UNC Charlotte Music Education Graduate Certificate

UNC Charlotte Music Education – Graduate Certificate

UNC Charlotte Program Proposal for MUSIC EDUCATION – GRADUATE CERTIFICATE

*NOTE: this document was originally submitted in 2009 and references decisions made during the initial state- mandated revisioning process which occurred in 2009-10. Readers may need to refer to the original November 2009 NC DPI blueprint submission as needed. Updated areas of this document are noted.

Description and Rationale (original NCDPI blueprint, November 2009)

Description of how the proposed program has been re-visioned: The Music Education Committee at the University Of North Carolina at Charlotte has consulted several sources in re-visioning its Graduate Certificate Program: The National Association of the Schools of Music (NASM) standards for accreditation; the North Carolina Standard for Teachers and the 21st century knowledge, skills, and dispositions embedded in them; and exemplary music education programs at other institutions of higher education around the US (e.g., The Florida State University, The University of Tennessee, Louisiana State University, The University of Memphis). The program enhancements include attention to and infusion of research-based practices in all music education coursework, increase in field experiences (“clinicals”) before the graduate internship, an assessment and subsequent streamlining of our comprehensive musicianship examinations and policies, and reducing curricular redundancies to streamline coursework. Best practices in implementing music education curricula were researched via websites of institutions, and full faculty input on curricular and policy changes led to the proposed degree plan. A focus on content in music, on content in human growth and development in music, and on practical application of music and its teaching/learning in authentic situations is at the core of the revisioned program.

Specific changes and rationale for the changes a. The Graduate Certificate Program will now have only two options (AKA “tracks”): choral and instrumental, with general music being folded into both tracks. All levels of public school education contain general music courses as part of the curriculum; checking other programs in neighboring states revealed that general music is a part of all music education coursework. Furthermore, the license in North Carolina is a K-12 license. Previously, choral students had instruction in instrument teaching, and the instrumental students had complementary experiences in choral/vocal training; general music students had both. However, neither choral nor instrumental had general music training. Therefore, all students will be required to take General Music Methods and its lab (the field component). b. The addition of MUED 5141 Music Development and Learning: this class was not taught previously, but it focuses on human growth and development content as it pertains specifically to the developing child- musician, as well as issues of cognitive exceptionalities in music teaching/learning. c. Several music education core classes discuss the teaching of students with special needs: MUED 5141 Music Development & Learning; MUED 5270 Teaching Discipline where a clinical is required teaching students with special needs; EDUC 5100 Diverse Learners d. The Music Education Committee has defined the diverse teaching situations in which field experiences and student teaching will occur. These situations coincide with accreditation standards of NASM, and the local school districts’ population will ensure diversity in student populations: (1) individual teaching and tutoring; (2) small group teaching at the elementary and middle school level; (3) large ensemble and full classroom teaching (peer and in-the-field); and (4) teaching students with special needs. Field experience teaching situations were not previously defined or sequenced in the previous degree. Sequence of field experiences by course follows: d.i. MUED 5100 Critical Issues in Music Education: minimum of 15 hours directed observation in diverse music teaching situations. d.ii. MUED 5141 Music Development & Learning: minimum of 15 hours of individual and/or small group teaching in a school setting. d.iii. MUED 5270 Teaching/Discipline: Assessment & Behavior: minimum of 15 hours of teaching music to students with special needs. d.iv. MUED 5192 General Music Methods/Lab: minimum of 15 hours of teaching in a general music setting (elementary or secondary). d.v. MUED 5XXX: Choral or Instrumental Methods/Lab: minimum of 15 hours of teaching in a choral, orchestral (strings), or band program.

Nov 2009 – original 1 June 2014 – update UNC Charlotte Music Education – Graduate Certificate

e. Other curricular changes: READ 5255 Teaching Reading and Writing across Content Areas will allow music education candidates to accommodate literacy within a diverse student population, including teaching students who are non-native English speakers. These changes and existing coursework reflect the NC Standards and the embedded 21st Century Knowledge Skills, and Dispositions. See attached matrix for alignment of program coursework.

Data sources for changes: http://music.fsu.edu (Florida State University College of Music) http://www.music.lsu.edu (Louisiana State University School of Music) http://www.ecu.edu/music/ (East Carolina University School of Music) http://www.memphis.edu/music (University of Memphis Rudi E. Scheidt School of Music) http://www.music.utk.edu (The University of Tennessee School of Music) The National Association of Schools of Music (NASM) Standards for Accreditation Handbook (www.nasm.arts-accredit.org) School Partners Online Survey (see below) Data from piloted Revisioning proposal (Fall 2009 this will begin)

Involvement of School Partners (original NCDPI blueprint, November 2009)

How public school partners were involved in the re-visioning of the program. The music curriculum coordinator for Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools, Mr. Mark Propst and the Coordinator of Music Education invited all music teachers (approximately 275 teachers) to respond anonymously to a School Partners Online Survery concerning curricular practices in undergraduate music education training. Sixty-eight teachers responded and these answers were analyzed against the proposed curricular revisions. These responses impacted the Revisioning process, in particular, with regards to these survey points: a. Numerous and varied clinical experiences for future music educators (18% agree; 46% strongly agree); the Department has streamlined and defined what these will be (see above discussion). b. Music teachers should all be trained in general music at all levels (28% agree; 60% strongly agree); the Department will now require all music education majors to take MUED 4192/4192L General Music Methods & Lab (see above discussion). c. Music teachers need to demonstrate competence in one music teaching area, but have a working knowledge of all teaching areas in music (35% agree; 59% strongly agree); see the specialty standards curriculum matrix.

The College of Education consistently surveys school partners in a variety of venues, and these consultations have influenced the changes in the music education program.. The following chart indicates the venues and times for this past academic year.

1. September 12, 2008 Southwest Education Alliance Presentation and Consultation: Presented basic Elementary Curriculum Directors information about program revisioning to the Elementary Curriculum Directors from 15 area school systems, followed by feedback from them. Also attending: Faculty members Drew Polly and Sherell Fuller. 2. September 16, 2008 Southwest Education Alliance Presentation and Consultation: Presented basic Middle and High School Curriculum information about program revisioning to the Middle and Directors High School Curriculum Directors from 15 area school systems, followed by feedback from them. Also attending: Faculty member Jeanneine Jones 3. October 16, 2008 Southwest Education Alliance Presentation and Consultation: Presented basic Exceptional Children Directors information about program revisioning to the EC Directors from 15 area school systems. Lee Sherry distributed a questionnaire from the SPED team, followed by feedback from the directors. Also attending: Faculty members Lee Sherry 4. October 23, 2008 Professional Development School and Presentation to representatives from all the PD Schools. University Liaisons Received feedback regarding the strengths of our Melba Spooner, Director candidates as well as areas of increased emphasis: dual

Drew Polly, Co-Director licensure, differentiation, collaborative planning, integrating curriculum, 5. November 7, 2008 CMS and COED Leadership Quarterly Meeting to discuss matters of mutual concern. Collaborative Discussion included school leadership program for prospective high school principals, need for middle/secondary teachers to have background in reading, student teaching placement processes. In terms of Program Revisioning, enthusiasm for TESL minor, more experience/knowledge with different cultures and understanding poverty, co-teaching of SPED in general classrooms. Attending from COED were Mary Lynne Calhoun, Susan Furr, Barbara Edwards, Joyce Frazier, Melba Spooner, Dawson Hancock, Vicki Jaus 6. November 8, 2007 Beginning Teacher Brunch Brunch for May graduates and their professors to discuss first year successes and surprises, valuable and deficient parts of their preparation programs, and on-going support. Faculty attending were Mary Lynne Calhoun, Barbara Edwards, Melba Spooner, Hal Jaus, Vicki Jaus, Myra Dietz, Laura Hart, Tarra Ellis, Jack Piel, Sherell Fuller, Stephen Hancock, Cindy Hopper, Joyce Frazier, Bob Audette, Donna James, Libby Holman, Jeff Passe, Tracy Rock 7. November 13, 2008 SWEA Personnel Directors Presentation and Consultation: Presented basic information about program revisioning to the Personnel Directors from 15 area school systems. Received feedback from the directors. Also attending: Faculty member Pam Shue from CHFD 8. March 19, 2009 Professional Development Schools Focus Groups with three groups of teachers representing eight elementary, middle and high schools. Received feedback on program strengths and weaknesses as well as proposed changes.

How school partners will be involved in the delivery and evaluation of the program

Cooperating teachers who host students for field experiences (clinicals) or for the graduate internship deliver content of our program through mentoring our candidates. Cooperating teachers assess the students with University-wide and Departmental-devised instruments (NB: Departmental rubrics are being revised in Fall 2009). During student teaching, administrators offer feedback via online methods, an annual DPI survey for the IHE report, and through written qualitative assessments to the university professor of record for a Department of Music methods class. Finally, alumni are surveyed every other year as part of the College of Education’s ongoing practice of partner involvement.

Timeline for Implementation (original NCDPI blueprint, November 2009)

Some elements of the revisioned Graduate Certificate Program will be piloted in Fall 2009. Candidates who are already admitted to the program will see a minimal impact as the “old” program will phase out with the new, or course substitutions will be granted according to present university policy to accommodate those students in an earlier degree track. It is worth noting that the Department of Music has instituted two strands of content change: the BM degree in music education and the Department of Music’s Policies and Guidelines for Comprehensive Musicianship, both of which have implications for the Graduate program. These two curricular events are related to each other and followed similar processes to be implemented/piloted Fall 2009: 1. Committee research and development for full faculty discussion and approval: Fall 2008 – April 2009 (completed). 2. Curriculum Committee proposal to the College of Arts + Architecture: 6 May 2009 (in process of catalog copy changes, credit hour changes, and new course approval; if approved Fall 2009 will implement changes) 3. Piloting of new degree program: Fall 2009 (Fall 2010 if not approved on 6 May 2009) 4. Revisioning and Development of assessment instruments: Fall 2009

5. Piloting of evidences: Spring 2010 Piloting of the TK20 with the electronic evidences portfolio: 2009-2010.

SECTION I: KEY EVIDENCES UPDATED JUNE 2014* *NOTE: the evidences noted in the chart below reflect NCDPI/SBE approval for the UNC Charlotte substitutions approved January 8, 2014 for the secondary/middle grades licensure programs (including Graduate Certificate programs).

Name of Descriptors of the Elements of the Standards Evidence Briefly Describe the Evidence Evidence Addressed by the Evidence 1 Content Knowledge: Evidence that demonstrates breadth T Copy of transcript with at least 24 Required: 3b.1 of content knowledge in the specialty area1. r semester hours of coursework relevant to a the specialty area from a regionally n accredited college or university with a s grade of C (2.0) or better in each of the 24 c hours OR satisfactory Praxis II scores. r i p t o r P r a x i s I I s c o r e s

2 Content Knowledge: Evidence that demonstrates candidate P Praxis II® Subject Assessments measure Required: 3b.1 depth of understanding and application of content R knowledge of specific subjects that K–12 knowledge in the specialty area. UPDATED JUNE 2014 A educators will teach, as well as subject- X specific teaching skills and knowledge. I S

I I s c o r e s i n

1 This evidence MUST be a transcript or passing scores on the appropriate Praxis II test(s).

Name of Descriptors of the Elements of the Standards Evidence Briefly Describe the Evidence Evidence Addressed by the Evidence t h e c o r r e s p o n d i n g

c o n t e n t a r e a ( M u s i c E d u c a t i o n )

3 Pedagogical and Professional Knowledge Skills and e edTPA™, formerly the Teacher Included: 1a.2, 2b.3, 3a.1, 3c.1, 3c.2, 3d.1, Dispositions: Evidence that demonstrates effective design d Performance Assessment, was designed 4a.1, 4b.1, 4c.1, 4d.1, 4e.1, 4f.1, 5c.1 of classroom instruction based on research-verified practice. T by teachers and teacher educators to UPDATED JUNE 2014 (APPROVED JANUARY 2014) P support candidate learning and provide A data that support preparation program growth and renewal. Aligned with Common Core State Standards and InTASC Standards, edTPA assesses

Name of Descriptors of the Elements of the Standards Evidence Briefly Describe the Evidence Evidence Addressed by the Evidence teaching behaviors that focus on student learning. edTPA is a summative capstone assessment to evaluate readiness to teach.

4 Pedagogical and Professional Knowledge Skills and L State-required evaluation of the candidate Required: 1a.1, 1a.3, 1a.4, 1d.1, 1e.1, 2a.1, Dispositions: Evidence that demonstrates knowledge, skills, E completed by the institution and the 2b.1, 2b.2, 2c.1, 2d.1, 2d.2, 3a.2, 3b.2, 3d.1, and dispositions in practice.2 A cooperating teacher. 4c.1, 4d.1, 4e.1, 4f.1, 4g.1, 4g.2, 4h.1, 4h.2, 5a.1 / I H E

C e r t i f i c a t i o n

o f T e a c h i n g

C a p a c i t y

Name of Descriptors of the Elements of the Standards Evidence Briefly Describe the Evidence Evidence Addressed by the Evidence 5 Positive Impact on Student Learning: Evidence that e edTPA™, formerly the Teacher Included: 1a.1, 1a.2, 2d.i, 4a.2, 4b.1, 4h.1, 4h.2, demonstrates impact on student learning. d Performance Assessment, was designed 5a.1 T by teachers and teacher educators to UPDATED JUNE 2014 (APPROVED JANUARY 2014) P support candidate learning and provide A data that support preparation program growth and renewal. Aligned with Common Core State Standards and InTASC Standards, edTPA assesses teaching behaviors that focus on student learning. edTPA is a summative capstone assessment to evaluate readiness to teach.

6 Leadership and Collaboration: Evidence that C Candidates will reflect on a series of Included: 1b.1, 1b.2, 1b.3, 1c.1, 1c.2, 2e.1, 5b.1 demonstrates leadership and collaboration. a professional growth opportunities that n include leadership, collaboration, and d advocacy. i d a t e P r o f e s s i o n a l D e v e l o p m e n t P l a n

SECTION II: RELATIONSHIP OF THE EVIDENCE TO THE STANDARDS (original NCDPI blueprint, November 2009; unchanged for June 2014 update)

KEY EVIDENCE(S) FROM SECTION I NORTH CAROLINA TEACHER STANDARD DEMONSTRATING THE DESCRIPTORS OF THE ELEMENTS 1. TEACHERS DEMONSTRATE LEADERSHIP a. Teachers lead in their classrooms. 1. Evaluates the progress of students toward high school graduation using a variety of assessment data measuring goals of the North Carolina Standard Course of Study. #1 #2 #3 #4

2. Draws on appropriate data to develop classroom and instructional plans. #1 #2 #3 #4

3. Maintains a safe and orderly classroom that facilitates student learning. #1 #2 #3 #4

4. Uses positive management of student behavior, effective communication for defusing and deescalating disruptive or dangerous behavior, and safe and appropriate seclusion and #1 #2 #3 #4 restraint. b. Teachers demonstrate leadership in the school. 1. Engages in collaborative and collegial professional learning activities. #1 #2 #3 #4

2. Identifies the characteristics or critical elements of a school improvement plan. #1 #2 #3 #4

3. Displays the ability to use appropriate data to identify areas of need that should be addressed #1 #2 #3 #4 in a school improvement plan. c. Teachers lead the teaching profession. 1. Participates in professional development and growth activities. #1 #2 #3 #4

2. Begins to develop professional relationships and networks. #1 #2 #3 #4

d. Teachers advocate for schools and students. 1. Implements and adheres to policies and practices positively affecting students’ learning. #1 #2 #3 #4 e. Teachers demonstrate high ethical standards 1. Upholds the Code of Ethics for North Carolina Educators and the Standards for Professional #1 #2 #3 #4 Conduct.

2. TEACHERS ESTABLISH A RESPECTFUL ENVIRONMENT FOR A DIVERSE POPULATION OF STUDENTS a. Teachers provide an environment in which each child has a positive, nurturing relationship with caring adults. 1. Maintains a positive and nurturing learning environment. #1 #2 #3 #4

KEY EVIDENCE(S) FROM SECTION I NORTH CAROLINA TEACHER STANDARD DEMONSTRATING THE DESCRIPTORS OF THE ELEMENTS

b. Teachers embrace diversity in the school community and in the world. 1. Appropriately uses materials or lessons that counteract stereotypes and acknowledges the contributions of all cultures. #1 #2 #3 #4

2. Incorporates different points of view in instruction. #1 #2 #3 #4

3. Understands the influence of diversity and plans instruction accordingly. #1 #2 #3 #4 c. Teachers treat students as individuals. 1. Maintains a learning environment that conveys high expectations of every student. #1 #2 #3 #4 d. Teachers adapt their teaching for the benefit of students with special needs. 1. Cooperates with specialists and uses resources to support the special learning needs of all students. #1 #2 #3 #4

2. Uses research-verified strategies to provide effective learning activities for students with special needs. #1 #2 #3 #4 e. Teachers work collaboratively with the families and significant adults in the lives of their students. 1. Communicates and collaborates with the home and community for the benefit of students. #1 #2 #3 #4

3. TEACHERS KNOW THE CONTENT THEY TEACH a. Teachers align their instruction with the North Carolina Standard Course of Study. 1. Develops and applies lessons based on the North Carolina Standard Course of Study. #1 #2 #3 #4

2. Integrates effective literacy instruction throughout the curriculum and across content areas to enhance students’ learning. #1 #2 #3 #4 b. Teachers know the content appropriate to their teaching specialty. 1. Demonstrates and appropriate level of content knowledge in the teaching specialty. #1 #2 #3 #4

2. Encourages students to investigate the content area to expand their knowledge and satisfy their natural curiosity. #1 #2 #3 #4 c. Teachers recognize the interconnectedness of content areas/discipline. 1. Demonstrates knowledge of links between grade/subject and the North Carolina Standard Course of Study by relating content to other disciplines. #1 #2 #3 #4

KEY EVIDENCE(S) FROM SECTION I NORTH CAROLINA TEACHER STANDARD DEMONSTRATING THE DESCRIPTORS OF THE ELEMENTS

2. Relates global awareness to the subject. #1 #2 #3 #4 d. Teachers make instruction relevant to students. 1. Integrates 21st century skills and content in instruction. #1 #2 #3 #4

4. TEACHERS FACILITATE LEARNING FOR THEIR STUDENTS a. Teachers know the ways in which learning takes place, and they know the appropriate levels of intellectual, physical, social, and emotional development of their students. 1. Identifies developmental levels of individual students and plans instruction accordingly. #1 #2 #3 #4

2. Assess and uses resources needed to address strengths and weaknesses of students. #1 #2 #3 #4 b. Teachers plan instruction appropriate for their students. 1. Collaborates with colleagues to monitor student performance and make instruction responsive to cultural differences and individual learning needs. #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 c. Teachers use a variety of instructional methods. 1. Uses a variety of appropriate methods and materials to meet the needs of all students. #1 #2 #3 #4 d. Teachers integrate and utilize technology in their instruction. 1. Integrates technology with instruction to maximize students’ learning. #1 #2 #3 #4 e. Teachers help students develop critical-thinking and problem-solving skills. 1. Integrates specific instruction that helps students develop the ability to apply processes and #1 #2 #3 #4 strategies for critical thinking and problem solving. f. Teachers help students to work in teams and develop leadership qualities. 1. Organizes student learning teams for the purpose of developing cooperation, collaboration, #1 #2 #3 #4 and student leadership. g. Teachers communicate effectively. 1. Uses a variety of methods to communicate effectively with all students. #1 #2 #3 #4

2. Consistently encourages and supports students to articulate thoughts and ideas clearly and effectively. #1 #2 #3 #4

KEY EVIDENCE(S) FROM SECTION I NORTH CAROLINA TEACHER STANDARD DEMONSTRATING THE DESCRIPTORS OF THE ELEMENTS h. Teachers use a variety of methods to assess what each student has learned. 1. Uses multiple indicators, both formative and summative, to monitor and evaluate students’ progress and to inform instruction. #1 #2 #3 #4

2. Provides evidence that students attain 21st century knowledge, skills and dispositions. #1 #2 #3 #4

5. TEACHERS REFLECT ON THEIR PRACTICE a. Teachers analyze student learning. 1. Uses data to provide ideas about what can be done to improve students’ learning. #1 #2 #3 #4 b. Teachers link professional growth to their professional goals. 1. Participates in recommended activities for professional learning and development. #1 #2 #3 #4

c. Teachers function effectively in a complex, dynamic environment. 1. Uses a variety of research-verified approaches to improve teaching and learning. #1 #2 #3 #4

SECTION III: DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE EVIDENCES

#1 Required (State prescribed) Content Knowledge: Evidence that demonstrates breadth of content knowledge in the specialty area. A transcript OR passing scores on the appropriate Praxis II test(s) must be submitted. This evidence must address descriptor 3b.1.

Name of Evidence: Transcript of Coursework (original NCDPI blueprint, November 2009)

Transcript analysis of previous coursework The Graduate Certificate in Music Education requires candidates to hold a bachelor’s degree in Music or a minimum of 24 hours in music that align with the specialty area standards. In addition, all students applying to either graduate track in music education will have an analysis of transcripts of past music studies. This analysis will be matched against the Background Requirements to identify any deficiencies. Any deficiencies noted must be remediated with the undergraduate courses.

Candidates must earn a grade of C or better in the music courses and hold a GPA of 2.75 in these courses as a prerequisite to the graduate student teaching experience.

Plan of Study for Music Education Alignment with Specialty Area Standards All Concentrations Course Number and Title MUED 5100 Critical Issues in Music Education (3 cr) Standard 3, Standard 4, Standard 5 MUED 5141 Music Development & Learning (3 cr) Standard 4, Standard 5 MUED 5270 Teaching & Discipline: Behavior and Standard 4, Standard 5 Assessment in Music (3 cr) EDUC 5100 Diverse Learners (3 cr) Teacher Candidate Standards READ 5255 Teaching Reading and Writing Across Teacher Candidate Standards Content Areas (3 cr) MUED 5192/5192L General Music/Lab (3 cr) Standard 2, Standard 4, Standard 5 MUSC 5151 Music Technology (3 cr) Standard 2 MUED 6467 Music Education Internship (3 cr) Standard 3, Standard 4, and Standard 5

Plan of Study for Music Education Alignment with Specialty Area Standards Vocal Music Track ONLY MUED 5140/5140L Choral Methods/Lab (3 cr) Standard 1, Standard 2, Standard 3, Standard 4, Standard 5

Plan of Study for Music Education Alignment with Specialty Area Standards Instrumental Track Only MUED 5194/5194L Instrumental Methods/Lab (3 cr) Standard 1, Standard 2, Standard 3, Standard 4, Standard 5

#2 Required

Content Knowledge: Evidence that demonstrates candidate depth of understanding and application of content knowledge in the specialty area.

This evidence must address descriptor 3b.1.

1. Name of Evidence: Passing Praxis II scores UPDATED JUNE 2014/approved January 2014

2. Directions and/or Requirements to be Provided to the Candidates:

All candidates seeking licensure in K-12 Music will be required to pass the corresponding Praxis II test for the licensure area. This testing requirement was mandated by the State Board of Education beginning with candidates seeking licensure in the fall 2014 semester. Notice of this requirement has been shared via emails to candidates planning to student teach in AY 2014-15 and information has been posted on College websites. Advisors have also been diligent in sharing this information with candidates during regular advising sessions. The Office of Field Experiences (the office that oversees our student teaching experiences) also offers this information to candidates as part of their application to student teaching/graduate internship. This requirement is already in place for Lateral Entry teachers.

3. How the Evidence Specifically Addresses the Descriptors for which it is Cited:

By achieving a passing Praxis II score, teacher education candidates will demonstrate an appropriate level of content knowledge within their content specialty. According to the Educational Testing Service (ETS), “The content matter of the Praxis II tests is defined and validated by educators in each subject area tested. ETS oversees intensive committee work and national job analysis surveys so that the specifications for each test are aligned with the knowledge expected of the entry-level teacher in the relevant content area. In developing test specifications, standards of professional organizations also are considered, such as the standards of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics or the National Science Teachers Association” (Praxis Technical Manual, p. 10). ETS has a well-established record for validity and reliability of the Praxis II content knowledge assessment for beginning teachers (Praxis Technical Manual, p. 15-17).

4. How the Evidence is/will be Evaluated by the Institution:

The evidence will be evaluated by ETS, and access to Praxis II scores is made available to each IHE. At UNC Charlotte, the Director of Teacher Education, Advising, Licensure, and Recruitment (TEALR) accesses the collective scores of our candidates and determines if each candidate has passed the test according to the passing score set by ETS. Candidates who do not receive a passing score as determined by ETS will not receive a licensure recommendation.

These scores will also be used in our SACS and CAEP reporting mechanisms. The aggregated scores will be shared with program directors and department chairs to guide program improvement.

#3 Required

Pedagogical and Professional Knowledge Skills and Dispositions: Evidence that demonstrates effective design of classroom instruction based on research-verified practice.

It is recommended this evidence address descriptors 1a.2, 2b.3, 3a.1, 3c.1, 3c.2, 3d.1, 4a.1, 4c.1, 4d.1, 4e.1, 4f.1, 5c.1.

1. Name of Evidence: edTPA UPDATED JUNE 2014/approved January 2014

2. Directions and/or Requirements to be Provided to the Candidates*: *The edTPA Performing Arts Handbook in its entirety is available from https://edtpa.aacte.org. Copyright protections prohibit providing the specific instructions/rubrics to candidates in this document. The following is a summary of the planning requirements of edTPA and how they are used at UNC Charlotte. edTPA demonstrates candidate knowledge and understanding of content, pedagogy, and pedagogical content knowledge edTPA is designed to show evidence that the candidate can design effective, developmentally appropriate classroom instruction for a wide range of learners that is based on the approved curriculum for a given grade level and/or subject area. In the Planning Instruction Task, candidates establish the instructional and social context for student learning and develop content-specific lesson plans, instructional materials and student assignments/assessments for a defined learning segment. Candidates demonstrate how their plans align with content standards, building upon students’ prior academic learning and life experiences while differentiating instruction to address student needs. Attention to 21st century skills and content are also embedded, along with research-verified approaches to teaching and learning. In Tasks 2 and 3, candidates then go on to implement those lesson plans with their current P-12 students and assess their students’ learning, both for the whole group and for targeted learners identified early in the project. The project is conducted during the student teaching/graduate internship semester, although formative edTPA knowledge and skills are taught throughout the program coursework with detailed individualized feedback provided to candidates.

To fully demonstrate an understanding of the content and methods of instruction within licensure areas, candidates will be expected to complete a final edTPA product in their student teaching/graduate internship course. Instruction within the edTPA product will be detailed to the degree that scope and sequence are lucid and exhibit a variety of research-verified teaching strategies that effectively promotes 21st Century skills and content while facilitating global awareness. The learning experiences within the edTPA learning segment should build upon one another and clearly demonstrate continuity between the content being learned, content standards, and other disciplines. Curriculum should draw from various research-verified instructional methods to promote a collaborative learning environment that appropriately addresses developmental levels of individual students, effectively integrates technology, and encourages culturally responsive learning. Lessons must integrate authentic and meaningful instruction that help middle/secondary students develop the ability to apply processes and strategies for critical thinking and problem solving. The final edTPA product will be developed and assessed in in the student teaching/graduate internship semester; however, edTPA knowledge and skills will be scaffolded throughout the program in targeted courses, with heavy emphasis on content-specific effective lesson/unit design occurring in the methods course. Candidates will be expected to achieve targeted goals in demonstrating pedagogical and pedagogical content knowledge, skills, and dispositions. The topic of the learning segment is directly linked to the North Carolina Standard Course of Study (currently the Common Core/Essential Standards) and aligns with national content standards within appropriate licensure areas. The classroom context, student characteristics, and duration of lessons are representative of authentic classrooms and students and are determined by the candidate’s student teaching/graduate internship assignment. Instructional learning segments include a minimum of three-to-five well-developed, sequential lessons. Learning outcomes are designed to integrate 21st Century content and skills and candidates are required to indicate where their lesson designs connect to research-based theory/practice. Learning segments that promote 21st Century content and skills emphasize student collaboration, cooperation, and leadership; global awareness, critical thinking, and problem

Nov 2009 – original 15 June 2014 – update UNC Charlotte Music Education – Graduate Certificate solving; differentiation of instruction, authentic assessment of student learning, integration of advanced technologies, and utilization of content specific best practices; and models the purposeful application of responsive pedagogy and content. Curriculum and instruction of learning segments provide the tools to purposefully support content understanding and appropriately address the cognitive, cultural, linguistic, and diverse strengths and weaknesses of all students. In addition, by completing the edTPA product in its entirety, candidates not only complete these tasks, but reflect on their lesson designs while providing a well-considered rationale for their decision-making.

Successful completion of edTPA allows the candidate to meet the following descriptors: 1a.2: To use appropriate data to develop lessons, candidate will use a real group of students within the current student teaching/graduate internship placement during the final semester of the program. 2b.3: The edTPA rubrics will assess the degree to which the candidate plans instruction that demonstrates an understanding of the influence of diversity. 3a.1. and 3c.1: The edTPA learning segment must be based on the NCSCOS and must link to other discipline areas for the grade/subject (e.g. national content standards, as noted in the edTPA rubrics. 3c.2: The edTPA learning segment will be designed to increase students' awareness of the global links to the subject area, as noted in the edTPA rubrics. 3d.1: The edTPA learning segment will integrate 21st century skills and content, as noted in the edTPA rubrics. 4a.1 and 4c.1: In describing the Context for Learning (in edTPA Task 1), candidates must identify the developmental levels of the students, both for the group as a whole and for their targeted learners, and these understandings will be reflected in pedagogical applications by describing the use of a variety of appropriate methods and materials to meet the needs of all students, as noted in the edTPA rubrics. 4d.1: The lessons within the learning segment must clearly show how medium-level and advanced technology is integrated with instruction to maximize students' learning, as noted in the edTPA rubrics. 4e.1: Specific instruction described in the learning segment will help students develop critical thinking and problem solving skills, as noted in the edTPA rubrics. 4f.1: The learning segment will utilize student learning teams to develop cooperation, collaboration, and student leadership, as noted in the edTPA rubrics. 5c.1: The learning segment will use a variety of research-verified approaches to improve teaching and learning, as noted in the edTPA rubrics.

The final edTPA product is evaluated with fifteen individual rubrics rated on a scale from 1-5. A rating of 3 is considered “ready to teach.” While Task 1 focuses primarily on planning, Task 2 (implementation) and Task 3 (assessment) are equally important and collectively provide a broad understanding of each candidate’s ability to effectively design and implement instruction to a wide variety of learners. At UNC Charlotte, each candidate will submit their final edTPA product to SCALE/Pearson for third-party evaluation. The final edTPA scores will be provided to the IHE by SCALE/Pearson approximately four weeks after the candidate’s product is submitted for SCALE/Pearson evaluation. Once the scores are received by the IHE, the IHE will determine if each candidate has met the criteria for passing based on guidelines established by UNC Charlotte faculty. Beginning with AY 2014-15, “passing” is defined as a total score of 37. Once the scores are received, program faculty will use this information for program evaluation purposes. The edTPA Performing Arts Handbook in its entirety is available from https://edtpa.aacte.org. Copyright protections prohibit providing the specific instructions/rubrics to candidates in this document; however, the rubric titles are available and are included in the chart below:

Rubric # Task edTPA Rubric Title 1 1 Planning to Build Student Understanding 2 1 Planning to Support Varied Student Learning Needs 3 1 Using Knowledge of Students to Inform Teaching and Learning 4 1 Identifying and Supporting Academic Language Demands 5 1 Planning Assessments to Monitor and Support Student Learning 6 2 Learning Environment 7 2 Engaging Students in Learning 8 2 Deepening Student Learning 9 2 Subject Specific Pedagogy 10 2 Analyzing Teaching Effectiveness 11 3 Analysis of Student Learning 12 3 Using Feedback to Guide Further Learning 13 3 Student Use of Feedback 14 3 Analyzing Students’ Language Use 15 3 Using Assessment to Inform Instruction

#4 Required (State-prescribed)

Pedagogical and Professional Knowledge Skills and Dispositions: Evidence that demonstrates knowledge, skills, and dispositions in practice.

This evidence must be the state-approved LEA/IHE Certification of Teaching Capacity.

Descriptors addressed: 1a.1, 1a.3, 1a.4, 1d.1, 1e.1, 2a.1, 2b.1, 2b.2, 2c.1, 2d.1, 2d.2, 3a.2, 3b.2, 3d.1, 4c.1, 4d.1, 4e.1, 4f.1, 4g.1, 4g.2, 4h.1, 4b.2, 5a.1

Name of Evidence: LEA/IHE Certification of Teaching Capacity (original NCDPI blueprint, November 2009) The LEA/IHE Certification of Teaching Capacity will be administered during the graduate internship semester, as part of a more extensive evaluative process using the UNC Charlotte Student Teaching Assessment Rubric. Candidates must score at the "Met" level on all items in order to be recommended for licensure.

#5 Required

Positive Impact on Student Learning: Evidence that demonstrates impact on student learning.

It is recommended this evidence address descriptors 1a.1, 4b.1, 4h.1, 4h.2, 5a.1.

Descriptors addressed IF different from those recommended: Also 1a.2, 2d.1, 4a.2

1. Name of Evidence: edTPA UPDATED JUNE 2014/approved January 2014

2. Directions and/or Requirements to be Provided to the Candidates*: *The edTPA Performing Arts Handbook in its entirety is available from https://edtpa.aacte.org. Copyright protections prohibit providing the specific instructions/rubrics to candidates in this document. The following is a summary of the assessment requirements of edTPA and how they are used at UNC Charlotte. edTPA is intended to show evidence that the candidate can design effective, developmentally appropriate classroom instruction for a wide range of learners that is based on the approved curriculum for a given grade level and/or subject area. In the planning task (Task 1), candidates develop a learning segment of connected lessons that address multiple student learning needs and 21st Century skills (see description for Evidence 3). In Task 2, candidates implement the planned lessons, providing evidence via submitted video clips. Candidates also complete extensive implementation commentaries where they identify moments in the video clips where they have met specific criteria and provide rationales for their decision making. In the assessment task (Task 3), candidates evaluate learning patterns for both the whole class group and for targeted learners identified early in the project. Actual student data results are used for this purpose and candidates are required to provide examples of the feedback they give to their students to guide student improvement.

The edTPA requires a candidate to make data-driven decisions about instructional plans and to differentiate instruction based on formative assessment of every student's needs. After teaching the lessons and providing feedback to students, the candidate then reflects upon and evaluates his or her teaching as related to student learning and feedback. In completing edTPA, candidates provide evidence that they can design and implement assessments before, during, and after instruction in order to show the impact of the candidate’s teaching on the learning of P-12 students. Candidates not only demonstrate their ability to evaluate student data results but also to use those results to improve student achievement. The project is conducted during the student teaching/graduate internship semester, although formative edTPA knowledge and skills are taught throughout the program coursework. In addition, edTPA also provides evidence of a candidate’s mastery of the College of Education’s Conceptual Framework.

1a.1: The classroom performance data gathered in this project is used to evaluate student progress on lessons that are directly linked to NCSCOS, as noted in the edTPA rubrics. 1a.2: The pretest and formative assessments required in this project provide appropriate data to develop instructional plans, as noted in the edTPA rubrics. 2d.1: After obtaining assessment results, candidates must consult with specialists for recommendations about resources and strategies necessary to meet the learning needs of all students, as noted in the edTPA rubrics. 4a.2: During and after instruction, candidates assess the value and appropriateness of the resources they used in terms of the impact on students' strengths and weaknesses, as noted in the edTPA rubrics. 4b.1: Candidates collaborate with cooperating teachers and specialists as they monitor student performance and design lessons that are responsive to cultural and individual learning needs, as noted in the edTPA rubrics. 4h.1: Candidates must use multiple formative and summative assessments to monitor progress and inform instruction, as noted in the edTPA rubrics.

4h.2: Evidence that students have attained 21st century knowledge, skills and/or dispositions is seen in analysis of student learning based on the stated instructional goals and teaching strategies, as noted in the edTPA rubrics. 5a.1: Data analysis is required in order to report the results, and the candidates' final reflections of this analysis provide ideas about improving students' learning, as noted in the edTPA rubrics.

The final edTPA product is evaluated with fifteen individual rubrics rated on a scale from 1-5. A rating of 3 is considered “ready to teach.” Task 1 focuses primarily on planning, Task 2 on implementation of the planned lessons, and Task 3 on assessment. Collectively, these tasks provide a broad understanding of each candidate’s ability to effectively design, implement, and assess instruction to a wide variety of learners. At UNC Charlotte, each candidate will submit their final edTPA product to SCALE/Pearson for third-party evaluation. The final edTPA scores will be provided to the IHE by SCALE/Pearson approximately four weeks after the candidate’s product is submitted for SCALE/Pearson evaluation. Once the scores are received by the IHE, the IHE will determine if each candidate has met the criteria for passing based on guidelines established by UNC Charlotte faculty. Beginning with AY 2014-15, “passing” is defined as a total score of 37. Once the scores are received, program faculty will use this information for program evaluation purposes. The edTPA Performing Arts in its entirety is available from https://edtpa.aacte.org. Copyright protections prohibit providing the specific instructions/rubrics to candidates in this document; however, the rubric titles are available and are included in the chart below: Rubric # Task edTPA Rubric Title 1 1 Planning to Build Student Understanding 2 1 Planning to Support Varied Student Learning Needs 3 1 Using Knowledge of Students to Inform Teaching and Learning 4 1 Identifying and Supporting Academic Language Demands 5 1 Planning Assessments to Monitor and Support Student Learning 6 2 Learning Environment 7 2 Engaging Students in Learning 8 2 Deepening Student Learning 9 2 Subject Specific Pedagogy 10 2 Analyzing Teaching Effectiveness 11 3 Analysis of Student Learning 12 3 Using Feedback to Guide Further Learning 13 3 Student Use of Feedback 14 3 Analyzing Students’ Language Use 15 3 Using Assessment to Inform Instruction

#6 Required

Leadership and Collaboration: Evidence that demonstrates leadership and collaboration.

It is recommended this assessment address descriptors 1b.1, 1b.2, 1b.3, 1c.1, 1c.2, 2e.1, 5b.1.

1. Name of Evidence: Candidate Professional Development Plan (original NCDPI blueprint, November 2009; updated to reflect changes in language (not content), November 2015)

The Candidate Professional Development Plan (CPDP) is a comprehensive portfolio demonstrating a candidate’s professional growth in leadership, collaboration, and advocacy during the professional education program of study. The CPDP is started in early program coursework and completed by the end of the student teaching internship

2. Directions and/or Requirements to be Provided to the Candidates: a. Professional Conference Attendance: Each candidate in the Music Education degree program must attend at least one professional music/music education conference prior to the graduate internship (e.g., the North Carolina Music Educators Association Conference—NCMEA Conference). Attendance at conferences requires that a candidate be a member of that professional organization. Subsequently, all candidates must be part of a professional organization, too. The Department of Music sponsors a chapter Collegiate Music Educator’s National Conference (CMENC). On-campus activities already include hosting school festivals for networking and service opportunities, as well as provided the means for professional development through attendance at state, regional, and national professional development conferences. In these capacities, candidates in these professional music/music education organizations take on leadership roles when the campus is hosting a music event for area schools. Furthermore, candidates are collaborating with area directors, and university faculty in realizing the event(s). b. Advocacy Statement: Candidates in MUED 5100 Critical Issues in Music Education will be required to write a paper advocating for music in the schools. c. School Improvement Plan Analysis (SIPA): During the graduate internship (MUSC 6467) the candidate will procure and discuss with the cooperating teacher the host school’s School Improvement plan. d. Community Collaboration: During the graduate internship, the candidate will be involved with parent volunteers (e.g., Booster organizations and the like), and be present and assist as necessary with parent-teacher conferences. e. Documentation: The candidate will document the completion of the evidence online and submit into the TK20 System (see Draft of TK20 Documentation for EE6 below). Furthermore, in the final reflective paper submitted during the graduate internship semester will incorporate the candidate’s growth and development in advocacy, leadership, and collaboration.

3. How the Evidence Specifically Addresses the Descriptors for which it is Cited: a. Conference attendance allows candidates to: (1) engage in collaborative and collegial professional learning activities (1b.1) (2) participate in a field-specific professional development activity (1c.1) while building professional networks (1c.2); and (3) participate in an appropriate and recommended activity for professional learning and development (5b.1). b. The Music Advocacy Statement allows the candidate to communicate and collaborate with the community for the benefit of students (2e.1) by detailing the academic benefits associated with learning in music, as well as in the arts. Research in music learning cited in the paper exposes the candidate to how music affects the whole school-learning environment (1b.3). c. SIPA: Student teaching/internship engages candidates relating music learning to the overall school improvement plan (1b.3) in an authentic context. d. Community Collaboration: The student teacher/intern engages the candidate to be involved with parents and community members through parent-teacher conferences, performances, booster organizations, and music rating festivals (2e.1).

4. How the Evidence is/will be Evaluated by the Institution: a. Professional Conference Attendance Reflection Paper: Upon attendance of at least on professional conference, the candidate will upload into TK20 a scanned copy of his/her registration, and membership documentation of the professional organization. Also, the candidate will write a two- to four-page reflection paper. The paper will

detail specific sessions attended at a professional conference, what information was learned, and how this information will inform the candidates teaching. The paper and conference attendance documentation will submitted, with the paper being evaluated with a Departmental rubric. The rubric will be developed in Spring 2010. b. The Music Advocacy Statement: The paper will be a two- to four-page paper that includes research about how the developmental, emotional, social, aesthetic, and societal functions of music contribute to the academic and social success of a child. The paper will be graded by the course instructor’s evaluation instrument. The evaluation instrument will be developed in Fall 2009 and piloted with that rotation of that class (a fall-only class). c. School Improvement Plan Analysis & Report: The student teaching candidate will analyze the data of the host school’s SIP and describe how its components are realized with the classes (s)he is teaching in the host school (i.e., how music is helping to achieve the SIP’s goals). The format for this report will be developed in Fall 2009. d. Community Collaboration: Cooperating teachers will document student teacher collaboration with parents and the community through participation in booster club meetings, faculty meetings, district in-services, concerts, festivals (local, all-district or all-state) during placement in the host school. e. Final Summative Reflection: The candidate will submit a summative reflection on his/her growth in advocacy, leadership, and collaboration at the end of the graduate internship semester, and this reflection will be evaluated by the university supervisor. The format and rubric for this reflection will be developed and piloted in 2009-10.

TK20 Uploaded Documentation: (Draft of TK20 & EE6 Documentation) Pre-Service Music Teacher’s EE6: Leadership & Collaboration Professional Development & Advocacy in Music TK 20 Documentation

Candidate Requirement Course/when completed Date Electronic Signature of (Click on link for full documentation) Completed US/CT/COMUED* Professional Membership Before internship Documentation Professional Conference Attendance Before internship Professional Conference Attendance Before internship Reflection Paper Music Advocacy Statement MUED 5100 School Improvement Plan Analysis & MUED 6467 Report (graduate internship) Community Collaboration MUED 6467 (graduate internship) Final Summative Reflection MUED 6467 (graduate internship) *US = University Supervisor; CT = Cooperating Teacher; COMUED = Coordinator of Music Education

Nov 2009 – original 22 June 2014 – update