At the end of the Clinical Experience



Nebraska Department of Education Rule 24 ReportEARLY CHILDHOOD INCLUSIVE(Content Area)Educator Preparation Content Program ReviewName of institutionUniversity of Nebraska-LincolnDate Submitted3.20.2017Contact PersonThomas WandzilakPhone/Fax402-472-8626Emailtwandzilak1@unl.eduFolio type:XRegularMiniAdvanced ProgramProgram(s) Covered by this Folio Press tab in last column to add rowsEndorsement(s)TypeGrade LevelProgram Level List EndorsementsFieldB-3BaccalaureatePost-BaccalaureateEarly childhood Inclusive, Grades B-3Is the endorsement offered at more than one site?YesXNoIf yes, list additional sites where endorsement is offered: Institution Accreditation Status:XNationalXStateIs this a Nationally Accredited Program?XYesNoIf Yes, list Accrediting Organization:CAEPAttach National Letter to Cover SheetReport to the Nebraska Department of EducationUniversity of Nebraska—Lincoln Folio Initial Level—June 2017INTRODUCTION AND WELCOMEThe purpose of this section is to provide general background information on the University of Nebraska-Lincoln and the College of Education and Human Sciences. In addition, information is provided on the teacher education program, admission and retention standards, the field experiences in which students participate, and information on the key assessments used in Section 2 concerning data that have been collected in support of our programs.Here is a list of websites that can provide some additional information on the university, the college, and our teacher education program: is the University of Nebraska-Lincoln website. is the link for the undergraduate bulletin. is the link for the College of Education and Human Sciences section in the Undergraduate Bulletin. is the link for the Graduate Bulletin. is the link for the website for the College of Education and Human Sciences. is the link for our program sheets for all of the programs offered through the College of Education and Human Sciences. Program sheets will also be available for multiple years.If you have any questions, feel free to contact Tom Wandzilak, Certification Officer, College of Education and Human Sciences at:402-472-8626 or attwandzilak1@unl.eduSECTION 1: CONTEXTUAL INFORMATION NARRATIVESection 1a: Endorsement Program/Contextual InformationThe link to the Rule 20 Folio is: Statement ion StatementThe University of Nebraska-Lincoln (UNL), chartered by the Legislature in 1869, is the part of the University of Nebraska system that serves as both the land-grant and the comprehensive public University for the State of Nebraska.Through its three primary missions of teaching, research, and service, UNL is the state's primary intellectual center providing leadership throughout the state through quality education and the generation of new knowledge. UNL's graduates and its faculty and staff are major contributors to the economic and cultural development of the state. UNL attracts a high percentage of the most academically talented Nebraskans, and the graduates of the University form a significant portion of the business, cultural, and professional resources of the State. The quality of primary, secondary, and other post-secondary educational programs in the state depends in part on the resources of UNL for curricular development, teacher training, professional advancement, and enrichment activities involving the University's faculty, museums, galleries, libraries, and other facilities. UNL provides for the people of the state unique opportunities to fulfill their highest ambitions and aspirations, thereby helping the state retain its most talented youth, attract talented young people from elsewhere, and address the educational needs of the nontraditional learner.The University of Nebraska-Lincoln has been recognized by the Legislature as the primary research and doctoral degree granting institution in the state for fields outside the health professions. Through its service and outreach efforts the University extends its educational responsibilities directly to the people of Nebraska on a state-wide basis.The College of Education and Human SciencesThe College of Education and Human Sciences (CEHS) was founded on August 18, 2004, by Teachers College and The College of Human Resources and Family Sciences, with each founding college contributing extensive history and tradition. The College of Education and Human Sciences offers excellent educational advancement to both undergraduate and graduate students, serving approximately 2,800 undergraduates and 1,000 graduate students each year.Education courses first became a part of the University curriculum in 1895 with the organization of a Department of Education designed to prepare students for teaching careers. On Valentine’s Day, 1908, the Board of Regents established a Teachers College. Since that time, the College has been highly respected for its programs preparing teachers, administrators, and specialists for the education of children, youth, and adults. The quality of these programs is reflected in outstanding educational leadership in communities across the state and in the nation in teaching, administration, communication disorders, special education, and educational psychology.Teacher Education Programs Teacher education programs are found in five departments in CEHS as well as in two other colleges on campus. The College of Fine and Performing Arts (CFPA) oversees Music Education while Agriculture Education, Horticulture Education and Industrial Technology are located in the College of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources. Even though these programs are housed outside of CEHS, they must comply with state rules and regulations tied to teacher education. The majority of the teacher education programs are located in the Department of Teaching, Learning and Teacher Education (TLTE). There are currently 40 endorsement areas offered at the undergraduate and graduate levels through the University. Options exist for students to complete initial teacher certification and teaching endorsements at the undergraduate and graduate levels. All programs leading to an initial teaching certificate will also require the completion of an undergraduate or graduate degree. Individuals interested in adding one or more teaching endorsements may do so without pursuing a degree.1b. Standards of Admission, RETENTION, TRANSITION AND COMPLETIONAdmission to the University of Nebraska-LincolnAdmission to the University is based on a student’s demonstrated academic preparation for University-level work (see Appendix—Table 1). Admission standards to the University are established by the University of Nebraska Board of Regents and apply to all new, first time degree-seeking students. This includes freshman as well as transfer students. The admission standards apply to general admission to the University as well as admission to the College of Education and Human Sciences.Admission to the Teacher Education Program (TEP)Admission to the College of Education and Human Sciences does not guarantee admission to a teacher education program. Admission to the advanced phases of teacher education is selective and, in some endorsements, highly competitive. Selection to a TEP is based upon the following criteria:Completion of at least 30 credit hours (Elementary Education) or 42 credit hours (Secondary Education) with a minimum 2.5 pletion of TEAC 331 or 430 or 431 or 434 or 437 or 496 (3 hrs.) or approved course, and EDPS 250 or 251 with a 2.5 cumulative average in the two classes, no grade lower than a C.Documentation of proficiency in reading, writing, and mathematics through successful completion of a basic skills examination that meets the Nebraska Department of Education competency pletion of one course in communication studies selected from COMM 109, 205, 209, 210, or 341, or an approved substitute.Faculty recommendations.Demonstration of attaining particular learning outcomes in the pletion of a personal and professional fitness self-disclosure form.Admission to Student TeachingAll students who are candidates for an appropriately endorsed Nebraska Teacher’s certificate are required to student teach. Students who plan to student teach in the fall semester must complete the student teaching application form and submit it by the preceding March 1 to the Director of Field Experiences in 104 Henzlik Hall; students planning to student teach in the spring semester must apply by the preceding October 1. The basic program for student teaching provides for a full-day experience on a semester basis. Students enrolled in an elementary education dual major will complete requirements for student teaching in both majors. Admission to student teaching requires the following:Matriculation in a teacher education program in the College of Education and Human Sciences, the Graduate College, or dual matriculation in the College of Education and Human Sciences and another college.Admission to a teacher education program.Senior standing (89 hours or more) with a minimum cumulative GPA of 2.75.Application for and completion of a senior check.Minimum average of 2.5 in each endorsement area (in the case of Middle Grades Endorsement, a 2.5 in each academic area) with no grade below C.A minimum grade point average of 2.5 in pre-professional and professional education courses with no grade below a C in pre-professional education courses and no grade below a C+ in professional education pletion of a criminal history check that will be conducted by an independent party (lab fee required).RetentionMust maintain a minimum cumulative GPA of 2.75.Must maintain a minimum average of 2.5 in each endorsement area (in the case of Middle Grades Endorsement, a 2.5 in each academic area) with no grade below C.Must maintain a minimum grade point average of 2.5 in pre-professional and professional education courses with no grade below a C in pre-professional education courses and no grade below a C+ in professional education courses.Must meet student teaching application deadlines.Must meet criminal history requirements at all times.Transition PointsA summary of the transition points can be found in the Appendix in Table 2.Requirements to Complete the Teacher Education ProgramSuccessful completion of student teaching.Successful completion of all remaining courses as identified in the senior check with grades meeting the minimum requirements as identified in the “Admission to Student Teaching” section as described above.Satisfy any additional requirements as described under teacher education in the undergraduate bulletin.Address all financial obligations tied to the University of Nebraska-Lincoln.Apply for the degree.The Student Advising Sheet for the program(s) associated with this Folio can be found at: 1c. Field ExperiencesThe link to the Rule 20 Folio is: experience “courses” can be divided into the following areas:Early Childhood, Inclusive, Elementary Education, Elementary Education/Mild Moderate Disabilities, and Secondary Education. Practicum experiences at the 200 level are initial experiences in the schools for our students. They can be placed in a classroom with a teacher at the appropriate grade level for their respective content area. Secondary students are placed individually in middle grades or secondary classrooms whereas elementary students are placed in pairs in elementary classrooms. In all instances, university students have opportunities to work with K-12 learners individually or in small groups. In some instances, they may be given full-class opportunities to work with learners. Students completing 397 level practica have expanded responsibilities where they will have greater classroom responsibilities that will include the teaching of multiple lessons as a requirement for the experience as well as teacher assistant roles during each day. The 497 experience is student teaching where the university student takes on more and more responsibilities that would be equivalent to those taken on by the classroom teacher. These responsibilities include, but are not limited to, the preparation of lesson plans and materials for teaching and assessment, the teaching of classes, grading formative and summative materials, working with students after class, attending staff/faculty meetings, and speaking with parents where necessary, all under the guidance of a cooperating teacher. Please see Table 3 in the Appendices for a summary of the Field Experience hour requirements associated with each practicum course and the related endorsements.1d. Program CompletersTable 4—Program CompletersProgram Completers and Level – Content AreaAcademic YearNumber of Endorsement Program CompletersBacPost BacAlternate RouteMastersEd. SpecialistPhD2014to20151802015to2016260SECTION 2: ENDORSEMENT PROGRAM KEY ASSESSMENTS AND RELATED DATAArtifact 1Table 5Summary Table of Endorsement Program Key AssessmentsREGULAR FOLIOSName of Assessmentused for the following areas:Type or Form of AssessmentBrief Description of Assessment, including indicated information obtained from AssessmentWhen Assessment is AdministeredSpecific Items1Content-Praxis II or GPACumulative GPASummativeNumerical computation of grades based on quality points earned divided by credit hours completedOngoing—throughout one’s college career. Cumulative GPA is what is reported.Specific to content area Praxis IIComparison to a StandardFor elementary students, this test has been used to document one being highly qualified (minimum score of 159) for No Child Left Behind.For secondary students, we piloted results for the 2014-2015 academic year. Results will be used as a requirement fro teacher certification at all levels starting September 1, 2015.Just before or during clinical practicum (student teaching)Specific to content area CEHS Student Teaching InstrumentSummativeThis instrument consists of 14 items that is completed by the student teacher supervisor and cooperating teacher on the basis of one being proficient, basic or unsatisfactory on each item.At the end of the Clinical ExperienceItem 1 Administrator SurveySummativeThis is a 21-item instrument that is completed by school administrators at the end of a candidate’s first year of teaching. It is now administered by the Nebraska Department of Education.In March/April at the end of the candidate’s first year of teachingStandards 4.1, 4.2, 4.3 Candidate Teacher SurveySummativeThis is a 23-item instrument that is completed by program completers at the end of the first year of teaching. It is administered by the College of Education and Human Sciences at UN-L.In March/April at the end of the candidate’s first year of teachingItems 1 & 22Content - Knowledge Cumulative GPASummativeNumerical computation of grades based on quality points earned divided by credit hours completedOngoing—throughout one’s college career. Cumulative GPA is what is reported.Specific to content area Praxis IIComparison to a StandardFor elementary students, this test has been used to document one being highly qualified (minimum score of 159) for No Child Left Behind.For secondary students, we piloted results for the 2014-2015 academic year. Results will be used as a requirement fro teacher certification at all levels starting September 1, 2015.Just before or during clinical practicum (student teaching)Specific to content area CEHS Student Teaching InstrumentSummativeThis instrument consists of 14 items that is completed by the student teacher supervisor and cooperating teacher on the basis of one being proficient, basic or unsatisfactory on each item.At the end of the Clinical ExperienceItem 1 Administrator SurveySummativeThis is a 21-item instrument that is completed by school administrators at the end of a candidate’s first year of teaching. It is now administered by the Nebraska Department of Education.In March/April at the end of the candidate’s first year of teachingStandards 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, 5.1, 5.2 Candidate Teacher SurveySummativeThis is a 23-item instrument that is completed by program completers at the end of the first year of teaching. It is administered by the College of Education and Human Sciences at UN-L.In March/April at the end of the candidate’s first year of teachingItem 143Learner/Learning Environments CEHS Student Teaching InstrumentSummativeThis instrument consists of 14 items that is completed by the student teacher supervisor and cooperating teacher on the basis of one being proficient, basic or unsatisfactory on each item.At the end of the Clinical ExperienceItems 2 & 3 Administrator SurveySummativeThis is a 21-item instrument that is completed by school administrators at the end of a candidate’s first year of teaching. It is now administered by the Nebraska Department of Education.In March/April at the end of the candidate’s first year of teachingStandards 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 3.1, 3.2, 3.3 Candidate Teacher SurveySummativeThis is a 23-item instrument that is completed by program completers at the end of the first year of teaching. It is administered by the College of Education and Human Sciences at UN-L.In March/April at the end of the candidate’s first year of teachingItems 3 & 44Instructional Practices - Knowledge CEHS Student Teaching InstrumentSummativeThis instrument consists of 14 items that is completed by the student teacher supervisor and cooperating teacher on the basis of one being proficient, basic or unsatisfactory on each item.At the end of the Clinical ExperienceItems 2, 3, & 6 Administrator SurveySummativeThis is a 21-item instrument that is completed by school administrators at the end of a candidate’s first year of teaching. It is now administered by the Nebraska Department of Education.In March/April at the end of the candidate’s first year of teachingStandards 7.1, 7.2, 7.3, 8.1, 8.2, 8.3 Candidate Teacher SurveySummativeThis is a 23-item instrument that is completed by program completers at the end of the first year of teaching. It is administered by the College of Education and Human Sciences at UN-L.In March/April at the end of the candidate’s first year of teachingItems 7, 8, 9, 16, 17 & 205Instructional Practices - Effectiveness CEHS Student Teaching InstrumentSummativeThis instrument consists of 14 items that is completed by the student teacher supervisor and cooperating teacher on the basis of one being proficient, basic or unsatisfactory on each item.At the end of the Clinical ExperienceItems 2, 3, & 5 Administrator SurveySummativeThis is a 21-item instrument that is completed by school administrators at the end of a candidate’s first year of teaching. It is now administered by the Nebraska Department of Education.In March/April at the end of the candidate’s first year of teachingStandards 6.1, 6.2 Candidate Teacher SurveySummativeThis is a 23-item instrument that is completed by program completers at the end of the first year of teaching. It is administered by the College of Education and Human Sciences at UN-L.In March/April at the end of the candidate’s first year of teachingItem 106Professional Responsibility CEHS Student Teaching InstrumentSummativeThis instrument consists of 14 items that is completed by the student teacher supervisor and cooperating teacher on the basis of one being proficient, basic or unsatisfactory on each item.At the end of the Clinical ExperienceItems 12 & 14 Administrator SurveySummativeThis is a 21-item instrument that is completed by school administrators at the end of a candidate’s first year of teaching. It is now administered by the Nebraska Department of Education.In March/April at the end of the candidate’s first year of teachingStandards 9.1, 9.2, 9.3, 9.4, 10.1, 10.2 Candidate Teacher SurveySummativeThis is a 23-item instrument that is completed by program completers at the end of the first year of teaching. It is administered by the College of Education and Human Sciences at UN-L.In March/April at the end of the candidate’s first year of teachingItems 12 & 157Overall ProficiencyAdministrator SurveySummativeThis is a 21-item instrument that is completed by school administrators at the end of a candidate’s first year of teaching. It is now administered by the Nebraska Department of Education.In March/April at the end of the candidate’s first year of teachingStandard 11.1 Candidate Teacher SurveySummativeThis is a 23-item instrument that is completed by program completers at the end of the first year of teaching. It is administered by the College of Education and Human Sciences at UN-L.In March/April at the end of the candidate’s first year of teachingItem 238Optional AssessmentSECTION 3: USE OF RELATED DATA AND INFORMATION FOR CONTINUOUS PROGRAM IMPROVEMENT OF ENDORSEMENT PROGRAMREQUIRED RULE 24 FOLIO APPENDICESTable 1UNL Admission RequirementsEnglish4 units of EnglishAll units must include intensive reading and writing experienceMathematics4 units of mathematicsMust include Algebra I, II. Geometry and one additional unit that builds on a knowledge of algebra or geometry.Natural Science3 units of natural sciencesIncluding at least 2 units selected from biology, chemistry, physics, and earth sciences. One of the units must include laboratory instruction.Social Studies3 units of social studiesAt least one unit of American and/or world history and one additional unit of history, American government and/or geographyForeign Language2 units of foreign languageMust include 2 units of the same foreign language. Students who are unable to take two years of foreign language in high school may still qualify for admission. Such students will be required to take two semesters of foreign language at the University of Nebraska. These students are required to complete 16 units of academic courses for admission.Class Rank or ACT/SATFor assured admission you must also graduate in the upper half of your class, or have an ACT composite score of 20 or higher, or an SAT combined score of 950. All freshman applicants under the age of 23 are required to submit an official ACT or SAT score.TransferFor assured admission, in addition to completion of core course requirements, you must also show a C average (2.0 on a 4.0 scale) for your cumulative grade point average and a C average on your most recent term of college enrollmentTable 2Major Transition Points Acceptance into University(Prior to Freshman year)Acceptance into Teacher Education program(Sophomore year)Acceptance into Student Teaching(Semester before Student Teaching)Program Completion/Graduation(After Student Teaching)-- Completion of specific number of high school units.-- Appropriate ACT /SAT score--Credit hour minimum--Minimum grades in specific courses-- PPST-- Faculty recommendations-- Completion of Prof. & Personal Fitness Form-- Criminal History check-- Admission to TEP-- Credit Hour /overall 2.75 GPA minimum-- 2.5 GPA in content areacourses, no grade below a C--2.5 GPA in Prof. ed – specific grade requirements for methods courses-- Criminal History check-- 120 + credit hours-- successful completion of Student Teaching-- Maintain GPA minimum requirements-- Completion of a senior check --Met all financial obligations-- Apply for degreeTable 3Summary Table of Practicum and Clinical ExperiencesCourseCrDays/WkHrs/DayWeeksTotal HrsELEDSec. Ed.ELED/SPEDECE UnifELED/ECE TEAC 297A123148484848484297B22714140140140140EDPS 2971211425397A32714196196196196497A12581664064064064029712110202039735212120120397D32815240240497125816640640497A65840400400SPED 39733412144120SPED 496Y124145656497M95810400400CYAF 270L21414525252271L11312363636374L11315454545497A95416320320320Total-------------------------------1060780134014731513Instruments Used in Key Assessments: In order to view the instruments used for the different surveys the provided data for this report, go to the “Instruments” folder at the State Approval website and select each of the following:Student Teaching Final Evaluation used in Fall 2014–Spring 2015—All Program CompletersStudent Teaching Final Evaluation used in Fall 2015–Spring 2016—All Program CompletersNDE First-Year Administrator Survey First-Year Teacher Survey SECTION 2: KEY ASSESSMENTS AND FINDINGS — Artifact 2 1. Content KnowledgeBelow are the measures used specifically for addressing the content knowledge or teacher candidates at the University of Nebraska–Lincoln.Table 1AGrade Point Average in the Content Area and Cumulative GPAYearEndorsementSubject Area/Content GPACumulative GPATotal Students2014-2015Secondary Education3.493.5695Elementary Education3.433.57125Special Education3.823.6859Early Childhood3.813.7025Content area2015-2016Secondary Education3.542503.55747108Elementary Education3.366323.56379153Special Education3.804803.6488172Early Childhood Education3.747773.5820340Content areaTable 1BGrade Point Average in the Content Area and Cumulative GPAYearCodeSubject Area/Content GPACumulative GPATotal StudentsNotes2014-2015BECE3.212.791Business & Cooperative EducationBMIT3.353.326Business, Marketing & Information EducationCYEC3.853.7418Inclusive Early Childhood EducationCYFC3.373.244Family & Consumer Science Education 6-12ECED3.573.656Elementary Education & Early Childhood EducationELED3.433.5283Elementary Education K-6EMATH3.253.6113Mathematics 7-12ENGL 3.793.7815EnglishESPAN3.673.589SpanishLART3.633.674Language ArtsNTSC3.503.6412Science (Field endorsement)PHSC3.673.781PhysicsSPEN (3.443.541English and Speech ( old program)SPM73.293.6837Elementary & Special Education K-6SPM83.653.474Special Education 7-12SSCI3.403.4927Social Science Education 7-122015-16AEDU3.450003.4314010Agriculture EducationCYEC3.774133.6227524Inclusive Early Childhood EducationCYFC3.644863.600007Family & Consumer Science, 6-12ECED?3.581229Elementary Education & Early Childhood EducationELAT3.800003.683001English/language ArtsELED3.366323.54869103Elementary EducationENGL3.663753.6547512EnglishERSS3.131003.096001Earth and space ScienceMATH3.254273.4826715MathMUED3.577433.5429021Music EducationNTSC3.138503.409004Science (formerly natural science)(old endorsement)SCIE3.386503.528002Science (new science endorsement)SENG4.000003.990001Secondary English????SPAN3.771573.613437SpanishSPM7?3.6333537Elementary and Special Education, K-6SPM83.871733.7576411Special Education, 7-12SSCI3.567673.5995012Social ScienceTable 2APraxis II—September 2014—August 2015Pass Rate Based on Nebraska Cut ScorePraxis II – September 2014 – August 2015Pass Rate Based on Nebraska Cut ScoreEndrsmntTest #Cut ScoreUN-L NUN-L # PassingUN-L # FailingUN-L %age PassUN-L MeanState NState %age PassState MeanNational NNational %ageNational MeanCurr Sup.NonePrincipal541114511010012393.5163.85277883.59164.95Supt60211521101001632696.15167.2363796.39168.15Unified50241601716194.2174.4710177.23168.15191778.87167.57Agric Ed57011471918194.74166.532095166.6543695.64167.52BMIT5101154880100174.2536100174.64184889.72170.45ELED5017153151142994.04170.6680390.78167.94449191.27168.74FACS5122153127558.33158.421758.82160.0063077.46160.21ITENoneMath51611463026486.67163.8710177.23158.12809065.7153.20Music511415220200100173.906188.52164.28117885.48164.50Science543514812120100176.255394.34173.00309181.11163.75Biology5235148330100160.672180.95159.62391083.43162.16Chemistry5245140110100176.007100161.57158284.39159.79Earth & Space Sc5571147220100162.0036715781684.44164.48Physics5265131110100169683.33147.5095180.34150.34LA & Sec. English50391682218481.82175.8610976.15173.33283175.27173.28Soc. Sci.50811542723485.191688877.27165.02603779.41165.57SPED535415142420100175.4023998.33172.08582595.91171.85SPED HH527216010100100173.911100173.4512570.40163.72ECSE5691159110100191110019176191.33173.71SPED V I5282163110100167110016716973.96167.24SLPA53311621311284.621733591.43174.51838492.20176.41French5174162110100168580175.2048269.92169.59German5183163110100183210018212270.49170.50Latin5601155000000009184.62175.30RussianNoneSpanish5195156000000001100178School Counslr5421156000003196.76169.97319690.18168.57School Psychlgst5402147770100175.2923100170.83263397.27169.02TOTAL4033733092.56%Table 2BPraxis II – September 2015 – August 2016Pass Rate Based on Nebraska Cut ScoreEndrsmntTest #Cut ScoreUN-L NUN-L # PassingUN-L # FailingUN-L %age PassUN-L MeanState NState %age PassState MeanNational NNational %ageNational MeanCurr Sup.NonePrincipal54111452120195.24171.3328698.25166.33307094.40164.17Supt6021152330100.00171.6727100169.5965894.68168.32Unified50241602726196.30173.9311084.55167.56245079.63167.25Agric Ed5701147550100.00170.007100.00167.2939896.98168.69BMIT510115465183.33172.333597.14174.31182188.69169.89ELED5017153197190796.45171.9884994.35168.85499692.77169.15FACS51221532019195.00165.653196.77164.48104980.46160.84ITENoneMath51611462522388.00166.3210286.27159.63796166.66153.77Music51141522726196.30175.419292.39167.29119185.14164.58Science543514815150100.00175.875398.11175.34284881.85164.12Biology52351481312192.31165.233193.55164.65355685.18163.10Chemistry524514032166.67159.67683.33165.33154584.53158.76Earth & Space Sc557114732166.67156475.00156.0072184.60164.47Physics5265131220100.001679100.00165.1184481.52150.77LA & Sec. English50391682423195.83177.5813089.23176.12294376.79173.51Soc. Sci.508115418180100.00170.069090.00169.38559980.62165.76SPED535415152520100.00176.4931699.68173.80597796.29171.97SPED HH5272160220100.00176.007100.00170.1413688.97168.82ECSE5691159770100.00184.298100.00182.8581693.01173.88SPED VI528216343175.00168.75475.00168.7514271.13166.97SLPA533116243175.00173.25977.78167.89901393.38176.21 French51741621010159.00450.00168.0040767.57168.57German5183163220100.00197.53100.00186.3311666.38171.88Latin5601155-----2100.00174.55284.62176.02RussianNoneSpanish519515696366.67161.893672.22166184273.13167.22School Counselor5421156220100.00177.006696.97171.39332789.93168.90School Psychlgst540214711110100.00178.0038100.00170.66258697.56169.36TOTAL5034782595.03%Response From College of Education & Human Sciences Student Teaching Instrument Teacher Candidate Summative Evaluation on Subject Matter Knowledge for the 2014-2015 Academic Year for Teaching in General (Item 1).Table 3AItem 1: Subject Matter Knowledge for Teaching in General 2014-2015Subject Area ScoringYear#ItemEndorsementUnsatisfactoryBasicProficientGrand Total2014- 20151Subject Matter Knowledge for Teaching in general. Demonstrates capacity to make content knowledge accessible to students.Inclusive Early Childhood Education (CYEC)00.00%15.88%1694.12%17Early Childhood00.0%48.2%4591.8%49Elementary Education00%00%121100%121Secondary Education 00%97.5%11192.5%120Special Education00%510.2%4489.8%49Response From College of Education & Human Sciences Student Teaching Instrument Teacher Candidate Summative Evaluation for the 2015-2016 Academic Year on Subject Matter Knowledge for Teaching (Item 3—Table 3B)—LIVETEXT version.Table 3BItem 3: Subject Matter Knowledge for Teaching in General2015-16Subject Area ScoringYear#ItemEndorsementUnacceptableEmergentSufficientAdvancedGrand Total2015- 20163Subject Matter Knowledge for Teaching.Subject matter Knowledge for Teaching. Make content knowledge accessible for studentsEarly Childhood Inclusive00.00%00.00%1041.67%1458.33%24Early Childhood Education00.00%00.00%1338.24%2113.00%34Elementary Education00.00%31.63%7138.59%11059.78%184Secondary Education00.00%44.60%4855.17%3540.23%87Special Education00.00%22.35%2934.12%5463.53%85Responses From First Year Administrator Survey: Preparation of Candidate to Teach Content Area.Table 4Standards 4.1, 4.2, and 4.3—Content KnowledgeIndicator Endorsement Rare Occasional Frequent Consistent Grand Information Total4.1 --Theteacher understands thecentral concepts, tools of inquiry, and structuresof the discipline(s) s/he teaches.2014-2015Early Childhood Inclusive 00.00%116.67%233.33%350.00%6Early Childhood?0.00%114.29%228.57%457.14%7Elementary?0.00%23.23%2235.48%3861.29%62Middle Grades?0.00%?0.00%125.00%375.00%4Content (Subject Area) Endorsements?0.00%35.08%1728.81%3966.10%59Special Education15.88%15.88%635.29%952.94%17?Total10.67%74.70%4832.21%9362.42%1492015-2016RareOccasionalFrequentConsistentTotalEarly Childhood Inclusive00.00%00.00%225.00%675.00%8Early Childhood?0.00%?0.00%20.00%20.00%4Elementary11.89%?0.00%2750.94%2547.17%53Middle Grades?0.00%?0.00%1100.00%?0.00%1Content (Subject Area) Endorsements?0.00%11.45%2536.23%4362.32%69Special Education?0.00%210.00%1050.00%840.00%20?Total10.68%32.04%6544.22%7853.06%1474.2 Theteacher creates learningexperiences that make these aspects of thediscipline accessible and meaningful for studentsto assure mastery of content.2014-2015RareOccasionalFrequentConsistentTotalEarly Childhood Inclusive 00.00%116.67%233.33%350.00%6Early Childhood0.00%114.29%228.57%457.14%7Elementary0.00%46.45%2438.71%3454.84%62Middle Grades0.00%?0.00%125.00%375.00%4Content (Subject Area) Endorsements0.00%35.08%2440.68%3254.24%59Special Education0.00%317.65%423.53%1058.82%17?Total0.00%117.38%5536.91%8355.70%1492015-2016RareOccasionalFrequentConsistentTotalEarly Childhood Inclusive00.00%00.00%450.00%450.00%8Early Childhood?0.00%?0.00%20.00%20.00%4Elementary11.89%35.66%2547.17%2445.28%53Middle Grades?0.00%?0.00%1100.00%?0.00%1Content (Subject Area) Endorsements?0.00%34.35%2536.23%4159.42%69Special Education?0.00%15.00%1050.00%945.00%20Total4.3 Theteacher integrates NebraskaContent Standards and/or professional standardswithin instruction.2014-2015RareOccasionalFrequentConsistentTotalEarly Childhood Inclusive 00.00%116.67%233.33%350.00%6Early Childhood?0.00%711.29%228.57%457.14%7Elementary?0.00%?0.00%1930.65%3658.06%62Middle Grades?0.00%16.25%125.00%375.00%4Content (Subject Area) Endorsements?0.00%114.29%2440.68%3254.24%59Special Education16.25%128.11%637.50%850.00%16?Total10.68%114.29%5235.14%8356.08%1482015-2016RareOccasionalFrequentConsistentTotalEarly Childhood Inclusive00.00%00.00%225.00%675.00%8Early Childhood?0.00%?0.00%10.00%30.00%4Elementary11.92%?0.00%2038.46%3159.62%52Middle Grades?0.00%?0.00%?0.00%?0.00%0Content (Subject Area) Endorsements?0.00%22.90%2028.99%4768.12%69Special Education?0.00%15.00%945.00%1050.00%20?Total10.69%32.07%5034.48%9162.76%145Responses From First Year Candidate Survey: Items Related to Preparation to Teach Content Knowledge (Item 1) and Prepared to Teach Content Area (Item 2).Table 5Item 1: Prepared to Teach Content AreaYear#ItemEndorsementStrongly DisagreeDisagreeNeither Agree nor DisagreeAgreeStrongly AgreeGrand Total2014 - 20151I am well prepared to teach in my content area.Inclusive Early Childhood Education (CYEC)00.00%00.00%114.29%571.43%114.29%7Early Childhood Education00%00%18.3%975.0%216.7%12Elementary Education00%36.1%36.1%3061.2%1326.5%49Secondary Education 00%12.0%12.0%3367.3%1428.6%49Special Education00%29.5%29.5%1152.4%628.6%212015 - 20161I am well prepared to teach in my content area.CYEC00.00%00.00%00.00%00.00%3100.00%3Early Childhood Education00.00%00.00%112.50%225.00%562.50%8Elementary Education00.00%12.00%24.00%3060.00%1734.00%50Secondary Education00.00%11.61%46.45%4470.97%1320.97%62Special Education00.00%00.00%00.00%1568.18%731.82%22Table 6Item 2: Prepared to Teach Content AreaYear#ItemEndorsementStrongly DisagreeDisagreeNeither Agree nor DisagreeAgreeStrongly AgreeGrand Total2014 - 20152I am confident in my level of subject matter knowledge.Inclusive Early Childhood Education (CYEC)00.00%00.00%228.57%457.14%114.29%.Early Childhood Education00%00%325.0%758.3%216.7%12Elementary Education00%36.1%48.2%2653.1%1632.7%49Secondary Education 00%00%24.1%2755.1%2040.8%49Special Education00%00%314.3%1152.4%733.3%212015-20162I am confident in my subject matter knowledge.CYEC00.00%00.00%00.00%133.33%266.67%3Early Childhood Education00.00%00.00%112.50%450.00%337.50%8Elementary Education00.00%12.00%36.00%2652.00%2040.00%50Secondary Education00.00%00.00%69.68%3150.00%2540.32%62Special Education00.00%00.00%14.55%1463.64%731.82%22Narrative:Data from three different sources (i.e., summative evaluation of teacher candidates, administrator evaluation of first-year teachers, and self-evaluation of first-year teachers) are presented in this section in terms of the teacher candidates’ understanding of subject matter and state and professional standards.Early Childhood Inclusive (Inclusive Early Childhood Education; IECE; CYEC): There was a slight increase in the content knowledge from 2014-2015 to 2015-2016 in all three sets of data. In general, about 95% of the teacher candidates were evaluated to have proficient level of content knowledge in 2014-2015, and all teacher candidates exhibited proficient level of content knowledge in 2015-2016. The administrator evaluation also presents data consistent with summative evaluation. About 85% of the first-year teachers have frequently or consistently shown their understanding of subject matter in 2014-2015 compared with 100% of the first-year teachers in 2015-2016. Self-report of first-year teachers also shows the same change (i.e., approximately 90% in 2014-2015 to 100% in 2015-2016) in their perceived confidence with content knowledge. 2. Content Area See Tables 1-6 from Content Area #1 above (first 8 tables in that section)Table 7Responses from First Year Administrator Survey: Application of ContentIndicator Endorsement Rare Occasional Frequent Consistent Grand Information Total5.1 The teacher candidate understands how to connect concepts across disciplines 2014-15Early Childhood Inclusive 00.00%116.67%350.00%233.33%6Early Childhood?0.00%114.29%342.86%342.86%7Elementary11.61%69.68%2743.55%2845.16%62Middle Grades?0.00%375.00%?0.00%125.00%4Content (Subject Area) Endorsements?0.00%22.90%2028.99%4768.12%69Special Education?0.00%423.53%423.53%952.94%17?Total10.67%2214.77%5838.93%6845.64%1492015-2016RareOccasionalFrequentConsistentTotalEarly Childhood Inclusive00.00%10.00%337.50%450.00%8Early Childhood?0.00%?0.00%375.00%125.00%4Elementary11.92%35.77%3057.69%1834.62%52Middle Grades?0.00%?0.00%1100.00%?0.00%1Content (Subject Area) Endorsements11.45%913.04%2637.68%3347.83%69Special Education?0.00%210.00%1155.00%735.00%20?Total21.37%149.59%7148.63%5940.41%1465.2 The teacher candidate uses differing perspectives to engage students in critical thinking, creativity, and collaborative problem solving related to authentic local and global issues2014-2015RareOccasionalFrequentConsistentTotalEarly Childhood Inclusive 00.00%00.00%583.33%116.67%6Early Childhood?0.00%?0.00%571.43%228.57%7Elementary11.61%711.29%2438.71%3048.39%62Middle Grades?0.00%?0.00%250.00%250.00%4Content (Subject Area) Endorsements?0.00%711.67%2135.00%3253.33%60Special Education?0.00%423.53%529.41%847.06%17?Total10.67%1812.00%5738.00%7449.33%1502015-2016RareOccasionalFrequentConsistentTotalEarly Childhood Inclusive00.00%10.00%337.50%450.00%8Early Childhood?0.00%?0.00%20.00%20.00%4Elementary11.89%47.55%2852.83%2037.74%53Middle Grades?0.00%?0.00%1100.00%?0.00%1Content (Subject Area) Endorsements?0.00%913.04%2434.78%3652.17%69Special Education?0.00%210.00%945.00%945.00%20?Total10.68%1510.20%6443.54%6745.58%147Responses From First Year Candidate Survey: Items Related to Teaching Subject Matter Materials in Ways Meaningful to Learners (Item 14). Table 8Item 14: Prepared to Teach Content Area Year#ItemEndorsementStrongly DisagreeDisagreeNeither Agree nor DisagreeAgreeStrongly AgreeGrand Total2014 - 201514I teach subject matter in ways that are meaningful to learners.Inclusive Early childhood Education (CYEC)00.00%00.00%00.00%571.43%228.57%7Early Childhood Education00%00%18.3%758.3%433.3%12Elementary Education00%00%36.1%2755.1%1836.7%48Secondary Education 00%24.1%510.2%2959.2%1326.5%49Special Education00%00%29.5%1047.6%942.9%212015-201614I teach subject matter in ways that are meaningful to learners.CYEC00.00%00.00%00.00%133.33%266.67%3Early Childhood Education00.00%00.00%00.00%450.00%450.00%8Elementary Education00.00%00.00%612.00%2652.00%1836.00%50Secondary Education00.00%00.00%711.48%4065.57%1422.95%61Special Education00.00%00.00%29.09%1359.09%731.82%22Narrative:Data from three different sources (i.e., summative evaluation of teacher candidates, administrator evaluation of first-year teachers, and self-evaluation of first-year teachers) are presented in this section in terms of the teacher candidates’ ability to teach concepts in a meaningful way, connect concepts across disciplines, and engage students in higher level thinking.Early Childhood Inclusive (Inclusive Early Childhood Education; IECE; CYEC): The administrator survey indicated that most first-year teachers (close to 87%) have frequently or consistently shown their ability to connect concepts, and all but one engaged students in higher-level thinking related to authentic local and global issues in 2014-2015 and 2015-2016 years. According to self-report, all first-year teachers agreed or strongly agreed that they were teaching subject matter in ways that are meaningful to students.3. Learner/Learning EnvironmentsResponse From College of Education & Human Sciences Student Teaching Instrument Teacher Candidate Summative Evaluation on Planning for Learning for the 2014-2015 Academic Year (Item 2—Table 9A).Table 9AItem 2: Subject Planning for Learning2014-2015Subject Area ScoringYear#ItemEndorsementUnsatisfactoryBasicProficientGrand Total2014- 20152Demonstrates capacity to create useable lesson and unit plans that are based upon knowledge of the discipline, students, and curricular goalsInclusive Early Childhood Education (CYEC)00.00%16.25%1593.75%16Early Childhood Education12.1%612.5%4185.4%48Elementary Education00%54.0%12096.0%54Secondary Education 00%2117.5%9982.5%120Special Education12.0%714.0%4284.0%50Response From College of Education & Human Sciences Student Teaching Instrument Teacher Candidate Summative Evaluation for the 2015-2016 Academic Year on Planning for Learning (Item 4—Table 9B)—LIVETEXT version.Table 9BItem 4: Planning for Learning2015-2016Subject Area ScoringYear#ItemEndorsementUnacceptableEmergentSufficientAdvancedGrand Total2015- 20164Planning for learning:Creates usable lessons and unit plans based on knowledge of the discipline, students, and curricular goalsEarly Childhood Inclusive00.00%00.00%625.00%1875.00%24Early Childhood Education00.00%12.94%823.53%2573.53%34Elementary Education00.00%21.08%5328.65%13070.27%185Secondary Education00.00%22.27%4753.41%3944.32%88Special Education00.00%00.00%2427.91%6272.09%86Response From College of Education & Human Sciences Student Teaching Instrument Teacher Candidate Summative Evaluation for the 2014-2015 Academic Year on Instructional Enactment (Item 3—Table 10A).Table 10AItem 3: Instructional Enactment 2014-2015Subject Area ScoringYear#ItemEndorsementUnsatisfactoryBasicProficientGrand Total2014- 20153Demonstrates Capacity to implement, modify, and adapt plans that are responsive to students and curricular goalsInclusive Early Childhood Education (CYEC)00.00%15.88%1694.12%17Early Childhood Education00%510.2%4489.8%49Elementary Education00%86.4%11793.6%125Secondary Education 10.8%1210.0%10789.2%120Special Education12.0%510.0%4488.0%50Response From College of Education & Human Sciences Student Teaching Instrument Teacher Candidate Summative Evaluation for the 2015-2016 Academic Year on Responsive Teaching (Item 5—Table 10B). LIVETEXT version.Table 10BItem 5: Responsive Teaching2015-2016Subject Area ScoringYear#ItemEndorsementUnacceptableEmergentSufficientAdvancedGrand Total2015- 20165Responsive Teaching:Skillfully implements lessons that are flexible and intentional to meet individual student needsEarly Childhood Inclusive00.00%00.00%729.17%1770.83%24Early Childhood Education00.00%00.00%926.47%2573.53%34Elementary Education00.00%21.08%5831.35%12567.57%185Secondary Education00.00%66.90%3843.68%4349.43%87Special Education00.00%11.16%2427.91%6170.93%86Responses from First Year Administrator Survey: Items Related to Student Development, Learning Differences, and Learning Environments: Student Development (Standards 1.1, 1.2, and 1.3); Learning Differences (Standards 2.1 and 2.2); Learning Environments (Standards 3.1 and 3.2).Table 11Standards 1.1, 1.2, and 1.3: Student DevelopmentIndicator Endorsement Rare Occasional Frequent Consistent Grand Information Total1.1 The teacher understands how students grow and develop.2014-2015Early Childhood Inclusive 00.00%00.00%350.00%350.00%6Early Childhood?0.00%?0.00%342.86%457.14%7Elementary?0.00%34.84%2641.94%3353.23%62Middle Grades?0.00%?0.00%250.00%250.00%4Content (Subject Area) Endorsements?0.00%23.33%2643.33%3253.33%60Special Education?0.00%211.76%317.65%1270.59%17?Total?0.00%74.67%6040.00%8355.33%1502015-2016RareOccasionalFrequentConsistentTotalEarly Childhood Inclusive00.00%00.00%337.50%562.50%8Early Childhood?0.00%?0.00%20.00%20.00%4Elementary11.89%47.55%2037.74%2852.83%53Middle Grades?0.00%?0.00%1100.00%?0.00%1Content (Subject Area) Endorsements?0.00%22.90%3246.38%3550.72%69Special Education?0.00%15.00%735.00%1260.00%20?Total10.68%74.76%6242.18%7752.38%1471.2 The teacher recognizes that patterns of learning and development vary individually within and across the cognitive, linguistic, social, emotional, and physical areas.2014-2015RareOccasionalFrequentConsistentTotalEarly Childhood Inclusive 00.00%116.67%233.33%350.00%6Early Childhood?0.00%114.29%228.57%457.14%7Elementary?0.00%34.84%2641.94%3353.23%62Middle Grades?0.00%?0.00%250.00%250.00%4Content (Subject Area) Endorsements?0.00%35.00%2541.67%3253.33%60Special Education?0.00%317.65%211.76%1270.59%17?Total?0.00%106.67%5738.00%8355.33%1502015-2016RareOccasionalFrequentConsistentTotalEarly Childhood Inclusive00.00%00.00%225.00%675.00%8Early Childhood?0.00%?0.00%10.00%30.00%4Elementary11.89%47.55%2037.74%2852.83%53Middle Grades?0.00%?0.00%1100.00%?0.00%1Content (Subject Area) Endorsements11.45%34.35%3144.93%3449.28%69Special Education?0.00%15.26%736.84%1157.89%19?Total21.37%85.48%6041.10%7652.05%1461.3 The teacher implements developmentally appropriate and challenging learning experiences.2014-2015RareOccasionalFrequentConsistentTotalEarly Childhood Inclusive 00.00%116.67%233.33%350.00%6Early Childhood?0.00%114.29%228.57%457.14%7Elementary?0.00%46.45%2133.87%3759.68%62Middle Grades?0.00%?0.00%250.00%250.00%4Content (Subject Area) Endorsements?0.00%58.47%2237.29%3254.24%59Special Education15.88%211.76%635.29%847.06%17?Total10.67%128.05%5335.57%8355.70%1492015-2016RareOccasionalFrequentConsistentTotalEarly Childhood Inclusive00.00%00.00%225.00%675.00%8Early Childhood?0.00%?0.00%20.00%20.00%4Elementary11.89%611.32%1630.19%3056.60%53Middle Grades?0.00%?0.00%1100.00%?0.00%1Content (Subject Area) Endorsements?0.00%57.25%2536.23%3956.52%69Special Education?0.00%15.00%1050.00%945.00%20?Total10.68%128.16%5436.73%8054.42%147Table 12Standards 2.1 and 2.2: Learning DifferencesIndicator Endorsement Rare Occasional Frequent Consistent Grand Information Total2.1 The teacher understands individual differences and diverse cultures and communities2014-2015Early Childhood Inclusive 00.00%00.00%466.67%233.33%6Early Childhood?0.00%?0.00%457.14%342.86%7Elementary?0.00%46.45%2743.55%450.00%62Middle Grades?0.00%?0.00%250.00%?50.00%4Content (Subject Area) Endorsements?0.00%610.17%1830.51%659.32%59Special Education?0.00%?0.00%635.29%?64.71%17?Total?0.00%106.71%5738.26%1055.03%1492015-2016RareOccasionalFrequentConsistentTotalEarly Childhood Inclusive00.00%00.00%337.50%562.50%8Early Childhood?0.00%?0.00%20.00%20.00%4Elementary11.89%59.43%1426.42%3362.26%53Middle Grades?0.00%?0.00%1100.00%?0.00%1Content (Subject Area) Endorsements?0.00%710.14%2536.23%3753.62%69Special Education?0.00%15.00%735.00%1260.00%20?Total10.68%138.84%4933.33%8457.14%1472.2 The teacher ensures inclusive learning environments that enable each student to meet high demands2014-2015RareOccasionalFrequentConsistentTotalEarly Childhood Inclusive 00.00%116.67%116.67%466.67%6Early Childhood?0.00%114.29%114.29%571.43%7Elementary?0.00%34.84%2337.10%3658.06%62Middle Grades?0.00%125.00%?0.00%375.00%4Content (Subject Area) Endorsements?0.00%35.08%2440.68%3254.24%59Special Education15.88%211.76%423.53%1058.82%17?Total10.67%106.71%5234.90%8657.72%1492015-2016RareOccasionalFrequentConsistentTotalEarly Childhood Inclusive00.00%00.00%337.50%562.50%8Early Childhood?0.00%?0.00%20.00%20.00%4Elementary11.89%611.32%1935.85%2750.94%53Middle Grades?0.00%?0.00%1100.00%?0.00%1Content (Subject Area) Endorsements?0.00%57.25%2637.68%3855.07%69Special Education?0.00%15.00%525.00%1470.00%20?Total10.68%128.16%5336.05%8155.10%147Table 13Standards 3.1 and 3.2: Learning EnvironmentsIndicator Endorsement Rare Occasional Frequent Consistent Grand Information Total3.1 The teacher works with others to create environments that support individual and collaborative learning.2014-2015Early Childhood Inclusive 00.00%116.67%116.67%466.67%6Early Childhood?0.00%114.29%114.29%571.43%7Elementary?0.00%23.28%2134.43%3862.30%61Middle Grades?0.00%125.00%125.00%250.00%4Content (Subject Area) Endorsements?0.00%58.62%1525.86%3865.52%58Special Education?0.00%211.76%317.65%1270.59%17?Total?0.00%117.48%4127.89%9564.63%1472015-2016RareOccasionalFrequentConsistentTotalEarly Childhood Inclusive00.00%00.00%225.00%675.00%8Early Childhood?0.00%?0.00%10.00%30.00%4Elementary11.89%611.32%1833.96%2852.83%53Middle Grades?0.00%?0.00%1100.00%?0.00%1Content (Subject Area) Endorsements?0.00%68.82%2130.88%4160.29%68Special Education?0.00%210.00%525.00%1365.00%20?Total10.68%149.59%4631.51%8558.22%1463.2 The teacher creates environments that encourage positive social interaction, active engagement in learning, and self-motivation.2014-2015RareOccasionalFrequentConsistentTotalEarly Childhood Inclusive 00.00%116.67%233.33%350.00%6Early Childhood?0.00%114.29%228.57%457.14%7Elementary11.61%23.23%2032.26%3962.90%62Middle Grades?0.00%?0.00%250.00%250.00%4Content (Subject Area) Endorsements?0.00%35.17%1627.59%3967.24%58Special Education?0.00%15.88%529.41%1164.71%17?Total10.68%74.73%4530.41%9564.19%1482015-2016RareOccasionalFrequentConsistentTotalEarly Childhood Inclusive00.00%00.00%225.00%675.00%8Early Childhood?0.00%?0.00%10.00%30.00%4Elementary11.89%611.32%1426.42%3260.38%53Middle Grades?0.00%?0.00%1100.00%?0.00%1Content (Subject Area) Endorsements?0.00%811.76%1927.94%4160.29%68Special Education?0.00%210.00%420.00%1470.00%20?Total10.68%1610.96%3926.71%9061.64%1463.3 The teacher manages student behavior to promote a positive learning environment.2014-2015RareOccasionalFrequentConsistentTotalEarly Childhood Inclusive 00.00%116.67%233.33%350.00%6Early Childhood00.00%114.29%228.57%457.14%7Elementary00.00%34.84%2235.48%3759.68%62Middle Grades00.00%00.00%250.00%250.00%4Content (Subject Area) Endorsements00.00%712.07%2339.66%2848.28%58Special Education00.00%211.76%529.41%1058.82%17Total00.00%138.78%5436.49%8154.73%1482015-2016RareOccasionalFrequentConsistentTotalEarly Childhood Inclusive00.00%00.00%112.50%787.50%8Early Childhood?0.00%?0.00%?0.00%40.00%4Elementary23.77%815.09%2037.74%2343.40%53Middle Grades?0.00%?0.00%1100.00%?0.00%1Content (Subject Area) Endorsements?0.00%1319.12%2536.76%3044.12%68Special Education?0.00%315.00%525.00%1260.00%20?Total21.37%2416.44%5134.93%6947.26%146Responses From First Year Candidate Survey: Items Related to Student Learning: Understands How Learners Learn (Item 3), and Adapts to Developmental Strategies of Learners (Item 4).Table 14Item 3: Understands How Learners LearnYear#ItemEndorsementStrongly DisagreeDisagreeNeither Agree nor DisagreeAgreeStrongly AgreeGrand Total2014 - 20153I positively impact the learning and development of all students.Inclusive Early Childhood Education (CYEC)00.00%00.00%00.00%457.14%342.86%7Early Childhood Education00%00%00%758.3%541.7%12Elementary Education00%12.0%00%2244.9%2653.1%49Secondary Education 00%00%36.1%2653.1%1938.8%48Special Education00%00%00%1047.6%1152.4%212015-20163I positively impact the learning and development of all students.CYEC00.00%00.00%00.00%00.00%3100.00%3Early Childhood Education00.00%00.00%00.00%225.00%675.00%8Elementary Education00.00%00.00%510.00%2142.00%2448.00%50Secondary Education00.00%00.00%1016.13%3353.23%1930.65%62Special Education00.00%00.00%14.55%1150.00%1045.45%22Table 15Item 4: Adapts to Developmental Strategies of LearnersYear#ItemEndorsementStrongly DisagreeDisagreeNeither Agree nor DisagreeAgreeStrongly AgreeGrand Total2014 - 20154I adapt to different developmental stages of learners.Inclusive Early Childhood Education (CYEC)00.00%00.00%114.29%457.14%228.57%7Early Childhood Education00%00%18.3%866.7%325.0%12Elementary Education00%00%48.2%2244.9%2346.9%49Secondary Education 00%00%918.4%2959.2%1122.4%49Special Education00%00%29.5%1047.6%942.9%212015-20164I adapt to different developmental stages of learnersCYEC00.00%00.00%00.00%00.00%3100.00%3Early Childhood Education00.00%00.00%00.00%337.50%562.50%8Elementary Education00.00%00.00%816.00%2040.00%2244.00%50Secondary Education00.00%00.00%1727.87%3150.82%1321.31%61Special Education00.00%00.00%14.55%1045.45%1150.00%22Narrative:Data from three different sources (i.e., summative evaluation of teacher candidates, administrator evaluation of first-year teachers, and self-evaluation of first-year teachers) are presented in this section in terms of the teacher candidates’ ability to effectively plan, implement, and adapt curriculum and lessons; their understanding of child development as well as individual differences; their ability to provide learning environment that supports students’ individual and collaborative learning; and their ability to manage effectively student behavior to promote positive learning.Early Childhood Inclusive (Inclusive Early Childhood Education; IECE; CYEC): According to the summative evaluation of teacher candidates, an increased percent of teacher candidates showed a proficient level of ability to create and implement lesson and unit plans (94% in 2014-2015 to 100% in 2015-2016). All teacher candidates have frequently or consistently shown their understanding of child development in both years and showed an increased understanding of developmentally appropriate learning experience that is still challenging (83% in 2014-2015 to 100% in 2015-2016). All teacher candidates frequently or consistently showed their understanding of individual differences in students in both years; and there was an increase in the percent of teacher candidates who frequently or consistently implemented effective inclusive practices (84% in 2014-2015 to 100% in 2015-2016). The same level of increase was observed in teacher candidates’ ability to support students’ individual and collaborative learning, engage students in learning in a meaningful way, and effectively manage student behavior in the classroom (100% in 2015-2016). First-year teachers expressed confidence in positively impacting the learning and development of all students (100% in both years) and adapting to developmental differences of learners (86% in 2014-2015 to 100% in 2015-2016).4. Instructional Practices—Candidate Knowledge and SkillsResponse from College of Education & Human Sciences Student Teaching Instrument Teacher Candidate Summative Evaluation for the 2014-2015 Academic Year on Planning for Learning, Instructional Enactment (Item 2—Table 16A)Table 16AItem 2: Subject Planning for Learning 2014-2015Subject Area ScoringYear#ItemEndorsementUnsatisfactoryBasicProficientGrand Total2014- 20152Demonstrates capacity to create useable lesson and unit plans that are based upon knowledge of the discipline, students, and curricular goalsInclusive Early Childhood Education (CYEC)00.00%16.25%1593.75%16Early Childhood Education12.1%612.5%4185.4%48Elementary Education00%54.0%12096.0%125Secondary Education 00%2117.5%9982.5%120Special Education12.0%714.0%4284.0%50Response From College of Education & Human Sciences Student Teaching Instrument Teacher Candidate Summative Evaluation on Planning for Learning for 2015-2016 Academic Year on Planning for Learning (Item 4—Table 16B)—LIVETEXT version.Table 16BItem 4: Planning for Learning2015-2016Subject Area ScoringYear#ItemEndorsementUnacceptableEmergentSufficientAdvancedGrand Total2015- 20164Planning for learning:Creates usable lessons and unit plans based on knowledge of the discipline, students, and curricular goalsEarly Childhood Inclusive00.00%00.00%625.00%1875.00%24Early Childhood Education00.00%12.94%823.53%2573.53%34Elementary Education00.00%21.08%5328.65%13070.27%185Secondary Education00.00%22.27%4753.41%3944.32%88Special Education00.00%00.00%2427.91%6272.09%86Response From College of Education & Human Sciences Student Teaching Instrument Teacher Candidate Summative Evaluation for the 2014-2015 Academic Year on the Learning Environment (Item 3).Table 17AItem 3: Instructional Enactment2014-2015Subject Area ScoringYear#ItemEndorsementUnsatisfactoryBasicProficientGrand Total2014- 20153Demonstrates Capacity to implement, modify, and adapt plans that are responsive to students and curricular goalsInclusive Early Childhood Education (CYEC)00.00%15.88%1694.12%17Early Childhood Education00%510.2%4489.8%49Elementary Education00%86.4%11793.6%125Secondary Education 10.8%1210.0%10789.2%120Special Education12.0%510.0%4488.0%50 Response From College of Education & Human Sciences Student Teaching Instrument Teacher Candidate Summative Evaluation on Planning for Learning for the 2015-2016 Academic Year on Responsive Teaching (Item 5—Table 17B)—LIVETEXT version.Table 17BItem 5: Responsive Teaching2015-2016Subject Area ScoringYear#ItemEndorsementUnacceptableEmergentSufficientAdvancedGrand Total2015- 20165Responsive Teaching:Skillfully implements lessons that are flexible and intentional to meet individual student needsEarly Childhood Inclusive00.00%00.00%729.17%1770.83%24Early Childhood Education00.00%00.00%926.47%2573.53%34Elementary Education00.00%21.08%5831.35%12567.57%185Secondary Education00.00%66.90%3843.68%4349.43%87Special Education00.00%11.16%2427.91%6170.93%86Response From College of Education & Human Sciences Student Teaching Instrument Teacher Candidate Summative Evaluation for the 2014-2015 Academic Year on the Learning Environment (Item 6—Table 18A).Table 18AItem 6: Learning Environment2014-2015Subject Area ScoringYear#ItemEndorsementUnsatisfactoryBasicProficientGrand Total2014- 20156Learning Environment. Demonstrates capacity to create classroom communities that invite students’ engagement and learning, encourages positive social interaction and self-motivation.Inclusive Early Childhood Education (CYEC)00.00%00.00%17100.00%17Early Childhood Education00%12.0%4898.0%49Elementary Education00%97.2%11692.8%125Secondary Education 00.0%1210.0%10890.0%120Special Education00%510.0%4590.0%50Response From College of Education & Human Sciences Student Teaching Instrument Teacher Candidate Summative Evaluation on Planning for Learning for the 2015-2016 Academic Year on Learning Culture (Item 10—Table 18B)—LIVETEXT version.Table 18B—Item 10: Learning Culture2015-2016Subject Area ScoringYear#ItemEndorsementUnacceptableEmergentSufficientAdvancedGrand Total2015- 201610Learning Culture:Creates classroom communities that invite student engagement and learning and encourage positive social interactions.Early Childhood Inclusive00.00%14.17%729.17%1666.67%24Early Childhood Education00.00%12.94%1132.35%2264.71%34Elementary Education00.00%10.55%5128.18%12971.27%181Secondary Education00.00%00.00%3945.35%4754.65%86Special Education00.00%11.20%1922.89%6375.90%83Responses From First Year Administrator Survey: Items Related to Planning for Instruction (Standards 7.1, 7.2, and 7.3) and Instructional Strategies (Standards 8.1, 8.2, and 8.3)Table 19Standards 7.1, 7.2, and 7.3: Planning for InstructionIndicator Endorsement Rare Occasional Frequent Consistent Grand Information Total7.1 The teacher plans instruction that supports every student in meeting rigorous learning goals.2014-2015Early Childhood Inclusive 00.00%116.67%116.67%466.67%6Early Childhood?0.00%114.29%228.57%457.14%7Elementary?0.00%58.06%2438.71%3353.23%62Middle Grades?0.00%?0.00%125.00%375.00%4Content (Subject Area) Endorsements?0.00%46.78%2237.29%3355.93%59Special Education15.88%423.53%635.29%635.29%17?Total10.67%149.40%5536.91%7953.02%1492015-2016RareOccasionalFrequentConsistentTotalEarly Childhood Inclusive00.00%00.00%225.00%675.00%8Early Childhood?0.00%?0.00%10.00%30.00%4Elementary11.89%47.55%2445.28%2445.28%53Middle Grades?0.00%?0.00%1100.00%?0.00%1Content (Subject Area) Endorsements?0.00%57.25%3347.83%3144.93%69Special Education?0.00%15.00%1050.00%945.00%20?Total10.68%106.80%6946.94%6745.58%1477.2 The teacher candidate draws upon knowledge of content areas, curriculum, cross-disciplinary skills, technology, and pedagogy.2014-2015RareOccasionalFrequentConsistentTotalEarly Childhood Inclusive 00.00%116.67%350.00%233.33%6Early Childhood?0.00%114.29%342.86%342.86%7Elementary?0.00%58.06%2337.10%3454.84%62Middle Grades?0.00%125.00%125.00%250.00%4Content (Subject Area) Endorsements?0.00%46.78%2338.98%3254.24%59Special Education15.88%317.65%423.53%952.94%17?Total10.67%149.40%5436.24%8053.69%1492015-2016RareOccasionalFrequentConsistentTotalEarly Childhood Inclusive00.00%10.00%225.00%562.50%8Early Childhood?0.00%?0.00%20.00%20.00%4Elementary23.77%35.66%2750.94%2139.62%53Middle Grades?0.00%?0.00%1100.00%?0.00%1Content (Subject Area) Endorsements?0.00%68.70%2942.03%3449.28%Special Education?0.00%15.00%1155.00%840.00%20?Total21.36%106.80%7047.62%6544.22%1477.3 The teacher draws upon knowledge of students and the community context.2014-2015RareOccasionalFrequentConsistentTotalEarly Childhood Inclusive 00.00%00.00%350.00%350.00%6Early Childhood?0.00%?0.00%457.14%342.86%7Elementary?0.00%46.45%2337.10%3556.45%62Middle Grades?0.00%125.00%125.00%250.00%4Content (Subject Area) Endorsements11.69%46.78%2440.68%3050.85%59Special Education15.88%423.53%317.65%952.94%17?Total21.34%138.72%5536.91%7953.02%1492015-2016RareOccasionalFrequentConsistentTotalEarly Childhood Inclusive00.00%10.00%225.00%562.50%8Early Childhood?0.00%?0.00%20.00%20.00%4Elementary11.89%611.32%2241.51%2445.28%53Middle Grades?0.00%?0.00%1100.00%?0.00%1Content (Subject Area) Endorsements?0.00%811.59%2637.68%3550.72%69Special Education?0.00%15.00%1050.00%945.00%20?Total10.68%1510.20%6141.50%7047.62%147Table 20Standard 8.1, 8.2, and 8.3: Instructional StrategiesIndicator Endorsement Rare Occasional Frequent Consistent Grand Information Total8.1 The teacher understands a variety of instructional strategies.2014-2015Early Childhood Inclusive 00.00%116.67%233.33%350.00%6Early Childhood?0.00%114.29%228.57%457.14%7Elementary?0.00%711.29%1829.03%3759.68%62Middle Grades?0.00%?0.00%125.00%375.00%4Content (Subject Area) Endorsements?0.00%610.00%1931.67%3558.33%60Special Education15.88%211.76%529.41%952.94%17?Total10.67%1610.67%4530.00%8858.67%1502015-2016RareOccasionalFrequentConsistentTotalEarly Childhood Inclusive00.00%00.00%337.50%562.50%8Early Childhood?0.00%?0.00%20.00%20.00%4Elementary23.85%11.92%2038.46%2955.77%52Middle Grades?0.00%?0.00%1100.00%?0.00%1Content (Subject Area) Endorsements?0.00%57.35%2739.71%3652.94%68Special Education?0.00%15.00%840.00%1155.00%20?Total21.38%74.83%5840.00%7853.79%1458.2 The teacher uses a variety of instructional strategies to encourage students to develop deep understanding of content areas and their connection and to build skills to apply knowledge in meaningful ways.2014-2015RareOccasionalFrequentConsistentTotalEarly Childhood Inclusive 00.00%116.67%233.33%350.00%6Early Childhood?0.00%114.29%228.57%457.14%7Elementary?0.00%711.29%2438.71%3150.00%62Middle Grades?0.00%125.00%?0.00%375.00%4Content (Subject Area) Endorsements?0.00%711.67%2338.33%3050.00%60Special Education15.88%211.76%529.41%952.94%17?Total10.67%1812.00%5436.00%7751.33%1502015-2016RareOccasionalFrequentConsistentTotalEarly Childhood Inclusive00.00%10.00%225.00%562.50%8Early Childhood?0.00%?0.00%20.00%20.00%4Elementary11.92%35.77%2140.38%2751.92%52Middle Grades?0.00%?0.00%1100.00%?0.00%1Content (Subject Area) Endorsements?0.00%811.76%2536.76%3551.47%68Special Education?0.00%15.00%945.00%1050.00%20?Total10.69%128.28%5840.00%7451.03%1458.3 The teacher utilizes available technology for instruction and assessment.2014-2015RareOccasionalFrequentConsistentTotalEarly Childhood Inclusive 00.00%00.00%466.67%233.33%6Early Childhood?0.00%?0.00%571.43%228.57%7Elementary?0.00%46.45%2337.10%3556.45%62Middle Grades?0.00%?0.00%375.00%125.00%4Content (Subject Area) Endorsements11.67%46.67%1728.33%3863.33%60Special Education?0.00%423.53%635.29%741.18%17?Total10.67%128.00%5436.00%8355.33%1502015-2016RareOccasionalFrequentConsistentTotalEarly Childhood Inclusive00.00%10.00%112.50%675.00%8Early Childhood?0.00%?0.00%10.00%30.00%4Elementary11.92%47.69%1936.54%2853.85%52Middle Grades?0.00%?0.00%1100.00%?0.00%1Content (Subject Area) Endorsements?0.00%811.94%2435.82%3552.24%67Special Education?0.00%210.00%945.00%945.00%20?Total10.69%149.72%5437.50%7552.08%144Responses From First Year Candidate Survey: Items Related to Creating Effective Instructional Plans (Item 7), Working Effectively as Part of an Instructional Planning Team (Item 8), Classroom Management (Item 9), Instruction Requires Problem Solving or Critical Thinking Skills (Item 16), Instruction is Adapted to the Needs of Learners with Special Needs (Item 17), and Use of Multiple Methods to Teach (Item 20).Table 21Item 7: Create Effective Instructional Plans Year#ItemEndorsementStrongly DisagreeDisagreeNeither Agree nor DisagreeAgreeStrongly AgreeGrand Total2014 - 20157I create effective instructional plans.Inclusive Early Childhood Education (CYEC)00.00%00.00%00.00%571.43%228.57%7Early Childhood Education00%00%00%866.7%433.3%12Elementary Education00%00%36.1%2653.1%2040.8%49Secondary Education 00%12.1%48.3%2756.3%1633.3%48Special Education00%14.8%14.8%1361.9%628.6%212015-20167I create effective new lesson plansCYEC00.00%00.00%00.00%133.33%266.67%3Early Childhood Education00.00%00.00%112.50%337.50%450.00%8Elementary Education00.00%12.00%714.00%2856.00%1428.00%50Secondary Education11.61%23.23%69.68%3759.68%1625.81%62Special Education00.00%29.09%313.64%1254.55%522.73%22Table 22Item 8: Work Effectively as a Part of an Instructional TeamYear#ItemEndorsementStrongly DisagreeDisagreeNeither Agree nor DisagreeAgreeStrongly AgreeGrand Total2014 - 20158I work effectively as part of an instructional planning team.Inclusive Early Childhood Education (CYEC)00.00%00.00%114.29%342.86%342.86%7Early Childhood Education00%00%18.3%433.3%758.3%12Elementary Education00%24.1%36.1%2040.8%2449.0%49Secondary Education 00%12.0%1020.4%2346.9%1530.6%49Special Education00%14.8%14.8%942.9%1047.6%212015-20168I work effectively as part of an instructional teamCYEC00.00%00.00%00.00%133.33%266.67%3Early Childhood Education00.00%00.00%112.50%225.00%562.50%8Elementary Education00.00%36.00%24.00%2346.00%2244.00%50Secondary Education00.00%11.61%914.52%2743.55%2540.32%62Special Education00.00%14.55%418.18%940.91%836.36%22Table 23Item 9: Manages Classroom ManagementYear#ItemEndorsementStrongly DisagreeDisagreeNeither Agree nor DisagreeAgreeStrongly AgreeGrand Total2014 - 20159I apply effective methods to manage the classroom environment.Inclusive Early Childhood Education (CYEC)00.00%00.00%00.00%457.14%342.86%7Early Childhood Education00%00%18.3%650.0%541.7%12Elementary Education00%12.0%48.2%2142.9%2346.9%49Secondary Education 12.0%36.1%1122.4%2040.8%1428.6%49Special Education00%00%14.8%733.3%1361.9%212015-20169I apply effective methods to manage the classroom environmentCYEC00.00%00.00%00.00%133.33%266.67%3Early Childhood Education00.00%00.00%112.50%337.50%450.00%8Elementary Education12.00%12.00%816.00%2142.00%1938.00%50Secondary Education11.61%812.90%1524.19%2845.16%1016.13%62Special Education00.00%14.55%313.64%836.36%1045.45%22Table 24Item 16: Instruction Requires Student Problem Solving and/or Critical Thinking SkillsYear#ItemEndorsementStrongly DisagreeDisagreeNeither Agree nor DisagreeAgreeStrongly AgreeGrand Total2014 - 201516My instruction requires student problem solving and/or critical thinking skills.Inclusive Early Childhood Education (CYEC)00.00%00.00%114.29%571.43%114.29%7Early Childhood Education00%00%216.7%650.0%433.3%12Elementary Education00%00%612.2%2755.1%1632.7%49Secondary Education 00%36.1%816.3%2346.9%1530.6%49Special Education00%00%419.0%1152.4%628.6%212015-201616My instruction requires student problem solving and/or critical thinking skillsCYEC00.00%00.00%00.00%133.33%266.67%3Early Childhood Education00.00%00.00%00.00%562.50%337.50%8Elementary Education00.00%12.00%510.00%3060.00%1428.00%50Secondary Education11.61%11.61%812.90%3150.00%2133.87%62Special Education00.00%00.00%29.09%1463.64%627.27%22Table 25Item 17: Adapt Instruction to Meet Needs of Learners With Special NeedsYear#ItemEndorsementStrongly DisagreeDisagreeNeither Agree nor DisagreeAgreeStrongly AgreeGrand Total2014 - 201517I adapt my instruction to the needs of learners with special needs.Inclusive Early Childhood Education (CYEC)00.00%00.00%00.00%457.14%342.86%7Early Childhood Education00%00%18.3%650.0%541.7%12Elementary Education00%12.0%612.2%2244.9%2040.8%49Secondary Education 00%24.1%36.1%2653.1%1836.7%49Special Education00%00%00%838.1%1361.9%212015-201617I adapt my instruction to the needs of learners with special needs.CYEC00.00%00.00%00.00%133.33%266.67%3Early Childhood Education00.00%00.00%112.50%337.50%450.00%8Elementary Education00.00%00.00%816.00%2346.00%1938.00%50Secondary Education00.00%11.61%914.52%3962.90%1320.97%62Special Education00.00%14.55%14.55%940.91%1150.00%22Table 26Item 20: Use Multiple Methods to Teach Year#ItemEndorsementStrongly DisagreeDisagreeNeither Agree nor DisagreeAgreeStrongly AgreeGrand Total2014 - 201520I use multiple methods to teach.Inclusive Early Childhood Education (CYEC)00.00%00.00%228.57%00.00%571.43%7Early Childhood Education00%00%325.0%216.7%758.3%12Elementary Education00%00%612.2%2142.9%2244.9%49Secondary Education 00%00%24.1%2755.1%240.8%49Special Education00%00%419.0%1152.4%628.6%212015-201620I use multiple methods to teachCYEC00.00%00.00%00.00%133.33%266.67%3Early Childhood Education00.00%00.00%00.00%337.50%562.50%8Elementary Education00.00%12.00%48.00%2550.00%2040.00%50Secondary Education00.00%11.61%46.45%3658.06%2133.87%62Special Education00.00%14.55%14.55%940.91%1150.00%22Narrative:Data from three different sources (i.e., summative evaluation of teacher candidates, administrator evaluation of first-year teachers, and self-evaluation of first-year teachers) are presented in this section in terms of the teacher candidates’ ability to effectively plan, implement, and adapt curriculum and lessons, effectively use various instructional strategies, work collaboratively in a team, and effectively use technology in instruction and assessment.Early Childhood Inclusive (Inclusive Early Childhood Education; IECE; CYEC): According to the summative evaluation, teacher candidates have frequently and consistently shown their ability to effectively plan, implement, and adapt their lesson and unit plans, and there was an increase in the percent of teacher candidates across the 2 years (94% in 2014-2015 to 100% in 2015-2016). The administrator survey also indicated the increase in first-year teachers’ ability to plan and individualize their lessons in the classroom (84% in 2014-2015 to 100% in 2015-2016). Self-report of first-year teachers showed an increase in their perceived ability to promote higher-level thinking in students (86% in 2014-2015 to 100% in 2015-2016) and use various instructional strategies (72% in 2014-2015 to 100% in 2015-2016). All first-year teachers expressed their confidence in using inclusive practice and strategies and in using multiple and various methods of teaching students (100% in both years).5. Instructional Practices—Assessment That Demonstrates Effects or Impact on P-12 Student LearningResponse from College of Education & Human Sciences Student Teaching Instrument Teacher Candidate Summative Evaluation for the 2014-2015 Academic Year on Planning for Learning (Item 2—Table 27A).Table 27AItem 5: Planning for Learning2014-2015Subject Area ScoringYear#ItemEndorsementUnsatisfactoryBasicProficientGrand Total2014- 20152Demonstrates capacity to create useable lesson and unit plans that are based upon knowledge of the discipline, students, and curricular goalsInclusive Early Childhood Education (CYEC)00.00%16.25%1593.75%16Early Childhood Education12.1%612.5%4185.4%48Elementary Education00%54.0%12096.0%54Secondary Education 00%2117.5%9982.5%120Special Education12.0%714.0%4284.0%50Response From College of Education & Human Sciences Student Teaching Instrument Teacher Candidate Summative Evaluation on Planning for Learning for 2015-2016 Academic Year on Planning for Learning (Item 4—Table 27B). LIVETEXT version.Table 27B Item 4: Planning for Learning2015-2016Subject Area ScoringYear#ItemEndorsementUnacceptableEmergentSufficientAdvancedGrand Total2015- 20164Planning for learning:Creates usable lessons and unit plans based on knowledge of the discipline, students, and curricular goalsEarly Childhood Inclusive00.00%00.00%625.00%1875.00%24Early Childhood Education00.00%12.94%823.53%2573.53%34Elementary Education00.00%21.08%5328.65%13070.27%185Secondary Education00.00%22.27%4753.41%3944.32%88Special Education00.00%00.00%2427.91%6272.09%86Response from College of Education & Human Sciences Student Teaching Instrument Teacher Candidate Summative Evaluation for the 2014-2015 Academic Year on Instructional Enactment (Item 3—Table 28A).Table 28AItem 3: Instructional Enactment2014-2015Subject Area ScoringYear#ItemEndorsementUnsatisfactoryBasicProficientGrand Total2014- 20153Demonstrates Capacity to implement, modify, and adapt plans that are responsive to students and curricular goalsInclusive Early Childhood Education (CYEC)00.00%15.88%1694.12%17Early Childhood Education00%510.2%4489.8%49Elementary Education00%86.4%11793.6%125Secondary Education 10.8%1210.0%10789.2%120Special Education12.0%510.0%4488.0%50Response from College of Education & Human Sciences Student Teaching Instrument Teacher Candidate Summative Evaluation on Planning for Learning for 2015-2016 Academic Year on Responsive Teaching (Item 5—Table 28B)—LIVETEXT version.Table 28BItem 5: Responsive Teaching2015-2016Subject Area ScoringYear#ItemEndorsementUnacceptableEmergentSufficientAdvancedGrand Total2015- 20165Responsive Teaching:Skillfully implements lessons that are flexible and intentional to meet individual student needsEarly Childhood Inclusive00.00%00.00%729.17%1770.83%24Early Childhood Education00.00%00.00%926.47%2573.53%34Elementary Education00.00%21.08%5831.35%12567.57%185Secondary Education00.00%66.90%3843.68%4349.43%87Special Education00.00%11.16%2427.91%6170.93%86Response From College of Education & Human Sciences Student Teaching Instrument Teacher Candidate Summative Evaluation for the 2014-2015 Academic Year on Classroom Interaction Qith Students (Item 5—Table 29A).Table 29AItem 5: Classroom Interaction With Students2014-2015Subject Area ScoringYear#ItemEndorsementUnsatisfactoryBasicProficientGrand Total2014- 20155Demonstrates a capacity to interact with learners in supportive and constructive ways.Inclusive Early Childhood Education (CYEC)00.00%15.88%1694.12%17Early Childhood Education00%12.0%4898.0%49Elementary Education00%21.6%12398.4%125Secondary Education 00%86.7%11293.3%120Special Education00%12.0%4998.0%50Response From College of Education & Human Sciences Student Teaching Instrument Teacher Candidate Summative Evaluation on Planning for Learning for the 2015-2016 Academic Year on Relationships with Students (Item 7—Table 29B)—LIVETEXT version.Table 29BItem 7: Relationships With Students2015-2016Subject Area ScoringYear#ItemEndorsementUnacceptableEmergentSufficientAdvancedGrand Total2015- 20167Relationships with Students: Develops and Maintains rapport with individual and groups of studentsEarly Childhood Inclusive00.00%00.00%312.50%2187.50%24Early Childhood Education00.00%00.00%411.76%3088.24%34Elementary Education00.00%10.54%2714.59%15784.86%185Secondary Education00.00%44.55%2528.41%5967.05%88Special Education00.00%11.16%89.30%7789.53%86Responses From First Year Administrator Survey on Assessment (Items 6.1 and 6.2)Table 30Standard 6.1 and 6.2: AssessmentIndicator Endorsement Rare Occasional Frequent Consistent Grand Information Total6.1 The teacher understands multiple methods of assessment2014-2015Early Childhood Inclusive 00.00%00.00%350.00%350.00%6Early Childhood?0.00%?0.00%457.14%342.86%7Elementary?0.00%58.06%2641.94%3150.00%62Middle Grades?0.00%125.00%?0.00%375.00%4Content (Subject Area) Endorsements11.67%813.33%2440.00%2745.00%60Special Education15.88%211.76%529.41%952.94%17?Total21.33%1610.67%5939.33%7348.67%1502015-2016RareOccasionalFrequentConsistentTotalEarly Childhood Inclusive00.00%00.00%225.00%675.00%8Early Childhood?0.00%?0.00%10.00%30.00%4Elementary11.89%611.32%2343.40%2343.40%53Middle Grades?0.00%?0.00%1100.00%?0.00%1Content (Subject Area) Endorsements?0.00%710.29%2942.65%3247.06%68Special Education?0.00%315.00%945.00%840.00%20?Total10.68%1610.96%6343.15%6645.21%1466.2 The teacher uses multiple methods of assessment to engage students in their own growth, to monitor student progress, and to guide the teacher candidate’s and student’s decision making.2014-2015RareOccasionalFrequentConsistentTotalEarly Childhood Inclusive 00.00%00.00%350.00%350.00%6Early Childhood?0.00%?0.00%457.14%342.86%7Elementary?0.00%46.45%2743.55%3150.00%62Middle Grades?0.00%125.00%125.00%250.00%4Content (Subject Area) Endorsements11.67%813.33%3050.00%2135.00%60Special Education15.88%317.65%529.41%847.06%17?Total21.33%1610.67%6744.67%6543.33%1502015-2016RareOccasionalFrequentConsistentTotalEarly Childhood Inclusive00.00%10.00%225.00%562.50%8Early Childhood?0.00%?0.00%20.00%20.00%4Elementary11.89%916.98%2547.17%1833.96%53Middle Grades?0.00%?0.00%1100.00%?0.00%1Content (Subject Area) Endorsements?0.00%811.76%2435.29%3652.94%68Special Education?0.00%210.00%1050.00%840.00%20?Total10.68%1913.01%6242.47%6443.84%146Responses From First Year Candidate Survey: Items Related to Assessment: Create Effective Assessments to Measure Learning (Item 10).Table 31 Standard 10: Creates Effective Assessments to Measure LearningYear#ItemEndorsementStrongly DisagreeDisagreeNeither Agree nor DisagreeAgreeStrongly AgreeGrand Total2014 - 201510I create effective assessments to measure learning.Inclusive Early Childhood Education (CYEC)00.00%114.29%114.29%457.14%114.29%7Early Childhood Education18.3%216.7%216.7%541.7%216.7%12Elementary Education00%36.1%48.2%3367.3%918.4%49Secondary Education 00%12.0%816.3%3367.3%714.3%49Special Education00%419.0%29.5%1152.4%419.0%212015-201610I create effective assessments to measure learningCYEC00.00%00.00%00.00%133.33%266.67%3Early Childhood Education00.00%00.00%00.00%450.00%450.00%8Elementary Education00.00%24.08%510.20%2959.18%1326.53%49Secondary Education00.00%23.23%1016.13%3759.68%1320.97%62Special Education00.00%00.00%29.09%1568.18%522.73%22Narrative:Data from three different sources (i.e., summative evaluation of teacher candidates, administrator evaluation of first-year teachers, and self-evaluation of first-year teachers) are presented in this section in terms of the teacher candidates’ ability to effectively plan, implement, and adapt curriculum and lessons, use multiple methods to engage students, understand and effectively implement multiple methods of assessment, and use assessment data to inform practice.Early Childhood Inclusive (Inclusive Early Childhood Education; IECE; CYEC): According to the administrator evaluation, first-year teachers have frequently or consistently shown their understanding of multiple methods of assessment in both years (100%). The summative evaluation of teacher candidates showed an increased percent of teacher candidates exhibiting their ability to effectively plan, implement, and adapt lessons (94% in 2014-215 to 100% in 2015-2016) and use multiple methods to engage student (94% in 2014-2015 to 100% in 2015-2016). There was a greater increase in the percentage of first-year teachers who expressed confidence in conducting effective assessments (72% in 2014-2015 to 100% in 2015-2016).6. Professional ResponsibilityResponse From College of Education & Human Sciences Student Teaching Instrument Teacher Candidate Summative Evaluation for the 2014-2015 Academic Year on Collaborative Relationships (Item 12—Table 32A).Table 32AItem 12: Collaborative Relationships and Professional Conduct2014-2015Subject Area ScoringYear#ItemEndorsementUnsatisfactoryBasicProficientGrand Total2014- 201512Collaborative Relations and Professional Conduct. Demonstrates a capacity to work with other practitioners to improve teaching for the benefit of students’ learning. Inclusive Early Childhood Education (CYEC)00.00%00.00%17100.00%17Early Childhood Education00%24.1%4795.9%49Elementary Education00%86.4%11793.6%125Secondary Education 00%1310.8%10789.2%120Special Education00%510.0%4590.0%50 Response From College of Education & Human Sciences Student Teaching Instrument Teacher Candidate Summative Evaluation on Planning for Learning for 2015-2016 Academic Year on Collaborative Relations and Professional Conduct (Item 13–Table 32B). LIVETEXT version.Table 32BItem 13: Collaborative Relations and Professional Conduct2015-2016Subject Area ScoringYear#ItemEndorsementUnacceptableEmergentSufficientAdvancedGrand Total2015- 201613Collaborative Relations and Professional Conduct:Uses effective communication and consultation techniques with other professionals and families for the benefit of student learningEarly Childhood Inclusive00.00%00.00%937.50%1562.50%24Early Childhood Education00.00%00.00%1338.24%2161.76%34Elementary Education00.00%10.54%6635.68%11863.78%185Secondary Education00.00%22.30%5664.37%2933.33%87Special Education00.00%11.16%2832.56%5766.28%86Response From College of Education & Human Sciences Student Teaching Instrument Teacher Candidate Summative Evaluation Relationships for the 2014-2015 Academic Year on Reflection and Professional Growth (Item 14—Table 33A).Table 33AItem 14: Reflection and Professional Growth2014-2015Subject Area ScoringYear#ItemEndorsementUnsatisfactoryBasicProficientGrand Total2014- 201514Reflection and Professional Growth. Demonstrates capacity to continually evaluate how choices and actions affect students and others in the learning community and actively seeks opportunities to grow professionally. Inclusive Early Childhood Education (CYEC)00.00%211.76%1588.24%17Early Childhood Education00%36.1%4693.9%49Elementary Education00%97.2%11692.8%125Secondary Education 00%97.5%11192.5%120Special Education00%510.0%4590.0%50Response From College of Education & Human Sciences Student Teaching Instrument Teacher Candidate Summative Evaluation for the 2015-2016 Academic Year—Reflective Practices and Professional Growth (Item 14—Table 33B)—LIVETEXT version.Table 33BItem 14: Reflective Practices and Professional Growth2015-2016Subject Area ScoringYear#ItemEndorsementUnacceptableEmergentSufficientAdvancedGrand Total2015- 201614Reflective Practices and Professional Growth:Continually evaluates how choices and actions affects students and others in the learning community, makes necessary adjustments and actively seeks opportunities to grow professionallyEarly Childhood Inclusive00.00%00.00%1250.00%1250.00%24Early Childhood Education00.00%00.00%1647.06%1852.94%34Elementary Education10.54%10.54%6635.68%11763.24%185Secondary Education00.00%56.25%4758.75%2835.00%80Special Education11.16%00.00%3136.05%5462.79%86Responses From First Year Administrator Survey: Items Related to Professional Learning and Ethical Practice (Standards 9.1, 9.2, 9.3, and 9.4) and Leadership and Collaboration (Standards 10.1 and 10.2)Table 34Standards 9.1, 9.2, 9.3, and 9.4: Professional Learning and Ethical PracticeIndicator Endorsement Rare Occasional Frequent Consistent Grand Information Total9.1 The teacher engages in ongoing professional learning. 2014-2015Early Childhood Inclusive 00.00%00.00%350.00%350.00%6Early Childhood?0.00%?0.00%342.86%457.14%7Elementary?0.00%914.52%1219.35%4166.13%62Middle Grades?0.00%125.00%?0.00%375.00%4Content (Subject Area) Endorsements?0.00%23.33%1830.00%4066.67%60Special Education15.88%211.76%317.65%1164.71%17?Total10.67%149.33%3624.00%9966.00%1502015-2016RareOccasionalFrequentConsistentTotalEarly Childhood Inclusive00.00%00.00%337.50%562.50%8Early Childhood?0.00%?0.00%20.00%20.00%4Elementary11.89%47.55%1222.64%3667.92%53Middle Grades?0.00%?0.00%1100.00%?0.00%1Content (Subject Area) Endorsements?0.00%22.90%2536.23%4260.87%69Special Education?0.00%420.00%420.00%1260.00%20?Total10.68%106.80%4429.93%9262.59%1479.2 The teacher models ethical professional practice.2014-2015RareOccasionalFrequentConsistentTotalEarly Childhood Inclusive 00.00%00.00%233.33%466.67%6Early Childhood?0.00%?0.00%228.57%571.43%7Elementary?0.00%46.45%1016.13%4877.42%62Middle Grades?0.00%?0.00%125.00%375.00%4Content (Subject Area) Endorsements?0.00%23.33%1423.33%4473.33%60Special Education?0.00%15.88%423.53%1270.59%17?Total?0.00%74.67%3120.67%11274.67%1502015-2016RareOccasionalFrequentConsistentTotalEarly Childhood Inclusive00.00%00.00%112.50%787.50%8Early Childhood?0.00%?0.00%?0.00%40.00%4Elementary11.89%?0.00%1426.42%3871.70%53Middle Grades?0.00%?0.00%1100.00%?0.00%1Special Education?0.00%15.00%525.00%1470.00%20Content (Subject Area) Endorsements?0.00%11.45%811.59%6086.96%69?Total10.68%21.36%2819.05%11678.91%1479.3 The teacher uses evidence to continually evaluate his/her practice, particularly the effects of his/her choices and actions on others (students, families, other professionals, and the community), and adapts practice to meet the needs of each student.2014-2015RareOccasionalFrequentConsistentTotalEarly Childhood Inclusive 00.00%00.00%350.00%350.00%6Early Childhood?0.00%?0.00%342.86%457.14%7Elementary11.61%?0.00%2845.16%3353.23%62Middle Grades?0.00%125.00%125.00%250.00%4Content (Subject Area) Endorsements?0.00%11.67%2643.33%3355.00%60Special Education?0.00%317.65%423.53%1058.82%17?Total10.67%53.33%6241.33%8254.67%1502015-2016RareOccasionalFrequentConsistentTotalEarly Childhood Inclusive00.00%10.00%112.50%675.00%8Early Childhood?0.00%?0.00%10.00%30.00%4Elementary11.89%35.66%1935.85%3056.60%53Middle Grades?0.00%1100.00%?0.00%?0.00%1Content (Subject Area) Endorsements?0.00%45.80%2739.13%3855.07%69Special Education?0.00%15.26%842.11%1052.63%19?Total10.68%96.16%5537.67%8155.48%1469.4 The teacher models professional dispositions for teaching.2014-2015RareOccasionalFrequentConsistentTotalEarly Childhood Inclusive 00.00%00.00%233.33%466.67%6Early Childhood?0.00%?0.00%228.57%571.43%7Elementary11.61%23.23%1524.19%4470.97%62Middle Grades?0.00%?0.00%250.00%250.00%4Content (Subject Area) Endorsements?0.00%46.78%1525.42%4067.80%59Special Education?0.00%211.76%423.53%1164.71%17?Total10.67%85.37%3825.50%10268.46%1492015-2016RareOccasionalFrequentConsistentTotalEarly Childhood Inclusive00.00%00.00%112.50%787.50%8Early Childhood?0.00%?0.00%?0.00%40.00%4Elementary11.89%23.77%1833.96%3260.38%53Middle Grades?0.00%?0.00%1100.00%?0.00%1Content (Subject Area) Endorsements?0.00%11.45%1420.29%5478.26%69Special Education?0.00%15.00%735.00%1260.00%20?Total10.68%42.72%4027.21%10269.39%147Table 35Standards 10.1 and 10.2: Leadership and CollaborationIndicator Endorsement Rare Occasional Frequent Consistent Grand Information TotalEarly Childhood Inclusive 00.00%00.00%350.00%350.00%6Early Childhood?0.00%?0.00%342.86%457.14%7Elementary?0.00%58.06%1930.65%3861.29%62Middle Grades?0.00%133.33%?0.00%266.67%3Content (Subject Area) Endorsements?0.00%46.78%1728.81%3864.41%59Special Education?0.00%317.65%529.41%952.94%17?Total?0.00%138.78%4429.73%9161.49%1482015-2016RareOccasionalFrequentConsistentTotalEarly Childhood Inclusive00.00%00.00%225.00%675.00%8Early Childhood?0.00%?0.00%10.00%30.00%4Elementary11.89%611.32%1732.08%2954.72%53Middle Grades?0.00%?0.00%1100.00%?0.00%1Content (Subject Area) Endorsements?0.00%11.45%2536.23%4362.32%69Special Education?0.00%210.00%525.00%1365.00%20?Total10.68%96.12%4933.33%8859.86%14710.2 The teacher seeks opportunities, including appropriate technology, to collaborate with students, families, colleagues, and other school professionals, and community members to ensure student growth2014-2015RareOccasionalFrequentConsistentTotalEarly Childhood Inclusive 00.00%00.00%466.67%233.33%6Early Childhood?0.00%?0.00%457.14%342.86%7Elementary?0.00%34.92%2540.98%3354.10%61Middle Grades?0.00%133.33%133.33%133.33%3Content (Subject Area) Endorsements11.72%23.45%2339.66%3255.17%58Special Education?0.00%317.65%529.41%952.94%17?Total10.68%96.16%5839.73%7853.42%1462015-2016RareOccasionalFrequentConsistentTotalEarly Childhood Inclusive00.00%00.00%450.00%450.00%8Early Childhood?0.00%?0.00%30.00%10.00%4Elementary11.89%611.32%1732.08%2954.72%53Middle Grades?0.00%?0.00%1100.00%?0.00%1Content (Subject Area) Endorsements?0.00%45.80%2231.88%4362.32%69Special Education?0.00%420.00%315.00%1365.00%20?Total10.68%149.52%4631.29%8658.50%147Responses From First Year Candidate Survey: Items Related to Professional Responsibility: Works Effectively With Parents (Item 12) and Takes Advantage of Opportunities to Grow Professionally (Item 15).Table 36Item 12: Works Effectively with ParentsYear#ItemEndorsementStrongly DisagreeDisagreeNeither Agree nor DisagreeAgreeStrongly AgreeGrand Total2014 - 201512I work effectively with parentsInclusive Early Childhood Education (CYEC)00.00%00.00%00.00%571.43%228.57%7Early Childhood Education00%00%18.3%866.7%325.0%12Elementary Education00%00%24.1%2449.0%2346.9%49Secondary Education 12.0%36.1%918.4%1530.6%2142.6%49Special Education00%00%00%1152.4%1047.6%212015-201612I work effectively with parentsCYEC00.00%00.00%00.00%133.33%266.67%3Early Childhood Education00.00%00.00%00.00%450.00%450.00%8Elementary Education00.00%24.00%612.00%3060.00%1224.00%50Secondary Education11.64%23.28%1524.59%3354.10%1016.39%61Special Education00.00%00.00%29.09%1568.18%522.73%22Table 37Item 15: Takes Advantage of Opportunities to Grow ProfessionallyYear#ItemEndorsementStrongly DisagreeDisagreeNeither Agree nor DisagreeAgreeStrongly AgreeGrand Total2014 - 201515I take advantage of opportunities to grow professionally.Inclusive Early Childhood Education (CYEC)00.00%00.00%00.00%457.14%342.86%7Early Childhood Education00%00%18.3%541.7%650.0%12Elementary Education00%00%24.1%2142.9%2653.1%49Secondary Education 00%00%24.1%2142.9%2653.1%49Special Education00%00%29.5%838.1%1152.4%212015-201615I take advantage of opportunities to grow professionallyCYEC00.00%00.00%00.00%00.00%3100.00%3Early Childhood Education00.00%00.00%112.50%337.50%450.00%8Elementary Education00.00%12.00%12.00%3060.00%1836.00%50Secondary Education00.00%00.00%711.29%3251.61%2337.10%62Special Education00.00%00.00%14.55%1463.64%731.82%22Narrative:Data from three different sources (i.e., summative evaluation of teacher candidates, administrator evaluation of first-year teachers, and self-evaluation of first-year teachers) are presented in this section in terms of the teacher candidates’ professional and ethical conduct, collaborative relationships with colleagues and parents, and reflection and professional growth.Early Childhood Inclusive (Inclusive Early Childhood Education; IECE; CYEC): Data from all three sources indicated that all teacher candidates and first-year teachers have shown a proficient level of professional conduct and collaborative relationships with colleagues and parents in both years. According to the summative evaluation of teacher candidates, an increased percent of teacher candidates demonstrated capacity to continually evaluate how choices and actions affected students and others in the learning community and actively sought opportunities to grow professionally (88% in 2014-2015 to 100% in 2015-2016).7. Overall ProficiencyResponse to Administrative Survey: Items on Impact of Student Learning and Development (Standard 11.1).Table 38 Standard 11.1: Impact of Student Learning and DevelopmentIndicator Endorsement Rare Occasional Frequent Consistent Grand Information Total11.1 The teacher positively impacts the learning and development for all students2014-2015Early Childhood Inclusive 00.00%116.67%116.67%466.67%6Early Childhood?0.00%114.29%114.29%571.43%7Elementary?0.00%23.23%1829.03%4267.74%62Middle Grades?0.00%?0.00%250.00%250.00%4Content (Subject Area) Endorsements?0.00%23.33%1626.67%4270.00%60Special Education?0.00%317.65%423.53%1058.82%17?Total?0.00%85.33%4127.33%10167.33%1502015-2016RareOccasionalFrequentConsistentTotalEarly Childhood Inclusive00.00%00.00%225.00%675.00%8Early Childhood?0.00%?0.00%10.00%30.00%4Elementary11.89%47.55%1833.96%3056.60%53Middle Grades?0.00%?0.00%1100.00%?0.00%1Content (Subject Area) Endorsements?0.00%22.90%1927.54%4869.57%69Special Education?0.00%15.00%315.00%1680.00%20?Total10.68%74.76%4228.57%9765.99%147Responses From First Year Candidate Survey: Items Related to Overall Proficiency: I Am an Excellent Teacher (Item 23).Table 39Item 23: I Am an Excellent TeacherYear#ItemEndorsementStrongly DisagreeDisagreeNeither Agree nor DisagreeAgreeStrongly AgreeGrand Total2014 - 201523I am an excellent teacher.Inclusive Early Childhood Education (CYEC)00.00%00.00%228.57%342.86%228.57%7Early Childhood Education00%00%216.7%866.7%216.7%12Elementary Education12.0%24.1%1122.4%2755.1%816.3%49Secondary Education 00%36.1%918.4%2857.1%918.4%49Special Education00%29.5%523.8%1152.4%314.3%212015-201623I am an excellent teacherCYEC00.00%00.00%00.00%133.33%266.67%3Early Childhood Education00.00%00.00%112.50%225.00%562.50%8Elementary Education00.00%36.00%714.00%2958.00%1122.00%50Secondary Education11.61%46.45%1930.65%3556.45%34.84%62Special Education00.00%29.09%418.18%940.91%731.82%22Narrative:Data are taken from the Administrator evaluation of first-year teachers on Early Childhood Inclusive (Inclusive Early Childhood Education; IECE; CYEC) program completers and from the First-Year Candidate Survey. Administrators indicated an increased percent of first-year teachers positively impacting students’ development and learning across the 2 years (83% in 2014-2015 to 100% in 2015-2016). An increased percent of first-year teachers considered themselves an excellent teacher (71% in 2014-2015 to 100% in 2015-2016).SECTION 3: USE OF RELATED DATA AND INFORMATION FOR CONTINUOUS PROGRAM IMPROVEMENT OF ENDORSEMENT PROGRAM — Artifact 3Provide the 3-5 Page Summary Narrative Here:Early Childhood Inclusive (Inclusive Early Childhood Education; IECE; CYEC)Summary about the program and the quality of program completersOverall the quality of program completers was very high in all aspects of teacher competencies including their understanding of content knowledge, learners and learning environment, instructional strategies and practices, and professional responsibility. Data from three important sources and stakeholders (i.e., summative evaluation of teacher candidates, administrator evaluation of first-year teachers, and self-evaluation of first-year teachers) provide consistent information about our program completers.There was a slight increase in the content knowledge from 2014-2015 to 2015-2016. In general, about 95% of the teacher candidates were evaluated to have a proficient level of content knowledge in 2014-2015, and all teacher candidates exhibited a proficient level of content knowledge in 2015-2016. The administrator evaluation also presents data consistent with summative evaluation. About 85% of the first-year teachers have frequently or consistently shown their understanding of subject matter in 2014-2015 compared with 100% of the first-year teachers in 2015-2016. Self-report of first-year teachers also shows the same change in their perceived confidence with content knowledge.The administrator survey indicated that most first-year teachers have frequently or consistently shown their ability to connect concepts, and all but one engaged students in higher-level thinking related to authentic local and global issues in 2014-2015 and 2015-2016 years. According to self-report, all first-year teachers agreed or strongly agreed that they were teaching subject matter in ways that are meaningful to students.According to the summative evaluation of teacher candidates, an increased percent of teacher candidates showed a proficient level of ability to create and implement lesson and unit plans. All teacher candidates frequently or consistently showed their understanding of child development in both years and showed an increased understanding of developmentally appropriate learning experience that is still challenging. All teacher candidates frequently or consistently showed their understanding of individual differences in students in both years; and there was an increase in the percent of teacher candidates who frequently or consistently implemented effective inclusive practices. The same level of increase was observed in teacher candidates’ ability to support students’ individual and collaborative learning, engage students in learning in a meaningful way, and effectively manage student behavior in the classroom. First-year teachers expressed confidence in positively impacting the learning and development of all students and adapting to developmental differences of learners.According to the summative evaluation, teacher candidates have frequently and consistently shown their ability to effectively plan, implement, and adapt their lesson and unit plans, and there was an increase in the percent of teacher candidates across the two years. The administrator survey also indicated the increase in first-year teachers’ ability to plan and individualize their lessons in the classroom. Self-report of first-year teachers showed an increase in their perceived ability to promote higher level thinking in students and use various instructional strategies. All first-year teachers expressed their confidence in using inclusive practice and strategies and in using multiple and various methods of teaching students.According to the administrator evaluation, first-year teachers have frequently or consistently shown their understanding of multiple methods of assessment in both years. The summative evaluation of teacher candidates showed an increased percent of teacher candidates exhibiting their ability to effectively plan, implement, and adapt lessons and use multiple methods to engage student. There was a greater increase in the percentage of first-year teachers who expressed confidence in conducting effective assessments.Data from all three sources indicated that all teacher candidates and first-year teachers have shown proficient levels of professional conduct and collaborative relationships with colleagues and parents in both years. According to the summative evaluation of teacher candidates, an increased percent of teacher candidates demonstrated capacity to continually evaluate how choices and actions affected students and others in the learning community and actively sought opportunities to grow professionally (88% in 2014-2015 to 100% in 2015-2016).Administrators indicated an increase percent of first-year teachers positively impacting students’ development and learning across the 2 years. An increased percent of first-year teachers considered themselves an excellent teacher.Strengths and weaknessesStrengths: IECE program completers seem to have a sufficient level of content knowledge, and it has increased over the 2 years for which data were included in this folio. Program completers have created and provided a meaningful learning environment to all students and exhibited a better understanding of professional standards. One of the strongest competencies that our program completers show seems to be effective lesson planning. Most completers were rated to have an advanced level of understanding and skills of lesson planning, implementation, and adaptation that required a significant amount of knowledge on child development, effective teaching strategies, adaptation of lessons and strategies for individualization, and planning of effective assessment to inform practice. The program completers have also exhibited their understanding of child development (how learners learn and develop), which must have impacted how they provided developmentally an appropriate learning experience that is still somewhat challenging to individual students. Data showed that they were impacting students in a positive way and using instructional strategies to encourage higher level thinking skills and deep understanding of content, skills, and process of learning. IECE program completers exhibited strength in understanding and using multiple methods of assessment and using assessment data to inform practice. They showed competence in building and maintaining collaborative relationships with colleagues and parents and also in reflecting on their own teaching and learning for further growth as a professional. All administrators expressed that our program completers have shown an excellent level of understanding of professional responsibility and ethical practice.Weaknesses:IECE program completers have shown a lot of high quality teacher characteristics and practices in all aspects of early childhood teaching and learning. Although the ranges of ratings were consistently high in all three sets of data, our IECE teacher education program could make improvements in three areas: (a) training our teacher candidates to help their students connect concepts across disciplines, (b) training them to use technology in instruction more effectively, and (c) training them to work effectively with English Language Learners and their families.Steps to address the weaknessesTraining our teacher candidates to help their students connect concepts across disciplines:The IECE program includes multiple early childhood content-focused courses (e.g., social-emotional development and guidance, inclusive mathematics methods, inclusive literacy methods, reading intervention) as well as age/development-focused courses (e.g., infancy, development of the preschool child, educational program for kindergarten children); and these courses are offered by three different departments (Child, Youth and Family Studies; Special Education and Communication Disorders; Teaching, Learning and Teacher Education). The IECE program committee meets every 3 weeks to discuss ways to integrate and streamline course content and sequence and strategies to help teacher candidates meet professional requirements. We will continue to have this discussion to add more seamless transitions across both content-focused courses and age/development-focused courses and to minimize unnecessary redundancy while maximizing the integrated nature of our program. We have recently eliminated one of the development-focused courses from the program to minimize redundancy but integrated the course content in other courses to help teacher candidates better connect concepts across developmental domains and content areas.Training our teacher candidates to use technology in instruction more effectively:Technology plays a large part of everyday lives of teachers as well as students, and an increasing number of schools and educational settings includes technology as an important tool for instruction and assessment. Our program completers have expressed confidence in using technology in instruction and assessment; however, the IECE program does not have a course or a set of specific and planned content related to technology use in the classroom setting. The IECE faculty have recently initiated a conversation about adding a course or content to our program that focused on effective use of technology with young children and their families. The initial step would be to gather the information regarding if and/or how faculty teaching IECE courses are incorporating technology into their course content. Then we will develop a systemic way to incorporate this content into multiple courses.Training our teacher candidates to work effectively with English Language Learners (ELLs) and their families:This has not come up in the data as a weakness of our program completers partly because the question was not asked specifically about working with ELL population. As the ELL population increases in Nebraska, the IECE program committee think that it is critical to train our teacher candidates to become more competent in working with ELL students and their families. The same steps we will take with technology content would be followed for ELL content. The initial step would be to gather the information regarding if and/or how faculty teaching IECE courses are incorporating the content related to working with ELL students and families into their course content. Then we will develop a systemic way to incorporate this content into multiple courses or require candidates to take a course focused on ELL. ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download