Average - Brigham Young University - Idaho



Teacher Education DepartmentOutcomes and AssessmentForEarly Childhood Education/ Early Childhood Special Education Blended Program (Birth to age 8)Special Education Program (age 5 to 21)Teacher Education DepartmentPrograms:Early Childhood Education/ Early Childhood Special Education Blended Program (Birth to age 8)Special Education Program (age 5 to 21)OutcomesTeacher candidates design coherent instruction through having a comprehensive understanding of the content to be taught, knowledge of the students’ backgrounds, setting instructional outcomes, and designing assessments that guide current and future instruction.Teacher candidates create an environment of respect and rapport in their classrooms by the ways they interact with students and by the interactions they encourage and cultivate among students. They will create a culture of learning through demonstrating a passion for the content and establishing clear and high expectations for their students.Teacher candidates engage students in learning by communicating clearly and accurately, using questioning and discussion techniques, using assessment in instruction, providing feedback to students, and demonstrating flexibility and responsiveness.Teacher candidates demonstrate professionalism and commitment to long-term growth and development by reflecting on teaching, maintaining accurate records, communicating with families, contributing to their professional communities locally and nationally, and showing professionalism.Program Level InterventionProgram Guidance and SteeringWe can’t expect our students to collaborate and be unified unless we ourselves are as well. As such we model what we expect and we have become ONE in purpose and thought. For example, we feel comfortable answering questions for each other, knowing we would answer them the same way. This has been accomplished over many years and hours together every week:Team Meetings - The EC/SE Faculty meet weekly for one to two hours to discuss program issues and needs; plan program-related meetings; coordinate course content and curricular concerns; address student concerns; share updates from participation in state committees; report on items relating to the profession. All Majors Meetings - Each semester an All Majors Meeting is held with a general meeting followed by three break-out sessions. Students are updated on any program/department/licensure changes or policies prior to meeting with cohorts to discuss relevant topics. Further, we encourage the natural development relationship across class (e.g., seniors to freshman) by beginning or ending these meetings with social games and refreshments.Team Retreat - The faculty participate in a one-day or two-day retreat each semester to engage in long-range planning and program evaluation.Active Participation in state committee and councils – 5 of 6 faculty currently sit on one or more state entitiesEarly Childhood Consortium for Professional Preparation; David Allen (state co-chair), Chris Brown, and Jillisa CranmerEarly Childhood Coordinating Council – governor appointed committee; David AllenStandards Review panels – Dean Cloward, Jeff PulsipherInclusive Education Consortium – Dean Cloward, Jeff PulsipherStudent Review (evaluation)Philosophically, our team has always felt that informal formative assessment informs our practice and individualized accountability better than anything else we do. Further, the personal touch or individual conferences with students reinforce our commitment to our standards, express love and commitment to our students, and allow for remedial support. We accomplish this in the following ways:Faculty Review CommitteeEach semester, students beginning with their first practicum experience (late sophomore or early junior year) meet individually with a panel of EC/SE faulty to review individual student progress within the program.Outcomes are documented on a Faculty Review Form that includes feedback from every class and each practicum, a review of their 4-year plan, a review by the ADC and Field Services Offices, and documentation of passage of competency exams (9 exams).Students who are not making adequate progress may be placed on an Improvement Plan.Student Improvement PlansAt weekly Team Meetings, a portion of the agenda is devoted to tracking student progress and coordinating remedial efforts. When concerns arise regarding any aspect of a student’s performance (academic, interpersonal skills, professional competencies) the student may be placed on an Improvement Plan which is monitored by the student’s faculty mentor for at minimum one semester. Students must provide evidence of improvement in the documented area(s) of concern prior to removal from the Improvement Plan.Portfolio Review Committee MeetingDuring the semester just prior to student teaching, majors participate in a Portfolio Review Committee Meeting, with committee members being comprised of community partners, parents, cooperating teachers, and faculty. Initially the student presents his/her learning journey, by sharing experiences that demonstrate learning and competence. Committee members document the student’s competence in the areas of instruction, assessment and professionalism. (15 minutes)A question and answer period with committee members and the student candidate follows the presentation. (10-15 minutes)The student candidate is excused and the committee deliberates on the student’s readiness for student teaching, the student’s strengths, and weaknesses. (5 to 10 minutes)When students are invited back into the room we share with them our insights on their strengths, any concerns that may have been identified, and committee recommendations. At this point the student is/is not recommended to proceed to student teaching. (5 to 10 minutes)If a student is not recommended to proceed to student teaching, necessary steps are taken to remediate any deficits identified. These may include but are not limited to:Additional courseworkAdditional practicum experiencePresenting a second time to the committeeProgram AssessmentsOutcomes/GoalsInstructionAssessmentProfessionalismKey PhrasesPlanning for LearningStrategiesDocumenting Student PerformanceAdaptations/ModificationsFamily CollaborationPositive Behavioral SupportsTransitionsTechnologyFormal/InformalFamily CollaborationTypical/Atypical DevelopmentDetermining EligibilityIEP/IFSPInforming InstructionFamily InteractionsCollaboration – Cooperating Teachers, Parents, PeersCurrent Research in the FieldPracticums/Student TeachingService LearningMajors MeetingsProfessionalism MeetingKey AssessmentsActivity Plans/Lesson Plans (427,428,429)Cooperating Teacher Feedback (427,428,429)Teaching/Intervention Videos (425,428)Teaching Reflections (427,428,429)Case Study (425)Proficiency Exam (424)Assessment Reports (424)Data Collection (425,429)Preassessments (428,429)Photographic Essay (429)Portfolio Assessment (428)Case Study - Data Collection, Pre-Intervention Assessment Report (425)Parent Feedback (425,428,429)IEP/IFSP (425, 428) Cooperating Teacher Feedback (427,428,429)Team Member Feedback (428, 429)Parent Meetings (424)Case Study (425)StandardsICT St 3 K1 P1 P2 Enh St 7 K1 P1(Activity/Lesson Plans)ICT St 3 P3 Enh St 6 K1(Teaching/Intervention Videos)ICT St 7 P 5 (Data Collection)Enh St 7 P4(Teaching Reflection, Cooperating Teacher Feedback)ICT St 2 P 1ICT St 7 P 5(Preassessments)ICT St 3 P4Enh St3 K3 P1 (Pre-Intervention Assessment Report)ICT St 8 P7(Photographic Essay)ICT St 8 P 1(Portfolio Assessment)Enh St 7 P4(Data Collection)Ehn St 8 K2 K3 K4(Assessment Reports, Proficiency Exam)ICT St 7 P7Enh St3 K4 P1(Case Study)ICT St 10 K6 P10Enh St8 P3(Parent Feedback)ICT St10 P2 P6(Cooperating Teacher Feedback)Enh 8 K1 (IEP/IFSP) 3891916203073000Assessment Data – Praxis ScoresTest Name: 5691 Special Ed: Preschool/Early Childhood (cmptr)Administration DateState/Agency/InstitutionAll ScoresNMean Score# Passing% PassingJAN-2014 to DEC-2014All Test Takers697172.66??Brigham Young University Idaho25175.482392.00Idaho State Dept Education36173.753288.8972%-1616075190500Test Name: 5022 Early Childhood: Content Knowledge (computer)Administration DateState/Agency/InstitutionAll ScoresNMean Score# Passing% PassingJAN-2011 to DEC-2015All Test Takers17,676172.72??Brigham Young University Idaho98179.4798100.00Idaho State Dept Education177180.14177100.0055%Test Name: 5021 Education of Young Children (computer)Administration DateState/Agency/InstitutionAll ScoresNMean Score# Passing% PassingJAN-2011 to DEC-2015All Test Takers12,715181.11??Brigham Young University Idaho56180.345191.07Idaho State Dept Education88180.667686.3667%Test Name: 5543 Special Ed: Core Know Mild Mod App (computer)Administration DateState/Agency/InstitutionAll ScoresNMean Score# Passing% PassingJAN-2011 to DEC-2015All Test Takers23,083169.07??Brigham Young University Idaho2***Idaho State Dept Education203173.7620299.51Assessment Data – Student Teaching Outcomes (last 3 years)ECSEW-123.473.673.453.483.453.783.55S-123.713.793.643.433.573.863.67F-123.483.503.583.543.383.633.52W-133.513.573.523.393.513.683.53S-133.904.004.003.303.604.003.80F-133.773.773.693.543.773.853.73W-143.673.593.633.633.333.743.60S-143.003.503.503.003.003.503.25F-143.563.453.623.593.483.763.58Average3.563.653.633.433.463.763.58In ten years, only one ECSE student has been pulled from student teaching and her situation was complicated by health issues. She eventually returned to student teaching, completed, and is now teaching in Utah.Standards Programs are required to meet:ECSENationalNational Association of Education of Young Children (NAEYC)Council for Exceptional Children (CEC) and the Division of Young Children (DEC)Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP)The Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC)StateIdaho Standards For Initial Certification Of Professional School PersonnelCore Standards Enhanced StandardsIdaho Early Childhood Core CompetenciesTeacher Evaluation StandardsDanielson FrameworkHistorically, we have had our own internal outcomes (e.g., Instruction, Assessment, and Professionalism) for evaluating students and subscribed to CAEP and to the Idaho Professional School Personnel Standards for accreditation, and a hodge-podge of standards harvested from all of the others above for courses. Over the last year and a half, we have been moving to the Danielson Framework modified for our program for everything (e.g., accreditation, student evaluation, and outcomes) and have mapped all of the other standards to our “master rubric”. We are still not done with this process. The master rubric still needs some additions and some refining. From the master rubric, we must now create rubrics for each key assessment that is associated with each course, field experience, and program requirement. This work has begun, but is still in progress. The master rubric follows on the next ten pages. ................
................

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

Google Online Preview   Download