Web viewThe 2008 HEOA outlines the requirements for all teacher ... NCATE coordinator has...

Mansfield University of PennsylvaniaTeacher Education Unit

2012-13 HEOA Teacher Preparation Report

06 December 2013


2012-13 HEOA Teacher Preparation Report

In 2008, the Higher Education Opportunity Act (HEOA) reauthorized the Higher Education Act (HEA) of 1965. The 2008 HEOA outlines the requirements for all teacher preparation programs to provide a report to the public. The requirements are defined below; the pages that follow provide evidence for each of the requirements.

Requirements: HEOA Sec. 201 amended HEA Title II, Part A: new HEA Sec. 205-208 (20 U.S.C. 1022d-1022g).

1. Goals (Pages 2-3): “The institution must set annual quantifiable goals for increasing the number of prospective teachers trained in teacher shortage areas designated by the Department or by the state education agency.” The public report includes: “information about whether goals have been met, activities implemented to achieve goals, and steps taken to improve performance in meeting goals.”

2. Assurances (Pages 4-10): “The institution must provide assurances to the Department of Education regarding training related to identified needs of local education agencies or states and the needs of schools, training of special education teachers, training in providing instruction to diverse populations, and training to effectively teach in urban and rural schools, as applicable.” The public report includes: a “description of activities the institution has implemented to meet assurances.”

3. Certification Exam Data (Pages 11-12): “Pass rates and scaled scores for the most recent year for which information is available on assessments used by the state for teacher certification or licensure that have been taken by students who are enrolled in the teacher preparation program and students who have completed the program during the prior 2 years… If a program has fewer than 10 scores reported on any assessment during an academic year, the average pass rate and scaled scores shall be provided for a 3-year period.”

4. General Program Information (Pages 13-16): “Admission criteria; enrollment disaggregated by race, ethnicity, and gender; average number of hours of supervised clinical experience; number of full-time-equivalent faculty and students in the supervised clinical experience; total number of students who have been certified or licensed as teachers, disaggregated by subject and area of certification or licensure.”

5. Accreditation (Page 17): “Statement of approval or accreditation of program (if required by the state); whether the state has designated the program as low-performing.”

6. Technology (Page 18): “Description of activities that prepare teachers to effectively use technology in instruction and to collect, manage, and analyze data.”

7. Diversity (Pages 19-30): “Description of activities that prepare teachers to teach effectively students with disabilities and students who have limited English proficiency.”

Page 1


Goals 2012-2013

Summary in Blue Ink1. Develop diversity proficiencies and assessments for the teacher education unit. (Continue from

2011-2012.) Monitor and assess the “Passport” use.

Not Achieved: The Passport was issued to students but according to Social Equity & Multicultural Affairs Officer, no monitor of the use of Passport was done and no assessment of the passport use was conducted.

2. Employer survey: Review and refine the questions using pilot study results in summer 2012. Administer surveys and compile data to share with the unit and programs for program improvement purposes.

Partially Achieved: Pilot study results in summer 2012 were summarized. Additional follow up e-mails were sent to those principals who did not respond in the initial e-mail invitation. The response rate for the follow up e-mails was low. No additional valid data was added to the initial result. The instrument has not been revised and additional administration of the survey was not conducted during the Spring 2013 semester. The revision of the instrument and the data collection should be planned in the Fall 2013 semester.

3. Alumni survey: Develop and administer the questionnaire to graduates and compile data to share with the unit and programs for program improvement purposes.

Partially Achieved: Alumni survey was developed and administered by phone. However, minimal success was achieved. A better contact phone number is needed to survey our graduates.

4. Review and revise the current teacher education portfolio system in all programs to better align with the conceptual framework for teacher education, assessment goals, program changes, and PDE initiatives. (continue from 2011-2012)

Achieved: The portfolio template and rubric were reviewed by each program and the changes were made when necessary. Data collection for the portfolio review was planned and will be completed by May 31, 2013.

5. NCATE Standard 2 was identified as being the highlighted standard. Continue collecting assessment data in TracDat and use the results to improve the program.

Achieved: NCATE coordinator has re-established the membership for Standard 2 team. The tasks and assessment plan will be continued throughout the AY2013-2014.

6. Continue providing assistance to the NCATE Coordinator towards completing the SPA report.

Achieved: Annual SPA reports were completed by the assistance of the NCATE coordinator.

Page 2

7. Expand the assessment analysis for program improvement.

Partially Achieved: STER analysis for AY2011-2012 was completed. Assessment analysis for AY2012-2013 needs to be done once spring 2013 STER data is available. Review of the assessment analysis results will be used to suggest the program improvement.

We have also had an additional assessment system in place and have finished out first cycle according to the system as is evident by the Continuous Improvement Report Forms that have been archived in the warehouse and reviewed by the respective deans and program leaders. These will be used to track the programs’ continuous improvement.

8. Field Experiences

Evaluating and making changes to the STER in order to meet NCATE and PDE expectations. Partially Achieved: NCATE coordinator and Dr. Moore have started working on the revision and the plan. They will be revising and finalizing the STER instrument during summer 2013 and pilot study in fall 2013 in Dr. Moore’s student teaching supervision class.

Creating a sustainable plan to support new teachers a required by Part VI of Chapter 49.16 (22 PA Code). Not Achieved: Field Experience Office will look into this goal in fall 2013.

Reviewing SPA narratives with NCATE Coordinator’s direction. Not Achieved: there is no need for this goal.

9. Technology:

Identify courses that assess The International Society for Technology in Education (I.S.T.E.) standards.

Achieved: Dr. Gambill will submit the matrix to TEC chair by May 15th.

Page 3

Mansfield University of PennsylvaniaTeacher Education Unit Assurances 2012-2013

The Mansfield University Teacher Education Unit (TEU) Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs) serve as the University’s assurances to the Department of Education “regarding training related to identified needs of local education agencies or states and the needs of schools, training of special education teachers, training in providing instruction to diverse populations, and training to effectively teach in urban and rural schools, as applicable.” Each TEU SLO has been developed in alignment with the unit’s conceptual framework and with the National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education. The TEU SLOs are assessed annually using unit-wide key assessments at both undergraduate and graduate levels. These data are then analyzed and interpreted for use in continuous program improvement.

The Mansfield University TEU SLOs and their results for 2012-13 are below.

Candidates will:

1. Demonstrate professional reflection that supports continuing critical and constructive self-assessment leading to professional growth as evidenced by student teaching reflective exercises in Parts Two and Three of the STER.

Criteria:

(a) At least 90% of candidates score at or above 80% on the totaled scores of the four reflective exercises on Part Two of the STER;

(b) At least 90% of candidates score at or above 80% on The P-12 Student Learning Project.

Results: The TEU SLO1 criteria have each been met:

(a) 90 out of 91 (99%) of candidates, scored at or above 80% on the totaled scores of the four reflective exercises on Part Two of the STER.

(b) 85 out of 91 (93%) of candidates score at or above 80% on The P-12 Student Learning Project.

Page 4

2. Plan and prepare effective instruction that leads to student learning as evidenced by Domain One evaluations in Part One of the STER and Category One of the PDE 430 summative assessment.

Criteria:

(a) At least 90% of candidates score “Very Good” (level 5) on STER Domain One items;

(b) At least 80% or above score “Outstanding” (level 6) on STER Domain One items;

(c) At least 95% of candidates score at or above the “Satisfactory” (level 1) on Category 1 of the PDE 430 summative assessment;

(d) At least 80% of candidates score at or above the “Superior” (level 2) on Category 1 of the PDE 430 summative assessment.

Results: The TEU SLO2 criteria are partially met:

(a) Met: 91 out of 91 (100%) of candidates score “Very Good” (level 5) or above on STER Domain One items.

(b) Not Met: Not more than 80% of candidates scored above 80% on STER Domain One items; these results are: 1a (74%), 1b (68%), 1c (55%), 1d (71%), 1e (70%), and 1f (58%).

(c) Met: 91 out of 91 (100%) of candidates score at or above “Satisfactory” (level 1) on Category 1 of the PDE430.

(d) Met: 82 out of 91 (90%) of candidates score at or above “Superior” (level 2) on Category 1 of the PDE 430 summative assessment.

Page 5

3. Support and maintain positive classroom environments that are conducive to student learning as evidenced by Domain Two evaluations in Part One of the STER and Category Two of the PDE 430 summative assessment

Criteria: (a) At least 90% of candidates score “Very Good” (level 5) on STER Domain Two items;

(b) At least 80% or above score “Outstanding” (level 6) on STER Domain Two items;



Results: The TEU SLO 3 criteria are partially met:

(a) Met: 91 out of 91 (100%) of candidates score “Very Good” (level 5) or above on DomainTwo, Part One of the STER.

(b) Not Met: 80% or more of the candidates scored “Outstanding” (level 6) on Domain Two elements 2a (89%) and 2e (87%); not more than 80% of candidates scored above 80% on Domain 2 elements 2b (78%), 2c (64%), and 2d (52%).



Page 6

4. Deliver effective and appropriate instruction leads to student learning as evidenced by Domain Three evaluations in Part One of the STER, The P-12 Student Learning Project, and Category Three of the PDE 430 assessment

Criteria:

(a) At least 90% of candidates score “Very Good” (level 5) on STER Domain Three items;

(b) At least 80% or above score “Outstanding” (level 6) on STER Domain Three items;

(c) At least 90% of students score above 80% on the P-12 Student Learning Project;

(d) At least 95% of candidates score at or above the “Satisfactory” (level 1) on Category 3 of the PDE 430 summative assessment;

(e) At least 80% of candidates score at or above the “Superior” (level 2) on Category 3 of the PDE 430 summative assessment.


(a) Met: 91 out of 91 (100%) of candidates score “Very Good” (level 5) or above on Domain Three, Part One of the STER.

(b) Not Met: 80% or more of the candidates scored “Outstanding” (level 6) on Domain Three element 3e (81%); not more than 80% of candidates scored above 80% on Domain 3 elements 3a (76%), 3b (64%), 3c (77%), and 3d (67%).

(c) Met: 85 out of 91 (93%) of candidates score at or above 80% on The P-12 Student Learning Project.

(d) Met: 91 out of 91 (100%) of candidates score at or above “Satisfactory” (level 1) on Category 3 of the PDE430.

(e) Met: 82 out of 91 (90%) of candidates score at or above “Superior” (level 2) on Category 3 of the PDE 430 summative assessment.

Page 7

5. Demonstrate abilities to meet professional responsibilities as evidenced by Domain Four artifacts in professional portfolios and Domain Four evaluations in Part One of the Student Teaching Evaluation Report and Category Four of the PDE 430 assessment

Criteria: (a) At least 90% of candidates score “Very Good” (level 5) on STER Domain Four items;

(b) At least 80% or above score “Outstanding” (level 6) on STER Domain Four items;




(a) Met: 91 out of 91 (100%) of candidates score “Very Good” (level 5) or above on Domain Four, Part One of the STER.

(b) Not Met: 80% or more of the candidates scored “Outstanding” (level 6) on the following Danielson elements: 4a (84%), 4b (80%), 4d (92%), 4e (89%), and 4f (95%), while less than 80% of candidates scored “Outstanding” on Danielson elements 4c (76%).



Page 8

6. Demonstrate professional knowledge and skills on Praxis I and II examinations and in field experiences

Criteria:

(a) Using the PDE cut scores, annually at least 95% of candidates will earn passing scores on the Praxis I tests (reading, writing, mathematics) and at least 80% of candidates will earn passing scores on all applicable Praxis II tests (based on Title II reporting data);

(b) At least 90% of respondents rate the success of the teacher education program as Good or above;

(c) At least 85% of respondents rate the success of the teacher education program as Very Good.

Results: Unable to determine at this time:

(a) The Praxis reports have not yet been provided to Mansfield University. When available, this data will be analyzed and forwarded to the TEC.

(b) Met: 97% (Fall 2012) and 100% (Spring 2013) of Cooperating Teachers rated the success of the teacher education program as “Good” or above.

(c) Not Met: 71% (Fall 2012) and 63% (Spring 2013) of Cooperating Teachers rated the success of the teacher education program as “Very Good.”

Page 9

7. Conduct themselves in accordance with Pennsylvania’s Code of Professional Practice and Conduct for Educators and the Mansfield University dispositions policy as evidenced by assessments of dispositions in field placements

Criterion: At least 98% of candidates are scored at or above “Satisfactory” for all professional dispositions evaluated by field placement cooperating teachers and professors supervising field experience

Results: Unable to determine:

The formal dispositions instruments were being revised during AY 2012-13 in response to data analysis from previous years, in which it was determined that the former instruments were not valid.

However, the following two (general) questions are asked of cooperating teachers, and their results indicate that the criterion for TEU SLO 7 are probably met:

Fall 2012100% of cooperating teachers either agree (19%) or strongly agree (81%) that student teachers displayed positive teaching dispositions with students.

98.4% of cooperating teachers either agree (23.8%) or strongly agree (74.6%) that student teachers displayed positive teaching dispositions with staff and faculty.

Spring 201397.3% of cooperating teachers either agree (28.8%) or strongly agree (68.5%) that student teachers displayed positive teaching dispositions with students.

94.6% of cooperating teachers either agree (20.3%) or strongly agree (74.3%) that student teachers displayed positive teaching dispositions with staff and faculty.

Page 10


Certification Exam Data 2012-13

Year Test Name

Test Numbe

r

Passing

Score

Number of

Examinees

Number

Passing

Pass Rate Range

Mean

Score

2009-2010 Elem.Ed. Curr. Instruc. Assessment 0011 168 74 60 81% 135-

193 175

2009-2010 Mathematics: Content Knowledge 0061 136 7 5 71% 132-

164 145

2009-2010 Social Studies: Content Knowledge 0081 157 6 6 100

%157-195 171

2009-2010 Music: Content Knowledge 0113 158 33 26 79% 143-

180 164

2009-2010 Art: Content Knowledge 0133 158 8 7 88% 156-

196 172

2009-2010 Library Media Specialist 0311 151 31 31 100

%152-184 170

2009-2010 Ed. Of Exceptional Students: Core CK 0353 136 35 34 97% 134-

195 177

2009-2010

Fundamental Subjects: Content Knowledge 0511 150 119 115 97% 130-

200 172

2010-2011 Elem. Ed. Curr. Instruc. Assessment 0011 168 51 30 59% 133-

193 171

2010-2011 Eng. Lang. Lit. Comp. Content Knowledge 0041 160 12 12 100

%160-196 178


175 143

2010-2011 Social Studies: Content Knowledge 0081 157 9 6 67% 136-

191 166


188 166

2010-2011 Art: Content Knowledge 0133 158 13 12 92% 155-

182 167

2010-2011 Library Media Specialist 0311 151 31 29 94% 145-

186 170

2010-2011 S.E. Core Knowledge & Applications 0354 151 31 31 100

%154-196 176

2010-2011

Fundamental Subjects: Content Knowledge 0511 150 106 101 95% 136-

197 173


195 178

2011- Elem. Ed. Curr. Instruc. Assessment 0011 168 41 37 90% 137- 177

Page 11

2012 1982011-2012 Eng. Lang. Lit. Comp. Content Knowledge 0041 160 11 11 100

%161-186 173


165 135


189 171


184 171

2011-2012 Art: Content knowledge 0134 158 8 5 63% 147-

181 162

2011-2012 Reading Specialist 0300 570 5 4 80% 560-

730 654


%158-188 171


%165-195 177

2011-2012 Fundamental Subjects: Content 0511 150 96 93 97% 134-

200 174


195 174

2012-2013 Elem. Ed. Curr. Instruc. Assessment 0011 168 5 5 100

%168-193 180

2012-2013 Eng. Lang. Lit. Comp. Content Knowledge 0041 160 5 4 80% 158-

192 182


170 133


167 157


186 167

2012-2013 Art: Content knowledge 0134 158 8 6 75% 151-

179 164


%155-183 169


%173-196 182

2012-2013 Fundamental Subjects: Content 0511 150 10 9 90% 143-

195 175


188 172

Page 12


General Program Information 2012-13

HEOA reporting requires the following general program information: “admission criteria; enrollment disaggregated by race, ethnicity, and gender; average number of hours of supervised clinical experience; number of full-time-equivalent faculty and students in the supervised clinical experience; total number of students who have been certified or licensed as teachers, disaggregated by subject and area of certification or licensure.”

Admission criteria

Admission criteria can be found in the Policies section of the Mansfield University Catalog, available here: http://catalog.mansfield.edu/content.php?catoid=22&navoid=432

Average number of hours of supervised clinical experience

190 Number of full-time-equivalent faculty and students in the supervised clinical experience;

Fall 2012 Student Teachers: 42Fall 2012 University Supervisors: 12Spring 2013 Student Teachers: 49Spring 2013 University Supervisors: 16

Page 13

Total number of students who have been certified or licensed as teachers, disaggregated by subject and area of certification or licensure.

Degrees Awarded - Current Programs Certificate AY10-11

AY11-12

AY 12-13

Undergraduate ProgramsBachelor of Music - Music Education K-12 31 34 28Bachelor of Science in Education - Art Education K-12 8 10 6Bachelor of Science in Education - English Education 7-12 1 2 3Bachelor of Science in Education - Earth and Space Science Education 7-12 3 4 3Bachelor of Science in Education - Social Studies: History Education 7-12 7 2 4Bachelor of Science in Education - Mathematics Education 7-12 10 7 0Bachelor of Science in Education - Early Childhood and Elementary Education PreK-4 0 0 7Bachelor of Science in Education - Early Childhood and Elementary Education with Special Education second certification

PreK-4 and Sp Ed PreK-8 0 0 11

Master's ProgramsMaster of Education-Special Education: Certification Sp Ed PreK-8 0 0 2Master of Education-Special Education: Non-Certification None 0 1 2Master of Science - Education: Reading Specialist K-12 0 1 0Master of Education - School Library and Information Technologies K-12 0 46 45

Total Degrees Awarded in Current Programs at Both Undergraduate and Graduate Level 60 107 111

Degrees Awarded - Old (Closed) Programs Program Code

AY10-11

AY11-12

AY 12-13

Closed Undergraduate ProgramsCertificate Undergrad - Elementary and Early Childhood Ed PreK-4 1 0 0Certificate Undergrad - Elementary Ed PreK-4 1 0 0Certificate Undergrad - English Ed 7-12 1 0 0Certificate Undergrad - Social Studies: History Ed 7-12 1 0 0Bachelor of Science-Ldshp for Child & Adlts Dis None 0 8Bachelor of Science in Education - French Ed 7-12 1 0 0Bachelor of Science in Education - Spanish Ed 7-12 1 0 0Bachelor of Science in Education - Chemistry Ed 7-12 1 0 0Bachelor of Science in Education - Elementary Ed PreK-4 9 9 6Bachelor of Science in Education - Elementary Ed PreK-4 18 16 1Bachelor of Science in Education-Elementary Ed PreK-4 18 20 12Bachelor of Science in Education - Special Education Sp Ed PreK-8 7 3 0Bachelor of Science in Education - Special Education with Special Education Second Certification Sp Ed PreK-8 6 2 0

Closed Master's ProgramsMaster of Education - Elementary Education: Track 1, Children's Literature Concentration PreK-4 0 4 4

Master of Education - Elementary Education: Track 1, Other Concentration PreK-4 0 1 1

Page 14

Master of Education - Elementary Education: Track 2, Reading Concentration PreK-4 0 3 8Master of Education - Elementary Education: Track 3, Area of Interest PreK-4 0 1 0Master of Education - Elementary Education: Track 4, Area of Interest, Student is seeking certification PreK-4 7 4 7

Master of Education - Elementary Education: Track 3, Area of Interest PreK-4 0 2 0Master of Education - Special Education Sp Ed PreK-8 2 6 2Master of Education - Special Education Sp Ed PreK-8 1 3 4Master of Education - Special Education Sp Ed PreK-8 0 1 2Master of Science - Education: Track 1, Children's Literature Concentration PreK-4 0 1 1Master of Science - Education: Track 1, Other Concentration PreK-4 0 1 3Master of Science - Education: Track 2, Reading Concentration PreK-4 2 1 1Master of Science - Education: Track 4, Area of Interest, Student is seeking certification

PreK-4 44

4

Master of Science - Education: Track 5, Area of Interest, Student is not seeking certification None

4

5

Master of Music- Music Ed and Music Special Ed K-12 2 Master of Education - Art Education K-12 1 8 1

Total Degrees Awarded in Closed Programs at Both Undergraduate and Graduate Level 84 94 70

Enrollment disaggregated by gender

Total Headcount Female Male

Fall 2012

Fall2013

Fall 2012

Fall2013

Fall 2012

Fall2013

Bachelor of Music - Music Education BM.ME 127 97 72 57 55 40Bachelor of Science in Education - Art Education BSE.AE 21 16 18 14 3 2Bachelor of Science in Education - English Education BSE.EN 19 13 13 8 6 5Bachelor of Science in Education - Earth and Space Science BSE.ESS 5 2 2 0 3 2Bachelor of Science in Education - Social Studies: History BSE.SSH 20 19 10 7 10 12Bachelor of Science in Education - Mathematics Education BSE.MA 17 19 11 11 6 8Bachelor of Science in Education - Early Childhood & El Ed BSE.ECEE 54 43 42 34 12 9Bachelor of Science in Education - Early Childhood and Elementary Ed with Special Ed Second Cert BSE.ECSE 88 94 76 84 12 10

Master of Education-Special Education: Certification MED.SEC 15 15 13 12 2 3Master of Education-Special Education: Non-Certification MED.SENC 7 10 6 10 1 0Master of Science - Education: Reading Specialist MS.EDRS 4 13 3 10 1 3Master of Science - Education: Teaching Children's Lit MS.EDCL 1 1 0 0 1 1Master of Education - School Library and Information Tech MED.LIT 121 78 106 67 15 11Master of Education - School Library and Information Technologies (Non-Cert) NDG.LIT 10 12 10 12 0 0

Page 15

Enrollment disaggregated by race, ethnicityAsian Black Hispanic Mixed

RaceNative

American NRA Pacific Islander

Race Unknown White

FA12

FA13

FA12

FA13

FA12

FA13

FA12

FA13

FA12

FA13

FA12

FA13

FA12

FA13

FA12

FA13

FA12

FA13

Current Undergraduate ProgramsMusic Education BM.ME 2 2 2 3 2 3 1 1 4 115 89Art Education BSE.AE 1 1 1 19 15English Education BSE.EN 1 1 2 1 16 11 Earth and Space Science Ed BSE.ESS 5 2Social Studies: History Ed BSE.SSH 1 19 19Mathematics Education BSE.MA 1 1 1 1 15 17Early Childhood & El Ed BSE.ECEE 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 47 38Early Childhood & El Ed with Special Ed Second Cert BSE.ECSE 2 2 2 2 3 1 1 6 7 77 125

Current Graduate ProgramsSpecial Education: Certification MED.SEC 15 15Special Education: Non-Certification MED.SENC 1 7 9Education: Reading Specialist MS.EDRS 1 1 3 12Education: Teaching Children's Lit MS.EDCL 1 1School Library and Information Tech MED.LIT 2 1 6 4 4 3 1 1 8 5 100 64School Library and Information Technologies (Non-Cert) NDG.LIT 1 1 9 11

Page 16


Accreditation Information 2012-13

The statement below appears in Mansfield University’s Catalog as an indication of the Teacher Education Unit’s accreditation status.

“Mansfield University is accredited by the Middle States Commission on Higher Education, 3624 Market Street, Philadelphia, PA 19104. (267-284-5000) The Middle States Commission on Higher Education is an institutional accrediting agency recognized by the U.S. Secretary of Education and the Council for Higher Education Accreditation.

“The professional education unit at Mansfield University (MU) is accredited by the National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE). NCATE is recognized by the U.S. Department of Education and the Council for Higher Education Accreditation as “a professional accrediting body for teacher preparation” (see http://www.ncate.org/Public/AboutNCATE/tabid/179/Default.aspx). Selected Mansfield programs that prepare teachers and other educational professionals at the initial or advanced levels are nationally recognized by specialized professional associations (SPAs), which are member organizations of NCATE. For a current listing of specific Mansfield University nationally recognized SPAs, please consult the NCATE listing at http://www.ncate.org/tabid/178/Default.aspx?state=PA&CO_ID=10753. The contact information for NCATE is:

“National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education2010 Massachusetts Ave NW, Suite 500Washington, DC 20036Telephone: (202) 466-7496Fax: (202) 296-6620General e-mail: [email protected]”

Page 17

mailto:[email protected]


Technology Use Information 2012-13

Activities that “prepare teachers to effectively use technology in instruction and to collect, manage, and analyze data” are integrated throughout the curricula of Mansfield University’s Teacher Education Unit (TEU). Through face-to-face, online, and hybrid coursework leading to initial and advanced certifications, candidates are prepared to use technology as an instructional tool and as a pedagogical tool for the collection, management, and analysis of data with the intention of leading to greater student learning.

Page 18


Diversity Information 2012-13

Activities that “prepare teachers to effectively teach students with disabilities and students who have limited English proficiency” are integrated throughout the curricula of Mansfield University’s Teacher Education Unit (TEU). Additionally, faculty have designed four specific courses to focus on students with exceptionalities and students with limited English proficiency. These four courses are offered at both the undergraduate level for initial certification programs and at the graduate level for advanced certification programs. All Mansfield University candidates complete these courses, which have been mapped to the proficiencies as required by the Pennsylvania Department of Education as shown in the chart below.

Accommodations & Adaptations/ Special Education & ELL Competencies

SPE 1001: Foundations in Special Education

SPE 3291: High Incidence Disabilities

SPE 3352: Assessment and Evidence Based Behavior Support for Inclusion

SPE 2276: Instruction for English Language Learners

I. Types of Disabilities and Implications for Learning: Candidate will be able to :

A) Demonstrate an understanding of and ability to plan for: type, identification and characteristics of different types of disabilities, as well as effective, evidence-based instructional practices and adaptations

Test Project

B) Demonstrate understanding of the legal rights and responsibilities of the teacher for special educational referral and evaluation and the rights and procedural safeguard that students are guaranteed.

Test Test/Quiz Write on test

Case Study

C) Demonstrate an understanding of possible causes and implications of over-representation of minorities in special education so as not to misinterpret behaviors that represent cultural, linguistic differences as indicative of learning problems.

Test Essay Evaluate CS for problems

Case Study

II. Cognitive Skill Development to Ensure Achievement of Students with Disabilities in Standards aligned Systems to Include All School Environments

A) Cognitive—Delineate how individuals acquire and process information.

Test/Quiz

Page 19






1) Design learning environments to facilitate encoding, storage and retrieval of knowledge and information for memory, attention, perception, and actions, problem-solving.

Test Project

2) Describe the developmental patterns of change, physical, cognitive, and psychosocial areas that have been identified for each stage of child development.

Test

3) Apply concepts of human development to education and learning regarding attention, memory, conceptual knowledge and its formation, reasoning, decision-making, problem solving, executive functioning, principles and mechanisms of development, intelligence, action, and motor control.

Test Case Study

4) Specify the experiences children need from birth to age eight to prepare them to learn, read, and succeed in school.

Test Test/Quiz

5) Identify early interactions with adults and peers, the early childhood education teaching methods and curricula, and comprehensive early childhood interventions that support learning and development, specifically in domains that prepare children from diverse backgrounds for kindergarten and the early grades. (see early childhood)

Test Case Study

B) Physical—Recognize patterns of normal physical developmental milestones and how patterns of students with disabilities may be different, and plan effectively for possible accommodations and/or modifications which may be necessary to implement effective instructional practices.

Test Test

C) Social—Initiate, maintain, and manage Test Case study

Page 20






positive social relationships with a range of people in a range of contexts.1) Recognize areas of development for students with disabilities and plan effectively for: interpersonal processes, forming and maintaining relationships (including parent-child, care giving, peer, friend, sibling), and attachment models and their effects on learning.

Case Study Case Study CS/ Exploration of course/ Mock IEP

2) Apply principles in social competence, social withdrawal, social role formation and maintenance, and pro-social behaviors, and aggression as the affect learning.

Test Case Study

Case Study CS responses

D) Behavioral—Recognize patterns of normal behavioral milestones and how patterns of students with disabilities may be different, and plan effectively for positive teaching of appropriate behaviors that facilitate learning.

Case Study Case Study IEP

E) Language—Apply reading predicators, analyzing the effect individual differences in specific perceptual, linguistic, and cognitive skills and how they affect a child’s ability to read.

Project Case Study

1) Apply principles of early learning to language development in the following areas: language comprehension, language expression, language form and syntax, morphology and semantics. Content reading child development.

Project Case Study

2) Apply and teach skills of spoken language as a precursor of reading and academic development.

Project Case Study

F) Positive Environments for Learning for Students with Disabilities

Project IEP

1) Define the scientific principles influencing academic and social behavior

Test Test

2)Implement positive behavioral Screening Case Study

Page 21






interventions based on a functional analysis of behavior3) Create an optimal learning environment by utilizing, evaluating, modifying and adapting the classroom setting, curricula, teaching strategies, materials, and equipment.

Case Study Project Field Exp/ Practicum

Presentation

G) Collaboration and Communication 1) Identify effective co-planning and co-teaching strategies.

Case Study Test/Quiz Case Study

2)Identify collaborative consultative skills and models (i.e. understanding role on the IEP team; teaming; parallel teaching)

Test Test/Quiz Mock Multi-discipline team

Case Study

3) Identify instructional level of students through collaboration with members of the IEP team.

Test IEP project Mock IEP Case Study

4) Understand the role of the general educator as part of the team for transition planning across transition points (i.e. preschool to school entry, grade level to grade level, school to school, to post school outcomes)

Test Test/Quiz Mock MDT

5) Demonstrate an understanding of the meaningful roles that parents and students play in the development of the student’s education

Test Mock IEP/MDT

Presentation

6) Demonstrate sensitivity multicultural and economic perspectives in order to encourage parent participation

Test Test Research Paper & Presentation

7) Demonstrate an understanding of how to support student and family communication and meaningful participation into the student’s educational program

Test Research Paper & Presentation

8) Work collaboratively with all members of the student’s instructional team including parents and agency personnel

Test

III. Assessments: Candidates will be able

Page 22






to:A) Identify, administer, interpret, and plan instruction based on each of the following assessment components in a standards aligned system.

1.) Authentic--A form of assessment in which, students are asked to perform real-world tasks that demonstrate meaningful application of essential knowledge and skills. The assessment usually includes a task for students to perform, and a rubric is used to evaluate their performance.

Test & Mock Application (MA) IEP/MDT

2.) Screening--Screening assessments are used to determine which students may be at risk. Poor performance on the screening assessments identifies those students needing additional, in-depth assessment of strengths and weaknesses. The primary purpose of screening assessments is to identify children who need additional instructional (or behavioral) intervention. An essential element of using a screening assessment is implementing additional identified intervention(s) (instructional, behavioral, or medical).

Mock Prereferral MDT/IEP

Case Study

3.) Diagnostic--The purpose of diagnostic assessments is to ascertain, prior to instruction, each student's strengths, weaknesses, knowledge, and skills. Using diagnostic assessments enable the instructor to remediate students and adjust the curriculum to meet each pupil's unique needs. (Examples of diagnostic assessments are: DRA's; Running Records; GRADE; GMADE)

Test & Give to children-- practice

Case Study

4.) Formative--Pennsylvania defines formative assessments are classroom based assignments that allow teachers to

Case Study /Test (MA)

Page 23






monitor and adjust their instructional practice in order to meet the individual needs of their students. Formative assessments can consist of formal instruments or informal observations. The key is how the results are used. Results should be used to shape teaching and learning.

Practicum

5.) Benchmark--Assessments that are designed to provide feedback to both the teacher and the student about how the student is progressing towards demonstrating proficiency on grade level standards.

Case Study Test (MA)

6.) Summative--Summative assessments seek to make overall judgment of progress at the end of a defined period of instruction. Often the summative assessment occurs at the end of a school level, grade, or course, or is administered at certain grades for purposes of state or local accountability.

MDT/IEP Test (MA)

B) Demonstrate an understanding of the types of assessments used (e.g., screening, diagnostic, formative, summative) and the purpose of each assessment in a data-based decision making process.

Case Study

C) Demonstrate the use of formal and informal assessment data for instructional, behavioral and possible eligibility decisions based on the type of assessment, level of the students being assessed, and the point and quality of instruction.

Mock reverse case study in class

D) Demonstrate an understanding of the multi-disciplinary evaluation process and an ability to articulate the findings presented in an evaluation report

Case Study -essay explanation

Page 24






including grade-level equivalents, percentile rank, standard scores, and stamina.E) Demonstrate an understanding of the components of the Individualized Education, Plan (IEP) process, with emphasis on understanding measurable goals based on present levels, specially designed instruction, adaptations, accommodations, supplementary aids and services, and supports for school personnel.

Test IEP project Explain the process to parents - in class mock scenario

F) Articulate differences between achievement tests, aptitude tests, and observational data used in special education placement decisions.

Paper pencil test

G) Create an instructional plan using assessment information related to individual student achievement,

Case Study Case Study

H) Analyze and interpret formative assessment (e.g. curriculum based assessment, CBA)

Given data reach conclusion

I) Demonstrate an understanding of the purpose and intent of standardized assessments and progress monitoring as one of multiple indicators used in overall student evaluations

Explain - essay exam

Case Study

J) Systematically monitor student performance to best identify areas of need

Case study Case Study

K) Use evaluative data on an individual, class and district level to implement instructional and/or programmatic revisions for quality improvement. Student Teaching

Case study

L) Demonstrate an understanding of legally acceptable modifications and accommodations for assessment for students with disabilities.

Test IEP project Explain - essay exam

Page 25






M) Demonstrate an understanding of ethical practice for assessment.

Test Case Study Case Study

N) Recognize the need to consult with multi-disciplinary team when cultural, economic, or linguistic differences are present in order to avoid biased assessment

Test Test/Quiz Case Study Case Study

IV. Literacy Development and Instruction in Core and Intervention Areas: Candidates will be able to

A) Demonstrate an ability to match instructional research-validated literacy interventions to identified student needs.

X Project Activities

B) Demonstrate a conceptual understanding of the components of reading and describe how these areas pose challenges for students with disabilities:

Test/Quiz

· Phonological Awareness &Phonics Test/Quiz · Fluency Test/Quiz · Vocabulary Test/Quiz · Comprehension Test/Quiz · Language Test/Quiz · Word Study (Phonological Awareness & Phonics)

Test/Quiz

C) Demonstrate an ability to review and evaluate literacy programs for purpose, quality, effectiveness, and research-base and show knowledge of commonly available programs

Project

D) Identify evidence-based instructional practices to be used with students with disabilities in the area of literacy

Project

E) Demonstrate an understanding of the evidence-based connection between literacy and behavior.

Test/Quiz

F) Demonstrate a conceptual understanding of the components of

Test/Quiz

Page 26






writing and describe how these areas pose challenges for students with disabilities · Text production Test/Quiz · Spelling Test/Quiz · Composition for different types of writing

Test/Quiz

G) Clearly articulate and model the use of explicit and systematic instruction in the teaching of literacy (reading and writing) for students with disabilities across all reading levels

Project

H) Clearly articulate and model the use of explicit and systematic instruction in the teaching of content area literacy for all students with disabilities.

Project

I) Demonstrate instructional strategies to enhance comprehension of material

Project

J) Demonstrate an understanding of the challenges that students with specific disabilities face in content area literacy

Project

K) Assess the readability of content and reading materials

Case Study

L) Demonstrate the ability to adapt content area materials to the student’s instructional level

Project Case Study

M) Utilize assessment tools with appropriate accommodations in the area of literacy to identify effectiveness of the standards based curriculum (core literacy program for students with disabilities).

Project

N) Establish and maintain progress monitoring practices within the content area aligned with the identified needs of each student to adjust instruction and provide rigor in the area of literacy for all students with disabilities

Project

O) Establish and maintain progress monitoring practices within the content area aligned with the identified needs of

Project

Page 27






each student to adjust instruction and provide rigor in the area of literacy for all student with disabilities.V. Effective Instructional Strategies for Students with Disabilities in Inclusive Settings: Candidates will be able to

A) Identify effective instructional strategies to address areas of need

Case Study Project Case Study

B) Scaffold instruction to maximize instructional access to all students

Project

C) Monitor student progress to provide mediated scaffolding and increase academic rigor when appropriate

Project

D) Provide feedback to students at all levels to increase awareness in areas of strength, as well as areas of concern

Project

E) Strategically align standard based curriculum with effective instructional practices

Test IEP Project

F) Identify and implement instructional adaptations based on evidence-based practices (demonstrated to be effective with students with disabilities) to provide curriculum content in a variety of ways without compromising curriculum intent

Intro/ Test Project

G) Analyze performance of all learners and make appropriate modifications.

Test Project C.S. Practicum

H) Design and implement programs that reflect knowledge, awareness and responsiveness to diverse needs of students with disabilities.

Project Research / Poster Session

I) Use research supported methods for academic and non-academic instruction for students with disabilities

Project Paper

J) Develop and implement universally designed instruction

IEP Project Case Study

K) Demonstrate an understanding of the range and the appropriate use of assistive technology (i.e. no tech, low tech, high

Test

Page 28






tech)L) Demonstrate efficient differentiated instruction and an understanding of efficient planning, coordination and delivery for effective instruction required for inclusive setting

Project

3 Credits/90 hours--English Language Learners

I. Foundations for Pre-Service Candidates: Candidates will be able to

A. Language 1) Demonstrate knowledge of language systems, structures, functions, and variation

Case Study

2) Identify the process of acquiring multiple languages and literacy skills, including the general stages of language development.

Case Study

3) Identify the differences between academic language and social language.

Case Study

B. Culture 1) Identify socio-cultural characteristics of ELLs including educational background and demographics.

Class activities

2) Describe how ELLs’ cultural communication styles and learning styles affect the learning process.

Case Study

3) Describe how ELLs' cultural values affect their academic achievement and language development.

Case Study

4) Identify bias in instruction, materials and assessment

Case Study

5) Demonstrate cross-cultural competence in interactions with colleagues, administrators, school and community specialists, students and their families.

Case Study

6) Observe culturally and/or linguistically diverse instructional settings.

Video or field

Page 29






experienceII. Applications for Pre-Service Candidates: Candidates will be able to

A. Standards-based instruction 1) Apply research, concepts and theories of language acquisition to instruction.

Case study

2) Implement appropriate research-based instructional strategies to make content comprehensible for all ELLs.

Modify chapters in content area

3) Demonstrate effective instructional planning and assessment integrating the PA Language Proficiency Standards for English Language Learners PreK-12 (ELPS) and PA academic standards

Case study

B. Assessment specific to ELL 1) Use PA ELPS to design content assessment.

Test/ Case study

Presentation

2) Identify issues related to standards-based formative and summative assessment for all ELLs.

Test/ Case study

Case study

3) Use assessment data to differentiate and modify instruction for optimal student learning

Test/ Case study

Case study

C. Professionalism 1) Describe the legal responsibilities related to serving ELLs.

Presentation

2) Demonstrate collaborative, co-teaching models for serving ELLs

Group activity

3) Define common terms associated with English Language Learners.

Presentation

4) Identify professional resources and organizations related to serving ELLs.

Presentation

Page 30

Web viewThe 2008 HEOA outlines the requirements for all teacher ... NCATE coordinator has...

Documents

Transcript of Web viewThe 2008 HEOA outlines the requirements for all teacher ... NCATE coordinator has...