display what they know and can do in art, including displays for peers,
family members, and the community;8. Provide insightful critiques to students considering the learning and creative processes of student work as well as the
finished product and in the context of previous work;9. Model good assessment processes that assist students in assessing their own work and the work of their peers; and,10. Provide recognition of a variety of student accomplishments and positive behaviors.
Candidate Proficiencies
Course #, Title, and Credits Course Assessment(s) Key Program Assessment(s)
Content Knowledge
Pedagogical Knowledge
Skills Dispositions P-12 Student Learning
EDUC 431 a Secondary Art Methods...3 Lesson Plans, Projects, Presentations X X X X X
39 Rule24 March2007 Version
P a g e | 40
ART 334 Art for the Elementary Teacher…3 Lesson Plans, Projects, Presentations X X X X X
ART 323 Creative Photography…3 Projects, Critiques X XART 412 Senior Thesis…1 Projects, Critiques X X
ART 320 Figure Drawing II…3 Projects, Critiques X XART 325 Printmaking II…3 Projects, Critiques X X
ART 131 Drawing I…3 Projects, Critiques X XART 225 Printmaking I…3 Projects, Critiques X X
ART 232 Painting I….3 Projects, Critiques X X
Standard/Description
N. Adapt their assessments to serve school-wide and system goals, including being able to:1. Assess the effectiveness of an art program with regard to program, school, and district goals;2. Develop assessment strategies to deal with broad issues of program effectiveness;3. Select and evaluate forms of communication needed to convey results to various audiences, including exhibits, portfolios,
test scores;4. Convey results in meaningful, understandable form appropriate for popular audiences; and,5. Describe the importance of reporting results of assessments to students, families, administrators, and the public.
Candidate Proficiencies
Course #, Title, and Credits Course Assessment(s) Key Program Assessment(s)
Content Knowledge
Pedagogical Knowledge
Skills Dispositions P-12 Student Learning
ART 334 Art for the Elementary Teacher…3 Critiques, Projects, Evaluations X X X X X
EDUC 431 a Secondary Art Methods...3 Critiques, Projects, Evaluations X X X X XART 412 Senior Thesis…1 Critiques, Projects, Evaluations X X
Standard/Description
O. Reflect on their own practices, including being able to:1. Articulate their teaching philosophy and the unique ways in which art learning contributes to cognitive, emotional and
social growth;2. Develop a professional resume and portfolio;3. Research different teaching strategies;4. Communicate to the larger community including school administrators, parents and colleagues in other disciplines the
vital role that the visual arts play in education;5. Describe the importance of their active participation, as an art teacher, in policy committees, educational councils, and
other collaborative efforts with other educational professionals and community members;6. Describe educational and art literature, including publications and Internet sites;7. Collaborate with colleagues in the schools to foster a professional culture that has a significant place for the arts;8. Describe the value of working with educators from other schools, districts, colleges and universities, arts organizations
and museums; and,9. Produce studio quality works of art.
Candidate Proficiencies
Course #, Title, and Credits Course Assessment(s) Key Program Assessment(s)
Content Knowledge
Pedagogical Knowledge
Skills Dispositions P-12 Student Learning
ART 334 Art for the Elementary Teacher…3 Presentations, Papers X X X X XEDUC 431 a Secondary Art Methods...3 Presentations, Papers X X X X X
Standard/Description
40 Rule24 March2007 Version
P a g e | 41
P. Describe the relationship of the school art program and the role of the art teacher to the total community, including being able to:
1. Actively participate in the total school community;2. Collaborate with colleagues to improve and evaluate professional development plans and practices; and,3. Describe ways to provide leadership in educational and professional roles.
Candidate Proficiencies
Course #, Title, and Credits Course Assessment(s) Key Program Assessment(s)
Content Knowledge
Pedagogical Knowledge
Skills Dispositions P-12 Student Learning
ART 334 Art for the Elementary Teacher…3 Presentations, Papers X X X X XEDUC 431 a Secondary Art Methods...3 Presentations, Papers X X X X X
Standard/Description
Q. Contribute to the growth of the profession, including being able to:1. Describe the history of the profession and the foundations of art education;2. Describe the importance of making presentations at professional, school, parent, and community meetings;3. Describe the importance of research and its impact on practices in the classroom; and,4. Create a professional growth plan that may include:
a. conducting action research in their own classrooms;b. collaborating with educational researchers to examine their own practices;c. methods for expanding their repertoire of teaching methods and strategies;d. means for deepening their knowledge of art, art education, and learning and development, and,e. modeling what it means to be an educated person for their students.
Candidate Proficiencies
Course #, Title, and Credits Course Assessment(s) Key Program Assessment(s)
Content Knowledge
Pedagogical Knowledge
Skills Dispositions P-12 Student Learning
ART 334 Art for the Elementary Teacher…3 Papers, Presentations, Lectures X X X X XEDUC 431 a Secondary Art Methods...3 Papers, Presentations, Lectures X X X X X
ART 412 Senior Thesis…1 Papers, Evaluations, Papers X X
41 Rule24 March2007 Version
![[PPT]PowerPoint Presentation - Yaşar Üniversitesisgumusoglu.yasar.edu.tr/.../01/Total-Quality-Management.ppt · Web viewTotal Quality Management Elements of TQM Principles of TQM](https://img.pdfslide.net/doc/110x75/5ad5ca7f7f8b9a5d058d9d3f/pptpowerpoint-presentation-yasar-n-viewtotal-quality-management-elements-of.jpg)
![[XLS]mgnregaup.inmgnregaup.in/jcnotavailable/Allahabad/IInd Phase... · Web viewTOTAL DATA District Block GramPanchayat RevenueVillage Majara FamilyHeadName JobCardHolderName JobCardHolderGender](https://img.pdfslide.net/doc/110x75/5ac0ff587f8b9ad73f8c6e40/xls-phaseweb-viewtotal-data-district-block-grampanchayat-revenuevillage-majara.jpg)
