Washburn.edu



Revised 05-27-15Program Report FormatMathematics (Grades 6-12)Kansas State Department of EducationCOVER SHEETEducation Preparation Provider (EPP): FORMTEXT Washburn UniversityAccredited By: FORMCHECKBOX KSDE FORMCHECKBOX NCATE/CAEP Date Submitted: FORMTEXT 9-30-16Name of Preparer(s): FORMTEXT Janet SharpEPP Unit Head Name: FORMTEXT Dr. Cherry SteffenUnit Head Phone Number: FORMTEXT 670-1943 Email: FORMTEXT cherry.steffen@washburn.eduLevel of the Program: FORMCHECKBOX Initial FORMCHECKBOX AdvancedGrade levels for which candidates are being prepared: FORMCHECKBOX 6-12Is this program being offered at more than one site? FORMCHECKBOX Yes FORMCHECKBOX NoIf yes, please list the sites at which the program is offered: FORMTEXT ?????Program Report Status: FORMCHECKBOX New Program FORMCHECKBOX Continued Program FORMCHECKBOX Dormant Program(NEW PROGRAMS MUST SUBMIT SYLLABI)A PROGRAM WILL NOT BE RECOMMENDED FOR FULL APPROVAL IF IT MEETS FEWER THAN 75% OF THE STANDARDS. GENERAL DIRECTIONSThe following directions are designed to assist institutions as they complete this program report. To complete the report, institutions must provide data from multiple assessments that, taken as a whole, will demonstrate candidate mastery of the Kansas standards. These data will also be used to answer the following questions. Reviewers expect these prompts to be answered by the report.Have candidates mastered the necessary knowledge for the subjects they will teach or the jobs they will perform?Do candidates meet state licensure requirements?Do candidates understand teaching and learning and can they plan their teaching?Can candidates apply their knowledge in classrooms and schools?Are candidates effective in promoting student learning?To that end, the program report form includes the following sections:I. Contextual Information – provides the opportunity for institutions to present general information to help reviewers understand the program.II. and III. Chart with Standards and Assessments – provides the opportunity for institutions to submit multiple assessments, scoring guides or criteria, and assessment data as evidence that standards are being met.– provides the opportunity for institutions to indicate which of the assessments are being used to determine if candidates meet program standards.IV. Evidence for Meeting Standards – provides the opportunity for institutions to discuss the assessments and assessment data in terms of standards.V. Use of Assessment Results to Improve Candidate and Program Performance – provides the opportunity for institutions to indicate how faculty are using the data from assessments to improve candidate performance and the program, as it relates to content knowledge; pedagogical and professional knowledge, and skills; and effects on student learning.Page limits are specified for each of the narrative responses required in Sections IV and V of the report, with each page approximately equivalent to one text page of single-spaced, 12-point type. Each attachment required in Sections I and IV of the report should be kept to a maximum of six text pages. Although attachments longer than five pages will be accepted electronically, staff will require institutions to revise reports submitted with lengthy attachments.Except for the required attachments, institutional responses can be entered directly onto the form. Specific directions are included at the beginning of each section. SECTION I—CONTEXTComplete the following contextual information:A program of study that outlines the courses and experiences required for all candidates to complete the program. The program of study must include course titles and hours of credit per course. (The program of study will be provided as an attachment in the Document Warehouse -- maximum of five text pages.) NEW PROGRAMS MUST SUBMIT SYLLABI IN THE DOCUMENT WAREHOUSE.(response is limited to 6 pages, not including charts)Program of Study: Attachment in the document warehouse.Provide the following contextual information: Description of the EPP’s conceptual framework and how it relates to the program. FORMTEXT The development of Reflective Educators is the conceptual framework that guides the preparation of 6-12 teacher educators at Washburn University. A Reflective Educator demonstrates knowledge, values, and practices in six dimensions of reflection: reflection on self as an emerging, developing, and maturing professional; reflection on the context of teaching and learning; reflection on student differences; reflection on content; reflection on materials and methods; and reflection on assessment as a process for change. Courses, clinical and field experiences, and assessments are guided by the fundamentals of the conceptual framework. The faculty handbook documents the research on which the Reflective Educator model is based and provides detail on all six areas of dimension. All six dimensions of reflection are found throughout the 6-12 teacher education program. The manner in which each course connects with the Reflective Educator model is specific and noted in course syllabi. Candidates observe and teach in a variety of classroom-based contexts through assignments, practica and student teaching. Candidates reflect on teaching and learning interactions through journals, papers, projects, portfolios, lesson/unit reflections, and case studies. They also analyze and reflect on students' performance through lesson plan assessments and the KPTP. Our preservice teachers are prepared in collaboration with professionals from local districts. candidates are placed in a variety of classroom and school environments with continuous monitoring by university supervisors who guide and assist them in becoming effective and reflective educators. Varied field-based experiences provide opportunities for preservice teachers to work with learners from diverse cultures, backgrounds, and with varied needs in order to examine what they know about the process of teaching/learning, themselves as professionals, and their students as learners. As a result, candidates develop authentic understanding of student differences and use this knowledge to reflect on and modify instruction to meet student needs. Reflection on content, methods and materials occur as candidates plan lessons and units across content areas and grade levels while adjusting for the needs of students. Preservice teachers demonstrate a broad grasp of their subject areas as well as the ability to integrate concepts across academic disciplines. Candidates reflect on their own strengths and weaknesses in content knowledge and teaching skills through lesson/unit reflections. Regardless of content area, assessment is a constant in lesson and unit planning throughout the program. Preservice teachers demonstrate their ability to assess students' performance and reflect on the data with regard to both their own teaching and student learning through implementation of lessons, case studies, and the departmental work sample project (KPTP). Reflection is central to the preparation of Washburn teacher educators at all levels and across all programs.In 2016 the Department revised the conceptual framework of the unit. Time was spent discussing the current six dimensions and two more dimensions were added to reflect the overall philosophy of the department and to be in line with current standards.Eight separate, yet strongly interdependent, Dimensions of Reflection have been identified that influence the education and development of educators at all levels of professional practice and these include:Reflection on Self as an Emerging, Developing, and Maturing Professional Reflection on Collaboration and LeadershipReflection on the Context of Teaching and Learning Reflection on Student Diversity Reflection on Content Reflection on Instructional PracticesReflection on Assessment as a Process to Inform Decision MakingReflection on the Role of Technology in Teaching and LearningDescription of the EPP assessment system as a whole including but not limited to transition points, transition requirements, and use of data for candidate performance and program and EPP improvement. FORMTEXT Assessment as a Comprehensive SystemThe unit regularly collects, maintains, and analyzes data on three key elements:1. Candidate assessment2. Program assessments3. Unit operationsCANDIDATE ASSESSMENTThe assessment of all candidates follows 4 distinct phases, or transition points, as candidates move through the program. Specific requirements must be met for a candidate to move to the next phase. The requirements for each phase are discussed belowPhase 1 –Admission to Teacher EducationCompletion of at least 30 credit hours of general education course work, successful completion of ED 150, ED 225 and ED 285 with a grade of C or better, an overall GPA of 2.75 or better, successful completion of the Praxis I (CORE) or an ACT of 24 or higher, professional references, and a signed Professional Conduct and Dispositions form.Phase II – Professional DevelopmentSuccessful completion of professional education courses with a grade of C or better, monitoring of professional conduct and dispositions.Phase III – Program Completion (Student Teaching)To be admitted to student teaching candidates need to meet the following: Filed a Student Teaching Application by the established deadline, have completed all professional education courses with a grade of C or better prior to the student teaching semester, have completed all content area teaching specialty courses with a grade of C or better prior to the student teaching semester, have completed all general education courses and courses in the content/specialty area prior to student teaching, have a cumulative professional education GPA of 2.75 or better, a specialty GPA of 2.75 or better, and an overall cumulative GPA of 2.50, be approved by the Washburn Department of Education, and submitted updates of a KBI Background check and current TB test results by assigned dates.Phase IV - Follow-up of Program CompletersSuccessful completion of required content test(s) for licensure, follow-up of program completers, KPTP data, impact on student learning data, and Student Teaching Evaluations.PROGRAM ASSESSMENTSProgram assessments include such things as field experiences, impact on student learning, demographics and dispositions. Specific assessment information collected includes:Licensure Program Assessment - (6-8 assessments per licensure program, data is collected and reviewed at least annually for each assessment. Content test scores and courses grades (assessments one and five) are collected and summarized in the university Banner system; assessments three and four (KPTP and Student Teaching evaluations) are collected and summarized by the unit each semester).PLT and Content Test ScoresStudent Teaching EvaluationsImpact on Student Learning Data (academic and nonacademic)Field Experience Placement DataEvaluation of Professional DispositionsEvaluation of Diversity Proficiencies (tied to licensure program assessments)Candidate Diversity DispositionsKPTP (formally WUPA or STEP) scoresFollow-Up Surveys of Program CompletersTeaching Retention DataDemographic data of Schools and CandidatesUNIT OPERATIONSData on unit operations includes the following:Department Chair EvaluationAdvising SurveyCandidate ComplaintsFaculty/Course EvaluationsAnnual Faculty Activity ReportsProgram Evaluation Surveys Demographics, Licensure and Qualifications of Cooperating TeachersEducation Interview Day SurveysThe unit has a clearly established assessment system. We have a unit assessment director and an assessment calendar which shows when assessments are completed. Data for each assessment is collected, summarized, and reviewed at least once a year. The unit has assessment retreats twice a year (January & August) where data is reviewed, discussed as a mechanism for program improvement. We have a unit assessment committee which meets twice a year and includes school district staff, a student representative and UTEC faculty. We share data with teachers, unit faculty, and candidates.as well as the public through data provided in our department website. We store and access data in our secure internal ‘S’ drive. Four of the 6-8 assessments for licensure programs are integrated into our system such as content test scores and course grades. A considerable amount of data, such as candidate information and Praxis test scores, are input into the university Banner system and reports can be accessed through the Argos reporting tool. We have a number of reports set up within Argos such as content test scores and course grades which are accessed frequently. We submit multiple reports each year that require the department to collect and analyze assessment information such as PEDS, Title II, CAEP Part C, and the WU annual assessment reports. Our assessments are linked to the 10 InTASC standards. The unit uses a consistent assessment rubric including indicators for Advanced, Target, Developing, and Unacceptable performance.Student Teaching Work SampleThe unit requires all completing student teachers to successfully prepare and pass a teacher work sample. While the basic structure and format of this assessment has been the same the name of the work sample and some specific information required has varied somewhat. Over the last several years we have used the KPTP and the STEP (Student Teacher Evaluation Portfolio). In 2013-14 we used the KPTP and it was scored in a blind review by unit faculty and an outside paid reviewer. There is a maximum score of 30 on the KPTP and candidates were required to earn a 21 or better on the KPTP. The STEP was a unit developed assessment that incorporated all aspects of the current KPTP plus some additional indicators for classroom management, technology and reflection. It was used in the fall 2014 and spring 2015 semesters and was scored in a blind review by at least two members of the unit faculty. The STEP had a maximum score of 92 points divided across four constructs (Construct 1: Learner and Learning (20 points), Construct 2: Instruction (32 points), Construct 3: Assessment (20 points), and Construct 4: Professional Responsibility and Reflection (20 points). Candidates were required to earn at least 75% on the STEP. For several reasons it was decided that we should go back to the KPTP and this was required in the fall of 2015. In 2015-16 candidates submit KPTP’s to KSDE and pay $60 each for the reviews. It should be stressed that although the names of these assessments has differed what is required of candidates has been very much the same.Description of the criteria for admission, retention, and exit from the program, including required GPAs and minimum grade requirements for the content courses accepted by the program. Please explain the requirements for the EPP as a whole, by level (if applicable), and include any exceptions. FORMTEXT Admission:Completion of 30 hours of university level coursework at the time of application including the Professional Sequence of courses ED 150, ED 285, and ED 225Cumulative GPA of 2.75 or higherC or better grades in Professional Education and University Core courseworkGrades of C or better in Education and University core coursesAccurate declaration of major University/Professional Recommendation Complete and submit a signed Professional Conduct Dispositions formMeet minimum scores in one of 3 skills tests: Praxis CORE Academic Skills Test for Educators with minimum scores of: Writing: 162, Reading: 156, and Mathematics: 150, or Pre-professional Skills Test (PPST) with minimum scores of: Writing:172, Reading:173, and Mathematics: 172, or Composite ACT greater than or equal to 24, or SAT score greater than or equal to 1665.For program completion candidates must obtain at least a 21 out of 30 on the KPTP and have at least Target level (3.0) on the Student Teaching Evaluation completed by cooperating teachers and university supervisors. They must have an overall GPA of 2.75 to apply for student teaching and have all other course work completed. To apply for their teaching license candidates must take and pass the required content test(s), but this is not a graduation requirement. Description of the field and clinical experiences required for the program, including the number of hours for early field experiences and the number of hours/weeks for student teaching or internships. Please explain the requirements for the EPP as a whole, by level, and include any exceptions. FORMTEXT Several field-based experiences are required throughout the 6-12 program for all teacher candidates. Beginning with a preservice teacher’s first semester before being admitted to the program and culminating with student teaching, a classroom experience is tied to many courses either as a structured observation or direct classroom instruction. Each field placement provides a unique learning experience and each successive semester provides more intensity and responsibility for instruction. Placements are tracked so that students experience multiple levels and varied settings across four districts in and around Topeka, including urban and suburban schools. All teacher candidates experience many students with IEPs and special needs across methods block placements, and all have one or more field experiences with populations of highly diverse students from varied cultural backgrounds, ethnicities, and low income learners. Additionally, some practicum and student teaching assignment also reflect distinctly rural or small town schools. The Department of Education’s Field Placement Coordinator secures placements for EPIC, ED 225, methods, and student teaching. The process of placing and evaluating students in school is a coordinated effort between university professors and our clinical partners. Student teachers are evaluated by both University Supervisors and Cooperating Teachers. University Supervisors, professors, principals, Clinical Teachers, and Cooperating Teachers all play a role in providing excellent field-based learning experiences across the 6-12 teacher education program. Additionally, program advisory councils provide guidance and feedback to improve our field-based experiences.:ED 150 EPIC, requires 35 clock hours of structured observationsED 302 Exceptional Learner, requires approximately 15 hours of structured observation.ED 402—Teaching Struggling Learners, requires approximately 10 hours of structured instruction with a student6-12 Student Teach; Classroom Management; 240+ across 16 weeks3.Chart with Candidate Information:Directions: Provide three years of data on candidates enrolled in the program and completing the program, beginning with the most recent academic year for which numbers have been tabulated. Please report the data separately for any different levels/tracks (e.g., route to licensure, degree, campus, or level) being addressed in this report. Program (initial): FORMTEXT mathematicsAcademic Year# of Candidates Enrolled in the Program# of Program Completers20 FORMTEXT 13-20 FORMTEXT 14 FORMTEXT 9 FORMTEXT 120 FORMTEXT 14-20 FORMTEXT 15 FORMTEXT 10 FORMTEXT 220 FORMTEXT 15-20 FORMTEXT 16 FORMTEXT 10 FORMTEXT 4Note: Enrolled candidates are officially admitted to the program but have not completed the program anytime during the academic year.Note: KSDE uses the Title II definition for program completers. Program completers are persons who have met all the requirements of a state-approved teacher preparation program. Program completers include all those who are documented as having met such requirements. Documentation may take the form of a degree, institutional certificate, program credential, transcript, or other written proof of having met the program’s requirements.Program (Post-baccalaureate – Added Endorsement): FORMTEXT N/AAcademic Year# of Candidates Enrolled in the Program# of Program CompletersMaster’s/Ed. Specialist/Doctoral20 FORMTEXT ??-20 FORMTEXT ?? FORMTEXT ????? FORMTEXT ????? FORMTEXT ?????20 FORMTEXT ??-20 FORMTEXT ?? FORMTEXT ????? FORMTEXT ????? FORMTEXT ?????20 FORMTEXT ??-20 FORMTEXT ?? FORMTEXT ????? FORMTEXT ????? FORMTEXT ?????SECTION II and III—CHART WITH STANDARDS AND ASSESSMENTS In this section, list the multiple assessments that are being submitted as evidence for meeting the Kansas standards for this content area. All programs must provide a minimum of six assessments, maximum of eight assessments; assessments #1-6 are required for all programs. For each assessment, indicate the type or form of the assessment and when it is required/administered in the program. Note: Identify assessment by title used in the program; refer to Section IV for further information on appropriate assessment to include.Identify the type of assessment (e.g., essay, case study, project, comprehensive exam, reflection, portfolio). 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 number], or completion of the program).Assessment 1a Praxis II Content Test Data (Required)Note:Assessment #1a Praxis II content data may be used to meet multiple content standards but not as a stand-alone assessment. The data must be used in conjunction with at least one other assessment (not including other Praxis data). A data table for Praxis II content test must be submitted but a rubric is not required.Assessment 1b Sub-score data (from Praxis II content test) may be utilized but not required.Note:Assessment #1b Praxis II content sub-score data may be used as an assessment for meeting content standards. A data table for Praxis II content sub-score data must be submitted but a rubric is not required. Assessment #1b Praxis II content sub-scores are not used as a stand-alone assessment. The data must be used in conjunction with at least one other assessment (not including Praxis II content or PLT data).Assessment 1c Praxis II Principles of Learning and Teaching Data (Required)Note:Assessment #1c Praxis II PLT data may be used to meet multiple pedagogy standards or multiple pedagogy pieces in standards but not as a stand-alone assessment. The data must be used in conjunction with at least one other assessment (not including Praxis II content or PLT data). A data table for the Praxis II PLT test must be submitted but a rubric is not required. Assessment 1d Sub-score data (from Praxis II PLT test) may be utilized but not requiredNote:Assessment #1d Praxis II PLT sub-score data may be used as an assessment for meeting pedagogy standards. A data table for Praxis II PLT sub-score data must be submitted but a rubric is not required. Assessment #1d Praxis II PLT sub-scores are not used as a stand-alone assessment. Sub-scores must be used in conjunction with at least one other assessment (not including other Praxis data).Assessment 2 Candidate Ability to Plan Instruction (Required)Assessment 3 Clinical Experience (Required)Note:Clinical experience includes practica, student teaching, and internships.Assessment 4 Candidate Effect on Student Learning (Required)Assessment 5 Content-based assessment (Required)] Examples of assessments include comprehensive examinations, projects, comprehensive portfolio tasks and score/s aligned to standards OR up to TEN course grades-based assessments related to content knowledge.Note Course grades-based assessments can only be used for Assessment 5. The program may not use course grades-based assessments and a content based assessment for Assessment 5. One course MAY NOT MEET more than TWO standards. If the course grades-based assessments are used as evidence for meeting two standards, the program must submit the course key assessments’ data results in a total grade per each standard. Do not submit grades for each key assessment, but instead a cumulative grade for all the key assessments together per each standard.Assessment 6 Content-based assessment (Required)Assessments 7 and 8 Content-based assessment (Optional)For each Kansas licensure standard on the chart below, Identify/name the assessment(s) in the assessment column header (multicolored top row). In each standard row, identify the assessment &/or assessment component that is used to address that standard or part of the standard.One assessment may apply to multiple Kansas licensure standards. In Section IV you will describe these assessments in greater detail and summarize and analyze candidate results to document that a majority of your candidates are meeting Kansas standards. To save space, the knowledge and performance indicators of the Kansas licensure standards are not identified here, but are available on the website — . Summary of Standards and AssessmentsStandardThe teacher of Mathematics (Grades 6-12)Assessment 1Praxis 1a) Content1b) Sub-scores1c) PLT1d) PLT sub-scoresAssessment 2 Plan Instruction FORMTEXT Lesson Plan (ED 363) Sample KPTP/STEP TableAssessment 3 Clinicals FORMTEXT Teacher Candidate Summary Evaluation FormsAssessment 4 Student learning FORMTEXT Teacher Work Sample KPTP/STEP Task/Construct 3Assessment 5 OR Course Grades-Based FORMTEXT Course GradesAssessment 6 FORMTEXT Teacher Candidate Summary Evaluation Form Construct 2Assessment 7 FORMTEXT ?????Assessment 8 FORMTEXT ?????The teacher of mathematics has conceptual and procedural understanding of mathematics. FORMTEXT Praxis 1a) Mathematics 6-12 content knowledge FORMTEXT ????? FORMTEXT ????? FORMTEXT ????? FORMTEXT MA 388 (Capstone Research) FORMTEXT ????? FORMTEXT ????? FORMTEXT ?????The teacher of mathematics can demonstrate conceptual and procedural understanding of number and number systems and is able to identify and apply these understandings within a real world context. FORMTEXT Praxis Test FORMTEXT ????? FORMTEXT ????? FORMTEXT ????? FORMTEXT MA 387 (Capstone Experience) FORMTEXT Teacher Candidate Summary Evaluation Form Construct 2 FORMTEXT ????? FORMTEXT ?????The teacher of mathematics can demonstrate the need for, uses of, and conceptual and procedural understanding of patterns, functions, and algebra from both concrete and abstract perspectives, and are able to identify and apply these relationships in the real world context, including the use of appropriate technology. FORMTEXT Praxis Test FORMTEXT ????? FORMTEXT ????? FORMTEXT ????? FORMTEXT MA 354 (Abstract Algebra) andMA 301 (Linear Algebra) FORMTEXT Teacher Candidate Summary Evaluation Form Construct 2 FORMTEXT ????? FORMTEXT ?????The teacher of mathematics can demonstrate the need for, uses of, and conceptual and procedural understanding of geometry, measurement, and spatial visualization from both concrete and abstract perspectives, and are able to identify and apply these relationships in the real world context, including the use of technology. FORMTEXT Praxis Test FORMTEXT ????? FORMTEXT ????? FORMTEXT ????? FORMTEXT MA 367 (Modern Geometry) FORMTEXT Teacher Candidate Summary Evaluation Form Construct 2 FORMTEXT ????? FORMTEXT ?????The teacher of mathematics can demonstrate conceptual and procedural understanding of concepts of data, statistics and probability and is able to identify and apply these relationships within a real world context including the use of appropriate technology. FORMTEXT Praxis Test FORMTEXT ????? FORMTEXT ????? FORMTEXT ????? FORMTEXT MA 343 (Applied Statistics) FORMTEXT Teacher Candidate Summary Evaluation Form Construct 2 FORMTEXT ????? FORMTEXT ?????The teacher of mathematics can demonstrate conceptual and procedural understanding of concepts of calculus and is able to identify and apply these relationships within a real world context, including the use of appropriate technology. FORMTEXT Praxis Test FORMTEXT ????? FORMTEXT ????? FORMTEXT ????? FORMTEXT MA 371 (Real Analysis I) FORMTEXT Teacher Candidate Summary Evaluation Form Construct 2 FORMTEXT ????? FORMTEXT ?????The teacher of mathematics can demonstrate conceptual and procedural understanding of discrete processes and is able to identify and apply these understandings within a real world context including the use of appropriate technology. FORMTEXT Praxis Test FORMTEXT ????? FORMTEXT ????? FORMTEXT ????? FORMTEXT MA 207 (Discrete Mathematics) FORMTEXT Teacher Candidate Summary Evaluation Form Construct 2 FORMTEXT ????? FORMTEXT ?????The teacher of mathematics can demonstrate knowledge of the history of mathematics. FORMTEXT ????? FORMTEXT ????? FORMTEXT ????? FORMTEXT ????? FORMTEXT MA (381) History and Literature of Mathematics) FORMTEXT ????? FORMTEXT ????? FORMTEXT ?????The teacher of mathematics has a foundational knowledge of students as learners and of pedagogical strategies. FORMTEXT PraxisPrinciples of Teaching & Learning1c) PLT (Cut score = 160) FORMTEXT KPTP/STEP Teacher Work Sample Construct 2 FORMTEXT Teacher Evaluation Summary Form Construct 1 FORMTEXT KPTP/STEP Construct 3 FORMTEXT ????? FORMTEXT ????? FORMTEXT ????? FORMTEXT ?????SECTION IV—EVIDENCE FOR MEETING STANDARDSDIRECTIONS: Information on the multiple assessments listed in Section II and the data findings must be reported in this section. The assessments must be those that all candidates in the program are required to complete and should be used by the program to determine candidate proficiencies as expected in the program standards. For each assessment, the evidence for meeting standards should include the following information:A brief description of the assessment, project, portfolio and its use in the program. Explain specificity of the assessment to the standard/s. An assessment may assess several standards at the same time; content assessment data must be disaggregated per each standard assessed;The alignment of the assessment with the specific KSDE standards addressed by the assessment, as they are identified in Section III;A brief summary of the data findings;An interpretation of how that data provide evidence for meeting standards. The response to each assessment is limited to the equivalent of two pages.For each assessment listed, you will need to attach the following: Scoring guides, criteria or rubric (specific to content of standard/s) used to score candidate responses on the assessment; A table (include # of candidates) with the aggregated results of the assessment providing all available data for the most recent three years. Data should be organized according to the criteria used in the scoring guide/rubric. Provide the number and percentage of candidates achieving at each performance level. The alignment between the criteria used in the scoring guide/rubric and standards should be described clearly in the narrative. In the two columns for attachments, click in the box for each attachment to be included with the report. Each attachment should be no longer than five pages. The two attachments related to each assessment must be included for the program report to be complete. The report will not be reviewed until it is complete.#1 (Required) CONTENT KNOWLEDGE: Data from licensure tests for content knowledge. Provide assessment information as outlined in the directions for Section IV. 1a and 1c--PRAXIS II Content and PLT data (Required). Licensure test data must reflect the percentage of candidates who have passed the state licensure tests (Praxis II and PLT) for most recent three years.1b--PRAXIS II Content sub-score data should be aligned to a specific standard. (Optional – report if used to address a Standard.)Data will report the candidate n and the percentage for mean and above and below the mean. Data must be presented for all program completers, even if there were fewer than 10 test takers in a given year. 1d—Praxis II PLT sub-score data should be aligned to a specific standard. (Optional – report if used to address a Standard.)Data will report the candidate n and the percentage for mean and above and below the mean. Data must be presented for all program completers, even if there were fewer than 10 test takers in a given year.For each assessment #1b and 1d (sub-score data) you will include the following information:Praxis II sub-score data tables must be clearly labeled to indicate alignment with the standard it is assessing. Each sub-score is used only once to assist meeting one standard and may not be used again.Section IV narrative must clearly show alignment of sub-score data to the standard or elements of the standard.Praxis II sub-score CANNOT be used as a stand-alone assessment. FORMTEXT DESCRIPTION: PRAXIS Math Content KnowledgeThe Praxis Content Test (5161) is designed to assess the mathematical knowledge and competencies necessary for a beginning teacher of secondary school mathematics. It is composed of 60 questions. Forty-one questions pertain to number & quantity, algebra, functions and calculus. The remaining 19 questions target geometry, probability & statistics, and discrete mathematics.The test format includes multiple choice, numerical answer, drag-and-drop questions, and text completion. An on-line graphing calculator is provided. Candidates are required to complete the exam with the minimum state passing score prior to recommendation for licensure.ALIGNMENT WITH STANDARDS: Content addressed in this examination aligns with standards 1 - 7. Standard 1 is overall conceptual and procedural knowledge. Standards 2, 3, and 6 are exact matches with number & quantity, algebra, and functions & calculus, assessed by 41 questions on the 60-question test. Standards 4, 5 & 7 align with geometry, probability & statistics and discrete mathematics, which are assesed by 19 questions on the 60-question test.DATA: Over the three year program review period, 11 test scores were reported to Washburn. Of those scores, 5 scores are associated with citizens who are not in the program and 6 scores are associated with candidates in the program. All 6 program candidates passed the Praxis content test. One candidate scored DATA ANALYSIS: The average passing score for candidates over the program review period was 167 (n=6), well above the required KSDE qualifying score of 152. PLT: The purpose of the PLT exam is to assess new teachers’ knowledge and understanding of educational practices foundational to beginning a career as a professional educator. The major topics addressed by the exam are students as learners, instructional processes, assessment, professional development and leadership and community. Candidates are required to complete the PLT with the minimum state passing score (160) prior to recommendation for licensure.ALIGNMENT WITH STANDARDS: Content assessed by PLT aligns with Standard 9, which states that candidates hold a foundational knowledge of students as learners and of pedagogical strategies. The exam addresses foundational knowledge of students as learners, pedagogy and assessments to measure student learning.DATA: The PLT pass rate for Washburn candidates over the program review period was 100% each of the 3 years. DATA ANALYSIS: The average score for candidates in the program was 178, well above the required KSDE qualifying score of 160.INTERPRETATION OF DATA: Washburn candidates in 6-12 mathematics present strong overall performance on the PRAXIS II exams. They all scored above the cut score in the area of mathematics and in the area of professional learning and teaching. The pass rates on both exams indicate that Washburn candidates know mathematics content (Praxis 1) and understand students as learners and effective pedagogical strategies (PLT). (No more than 2 pages)AttachmentsAssessment #1Scoring Guides/Criteria/ RubricData Table1a—Praxis II Content1b—Content sub-scores1c—PLT1d—PLT sub-scoresNANA NANAClick the box if submitted to Document Warehouse. FORMCHECKBOX FORMCHECKBOX FORMCHECKBOX FORMCHECKBOX #2 (Required) PEDAGOGICAL AND PROFESSIONAL KNOWLEDGE AND SKILLS: Assessment that demonstrates candidates can effectively plan classroom-based instruction. Examples of assessments include the evaluation of candidates’ abilities to develop lesson or unit plans, individualized educational plans, needs assessments, or intervention plans. Provide assessment information as outlined in the directions for Section IV. FORMTEXT DESCRIPTION: Portfolio - KPTP (Task 2) / STEP (Construct 2)The Kansas Performance Teaching Portfolio (KPTP) is a teacher work sample structured around four tasks that allow teacher candidates to demonstrate their ability to use contextual factors to plan, implement, and reflect on a unit of study. The KPTP covers four kinds of tasks: Task 1: Contextual Information & Learning Environment Factors; Task 2: Designing Instruction; Task 3: Teaching and Learning; and Task 4: Reflection and Professionalism. The Student Teaching Evaluation Portfolio (STEP), is an internally-developed teacher work sample organized around four constructs: Construct 1: Learner and Learning; Construct 2: Instruction; Construct 3: Assessment; and Construct 4: Professional Responsibility and Reflection. KPTP Task 2 (Designing Instruction) and STEP Construct 2 (Instruction) were used to assess candidates’ ability to plan instruction that is developmentally appropriate and that attends to the needs of diverse learners. This assessment is based on candidate data from KPTP Task 2 (2013-2014 & 2015-2016) and STEP Construct 2 (2015-2015). Data were collected to assess candidates’ understanding of professional and pedagogical knowledge needed to plan effective instruction, which is . Professional knowledge was evaluated as candidates provided evidence of their understanding of how students learn and develop, as well as an understanding of the learning needs of diverse student populations (including student with exceptionalities). Candidates demonstrated understanding and ability to use developmentally appropriate and multiple instructional strategies as they planned instruction based on their understanding of students, content, and curriculum outcomes. They also demonstrate ability to plan instruction that integrates content within and across curriculum fields, incorporate methods of teaching reading within lessons/units, and to use technology both as a tool for instruction and a tool to gather, analyze and present information. ALIGNNMENT WITH STANDARDS:KPTP Task 2 and STEP Construct 2 align with Standard 9, which requires candidates to have a foundational knowledge of students as learners and of pedagogical strategies. Candidates are assessed for their ability to plan instruction based an understanding of the students they teach. They are also assessed for ability to plan developmentally appropriate learning opportunities that make use of multiple instructional strategies to help all students learn. SUMMARY OF DATA: The KPTP Task 2 has a maximum score of 32. In 2013-2014, 1 candidate was evaluated. She earned an overall score of 2.5, which corresponds to having moved beyond the developing level and through the "target" level. The STEP Construct 2 has a maximum score of 3. During 2014-2015 2 candidates were assessed and earned an overall mean of 26 (out of 32). In Fall 2015-2016, 4 candidates were evaluated with the KPTP Task 2 and had a mean of 2.3, again performing at the target level. ITERPRETATION OF DATA: The number of candidates exhibiting solid professional knowledge related to planning for instruction suggests that candidates are able to use knowledge about the students they teach when planning lessons. The average over the three years under review was well above "on target" indicating the program tends to prepare candidates to plan lessons that are professional and pedagogically sound. The somewhat lower score of 2.3 score during the 2015-2016 year is perhaps related to the fact that these candidates were in the "licensure only" program and had not completed all coursework within the Washburn program. It will be important to monitor this situation to determine whether or not this is an explanation for the lower scores or if there is a piece of the program that needs modified. (No more than 2 pages)AttachmentsAssessment #2Scoring Guides/Criteria/ RubricData Table[Assessment of candidate ability to plan instruction] * (Required) FORMTEXT ?????Click the box if submitted to Document Warehouse. FORMCHECKBOX Click the box if submitted to Document Warehouse. FORMCHECKBOX #3 (Required) PEDAGOGICAL AND PROFESSIONAL KNOWLEDGE AND SKILLS: Assessment that demonstrates candidates' knowledge and skills are applied effectively in practice. The assessment instrument used in student teaching should be submitted. Provide assessment information as outlined in the directions for Section IV. FORMTEXT DESCRIPTION: The Teacher Candidate Summary Evaluation Form is used to evaluate candidate performance in classrooms during the student teaching semester. Both a Mentor (cooperating) Teacher and a University Supervisor complete the form by the end of each student teaching experience. The form consists of four constructs observers use to evaluate candidates’ classroom practices. They are: Construct 1: Learners and Learning; Construct 2: Instructional Practice and Content Knowledge; Construct 3: Assessment; and Construct 4: Professional Responsibility. Candidates are rated on indicators related to each construct, and are given an overall rating for each construct. Levels of Performance used to rate candidate performance are Unacceptable (1), Developing (2), Target (3), and Advanced (4).NARRATIVE: Assessment 3, Clinical Practice is assessed using Construct 1: Learners and Learning. Candidates are evaluated by the extent to which they are able to create classroom environments that are safe, fair, respectful, equitable and conducive to learning. They are also evaluated on their ability to establish positive classroom cultures and positive interactions between and among students. Candidates are expected to show skill in establishing expectations for behavior, while at the same time address off-task behaviors. In addition to assessment of productive classroom cultures/environments, candidates must show evidence that they are able to plan instruction that addresses the needs of diverse learners and that they have a positive impact on learning for all students. ALIGNNMENT WITH STANDARDS: Assessment 3 aligns with Standard 9, which requires candidates to demonstrate a foundational knowledge of students as learners and of pedagogical strategies. The evaluation focuses on candidates abilities to show that they are able to use professional and pedagogical knowledge in practice, as a means for meeting the classroom environment and learning needs of the students they teach. SUMMARY OF DATA: During the 2013-2014 academic year, 1 candidate had a mean evaluation of 3.8 for showing evidence of planning develomentally appropriate instruction that met diverse learner needs, establishing positive classroom environmnets, establishing fair, safe respectful and equitable classroom environments and impact on student learning. For 2014-2015 the overall rating was 3.4 for 2 candidates. Four candidates were reviewed in 2015-2016 and had a mean rating of 3.7.INTERPRETATION OF DATA: Candidates are generally well above the expected Target level (a score of 3) when it comes to putting professional and pedagogical knowledge to practice in classroom environments. They exceed expectations when evaluated on individual indicators related to their practice. The program provides candidate with learning opportunities and field experiences so that they are able to meet the classroom and learning experiential needs of their students. (No more than 2 pages)AttachmentsAssessment #3Scoring Guides/Criteria/ RubricData Table[Assessment of clinical experience] * (Required)Clinical experience includes practica, student teaching and internships.Click the box if submitted to Document Warehouse. FORMCHECKBOX Click the box if submitted to Document Warehouse. FORMCHECKBOX #4 (Required) EFFECTS ON STUDENT LEARNING: Assessment that demonstrates candidate effects on student learning. Examples of assessments include those based on student work samples, portfolio tasks, case studies, or follow-up surveys.Provide assessment information as outlined in the directions for Section IV. FORMTEXT DESCRIPTION: Task 3 of the Kansas Performance Teaching Portfolio (KPTP) is a teacher work sample structured around Teaching and Learning. Construct 3 of the Student Teaching Evaluation Portfolio (STEP) is called “Assessment” and requires candidates to evaluate student learning based on reflection about results from instructional techniques. Both Task 3 and Construct 3 require candidates to describe how to use information collected to improve instruction. The rubrics used to assess Task 3, resulted in a maximum score of 20, and for Construct 3, a maximum score of 3. NARRATIVE: Assessment #4, Effects on Student Learning is assessed using data collected for Task 3 (KTPT) and Construct 3 (STEP). These tools assess candidates for ability to design and use a variety of assessment tools in order to determine the impact of their instruction on student learning and development. Candidates are assessed for their abilities to collect, analyze, and interpret data. They are also assessed on the extent to which they are able to use data collected from students to improve instruction. ALIGNNMENT WITH STANDARDS: KPTP Task 3, Focus E and STEP, Construct 3 aligns with Standard 9, which requires candidates to demonstrate foundational knowledge of students as learners and of pedagogical strategies. Candidates use professional knowledge as they use a variety of assessments to evaluate student learning based on instruction, and professional and pedagogical knowledge to determine how to use information collected to improve instruction. SUMMARY OF DATA: One candidate was reviewed during 2013-2014 for Task 3 on the KTPT evaluation instrument. She scored 2.8 (out of 3), which is above the Target level. In 2014-2015, two candidate were reviewed on the STEP (Construct 2) and their Construct 3 score average was 16 (out of 20). During 2015-2016, the overall mean rating of four candidates evaluated on the KTPT (Task 3) was 2.4 (out of 3), which was at the Target level.INTERPRETATION OF DATA: In broad terms, candidates performed at acceptable or very good levels. The program tends to prepare candidate to use professional and pedagogical knowledge to determine how to analyze student learning, along with ways to improve instruction to improve student learning. Again, though, we see the two "licensure only" candidates scoring slightly lower than candidates who experienced the entire program at Washburn. This is, perhaps, an indicator that the students who are in the program for 9 months do not gain the same kind of experiences as candidates who experience the entire program. However, the 2.4 rating is acceptable. (No more than 2 pages)AttachmentsAssessment #4Scoring Guides/Criteria/ RubricData Table[Assessment of candidate effect on student learning] * (Required) FORMTEXT ?????Click the box if submitted to Document Warehouse. FORMCHECKBOX Click the box if submitted to Document Warehouse. FORMCHECKBOX #5 (Required) CONTENT KNOWLEDGE: Assessment of content knowledge. Examples of assessments include comprehensive examinations, projects, comprehensive portfolio tasks and score/s aligned to standards OR the option of submitting course grades-based assessment related to content knowledge evaluation.If submitting course grades-based assessment, the detailed description for Assessment #5 must clearly delineate the alignment of the course description and assessments to the standard that is assessed during the course in order to assure that the course grade reflects candidate knowledge of the standard. Identify course key activities, projects, assessments that show specificity to the standard. If course grades are used, include the program or EPP definition of grades in the narrative or as an attachment to assessment 5. If the course grades-based assessments are used as evidence for meeting two standards, the program must submit the course key assessments’ data results in a total grade per each standard. The total grades per standard are displayed in a data table for each of the two standards. This is necessary to provide evidence of meeting each standard. This narrative must state the proficiency level or grade acceptable by the program. COURSE GRADES-BASED ASSESSMENTS ARE LIMITED TO TEN COURSES.A standard may be met with more than one course. The narrative must clearly indicate which part of the standard is assessed by each course. Provide assessment information as outlined in the directions for Section IV FORMTEXT DESCRIPTION:5A. MA 387 Topics in mathematical modeling and other advanced topics requiring a background in calculus and linear algebra. ALIGNMENT WITH STANDARD: This course, taken near the end of the program, is designed to build problem solving abilities and explorations on all prior coursework. The majority of the problems require a particular ability with numerical understandings, which is the goal of Standard 2. Standard 2 requires candidates to demonstrate knowledge of number systems. These abilities extend well beyond arithmetic and into a focus on inherent and habitual use of numerical relationships to solve real world, as well as hypothetical, problems. KEY ACTIVITIES: Students work collaboratively to solve difficult problems across a wide range of mathematical areas. To successfully solve the problems, they must attend to their mathematical skill set in terms of both content and practice.SUMMARY of DATA: Over the three year program review period, 6 candidates completed MA 387. The average GPA over this period was 3.2, or roughly a B+. INTERPRETATION OF DATA: All candidates performed at least average or above average, with the majority of candidates performing at the excellent level. During this course, candidates must display an integrated knowledge of mathematics content and mathematical practices.5B. MA 388 Students must complete an individual semester project on a topic in the mathematical sciences under the guidance of one or more faculty from the department. The project requires both a written and an oral component. ALIGNMENT WITH STANDARD: This course requires students to delve into an area of interest and conduct research about a mathematical idea. Projects can range from geometric understandings of non-Euclidean geometries to data mining efforts to develop a business related model for manufacturing. Students might right a computer program to analyze probabilities within a game or assign a set of algebraic relationships to an engineering problem, like building a bridge. As such, the course requires a global understanding of mathematics in terms of both concepts and procedures in a broad general sense, which is Standard 1. Standard 1 requires an overall understanding of the concepts and procedures of mathematics.KEY ACTIVITIES: Students provide an oral presentation in defense of their research. There is a question/answer session during which students must respond to questions related to their work.SUMMARY OF DATA: Much like a graduate degree, this course earns “Credit” or “No Credit”. The only student who earned no-credit experienced an athletic injury and could not complete his research. (He remains in the program.) The rest of the students successfully defended their work.INTERPRETATION OF DATA: All candidates performed at least average or above average along this standard, with the majority of candidates performing at the excellent level. During this course, candidates must display an integrated knowledge of mathematics concepts and procedures.5C. MA354 Algebraic structures of permutation groups, finitely generated Abelian groups, factor groups, rings and fields and their substructures. ALIGNMENT WITH STANDARD: This course requires candidates to develop and apply abstract thinking with respect to patterns and algebra, which is Standard 3, because upon successful completion of this course students demonstrate an understanding of mathematical structures. Students demonstrate knowledge of the algebraic structures of permutation groups, finitely generated Abelian groups, factor groups, rings and fields and their substructures. Although this is a course in Modern Algebra, students must be able to apply the skills and knowledge of prerequisite courses to the content of this course. Standard 3 requires knowledge of functions, patterns and algebra. KEY ACTIVITIES: Of critical importance for developing the kind of abstract knowledge learned in this course is the ability to communicate clearly and correctly. As part of the on-going efforts to develop this kind of synthesis of knowledge, students create problem solutions with a dual focus on mathematical correctness and communication. In addition, students present solutions to problems. SUMMARY OF DATA: Over the three year program review period, 10 candidates completed MA 354. The average GPA over this period was 3.2, or roughly a B+. INTERPRETATION OF DATA: All candidates performed at least average or above average, with the majority of candidates performing at the excellent level. During this course, candidates must display an integrated knowledge of mathematics content and mathematical practices for algebra.5D. MA 301 Linear Algebra: An introduction to the fundamental concepts and basic computational techniques of linear algebra. Topics investigated from both a theoretical and computational perspective include systems of linear equations, vector spaces, transformations, matrices, eigenvalues and eigenvectors, and orthogonality. ALIGNMENT WITH STANDARD: This course is the second of two courses that align with Standard 3. During this course, candidates look for patterns among numerical amounts as well as within algebraic symbolism. They work with matrices and study computations in depth. As such, this course is profoundly different from MA 354, yet also meets Standard 3, because students will have acquired the fundamental knowledge of patterns, functions, and algebra required by the content standard. Standard 3 requires candidates have an understanding of function, patterns and algebra.KEY ACTIVITIES: Students solve problems in small groups several times during the semester. The foci of the problems are to extend and apply concepts from the lectures, as well as to develop procedural fluency. The problems are situated in both real-world settings as well as hypothetical scenarios. SUMMARY OF DATA: Over the three year program review period, 11 candidates completed MA 301. The average GPA over this period was 3.1, or roughly a B.INTERPRETATION OF DATA: All candidates performed at least average or above average, with the majority of candidates performing at the excellent level. During this course, candidates must display an integrated knowledge of mathematics content and mathematical practices for algebra.5E. MA 367 Modern Geometry: This course will focus on the study of geometry as an axiomatic system. Emphasis will be placed on conjecture, proof and construction utilizing both classical tools as well as appropriate technology. Geometries investigated will include Euclidean, affine, projective, hyperbolic, and elliptical. A variety of approaches (synthetic, analytical and transformation) will be used to investigate the geometries. ALIGNMENT WITH STANDARD This course requires spatial visualization and geometric reasoning, which is Standard 4, as candidates apply what they know beyond the Euclidean plan and onto the sphere. Candidates develop conceptual and procedural knowledge by studying definitions and postulates and considering the ramifications those decisions will have when they move to an unfamiliar surface, like a sphere. Other geometric surfaces are also considered: Hyperbolic & “taxi-cab” geometries. Standard 4 requires an understanding of geometry, measurement and spatial visualization.KEY ACTIVITIES: In this course, candidates create a geometry textbook. This textbook includes a logical sequence of Definitions, Postulates, Common Notions spread out across at least 6 chapters that build upon one another. In those chapters, students must include Related important definitions, Examples, counter-examples, Conjectures and Theorems (with proof)SUMMARY OF DATA: Over the three year program review period, 10 candidates completed MA 367. The average GPA over this period was 3.8, or roughly an A-.INTERPRETATION OF DATA: All candidates performed at least average or above average, with the majority of candidates performing at the excellent level. During this course, candidates must display an integrated knowledge of mathematics content and mathematical practices for geometric thinking.5F. MA 343 Applied Statistics: Sampling, concepts of experimental design. Tests of significance, point and interval estimation, simple and multiple regression, ANOVA, ANCOVA, nonparametric tests, logistic regression, and quality control. Emphasis on developing statistical thought, not just methodology, and on the use of computing technology.ALIGNMENT WITH STANDARD: This course requires candidates to study probability and statistics from both conceptual and procedural viewpoints, which is Standard 5. Candidates must successfully use technology to demonstrate data analysis techniques that illustrate an understanding of statistics. Students demonstrate knowledge of sampling, concepts of experimental design, descriptive statistical techniques, probability, random variables and distributions of random variables, sampling distributions, tests of significance, point and interval estimation, and simple linear regression. Upon completion of this course students demonstrate an ability to analyze problems and apply the appropriate methodology. Students are capable of statistical thought, so this course is aligned with Kansas standard 5, which requires understanding of data, statistics and probability.KEY ACTIVITIES: In addition to regular homework, students engage in projects that require solving problems using computer-aided data analysis tools. The projects are designed to extend concepts from the course lectures and homework, as well as to learn to work as a team on a problem that are much more deeply involved than a regular homework problem. These projects are situated in real-world contexts, as well as hypothetical situations. SUMMARY OF DATA: Over the three year program review period, 9 candidates completed MA 343. The average GPA over this period was 3.4, or roughly a B+.INTERPRETATION OF DATA: All candidates performed at least average or above average, with the majority of candidates performing at the excellent level. During this course, candidates must display an integrated knowledge of mathematics content and mathematical practices for data analyses.5G.MA 153 Calculus and Analytic Geometry III: A continuation of MA152, which is described below. Multivariable calculus, vectors in two and three dimensional spaces. Graphics calculator required. (MA152: A continuation of MA 151, described below, focused on topics in plane analytic geometry, techniques of integration with applications, and infinite series. MA151: Differential and integral calculus of the elementary functions with applications.) ALIGNMENT WITH STANDARD: Students demonstrate knowledge of differential and integral calculus. Students are able to appropriately utilize the techniques in the solution of problems in science, engineering and social science. Students demonstrate an ability to use technology tools in both demonstrating understanding of concepts as well as in problem solving. Tools include both hand-held technologies as well as Computer Algebra Systems. This course is the culmination of a 13 credit hour sequence in Calculus and Analytical Geometry and is aligned with Standard 6, which requires understanding calculus. Successful completion of this class requires students demonstrate both an understanding of the theoretical underpinnings of calculus as well as demonstrate the ability to analyze real world problems and apply the appropriate mathematical tool. KEY ACTIVITIES: One of the primary extensions from Calc I and Calc 2 is the application of those ideas into a 3-dimensional setting. Students learn to understand differential and integral calculus techniques and concepts in 3-dimensional space by completing Maple projects. (Maple is a computer algebra system with graphing capabilities, which is used as a demonstration tool.) As such students experience in-depth examination of calculus ideas and solve difficult problems. SUMMARY OF DATA: Over the three year program review period, 13 candidates completed MA 153. The average GPA over this period was 3.0, a solid B.INTERPRETATION OF DATA: All candidates performed at least average or above average, with the majority of candidates performing at the excellent level. During this course, candidates must display an integrated knowledge of mathematics content and mathematical practices for calculus.5H. MA 207: Discrete Mathematics: Logic, counting methods, induction, functions, equivalence, partial order, and congruence relations. Set up and solve recurrence relations problems. Graph theory and its applications. Significant emphasis on the format and method of mathematical proof. ALIGNMENT WITH STANDARD: Students demonstrate knowledge of logic, sets, functions, equivalence relations, induction, recursion and difference equations. In this course, there is significant emphasis on method of mathematical proof and applications of discrete mathematics algorithms. Success in this course is predicated on the student’s ability to write and evaluate mathematical proofs and apply problem solving techniques from discrete mathematics to a variety of problems. This course is aligned with Kansas standard 7, which requires understanding of discrete mathematics. Successful completion of this course ensures students are able to explain and apply the methods of discrete mathematics.KEY ACTIVITIES: The activities of this class are focused on extending philosophical logic into the discipline of mathematics. The key activities are writing proofs to develop knowledge about and coordination of the structure of proofs, concepts, and definitions. Proof-writing is shared among students and discussed so that the learners become aware of the importance of language and that proof-writing must be clear and logical so as not to allow for inference on the part of the reader. SUMMARY OF DATA: Over the three year program review period, 10 candidates completed MA 207. The average GPA over this period was 3.6, or roughly a B+.INTERPRETATION OF DATA: All candidates performed at least average or above average, with the majority of candidates performing at the excellent level. During this course, candidates must display an integrated knowledge of mathematics content and mathematical practices for discrete mathematics.5I. MA 381 History and Literature of Mathematics: Chronological development of mathematics, with emphasis on the great mathematicians of yore and periods of mathematical genius and invention. Topics include development of numeration systems, algebra, calculus, proof, Euclidean and non-Euclidean geometry, graphing technology, and philosophies of mathematics. Readings from extant and translations of mathematical text. ALIGHNMENT WITH STANDARD: This course aligns with Standard 8, which requires demonstrating knowledge of the history of mathematics, because students study the development of mathematical ideas taking into account the impact on historical events upon mathematics, as well as the impact of various mathematicians on the advancement of mathematical thinking. Students acquire knowledge of the chronological development of mathematics, based on the study of classical problems and proofs, biographies of mathematicians, literature and cultural analysis. Upon completion of this course students demonstrate the ability to provide a historical context for mathematics and to describe the evolution of the discipline.KEY ACTIVITIES: Students must study a mathematical idea in depth and create a physical (or digital) representation of it. The students are given the freedom to exercise creativity, but with the suggestion that the product would be useful in explaining the idea to others. The final project must demonstrate: (1) The manner in which the mathematical idea developed (2) The background mathematical ideas that were used in the development of the topic (3) The relationship between the topic and the general progress of mathematics afterwards (4) Strong, deep & profound understanding of the mathematical idea and (5) Where the topic could be fit into a high school curriculum. SUMMARY OF DATA: Over the three year program review period, 11 candidates completed MA 381. The average GPA over this period was 4.0, all solid As.INTERPRETATION OF DATA: All candidates performed well above average, at the excellent level. During this course, candidates must display an integrated knowledge of mathematics content, practices, and the relationship with mathematics history. (No more than 5 pages)FOR COURSE GRADES-BASED ASSESSMENTS USE THE TABLE THAT INDICATES 5A—5J.AttachmentsAssessment #5Scoring Guides/Criteria/ RubricData Table[Content based assessment that addresses Kansas content standards] *Required Examples of assessments include comprehensive examinations, projects, comprehensive portfolio tasks and score/s aligned to standards.Click the box if submitted to Document Warehouse. FORMCHECKBOX Click the box if submitted to Document Warehouse. FORMCHECKBOX For each assessment #5 (course grades-based assessments), you will include the following information:Course grades-based assessments must have a brief description in the matrix. Course syllabi and individual course assessments do not need to be submitted for continuing programs.The course grades-based assessments data table will be included in the narrative of assessment 5. Each course grades-based assessment is numbered and lettered as 5A, 5B, 5C, 5D, 5E, 5F, 5G, 5H, 5I and 5J. Use the same number and letter in the narrative and the data tableOne course MAY NOT MEET more than two standards.IF COURSE GRADES-BASED ASSESSMENTS are submitted, the following matrix MUST be used in addition to the narrative detailed description of the assessments the program provides in the above #5 Content Knowledge description!Alignment Matrix, Course Description, and Assessment Summary for Course Grades-Based AssessmentAssessments 5.A--5.J for TEN coursesCourse Name & NumberProgram Standard Addressed by Course AssessmentBrief Description of how the Course addresses and assesses the standard from an AUTHENTIC source—such as a syllabus or a course catalog. Cite the most current source in each description below. The description should provide evidence of the alignment of the course to the standard indicated on the chart in Section III. Cite your source in each description below.5.A. FORMTEXT MA 388 Capstone Research FORMTEXT 1 FORMTEXT This course requires students to investigate a topic of their choosing and to do so in great detail and depth. The primary objective of the course is to guide students, who are paired with a university professor, through the research process. The research culminates with a defense of their work and requires the work be original to the student and demonstrate a growing understanding of the nature of mathematics as well as precision in their understnding of that specific topic. The project is evaluated by a panel of professors immediately after the student has presented his/her project. Since Standard 1 requires overal understanding of concepts and procedures of mathematics, this course aligns with the standard.Source:Washburn University Catalog and Master Syllabuss 5.B. FORMTEXT MA 387 Capstone Experience (Problem Solving Techniques) FORMTEXT 2 FORMTEXT This course requires students to collaboratively solve difficult problems. During the course of the semester, students are responsible for sharing their work in a thoughtful logical manner. The nature of the problems range from problems that require keen mathematical insights to problems that are unsolved in the mathematical community. The mathematical skill needed for successful completion of this course ranges across all areas of mathematics and requires both conceptual and procedural knowledge. Since Standard 2 requires understanding of number and number systems, this course aligns with the standard.Source: Washburn University Catalog and Master Syllabus 5.C FORMTEXT MA 354 Abstract Algebra FORMTEXT 3 FORMTEXT This course investigates the algebraic structures of permutation groups, finitely generated Abelian groups, factor groups, rings and fields and their substructures. The primary objective is to give the mathematics major an understanding of the underlying mathematical principles of abstract algebra and to enhance the skills developed in prerequisite courses. Through both written and oral homework assignments, students will demonstrate mastery of the course material and an ability to effectively communicate ideas. Students will be expected to steps of computations and proof. Since standard 3 requires conceptual and procedural understanding of algebraic ideas, including patterning and function, this course aligns with the standard.Source: Master Modern Algebra Syllabus and Washburn University Catalog5.D. FORMTEXT MA 301 Linear Algebra FORMTEXT 3 FORMTEXT This course serves as an introduction to the fundamental concepts and basic computational techniques for linear equations, vector spaces, transformations, matrices, eigenvalues and eigenvectors, and orthogonality. As such, the course adds more depth and breadth to students algebraic skillset and works well in tandem with MA 354 (Abstract Algebra). The two-courses together meet the standard for algebra due to the dynamically different nature of the courses. Given the more procedural empahses in MA 301, the two courses provide foundation for students' algebraic thinking. Since Standard 3 requires conceptual and procedural understanding of algebraic ideas, including applications and using technology, this course aligns with the standard. Source: Washburn University Catalog and Master Syllabus 5.E. FORMTEXT MA 367 Modern Geometry FORMTEXT 4 FORMTEXT Modern Geometry requires the mathematics student become proficient in the understanding and demonstration of the need for, the uses of and conceptual and procedural understanding of geometry, measurement, and spatial visualization from both concrete (the Euclidean axiomatic geometry used for over 2000 years) and abstract perspectives (non-Euclidean and other more theoretical geometries, such as transformational or finite geometries.) Students demonstrate an understanding of geometric transformations for 2- and 3- dimensioal figures and how to choose from analytical and synthetic geometries to formulate strategies for solving real world problems. Students are also able to identify and apply Euclidean or plane geometry concepts, processes, and constructions in real world settings and use appropriate technology to demonstrate these relationships. Appropriate technology includes the graphing calculator and various open source applications such as GeoGebra, are used for visualization, exploration and computation. Since Standard 5 focuses on geometry, spatial visualization and measurment, this course aligns with the standard.Source: Master Modern Geometry Syllabus and Washburn University University Catalog5.F. FORMTEXT MA 343 Applied Statistics FORMTEXT 5 FORMTEXT Applied Statistics begins with descriptive statistics: statistical graphs and displays, measures of central tendency, measures of dispersion, and other concepts of numerical data, and the basic concepts and processes of theoretical and empirical probability. The Applied Statistic student then uses these basic concepts to demonstrate real world applications such as linear regression, hypothesis testing, analysis of data sets, counting processes, geometric and conditional probability, and other problem solving involving data and chance. The student also demonstrates how to investigate problems using data, how to use inferential statistics to make predictions and draw conclusions, and how to use experiements and simulations to make decisions and predictions. Various technologies, such as the graphing calculator and software like Excel and SPSS and SAS are employed by the student to aid in these demonstations. Since Standard 5 requires understanding of statistics, data analysis and probability, this course aligns with the standard.Source: Master Applied Statistics Syllabus and Washburn University Catalog5.G. FORMTEXT MA 153 Calculus and Analytic Geometry III FORMTEXT 6 FORMTEXT Calulus III takes the large concepts of Calculus and analytical geometry first presented in Calculus I and applies these 2-dimensional concepts and processes to 3 dimensional models and problems. The Calculus III student shows conceptual understanding of the major concepts of Calculus (the integral and derivative) and shows understanding of the the procedures of integration, the taking of limits, and differentiation using three-dimensional models and applications in mathematics and other fields, as well as, appropriate technology such as the graphing calculator and the software Maple. This is supported by the data from Calculus I or II. Since Standard 6 requires procedural and conceptual knowledge of caclulus, this course, having built upon Calc 1 and II, aligns with the standard.Source: Calculus III Master Syllabus 5.H. FORMTEXT MA 207 Discrete Mathematics FORMTEXT 7 FORMTEXT Discrete Mathematics requires the student demonstrate the need for, uses of, and conceptual and procedural understanding of patterns, functions, and algebra from both concrete and abstract perspectives. The Discrete Mathematics student understands how to investigate algebraic structures using concrete examples such as clock arithmetic, modular systems, and matrices. The student also demonstrates an understanding of the representations of situations and solutions of problems that involve variable quantities with expressions, equations, and inequalities, including algebraic, geometric, and combinatoric problems. Transformation of algebraic expressions and the effects of this transformation, as well as, algebraic properties and algebraic structures such as order relations, groups, and fields are explored in Discrete Mathematics. The student who successfully completes this course has acquired the ability to read and write formal proof beyond the introductory level. This course prepares the student to identify and apply patterns, functions, and algebra in a real world context, including the use of appropriate technology. Since Standard 7 requires understanding of discrete mathematics, this course aligns with the standard.Source: Master Syllabus Discrete Mathematics and Washburn University Catalog5.I. FORMTEXT MA 381 History and Literature of Mathematics FORMTEXT 8 FORMTEXT History of Mathematics traces the early development of numbersystems through the discovery and/or invention of mathematical and geometric processes, proof, real world applications, and different philosophies of mathematical thinking. The History of Mathematics student is required to demonstrate understanding of the inventions and inventors of concepts and processes, such as Algebra, the Calculus, Integers as a set of numbers, and myriad mathematical and geometric areas of study, through written and oral biographies and creations of timelines tracing the history of the various areas of mathematics given above. Students acquire the knowledge of the role played by mathematics in the development of society and the central role of mathematics in the abiltiy of a society to generate innovations in science and engineering. Students are required to use early mathematical processes such as Egyptian Multiplication to demonstrate their understanding of the time, effort, and reasoning that goes into the development of a mathematical concept and/or process that will stand the test of time. Since Standard 8 requires knowledge of mathematics history, this course aligns with the standard.Source: Master History of Mathematics Syllabus and Washburn University Catalog5.J. FORMTEXT ????? FORMTEXT ????? FORMTEXT ?????#6 (Required) CONTENT KNOWLEDGE: Assessment of content knowledge. Examples of assessments include comprehensive standard examinations, case studies involving many content standards, projects, comprehensive portfolio tasks and score/s aligned to standards and related to content knowledge. Provide assessment information as outlined in the directions for Section IV. FORMTEXT DESCRIPTION: The Teacher Candidate Summary Evaluation Form (TCSEF) is used to evaluate candidate performance in classrooms during the student teaching semester. Both a Mentor (cooperating) Teacher and a University Supervisor complete the form by the end of each student teaching experience. The form consists of four constructs observers use to evaluate candidates’ classroom practices. They are: Construct 1: Learners and Learning; Construct 2: Instructional Practice and Content Knowledge; Construct 3: Assessment; and Construct 4: Professional Responsibility. Candidates are rated on indicators related to each construct, and are given an overall rating for each construct. NARRATIVE: Assessment 6, Content Knowledge, is assessed using Construct 2: Instructional Practice and Content Knowledge. Candidates are evaluated based on demonstrated content and pedagogical knowledge, their ability to plan lessons based on content standards, and their ability motivate learner understanding between and within subject areas. The cooperating teacher and university supervisor score candidates according to performance of (1) unaccepable; (2) developing; (3) on target; (4) advanced. ALIGNNMENT WITH STANDARDS: Assessment 6 aligns with Standards 2-7, which represent all of the major mathematics content areas: Number, Algebra, Geometry, Statistics, Calculus Discrete & Math History . Since these Standards require candidates to demonstrate their knowledge of various mathematic topics, assessment #6 (TCSEF Construct 2) aligns with these standards because it requires candidates to demonstrate a wide range of solid content knowledge as they plan for and implement lessons with middle and high school learners. SUMMARY OF DATA: During the 2013-2014 academic year, 1 candidate received an evaluation of 4.0 (advanced). For 2014-2015 mean evaluation of 2 candidates was 3.5 For the 2015-2016 academic year, 4 candidates had an overall mean rating of 3.7 INTERPRETATION OF DATA: Out of the 7 candidates evaluated during this review period, all candidates exceeded expections (3 – “on target”) of demonstration of content knowledge, on this assessment. Construct 2 evaluates candidates’ abilities to apply solid understanding of content knowledge as they implement lessons that are innovative in ways that engage and challenge learners. All of the candidates candidates demonstrated the content knowledge that allowed them to effectively implement mathematics lessons for 6-12 learners. (No more than 2 pages)AttachmentsAssessment #6Scoring Guides/Criteria/ RubricData Table[Content based assessment that addresses Kansas content standards] * Required Examples of assessments include comprehensive standard examinations, case studies involving many content standards, projects, comprehensive portfolio tasks and score/s aligned to standards, and related to content knowledge. FORMTEXT ?????Click the box if submitted to Document Warehouse. FORMCHECKBOX Click the box if submitted to Document Warehouse. FORMCHECKBOX #7 (Optional) Additional assessment that addresses Kansas content standards. Examples of assessments include evaluations of field experiences, case studies, portfolio tasks, and follow-up studies. Provide assessment information as outlined in the directions for Section IV. FORMTEXT ?????(No more than 2 pages)AttachmentsAssessment #7Scoring Guides/Criteria/ RubricData Table[Additional assessment that addresses Kansas content standards ] * Optional FORMTEXT ?????Click the box if submitted to Document Warehouse. FORMCHECKBOX Click the box if submitted to Document Warehouse. FORMCHECKBOX #8 (Optional) Additional assessment that addresses Kansas content standards.Examples of assessments include evaluations of field experiences, case studies, portfolio tasks, and follow-up studies. Provide assessment information as outlined in the directions for Section IV. FORMTEXT ????? (No more than 2 pages)AttachmentsAssessment #8Scoring Guides/Criteria/ RubricData Table[Additional assessment that addresses Kansas content standards ] * Optional FORMTEXT ?????Click the box if submitted to Document Warehouse. FORMCHECKBOX Click the box if submitted to Document Warehouse. FORMCHECKBOX SECTION V—USE OF ASSESSMENT RESULTS TO IMPROVE CANDIDATE AND PROGRAM PERFORMANCEEvidence must be presented in this section that assessment results have been analyzed (or will be analyzed for new programs) and have been or will be used to improve candidate performance and strengthen the program. This description should not link improvements to individual assessments, but rather, it should summarize major findings from the evidence, the faculty’s interpretation of those findings, and changes made in (or planned for) the program as a result. Describe the steps program faculty have taken to use information from assessments for improvement of both candidate performance and the program.New programs or Dormant programs must describe their plan to collect, analyze and use data to improve candidate performance, and strengthen program. Note:It is understood that data collected on less than 10 candidates will not typically produce data-driven changes because of the small “N”. The process of reviewing and analyzing data is still necessary by the program. FORMTEXT The Department of Education is required to submit an annual assessment report to Washburn University each June for data for the academic year. This report focuses on five Student Learning Outcomes (SLO’s) which are common to all secondary and P12 education majors, our conceptual framework, and InTasc standards. These SLO’s include knowledge of content, the ability to plan and implement instruction, assessment, fostering diversity, and having a positive impact on student learning. The Department reviews these data at our assessment retreats conducted twice a year (Aug. & Jan.).The Department has also been working to expand the data and evidence we have regarding having a positive impact on student learning. We now have data on impact on student learning from follow-up surveys with building principals for program completers, the observations and evaluations completed by university supervisors and cooperating teachers during student teaching (indicators 1.4 and 3.5), candidate self-assessments, academic gain scores for students in the schools based on KPTP data, and a survey non-academic factors completed by students in the schools. The evidence of the various assessments cumulatively suggests that the Department of Mathematics & Statistics program for preparing secondary-school teachers in mathematics is working very effectively. Grade-based assessments of courses in mathematics and of related assessments from the Department of Education that correlate with Kansas standards show significant levels of mastery of material presented by students in the secondary education/6-12 mathematics program. Although the overall assessments cover all students in the program, whether degree-seeking or licensure-only, candidates enrolled in courses all showed strong performance. Although, as discussed earlier, it will be worthwhile to continue to monitor the education evaluations of licensure-only candidates. Strong mathematics knowledge is also confirmed by the exceptionally good results students have had in the Praxis examinations, where their mastery and retention of content is demonstrated. We continue to refine our procedures and assessments to better understand these results. Changes that have been implemented since the last KSDE review in 2010 are: three additional courses have been added to the KSDE evaluation. These courses are MA 301 (Linear Algebra) – to give a more rounded assessment of algebraic thinking, MA 388 (Capstone) – to give a more general view of candidates overall mathematics knowledge, and MA 387 – (Problem Solving) – to give deeper insight into candidates abilities with numerical systems. These courses have always been part of the plan of study, but we are now using them to help evaluate candidates. We will continue to regularly monitor student progress in mastery of content areas connected with Kansas standards, and we are prepared to make corrections when evidence suggests any weakening of the preparation students receive and the content mastery they demonstrate in licensing examinations. We will continue to monitor course content and pedagogy, as we continuously seek to improve our candidates’ performance to strengthen our program. And we will continue to monitor student success with licensing examinations in order to ensure that graduates of the program are fully prepared to teach history/government at the secondary-education level. Beginning in Fall 2016, we will review our program’s effectiveness and expect to make course changes to the plan of study.(No more than 3 pages)[T:\Teacher Education\Program Review\Institutional Templates\Templates-tables 2014-2015\old standards] ................
................

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

Google Online Preview   Download