Early Childhood Education



Advanced Programs (Graduate Programs) Assessment Plans

Part I. Conceptual Framework (CF) Learner Outcomes Product Matrices

Part II. Detailed Assessment Plans for CF, and SPA (MEd ECE, MEd Spec Ed, MEd Reading, MEd School Counseling, Clinical/MH Counseling) & Non-SPA Programs (MEd Secondary, MEd Student Affairs, MHRD, PhD Curriculum & Instruction, Phd Ed Leadership, Higher Education & P12), EEDA (MEd School Counseling, MEd Administration & Supervision),& NBPTS (MEd Secondary Ed)

• MEd Admin/Supervision

• EdS Admin/Supervision

• PhDs Ed Leadership

• MEds, Counselor Education

• MEd School Counseling EEDA

• MHRD

• MEd Reading

• MEd Early Childhood

• MEd Secondary Ed

• MEd Special Ed

• PhD Curr. & Instruction

Part I: Advanced Programs (Graduate Programs)

Conceptual Framework Learner Outcomes Product Matrices

Conceptual Framework

The Eugene T. Moore School of Education Conceptual Framework guides our work as a unit. It is consensus-based and provides the foundation for all we do. It addresses the fundamental issues of what our students need to know (knowledge), what they need to be able to do (skills), what they value (dispositions), and how they interface with their communities, large and small (connections).

Our Conceptual Framework, simply stated, is to prepare caring, capable, and connected professionals for the 21st century.

As a unit, we have undertaken in-depth analyses of the accreditation, accountability, and assessment issues and mandates from our myriad stakeholders. Our efforts to synthesize these elements are illustrated through our Conceptual Framework.

The Conceptual Framework consists of four parts: Mission, Guiding Principles, Learner Outcomes and the Assessment System.

Mission

The Mission of the Eugene T. Moore School of Education is to prepare caring and capable professionals through intellectually engaging experiences in theory, method, and research that connect them to the communities in which they live and serve.

Guiding Principles

Our Guiding Principles provide the philosophical underpinning of our programs. They are statements of our collective beliefs about our students, our profession and ourselves:

As faculty and staff, we:

• Respect the rights and responsibilities of all students and recognize diverse points of view

• Act ethically and professionally to meet the students’ intellectual and developmental needs

• Accept our professional and ethical responsibility to help our students acquire comprehensive knowledge and skills in their specialty area that equip them to be effective educators, researchers, and leaders

• Are committed to excellent instruction represented by effective teaching practices, emerging technologies, and assessment

• Encourage our students to make positive contributions that make their own lives and the lives of others potentially more fulfilling and productive.

Learner Outcomes

Our Learner Outcomes become the basis for the results of our programs. They are what we expect our students to value, to know, and to be able to do. There are six learner outcomes or elements in the conceptual framework.

Caring comprises beliefs and actions.

• Beliefs: Our candidates are committed to ethical and democratic dispositions including respecting the rights and responsibilities of all and recognizing diverse points of view.

• Actions: Our candidates act in accord with the rights and responsibilities of all; are sensitive to developmental, social, and cultural differences; and encourage a democratic culture.

Capable consists of knowledge and practice.

• Knowledge: Our candidates are knowledgeable about the foundations of education and about their specialty area(s), including appropriate practices.

• Practice: Our candidates apply their knowledge through best practices that include the effective use of educational and information technology and appropriate assessments.

Connected contains communication and integration.

• Communication: Our candidates communicate effectively through a variety of representations (spoken, written, and digital).

• Integration: Our candidates synthesize their knowledge and practices to integrate interdisciplinary perspectives and applications by making connections to real life and by making global issues locally relevant.

Assessment System

Our Assessment System evolves from our mission, guiding principles, and learner outcomes. Each candidate is rated on each of the six elements of the conceptual framework at multiple times during his or her program. Initial candidates are rated four times in their program on a four-point scale (unsatisfactory, developing, proficient, and distinguished) using a set of rubrics specific to each time period.  Ratings of unsatisfactory and distinguished are accompanied by a detailed explanation. The assessment of advanced candidates varies by program, with two to four assessment points, and two- to four-point rating scales. Ratings are based on a variety of candidate products (for example, electronic portfolios, reflections, lesson plans, and internship/student teaching evaluations). The ratings for all candidates are recorded in an on-line database. Yearly program reports are generated, and program faculty react to the reports by addressing any apparent weaknesses with programmatic changes. A yearly, written statement of program and course changes is provided to the School of Education by the program chair.

MEd Administration and Supervision (Unacceptable, Acceptable, Target)

|CF Element |Level 1 |Level 2 |

|Caring Beliefs |EDL 750/751/755/756 Internship Portfolio Docs |Comprehensive Exams |

|Caring Actions |EDL 750/751/755/756 Internship Portfolio Docs |EDL 751/756 3 Field IL Action Research Project |

|Capable Knowledge |EDL 730 Curriculum Improvement Project |Comprehensive Exams |

|Capable Practice |EDL 730 Curriculum Improvement Project |EDL 751/756 3 Field IL Action Research Project |

|Connected Communication |EDL 751/756 3 Field Sp Ed Project |EDL 750/751/755/756 Internship Portfolio Docs |

|Connected Integration |EDL 751/756 3 Field Projects (IL, Sch Brd, Spec Ed) |EDL 750/751/755/756 Internship Portfolio Docs |

EdS Administration and Supervision (Unacceptable, Acceptable, Target)

|CF Element |Level 1 |Level 2 |

|Caring Beliefs |EDL 850/851 Internship Docs |PRAXIS subtest scores |

|Caring Actions |EDL 850/851 Internship Docs |Comprehensive Exams |

|Capable Knowledge |EDL 840 Curriculum Project |EDL 850/851 Internship Docs |

|Capable Practice |EDL 805 Vision |Comprehensive Exams |

|Connected Communication |EDL 810 Resource Improvement Project |PRAXIS subtest scores |

|Connected Integration |EDL 820 Editorial Project |EDL 810 Resource Improvement Project |

PhD Educational Leadership P12/Higher Ed (Weak, Acceptable, Excellent) updated forFall10

|CF Element |Level 1 |Level 2 |

|Caring Beliefs |Preliminary Exam |Dissertation Proposal |

|Caring Actions |Preliminary Exam |Dissertation Proposal |

|Capable Knowledge |Comprehensive Exam Core |Comprehensive Exam Concentration |

|Capable Practice |Internship II |Dissertation |

|Connected Communication |Internship II |Dissertation |

|Connected Integration |Dissertation Proposal |Dissertation |

PhD Curriculum and Instruction (Met, Not Met)

|CF Element |Level 1 |Level 2 |

|Caring Beliefs |Doctoral Seminar ED 901 |Dissertation Proposal |

|Caring Actions |Doctoral Seminar ED 901 |Comprehensive Exam |

|Capable Knowledge |Comprehensive Exam |Dissertation Proposal |

|Capable Practice |Doctoral Seminar ED 901 |Undergraduate Teaching |

|Connected Communication |National Presentation |Manuscript |

|Connected Integration |Dissertation Proposal |Dissertation Proposal |

MEd Counselor Education – Student Affairs, Community, and School (1=Does not consistently meet criteria, 2=Meets criteria consistently, 4=Exceeds criteria consistently

|CF Element |Level 1 |Level 2 |

|Caring Beliefs |1st Yr Professional Fitness Review (PFR) Integrity sub element 2 |Final Yr Professional Fitness Review (PFR) Integrity sub element 2 |

|Caring Actions |1st Yr PFR Integrity sub element 5 |Final Yr PFR Integrity sub element 5 |

|Capable Knowledge |1st Yr PFR Professional Responsibility sub element 3 |Final Yr PFR Professional Responsibility sub element 3 |

|Capable Practice |1st Yr PFR Competence sub element 3 |Final Yr PFR Competence sub element 3 |

|Connected Communication |1st Yr PFR Professional Responsibility sub element 1 |Final Yr PFR Professional Responsibility sub element 1 |

|Connected Integration |1st Yr PFR Comportment sub element 4 |Final Yr PFR Comportment sub element 4 |

MHRD (Does Not Meet, Meets, Exceeds) updated July 2010

|CF Element |Level 1 |Level 2 |

|Caring Beliefs |HRD 830 Knowledge Test |HRD 847 Instructional Design Project |

|Caring Actions |HRD 847 Instructional Design Project |HRD 860 Delivery Training Project |

|Capable Knowledge |HRD 830 Knowledge Test |HRD 825 Org Development Test |

|Capable Practice |HRD 847 Org Performance Capstone Project |HRD 897 Org Perf Capstone Project |

|Connected Communication |HRD 847 Instructional Design Project |HRD 860 Delivery Training Project |

|Connected Integration |HRD 847 Org Performance Capstone Project |HRD 897 Org Perf Capstone Project |

MEd Reading (Unacceptable, Acceptable, Target)

|CF Element |Level 1 |Level 2 |Level 3 |

|Caring Beliefs |READ 865 Case Report |READ 866 Case Report |Portfolio |

|Caring Actions |READ 865 Case Report |READ 866 Case Report |Portfolio |

|Capable Knowledge |READ 865 Case Report |READ 866 Case Report |Portfolio |

|Capable Practice |READ 865 Case Report |READ 866 Lesson Plans |Portfolio |

|Connected Communication |READ 865 Case Report |READ 866 Case Report |Portfolio |

|Connected Integration |READ 865 Case Report |READ 866 Case Report |Portfolio |

MEd Early Childhood Education (Unacceptable, Acceptable, Target) revised Spring2010

|CF Element |Level 1 |Level 2 |

|Caring Beliefs |EDSP 760 Case Study |EDEC 890 Comprehensive Unit of Instruction |

|Caring Actions |EDEC 800 Case Study |EDSP 760 Case Study |

|Capable Knowledge |EDEC 895 Literature Review |Comprehensive Exam |

|Capable Practice |EDEC 890 Comprehensive Unit of Instruction |EDSP 760 Case Study |

|Connected Communication |Comprehensive Exam |EDEC 800 Case Study |

|Connected Integration |EDEC 840 Research Paper |EDEC 895 Literature Review |

MEd Secondary Education (Unsatisfactory, Competent, Target)

|CF Element |Level 1 |Level 2 |

|Caring Beliefs |EDSEC 765 Unit Plan |Comprehensive Exams-Critical Issue in Content Area |

|Caring Actions |EDSEC 803 Action Research Project |Comprehensive Exams-Critical Issue in Content Area |

|Capable Knowledge |EDSEC 803 Action Research Project |Comprehensive Exam-Content |

|Capable Practice |EDSEC 765 State Content Standards Critique |EDSEC 803 Authentic Assessment |

|Connected Communication |EDSEC 765 State Content Standards Critique |Comprehensive Exam-Content |

|Connected Integration |EDSEC 765 Unit Plan |Comprehensive Exams-Critical Issue in Content Area |

MEd Special Education (Unsat., Sat., Disting, Prof.)

|CF Element |Level 1 |Level 2 |

|Caring Beliefs |EDSP 820 Evaluation Language Arts Instruction for Students|EDSP 676, 678, 679 Final Evaluation |

| |with Disabilities |Practicum in Learning Disabilities |

|Caring Actions | | |

|Capable Knowledge | | |

|Capable Practice | | |

|Connected Communication | | |

|Connected Integration | | |

Masters of Ag Education (Met, Not Met) coming soon

|CF Element |Level 1 |Level 2 |Level 3 |

|Caring Beliefs | | | |

|Caring Actions | | | |

|Capable Knowledge | | | |

|Capable Practice | | | |

|Connected Communication | | | |

|Connected Integration | | | |

Part II: Detailed Assessment Plans for CF and SPA (MEd ECE, Spec Ed) & Non-SPA Plans

MEd in Administration and Supervision (Building-Level Leadership)

ELCC ASSESSMENT MATRIX

WITH EEDA AND SOE CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK MAPPING

Summary:

I took the following steps to analyze our MEd assessment process. First, I cross-referenced the subelements and the courses/ areas where the assessments occur. From this, I identified overlaps and gaps and suggested data points to eliminate for ELCC reporting purposes. (See attached table.) Next, I summarized what we would have remaining as ELCC assessment data points and the balance across faculty responsibility in classes.

Content Assessments:

1) ELCC Assessment #1- Using PRAXIS for 17 data points

2) ELCC Assessment #2- Using MEd Comps for 14 data points

3) ELCC Assessment #6- Using EdL final internship (EdL 751/756) with 3 field experiences to cover 32 data points

Professional Skills Assessments:

1) ELCC Assessment #3- Using Instructional Improvement project in EdL 730 class for 5 data points

2) ELCC Assessment #4- Use portfolio documents to score them in 750/755 for 12 data points and 755/756 for 20 data points

3) ELCC Assessment #7- Using three field experience assignments coming from (a) Facility Project in EdL 750/755 with 3 data points, (b) Budget Analysis Project in EdL 745 with 13 data points, and (c) HR Policy Analysis Project in EdL 720 with 3 data points

Effects Assessment:

1) ELCC Assessment #5- Using our exit survey, supt. and completer survey for 11 data points- and EDL 740 Curriculum Planning & Improvement for 5 data points (Needs revision to meet required data points. We are meeting ELCC elements but not subelements)

Overall Balance of Assessment Responsibility/ Placement in MEd Classes:

MEd classes with ELCC assessments:

EdL 720

EdL 730

EdL 710 (Vision essay written but scored in 750/755)

EdL 745

EdL 740

EdL 750/755 and EdL 755/756

Note: Only core class not involved in ELCC assessment is EdL 725 which will contain EEDA assessment items. EEDA assessment items also will come from EdL 730 assessment and Edl 751/756 School Counseling field experience.

If a student takes a class-based assessment and scores “Does Not Meet”, the student would redo that portion of the assignment to meet criteria for “Meets”.

MEd ELCC ASSESSMENT MATRIX

WITH EEDA AND CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK MAPPING

|ELCC Standard |Assessment #1 |Assessment #2 |Assessment #6 |

|Elements |Use PRAXIS subscores |Use MEd Comps Exam |Use 3 field projects in EdL |

| | | |751/756: (a) IL project, (b) |

| | | |Sch Brd proj, (c) Sp Ed proj) |

|2. Clusters of study |EdL 730- Instructional Supervision |Test items |Student Test Response |

|3. Elements of Career Guidance Model |EdL 751/756- Principal Internship |Student Support Services Field Experience |Student Field Paper |

|4. Character Education |EdL 730- Instructional Supervision |Test items |Student Test Response |

|5. Contextual Teaching |EdL 730- Instructional Supervision |Test items |Student Test Response |

|6. Cooperative Learning |EdL 730- Instructional Supervision |Test items |Student Test Response |

|7. Diverse Learning Styles |EdL 730- Instructional Supervision |Test items |Student Test Response |

|8. High Schools that Work |EdL 730- Instructional Supervision |Test items |Student Test Response |

|9/ Ident. Of At-Risk Children |EdL 725- Sch. Law (EEDA Overview) |Test items |Student Test Response |

EdS in Administration and Supervision (District-Level Leadership)

ELCC ASSESSMENT MATRIX WITH CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK MAPPING

Summary:

I took the following steps to analyze our EdS assessment process. First, I cross-referenced the sub-elements and the courses/ / areas where the assessment occurs. From this, I identified where we have overlaps and gaps and suggested data points to eliminate for ELCC reporting purposes. (See attached table.) Next, I summarized what we would have remaining as ELCC assessment data points and the balance across faculty responsibility in classes, etc.

Content Assessments:

4) ELCC Assessment #1- Using PRAXIS for 54 sub-element data points

5) ELCC Assessment #2- Using EdS Comps for 17 data points

6) ELCC Assessment #6- Use EdL 840 Curriculum Project for 8 data points

Professional Skills Assessments:

4) ELCC Assessment #3- Use EdL 810 School Resource Improvement Project for 21 data points

5) ELCC Assessment #4- Use portfolio documents to score them in 850/ 851 internship using 13 data points

6) ELCC Assessment #7- Using four course-based field assignments coming from (a) EdL 830 Budget Project for 3 data points, (b) EdL820 Editorial Project for 7 data points, EdL 815 School Board Plan for 5 data points, and EdL 805 Vision Project for 1 data point.

Effects Assessment:

2) ELCC Assessment #5- Using our exit survey, supt. and completer survey- This needs work and our data have been limited at best for the Effects assessment. (Recommend looking at what other institutions are using here.)

Overall Balance of EdS Assessment Responsibility and Placement in Class:

We have EdS assessments placed in 8 EdS classes to include:

EdL 805 EdL 810 EdL 815 EdL 820 EdL 830 EdL 840 EdL 850 EdL 851

If a student takes a class-based assessment and scores “Does Not Meet”, the student would redo that portion of the assignment to meet criteria for “Meets”.

EdS in Administration and Supervision (District-Level Leadership)

ELCC ASSESSMENT MATRIX

Strike out represents recommended assessment points to discontinue. Shaded areas represents unaddressed subelements.

|ELCC |Assessment #1 |Assessment #2 |Assessment #6 |Assessment #4 |

|Standard |Use PRAXIS subscores / same scores for MEd |Use EdS Comp Exam |Use EdL 840 |Use EdL 850 and 851 |

|Elements | | |Curriculum Project |internship documents |

|1.1a |X |X (CP2) | | | |X (805) |

| | | | | | |(CP1) |

|Standard 1. Cultural Competence. Advanced program candidates demonstrate a high level of| | | | | | |

|competence in understanding and responding to diversity of culture, language, and |X |X |X |X |X |X |

|ethnicity. | | | | | | |

| | | | | | | |

| |(CA1) | | | |(CA2) | |

|CF Caring Actions (CA): Candidates act in accord with the rights and responsibilities of| | | | | | |

|all, are sensitive to developmental, social, and cultural differences, and encourage a | | | | | | |

|democratic culture. | | | | | | |

|Standard 2. Knowledge and Application of Ethical Principles. Advanced program candidates| | | | | | |

|demonstrate in-depth knowledge and thoughtful application of the Code of Ethical Conduct|X |X |X |X |X |X |

|and other guidelines relevant to their professional role. | | | | | | |

| | | | | | | |

| | | | | | | |

| |(CB1) | | | |(CB2) | |

|CF Caring Beliefs (CB): Candidates are committed to ethical and democratic dispositions | | | | | | |

|including respecting the rights and responsibilities of all and recognizing diverse | | | | | | |

|points of view. | | | | | | |

|Standard 3. Communication Skills. Advanced program candidates possess a high level of | | | | | | |

|oral, written, and technological communication skills, with specialization for the |X |X |X |X |X |X |

|specific professional role(s) emphasized in the program. For doctoral programs, | | | | | | |

|candidates are prepared to publish and present at conferences. | | | | | | |

| | | | | | | |

| | | | |(CC1) | |(CC2) |

|CF Connected Communication (CC): Candidates communicate effectively through a variety of| | | | | | |

|representations (spoken, written, and digital). | | | | | | |

|Standard 4. Mastery of Relevant Theory and Research. Advanced program candidates | | | | | | |

|demonstrate in-depth, critical knowledge of the theory and research relevant to the |X |X |X |X |X |X |

|professional role(s) and focus area(s) emphasized in the program. | | | | | | |

| | | | | | | |

| | |(CK1) |(CK2) | | | |

|CF Capable Knowledge (CK): Candidates are knowledgeable about the foundations of | | | | | | |

|education and about their specialty area(s), including appropriate practices. | | | | | | |

|Standard 5. Skills in Identifying and Using Professional Resources. Advanced program | | | | | | |

|candidates demonstrate a high level of skill in identifying and using the human, | | | |X |X |X |

|material, and technological resources needed to perform their professional roles and to | | | | | | |

|keep abreast of the field’s changing knowledge base. | | | | | | |

| | | | | | | |

| | | | |(CP1) | |(CP2) |

|CF Capable Practice (CP): Candidates apply their knowledge through best practices that | | | | | | |

|include the effective use of educational and information technology and appropriate | | | | | | |

|assessments. | | | | | | |

|Standard 6. Inquiry Skills and Knowledge of Research Methods. Using systematic and | | | | | | |

|professionally accepted approaches, advanced program candidates demonstrate inquiry | | | |X |X |X |

|skills, showing their ability to investigate questions relevant to their practice and | | | | | | |

|professional goals. | | | | | | |

|Standard 7. Skills in Collaborating, Teaching, and/or Mentoring. Advanced program | | | | | | |

|candidates demonstrate the flexible, varied skills needed to work collaboratively and | | | |X |X |X |

|effectively with other adults in professional roles. | | | | | | |

|Standard 8. Advocacy Skills. Advanced program candidates demonstrate competence in | | | | | | |

|articulating and advocating for sound professional practices and public policies for the| | | |X |X |X |

|positive development and learning of all students. | | | | | | |

| Standard 9. Leadership Skills. Advanced program candidates reflect on and use their | | | | | | |

|abilities and opportunities to think strategically, build consensus, create change, and | | | |X |X |X |

|influence better outcomes for students, families, and the profession. | | | | | | |

| | | | | | | |

| | | | | |(CI1) |(CI2) |

|CF Connected Integration (CI): Candidates synthesize their knowledge and practices to | | | | | | |

|integrate interdisciplinary perspectives and applications by making connections to real | | | | | | |

|life and by making global issues locally relevant. | | | | | | |

*revised for Fall10. Removed the assessment for Internship I.

MEd Counselor Education – Student Affairs, School Counseling,

Clinical/Mental Health Counseling

Professional Fitness Review Form

Student_____________________________ Faculty ______________________ Semester/Year________

Evaluation Criteria

1--Does not consistently meet criteria for program level 3--Exceeds criteria consistently at program level

2--Meets criteria consistently at program level

|Professional fitness catEgories: |1st Yr |2nd Yr |comments |

| | | | |

|“Standard 1” Professional Responsibility | | | |

|“1.1” 1.The student relates to peers, professors, and others in an | | | |

|appropriate professional manner. (CF Learner Outcome: Connected Communication) | | | |

|“1.2” 2.The student does not exploit or mislead other people during or after professional | | | |

|relationships. | | | |

|“1.3” 3.The student applies legal and ethical standards during the training program. (CF Learner | | | |

|Outcome: Capable Knowledge) | | | |

|“Standard 2” Competence | | | |

|“2.1” 1. The student takes responsibility for compensating for his/her deficiencies. | | | |

|“2.2” 2.The student provides only those services and applies only those techniques for which he/she | | | |

|is qualified by education, training or experience. | | | |

|“2.3” 3.The student demonstrates basic cognitive skills and appropriate affect in response to | | | |

|clients/students. (CF Learner Outcome: Capable Practice) | | | |

|“Standard 3” Comportment | | | |

|“3.1” 1.The student demonstrates appropriate self-control (such as anger control, impulse control) in| | | |

|interpersonal relationships with faculty, peers, and clients/students. | | | |

|“3.2” 2.The student demonstrates honesty and fairness both personally and professionally. | | | |

|“3.3” 3.The student is aware of his/her own belief systems, values, and limitations do not actively | | | |

|effect his/her professional work. | | | |

|“3.4” 4. The student demonstrates the ability to receive, integrate, and utilize feedback from peers,| | | |

|teachers, and supervisors. (CF Learner Outcome: Connected Integration) | | | |

|“Standard 4” Integrity | | | |

|“4.1” 1.The student does not make statements that are false, misleading, or deceptive. | | | |

|“4.2” 2.The student respects the fundamental rights, dignity, and worth of all people. (CF Learner | | | |

|Outcome: Caring Beliefs) | | | |

|“4.3” 3.The student respects the rights of individuals to privacy, confidentiality, and choices | | | |

|regarding self-determination. | | | |

|“4.4” 4.The student respects cultural, individual, and role differences, including those due to age, | | | |

|gender, race, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, physical ability/disability, | | | |

|language, and socioeconomic status. | | | |

|“4.5” 5.The student behaves in accordance with the programs accepted code(s) of ethics/standards of | | | |

|practice. (CF Learner Outcome: Caring Actions) | | | |

*Faculty Assessment – Once per year the entire faculty meet to discuss each student’s progress and professional fit in the Counselor Education program. Each advisor is responsible for taking notes to share with each advisee, as well as assign the scores in each area on the Professional Fitness Review form. Each student will be assessed according to the Professional Fitness Review at least twice in their degree plan; during the student’s 1st year and again during the 2nd year of the program.

CF Scores –Level 1 is first year, Level 2 is 2nd year, and possible more levels. School of Education Conceptual Framework Learner Outcomes:

Caring: Beliefs Our candidates are committed to ethical and democratic dispositions including respecting the rights and responsibilities of all and recognizing diverse points of view.

Caring: Actions Our candidates act in accord with the rights and responsibilities of all, are sensitive to developmental, social, and cultural differences, and encourage a democratic culture.

Capable: Knowledge Our candidates are knowledgeable about the foundations of education and about their specialty area(s), including appropriate practices.

Capable: Practice Our candidates apply their knowledge through best practices that include the effective use of educational and information technology and appropriate assessments.

Connected: Communication Our candidates communicate effectively through a variety of representations (spoken, written, and digital).

Connected: Integration Our candidates synthesize their knowledge and practices to integrate interdisciplinary perspectives and applications by making connections to real life and by making global issues locally relevant.

EEDA MEd Counselor Education –School Counseling

|Concept |

|Where Taught? |

|Assessment* |

|Artifact |

| |

| |

| |

| |

| |

| |

| |

| |

| |

| |

| |

|Career Guidance |

|EDC 801 - Foundations of Professional School Counseling and EDC 841 -School Counseling Internship |

|short answer exam question and internship experience |

|short answer exam question response (describe) and written summary (demonstrate) of a developmentally appropriate career guidance intervention |

| |

|Clusters of study |

|EDC 801 - Foundations of Professional School Counseling |

|short answer exam question |

|short answer exam question response |

| |

|Elements of Career Guidance Model |

|EDC 801 - Foundations of Professional School Counseling |

|short answer exam question |

|short answer exam question response |

| |

|Diverse Learning Styles |

|EDC 801 - Foundations of Professional School Counseling |

|short answer exam question |

|short answer exam question response |

| |

|Contextual Teaching |

|EDC 801 - Foundations of Professional School Counseling |

|short answer exam question |

|short answer exam question response |

| |

|Cooperative Learning |

|EDC 801 - Foundations of Professional School Counseling |

|short answer exam question |

|short answer exam question response |

| |

|Character Education |

|EDC 841 - School Counseling Internship |

|internship experience |

|written summary of student's role in the character education program at his/her internship site |

| |

| | | | |

| | | | |

| | | | |

MHRD Assessment Mapping to ASTD Standards and CF Elements

| |Assessme|Assessme|Assessme|Assessmen|Assessme|

|ASTD Standards from |nt |nt |nt 3/ |t 4/ HRD|nt 5/ |

|the American Society for Training and Development representing the leading |1/HRD |2/HRD |HRD 860 |897 |HRD 847 |

|professional organization in the training and performance improvement field having |830 |825 | | | |

|over 100,000 members. | | | | | |

| | | | | | |

|School of Education Conceptual Framework Indicators | | | | | |

|ASTD STANDARD 1 - Designing Learning- | | |XX | |XX |

|Designing, creating, and developing learning interventions. | | | | | |

|ASTD STANDARD 2 - Improving Human Performance- |XX | | |XX |XX |

|Applying a systematic process for designing and developing cost effective and ethical| | | | | |

|solutions to close performance gaps. | | | | | |

|ASTD STANDARD 3 – Delivering Training |XX | | | |XX |

|Delivering learning solutions that both engage the learner and produces desired | | | | | |

|outcomes. | | | | | |

|ASTD STANDARD 4 - Measuring and Evaluating- | | |XX | | |

|Gathering and analyzing data to answer specific questions regarding the value or | | | | | |

|impact of learning and performance solutions. | | | | | |

|ASTD STANDARD 5 - Facilitating Organizational Change- | |XX | |XX | |

|Leading, managing, and facilitating change within organizations. | | | | | |

|ASTD STANDARD 6 - Managing the Learning Function- | | |XX | |XX |

|Providing leadership in developing human capital. | | | | | |

|ASTD STANDARD 7 - Managing Organizational Knowledge- | |XX | | | |

|Initiating, driving, and integrating the organizations knowledge management efforts. | | | | | |

|CF#1 Caring Actions (CA): Candidates act in accord with the rights and | | |XX 2nd | |XX 1st |

|responsibilities of all, are sensitive to developmental, social, and cultural | | |time | |time |

|differences, and encourage a democratic culture. | | | | | |

|CF#2 Caring Beliefs (CB): Candidates are committed to ethical and democratic |XX 1st | | | |XX 2nd |

|dispositions including respecting the rights and responsibilities of all and |time | | | |time |

|recognizing diverse points of view. | | | | | |

|CF #3 Connected Communication (CC): Candidates communicate effectively through a | | |XX 2nd | |XX |

|variety of representations (spoken, written, and digital). | | |time | |1st time|

|CF#4 Capable Knowledge (CK): Candidates are knowledgeable about the foundations of |xx- 1st |XX | | | |

|education and about their specialty area(s), including appropriate practices. |time |2nd time| | | |

|CF#5 Capable Practice (CP): Candidates apply their knowledge through best practices | | | |XX 2nd |XX 1st |

|that include the effective use of educational and information technology and | | | |time |time |

|appropriate assessments. | | | | | |

|CF #6 Connected Integration (CI): Candidates synthesize their knowledge and practices| | | |XX 2nd |XX 1st |

|to integrate interdisciplinary perspectives and applications by making connections to| | | |time |time |

|real life and by making global issues locally relevant. | | | | | |

updated July 2010, removal of one assessment, follow-up survey.

MEd Reading

|# |Assessment |When occurs |IRA Standards |

| | | |1 |2 |3 |4 |5 |

|1 |PRAXIS scores |END | | |

| | |Beliefs |Actions |Knowledge |Practice |Integration |Communication |

|PRAXIS scores |END | |

| | | |

|1 |[Content-based assessment] |Literature review on the current research base on early |Course requirement in ED EC 895: |

| | |childhood content in math, science, or technology |Integrating Math, Science and |

| | |(student selects the focus): Essay/Reflection |Technology into the Inclusive Early |

| | |CF (CK-1) Capable Knowledge: Candidates are knowledgeable|Childhood Curriculum |

| |NAEYC Standard 4: Teaching and Learning |about the foundations of education and about their | |

| | |specialty area(s), including appropriate practices. | |

| |NAEYC Standard 1: Promotes |CF (CI-2) Capable Integration: Candidates synthesize | |

| |Child Development and Learning |their knowledge and practices to integrate | |

| | |interdisciplinary perspectives and applications by making| |

| | |conn ections to real life and by making global issues | |

| | |locally relevant. | |

|2 |[Assessment of content knowledge in early |A research paper that includes a comparative analysis of |Course requirement in ED EC 840: |

| |childhood education] |theories in early childhood education and implications |Theories of Early Childhood |

| | |for instruction: Essay/Research Paper |Education. |

| |NAEYC Standard 1: |CF (CI-1) Connected Integration: | |

| |Promotes Child Development and Learning |Candidates synthesize their knowledge and practices to | |

| | |integrate interdisciplinary perspectives and applications| |

| |NAEYC Standard 5: |by making connections to real life and by making global | |

| |Becoming a Professional |issues locally relevant. | |

|3 |[Assessment of candidate ability to plan |Comprehensive unit of instruction for an inclusive |Course requirement in ED EC 890: |

| |instruction] |classroom for preschool, kindergarten, or primary level |Assessment and Program Planning in |

| | |that focuses on math, science, or technology: |Early Childhood. |

| | |Project/Unit of Instruction with Activities for Children,| |

| | |Parents, Families, Community. | |

| | | | |

| | | | |

| | |CF (CP-1) Capable Practice: Candidates apply their | |

| |NAEYC Standard 4: |knowledge through best practices that include the | |

| |Teaching and Learning |effective use of educational and information technology | |

| | |and appropriate assessments. | |

| | | | |

| | |CF (CB-2) Caring Beliefs: Candidates are committed to | |

| |NAEYC Standard 3: |ethical and democratic dispositions including respecting | |

| |Observing, Documenting, and Assessing to |the rights and responsibilities of all and recognizing | |

| |Support Young Children and Parents |diverse points of view. | |

| | | | |

| |NAEYC Standard 5: | | |

| |Becoming a Professional | | |

|4 |[Assessment of internship or other |Case study of a family representing cultural diversity as|Course requirement in ED EC 800: |

| |field-based experiences |part of the Service Learning/Internship requirement in an|Parent Education in Early Childhood |

| | |early childhood center with diversity in the forms of |Multicultural Settings |

| | |SES, race, ethnicity, family form, language, special | |

| | |needs, or other: Case Study/Reflective Journal/Log | |

| | |CF (CA-1) Caring Actions: Candidates act in accord with | |

| | |the rights and responsibilities of all, are sensitive to | |

| |NAEYC Standard 2: |developmental, social, and cultural differences, and | |

| |Building Family and Community |encourage a democratic culture. | |

| |Relationships |CF (CC-2) Connected Communication: Candidates | |

| | |communicate effectively through a variety of | |

| |NAEYC Standard 5: |representations (spoken, written, and digital). | |

| |Becoming a Professional | | |

|5 |Additional assessment that addresses NAEYC|Comprehensive Examination: Examination Across Key |Completion of the Program. |

| |standards (required) ] |Components of the Program | |

| | | | |

| |NAEYC Standard 5: | | |

| |Becoming a Professional |CF (CC-1) Connected Communication: Candidates communicate| |

| | |effectively through a variety of representations (spoken,| |

| |NAEYC Standard 1: |written, and digital). | |

| |Promotes Child Development and Learning |CF (CK-2) Capable Knowledge: Candidates are knowledgeable| |

| | |about the foundations of education and about their | |

| | |specialty area(s), including appropriate practices. | |

|6 |Additional assessment that addresses NAEYC|Case study of a child demonstrating special needs in the |Course requirement in ED SP 760: |

| |standards (optional) ] |area of social growth and development, to include the |Social Development and Guidance |

| | |role of the classroom, family, community: Case study |of Young Children in Inclusive |

| | | |Settings |

| |NAEYC Standard 1: Promotes Child |CF (CB-1) Caring Beliefs: Candidates are committed to | |

| |Development and Learning |ethical and democratic dispositions including respecting | |

| | |the rights and responsibilities of all and recognizing | |

| |NAEYC Standard 2: Building Family and |diverse points of view. | |

| |Community Relationships | | |

| | | | |

| |NAEYC Standard 3: Observing, Documenting, |CF (CA-2) Caring actions: Candidates act in accord with | |

| |and Assessing to Support Young Children |the rights and responsibilities of all, are sensitive to | |

| |and Families |developmental, social, and cultural differences, and | |

| | |encourage a democratic culture. | |

| | | | |

| | |CF (CP-2) Capable Practice: Candidates apply their | |

| | |knowledge through best practices that include the | |

| | |effective use of educational and information technology | |

| | |and appropriate assessments. | |

|7 |Additional assessment that addresses NAEYC|Thesis (for students selecting the thesis track of the M.|Completion of the Program |

| |standards (optional) |Ed. In Early Childhood Education). Research Project |*Note: Only students completing a |

| | | |thesis will |

| |NAEYC Standard 1: Promotes Child |CF (CI-3) Connected Integration: Candidates synthesize |have this assessment score recorded. |

| |Development and Learning |their knowledge and practices to integrate | |

| | |interdisciplinary perspectives and applications by making| |

| |NAEYC Standard 4: Teaching and Learning |connections to real life and by making global issues | |

| | |locally relevant. | |

| |NAEYC Standard 5: Becoming a Professional | | |

Revised Spr 2010 to remove an assessment in EDEC 890 the pre-post and moved CF CB1 and CP2 to EDSP 760

Evaluation Rubrics

For NAEYC Standards:

Each instructor will submit an evaluation rubric based on the relevant NAEYC standards for each assignment using the specific scale of 0, 1, and 2. The chart below depicts these 3 levels of evaluation and provides an example of application of the scale to an assignment: Case study of a child demonstrating special needs in the area of social growth and development, to include the role of the classroom, family, and community.

|Assignment |NAEYC Standard |Does not meet requirements = |Meets requirements = 1 |Exceeds requirements = 2 |

| | |0 | | |

|Sample: |NAEYC Standard 1: Promotes |Case study lacks sufficient |Case study provides adequate|Case study provides |

|Case study of a child |Child Development and |content related to the |content related to the |exceptional content related |

|demonstrating special needs |Learning |individualized developmental |individualized developmental|to the individualized |

|in the area of social growth | |needs of the selected child. |needs of the selected child.|developmental needs of the |

|and development, to include | | | |selected child. |

|the role of the classroom, | | | | |

|family, community: Case study| |Case study does not |Case study addresses the |Case study addresses in an |

| |NAEYC Standard 2: Building |adequately address the needs |needs of the child’s family |exceptional way the needs of|

| |Family and Community |of the child’s family or the |and identifies appropriate |the child’s family and |

| |Relationships |use of community resources to|community resources for |excels in integrating |

| | |meet the child and family’s |meeting the needs of the |elements of the community |

| | |needs. |child and family. |that contribute to meeting |

| | | | |the needs of the child and |

| | | | |family. |

| | | | | |

| | | | | |

| | | |Case study includes complete|Case study excels in the |

| | | |information and demonstrates|area of assessment and |

| | | |diverse strategies for |illustrates appropriate and |

| |NAEYC Standard 3: Observing,|Case study does not |assessing the needs of the |diverse strategies for both |

| |Documenting, and Assessing |adequately demonstrate the |child and family in order to|assessing the child and |

| |to Support Young Children |use of appropriate |determine needs. |family’s needs and then |

| |and Families |observational and other | |determining specific |

| | |assessment strategies for the| |interventions to meet |

| | |child and family in order to | |educational and family |

| | |determine their needs. | |support needs. |

For Conceptual Framework (CF) Standards:

The following rubrics will be used to evaluate each of the Eugene T. Moore School of Education’s CF assessment items using a binary (met, not met) system.

CF Item: Caring Actions (CA-1) Case study of a family representing cultural diversity as part of the Service Learning/Internship requirement in an early childhood center with diversity in the forms of SES, race, ethnicity, family form, language, special needs, or other: Case Study/Reflective Journal/Log

o Candidate meets requirements

o Candidate does not meet requirements

CF Item: Caring Actions (CA-2) Case study of a child demonstrating special needs in the area of social growth and development, to include the role of the classroom, family, community: Case study

o Candidate meets requirements

o Candidate does not meet requirements

CF Item: Caring Beliefs (CB-1) Case study of a child demonstrating special needs in the area of social growth and development, to include the role of the classroom, family, community: Case study

o Candidate meets requirements

o Candidate does not meet requirements

CF Item: Caring Beliefs (CB-2) Comprehensive unit of instruction for an inclusive classroom for preschool, kindergarten, or primary level that focuses on math, science, or technology: Project/Unit of Instruction with Activities for Children, Parents, Families, Community.

o Candidate meets requirements

o Candidate does not meet requirements

CF Item: Connected Communication (CC-1) Comprehensive Examination: Examination Across Key Components of the Program

o Candidate meets requirements

o Candidate does not meet requirements

CF Item: Connected Communication (CC-2) Case study of a family representing cultural diversity as part of the Service Learning/Internship requirement in an early childhood center with diversity in the forms of SES, race, ethnicity, family form, language, special needs, or other: Case Study/Reflective Journal/Log

o Candidate meets requirements

o Candidate does not meet requirements

CF Item: Capable Knowledge (CK-1): Literature review on the current research base on early childhood content in math, science, or technology (student selects the focus): Essay/Reflection

o Candidate meets requirements

o Candidate does not meet requirements

CF Item: Capable Knowledge (CK-2): Comprehensive Examination: Examination Across Key Components of the Program

o Candidate meets requirements

o Candidate does not meet requirements

CF Item: Capable Practice (CP-1): Comprehensive unit of instruction for an inclusive classroom for preschool, kindergarten, or primary level that focuses on math, science, or technology: Project/Unit of Instruction with Activities for Children, Parents, Families, Community

o Candidate meets requirements

o Candidate does not meet requirements

CF Item: Capable Practice (CP-2): Assess a child’s learning in a pre/post method based on an educational intervention. Provide quantitative and qualitative data: Case study.

o Candidate meets requirements

o Candidate does not meet requirements

CF Item: Connected Integration (CI-1) A research paper that includes a comparative analysis of theories in early childhood education and implications for instruction: Essay/Research Paper

o Candidate meets requirements

o Candidate does not meet requirements

CF Item: Connected Integration (CI-2) Literature review on the current research base on early childhood content in math, science, or technology (student selects the focus): Essay/Reflection

o Candidate meets requirements

o Candidate does not meet requirements

CF item: Connected Integration (CI-3) Thesis (for students selecting the thesis track of the M. Ed. In Early Childhood Education). Research Project (Note: Only students completing a thesis will have this assessment indicator recorded).

o Candidate meets requirements

o Candidate does not meet requirements

MEd in Secondary Education

Assessments 2-6 will be required components of each candidate’s e-Portfolio, which is to be submitted when

applying to take the comprehensive exam.

|Name of Assessment1 |Type or |When the Assessment is|Assessment Description (the |Scale used for meaning of |Description of |

| |Form of Assessment2 |Administered |assignment given to the candidate) |the score |Field Experience |

|(See attached pages.) |(Specific Name of | | | |(required for all |

| |Assignment) | | |Do you have a scoring |programs) |

| | | | |rubric/guide? Yes/ No | |

|1 |Content Knowledge |Comprehensive Exam - |End of Program |Candidates will be challenged on |1: Unsatisfactory | |

| | |Content | |content, as well as pedagogy, to |2: Competent | |

| | | | |address questions and problems |3: Target | |

| | | | |submitted by content (& education) | | |

| | | | |faculty members. | | |

|2 |Content Knowledge |State Contents |EDSEC 765: Secondary |Candidates will study content |1: Unsatisfactory | |

| | |Standards Critique |School Curriculum |standards and create a concept map |2: Competent | |

| | | | |and reflective paper that shows how |3: Target | |

| | | | |key ideas for four secondary courses | | |

| | | | |are linked. | | |

|3 |Planning/Implementing|Unit Plan |EDSEC 765: Secondary |Candidates will design a unit that |1: Unsatisfactory | |

| |appropriate teaching | |School Curriculum |targets key ideas in a secondary |2: Competent | |

| |and learning | | |course and is differentiated for |3: Target | |

| |experiences | | |individual and cultural differences. | | |

|4 |Assessment of |Action Research Project|EDSEC 803: Advanced |Candidates will work with a team to |1: Unsatisfactory |The field experience|

| |internship or other | |Methods of Teaching in|design and implement a study to |2: Competent |will involve |

| |field experiences | |the Secondary School |measure the impact of an |3: Target |candidates as their |

| | | | |instructional innovation upon student| |innovation is |

| | | | |performance. | |implemented and then|

| | | | | | |evaluated. |

|5 |Assessment of |Authentic Assessment |EDSEC 803: Advanced |Candidates will develop and use |1: Unsatisfactory |The field experience|

| |candidate effect on | |Methods of Teaching in|diagnostic, formative, and summative |2: Competent |will involve |

| |student learning | |the Secondary School |assessments to determine the impact |3: Target |candidates as their |

| | | | |of different instructional strategies| |Unit Plan is |

| | | | |upon student learning. | |assessed. |

|6 |Additional assessment|Comprehensive Exam – |End of Program |Candidates will study an educational |1: Unsatisfactory | |

| | |Critical Issue in | |problem in their content area, study |2: Competent | |

| | |Content Area | |the literature, and propose a |3: Target | |

| | | | |solution that will address standards | | |

| | | | |and would enhance performance for all| | |

| | | | |students in a democratic manner. | | |

From CHE Report: SECTION III—RELATIONSHIP OF ASSESSMENT TO STANDARDS/OUTCOMES

(We added the Clemson CF column to show potential mapping.)

I. All programs complete Chart #1.

II. A. Programs for the Advanced Preparation of Teachers complete Chart #2.

B. Other Advanced Programs complete Chart #3.

Chart #1 - For each standard/outcome on the chart below; identify the assessment(s) in Section II that address the standard/outcome.

One assessment may apply to multiple standards/outcomes.

|ESSENTIAL PROFESSIONAL TOOLS FOR ALL CANDIDATES IN ADVANCED PROGRAMS (all programs) |APPLICABLE ASSESSMENTS FROM SECTION|

| |II |

|1. Cultural Competence. Advanced program candidates demonstrate a high level of competence in understanding and responding to |3, 4, 5, 6 |

|diversity of culture, language, and ethnicity. | |

|2. Knowledge and Application of Ethical Principles. Advanced program candidates demonstrate in-depth knowledge and thoughtful |3, 4, 5, 6 |

|application of the Code of Ethical Conduct and other guidelines relevant to their professional role. | |

|3. Communication Skills. Advanced program candidates possess a high level of oral, written, and technological communication |1, 2, 4, 6 |

|skills, with specialization for the specific professional role(s) emphasized in the program. For programs for the advanced | |

|preparation of teachers, candidates meet ISTE standards. For doctoral programs, candidates are prepared to publish and present | |

|at conferences. | |

|4. Mastery of Relevant Theory and Research. Advanced program candidates demonstrate in-depth, critical knowledge of the theory |1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 |

|and research relevant to the professional role(s) and focus area(s) emphasized in the program. | |

|5. Skills in Identifying and Using Professional Resources. Advanced program candidates demonstrate a high level of skill in |3, 4, 6 |

|identifying and using the human, material, and technological resources needed to perform their professional roles and to keep | |

|abreast of the field’s changing knowledge base. | |

|6. Inquiry Skills and Knowledge of Research Methods. Using systematic and professionally accepted approaches, advanced program |4, 6 |

|candidates demonstrate inquiry skills, showing their ability to investigate questions relevant to their practice and | |

|professional goals. | |

|7. Skills in Collaborating, Teaching, and/or Mentoring. Advanced program candidates demonstrate the flexible, varied skills |4, 5 |

|needed to work collaboratively and effectively with other adults in professional roles. | |

|8. Advocacy Skills. Advanced program candidates demonstrate competence in articulating and advocating for sound professional |3, 5, 6 |

|practices and public policies for the positive development and learning of all students. (Appears to be too P-12 oriented) | |

|Suggested change “…..public policies related to one’s field of practice.” | |

|9. Leadership Skills. Advanced program candidates reflect on and use their abilities and opportunities to think strategically, |2, 4, 6 |

|build consensus, create change, and influence better outcomes for students, families, and the profession. | |

|(Appears to be too P-12 oriented) Recommend: …”for one’s constituencies and the profession.” | |

Chart #2 – (For Programs for the Advanced Preparation of Teachers Only) For each NBPTS standard on the chart below; identify the assessment(s) in Section II that address the standard. One assessment may apply to multiple NBPTS standards.

|NBPTS STANDARDS |APPLICABLE ASSESSMENTS FROM SECTION II |

|(Advanced Programs for Continuing Preparation of Teachers) | |

|CORE PROPOSITIONS |

|1. Teachers are Committed to Students and Learning. |3, 4, 5, 6 |

|Demonstrate an understanding of students’ cognitive development and the influence of context and culture. | |

|Foster all students cognitive, affective, and social/cultural development, adjusting practice to meet individual needs. | |

|2. Teachers Know the Subjects They Teach and How to Teach Those Subjects to Students. |1, 3, 4, 5 |

|Know subject(s) they teach. | |

|Know students’ typical understanding of subjects and how to teach subject(s). | |

|Foster problem posing and solving. | |

|3. Teachers are Responsible for Managing and Monitoring Student Learning. |3, 4, 5, 6 |

|Establish disciplined learning environment and effectively engage students using a range of appropriate teaching techniques. | |

|Enlist expertise of others to complement own teaching. | |

|Assess individual students and whole class using multiple measures and communicate assessment/data collection to parents. | |

|4. Teachers Think Systematically about Their Practice and Learn from Experience. |2, 4, 5 |

|Demonstrate an experimental and problem solving approach to teaching applying theory, research, and personal experience to making decisions of practice.| |

|Critically examine practice on an on-going basis. | |

|5. Teachers are Members of Learning Communities. |4, 5 |

|Work collaboratively with others, including colleagues and parents, to foster school progress and improve educational experiences in the context of the | |

|community/state and through the development of curriculum, instruction, and staff. | |

|Use community resources to the benefit of students. | |

|6. Evidence of significant learning beyond initial preparation. |1, 2, 4, 6 |

|STD/ASSESS |1. Comps - |2. State Contents |3. Unit Plan |4. Action Rsch |5. Authentic |6. Comps-Crit |

| |Content |Standards Critique | |Proj |Assessmt |Issue Content |

| | | | | | |Area |

|1) Cult Comp | | |X (CB1) |X |X |X (CB2) |

|2) Know & App | | |X |X (CA1) |X (CP2) |X (CA2) |

|3) Commun |X (CC2) |X (CC1) | |X | |X |

|4) Theory/Rsch |X (CK2) |X |X |X (CK1) |X |X |

|5) Prof Resour | |X (CP1) | |X | | |

|6) Inq & Rsch | | |X (CI1) |X | |X |

|7) Collab,Tch, Men | | |X |X | |

|8) Advocacy |X | |X | |X |X |

|9) Leadership | |X | |X | |X (CI2) |

|N1) Commit | | |X |X |X |X |

|N2) Cont/Ped |X | |X |X |X | |

|N3) Mng/Mon | | |X |X |X |X |

|N4) Reflect | |X | |X |X | |

|N5) Learn Comm | | | |X |X | |

|N6) Sig Learn |X |X | |X | |X |

Comprehensive Examination

(Master’s candidate has completed or will have completed at least 24 hours toward the degree by the end of the semester in which the exam is taken.)

The Comprehensive Examination is a 3-hour written examination that addresses content and professional standards and competencies. It is divided into three sections:

1) A content section, which is used for Assessment #1

2) A critical issues section, which is used for Assessment #6

3) A section to be determined by the candidate’s committee

The content section will be supplied by a committee member in the content discipline and approved by the chair. In this section, the candidate must demonstrate satisfactory knowledge in the appropriate subject as determined by a majority of the committee.

The critical issues section will be given to the candidate a minimum of two weeks prior to the examination date, though the candidate will have to compose her/his response during the examination period without reference to notes. The question follows:

Identify one critical issue in your content area of education (English, mathematics, science, social studies or foreign language). Describe the issue and explain why it is important or controversial. Summarize what the current literature suggests about this problem. Make sure that you allude to at least three (3) thinkers in the field. Finally, give your personal and reflective suggestions or solutions for addressing this critical issue. Explain how your suggestions or solutions would enhance performance for all students in a democratic manner and in accord with state and/or national content standards.

Scoring for these two sections (Assessment #1 and Assessment #6) of the Comprehensive Examination will be based on the following rubrics:

1. Unsatisfactory: The response contains significant flaws or has significant omissions.

2. Competent: The response is accurate and sufficient.

3. Target: The response is accurate, sufficient, well developed and well supported.

Rubrics for Evaluation of Assessment #1 in Regard to Conceptual Framework follow:

Connected Communication

1: Unsatisfactory: Response is vague and does not clearly convey candidate’s ideas

2: Competent: Response conveys candidate’s ideas clearly and effectively

3: Target: Response is clear and conveys conceptual understanding in more than one way

Capable Knowledge

1: Unsatisfactory: Response either does not demonstrate understanding of underlying concepts or demonstrates at a superficial level

2: Competent: Response demonstrates satisfactory understanding of the principal underlying concepts

3: Target: Response demonstrates understanding of underlying concepts at a deep and sophisticated level

Rubrics for Evaluation of Assessment #6 in Regard to Conceptual Framework follow:

Caring Beliefs

1: Unsatisfactory: Response does not address how solution would meet needs of all students in a democratic manner

2: Competent: Response shows awareness of and strategies to enhance learning of all students in a democratic manner

3: Target: Response proposes insightful, creative and original strategies to enhance learning of all students in a democratic way

Caring Actions

1: Unsatisfactory: Response reflects no intent to act on proposed solution or only in a superficial way

2: Competent: Response reflects intent to act on solution in a way that would respect rights of all and encourage a democratic culture

3: Target: Response reflects intent for candidate to become deeply involved in solving the problem in a significant way

Connected Integration

1: Unsatisfactory: Response does not reflect an appropriate synthesis of the literature and does not provide practical solution

2: Competent: Response provides provide solution to problem that is consistent with some of the literature in the field

3: Target: Response synthesizes literature and integrates practical solutions with current thinking in the field

MEd Special Education - MRDD

|MEd in Special Education |Assessme|Assessme|Assessment3|Assessme|Assessme|Assessment6|

| |nt1 |nt2 | |nt4 |nt5 | |

|Standard 1. Cultural Competence. Advanced program candidates demonstrate a high level of| | | | | | |

|competence in understanding and responding to diversity of culture, language, and |X |X | | | | |

|ethnicity. | | | | | | |

| | | | | | | |

| |(CA1) |(CA2) | | | | |

|CF Caring Actions (CA): Candidates act in accord with the rights and responsibilities of| | | | | | |

|all, are sensitive to developmental, social, and cultural differences, and encourage a | | | | | | |

|democratic culture. | | | | | | |

|Standard 2. Knowledge and Application of Ethical Principles. Advanced program candidates| | | | | | |

|demonstrate in-depth knowledge and thoughtful application of the Code of Ethical Conduct|X | | | | |X |

|and other guidelines relevant to their professional role. | | | | | | |

| | | | | | | |

| | | | | | | |

| |(CB1) | | | | |(CB2) |

|CF Caring Beliefs (CB): Candidates are committed to ethical and democratic dispositions | | | | | | |

|including respecting the rights and responsibilities of all and recognizing diverse | | | | | | |

|points of view. | | | | | | |

|Standard 3. Communication Skills. Advanced program candidates possess a high level of | | | | | | |

|oral, written, and technological communication skills, with specialization for the | | |X | |X | |

|specific professional role(s) emphasized in the program. For doctoral programs, | | | | | | |

|candidates are prepared to publish and present at conferences. | | | | | | |

| | | | | | | |

| | | |(CC1) | |(CC2) | |

|CF Connected Communication (CC): Candidates communicate effectively through a variety of| | | | | | |

|representations (spoken, written, and digital). | | | | | | |

|Standard 4. Mastery of Relevant Theory and Research. Advanced program candidates | | | | | | |

|demonstrate in-depth, critical knowledge of the theory and research relevant to the | |X | | | |X |

|professional role(s) and focus area(s) emphasized in the program. | | | | | | |

| | | | | | | |

| | |(CK1) | | | |(CK2) |

| | | | | | | |

| | | | | | | |

|CF Capable Knowledge (CK): Candidates are knowledgeable about the foundations of | | | | | | |

|education and about their specialty area(s), including appropriate practices. | | | | | | |

|Standard 5. Skills in Identifying and Using Professional Resources. Advanced program | | | | | | |

|candidates demonstrate a high level of skill in identifying and using the human, |X | | |X | | |

|material, and technological resources needed to perform their professional roles and to | | | | | | |

|keep abreast of the field’s changing knowledge base. | | | | | | |

| | | | | | | |

| |(CP1) | | |(CP2) | | |

|CF Capable Practice (CP): Candidates apply their knowledge through best practices that | | | | | | |

|include the effective use of educational and information technology and appropriate | | | | | | |

|assessments. | | | | | | |

|Standard 6. Inquiry Skills and Knowledge of Research Methods. Using systematic and | | | | | | |

|professionally accepted approaches, advanced program candidates demonstrate inquiry | | | | | |X |

|skills, showing their ability to investigate questions relevant to their practice and | | | | | | |

|professional goals. | | | | | | |

|Standard 7. Skills in Collaborating, Teaching, and/or Mentoring. Advanced program | | | | | | |

|candidates demonstrate the flexible, varied skills needed to work collaboratively and | | | |X | |X |

|effectively with other adults in professional roles. | | | | | | |

|Standard 8. Advocacy Skills. Advanced program candidates demonstrate competence in | | | | | | |

|articulating and advocating for sound professional practices and public policies for the| | | |X | | |

|positive development and learning of all students. | | | | | | |

| Standard 9. Leadership Skills. Advanced program candidates reflect on and use their | |(CI1) | | | | |

|abilities and opportunities to think strategically, build consensus, create change, and | | | | | |X |

|influence better outcomes for students, families, and the profession. | | | | | | |

| | | | | | | |

| | | | | | |(CI2) |

|CF Connected Integration (CI): Candidates synthesize their knowledge and practices to | | | | | | |

|integrate interdisciplinary perspectives and applications by making connections to real | | | | | | |

|life and by making global issues locally relevant. | | | | | | |

Assessments

1. Doctoral Seminar – Students will complete all requirements included in the Doctoral Seminar including a Preliminary Literature Review.

2. Comprehensive Exam - The comprehensive written examination is designed to cover the areas of knowledge most closely related to the student’s planned goals and research. The content and scope of the written examination questions are at the discretion of the advisory committee.

3. National Presentation - Students will conduct a national presentation as a primary author and/or demonstrate competency in scholarly communication within a professional setting.

4. Undergraduate Teaching - Students will teach a college/university undergraduate class and/or demonstrate competency in instructional methods as it relates to higher education.

5. Manuscript Submission - Students will submit a manuscript for publication (national level preferred) as a primary author and/or demonstrate competency in scholarly writing in an external resource.

6. Dissertation Defense - The candidate’s advisory committee will conduct the oral defense and all faculty members are invited to participate. The final examination demands a broad and penetrating interpretation by the student of the research project and conclusions. The final manuscript must be approved by the advisory committee.

-----------------------

[1] Identify assessment by title used in the program; refer to Section IV for further information on appropriate assessment to include.

[2] Identify the type of assessment (e.g., essay, case study, project, comprehensive exam, reflection, state licensure test, portfolio).

[3] Indicate the point in the program when the assessment is administered (e.g., admission to the program, admission to student teaching/internship, required courses [specify course title and numbers], or completion of the program).

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

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

Google Online Preview   Download