NOTE: I followed the Transition Point structure used by ...
Commission on Teacher Credentialing
Biennial Report
Academic Years 09-10 and 10-11
Institution Michael D. Eisner College of Education, California State University, Northridge
Date report is submitted June 6, 2012 Date of last Site Visit November 11-16-2009
Program documented in this report: Multiple Subject Preliminary Credential
Name of Program Multiple Subject Preliminary Credential/
Credential awarded Multiple Subject Preliminary Credential
Is this program offered at more than one site? No
Program Contact: Richard Castallo
Phone # 818-677-2621
E-Mail: Richard.castallo@csun.edu
If the preparer of this report is different than the Program:
Name: Beverly Cabello
Phone # 818 677 2590_________________________________
E-mail Beverly.cabello@csun.edu_____________________________
SECTION A:
MULTIPLE SUBJECT CREDENTIAL PROGRAM SPECIFIC INFORMATION
I. CONTEXTUAL INFORMATION
The Multiple Subject Credential Program at California State University, Northridge prepares teacher candidates for careers as elementary school teachers through five distinct pathways. Two pathways serve undergraduates who complete subject matter and credential program coursework concurrently in a blended fashion. Three pathways are designed for students who have already earned the baccalaureate degree. Candidates completing a post-baccalaureate pathway may opt to earn a BCLAD (Bilingual Cross-cultural Language and Academic Development) credential. These five pathways reflect principles consistent with a developmental approach to learning to teach and are aligned with the Unit’s Conceptual Framework (csun.edu/coe). Further, the organization of coursework and experiences in each of the pathways is designed to meet the varying needs of our credential candidates.
Multiple Subject Program Pathways
Integrated Teacher Education Program (ITEP) Freshman Option (129 units)
The ITEP-Freshman Option (FO) is an undergraduate program for students who have decided upon entering the university as freshmen that they will pursue a career in teaching. The ITEP-Freshman Option is available to students who are prepared to enter college-level mathematics and English classes. The program blends subject matter and education coursework and enables students to earn both a Bachelor of Arts degree in Liberal Studies and the Multiple Subject Credential in four years.
Integrated Teacher Education Program (ITEP) Junior Option (69 units)
The ITEP-Junior Option (JO) is an undergraduate program for junior-level CSUN students or community college transfers. Entering students have completed all lower division General Education requirements. The program blends subject matter and education coursework and enables students to earn both a Bachelor of Arts degree in Liberal Studies and the Multiple Subject Credential in two to three years following their entry into the program.
Traditional Multiple Subject Credential Pathway (37units)
The Traditional Multiple Program is a post-baccalaureate program for full-time or part-time students. Students who meet all credential requirements upon admission may complete the program in as few as two semesters, though most teacher candidates elect a three or four semester schedule (link to TRAD advisement form). The Traditional pathway provides the flexibility for students who must attend the university on a part-time basis.
Accelerated Collaborative Teacher (ACT) Preparation Program (37 units)
The ACT Program is a cohorted, intensive one-year full-time program for Multiple Subject, Single Subject, and Education Specialist Credential candidates. The ACT Program is offered in collaboration with Local District 2, Los Angeles Unified School District. ACT MS candidates enroll in many of the same classes as candidates in the Traditional pathway, but take a Core class that addresses diversity and students with special needs with single subject and education specialist candidates enrolled in the program.
Multiple Subject University Intern Program (36 units)
The Multiple Subject University Internship Program is designed for individuals who are employed as teachers in a public school, have met basic skills and subject matter requirements, but have not met teacher preparation requirements for the Multiple Subject Credential. Candidates in this two year program proceed through a structured program of coursework in a sequence similar to that of a four semester sequence for Traditional Program candidates. Interns enroll in and complete a supervised field experience in each of the four semesters of the program.
Enrollments
Data compiled from the department database for the Multiple Subject Credential Program provide important information on enrollment by pathway. Table 1 indicates the number of teacher candidates enrolled in their final semester of student teaching in the program.
Table 1: Enrollment in Final Semester of Student Teaching/Internship Teaching by Pathway/Year
|Pathway/Year |ITEP |Traditional |ACT* |Internship |
| |FO and JO | | | |
|2009/2010 |104 |111 |50 | |
| | | | |5 |
|2010/2011 |78 |78 |34 |17 |
1 Includes Summer Student Teaching
2 Includes Ryan Program Credential Candidates
As suggested in the data, except for the Internship program, enrollment in all pathways have been declining over the past several semesters. The decrease is the result in employment freezes or decreases in local school districts, particularly the Los Angeles Unified School District. Tables 2 and 3 below show enrollment data for methods courses and student teaching for ITEP and the three post-baccalaureate pathways. The tables are not intended to provide data for all courses in the Multiple Subject Credential Program options (e.g., foundational courses), however, enrollment in courses offered by the department provide a clear indication of the pattern in which students approach meeting the course requirements in their program.
The larger numbers of students enrolling in EED 515/OL, EED 520, EED 565M, and EED 577 can be explained by the fact that Special Education candidates take those courses as required by their program. They are not required to take EED 565S or 575 as part of their program. The number of students enrolled in EED 560C and EED 561F in the semesters indicated give a clear indication that enrollment in more recent semesters is holding steady and that the Traditional pathway does not experience the same cycle of enrollment so characteristic of ITEP. The ACT pathway is cyclical in nature as we have one admissions period for that two semester program. ACT candidates complete EED 567ACT in the fall semester, and EED 568ACT in the spring.
Table 2: Fall 2009, Spring 2010, Fall 2010, and Spring 2011 Multiple Subject ITEP Program Methods
and Field Experience Enrollments
|Methods Course |Course Title |Fall 2009 |Spring 2010 |Fall 2010 |Spring 2011 |
|EED 472 |Mathematics Curriculum and Methods |41 |65 |33 |50 |
|EED 477A |Literacy Instruction for Diverse Learners |42 |58 |27 |49 |
|EED 477B |Literacy Instruction for Diverse Learners |96 |36 |57 |29 |
|EED 480 |Science/Social Science Curriculum and Methods |24 |79 |34 |56 |
|ITEP Student Teaching | | | | |
|EED 578A/579 |Student Teaching/Student Teaching Seminar |84 |36 |57 |27 |
|EED 578D/579 |Student Teaching/Student teaching Seminar |26 |79 |35 |56 |
Enrollment figures for ITEP indicate that most candidates complete their program in the spring semester. ITEP students generally take the courses listed above in a three semester sequence. Candidates complete EED 472 and 477A in the semester before they intend to student teach. They enroll in EED 477B in their first semester (EED 578A/579) of student teaching in the fall semester (generally) and complete EED 480 with their second semester of student teaching (EED 578D), generally in the spring semester.
Table 3: Fall 2009, Spring 2010, Fall 2010, and Spring 2011 Multiple Subject Post-baccalaureate Pathways Methods
and Supervised Fieldwork and Student Teaching Enrollments
|Methods Course |Course Title |Fall 2009 |Spring 2010 |Fall 2010 |Spring 2011 |
|EED 515/OL |Basic Technology Methods |153/OL 44 |83/OL 42 |25 |47 |
|EED 520 |Teaching Reading in the Elementary School |176 |84 |80 |38 |
|EED 565M |Mathematics Curriculum and Methods |167 |86 |99 |72 |
|EED 565S |Science Curriculum and Methods |68 |113 |46 |65 |
|EED 575 |Integrated Social Studies/Arts Curriculum and Methods |38 |121 |46 |72 |
|EED 577 |Language Arts and ESL Instruction |142 |77 |56 |38 |
|Traditional Pathway Supervised Fieldwork and Student Teaching | | | | |
|EED 560C/559C |Supervised Fieldwork/Supervised Fieldwork Seminar |57 |46 |58 | 30 |
|EED 561F/FB/559F |Student Teaching/Student Teaching Seminar |51/30 |57 |37 |56 |
|ACT Program Supervised Fieldwork and Student Teaching | | | | |
|EED 567ACT/559C |Supervised Fieldwork/Supervised Fieldwork Seminar |51 |N/A |21 |N/A |
|EED 568ACT/559F |Student Teaching/Student Teaching Seminar |N/A |49 |N/A |19 |
|Internship Program Supervised Field Experience and Student Teaching | | | | |
|EED 550B/559C |Supervised Field Exp./Supervised Fieldwork Seminar |1 |1 |4 |4 |
|EED 551C/CB |Supervised Student Teaching/Student Teaching Seminar |1 |0 |2 |5 |
The larger numbers of students enrolling in EED 515/OL, EED 520, EED 565M, and EED 577 can be explained by the fact that Special Education candidates take those courses as required by their program. They are not required to take EED 565S or 575 as part of their program. The number of students enrolled in EED 560C and EED 561F in the semesters indicated give a clear indication that enrollment in more recent semesters is holding steady and that the Traditional pathway does not experience the same cycle of enrollment so characteristic of ITEP. The ACT pathway is cyclical in nature as we have one admissions period for that two semester program. ACT candidates complete EED 567ACT in the fall semester, and EED 568ACT in the spring.
Program Changes since Last Accreditation Visit - 2009
Table 4 indicates changes made to pathways to the Multiple Subject Program since Fall of 2009. Following the 2009 accreditation visit, the CTEL program was submitted and approved. In addition, the department revised the course outlines for EED 477A and EED 477B in ITEP as a result of examining survey data collected over several semesters. That data indicated that students were not being adequately prepared to meet the needs of English learners through the K-5 literacy program. The courses were revised to reflect a curriculum that mirrored EED 520 and EED 577, the two literacy courses in post-baccalaureate pathways. Finally, the Program developed two seminars, EED 559C and EED 559F to accompany the first and second semesters of student teaching in the three post-baccalaureate pathways. These seminars provide support for teacher candidates in student teaching and opportunities for rehearsal of the PACT Teaching Event. In 2010, the department increased the mathematics methods courses from two to three units (EED 472, EED 565M). The reason for this is that program data as well as the CSU Follow-up data indicated that candidates needed more mathematics instruction. In addition, these courses as well as others have embedded PACT assignments to prepare candidates for that assessment. Likewise, first semester student teaching seminars, which are taken concurrently with the student teaching course, were increased from one to two units in order to allow more time to address PACT issues.
Table 4: Program Changes Since 2009
|Date of Approval |Program/Course Modifications |
|2009 |CTEL program approved |
|2010 |Increased mathematics methods courses from 2 to 3 units. |
| |Increased student teaching seminar courses from 1 to 2 units. The seminars are taken concurrently with student teaching fieldwork courses to provide faculty|
| |and student teachers with more time to discuss student teaching experiences and also to integrate student teaching experiences and PACT event practice. |
|2011 |Bilingual Authorization program approved. |
Demographic Data
Table 5 provides demographic data compiled from admissions data for the Fall 2009, Spring 2010, Fall 2010, and Spring 2011 semesters. Candidates for the Multiple Subject Program are diverse in their ethnic background, age, and GPA at admissions. As one might expect, the population of candidates is not so diverse when it comes to gender - about 9 out of every 10 Multiple Subject candidates are female. In terms of ethnicity, no single population represents a resounding majority (>50% of admissions). Just under half of those admitted in these three semesters are white, roughly 35% are of Hispanic background, and 15% are of Asian descent. African Americans comprise a relatively small fraction of students admitted to the program. As a university, we are committed to recruiting and admitting candidates from traditionally under–represented populations. As a department, we appreciate the diversity in ethnic background and languages that our candidates bring to our programs.
As indicated in Table 5, Multiple Subject candidates are a relatively young group. Across the three semesters for which data are provided, slightly more than half (53%) of candidates admitted to the program were under 25 years of age, and nearly 3 out of 4 candidates was under 30.
Table 5: Demographic Admissions Data -Fall 2009, Spring 2010, Fall 2010, and Spring 2011-All Multiple Subject Pathways
|Demographics |Fall 2009 (N=99) |Spring 2010 (N=39) |Fall 2010 (N=116) |Spring 2011 |
| | | | |(N=64) |
| | | | | |
|Gender | | | | |
|Female |88.9% |92.3% |89.7% |89.1% |
|Male |11.1% |7.7% |10.3% |10.9% |
| | | | | |
|Race/Ethnicity | | | | |
|African American |8.3% |5.6% |3.7% |3.4% |
|Asian |3.6% |16.7% |19.6% |5.1% |
|Hispanic |23.8% |41.7% |30.8% |39.0% |
|White |64.3% |36.1% |45.8% |50.8% |
|Native American |0% |0% |0% |1.7% |
| | | | | |
|Age | | | | |
|Under 25 |47.9% |43.6% |50.9% |56.3% |
|26-29 |24.0% |30.8% |24.1% |23.4% |
|30-39 |19.8% |20.5% |17.2% |12.5% |
|40 and over |8.3% |5.1% |7.8% |7.8% |
| | | | | |
|GPA | | | | |
|3.50 – 4.00 |76.3% |89.2% |64.7% |49.2% |
|3.00 – 3.49 |15.5% |8.1% |17.2% |36.5% |
|2.50 – 2.99 |6.2% |2.7% |18.1% |12.7% |
|2.00 – 2.49 |2.1% |0% |0% |1.6% |
As the minimum GPA required to be considered for admission is 2.67, we would expect that the majority of applicants would have GPAs above that level and that is the case. In any given semester 81.9 to 97.3 % of those admitted had GPAs of 3.0 or above. The program does accept up to 15% of applicants who have GPAs below 2.67 on Exceptional Admission status if they have strong CBEST and/or CSET scores.
II. CANDIDATE ASSESSMENT/PERFORMANCE INFORMATION
Transition Points and Key Assessments
We view all transition points as developmental in nature. For example, measures at Transition Points 1 and 2 provide baseline information regarding candidates’ knowledge about the content they will teach, as well as basic skills. Grade point averages and passage of state exams reflect candidates’ basic skills and subject matter knowledge. However, we believe that candidates’ skills and subject matter knowledge will grow as they are asked to teach children. We anticipate that their pedagogical content knowledge and skills, professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills, and student learning will significantly increase as they experience the subject-specific methods courses we have built our curriculum around, and the assessments at Transition Points 3 and 4 will reflect candidates’ growing knowledge and application of that knowledge because of their work in field experiences. We are now using the Teaching Performance Assessment :Performance Assessment for California Teachers Teaching Event,( PACT) for candidates who entered the program after July 1, 2008 for Transition Points 4 and 5. Transition 6 includes the CSU Follow-Up Survey of Teacher Graduates and the CSU Follow-Up Survey of Employers.
Table 6: Transition Point Matrix for All Multiple Subject Credential Program Pathways (Initial)
Department of Elementary Education Fall 2009-Fall 2010
|[pic] |Transition Point 1 |Transition Point 2 |Transition Point 3 |Transition Point 4 |Transition Point 5 |Transition Point 6 |
| |Entry to |Entry to |Exit from First Clinical |Exit from |Exit from |Follow-Up |
| |Program |Clinical Practice |Experience |Clinical Practice |Program | |
|Skills |(1) Applicant Interview |(1) CBEST Passed or: (a) all |(1) Classroom Teaching |(1) Classroom Teaching Profile – |(1) GPA of at least 3.0 in |(1) CSU Follow-Up Survey |
| | |three subsets of CSET passed |Profile – First semester |Second semester |program courses and 2.75 |(Candidates’ Perceptions) |
| |(2) CBEST attempted |and (b) CSET Writing Subtest | | |overall cumulative GPA | |
| | |Passed | |(2) Teaching Performance | |(2) CSU Follow-Up Survey |
| | |(2) Writing Proficiency | |Assessment |(2) Individual Induction Plan|(Employers’ Perceptions) |
| | |(UDWPE score of 10 or higher,| |or PACT Teaching Event | | |
| | |or passing grade in | | |(3) CSU Exit Survey | |
| | |composition course, or | | |(Candidates’ Perceptions) | |
| | |minimum score of 41 on CBEST)| | | | |
|Dispositions |(1) Applicant Interview | |
| | | |
| |(2) Dispositions Self Survey at Beginning* | |
| |(N=116) |(N=64) |
|GENDER | | |
|Female |89.7% |89.1% |
|Male |10.3% |10.9% |
|ETHNICITY | | |
|African American |3.7% |3.4% |
|Asian |19.6% |5.1% |
|Hispanic |30.8% |39.0% |
|White |45.8% |50.8% |
|Native American |0% |1.7% |
|AGE | | |
|Under 25 |50.9% |56.3% |
|26-29 |24.1% |23.4% |
|30-39 |17.2% |12.5% |
|40 and over |7.8% |7.8% |
|GPA | | |
|3.50 – 4.00 |64.7% |49.2% |
|3.00 – 3.49 |17.2% |36.5% |
|2.50 – 2.99 |18.1% |12.7% |
|2.00 – 2.49 |0% |1.6% |
Notes: Overall or Last 60 Units GPA ; N/A – ITEP-F does not admit candidates in Fall, ACT and Intern do not admit candidates in Spring.
Subject Matter Competency. The Title II reports for 2009 – 2010 and 2010 – 2011 show that program candidates show strong subject matter competency as per the CBEST and CSET pass rates. Table 8 below shows that CSU Northridge candidate had been showing strong pass rates for RICA in 2009 -2010 (also in prior years). The data for 2010 -2011 show that most of the majority of RICA test takers pass the test.
Table 8: Subject Matter Competency
Multiple Subject Credential 2009-2010, 2010 - 2011
|Subject Matter Competency |Takers |Passers |% Pass Rate |
|2009 - 2010 RICA |312 |310 |99 |
|2010 – 2011 RICA | | | |
|Group 1 RICA 1 |8 |0 |0 |
|Group 2 RICA |3 |0 |0 |
| RICA.1 |163 |110 |67 |
|Group 3 RICA |6 |0 |0 |
| RICA.1 |227 |224 |99 |
|Group 4 RICA |97 |97 |100 |
| RICA.1 |180 |179 |99 |
Verbal Skills. Verbal skills are assessed during the Applicant Interview. Tables 9 and 10 report Interview scores for verbal skills. Candidates entering the program options have been assessed as having adequate to competent verbal skills. The 2009-10 data show that ITEP –F candidates consistently demonstrate higher verbal skills as measured during the interview process. All ITEP-F candidates are enrolled into the program as incoming freshmen from high schools who register as Liberal Studies majors. One of the entrance requirements into that program is that the candidates must meet the English Composition “college ready” requirements of the university. ITEP-J candidates are allowed to come to CSUN needing developmental English curriculum or they may have completed developmental English programs at community colleges. We continue to believe that the ITEP-F candidates represent a group of incoming freshman who have more accomplished English skills and the Verbal Skills scores from the Admissions Interview data support this finding.
Table 9: Applicant Interview
Multiple Subject Credential
Fall 2009 and Spring 2010
| |NCATE Standard |Fall 2009 |Spring 2010 |
| | |Traditional |ACT |
| | |ACT |ITEP-J |
| | |Traditional |ACT |
| | |ACT |ITEP-J |Traditional |Traditional |
|Entry to |(1) GPA of 3.0 or higher in |(1) GPA of 3.0 or higher in |(1) CBEST Passed or: (a) all |(1) GPA of 3.0 or higher in | |
|Clinical |credential program courses |credential program courses |three subsets of CSET passed and|credential program courses | |
|Practice | | |(b) CSET Writing Subtest Passed | | |
| |(2) Credential coursework passed with|(2) Credential coursework passed| |(2) Credential coursework passed| |
| |no grade below “C” |with no grade below “C” |(2) Writing Proficiency |with no grade below “C” | |
| | | |(UDWPE score of 10 or higher, or| | |
| |(3) Overall GPA 2.75 or higher | |passing grade in composition | | |
| | | |course, or minimum score of 41 | | |
| |(4) CBEST Passed or: (a) all three | |on CBEST) | | |
| |subsets of CSET passed and (b) CSET | | | | |
| |Writing Subtest Passed | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| |(5) Writing Proficiency | | | | |
| |(UDWPE score of 10 or higher, or | | | | |
| |passing grade in composition course, | | | | |
| |or minimum score of 41 on CBEST) | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| |(6) CSET subtests 1, 2, and 3 passed | | | | |
| |(ITEP ONLY) | | | | |
| | | | | | |
1.a Content Knowledge
The GPA data reported in Tables 14 and 15 below indicate that candidates who complete credential courses prior to the first student teaching assignment maintain strong grade point averages of A- or B+. Active learning, participation in class activities, discussions, and numerous opportunities to write and reflect on subject-area lessons contribute to these GPA results.
Writing Proficiency may be met in a variety of ways, but the most common is a score of 41 or higher on the CBEST. The mean
CBEST writing scores reported below are evidence that our candidates possess satisfactory or better writing capabilities. A second way to meet Writing Proficiency is by completing English 305 with a grade of C or higher. The GPA means for candidates who have completed the writing course demonstrate candidates’ ability to write.
A Basic Skills Requirement must be demonstrated and represents a basic level of content knowledge in reading, math and writing. Most candidates meet this requirement by passing CBEST (California Basic Educational Skills Test). Some candidates are beginning to meet this requirement by passing CSET with the new Writing assessment component. Because the ITEP program options are “blended” programs, candidates complete a Liberal Studies degree concurrently while taking pedagogical coursework. As required by the CSU Chancellor’s office, integrated program baccalaureate candidates must demonstrate subject matter competence before they enter their first clinical practice experience, after completing 60-90 units of subject matter coursework.
1.b Pedagogical Content Knowledge and Skills
Pedagogical Content Knowledge and Skills are also assessed by the grade point average earned in credential program coursework. The GPA means identify the level of candidates’ learning of pedagogical content knowledge in credential coursework as they enter the first student teaching experience. Many candidates in the Traditional program option, as well as all ITEP candidates have completed three to four foundations and methods courses that emphasize pedagogical content knowledge before they enter the first clinical experience. The data suggests that candidates’ are successfully demonstrating they are acquiring this knowledge base.
1.c Professional and Pedagogical Content Knowledge and Skills
Please see the above tables for GPA means as candidates begin the first clinical experience and for the data on Writing Proficiency by CBEST score or course grade. Math and literacy methods courses, completed by many Traditional candidates and all ITEP F and J candidates prior to the first clinical experience require candidates to demonstrate their understanding of national and state standards, know the research base regarding pedagogical practices and their impact on pupil achievement. Course assignments that are standardized across all sections of reading and math methods courses require candidates to analyze research findings and develop lesson plans that accommodate pupil learning.
Table 14: GPA and Writing Proficiency
Entry to Student Teaching
Multiple Subject Credential
Fall 2009 to Spring 2011
| |NCATE |Fall 2009 |Spring 2010 |Fall 2010 |
| |Standard | | | |
| | |Mean |
| | |Mean |N |
|GPA Credential Program Courses |1.a, c | | |
|GPA Post BA Courses |1.a, c | | |
|CBEST Writing |1.a, c | | |
|Writing Course GPA |1.a, c | | |
1.b Pedagogical Content Knowledge and Skills
Pedagogical Content Knowledge and Skills are also assessed by the grade point average earned in credential program coursework. The GPA means identify the level of candidates’ learning of pedagogical content knowledge in credential coursework as they enter the first student teaching experience. Many candidates in the Traditional program option, as well as all ITEP candidates have completed three to four foundations and methods courses that emphasize pedagogical content knowledge before they enter the first clinical experience. The data suggests that candidates’ are successfully demonstrating they are acquiring this knowledge base.
1.c Professional and Pedagogical Content Knowledge and Skills
Please see the above tables for GPA means as candidates begin the first clinical experience and for the data on Writing Proficiency by CBEST score or course grade. Math and literacy methods courses, completed by many Traditional candidates and all ITEP F and J candidates prior to the first clinical experience require candidates to demonstrate their understanding of national and state standards, know the research base regarding pedagogical practices and their impact on pupil achievement. Course assignments that are standardized across all sections of reading and math methods courses require candidates to analyze research findings and develop lesson plans that accommodate pupil learning.
1.d Student Learning
The ability to assess and analyze student work to improve learning begins in the early methods courses for mathematics and reading. Linking analysis of student work to planned lessons and student work product is a goal in those experiences. Again, all ITEP-F and ITEP-J candidates, as well as many Traditional candidates begin their first clinical experience with a knowledge base gleaned from mathematics and literacy methods courses that focus candidates on student learning.
Transition Point 3: Exit from Initial Clinical Experience
Candidates in the Traditional, ACT, ITEP-F and ITEP-J Pathways all enroll in two student teaching assignments. In 2009-2011, the first student teaching assignment in the pathways is 10-weeks long beginning in the morning through lunchtime. All candidates are expected to teach language arts and mathematics during that time period. Candidates in the Intern Pathway enroll in four field experiences at the school where they are teaching. The two initial experiences [EED550(1) and EED550(2)] occur during the Intern’s first year of service. Two additional experiences take place during the second year of service – EED 550(3) and EED 551C. The data of the third clinical experience [EED550(3)] is presented, representing the Interns’ exit from their initial clinical experience.
Table 16: Transition Point 3 - Exit from Initial Clinical Experience
Multiple Subject Credential Pathways
|Transition |1.a |1.b |1.c |1.d |1.g |
|Point 3 |Content |Pedagogical |Professional & |Student |Dispositions |
| |Knowledge |Content |Pedagogical |Learning | |
| | |Knowledge |Knowledge & Skills | | |
|Exit From |(1) Overall GPA 2.75 or higher | (1) GPA of 3.0 or higher in | (1) GPA of 3.0 or higher in | (1) Classroom Teaching Profile| (1) Classroom Teaching Profile|
|Initial Clinical | |credential program courses |credential program courses |– First semester |– First semester |
|Experience |(2) Classroom Teaching Profile | | | | |
| |– First semester |(2) Overall GPA 2.75 or higher |(2) Overall GPA 2.75 or higher | | |
| | | | | | |
| | |(3) Classroom Teaching Profile |(3) Classroom Teaching Profile | | |
| | |– First semester |– First semester | | |
The following discussion of Transition Point 3 uses data from Fall 2009, Spring 2010, and Fall 2010 and will refer to Table 17 aligned to NCATE Standard 1 subcategories of Content Knowledge, Pedagogical Content Knowledge, Professional & Pedagogical Knowledge and Skills, Student Learning and Dispositions.
Table 17: Classroom Teaching Profile - First Semester Multiple Subject Credential
NCATE Standard 1 Means by Pathways
| |Fall 2009 |Spring 2010 |Fall 2010 |
| |Traditional |Intern |ACT |
| | |University Supervisor |Supervising Teacher |University Supervisor |Supervising Teacher |
| | |Mean |
| | |University Supervisor |Supervising Teacher |
| | |Mean |N |Mean |N |
|TPE 1 Specific pedagogical skills |1.b |2.93 |44 |2.89 |44 |
|for subject matter instruction | | | | | |
|TPE 2 Monitoring student learning |1.d |2.77 |44 |2.74 |44 |
|during instruction | | | | | |
|TPE 3 Interpretation and use of |1.d |2.51 |44 |2.69 |44 |
|assessments | | | | | |
|TPE 4 Making content accessible |1.b |2.86 |44 |2.85 |44 |
|TPE 5 Student engagement |1.b, 1.c |2.78 |44 |2.85 |44 |
|TPE 6 Developmentally appropriate |1.c |2.69 |44 |2.84 |44 |
|teaching practices | | | | | |
|TPE 7 Teaching English learners |1.b |2.60 |38 |2.77 |39 |
|TPE 8 Learning about students |1.c, 1.d |2.88 |44 |2.91 |44 |
|TPE 9 Instructional planning |1.b |2.75 |44 |2.79 |44 |
|TPE 10 Instructional time |1.c |2.81 |44 |2.74 |44 |
|TPE 11 Social environment |1.c |2.94 |44 |2.93 |44 |
|TPE 12 Professional, legal, and |1.g |2.68 |44 |2.99 |44 |
|ethical obligations | | | | | |
|TPE 13 Professional growth |1.g |2.83 |44 |2.91 |44 |
Notes: 1=Limited Competency, 2=Emerging Competency, 3=Significant Competency
Table 20: Classroom Teaching Profile – First Semester
Multiple Subject Credential - ACT
Teaching Performance Expectations (TPE)
|Teaching Performance Expectation | |Fall 2010 |
| |NCATE Standard(s) | |
| | |University Supervisor |Supervising Teacher |
| | |Mean |N |Mean |N |
|TPE 1 Specific pedagogical skills |1.b |2.88 |19 |2.81 |18 |
|for subject matter instruction | | | | | |
|TPE 2 Monitoring student learning |1.d |2.37 |19 |2.78 |18 |
|during instruction | | | | | |
|TPE 3 Interpretation and use of |1.d |2.28 |18 |2.67 |18 |
|assessments | | | | | |
|TPE 4 Making content accessible |1.b |2.79 |19 |2.78 |18 |
|TPE 5 Student engagement |1.b,1.c |2.89 |19 |2.83 |18 |
|TPE 6 Developmentally appropriate |1.c |3.00 |19 |2.78 |18 |
|teaching practices | | | | | |
|TPE 7 Teaching English learners |1.b |2.73 |15 |2.81 |16 |
|TPE 8 Learning about students |1.c, 1.d |2.68 |19 |2.89 |18 |
|TPE 9 Instructional planning |1.b |2.74 |19 |2.83 |18 |
|TPE 10 Instructional time |1.c |2.84 |19 |2.72 |18 |
|TPE 11 Social environment |1.c |2.79 |19 |2.89 |18 |
|TPE 12 Professional, legal, and |1.g |2.89 |19 |2.83 |18 |
|ethical obligations | | | | | |
|TPE 13 Professional growth |1.g |3.00 |19 |2.89 |18 |
Notes: 1=Limited Competency, 2=Emerging Competency, 3=Significant Competency
Comparisons of university supervisor scores with supervising teacher scores for the ACT program in Fall 2010 (Table 20) indicate some discrepancy between those two sets of evaluators on TPE 3 Interpretation and use of assessments. Ongoing efforts at standardizing calibration and the stabilization of faculty in the ACT program continue to be necessary to assure constancy of scoring between university supervisors and supervising teachers.
Tables 21 and 22 display data from Fall 2009 and Fall 2010 for the ITEP-F program. Like the ACT program, there is only a Fall start for the first clinical experience in the ITEP-F program.
Table 21: Classroom Teaching Profile – First Semester
Multiple Subject Credential – ITEP Freshmen
Teaching Performance Expectations (TPE) Fall 2009
|Teaching Performance Expectation | |Fall 2009 |
| |NCATE Standard(s) | |
| | |University Supervisor |Supervising Teacher |
| | |Mean |N |Mean |N |
|TPE 1 Specific pedagogical skills |1.b |2.77 |16 |2.88 |20 |
|for subject matter instruction | | | | | |
|TPE 2 Monitoring student learning |1.d |2.41 |16 |2.68 |19 |
|during instruction | | | | | |
|TPE 3 Interpretation and use of |1.d |2.42 |16 |2.75 |20 |
|assessments | | | | | |
|TPE 4 Making content accessible |1.b |2.67 |16 |2.85 |20 |
|TPE 5 Student engagement |1.b,1.c |2.68 |16 |2.80 |20 |
|TPE 6 Developmentally appropriate |1.c |2.70 |16 |2.83 |20 |
|teaching practices | | | | | |
|TPE 7 Teaching English learners |1.b |2.46 |16 |2.65 |20 |
|TPE 8 Learning about students |1.c, 1.d |2.84 |16 |2.83 |20 |
|TPE 9 Instructional planning |1.b |2.72 |16 |2.81 |20 |
|TPE 10 Instructional time |1.c |2.72 |16 |2.58 |20 |
|TPE 11 Social environment |1.c |2.81 |16 |2.87 |20 |
|TPE 12 Professional, legal, and |1.g |2.88 |16 |2.85 |20 |
|ethical obligations | | | | | |
|TPE 13 Professional growth |1.g |2.90 |16 |2.92 |20 |
Notes: 1=Limited Competency, 2=Emerging Competency, 3=Significant Competency
Table 22: Classroom Teaching Profile – First Semester
Multiple Subject Credential - ITEP Freshmen
Teaching Performance Expectations (TPE), Fall 2010
|Teaching Performance Expectation | |Fall 2010 |
| |NCATE Standard(s) | |
| | |University Supervisor |Supervising Teacher |
| | |Mean |N |Mean |N |
|TPE 1 Specific pedagogical skills |1.b |2.82 |19 |2.88 |16 |
|for subject matter instruction | | | | | |
|TPE 2 Monitoring student learning |1.d |2.68 |19 |2.69 |16 |
|during instruction | | | | | |
|TPE 3 Interpretation and use of |1.d |2.53 |19 |2.75 |16 |
|assessments | | | | | |
|TPE 4 Making content accessible |1.b |2.79 |19 |2.81 |16 |
|TPE 5 Student engagement |1.b,1.c |2.84 |19 |2.88 |16 |
|TPE 6 Developmentally appropriate |1.c |2.84 |19 |3.00 |16 |
|teaching practices | | | | | |
|TPE 7 Teaching English learners |1.b |2.57 |14 |2.93 |15 |
|TPE 8 Learning about students |1.c, 1.d |2.74 |19 |2.88 |16 |
|TPE 9 Instructional planning |1.b |2.68 |19 |2.75 |16 |
|TPE 10 Instructional time |1.c |2.74 |19 |2.69 |16 |
|TPE 11 Social environment |1.c |2.79 |19 |2.80 |15 |
|TPE 12 Professional, legal, and |1.g |2.79 |19 |2.63 |16 |
|ethical obligations | | | | | |
|TPE 13 Professional growth |1.g |2.84 |19 |2.81 |16 |
Notes: 1=Limited Competency, 2=Emerging Competency, 3=Significant Competency
Data from Fall 2009 and Fall 2010 for the ITEP-F program indicate similar patterns of strength and weakness of teacher candidates matriculating through the program. Assessment (TPEs 2 and 3) and working with English Learners (TPE 7) are consistently perceived as those components needing to be strengthened after the initial clinical experience.
Two semesters of data from the ITEP-J program listed in Table 23 again show consistency across semesters in how candidates score in areas of relative strengths and weaknesses. This will be discussed further under relevant headings below for Pedagogical Content Knowledge and Skills, Professional and Pedagogical Knowledge and Skills, Student Learning, and Dispositions.
Table 23: Classroom Teaching Profile – First Semester
Multiple Subject Credential – ITEP Junior
Teaching Performance Expectations (TPE)
Fall 2009 and Spring 2010
|Teaching Performance Expectation | |Fall 2009 |Spring 2010 |
| |NCATE Standard(s) | | |
| | |University Supervisor |Supervising Teacher |University Supervisor |Supervising Teacher |
| | |Mean |N |
| | |EED550(1) |EED550(2) |
| |
|Indicator: |Unsatisfactory Performance |Limited Competency |Emerging Competency |Significant Competency |Exemplary Competency |
| |“0” |“1” |“2” |“3” |“4” |
Additionally, the second student teaching experience was nine weeks in length, with teacher candidates required to be in their placement for the entire school day and responsible for teaching all subject areas. The second student teaching experience culminates in ten days of takeover in the elementary classroom by the teacher candidate.
Table 27: Transition Point 4 – Exit from Clinical Practice
Multiple Subject Credential Program
|Transition |1a. |1b. |1c. |1d. |1g. |
|Point 4 |Content |Pedagogical |Professional |Student |Dispositions |
| |Knowledge |Content |& |Learning | |
| | |Knowledge & |Pedagogical | | |
| | |Skills |Knowledge | | |
| | | |& Skills | | |
|Exit From |(1) Classroom Teaching |(1) Classroom Teaching |(1) Classroom Teaching |(1) Classroom Teaching |(1) Classroom Teaching Profile |
|Clinical |Profile |Profile |Profile |Profile | |
|Practice | | | | | |
| |(2) TPA - PACT |(2) TPA - PACT |(2) TPA - PACT |(2) TPA- PACT | |
| | | | | | |
| |(3) Overall GPA | | | | |
The following tables will be used to discuss NCATE standards 1.a through 1.g. Because ACT and ITEP-F are cohorted experiences, there is no data at the exit to clinical experience in the Fall semesters.
Table 28: Classroom Teaching Profile - Second Semester
Multiple Subject Credential
NCATE Standard 1 Means by Pathways
Fall 2009, Spring 2010, and Fall 2011
| |Fall 2009 |Spring 2010 |Fall 2011 |
| |Traditional |Intern |ITEP-F |
| | |University Supervisor |Supervising Teacher |University Supervisor |Supervising Teacher |
| | |Mean |N |
| | |University Supervisor |Supervising Teacher |University Supervisor |Supervising Teacher |
| | |Mean |
| | |University Supervisor |Supervising Teacher |
| | |Mean |N |Mean |N |
|TPE 1 Specific pedagogical skills |1.b |3.59 |45 |3.72 |38 |
|for subject matter instruction | | | | | |
|TPE 2 Monitoring student learning |1.d |3.62 |45 |3.67 |38 |
|during instruction | | | | | |
|TPE 3 Interpretation and use of |1.d |3.52 |45 |3.66 |38 |
|assessments | | | | | |
|TPE 4 Making content accessible |1.b |3.73 |45 |3.74 |38 |
|TPE 5 Student engagement |1.b,1.c |3.63 |45 |3.79 |38 |
|TPE 6 Developmentally appropriate |1.c |3.61 |45 |3.69 |38 |
|teaching practices | | | | | |
|TPE 7 Teaching English learners |1.b |3.47 |42 |3.75 |34 |
|TPE 8 Learning about students |1.c, 1.d |3.80 |45 |3.80 |37 |
|TPE 9 Instructional planning |1.b |3.63 |45 |3.68 |38 |
|TPE 10 Instructional time |1.c |3.50 |45 |3.58 |38 |
|TPE 11 Social environment |1.c |3.91 |45 |3.82 |38 |
|TPE 12 Professional, legal, and |1.g |3.79 |45 |3.75 |38 |
|ethical obligations | | | | | |
|TPE 13 Professional growth |1.g |3.75 |45 |3.75 |38 |
Notes: 1=Limited Competency, 2=Emerging Competency, 3=Significant Competency
Table 32: Classroom Teaching Profile – Second Semester
Multiple Subject Credential - ACT
Teaching Performance Expectations (TPE)
Spring 2011
|Teaching Performance Expectation | |Spring 2011 |
| |NCATE Standard(s) | |
| | |University Supervisor |Supervising Teacher |
| | |Mean |N |Mean |N |
|TPE 1 Specific pedagogical skills |1.b |3.68 |19 |3.73 |16 |
|for subject matter instruction | | | | | |
|TPE 2 Monitoring student learning |1.d |3.68 |19 |3.81 |16 |
|during instruction | | | | | |
|TPE 3 Interpretation and use of |1.d |3.53 |19 |3.75 |16 |
|assessments | | | | | |
|TPE 4 Making content accessible |1.b |3.95 |19 |3.75 |16 |
|TPE 5 Student engagement |1.b,1.c |4.00 |19 |3.88 |16 |
|TPE 6 Developmentally appropriate |1.c |3.95 |19 |3.81 |16 |
|teaching practices | | | | | |
|TPE 7 Teaching English learners |1.b |3.44 |18 |3.79 |14 |
|TPE 8 Learning about students |1.c, 1.d |3.68 |19 |4.00 |16 |
|TPE 9 Instructional planning |1.b |3.79 |19 |3.69 |16 |
|TPE 10 Instructional time |1.c |3.84 |19 |3.69 |16 |
|TPE 11 Social environment |1.c |3.84 |19 |3.94 |16 |
|TPE 12 Professional, legal, and |1.g |3.95 |19 |4.00 |16 |
|ethical obligations | | | | | |
|TPE 13 Professional growth |1.g |4.00 |19 |3.88 |16 |
Notes: 1=Limited Competency, 2=Emerging Competency, 3=Significant Competency, 4=Exemplary Competency
Data for ITEP-F are also somewhat consistent across reported semesters. Relative strengths include Making Content Accessible, Learning about Students, and Social Environment. Relative weaknesses include assessment and working with English Learners.
Table 33: Classroom Teaching Profile – Second Semester
Multiple Subject Credential - ITEP Freshmen
Teaching Performance Expectations (TPE)
Spring 2010
|Teaching Performance Expectation | |Spring 2010 |
| |NCATE Standard(s) | |
| | |University Supervisor |Supervising Teacher |
| | |Mean |N |Mean |N |
|TPE 1 Specific pedagogical skills |1.b |3.51 |17 |3.66 |15 |
|for subject matter instruction | | | | | |
|TPE 2 Monitoring student learning |1.d |3.56 |17 |3.67 |15 |
|during instruction | | | | | |
|TPE 3 Interpretation and use of |1.d |3.39 |17 |3.72 |15 |
|assessments | | | | | |
|TPE 4 Making content accessible |1.b |3.61 |17 |3.71 |15 |
|TPE 5 Student engagement |1.b,1.c |3.64 |17 |3.73 |15 |
|TPE 6 Developmentally appropriate |1.c |3.59 |17 |3.68 |15 |
|teaching practices | | | | | |
|TPE 7 Teaching English learners |1.b |3.33 |15 |3.58 |12 |
|TPE 8 Learning about students |1.c, 1.d |3.68 |17 |3.60 |15 |
|TPE 9 Instructional planning |1.b |3.59 |17 |3.67 |15 |
|TPE 10 Instructional time |1.c |3.59 |17 |3.63 |15 |
|TPE 11 Social environment |1.c |3.63 |17 |3.67 |14 |
|TPE 12 Professional, legal, and |1.g |3.65 |17 |3.68 |15 |
|ethical obligations | | | | | |
|TPE 13 Professional growth |1.g |3.56 |17 |3.63 |15 |
Notes: 1=Limited Competency, 2=Emerging Competency, 3=Significant Competency, 4=Exemplary Competency
Table 34: Classroom Teaching Profile – Second Semester
Multiple Subject Credential - ITEP Freshmen
Teaching Performance Expectations (TPE)
Spring 2011
|Teaching Performance Expectation | |Spring 2011 |
| |NCATE Standard(s) | |
| | |University Supervisor |Supervising Teacher |
| | |Mean |N |Mean |N |
|TPE 1 Specific pedagogical skills |1.b |3.62 |17 |3.57 |18 |
|for subject matter instruction | | | | | |
|TPE 2 Monitoring student learning |1.d |3.59 |17 |3.61 |18 |
|during instruction | | | | | |
|TPE 3 Interpretation and use of |1.d |3.41 |17 |3.44 |18 |
|assessments | | | | | |
|TPE 4 Making content accessible |1.b |3.71 |17 |3.67 |18 |
|TPE 5 Student engagement |1.b,1.c |3.88 |17 |3.72 |18 |
|TPE 6 Developmentally appropriate |1.c |4.00 |17 |3.67 |18 |
|teaching practices | | | | | |
|TPE 7 Teaching English learners |1.b |3.53 |17 |3.59 |17 |
|TPE 8 Learning about students |1.c, 1.d |3.69 |16 |3.61 |18 |
|TPE 9 Instructional planning |1.b |3.71 |17 |3.61 |18 |
|TPE 10 Instructional time |1.c |3.65 |17 |3.56 |18 |
|TPE 11 Social environment |1.c |3.94 |17 |3.56 |18 |
|TPE 12 Professional, legal, and |1.g |3.82 |17 |3.61 |18 |
|ethical obligations | | | | | |
|TPE 13 Professional growth |1.g |3.88 |17 |3.78 |18 |
Notes: 1=Limited Competency, 2=Emerging Competency, 3=Significant Competency, 4=Exemplary Competency
Data for ITEP-J teacher candidates is also remarkably consistent with similar relative weaknesses in assessment and working with English Learners. See Tables 35 and 36 for a comparison of data from four semesters.
Table 35: Classroom Teaching Profile – Second Semester
Multiple Subject Credential - ITEP Junior
Teaching Performance Expectations (TPE)
Fall 2009 and Spring 2010
|Teaching Performance Expectation | |Fall 2009 |Spring 2010 |
| |NCATE Standard(s) | | |
| | |University Supervisor |Supervising Teacher |University Supervisor |Supervising Teacher |
| | |Mean |N |
| | |University Supervisor |Supervising Teacher |University Supervisor |Supervising Teacher |
| | |Mean |N |
| | |EED550 |EED 550 551C/561CB |
| | |551C/561CB | |
| | |Mean |N |Mean |N |
|TPE 1 Specific pedagogical |1.b |2.5 |7 |2.5 |7 |
|skills for subject matter | | | | | |
|instruction | | | | | |
|TPE 2 Monitoring student |1.d |2.5 |7 |2.5 |6 |
|learning during instruction | | | | | |
|TPE 3 Interpretation and use |1.d |2.0 |1 |2.0 |3 |
|of assessments | | | | | |
|TPE 4 Making content |1.b |2.0 |7 |2.5 |1 |
|accessible | | | | | |
|TPE 5 Student engagement |1.b,1.c |3.0 |7 |2.5 |6 |
|TPE 6 Developmentally |1.c |3.0 |7 |2.5 |6 |
|appropriate teaching practices| | | | | |
|TPE 7 Teaching English |1.b |2.50 |7 |2.50 |6 |
|learners | | | | | |
|TPE 8 Learning about students |1.c, 1.d |2.50 |7 |2.50 |6 |
|TPE 9 Instructional planning |1.b |2.50 |7 |2.50 |6 |
|TPE 10 Instructional time |1.c |2.50 |7 |2.50 |6 |
|TPE 11 Social environment |1.c |3.00 |7 |3.00 |6 |
|TPE 12 Professional, legal, |1.g |3.00 |7 |3.00 |6 |
|and ethical obligations | | | | | |
|TPE 13 Professional growth |1.g |3.00 |7 |3.00 |6 |
Notes: 1=Limited Competency, 2=Emerging Competency, 3=Significant Competency, 4=Exemplary Competency
At the end of the second clinical experience, as candidates exit the Clinical program, they are asked to rate their priorities in terms of Induction Goals organized by the six domains of the California Standards for the Teaching Profession. Tables 38-40 indicate that, using a scale of 1 through 3, teacher candidates have most consistently indicated the need for continued support in domains C Engaging and Supporting Students in Learning and E Creating and Maintaining Effective Environments for Student Learning. Although candidates in different pathways may have indicated other goals, candidates in all pathways indicated that they needed support in C and E.
Table 38: Individual Induction Goals
Multiple Subject Credential
Fall 2009
|Domain |NCATE |Fall 2009 |
| |Standard(s) | |
| | |Traditional |Intern |ITEP-F |ITEP-J |
| | |Mean |
| | |Traditional |ITEP-J |
| | |Mean |N |Mean |N |
|Domain A: Making Subject Matter |1.b |2.31 |64 |2.44 |64 |
|Comprehensible to Students | | | | | |
|Domain B: Assessing Student |1.d |2.27 |64 |2.22 |64 |
|Learning | | | | | |
|Domain C: Engaging and Supporting |1.c |2.41 |63 |2.48 |63 |
|Students in Learning | | | | | |
|Domain D: Planning Instruction and |1.c |2.35 |63 |2.47 |64 |
|Designing Learning Experiences for | | | | | |
|Students | | | | | |
|Domain E: Creating and Maintaining |1.c |2.41 |63 |2.47 |64 |
|Effective Environments for Student | | | | | |
|Learning | | | | | |
|Domain F: Developing as a |1.g |2.32 |62 |2.23 |64 |
|Professional Educator | | | | | |
Notes: 1=Minimal Need, 2=Some Need, 3=Strong Need
Table 40: Individual Induction Goals
Multiple Subject Credential
Spring 2010
|Domain |NCATE |Spring 2010 |
| |Standard(s) | |
| | |Traditional |Intern |
| | |Mean |N |Mean |N |
|Establishing a balanced instructional focus |1.a, 1.b |2.99 |203 |2.76 |41 |
|Making content accessible |1.b |3.23 |203 |2.83 |41 |
|Designing assessments |1.d |2.92 |203 |2.73 |41 |
|Engaging students in learning |1.b, 1.c |2.80 |203 |2.61 |41 |
|Monitoring student learning |1.b, 1.d |2.62 |203 |2.66 |41 |
|Analyzing student work from an assessment |1.d |2.87 |203 |2.71 |41 |
|Using assessment to inform instructional decisions |1.d |2.72 |203 |2.66 |41 |
|Providing feedback |1.d |2.79 |203 |2.66 |41 |
|Monitoring student progress |1.g |2.69 |203 |2.56 |41 |
|Reflecting on learning using theoretical research |1.g |2.82 |203 |2.76 |41 |
|Understanding Language Demands |1.b |2.55 |203 |2.46 |41 |
|Supporting academic language development |1.b |2.67 |203 |2.59 |41 |
Notes: 1=Unsatisfactory, 2=Satisfactory, 3=Strong, 4=Exemplary
Table 42: Performance Assessment for California Teachers (PACT) - Teaching Event
Multiple Subject Credential
2010-2011
|Rubric |NCATE Standard |2010-2011 |
| | |Mean |N |
|Establishing a balanced instructional focus |1.a, 1.b |3.03 |214 |
|Making content accessible |1.b |3.14 |214 |
|Designing assessments |1.d |2.98 |214 |
|Engaging students in learning |1.b, 1.c |2.83 |214 |
|Monitoring student learning |1.b, 1.d |2.57 |214 |
|Analyzing student work from an assessment |1.d |2.74 |214 |
|Using assessment to inform instructional decisions |1.d |2.69 |214 |
|Providing feedback |1.d |2.74 |214 |
|Monitoring student progress |1.g |2.64 |214 |
|Reflecting on learning using theoretical research |1.g |2.79 |214 |
|Understanding Language Demands |1.b |2.71 |214 |
|Supporting academic language development |1.b |2.68 |214 |
Notes: 1=Unsatisfactory, 2=Satisfactory, 3=Strong, 4=Exemplary
Table 43: Classroom Teaching Profile - Second Semester
Multiple Subject Credential
TPE Scores By Pathways
Fall 2009, Spring 2010, and Fall 2010
| |Fall 2009 |Spring 2010 |Fall 2010 |
| |Traditional |Intern |ITEP-J |Traditional |Intern |
|Exit from |(1) GPA of 3.0 or higher |(1) GPA of 3.0 or higher |(1) GPA of 3.0 or higher |(1) GPA of 3.0 or higher |(1) CSU Exit |
|Program |in credential program |in credential program |in credential program |in credential program |Survey |
| |courses, with no grade |courses, with no grade |courses, with no grade |courses, with no grade |(Candidates’ |
| |below C |below C |below C |below C |Perceptions) |
| | | | | | |
| |(2) GPA of 2.75 in all |(2) GPA of 2.75 in all |(2) GPA of 2.75 in all |(2) GPA of 2.75 in all | |
| |post-BA courses |post-BA courses |post-BA courses |post-BA courses | |
| | | | | |(2) Dispositions |
| | |(3) CSU Exit Survey |(3) CSU Exit Survey |(3) CSU Exit Survey |Self-survey |
| |(3) CSU Exit Survey |(Candidates’ Perceptions)|(Candidates’ Perceptions)|(Candidates’ Perceptions)|(Program Exit) |
| |(Candidates’ Perceptions)| | | | |
1.a Content Knowledge
One item on the CSU Exit Survey directly addresses Content Knowledge, and the outcomes appear below in Table 45. Results for Fall 2009 and Spring 2010 are separated out only by Traditional, ITEP and ACT pathways. The data indicates that an overwhelming majority of candidates feel they were well or adequately prepared. It is important to note, however that Standard 1b provides Exit Data in which candidates indicate that they do not feel they have had the opportunity to become as well prepared in school placements in science, health, physical education and health. Because STEM and student health are critical areas of concern for educators, parents and policy makers this is an area that will be studied for future placement of teacher candidates.
Table 45: CSU Exit Survey Item by Pathways Aligned with NCATE Standard 1.a
Fall 2009-Spring 2010
|As a new teacher, I am ... | |
| . . . to know and understand the subject(s) in which I earned my teaching |NCATE Standard |N |Well prepared |Adequately prepared |Somewhat prepared |Not at all prepared |
|credential. | | | | | | |
| | |88 |68% |27% |5% |0% |
|Traditional |1.a | | | | | |
| |1.a |19 |63% |32% |5% |0% |
|ITEP | | | | | | |
| |1.a |80 |73% |25% |3% |0% |
|ACT | | | | | | |
1.b Pedagogical Content Knowledge
Tables 46 through 48 below present selected items from the 2009-2010 CSU Exit Survey that address Pedagogical Content Knowledge, as they appear in the report the university receives from the CSU. It is important to note that gains have been made in improving candidates expressed ability to teach English Language Learners and students with special needs. Despite this, it will be important to pursue these two areas of teacher candidate professional development to assure candidate efficacy.
The data show evidence of a very high level of perceived competency by Candidates in reading and mathematics followed by knowledge of child development, teaching social studies and science. The lowest three pedagogical content area competencies are reported by Candidates in the visual and performing arts, physical education --and health education a distant 20%. Focused consideration is important for faculty to conduct on this continued drift-off in the areas significant to the health, well-being and aesthetic aspects of student development and learning.
Table 46: CSU Exit Survey – Teacher Preparation: Part I
Multiple Subject Credential -
Traditional 2010-2011 Completers
|As a new teacher, I am ... |NCATE Standard |N |Well prepared |Adequately |Somewhat prepared|Not at all |
| | | | |prepared | |prepared |
|...to prepare lesson plans and make prior arrangements for students' class activities. |1.b |88 |82% |18% |0% |0% |
|...to organize and manage a class or a group of students for instructional activities |1.c |88 |75% |20% |5% |0% |
|...to organize and manage student behavior and discipline satisfactorily. |1.c |88 |50% |42% |8% |0% |
|...to use an effective mix of teaching strategies and instructional activities. |1.b |88 |69% |27% |2% |1% |
|...to meet the instructional needs of students who are English language learners. |1.b |88 |55% |35% |9% |1% |
|...to meet the instructional needs of students from diverse cultural backgrounds. |1.b |88 |56% |36% |8% |0% |
|...to meet the instructional needs of students with special learning needs. |1.b |88 |36% |44% |17% |2% |
|...to understand how personal, family and community conditions often affect learning. |1.c |88 |65% |30% |6% |0% |
|...to learn about my students' interests and motivations, and how to teach accordingly. |1.c |88 |75% |24% |0% |0% |
|...to get students involved in engaging activities and to sustain on-task behavior. |1.c |88 |70% |30% |0% |0% |
|...to use computer-based technology to help students learn subject of the curriculum. |1.b |88 |58% |27% |14% |1% |
|...to use computer-based technology for instruction, research, and record keeping. |1.b, 1.g |88 |60% |30% |10% |0% |
|...to monitor student progress by using formal and informal assessment methods. |1.d |88 |69% |26% |3% |0% |
|...to assess pupil progress by analyzing a variety of evidence including exam scores. |1.d |88 |58% |36% |6% |0% |
|...to adjust my teaching strategies so all pupils have chances to understand and learn. |1.b |88 |68% |30% |2% |0% |
|...to adhere to principles of educational equity in the teaching of all students. |1.c |88 |77% |22% |0% |0% |
|...to use class time efficiently by relying on daily routines and planned transitions. |1.c |88 |69% |26% |5% |0% |
|...to know about resources in the school & community for at-risk students and families. |1.c |88 |44% |35% |18% |2% |
|...to communicate effectively with the parents or guardians of my students. |1.g |88 |44% |38% |17% |1% |
|...to work collaboratively on school issues with other teachers in our school. |1.g |88 |57% |35% |8% |0% |
|...to think about problems that occur in teaching and to try-out various solutions. |1.c |88 |61% |27% |10% |0% |
|...to understand my professional, legal, and ethical obligations. |1.g |88 |69% |26% |5% |0% |
|...to evaluate and reflect and seek out assistance that leads to professional growth. |1.g |88 |84% |15% |1% |0% |
Table 47: CSU Exit Survey – Teacher Preparation: Part II
Multiple Subject Credential
Traditional
2010-2011 Completers
|As a new teacher, I am ... |NCATE Standard |N |Well prepared |Adequately |Somewhat |Not at all |
| | | | |prepared |prepared |prepared |
|...to know and understand the subject of the curriculum at my grade level(s). |1.a |88 |68% |27% |5% |0% |
|...to teach reading-language arts according to California Content Standards in reading. |1.b |88 |80% |19% |1% |0% |
|...to understand child development, human learning and the purposes of schools. |1.b |88 |60% |33% |7% |0% |
|...to teach mathematics according to California Content Standards in math. |1.b |88 |74% |25% |1% |0% |
|...to teach science according to California State Content Standards in science. |1.b |88 |58% |33% |9% |0% |
|...to teach history and social studies according to California Content Standards. |1.b |88 |66% |28% |6% |0% |
|...to teach visual and performing arts according to California Content Standards. |1.b |88 |53% |32% |13% |2% |
|...to teach physical education according to the California P. E. Curriculum Framework. |1.b |87 |59% |30% |9% |2% |
|...to teach health according to the California Health Curriculum Framework. |1.b |88 |45% |28% |22% |5% |
|...to design hands-on classroom activities that suit the attention spans of my students. |1.d |88 |76% |20% |3% |0% |
|...to enable my young students to interact with their peers in healthy, productive ways. |1.b, 1.c |87 |76% |23% |1% |0% |
|...to promote the academic skills of pupils at different levels of prior proficiency. |1.b |88 |68% |30% |2% |0% |
|...to extend students' concrete thoughts by familiarizing them with more abstract ideas. |1.b |88 |57% |36% |7% |0% |
|...to assist students in managing their time and in keeping track of school assignments. |1.c |88 |63% |32% |6% |0% |
|...to build on peer friendships, develop group skills, and encourage leadership roles. |1.c |88 |68% |25% |7% |0% |
|...to encourage students to take risks in discovery activities and divergent thinking. |1.b |88 |61% |30% |9% |0% |
|...to assist students in making sound ethical judgments. |1.g |87 |61% |36% |3% |0% |
|...to assist students in decision-making, problem-solving, and critical thinking. |1.b |87 |69% |29% |2% |0% |
|...to create an environment that supports language use, analysis, practice and fun. |1.b, 1.d |88 |76% |23% |1% |0% |
|...to use language so pupils at different levels understand oral and written English. |1.b |88 |70% |27% |2% |0% |
|...to teach the skills of English writing and to provide appropriate feedback to students. |1.b |88 |72% |24% |5% |0% |
|...to assist individual students in areas of their instructional needs in reading and mathematics. |1.b |88 |74% |23% |3% |0% |
Table 48: CSU Exit Survey – Instructional Preparation
Multiple Subject Credential
Traditional
2010-2011 Completers
|Instruction in your Teaching Credential Program |NCATE Standard |N |Well prepared |Adequately |Somewhat prepared|Not at all prepared |
| | | | |prepared | | |
|Instruction in how children and adolescents grow and develop. |1.c |80 |45% |38% |13% |5% |
|Instruction in the implications of human learning and motivation. |1.c |82 |54% |30% |15% |1% |
|Instruction in school purposes, organization, issues and history. |1.c |79 |44% |35% |18% |3% |
|Instruction in methods of classroom teaching and management. |1.b |87 |67% |26% |6% |1% |
|Instruction in the teaching of English language learners (ELL). |1.b |88 |72% |25% |3% |0% |
|Instruction in cultural diversity and multicultural education. |1.c |88 |65% |32% |2% |1% |
|Instruction in teaching students with special learning needs. |1.b |88 |45% |47% |8% |0% |
|Instruction in using computer technology for classroom instruction. |1.b |88 |51% |28% |18% |2% |
|Instruction in the teaching of reading-language arts in grades K-8. |1.b |88 |84% |15% |1% |0% |
|Instruction in the teaching of mathematics in grades K-8. |1.b |88 |73% |25% |2% |0% |
|Instruction in the teaching of science in grades K-8. |1.b |87 |55% |31% |11% |2% |
|Instruction in the teaching of history-social studies in grades K-8. |1.b |86 |62% |34% |2% |2% |
|Instruction in the teaching of K-8 art, music, drama and/or dance. |1.b |87 |52% |37% |9% |1% |
|Instruction in the teaching of physical education in grades K-8. |1.b |87 |71% |24% |5% |0% |
|Instruction in the teaching of health in grades K-8. |1.b |85 |39% |29% |28% |4% |
Table 49: CSU Exit Survey – Value and Helpfulness of Program
Multiple Subject Credential
Traditional
2010-2011 Completers
|Rate the value of these elements of your credential program: |NCATE Standard |N |Very valuable |Somewhat |Little Value |No value |
| | | | |valuable | | |
|My supervised teaching experiences in K-12 schools. |3.c |88 |88% |8% |3% |1% |
|My fieldwork (e.g., school visits, observations, school-based course assignments, etc.) and|3.c |88 |74% |20% |5% |1% |
|observations prior to supervised teaching. | | | | | | |
|Discussions sponsored by the university during student teaching. |3.c |79 |56% |30% |8% |6% |
|Guidance and assistance from field supervisor(s) from the campus. |3.c |88 |66% |24% |8% |2% |
|Guidance and assistance from supervising teacher(s) in K-12 schools. |3.c |86 |77% |20% |2% |1% |
|Information and support provided in initial program orientation. |2.c |87 |38% |33% |26% |2% |
|Information, support, and solutions provided by the credentials office |2.c |85 |34% |32% |25% |9% |
|Information, support and advice provided by faculty advisor(s) |2.c |78 |51% |31% |15% |3% |
|Information provided in written materials (e.g., handbook, catalogues, website) |2.c |87 |46% |36% |16% |2% |
Table 50: CSU Exit Survey – Teacher Preparation: Part I
Multiple Subject Credential
ACT
2010-2011 Completers
|As a new teacher, I am ... |NCATE Standard |N |Well prepared |Adequately |Somewhat prepared|Not at all |
| | | | |prepared | |prepared |
|...to prepare lesson plans and make prior arrangements for students' class activities. |1.b |19 |79% |16% |5% |0% |
|...to organize and manage a class or a group of students for instructional activities |1.c |19 |74% |21% |5% |0% |
|...to organize and manage student behavior and discipline satisfactorily. |1.c |19 |58% |32% |11% |0% |
|...to use an effective mix of teaching strategies and instructional activities. |1.b |19 |63% |26% |5% |0% |
|...to meet the instructional needs of students who are English language learners. |1.b |19 |68% |26% |5% |0% |
|...to meet the instructional needs of students from diverse cultural backgrounds. |1.b |19 |63% |32% |5% |0% |
|...to meet the instructional needs of students with special learning needs. |1.b |19 |32% |47% |21% |0% |
|...to understand how personal, family and community conditions often affect learning. |1.c |19 |68% |21% |11% |0% |
|...to learn about my students' interests and motivations, and how to teach accordingly. |1.c |19 |68% |26% |5% |0% |
|...to get students involved in engaging activities and to sustain on-task behavior. |1.c |19 |58% |37% |5% |0% |
|...to use computer-based technology to help students learn subject of the curriculum. |1.b |19 |63% |21% |16% |0% |
|...to use computer-based technology for instruction, research, and record keeping.. |1.b, 1.g |19 |53% |32% |16% |0% |
|...to monitor student progress by using formal and informal assessment methods. |1.d |19 |63% |32% |5% |0% |
|...to assess pupil progress by analyzing a variety of evidence including exam scores. |1.d |19 |58% |26% |11% |0% |
|...to adjust my teaching strategies so all pupils have chances to understand and learn. |1.b |19 |58% |37% |5% |0% |
|...to adhere to principles of educational equity in the teaching of all students. |1.c |19 |63% |32% |5% |0% |
|...to use class time efficiently by relying on daily routines and planned transitions. |1.c |19 |63% |32% |5% |0% |
|...to know about resources in the school & community for at-risk students and families. |1.c |19 |37% |42% |16% |0% |
|...to communicate effectively with the parents or guardians of my students. |1.g |19 |37% |32% |32% |0% |
|...to work collaboratively on school issues with other teachers in our school. |1.g |19 |47% |37% |16% |0% |
|...to think about problems that occur in teaching and to try-out various solutions. |1.c |19 |53% |26% |21% |0% |
|...to understand my professional, legal, and ethical obligations. |1.g |19 |63% |26% |11% |0% |
|...to evaluate and reflect and seek out assistance that leads to professional growth. |1.g |19 |74% |21% |5% |0% |
Table 51: CSU Exit Survey – Teacher Preparation: Part II
Multiple Subject Credential
ACT
|As a new teacher, I am ... |NCATE Standard |N |Well prepared |Adequately |Somewhat |Not at all |
| | | | |prepared |prepared |prepared |
|...to know and understand the subject of the curriculum at my grade level(s). |1.a |19 |63% |32% |5% |0% |
|...to teach reading-language arts according to California Content Standards in reading. |1.b |19 |74% |26% |0% |0% |
|...to understand child development, human learning and the purposes of schools. |1.b |19 |58% |42% |0% |0% |
|...to teach mathematics according to California Content Standards in math. |1.b |19 |53% |47% |0% |0% |
|...to teach science according to California State Content Standards in science. |1.b |19 |37% |53% |11% |0% |
|...to teach history and social studies according to California Content Standards. |1.b |19 |47% |53% |0% |0% |
|...to teach visual and performing arts according to California Content Standards. |1.b |19 |42% |37% |21% |0% |
|...to teach physical education according to the California P. E. Curriculum Framework. |1.b |19 |47% |47% |5% |0% |
|...to teach health according to the California Health Curriculum Framework. |1.b |18 |33% |50% |17% |0% |
|...to design hands-on classroom activities that suit the attention spans of my students. |1.d |19 |58% |37% |5% |0% |
|...to enable my young students to interact with their peers in healthy, productive ways. |1.b, 1.c |19 |68% |32% |0% |0% |
|...to promote the academic skills of pupils at different levels of prior proficiency. |1.b |18 |67% |33% |0% |0% |
|...to extend students' concrete thoughts by familiarizing them with more abstract ideas. |1.b |19 |58% |42% |0% |0% |
|...to assist students in managing their time and in keeping track of school assignments. |1.c |19 |53% |37% |11% |0% |
|...to build on peer friendships, develop group skills, and encourage leadership roles. |1.c |19 |63% |32% |5% |0% |
|...to encourage students to take risks in discovery activities and divergent thinking. |1.b |19 |47% |47% |5% |0% |
|...to assist students in making sound ethical judgments. |1.g |18 |61% |33% |6% |0% |
|...to assist students in decision-making, problem-solving, and critical thinking. |1.b |19 |58% |42% |0% |0% |
|...to create an environment that supports language use, analysis, practice and fun. |1.b, 1.d |19 |74% |26% |0% |0% |
|...to use language so pupils at different levels understand oral and written English. |1.b |19 |58% |42% |0% |0% |
|...to teach the skills of English writing and to provide appropriate feedback to students. |1.b |19 |58% |42% |0% |0% |
|...to assist individual students in areas of their instructional needs in reading and mathematics. |1.b |19 |63% |37% |0% |0% |
Table 52: CSU Exit Survey – Instructional Preparation
Multiple Subject Credential
ACT
2010-2011 Completers
|Instruction in your Teaching Credential Program |NCATE Standard |N |Well prepared |Adequately |Somewhat prepared|Not at all |
| | | | |prepared | |prepared |
|Instruction in how children and adolescents grow and develop. |1.c |19 |42% |42% |16% |0% |
|Instruction in the implications of human learning and motivation. |1.c |19 |68% |21% |11% |0% |
|Instruction in school purposes, organization, issues and history. |1.c |19 |47% |42% |5% |5% |
|Instruction in methods of classroom teaching and management. |1.b |19 |74% |21% |5% |0% |
|Instruction in the teaching of English language learners (ELL). |1.b |19 |89% |5% |5% |0% |
|Instruction in cultural diversity and multicultural education. |1.c |19 |89% |5% |5% |0% |
|Instruction in teaching students with special learning needs. |1.b |19 |63% |21% |16% |0% |
|Instruction in using computer technology for classroom instruction. |1.b |19 |37% |37% |21% |5% |
|Instruction in the teaching of reading-language arts in grades K-8. |1.b |19 |79% |16% |5% |0% |
|Instruction in the teaching of mathematics in grades K-8. |1.b |19 |68% |26% |5% |0% |
|Instruction in the teaching of science in grades K-8. |1.b |19 |53% |42% |5% |0% |
|Instruction in the teaching of history-social studies in grades K-8. |1.b |19 |74% |21% |5% |0% |
|Instruction in the teaching of K-8 art, music, drama and/or dance. |1.b |17 |41% |35% |24% |0% |
|Instruction in the teaching of physical education in grades K-8. |1.b |19 |58% |37% |5% |0% |
|Instruction in the teaching of health in grades K-8. |1.b |19 |32% |63% |5% |0% |
Table 53: CSU Exit Survey – Value and Helpfulness of Program
Multiple Subject Credential
ACT
2010-2011 Completers
|Rate the value of these elements of your credential program: |NCATE Standard |N |Very valuable |Somewhat |Little Value |No value |
| | | | |valuable | | |
|My supervised teaching experiences in K-12 schools. |3.c |19 |95% |5% |0% |0% |
|My fieldwork (e.g., school visits, observations, school-based course assignments, etc.) and|3.c |19 |89% |11% |0% |0% |
|observations prior to supervised teaching. | | | | | | |
|Discussions sponsored by the university during student teaching. |3.c |15 |60% |20% |20% |0% |
|Guidance and assistance from field supervisor(s) from the campus. |3.c |18 |72% |17% |0% |11% |
|Guidance and assistance from supervising teacher(s) in K-12 schools. |3.c |19 |89% |11% |0% |0% |
|Information and support provided in initial program orientation. |2.c |18 |28% |56% |17% |0% |
|Information, support, and solutions provided by the credentials office |2.c |19 |21% |37% |42% |0% |
|Information, support and advice provided by faculty advisor(s) |2.c |19 |53% |32% |16% |0% |
|Information provided in written materials (e.g., handbook, catalogues, website) |2.c |19 |37% |32% |26% |5% |
Table 54: CSU Exit Survey – Teacher Preparation: Part I
Multiple Subject Credential
ITEP
2010-2011 Completers
|As a new teacher, I am ... |NCATE Standard |N |Well prepared |Adequately |Somewhat prepared|Not at all |
| | | | |prepared | |prepared |
|...to prepare lesson plans and make prior arrangements for students' class activities. |1.b |81 |83% |16% |1% |0% |
|...to organize and manage a class or a group of students for instructional activities |1.c |81 |79% |19% |2% |0% |
|...to organize and manage student behavior and discipline satisfactorily. |1.c |81 |75% |21% |2% |0% |
|...to use an effective mix of teaching strategies and instructional activities. |1.b |81 |67% |31% |2% |0% |
|...to meet the instructional needs of students who are English language learners. |1.b |81 |56% |37% |6% |1% |
|...to meet the instructional needs of students from diverse cultural backgrounds. |1.b |81 |60% |32% |5% |0% |
|...to meet the instructional needs of students with special learning needs. |1.b |81 |41% |43% |16% |0% |
|...to understand how personal, family and community conditions often affect learning. |1.c |81 |78% |19% |4% |0% |
|...to learn about my students' interests and motivations, and how to teach accordingly. |1.c |81 |83% |15% |2% |0% |
|...to get students involved in engaging activities and to sustain on-task behavior. |1.c |81 |80% |17% |2% |0% |
|...to use computer-based technology to help students learn subject of the curriculum. |1.b |81 |49% |27% |19% |0% |
|...to use computer-based technology for instruction, research, and record keeping.. |1.b, 1.g |81 |52% |27% |19% |1% |
|...to monitor student progress by using formal and informal assessment methods. |1.d |81 |68% |30% |1% |1% |
|...to assess pupil progress by analyzing a variety of evidence including exam scores. |1.d |81 |59% |31% |10% |0% |
|...to adjust my teaching strategies so all pupils have chances to understand and learn. |1.b |81 |69% |28% |2% |0% |
|...to adhere to principles of educational equity in the teaching of all students. |1.c |81 |79% |19% |1% |1% |
|...to use class time efficiently by relying on daily routines and planned transitions. |1.c |81 |75% |22% |1% |1% |
|...to know about resources in the school & community for at-risk students and families. |1.c |81 |53% |36% |10% |1% |
|...to communicate effectively with the parents or guardians of my students. |1.g |81 |68% |21% |9% |2% |
|...to work collaboratively on school issues with other teachers in our school. |1.g |81 |65% |28% |4% |2% |
|...to think about problems that occur in teaching and to try-out various solutions. |1.c |81 |62% |37% |0% |1% |
|...to understand my professional, legal, and ethical obligations. |1.g |81 |84% |14% |1% |1% |
|...to evaluate and reflect and seek out assistance that leads to professional growth. |1.g |81 |86% |12% |1% |0% |
Table 55: CSU Exit Survey – Teacher Preparation: Part II
Multiple Subject Credential
ITEP
2010-2011 Completers
|As a new teacher, I am ... |NCATE Standard |N |Well prepared |Adequately |Somewhat |Not at all |
| | | | |prepared |prepared |prepared |
|...to know and understand the subject of the curriculum at my grade level(s). |1.a |80 |73% |25% |3% |0% |
|...to teach reading-language arts according to California Content Standards in reading. |1.b |81 |84% |16% |0% |0% |
|...to understand child development, human learning and the purposes of schools. |1.b |81 |62% |36% |2% |0% |
|...to teach mathematics according to California Content Standards in math. |1.b |81 |89% |11% |0% |0% |
|...to teach science according to California State Content Standards in science. |1.b |81 |69% |26% |4% |1% |
|...to teach history and social studies according to California Content Standards. |1.b |81 |60% |31% |9% |0% |
|...to teach visual and performing arts according to California Content Standards. |1.b |81 |58% |37% |4% |1% |
|...to teach physical education according to the California P. E. Curriculum Framework. |1.b |81 |52% |38% |9% |1% |
|...to teach health according to the California Health Curriculum Framework. |1.b |81 |48% |38% |12% |1% |
|...to design hands-on classroom activities that suit the attention spans of my students. |1.d |81 |81% |17% |1% |0% |
|...to enable my young students to interact with their peers in healthy, productive ways. |1.b, 1.c |81 |81% |19% |0% |0% |
|...to promote the academic skills of pupils at different levels of prior proficiency. |1.b |81 |68% |31% |1% |0% |
|...to extend students' concrete thoughts by familiarizing them with more abstract ideas. |1.b |81 |63% |35% |2% |0% |
|...to assist students in managing their time and in keeping track of school assignments. |1.c |81 |72% |27% |1% |0% |
|...to build on peer friendships, develop group skills, and encourage leadership roles. |1.c |79 |85% |14% |1% |0% |
|...to encourage students to take risks in discovery activities and divergent thinking. |1.b |79 |71% |28% |1% |0% |
|...to assist students in making sound ethical judgments. |1.g |81 |72% |26% |2% |0% |
|...to assist students in decision-making, problem-solving, and critical thinking. |1.b |81 |78% |21% |1% |0% |
|...to create an environment that supports language use, analysis, practice and fun. |1.b, 1.d |80 |86% |14% |0% |0% |
|...to use language so pupils at different levels understand oral and written English. |1.b |81 |74% |25% |0% |1% |
|...to teach the skills of English writing and to provide appropriate feedback to students. |1.b |80 |75% |25% |0% |0% |
|...to assist individual students in areas of their instructional needs in reading and mathematics. |1.b |79 |76% |23% |1% |0% |
Table 56: CSU Exit Survey – Instructional Preparation
Multiple Subject Credential
ITEP
2010-2011 Completers
|Instruction in your Teaching Credential Program |NCATE Standard |N |Well prepared |Adequately |Somewhat prepared|Not at all |
| | | | |prepared | |prepared |
|Instruction in how children and adolescents grow and develop. |1.c |81 |56% |42% |2% |0% |
|Instruction in the implications of human learning and motivation. |1.c |81 |60% |35% |5% |0% |
|Instruction in school purposes, organization, issues and history. |1.c |77 |45% |38% |16% |1% |
|Instruction in methods of classroom teaching and management. |1.b |80 |88% |10% |0% |3% |
|Instruction in the teaching of English language learners (ELL). |1.b |81 |75% |21% |4% |0% |
|Instruction in cultural diversity and multicultural education. |1.c |81 |69% |25% |6% |0% |
|Instruction in teaching students with special learning needs. |1.b |81 |46% |43% |10% |1% |
|Instruction in using computer technology for classroom instruction. |1.b |76 |30% |45% |20% |5% |
|Instruction in the teaching of reading-language arts in grades K-8. |1.b |81 |88% |12% |0% |0% |
|Instruction in the teaching of mathematics in grades K-8. |1.b |81 |88% |12% |0% |0% |
|Instruction in the teaching of science in grades K-8. |1.b |81 |67% |21% |11% |1% |
|Instruction in the teaching of history-social studies in grades K-8. |1.b |81 |58% |31% |10% |1% |
|Instruction in the teaching of K-8 art, music, drama and/or dance. |1.b |81 |59% |32% |9% |0% |
|Instruction in the teaching of physical education in grades K-8. |1.b |80 |56% |35% |9% |0% |
|Instruction in the teaching of health in grades K-8. |1.b |79 |44% |37% |15% |4% |
Table 57: CSU Exit Survey – Value and Helpfulness of Program
Multiple Subject Credential
ITEP
2010-2011 Completers
|Rate the value of these elements of your credential program: |NCATE Standard |N |Very valuable |Somewhat |Little Value |No value |
| | | | |valuable | | |
|My supervised teaching experiences in K-12 schools. |3.c |81 |84% |16% |0% |0% |
|My fieldwork (e.g., school visits, observations, school-based course assignments, etc.) and|3.c |81 |70% |25% |5% |0% |
|observations prior to supervised teaching. | | | | | | |
|Discussions sponsored by the university during student teaching. |3.c |73 |60% |27% |12% |0% |
|Guidance and assistance from field supervisor(s) from the campus. |3.c |79 |72% |24% |4% |0% |
|Guidance and assistance from supervising teacher(s) in K-12 schools. |3.c |81 |80% |16% |4% |0% |
|Information and support provided in initial program orientation. |2.c |81 |58% |28% |12% |1% |
|Information, support, and solutions provided by the credentials office |2.c |80 |48% |26% |23% |4% |
|Information, support and advice provided by faculty advisor(s) |2.c |80 |56% |28% |15% |1% |
|Information provided in written materials (e.g., handbook, catalogues, website) |2.c |81 |51% |33% |14% |2% |
Based on the exit surveys, program candidates feel very well-prepared to plan and implement lessons that use a variety of instructional strategies, to adjust to meet the needs of individual learners, to teach Language Arts and Mathematics, to teach critical thinking. Candidates feel less than well- prepared to meet the needs of special needs learners, use technology in the classroom, meet the instructional needs of English language learners or students from diverse cultural backgrounds, to know about the resources in the school and community for at-risk students and families, or to communicate effectively with parents or guardians. They want more or better instruction in how children and adolescents grow and develop, the implications of human learning and motivation, and school purposes, organization, issues, and history. Graduates also expressed the need for more and/or better instruction on the teaching of history, social studies, art, music, drama, dance, physical education and health in K – 8. Their thirst for more knowledge on these topics may stem from the fact that local districts have significantly reduced if not eliminated the opportunity to teach these subjects in the K – 8 environment.
In addition they feel the need for improvement in regard to the various opportunities and forms of information provided at the initial orientation, at the credentials office, by faculty advisors, and information provided in written materials. These components of the program are part of the Department’s action plan for future program improvement. The informational issues will also be addressed by the College.
1.c Professional and Pedagogical Content Knowledge and Skills
The outcomes of the CSU Exit Survey addressing Standard 1.c appear above in Tables 51 and 55. Again, the percentages of candidates who feel well or adequately prepared are high, and typically well above the benchmark. Candidates felt well prepared to manage classrooms and student behavior, to problem-solve issues related to teaching, and to promote student interaction. Candidates felt that they are only somewhat prepared in is in knowing about resources in the school and community for at-risk students and in teaching visual and performing arts and health in K – 8.. During the 2009-2010 academic year, the Department of Elementary Education voted to restructure the student teaching experiences to include an Early Field Experience that candidates must complete before student teaching. This enriched experience will include opportunities for the candidates to learn about school and community resources.
Transition Point 6: Program Follow-Up
The assessment data available at Transition Point 6 includes the CSU Employer and Beginning Teacher Follow-Up Survey results collected at the end of the first year of teaching after earning the Preliminary Credential. Please note that responses are on a 0-3-point scale, with 3 = well prepared, 2= adequately prepared, 1= somewhat prepared, and 0 = not prepared. Finally, responses to the Follow-Up Survey are not currently available by Pathways, so are reported as a single rating for all program completers combined.
Table 58: Transition Point 6 - Follow-Up to the Program
|Transition |1a. |1b. |1c. |1d. |1g. |
|Point 6 |Content |Pedagogical |Professional |Student |Dispositions |
| |Knowledge |Content |& |Learning | |
| | |Knowledge |Pedagogical | | |
| | | |Knowledge | | |
| | | |& Skills | | |
|Follow-Up |(1) CSU Follow-Up Survey |(1) CSU Follow-Up Survey |(1) CSU Follow-Up Survey |(1) CSU Follow-Up Survey |(1) CSU Follow-Up Survey |
|to the |Item (Candidates’ |(Candidates’ Perceptions)|(Candidates’ Perceptions)|(Candidates’ Perceptions)|Item (Candidates’ |
|Program |Perceptions) | | | |Perceptions) |
| | |(2) CSU Follow-Up Survey |(2) CSU Follow-Up Survey |(2) CSU Follow-Up Survey | |
| |(2) CSU Follow-Up Survey |(Employers’ Perceptions) |(Employers’ Perceptions) |(Employers’ Perceptions) |(2) CSU Follow-Up Survey |
| |Item (Employers’ | | | |Item (Employers’ |
| |Perceptions) | | | |Perceptions) |
Tables 59 and 60 show responses from Employers of CSU Northridge teacher graduates. Responses to all except five items on these tables show employer ratings of 88 – 100% in 2009/10 and 75 – 100% in 2010/11 indicating that graduates were well or adequately prepared in nearly all of the standards. Of course this is tempered by the fact that in these two tables the number of respondents is very limited (from 1 to 8 respondents). The five items that fell below a satisfactory level are:
Know about resources in the school & community for at risk pupils (38% well or adequately prepared, 63% somewhat or not prepared.
Monitor student progress by using formal and informal assessment methods (67% / 33% N = 3)
Assess pupil progress by analyzing a variety of evidence including exam scores. (50% 50% N = 4)
Assist individual students in areas of their instructional needs in reading/math. (100% somewhat or not prepared N = 1)
Tables 61 – 64 show responses from CSU Northridge-prepared teachers, one-year after they graduated. Responses to all except 10% of the items on these tables show employer ratings ranging from 75 – 100% in the well or adequately prepared category. Of the 10% below this level, nine items stand out. Of these only one overlaps with the employer survey – knowing about school and community resources for at-risk pupils and their families. The response rates were much higher for the teachers surveys, primarily ranging from 18 – 19 respondents)
1. Organize and manage student behavior and discipline satisfactorily (N = 19 58% / 42%
2. Communicate effectively with the parents or guardians of students (N = 19 58%/42%)
3. Think about problems that occur in teaching and try out various solutions (N = 18 67% 33%)
4. Use computer-based applications to help students learn curriculum subject (N = 19 63% / 37%)
5. Use computer-based technology in class activities and to keep class records (N = 19 56% /44%)
6. Know about resources in the school and community for at-risk students/families (N = 18 56%/44%)
7. [learn] instruction in ways to communicate effectively with parents (N = 6 67% /33%)
8. During program, I saw evidence that university faculty and administrators worked closely with educators in K-12 schools. (N = 16 69% /31%)
9. Off-campus fieldwork assignments in my reading methods class (N=13 69% / 31%)
Table 59: CSU Employer Follow-Up Survey
Multiple Subject Credential
General Concepts and Practices of Teaching: Part I
|Based on your observations rate how well s/he was prepared to: |NCATE |2009 – 2010 |
| |Standard(s) | |
| | |N |Well or Adequately|Somewhat or Not |Mean |SD |
| | | |Prepared |Prepared | | |
|Know and understand the subject of the curriculum at her/his grade level. |1.a |8 |100% |0% |2.63 |.52 |
|Organize and manage a class or a group of pupils for instructional activities. |1.c |8 |100% |0% |2.75 |.46 |
|Organize and manage student behavior and discipline satisfactorily. |1.c |8 |88% |13% |2.38 |.74 |
|Prepare lesson plans and make prior arrangements for class activities. |1.c |7 |100% |0% |2.86 |.38 |
|Use an effective mix of teaching strategies and instructional activities. |1.b |8 |100% |0% |2.38 |.52 |
|Meet the instructional needs of students who are English language learners. |1.b |7 |100% |0% |2.43 |.53 |
|Meet the instructional needs of students from diverse cultural backgrounds. |1.b |8 |88% |13% |2.38 |.74 |
|Meet the instructional needs of students with special learning needs. |1.b |8 |88% |13% |2.25 |.71 |
|Communicate effectively with the parents or guardians of his/her students. |1.g |7 |86% |14% |2.29 |.76 |
|Maintain positive rapport and foster students' motivation and excitement. |1.c |8 |100% |0% |2.50 |.53 |
|Think about problems that occur in teaching and try out various solutions. |1.c |7 |100% |0% |2.29 |.49 |
Notes: 0=Not prepared, 1=Somewhat prepared, 2=Adequately prepared, 3=Well prepared
|Based on your observations rate how well s/he was prepared to: |NCATE |2010 - 2011 |
| |Standard(s) | |
| | |N |Well or Adequately|Somewhat or Not |Mean |SD |
| | | |Prepared |Prepared | | |
|Know and understand the subject of the curriculum at her/his grade level. |1.a |4 |75% |25% |2.50 |1.0 |
|Organize and manage a class or a group of pupils for instructional activities. |1.c |4 |75% |25% |2.50 |1.0 |
|Organize and manage student behavior and discipline satisfactorily. |1.c |4 |75% |25% |2.50 |1.0 |
|Prepare lesson plans and make prior arrangements for class activities. |1.c |4 |100% |0% |2.50 |.58 |
|Use an effective mix of teaching strategies and instructional activities. |1.b |4 |75% |25% |2.25 |.96 |
|Meet the instructional needs of students who are English language learners. |1.b |4 |75% |25% |2.25 |.96 |
|Meet the instructional needs of students from diverse cultural backgrounds. |1.b |4 |75% |25% |2.25 |.96 |
|Meet the instructional needs of students with special learning needs. |1.b |4 |75% |25% |2.00 |.82 |
|Communicate effectively with the parents or guardians of his/her students. |1.g |4 |100% |0% |2.50 |.58 |
|Maintain positive rapport and foster students' motivation and excitement. |1.c |4 |75% |25% |2.50 |1.0 |
|Think about problems that occur in teaching and try out various solutions. |1.c |4 |100% |0% |2.50 |.58 |
Table 60: CSU Employer Follow-Up Survey
Multiple Subject Credential
General Concepts and Practices of Teaching: Part II
|Based on your observations rate how well s/he was prepared to: |NCATE |2009 - 2010 |
| |Standard(s) | |
| | |N |Well or |Somewhat or Not |Mean |SD |
| | | |Adequately |Prepared | | |
| | | |Prepared | | | |
|Understand adolescent growth, human learning and the purposes of schools. |1.c |8 |100% |0% |2.25 |.46 |
|Understand how personal, family & community conditions may affect learning. |1.c |8 |100% |0% |2.38 |.52 |
|Learn about students’ interests and motivations, and how to teach accordingly. |1.c |8 |88% |13% |2.38 |.74 |
|Get students involved in engaging activities and to sustain on-task behavior. |1.c |7 |100% |0% |2.57 |.53 |
|Use computer-based applications to help students learn curriculum subject. |1.b |6 |83% |17% |2.17 |.75 |
|Use computer-based technology in class activities and to keep class records. |1.b, 1.g |7 |86% |14% |2.43 |.79 |
|Monitor student progress by using formal and informal assessment methods. |1.d |7 |100% |0% |2.43 |.53 |
|Assess pupil progress by analyzing a variety of evidence including exam scores. |1.d |7 |86% |14% |2.29 |.76 |
|Assist individual students in areas of their instructional needs in reading/math. |1.b |7 |100% |0% |2.43 |.53 |
|Adjust teaching strategies so all pupils have chances to understand and learn. |1.c |7 |100% |0% |2.43 |.53 |
|Adhere to principles of educational equity in the teaching of all students. |1.c |8 |100% |0% |2.50 |.53 |
|Use class time efficiently by relying on daily routines and planned transitions. |1.c |8 |100% |0% |2.75 |.46 |
|Know about resources in the school & community for at-risk pupils. |1.c |8 |38% |63% |1.75 |1.04 |
Notes: 0=Not prepared, 1=Somewhat prepared, 2=Adequately prepared, 3=Well prepared
|Based on your observations rate how well s/he was prepared to: |NCATE |2010 - 2011 |
| |Standard(s) | |
| | |N |Well or |Somewhat or Not |Mean |SD |
| | | |Adequately |Prepared | | |
| | | |Prepared | | | |
|Understand adolescent growth, human learning and the purposes of schools. |1.c |4 |75% |25% |2.00 |.82 |
|Understand how personal, family & community conditions may affect learning. |1.c |4 |75% |25% |2.25 |.96 |
|Learn about students’ interests and motivations, and how to teach accordingly. |1.c |4 |75% |25% |2.50 |1.00 |
|Get students involved in engaging activities and to sustain on-task behavior. |1.c |4 |75% |25% |2.50 |1.00 |
|Use computer-based applications to help students learn curriculum subject. |1.b |3 |100% |0% |2.67 |.58 |
|Use computer-based technology in class activities and to keep class records. |1.b, 1.g |4 |100% |0% |2.50 |.58 |
|Monitor student progress by using formal and informal assessment methods. |1.d |3 |67% |33% |2.33 |1.15 |
|Assess pupil progress by analyzing a variety of evidence including exam scores. |1.d |4 |50% |50% |2.00 |1.15 |
|Assist individual students in areas of their instructional needs in reading/math. |1.b |1 |0% |100% |1.00 |-- |
|Adjust teaching strategies so all pupils have chances to understand and learn. |1.c |4 |75% |25% |2.25 |.96 |
|Adhere to principles of educational equity in the teaching of all students. |1.c |4 |75% |25% |2.25 |.96 |
|Use class time efficiently by relying on daily routines and planned transitions. |1.c |4 |100% |0% |2.75 |.50 |
|Know about resources in the school & community for at-risk pupils. |1.c |4 |75% |25% |2.25 |.96 |
Table 61: CSU First-Year Teacher Follow-Up Survey
Multiple Subject Credential
General Concepts and Practices of Teaching: Part I
|Based on your observations rate how well you were prepared to: |NCATE |2009 - 2010 |
| |Standard(s) | |
| | |N |Well or |Somewhat or Not |Mean |SD |
| | | |Adequately |Prepared | | |
| | | |Prepared | | | |
|Know and understand the subject of the curriculum at her/his grade level. |1.a |6 |100% |0% |2.50 |.55 |
|Organize and manage a class or a group of pupils for instructional activities. |1.c |6 |100% |0% |2.67 |.52 |
|Organize and manage student behavior and discipline satisfactorily. |1.c |6 |100% |0% |2.33 |.52 |
|Prepare lesson plans and make prior arrangements for class activities. |1.c |6 |100% |0% |2.67 |.52 |
|Use an effective mix of teaching strategies and instructional activities. |1.b |6 |100% |0% |2.50 |.55 |
|Meet the instructional needs of students who are English language learners. |1.b |6 |83% |17% |2.33 |.82 |
|Meet the instructional needs of students from diverse cultural backgrounds. |1.b |6 |83% |17% |2.33 |.82 |
|Meet the instructional needs of students with special learning needs. |1.b |6 |83% |17% |2.50 |.84 |
|Communicate effectively with the parents or guardians of his/her students. |1.g |6 |83% |17% |2.33 |.82 |
|Maintain positive rapport and foster students' motivation and excitement. |1.c |6 |83% |17% |2.33 |.82 |
|Think about problems that occur in teaching and try out various solutions. |1.c |6 |83% |17% |2.17 |.75 |
Notes: 0=Not prepared, 1=Somewhat prepared, 2=Adequately prepared, 3=Well prepared
|Based on your observations rate how well you were prepared to: |NCATE |2010 - 2011 |
| |Standard(s) | |
| | |N |Well or |Somewhat or Not |Mean |SD |
| | | |Adequately |Prepared | | |
| | | |Prepared | | | |
|Know and understand the subject of the curriculum at her/his grade level. |1.a |18 |89% |11% |2.56 | |
|Organize and manage a class or a group of pupils for instructional activities. |1.c |19 |79% |21% |2.21 | |
|Organize and manage student behavior and discipline satisfactorily. |1.c |19 |58% |42% |1.89 | |
|Prepare lesson plans and make prior arrangements for class activities. |1.c |19 |95% |5% |2.68 | |
|Use an effective mix of teaching strategies and instructional activities. |1.b |18 |94% |6% |2.44 | |
|Meet the instructional needs of students who are English language learners. |1.b |18 |89% |11% |2.22 | |
|Meet the instructional needs of students from diverse cultural backgrounds. |1.b |19 |89% |11% |2.26 | |
|Meet the instructional needs of students with special learning needs. |1.b |19 |68% |32% |1.89 | |
|Communicate effectively with the parents or guardians of his/her students. |1.g |19 |58% |42% |1.74 | |
|Maintain positive rapport and foster students' motivation and excitement. |1.c |19 |95% |5% |2.37 | |
|Think about problems that occur in teaching and try out various solutions. |1.c |18 |67% |33% |2.06 | |
Table 62: CSU First-Year Teacher Follow-Up Survey
Multiple Subject Credential
General Concepts and Practices of Teaching: Part II
|Based on your observations rate how well you were prepared to: |NCATE |2009 - 2010 |
| |Standard(s) | |
| | |N |Well or |Somewhat or Not |Mean |SD |
| | | |Adequately |Prepared | | |
| | | |Prepared | | | |
|Understand adolescent growth, human learning and the purposes of schools. |1.c |6 |100% |0% |2.83 |.41 |
|Understand how personal, family & community conditions may affect learning. |1.c |6 |100% |0% |2.50 |.55 |
|Learn about students’ interests and motivations, and how to teach accordingly. |1.c |5 |100% |0% |2.40 |.55 |
|Get students involved in engaging activities and to sustain on-task behavior. |1.c |6 |83% |17% |2.50 |.84 |
|Use computer-based applications to help students learn curriculum subject. |1.b |6 |100% |0% |2.83 |.41 |
|Use computer-based technology in class activities and to keep class records. |1.b, 1.g |6 |83% |17% |2.50 |1.22 |
|Monitor student progress by using formal and informal assessment methods. |1.d |6 |100% |0% |2.67 |.52 |
|Assess pupil progress by analyzing a variety of evidence including test scores. |1.d |6 |100% |0% |2.50 |.55 |
|Assist individual students in areas of their instructional needs in reading/math. |1.b |5 |80% |20% |2.60 |.89 |
|Adjust teaching strategies so all pupils have chances to understand and learn. |1.c |6 |83% |17% |2.67 |.82 |
|Adhere to principles of educational equity in the teaching of all students. |1.c |6 |100% |0% |2.83 |.41 |
|Use class time efficiently by relying on daily routines and planned transitions. |1.c |5 |80% |20% |2.40 |.89 |
|Know about resources in the school & community for at-risk students/families. |1.c |6 |83% |17% |2.00 |1.10 |
Notes: 0=Not prepared, 1=Somewhat prepared, 2=Adequately prepared, 3=Well prepared
|Based on your observations rate how well you were prepared to: |NCATE |2010 - 2011 |
| |Standard(s) | |
| | |N |Well or |Somewhat or Not |Mean |SD |
| | | |Adequately |Prepared | | |
| | | |Prepared | | | |
|Understand adolescent growth, human learning and the purposes of schools. |1.c |18 |72% |28% |2.22 |1.00 |
|Understand how personal, family & community conditions may affect learning. |1.c |19 |79% |21% |2.11 |.99 |
|Learn about students’ interests and motivations, and how to teach accordingly. |1.c |19 |84% |16% |2.26 |.73 |
|Get students involved in engaging activities and to sustain on-task behavior. |1.c |19 |89% |11% |2.21 |.63 |
|Use computer-based applications to help students learn curriculum subject. |1.b |19 |63% |37% |1.74 |.93 |
|Use computer-based technology in class activities and to keep class records. |1.b, 1.g |18 |56% |44% |1.50 |1.04 |
|Monitor student progress by using formal and informal assessment methods. |1.d |18 |89% |11% |2.33 |.69 |
|Assess pupil progress by analyzing a variety of evidence including test scores. |1.d |18 |83% |17% |2.33 |.77 |
|Assist individual students in areas of their instructional needs in reading/math. |1.b |18 |89% |11% |2.22 |.81 |
|Adjust teaching strategies so all pupils have chances to understand and learn. |1.c |18 |89% |11% |2.11 |.76 |
|Adhere to principles of educational equity in the teaching of all students. |1.c |19 |89% |11% |2.47 |.70 |
|Use class time efficiently by relying on daily routines and planned transitions. |1.c |19 |84% |16% |2.26 |.87 |
|Know about resources in the school & community for at-risk students/families. |1.c |18 |56% |44% |1.67 |.97 |
Table 63: CSU First-Year Teacher Follow-Up Survey
Multiple Subject Credential
Value and Helpfulness of Credential Program
|Based on your observations rate how valuable or helpful your coursework and fieldwork was in your |NCATE |2009 - 2010 |
|credential program: |Standard(s) | |
| | |N |Very or Somewhat |A Little |Mean |SD |
| | | |Valuable |or Not Valuable | | |
|Instruction in how children and adolescents grow and develop. |1.c |6 |83% |17% |2.17 |.75 |
|Instruction in the implications of human learning and motivation. |1.c |6 |100% |0% |2.50 |.55 |
|Instruction in school purposes, organization, issues and history. |1.c |6 |100% |0% |2.50 |.55 |
|Instruction in methods of classroom teaching and management. |1.c |6 |100% |0% |2.83 |.41 |
|Instruction in the teaching of English language learners (ELL). |1.c |6 |100% |0% |2.83 |.41 |
|Instruction in cultural diversity and multicultural education. |1.c |6 |100% |0% |2.83 |.41 |
|Instruction in teaching students with special learning needs. |1.c |6 |100% |0% |2.83 |.41 |
|Instruction in ways to communicate effectively with parents. |1.g |6 |67% |33% |1.83 |.75 |
|Instruction in ways to reflect on and improve my teaching practices. |1.b |6 |83% |17% |2.33 |.82 |
|Your supervised teaching experiences in K-12 schools. |3.c |7 |86% |14% |2.71 |.76 |
|Your school visits and observations prior to supervised teaching. |3.c |7 |100% |0% |2.86 |.38 |
|Off-campus fieldwork assignments in my reading methods class. |3.c |6 |100% |0% |2.33 |.52 |
|Guidance and assistance provided by field supervisor(s) from the CSU. |3.c |7 |86% |14% |2.43 |.79 |
|Guidance and assistance provided by supervising teacher(s) in K-12 schools. |3.c |7 |86% |14% |2.43 |.79 |
Notes: 0=No Value, 1=Little Value, 2=Somewhat Valuable, 3=Very Valuable
|Based on your observations rate how valuable or helpful your coursework and fieldwork was in your |NCATE |2010 - 2011 |
|credential program: |Standard(s) | |
| | |N |Very or Somewhat |A Little |Mean |SD |
| | | |Valuable |or Not Valuable | | |
|Instruction in how children and adolescents grow and develop. |1.c |13 |85% |15% |2.31 |.75 |
|Instruction in the implications of human learning and motivation. |1.c |13 |85% |15% |2.46 |.78 |
|Instruction in school purposes, organization, issues and history. |1.c |13 |77% |23% |2.08 |.95 |
|Instruction in methods of classroom teaching and management. |1.c |12 |92% |8% |2.50 |.90 |
|Instruction in the teaching of English language learners (ELL). |1.c |16 |81% |19% |2.25 |1.06 |
|Instruction in cultural diversity and multicultural education. |1.c |16 |88% |13% |2.44 |.89 |
|Instruction in teaching students with special learning needs. |1.c |13 |92% |8% |2.46 |.66 |
|Instruction in ways to communicate effectively with parents. |1.g |11 |91% |9% |2.36 |.67 |
|Instruction in ways to reflect on and improve my teaching practices. |1.b |11 |91% |9% |2.45 |.93 |
|Your supervised teaching experiences in K-12 schools. |3.c |17 |94% |6% |2.76 |.56 |
|Your school visits and observations prior to supervised teaching. |3.c |17 |82% |18% |2.47 |.94 |
|Off-campus fieldwork assignments in my reading methods class. |3.c |13 |69% |31% |2.00 |1.15 |
|Guidance and assistance provided by field supervisor(s) from the CSU. |3.c |17 |88% |12% |2.35 |.86 |
|Guidance and assistance provided by supervising teacher(s) in K-12 schools. |3.c |16 |100% |0% |2.88 |.34 |
Table 64: CSU First-Year Teacher Follow-Up Survey
Multiple Subject Credential
Quality of Pedagogical Preparation
|While you were enrolled in your credential program how true was each of the following statements |NCATE |2009 - 2010 |
|about the program? |Standard(s) | |
| | |N |True or Mostly |Somewhat Or Not |Mean |SD |
| | | |True |True | | |
|The program had a sequence of courses and school experiences that addressed the complexities of |2.c |7 |100% |0% |2.71 |.49 |
|teaching gradually over time. | | | | | | |
|The program provided an appropriate mixture of theoretical ideas and practical strategies, and I |2.c |7 |86% |14% |2.57 |.79 |
|learned about links between them. | | | | | | |
|During the program, I saw evidence that university faculty and administrators worked closely with |3.a |7 |100% |0% |2.71 |.49 |
|educators in K-12 schools. | | | | | | |
|At each stage of the teaching credential program, I felt ready to assume a little more |2.c |7 |100% |0% |2.57 |.53 |
|responsibility for K-12 student instruction. | | | | | | |
|I taught in at least one school that was a good environment for practice teaching and for |3.c |7 |86% |14% |2.29 |1.11 |
|reflecting on how I was teaching students. | | | | | | |
|My supervising teacher(s) frequently observed my teaching, met with me and offered suggestions and |3.b |7 |86% |14% |2.57 |.79 |
|advice about my teaching. | | | | | | |
|My university supervisor(s) occasionally observed my class, met with me and offered suggestions and|3.b |7 |86% |14% |2.57 |.79 |
|advice about my teaching. | | | | | | |
|During supervised teaching, my university-based supervisor and cooperating teacher communicated |3.a |7 |86% |14% |2.43 |.79 |
|effectively with each other. | | | | | | |
|Over time, the credential program and its curriculum met my needs as |2.c |7 |100% |0% |2.71 |.49 |
|I prepared myself to become a good teacher. | | | | | | |
Notes: 0=Not true, 1=Somewhat true, 2= Mostly true, 3=True
CSU Follow-up Survey results from Employers and Beginning Teachers appear in Tables 59-62 for Fall 2010. Therefore, relevant data interpretations for NCATE Standards item responses are provided in the following subsections.
|While you were enrolled in your credential program how true was each of the following statements |NCATE |2010 - 2011 |
|about the program? |Standard(s) | |
| | |N |True or Mostly |Somewhat Or Not |Mean |SD |
| | | |True |True | | |
|The program had a sequence of courses and school experiences that addressed the complexities of |2.c |16 |94% |6% |2.50 |.63 |
|teaching gradually over time. | | | | | | |
|The program provided an appropriate mixture of theoretical ideas and practical strategies, and I |2.c |16 |75% |25% |2.38 |.89 |
|learned about links between them. | | | | | | |
|During the program, I saw evidence that university faculty and administrators worked closely with |3.a |16 |69% |31% |2.00 |.97 |
|educators in K-12 schools. | | | | | | |
|At each stage of the teaching credential program, I felt ready to assume a little more |2.c |16 |88% |13% |2.50 |.73 |
|responsibility for K-12 student instruction. | | | | | | |
|I taught in at least one school that was a good environment for practice teaching and for |3.c |16 |94% |6% |2.81 |.54 |
|reflecting on how I was teaching students. | | | | | | |
|My supervising teacher(s) frequently observed my teaching, met with me and offered suggestions and |3.b |19 |95% |5% |2.68 |.58 |
|advice about my teaching. | | | | | | |
|My university supervisor(s) occasionally observed my class, met with me and offered suggestions and|3.b |19 |84% |16% |2.47 |.77 |
|advice about my teaching. | | | | | | |
|During supervised teaching, my university-based supervisor and cooperating teacher communicated |3.a |16 |75% |25% |2.13 |.96 |
|effectively with each other. | | | | | | |
|Over time, the credential program and its curriculum met my needs as |2.c |19 |89% |11% |2.58 |.69 |
|I prepared myself to become a good teacher. | | | | | | |
1.b. Pedagogical Content Knowledge and Skills
Employers sometimes rate the first year teachers’ preparation higher than the beginning teachers themselves. Employers and new teachers indicated that new teachers were somewhat effective at using a mix of teaching strategies and activities to meet the instructional needs of English Language Learners and at-risk students and families. Additionally, employers and first year teachers felt that new teachers were capable of assisting individual students in reading and mathematics. However, the candidates felt less prepared to use computer-based technologies in the classroom than their employers did. This finding is consistent with the candidates’ responses on the Exit Survey concerning their comfort level with using computer-based technologies in the classroom. One explanation of the higher Employer scores is that the employers have a broader perspective on the teaching performance of beginning teachers. Also, at the end of the first year of teaching, typically a challenging year, beginning teachers have a strong sense of the ways they might improve their teaching. It should also be understood that this is a consistent pattern across the CSUs.
1.c. Professional and Pedagogical Content Knowledge and Skills
Ratings by employers and graduates were fairly consistent with regards to Professional and Pedagogical Content Knowledge and Skills. The two largest points of variation concerned “problems that occur in teaching and related solutions” and “Knowing about resources in the school and community for at-risk students/families”. Graduates and their employers seemed to feel that the strengths of the graduates centered on planning appropriate activities, maintaining rapport and motivation for learners, and understanding factors that would affect learning.
1d. Student Learning
Employers and CSUN Credential Program Completers felt that the programs had prepared teachers well to work with diverse learners and first year teachers felt confident about motivating those learners to learn. Employer responses indicate that they felt that new teachers were capable at monitoring student progress using both formal and informal types of assessments. They also indicated that new teachers were able to assess student learning progress by the analyzing multiple forms of evidence including exams. First year teachers also indicated that they were able to utilize a variety of assessment methods to monitor student progress.
1.g. Dispositions
Employers and first year teachers report upon new teacher dispositions. Ratings by employers and graduates seem to indicate that new teachers are somewhat capable at effectively communicating with the parents or guardians of their students. While communications with parents and guardians is an important job skill for teachers to have and develop, we are not surprised that both employers first year teachers do not provide high rating responses in this area as this is a skill set that is often times developed over the course of several years in which case teachers come to know about the various backgrounds and circumstances impinging upon the lives of their students’ parents/guardians.
Another part of the CSU Follow-Up Survey completed by those near the end of their first year of teaching asks for ratings on the value of program topics for beginning teaching, and these responses are summarized in Table 63.
Data presented in Table 63, value and helpfulness of the Credential Program presents first-year teacher perceptions of key teacher preparation aspects. While all indices are rated highly, it is important to note that these teachers continue to indicate that there has not been enough attention given to the importance of parent involvement and knowledge regarding effective ways to effectively communicate with parents.
The last table presented addresses the quality of pedagogical preparation. Table 64 provides first year teacher responses indicating perceptions of program preparation received within the multiple subject credential program. While the overall response indicates strong agreement that the Program has met these items in a high quality way, data suggest that the Program can continue to improve by making strong links between theoretical ideas and the practical strategies that result in effective teaching and learning. Data also indicate that students need and expect to be placed in high quality school and classroom environments that provide guidance and support in practice teaching. First-year teachers also indicate that they require consistently high quality mentoring and support from their university supervisor as well as strong, effective communication between their university-based supervisor and the school-based cooperating teacher communicated y with each other.
| |
Transition Point 6 Analysis and Course/Program Changes
The CSU Exit surveys for supervisors and graduates of our programs give us a unique opportunity to link together aspects of our programs, our assessment of candidates and their continued assessment of their skills in their first years of teaching. We see patterns – that working with English Learners and Special Needs learners is difficult work and needs to be emphasized in our programs as much as possible, that assessment is a broad and complex topic that we need to continue to problem solve how to improve, and that integration of technology in curriculum and instruction is a complex process. Our candidates and program completers want a deeper understanding of how to communicate effectively with families, and we are pleased to see that they consider equity in teaching important work.
Conclusion: Candidate Strengths, Areas for Program/Candidate
Improvement and Action Plan
The Department has established a committee structure for reviewing and evaluating the assessment data that is collected and disseminated by the College Dean’s Office. This Assessment Committee reports regularly at department meetings and communicates with Credential and MA committees as well as the overall college standing assessment committee. The Assessment Committee conducts reviews of assessment data as they become available and makes recommendations to the department faculty for program and course modifications and/or changes in the measures/instruments to be used. While the Credential Committee develops and recommends program/course/instrument changes or modifications the Assessment Committee monitors changes to the measures of candidate competency (e.g., Classroom Teacher Profile - CTP). Typically, the faculty designated as Course Coordinators convene their discipline-specific faculty to study data reports and determine needed changes to courses and field-work/student teaching in ongoing efforts to improve the overall performance of teacher candidates and support their development as beginning teachers. In addition, the Department hosts meetings and retreats for University Supervisors to address identified assessment data that has impacted faculty decision making and provides specific professional development addressing program/course/instrument changes or modifications.
Program and Candidate Strengths
Content Knowledge (NCATE Standard 1.a.). Content knowledge is measured at Transition Point 1 with GPAs and passage of the CSET at admission. Across all pathways, on average, entering students’ GPAs are well-above the minimum required for admission to the program. In addition, all candidates are required to pass CSET upon admission to the program, though by Chancellor’s Order, the program has the flexibility to accept a small portion of students who have not met the CSET requirement on an Exceptional Admission basis should they demonstrate strength in other measures (e.g., GPA and CBEST scores).
Multiple Subject Pedagogical Content Knowledge and Skills (NCATE Standard 1.b., TPEs 1, 4, 5, 7 and 9). Across all transition points and all pathways, candidates demonstrate knowledge and skill in subject-specific pedagogy (TPE 1) in the areas of language and mathematics, and to a lesser degree, science and social studies. The strength of candidates’ preparation to implement subject specific pedagogy is clearly linked to an instructional program that offers methodological coursework delivered by faculty with subject-specific expertise in the disciplines. Another important factor in considering the strength in PCK related to language and mathematics is the extensive opportunities candidates have to practice teaching reading/language arts and mathematics on a daily basis across both first and second semester student teaching.
As to the earlier observation of somewhat weaker Candidate self-reflection on preparedness to teach in science and social studies this may be due to the structure in which they only address these disciplines in their second semester of student teaching. Similarly, data related to candidates’ self-assessment that their preparation to teach the visual and performing arts, physical education, and health is quite limited, reflects the fact that there continue to be few opportunities for candidates to practice teach in these disciplines under the current constraints elementary school teachers experience in assuring student achievement in language arts and mathematics. Candidates continue to report that given the emphasis in language arts and mathematics in our local schools, they have minimal opportunities to engage students meaningfully in science, social studies, the performing arts, health and physical education.
Professional and Pedagogical Knowledge and Skills (NCATE Standard 1.c., TPEs 5, 6, 8, 10, 11). Data from the Classroom Teaching Profile indicates that generally, candidates demonstrate proficiency in their ability to implement developmentally appropriate teaching practices, learn about students, use instructional time effectively, and create an engaging social environment. Of these different elements, using instructional time continues to yield the weakest ratings, a finding that is important to address as the department identifies “clinical” partners who will model, assist and mentor elementary student candidates and beginning teachers in managing active and engaged learning classrooms with confidence and a continuously developing sense of efficacy.
In examining CSU Exit Survey data, several areas emerge as strengths, while others emerge as weakness in our preparation of teachers. Areas of strength include candidates’ ability to manage a class or group of students, learn about students, engage students, and promote positive interactions between students and group skills. It will be desirable to build on these strengths for all students as we target the 21st century learning skills and dispositions that are increasingly understood to have their roots for success in the elementary school years.
|Student Learning (NCATE Standard 1.d., TPEs 2, 3, and 8). Of all elements of NCATE Standard 1, measures of candidate’s |
|ability to monitoring student learning during instruction and use formative and summative assessments to determine student |
|understanding and provide feedback have yielded the lowest, but still respectable, ratings. Average scores on the CTP by |
|pathway, range from a low of around 2.56 for candidates in the Traditional Program and within the 2.70-2.75 range for the |
|ITEP and ACT pathways. Given that this Program offers specific foundational and subject-specific pedagogical coursework |
|that culminates with the TPA (PACT) it is becoming more important to embed up-to-date knowledge about the use of |
|classroom-based formative and summative assessments as well as the interpretation of high-stakes assessment data in |
|coursework across all Pathways. |
| |
|Beginning teachers’ responses to items on the CSU Exit Survey relevant to NCATE Standard 1.d. and TPEs 2, 3 and 8 |
|indicate that they feel well to adequately prepared to (1) monitor and (2) assess student progress and (3) design classroom |
|activities to suit the attention spans of students, though more beginning teachers feel well-prepared to design a classroom |
|environment than to assess and monitor student progress. Data from the CSU Follow-up study align with |
|the CTP and Exit Surveys results. While the small number of Employers (N=8) of recent beginning teachers rate |
|their teachers’ competencies to assess and monitor pupil progress as high, beginning teachers indicate that they do |
|not view their competencies as strong as others—especially with regard to assessing pupil progress by analyzing a |
|variety of evidence including exam scores. |
| |
|With the implementation of PACT as the CSUN TPA, faculty and candidates are becoming more focused on the critical |
|issues of assessing and monitoring pupil progress in their courses. Still, study will be conducted to learn how to enhance |
|the knowledge and skill for all candidates who are required to complete the PACT Teaching Event through analysis and |
|discussion of assessed learning outcomes—specifically in language arts, and mathematics; but also all elementary |
|subject areas. The Department will direct this concern to the Assessment Committee for review and recommendations |
|to the faculty. |
| |
Areas for Program Improvement
In evaluating assessment data from transition points 4, 5 and 6, it is clear that often teacher candidates are rated higher as teacher candidates than they rate their preparation and abilities as they leave the program as beginning teachers. Consistent with the idea that one’s perception is his or her reality, we believe that we must give attention to reaching more beginning teachers from our programs and utilizing the subsequent CSU Exit and Follow-up survey data in constructing an action plan to remedy such matters.
Meeting the Needs of Students with Special Learning Needs (TPE 8). The subject of students with special needs is given attention in the Classroom Teaching Profile only as part of other elements related to this TPE 8. Therefore, it does not stand out as an area of weakness in evaluations of teacher candidates. It does however emerge as a significant area of concern in the CSU Exit and Follow-up surveys. Of all the items in the 2010-11 Exit Survey related to NCATE Standard 1.b., providing for the needs of students with special learning needs received the lowest ratings, with a range across pathways from just 32% to 63% of all beginning teachers who feel well-prepared in this regard. Furthermore, of all the items within the realm of Standard 1.b., Employers (though a small sample) continue to give beginning teachers lower ratings (88% Well/Adequately Prepared) in meeting the needs of students with special needs. Beginning teachers also give low ratings in their preparation in this area.
The Department has begun to explore the opportunity to work with colleagues in the Department of Special Education to learn about co-teaching as a possible avenue for Elementary Education faculty to lead and model professional practices that result in creating the learning environments and instructional strategies that optimize the learning and development of special needs students in the general education setting. These professional development activities may also be extended to key schools that serve as pre-clinical and clinical placement sites for our teacher candidates (and faculty) to meet the needs of students with special needs.
Using Technology in Teaching and Managing the Classroom (TPEs 4 & 5). There is only one item in the CTP that addresses candidates’ abilities to use technology in teaching and therefore, the CTP ratings for candidates do not point to this as a specific area of weakness. This is not the case, however, when one examines candidates’ responses in the Exit or Follow-up Surveys. Across all program pathways, fewer than 40% of beginning teachers felt well-prepared to use technology in helping students learn the curriculum and use technology in instruction. Similar findings emerge from the CSU Follow-up Study in which, while 74% of employers rated their beginning teachers as well or adequately prepared in educational technology, only 55% of beginning teachers felt well to adequately prepared to use technology in exploring the curriculum and use technology in instruction, respectively. Post-baccalaureate candidates for the Preliminary Credential do take a 2-unit course in educational technology. Program faculty have already begun to utilize emerging platforms for applying technology in elementary curriculum and instruction with focus on Web 2.0 tools. In addition, Elementary Education faculty are studying instructional simulation tools together with colleagues in Special Education to promote more awareness of technology tools that promote K-12 student learning achievement for academically diverse students.
Managing the Classroom and Student Behavior (TPE 5).
Both CTP and data from the CSU Exit and Follow-up Surveys ratings of teacher candidates’ ability to manage the classroom environment and student behavior show respectable improvements in candidates’ classroom management abilities--handling student disciplines and addressing problem behavior. This is expected to reach higher levels of attainment as the efforts underway with respect to addressing the needs of special populations and creating clinical partnerships with schools proceeds. Related to this standard is the need for the Program to integrate more attention to the importance of parent involvement and communication. While the absence of focused instruction in this essential element of teaching has been frequently identified, it is imperative that the Department consider strategies to embed knowledge of parent involvement into the curriculum throughout the Program.
We clearly cannot depend upon the fact that Candidates across all pathways are required to take a course that addresses the needs of diverse students (ELPS 203 Urban Education in American Society in ITEP; ELPS/CHS/PAS/AAS/ARMN 417 in Traditional and Intern pathways; and ELPS 541A/ELPS 542A in ACT). In addition to the content and experiences in these course that serve as basic preparation in diversity and multicultural education, we need to work with school partners in specifically addressing the importance of seeking out knowledge and contact with local, community service agencies that provide services for at-risk families, youth and children. One way in which this can be accomplished in a coherent manner by including it as an explicit part of the PACT context for learning Teaching Event 1.
Action Plan for Program Improvement
In light of the strengths and identified areas for candidate and program improvement, faculty of the Department of Elementary Education will engage in the following activities:
|Focus Area |Activities |
|Pedagogical Content Knowledge |Continue to adapt field materials such as CTP scoring rubrics and lesson observation forms to effectively support University Supervisor’s and Supervising |
| |Teachers’ assessment of candidates’ PCK and to promote more focused attention on subject-specific pedagogy in lesson planning and post-observation conferences. |
| |Provide professional development for supervising teachers on the use of field observational materials. |
| |Continue to focus on and develop communication patterns that clearly demonstrate program intent to meet the needs of English learners. |
| |Engage Department faculty and teachers schools that serve as clinical partners to explore models such as co-teaching to better meet the needs of special |
| |education students. |
|Classroom Organization and |Continue to strengthen the credential pathways’ delivery of effective classroom management and communication with focus on 21st century learning skills and |
|Management and Student Discipline|dispositions. |
| |Meet with Special Education faculty to discuss and learn about co-teaching as well as positive discipline and classroom community building skills that create |
| |safe and optimal learning climates for students with special needs and their classroom peers. |
| |Utilize the expertise of key department faculty who specialize in classroom organization, management and communication with students and parents through |
| |curriculum design and instruction. Enhance content of pathway methods courses as appropriate. |
|Pupil Assessment and Using |Department faculty will convene meetings to determine how a spectrum of formative and summative assessment tools, strategies, instruments can be introduced, |
|Assessment Data |modeled and taught to teacher candidates for transfer into their student teaching experiences. |
| |Work with faculty to strengthen the context-planning-instruction-assessment-refection cycle in all methods courses. |
|English Learners |Convene recent program completers (1 and 2 years out) for focus group discussions about the challenges of teachers to meet the needs of English learners (see |
| |also Students with Special needs (1) and Using Technology (1), below). |
| |Conduct surveys with program completers to learn their assessment of their preparation through the program pathways and any dissonance they have experienced |
| |between their preparation and the realities of teaching a linguistically diverse population of students |
| |Discuss results of focus group sessions and their implications for the courses they teach with Department faculty. |
| |Design and provide professional development for faculty in response to gaps in program courses in meeting the subject specific needs of English learners. |
| |Use information to make program and course changes to course syllabi and instruction |
|Students with Special Needs |Convene recent program completers (1 and 2 years out) for focus group discussions with colleagues from the Department of Special Education, about the challenges|
| |faced by teachers in meeting the needs of students with special needs. |
| |Meet with those Special Education faculty who promote co-teaching to develop perspectives and ideas to model this or similar structures that assures that the |
| |preparation of beginning teachers helps them to meet the emotional, social, and academic needs of students with special needs. |
| |Review EED methods courses for content, activities, and assignments related to addressing academic achievement of students with special needs in the different |
| |content areas. |
| |Explore positive discipline and communication strategies for assuring that teacher candidates have knowledge and basic understanding of how to create safe and |
| |engaging classroom communities for all learners –including students with special needs. |
|Using Technology |Continue implementation of enhanced and updated course content for EED 515 Basic Technology Methods to assure that students know how to apply emergent |
| |technology in promoting effective student learning and achievement. |
| |Pursue current exploration of assistive technologies and use of simulation technologies to assure candidates’ success in working with diverse students. |
| |Engage Department faculty who utilize various educational technology tools to share expertise and find ways to implement in courses across pathways. Also |
| |consult with university-wide faculty and committees who have knowledge and expertise related to educational technologies. |
| |Communicate with schools that serve as clinical partners to ensure that all candidates have an opportunity to use technology in student teaching. |
|Resources for At-Risk Youth and |Review credential course content and field experience assignments with goal of strengthening candidates’ knowledge of how to access and utilize school-community|
|Their Families |resources and agencies for at-risk youth and their families. |
| |Continue to develop Early Field Experience activities-such as the PACT Teaching Event 1 with the objective of assuring that candidates engage with school |
| |personnel in the exploration of student demographics, language needs and community resources for students at risk and their parents. |
................
................
In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.
To fulfill the demand for quickly locating and searching documents.
It is intelligent file search solution for home and business.
Related download
- sector fiche ipa national programmes component i
- evidence based practice protocol
- attendance minnesota state university moorhead
- public enitty application law enforcement liability
- ucmc hypothermia after cardiac arrest protocol
- order sets committee
- i spot exclusion medication list nett
- dear sir tpauk
- note i followed the transition point structure used by