COMPREHENSIVE ASSESSMENT SYSTEM - University of North …



UNIVERSITY OF NORTH ALABAMA

Comprehensive Assessment System

for

Teacher Education

“Engaging Learners, Inspiring Leaders, Transforming Lives”

Updated 2017.08.02

UNIVERSITY OF NORTH ALABAMA

COMPREHENSIVE ASSESSMENT SYSTEM

for

TEACHER EDUCATION

“Engaging Learners, Inspiring Leaders, Transforming Lives”

Table of Contents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . page 1

Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . page 2

Conceptual Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . page 3

Undergraduate Assessment Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . pages 4 – 8

Graduate Assessment Plan. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . pages 8 – 11

Alternative Class A Assessment Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . pages 12 – 16

Overview

The University of North Alabama College of Education and Human Sciences Comprehensive Assessment System is based on and linked to the faculty’s values as expressed through the Conceptual Framework and is consistent with the University Institutional Mission. The system consists of three plans: the Undergraduate Assessment Plan, the Graduate Assessment Plan, and the Alternative Class A Assessment Plan. Each plan includes transition points to monitor candidate progress from entry, midpoint, completion, and follow-up. Through an assessment system cycle, the unit regularly and systematically evaluates each component of the comprehensive assessment system. The system measures candidate, faculty, and program effectiveness as well as graduate and employer satisfaction.

Once the data are retrieved, the information is provided to each department chair. Department chairs then meet with their faculty to discuss the data, determine the strengths and weaknesses of the assessments, and strategize how to use the analysis for program improvement.

The Undergraduate Assessment Plan is used to evaluate all aspects of undergraduate teacher education programs. Successful completion of programs qualifies candidates for a recommendation for an Alabama Class B Professional Certificate in a teaching field.

The Graduate Assessment Plan is used to evaluate all facets of traditional master’s programs that lead to recommendation for Alabama Class A Professional Certification in a teaching field, school counseling, or instructional leadership. In addition, the Graduate Assessment Plan includes the Education Specialist (Ed.S.) degree program that leads to a recommendation for an Alabama Class AA Professional Certificate in instructional leadership.

The Alternative Class A Assessment Plan is used to evaluate all aspects of the alternative master’s program. Successful completion of the program qualifies candidates for a recommendation for an Alabama Class A Professional Certificate in a teaching field.

UNIVERSITY OF NORTH ALABAMA

COLLEGE OF EDUCATION

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

“Engaging Learners,

Inspiring Leaders,

Transforming Lives”

The Conceptual Framework establishes a shared vision in preparing educators to work effectively in P–12 schools and provides direction for programs, courses, teaching, candidate performance, scholarship, service and accountability. The Conceptual Framework is continuously evaluated in an outcome based system, and is knowledge-based, articulated, shared and consistent with the University of North Alabama’s institutional mission –

“Changing lives. Creating futures.”

The Conceptual Framework is designed to reflect current research-based knowledge and effective practices through professionalism, assessment, collaboration, technology, diversity and reflection. The UNA College of Education prepares

“Knowledgeable Practicing Professionals” who:

1. Have content and pedagogical knowledge to demonstrate professionalism through a set of beliefs, actions, dispositions and ethical standards that form the core of their practice;

2. Have the knowledge and ability to use assessment strategies to guide teaching and learning, especially impact on student learning, and to strengthen instruction and increase professional growth;

3. Form communities of learners with other teachers, parents, and members of the community, through collaboration, teamwork, and research-based approaches;

4. Use technology to support assessment, planning and instruction for promoting student learning;

5. Value and plan for diversity in curriculum development, instructional strategies and in the promotion of social consciousness;

6. Know and use self-awareness and reflection as decision-making tools for assuring student learning, professional performance and personal growth.

Graduates of the University of North Alabama’s College of Education are knowledgeable practicing professionals who are prepared as outstanding educators and leaders through achievement of the highest standards of knowledge and practice to assist all students to learn.

Undergraduate Assessment Plan

The Undergraduate Assessment Plan consists of the five transition points; entry, entry/admission to teacher education, midpoint, completion, and follow-up. The plan includes the key assessments/measures used to monitor candidates’ performance as well as to manage and improve the operations and programs of the unit.

The following chart outlines the components of the Undergraduate Assessment Plan, identifies when key assessments are administered, provides a description of each component, identifies how data are used for improvement, and aligns each component with the Conceptual Framework.

Undergraduate Assessment Plan

|Transition Point: Entry |

|Pre-Candidates are Admitted to the University and Declare Education as a Major |

|Component |Assessment/Description |Use of Data for Improvement |Conceptual Framework|

| | | |Commitment |

|Transcript |Office of Admissions verifies eligibility for |Office of Admission enters eligible student data into|n/a |

| |admission to university |university data base according to proposed majors | |

|Advisement |Once pre-candidate declares major, faculty advisor|The advisor monitors program of study and guides |n/a |

| |in the COE assigned |pre-candidates to formal admission to Teacher | |

| | |Education Program (TEP) | |

|Orientation |ED 292, Pre-professional Seminar and Laboratory |Results of designated course assignments serve as |1 |

| |Experience, is a beginning professional education |partial components of formal TEP admission process | |

| |course addressing specific requirements and | | |

| |expectations of the program | | |

| |Level 1 |Pre-candidate establishes a baseline of beliefs about|1 |

| |TEP essay and interview rubric? |teaching, learning and professional growth | |

| | |COE examines the results for programmatic | |

| | |implications | |

| |Assessment of Dispositions (form) |Pre-candidate examines professional dispositions to |1, 6 |

| |Key classes asses the dispositions throughout the |form a baseline for growth | |

| |program. Elem: ED 292, ECE 309, ECE 410, |COE examines pre-candidate perceptions of | |

| |Internship |dispositions for programmatic implications | |

| |Secondary: ED 292, ED 382, ED 480, Internship | | |

| |Alabama Bureau of Investigation/Federal Bureau of |Fingerprints of pre-candidate are examined by ABI/FBI|n/a |

| |Investigation background clearance |to ensure clearance of criminal background check. | |

| | |Clear background check allows candidate to | |

| | |participate in field experiences and register for ED | |

| | |292 | |

|Alabama Prospective |Praxis I- Academic Core |Pre-candidate completes standardized test required by|1 |

|Teacher Testing | |the Alabama State Board of Education as a | |

|Program (APTTP) Part| |pre-condition for initial certification to assess a | |

|I | |candidate in reading, writing, and mathematics.. | |

| | |COEHS verifies successful completion for admission to| |

|[Semester] | |TEP | |

|Transition Point: Entry/Admission to Teacher Education Program (TEP) |

|Pre-Candidates Successfully Complete All Admission Requirements and are Formally Admitted to the Teacher Education Program as Candidates |

|Component |Assessment/Description |Use of Data for Improvement |Conceptual Framework|

| | | |Commitment |

|Formal TEP Interview|Written communication assessment (rubric) |Pre-candidate submits an essay. |1 |

| | |Faculty panel evaluates essay to determine | |

|[Semester] | |professional writing skills. | |

| |Oral communication assessment (rubric)/ Interview |Pre-candidate responds to professional queries from | |

| |(rubric) |the panel | |

| | |Faculty panel evaluates oral communication skills | |

| |Knowledge of Conceptual Framework (CF) commitments| Pre-candidate responds to scripted prompt | |

| |(rubric) / Interview (rubric) |Faculty panel evaluates the ability to articulate | |

| | |their knowledge of the CF commitments | |

| |Professionalism assessment (rubric) / Interview |Faculty panel evaluates professional attributes (e.g.| |

| |(rubric) | | |

| | |attire, demeanor) | |

| |Intervention (if warranted) |Any pre-candidate deficient in written communication,|1, 6 |

| | |oral communication, | |

| | |knowledge of CF, and/ | |

| | |or professionalism devise an individualized | |

| | |intervention plan with advisor After successful | |

| | |intervention pre-candidate is cleared to repeat | |

| | |specific assessment(s) | |

|Application |COEHS Form |Pre-candidate submits formal TEP application |n/a |

|Admission Audit |Certification Officer reviews written application |Clearance from Certification Officer combined with |1 |

| |and verifies completion of required general |successful formal interview results in admission to | |

| |studies; checks GPA for a minimum of 2.75 on |the Teacher Education Program | |

| |coursework in the teaching fields and on all | | |

| |coursework attempted; checks GPA for a minimum of | | |

| |3.0 in the professional studies | | |

| |Grade of C or better in COM 201, EN 111, EN 112, | | |

| |and ED 292. | | |

| |Successful completion of Part I of APTTP | | |

| |Fingerprints are submitted to the ALSDE for | | |

| |ASBI/FBI background clearance | | |

|Program of Study |COEHS recommends the sequence of courses required|Candidate schedules courses each semester to complete|1 |

| |in the approved program of study |program of study. | |

| | |Academic advisor monitors candidate’s progress | |

| | |toward program completion | |

|Transition Point: Midpoint |

|Candidate Successfully Completes Prescribed Pre-Internship Sequence of Courses |

|Component |Assessment/ Description |Use of Data for Improvement |Conceptual Framework|

| | | |Commitment |

|Faculty Evaluation |Candidate’s dispositions are assessed in ED 292, |Candidate is made aware of the courses when |1, 6 |

|of Dispositions |ED 333, ECE 309/ED 382, ECE 410/ED 480, and |professional dispositions are assessed. Faculty | |

| |internship by COE faculty. |verifies that candidate demonstrates professional | |

|[Semester] | |dispositions and recommends intervention if | |

| | |warranted. Advisor and candidate devise intervention | |

| | |plan | |

|Field Experiences |COEHS plans a variety of early and ongoing |Candidate engages in a variety of prescribed field |1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 |

| |field-based contacts in P-12 schools prior to |experiences in grade level and certification area | |

| |internship. Listed in the department field |The Office of Clinical Experiences verifies candidate| |

| |experiences chart and clusters. |has extensive P-12 experiences to link theory to | |

| | |practice in a diversity of settings prior to | |

| | |internship | |

|Course Assessments |A variety of tools used in courses to assess the |Candidate completes a variety of course requirements |1, 2, 4, 5, 6 |

| |knowledge and skills of candidate |outlined in course syllabi | |

|[Semester] | |Faculty assesses course requirement that prepare the | |

| | |candidate to impact student learning. Data are | |

| | |analyzed for candidate performance and programmatic | |

| | |implications | |

|Alabama Prospective |Praxis II content area test(s) in area(s) of study|Candidate completes a standardized test in subject |1 |

|Teacher Testing |Currently PLT is required until Fall 2018 when |area of certification | |

|Program (APTTP) Part|edTPA becomes consequential |COE verifies a passing score to ensure mastery of | |

|II | |required content | |

|[Semester] | | | |

|Application |Internship application |Candidate submits internship application |n/a |

|Internship Audit |Certification Officer verifies GPA for a minimum |Clearance from Certification Officer results in |n/a |

| |of 2.75 on coursework in the teaching fields and |internship placement | |

| |on all coursework attempted; verifies GPA for a | | |

| |minimum of 3.0 in the professional studies; | | |

| |verifies for successful completion of two | | |

| |components of APTTP; verifies ABI/FBI clearance | | |

|Transition Point: Completion |

|Candidate Successfully Completes Internship and is Recommended for Class B Certification |

|Component |Assessment/Description |Use of Data for Improvement |Conceptual Framework|

| | | |Commitment |

|Internship |Lesson Plans |Candidate submits lesson plans to university |1, 2, 4, 5, 6 |

|Assessments | |supervisor Supervisor assesses candidate’s ability | |

|[Internship | |to plan instruction based on state/national | |

|Semester] | |standards, college and career ready standards and | |

| | |AL courses of study to meet the needs of all | |

| | |learners, | |

| | |Data are analyzed for candidate performance and | |

| | |programmatic implications | |

| | | | |

| |TWS – Teacher Work Sample |Candidate submits Teacher Work Sample to university |1, 2, 4, 5, 6 |

| | |supervisor | |

| | |Supervisor assesses candidate’s ability to plan and | |

| | |implement units of instruction that impact student | |

| | |learning | |

| | |Data are analyzed for candidate performance and | |

| | |programmatic implications | |

| |Teacher Field and Clinical Observation Instrument |Candidate teaches multiple lessons during supervised |1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 |

| | |observation. Both supervisor and classroom teacher | |

| | |assess candidate’s teaching and planning based on | |

| | |state competencies and indicators | |

| | |Data are analyzed for candidate performance and | |

| | |programmatic implications | |

| |Internship Summative Evaluation Rubric |Candidate is made aware aware of is aware of |1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 |

| | |assessment of teaching competenciesbservation.isor. | |

| | |Supervisor assesses canitted)that teaching | |

| | |competencies are assessed during internship. | |

| | |Supervisor/Cooperating Teacher assesses candidate’s | |

| | |competencies common to all programs identified by | |

| | |ALSDE Professional Studies Analysis | |

| | |Forms/ACTS/INTASC. | |

| | |Data are analyzed for candidate performance and | |

| | |programmatic implications | |

| | | | |

| |Internship Summative Evaluation Rubric |Candidate is made aware aware of is aware of |1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 |

| | |assessment of teaching competenciesbservation.isor. | |

| | |Supervisor assesses canitted)that an overall | |

| | |performance evaluation is completed at the end of | |

| | |internship. | |

| | |Supervisor provides overall assessment of candidate | |

| | |performance in internship. | |

| | |Data are analyzed for candidate performance and | |

| | |programmatic implications | |

| |Cooperating Teacher Evaluation by Intern and |Cooperating teacher is made aware aware of is aware |1, 2, 3, 5, 6 |

| |Supervisor (form) |of assessment of teaching | |

| | |competenciesbservation.isor. Supervisor assesses | |

| | |canitted)that mentoring effectiveness is assessed | |

| | |during internship in TK20. | |

| | |Both intern and supervisor assess effectiveness of | |

| | |the mentoring of cooperating teacher | |

| | |Data are analyzed for future placement decisions | |

| |Faculty Evaluation of Dispositions (form) |Candidate is made aware that professional |1, 6 |

| | |dispositions are assessed during internship | |

| | |Supervisor assesses candidate professional | |

| | |dispositions in P-12 setting | |

| | |Data are analyzed for overall candidate performance | |

| | |and programmatic implications | |

| | |Candidate selects artifacts from coursework and |1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 |

| |edTPA |internship that illustrate understanding of | |

| |TWS |conceptual framework commitments and relevant | |

| | |standards | |

| | |EdTPA portfolio is assessed to verify understanding | |

| | |of state/national standards/initiatives and ability | |

| | |to reflect on each CF commitment | |

| | |COEHS analyzes assessment data for candidate | |

| | |performance and programmatic implications | |

| | | | |

|Graduating Senior |Candidate assessment of program |Graduating candidate completes survey of overall |1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 |

|Survey | |program of study | |

|[Graduating | |COE analyzes results to determine areas for program | |

|Semester] | |improvement | |

|Certification Final |Certification Officer verifies graduating GPA for |Clearance qualifies candidate for recommendation for |n/a |

|Audit |a minimum of 2.75 on coursework in the teaching |an Alabama Class B professional educator certificate | |

| |fields and on all coursework attempted; verifies | | |

| |GPA for a minimum of 3.0 in the professional | | |

| |studies; and all other institutional requirements | | |

|Transition Point: Follow-Up |

|Surveys, Evaluations, and State Reports Provide Follow-up Data |

|Component |Assessment/ Description |Use of Data for Improvement |Conceptual |

| | | |Framework |

| | | |Commitment |

|Survey of Employers |ALSDE will conduct an employee satisfaction survey|Data are reported to the COEHS and results are examined|1, 2, 3, 6 |

| |statewide and provide to each university. |for program improvement implications | |

| | | | |

| |ALSDE will conduct a First Year Teacher Survey – |Results are used for program improvement implications | |

| |Administrator (form) | | |

|Survey of Graduates | |Results are used for program improvement implications |1, 2, 3, 6 |

| |COEHS First Year Teacher Survey (form) | | |

|ALSDE Institutional |The annual Report Card includes pre-teaching |Results are examined and used to make program |1, 2, 3, 5, 6 |

|Report Card |experiences, partnerships with Alabama Schools, |improvements | |

| |APTTP scores, and on-the-job performance (PEPE and| | |

| |surveys) | | |

|Faculty/ |UNA Instructor/Course Evaluation |Candidate evaluates instructors |1, 2, 3, 5, 6 |

|Course Evaluations | |Department Chair evaluates faculty | |

| | |COE examines results for programmatic and professional | |

| | |development implications and/or assistance toward | |

| | |promotion/tenure | |

| | |Faculty provide updates on research and presentations | |

| | |in Sedona | |

|Departmental and |Chairs submit Academic Department and Program |Data are used to identify trends, patterns, outcomes |1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 |

|Program Review |Review documents to the Office of Institutional |and goals to verify departmental and program alignment | |

|[5-year cycle] |Research, Planning and Assessment on a rotating |with the Institutional mission and strategic plan. | |

| |5-year cycle. |Departments use data to make decisions for program | |

| | |improvement. | |

Graduate Assessment Plan

The Graduate Assessment Plan consists of five transition points: entry, midpoint, completion, and follow-up. The plan includes the key assessments/measures used to monitor candidate performance as well as to manage and improve the operations and programs of the unit.

The following chart outlines the components of the Graduate Assessment Plan, identifies when key assessments are administered provides a brief description of each component, identifies how data are used for improvement, and aligns each component with the Conceptual Framework.

Graduate Assessment Plan

Master’s and Education Specialist

|Transition Point: Entry |

|Graduate Pre-Candidates are Admitted to the University and Declare Area of Study |

|Component |Assessment/ Description |Use of Data for Improvement |Conceptual |

| | | |Framework |

| | | |Commitment |

|Application |Coordinator of Graduate Enrollment verifies |Office of Graduate Admissions verifies eligibility for |1 |

| |program eligibility |admission to university graduate programs | |

| |COEHS Coordinator of Graduate Enrollment verifies |Coordinator of Graduate Enrollment notifies candidate |1 |

| |program eligibility (bachelor’s or master’s degree|of eligibility status | |

| |from a regionally accredited institution) | | |

| |COE verifies licensure required for admission for | | |

| |specific programs that require specific | | |

| |certification | | |

|Admission Test |MAT, GRE, or Praxis II |COE verifies graduate pre-candidate score |1 |

|Admission |Candidate submits fingerprints for ASBI/FBI |Graduate pre-candidate completes appropriate program |1 |

| |background clearance, if not previously cleared |orientation and completes requirements specific to | |

| | |program | |

| | | | |

| | |Clear background check allows graduate pre-candidate | |

| | |to participate in field experiences | |

| | |Graduate pre-candidate examines dispositions to form a |1, 6 |

| | |baseline for professional growth | |

| | |COEHS examines graduate pre-candidate perceptions of | |

| | |dispositions for programmatic implications | |

| |

| |

| | | | |

|Advisement |Candidate completes 12 hours of graduate credit |Advisor monitors program of study and guides graduate |1 |

| |with an average grade of B or better |pre-candidate to formal admission | |

| | | | |

| | |Candidate maintains grade a B or better in graduate | |

| |Candidate and advisor develop a program of study |courses | |

| | | | |

|Transition Point: Midpoint |

|Candidates Successfully Complete Sequence of Coursework |

|Component |Assessment/ Description |Use of Data for Improvement |Conceptual |

| | | |Framework |

| | | |Commitment |

|Program of Study |COEHS determines the courses required in the |Candidate completes required coursework |1 |

| |approved program of study |Academic advisor monitors candidate’s progress toward | |

| | |program completion | |

|Faculty Evaluation of| Candidate’s dispositions are assessed by COEHS |Candidate is made aware that professional dispositions |1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 |

|Dispositions |faculty (form) |are assessed at midpoint of program | |

|[Semester] | |Faculty verifies that candidate demonstrates | |

| | |professional dispositions and recommends intervention | |

| | |if warranted. Advisor and candidate devise intervention| |

| | |plan | |

|Field Experiences |COEHS plans a variety of early and ongoing |The Office of Clinical Experiences verifies candidate |1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 |

| |field-based contacts in P-12 schools |has extensive P-12 experiences to link theory to | |

| | |practice in a diversity of settings | |

|Course Assessments |A variety of tools used in courses to assess the |Candidate completes a variety of course requirements |1, 2, 4, 5, 6 |

|[Semester] |knowledge and skills of candidates (e.g.) research|outlined in course syllabi. | |

| |papers, projects, portfolio, course exams, |Faculty assesses course requirements that prepare the | |

| |rubrics, presentations, case studies, lesson |candidate to impact student learning | |

| |plans) |COE analyzes assessment data for candidate performance | |

| | |and programmatic implications | |

|Continuous |Diversity and technology requirements for all |COEHS assesses candidate’s diversity and technology |4 |

|Improvement in |graduate programs for teachers are included on |knowledge and ability as established by ALSDE | |

|Educator Preparation |course syllabi |COEHS analyzes assessment data for candidate | |

|(CIEP) | |performance and programmatic implications | |

| | | | |

|Transition Point: Completion |

|Candidate Successfully Completes Graduate Studies |

|Component |Assessment/ Description |Use of Data for Improvement |Conceptual |

| | | |Framework |

| | | |Commitment |

|Internship |Intensive and extensive clinical activity that |Candidate completes program-specific required clinical |1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 |

|(Collaborative |provides opportunity to develop and demonstrate |hours | |

|Teacher, School |competence in professional role in which candidate|Faculty assesses candidate’s professional knowledge and| |

|Counseling, and |is preparing |skills based on state/national standards and | |

|Master’s Level | |initiatives | |

|Instructional | |COEHS analyzes assessment data for candidate | |

|Leadership) | |performance and programmatic implications. | |

| |Observation Tool (School Counseling) (form) |COE analyzes assessment data for candidate performance |1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 |

| | |and programmatic implications. | |

| |Content-Specific Continuous Improvement in | COE assesses candidate’s content specific competencies|1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 |

| |Educator Preparation (CIEP) |as established by ALSDE | |

| |for Collaborative, Instructional Leadership, and |COE analyzes assessment data for candidate performance | |

| |School Counseling |and programmatic implications. | |

| | Supervisor Evaluation by Intern (form) |University supervisor is made aware that supervision |1, 2, 3, 5, 6 |

| | |effectiveness is assessed. | |

| | |COEHS uses data to determine effectiveness of | |

| | |university supervisor | |

|Comprehensive |Portfolio (rubric) |Candidate completes professional portfolio that |1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 |

|Assessment |Self-Assessment of Dispositions (form) |documents mastery of the curriculum, understanding of | |

| | |the National Board Core Propositions and understanding | |

|[Final Semester] | |of state/ national standards, and initiatives and | |

| | |reflection on each CF commitment | |

| | |Portfolio is assessed to verify candidate’s knowledge, | |

| | |skills, and dispositions for advanced professional | |

| | |practice | |

| | |COEHS analyzes assessment data for candidate | |

| | |performance and programmatic implications | |

| | | | |

| | |Candidate reflects on growth or professional | |

| | |dispositions |1, 6 |

| | |COEHS compares overall pre/post data to verify | |

| | |candidate growth/understanding of professional | |

| | |dispositions and to determine areas for program | |

| | |improvement | |

|Research Analysis |Culminating individualized project (rubric) |Analysis verifies candidate’s advanced knowledge of |1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 |

|Project (Ed.S.) | |curriculum and research. | |

|[Final Semester] | | | |

|Graduate Survey – |Candidate assessment of graduate program (form) |Graduate completes survey of overall program of study |1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 |

|Advanced Programs | |COEHS analyzes results to determine areas for program | |

|[Final Semester] | |improvement | |

|Certification Final |Certification Officer checks candidate’s record |Clearance qualifies candidate for recommendation for an|n/a |

|Audit |for a minimum overall 3.25 GPA for all master’s |Alabama Professional Educator’s Certificate. | |

| |programs and 3.50 GPA for Ed.S. | | |

|Transition Point: Follow-Up |

|Surveys, Evaluations, and State Reports Provide Follow-up Data |

|Component |Assessment/ Description |Use of Data for Improvement |Conceptual |

| | | |Framework |

| | | |Commitment |

|Survey of Employers |ALSDE administers satisfaction survey to local K12|Data are reported to the COEHS and results are examined|1, 2, 3, 6 |

| |partners statewide |for program improvement implications | |

| | | | |

| | | | |

| Meetings | Administrators’ Satisfaction Report (form) |Results are used for program improvement implications | |

|Survey of Post |COEHS administers survey to LEAD Initiative |Data are reported to the COEHS and results are examined|1, 2, 3, 6 |

|Graduates |candidates |for program improvement implications | |

|ALSDE Institutional |The annual Report Card includes partnerships with |Results are examined and used to make program |1, 2, 3, 5, 6 |

|Report Card |Alabama Schools, APTTP scores, and on-the-job |improvements | |

|[Annual] |performance | | |

|Faculty/Course |UNA Instructor/Course Evaluation |Candidate evaluates instructors |1, 2, 3, 5, 6 |

|Evaluations | |Department Chair evaluates Faculty | |

|[Annual] | |COEHS examines results for programmatic and | |

| | |professional development implications | |

| | |and/or assistance toward promotion/tenure | |

|Departmental and |Chairs submit Academic Department and Program |Data are used to identify trends, patterns, outcomes |1,2,3,4,5,6 |

|Program Review |Review documents to the Office of Institutional |and goals to verify departmental and program alignment | |

| |Research, Planning and Assessment on a rotating |with the Institutional mission and strategic plan. | |

| |5-year cycle. |Departments use data to make decisions for program | |

| | |improvement. | |

Alternative Class A Assessment Plan

The Alternative Class A Assessment Plan consists of five transition points: entry, entry/admission to teacher education, midpoint, completion, and follow-up. The plan includes the key assessments/measures used to monitor candidate performance as well as to manage and improve the operations and programs of the unit.

The following chart outlines the components of the Alternative Class A Assessment Plan, identifies when key assessments are administered (e.g. semester, annually), provides a brief description of each component, identifies how data are used for improvement, and aligns each component with the Conceptual Framework.

Alternative Class A Assessment Plan

|Transitions Point: Entry |

|Alternative A Pre-Candidates are Admitted to the University and Declare Education as a Major |

|Component |Assessment/Description |Use of Data for Improvement |Conceptual |

| | | |Framework |

| | | |Commitment |

|Transcript |Office of Admissions verifies eligibility for |Office of Admissions forwards information to COEHS for |1 |

| |admission to university |verification of program eligibility | |

| |COE verifies program eligibility (bachelor’s or |COEHS Graduate Coordinator notifies Alt -A |1 |

| |master’s degree from a regionally accredited |pre-candidate of eligibility status | |

| |institution with a graduating GPA of 2.75 or | | |

| |higher) | | |

|Admission Test |MAT, GRE, or Praxis II |COEHS verifies graduate pre-candidate score |1 |

|Admission |ABI/FBI clearance |Clear background check allows Alt A pre-candidate to | |

| | |participate in field experiences | |

|ED 585 |Candidate submits fingerprints for ABI/FBI |Alt -A pre-candidate attends appropriate program |1 |

| |background clearance, if not previously cleared |orientation and completes requirements specific to | |

| | |program | |

| | |Results of specific orientation assessments serve as | |

| | |partial components of admission to candidacy | |

| |Level 1 Philosophy (rubric) |Alt –A candidate establishes a baseline of beliefs |1 |

| | |about teaching, learning and professional growth | |

| | |COE examines the results for programmatic implications| |

| |Assessment of Dispositions (form) |Alt- A Pre-candidate examines professional dispositions|1, 6 |

| | |to form a baseline for growth | |

| | |COE examines overall candidate perceptions of | |

| | |dispositions for programmatic implications | |

|Transition Point: Entry/Admission to Teacher Education |

|Alternative A Pre-Candidates Successfully Complete All Admission Requirements and are Formally Admitted to the Teacher Education Program as |

|Candidates |

|Component |Assessment/Description |Use of Data for Improvement |Conceptual |

| | | |Framework |

| | | |Commitment |

| | | | |

|Alabama Prospective |3 Basic Skills Assessments (Applied Mathematics, |Alt -A Pre-candidate completes standardized test |1 |

|Teacher Testing |Reading for Information, Writing) |required by the Alabama State Board of Education as a | |

|Program (APTTP) | |pre-condition for initial certification to assess a | |

| | |candidates basic skills in Applied Mathematics, | |

|[Semester] | |Reading for Information, and Writing | |

| | |COE verifies successful completion of the 3 basic | |

| | |skills assessments for admission to TEP | |

| |Praxis II subject matter test(s) in area(s) of |Alt -A Pre-Candidate completes the PRAXIS II test(s | |

| |study |)appropriate to chosen major | |

| | |COE verifies successful completion of required subject| |

| | |matter assessment(s) | |

|Formal GTEP |Written communication assessment (rubric) |Alt-A pre-candidate submits an essay Faculty panel |1 |

|Interview |Interview |evaluates essay to determine professional writing | |

| | |skills | |

|[Semester] | | | |

| |Oral communication assessment (rubric) |Alt-A pre-candidate responds to professional queries | |

| |Interview |from the panel | |

| | |Faculty panel evaluates oral communication skills | |

| |Knowledge of Conceptual Framework (CF) commitments |Alt-A pre-candidate responds to scripted prompt | |

| |(rubric) |Faculty panel evaluates the ability to articulate | |

| | |their knowledge of the CF commitments | |

| |Professionalism assessment (rubric) |Faculty panel evaluates professional attributes | |

| |Interview | | |

| |Intervention (if warranted) |Any Alt-A pre-candidate deficient in written |1, 6 |

| | |communication, oral communication, | |

| | |knowledge of CF, and/ | |

| | |or professionalism devise an individualized | |

| | |intervention plan with advisor | |

| | |After successful intervention pre-candidate is cleared| |

| | |to repeat specific assessment(s) | |

|Application |COE Form |Alt –A Pre-Candidate submits formal TEP application |n/a |

|Transition Point: Midpoint |

|Alternative A Candidate Successfully Completes Prescribed Pre-Internship Coursework |

|Component |Assessment/Description |Use of Data for Improvement |Conceptual |

| | | |Framework |

| | | |Commitment |

|Program of Study |Candidate completes required coursework specific to|Candidate completes required coursework |1 |

| |major |Academic advisor monitors candidate’s progress toward | |

| | |program completion | |

| Faculty Evaluation |Candidate’s dispositions are assessed by COEHS |Candidate is made aware that dispositions are assessed|1, 6 |

|of Dispositions |faculty (form) |Faculty verifies that candidate demonstrates | |

| | |professional dispositions and recommends intervention | |

|[Semester] | |if warranted Advisor and candidate devise | |

| | |intervention plan | |

|Field Experiences |COEHS plans a variety of early and ongoing |The Office of Clinical Experiences verifies candidate |1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 |

| |field-based contacts in P-12 schools |has extensive P-12 experiences to link theory to | |

| |? |practice in a diversity of settings | |

|Course Assessments |A variety of tools used in courses to assess the |Candidate completes a variety of course requirements |1, 2, 4, 5, 6 |

| |knowledge and skills of candidates (e.g.) research |outlined in course syllabi. | |

|[Semester] |papers, projects, portfolio, course exams, |Faculty assesses course requirements that prepare the | |

| |rubrics, presentations, case studies, lesson plans)|candidate to impact student learning | |

| | |COE analyzes assessment data for candidate performance| |

| | |and programmatic implications | |

|Transition Point: Completion |

|Alternative A Candidate Successfully Completes Internship and is Recommended for Class A Certification |

| |

|Component |Assessment/Description |Use of Data for Improvement |Conceptual |

| | | |Framework |

| | | |Commitment |

|Internship Audit |Certification Officer verifies completion of |Successful clearance from Certification Officer |n/a |

| |required coursework, checks GPA for a minimum of |results in internship placement | |

| |3.0, checks for successful completion of two | | |

| |components of APTTP, verifies ABI/FBI clearance, | | |

| |and all other institutional requirements | | |

|Internship |Lesson Plans (rubric) |Candidate submits lesson plans to supervisor |1, 2, 4, 5, 6 |

|Assessments | |Supervisor assesses candidate’s ability to plan | |

| | |instruction based on state/national standards and AL | |

|[Internship | |courses of study to meet the needs of all learners | |

|Semester] | |COE analyzes assessment data for candidate performance| |

| | |and programmatic implications | |

| |edTPA |Candidate submits to university supervisor |1, 3, 6 |

| | |Supervisor assesses candidate’s knowledge of classroom| |

| |TWS |management and school policies; candidate’s ability to| |

| | |collaborate with school personnel; and candidate’s | |

| | |involvement in for lifelong learning | |

| | |COEHS analyzes assessment data for candidate | |

| | |performance and programmatic implications | |

| |Teacher Work Sample (rubric) |Candidate submits Project USA to university supervisor|1, 2, 4, 5, 6 |

| |TWS |Supervisor assesses candidate’s ability to plan and | |

| | |implement units of instruction that impact student | |

| | |learning | |

| | |COE analyzes assessment data for candidate performance| |

| | |and programmatic implications | |

| |Level 2 Philosophy (included in portfolio) |Candidate submits philosophy during internship based |1, 6 |

| | |on coursework, field experiences, and internship. | |

| | |Candidate compares Level 2 philosophy to Level 1 | |

| | |philosophy and reflects on changes in beliefs about | |

| | |teaching, learning and professional growth | |

| | |COE examines the results for programmatic implications| |

| |Portfolio (rubric) |Candidate selects artifacts from coursework and |1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 |

| | |internship that illustrate understanding of conceptual| |

| | |framework commitments and relevant standards | |

| | |Portfolio is assessed to verify understanding of | |

| | |state/national standards/initiatives, National Board | |

| | |Core Propositions, and ability to reflect on each CF | |

| | |commitment | |

| | |COE analyzes assessment data for candidate performance| |

| | |and programmatic implications | |

| |Intern Evaluation |Candidate teaches multiple lessons during supervised |1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 |

| | |observation | |

| |(form) |Both supervisor and classroom teacher assess | |

| | |candidate’s teaching and planning based on state | |

| | |competencies and indicators | |

| | |COE analyzes assessment data for candidate performance| |

| | |and programmatic implications | |

| |UNA COE Competencies Assessment (to be replaced by |Candidate is made aware aware of is aware of |1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 |

| |Alabama Quality Teaching Standards [AQTS] to be |assessment of teaching competenciesbservation.isor. | |

| |submitted July 1, 2008) |Supervisor assesses canitted)that teaching | |

| | |competencies are assessed during internship. | |

| |(form) |Supervisor assesses candidate’s competencies common to| |

| | |all programs identified by ALSDE Professional Studies| |

| | |Analysis Forms | |

| | |COE analyzes assessment data for candidate performance| |

| | |and programmatic implications | |

| |Content Specific Addendum (form) |Candidate is made aware aware of is aware of |1 |

| | |assessment of teaching competenciesbservation.isor. | |

| | |Supervisor assesses canitted)that content specific | |

| | |competencies are assessed during internship. | |

| | |Supervisor assesses candidate’s content specific | |

| | |competencies as identified by ALSDE content-specific | |

| | |Analysis Forms [to be replaced by Performance | |

| | |Assessment Templates (PATs) upon state approval] | |

| | |COE analyzes assessment data for candidate performance| |

| | |and programmatic implications | |

| |Continuous Improvement in Educator Preparation |COE assesses candidates technology knowledge and |4 |

| |(CIEP) |ability as established by ALSDE | |

| | |COE analyzes assessment data for candidate performance| |

| | |and programmatic implications | |

| |Intern Final Evaluation |Candidate is made aware that an overall performance |1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 |

| | |evaluation is completed at the end of internship | |

| |(form) |Supervisor provides overall evaluation of candidate | |

| | |performance in internship | |

| | |COE analyzes assessment data for candidate performance| |

| | |and programmatic implications | |

| |Cooperating Teacher Evaluation by Intern and |Cooperating teacher is made aware that mentoring |1, 2, 3, 5, 6 |

| |Supervisor (form) |effectiveness is assessed during internship | |

| | |Both intern and supervisor assess effectiveness of the| |

| | |mentoring of cooperating teacher | |

| | |COE analyzes assessment data for candidate performance| |

| | |and programmatic implications | |

| | Supervisor Evaluation by Intern and Cooperating |University supervisor is aware that supervision |1, 2, 3, 5, 6 |

| |Teacher (form) |effectiveness is assessed during internship | |

| | |COE uses data to determine effectiveness of university| |

| | |supervisor | |

| |Faculty Evaluation of Dispositions (form) |Candidate is made aware that professional dispositions|1, 6 |

| | |are assessed during internship | |

| | |Supervisor assesses candidate professional | |

| | |dispositions in P-12 settings | |

| | |COE analyzes assessment data for candidate performance| |

| | |and programmatic implications | |

| |Self-Assessment of Dispositions (form) |Candidate reflects on growth of professional |1, 6 |

| | |dispositions | |

| | |COE examines overall pre-post data to verify candidate| |

| | |growth/understanding of professional dispositions | |

|Comprehensive |Teacher Work Sample |Candidate completes professional portfolio that |1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 |

|assessment |edTPA |documents mastery of the curriculum, understanding of | |

| | |state/ national standards, National Board Core | |

|[Final Semester] | |Propositions and initiatives and reflection on each CF| |

| | |commitment | |

| | |Portfolio is assessed to verify candidate’s knowledge,| |

| | |skills, and dispositions for advanced professional | |

| | |practice | |

| | |COE analyzes assessment data for candidate performance| |

| | |and programmatic implications | |

|Graduate Survey – |Candidate assessment of program (form) |Graduating candidate completes survey of overall |1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 |

|Advanced Programs | |program of study | |

|[Graduating | |COE analyzes results to determine areas for program | |

|Semester] | |improvement | |

|Certification Final |Certification Officer checks candidate’s record |Clearance qualifies candidate for recommendation for |n/a |

|Audit |for a minimum overall 3.0 GPA and C or better in |an Alabama professional educator certificate | |

| |internship | | |

|Transition Point: Follow-Up |

|Surveys, Evaluations, and State Reports Provide Follow-up Data |

|Component |Assessment/Description |Use of Data for Improvement |Conceptual |

| | | |Framework |

| | | |Commitment |

|Survey of Employers |ALSDE conducts a statewide survey of K12 employer |Data are reported to the COEHS and results are |1, 2, 3, 6 |

| |partners |examined for program improvement implications | |

| | | | |

|Graduates | | |1, 2, 3, 6 |

| | | | |

| | | | |

| | | | |

| |ALSDE conducts First Year Teacher Survey |Results are used for program improvement implications| |

|ALSDE Institutional |The annual Report Card includes pre-teaching |Results are examined and used to make program |1, 2, 3, 5, 6 |

|Report Card |experiences, partnerships with Alabama Schools, |improvements | |

|[Annual] |APTTP scores, and on-the-job performance | | |

|Faculty/Course |UNA Instructor/Course Evaluation |Candidate evaluates instructors |1, 2, 3, 5, 6 |

|Evaluations | |Faculty completes self-assessment of professional | |

| | |attributes | |

|[Annual] | |Department Chair evaluates Non-Tenured Faculty | |

| | |COE examines results for programmatic and professional| |

| | |development implications | |

| | |and/or assistance toward promotion/tenure | |

| |COE Faculty Self-Assessment (form) | | |

| |COE Non-Tenured Faculty Evaluation (form) | | |

|Departmental and |Chairs submit Academic Department and Program |Data are used to identify trends, patterns, outcomes |1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 |

|Program Review |Review documents to the Office of Institutional |and goals to verify departmental and program alignment| |

|[5-year cycle] |Research, Planning and Assessment on a rotating |with the Institutional mission and strategic plan. | |

| |5-year cycle. |Departments use data to make decisions for program | |

| | |improvement. | |

................
................

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

Google Online Preview   Download