2012-13 Student Learning Outcomes Assessment Plan and Report

College: College of Education Department: Middle, Secondary, & K-12 Education Degree Program: Graduate Certificate in Teaching English as a Second Language

The University of North Carolina at Charlotte currently offers 1 pathway to the Initial Teacher Licensure required to teach in North Carolina- specifically in the area of Teaching English as a Second Language (TESL). The only pathway to initial licensure in this area is through the completion of twenty-four credit hours in the Graduate Certificate in Teaching Program, which is earned beyond the completion of a traditional BA degree (in any field).

Reflection on the Continuous Improvement of Student Learning 1. List the changes and improvements your program planned to implement as a result of last year’s student learning outcomes assessment data. 2. Were all of the changes implemented? If not, please explain. 3. What impact did the changes have on student learning? As was indicated in the 2011-2012 Annual Report, Graduate Certificate in Teaching students met expectations for each of the five SLOs. As a result no changes were made.

Student Learning Outcome 1 (knowledge, skill or ability to be assessed) Initial teacher licensure candidates demonstrate knowledge of the important principles and concepts of the content they teach.

Changes to the Student Learning Outcomes Assessment Plan: If any changes were made to the assessment plan (which includes the Student Learning Outcome, Effectiveness Measure, Methodology and Performance Outcome) for this student learning outcome since your last report was submitted, briefly summarize the changes made and the rationale for the changes. During the fall of 2012 a new assessment instrument is being implemented – a new version of the Student Teaching Assessment Rubric (STAR 2012). This assessment instrument is a revised version of the Student Teaching Assessment Rubric (STAR) that was used to collect SLO data in prior reporting years. The STAR became the STAR 2012. This revised rubric resulted in changes in element numbering and in some cases different wording of elements. When necessary, Methodology and Performance Outcomes have been updated to reflect these changes. Effectiveness Measure: Identify the data collection instrument, e.g., exam, project, paper, etc. that will be used to gauge acquisition of this student learning outcome and explain how it assesses the desired knowledge, skill or ability. A copy of the data collection instrument and any scoring rubrics associated with this student learning outcome are to be submitted electronically to the designated folder on the designated shared drive and hyperlinked to the Effectiveness Measure. A common observation instrument, Student Teaching Assessment Rubric (STAR) 2012, is used with every student teacher at the end of his or her academic program. The final (fourth) administration of the STAR instrument is used specifically to measure the SLO. The University Supervisor (US) observes the teacher candidate during the Graduate Student Teaching Internship and evaluates his/her teaching skills using the STAR 2012 rubric. The rubric has a 4-point scale. Three elements included on the STAR 2012 rubric relate specifically to Content Knowledge and are therefore used to measure SLO #1 (K2a: Demonstrates Knowledge of Content, K2c Demonstrates Awareness of Literacy Instruction Across All Content Areas, K2d Makes content relevant and accessible to all learners).  Candidates pursuing the Graduate Certificate in Teaching will select prior to the Graduate Internship Student Teaching semester, in collaboration with program faculty and methods instructor, an appropriate artifact from a content course within their content licensure or content degree that demonstrates depth of content knowledge. Depth of content is defined as an artifact that elaborates a specific topic, concept, or theme that shows intensity, rigor, scholarship, and an overall quality of excellence, and that exhibits the nature of the academic discipline authentically and accurately. In the content area methods course candidates select a content paper or in-depth project their artifact for this evidence. The artifact selected must be of high quality receiving a grade of A or B as evaluated by content course instructors using criteria established by content- specific faculty at an accredited university. If a candidate is unable to produce an artifact from a prior rigorous, advanced content course from an accredited university, then a program faculty member will supervise the development of an equivalent artifact. In addition, candidates will create a concise self-evaluation on the approved and submitted content artifact describing its alignment with one or more of the specialty area standards. In the content area methods course,the candidate submits evidence that includes an explanation of how the approved artifact demonstrates content depth, an identification of specialty area standards met and a justification of alignment of these content specific standards. This artifact and accompanying reflective paper are referred to as Electronic Evidence 2 (EE2) which integrated within the content methods course and TESL 5104 [Authentic Assessment] to measure depth of content knowledge. EE2 is evaluated by methods instructors using EE2 Rubric. The rubric has a 3-point scale. One element included on the EE2 relates specifically to Content Knowledge and is therefore used to measure SLO1 (3b.1: Demonstrates appropriate level of content knowledge in specialty).

 Teacher-candidates in the Graduate Certificate in Teaching program must complete an Instructional Unit Plan (IUP) for a content area methods course. Candidates enroll in the methods course that aligns with their content area degree and licensure. The IUP assignment gives the candidates an opportunity to apply the various pedagogical content skills and knowledge they have developed in the program.This is referred to as Electronic Evidence 3 (EE3) and is integrated within the required content methods courses (TESL 5103) to measure pedagogical content knowledge and skills.EE3 is evaluated by methods instructors using the IUP Rubric. The rubric has a 3-point scale. Two elements included on the IUP Rubric relate specifically to Content Knowledge and are therefore used to measure SLO1 (3a.1: Develops and applies lessons from the North Carolina Standard Course of Study, 3c.1: Demonstrates links by relating content to other disciplines). All performance outcomes were met; no changes are needed at this time.

Methodology: Describe when, where and how the assessment of this student learning outcome will be administered and evaluated. Describe the process the department will use to collect, analyze and disseminate the assessment data to program faculty and to decide the changes/improvements to make on the basis of the assessment data. The Student Teaching Assessment Rubric (STAR) 2012 is used during TESL 6470 (Graduate Student Teaching Internship), the final semester a teacher candidate is in the program, to evaluate a student’s work and teaching. The University Supervisor (US) observes the student teacher in a school setting. The final administration of the instrument is collected and used to measure SLO #1.

The EE2 Content Knowledge Artifact and Paper is assessed in the content area methods course [TESL 5103] taken prior to TESL 6470 (Graduate Student Teaching Internship). The chosen scholarly artifact is evaluated within the content area degree coursework and must be of high quality, receiving a grade of A or B. In addition, in a content area methods course, students create a concise self-evaluation on the approved and submitted content artifact describing its alignment with one or more of the specialty area standards. The artifact and paper are evaluated by the methods instructor using the EE2 Content Knowledge Rubric. The rubric has a 3-point scale; Accomplished, Proficient, Not Met.

The instructional Unit Plan (IUP) is assessed in the content area methods course [TESL 5103] which is taken prior to TESL 6470 (Graduate Student Teaching Internship). EE3 is evaluated by the content area methods instructor using the IUP Rubric. The rubric has a 3-point scale; Accomplished, Proficient, Not Met.

Scores are collected using the College’s electronic data management system and are analyzed at the college and program level. Simple descriptive statistics are used to analyze the scores, and disaggregated findings are reported by semester at three levels (College, Program and Licensure Area). Once a year results from all assessments administered by the programs are disseminated to the faculty in the College of Education. The data is discussed during a final faculty meeting and next steps determined to address any needs identified. All strategies determined during this closing the loop discussion are implemented during the next academic year. All data reports created by the College of Education are housed on a secure website which is accessible to all faculty within the College of Education.

Performance Outcome: Identify the percentage of students assessed that should be able to demonstrate proficiency in this student learning outcome and the level of proficiency expected. Example: 80% of the students assessed will achieve a score of “acceptable” or higher on the Oral Presentation Scoring Rubric (Note: a copy of the scoring rubric, complete with cell descriptors for each level of performance, is to be submitted electronically to the designated folder on the designated shared drive and hyperlinked to the Effectiveness Measure above for each student learning outcome.) The program expects 80% of its teacher candidates to score “3” or better (target/exemplary or proficient/accomplished) on the STAR rubric, which has a 4-point scale. With respect to EE2 and the IUP (Instructional Unit Plan), which has only a 3-point scale, the program expects 80% of its teacher candidates to score “2” or better (proficient/accomplished) on the corresponding rubrics. 2009-10 Assessment Data 2010-11 Assessment Data 2011-12 Assessment Data (Results can be shown by year or (Results can be shown by year or (Results can be shown by year by semester) by semester) or by semester)

Teaching Teaching Teaching Teaching Teaching Teaching Grad Cert Grad Cert Grad Cert Grad Cert Grad Cert Grad Cert Program TESL TESL TESL TESL TESL TESL

Spring Spring Fall 2011 Spring Fall 2012 Semester 2010 Fall 2010 2011 2012

Count 8 12 14 13

STAR: 1A Demonstrates Knowledge of Content 100% 100% 100% 100%

STAR: 1B Implements Interdisciplinary Approaches 100% 100% 100% 100%

STAR: 7A Bases Purposeful Learning Activities on Essential Skills and District Curriculum 100% 100% 100% 100%

STAR 2012: K2a Demonstrates Knowledge of Content 100% 100%

STAR 2012: K2c Demonstrates Awareness of Literacy Instruction Across All Content Areas 100% 100%

STAR 2012: K2d Makes content relevant and accessible to all learners 100% 100%

Count 0 22 0 12

EE2: 3.b.1 Demonstrates appropriate level of content knowledge in specialty 100% 100% 100% 100%

Count 14 13 9 6

IUP: 3a.1 Develops and applies lessons from the North Carolina Standard Course of Study 100% 100% 100% 100%

IUP: 3.c.1 Demonstrates links by relating content to other disciplines 100% 100% 100% 100% Plans for 2013-14: Based upon the assessment data included in this annual report, what changes/improvements will the program implement during the next academic year to improve performance on this student learning outcome? All performance outcomes were met; no changes are needed at this time.

Assessment Lead’s Comments on Student Learning Outcome:

Student Learning Outcome 2 (knowledge, skill or ability to be assessed) Initial teacher licensure candidates demonstrate thorough understanding of the relationship between clear, meaningful presentation of content and content-specific pedagogy through the appropriate use of multiple explanations, instructional strategies, and technologies.

Changes to the Student Learning Outcomes Assessment Plan: If any changes were made to the assessment plan (which includes the Student Learning Outcome, Effectiveness Measure, Methodology and Performance Outcome) for this student learning outcome since your last report was submitted, briefly summarize the changes made and the rationale for the changes. During the fall of 2012 a new assessment instrument is being implemented – a new version of the Student Teaching Assessment Rubric (STAR 2012). This assessment instrument is a revised version of the Student Teaching Assessment Rubric (STAR) that was used to collect SLO data in prior reporting years. The STAR became the STAR 2012. This revised rubric resulted in changes in element numbering and in some cases different wording of elements. When necessary, Methodology and Performance Outcomes have been updated to reflect these changes.

Effectiveness Measure: Identify the data collection instrument, e.g., exam, project, paper, etc. that will be used to gauge acquisition of this student learning outcome and explain how it assesses the desired knowledge, skill or ability. A copy of the data collection instrument and any scoring rubrics associated with this student learning outcome are to be submitted electronically to the designated folder on the designated shared drive and hyperlinked to the Effectiveness Measure.  A common observation instrument, Student Teaching Assessment Rubric (STAR) 2012, is used with every student teacher at the end of his or her academic program. The final (fourth) administration of the STAR 2012 instrument is used specifically to measure the SLO. The University Supervisor (US) observes the teacher candidate using the rubric. The rubric has a 4- point scale. Six elements included on the STAR 2012 rubric relate specifically to Pedagogical Content Knowledge and are therefore used to measure SLO #2 (E5b Develops higher order thinking skills in students, E5c Uses a variety of instructional methods, E5d Integrates technology with instruction, E5e Varies the instructional role, E2a Teachers connect content, K2b Implements interdisciplinary approaches and multiple perspectives for teaching content).  A common capstone work sample, Impact on Student Learning (ISL) Project is required from every Graduate Certificate in Teaching candidate. The ISL Project requires candidates to collect and analyze pre-test data related to a unit of study. As part of the project, the candidates must then design and teach a series of lessons related to that unit of study before administering a post- test. Finally, candidates must compare the pre- and post-test data in order to demonstrate that their teaching has resulted in increased understanding among all students. The ISL Project is scored by the University Supervisor. The ISL rubric has a 3-point scale. One element of the ISL rubric relates specifically to SLO2 (4a.2: Assesses and uses resources).

 Teacher-candidates in the Graduate Certificate in Teaching program must complete an Instructional Unit Plan (IUP) for a content area methods course [TESL 5103]. Candidates enroll the methods course that aligns with their content area degree and licensure. The IUP assignment gives the candidates an opportunity to apply the various pedagogical content skills and knowledge they have developed in the program. This is referred to as Electronic Evidence 3 (EE3) and is integrated within the required content methods courses methods course [TESL 5103]. to measure pedagogical content knowledge and skills. EE3 is evaluated by methods instructors using the IUP Rubric. The rubric has a 3-point scale. Five elements included on the IUP Rubric relate specifically to SLO2 (3d.1: Integrates 21st century skills in instruction, 4d.1: Integrates technology into instruction, 4e.1: Integrates instruction that promotes critical thinking skills, 4f.1: Organizes teams for collaboration and leadership, 5c.1: Uses approaches to improve teaching and learning). Methodology: Describe when, where and how the assessment of this student learning outcome will be administered and evaluated. Describe the process the department will use to collect, analyze and disseminate the assessment data to program faculty and to decide the changes/improvements to make on the basis of the assessment data. The Student Teaching Assessment Rubric (STAR) 2012 is used during the TESL 6470 course, the final semester a teacher candidate is in the program, to evaluate a student’s work and teaching. The University Supervisor (US) observes the student teacher in a school setting. The final administration of the instrument is collected and used to measure SLO #2.

The Impact on Student Learning (ISL) project is a capstone work samples that is also completed during TESL 6470. The ISL project is scored by the University Supervisor using the ISL Project Rubric. This is a common COED rubric is used to grade each component of the ISL Project. Each component of the ISL Project is rated on the following scale: not met, proficient, or accomplished.

The instructional Unit Plan (IUP) is assessed in the content area methods course methods course [TESL 5103]. which is taken prior to TESL 6470 (Graduate Student Teaching Internship). EE3 is evaluated by the content area methods instructor using the IUP Rubric. The rubric has a 3-point scale; Accomplished, Proficient, Not Met.

Scores are collected using a data management system, TaskStream, and are analyzed at the college and program level. Simple descriptive statistics are used to analyze the scores, and disaggregated findings are reported by semester at three levels (College, Program and Licensure Area). Once a year results from all assessments administered by the programs are disseminated to the faculty in the College of Education. The data is discussed during a final faculty meeting and next steps determined to address any needs identified. All strategies determined during this closing the loop discussion are implemented during the next academic year. All data reports created by the College of Education are housed on a secure website which is accessible to all faculty within the College of Education.

Performance Outcome: Identify the percentage of students assessed that should be able to demonstrate proficiency in this student learning outcome and the level of proficiency expected. Example: 80% of the students assessed will achieve a score of “acceptable” or higher on the Oral Presentation Scoring Rubric (Note: a copy of the scoring rubric, complete with cell descriptors for each level of performance, is to be submitted electronically to the designated folder on the designated shared drive and hyperlinked to the Effectiveness Measure above for each student learning outcome.) The program expects 80% of its teacher candidates to score “3” or better (target/exemplary or proficient/accomplished) on the STAR which is a 4-point rubric and to score “2” or better (proficient/accomplished) on the Impact on Student Learning (ISL) Rubric which is a 3-point rubric. With respect to the Instructional Unit Plan, which has a 3-point scale, the program expects 80% of its teacher candidates to score “2” or better (proficient/accomplished) on the corresponding rubric.

2009-10 Assessment Data 2010-11 Assessment Data 2011-12 Assessment Data (Results can be shown by year or (Results can be shown by year or (Results can be shown by year by semester) by semester) or by semester)

Program Teaching Teaching Teaching Teaching Teaching Teaching Grad Cert Grad Cert Grad Cert Grad Grad Cert Grad Cert TESL TESL TESL Cert TESL TESL TESL

Spring 2011 Spring Spring 2010 Fall 2010 Semester Fall 2011 2012 Fall 2012

Count 8 12 14 13

STAR: 1C Makes content relevant to learners 100% 100% STAR: 2A Demonstrates Understanding of Learner Developmental Trait 100% 100%

STAR: 3A Individualizes the Instructional Environment 100% 100%

STAR: 3B Meets the Range of Individual Needs 100% 100%

STAR: 3C Sets Expectations for Learning and Achievement 100% 100%

STAR: 4A Selects Multiple Teaching Strategies 100% 100% 100% 100%

STAR: 6A Demonstrates Effective Oral and 100% 100% Written Language STAR: 6D Utilizes Media and Technology 100% 100% 100% 100%

STAR 2012: E5b Develops Higher Order Thinking Skills in Students 100% 100%

STAR 2012: E5c Uses a Variety of Instructional Methods 100% 100%

STAR 2012: E5d Integrates Technology with Instruction 100% 100%

STAR 2012: E5e Varies the Instructional Role 100% 100%

STAR 2012: E2a Teachers connect content 100% 100%

STAR 2012: K2b Implements Interdisciplinary Approaches and Multiple Perspectives for Teaching Content 100% 100%

Count 14 13 100% 100%

ISL: 4.a.2 Assessment Methods Overview 100% 100% 100% 100%

Count 14 13 9 6 IUP 3d.1: Integrates 21st century skills in instruction 100% 100% 100% 100%

IUP 4d.1 Integrates technology into instruction 100% 100% 100% 100%

IUP 4e.1 Integrates instruction that promotes critical thinking skills 100% 100% 100% 100%

IUP 4f.1 Organizes teams for collaboration and leadership 100% 100% 100% 100%

IUP 5c.1 Uses approaches to improve teaching and learning 100% 100% 100% 100%

Plans for 2013-14: Based upon the assessment data included in this annual report, what changes/improvements will the program implement during the next academic year to improve performance on this student learning outcome? All performance outcomes were met; no changes are needed at this time.

Student Learning Outcome 3 (knowledge, skill or ability to be assessed) Initial teacher licensure candidates apply their knowledge of how students learn to facilitate meaningful and accessible learning for all students, while considering family, community, and real-world issues, reflecting on their practice, and making necessary adjustments to enhance student learning.

Changes to the Student Learning Outcomes Assessment Plan: If any changes were made to the assessment plan (which includes the Student Learning Outcome, Effectiveness Measure, Methodology and Performance Outcome) for this student learning outcome since your last report was submitted, briefly summarize the changes made and the rationale for the changes. During the fall of 2012 a new assessment instrument is being implemented – a new version of the Student Teaching Assessment Rubric (STAR 2012). This assessment instrument is a revised version of the Student Teaching Assessment Rubric (STAR) that was used to collect SLO data in prior reporting years. The STAR became the STAR 2012. This revised rubric resulted in changes in element numbering and in some cases different wording of elements. When necessary, Methodology and Performance Outcomes have been updated to reflect these changes. Effectiveness Measure: Identify the data collection instrument, e.g., exam, project, paper, etc. that will be used to gauge acquisition of this student learning outcome and explain how it assesses the desired knowledge, skill or ability. A copy of the data collection instrument and any scoring rubrics associated with this student learning outcome are to be submitted electronically to the designated folder on the designated shared drive and hyperlinked to the Effectiveness Measure. A common observation instrument, Student Teaching Assessment Rubric (STAR) 2012, is used with every student teacher at the end of his or her academic program. The final (fourth) administration of the STAR 2012 instrument is used specifically to measure the SLO. The University Supervisor (US) observes the teacher candidate during the Graduate Student Teaching Internship and evaluates his/her teaching skills using the STAR 2012 rubric. The rubric has a 4-point scale. Eight elements included on the STAR 2012 rubric relate specifically to Professional and Pedagogical Knowledge and Skills and are therefore used to measure SLO #3 (E1a Manages Time and Materials, E1c Monitors and Responds to Student Behavior, E2b Communicate Effectively with Students, E2c Encourages Students to Articulate Understanding of Content, E2d Embraces Diversity in the School Community and in the World, E3c Creates Opportunities for Learner Response, E4a Develops Plans that are Aligned with State and District Curriculum, E4b Monitors and Adjusts Lesson Plans (to meet and enhance student progress towards goals), E5a Poses Quality Questions , and C1d Self-evaluates Teaching and Professional Role.  A common capstone work sample, Impact on Student Learning Project (ISL) is required from every teacher education candidate. The ISL Project requires candidates to collect and analyze pre-test data related to a unit of study. As part of the project, the candidates must then design and teach a series of lessons related to that unit of study before administering a post-test. Finally, candidates must compare the pre- and post-test data in order to demonstrate that their teaching has resulted in increased understanding among all students. The work product is scored by the University Supervisor. The rubric has a 3-point scale. Two elements of the ISL rubric relate specifically to SLO3 (2d.1: Cooperates with specialists and uses resources, 4b.1: Collaborates with colleagues on student performance and to respond to cultural differences). The ISL project is scored by the University Supervisor using the ISL rubric (spring 2011).

 Teacher-candidates in the Graduate Certificate in Teaching program must complete an Instructional Unit Plan (IUP) for a content area methods course [TESL 5103]. Candidates enroll the methods course that aligns with their content area degree and licensure. The IUP assignment gives the candidates an opportunity to apply the various pedagogical content skills and knowledge they have developed in the program. This is referred to as Electronic Evidence 3 (EE3) and is integrated within the required content methods courses (TESL 5103) to measure pedagogical content knowledge and skills. EE3 is evaluated by methods instructors using the IUP Rubric. The rubric has a 3-point scale. Seven elements included on the IUP Rubric relate specifically to SLO3 (1a.2: Draws data to develop plans, 2b3: Understands diversity and incorporates in instruction, 4a.1: Identifies and plans for student level, 4c.1: Uses appropriate methods and materials, 4e.1: Integrates instruction that promotes critical thinking skills, 4f.1: Organizes teams for cooperation, collaboration and leadership, 5c.1: Uses approaches to improve teaching and learning).

 A two-part School Improvement Plan (SIP) Project is assigned to all Teacher-candidates pursuing the Graduate Certificate in Teaching. Part A involves the analysis of a school improvement plan. Part B requires candidates to develop a plan of action that will help them to align their own instruction with the school improvement plan of the school where they are completing their internship. Both parts are completed in TESL 6470. One element addressed in Part B of the assignment, and included on the SIP Project RubricB, relates specifically to SLO3 (2e.1:Communicates and Collaborates with home and community).

Methodology: Describe when, where and how the assessment of this student learning outcome will be administered and evaluated. Describe the process the department will use to collect, analyze and disseminate the assessment data to program faculty and to decide the changes/improvements to make on the basis of the assessment data. The Student Teaching Assessment Rubric (STAR) 2012 is used during the TESL 6470 course, the final semester a teacher candidate is in the program, to evaluate a student’s work and teaching. The University Supervisor (US) observes the student teacher in a school setting. The final administration of the instrument is collected and used to measure SLO #3.

The School Improvement Plan Project is a two-part project. As mentioned above, part B of the project specifically addresses SLO3. Part B involves the development and implementation of an action plan to align the candidate’s own teaching with his/her school’s school improvement plan. Part B of the project is completed during TESL 6470 (Graduate Student Teaching Internship semester), and is evaluated by the University Supervisor/Course Instructor using criteria described in the SIP Rubric Part B. The rubric has a 3-point scale.

Scores are collected using a data management system, TaskStream, and are analyzed at the college and program level. Simple descriptive statistics are used to analyze the scores, and disaggregated findings are reported by semester at three levels (College, Program and Licensure Area). Once a year results from all assessments administered by the programs are disseminated to the faculty in the College of Education. The data is discussed during a final faculty meeting and next steps determined to address any needs identified. All strategies determined during this closing the loop discussion are implemented during the next academic year. All data reports created by the College of Education are housed on a secure website which is accessible to all faculty within the College of Education. Performance Outcome: Identify the percentage of students assessed that should be able to demonstrate proficiency in this student learning outcome and the level of proficiency expected. Example: 80% of the students assessed will achieve a score of “acceptable” or higher on the Oral Presentation Scoring Rubric (Note: a copy of the scoring rubric, complete with cell descriptors for each level of performance, is to be submitted electronically to the designated folder on the designated shared drive and hyperlinked to the Effectiveness Measure above for each student learning outcome.) The program expects 80% of its teacher candidates to score “3” or better (target/exemplary or proficient/accomplished) on the STAR 2012 which is a 4-point rubric and to score “2” or better (proficient/accomplished) on the Impact on Student Learning (ISL) Rubric which is a 3-point rubric. With respect to the Instructional Unit Plan, which has a 3-point scale, the program expects 80% of its teacher candidates to score “2” or better (proficient/accomplished) on the corresponding rubric.

Teaching Teaching Teaching Teaching Teaching Teaching Grad Grad Grad Grad Grad Grad Cert Cert Cert Cert Cert Cert Program TESL TESL TESL TESL TESL TESL

Spring Spring Fall 2011 Spring Fall 2012 Fall 2010 Semester 2010 2011 2012

Count 8 12 13 9

STAR: 1C Makes Content Relevant to Learners 100% 100%

STAR: 2A Demonstrates understanding of Learner Developmental Traits 100% 100%

STAR: 2B Stimulates Reflection to Connect Prior Knowledge to New Concepts 100% 100% 100% 100%

STAR:3B Meets the Range of Individual Needs 100% 100%

STAR: 4A Selects Multiple teaching Strategies 100% 100%

STAR: 4B Utilizes a Variety of Materials and Resources 100% 100%

STAR: 5A Establishes and Maintains a Positive Climate 100% 100% 100% 100% STAR: 7A Bases Purposeful Learning Activities on Essential Skills and District Curriculum 100% 100%

STAR: 7B Develops Short- and Long-Term Planning 100% 100%

STAR: 7C Monitors and Adjusts Lesson Plans 100% 100% 100% 100%

STAR: 9A: Self-evaluates Teaching and the Professional Role 100% 100%

STAR: 10A Communicates with Families 100% 100% 100% 100%

STAR: 10B Utilizes School and Community Resources 100% 100% 100% 100%

STAR 2012: E1a Manages time 9 6 and materials

STAR 2012: E1c Monitors and responds to student behavior 100% 100%

STAR 2012: E2b Communicates effectively with students 100% 100%

STAR 2012: E2c Encourages students to articulate understanding of content 100% 100%

STAR 2012: E2d Embraces diversity in the school community and in the world 100% 100%

STAR 2012: E3c Creates opportunities for learner response 100% 100%

STAR 2012: E4a Develops plans that are aligned with state and district curriculum 100% 100%

STAR 2012: E4b Monitors and adjusts lesson plans (to meet and enhance student progress towards goals) 100% 100%

STAR 2012: E5a Poses quality questions 100% 100%

STAR 2012: C1d Self-evaluates teaching and professional role 100% 100% Count

ISL: 2d.1 Cooperates with specialists and uses resources 100% 100% 100% 100%

ISL: 4b.1 Collaborates with colleagues on student performance and to respond to cultural differences 100% 100% 100% 100%

Count 0 22 0 11

IUP: 1a.2 Draws data to develop plans 100% 100% 100% 100%

IUP: 2b3 Understands diversity and incorporates in instruction 100% 100% 100% 100%

IUP: 4a.1 Identifies and plans for student level 100% 100% 100% 100%

IUP: 4c.1 Uses appropriate methods and materials 100% 100% 100% 100%

IUP: 4e.1 Integrates instruction that promotes critical thinking skills 100% 100% 100% 100%

IUP: 4f.1 Organizes teams for cooperation, collaboration and leadership 100% 100% 100% 100%

IUP: 5c.1 Uses approaches to improve teaching and learning 100% 100% 100% 100%

Count 14 13 9 6

SIP: 2e.1Communicates and Collaborates with home and community 100% 100% 100% 100%

Plans for 2013-14: Based upon the assessment data included in this annual report, what changes/improvements will the program implement during the next academic year to improve performance on this student learning outcome? All performance outcomes were met; no changes are needed at this time. Assessment Lead’s Comments on Student Learning Outcome:

Student Learning Outcome 4 (knowledge, skill or ability to be assessed) Initial teacher licensure candidates demonstrate classroom behaviors consistent with fairness and the belief that all students can learn, including creating caring, supportive learning environments, encouraging student-directed learning, and making adjustments to their own professional dispositions when necessary.

Changes to the Student Learning Outcomes Assessment Plan: If any changes were made to the assessment plan (which includes the Student Learning Outcome, Effectiveness Measure, Methodology and Performance Outcome) for this student learning outcome since your last report was submitted, briefly summarize the changes made and the rationale for the changes. During the fall of 2012 a new assessment instruments are being implemented – a new version of the Student Teaching Assessment Rubric (STAR 2012).These changes resulted in changes in element numbering and in some cases different wording of elements. When necessary, Methodology and Performance Outcomes have been updated to reflect these changes.

Effectiveness Measure: Identify the data collection instrument, e.g., exam, project, paper, etc. that will be used to gauge acquisition of this student learning outcome and explain how it assesses the desired knowledge, skill or ability. A copy of the data collection instrument and any scoring rubrics associated with this student learning outcome are to be submitted electronically to the designated folder on the designated shared drive and hyperlinked to the Effectiveness Measure. Methodology: Describe when, where and how the assessment of this student learning outcome will be administered and evaluated. Describe the process the department will use to collect, analyze and disseminate the assessment data to program faculty and to decide the changes/improvements to make on the basis of the assessment data. The Student Teaching Assessment Rubric (STAR) 2012 is used during the TESL 6470 course, the final semester a teacher candidate is in the program, to evaluate a student’s work and teaching. The University Supervisor (US) observes the student teacher in a school setting. The final administration of the instrument is collected and used to measure SLO #4.

Performance Outcome: Identify the percentage of students assessed that should be able to demonstrate proficiency in this student learning outcome and the level of proficiency expected. Example: 80% of the students assessed will achieve a score of “acceptable” or higher on the Oral Presentation Scoring Rubric (Note: a copy of the scoring rubric, complete with cell descriptors for each level of performance, is to be submitted electronically to the designated folder on the designated shared drive and hyperlinked to the Effectiveness Measure above for each student learning outcome.) The program expects 80% of its teacher candidates to score “3” or better (target/exemplary or meets expectations) on a 4 point scale on both rubrics [Student Teaching Assessment Rubric (STAR) 2012].

Semester Spring Spring Fall 2012 Spring 2010 Fall 2010 2011 Fall 2011 2012

Count 8 12 14 13 9 6

STAR: 2C Provides Opportunities for Student Involvement and Responsibility for Learning 100% 100% STAR: 3C Sets Expectations for Learning and Achievement 100% 100%

STAR: 5A Establishes and Maintains a Positive Climate 100% 100% 100% 100%

STAR: 9A Self-evaluates Teaching and the Professional Role 100% 100% 100% 100%

STAR: 9B Assumes the Professional Role 100% 100%

STAR: 10A:Communicates with 100% 100% Families STAR 2012: K1b Sets Expectations for Learning 100% 100% and Achievement STAR 2012: E1d Establishes and Maintains 100% 100% a Positive Climate STAR 2012: C1a Assumes the Professional Role and Maintains High 100% 100% Ethical Standards

Student Learning Outcome 5 (knowledge, skill or ability to be assessed) Initial teacher licensure candidates demonstrate a positive impact on student learning by assessing/analyzing student learning, adjusting instruction, monitoring progress, and reflecting on the effects of their instruction. Changes to the Student Learning Outcomes Assessment Plan: If any changes were made to the assessment plan (which includes the Student Learning Outcome, Effectiveness Measure, Methodology and Performance Outcome) for this student learning outcome since your last report was submitted, briefly summarize the changes made and the rationale for the changes. During the fall of 2012 a new assessment instrument is being implemented – a new version of the Student Teaching Assessment Rubric (STAR 2012). This assessment instrument is a revised version of the Student Teaching Assessment Rubric (STAR) that was used to collect SLO data in prior reporting years. The STAR became the STAR 2012. This revised rubric resulted in changes in element numbering and in some cases different wording of elements. When necessary, Methodology and Performance Outcomes have been updated to reflect these changes.

Effectiveness Measure: Identify the data collection instrument, e.g., exam, project, paper, etc. that will be used to gauge acquisition of this student learning outcome and explain how it assesses the desired knowledge, skill or ability. A copy of the data collection instrument and any scoring rubrics associated with this student learning outcome are to be submitted electronically to the designated folder on the designated shared drive and hyperlinked to the Effectiveness Measure.  A common observation instrument, Student Teaching Assessment Rubric (STAR) 2012, is used with every student teacher at the end of his or her academic program. The final (fourth) administration of the STAR 2012 instrument is used specifically to measure the SLO. The University Supervisor (US) observes the teacher candidate using the rubric. The rubric has a 4- point scale. Six elements included on the STAR 2012 rubric relate specifically Student Learning and are therefore used to measure SLO 5 (K1a: Individualizes the instructional environment, E3a: Uses a variety of formal and informal assessment strategies, E3b: Establishes criteria and provides assessment feedback, E3d: Uses, monitors, and records assessment data, E4b: Monitors and adjusts lesson plans (to meet and enhance student progress towards goals), E4c: Collaborates and plans with other professionals).

 A common capstone work sample, Impact on Student Learning Project (ISL) is required from every teacher education candidate. The ISL project requires candidates to collect and analyze pre-test data related to a unit of study. As part of the project, the candidates must then design and teach a series of lessons related to that unit of study before administering a post-test. Finally, candidates must compare the pre- and post-test data in order to demonstrate that their teaching has resulted in increased understanding among all students. The ISL project is scored by the University Supervisor. The ISL rubric has a 3-point scale. Five elements of the ISL rubric relate specifically to Student Learning and are therefore used to measure SLO5 (1a.1:Evaluates student progress using goals, 1a.2: Draws on data to develop plans, 4h.1: Uses indicators to monitor and evaluate student progress, 4h.2: Provides evidence for student attainment of 21st century skills, 5a.1: Uses data to make suggestions on student learning).

 Teacher-candidates in the Graduate Certificate in Teaching program must complete an Instructional Unit Plan (IUP) for a content area methods course [TESL 5103]. Candidates enroll the methods course that aligns with their content area degree and licensure. The IUP assignment gives the candidates an opportunity to apply the various pedagogical content skills and knowledge they have developed in the program. This is referred to as Electronic Evidence 3 (EE3) and is integrated within the required content methods courses [TESL 5103] to measure pedagogical content knowledge and skills. EE3 is evaluated by methods instructors using the IUP Rubric. The rubric has a 3-point scale. Six elements included on the IUP Rubric relate specifically to SLO5 (1a.2: Draws on data to develop plans, 2b3: Understands diversity and incorporates in instruction, 3c.2: Relates global awareness to subject, 4a.1: Identifies and plans for student level, 4b.1: Collaborates with colleagues on student performance and to respond to cultural differences, 4c.1: Uses appropriate methods and materials).

 A two-part School Improvement Plan (SIP) Project is assigned to all Teacher-candidates pursuing the Graduate Certificate in Teaching. Part A involves the analysis of a school improvement plan. Part B requires candidates to develop a plan of action that will help them to align their own instruction with the school improvement plan of the school where they are completing their internship. Both parts are completed in TESL 6470. One element included on the SIP Project Rubric Part A relates specifically to SLO5 (1b.3: Uses data to identify areas of need for School Improvement Plan). Methodology: Describe when, where and how the assessment of this student learning outcome will be administered and evaluated. Describe the process the department will use to collect, analyze and disseminate the assessment data to program faculty and to decide the changes/improvements to make on the basis of the assessment data. The Student Teaching Assessment Rubric (STAR) 2012 is used during the TESL 6470 course, the final semester a teacher candidate is in the program, to evaluate a student’s work and teaching. The University Supervisor (US) observes the student teacher in a school setting. The final administration of the instrument is collected and used to measure SLO #5.

The School Improvement Plan Project is a two-part project. As mentioned above, part B of the project specifically addresses SLO3. Part B involves the development and implementation of an action plan to align the candidate’s own teaching with his/her school’s school improvement plan. Part B of the project is completed during TESL 6470 (Graduate Student Teaching Internship semester), and is evaluated by the University Supervisor/Course Instructor using criteria described in the SIP Rubric Part B. The rubric has a 3-point scale.

Performance Outcome: Identify the percentage of students assessed that should be able to demonstrate proficiency in this student learning outcome and the level of proficiency expected. Example: 80% of the students assessed will achieve a score of “acceptable” or higher on the Oral Presentation Scoring Rubric (Note: a copy of the scoring rubric, complete with cell descriptors for each level of performance, is to be submitted electronically to the designated folder on the designated shared drive and hyperlinked to the Effectiveness Measure above for each student learning outcome.) The program expects 80% of its teacher candidates to score “3” or better (target/exemplary or proficient/accomplished) on the STAR which is a 4-point rubric and to score “2” or better (proficient/accomplished) on the Impact on Student Learning (ISL) Rubric which is a 3-point rubric. With respect to the Instructional Unit Plan, which has a 3-point scale, the program expects 80% of its teacher candidates to score “2” or better (proficient/accomplished) on the corresponding rubric. 2009-10 Assessment Data 2010-11 Assessment Data 2011-12 Assessment Data (Results can be shown by year or (Results can be shown by year or (Results can be shown by year by semester) by semester) or by semester)

Spring Spring Fall 2011 Spring Fall 2012 Fall 2010 Semester 2010 2011 2012

Count 8 12 14 13 9 6

STAR: 7C Monitors and Adjusts Lesson Plans 100% 100%

STAR: 8A Uses a Variety of Formal and Informal Assessment Strategies 100% 100% 100% 100%

STAR: 8B Establishes Criteria and Provides Assessment Feedback 100% 100%

STAR: 8C Monitors and Records Assessment Data 100% 100% 100% 100%

STAR 2012: K1a Individualizes the Instructional 100% 100% Environment STAR 2012: E3a Uses a Variety of Formal and Informal Assessment 100% 100% Strategies STAR 2012: E3b Establishes Criteria and Provides 100% 100% Assessment Feedback STAR 2012: E3d Uses, Monitors, and Records 100% 100% Assessment Data STAR 2012: E4b Monitors and Adjusts Lesson Plans (to meet and enhance student progress 100% 100% towards goals) STAR 2012: E4c Collaborates and Plans with Others 100% 100% Professionals Count 8 9 6

100% 100% 100% ISL: 4B Pre Post Assessment ISL: 5A Results of Pre 100% 100% 100% Assessment ISL: 5B Analysis of Pre- 100% 100% 100% Assessment Data ISL: 7 Summary of Student 100% 100% 100% Progress ISL: 9 Reflection on Instructional 100% 100% 100% Decision-Making ISL (NCPTS 1a.1) Evaluates the progress of students toward graduation using a variety 100% 100% 100% 100% of assessment data. ISL (NCPTS 1a.2) Draws on appropriate data to develop classroom and 100% 100% 100% 100% instructional plans. ISL (NCPTS 4h.1) Uses multiple indicators, formative and summative, to monitor and evaluate students’ 100% 100% 100% 100% progress and to inform instruction. ISL (NCPTS 4h.2): Provides evidence for student attainment of 100% 100% 100% 100% 21st century skills 14 13 9 6

ISL (NCPTS 5a.1) Uses data to provide ideas about what can be done to improve students’ learning. 100% 100% 100% 100%

Count 0 22 3 11

IUP: 1a.2 Draws on data to develop plans 100% 100% 100%

IUP: 2b3 Understands diversity and incorporates in instruction 100% 100% 100%

IUP: 3c.2 Relates global awareness to subject 100% 100% 100%

IUP: 4a.1 Identifies and plans for student level 100% 100% 100%

IUP: 4b.1 Collaborates with colleagues on student performance and to respond to cultural differences 100% 100% 100%

IUP: 4c.1 Uses appropriate methods and materials 100% 100% 100%

Count 14 13 9 6 SIP: 1b.3Uses data to identify areas of need for School Improvement Plan 100% 100% 100% 100%