3.1.c

3.1.c Candidates' Development and Demonstration of Knowledge, Skills, and Professional Dispositions to Help All Students Learn

Summarize proficiency expectations and processes for development during field experiences and
clinical practices; and outcomes based on demonstration of knowledge, skills, and professional
dispositions to help all students learn.

The EPP systematically ensures that candidates develop proficiencies outlined in the conceptual
framework, state standards and professional standards through summative and formative evaluative data,
field assignments and online discourse. University supervisors and course instructors provide onsite and
online feedback to candidates using evaluation instruments. The Student Teaching Evaluation Rubric
addresses all aforementioned competencies. The first two placements (CORE I and II) are 45 hours
each, the Practicum or Pre-Student Teaching (Core III) placement is 135 hours, and Student Teaching
(CORE IV) is full-time for the 15 week semester.

Early Childhood and Elementary candidates construct integrated assignments in literacy, mathematics,
history/social studies and science. The integrated assignments address the planning, instructing,
assessing and professional responsibility competencies found in the Student Teaching Evaluation
Rubric. During CORE II, Early Childhood candidates are paired with peers to conduct teach/re-teach
lessons in first, second and third grade classrooms. Secondary candidates construct content specific
assignments for P-12 students. Onsite instructors in Physical Education and Early Childhood work
directly with candidates to evaluate performance and develop proficiencies related to each area of the
conceptual framework.

Candidates are expected to collect and analyze data on student learning during clinical practice.
Relevant competencies on the Student Teaching Evaluation Rubrics identify these performance
indicators. These competency areas ask teacher candidates to examine assessment of student work and
use this information/ data in their daily planning. Daily lesson plans also require assessment and
evaluation of student progress. See data from student teaching for three semesters. Item 4.5
measures candidates' abilities to differentiate instruction to support all students. While the mean scores
in Fall 2014 and Spring 2015 were 2.90 and 2.91 respectively, the mean score for Fall 2015 was 3.19
(proficiency level). Clearly, programmatic changes particularly within methods courses aimed at
addressing differentiation more explicitly are effective in supporting our candidates.
Advanced candidates are expected to demonstrate proficiency in their abilities to measure the impact of
their teaching on student learning. At the culminating capstone seminar, candidates utilize data from
their classrooms to analyze their effect on student learning, to plan further interventions and to reflect on
their continuous impact. Data on the item related to adapting for diverse needs of students (item 3 in
capstone portfolio) and model digital age learning (item 3 in educational technology portfolio) was
examined to gather evidence of our candidates' abilities to effect student learning. First attempt score
data for capstone portfolio and for educational technology portfolio demonstrate that our candidates
perform at acceptable levels, with most of them scoring at the target level or at the acceptable level.
The few who received a score of 1 (unacceptable) were counseled and allowed to revise and
re-submit. In the newly revised Advanced program, using data to examine student learning will be
reinforced during the capstone portfolio.

Return to Standard 3 Main Page

Return to Institutional Report Main Page