Vanderbilt University

Peabody College of Education and Human Development Institutional Report

National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education and Tennessee State Department of Education Board of Examiners Visit

February 14-16, 2010

Peabody College Electronic Exhibit Room

TABLE OF CONTENTS Overview 1 Vanderbilt University 1 Peabody College of Education and Human Development 2

Conceptual Framework 6

Standard 1 – Candidate Knowledge, Skills, and Dispositions 12 1a. Content Knowledge for Teacher Candidates 12 1b. Pedagogical Content Knowledge for Teachers 15 1c. Professional and Pedagogical Knowledge and Skills for Teachers 17 1d. Student Learning for Teacher Candidates 20 1e. Professional Knowledge and Skills for Other School Personnel 22 1f. Student Learning for Other School Professionals 23 1g. Professional Dispositions 23

Standard 2 – Assessment System and Unit Evaluation 27 2a. Assessment System 27 2b. Data Collection, Analysis, and Evaluation 30 2c. Use of Data for Program Improvement 33

Standard 3 – Field Experiences and Clinical Practice 37 3a. Collaboration Between Unit and School Partners 37 3b. Design, Implementation, and Evaluation of Field Experiences and Clinical 39 Experiences 3c. Candidate’s Development and Demonstration of Knowledge, Skills, and 43 Dispositions to Help All Students Learn

Standard 4 – Diversity 48 4a. Design, Implementation, and Evaluation of Curriculum and Experiences 48 4b. Experiences Working with Diverse Faculty 51 4c. Experiences Working with Diverse Candidates 53 4d. Experiences Working with Diverse Students in P-12 Schools 54

Standard 5 – Faculty Qualifications, Performance, and Development 55 5a. Qualified Faculty 55 5b. Modeling Best Professional Practices in Teaching 56 5c. Modeling Best Professional Practices in Scholarship 58 5d. Modeling Best Professional Practices in Service 59 5e. Unit Evaluation of Professional Education Faculty Performance 60 5f. Unit Facilitation of Professional Development 61

Standard 6 – Unit Governance and Resources 62 6a. Unit Leadership and Authority 62 6b. Unit Budget 64 6c. Personnel 66 6d. Unit Facilities 68 6e. Unit Resources Including Technology 68

i Overview

A. Institution

A.1. What is the institution's historical context?

The history of Vanderbilt University began in 1873 when Commodore Cornelius Vanderbilt endowed $1 million. Vanderbilt endowed the money to build a university in the South that would "contribute to strengthening the ties which should exist between all sections of our common country." For the first 40 years of its existence, Vanderbilt was under the auspices of the Methodist Episcopal Church, South. The Vanderbilt Board of Trust severed its ties with the church in June 1914 as a result of a dispute with the bishops over who would appoint university trustees. From the outset, Vanderbilt met two definitions of a university: It offered work in the liberal arts and sciences beyond the baccalaureate degree and it embraced several professional schools in addition to its college. The university is self-governing under a Board of Trust that, since the beginning, has elected its own members and officers. The university's general government is vested in the Board of Trust. The immediate government of the university is committed to the Chancellor, who is elected by the Board of Trust. George Peabody College for Teachers, the professional education unit, merged with Vanderbilt in 1979. Today, Vanderbilt University is a private research university of about 6,500 undergraduates and 5,300 graduate and professional students. The university comprises 10 schools, a distinguished medical center, a public policy center and The Freedom Forum First Amendment Center. Vanderbilt offers undergraduate programs in the liberal arts and sciences, engineering, music, education and human development as well as a full range of graduate and professional degrees. The university is consistently ranked as one of the nation's top 20 universities by publications such as U.S. News & World Report, with several programs and disciplines ranking in the top 10. An independent, privately supported university Vanderbilt employs more than 3,100 full-time faculty members and a staff of over 21,500.

A.2. What is the institution's mission?

The nature and mission of Vanderbilt University are illustrated in two short statements about the purpose of the university, one from 1873 and the other from 1975. They are as follows: Commodore Cornelius Vanderbilt, who gave a million dollars to build and endow Vanderbilt University in 1873, expressed the wish that it "contribute to strengthening the ties, which should exist between all geographical sections of our common country."

A little more than a hundred years later, in 1975, the Vanderbilt Board of Trust adopted the following mission statement:

"We reaffirm our belief in the unique and special contributions that Vanderbilt can make toward meeting the nation's requirements for scholarly teaching, training, investigation, and service, and we reaffirm our conviction that to fulfill its inherited responsibilities, Vanderbilt must relentlessly pursue a lasting future and seek highest quality in its educational undertakings."

1 Vanderbilt University is a center for scholarly research, informed and creative teaching, and service to the community and society at large. Vanderbilt will uphold the highest standards and be a leader in the quest for new knowledge through scholarship, dissemination of knowledge through teaching and outreach, and creative experimentation of ideas and concepts.

In pursuit of these goals, Vanderbilt values most highly intellectual freedom that supports open inquiry and equality, compassion, and excellence in all endeavors.

A.3. What are the institution's characteristics?

Vanderbilt University is a private university located in Nashville, Tennessee. Vanderbilt University is classified by Carnegie as a Doctoral/Research University-Extensive. There are four undergraduate colleges: The College of Arts & Sciences has 49 majors, the Blair School of Music has 4 majors, the College of Engineering has 8 majors, and Peabody College of Education and Human Development has 20 majors. There are advanced degrees offered in all four schools mentioned and in addition to those schools there are six professional and graduate schools: Divinity School, Graduate College, Law School, Owen Graduate School of Management, the School of Medicine, and the School of Nursing. The Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS) accredit the institution. As can be seen in the Vanderbilt Organizational Chart the Vanderbilt University Board of Trust governs all aspects of the university. The Board of Trust’s mission is to help Vanderbilt University achieve its goal to become one of the top ten research and teaching universities in America and to be admired for its service to the community. As fiduciaries of the University, the Board of Trust shall work through the Chancellor to: * Determine the University’s strategy; * Guarantee its fiscal soundness including providing leadership to its development efforts; * Establish appropriate policies; * Assure adequate human resources exist to implement the University’s strategy; * Review progress toward the University’s goal.

B. The unit

B.1. What is the professional education unit at your institution and what is its relationship to other units at the institution that are involved in the preparation of professional educators?

Peabody College of Education and Human Development is comprised of 5 departments including Human Organization and Development (HOD), Leadership, Policy and Organization, Psychology, Special Education, and Teaching and Learning. The School Counseling Program is housed in the HOD Department. With the exception of music education, all other teacher education programs are located within the Departments of Special Education and Teaching and Learning. The Music Education Program is housed in the Blair School of Music. Candidates in all secondary programs are required to obtain a second major in their area of concentration through the College of Arts & Sciences. The Dean serves as the Unit Head and has an advisory committee consisting of an Associate Dean/Chief of Staff, Associate Dean of Faculty and Programs, Associate Dean of Special Projects, Associate Dean of Graduate Education, Associate Dean of External Affairs, 5 Department Chairs, and a Co-Chair of the Teacher Education Policy

2 Committee. There are approximately 1,200 undergraduates enrolled at Peabody College and approximately 370 master’s level students. Peabody College does not have programs housed off campus and does not offer any online programs.

B.2. How many professional education faculty members support the professional education unit?

The Faculty Qualifications Table indicates there are 60 full-time faculty members that support the teacher education and other school personnel programs at Peabody including 33 tenure track faculty, 17 practice faculty, and 10 lectures. Adjunct faculty and doctoral level students also support these programs as needed.

B.3. What programs are offered at your institution to prepare candidates for their first license to teach?

There are 36 initial teacher education programs at Vanderbilt University. The Initial Teacher Preparation Programs and Their Review Status Table shows the programs, number of candidates enrolled in each program and their approval status from the State of Tennessee and Professional Organizations.

B.4. What programs are offered at your institution to prepare advanced teacher candidates and other school professionals?

The Reading Specialist Program is the only advanced program, and the School Counseling Program is the only program under the other school professional category. The Advanced Preparation* Programs and Their Review Status Table shows the programs, number of candidates enrolled in each program and their approval status from the State of Tennessee and Professional Organizations.

B.5. Which of the above initial teacher preparation and advanced preparation programs are offered off-campus or via distance learning technologies? What alternate route programs are offered?

Vanderbilt University does not offer courses off-campus or via distance learning. There are no alternate route programs at the initial licensure level. An alternate route program for School Counseling is available.

B.6. (Continuing Visit Only) What substantive changes have taken place in the unit since the last visit (e.g., added/dropped programs/degrees; significant increase/decrease in enrollment; major reorganization of the unit, etc.)?

During the 2005-2006 academic year faculty members from the Departments of Teaching and Learning and Special Education voted to drop the Early Childhood Master’s Program in Teaching and Learning and the Undergraduate Early Childhood Special Education Program due to low enrollment. The final undergraduate candidate will graduate in December 2009 from the Early Childhood Special Education Program. In Fall 2007 the special education faculty voted to

3 suspend the Deaf Education program because of low enrollment. There are currently 5 candidates in the program and the final candidates will graduate in May 2011. The Foreign Language Program has also been suspended and candidates currently enrolled in the program will graduate in May 2011. Two programs have been added in the Department of Teaching and Learning, an English Language Learners endorsement program and a new Elementary Major with a focus on language and literacy. All secondary candidates in sociology, psychology, or economics are now required major in history. Candidates within the secondary programs now complete field experiences each semester that allow them to have a variety of experiences with adolescents. Undergraduate candidates in the Department of Special Education are now required to complete a semester of Pre-Student Teaching during the semester prior to student teaching. Candidates spend 15 hours per week in either an elementary general education classroom or an elementary classroom for students who are English Language Learners. The purpose of this experience is to gain a better understanding of the general education setting. This experience began in Fall 2006.

The Professional Learning Trajectory (PLT) Website was developed in Fall 2005. This website is used by candidates, faculty, school based faculty, and university mentors to upload, score, and store data related to key assessments and field based experience evaluations. The PLT is described in more detail in Standard 2.

The Dean appointed a task force to evaluate the Teacher Education Programs at Peabody in Spring 2006. This task force spent 18 months evaluating the current state of teacher education and provided the Dean with the Final Report of the Teacher Education Task Force in April 2008. It was recommended that a Teacher Education Policy Committee be developed to oversee teacher education at Peabody. This committee was established in Fall 2008 and is comprised of faculty members from the Departments of Teaching and Learning and Special Education.

In 2006, the Tennessee Department of Education adopted a new standard with regard to the Speech/Language endorsement as follows: "Candidates who hold a valid license, issued by the Tennessee or an out-of-state licensing Board of Communication Disorders and Sciences or who hold the Certificate of Clinical Competence from the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association, will be issued the professional school services personnel license with the school speech-language pathologist endorsement upon application. There are no additional requirements." This change in standards makes it possible for a licensed speech pathologist, as described above, to apply directly to the Tennessee office of Teacher Licensing without the necessity of recommendation by a state-approved, university-based teacher education program. For this reason, we have not recommended the speech/language endorsement in the past three years.

Due to the retirement of the only faculty member in the Visual Impairments Program the vision program has been in flux over the past four years. The Department of Special Education had been searching for a second faculty member since the late 90s without success. During the 2006- 2007 academic year the faculty had several discussions about dropping the vision program. As individuals heard about the possibility of this program being dropped the department received several letters and phone calls from individuals around the country stating what a loss it would be to the field if the program was to stop, as it is considered one of the top vision programs in the

4 country. At this time there were three candidates left in the program and a lecturer and doctoral students were coordinating the program. Because of the feedback received, the faculty decided to conduct a final search to recruit both a tenure-track and practice faculty member for the program. During this 18-month time period admissions to the vision program were suspended. A tenure track and a practice faculty member were hired and joined the department in August 2009. Due to these circumstances we have no data to report for the vision program. The two faculty members have developed a plan, identified keys assessments, and developed rubrics to be used. Information on key assessments can be found in Standard 1 and data is being collected this semester, Fall 2009.

5 Conceptual Framework

C.1. How does the unit's conceptual framework address the following structural elements? [Please provide a summary here. A more complete description of the conceptual framework should be available as an electronic exhibit.]

Vision and Mission of the Institution

In1975, the Vanderbilt Board of Trust adopted the following mission statement: "We reaffirm our belief in the unique and special contributions that Vanderbilt can make toward meeting the nation's requirements for scholarly teaching, training, investigation, and service, and we reaffirm our conviction that to fulfill its inherited responsibilities, Vanderbilt must relentlessly pursue a lasting future and seek highest quality in its educational undertakings."

Vision and Mission of the Unit

The nature, focus, and mission of Peabody College are described in a mission statement adopted in 1990: Peabody College is Vanderbilt University’s college of education and human development and a national leader among graduate schools of education. The college, embodied in its faculty and students, constitutes a vibrant intellectual community dealing with pressing questions and expanding knowledge about education, including special education; psychology, especially focused on families and children; the development of individuals, organizations, and communities; and education administration, leadership, and policy. Peabody seeks to educate highly skilled professionals from diverse backgrounds, for organizations both in and out of education, who share a deep concern for the human condition.

Philosophy, Purposes, and Goals of the Unit

An overarching philosophy of our unit is that practice guides research and research guides practice. This philosophy can be found in our four key dimensions: (1) Knowledge of Subject Matter, (2) Understanding of Learners and Learning, (3) Conceptions of the Practice, and (4) Beginning Repertoire. We strive to develop our candidates in the individual dimensions through course work and field-based experiences, and as candidates progress in the program we expect them to integrate and enact all four dimensions in order to become strong teachers and leaders in their future schools. Although as a unit we embrace the four dimensions, we realize that not all P-12 students learn in the same way. Hence, programs within the unit reflect different perspectives on teaching and learning in relation to the student populations on which they focus.

Knowledge Base

The knowledge base for our program is supported by standards, research-based practices, and preservice teacher development research. First, all of the unit programs are based on Tennessee

6 Standards, which are closely aligned with INTASC and SPA Standards for each program area. Each program area has been approved by the Tennessee Department of Education for meeting their standards. Second, each of our four dimensions was conceptualized based on research- based practices and research on teacher growth and development. For a complete description of the knowledge base for each dimension please see the full conceptual framework text.

Candidate proficiencies related to expected knowledge, skills, and professional dispositions

A set of outcomes has been established for all candidates in the unit. These outcomes reflect our expectations in each of our four key dimensions and are outlined below.

Subject Matter Knowledge for Teaching Candidates understand the content domains as dynamic fields of study, and possess a solid command of subject matter (including major concepts, assumptions, debates, and processes of inquiry) in the disciplines they plan to teach. They make connections across subject areas and identify opportunities for interdisciplinary study.

Candidates demonstrate the ability to design and organize given subject matter in order to make disciplinary content accessible to students. They recognize landmarks in the development of understanding of core ideas/concepts – as reflected in students’ explanations, errors, etc. – and how these landmarks relate to trajectories of development.

Understanding Learners and Learning Candidates understand learning as a process of participation that shapes and is shaped by persons, content, and contexts. They seek to identify and learn about students’ linguistic, social, behavioral, cognitive and cultural histories and repertoires – integrating them as resources for teaching and learning, and thus providing each student access to learning. Specifically, candidates plan for learners’ unique strengths, resources, goals and motivations, connecting to the experiences of students and their families.

Candidates demonstrate the ability to enter into the learner’s thinking/reasoning as reflected in learner’s talk and work, and to use these insights to inform planning and instruction. They envision developmental learning trajectories, and plan learning experiences that support students’ progress along these trajectories. They understand and draw appropriately on learning theory to support their investigations and analyses of student learning and planning for instruction.

Developing Conceptions of the Practice and Profession of Teaching Candidates understand that teachers support and constrain learning through the conditions and opportunities they make available to students, and that students are active agents who also shape the learning process.

Candidates recognize that teaching and learning are nested within a broader educational system that includes school and district organizations, families, local communities and government.

7 As they work to support children's learning and welfare, candidates understand their roles and influence in different contexts. They develop respectful and collaborative relationships with students, colleagues, parents, and members of the broader community, and act to uphold professional norms of responsibility, advocacy, and confidentiality.

Candidates understand that learning to teach is a career-long endeavor. Ongoing critical analysis and revision of one’s practice, and pursuit of other opportunities for learning and renewal, are central to one's role as “teacher.”

Developing an Initial Repertoire in Curriculum, Instruction, Management, and Assessment Candidates can use a carefully chosen set of research-based instructional strategies, curriculum materials, and classroom management techniques to support their work with all students. In planning, candidates select curricular and instructional tools on the basis of their deeper function in supporting learning – matching tools and approach to a variety of learning goals and needs.

Candidates can use assessment techniques (formal and informal) to collect data on student progress and can interpret these data to inform goal-setting, planning and instruction for all students.

Candidates demonstrate the abilities both to modify existing materials to support students’ learning of subject matter and to develop new materials. Candidates possess skills to create modifications and accommodations for students who require them.

Candidates can plan simultaneously for instruction, management and assessment to create an optimal learning environment for all students.

Professional Commitments and Dispositions

Our framework shows commitment through the candidates’ knowledge of subject matter, understanding of learners and learning, conceptions of the practice, and beginning repertoire. These commitments are seen in our expected candidate outcomes in both course work and field- based experiences. Candidates must also demonstrate commitments identified in program specific standards. We also have a set of dispositions that all candidates must adhere to.

Commitment to Diversity

Candidates who graduate from our teacher education programs will provide service at the local, state, national, and international levels. As a unit we recognize that faculty and candidates must understand and respect difference among individuals and that those differences come in many forms including, but not limited to, race, ethnicity, gender, socioeconomic status, linguistics, cognitive abilities, and life experiences.

The unit’s commitment to diversity is a primary element of our conceptual framework and that commitment is integrated throughout course instruction, assignments, and field-based

8 experiences. Our expected outcomes and dispositions also reflect our strong commitment to diversity, not only in words, but also in the actions of both our faculty and candidates.

Commitment to Technology

Peabody College recognizes the important role technology plays in the learning outcomes of P- 12 students and is committed to integrating technology into its programs in several ways. First, all initial licensure candidates are required to demonstrate proficiency in the Tennessee standards that address technology. This demonstration is required at both the conceptual and application levels. Second, candidates in all programs are required to use technology for class assignments, lesson planning, data collection and analysis, class presentations, delivering their lessons during field-based experiences. Third, candidates in most programs are required to videotape themselves teaching lessons and use this tape to critique and reflect on their teaching. Finally, faculty and candidates communicate through email and the Online Academic Knowledge (OAK) webpage.

The unit’s commitment to technology is also demonstrated through infrastructures. The unit has a fully staffed Technology Center whose primary responsibility is to update and maintain technology in classrooms, computer labs, and offices. A majority of the classrooms and conference rooms located at Peabody College are smart technology classrooms.

Candidate Proficiencies Aligned with Professional and State Standards

Candidate proficiencies are aligned with institutional, state, and national standards, including standards from specialized program areas. Please see the matrices in the conceptual framework.

Summarized Description of the Unit’s Assessment System

Program areas continually assess candidate performance both at course and program levels. At the course level, instructors assess candidate proficiencies through course assignments and dispositions. At the program level, program faculty members assess candidates on program assessments and course and field-based dispositions. Aggregated data of candidate performance are used to evaluate the effectiveness of individual programs and the unit as a whole. This data is used to improve programs and enhance the learning experiences of our candidates.

Undergraduate teacher education candidates are assessed at five key transition points: admission to the University, Screening I (admittance to teacher education), Screening II (admittance to student teaching), exit from clinical experiences, and follow up surveys with graduates and their employers. Master’s level candidates seeking licensure are assessed at four key transition points: admission to the University, Screening II, exit from clinical experiences, and follow up surveys with graduates and employers. Candidates in the advanced programs and programs for other school personnel are also assessed at four key transition points: admission to the University, midterm evaluation, exit from clinical experience, and follow up surveys. A more through description of the assessment system can be found in the full conceptual framework text and in Standard 2.

9 Changes in the Conceptual Framework

The conceptual framework presented in the institutional report for the 2002 visit presented six characteristics of professional educators: • Committed to educating all students • Knowledgeable about both the content and the students they teach • Able to create learning experiences that maximize the learning of diverse students • Reflective and informed decision makers • Capable of fostering relationships among school colleagues, parents and the larger community • Educational leaders

The conceptual framework also described beginning teachers as: • Caring Adults • Role Models • Intelligent • Knowledgeable • Decisive • Executive Manager • Artistic • Analytical • Reflective * Skilled

The 2002 conceptual framework also had a classroom-based research component that focused on the following: • What we mean by Practice-Based Research • Technology • Diversity & Equity • Preparing Future Researchers • Innovative Education of Future Teachers • Collaborations • Examine Institutional Settings

The current conceptual framework emerged from the work of a committee charged by the Dean of Peabody College to evaluate the current state of teacher education at Peabody. This committee included the Dean, Chairs of the Departments of Teaching and Learning, Special Education, and Psychology, and tenure-track and practice faculty from the Departments of Teaching and Learning, Special Education, and Leadership, Policy, and Organization. A sub group of this committee was formed to develop a conceptual framework that would be embraced by both the Department of Teaching and Learning and Special Education, while not compromising the differing philosophies of the two departments. This sub group met bi-weekly for approximately 18 months to revise the conceptual framework and regularly obtained feedback from the larger committee and teacher education faculty.

While the sub group believed in the overall principles of the 2002 conceptual framework they felt a more comprehensive one was needed, and decided to begin with a clean slate. As the group began their work it became clear that many did not have an understanding of all programs. To be better informed, members of the group spent a great deal of time learning about the different programs, including looking at standards for program areas. The members also read literature on teaching and learning. It was through this process that the members adopted Sharon Feiman- Nemser’s model of teacher development and identified the four key dimensions of our conceptual framework. Once the four key dimensions were identified, the sub group felt it was

10 necessary to provide specific outcomes we wanted our candidates to achieved under each dimension. These specific outcomes were something the group felt were missing from previous conceptual frameworks. Identifying outcomes that captured the needs of both departments proved to be a challenging, but beneficial process; one that required understanding and compromise. Through this collaborative process the end product is a set of outcomes we all agree our candidates should master, with the understanding that there are many paths for achieving the outcomes in different programs.

A second task of this subgroup was to identify dispositions needed to be an effective educator and a means for measuring these dispositions. When disposition data was first collected we used a form that listed dispositions and had faculty rate each candidate at the end of the semester as “acceptable” or “concern”. We found that this did not give us the information we needed, as most instructors circled acceptable and provided no comments. Moreover, field-based mentors did not evaluate these dispositions. Again, the subgroup looked to the literature for information on dispositions and developed a form to assess candidates’ on the behaviors listed in the section above. Course instructors, university mentors and mentoring teachers evaluate each candidate at the end of each semester.

The Teacher Education Committees in each department and the Teacher Education Committee appointed by the Dean approved the conceptual framework and disposition forms in Fall 2006. The Council on Teacher Education also approved the conceptual framework in Fall 2006. This council is comprised of the Deans of Peabody College and the College of Arts and Sciences, faculty from both colleges and the Blair School of Music, teachers from the local public school district, and students enrolled in teacher education programs.

11 STANDARD 1: CANDIDATE KNOWLEDGE, SKILLS, AND DISPOSITIONS

1a. Content Knowledge for Teacher Candidates

1a.1. What are the pass rates of teacher candidates in initial teacher preparation programs on state tests of content knowledge for each program and across all programs (i.e., overall pass rate)?

All initial teacher education candidates are required to pass several PRAXIS II Exams before being recommended to the state for their appropriate license. The Pass Rates on PRAXIS II Exams Table provides data for specific program areas. The aggregated data presented below show a pass rate above the required 80% level.

2004-2005 2005-2006 2006-2007 2007-2008 Number Taking Exam 131 126 113 104 Number Passing Exam 130 124 112 104 Institutional Pass-Rate 99% 98% 99% 100% Statewide Pass-Rate 97% 97% 97% 98%

1a.2. (Programs Not Nationally Reviewed) What data from other key assessments indicate that candidates in initial teacher preparation programs demonstrate the content knowledge delineated in professional, state, and institutional standards?

The Foreign Language, Mathematics, Science, and Social Studies Secondary Programs did not submit materials for program review; all other initial teacher preparation programs submitted materials to their respective Specialty Program Areas (SPA) for review. For programs submitting SPA Review Reports please see SPA Reports Submitted and SPA Reports Results.

Candidates in the secondary programs complete a Content Course Performance Assessment. This assessment requires candidates to complete a Coursework Standards Correlation and Self Analysis prior to Screening II, admission to student teaching. Candidates align the tasks in their coursework with Program Area Thematic and Disciplinary Standards. The content methods instructor scores candidates’ submitted work, provides critical feedback, and on occasion, requires a revision. On occasion the instructor recommends additional coursework to address deficiencies. This assignment along with candidates’ standards based teaching during the fall practicum and spring clinical experiences provide insights into growth in understanding of standards based teaching within the content. The Secondary Programs Content Knowledge Assessment Data Table displays scores. Candidates complete this assessment during the fall semester prior to their clinical experience and are scored on a 4-point rating scale: (1) not evident, (2) emergent, (3) proficient and (4) accomplished. Three semesters of data indicate all candidates in the Foreign Language Program were within the proficient to accomplished level. In Fall 06 1 candidate in the Social Studies Program was at the emergent level, 2 were at the proficient level and 8 scored within the accomplished level. Data from Fall 07 indicate 1 candidate was at the not evident level, 2 were at the emergent level, 4 at the proficient level and 3 at the accomplished level. Two candidates were at the emergent level and 4 were at the proficient level in Fall 07. In Fall 06 all nine candidates in the Mathematics Program scored

12 within the accomplished range. Fall 07 data indicate 2 candidates were at the emergent level, 1 at the proficient level, and 2 at the accomplished level. In Fall 08, 4 candidates fell within the proficient range and 2 fell within the accomplished level. Data on candidates in the Science Program indicate that 3 candidates fell within both the proficient and accomplished levels in Fall 06. Two candidates fell within the proficient range in Fall 07 and 2 candidates fell within the accomplished level in Fall 08.

Candidate content knowledge is also evaluated during their clinical experiences. Both mentoring teachers and university mentors evaluate candidates on their content knowledge at the end of their placements. Data on the Final Student Teaching Summary for Secondary Programs indicate that all candidates in the Foreign Language, Mathematics, Science, and Social Studies Programs fell within the proficient to accomplished levels in the area of content knowledge, indicating that candidates demonstrate evidence of content knowledge in their planning, implementation, and evaluation of lessons.

1a.3. (Programs Not Nationally Reviewed) What data from key assessments indicate that advanced teacher candidates demonstrate an in-depth knowledge of the content knowledge delineated in professional, state, and institutional standards?

All Reading Specialist Candidates are required to pass the Reading Specialist PRAXIS II Exam before being recommended to the state for their appropriate license. The minimum Tennessee Score for the Reading Specialist Exam is 510. The aggregated data presented below show a pass rate above the required 80% level.

2006 2007 2008 2009 Number Taking Exam 2 0 5 2 Number Passing 2 n/a 5 2 Institutional Pass-Rate 100% n/a 100% 100% Range of Scores 620-630 n/a 630-710 660-700 Median 700

Candidates in the Reading Specialist program complete an initial diagnostic report that includes (a) an analysis of data obtained through observation, interview, and assessment tools, (b) interpretation and summary of data to derive strengths and instructional needs of a small group of students, and (c) an instructional plan that is implemented during ten weeks of teaching at a minimum of two hours per week. When writing this report, candidates demonstrate knowledge of the major components of the reading process, knowledge and application of instructional strategies and curriculum materials, use of assessment information to interpret student performance data and plan instruction, and ability to share assessment data and instructional plans with colleagues. The Reading Specialist Diagnostic Report indicate that all 6 candidates fell within the proficient range in Spring 08 and during the Spring 09 semester 1 candidate was within the proficient range and 5 were within the accomplished range.

13 1a.4. What do follow-up studies of graduates and employers indicate about graduates' preparation in the content area? If survey data are being reported, what was the response rate?

All candidates in the initial teacher preparation programs complete an exit interview after completing their clinical experiences. In the past, graduates of our program and their employers each completed follow up surveys during their third and fifth years of teaching. Beginning in Spring 2009, alumni and their employers will complete this survey during their first, third, and fifth years of teaching. All three surveys have candidates, alumni and employers rank statements on a scale of 1 (low) to 7 (high). The Educational Benchmark Incorporation (EBI) provides the data to Peabody. Response rates on the Exit Interview ranged from 88-100% from 2004-2009. The Alumni Survey was sent to 162 graduates in 2005-2006 with 116 (72%) returning the survey. In 2006-2007 182 graduates received the survey and 128 (70%) responded. In 2007-2008 150 of 178 graduates responded, for a 73% return rate. In 2008-2009, the survey was sent to 311 graduates, with 219 (70%) responding. The Employer Survey was sent to 74 employers in 3004- 2005 and 56 (75.7%) responded. In 2006-2007, 59 employers were sent the survey with 45 (76.3%) completing them. Fifty-eight employers received the survey in 2007-2008 with 46 (79.3%) completing them. In 2008-2009 92 out of 119 employers completed the survey for a 77.3% response rate.

The Exit Interview Data Table provides candidate rankings on several indicators. Factor 2 asks candidates to rank several items in the areas of Learning Theories and Teaching Pedagogy/Techniques. Overall scores on this factor range from 5.20-5.52. Addressing the impact of technology on schools was the lowest ranked item (4.65-5.02), while addressing teaching methods was the highest (5.74-6.12). Please see the data table for scores on other indicators.

Data from The Alumni Follow-Up Survey indicate that overall, graduates feel they received the needed knowledge and skills to be effective teachers, develop curricula, plan lessons, and foster intellectual development of their students. Data from Factor 6: Degree Enhanced Ability to Develop Curricula indicate that candidates felt prepared to develop curricula (5.72-5.84) and develop lesson plans (6.11-6.33). Data from Factor 12: Degree Enhanced Ability to Access Learning indicate graduates believe their program provided them with the ability to informally assess student learning (5.88-6.21), teacher areas in their content field (5.42-6.22), and formally assess students (5.35-6.07). Please see the data table for scores on other indicators.

Data from The Employer Follow-Up Survey indicate that employers are satisfied with our graduate’s ability to plan (6.32-6.47), develop curriculum (6.14-6.45), formally assess student learning (6.16-6.65), and informally assess student learning (6.21-6.22). Please see the data table for scores on other indicators.

14 1b. Pedagogical Content Knowledge for Teachers

1b.1. (Programs Not Nationally Reviewed) What data from key assessments indicate that candidates in initial teacher preparation programs demonstrate the pedagogical content knowledge and skills delineated in professional, state, and institutional standards?

The Foreign Language, Mathematics, Science, and Social Studies Secondary Programs did not submit materials for program review; all other initial programs submitted materials for review. For programs submitting SPA Review Reports please see SPA Reports Submitted and SPA Reports Results.

The Candidate Planning Continuum Assessment is a group of bundled assignments that revolve around the planning of instructional units and lessons. As candidates develop knowledge sets through which they formulate and internalize their understandings of planning, we provide a number of opportunities to develop unit plans and lesson plans. Candidates develop, try out, and refine their emerging repertoire of plans in the methods courses and student teaching seminar as well as in the field and clinical experiences. Candidates engage in standards based lesson planning and ongoing reflection about their lesson planning in methods courses through the following assignments: (a) introductory work with the Understanding by Design model, (b) a long range planning in syllabus form for the entire year of teaching, (c) a standards based learning plan, (d) a pre and post reflection tied to their planning and their teaching of their plan in a classroom, and (e) a standards-based unit plan for each clinical experience placement. The expectation is that candidates will be at different stages along a planning continuum during different places in their program. The secondary planning model promotes the belief that planning is a reflective and recursive process that requires development, implementation, assessment, reflection, and revision. The rubrics used in these assignments reflect an expectation that planning occurs on a developmental continuum of emergent, proficient, and accomplished. The Secondary Programs Lesson Plan Data Table shows the standards addressed by each program area and the number of candidates that scored at each level. Data indicate that all candidates in the Foreign Language Program in Spring 07 - Spring 09 fell within the proficient to accomplished levels. Data for candidates in the Social Studies Program indicate that most candidates fell within the proficient to accomplished levels, with 4 candidates falling within the emergent level and 1 at the not evident level. All candidates in the Mathematics Program also fell within the proficient to accomplished levels during Spring 07 and Spring 08. In Spring 09 most candidates fell within the proficient to accomplished level, with some falling in the emergent level on a few standards. All candidates but one in the Science Program fell within the proficient to accomplished level from Spring 07 – Spring 09 one candidate was within the not evident to emergent levels on several standards.

1b.2. (Programs Not Nationally Reviewed) What data from key assessments indicate that advanced teacher candidates know and apply theories related to pedagogy and learning, are able to use a range of instructional strategies and technologies, and can explain the choices they make in their practice.

Candidates in the Reading Specialist Program are required to write daily lesson plans that include objectives for each instructional session, specific materials, explicit descriptions of

15 anticipated assessment and instructional procedures corresponding to objectives, and concise review and evaluation of the daily lesson. To complete this assignment, candidates write daily lesson plans for each teaching session of their 10-week field placement at two teaching sessions per week in Education 3430 and their 8-week field placement in Education 3370/3390. Writing lesson plans requires application of both assessment and instructional knowledge. Both assessment and instructional planning require knowledge of the major components of the reading process. Additionally, candidates demonstrate knowledge of curriculum materials and instructional strategies and the ability to choose those that are appropriate for meeting instructional goals and supporting students reading development. Part of the instructional planning requires attention to students’ engagement, interests, and background experiences, knowledge of books and materials that represent broad interests and cultural backgrounds, and modeling reading and writing as valued lifelong activities. The Reading Specialist Lesson Plan Data Table indicates that in Spring 07 most students fell within the proficient to accomplished levels on a majority of the standards, although 6 of the 7 candidates scored at the emergent level on 3 of the standards. Fall 07 data indicate all candidates were at the proficient to accomplished levels for all standards. All 6 candidates were at the proficient to accomplished level in Fall 07 and Spring 08 semesters.

1b.3. What do follow-up studies of graduates and employers indicate about graduates' preparation in pedagogical content knowledge and skills? If survey data have not already been reported, what was the response rate?

The Exit Interview Data Table provides candidate rankings on several indicators. Factor 2 asks candidates to rank several items in the areas of Learning Theories and Teaching Pedagogy/Techniques. Overall scores on this factor range from 5.20-5.52. Data from Factor 4: Aspects of Student Development had overall scores from 5.46-5.88. Overall scores on Factor 6: Management of Education Constituencies range from 4.37-4.88. Please see the data table for scores on specific indicators under each factor.

Data from The Alumni Follow-Up Survey indicate that overall graduates feel they received the needed knowledge and skills to be effective teachers, develop curricula, plan lessons, and foster intellectual development of their students. Data from Factor 6: Degree Enhanced Ability to Develop Curricula indicate that candidates felt prepared to develop curricula (5.72-5.84) and develop lesson plans (6.11-6.33). Data from Factor 12: Degree Enhanced Ability to Access Learning indicate graduates believe their program provided them with the ability to informally assess student learning (5.88-6.21), teacher areas in their content field (5.42-6.22), and formally assess students (5.35-6.07). Please see the data table for scores on specific indicators.

16 1c. Professional and Pedagogical Knowledge and Skills for Teachers

1c.1. What data from key assessments indicate that candidates in initial teacher preparation and advanced teacher preparation programs demonstrate the professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills delineated in professional, state, and institutional standards to facilitate learning?

Candidates in the initial teacher preparation programs demonstrate professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills in several ways. A majority of the program areas have been evaluated through the NCATE SPA system. Program areas not submitting data to the SPAs follow the same procedure for collecting and analyzing data. Thus faculty from all program areas have identified five to eight key assessments to ensure candidates have mastered the required knowledge and skills required by professional, state, and unit standards. The Key Program Assessments Table provides a list of key assessments.

The PRAXIS II examinations taken by all candidates provide evidence of candidate professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills. All candidates are required to complete a Principles of Learning and Teaching examination for their appropriate grade level. In addition candidates are required to take specific content area examinations; some candidates take up to 4 additional PRAXIS II Exams. As can be seen by the data presented on the Pass Rates on PRAXIS II Exams Table, candidates not only pass the exams, but also often far exceed the state minimum score. In addition to the PRAXIS II all candidates develop either lesson plans or unit plans. For programs submitting SPA reports please see Assessment 3 of the SPA Reports Submitted and SPA Reports Results for data that indicate candidates have the needed professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills to plan and implement effective lessons. The Secondary Programs Lesson Plan Data Table provides similar data for secondary programs not submitting program reviews, and the Reading Specialist Lesson Plan Data Table provides this data for advanced candidates in the Reading Specialist Program. Scores from the PRAXIS II Exams and planning assessments indicate that candidates have the needed professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills in the area of educational foundations, child/adolescent development, professionalism, planning, curriculum development, etc.

Final student teaching evaluations provide further evidence that candidates have the needed professional and pedagogical skills required to be an effective teacher. The Final Student Teaching Data Table summarizes the data provided by mentoring teachers and university mentors. Data from the Understanding Learners and Learning, Conceptions of the Practice and Profession, and Beginning Repertoire components show that both mentoring teachers and university mentors believe our candidates have the needed professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills as they have ranked most candidates within the proficient to accomplished levels in all three areas.

17 1c.2. What data from key assessments indicate that candidates in initial teacher preparation programs consider the school, family, and community contexts and the prior experiences of students; reflect on their own practice; know major schools of thought about schooling, teaching, and learning; and can analyze educational research findings?

Knowledge and skills related to working with families, colleagues, and communities can be found in the Conceptions of the Practice and Profession Component of the conceptual framework. Specifically candidates are expected to recognize that teaching and learning are nested within a broader educational system that includes school and district organizations, families, local communities and government, develop respectful and collaborative relationships with students, colleagues, parents, and members of the broader community, and act to uphold professional norms of responsibility, advocacy, and confidentiality. In addition, candidates understand that learning to teach is a career-long endeavor. Ongoing critical analysis and revision of one’s practice, and pursuit of other opportunities for learning and renewal, are central to one's role as “teacher.”

The Understanding Learners and Learning Component candidates are expected to identify and learn about students’ linguistic, social, behavioral, cognitive and cultural histories and repertoires – integrating them as resources for teaching and learning, and thus providing each student access to learning. Specifically, candidates plan for learners’ unique strengths, resources, goals and motivations, connecting to the experiences of students and their families. Second, in the Beginning Repertoire Component, candidates are evaluated on their ability to choose research- based instructional strategies, curriculum materials, and classroom management techniques to support their work with all students, use assessment techniques (formal and informal) to collect data on student progress and can interpret these data to inform goal-setting, planning and instruction for all students, modify existing materials to support students’ learning of subject matter and to develop new materials, and possess skills to create modifications and accommodations for students who require them.

Data from the Final Student Teaching Data Table summarizes the data provided by mentoring teachers and university mentors. Data from the Conceptions of the Practice and Profession, Understanding Learners and Learning, and Beginning Repertoire Components shows that both mentoring teachers and university mentors believe our candidates have the needed knowledge and skills to work with students, families, colleagues and members of the community, and analyze and use research-based practices in developing their lessons and teaching their students.

1c.3. What data from key assessments indicate that advanced teacher candidates reflect on their practice; engage in professional activities; have a thorough understanding of the school, family, and community contexts in which they work; collaborate with the professional community; are aware of current research and policies related to schooling, teaching, learning, and best practices; and can analyze educational research and policies and explain the implications for their own practice and the profession?

18 data, conclusions and recommendations for future instruction, and reflections on teaching. This case study assignment is a comprehensive measure, evaluating performance in all major areas. Candidates completing this assessment must demonstrate knowledge of students’ language development and reading acquisition and how cultural and linguistic diversity influences such development; knowledge and applications of this knowledge to identify appropriate instructional strategies and curriculum materials for the struggling readers they are teaching; knowledge and use of a wide range of assessment tools and practices to inform instruction and ability to interpret assessment data, consider individual differences (that include cultural and linguistic backgrounds) when interpreting assessment data, and communicate results to students, parents, other teachers and administrators; use assessment data and student information to plan for literate environments that motivate students’ reading and writing interest and effective instruction; and display and engage in productive professional development that involves collaboration with peers and other professionals.

The Reading Specialist Case Study Report data show that all candidates were at the proficient to accomplished levels in Fall 07 and Fall 08. This data would indicate that candidates in this program demonstrate they have the needed skills to effectively assess student learning and use data to plan for instruction.

Further evidence of candidate ability to analyze research findings can be found in the Instructional Materials Analysis. This assessment requires candidates to analyze published reading instructional materials based on theoretical models of reading and research on reading processes and instruction. Candidates must display knowledge of psychological, sociological, and linguistic foundations of reading and writing processes and instruction; demonstrate knowledge of language development and reading acquisition and the variations related to cultural and linguistic diversity; demonstrate knowledge of the major components of reading and how they are integrated in fluent reading; and knowledge and application of knowledge about a wide range of instructional practices, approaches, and methods including technology-based practices for differing levels of development and appropriate for individual differences.

The Reading Specialist Instructional Materials Analysis data indicate that all candidates were within the proficient to accomplished levels in Fall 07 and Fall 08.

1c.4. What do follow-up studies of graduates and employers indicate about graduates' preparation related to professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills?

The Exit Interview Data Table provides candidate rankings on several indicators. Factor 2 asks candidates to rank several items in the areas of Learning Theories and Teaching Pedagogy/Techniques. Overall scores on this factor range from 5.20-5.52. Data from Factor 4: Aspects of Student Development had overall scores from 5.46-5.88. Overall scores on Factor 6: Management of Education Constituencies range from 4.37-4.88. Please see the data table for scores on specific indicators under each factor.

19 Develop Curricula indicate that candidates felt prepared to develop curricula (5.72-5.84) and develop lesson plans (6.11-6.33). Data from Factor 12: Degree Enhanced Ability to Access Learning indicate graduates believe their program provided them with the ability to informally assess student learning (5.88-6.21), teacher areas in their content field (5.42-6.22), and formally assess students (5.35-6.07). Please see the data table for scores on specific indicators.

1d. Student Learning for Teacher Candidates

1d.1. (Programs Not Nationally Reviewed) What data from key assessments indicate that candidates in initial teacher preparation programs can assess and analyze student learning, make appropriate adjustments to instruction, monitor student learning, and develop and implement meaningful learning experiences to help all students learn?

Candidates in the secondary program complete an Assessment Portfolio during their clinical experience semester. The Assessment Portfolio consists of entries made during each of the two teaching placements. In the portfolio, the candidates present the context of their placements, discuss the formative and summative assessments they used before, during, and after the unit to assess students’ progress and understanding. The two parts of this portfolio assignment require that candidates examine both large group and individual forms of assessment. The second part of the assignment asks candidates to look deeply and closely at three individual students and is a more challenging task than the first task, which asks candidates to look at pre- and post assessments. This range of tasks and the depth of thinking and analysis provides a view of the candidate’s ongoing development as reflective practitioners. The candidates must provide a narrative that discusses both assessments and their reasoning for choosing to implement the assessments they chose. The candidates are expected to articulate why they chose those particular assessments for these students at this time in this context. A significant part of the portfolio is the candidates’ reflections and analyses of their efforts to scaffold student learning as well as their reflections upon decisions they made and what possible alternatives were available to them. Although the portfolio provides a partial view of the candidates ability to select appropriate assessment activities to fit learners’ strengths and needs, the view that it provides reflects both the choices the candidate makes as well as the reasoning behind the choices. The Secondary Programs Student Learning Data Table displays specific standards addressed in each content area and candidate scores for each standard. All candidates in the Foreign Language Program fell within the proficient to accomplished levels on all standards measured. Data from Fall 07 show that 3 candidates in the Social Studies Program were ranked as emergent on this assessment, while all others were at the proficient to accomplished levels. Candidates in this

20 program in Fall 08 and 09 all fell within the proficient to accomplished levels. Data for candidates in the Mathematics Program show that all candidates were ranked as proficient or accomplished in Spring 07. In Spring 08, 1 candidate was at the emergent level, while the other 4 candidates were within the proficient to accomplished levels. Spring 09 data show 1 candidate was at the emergent level, while the others were at the proficient level. One candidate in the Science Program was at the emergent level in Spring 07, while the other 5 candidates were at the proficient to accomplished levels. All candidates were at the proficient to accomplished levels in Spring 08 and Spring 09.

1d.2. (Programs Not Nationally Reviewed) What data from key assessments indicate that advanced teacher candidates demonstrate a thorough understanding of the major concepts and theories related to assessing student learning; regularly apply them in their practice; analyze student, classroom, and school performance data; make data-driven decisions about strategies for teaching and learning; and are aware of and utilize school and community resources that support student learning?

Candidates in the Reading Specialist Program complete a Case Study Report describing and analyzing their instruction of struggling readers in their clinical experiences. This report includes instructional goals, instructional strategies and materials, assessment strategies and an analysis of data, conclusions and recommendations for future instruction, and reflections on teaching. This case study assignment is a comprehensive measure, evaluating performance in all major areas. Candidates completing this assessment must demonstrate knowledge of students’ language development and reading acquisition and how cultural and linguistic diversity influences such development; knowledge and applications of this knowledge to identify appropriate instructional strategies and curriculum materials for the struggling readers they are teaching; knowledge and use of a wide range of assessment tools and practices to inform instruction and ability to interpret assessment data, consider individual differences (that include cultural and linguistic backgrounds) when interpreting assessment data, and communicate results to students, parents, other teachers and administrators; use assessment data and student information to plan for literate environments that motivate students’ reading and writing interest and effective instruction; and display and engage in productive professional development that involves collaboration with peers and other professionals.

1d.3. What do follow-up studies of graduates and employers indicate about graduates' ability to help all students learn? If survey data have not already been reported, what was the response rate?

Factor 4, Aspects of Student Development, asks candidates to rank several indications. Overall, candidates are satisfied with the education they received in this area and rank all 11 specific indicators between 5.03 and 6.47. Please see The Exit Interview Data Table for the specific indicators and mean scores for each. Factor 5 asks candidates to rank their program in terms of

21 preparing them to develop classroom equity and diversity. Candidate scores ranged from 5.39- 5.80 when asked about working with students with diverse academic backgrounds, 5.27-5.66 in the area of teaching students from diverse ethnic backgrounds, and 5.37-5.73 in the area of establishing equity within the classroom. Factor 7: Assessment of Student Learning data shows students feel prepared to informally (5.78-6.23) and formally (5.58-6.19) assess student learning.

The Employer Follow-Up Survey has 7 indicators that provide evidence on graduates’ ability to foster student learning. Employers ranked graduates ability to foster intellectual development of students between 5.98 and 6.64, foster social development between 5.98 and 6.39, and foster student personal development between 5.98 and 6.41. Employers ranked graduates between 5.98 and 6.41 on their ability to foster holistic learning and between 6.09 and 6.59 on their ability to engage students in the learning process. Employers highly ranked graduates on their ability to informally (5.98-6.65) and formally (6.007-6.62) assess students.

1e. Professional knowledge and skill for other school professionals

1e.1. What are the pass rates of other school professionals on licensure tests by program and across all programs (i.e., overall pass rate)?

All School Counseling Candidates are required to pass the School Counseling PRAXIS II Exam before being recommended to the state for their appropriate license. The minimum Tennessee Score for the School Counseling Exam is 580. The aggregated data presented below show a pass rate above the required 80% level.

Required PRAXIS II 2004-2005 2005-2006 2006-2007 2007-2008 Exams Number of Candidates 11 11 5 12 Taking Assessment Number Passing 11 11 5 12 Assessment Institutional Pass-Rate 100% 100% 100% 100% Range of Scores 670-790 620-760 590-750 620-760 Median 730 720 730 720

22 1e.2. (Programs Not Nationally Reviewed) What data from other key assessments indicate that other school professionals demonstrate the knowledge and skills delineated in professional, state, and institutional standards?

Please see the CACREP Accreditation Letter for verification the School Counseling Program successfully completed a review by the Council for Accreditation of Counseling and Related Educational Programs Board.

1e.3. What do follow-up studies of graduates and employers indicate about the knowledge and skills of other school professionals? If survey data are being reported, what was the response rate?

In 2005 the School Counseling Program Faculty surveyed recent graduates about their preparation. The School Counseling Program Perceptions Alumni Survey Table shows the 8 CACREP Core Areas and mean scores from 102 alumni who ranked each area on a scale of 1(low) to 5 (high). These mean scores include: Professional Identity (4.23), Social and Cultural Diversity (4.14), Human Growth and Development (4.76), Career Development (3.76), Helping Relationships (4.68), Group Work (4.14), Assessment (3.73), and Research and Program Evaluation (3.58). Employers were asked to complete a 10-question survey. Scores from 26 employers included: Professional Roles (4.73), Ethical/Legal Considerations (4.92), Culture and Diversity (4.58), Developmental Levels/Needs (4.54), Career Development/Theory (4.47), Client Conceptualization/Intervention (4.68), Group Dynamics/Counseling (4.71), Assessment (4.59), Research (4.46), and Compared to Graduates from Other Universities (4.38)

1f. Student Learning for Other School Professionals

1f.1. (Programs Not Nationally Reviewed) What data from key assessments indicate that candidates can create positive environments for student learning, including building on the developmental levels of students; the diversity of students, families, and communities; and the policy contexts within which they work?

1g. Professional Dispositions

1g.1. What professional dispositions are candidates expected to demonstrate by completion of programs?

Candidates at Peabody College are expected to demonstrate the following behaviors that are characteristic of effective educators: Attendance: Candidates are expected to attend all classes and field-based experiences. Punctuality: Candidates are expected to be to classes and field-based experiences on time. Professional Appearance: Candidates are expected to maintain a professional appearance while at field-based experiences.

23 Oral Expression: Candidates are expected to have excellent skills in expressing ideas and to use proper grammar when speaking. Written Expression: Candidates are expected to produce written work that expresses ideas clearly and effectively, is well organized, and is free of grammatical errors. Social Understanding: Candidates are expected to exhibit a high level of understanding about what to do or say in order to maintain good relations with others. Work Habits: Candidates are expected to complete assignments on time, demonstrate proficient work habits, and work independently. Work Quality: Candidates are expected to complete work that is well thought out and carefully prepared. Self-Confidence: Candidates are expected to be appropriately self-assured and poised, and to competently handle professional demands. Interaction with Students: Candidates are expected to initiate opportunities and establish appropriate rapport with students. Response to Critical Feedback: Candidates are expected to solicit suggestions from others, and to act on feedback from others. Planning: Candidates are expected to consistently demonstrate effective planning. Response to Learners: Candidates are expected to consistently accommodate the learning and social needs of their students. Classroom Management: Candidates are expected to organize and manage the classroom activities to create an optimal learning environment for their students. Subject Matter Knowledge: Candidates are expected to work to deepen and use understanding of their subject matter. Response to Multiple Perspectives: Candidates are expected to evaluate multiple perspectives and make well-considered decisions about integration into their perspective. Collegiality: Candidates are expected to appropriately and effectively collaborate with others. Ability to Reflect and Improve Performance: Candidates are expected to work to deepen and use understanding of classroom practice and student learning.

Candidates are evaluated using The course disposition form by faculty in all teacher education courses at the end of the semester and The field-based disposition form by university mentors and mentoring teachers at the completion of each field-based experience.

1g.2. How do candidates demonstrate that they are developing professional dispositions related to fairness and the belief that all students can learn?

Dispositions related to fairness and the belief that all students can learn can be found in two components of our conceptual framework. First, in the Understanding Learners and Learning Component candidates are expected to identify and learn about students’ linguistic, social, behavioral, cognitive and cultural histories and repertoires – integrating them as resources for teaching and learning, and thus providing each student access to learning. Specifically, candidates plan for learners’ unique strengths, resources, goals and motivations, connecting to the experiences of students and their families. Second, in the Beginning Repertoire Component, candidates are evaluated on their ability to choose research-based instructional strategies, curriculum materials, and classroom management techniques to support their work with all students, use assessment techniques (formal and informal) to collect data on student progress and

24 can interpret these data to inform goal-setting, planning and instruction for all students, modify existing materials to support students’ learning of subject matter and to develop new materials, and possess skills to create modifications and accommodations for students who require them. Data from the Final Student Teaching Data Table summarizes the data provided by mentoring teachers and university mentors. Data from the Understanding Learners and Learning, and Beginning Repertoire components show that both mentoring teachers and university mentors have ranked most candidates within the proficient to accomplished levels in these areas.

Additional evidence on fairness and belief that all students can learn can be found in the Field Based Disposition Data Table. Mentoring teachers rank candidates on a scale of 1 (low) to 3 (high) in their field based and clinical experiences. Specific indicators assessing fairness and the belief that all students can learn include: Interactions with Students, Planning, and Response to Learners. Mean scores from field experience mentoring teachers ranged from 2.6-3.0 on the 3 indicators listed above. Mean scores from clinical experience mentors ranged from 2.7-3.0. Feedback from mentoring teachers and university mentors indicate that candidates understand and implement concepts of fairness and plan and implement appropriate lessons for all of their students.

1g.3. What data from key assessments indicate that candidates demonstrate the professional dispositions listed in 1.g.1 as they work with students, families, colleagues, and communities?

Dispositions related to working with families, colleagues, and communities can be found in the Conceptions of the Practice and Profession Component of the conceptual framework. Specifically candidates are expected to recognize that teaching and learning are nested within a broader educational system that includes school and district organizations, families, local communities and government, develop respectful and collaborative relationships with students, colleagues, parents, and members of the broader community, and act to uphold professional norms of responsibility, advocacy, and confidentiality.

Data from the Final Student Teaching Data Table summarizes the data provided by mentoring teachers and university mentors. Data from the Conceptions of the Practice and Profession Component shows that both mentoring teachers and university mentors believe our candidates have the needed knowledge and skills to work with students, families, colleagues and members of the community.

Additional evidence on candidate ability to work with families, colleagues and other members of the community can be seen in the Field Based Disposition Data Table. Mentoring teachers rank candidates on a scale of 1 (low) to 3 (high) in their field based and clinical experiences. Specific indicators assessing the ability to work with others include: Social Understanding, Response to Critical Feedback and Collegiality. Mean scores from field experience mentoring teachers ranged from 2.5-2.9 on the 3 indicators listed above. Mean scores from clinical experience mentors ranged from 2.8-3.0. Feedback from mentoring teachers and university mentors indicate that candidates understand and demonstrate skills needed to work with families, colleagues, and other members of the community.

25 1g.4. What do follow-up studies of graduates and employers indicate about graduates' demonstration of professional dispositions?

Data from alumni indicate they feel they have the needed knowledge and skills to help all students learn. Scores on the 11 indicators from Factor 4: Degree Enhanced Abilities to Foster Student Development range from 5.21 to 6.16. Factor 8: Degree Enhanced Classroom Equity and Diversity scores ranged from 5.23 to 5.74. Please see The Alumni Follow-Up Survey for data on all indicators in Factors 4 and 8. The Employer Follow-Up Survey has 7 indicators that provide evidence on graduates’ ability to foster student learning. Employers ranked graduates ability to foster intellectual development of students between 5.98 and 6.64, foster social development between 5.98 and 6.39, and foster student personal development between 5.98 and 6.41. Employers ranked graduates between 5.98 and 6.41 on their ability to foster holistic learning and between 6.09 and 6.59 on their ability to engage students in the learning process. Employers highly ranked graduates on their ability to informally (5.98-6.65) and formally (6.007-6.62) assess students.

In terms of working with families, colleagues, and other from the community, Factor 10 of the alumni survey, Degree Enhanced Ability to Manage Constituencies, candidates ranked indicators including: Ability to Work with Colleagues in Your School (5.06-5.22), Ability to Work Effectively with Parents (4.83-4.96), Ability to Work with School Administrators (4.55-4.82), and Ability to Deal with School Politics (3.66-4.14). Please see The Alumni Follow-Up Survey for data across 4 years. The Employer Follow-Up Survey data show employers ranked graduates on their ability to deal with school politics (5.52-5.93), ability to work with colleagues (6.21- 6.43), ability to work with school administrators (6.26-6.33), and ability to work with parents (5.93-6.44). Although these data show our graduates have the skills to work with others within the school setting and to deal with school politics, this is an area that faculty members should evaluate to determine more effective ways to present this material to candidates and provide them with more opportunities to develop these skills while completing field-based and clinical experiences.

26 STANDARD 2: ASSESSMENT SYSTEM AND UNIT EVALUATION

2a. Assessment System

2a.1. How does the unit ensure that the assessment system collects information on candidate proficiencies outlined in the unit's conceptual framework, state standards, and professional standards?

The Peabody College Assessment System is based on a continuous cycle of (1) formulating questions; (2) selecting and designing assessment instruments; (3) collecting, summarizing, and analyzing data; and (4) using data to inform program improvement. Data are collected at multiple points and across multiple data sources in five fundamental components: (1) criteria for admission to the university, teacher education, and student teaching; (2) candidate performance on identified standards (i.e., knowledge, skills, and dispositions); (3) candidate performance during clinical experiences; (4) follow-up data from graduates and their employers; and (5) program and unit effectiveness. Candidates in the undergraduate teacher education programs have five transition points: Admission to the University, Screening I, Screening II, Exit from Clinical Experiences, and Program Completion. Candidates at the master’s level have four transition points: Admission to the University, Screening II, Exit from Clinical Experiences, and Program Completion. Candidates in advanced programs and other school personnel have four transition points including Admission to the University, Midterm Review, Exit from Clinical Experience, and Program Completion. In addition to these required transition points, data are also collected on key program assessments discussed in Standard 1.

Peabody College’s Conceptual Framework consists of 4 main domains: (1) Subject Matter Content; (2) Understanding Learners and Learning; (3) Conceptions of the Practice and Profession; and (4) Beginning Repertoire. All teacher education and other school personnel programs have adopted standards that have been aligned to Specialty Program Area (SPA) Standards or other professional standards, INTASC Standards, and State of Tennessee Professional and Program Area Standards. The Alignment Matrix of Tennessee Professional Standards and Professional Organizations Standards shows how Tennessee Professional Standards align with the SPA Standards. The Alignment Matrix of Tennessee Professional Standards and Unit Standards shows the alignment between Tennessee’s Professional Standards and Peabody’s Conceptual Framework Standards.

A majority of the program areas have been evaluated through the NCATE SPA system or other professional accreditation boards (i.e., ASHA, CACREP, NASM). Program areas not submitting data to the SPAs follow the same procedure for collecting and analyzing data. Thus faculty from all program areas have identified five to eight key assessments to ensure candidates have mastered the required knowledge and skills required by professional, state, and unit standards. In addition, candidate dispositions are evaluated each semester in all teacher education courses and all field-based and clinical experience placements. These data along with admissions and follow- up data allow program faculties to make informed decisions at key transition points regarding candidate progress on identified competencies through the program.

27 2a.2. What are the key assessments used by the unit and its programs to monitor and make decisions about candidate performance at transition points such as those listed in Table 6?

The Transition Points Diagram presents the key assessments used to monitor progress and make decisions regarding candidate performance.

2a.3. How is the unit assessment system evaluated? Who is involved and how?

Peabody College’s Assessment System collects data that are used to track the progress of candidates through their programs (components 1-3), evaluate the effectiveness of program areas and the unit (components 4-5), and to facilitate needed changes at all levels. Program faculty began developing Key Program Assessments and scoring guides after our last NCATE visit in Spring 2002. Faculty directly involved in teacher education at each program level analyzed the data and scoring guides used for the key assessments and dispositions and made any needed changes. This information was shared with members of each Department’s Committee on Teacher Education, but went no further. Recently, a more thorough evaluation process for the assessment system has been developed. This assessment system was developed by and will continually be evaluated by faculty and administrators from Peabody College, faculty and administrators from the College of Arts and Sciences, faculty from the Blair School of Music and P-12 school personnel.

The unit assessment system is reviewed annually at several levels. At the program level, faculty score and review the data from key assessments at the end of the semesters they are administered. Then, at the end of each spring semester program faculty complete the Annual Program Assessment Report. In this report, for each of the five components, program faculty answer two questions about what the data tell them. First, what does the data tell us and second, what changes need to be made in the assessment system to provide us with more useful data? Faculty members are also required to provide activities, a timeline, and needed resources for implementing the changes. The Departments of Special Education and Teaching and Learning both have committees designated to teacher education. School Counseling faculty evaluates the progress of each candidate as they progress through the program. Each program area submits their report to their department committee for review. Members of these committees may provide comments and/or suggestions regarding the assessment system. One key task of committees at this level is to look for patterns across program areas within the same department that may indicate a change is needed in the assessment system. The Teacher Education Policy Committee (TEPC) then reviews the program reports, with the department committee comments and/or suggestions. The TEPC is made up of eight faculty members and is charged with overseeing the teacher education programs at Peabody. This committee looks for patterns across the college that may indicate a change is needed in the assessment system. Once the reports have been reviewed at the program, department, and college levels the NCATE Coordinator reviews them and summarizes the findings and generates a report that is sent to the Council on Teacher Education (CTE). The CTE is made up of faculty from Peabody College, the Dean and Associate Dean for Faculty and Programs at Peabody College, the Director of Teacher Licensure, NCATE Coordinator, faculty members from the Blair School of Music and College of Arts and Sciences, Dean of Arts & Sciences, two candidate representatives, and one member of the P-12 school system. As with the other levels, the CTE provides comments and suggestions. The Dean and

28 NCATE Coordinator review all reports and the Dean makes the final decision on changes made to the assessment system and the amount of resources to be provided for these changes.

2a.4. How does the unit ensure that its assessment procedures are fair, accurate, consistent, and free of bias?

NCATE states that assessments are fair when they assess what is taught and when candidates understand what is expected of them. To this end, the unit has aligned unit, state and professional standards with coursework as part of the SPA process. In addition, as part of the state review each program has developed a matrix based on state standards to determine where in the curriculum (i.e., coursework, field-based experiences) standards are addressed. Assessments and scoring guides have been developed based on these standards, course content, and field-based expectations. Candidates are given ample opportunity to clarify instructions for completing the assessments and also receive scoring guides (e.g., rubrics, disposition form, field-based evaluation forms) used to evaluate the key assessments.

In terms of admission and retention to our teacher education programs, candidates are made aware of policies upon being admitted to the college. All admission and retention policies are published in both the undergraduate and graduate handbooks and on the Teacher Education Licensure Website. Candidates are given a copy of the disposition form and its use is explained when they enter the program. While all forms are reviewed, candidates receive corrective feedback only when concerns are noted across more than one course and/or field experience.

According to NCATE guidelines, assessments are accurate when they measure what they say they are going to measure. To ensure this, assessments are continuously reviewed to make sure they measure the identified competencies to be met – competencies that are aligned with SPA, Tennessee, and Unit Standards.

Consistent assessments produce dependable results on repeated trials. Although some of the components have changed to improve the assessment or scoring guide, the assessments have remained the same over the past four years, allowing for comparison across cohorts. All scoring guides are based on a scale of 1-4: (1) not evident, (2) emergent, (3) proficient, (4) accomplished. This allows evaluators to compare candidates within and across programs and assessments. In order for candidates to receive consistent feedback during their field-based and clinical experiences, university mentors and mentoring teachers receive training on completing observation forms and the student teaching summary prior to working with candidates.

Faculty members strive to eliminate bias in assessments by continuously reviewing assessment instructions and scoring guidelines to check for vague language, poor instructions, or poor questions. Assessments and scoring guides are also evaluated to ensure they are free of racial and ethnic stereotypes or other types of cultural insensitivity. Assessments administered in a group setting are done so in properly lighted, quiet classrooms and the candidates are given clear copies.

29 2a.5. What assessments and evaluation measures are used to manage and improve the operations and programs of the unit?

Several measurements are used to evaluate the effectiveness of the operations and programs of the unit. The Component Data Collected and Evaluated Table provides a list of items collected and managed for each of the five components. At the candidate level, data are evaluated from the first three components. First, data from entrance exams are available for faculty to review. The number of candidates accepted into the teacher education program and into student teaching is evaluated each semester. Data from key assessments, dispositions, field-based evaluations, PRAXIS II Exams, and course grades are evaluated to determine candidate performance. In addition, specialty projects, thesis, and capstone projects are also evaluated at the graduate level. Data from the final student teaching summary and dispositions are evaluated to determine effectiveness of candidates’ ability to effectively work in P-12 school settings.

Data are collected on the effectiveness of mentoring teachers and university mentors and satisfaction with school sites to ensure candidates are having successful field-based experiences. Candidates evaluate faculty at the end of each semester course. Faculty teaching data are aggregated at the undergraduate and master’s level and then disaggregated by program area. Each spring faculty members submit their updated vita and teaching evaluations to their Department Chair and the Dean for review regarding their teaching, scholarly production, and service activities. Candidates complete an exit survey during their last semester and are again surveyed after their first, third, and fifth year of teaching. Employers of our graduates are also surveyed during the candidates first, third, and fifth year of teaching.

2b. Data Collection, Analysis, and Evaluation

2b.1. What are the processes and timelines used by the unit to collect, compile, aggregate, summarize, and analyze data on candidate performance, unit operations, and program quality?

The Timeline for Collecting, Aggregating, Summarizing, and Analyzing Data for Undergraduate Candidate Performance Table shows what data are collected and by whom, and how these data are summarized and disseminated for Components 1-4 (i.e., admission criteria, candidate performance, exit clinical practice, and program/unit effectiveness). It is important to note that undergraduate candidates are not required to take the PRAXIS I Exams unless they have a combined SAT score of lower than 1020 or an ACT score lower than 22. The Timeline for Collecting, Aggregating, Summarizing, and Analyzing Data for Master’s Candidate Performance Table shows what data are collected and by whom, and how these data are summarized and disseminated for Components 1-4. Candidates at the graduate level do not complete Screening I, as their acceptance to a master’s degree program provides sufficient data for admittance. However, a Liberal Core Audit of their undergraduate work is completed to ensure they have the proper liberal arts coursework (e.g., US History, sciences). The Timeline for Collecting, Aggregating, Summarizing, and Analyzing Data for Advanced Candidate Performance Table shows what data are collected and by whom, and how these data are summarized and disseminated for Components 1-4. Timeline for Collecting, Aggregating, Summarizing, and Analyzing Data on Other School Personnel Candidate Performance Table shows what data are

30 collected and by whom, and how these data are summarized and disseminated for Components 1-4.

Using information technologies, data are stored and archived in several places. Admissions to the university data (i.e., ACT, SAT, GRE Scores) are stored on the university’s Access to Academic Information Website (AAI). Faculty input candidate grades on the AAI and candidate GPAs can also be located on this website. The Director of Teacher Licensure maintains a database that tracks candidates progress from Screening I through recommendation for licensure. Using this database she also tracks the states in which each candidate has applied for licensure. The Director of Teacher Licensure is also responsible for completing the Title II Annual Report and the NCATE Annual Report. PRAXIS II data from Educational Testing Services (ETS) and follow-up data from the Educational Benchmarking Inc. (EBI) are sent to the Director of Teacher Licensure electronically. These data are shared with stakeholders, but are currently not housed on the Peabody website.

Data on the 6-8 assessments, disposition data, and data from mentoring teachers and university mentors are stored on the Professional Learning Trajectory (PLT) Website. The website was developed in Fall 2005 by an independent contractor and is housed on the Vanderbilt server. Peabody College chose to develop their own assessment system rather than having candidates purchase a commercial program so that Vanderbilt would own the data. The PLT was first used in Spring 2006. Candidates receive a copy of the Student PLT Handbook via email at the beginning of each semester. Candidates upload required assessments to the PLT and evaluate their field-based site, mentoring teacher, and university mentor using the PLT. Faculty members received a copy of the Faculty PLT Handbook when the PLT was developed and receive updates when any changes are made. Components of the scoring guides are entered into the PLT and faculty score key assessments by providing a score of 1-4 for each component. Faculty also complete disposition forms each semester on candidates enrolled in their teacher education courses.

University mentors use the PLT to enter candidate field-based disposition data and final student teaching summary data. They also complete the field-based site evaluation form on the PLT. Mentoring teachers use the PLT to complete field-based disposition forms, final student teaching summaries, and university mentor evaluations. These forms and collected data are presented in Standard 3.

The Timeline for Collecting, Aggregating, Summarizing, and Analyzing Unit and Program Operations and Quality Assessments Table shows what data are collected and by whom and how the data are summarized and disseminated for Component 5, follow-up. As can be seen, much of the data used to evaluate the programs are also used to evaluate candidate progress. However, when the data are used to evaluate candidate progress it is done on an individual basis. When the data are used to evaluate the program and unit operations, they are aggregated both across programs and the unit. For example average ACT, SAT, GRE scores are provided and percentages of candidates passing the PRAXIS II exams are reported. Follow-up data from graduates and employer are aggregated both at the program level and unit level. The PLT is programmed to aggregate data across candidates in a specific program or across all candidates in the college. For example data from a key assessment specific to a program are aggregated among

31 students in that program, but data from a key assessment such as the final student teaching summary are aggregated across candidates in all programs who completed their student teaching that semester.

Two sources of data used to evaluate the program and unit operations are not made public. First, Department Chairs and the Dean review faculty annual reports and no reports are generated. Second, the college budget is not available for public review but will be available for the NCATE Board of Examiners at the time of the onsite visit.

2b.2. How does the unit disaggregate candidate assessment data for candidates on the main campus, at off-campus sites, in distance learning programs, and in alternate route programs?

Peabody College does not offer programs off-campus, via distance learning, or through alternate routes in the initial or advanced programs. The School Counseling Program has an alternate program to train School Counselors to work in the Metro Nashville Schools. Data for candidates in this alternate route are not disaggregated.

2b.3. How does the unit maintain records of formal candidate complaints and their resolutions?

The Undergraduate Complaint and Grievance Policy outlines in detail the procedure candidates should follow if they feel they have not received fair treatment by a representative of the university or have a complaint about the performance, action, or inaction of a member of the staff or faculty. Candidates should direct their complaints first to the person or persons whose actions have caused the complaint. If matters are not able to be resolved at this level, candidates should consult with the Chair of the Department in which the issue has occurred and continue through the appropriate administrative channels as necessary. Candidates who have complaints involving unlawful discrimination (e.g., race, religion, color, disability, sexual harassment) should contact the Opportunity Development Center. If candidates feel their complaints have not been sufficiently addressed they may file a formal written grievance with the Office of the Chancellor and the proper process will be followed as outlined.

As outlined in the Graduate Grievance Policy candidates in the graduate level programs who feel they have not been fairly treated first direct their concerns to the Director of Graduate Studies in their department, and if needed the Department Chair. If concerns cannot be resolved at that level, they are directed to share their concerns with the Associate Dean of Peabody College. Outcomes may be appealed through the Dean of the Graduate College. Candidates who have complaints involving unlawful discrimination should contact the Opportunity Development Center.

Records for both undergraduate and graduate candidates are maintained and achieved in the office of the highest level the concern reached.

32 2c. Use of Data for Program Improvement

2c.1. In what ways does the unit regularly and systematically use data to evaluate the efficacy of and initiate changes to its courses, programs, and clinical experiences?

The Use of Data to Initiate Change Table shows how data are used to initiate change in the five fundamental components of Peabody’s Assessment System. University admissions criteria is evaluated to determine the average entrance score exams of candidates at both the undergraduate and graduate levels to ensure the scores are comparable with other units at the university. Data from Screening I are used to evaluate the knowledge, skills, and dispositions candidates have developed during the first two years at Peabody. These data are used to make needed changes in curriculum (e.g., content, course sequence) and field-based experiences (e.g., level of student interaction, difficulty level of assignments). Data from Screening II applications provide the same level of information as Screening I. Data from Component 2: Candidate Performance, are used to evaluate key assessments and dispositions of candidates. These data are used to prompt changes in the curriculum and field experiences as well as in assessments and scoring guides. Data from Component 3: Exit from Clinical Experiences are used to evaluate the effect candidates have on P-12 students, their ability to work within school settings, including working with other professionals and parents, and other dispositions. Data from Component 4: Program and Unit Effectiveness are used to improve the curriculum, training of mentoring teachers and university mentors, and methods used for observing candidates and providing them with sufficient feedback. Data from Component 5: Follow-up on Graduates and Employers evaluates programs on three levels. First, all candidates complete an exit survey at the end of their final clinical experience. Candidates complete this survey based on their experiences in courses and field-based and clinical experiences while at Peabody. Data from this survey are used to make improvements in curriculum and field-based experiences. Graduates then complete follow-up surveys after their first, third, and fifth years of teaching. Graduates complete these surveys based on experiences teaching in their own classrooms. Employers also complete surveys regarding the abilities of our graduates during their first, third, and fifth years of teaching. While data from the exit interviews are helpful, data obtained from the follow-up surveys provide stronger information because it is based on the realities of being in the “real-world” and running a classroom. Graduates and employers provide data that are again used to improve curriculum and field-based and clinical experiences. Data from these follow-up surveys can be aggregated across the unit or disaggregated by program areas, allowing faculty to make changes at either level.

Multiple data sources are evaluated to make changes at the unit level. Key assessments and disposition data are evaluated and used to initiate changes in the curriculum and field-based and clinical experiences. Data collected on mentoring teachers and university mentors are used to initiate changes in how these individuals are trained. Data from school site evaluations are used to evaluate the effectiveness of schools used and if those schools should continue to be used in the future. Candidate demographic data are used to determine the level of diversity represented at Peabody College. These data are used to improve recruitment of candidates from underrepresented groups. Individual faculty members analyze their course evaluations to improve their own courses and assignments attached with those courses. Annual faculty reports are reviewed by Department Chairs and the Dean and if needed, faculty are provided feedback

33 for improving their teaching, scholarly production, and service activities. The unit budget is examined yearly to ensure it is comparable to other units in the university. College resources (e.g., technology, library materials) are evaluated yearly and these data are used to determine if further resources need to be purchased.

2c.2. What data-driven changes have occurred over the past three years?

Many program and unit changes have occurred over the past three years based on several data sources. At the program level the Elementary Education and Early Childhood faculty recognized that some coursework requires stronger content knowledge, more developed ability to diagnose student thinking, a deeper knowledge of child development, and more professional maturity than others. In December 2007, faculty developed a prescribed sequence of coursework that capitalizes on the variation in required knowledge and skills; the sequence was implemented in Fall 2008. Secondary program faculty revised the structured interview for Screening I in order to have a better understanding of their candidates’ command of content in their focal subjects. The secondary program also added content in the area of effective planning. Elementary and Secondary faculty have also adopted the Teaching Event from the California PACT in order to gather better data on candidates abilities to appropriately and effectively plan, enact, and assess teaching strategies during student teaching. Pilot year data (2008-09) indicate that this is an effective tool not only for candidate-level, but also program level assessment. In the Department of Special Education a review of syllabi and standards indicated a need for changes in the curriculum. In the Early Childhood Special Education Program faculty redesigned their curriculum to incorporate more content knowledge for grades 1-3. The high incidence program has added a course on teaching writing to students with disabilities at both the undergraduate and graduate levels and a secondary level teaching methods course at the mater’s level. In addition a classroom management course has been added that includes a component on working with families of students with disabilities. The severe disabilities program added a course on teaching functional academics and a course on alternative and augmentative communication. In response to a need for more knowledge about general education settings all undergraduate special education candidates enroll in a semester of pre-student teaching during the fall of their senior year. In this experience they spend 3 hours per day in a general education classroom or a classroom for English Language Learners. This was a major change in the program and was actually approved in Spring 03 and became a requirement for candidates entering in Fall 03. The first cohort to complete the pre-student teaching did so in Fall 06.

At the unit level, Screening I was moved from the sophomore year to the junior year. Many candidates did not have a field-based experience before applying for Screening I when they applied during their sophomore year. By moving Screening I to the junior year faculty have more data to evaluate the candidates, including field-based disposition forms. Data obtained from follow-up surveys from graduates who received a dual major in elementary and special education indicated there was some overlap in content between the two programs and that they felt the two programs did not communicate well. This data prompted the Dean to convene at task force to address these issues. This task force, made up of three faculty members from each of the departments began meeting in February 2009 and will have a report and recommendations to the Dean in February 2010.

34 2c.3. What access do faculty members have to candidate assessment data and/or data systems?

All faculty members have access to the AAI Website for their advisees. They can obtain scores on admission exams, course grades, semester and cumulative GPAs, and transfer credits on this site. Department Chairs, Department Director of Graduate Studies, and Department Directors of Undergraduate Studies have access to all candidates enrolled in Peabody College. All faculty members have access to Online Academic Knowledge (OAK) website and can use this site to enter student grades if they choose.

For the PLT, faculty members have access to disposition data from their courses and data on key assessments that are administered as part of their courses. Program Directors have access to all assignments and evaluations on the PLT. There are three administrators for the PLT and they have access to all assignments, evaluations, and user data available on the PLT. Faculty can run data reports for their own courses, but if they would like information on other key assessments, dispositions, or evaluation of field sites, Program Directors or the PLT Administrators can run data reports for them.

Title II and yearly NCATE reports are available on the Peabody Website and faculty may access those reports at any time. The Director of Teacher Licensure maintains data from PRAXIS II exams and follow-up surveys. Department Chairs and Program Directors receive these data and faculty may contact the Director of Teacher Licensure, Department Chairs, or Program Directors if they would like to review the data in more detail.

2c.4. How are assessment data shared with candidates, faculty, and other stakeholders to help them reflect on and improve their performance and programs?

Candidates receive feedback in several ways. They receive feedback on key assessments throughout their program and are provided with scores using rubrics and feedback for improving their performance. Candidates in all program areas, except Early Childhood, receive feedback if there is a concern regarding their dispositions; candidates in the Early Childhood program receive feedback each semester even when there are no concerns. Candidates receive copies of their field-based midterm and final evaluations completed by both their university mentors and mentoring teachers. Candidates in need of an improvement plan during field-based and clinical experiences work with a committee formed to develop the plan and are provided a copy of the plan. Candidates are informed of their acceptance, or denial, into the teacher education program and clinical experiences.

Program Faculty members are provided data from each of the key assessments, dispositions, and follow-up data each spring. Data are shared and faculty members are required to use the data to make improvements in their programs. This process not only allows faculty to see data from across the multiple sources, but also helps ensure that assessments are being evaluated fairly. For example if candidates are doing well on all key assessments but one, faculty would want to evaluate both the assessment and scoring guide to ensure they are well constructed and being scored accurately. Data on candidates enrolled in the secondary programs are shared with faculty members in the College of Arts and Sciences to support planning for double majors. Faculty

35 members also receive their course evaluations at the end of each semester and should use this data to make warranted changes.

Data are shared with other stakeholders through the annual report provided to the CTE.

36 STANDARD 3: FIELD EXPERIENCES AND CLINICAL PRACTICE

3a. Collaboration between unit and school partners

3a.1. Who are the unit's partners in the design, delivery, and evaluation of the unit's field and clinical experiences?

Peabody College faculty members collaborate with P-12 professionals from several school districts in the Middle Tennessee Region to provide candidates with diverse settings. School districts that partner with Peabody College include Metro Nashville Public Schools, Williamson County School District, and the Franklin Special School District. Peabody College also partners with several Independent Schools in the Nashville area (e.g., University School of Nashville, Harding Academy, Christ Presbyterian Academy). Peabody is fortunate to have access to The Tennessee School for the Blind located in Nashville and The East Tennessee School for the Deaf located in Knoxville Tennessee. These two specialized schools provide candidates in the visual disabilities and deaf education programs with excellent opportunities to implement and enhance their specialized skills. There are two partners located on the Peabody Campus. Candidates in the Early Childhood and the Early Childhood Special Education programs complete some of their field-based and clinical experiences at the Susan Gray School for Children, an inclusive pre- school with 50% of the students having an identified disability. Candidates in the high incidence special education program complete a semester long field-based experience at the Peabody Reading Clinic working with a child identified as having difficulty in the area of reading. Candidates in the secondary programs complete one field experience in a non-school setting (e.g., Oasis Center: International Teen Outreach Program, Martha O’Bryan Community Center: Youth Development Program Advancement Via Individual Determination Vanderbilt Children’s Hospital). Principals and mentoring teachers from these schools continually assist in the design, delivery, and evaluation of field and clinical experiences through verbal and written feedback.

The Council on Teacher Education (CTE) is the advisory board for all teacher education and advanced programs. The CTE is made up of faculty from Peabody College, the Dean and Associate Dean for Faculty and Programs at Peabody College, the Director of Teacher Licensure, the NCATE Coordinator, faculty members from the Blair School of Music and College of Arts and Sciences, Dean of Arts & Sciences, two student representatives, and one member of the P-12 school system. Members of the CTE provide feedback on all field and clinical experiences. While program areas continually evaluate their program and make needed minor changes, any substantial changes to policies and procedures regarding field and clinical experiences are approved by the CTE.

3a.2. In what ways have the unit's partners contributed to the design, delivery, and evaluation of the unit's field and clinical experiences?

The Metro Nashville Council on Teacher Education is comprised of personnel from the Metro Nashville Public Schools and personnel from the colleges and universities that use the Metro Schools for field and clinical experiences. Members of this council establish the policies and procedures used when placing teacher education candidates and counselor candidates in the Nashville schools. The Metro Nashville Teacher Education Handbook outlines roles and

37 responsibilities of all parties involved in the field and clinical experiences. This agreement is resigned every 5 years. While there is not a similar committee structure in place with the other county and independent schools, faculty members work with principals and mentoring teachers from individual schools to solicit input and initiate changes in policies and procedures when necessary.

In order to receive feedback from mentoring teachers on the quality of supervision our candidates receive all mentoring teachers complete the Evaluation of University Mentor by Mentor Teacher form at the end of each field and clinical placement. The Evaluation of University Mentor by Mentor Teacher Data Table shows mentoring teachers are overall pleased with the supervision our candidates receive.

3a.3. What are the roles of the unit and its school partners in determining how and where candidates are placed for field experiences, student teaching, and internships?

The state of Tennessee requires that candidates only be placed with mentoring teachers and school counselors who are licensed in the area that they are teaching and have a minimum of 4 years teaching experience. In addition to these requirements, the School Counseling Program requires that counselors have been at their current school for a minimum of two years.

Personnel for The Metro Nashville School District contact school principals to determine their willingness to have Peabody candidates complete field-based and clinical experiences in their schools. Peabody’s Director of Teacher Licensure receives this list of approved schools and provides it to all program areas. Each program area is then responsible for identifying teachers and counselors who meet the state requirements to serve as mentors to the candidates. Once mentors have been identified, principals are contacted via email, phone, or fax to receive permission to use the selected mentors. Once the principals approve the requests, mentor teachers and counselors are contacted to determine their interests. While such a board does not exist with other school partners used by Peabody all principals must approve mentor teachers or counselors prior to them being contacted. Once approval has been given mentors are contacted to determine their interests. Each Program Director provides the Director of Teacher Licensure with a list of field and clinical placements each semester. The Schools Used for Field and Clinical Experiences Table provides a list of schools used and their demographic information.

To ensure candidates have successful field and clinical experiences, faculty members from the unit observe in classrooms to ensure: (1) effective instructional and behavioral practices are being implemented in the classroom, (2) lessons are differentiated for all learners, (3) the school and mentor teachers respect diversity, including student with disabilities, and (4) candidates will be able to complete assignments. Other factors in determining the school sites include diversity of site, geographic locations (urban, suburban, rural) of prior field experiences, ratings of mentoring teachers by former candidates and university mentors, and history of school site in supporting our candidates. Candidates complete the Evaluation of Field Placement Site and the university mentors complete the Evaluation of Field Placement Site at the end of each field and clinical experience and that data is analyzed to determine future use of the setting. The Evaluation of School Site Data Tables Field-Based Experiences and the Evaluation of School

38 Site Data Tables Clinical Experiences indicates that overall, university mentors and candidates are satisfied with their settings.

3a.4. How do the unit and its school partners share expertise and resources to support candidates' learning in field experiences and clinical practice?

Peabody College and its school partners share expertise and resources to support candidate learning in a variety of ways. First, all Peabody programs offer training for the mentoring teachers and counselors. These trainings focus on components of effective mentoring, required assignments and expectations of candidates, and the specific observation and feedback forms used by each program area. The length of these mentoring workshops varies by program areas. Through their on-campus coursework, candidates develop knowledge and skills in many research-based instructional strategies that are developed by faculty at Peabody College. Candidates share their knowledge and the resources for implementing these strategies with their mentors. Peabody also offers content area colloquiums and workshops that mentors are invited to attend. School-based mentors have access to the Peabody Library and can use resources from the library in their classes. Mentors have a choice of receiving a stipend for working with each candidate during their clinical experiences or accumulating credits toward taking a Peabody course. Mentors complete the Honorarium Form and may choose to receive one course credit per student teacher and once they have accumulated three credits they are allowed to register for one Peabody course at no charge.

The school partners share their resources at the school including book rooms, computer labs, library resource centers, and school personnel. Mentoring teachers also share their materials with candidates. Candidates who complete their clinical experience in the Metro Nashville School District have access to the Martin Professional Development Center that has a variety of materials and resources available.

3b. Design, implementation, and evaluation of field experiences and clinical practice

3b.1. What are the entry and exit requirements for clinical practice?

All initial licensure students must complete Screening II, the formal application process for entry to the student teaching semester. The general requirements for Screening II include a minimum GPA, minimum coursework grades, successful completion of early field-based experiences, First Aid/CPR certification, and faculty approval. Specific requirements can be found under Transition Point 3 for undergraduates and Transition Point 2 for Master’s students described on the Transition Points Diagram. Additionally candidates are required to attend a one-hour orientation with the Director of Teacher Licensure prior to the end of the Screening II semester. The purpose of this orientation is to provide the candidates with an overview of the policies and procedures for completing their clinical experiences, to discuss requirements for licensure (e.g., PRAXIS II exams, final recommendations) in Tennessee, and to answer any questions candidates may have about licensure in other states.

Candidates who have successfully passed Screening II are assigned two student teaching placements in our partner schools. To be eligible for a teaching license in Tennessee and other

39 states, a graduate must earn a positive recommendation from the University. The University’s recommendation of a candidate is based upon the following: (1) maintaining the grade point average required for admission to teacher education (2.5 on a 4.0 scale), (2) conferral of the bachelor’s degree, (3) achieving at least the minimum required scores on the PRAXIS II examinations, (4) receiving positive recommendation from the faculty as a result of the student teaching experience. (A “Pass” for student teaching does not guarantee a favorable recommendation.), (5) completing an exit meeting with the Director of Teacher Licensure, including completion of required forms for transcripts and licensure, and (6) first aid and CPR certification done within two years prior to licensure recommendation.

Candidates in the advanced programs are required to meet with faculty members from their respective programs prior to the semester they complete their clinical experiences. Program faculty members consider course grades and evaluations from prior field experiences and then either recommend the candidate for their clinical experience or deny them the opportunity. As with initial licensure candidates, those in the advanced programs must be recommended for licensure by the faculty.

3b.2. What field experiences are required for each program or categories of programs (e.g., secondary) at both the initial teacher preparation and advanced preparation levels, including graduate programs for licensed teachers and other school professionals? What clinical practice is required for each program or categories of programs in initial teacher preparation programs and programs for the preparation of other school professionals?

The Field Experience Table provides the experiences and total field-based and clinical experience hours for each program at the initial and advanced levels.

3b.3. How does the unit systematically ensure that candidates develop proficiencies outlined in the unit's conceptual framework, state standards, and professional standards through field and clinical experiences in initial and advanced preparation programs?

Early field experiences are aligned with specific content courses and identified outcomes of each of those experiences are aligned with the state and professional standards. Each program at Peabody has designed assessments that are aligned with the unit’s conceptual framework, state standards, and professional standards. Several of these assessments are completed during field and clinical experiences. For example, each program evaluates their candidates’ ability to plan and implement lessons as well as effect on P-12 student learning. Candidates are evaluated on their ability to develop and implement differentiated lessons that focus on the needs of the entire class as well as individual students who may need modifications. In addition, candidates are evaluated on their ability to collaborate with school personnel and parents. To ensure candidates are meeting the standards, each program area has developed evaluation forms specific to their program area standards and needs. These forms are used to observe candidates in their field and clinical experiences and to provide them with positive and constructive feedback. Forms used by each program area can be found in the electronic exhibit room under Field-Based Observation Forms and Clinical Experience Observation Forms. In addition to these evaluation forms all initial teacher preparation programs use the same Final Student Teaching Summary Form. This form requires mentoring teachers and university mentors to assess each candidate on the four

40 domains of the unit’s conceptual framework using a scale of 1-4 with 1 indicating the standards are not evident in the candidates performance, 2 indicating candidates are emerging in the area, 3 indicating that candidates have become proficient, and 4 indicating candidates have demonstrated knowledge and skills to be considered accomplished. The Final Student Teaching Data Table indicates that a majority of candidates fall within the proficient to accomplished levels on all four areas assessed. Candidates in all programs are evaluated by mentoring teaches and university mentors using the Field-Based Disposition Form at the midterm and final point of both placements. Data from these evaluations can be seen on the Field-Based Disposition Table.

Candidates in the advanced school counseling and reading specialist programs complete field and clinical experiences based on their needs. These experiences meet the state, professional, and unit standards and candidates are evaluated using the Field Based Observation Forms and Clinical Experiences Observation Forms.

3b.4. How does the unit systematically ensure that candidates use technology as an instructional tool during field experiences and clinical practice?

Candidates use various forms of technology as they progress through their field and clinical experiences. All teacher education candidates complete their Screening I and II applications electronically using the Screening Website. Candidates also complete the Evaluation of Mentor Teacher by Student, Evaluation of Field Placement Site by Student, and Evaluation of University Mentor by Student forms using the PLT at the end of each field and clinical experience. Candidates communicate with university mentors and faculty throughout their program by using electronic mail and Vanderbilt’s Online Access to Knowledge (OAK) website. While in their field and clinical experiences candidates use information technologies for tracking P-12 student progress by keeping grades electronically and graphing student progress. Candidates in the teacher education programs analyze their own teaching skills by videotaping themselves teaching and then critique their lessons. Candidates in the Department of Special Education are introduced to the Easy IEP used by the school districts.

Unit faculty members understand that the technology available at P-12 schools vary, however, candidates are expected to use technology devices available to them at the schools they are placed in. These technologies include, but are not limited to, PowerPoint, SMART Boards, websites, and audio/video. Candidates use assistive technology devices as needed to meet the needs of P-12 students in learning the content.

Candidates at the advanced level also use email and OAK to communicate with their instructors, use information technologies to track the progress of their P-12 students, and videotape themselves teaching. In the School Counseling program candidates are required to audiotape their sessions and critique them. In addition, candidates use technology to assist their secondary students with the college search process.

41 3b.5. What criteria are used in the selection of school-based clinical faculty? How are the criteria implemented? What evidence suggests that school-based clinical faculty members are accomplished school professionals?

The Tennessee Department of Education requires mentoring teachers for all field-based and clinical experiences be certified teachers who have a minimum of 4 years teaching experience and be recommended by their principals as being exemplary teachers. Mentors complete the Data Form for Cooperating Teachers, Mentors, and Counselors and this data is kept in the office of The Director of Teacher Licensure. In addition to those requirements program faculty ensure the mentoring teachers implement effective teaching, classroom management, and collaboration strategies in their classrooms and in their interactions with parents and other school personnel. Mentoring teachers must agree to serve in the role of mentor and understand the many responsibilities that go along with this commitment. Faculty also ensures that mentoring teachers have appropriate mentoring skills to work with our candidates. University mentors are unit faculty, graduate students, or individuals hired specifically to supervise candidates. University mentors typically have a minimum of a master’s degree and several years teaching experience and bring a wealth of practical experience to the candidates. The unit collects data on the effectiveness of mentoring teachers and university mentors. Candidates complete both the Evaluation of Mentor Teacher and Evaluation of University Mentor forms at the end of each field and clinical experience. Candidate ratings of mentor teachers and university mentors are displayed on the Evaluation of University Mentor by Student Table and the Evaluation of Mentor Teacher by Student Table. Mentoring teachers complete the Evaluation of University Mentor by Mentor Teacher Form at the completion of each experience and the university mentor completes the Evaluation of Mentoring Teacher by University Mentor Form at the end of each placement.

School counselors must also have a minimum of 4 years teaching experience and have worked at their current school for a minimum of 2 years. Mentoring teachers selected to host candidates in the Reading Specialist Program must be licensed Reading Specialist and have a minimum of 4 years teaching experience.

3b.6. What preparation do school-based faculty members receive for their roles as clinical supervisors?

All mentoring teachers and university mentors who supervise candidates in the initial teacher preparation programs attend a mentoring workshop provided by the program areas. In addition to this training each mentoring teacher and university mentor receives either the Early Childhood Education Student Teaching Manual, the Elementary Education Student Teaching Manual, the Secondary Education Teaching Manual, or the Special Education Teaching Manual. These manuals provide mentoring teachers and university mentors with a description of their roles and responsibilities, as well as the roles and responsibilities of the candidates, unit faculty, and field coordinators. Specific requirements of each field and clinical experience are outlined in these manuals, as well as a timeline for increasing teaching responsibilities. University mentors conduct an orientation meeting with each mentoring teacher prior to the field or clinical experience beginning. The focus of these meetings is to explain the purpose of the experience and to explain the specific requirements as described in the manuals. University mentors answer questions and explain the type and amount of supervision the candidate will receive.

42 The School Counseling program provides mentors with the School Counseling Clinical Experience Handbook and offers a workshop for their school-based faculty each year and mentors are required to attend every two years.

3b.7. What evidence demonstrates that clinical faculty members provide regular and continuous support for student teachers, licensed teachers completing graduate programs, and other school professionals?

Their university mentors continually supervise candidates in the teacher education. Candidates enrolled in the undergraduate field experiences are supervised by their university mentors for approximately an hour every other each week. Mentoring teachers are not required to complete formal observations of these undergraduate candidates, however both the university mentors and mentoring teacher complete midterm and final evaluations on each candidate. The Field Based Disposition Data indicate that university mentors and mentoring teachers rank candidates highly on the indicators identified. Their university mentors observe Master’s practicum students for 60-90 minutes every other week. As with the undergraduate candidates the Field Based Disposition Data indicate that university mentors and mentoring teachers rank candidates highly. Candidates completing their student teaching are observed each week for 60-90 minutes by their university mentor. It is recommended that the candidate, university mentor, and mentoring teacher meet following the observation, although this is not always possible due to scheduling conflicts. Mentoring teachers are encouraged to complete formal observations of their student teachers, but are not required to complete this on a weekly basis. The Final Student Teaching Data indicate that university mentors and mentoring teachers rank candidates highly. Although mentoring teachers are not required to complete formal observations, many informal observations occur daily and candidates often report that these informal observations and conversations are helpful in developing their skills. Their university mentor observes candidates in the School Counseling Program and Reading Specialist weekly.

3b.8. What structured activities involving the analysis of data and current research are required in programs for other school professionals?

Candidates in the School Counseling program complete HDC 3840, Research in Counseling. Candidates are required to complete a research project designed to provide them with a practical experience in developing an in-depth understanding of a research topic. Candidates are required to complete a comprehensive exam at the end of their program that requires research be incorporated into their responses to questions. Finally, candidates complete a research project and present their findings at a poster session during their last semester of the program.

3c. Candidates’ development and demonstration of knowledge, skills, and dispositions to help all students learn

3c.1. On average, how many candidates are eligible for clinical practice each semester or year? What percent, on average, complete clinical practice successfully?

Within the past 5 years an average of 126 candidates each year were eligible to complete their clinical practice in the initial teacher licensure programs. Of these 126 candidates, 99% of them

43 successfully completed their student teaching. One master’s level student in special education did not successfully complete his student teaching and was not recommended for licensure. An average of 8 candidates are eligible to complete their clinical experience in the Reading Specialist Program each year. One hundred percent of these candidates graduate from the program, however they may not be recommended for a Reading Specialist License until they have completed a minimum of 3 years teaching. Peabody College has only been recommending these candidates since 2006 and has recommended a total of 4 candidates to this point. School Counseling has an average of 10 eligible candidates each year, again with a 100% completion rate. The Clinical Experiences Data Table indicates the number of candidates who were admitted to clinical experience semesters and the number who successfully completed the experience. Files for candidates who did not complete their clinical experiences are kept with the appropriate Program Director.

3c.2. What are the roles of candidates, university supervisors, and school-based faculty in assessing candidate performance and reviewing the results during clinical practice?

Candidates assess and reflect on their learning and teaching during clinical experiences by completing videotapes, weekly reflections, and setting weekly goals.

University mentors observe candidates in their student teaching experience for a minimum of one hour each week using the specific program evaluation forms. University mentors meet with each candidate after each observation to provide both positive and constructive feedback to the candidates. Goals are set for each candidate to work on for the next observation. In addition, university mentors complete the Field-Based Disposition Form on each candidate and complete the Final Student Teaching Summary at the end of the candidates’ clinical experience.

Mentoring teachers provide candidates with positive and constructive feedback by using both informal and formal observations. In addition, mentor teachers complete the Field-Based Disposition Form on each candidate and complete the Final Student Teaching Summary at the end of the candidates’ clinical experience.

The candidate, university mentor, and mentoring teacher if it is found that the candidate needs more support or supervision to be successful in their clinical experience completes a Performance Improvement Plan. This plan includes strategies for assisting the candidate, responsibilities of the candidate, university mentor, and mentoring teacher, schedule for meeting the goals of the plan and a scheduled time for a follow up meeting. At the time of the follow-up meeting it is determined if the candidate will be allowed to continue or if the clinical experience will be terminated.

University faculty members provide the candidates with feedback by grading the specific assessments that are tied to the clinical experiences. For example faculty members provide feedback on lesson plans, assessment reports, and assignments designed to determine the level of impact on the learning of P-12 students.

Candidates in the Reading Specialist and School Counseling Programs are observed by their university mentors on a weekly basis. They schedule post observation meetings to discuss

44 observations and to provide positive and constructive feedback. As with initial licensure candidates, these candidates are evaluated at midterm and the end of their placements by both their university mentor and school-based mentor.

3c.3. How is time for reflection and feedback from peers and clinical faculty incorporated into field experiences and clinical practice?

Candidates and university mentors have a conversation prior to each observation to discuss the lesson to be presented and to determine if there is anything specific the candidate would like feedback on (e.g., questioning techniques, interactions with specific students, classroom management techniques). After each observation it is recommended that the candidate, university mentor, and mentoring teacher have a 3-way conference to discuss the lesson. Realizing this is not always possible because the candidate and mentoring teacher need to continue teaching, the conference is often done at a later time with the candidate and university mentor. At a minimum the candidate, university mentor, and mentoring teacher meet at midterm and the end of the experience to obtain feedback.

With the exception of secondary education, early field experiences are tied to specific courses and time is provided in those courses to discuss experiences with unit faculty and peers. Sophomore and junior field experiences in the secondary education program align with the sequence of courses but are not directly tied to them. During clinical experience candidates attend a weekly seminar with university faculty and peers. The purpose of these seminars are to discuss the candidates experiences and for faculty and peers to provide them with suggestions and support as needed. Candidates in the Department of Special Education are required to write weekly reflections and turn them into the university faculty member in charge of the experience.

Candidates in the advanced programs also have time to reflect and receive feedback from their peers during weekly seminars that are held on campus. University faculty members facilitate these seminars, so candidates are able to receive feedback from them as well.

3c.4. What data from multiple assessments provide evidence that candidates demonstrate the knowledge, skills, and professional dispositions for helping all students learn in field experiences and clinical practice?

Formative and summative evaluations are completed on candidates in their field and clinical experiences. Mentoring teachers and university mentors complete the Field Based Dispositions form at the midterm and final points of each experience. The specific indicators evaluated for student learning include planning, interactions with students, response to student learning, and classroom management. In addition to these indicators, candidates’ lesson plans are evaluated to ensure they are differentiating their instruction and meeting the needs of all of their P-12 students. University mentors also evaluate candidate effectiveness in the delivery of these lessons during each scheduled observation. Summative data is collected on each candidate through the Understanding Learners and Learning component of the Final Student Teaching Summary. Data from these specific indicators show that candidates demonstrate strong knowledge, skills, and dispositions when working with P-12 students.

45 3c.5. What process is used to ensure that candidates collect and analyze data on student learning, reflect on those data, and improve student learning during clinical practice?

Data on how candidates collecting and analyze data on student learning, reflect on those data, and improve student learning can be found in Assessment 5 for all initial licensure candidates. For programs submitting SPA Review Reports please see Assessment 5 in each SPA Reports Submitted and SPA Reports Results. Overall, candidates fell within the proficient to accomplished levels on these key assessments.

Candidates in the secondary programs not submitting SPA reports complete an Assessment Portfolio during their clinical experience semester. In the portfolio, candidates look deeply and closely at three individual students and is a more challenging task than the first task, which asks candidates to look at pre- and post assessments. The candidates are expected to articulate why they chose those particular assessments for these students at this time in this context. A significant part of the portfolio is the candidates’ reflections and analyses of their efforts to scaffold student learning as well as their reflections upon decisions they made and what possible alternatives were available to them. The Secondary Programs Student Learning Data Table displays specific standards addressed in each content area and candidate scores for each standard. All candidates in the Foreign Language Program fell within the proficient to accomplished levels on all standards measured. Data from Fall 07 show that 3 candidates in the Social Studies Program were ranked as emergent on this assessment, while all others were at the proficient to accomplished levels. Candidates in this program in Fall 08 and 09 all fell within the proficient to accomplished levels. Data for candidates in the Mathematics Program show that all candidates were ranked as proficient or accomplished in Spring 07. In Spring 08, 1 candidate was at the emergent level, while the other 4 candidates were within the proficient to accomplished levels. Spring 09 data show 1 candidate was at the emergent level, while the others were at the proficient level. One candidate in the Science Program was at the emergent level in Spring 07, while the other 5 candidates were at the proficient to accomplished levels. All candidates were at the proficient to accomplished levels in Spring 08 and Spring 09.

Candidates in the Reading Specialist Program complete a Case Study Report describing and analyzing their instruction of struggling readers in their clinical experiences. The Reading Specialist Case Study Report data show that all candidates were at the proficient to accomplished levels in Fall 07 and Fall 08. This data would indicate that candidates in this program demonstrate they have the needed skills to effectively assess student learning and use data to plan for instruction.

3c.6. How does the unit ensure that all candidates have field experiences or clinical practice that includes students with exceptionalities and students from diverse ethnic/racial, linguistic, gender, and socioeconomic groups?

In keeping with the aims of our conceptual framework, care is taken to select sites that provide candidates with ample opportunities to teach P-12 students from different ethnic/racial, linguistic, gender, and socioeconomic groups, as well as with students with disabilities. As can be seen by the demographic data presented in the Schools Used for Field and Clinical Experiences Table a majority of the schools have very diverse populations. Data for the

46 independent schools is not available, but unit faculty members that use those sites feel they have diverse populations as well.

47 STANDARD 4: DIVERSITY

4a Design, implementation, and evaluation of curriculum and experiences

4a.1. What proficiencies related to diversity are candidates expected to develop and demonstrate?

The unit faculty members realize the importance of diversity and are committed to developing candidates’ knowledge, skills, and dispositions in this area. Diversity proficiencies identified as important by Peabody faculty members can be found in state, professional, and unit standards. At the state level, two standards deal specifically with diversity. First, Standard 2 – Student Learning and Development states that candidates understand how students learn and develop and provide learning opportunities that support student intellectual, social and personal development. Second, Standard 3 – Diverse Learners states candidates will understand how students differ in their approaches to learning and create instructional opportunities that are adapted to diverse learners. The Alignment Matrix of Tennessee Professional Standards and Professional Organizations Standards shows how the Specialty Program Area Standards align with the Tennessee Professional Standards. The Alignment Matrix of Tennessee Professional Standards and Unit Standards shows the alignment between Tennessee’s Professional Standards and Peabody’s Unit Standards specific to diversity. These standards are aligned to specific courses and field based and clinical experiences to ensure candidates develop these proficiencies through a variety of activities and in a variety of school settings.

Within the unit’s conceptual framework diversity is emphasized in two of the four key components. First, in understanding learners and learning candidates are expected to identify and learn about students’ linguistic, social, behavioral, cognitive and cultural histories and integrate them as resources for teaching and learning. Specifically candidates are expected to plan for learners’ unique strengths, resources, goals and motivations, connecting to the experiences of students and their families. In the developing an initial repertoire component candidates are expected to use a carefully chosen set of research-based instructional strategies, curriculum materials, and classroom management techniques to support their work with all students. In planning, candidates select curricular and instructional tools on the basis of their deeper function in supporting learning – matching tools and approach to a variety of learning goals and needs.

Candidates are evaluated on several dispositions in both their coursework and field-based and clinical experiences. Dispositions specific to diversity include: (1) Response to Multiple Perspectives - candidates are expected to evaluate multiple perspectives and make well- considered decisions about integration into their perspective, (2) Interaction with students - candidates are expected to initiate opportunities and establish appropriate rapport with students, and (3) Response to learners - candidates are expected to consistently accommodate the learning and social needs of their students.

48 4a.2. What required coursework and experiences enable teacher candidates and candidates for other school professional roles to develop awareness of the importance of diversity in teaching and learning and the knowledge, skills, and professional dispositions to adapt instruction and/or services for diverse populations, including linguistically and culturally diverse students and students with exceptionalities?

All initial licensure candidates are required to take SPED 1010 or SPED 3000 - Introduction to Exceptionalities. This survey level course provides information on the areas of disability, special education law, and strategies for including individuals with disabilities in general education classrooms. A requirement for these courses is that all candidates work with individuals with disabilities for a minimum of 15 hours during the semester. These experiences may occur in a school setting, an after school tutoring program, or with a variety of non-school agencies that serve individuals with disabilities.

Candidates in the Early Childhood Program take three courses to develop their knowledge and skills in working with young children with disabilities. First, they take SPED 2010, Introduction to Instructional Models. This course focuses specifically on instructional and behavioral strategies for young children with disabilities. Candidates have an embedded field experience in the Susan Gray School for Children and have the opportunity to work with a child with a disability. The second course SPED 2420, Assessment of Young Children with Disabilities prepares candidates to effectively assess young children with disabilities using both formal and informal techniques. The final course SPED 2870, Accommodating Academic Diversity focuses on strategies for accommodating students with disabilities and students who are English Language Learners in grades K-3 who are included in the general education classroom. A second component of this course focuses on collaborating with other school personnel who work with individuals with disabilities and parents of children with disabilities. Candidates observe in a K-3 special education classroom for 20 hours during this course.

Candidates in the elementary program take EDUC 2430 or EDUC 3420, Teaching Struggling Readers. This course focuses on strategies for teaching students who have reading difficulties. Candidates complete a field experience working one-on-one with a K-6 student identified as having difficulty in the area of reading.

Candidates in the secondary programs take EDUC 2530 or EDUC 3530, English Language Learners Educational Foundations. This course examines the theoretical, historical, political, legal, and research bases for the education of students from linguistically and culturally diverse populations. Candidates in this program have a field experience at a non-school setting that serves students who are in substance recovery, have long-term illnesses, or other difficulties. Candidates in the Secondary English Education Program also take ENED 2920, Adolescent Literature. The reading selections for the course, written by culturally diverse authors, permit candidates to explore a broad range of adolescent experiences. They read and discuss books related to gender and sexual identity, class, race, cultural diversity, friendship, coming of age, voice and silence, technology, and a range of other social and psychological themes.

Candidates in the special education programs obviously have a wide range of experiences focusing on students with disabilities. Strategies for teaching English Language Learners is

49 covered in SPED 2870, Accommodating Academic Diversity and SPED 3880, Teaching Students with Disabilities at the Secondary Level. All undergraduate candidates complete a 150- hour pre-student teaching experience the semester prior to student teaching. This experience is completed in general education or English Language Learners classrooms at an elementary school where 77% of their students are from diverse populations, 87.5% receive free and reduced lunch, 35.2% are English Language Learners, and 6.3% qualify for special education.

Candidates in the advanced programs also have experiences focusing on diversity. The Reading Specialist Program’s main focus is developing knowledge and skills to serve P-12 students who struggle in reading. Candidates complete 50 hours of fieldwork across semesters with students who have diagnosed reading difficulties. Candidates also take EDUC 3540, Methods and Materials for ELL Education and EDUC 3550, Multicultural Education in Today’s Classroom. Candidates in the School Counseling Program are required to take SPED 3000 and have the same requirements as initial licensure candidates. Candidates also take HDC 3680, Multicultural Education. This course focuses on the school counselor’s role in working with individuals from a variety of races, cultures, and socioeconomic levels. School counseling candidates work in the same school settings as initial licensure candidates and are placed with diverse populations.

SPED 2060/3060 and EDUC 2060/3060 is an educational diversity course that is cross- listed in both departments. This course is not required, but many candidates take the course as an elective. Undergraduate candidates can use this course to satisfy their cultural studies liberal core requirement.

4a.3. What key assessments provide evidence about candidates' proficiencies related to diversity? How are candidates performing on these assessments?

Key assessments have been developed to assess candidates’ knowledge, skills, and dispositions related to diversity in both coursework and field-based and clinical experiences. All candidates are required to complete PRAXIS II Exams specific to their area of concentration. Each of these exams have sections specific to students as learners, development, diverse learners, and environment. The PRAXIS II Pass Rate Table indicates that 99% of our candidates pass these exams. The Final Student Teaching Data Table provides aggregated scores across program areas on the learners and learning and initial repertoire components of the unit’s conceptual framework. Each program area has identified specific assessments that are aligned with the diversity standards in the state, professional and unit standards. The Key Diversity Assessments- Initial and Key Diversity Assessments – Advanced provides assessments specific to diversity by program area and a description of these assessments. These assessments evaluate candidates’ ability to plan and implement effective lessons for al learners and to make adjustments for individual students when needed. Candidates’ ability to establish appropriate learning environments that encourage successful learning opportunities for all students is also assessed. Overall, data for these assessments indicate that our candidates are performing within the proficient to accomplished levels on these assessments. For specific data on these assessments please see the SPA Reports Submitted located in the electronic exhibit room. Candidates are assessed on disposition forms in both their courses and field-based and clinical experiences. Course instructors, university mentors, and mentoring teachers evaluate candidates on these

50 dispositions at the end of each course or field-based or clinical experience. Data presented on the Diversity Disposition Data Table indicates that candidates have the needed diversity dispositions.

Data is also collected from graduates and employers. Employers complete a survey on our graduates who are in their 3rd or 5th year of teaching. Questions specific to diversity include the ability to establish equity in the classroom, ability to teach children from diverse ethnic backgrounds, and ability to teach children with diverse academic background. Employers rank these questions on a scale of 1 (low) to 7 (high). The Employer Rating - Diversity Knowledge Table indicates that employers rank our graduates high with a range of scores between 6.10-6.62. Graduates also complete the survey after completing their student teaching and during their third and fifth years of teaching. The Exit Survey - Diversity Table shows candidates rank their ability to work with students from diverse populations with scores that range from 5.32-5.72. The Alumni Survey – Diversity Table indicates scores range from 5.23 to 5.69.

Candidates graduating from the School Counseling Program between 2001-2004 were surveyed about their satisfaction with the program. Two questions address diversity and were ranked on a scale of 1(Strongly Disagree) to 5 (Strongly Agree). When asked if candidates were comfortable expressing different points of view to faculty (e.g., politics, religion, lifestyle, theory) the mean score was 4.455. The second statement, the program prepared me to work with clients from different cultural backgrounds the mean score was 4.309. School Counseling Faculty are currently surveying recent graduates and that data will be available in October 2009.

4b Experience working with diverse faculty

4b.1. What opportunities do candidates (including candidates at off-campus sites and/or in distance learning or alternate route programs) have to interact with higher education and/or school-based faculty from diverse groups?

Initial and advanced candidates have opportunities to interact with diverse university faculty members in courses across the university and within the professional unit, during field-based and clinical experiences, and on research projects. Approximately 19% of Vanderbilt University’s faculty members are minorities, while 39% are women. Candidates have opportunities to work with these faculty members while taking courses from them and possibly interacting with them through their research projects. Candidates also have opportunities to work with diverse school- based faculty. Data on school-based faculty for the Metro schools indicate that 29% of the faculty members are from diverse groups and 3.5% are counted for under the race unknown. The Faculty Demographics Table provides specific statistics for university and school-based faculty diversity.

4b.2. What knowledge and experiences do faculty have related to preparing candidates to work with students from diverse groups?

Faculty members in the unit have opportunities to develop their knowledge and skills in working with individuals from diverse settings through a variety of activities. The Vanderbilt Center for Teaching offers workshops for faculty members in the area of diversity and will work with individual faculty members upon request. The Kennedy Center located on the Peabody Campus

51 sponsors a number of events each year that focus on issues of diversity and working with individuals with disabilities. The Colloquium Table presents a sample of presentations given over the past 5 years. Several faculty members across the professional unit are engaged in conducting research in schools that focuses on developing instructional methods for working with candidates in diverse settings. The findings from this research are presented in professional courses. Many faculty members serve as university mentors and supervise candidates during their field-based and clinical experiences. This allows faculty members to remain updated on the issues that are seen in the schools. In addition faculty members continue to develop their knowledge and skills in the area of diversity by reading current research and attending professional conferences.

4b.3. How diverse are the faculty members who work with education candidates? [Diversity characteristics in addition to those in Table 8 can also be presented and/or discussed, if data are available, in response to other prompts for this element.]

The Faculty Demographics Table provides demographic information for faculty from the professional unit and school-based faculty our candidates work with.

4b.4. What efforts does the unit make to recruit and retain a diverse faculty?

Vanderbilt University and Peabody College are committed to recruiting and retaining a diverse faculty through several initiatives. First, when conducting searches for new faculty members, search committees must follow the following guidelines:

The Human Resource Service Department includes the phrase “Equal Opportunity- Affirmative Action Employer” in all printed employment advertisements. All regular staff positions must be listed with Human Resources Recruitment and Staffing Office prior to the formal initiation of recruitment efforts. Media and organizational sources, specializing in recruitment and referral of women, people of color, and individuals with disabilities will be provided copies of vacancy announcements as determined practicable and useful by Vanderbilt. The Human Resources Department informs all recruiting sources of the University’s affirmative action commitment to recruit and refer minorities, women and individuals with disabilities to positions listed. Please see Human Resources Policies and Procedures for specific guidelines for hiring according to the university’s Affirmative Action Plan.

The Betts Endowed Chairs are used to recruit and retain faculty from diverse backgrounds. This endowed chair is a 3-year term and recipients receive funds to support their research activities. Two faculty involved in teacher preparation have held the Betts Chair, one in special education and one in teaching & learning.

While there is no written policy new faculty members typically receive start-up funds to support their research and engage in mentoring activities with senior faculty members. Course releases may also be provided to new faculty members.

52 4c Experiences Working with Diverse Candidates

4c.1. What opportunities do candidates (including candidates at off-campus sites and/or in distance learning or alternate route programs) have to interact with candidates from diverse groups?

Candidates in initial and advanced programs have several opportunities to work with peers from diverse backgrounds including race/ethnicity, gender, and geographical regions of the country. Candidates have opportunities to interact with peers from diverse backgrounds in classes through group discussions, small group learning activities, and other group projects completed outside of class. Faculty members establish communities within their classes that allow candidates to feel comfortable discussing their views with peers and considering the perspectives of others. In addition to participating with peers from diverse groups, candidates have the opportunity to join one or more of the 360 student organizations. Many of these organizations focus on areas of diversity such as culture, religion, politics, etc. For a list of available organizations go to http://www.vanderbilt.edu/studentorganizations/view.php.

4c.2. How diverse are the candidates in initial teacher preparation and advanced preparation programs? [Diversity characteristics in addition to those in Table 9 can also be presented and discussed, if data are available, in other prompts of this element.]

The Undergraduate Candidate Demographics Table and Graduate Candidate Demographics Table. Show the demographic data of candidates in the initial and advanced programs.

4c.3. What efforts does the unit make to recruit and retain candidates from diverse groups?

At the undergraduate level the unit recruits diverse candidates by visiting high schools with large populations of diverse students. Vanderbilt has several scholarships that are reserved for students from diverse backgrounds. In Fall 2009 Vanderbilt University began an expanded aid initiative. The goal of this initiative is to recruit candidates who would not be able to attend Vanderbilt due to financial reasons. For a complete description go to http://www.vanderbilt.edu/financialaid/index.html.

Vanderbilt University has seen an increase in the number of students enrolled from diverse populations. Demographic data for the class of 2011 indicate 61.8% identified themselves as White/Caucasian, 10.7% as African American, 7.0% as Asian, 6.2% as Hispanic/Latino, 0.4% as American Indian, and 0.9% as other. Applicants for the class of 2013 increased by double-digits with African-American applicants up 15%, Asian applicants up 20%, Hispanic applicants up 18%, Native-American applicants up 33%, Other Minority applicants up 10%, and International applicants up 38%.

Candidates at the graduate level are recruited through information presented on the Peabody Webpage. Faculty in the Department of Special Education who develop personnel training grants attempt to recruit 33% of their grantees from diverse populations. These grants provide tuition waivers and monthly stipends. Candidates are assigned advisors when they are accepted and are encouraged to become active in student organizations that interest them.

53 4d Experiences Working with Diverse Students in P-12 Schools

4d.1. How does the unit ensure that candidates develop and practice knowledge, skills, and professional dispositions related to diversity during their field experiences and clinical practice?

All candidates are evaluated on field-based dispositions in the areas of interacting with students, response to learners, and classroom management. Each program area has developed student teaching evaluation forms specific to their needs, including content areas and grade levels. All of these forms are designed to allow mentoring teachers and university mentors to rate candidates in the area of planning instruction for diverse learners, adapting instruction for individuals with disabilities, and selecting proper curriculum materials. Candidates are also evaluated on their ability to properly assess all students they teach and to provide this information to parents and others. Candidates are also evaluated on their interactions with students and the environment they establish to allow for successful learning.

4d.2. How diverse are the P-12 students in the settings in which candidates participate in field experiences and clinical practice? Please complete Table 10 or upload your own table at Prompt 4d.4 below.

The Demographic Table for Partnership Schools provides demographic information for partner schools.

4d.3. How does the unit ensure that candidates use feedback from peers and supervisors to reflect on their skills in working with students from diverse groups?

Candidates and university mentors have a conversation prior to each observation to discuss the lesson to be presented and to determine if there is anything specific the candidate would like feedback on (e.g., cultural awareness, interactions with specific students, classroom management techniques). After each observation it is recommended that the candidate, university mentor, and mentoring teacher have a 3-way conference to discuss the lesson. Realizing this is not always possible because the candidate and mentoring teacher need to continue teaching, the conference is often done at a later time with the candidate and university mentor. At a minimum the candidate, university mentor, and mentoring teacher meet at midterm and the end of the experience to obtain feedback.

Early field experiences are tied to specific courses and time is provided in those courses to discuss experiences with unit faculty and peers. During clinical experience candidates attend a weekly seminar with university faculty and peers. The purpose of these seminars are to discuss the candidates experiences and for faculty and peers to provide them with suggestions and support as needed. Candidates in the Department of Special Education are required to write weekly reflections and turn them into the university faculty member in charge of the experience.

54 STANDARD 5: FACULTY QUALIFICATIONS, PERFORMANCE, AND DEVELOPMENT

5a. Qualified Faculty

5a.1. What are the qualifications of the full- and part-time professional education faculty (e.g., earned degrees, experience, and expertise)?

Currently there are 33 tenure track faculty, 17 practice faculty (non-tenure track), 4 research faculty, and 10 lecturers that are directly involved with the preparation of teachers and other school personnel at the unit level. All of these individuals, with the exception of one instructor of practice, hold terminal degrees and are full-time. The one instructor of practice is scheduled to complete her PhD by March 2010. There are approximately 20 part-time adjunct faculty members in the unit. Seven unit faculty members have distinguished chairs including one Peabody Chair in Teaching and Learning, one Dunn Family Chair in Educational and Psychological Assessment, two Nicholas Hobbs Chair in Special Education and Human Development, two Currey Ingram Chairs in Special Education, and one Susan Gray Chair in Education and Human Development. The Faculty Qualifications Table provides degrees, experience and expertise for all unit faculty members.

5a.2. What expertise qualifies professional education faculty members who do not hold terminal degrees for their assignments?

All tenure track and practice faculty in the unit hold terminal degrees. Professional education faculty members that do not have terminal degrees have been carefully selected for their expertise in areas related to supervision, mentoring, and coaching of practicum students and student teachers. In some instances undergraduate methods are taught by well-qualified professional educators who do not have a terminal degree but who bring specifically identified experiences from the classroom that align with the Peabody conceptual framework. Most of these instructors have received recognition for their expertise related to their leadership in the classroom and school, including accolades such as teacher of the year awards, professional development awards, and national board certification. In addition, some of the part-time faculty members are retired teachers or principals who bring a wealth of practical experience to our candidates.

5a.3. How many of the school-based faculty members are licensed in the areas they teach or are supervising? How does the unit ensure that school-based faculty members are adequately licensed?

All mentoring teachers and university mentors are licensed in the area they teach or supervise in. The Tennessee State Board of Education requires all mentoring teachers be certified in their area and have a minimum of 4 years teaching experience. The Director of Teacher Licensure maintains a database of field mentors of candidates that indicates areas of licensure, endorsements, and years of experience. This information is collected regularly each semester from field mentors through self-reporting from the field mentor.

55 Mentor teachers selected to work with candidates in the Reading Specialist Program must meet the same qualifications stated above. IRA/NCTE standards require a one-year apprenticeship of reading specialist candidates with a practicing reading specialist in the field. Reading specialists from area schools are carefully selected as mentors based on reading specialist licensure and evidence of experience in providing professional development in literacy and coaching. Interviews with the reading specialist and careful review of reading specialists experiences contribute to the selection of exceptional mentors for the reading specialist candidates.

School Counselors selected to mentor candidates in the school counseling program must meet the qualifications stated above in addition they must be at their current school for at least two years.

5a.4. What contemporary professional experiences do higher education clinical faculty members have in school settings?

A majority of the unit faculty members have contemporary professional experiences in school settings. These experiences include providing school districts with professional development opportunities, consulting with personnel from school districts and conducting research in classrooms. Some unit faculty members serve as university mentors to candidates completing clinical experiences. Within the Departments of Special Education and Teaching and Learning, faculty often include embedded practicum experiences in their coursework, creating the opportunity for faculty members to see candidates in the field for short, specific assignments.

5b. Modeling Best Professional Practices in Teaching

5b.1. How does instruction by professional education faculty reflect the conceptual framework as well as current research and developments in the fields?

All courses taught by the professional education faculty have been aligned with state, professional, and unit standards. Course content, activities, and assessments are developed based on the standards aligned with each course. Unit faculty members provide candidates with opportunities to develop their knowledge and skills through presenting theories and research- based practices for their respective fields of study. Standards, specific content, activities and assessments can be found in each course syllabi; all course syllabi can be found in the electronic exhibit room under section Course Syllabi.

5b.2. How do unit faculty members encourage the development of reflection, critical thinking, problem solving, and professional dispositions?

Faculty members provide candidates several opportunities to become reflective practitioners through weekly reflections of practica experiences, journal writing, videotaping of their teaching with critique and through large and small group activities in the classroom. Candidates become critical thinkers through reading journal articles and have large and small group discussions focusing on the current educational trends and issues. The recently piloted capstone experience, the Teaching Performance Assessment, emphasizes deep reflection and analysis of teaching

56 through a series of prompts related to a teaching unit and video clips from selected lessons within that unit.

Candidates have several opportunities to develop their professional dispositions. The unit has identified 13 professional dispositions. Faculty members complete the Course Disposition Form on each candidate in their course at the end of each semester. This data are stored in the PLT and program directors assess the data each semester. Candidates who show a pattern of concern in any disposition are required to meet with program directors to discuss the issue. Field mentors are requested to complete disposition forms for practicum students and student teachers on a bi- weekly basis.

5b.3. What types of instructional strategies and assessments do unit faculty members model?

Faculty members use a variety of instructional strategies and assessment techniques in their courses. In terms of content presentations faculty members incorporate lecturing, guest speakers, technology, student presentations, debates, and questioning to instruct their candidates. Faculty uses large group, small group, and cooperative learning models. In terms of materials used by faculty members, manipulatives, graphic organizers, and sample instructional school-based texts are used. Faculty uses instructional models including role-playing, inductive thinking, deductive thinking, simulation, inquiry, and discovery. The Instructional Strategies Table indicates the number of faculty members who incorporate specific instructional strategies in their courses.

Faculty through coursework and field-based assignments uses a variety of assessment techniques. In courses, faculty members use quizzes, midterm and final exams, research papers, practical implications, curricula analysis, case studies, unit development, reflections, class presentations, and portfolios to assess candidate’s knowledge. In the field-based and clinical experiences faculty evaluate lesson planning and conduct direct observations of candidates teaching. Candidates are also required to write weekly reflections. The Assessment Strategies Table indicates the number of faculty members who incorporate specific assessment strategies into their courses and field-based and clinical experiences.

5b.4. How do unit faculty members incorporate the use of technology into instruction?

Unit faculty members incorporate technology into their instruction in several ways. In terms of teaching a majority of faculty use the Online Access to Knowledge (OAK) website supported by Vanderbilt’s Information Technology Services. Faculty members are able to upload their course syllabi, assignments, and other course material on the OAK webpage. Faculty members also use the grading software on OAK to record student grades. Candidates have access to OAK for all of their courses and can download and print needed materials for class as well as have an up-to-date place to see their grades. Unit faculty members teach in classrooms that are equipped with computers and projectors to facilitate the use of technology into their instruction. Faculty members have access to four computer labs located on the Peabody Campus. Faculty may reserve these labs if they would like to use them for whole class instruction. Candidates also have access to these labs and several other computers located in buildings throughout the Peabody Campus in order to complete course assignments. Faculty members also use a variety of

57 instructional strategies using technology including webpages, powerpoint, web page development and critique, and videotapes to present materials. . The Technology Used by Faculty Table indicates the number of faculty members who incorporate specific assessment strategies into their courses and field-based and clinical experiences. Beginning Fall 2009, technology seminars will be available to all students on the Peabody Campus by the Peabody Library. These seminars, four per semester, range from review of basic technology needs to more sophisticated uses, such as notetaking with the iphone.

5b.5. How do unit faculty members systematically engage in self-assessment of their own teaching?

Peabody’s teaching mission is aligned with its scholarly inquiry, reflecting the view that research and practice should inform and strengthen each other. Our educational programs, therefore, serve not only as laboratories for our research but also as channels through which the wisdom of real- world practice can inform our thinking and designs. They also serve as the site and means for preparing the leaders who will apply emerging understandings in their work to build human and social capital. Thus, Peabody College is committed to the education of individuals as future leaders, many of who will transform institutions and society.

Candidates evaluate professional unit faculty members at the end of every semester. Faculty members use this information to reflect on their teaching and make changes to the manner in which they present material in courses, and to make changes to assignments, readings, etc. The Instructor Course Evaluations Table reports average teaching ratings for courses.

5c. Modeling Best Professional Practices in Scholarship

5c.1. What types of scholarly work are expected of faculty as part of the institution's and unit's mission?

Vanderbilt University has the Carnegie classification of Doctoral/Research University – Extensive and all tenured, tenure track and practice faculty members are expected to continuously engage in scholarly endeavors. According to Vanderbilt’s Mission, Vanderbilt University is a center for scholarly research and will uphold the highest standards and be a leader in the quest for new knowledge through scholarship. Peabody College’s mission states that programs embody the belief that the human condition, both individual and collective, can be bettered through reason and through scholarly inquiry, teaching, and appropriate intervention. Research at Peabody is curiosity-inspired, theory-driven, and mission-oriented. It targets broad social problems that cut across disciplines. Specifically, Peabody’s scholars are devoted to creating fundamental understandings of learning, development, and their social contexts as well as the practices and processes that lead to high quality learning, excellent teaching, and positive developmental outcomes. This scholarship, which advances Dewey’s conception of reflective thought, ultimately enables our college and our graduates to enhance individual lives, transform learning institutions, build human and social capital, formulate sound educational policy, and foster an inclusive society. Faculty members are provided with time to devote to their research activities. An explanation for how this time is allocated is explained in more detail in Standard 6.

58 5c.2. In what types of scholarship activities are faculty members engaged? How is their scholarship related to teaching and learning? What percentage of the unit's faculty is engaged in scholarship?

Tenured, tenure track, and practice faculty members all engage in scholarly activities at a high level. The Peabody College Faculty Scholarship Productivity Table shows the high level of scholarship faculty members are engaged in. Faculty members contribute to the field of education in broad sense and to their specific areas of concentration more specifically through publishing their research in journal articles, writing textbooks and textbook chapters, writing technical reports, and presenting at local, state, national, and international professional conferences. In addition unit faculty members are successful in applying for and receiving funds through grants at both the state and national level. Unit faculty members develop their scholarly activities based on the philosophy that research informs practice and practice informs research. Faculty members conduct research in the areas of student development, teacher preparation, instructional strategies for teaching P-12 students, classroom management techniques, and effective teaching behaviors. This research spans a variety of learning and teaching theories from constructivism to behaviorism. A review of faculty vita will provide an in-depth look at each faculty members’ scholarly productivity.

5d. Modeling Best Professional Practices in Service

5d.1. What types of service are expected of faculty as part of the institution's and the unit's mission?

According to Vanderbilt’s Mission, faculty members are expected to make unique and special contributions through outreach and service to society. Faculty members are expected to engage in service activities at the program, department, college, and university levels. Faculty members also provide service to the local schools and educational agencies through consultation and professional development. At the state and national levels faculty members are expected to serve on advisory boards and committees that support the educational needs of society. Faculty members also serve as journal editors, associate editors and as members of editorial boards.

5d.2. In what types of service activities are faculty members engaged? Provide examples of faculty service related to practice in P-12 schools and service to the profession at the local, state, national, and international levels (e.g., through professional associations). What percentage of the faculty is actively involved in these various types of service activities?

All unit faculty members are required to take part in service activities at the program, department, college, university, local, state, and national levels. Faculty members serve on committees within their respective departments and across the college. Many faculty members serve on university committees and the governing bodies of Vanderbilt University. A large percentage of faculty members provide service to local school districts and districts across the country. This service includes doing workshops on research they have conducted. The Peabody College Faculty Service Table indicates the type of service faculty engage in.

59 5e. Unit Evaluation of Professional Education Faculty Performance

5e.1. How are faculty evaluated? How regular, systematic, and comprehensive are the unit evaluations of adjunct/part-time, tenured, and non-tenured faculty, as well as graduate teaching assistants?

All unit faculty members submit their current vita and teaching evaluation to their respective department chairs and to the Dean each January. The Chairs and Dean review these documents and schedule meetings with faculty members as needed. All faculty members receive a copy of the Faculty Manual that provides the rules and procedures for evaluation and guidelines for tenure and/or promotion. These processes are not consistent across types of faculty members. A description for each faculty type is provided below.

Tenure Track Faculty: Tenure track faculty members are formally reviewed during their fourth year of service to the university. Faculty members submit their portfolio to the department level where it is reviewed and sent to the college level evaluation committee, which includes the Dean. Reports from the department and college are forwarded to the University Provost. Then in their seventh year tenure track faculty members submit their portfolio to be evaluated for tenure and promotion and follow the same sequence as in their fourth year review. During this review the Provost sends a letter of recommendation to the Vanderbilt University Board of Trust for final action. Successful faculty members are not formally evaluated again, unless they choose to submit a portfolio to be promoted to full professor. See Vanderbilt Tenure Procedures and Policies for specific details regarding the process and guidelines for appealing decisions.

Practice Faculty: Practice faculty members receive 3-year appointments and are evaluated every 3 years. Practice faculty members submit their portfolios to the department level for review. It is then submitted to the college level evaluation committee. Successful faculty members are given another 3-year appointment. Practice faculty members are on non-tenured lines, but can be promoted. See Peabody College Practice Faculty Retention and Promotion Guidelines for specific details.

Adjunct Faculty, Lecturers, Graduate Teaching Assistants: All adjunct faculty, lecturers, and graduate teaching assistants are evaluated yearly by the department chairs. Adjunct faculty and graduate teaching assistant’s course evaluations are the primary documentation reviewed. Lectures receive a yearly letter from their department chair outlining their specific duties. Performance on these identified duties is evaluated at the end of each spring semester.

University Mentors: Candidates and mentoring teachers evaluate university mentors after each field-based and clinical experience. Program directors and department chairs review these data and make decisions about retention at the end of each semester.

5e.2. How well do faculty perform on the unit's evaluations?

Ten faculty members have been promoted from assistant professor to associate professor from Spring 2004-Spring 2009. No faculty members were denied tenure and promotion during this time period. Four tenured professors were promoted from associate to full professor during this

60 time period. One professor of the practice was promoted from assistant to associate in Spring 2005 and one assistant professor of the practice was not reappointed in Spring 2007.

5e.3. How are faculty evaluations used to improve teaching, scholarship, and service?

Department chairs and the Dean review vita and teaching evaluations each January. If they are concerned that faculty members are not making sufficient progress they will meet with them to develop a plan to assist the faculty member. These plans will outline professional development activities needed to become successful. The current mentoring situation will be reviewed to determine if mentoring needs to increase or change. A variety of activities may be implemented to assist the faculty member including, but not limited to observations of teaching, attending the Center for Teaching, scheduled meeting times to review progress on scholarship activities, and exploring opportunities to develop in the area of service. Department chairs and the Dean may recommend professional development plans for faculty members after their fourth year reviews or for practice faculty after their 3-year evaluations.

5f. Unit Facilitation of Professional Development

5f.1. How is professional development related to needs identified in unit evaluations of faculty? How does this occur?

Faculty members new to the university are assigned mentors to assist them in their scholarship, teaching, and service. These mentors are determined in collaboration with the new faculty member to ensure a good match among mentors and mentee. As stated above faculty who are identified as needing assistance to improve their scholarship, teaching, and service meet with department chairs. These plans would be developed specific to the faculty members’ needs and interests.

5f.2. What professional development activities are offered to faculty related to performance assessment, diversity, technology, emerging practices, and/or the unit's conceptual framework?

Orientation training for teaching assistants and other interested faculty members is provided by the Teaching Center. The Table of Colloquiums provides a list of professional development opportunities provided at Peabody. In addition faculty members are able to apply for a professional leave of absence. See Leaves of Absence Policy for a description of these leaves and those who are eligible to apply.

5f.3. How often does faculty participate in professional development activities both on and off campus? [Include adjunct/part-time, tenured, and non-tenured faculty, as well as graduate teaching assistants.]

Faculty members have several opportunities to attend the professional development activities listed above. In addition to those opportunities faculty members attend several professional conferences each year to increase their professional knowledge and interact with colleagues from across the country and world.

61 STANDARD 6: UNIT GOVERNANCE AND RESOURCES

6a. Unit Leadership and Authority

6a.1. How does the unit manage or coordinate the planning, delivery, and operation of all programs at the institution for the preparation of educators?

Peabody College of Education and Human Development is comprised of The Department of Human Organization and Development, The Department of Leadership, Policy, and Organization, The Department of Psychology, The Department of Special Education, and The Department of Teaching and Learning. There are 8 centers located on the Peabody Campus whose missions are to improve the lives of children and their families. In addition to the centers, The Susan Gray School for Children is located on the Peabody Campus. The Research and Outreach Centers Table provides a list of these centers and a description. The Dean’s advisory committee consists of Associate Dean/Chief of Staff, Associate Dean of Faculty and Programs, Associate Dean of Special Projects, Associate Dean of Graduate Education, Associate Dean of External Affairs, 5 Department Chairs, and a Co-Chair of the Teacher Education Policy Committee. This advisory council meets twice a month to discuss issues related to the college’s mission. Activities specific to teacher education are coordinated across the college by the Teacher Education Policy Committee. TEPC is made up of eight faculty members from across departments. The CTE is made up of faculty from Peabody College, the Dean and Associate Dean for Faculty and Programs at Peabody College, the Director of Teacher Licensure, NCATE Coordinator, faculty members from the Blair School of Music and College of Arts and Sciences, Dean of Arts & Sciences, two student representatives, and one member of the P-12 school system. The College Curriculum Committee is responsible for overseeing the curriculum. Faculty members who wish to have new courses or substantially change their courses must first have departmental approval. The course information is then sent to the curriculum committee for approval and then to the unit faculty council for final approval. If courses will be offered to doctoral students they must approved by the Graduate College.

6a.2. What are the unit's recruiting and admissions policies? How does the unit ensure that they are clearly and consistently described in publications and catalogues?

Undergraduate admissions are coordinated through the Office of Undergraduate Admissions. The Office of Undergraduate Admissions Website provides a wealth of information regarding the application process, including requirements, application materials, and dates and deadlines for applying to Vanderbilt University. The Selection Process section of the webpage provides prospective students with the step-by-step process admissions counselors to through with each application. The webpage also provides information on financial aid, housing and dining options, admissions statistics, additional information needed for international students and students who were home-schooled. Undergraduate students wishing to transfer to Vanderbilt can find all of the needed information on this webpage. Admission counselors are assigned to specific cities, states or regions of the country. Prospective students can locate the admissions counselor assigned to them at the admission counselors webpage.

62 Admission at the master’s level is coordinated by departments. All guidelines and materials needed for the admission can be found on the Peabody College Admissions Webpage. Each department has a secretary who coordinates the admissions process and forwards files to the department admissions committee where faculty members either admit or deny the applicants.

6a.3. How does the unit ensure that its academic calendars, catalogues, publications, grading policies, and advertising are accurate and current?

Vanderbilt University has a university-wide calendar committee. This committee sets the academic calendar and the unit follows the calendar. The academic calendar is published on the Vanderbilt webpage and in several other documents available to candidates. The Undergraduate Catalog and the Peabody Graduate Catalog are revised each spring and published over the summer to ensure they are available for candidates when they arrive in the fall. Vanderbilt provides each student with the proper bulletin and they may also be found online. In addition to the university bulletins each of the departments within the unit have developed handbooks for their undergraduate and master’s level candidates. Grading policies can be found in the handbooks. While the handbooks provide information on points for the GPA there is not a required grading scale that faculty members must follow. Course syllabi provide candidates with the specific grading scale for each course.

6a.4. How does the unit ensure that candidates have access to student services such as advising and counseling?

Undergraduate candidates select a major prior to be admitted to Vanderbilt and are assigned a freshman advisor who advises them through their first year. All undergraduate advisors are faculty members within the unit. Candidates may remain with this advisor for their remaining time at Vanderbilt or they may assigned a new advisor at the end of their freshman year if their needs and interests warrant this change. Candidates meet with their advisors a minimum of once each semester. These required meetings focus on course selection for the following semesters and developing a course of study. Candidates and their advisors may meet more often depending on the needs of the candidate. Master’s students are assigned a faculty advisor upon being admitted to the program. Candidates meet with their advisors to develop a course of study plan and when other needs arise. The Director of Graduate Studies for Masters Programs assigns two faculty reviewers for applications completed online that meet minimum admissions criteria set by the College. If an applicant's academic credentials are marginal or are inconsistent, the DGS will send these applications out for review as well. Once faculty reviewers are assigned, the admissions secretary sends an e-mail requesting that they review the application on Excalibur. The reviewers may recommend admission, denial of admission, or provisional admission. If admitted the DGS assigns an advisor - who then contacts the student to answer any questions. If there is a disagreement, a third reviewer is assigned, and the DGS also looks carefully at the application. Candidates with identified disabilities may register with the Opportunity Development Center whose staff will work with candidates and instructors to ensure proper modifications are being made. Candidates may also access the Psychological and Counseling Center. The center offers a range of services to candidates including individual, group, family & child, and couples psychotherapy, vocational testing, LD/ADHD assessment, and more. The Zerfoss Student Health Center also provides candidates with services, including mental health, to

63 improve their quality of life while at Vanderbilt.

6a.5. Which members of the professional community participate in program design, implementation, and evaluation? In what ways do they participate?

The Dean’s Advisory Committee and the Council on Teacher Education provide input into program design, implementation, and evaluation of our programs. They review yearly reports from each program area involved in teacher preparation and make recommendations to the Dean for improving the programs based on data provided.

Personnel from P-12 schools continuously participate in the design, implementation and evaluation of our programs by providing feedback on field experiences and candidate performance. Mentoring teachers use the PLT to complete field-based disposition forms, final student teaching summaries, and university mentor evaluations. These forms and collected data are presented in Standard 3.

6a.6. How does the unit facilitate collaboration with other academic units involved in the preparation of professional educators?

The Dean and Associate Dean of Arts and Sciences, four faculty members from Arts and Sciences, and a faculty member from the Blair School of Music serve on the Council for Teacher Education, the board that oversees all teacher education programs. One member of the P-12 community also serves on this counsel. Candidates majoring in the secondary areas are required to have a major in the College of Arts and Sciences and are assigned an advisor in their respective departments. These advisors are part of the Screening I and II processes and must recommend candidates for admittance to teacher education and their clinical experience semester. Faculty members from the unit and Arts and Sciences have met over the past several years to align professional standards to courses in the Arts and Sciences departments. This process has allowed advisors to recommend appropriate content area courses that will provide them with the knowledge and skills to be successful secondary teachers and to pass the appropriate PRAXIS exams.

6b. Unit Budget

6b.1. What is the budget available to support programs preparing candidates to meet standards? How does the unit's budget compare to the budgets of other units with clinical components on campus or similar units at other institutions?

Prior to FY 2010, each of Vanderbilt University’s colleges and schools, including Peabody College, had stand alone budgets. If Peabody College had desired to implement a new program, it would have to ensure that it had sufficient internal resources to accommodate the related costs – regardless of the need or strategic impact of the program on the school. However, beginning with FY 2010 budgets, Vanderbilt University centralized specific components of its four undergraduate schools (the College of Arts and Science, the School of Engineering, Peabody College, and the Blair School of Music) to strategically link University objectives with budgets.

64 Each of the four undergraduate schools prepared budgets based on estimated actual needs by department or for the entire school along with current and future new programs, revisions to programs due to fluctuations in demand, changes in staffing, and capital needs. Budgets included a detailed faculty model by individual plus all future recruitment plans, including associated projected salaries and start-up plans. In addition, each school could request additional funding to be used at the discretion of the Dean.

The centralized budgeting of Vanderbilt’s four undergraduate schools is not based upon formulaic allocations per student, faculty member, lab, square footage, etc. Rather, it is based upon meeting the needs of each individual school and achieving overall strategic plans for the University, as a whole. The centralized budgeting will build upon successes already achieved by these schools and will provide resources for future opportunities as they arise.

The following operating budget history demonstrates the University’s ongoing financial commitment to ensuring Peabody’s continued success:

FY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 Budgeted Operating Expenses 1 40,869,416 45,194,707 48,064,297 51,956,429 56,450,637 55,588,929 Budgeted Operating Surplus 596,636 430,325 438,046 504,678 561,148 1,000,000 Total 41,466,052 45,625,032 48,502,343 52,461,107 57,011,785 56,588,929 10.0% 6.3% 8.2% 8.7% -0.7%

1 Includes Transfers but Excludes Exchange Tuition

Budgeted Operating Expenses 1 FY 2010 Div 26 33,703,687 Div 48 (GPC) 13,862,802 Centralized Plant & Other Costs Div 51 (GPC) 8,022,440 Centralized Scholarship Total 55,588,929

The slight decline for FY 2010 operating budget is attributable to prudent reductions enacted for the overall University as a result of the recent economic downturn, including a salary freeze for FY 2010 and eliminations of expenditures which do not support the University’s core missions of instruction, research and patient care.

In addition to the operating budget noted above, Peabody College also receives significant financial support by other external funding and specifically designated internal funding, as noted below:

FY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Designated Expenses 2 External Funding Contract & Grants 3 17,676,867 19,998,608 23,025,852 26,203,511 28,173,757 Endowment 1,506,765 2,130,633 2,133,221 2,002,254 3,877,559 Gifts 455,057 404,378 472,482 441,848 529,143

Internal Funding Internally Designated Funding 2,825,160 2,492,893 2,993,186 3,276,861 3,109,142

Total Actual Designated Expenses 22,463,849 25,026,512 28,624,741 31,924,474 35,689,601

2 Excludes Transfers 3 Excludes Indirect Costs

6b.2. How adequately does the budget support all programs for the preparation of educators? What changes to the budget over the past few years have affected the quality of the programs offered?

The college budget is not disaggregated by program area. However, as can be seen enough the budget is adequate to support our programs. The unit has ample faculty, staff, technology, libraries, and other resources to support both the faculty and candidates in our programs. The entire budget will be available in the Dean’s Office when the NCATE and State Teams are on campus for their onsite visit.

6c. Personnel

6c.1. What are the institution's and unit's workload policies? What is included in the workloads of faculty (e.g., hours of teaching, advising of candidates, supervising student teachers, work in P-12 schools, independent study, research, administrative duties, and dissertation advisement)?

The Faculty Workload Policy shows that tenured or tenure track faculty members’ time is typically allocated by 40% teaching, 50% research, and 10% service. Advising students, including during the dissertation phase are included in the service allocation. These efforts may be adjusted due to external funding. The standard workload for non-tenure track faculty is typically comprised of 60% teaching, 10% research, and 30% service. Advising of students is included in service. Because the duties of practice faculty vary across individuals (e.g., administrative duties, supervision) each practice faculty member meets each spring with their department chair to determine their responsibilities for the next academic year and to make adjustments in the percentage of allotted time.

66 6c.2. What are the faculty workloads for teaching and the supervision of clinical practice?

As stated above, tenured or tenure track faculty members’ time is typically allocated 40% teaching, 50% research, and 10% service. Advising students, including during the dissertation phase are included in the service allocation. These efforts may be adjusted due to external funding. The standard workload for non-tenure track faculty is typically comprised of 60% teaching, 10% research, and 30% service. Advising of students is included in service. Full-time faculty members assigned to supervising candidates during their clinical experiences are released from one course for every eight hours of supervision duties.

6c.3. To what extent do workloads and class size allow faculty to be engaged effectively in teaching, scholarship, and service (including time for such responsibilities as advisement, developing assessments, and online courses)?

There is no policy for the maximum number of students that can be enrolled in courses. This decision is based on the type of course (e.g., lecture course, methods course), the level of the course, and the need to use technology labs. Teaching assistants are typically assigned to work with faculty members who have 32 or more students enrolled in their courses. Typically teacher education courses have between 15 and 40 students enrolled in them. The two required courses for freshman, Teaching and Society and Introduction to Exceptional learners typically have 100 candidates enrolled in them, but others are smaller. Courses that have smaller enrollments may only be offered once a year, and programs with very small numbers may offer courses every other year.

6c.4. How does the unit ensure that the use of part-time faculty contributes to the integrity, coherence, and quality of the unit and its programs?

Part-time faculty members are selected on their level of experience and expertise and are often current or retired teachers. These part-time faculty members meet with program directors to go over the syllabi and ensure they understand the purpose of the course, the specific objectives that need to be covered and appropriate assignments/assessments. Part-time faculty are also provided an overview of the conceptual framework. Part-time faculty and program directors correspond over the course of the semester to answer questions. Part-time faculty are evaluated at the end of each semester and those course evaluations are evaluated by the department chairs.

6c.5. What personnel provide support for the unit? How does the unit ensure that it has an adequate number of support personnel?

Each department has support staff that assist full-time and part-time faculty members in preparing candidates. In addition to department staff the Director of Teacher Licensure supports candidates in their efforts to become licensed. The Peabody Registrar’s Office assists in scheduling of courses and transcripts for candidates. In addition to the College supports, the University provides candidates with computer support through the Information Technology Services.

67 6c.6. What financial support is available for professional development activities for faculty?

The Peabody Travel Guidelines shows the support given to faculty members for travel to professional conferences and the guidelines for applying for those funds. Junior faculty members on the tenure track receive up to $3000 per year to support their travel to professional conferences. Tenured faculty and professors of the practice receive up to $1000 per year for travel.

6d. Unit Facilities

6d.1. How adequate are unit--classrooms, faculty offices, library/media center, the technology infrastructure, and school facilities--to support teaching and learning?

The Peabody Classrooms Table shows there are ___ classrooms on the Peabody Campus that are available for instructors. All of these classrooms are technology Smart. Most classrooms seat between 25-50 students. There are a few smaller rooms for seminar type courses and one large lecture room that seats 120. The Unit Technology Classrooms and the Unit Labs and Public Computers webpages show that there is ample technology available. The Jean and Alexander Heard Library system has eight libraries that all candidates may use. Specific to teacher education the Peabody Library provides a plethora of opportunities for candidates including workshops, a curriculum library complete with children’s literature books and curriculum used in the P-12 classrooms. The library also has 40 computers available throughout the library for candidates to access.

Each faculty member has a private office within his or her departments. These offices are equipped with appropriate storage space and technologies to support their work. Faculty members typically have additional space to house their research project staff members and materials.

The Peabody Library has been renovated in stages during the past eight years. These renovations have allowed the Library to create individual and group study spaces, seminar rooms and a Library Learning Commons. In 2009, Peabody Library purchased four flip video cameras and video rendering software to allow student teachers to record their practice teaching for review in the classroom. Information literacy classes taught by librarians and classes needing specialty software are regularly taught in the Library Learning Commons. Candidates, faculty and staff are able to reserve any of the group spaces at any time except during exam weeks. When not reserved, the study spaces are available to all on a first come first served basis.

6e. Unit Resources Including Technology

6e.1. How does the unit allocate resources across programs to ensure candidates meet standards in their field of study?

College resources are not allocated by program areas. All students, including candidates in teacher education programs have access to all resources available at Peabody, including

68 technology labs, individual computers placed across the campus, technology smart classrooms, and library materials.

6e.2. What information technology resources support faculty and candidates? What evidence shows that candidates and faculty use these resources?

All faculty members receive either a desktop or laptop computer and these computers are replaced on a rotating basis, typically every 3 years. Appropriate software is downloaded to each computer and the university has site licenses for these. As stated above all classrooms used by unit faculty are technology smart. Faculty members also have access to the technology labs located at Peabody.

6e.3. What resources are available for the development and implementation of the unit's assessment system?

The Access to Academic Information (AAI) and the Online Access to Knowledge (Oak) are provided by through the University website. The Professional Learning Trajectory (PLT) website was developed by unit faculty. The cost of this was approximately $18,000 and the Dead provided the funds to build this and continues to provide funds to keep the PLT updated.

6e.4. What library and curricular resources exist at the institution? How does the unit ensure they are sufficient and current?

The Jean and Alexander Heard Library System is comprised of eight libraries, each supporting a specific college, the Television News Archive, and University Archives and Special Collections. Candidates have access and privileges at all of these departments and campus libraries, but predominately use the Peabody Library and Anne Potter Wilson Music Library for their studies. Within each of the libraries, Librarians are assigned as liaisons to the programs and departments within the colleges. As liaisons, librarians work closely with faculty to select and order books and journals to support the teaching and research needs of the programs as well as teaching information literacy classes. Faculty and students have the opportunity to request purchases of monographs and other one-time purchases using an online purchase form or simply by communicating with the liaison for their department. Faculty are involved and consulted on decisions regarding journal purchases. The Wilson Music Library purchases materials on music teaching techniques for instructing children including multi-volume series that would assist educators in locating music that would be appropriate for the classroom such as Essential Elements, Standard of Excellence, and Essential Repertoire. The Peabody Library purchases materials for all other teacher education programs and maintains the Curriculum Materials Center and Youth Collection supporting all the program areas. The Curriculum Material Center is the collection of PreK to grade 12 textbooks, assessments, DVDs, manipulatives and other resources for use in practicum and classroom assignments. Textbook selection is based on series adopted in the Davidson and Williamson County school districts. The library maintains an open communication with faculty regarding selection of materials. Assessments are purchased only at the request of faculty for use in classes and kept secure according to publisher requirements. The Curriculum Materials Center also includes a Design Studio, for use in designing projects. A die cut collection is available as well as a binder,

69 laminator, extra-large paper cutter, markers, craft scissors and a color printer. Candidates may purchase construction paper, specialty paper or poster board.

Every third year, the library participates in the Association of Research Libraries’ LibQUAL survey. Student, faculty and staff responses to information control and collection questions on that survey are examined to help us assess how well the library’s collections are meeting the research and teaching goals of the school. Additionally, a journal usage review is conducted in alternate years to determine if online journal subscriptions are useful. This year, Peabody Library will conduct a review of our new book acquisitions to determine if our book approval plan needs to be revised. The goal for new books is to see usage of 60% of all new titles within two years of purchase.

6e.5. How does the unit ensure the accessibility of resources to candidates, including candidates in off-campus, distance learning, and alternate route programs, through electronic means?

All electronic resources, books, journals, and databases are available to candidates from any location on or off-campus. Off-campus access to electronic resources is authenticated through a valid Vanderbilt login. The Libraries have been modifying journal subscriptions to acquire online access for all that are possible. While not all journals are available online, the vast majority are. Candidates may discover journal articles through any one of the databases and link directly to the full text or access online journals via the ACORN catalog. Major databases relevant to the programs available to candidates are ERIC, Education Abstracts Full-Text, PsycInfo, International Index to Music Periodicals Full-Text, Naxos Music Library, and RILM (Répertoire internationale de littérature musicale). With hundreds of databases available, library liaisons have identified relevant ones for each program or area studies.

Books, chapters within books, and articles identified by candidates but not owned by Vanderbilt Libraries may be requested through interlibrary loan. Whenever possible, the interlibrary loan service provides an electronic copy of the requested material. Candidates or faculty working at a distance may request assistance with print materials simply by contacting their liaison in the Library or asking for help via the AskUs service. Links to the AskUs service are posted throughout the library web pages for easy access to students and faculty.