UNIVERSITY OF CENTRAL MISSOURI · Web viewThey evaluated first and second year teachers on...

Introduction 1

UNIVERSITY OF CENTRAL MISSOURITEACHER EDUCATION PROGRAMS

INTRODUCTION TO THE INSTITUTION AND THE UNIT

This section sets the context for the visit. It should clearly state the mission of the institution. It should also describe the characteristics of the unit and identify and describe any branch campuses, off-campus sites, alternate route programs, and distance learning programs for professional school personnel.

A. Institution

1. What is the institution's historical context?

Introduction to the University

The University of Central Missouri (UCM) is a moderately selective, comprehensive, public university located in Warrensburg, a west central Missouri community of 17,000, fifty miles southeast of Kansas City.

UCM was founded in 1871 as a two-year institution, State Normal School #2, with three faculty members and 30 students. Created originally for educator preparation, UCM has evolved into a multi-faceted, multi-college institution serving more than 11,000 students in 150 programs of study at the undergraduate and graduate level. The name of the institution has changed four times, each time signifying expansion of the university vision. The first occurred in 1916 when State Normal School #2 became Central Missouri State Teachers College and began offering four-year degrees. In 1946, the name became Central Missouri State College; the institution was authorized to award Master of Science in Education degrees in 1947 and Master of Arts and Education Specialist degrees a few years later. In August, 1972, in recognition of the changing role and importance of the college, the Missouri General Assembly granted university status and the name was changed to Central Missouri State University. The most recent change occurred in 2006, when the name became the University of Central Missouri, reflecting the newly defined mission of becoming a nationally recognized university that delivers a world-class education.

The importance of teacher education has remained a consistent focus of the university through its evolution. In 2000, during his opening State of the University remarks, President Patton reaffirmed teacher education as the first of four cornerstones of the university. UCM has an excellent reputation in Missouri and the region for educator preparation and is the longest continuously NCATE-accredited public institution in the state. Approximately 2,700 (24%) ofUCM’s students have enrolled in programs in the College of Education (COE), making education the largest discipline in the institution. In 2007, more than 10,000 UCM graduates were teaching in Missouri schools, representing the university in more than 80% of the state's school districts and all but six counties. Additional evidence of UCM’s reputation as a teacher-training institution is the 96.9% placement rate for our professional education graduates last year; many programs experienced 100% graduate employment.

Introduction 2

2. What is the institution's mission?

Institutional Mission

UCM regularly revisits its mission and vision statements, seeking input and feedback from students, faculty, and staff. Both have been revised since the last accreditation visit to reflect changes in administration and the institution's ongoing strategic planning process. The mission and vision reflect the university's core values, which articulate the underlying principles that define UCM as an institution of higher education.

Mission: The University of Central Missouri experience transforms students into lifelong learners, dedicated to service, with the knowledge, skills and confidence to succeed and lead in the region, state, nation, and world. UCM offers a comprehensive array of bachelor’s programs and selected master's and doctoral programs building upon historical strengths and statewide mission. (Approved by UCM Board of Governors, October, 2008)

Vision: The University of Central Missouri aspires to be a nationally recognized, comprehensive university that delivers a world-class university education by providing a small-college learning environment coupled with large-university opportunities. (Approved by UCM Board of Governors, June, 2006)

Core Values:

Learning: Student learning and development are the primary purposes of the University of Central Missouri. All institutional services exist to support the academic mission of the institution, and student life is viewed as an important facet of the educational experience. Central Missouri faculty and staff members believe strongly in the importance of educating the whole person and preparing students for lifelong learning. UCM provides all students with a strong liberal arts and sciences foundation and strives to instill in each of them the importance of freedom of expression and inquiry. Central Missouri is committed to improving public education in Missouri and beyond.

Excellence: The University of Central Missouri sets high expectations for students and graduates and demands excellence in teaching and in delivery of services. Central Missouri promotes quality and excellence in staff and faculty members through its many professional development activities. The university promotes the development and well-being of each member of the campus community, which in turn fosters a strong commitment to the institution.

Service: "Education for Service" is Central Missouri's official motto. The UCM community promotes involvement and provides experiences that foster a lifelong commitment to service. The university believes in the importance of sharing its human and academic resources with schools, businesses, industries and public agencies through partnerships and outreach activities. Central Missouri also serves as an informational, cultural and artistic center for Missouri citizens.

Introduction 3

Responsibility: The University of Central Missouri places a high value on being ethical in all practices, and faculty members strive to impress this value upon their students. Central Missouri strives to employ the most efficient and appropriate use of fiscal and human resources in order to provide students with a quality, affordable higher education experience. Faculty and staff members value fact-based decision making through collegial deliberation.

Adaptability: Preparing students for a global, technologically changing world requires Central Missouri faculty and staff members to be adaptive and responsive in developing and delivering programs and services. The university places a high value on the leadership shown by its faculty and staff. Central Missouri has a strong future orientation and a willingness to make long-term commitments when necessary, as well as the flexibility to respond quickly to meet regional and state needs.

Diversity: The University of Central Missouri is committed to attracting and supporting a diverse body of students, faculty and staff members. The campus strives to be responsive to the specific needs of people with physical handicaps and offers educational programs to allow all students to reach their full potential. Central Missouri encourages acceptance and respect of individuals with differing values, ideas, beliefs, abilities and life experiences. The university promotes good citizenship, a sense of civic responsibility, global awareness and an appreciation for human diversity at all levels.

Community: Through the Central Community Creed, students, faculty and staff members pledge to create a community based on the seven principles described in the Carnegie Foundation's Campus Life: In Search of Community – learning, open, just, caring, disciplined, purposeful and celebrative. Faculty and staff members strive to create and maintain effective channels of communication. The university also values the local community and engages in numerous partnerships. [Link to Community Creed.]

3. What are the institution's characteristics [e.g., control and type of institution such as private, land grant, or HBI; location (e.g., urban, rural, or suburban area)]?

Institutional Characteristics

UCM’s Warrensburg campus, covering more than 1,500 acres, is large and attractive, yet small enough that most facilities are within a six-minute walk. The University also offers courses at the Summit Center in Lee’s Summit, Missouri, approximately 35 miles from Warrensburg on the Eastern outskirts of the Kansas City metropolitan area. A number of UCM's teacher education programs offer courses through distance education, including online instruction and interactive television.

http://www.ucmo.edu/diversity/creed.cfm

Introduction 4

To maintain the quality of academic programs, UCM hires highly-qualified instructional faculty who are accessible to students. More than 2/3 of the university's faculty possess a Ph.D. or other terminal degree. The rate is slightly higher in the COE, with 72% of the COE full-time faculty possessing doctorate degrees and several more in the process of completing their dissertations. The average undergraduate class size is 22, with upper level and graduate courses frequently operating with lower numbers. The UCM faculty:student ratio is 1:17.

Recently, UCM was designated one of 161 best Midwestern colleges in the Princeton Review's Best Colleges: Region by Region online. The editor indicated "Students choose UCM because it is affordable, offers a wide variety of programs, and is a nice size--not too large or too small." UCM was also listed as "one of the nation's best value undergraduate institutions" in the Princeton Review's America's Best Value Colleges (2008, Random House/Princeton Review).

The University's academic programs are organized into five colleges: the College of Arts, Humanities and Social Sciences (CAHSS); the College of Education (COE); the College of Health and Human Performance (CHHS); the College of Science and Technology (CST); and the Harmon College of Business Administration (HCBA). UCM's teacher education programs extend across four of the five colleges (i.e., all but HCBA), with most K-12 and secondary programs residing in content area departments.

UCM's programs are fully accredited by the Higher Learning Commission of North Central Association of Colleges & Schools and teacher education programs are accredited by the Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE). A number of UCM's teacher education programs have also chosen to seek national recognition through their Specialized Professional Associations, as indicated in Table 2.

The typical UCM teacher education candidate is a female in her early twenties; however, UCM's varied programs also draw a large number of nontraditional and international students, as well as students from nearby Whiteman Air Force Base. Although 90% of UCM students reside in Missouri, the remaining 10% represent 40 states and 52 nations. Approximately 9% of the general student body is multicultural. UCM's education programs include a large number of post-baccalaureate candidates pursuing an alternate route to certification and/or the Master of Arts in Teaching.

4. (Optional) Links and key exhibits related to the institutional context could be attached here. (Links with descriptions must be typed into a Word document that can be uploaded here. The number of attached exhibits should be limited in number; BOE members can access other exhibits in the unit's electronic document room.)

Links to Exhibits: CAMPUS VIDEOS2008 FACT BOOK UCM Today Campus and Alumni Magazine

B. The unit

http://www.ucmo.edu/today/

http://www.ucmo.edu/rsearch/fact08.pdf

http://www.ucmo.edu/undergrad/live/muletube.cfm

Introduction 5

1. How many candidates are enrolled in programs preparing them to work in P-12 schools at the following levels: initial teacher preparation, advanced teacher preparation, and other school professionals?

Introduction to the Unit

The teacher education unit at the University of Central Missouri (UCM) includes 24 undergraduate initial certification programs (1777 declared majors) in four colleges and 18 advanced programs (523 declared majors). An additional 270 students are enrolled in UCM’s alternative certification program, and 361 are pursuing the Master of Arts in Teaching. The Unit at UCM is led by the dean of the College of Education, as defined in the Professional Education Faculty By-laws and Teacher Education Committee Guidelines. The PEF is comprised of all faculty who teach professional education courses, supervise student teachers, or administer departments with teacher education programs. The authority of the PEF is exercised through the Teacher Education Council (TEC) which is made up of ten voting members elected by faculty representing each of the colleges that has a teacher education program. The COE dean, associate dean, director of clinical services and certification, and department chairs serve as non-voting members of the TEC [See Teacher Education Committee Membership]. The COE currently has 2700 declared majors, 1282 at the initial/bachelor’s level, 1177 at the master’s level, 232 pursuing an educational specialist, and nine participating in the cooperative doctoral program at the University of Missouri-Columbia. [See Figure 1: COE Five-Year Enrollment by Degree]

http://faculty.ucmo.edu/ncate09/general/ir_intro_fig1_declared_majors_chart.doc

http://faculty.ucmo.edu/ncate09/reports/TEC_%20membership.pdf

http://faculty.ucmo.edu/ncate09/reports/TEC_policies.pdf

http://faculty.ucmo.edu/ncate09/reports/PEF_Bylaws.pdf


Introduction 6

Figure 1: COE Five-Year Enrollment by Degree

Enrollment in education courses has remained fairly consistent in terms of semester hours generated. However, over the past five years, there has been a significant increase in the number of candidates at the master’s level. The major reason for this is the growing number of postbaccalaureate candidates seeking initial certification while pursuing a Master of Arts in Teaching. There was a marked decline in the number of students pursuing bachelor’s degrees in education during 2007-2008, primarily in the three programs housed in the former Department of Curriculum & Instruction (i.e., Early Childhood, Elementary, and Middle School). The reason for the apparent decrease is less clear and may be a result of several factors. A new admissions procedure was instituted in fall 2007 for incoming freshmen who were admitted conditionally (i.e., with lower ACT scores and higher GPA); those students are no longer allowed to declare a major until they have successfully completed the freshman year. Another factor may be the number of hours required to complete a BSE in those three programs; students may have chosen other majors with fewer hours (e.g., secondary social studies rather than elementary education with a social studies emphasis). Finally, with the implementation of the new state-wide Associate of Arts in Teaching degree at the community colleges in 2007, there is now an added incentive for students to complete their AA degree prior to transferring to a four-year institution. The required program changes are now underway to facilitate transfer from our two largest community college partners to UCM.

2003-2004 2004-2005 2005-2006 2006-2007 2007-2008

Introduction 7

2. Please complete the following table (Table 1) to indicate the size of the professional education faculty.

Table 1: Professional Education Faculty and Graduate Teaching Assistants

Academic Rank # of Faculty who are full-time in the unit

# of faculty who are full-time in the institution, but part-time in the unit

# of faculty who are part-time at the institution & assigned to the unit (e.g., adjunct faculty)

# of graduate teaching assistants teaching or supervising clinical practice

Professors 13 22

Associate Professors 18 16 1

Assistant Professors 20 10

Instructors 5 4

Lecturers

Other 3 37

Total 59 52 38 0

NOTE: Based on Spring 2009 PEF list

3. What do the data in Table 1 tell the unit about its faculty?

Description of Unit Faculty

The UCM full-time faculty teaching professional education courses are well-qualified experts in their fields. Most have significant experience in P-12 education settings prior to joining the faculty. A review of faculty vita will reveal numerous professional presentations at various levels, peer-reviewed journal publications and textbooks, and laudable service to public schools and professional organizations. The majority of PEF faculty serve in full-time, tenure-track positions, distributed across the three ranks. Full-time instructors are used to augment tenure-track faculty lines, and to provide specialized expertise or skills. Part-time adjunct faculty are selected based on their expertise in course-specific content, for experience in P-12 education, and for knowledge and skills related to evidence-based practices. Adjunct faculty teaching courses are mentored and supervised by the program coordinator, or by the lead faculty member for a particular course.

4. Please complete the following table (Table 2) to indicate the programs offered at your institution at the initial teacher preparation level.

Introduction 8

Table 2: Initial Teacher Education Programs and Their Review Status

Program Name

Award Level

Number of Candidates Enrolled or Admitted*

Agency or Associate Reviewing Programs

Program Report Submitted for National Review

State Approval Status

Status of National Recognition of Programs by NCATE

Agriculture (9-12)

BSE 11 DESE No Approved2002

NA

Art(K-12)

BSE 87 NASAD/DESE

NASAD Accredited

Approved 2002

NA

Business Education (9-12)

BSE 39 DESE No Approved 2002

NA

Early Childhood (B-3)

BSE 277 NAEYC/DESE

Yes Approved 2002

Recognized

Elementary (1-6)**

BSE 524 ACEI/DESE

Yes Approved 2002

Recognized

English (9-12)

BSE 79 NCTE/ DESE

Yes Approved 2002

Recognized with probation

Family and Consumer Science (B-12)


NA

Program Name

Award Level

Number of Candidates Enrolled or Admitted





Foreign Language: French (K-12)

BSE 6 ACTFL/DESE

Yes Approved 2002

Further development required

Foreign Language: German (K-9)

Minor 0 NA No Approved 2002

NA

Foreign Language: Spanish (K-

BSE 15 ACTFL/DESE

Yes Approved 2002

Further development required

Introduction 9

12)Health (K-9, 9-12, K-12)

Minor 33 DESE No Approved 2002

NA

Industrial Technology (9-12)[Tech Ed.]

BSE 18 DESE No Approved 2002

NA

Journalism (9-12)

Minor 3 DESE No Approved 2002

NA

Mathematics (9-12)

BSE 40 NCTM/DESE

Yes Approved 2002

Recognized with conditions

Middle School (5-9)

BSE 81 NMSA/DESE

Yes Approved 2002


Music: Instrumental (9-12)

BME 66 NASM/DESE

NASM Accredited

Approved 2002

NA

Music: Vocal (9-12)

BME 28 NASM/DESE

NASM Accredited

Approved 2002

NA

Physical Education (9-12, K-12)

BS 186 AAHPERD/DESE

Yes Approved 2002


Social Science (9-12)

BSE 112 NCSS/DESE

Yes Approved 2002

Recognized

Program Name

Award Level






Speech/Theater(9-12)


NA

Science: Biology, Chemistry, Earth Science, Physics, Unified Science

BSE 42 NSTA/DESE

Yes Interim Approval for secondary single subject; UnifiedApproved


Introduction 10

(9-12) 2002 Special Ed: CrossCat (K-12)***

BSE 108 CEC/DESE

Yes Approved Recognized

Special Ed: ECSE (B-3rd gr)

BSE -- CEC/DESE Yes Approved Recognized

Special Ed: SDD(K-12

BSE -- CEC/DESE Yes Approved Recognized

NOTES:* Column 3 based on number of declared majors, 01/16/09, UCM Institutional Research; **Includes ELED/EC double majors; ***Disaggregated data not available.

5. What do the data in Table 2 tell the unit about its initial teacher preparation programs?

Description of Initial Programs/Status

Following the 2002 joint NCATE/DESE site visit, all of UCM's existing programs were approved by the Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE). Three of those programs were approved conditionally: Speech/Theater, Family and Consumer Sciences (FACS) and the add-on certificate in Gifted Education. In 2004, a focused review found those programs to have satisfied the concerns of the reviewers, and they were fully approved. The list of approved UCM initial certification programs is located on DESE's Educator Preparation website.

While Missouri does not require national recognition for institutions or programs, the members of the PEF have placed a high value on striving to achieve national recognition. UCM's vocal and instrumental music programs are accredited by the National Association of Schools of Music. The art education program is accredited by the National Association of Schools of Art and Design (NASAD), and is UCM is the only state institution in Missouri with NASAD accredited programs. Copies of the most recent NASAD and NASM documents are available for review in the UCM Electronic Document Center (EDC).

UCM submitted 12 initial programs for national recognition through the SPA review system in February of 2008. Six of those (Early Childhood; Elementary; Social Studies; and Special Education: CrossCategorical, Early Childhood, and Severe Developmental Disabilities) have been fully recognized. Four programs were recognized with conditions; one of which submitted a response to conditions report 2/1/09 (Math); the other three will submit in September 2009 (Middle School, Physical Education, Social Studies). The English program was recognized with probation, and both modern language programs were identified as needing further development. The feedback from the national peer reviewers was helpful. The two areas most often identified for improvement included more explicit alignment of unit and program assessments with SPA standards, and disaggregation of data by program or certification area.

A significant number of the unit’s initial preparation programs (15 of 24) have been nationally recognized or are in the process of seeking that status. This indicates that programs are generally

http://faculty.ucmo.edu/ncate09/index.html

http://dese.mo.gov/divteachqual/teached/directory/college_directory.pdf

Introduction 11

well-aligned with standards, and have assessment systems in place to assess initial candidate knowledge, skills and dispositions. Overall, unit and program-specific candidate outcome data indicate that our graduates are well-prepared to assume positions as first-year teachers. On the TEAC survey, both at completion and follow-up, they express confidence in their skills, and are regarded positively by their principals and administrators.

6. Please complete the following table (Table 3) to indicate the advanced programs offered at your institution for the advanced preparation of licensed teachers and other school professionals.

Table 3: Advanced Preparation Programs and Their Review Status

Program Name

Award Level






Career & Tech Ed Leadership

MS 32 DESE No Approved 2002

NA

Counselor (K-8, K-12, 7-12)

MS 94 DESE No Approved 2002

NA

Curriculum & Instruction (Elem, K-12, 9-12)

MSE 43 NCATE No NA NA

Award Level






Curriculum & Instruction

EdS 6 NCATE No NA NA

Driver's Education (9-12)

Add-on certificate only

NA DESE No Approved 2002

NA

Educational Leadership: Principal (K-8, 7-12, 5-9)

MSE 89 ELCC/DESE

Yes Approved 2002


Educational Leadership: Superintendent(K-12)

EdS 37 ELCC/DESE

Yes Approved 2002


Introduction 12

Educational Technology

MS 30 AECT/NCATE

Yes NA Recognized with conditions

Guidance & Counseling

EdS 18 NCATE No NA NA

Library Media Specialist (K-12)

MS/EdS 77 ALA/DESE

Yes Approved 2002

Recognized

Literacy Education

MSE 30 IRA/NCATE

Yes Approved 2002

Recognized

Master of Arts in Teaching (5-9, 7-12)

MAT 361 NCATE No NA NA

School Psychological Examiner (K-12)

MS + Certificate


NA

Special Education

MSE 28 NCATE No Approved 2002

NA

Special Education Director (K-12)

EdS + Certificate

10 DESE No Approved 2002

NA

Special Education: Gifted (K-12)



NA

Program Name

Award Level






Special Reading (K-12)



NA

Technology & Occupational Education

EdS 7 DESE No Approved 2002

NA

TESOL(K-12)

MA 22 DESE No Approved 2002

NA

7. What do the data in Table 3 tell the unit about its advanced programs?

Description of Advanced Programs/Status

Introduction 13

The advanced programs leading to certification for library media specialists, school counselors, building and district administrators, special education directors, career center directors, psychological examiners, and reading specialists were all approved by DESE during the last joint accreditation site visit in 2002. A number of UCM's advanced programs do not lead to certification, and some do not have a SPA affiliated with NCATE. However five advanced programs submitted reports through the NCATE SPA review system in February, 2008. Two of those--Library Media Specialist and the MSE in Literacy--were recognized by the ALA and IRA, respectively. The two advanced programs in Educational Leadership were recognized with conditions (principals and superintendents). Issues cited related to the minimum amount of data required for new assessments, the explicit alignment of assessments to standards, and the need for further differentiation between the two leadership programs. The fifth program submitted, the MS in Educational Technology, was a new program with no completers at the time of initial submission. Initially judged as in need of further development, the program has since been recognized with conditions. As discussed earlier, the five-year enrollment figures for graduate programs demonstrate an upward trend. Most of these programs are well-established and have had relatively stable enrollments. A large portion of the increase in master’s-level enrollment is related to the rapid growth of the alternative certification and Master of Arts in Teaching programs (discussed under #8 below).

The national recognition of five of UCM’s advanced programs indicate that they have made significant progress in aligning courses and assessments with standards, although improvements continue to be made. Program assessment data from all graduate programs, including the TEAC follow-up employer survey, indicate our candidates feel well-prepared to fill advanced roles in education and that they are positively regarded by their employers and supervisors.

8. What programs are offered off-campus or via distance learning technologies? What alternate route programs are offered?

Description of Off-campus, Distance Learning, and Alternate Route Programs

Over the past seven years, UCM has seen a significant increase in the number of postbaccalaureate students pursuing initial teaching certification via alternative route programs. That number includes some of the 361 candidates currently admitted to the Master of Arts in Teaching (MAT), all of whom have individualized programs of study to meet DESE requirements for certification in a middle school or secondary content area. Many of the MAT candidates are already serving as classroom teacher of record under Missouri's Temporary Authorization Certificate program (TAC). Another 270 candidates are completing UCM's state-approved Alternative Certification Program, with individualized programs of study designed to meet state requirements. The teacher education programs housed in the College of Education have made an effort to accommodate the increasing number of nontraditional learners by offering core and upper-level teacher education courses in a variety of formats and schedules (e.g., online, evening, summer, weekend). Many of these courses are offered at the Lee's Summit campus on a rotating basis to facilitate participation by nontraditional students who live and work in the Kansas City area. These alternate format and Lee's Summit courses are also utilized by a large number of individuals working on a TAC or taking classes to add an area of certification.

Introduction 14

Faculty in the Education Administration Program began offering the Collaborative Principal Preparation Program (CPPP) during the 2002 – 03 school year. The CPPP is a collaborative venture between UCM, the Regional Professional Development Center (RPDC) and 14 suburban Kansas City area school districts. The program is a collaborative effort to assist school districts in “growing their own” future leaders. CPPP courses are offered in locations that are geographically central to each cohort of students.

While many of UCM's teacher education courses are offered through distance education or extended campus, none of the undergraduate or initial certification programs currently can be completed entirely by alternative means. The majority of both initial and advanced programs are completed in face-to-face courses. The College of Education currently offers two online degree programs: MS in Educational Technology and the MS in Library Science & Information Services. Students also can earn a UCM graduate certificate in Online Teaching & Learning entirely through the Internet. During the 2007-2008 academic year, the College of Education offered 152 undergraduate courses online, with an enrollment of 2408. Graduate online offerings during the same period included 60 courses at the 5000 and 6000 level, with an enrollment of 1484. [See List of 2007-2008 online courses and enrollments.]

9. 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.)? (These changes could be compiled from those reported in Part C of the AACTE/NCATE annual reports since the last visit.)

Description of Substantive Changes since Last Visit

Since our 2002 NCATE site visit, a number of events have taken place at the state and institutional level that have impacted our educator preparation program. The Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE) revised their standards for initial teacher preparation and will continue to review and revise content-specific standards on a rotating basis. The Missouri Standards for Teacher Education Programs (MoSTEP Standards) are based on the 10 INTASC standard areas, with the addition of an 11th standard addressing use of technology in the classroom. DESE also aligned standards in the various certification areas with those of national Specialized Professional Associations (SPAs). Consequently, all of the UCM educator preparation programs have reviewed their curriculum, syllabi, and assessments to realign with the new standards and reporting requirements. For example, in 2002, the Missouri initial certification in K-12 mild-moderate special education was by discipline (i.e., emotional/behavioral disorders, learning disabilities, and mental retardation); the program now reflects DESE’s move to a cross-categorical mild-moderate certificate that includes the three previous areas plus physical and health impairments.

In addition, a number of program changes occurred as a result of areas for improvement identified during the 2002 site visit. Under Standard 1, examiners found that the Speech/Theater

http://faculty.ucmo.edu/ncate09/general/2007_2008_online_courses_and_enrollments.xls

Introduction 15

program’s methods course was not reflective of the UCM conceptual framework or the MoSTEP standards. Consequently, course syllabi were revised and a December 2004 focused review found the program to be in compliance. A second issue related to Standard 6 expressed concern that the heavy use of adjunct faculty in the Family and Consumer Sciences (FACS) program, the Recreation program, and the Gifted and Talented (GT) endorsement area had negatively affected the quality and growth of the programs. After an internal review of those programs, the following changes were made: (1) A full-time faculty line was approved for FACS, and the program was moved to the Department of Career and Technology Education; (2) The functional major in Therapeutic Recreation was placed in abeyance; and (3) the GT courses were revised and converted to an online format; those courses are now offered annually and taught consistently by an adjunct with exceptional expertise in the content area. The GT program was also found to be in compliance during the 2004 focused DESE review. In response to concerns that the number of teaching overloads would be discouraging to potential new hires, three new teacher education faculty lines were added in 2005-2006. A number of other program-specific improvements have occurred as well: the Early Childhood program was revised to increase observation and field experiences at the infant/toddler level; the Elementary Education portfolio was revised and scoring guides were redesigned to better align with standards; and the Middle School program continues to move toward addressing the developmental needs of that age group.

During the past five years, UCM has also seen a number of administrative and organizational changes. The University has a new president--Dr. Aaron Podolefsky (2005)--and provost--Dr. George Wilson (2007). Based on recommendations from a faculty task force in the Fall of 2006, the Board of Governors approved creation of a fifth college. Effective January 1, 2007, the College of Education and Human Services (CEHS) became the College of Education (COE), and the College of Health and Human Services (CHHS), and a number of programs moved across college lines. Two CEHS departments--Educational Leadership & Human Development and Curriculum & Instruction are now in COE. They were joined by Career & Technology Education, previously n the College of Science and Technology. After first serving as Interim Dean, Dr. Michael Wright became the inaugural dean of COE and Head of the Professional Education Unit in June 2007. A number of faculty task forces immediately began working on strategies for effective organization and governance of the new COE. They examined measures of excellence, organizational structure, feasibility of joint appointments, and the 21st century learning environment. Because the Unit includes teacher education programs housed in three other Colleges, representatives from across the PEF were involved in the task forces. Based partly on recommendations from the organizational task force, in July of 2008, the department of Curriculum & Instruction was divided into two new departments--Educational Foundations & Literacy (EDFL) and Elementary & Early Childhood (ECEL). This realignment allows clearer programmatic focus for Elementary Education and Early Childhood, as well as for the Middle School and Literacy programs in EDFL. Further it centralizes responsibility for the core education courses in EDFL along with the responsibility for coordinating the secondary pedagogy classes taken by education majors outside the college. [See Professional Education Organizational Chart.]

Substantial changes also have occurred in the unit assessment system. At the time of the 2002 site visit, the three major unit-mandated assessments for initial certification programs were the student teaching observation form, the Praxis II examination, and the candidate portfolio.

http://faculty.ucmo.edu/ncate09/general/ir_intro_org_chart.pdf

http://faculty.ucmo.edu/ncate09/general/ir_intro_org_chart.pdf

Introduction 16

Detailed in greater length in Standard Two, all unit assessments were reviewed by subcommittees of the PEF and representatives from area public schools during the summer of 2005. As a result, new assessments were developed and existing ones were realigned, modified, or dropped. The student teaching observation form was redesigned significantly, with changes to the content, scoring procedure and rubric, and administration schedule. The policy concerning the timing of the Praxis II examination was modified. Beginning in the 1990s, the State of Missouri strongly recommended portfolio assessment based on DESE standards for all educator preparation programs; consequently, all UCM programs used candidate portfolios as a primary summative assessment measure. Two years ago, with the most recent school improvement cycle, DESE removed the undergraduate portfolio requirement. The PEF voted in 2006 to remove the portfolio as a program assessment required by the Unit. Programs are now allowed to use other assessment measures to demonstrate candidate competency on MoSTEP standards, and most UCM programs have revised their program assessments accordingly. Three new assessments were introduced to address candidate dispositions, ability to plan instruction, and impact on P-12 learning. These were piloted in student teaching during the 2005-2006 academic year and, with minor modifications, continue to be used as described in Standard Two.

UCM is committed to strengthening its education programs. The unit's commitment to excellence in teacher education is evident and is supported by our colleagues across campus, in the public schools, and at the area community colleges. Based on recommendations from PEF task forces and our College of Education Advisory Council, a number of unit-wide program improvements are in the planning stages, including: increasing faculty and student involvement in the Kansas City Charter Schools; expanding the Professional Development School (PDS) Partnership to include sites in the Metropolitan Kansas City area; exploring the feasibility of a full senior-year field experience for all teacher education students; increasing tenure-track faculty supervision of student teaching in key programs; revamping all education programs to provide a smooth transition for students completing the new statewide Associate of Arts in Teaching degree; increasing the emphasis on differentiating instruction throughout the teacher education program; and adopting the Teacher Work Sample as a unit assessment.

10. (Optional) Links and key exhibits related to the unit context could be attached here. (Links with descriptions must be typed into a Word document that can be uploaded here. The number of attached exhibits should be limited in number; BOE members can access other exhibits in the unit's electronic exhibit room.)

Conceptual Framework 17

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

This section provides an overview of the unit's conceptual framework(s). The overview should include a brief description of the framework(s) and its development.

1. Briefly summarize the following elements of the unit's conceptual framework: the vision and mission of the unit philosophy, purposes, goals, and institutional standards of the unit knowledge bases, including theories, research, the wisdom of practice, and

educational policies that drive the work of the unit candidate proficiencies related to expected knowledge, skills, and professional

dispositions, including proficiencies associated with diversity and technology, that are aligned with the expectations in professional, state, and institutional standards

summarized description of the unit's assessment system

Vision and Mission of the Unit

The conceptual framework establishes the shared vision for the unit's efforts in preparing educators to work effectively in P-12 schools. It provides direction for programs, courses, teaching, candidate performance, scholarship, service, and unit accountability. The conceptual framework is knowledge-based, articulated, shared, coherent, consistent with the unit and/or institutional mission, and continuously evaluated.

The UCM Teacher Education Program (TEP) has articulated its conceptual framework in the following belief statement: The Central educator is a competent, caring, reflective practitioner committed to the premise that all can learn. The reflective practitioner theme is expanded upon in the Vision and Mission statements adopted by the Professional Education Faculty (PEF):

Vision: Through dedication to teaching, scholarship, collaboration, and outreach, the University of Central Missouri’s Professional Education Faculty prepares reflective practitioners who have high expectations for P-12 student learning, are informed decision makers, and value diversity. The University’s Teacher Education Program provides each graduate the foundation for a life of continued learning, service, and engagement.

Mission: As a cornerstone of the institution for over 130 years, the University of Central Missouri's Teacher Education Program (TEP) develops teachers and other school professionals who are well-grounded in theory, display competence in content knowledge and instructional strategies, and possess the dispositions to ensure success for all learners. The TEP prepares individuals as professional educators for an ever-changing, culturally diverse population. Faculty and candidates provide support and service to schools in meeting their present and future challenges by developing communities that learn through research and scholarly activities. Educator preparation is a campus-wide responsibility, a commitment that reflects the honor and worth of serving a vital profession.


Philosophy and Knowledge Base

Defined in the work of John Dewey (1933), reflective practice is “the active, persistent and careful consideration of any belief or supposed form of knowledge in light of the grounds that support it” (p. 9). The UCM reflective practitioner model, therefore, acknowledges that neither knowledge nor experience alone will produce an expert teacher. Rather, educator preparation must be a recursive, developmental process that requires intentional learner-educators to expand their knowledge base, skills, and dispositions continually through ongoing application, evaluation, and reflection.

Effective teachers possess a thorough understanding of the research-supported knowledge base, including foundational theories and models of education, child development, and educational psychology, content, and curriculum related to their area of practice, behavior management and motivation, instructional strategies for all students, and assessment and data-based classroom decision-making. In UCM’s educator preparation program, this fundamental information is introduced in three undergraduate core courses: Foundations of Education, Educational Psychology, and Education of the Exceptional Child. As part of those three courses, students are exposed to and assessed on their developing knowledge in each of these core areas.

However, it is not sufficient for candidates to merely understand and articulate the knowledge base. They must also develop skills in applying their knowledge to classroom practice. Structured activities and classroom observations in three core courses provide candidates with an opportunity to identify relationships between theory and practice, to systematically reflect on their experiences through personal narratives (Lefrancois, 2000), and to begin to develop their own research-based theory of teaching (McCown, Driscoll, & Roop, 1996). As summarized by Sternberg and Williams (2002), developing instructional expertise involves knowing the content and practical instructional strategies, observing and practicing the behaviors of successful teachers, reflecting on what works and what does not, and integrating knowledge and skills into a unique and personal teaching style. Therefore, the core courses also introduce candidates to the practice of reflection through modeling, discussion, observation, application, and case-study based activities and assessments using Sternberg’s (2002) triarchic aspects of intelligence:

Thinking analytically: Critical thinking and reflection about the knowledge base.

Thinking practically: Critical thinking and reflection about integrating course content into the knowledge base, applying knowledge to P-12 classroom practice, and refining personal philosophy of teaching.

Thinking creatively: Critical thinking and reflection about the teaching and learning process, integrating and refining knowledge and skills, applying knowledge and skills to P-12 classroom practice, and revisiting and reconstructing the knowledge base.

These course-embedded activities provide candidates with an opportunity to practice what Slavin (2006) called “necessary teacher decision-making skills.” “Educators must decide (1) how to recognize problems and issues, (2) how to consider situations from multiple perspectives, (3)


how to call up relevant professional knowledge to formulate actions, (4) how to take the most appropriate action, and (5) how to judge the consequences” (p. 13).

Once undergraduate teacher education candidates have acquired a basic understanding of the core knowledge base, they move into upper division teacher education courses that build on this information and expand into the three types of expert knowledge described by Sternberg and Williams (2002) as (1) content or subject matter knowledge, (2) pedagogical knowledge—strategies for instruction and assessment of student learning, and (3) pedagogical content knowledge—instruction and assessment strategies for specific content areas. Activities throughout the teacher education course sequence build upon the core knowledge base by continued modeling, observation, and practical application activities and assessments.

UCM’s graduate and advanced programs further develop and build on these three areas of expertise. In each of the specialized advanced program areas, curriculum, course activities, and assessments have been designed to deepen professional knowledge and skills and to prepare candidates as instructional leaders and educational professionals in library science, counseling, literacy, special education, educational technology, and school administration.

Candidate Proficiencies Aligned with Standards

Processes have been implemented to promote uniformity across programs within the TEP. Representatives of the PEF from the colleges (Education; Health and Human Services; Arts, Humanities and Social Sciences; and Science and Technology) meet regularly to discuss content, pedagogy, assessments, and outcomes related to candidate knowledge, skills, and dispositions.

Competencies for Beginning Teachers. For initial certification programs, the TEP has adopted the Missouri Standards for Teacher Education Programs (MoSTEP) which are based on standards developed by the Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (INTASC). Course syllabi, assessments, and candidate competencies are aligned with MoSTEP standards, and all candidates for initial teaching certification are expected to demonstrate competency on the following twelve items by the conclusion of their program:

Understands the central concepts, tools of inquiry, and structures of the discipline(s) within the context of a global society and creates learning experiences that make these aspects of subject matter meaningful for students.

Understands how students learn and develop, and provides learning opportunities that support the intellectual, social, and personal development of all students.

Recognizes the importance of short term and long range planning and curriculum development and develops, complements, and evaluates curriculum based upon students, district, and state performance standards.

Uses a variety of instructional strategies to encourage students’ development of critical thinking, problem solving, and performance skills.


Uses an understanding of individual and group motivation and behavior to create a learning environment that encourages positive social interaction, active engagement in learning, and self-motivation.

Models effective verbal, non-verbal, and media communication techniques to foster active inquiry, collaboration, and supportive interaction in the classroom.

Understands and uses formal assessment strategies to evaluate and ensure the continuous intellectual, social, and physical development of the learner.

Understands theories and applications of technology in educational settings and has adequate technological skills to create meaningful learning opportunities for all students.

Understands how students differ in their approaches to learning and creates instructional opportunities that are adapted to diverse learners.

Is a reflective practitioner who continually assesses the effects of choices and actions on others. Actively seeks opportunities to grow professionally and utilizes assessment and professional growth to generate more learning for more students.

Fosters relationships with school colleagues, parents, and educational partners in the larger community to support student learning and well-being.

Advanced Programs and Discipline-Specific Competencies. Candidates seeking initial certification in Missouri also must meet the prescribed Missouri Standards for their content/certification area defined by the Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE), which have been generally aligned with the expectations of each program's learned society or specialized professional association (SPA), where one exists. While national recognition is not required by the State of Missouri, many programs have chosen to seek recognition through the NCATE SPA system or through their own professional accreditation organizations (i.e., music and art). Like the MoSTEP standards, the content-specific standards also are infused throughout the Teacher Education Program and key standards-based assessments are used as benchmarks in evaluating candidate performance within each initial certification program. Similarly, advanced degree programs use standards from their professional organizations in determining candidate success, in conjunction with the premises of the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards.

Candidate Dispositions

The TEP acknowledges that dispositions are a critical factor in becoming a successful educator, and recognizes the necessary relationship between dispositions and candidate behaviors. Therefore, the Unit has developed a set of 12 dispositional expectations that are based on INTASC and MoSTEP standards, consistent with our conceptual framework, and reflect the values of our programs. The Unit Disposition Assessment, completed for all initial certification


candidates, provides multiple developmental exemplars of specific instructional behaviors and documents candidate performance in relation to each: [See Unit Disposition Assessment.]

Commits to high expectations for all students, and values the ability/capacity for each student to learn

Values student ability to apply concepts learned to performance activities

Commits to the development of critical thinking skills (e.g., problem solving, analysis)

Commits to seeking out, developing, and continually refining teaching practices that generate more learning for students

Commits to development of lessons that are interesting and engaging through a variety of instructional strategies to accommodate all learners, including those from diverse backgrounds, experiences, and cultures (e.g., use of technology, grouping, motivating materials)

Commits to making appropriate adaptations and accommodations for students with diverse needs (e.g., use of technology)

Appreciates and promotes acceptance of self-discipline, responsibility, and self-esteem

Commits to a positive and enthusiastic attitude for teaching and learning to inspire self and others

Believes students and colleagues should be treated and should treat others with kindness, fairness, patience, dignity, and respect

Commits to relationships with school colleagues, parents, and educational partners in the larger community to support student learning and well-being

Assesses the effects of choices and actions on others and actively seeks out opportunities to grow professionally in order to promote learner outcomes

Fulfills professional responsibilities consistent with building and district expectations and policies concerning appearance, punctuality, attendance, and timely and accurate paperwork completion

The advanced programs also consider candidate dispositions as an important factor in successful practice. In these programs, the dispositions are generally embedded within the discipline-specific standards and reflected in program-specific assessments.

Diversity Competence

The UCM campus community is committed to the enhancement of all aspects of diversity in all

http://faculty.ucmo.edu/ncate09/standards/standard_2/dispositions_assessment.DOC


of its programs, including Teacher Education. As one of UCM's Core Values, the following statement on diversity was approved by the Board of Governors in 2003:

The University of Central Missouri is committed to attracting and supporting a diverse body of students, faculty and staff members. The campus strives to be responsive to the specific needs of people with physical handicaps and offers educational programs to allow all students to reach their full potential. Central Missouri encourages acceptance and respect of individuals with differing values, ideas, beliefs, abilities and life experiences. The university promotes good citizenship, a sense of civic responsibility, global awareness and an appreciation for human diversity at all levels.

The campus attracts and supports a body of students, faculty, and staff reflecting the composition of its service area in West-Central Missouri. Various aspects of diversity are infused into the undergraduate Teacher Education Program curriculum, and are reflected in standards-based Unit assessment items, including:


Commits to high expectations for all students, and values the ability/capacity for each student to learn.

Commits to development of lessons that are interesting and engaging through a variety of instructional strategies to accommodate all learners, including those from diverse backgrounds, experiences, and cultures (e.g., use of technology, grouping, motivating materials).

Commits to making appropriate adaptations and accommodations for students with diverse needs (e.g., use of technology).

Believes students and colleagues should be treated and should treat others with kindness, fairness, patience, dignity, and respect.

Technology Competence

The University of Central Missouri has been the state's designated lead institution in professional technology since 1996. This designation resulted in substantial campus-wide support for hardware, software, and career and technical training. The Center for Teaching and Learning supports the use of new technology, offering 30 to 40 training sessions a month. UCM has many technology enhanced classrooms and serves its constituency through multiple initiatives including Extended Campus, the Center for Teaching and Learning, the Regional Professional Development Center, and the James C. Kirkpatrick Library.

Faculty in the Teacher Education Program (TEP) model integration of instructional technology in their courses. Candidates and faculty have technology-rich environments, innovative classrooms,


and traditional settings where appropriate technologies are modeled and used. Five College of Education faculty members have earned the Rodin Award for Excellence in Online Instruction.

In the TEP, the emphasis on technology use and integration is strengthened through a general education technology course requirement and one additional technology course within many Teacher Education Programs. Through their coursework and field experiences, candidates integrate technology into instruction with P-12 students and in other areas of professional practice. For initial program completers, technology competence is assessed during student teaching by a summative item on the Unit's Student Teaching Evaluation: understands theories and applications of technology in educational settings and has adequate technological skills to create meaningful learning opportunities for all students.

Unit Assessment System

Initial Certification. The University of Central Missouri’s Unit-level assessment system for undergraduate teacher education candidates includes a variety of measures and markers required at six critical transition points in the program. Those points are:

Admission to the University

Admission to the Teacher Education Program (TEP)

Admission to the Professional Education Semester and Student Teaching

The Professional Education Semester and Student Teaching

Completion of the Teacher Education Program

Recommendation for Certification

A Follow-up Survey is also conducted of first- and second-year graduates and their administrators, asking both to rate the novice teacher's performance and the degree to which the UCM program prepared them for their role in Missouri public schools.

The standards-based assessment system was developed around Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education’s MoSTEP standards for initial certification, which are based on INTASC standards plus an 11th standard addressing use of technology in instruction. Assessments and scoring rubrics were designed by members of the UCM Professional Education Faculty as well as community and public school representatives. NCATE accreditation requirements, as well as those pertaining to discipline-specific SPAs also were considered in development of the assessment system. All assessments use a similar Likert-type scale (Does Not Meet, Progressing, Meets, Exceeds) with standards-based scoring rubrics. In addition, the theme of the UCM Conceptual Framework—the Reflective Practitioner—is reflected in items across several of the measures. Data generated by the Unit assessments are reviewed annually by program faculty, program advisory committees, the College of Education Assessment


Committee, and the Teacher Education Council. Results are used for decision-making and program improvement, as well as to inform candidates of their progress.

Alternative Certification. UCM, in partnership with DESE, offers an alternative route to certification for candidates with a bachelor’s degree in a related field who are seeking initial teaching certification. Candidates complete an individually-negotiated certification plan, based on state minimum requirements that may include content and/or pedagogy courses. They participate in the Unit assessments described above with the exception of the C-BASE examination. Candidates who are already employed by a Missouri public school district under a Temporary Authorization Certificate (TAC) may complete their student teaching “in place” with fewer formative observations by the University Supervisor. TAC candidates who are also pursuing the Master of Arts in Teaching (MAT) at UCM enroll in Internship I rather than student teaching. Their assessments are similar to those used in student teaching, but also include measures aligned with National Board for Professional Teaching Standards.

Graduate/Advanced Programs. The University of Central Missouri’s assessment system for advanced professional education candidates includes a variety of measures and markers specific to their discipline-specific degree program. While all graduate and advanced programs are standards-based, the program-specific assessments differ; each addresses the knowledge, skills and dispositions required of advanced practitioners filling varied roles within schools. The UCM advanced programs in educator preparation have identified common transition points and use similar types of assessments and gate-keeping measures. The transition points are:

Admission to the Graduate School

Program Approval and Midpoint Review

Admission to Capstone Field Experience/Internship

Completion of the Degree

Follow-up Survey

For programs leading to advanced state educator certification, assessments address both the Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education’s MoSTEP standards for advanced preparation and those of the Specialty Professional Association (SPA) for each discipline. Programs that do not lead to certification or that do not have discipline-specific SPA standards have aligned their content and assessments with the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards. The theme of the UCM Conceptual Framework—the Reflective Practitioner—is reflected in the content and assessments of each of the advanced programs. Assessments and scoring rubrics for each program have been designed by members of the UCM Graduate and Professional Education Faculty with input from program advisory committees that include graduates and representatives from area public schools. Assessment data are reviewed at least annually by these advisory groups as well as by the Teacher Education Council and the College of Education Assessment Committee.


1a. (Optional) Links to key exhibits related to the conceptual framework could be attached here. (Links with descriptions must be typed into a Word document that can be uploaded here. The number of attached exhibits should be limited in number; BOE members should access most of the exhibits in the electronic exhibit room.

2. What changes have been made to the conceptual framework since the previous visit?

Changes in the Conceptual Framework since 2002

In the fall of 2001, a committee composed of unit faculty and leadership drafted a new conceptual framework, replacing the previous, scaffolded STEP model. In December 2001, the new conceptual framework was approved by the PEF and faculty began infusing the new accreditation standards and conceptual framework across the TEP. The unifying theme of the new conceptual framework was "the reflective practitioner." At about the same time, the PEF voted to implement portfolio evaluation across the Unit. At the request of the Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE), the aligned with MoSTEP standards, as well as the Missouri content-specific standards. K-12 and secondary programs implemented hard-copy portfolios, while web-based portfolios were developed for early childhood, elementary and middle school education majors. Although portfolios were not mandated for advanced and graduate programs, many chose to use a similar approach, requiring developmental artifacts with reflections at critical stages.

In 2005, revision of the unit assessment system precipitated a further revision of the conceptual framework. PEF subcommittees were formed to develop a revised assessment system that would provide multiple opportunities to assess candidates’ knowledge, skills, and dispositions as they moved through the Teacher Education Programs. The PEF approved the new assessment system in the spring of 2005. Although the assessment system revisions occurred under and were consistent with the existing conceptual framework's reflective practitioner theme, there was consensus among the committee members that the conceptual framework document itself also needed to be updated. Candidate competencies were refined and realigned with standards and unit expectations by a PEF committee in the summer and early fall of 2007. The work of this group was approved by the PEF membership with the proviso that a curriculum crosswalk be developed to illustrate where the conceptual framework content was introduced and assessed in courses taken by all education majors.

The core curriculum task force, comprised of lead faculty who taught Foundations, Educational Psychology, and Education of the Exceptional Child met for several months in the winter of 2007-2008 to realign the syllabi, instructional content, and assessment activities of those three courses with the new conceptual framework. As part of their work, the group more explicitly defined the UCM reflective practitioner model, and grounded it in the relevant professional literature. The new syllabi were in place for the spring 2008 semester.

A final set of revisions was undertaken by members of the Accreditation Steering Committee during the fall of 2008 to reorganize and streamline the conceptual framework document to fit the NCATE online IR template. As part of that work, a graphic logo was developed to illustrate


the conceptual framework. The final document and graphic were approved by the PEF on November 7, 2008. [See CF logo in the EDC.]

http://faculty.ucmo.edu/ncate09/conceptual/index.html

Standard One27

STANDARD 1: CANDIDATE KNOWLEDGE, SKILLS, AND DISPOSITIONS

Candidates preparing to work in schools as teachers or other professional school personnel know and demonstrate the content, pedagogical content knowledge, pedagogical and professional knowledge and skills, and professional dispositions necessary to help all students learn. Assessments indicate that candidates meet professional, state, and institutional standards.

1. What content knowledge tests are used for the purpose of state licensure and/or program completion? If the state has a licensure test for content, what is the overall pass rate? What programs do not have an 80% or above pass rate?

Initial Certification Programs

According to the State of Missouri, “All applicants for an initial Missouri certificate of license to teach must successfully complete the designated Praxis II Content Knowledge examination corresponding to the subject area for which certification is being sought. If no content knowledge or specialty area test has been designated for an area of certification, the applicant must take the Praxis II Principles of Learning and Teaching test corresponding to the grade range of certification being sought. Individuals who have completed a state-approved teacher preparation program in multiple content areas and are seeking an initial Missouri certificate of license to teach in each of those areas are required to successfully complete the Praxis II content knowledge or specialty area test only for the area designated as the primary area of certification” (DESE, http://dese.mo.gov/divteachqual/teached/praxis.htm). The PRAXIS Series (Professional Assessments for Beginning Teachers) is developed and administered by Educational Testing Service (ETS). ETS provides tests and other services for states to use as part of their teacher certification process. The assessments are designed to measure knowledge of specific subjects and teaching skills that candidates for B-12 certification have acquired through the completion of professional education programs. The PRAXIS II exam is administered at UCM through the University Assessment and Testing Services [http://www.ucmo.edu/x8078.xml] as well as at other sites across the state [http://dese.mo.gov/divteachqual/teached/assessmentinfo.htm]. Candidates seeking to take the PRAXIS II exam must complete an application at the ETS web site [http:// www.ets.org/praxis/ ].

The overall pass rate for candidates seeking initial certification is 95.8%. One program, Agricultural Education, meets the criterion for a pass rate of 80% or above. The Middle School English Language Arts subgroup also failed to meet the criterion. Both groups had fewer than 10 candidates in the three-year period reflected in this table.

To complete the Master of Arts in Teaching (MAT), each candidate must take the discipline specific courses listed on the individualized certification plan, the courses required for the MAT, and pass PRAXIS II in their content. The pass rate for all completers of the MAT is 100%. Additional information about this program is provided in the Alternative Certification section of this report.

http://www.ets.org/praxis/

http://dese.mo.gov/divteachqual/teached/assessmentinfo.htm

http://www.ucmo.edu/x8078.xml

http://dese.mo.gov/divteachqual/teached/praxis.htm

Standard One28

Advanced Programs

Candidates in a few advanced programs must also complete the PRAXIS II exam. Candidates for the MS in Counseling have a pass rate of 100%. Advanced candidates taking the School Leaders Licensure Assessment passed at a rate of 94.9% and those taking the School Superintendent Assessment passed at a rate of 93.6%

Summary: Candidates in both initial and advanced programs demonstrate content knowledge through successfully passing the PRAXIS exam appropriate for their discipline at a rate well above the 80% pass rate.

2. Please complete the following table (Table 4) to indicate pass rates on content licensure tests program by program and across all programs (i.e., overall pass rate). (This information could be compiled from Title II data submitted to the state or program reports prepared for national review.)

Table 4 Pass Rates on Content Licensure Tests for Initial Teacher Preparation

For Period 2005-2008:

See Table 4 – Praxis Exam Scores

3. What do the data in the above table (Table 4) tell the unit about the content knowledge of initial teacher candidates?

Individual program reports include more detailed data related to PRAXIS II exams. Program coordinators have reviewed this data in their efforts to identify both strengths and weaknesses in their programs. For example, the Business Teacher Education (BTE) reports reveal that in 2005-2006 BTE candidates were strong in Professional Business Education and Processing Information. In the Accounting and Marketing category for this content area, UCM candidates are equal to the state averages and exceed the national average by 3 percentage points. In other areas, candidate scores indicate equal or slightly lower performance. Faculty have worked to revise the curriculum, developing a new course to meet a deficiency, and have worked with faculty in the College of Business (where some courses are taught) to ensure that content is aligned with standards. BTE faculty note that the current PRAXIS exam includes out-of-date questions about shorthand. Rather than teaching to the test, BTE faculty have chosen to teach current strategies and technologies. The exam for this discipline is currently undergoing revision to address this shortcoming. Other reports show similar attention to the results of the PRAXIS exam and count it a point of pride that UCM candidates perform well on this exam.

Summary: The PRAXIS exam is an important, nationally-recognized content exam for reviewing the relative strength of programs. Data allow faculty to compare their program with those across the state and across the nation. UCM candidates overall perform quite well on this exam, both at the initial certification level and, for those programs where it is required, at the advanced level.

http://faculty.ucmo.edu/ncate09/standards/standard_1/praxis_scores_2005-2008.xls

Standard One29

4. 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? (Institutions that have submitted programs for national review or a similar state review are required to respond to this question only for programs not reviewed.)

Programs leading to initial certification are aligned with DESE’s MoSTEP standards and the standards that govern their specific content areas. Those content assessments include standards-aligned portfolios and comprehensive exams, formative and summative art reviews, and other course assignments. Some programs rely on GPAs. All programs have available survey data from the TEAC survey of recent graduates and formative and summative student teaching data. The student teaching data for MoSTEP standard 1.2.1 for content knowledge shows that university supervisors rated 99% of all candidates as meeting or exceeding expectations in 2006-2007 and that in 2007-2008 they rated nearly 98% of candidates as meeting or exceeding expectations.

Portfolios have long been a required part of the teacher preparation program in Missouri, but in 2006, they became optional. As such, some programs replaced them with other content-based assessments while others revised them to strengthen the connections between candidate knowledge, content standards, reflective practice, and performance.

Candidates in the Health program conduct research on drugs and youth, take content-driven exams, develop a nutrition-for-human-performance group presentation, and report on their analysis of a nutrition assessment. The Business Teacher Education program uses grades “in content courses for business education, specifically including accounting, business law, business communications, economics, management, marketing, keyboarding, personal finance, and 9 hours of emerging technologies” and successful candidates must have a GPA of 3.0 in these areas. The program reports a pass rate of 80% for 2005-2006, 78% for 2006-2007, and 100% for 2007-2008. Faculty in Agricultural Education rely on candidate GPAs, and 100% of those candidates have maintained a GPA of 3.0 or better during each year assessed.

In Family and Consumer Sciences, 100% of candidates have met or exceeded expectations for content knowledge during their Professional Education and Student Teaching Semester in the past two years, also the case with Technology Education and Speech and Theater candidates, among others. All but one Music candidate met or exceeded expectations in content knowledge during this semester. University Supervisors observe candidates in their classroom assignments a minimum of three times. On each of the early visits, supervisors complete the Formative Student Teaching Evaluation, rate the candidates on their knowledge, skills and dispositions based on the MoSTEP standards and the standards for their content area, and provide constructive feedback. During or immediately following the final visit, Supervisors complete the Summative Assessment. Candidates whose ratings indicate they have not met one or more standards are provided with recommendations for a continuing professional development plan. Candidates who received a grade of “C” or higher in student teaching, as assigned by the student’s University Supervisor, shall be deemed to have successfully met all criteria for exit from the Student Teaching Program.

Standard One30

Another source of valuable information is the TEAC survey. One aspect of the TEAC is to survey candidates currently in their student teaching semester on their perceptions of a variety of items. They indicate that they feel their knowledge of subject matter is very strong, fairly consistently falling at or near 4.5 on a scale of 1 to 5. This indicates to faculty that candidates experience relative confidence as they work with the content of their disciplines in preK-12 classrooms.

Additional programs that submitted reports to specialty program areas are represented in the Electronic Documents Center. All programs except for the Foreign Language Programs (Spanish and French) have been nationally recognized. One has been recognized with probation; three, recognized with conditions; and five have been fully recognized or accredited. Also note that alternative certification programs are reviewed elsewhere in this report.

Summary: Initial certification programs prepare candidates who have the content knowledge to be successful in their discipline. A review of assessment data for initial certification candidates shows a strong record of performance in the area of content knowledge.

4a. (Optional) One or more tables of key assessment data related to content knowledge of initial teacher candidates could be attached here. What the data tell the unit about content knowledge should be discussed in the response to 1a4 above.

5. What data from key assessments indicate that advanced teaching candidates demonstrate an in-depth knowledge of the content knowledge delineated in professional, state, and institutional standards? (Institutions that have submitted advanced teaching programs for national review or a similar state review are required to respond to this question only for programs not reviewed.)

The content knowledge in advanced programs is aligned with state and national standards. Candidates accomplish a variety of assessments designed or selected by faculty in those programs. The Counseling program is aligned with CACREP standards, and candidates take the Counselor Preparation Comprehensive Exam within two semesters of completing their program. The pass rate for the last three years is 100%. Candidates in the MSE or EDS in Education (Curriculum and Instruction) accomplish assignments aligned with National Board for Professional Teaching Standards. Candidates must receive a grade of C or higher in each course. The EdS in Special Education has been a small program that includes several courses in school administration as well as special education. Candidate assessment data is folded into the School Administration program data. After reviewing this program in preparation for the NCATE and DESE visit, faculty recognize that this program is in need of redesign. Technology Education candidates complete one of three end-of-program assessments: a written and oral exam, a thesis and oral exam, or a research paper/article.

The Electronic Document Center includes reports of several programs that were submitted to Specialty Program Areas. All programs have been either nationally recognized or recognized with conditions.

Standard One31

5a. (Optional) One or more tables of key assessment data related to content knowledge of advanced teacher candidates could be attached here. What the data tell the unit about content knowledge should be discussed in the response to 1a5 above.

6. 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?

First established in April of 1988, the Teacher Education Assessment Committee (TEAC) was charged with the task of developing and administering annually a set of follow-up surveys for the Teacher Education Program at the University of Central Missouri. The surveys are collectively known as the TEAC Survey. Among others, this survey targets first and second year teachers, most of them from various undergraduate programs, and their employers; alternative certification teachers and their employers; teachers from the Master of Arts (MAT) program and their employers; and graduates from the various Masters of Science in Education (MSE) or Educational Specialist (Ed. S.) programs, and their employers.

Except for the last group of graduates and their employers who are surveyed every two or three years, the TEAC Survey is administered on an annual basis, with most of the surveys conducted in the spring. Results from the TEAC Survey are summarized in the annual TEAC Report, which is available for review in the UCM Electronic Documents Center. According to Zelazek, Williams, McAdams, & Palmer (2002), the TEAC report is intended to provide specific programs with diagnostic information for self-improvement: “TEAC provides specific information to individual departments for use in the advisement and counseling of students as well as program revision and course development. Demographic trends of teacher education classes, at both elementary and secondary levels, have been tallied, analyzed and distributed in order to help in load assessment, needs assessment, future for program adjustment, and personnel management” (p. 2).

Thirty-one percent of graduates responded to the TEAC survey in 2008 and 33% in 2007. Graduates rate their content knowledge as 4 on a scale of 1 to 5 in the 2008 survey. This measure remained constant from 2007 to 2008 (TEAC, 2008, p. 9). [http://faculty.ucmo.edu/ncate09/reports/TEAC_08.pdf]. Forty-seven percent of employers responded to the survey in 2007; 62% returned the survey in 2008. Employers also rated graduates for their content knowledge at 4 on a scale of 1 to 5, and that measure was constant from 2007 to 2008.

The TEAC survey gathered data for Master of Arts Teachers separately from other graduates. In 2007 30% responded, and in 2008 31%. These respondents rated their content knowledge in 2008 as slightly above 4 on a scale of 1 to 5. The 2007 and 2008 data from principals was similar; with a response rate of 59%, about 77% of the principals considered the preparation of their MAT employees to be strong or very strong, and about 91% of the principals indicated in 2008 that they would hire their MAT teachers again.

In Spring 2007, the Communication and Theatre Departments requested an outside evaluation of their joint BSE Program in Speech/Theater. This was in part due to the fact that there was no

http://faculty.ucmo.edu/ncate09/reports/TEAC_08.pdf

Standard One32

SPA option available for external validation of the Speech and Theater Program. The evaluation was conducted by EdD candidates in the Cooperative Doctoral Program in Educational Leadership and Policy Analysis at the University of Central Missouri. The purpose of the utilization focused evaluation was to investigate the program regarding three main topics: (a) National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE) reaccreditation preparedness, (b) state teacher licensure examinations, and (c) alumni perceptions of program strengths and weaknesses. The results of this study are included in the Electronic Document Center at http://faculty.ucmo.edu/ncate09/programs/speech_theater/index.html. This team surveyed graduates and held a focus group for undergraduate candidates (11 candidates, 38% of the current student body). “Focus group members cited opportunities for involvement and strong faculty support as strong positives for the BSE program and indicated collaboration between faculty and students provides an environment that supports student success” (BSE Evaluation, Executive Summary, p. 1).

7. A table summarizing the results of follow-up studies related to content knowledge could be attached here.

Content Knowledge of First and Second Year Teachers, 2007-2008 Content Knowledge of First and Second Year Teachers, 2006-2007 Content Knowledge of Undergraduate Teachers, 2007-2008 Content Knowledge of Undergraduate Teachers, 2006-2007

Master of Arts Candidates and Completers

Please indicate to what extent you agree with the following statements: (5=Strongly agree; 4=Agree; 3=neutral; 2=Disagree; 1=Strongly disagree) The UCM program has prepared me to Understand the central concepts, tools of inquiry and structures of the discipline(s) within the context of a global society and create learning experiences that make these aspects of subject matter meaningful to students. Discipline Number of Candidates

SurveyedMean Standard Deviation

2006-2007 MAT Completers and Candidates, combined

108 4.2 0.76

2007-2008 MAT Completers*

55 4.1 0.72

2007-2008 MAT Teachers*

32 3.9 0.81

*Note: Data were disaggregated for Completers and Teachers (currently taking classes while teaching) in the MAT program for 2007-2008, but not for 2006-2007.

8. (Optional) Links to key exhibits related to the content knowledge of teacher candidates could be attached here. (Links with descriptions must be typed into a Word document that can be uploaded here. The number of attached exhibits should be limited in number; BOE members should access most of the exhibits in the unit's electronic exhibit room.)

http://faculty.ucmo.edu/ncate09/standards/standard_1/2006-2007UndergraduateKnowledge.doc

http://faculty.ucmo.edu/ncate09/standards/standard_1/2007-2008UndergraduateKnowledge.doc

http://faculty.ucmo.edu/ncate09/standards/standard_1/2006-2007GraduatesKnowledge.doc

http://faculty.ucmo.edu/ncate09/standards/standard_1/2007-2008GraduatesKnowledge.doc

http://faculty.ucmo.edu/ncate09/programs/speech_theater/index.html

Standard One33

Links to Exhibits: Praxis TableProgram Evaluation Report of the BSE in Speech and TheaterTEAC Report 2004TEAC Report 2005TEAC Report 2006TEAC Survey 2007TEAC Survey 2008

1b. Pedagogical Content Knowledge and Skills for Teacher Candidates

Note: In this section, institutions must address both (1) initial teacher preparation programs at the undergraduate and graduate levels and (2) licensure and non-licensure graduate programs for teachers who already hold a teaching license.

1. 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? (Institutions that have submitted programs for national review or a similar state review are required to respond to this question only for programs not reviewed.)

Candidates develop an understanding of the relationship of content and content-specific pedagogy as delineated in professional, state, and institutional standards throughout their course work. Special attention is given to this during discipline-specific teaching methods courses that are scheduled just prior to their student teaching experience. These courses address theories of pedagogy and learning, content-specific instructional strategies, and the appropriate integration of technology into instruction. This knowledge and these skills are practiced through several field experiences throughout their programs and demonstrated during the student teaching semester. Candidate performance is captured in a variety of assessments including program portfolios and assessments during the student teaching semester as well as through the Professional Development School (PDS) for elementary and middle school candidates.

University supervisors assess candidate performance in relation to MoSTEP Standard 1.2.2: The candidate “understands how students learn and develop, and provides learning opportunities that support the intellectual, social and personal development of all students” (Summative Student Teaching Evaluation). In 2006-2007, 316 of the 319 candidates met or exceeded expectations for this standard. In 2007-2008, 285 of the 292 candidates met or exceeded expectations.

The programs that did not submit SPA reports include Business Teacher Education, Agriculture, Health, Family and Consumer Sciences, Technology Education, Journalism, Speech and Theater, and Driver’s Education. Of these, Journalism, Health, and Driver’s Education had no candidates completing student teaching during the last three years, according to the data tables posted on the Electronic Document Center. Below is a summary of the performance of candidates in the other programs.

For MoSTEP Standard 1.2.2, Learning and Learners, all candidates in Agriculture, Business Teacher Education, Family and Consumer Sciences, Speech and Theater, and Technology Education met or exceeded expectations in 2006-2007. The next year, all candidates in Business






http://faculty.ucmo.edu/ncate09/programs/speech_theater/index.html

http://faculty.ucmo.edu/ncate09/standards/standard_1/praxis_scores_2005-2008.xls

Standard One34

Teacher Education, Family and Consumer Sciences, and Technology Education met or exceeded expectations. Additional data is available for candidates in programs aligned to standards of Specialty Program Areas; see those reports in the Electronic Data Center.

During student teaching, candidates develop and teach several instructional units. University supervisors observe their teaching and provide formative and summative assessments. In addition, candidates complete a reflective activity describing how they incorporated formative and summative assessment into the unit, how their instruction affected student learning outcomes, and what they would do to improve or follow up on the instructional sequence. The University Supervisor also evaluates and scores this document using an Assessment/Impact scoring guide. Of the 365 candidates who student taught during 2005-2006, 353 met or exceeded expectations for the Lesson Plan and the unit plan. In 2006-2007, of the 328 candidates assessed, 324 met or exceeded expectations on the lesson plan, and 323 met or exceeded expectations on the unit plan. In 2007-2008, 300 candidates were assessed on instructional planning. All but five met or exceeded expectations on the Lesson Plan, and all but four met or exceeded expectations on the Unit Plan. These data and the assessment instruments are available in the Electronic Document Center.

In 2006-2007, all candidates in Agriculture, Business Teacher Education, Speech and Theater, and Technology education met or exceeded expectations on both plans. All three Family and Consumer Sciences candidates exceeded expectations for planning.

In 2007-2008, all Business Teacher Education candidates exceeded expectations. The Family and Consumer Sciences and all Technology Education candidates met or exceeded expectations. We had no Agriculture or Speech and Theater candidate in student teaching this year. This assessment will soon be expanded into a full-blown Teacher Work Sample, replacing the portfolio requirements for many programs across the Unit.

Candidates in Elementary and Middle School majors participate in a Professional Development School (PDS), valuable experience for developing pedagogical content knowledge and skills. The purpose of the PDS is “the professional preparation of candidates, to support continuous faculty development, to create an opportunity for reflective practice focused on improvement of practice, and ultimately to improve student achievement” (Thomas, Grigsby, & Akins, 2008). PDS embodies the recommendations of many education researchers (Hinds, 2002; Darling-Hammond, 1992) for extensive clinical experience during their teacher preparation. PDS provides candidates a “hands-on” approach to learning. They participate in real classrooms with real K-12 students and work with experienced classroom teachers. They watch experts modeling best practices, and they practice various instructional and classroom management strategies under the guidance of college faculty and expert teachers. This initiative is currently being expanded to include secondary and K-12 content areas (see minutes from the Advisory Council Meeting, November 2008), and the middle school PDS has been the focus of ongoing adaptation as its faculty participate in a continuous process of improvement (Thomas, Grigsby, & Akins, 2008). The middle school program engages candidates in observation, working with small groups of students, assisting the classroom teacher with a number of teaching-related projects, and teaching at least one lesson during the semester themselves. This lesson is focused on learners and learning and includes instructional planning, delivery of instruction, and reflection upon student achievement. PDS candidates are evaluated in relation to the National Professional

Standard One35

Development Standards, which guide the program. In terms of the quality of candidates who participate in the PDS, one teacher whose comments are representative reported, “The primary strength of the program is the opportunity to provide and receive feedback on instructional strategies and interaction with students. The quality of this year’s interns (middle school) has been impressive. The interns have been punctual, articulate, and well versed in instructional theories and practices. Professional attire and behavior has never been an issue (in contrast to years past). (This speaks volumes about the interns, the quality of the interns’ instruction, and the administration of the program itself.)” (Theiss, Grigsby, & Moore, presentation at the 2008 Professional Development Schools National Conference).

1a. (Optional) One or more tables of key assessment data related to pedagogical content knowledge and skills of initial teacher candidates could be attached here. What the data tell the unit about pedagogical content knowledge and skills should be discussed in the response to 1b1 above.

2. What data from key assessments indicate that advanced teaching candidates know and apply theories related to pedagogy and learning, including the use of a range of instructional strategies and the ability to explain the choices they make in their practice? (Institutions that have submitted advanced teaching programs for national review or a similar state review are required to respond to this question only for programs not reviewed.)

All courses and assessments in the MSE in Curriculum and Instruction are aligned with MoSTEP standards and the Core Propositions of Accomplished Teaching, as identified by the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards. The MSE addresses (to some degree) the need for the “modern clinical model” (as suggested by Hinds, 2002) through its internships and field-based instruction. Candidates complete a portfolio aligned with NBPT standards and an internship, and they are encouraged to pursue National Board Certification.

Other programs, such as Technology and Occupational Education and Special Education, include courses and assessments aligned with national standards. Candidates must maintain a grade point average of at least 3.0 to continue in these Graduate programs.

Candidates in the Teaching English as a Second Language program are assessed through discipline-specific instruments that are aligned with TESOL/NCATE standards. The MA-TESL program assessments are as follows:

Course specific examinations and reflective papers (all courses).

Instructional Unit and Lesson Plans – (English 5800, 5860, 5890).

Portfolio – throughout the program of study and compiled during the capstone class (English 5880).

Standard One36

2a. (Optional) One or more tables of key assessment data related to pedagogical content knowledge and skills of advanced teacher candidates could be attached here. What the data tell the unit about pedagogical content knowledge and skills should be discussed in the response to 1b2 above.

3. What data indicate that candidates can integrate technology in their teaching?

Candidates are supported in a variety of ways in terms of developing technology skills and learning to integrate them into their teaching. Several years ago the University developed the Student Technology Fee Program, funded by fees charged to each student upon enrollment. Those funds are used to purchase a wide variety of technological resources for the use of candidates. During the 2007-2008 school year, the College of Education developed the 21st Century Learning task force, which recommended expanding technology to support and enrich instruction. A goal of the College of Education for 2008-2009 is to establish an incubator lab where candidates learn not only how to integrate current technology into their teaching, but also learn to seek out new technologies and explore strategies to integrate them into their teaching throughout their careers.

Evidence of successful integration of technology is embedded in reports submitted to Specialty Program Areas, available in the Electronic Data Center. During the student teaching semester all candidates are assessed on their use of technology in alignment with MoSTEP 1.2.11: The candidate “understands theories and applications of technology in educational settings and has adequate technological skills to create meaningful learning opportunities for all students.” In 2005-2006 all but two candidates met or exceeded this expectation; in 2006-2007, all but one did; and in 2007-2008, all candidates met or exceeded this expectation. Candidates also have the opportunity to self-assess their ability to use technology in their teaching through the TEAC survey. In 2007-2008, candidates rated themselves at 4.3 on a scale of 1 to 5 for the following statement: “Understand theories and applications in educational settings and has adequate technological skills to create meaningful learning opportunities for all students” (TEAC, 2008, p. 17). In 2006-2007, student teaching candidates rated themselves at 4.6 for this component (TEAC, 2007, p. 13).

Particular programs have especially strong efforts related to the integration of technology into teaching. The Vocational Agriculture Education program is uniquely suited to provide educators with the knowledge, skills, and dispositions to utilize technology to enhance learning. In fact, one of the central aspects of the conceptual framework is the commitment to instructional and learning technology. The Business Teacher Education (BTE) candidates are introduced to using technology in the classroom throughout their program beginning with a strong foundation in the foundational office application programs for word processing, using spreadsheets, databases, desktop and web publishing, and creating and delivering presentations. Managing Classroom Technologies is a new required course in the BTE major, where students are expected to relate teaching technologies with learning styles and abilities. In Family and Consumer Sciences, candidates gain knowledge of how to evaluate computers and Internet usage both as students and consumers, and develop skills in word processing, spreadsheet, and presentation software. Candidates discover how databases can be used to store and analyze information, learn to creatively utilize technology in the classroom, employ PowerPoint to enhance classroom

Standard One37

teaching, both visually enhancing topics discussed in he classroom as well as putting into practice activities such as digital storytelling. The FACS program has high expectations for the students and have faculty that are average to above average in technology skills. Some of the required courses are taught on-line, with a future goal to offer more of a mix of online, hybrid, and ITV courses. The program makes use of Blackboard and utilizes technology in computer labs, technology-driven assignments/projects, and iTunes University. Speech and Theater candidates learn about the technologies that are used in theater programs as well as speech and theater classrooms.

3a. (Optional) One or more tables of key assessment data related to candidates’ ability to integrate technology in their teaching could be attached here. What the data tell the unit about candidates’ technology skills should be discussed in the response to 1b3 above.Click here to upload or manage your uploaded file(s)

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

The results of the TEAC survey document graduates’ self-assessment and employer feedback on pedagogical content knowledge and skills.

Graduates are asked six questions which are aligned with components of MoSTEP standard 1.2. These address such topics as how students learn, instructional strategies, long-term planning, motivation, communication techniques, assessment, and the integration of technology into teaching. Graduates (33% response rate) in 2007-2008 rated themselves at between 3.7 and 4.0 on a scale of 1 to 5. Their employers (47% response rate) rated these graduates on the same questions at between 3.9 and 4.0, indicating strong confidence in the ability of UCM graduates to perform successfully in relation to pedagogical content knowledge and skills.

In 2007-2008 graduate (31% response rate) ratings rose slightly to between 3.9 and 4.1 for the same questions. Employer (response rate of 62%) ratings remained unchanged from 2006-2007.

Data for graduates of the Master of Arts in Teaching are reported separately in the TEAC survey. Graduates of this program rate their pedagogical content skills as slightly higher than graduates of undergraduate programs, from 4.0 to 4.3 on a scale of 1 to 5 (response rate of 31%) in 2007-2008. In 2006-2007, this group rated their skills at between 4.2 and 4.4 (response rate of 30%). These graduates express confidence in their ability to teach. Employers (36% response rate) of these graduates rated their abilities at between 3.9 and 4.0 this year and again in 2007-2008 (59% response rate).

The TEAC survey provides detailed results for candidates in individual programs. For example, Business Teacher Education graduates assessed their pedagogical skills at between 3.6 and 4.1 (10 respondents) in 2006-2007. In 2007-2008 four respondents express considerably more confidence in their abilities, rating their abilities at between 4.0 and 4.5. In Agricultural Education two graduates rated themselves at between 3.0 and 4.0 in 2007-2008, but the following year four graduates rated their abilities at between 4.0 and 4.5.

Standard One38

Summary: Follow up survey data indicates that first and second year graduates of programs at UCM express strong confidence in their ability to teach effectively.

5. A table summarizing the results of follow-up studies related to pedagogical content knowledge and skills could be attached here.

6. (Optional) Links to key exhibits related to the pedagogical content knowledge of teacher candidates could be attached here. (Links with descriptions must be typed into a Word document that can be uploaded here. The number of attached exhibits should be limited in number; BOE members should access most of the exhibits in the unit's electronic exhibit room.) 1c. Professional and Pedagogical Knowledge and Skills for Teacher Candidates


1. What data from key assessments indicate that candidates in initial teacher preparation programs demonstrate the professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills related to foundations of education; the ways children and adolescents develop and the relationship to learning; professional ethics, laws, and policies; the use of research in teaching; the roles and responsibilities of the professional communities; diversity of student populations, families and communities (this one may be addressed in the first element of Standard 4); and the consideration of school, family, and community contexts and the prior experiences of students? If a licensure test is required in this area, how are candidates performing on it?

Initial candidates are introduced to the concepts of teaching and learning in EDCI 2100, Foundations of Education and Field Experience. In this course, they learn about the American public school; its nature, purpose, history, philosophy, organization and administration; and contemporary issues and trends. In addition, they spend 30 hours in public school classrooms observing teachers and students in action. In 2007 and 2008, candidates rated their knowledge near the end of this course (100% return rate) as adequate on average in terms of content knowledge, multicultural issues, the role of schools in America, and legal and ethical responsibilities of teachers (TEAC, 2007, pp. 6 & 11; TEAC, 2008, pp. 3 & 13). Their self-assessments ranged from 2.9 for Knowledge of Multicultural Issues to 3.6 for American History in both 2007 and 2008 on a scale from 1 (very weak) to 5 (very strong). These findings are relatively consistent across time. Candidates are introduced to these concepts in this course. Mastery and assessment of candidate knowledge and skills in this area are throughout the courses that follow this foundations course as well as during several field experiences and the student teaching semester.

Several assessments track candidate performance in relation to the ways children and adolescents develop and the relationship of their development to learning. Candidates in the foundations course rate their knowledge of child and adolescent growth and development. In 2007 they rated

Standard One39

their knowledge at 3.4 on a scale of 1 to 5 (TEAC, 2008, p. 11); in 2008, they rated their knowledge at 3.5 (TEAC, 2008, p. 13). During their student teaching semester, trained university supervisors assess candidate performance in relation to learners and learning (MoSTEP 1.2.2: “Understands how students learn and develop, and provides learning opportunities that support the intellectual, social, and personal development of all students”). In 2006-2007 of the 319 candidates observed, 315 were rated at meets or exceeded expectations; the remaining 4 candidates were rated as progressing. In 2007-2008 of the 292 candidates observed, 285 were rated at meets or exceeds expectations, and the remaining 7 were rated as progressing, very strong evidence that candidates overall understand child and adolescent development and its relationship to learning. Their self-assessment on the same standard was 4.5 on a scale of 1 to 5 in both 2007 and 2008 (TEAC, 2007, p. 17; 2008, p. 15). This finding is reinforced in the data related to impact on student learning as well, discussed later in this standard.

In 2006-2007 all candidates in the Agricultural Education, Business Education, Family and Consumer Sciences, and Speech and Theater programs met or exceeded expectations except for one who was rated as progressing on MoSTEP 1.2.2. In 2007-2008, 100% of Business Education candidates exceeded expectations; all candidates in Family and Consumer Sciences and Technology Education met or exceeded expectations. Of the nine candidates in Music, all exceeded expectations except for two who were rated as progressing.

Candidates learn about professional ethics, laws, and policies throughout their course work and have opportunities to put into practice what they learn during their field work. During the student teaching semester they are evaluated by their university supervisor in relation to MoSTEP 1.2.10, Reflective Practitioner: “The candidate fosters relationships with school colleagues, parents, and educational partners in the larger community to support student learning and well being.” Overall, more than 90% of our candidates meet or exceed expectations for this important disposition in 2006-2007 and the next year, nearly 95% did so. In both years, 100% of candidates in programs not reviewed by Specialty Program Areas met or exceeded expectations in this important area. Additional information about the relationship of candidates to their educational community is provided in response to Standard 4 in the institutional report.

Our candidates practice research strategies as they assess the learning of their students formatively and summatively, adjusting their teaching to meet the individual learning styles and needs of all of their students. This is apparent in the student teaching findings for the candidate teaching assessment on the impact on student learning. Teaching with sensitivity to the diversity of students in the classroom is a component of this skill. Our student teachers respond to a survey, reporting on their perceptions of how well they feel they are prepared to address the needs of the cultural diversity of students they work with. In 2006-2007, 218 of 235 candidates reported their preparation was average to excellent (TEAC, 2007, p. 12); in 2007-2008, 216 of 232 provided the same range of responses (TEAC, 2008, p. 14). They also reported their sense of how well prepared they were to work with At Risk students. In 2006-2007, 190 of 235 rated their preparation as average to excellent, and in 2007-2008, 194 or 230 provided a similar range of responses. We recognize this as an area in which we have made great strides, but which we consider to be an important goal for future attention. Additional information about how candidates address the issues of diversity is available under Standard 4.

Standard One40

Summary: The data gathered on our candidates, from the foundations course through the student teaching semester, is a record of strong preparation of candidates in the area of professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills.

1a. (Optional) One or more tables of key assessment data related to professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills of initial teacher candidates could be attached here. What the data tell the unit about professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills should be discussed in the response to 1c1 above.

2. What data from key assessments indicate that advanced teaching candidates demonstrate the professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills such as those delineated in the core propositions of the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards?

Several advanced programs submitted SPA reports and have been nationally recognized. Their reports include assessments aligned with national standards that demonstrate advanced candidates have strong preparation and demonstrate expertise in the area of professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills. These programs include multiple assessments that assess candidate performance on practical and authentic projects, including field experiences and research projects.

Candidates in the Master of Science in Education and Education Specialist programs in the Department of Educational Foundations and Literacy accomplish several assignments that are aligned with the National Board for Professional Standards. As advanced degree programs, the course work and assessments are designed to deepen the candidates’ knowledge, skills, dispositions, and research base in each professional educational competency. Every course in these programs has an embedded research component to further strengthen and enhance the candidates’ knowledge base in each pedagogical area. Required internships within the MSE build on candidates’ knowledge, skills, and dispositions within an actual classroom setting. The impact on student learning and the MoSTEP standards are assessed within these Internships (field experiences). The internship assessments require the development of a portfolio that reflects both the MoSTEP standards and Core Propositions of Accomplished Teaching as defined by the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards (NBPTS). These portfolios provide candidates’ narrative accounts of their instruction to address various standards, how this instruction is assessed, and a reflection on the outcomes and possible revisions of the instructional process. A student must received a grade of C or higher on each course on the approved Program of Study. A student must repeat any course taken at UCM for which a grade of D or F is earned when the course is part of the student’s approved program of study. No substitutions may be made on an approved program for courses in which the student has earned grades below B.

In the Teaching English as a Second Language program, the field experience component of English 5890 is evaluated using a summative Student Teacher Observation form. The University Supervisor completes this form on each observation visit. Verbal feedback and a copy of the form are given to the candidate immediately following the visit. The primary purpose of the feedback is to assist the candidate in improving performance in any area not rated Meets or

Standard One41

Exceeds. A supervisor concerned about a candidate who appears unlikely to achieve a rating of at least Meets in all areas by the end of student teaching notifies Clinical Services immediately. One hundred percent of candidates assessed met or exceeded expectations on this assessment.

Summary: Candidates in advanced programs demonstrate strong performance in a variety of assessments, showcasing their expertise in pedagogical knowledge and skills.

2a. (Optional) One or more tables of key assessment data related to professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills of advanced teacher candidates could be attached here. What the data tell the unit about professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills should be discussed in the response to 1c2 above.

3. What do follow-up studies of graduates and employers indicate about graduates' preparation related to professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills? If survey data are being reported, what was the response rate?

The TEAC survey measures perceptions of recent graduates of the teacher education program and their performance as judged by their employers. In 2007, 643 employers (including employers of graduates of the advanced programs) received the survey, and 47% responded. In 2008, 453 employers received the survey, with a 62% response rate.

Both years, employers felt their first and second year teachers displayed strong performance. They evaluated first and second year teachers on instructional strategies, curriculum planning, motivation and behavior, communication skills, assessment skills, technology skills, working with diverse learners, reflective practitioner skills, and functioning successfully in a learning community. On a scale of 1 (weak) to 5 (strong), average ratings range from 3.9 to 4.1 (TEAC, p. 120-121, 2008; TEAC, p. 63-64, 2007).

Master of Arts in Teaching candidates also performed well, according to employers. In 2007, of 362 surveys mailed to principals who employ our MAT teachers, 130 surveys were returned, a return rate of 36% (TEAC 2007, pp. 86-89). Employers had positive views of MAT abilities, with the average ratings ranging from 3.9 to 4.1. With a return rate of 59%, employers rated MAT grads between 3.9 and 4.2 (TEAC, 2008, pp. 155-158).

When asked to rate the impact of the UCM program on their competencies in 2007, first- and second-year teachers reported average ratings ranging from 3.7 for instructional strategies to 4.1 for reflective practitioner (return rate of 33%). When asked to rate the impact of their program on their skills in 2008, first- and second-year teachers reported an averages 3.9 (on a 1-5 point scale) for instructional strategies and technology skills to 4.2 for reflective practitioner. Except for the competencies for subject matter knowledge, there was a small increase in ratings across all standards over last year (TEAC, 2008, p. 5). In both surveys, graduates were asked to rate themselves in relation to questions aligned with MoSTEP standards on such concepts as instructional strategies, curriculum planning, motivation and behavior, communication skills, assessment strategies, technology skills, working with divers learners, reflective practice, and relations with the learning community.

Standard One42

Graduates of programs that did not submit reviews to Specialty Subject Areas performed on a par with the average. In 2007, Agricultural Education graduates rated their understanding of how students learn and develop at 4.0 (TEAC, 2007, p 18); Journalism graduates rated their understanding at 4.3 (p. 42); and Speech and Theater graduates at 4.2 (p. 62). In 2008, Agricultural Education graduates rated their understanding of how students learn and develop at 4.3, up from the previous year (TEAC, 2008, p. 67) and Family and Consumer Sciences, and Speech and Theater graduates rated their understanding at 5.0 on a 5-point scale (p. 91, 118); Journalism graduates were not as self-assured, rating their understanding at 4.0 (p. 103).

Faculty in programs across the institution use the data gathered in the various TEAC surveys as indicators of areas that need attention. The data demonstrate how program graduates perform across time, but also how candidates across programs compare to each other. As we have reflected on these data, we are pleased with reports of strong performance, but we also recognize the need to offer additional supports to those programs whose graduates report more mixed responses.

Summary: Overall, graduates and employers report strong preparation and performance in relation to pedagogical knowledge and skills.

4. A table summarizing the results of follow-up studies related to professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills could be attached here.

5. (Optional) Links to key exhibits related to the professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills of teacher candidates could be attached here. (Links with descriptions must be typed into a Word document that can be uploaded here.)

1d. Student Learning for Teacher Candidate


1. 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? (Institutions that have submitted programs for national review or a similar state review are required to respond to this question only for programs not reviewed.)

The assessment that provides the clearest indication of how candidates successfully instruct, monitor student learning, and develop meaningful learning experiences takes place during the student teaching semester. It is the Instructional Unit Plan and Assessment, and it includes a measure of the impact on P-12 students. All teacher candidates must demonstrate the ability to develop an instructional unit and related lesson plans. They must also demonstrate the ability to design and implement varied assessment strategies, to implement those strategies in the classroom, to use assessment data and other feedback to modify instruction to help all students master predetermined learning outcomes, and to reflect on their impact on P-12 student learning.

Standard One43

The assessment instrument has been developed to align with INTASC and Missouri State Standards, as well as with UCM’s Conceptual Framework. The scoring rubric provides a narrative description of the criteria for determining how to rate each item using the following scale: Does Not Meet, Progressing, Meets, and Exceeds.

Candidates are expected to incorporate resources and materials that supplement, reinforce, and extend the curriculum and technology that enhances instruction and facilitates learning. They are expected to relate the content to real-world applications and incorporate a variety of teaching strategies, and foster inquiry, collaboration, and supportive interaction in the classroom. They assess P-12 student learning and develop reflective and formative responses to that assessment, and they accommodate the various learning styles and needs of the diversity of students in their classroom, including those with special education needs, culturally diverse backgrounds, and English-language learners. Candidates also provide a written reflection on the instructional unit which includes an analysis of students’ progress or difficulty, follow-up activities to help students overcome instruction that was not successful, and a description of adjustments they would make if teaching this unit again.

University supervisors review their instructional units and observe candidates teaching at least one lesson plan from this unit. They assess the candidate’s lesson plan, active teaching, and the candidate’s detailed reflection on the instructional unit.

In 2005-2006, more than 95% of candidates met or exceeded expectations on the impact on student learning assessment. In 2006-2007, nearly 91% met or exceeded expectations, and in 2007-2008, 94% did.

Candidate performance on the assessment that measures their impact on K-12 student learning during the student teaching semester also suggests that they understand this concept. In 2006-2007, 298 of the 304 candidates assessed met or exceeded university supervisors’ expectations, and in 2007-2008, 282 of 288 candidates met or exceeded expectations. The Electronic Data Center includes performance on programs that submitted reports to their Specialty Program Area. Below is a summary of performance for those programs that did not: Agricultural Education, Business Education, Family and Consumer Sciences, Technology Education, and Speech and Theater.

In 2006-2007, 100% of candidates in Agricultural Education, Business Education, and Speech and Theater met or exceeded expectations for the formative, summative, and reflective components of this assessment. In Family and Consumer Sciences, two of the five candidates were rated as progressing on their performance in relation to administering a summative assessment. All other components were rated at meets or exceeds expectations. In 2007-2008, 100% of candidates in Business Education, Family and Consumer Sciences, and Technology Education met or exceeded expectations. In each program and each year some candidates exceeded expectations. Their work is marked by creativity, completeness, constant monitoring of student learning, and adaptation as needed. Their understanding of events in the classroom is driven by relevant developmental and learning theories, and they consider how to improve their own performance for the future.

Standard One44

Aggregate data for all candidates and disaggregated data by program is available in the Electronic Data Center.

Summary: The data show that candidates understand how their students learn and can design instructional activities that promote learning for the diversity of students in their classrooms.

1a. (Optional) One or more tables of key assessment data related to student learning for initial teacher candidates could be attached here. What the data tell the unit about student learning should be discussed in the response to 1d1 above.

2. What data from key assessments indicate that advanced teaching candidates demonstrate a thorough understanding of the major concepts and theories related to assessing student learning and regularly apply them in their practice? (Institutions that have submitted advanced teaching programs for national review or a similar state review are required to respond to this question only for programs not reviewed.)

Candidates in the advanced programs must demonstrate a thorough understanding of content and theories within their discipline and apply these in their practice. They must demonstrate teaching and intervention strategies to meet the needs of all learners in their classrooms. Descriptions of standards-driven assessments and candidate performance are available in the Electronic Data Center for programs that submitted reports to their Specialty Program Areas. Additional description is provided here for the MSE in Curriculum and Instruction and Teaching English as a Second Language.

All MSE courses and their assessments are aligned with MoSTEP standards and the Core Propositions of Accomplished Teaching, as identified by the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards. Because this advanced program is related directly to the enhancement and application of methodologies, instructional planning, student assessment, theories of learning, educational philosophies, curriculum knowledge, content knowledge, and teaching dispositions, assessments are designed to ensure these competencies are being expressed and expanded within the context of the actual classroom. The formal assessments include (a) Summative and Formative MSE Internship Evaluation forms, (b) a portfolio, and (c) a student self-report survey. A student must receive a grade of C or higher on each course on the approved Program of Study. A student must repeat any course taken at UCM for which a grade of D or F is earned when the course is part of the student’s approved program of study. One hundred percent of program completers meet these criteria.

Candidates pursuing certification in English as a Second Language may earn a Master of Arts degree in the Teaching of English as a Second Language or receive an add-on certification for K-12 ESOL teaching for the State of Missouri. The TESOL/NCATE and DESE Standards for ESL teachers both require students to demonstrate competency in the following areas: linguistics, language and culture, second language acquisition, language instruction (planning and implementation), assessment and professionalism, and, for non-native speakers, language competency. These sets of standards along with the conceptual framework guide instruction and assessment within the MA-TESL program. Throughout the program, students are required to analyze content information and reflect carefully about classroom practice and how content

Standard One45

aligns with TESOL/NCATE standards. As they begin to design lessons plans, they examine and apply knowledge and methods to classroom practice, and an integral part of that process is reflection. During the practicum, reflection is emphasized, and the expectation is that candidates will continue this practice into and throughout their teaching careers. The capstone course is devoted to the compilation of a portfolio, which allows the students the opportunity to reflect on the program as a whole and to explain how their course work has addressed the standards. One hundred percent of candidates meet expectations in this course work as determined by an analysis of course grades. This program has recently instituted a portfolio in which candidates will document their work in relation to language, culture, instruction, assessment, and professionalism. No completed portfolios are currently available.

Summary: Advanced programs include courses, assignments, and assessments that are carefully designed and driven by state and national standards and the National Board of Professional Teaching Standards. Although detailed data are not available, current candidates demonstrate through successful completion of courses that they know and understand the concepts and theories related to student learning.

2a. (Optional) One or more tables of key assessment data related to student learning for advanced teacher candidates could be attached here. What the data tell the unit about student learning should be discussed in the response to 1d2 above.

3. What do follow-up studies of employers and graduates indicate about graduates’ ability to help all students learn? If survey data are being reported, what was the response rate?

Graduates of advanced programs are routinely surveyed every two or three years by the Teacher Education Assessment Committee (TEAC). They most recent data is available in the 2007 report, available in the Electronic Document Center. This reports includes data for the MSE in Curriculum and Instruction graduates aligned with MoSTEP standards, including questions related to effective teaching, student learning, and working effectively with a diversity of students (TEAC, 2007, pp. 104-105). Graduates of the MSE program rate their abilities related to these standards at 4.0 to 4.4 on a 5-point scale. Their employers provide a range of responses from 3.9 to 4.2 on a 5-point scale. On this scale, 4.0 is described as “strong,” indicating that overall, employers are pleased with the performance of graduates of this program.

Performance data for graduates of other advanced programs that submitted Specialty Program Area reports is available in the Electronic Document center.

Summary: The feedback from graduates and their employers indicates that graduates of our advanced programs are strong teachers who design instruction to meet the learning needs of all students in their classrooms.

4. A table summarizing the results of follow-up studies related to student learning could be attached here.

5. (Optional) Links to key exhibits related to student learning for teacher candidates could be attached here. (Links with descriptions must be typed into a Word document that can

Standard One46

be uploaded here. The number of attached exhibits should be limited in number; BOE members should access most of the exhibits in the unit's electronic exhibit room.)

1e. Knowledge and Skills for Other School Professionals

1. What content knowledge tests are used for the purpose of state licensure and/or program completion? If the state has a licensure test for content, what is the unit's overall pass rate across all programs for other school professionals? What programs do not have an 80 percent or above pass rate?

The programs at UCM that prepare other school professionals include Counseling, Educational Technology, Literacy, School Administration (including principals and superintendents), School Library Media, School Psychologists, Industrial Technology Administrators, and Special Education Administrators. Not all programs include the requirement for taking a school licensure exam.

School principal, Special Education, and Industrial Technology candidates take the School Leader Licensure Assessment, and their data is not distinguished from the data of candidates in other programs. Pass rates for this assessment are above 80% each year since 2004, reaching as high as 100% in the fall of 2008. These scores compare quite favorably with both state and national data (see table below).

Superintendent candidates take the School Superintendency Assessment (SSA). Based on their performance on the SSA, the candidates in the superintendent preparation programs at UCM have consistently demonstrated a strong understanding and application of the professional standards. The pass rate for UCM over the past four years has averaged 91.3%.

School Counselors complete the PRAXIS II exam in School Guidance and Counseling with a pass rate of 590. For the past four years, 100% of all candidates passed the PRAXIS on their first attempt.

Faculty in the other programs for Other School Professionals have designed content knowledge assessments that are aligned with national standards. These assessments are fully described in program reports linked from the Electronic Documents Center.

Summary: The programs preparing other school professionals have developed assessments that measure content knowledge. The results of these assessments show that our candidates are well prepared for practice.

2. Please complete the following table to indicate pass rates on content licensure tests for other school professionals program by program and across all programs (i.e., overall pass rate).

Standard One47

Table 5Pass Rates on Content Licensure Tests for Other School Professionals

For Period 2004-2008

Program # of Test Takers % Passing at State Cut ScoreOverall Pass Rate for the Unit (Across all programs for the preparation of other school professionals)

228 95.2

School Principal: SLLA 141 93.6Superintendent: SSA 23 91.3Counseling 64 100

3. What do the data in the above table (Table 5) tell the unit about the content knowledge of other school professionals?

Candidates in the Counseling program have an outstanding record of success on the PRAXIS exam, with a record of 100% of candidates passing this test since 2003-2004. The record is more varied for candidates taking other tests, but overall they set a strong pattern of success. The scores for candidates becoming school principals shows a strong and impressive pattern of improvement across time, with 81.8% of candidates passing the PRAXIS in 2003-2004 and 100% passing in 2007-2008. Although the pass rate for candidates taking the exam for superintendency falls below the 80% pass rate for two years, the low number of candidates taking this exam causes a wide swing in the percentage year by year when only one candidate fails to pass. When scores are taken together across four years, the overall pass rate is 91.3%, well above the 80% target. The program reports for School Principal and Superintendency include data showing that candidate performance on the PRAXIS is above the state and national average.

Summary: A review of the PRAXIS scores for Other School Personnel demonstrates that candidates in these programs are well prepared.

4. What data from other key assessments indicate that these candidates demonstrate the knowledge and skills delineated in professional, state, and institutional standards? (Institutions that have submitted programs for national review or a similar state review are required to respond to this question only for programs not reviewed.)

Candidates in the various programs that prepare other school personnel have performed exceptionally well in the key assessments designed by their faculty. Additional information about these assessments and candidate performance is available in the program reports in the Electronic Data Center.

The MS Counseling and EdS Human Services: Professional Counseling degrees require the completion of the candidate’s approved Program of Study and a passing score on the Counselor Preparation Comprehensive Exam (CPCE). These programs include Counselor (K-8, K-12, and

Standard One48

9-12), Guidance & Counseling, and School Psychological Examiner (K-12). All candidates are assessed using the same assessment instruments.

The second content assessment for Counseling is the Counselor Preparation Comprehensive Exam (CPCE). Candidates who do not achieve a passing score on the first administration of the CPCE may retake the exam up to two more administrations. To date, only 3 students have failed to achieve a passing score after completing the exam a second time. Those students took the test a third time. All three students were able to achieve passing scores on the 8 subtests of the CPCE. Therefore, the program has a final pass rate of 100% on the CPCE exam. The CPCE is aligned with both state and national standards and confirms a record of strong preparation in this program.

Technology Education offers a Master of Science in Career and Technology Education and an Education Specialist in Human Services (Technology and Occupational Education). While neither degree directly offers teacher or administrator certification, faculty have played an active role in aligning degrees with a candidate’s certification plan. These advanced programs require that candidates complete Thesis, or (2) two research papers submitted for publication, or (3) written and oral comprehensive examination, or (4) Missouri Assessment Center examination in content area required. Ninety-six percent of graduates of the Master of Science program have successfully completed these requirements, and 100% of graduates in the Education Specialist program have. While no data exist on the number of student theses conducted prior to 2002, the department has been averaging two student theses per year. In 2004, the department incorporated a follow-up oral examination that required students to participate in a review and defense session with their graduate committee. This achieved many positive results for the student and the program, including student accountability, question and answer clarification, more time for the students to defend their answers, identifying additional needs of the student prior to graduation, and collecting qualitative data for program evaluation and improvement. Candidates in administrative roles take courses aligned with the national standards of the Interstate School Leaders Licensure Consortium, and they take the School Leaders Licensure Assessment; the pass rate since the program first began to offer this option in the Fall of 2007 is 100% for four candidates.

Summary: The University of Central Missouri offers robust advanced programs for Other School Personnel. These are aligned with state and national standards and produce candidates who demonstrate strong performance in assessments designed to measure content knowledge.

4a. (Optional) One or more tables of key assessment data related to the knowledge and skills for other school professionals could be attached here. What the data tell the unit about content knowledge should be discussed in the response to the new 1e4 above.

5. What data from key assessments indicate that these candidates know their students, families, and communities; use data and current research to inform practices; and use technology in their practices?

The standards that drive the Counseling program make special note of the relationships between counselors and their students, families, and communities. Two standards in particular focus on

Standard One49

students, families and communities: (1) Standard 1.4.1.2 Culture and Diversity: The school counselor candidate knows and understands how human diversity affects learning and development within the context of a global society and a diverse community of families. The school counselor candidate uses this understanding to assist learners, parents, and colleagues in developing opportunities for learning and personal growth. (2) Standard 1.4.3.1 The school counselor candidate understands, develops, and uses professional relationships in the school, family and community, through consultation and collaboration, to promote development of all learners. All candidates meet expectations consistently when assessed according to these standards during their internship experience.

Counseling candidates complete an extensive and intensively supervised internship, which is aligned with state and national standards. Assessment data demonstrates a pattern of excellent performance from 2003 to the present with all candidates rated as meeting nearly all criteria consistently. In 2006-2007, 17 candidates were assessed on 28 indicators. On all but three indicators, 100% of candidates were rated as consistently meeting performance expectations. On those three indicators, the few candidates (1 on two indicators and 3 on a third indicator) were rated as meeting the criteria minimally or inconsistently. In 2007-2008, all candidates were rated as consistently meeting all indicators on all but two criteria. It is noted that two candidates were rated as meeting inconsistently or minimally the same criterion as the three the previous year. That criterion is Maturity, indicator #5: “The student exhibits appropriate levels of self-assurance, confidence, and trust in own ability.”

5a. (Optional) One or more tables of key assessment data related to the knowledge and skills outlined in 1e5 could be attached here. What the data tell the unit about content knowledge should be discussed in the response to 1e5 above.

6. What do follow-up studies of graduates and employers indicate about graduates' preparation related to knowledge and skills for their field? If survey data are being reported, what was the response rate?

Graduates of the Counseling program are surveyed every two to three years by the Teacher Education Assessment Committee. When asked to evaluate their own preparation in relation to “Know, understand and use professional relationships in the school, family and community, through consultation and collaboration, to promote development of all learners,” the response was 4.5 on a scale of 1 to 5 with 5 representing strong preparation. Employers rated them at 4.4 on the same scale. The response rate for this survey was 50% for employers and 78% for graduates (TEAC, 2007, pp. 119-126).

Graduates of the School Administration program assessed their preparation overall as very strong with a range of scores from 4.2 to 4.6 on a scale of 1 (weak) to 5 (very strong). The response rate for this group was 41% of graduates (TEAC, 2007, p. 112). Their employers rated these principals at 4.4 to 4.8 on a 5-point scale, judging that our graduates were very well prepared for the work of school administration (TEAC, 2007, p. 118).

Graduates of the Library Media Specialist program rated their abilities at between 4.3 and 4.6 (TEAC, 2007, p. 99), with a response rate of 56%. Their employers rated their performance at

Standard One50

3.9 to 4.3 on a scale of 1 to 5. The response rate for employers was 54% (TEAC, 2007, p. 103). No data are available for graduates of other programs.

Summary: The data available from follow-up surveys shows that graduates of our advanced programs have strong preparation and strong performance in their disciplines.

7. A table summarizing the results of follow-up studies related to knowledge and skills for other school professionals could be attached here.

8. (Optional) Links to key exhibits related to the knowledge and skills of other school professionals could be attached here. (Links with descriptions must be typed into a Word document that can be uploaded here. The number of attached exhibits should be limited in number; BOE members should access most of the exhibits in the unit's electronic exhibit room.)

1f. Student Learning for Other School Professionals

1. 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? (Institutions that have submitted programs for national review or a similar state review are required to respond to this question only for programs not reviewed.)

The Counseling program is based on MoSTEP standards, many of which inform practice in relation to how counselors positively affect the environment for student learning. The school counselor uses assessment strategies for individuals and groups (1.4.1.3), uses classroom guidance methods and techniques (1.4.2.1), and delivers responsive counseling services to learners (1.4.2.3), for example. To address the diversity of students, families, and communities, the program is informed by these standards: 1.4.1.2, culture and diversity; 1.4.2.4, System Support delivering a program to meet the needs of all learners; 1.4.3.1 uses professional relationships in the school, family, and community, through consultation and collaboration; and 1.4.2.5 Technology: The school counselor candidate knows, understands and uses technology as a management and counseling tool in promoting the personal, educational, social, and career development of the learner. To address the policy context, the Counseling standards focus on Ethical (1.4.4.1), Legal (1.4.4.2), and Professional (1.4.4.3) standards to drive their work. Candidate performance on the assessments that measure these standards is consistently strong from one assessment to the next and from one year to the next.

Candidates in other programs accomplish authentic learning activities, often in real school settings. Their standards drive the assignments and assessments so that student performance is marked by the standards throughout. Additional information about candidate performance is available in the Electronic Document Center.

Summary: Candidates in advanced programs know how to build programs that provide a positive environment in which student learning thrives. They support the learning of all students and embed their work within the cultural diversity of their students, families, and community.

Standard One51

1a. (Optional) One or more tables of key assessment data related to other school professionals’ support of student learning could be attached here. What the data tell the unit about student learning should be discussed in the response to 1f1 above.

2. What do follow-up studies of graduates and employers indicate about graduates’ ability to create positive environments for student learning? If survey data are being reported, what was the response rate?

Graduates of the Counseling program respond to several questions that are based on MoSTEP standards, resulting in a measure of their knowledge of those standards. In 2007, 78% of graduates responded to the survey. They rated their ability at 4.5 on a scale of 1 to 5 (strongly agree) for “Know, understand and use various methods for delivering responsive counseling services to learners in the school community;” at 4.2 for “Know, understand and use various methods to develop and maintain a comprehensive guidance program that serves the needs of all learners;” 4.5 for “Know, understand and use professional relationships in the school, family and community, through consultation and collaboration, to promote development of all learners;” and at 3.9 for “Know, understand and use technology as a management and counseling tool in promoting the personal, educational, social, and career development of the learner” (TEAC, 2007, p. 121). These data indicate that candidates feel that they were well prepared in their Counseling program. Their employers (response rate of 50%) concur. On the same items, their ratings were 4.5, 4.2, 4.4, and 4.2 on a scale of 1 (very weak) to 5 (very strong) (TEAC, 2007, p. 127). Although graduates rated their technology skills lower than other skills, their employers did not rate them lower than other skills.

Graduates of the Library Media program also responded to this survey (response rate of 56%). These graduates rated their agreement with several statements related to providing an environment conducive to student learning on a scale of 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree) at between 4.5 and 4.6 (TEAC, 2007, p. 99). Their employers (return rate of 54%) gave the following range of ratings for the same statements: 4.0 to 4.2 (TEAC, 2007, p. 103). It is of interest to the library science faculty that employer ratings are lower for these areas than those of the graduates, although still very strong. The research literature suggests a disconnect between the understanding of employers and library media specialists.

Graduates of the School Administration program (response rate of 45%) rated their agreement with several statements having to do with providing an environment for student success on a scale of 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree), rating their abilities between 4.4 and 4.5 (TEAC, 2007, p. 112). Their employers rated them on the same statements between 4.5 and 4.7, clearly indicating strong agreement with what our graduates are bringing into their schools (TEAC, 2007, p. 118).

Summary: Follow up surveys show that both graduates and their employers consider the advanced programs to be strong preparation for providing positive learning environments for students.

Standard One52

3. A table summarizing the results of follow-up studies related to support for student learning could be attached here.

4. (Optional) Links to key exhibits related to other school professionals' support of student learning could be attached here. (Links with descriptions must be typed into a Word document that can be uploaded here. The number of attached exhibits should be limited in number; BOE members should access most of the exhibits in the unit's electronic exhibit room.)

1g. Professional Dispositions for All Candidates

Note: Indicate where the responses refer to initial teacher preparation, advanced preparation of teachers, or other school professionals, noting differences when appropriate.

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

Initial Teacher Preparation

The Dispositions Assessment process includes both formative and summative data recorded on the Teacher Candidate Dispositions Assessment Form. The items on the instrument have been developed to align with INTASC and MoSTEP standards as well as with UCM’s Conceptual Framework. A key component of these dispositions is the premise that all students can learn. The scoring rubric provides a description of the criteria for determining how to rate each item using the scale Not Observed, Does Not Meet, Progressing, Meets, and Exceeds. The Teacher Candidate Dispositions Assessment is completed at a minimum of two points during the candidate’s program of study at UCM: (1) previous to the TE-16 Candidate Appraisal by the Academic Department prior to the Professional Education Semester, and (2) at the end of student teaching by the University Supervisor after consultation with the district supervisor(s). The first use of this assessment is by department faculty knowledgeable about the candidate and offers an opportunity to provide each candidate developmental feedback to assist candidates in improving their performance in any areas not rated Meets or Exceeds. A supervisor concerned about a candidate who appears unlikely to achieve a rating of at least Meets in all areas by the end of student teaching will notify Clinical Services immediately. One copy of each form is given to the student, with comments and recommendations for ongoing professional development (required in areas not marked Meets or Exceeds). Poor dispositions are a strong enough argument to prevent a candidate from being admitted to the student teaching semester. These candidates are given recommendations and support for remediating these dispositional shortcomings. If successful, they are then admitted to student teaching.

Advanced Programs

Faculty in advanced programs may have developed separate dispositions based on state and national standards, or they assessed their candidates using dispositions embedded in the assessments for knowledge, skills, and dispositions. Typically these programs assess candidates dispositionally more than once, with early assessments being opportunities for formative development. The Library Media program adopted a series of dispositions drawn from the AASL

http://www.ala.org/ala/mgrps/divs/aasl/aasleducation/schoollibrarymed/Dispositions.doc



http://www.ucmo.edu/Documents/cehs/teacher_candidate_disposition.doc

Standard One53

standards for school library media specialists developed by Dr. Elizabeth Haynes for the association. These dispositions are common to many school library media programs across the nation.

In 2004 Counselor Education faculty began developing a dispositions assessment. After an extensive review of the professional literature, 6 dispositions were identified as essential to effective functioning as a professional counselor. The faculty then began to create a rubric to assess candidate development of professional dispositions. This process was completed in 2007. The dispositions assessment is completed at four points as candidates progress through the program. At the completion of COUN 5610 Introduction to Group Work, candidates complete a peer assessment. Faculty complete a dispositions assessment when the candidate requests Advanced Status. Candidates complete a self-assessment at the completion of each semester of COUN 6910 Internship in Professional Counseling.

School Administration and Superintendency assess dispositions as embedded components in various assessments. No separate dispositions data is collected. Candidates in the Master of Science in Education program complete multiple assignments and a portfolio. Each is closely aligned with both standards and dispositions.

Summary: Candidates in both initial and advanced programs are assessed dispositionally. For initial programs a negative dispositions assessment is enough to bar a candidate from student teaching. Both initial and advanced programs offer candidates the opportunity to adjust and develop dispositionally.

2. What data from key assessments indicate that candidates demonstrate appropriate professional dispositions?


The data summarized here were gathered during the student teaching semester. During the first year of use, this assessment included 11 items. University Supervisors and faculty recommended including a 12th disposition related to general deportment and professionalism (i.e., arrive on time, dress professionally, be prepared, etc.). Candidates were assessed on each of the 11 dispositions, and data tables show their performance, disposition by disposition, for all student teachers, then broken down by program. In 2005-2006, the first year this form was used, candidate performance ranged from 41.6% to 62.2% exceeding expectations on the list of 11 dispositions, and another 34% to 51.5% met expectations. No more than 10 candidates were marked as Progressing on any one disposition, and only three data points were logged as “Does Not Meet.”

In 2006-2007 University Supervisors assessed student teachers on 12 dispositions. Candidate performance assessed at the Exceeds level ranged from 45.7% to 62.2% exceeding expectations. Fewer than 5% of candidates were rated at the Progressing level for any single disposition, with 4.62% for Disposition 12 (deportment). All other candidate data this year were at the Meets Expectations level.

Standard One54

In 2007-2008, University Supervisors rated candidate performance at the Exceeds level for 41% to more than 73% for some dispositions. No more than 2.3% of candidates were marked at the Progressing level this year. A single candidate was marked at Does Not Meet. All other candidates were rated at the Meets Expectations level. This pattern of data suggested to the Professional Education Faculty leadership a level of candidate quality that was possibly too good to be true. The Associate Dean hosted University Supervisors for a professional development session to discuss dispositions and how to rate them. It is expected that with this training the number of candidates rated at Exceeds Expectations will decline in the future, and that University Supervisors will provide a more reliable rating of candidate performance. Having said that, however, we are confident that our candidates demonstrate strong performance in the classroom.

Advanced Programs

In the Library Media program, candidates are introduced to the School Library Media Dispositions (based on the ALA/AASL and Missouri MoSTEP Standards) during the first course in their program. They are asked to provide a self-assessment of their abilities in relation to those dispositions. Typically, they have the highest confidence in their abilities related to all standards except for technology and their ability to advocate for their library media programs. The second time they are assessed is during their practicum, late in the program when candidates are assessed by both their supervising librarian and their university supervisor. This assessment shows a strong pattern of achievement across all dispositions as determined by both supervisors.

A key assessment for the Counselor Education program is the dispositions assessment at the point of admission to advanced status. The data shows that nearly all candidates function in relation to each of these dispositions at the level of Accepts and a few at the level of Embraces. This is a mid-point assessment in the Counselor Education program. This dispositional assessment is considered formative. It is noted that candidates at the Education Specialist level tend to embrace these dispositions more commonly than those at the Master’s level.

For the other programs, dispositional data are not gathered separately from the knowledge and skills data although candidates are clearly assessed dispositionally. For example, in the School Administration and Superintendency programs, candidates are assessed at multiple points throughout their program using grading rubrics aligned with state and national standards which have embedded in them clearly identified dispositions. These candidates have a strong performance record in relation to these standards.

Summary: In both initial and advanced programs, candidates have established a strong record of performance in relation to the dispositions established by faculty or embedded in state and national standards.

2a. (Optional) One or more tables of key assessment data related to professional dispositions could be attached here. What the data tell the unit about professional dispositions should be discussed in the response to 2g2 above.

Standard One55

3. In what ways do candidates demonstrate that they are developing professional dispositions related to fairness and the belief that all students can learn?


Although all dispositions are linked to the central beliefs of fairness and that all students can learn, four are especially focused on these tenets:

Disposition 1: Commits to high expectations for all students, and values the ability/capacity for each student to learn. (INTASC 1,2,3,4,5,6,7; MoSTEP 1,2,3,4,5,6)

Disposition 5: Commits to development of lessons that are interesting and engaging through a variety of instructional strategies to accommodate all learners, including those from diverse backgrounds, experiences, and cultures (e.g., use of technology, grouping, motivating materials). (INTASC 1,2,3,4,5,6; MoSTEP 1,2,3,5,6,7)

Disposition 6: Commits to making appropriate adaptations and accommodations for students with diverse needs (e.g., use of technology). (INTASC 1,2,3,5,6,8; MoSTEP 1,2,3,6,7,8)

Disposition 9: Believes students and colleagues should be treated and should treat others with kindness, fairness, patience, dignity, and respect. (INTASC 5,6,9,10; MoSTEP 6,7,9,10)

Strategies to identify and work with the widest range of exceptionalities in children are introduced in two key courses, SPED 2100, Education of the Exceptional Child and PSY 4200, Psychology of Exceptional Children. All initial certification candidates at the undergraduate level are required to take one or the other of these courses, and initial certification candidates at the graduate level take PSY 4200. In PSY 4200 candidates are introduced to the identification, care, treatment, and guidance of exceptional children. In SPED 2100, candidates are introduced to the identification of exceptional children, methods and techniques for teaching them, as well as possible sources of referral which may be of assistance to teachers and parents of these children. Beyond these two courses, candidates spend time in K-12 classrooms, watching experienced teachers in action working with all of the students in their classrooms. These candidates observe teachers interacting with each student, consulting with special education experts, and employing a diversity of teaching strategies to support the learning of all students.

As mentioned above, initial certification candidates are assessed twice. Both assessments may be formative in nature, but during the student teaching semester, they are assessed summatively, and the data for the past three years shows a strong record of performance for these candidates.

Advanced Programs

Dispositions vary from program to program, but they each include the tenets of fairness and the belief that all children can learn. In Counseling, candidates are assessed against these dispositions: “Communicates nonjudgmental warmth and acceptance of others without regard to ethnic group, race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, age, and/or disability.” Candidates are

Standard One56

assessed four times against this and other dispositions; one assessment is used as a key assessment in this program.

In the School Administration program, assessments are aligned with such ELCC standards as 5.1 Acts with integrity; 5.2 Acts fairly, and 5.3 Acts ethically. Multiple assessments include these standards; thus, candidates are assessed and demonstrate understanding of these key dispositions.

Summary: Candidates in both initial preparation programs and advanced programs are introduced to dispositions that are aligned with the tenets of fairness and the belief that all can learn. They are assessed on these dispositions and demonstrate that they understand and can implement these dispositions in the classroom.

4. What do follow-up studies of graduates and employers indicate about graduates' demonstration of professional dispositions? If survey data are being reported, what was the response rate?


In 2007 graduates of initial preparation programs rated their response to the dispositions statement about the diversity of learners in their classrooms at 3.9 (TEAC, 2007, p. 16, 33% response rate). Employers provide a rating of 4.0 on a scale of 1 to 5 (very strong) (47% response rate, p. 64). In 2008, 31% of graduates responded to the survey. They rated their understanding of the diversity of students at 4.0 (p. 58). Their employers also rated their work with diverse students at 4.0 (62% response rate, p. 121). Additional data disaggregated by program is available in these survey reports.

Advanced Programs

Graduates of a wide variety of advanced programs were surveyed in 2007. Their responses to statements that capture the ideas inherent in the tenets of fairness and the belief that all can learn show a strong pattern of accomplishment and performance. The TEAC survey for 2007 includes responses for graduates and their employers, disaggregated by program. The responses of candidates to dispositional statements range from 4.1 to 4.6 on a scale of 1 to 5 (very strong). Their employers rated these graduates in similar ways, ranging from 4.1 to 4.8. The data shows strong performance for graduates of all programs. Response rates vary from program to program, but all are above 47% for both graduates and employers.

Summary: Follow up survey data of both graduates and their employers demonstrate that graduates of initial certification and advanced programs demonstrate attitudes that support the learning of the wide diversity of students in their classrooms. They demonstrate the belief that all students can learn.

5. A table summarizing the results of follow-up studies related to professional dispositions could be attached here.

Standard One57

6. (Optional) Links to key exhibits related to professional dispositions could be attached here. (Links with descriptions must be typed into a Word document that can be uploaded here. The number of attached exhibits should be limited in number; BOE members should access most of the exhibits in the unit's electronic exhibit room.)

Optional

1. What does your unit do particularly well related to Standard 1?

The Teacher Education Program has developed a particularly strong system for assessing candidate performance for undergraduate programs. Especially valuable to our review of these programs are the data gathered during the student teaching semester and in follow-up surveys. This data are standards-driven and include evidence of candidate performance in relation to all standards, dispositions, and their impact on preK-12 student learning.

We believe that the Professional Development School provides our elementary and middle school candidates with valuable experiences in schools. This program offers our faculty and classroom teachers remarkable opportunities to learn from each other. We are currently planning to expand our PDS program into secondary and K-12 programs and count this an opportunity to better prepare all initial certification candidates.

Our experience with the Unit and Lesson Plan assessments during the student teaching semester have convinced us to expand this assessment into a fully developed teacher work sample. Faculty in the PEF are taking the lead to develop this assessment for implementation in the 2009-2010 school year. We are confident this assessment will provide our candidates the opportunity to present their teaching effectively and to reflect on their work.

We are proud of the innovative programs developed to meet the demands in the State of Missouri for well-trained certified teachers. These programs include—but are not limited to—the Master of Arts in Teaching which provides a rapid path into the classroom for candidates who have content expertise but not professional education course work in their undergraduate programs. We also recognize the efforts of faculty across the unit who are providing courses and programs at a distance from the main campus, some on site at the Central Summit Center and others online. The assessments reviewed in this standard show that candidates in all of our programs demonstrate the knowledge, skills, and dispositions needed to be successful in schools.

We are proud of the collaborative working relationships among Professional Education Faculty across the unit. Faculty in the College of Education value the expertise and leadership of PEF faculty in the other colleges. Faculty from across the university serve in leadership roles in the Teacher Education Council.

The Teacher Education Assessment Committee is also to be commended for their work of surveying candidates during the foundations course and student teaching as well as graduates and their employers. Their work provides valuable feedback to program faculty to consider as they strive to continually improve their programs.

Standard One58

The Professional Education Faculty benefit from the visionary leadership of Dean and Associate Dean of the College of Education. They have guided the work of preparation for this accreditation review and have supported the professional development of faculty on- and off-campus, so that program faculty could develop an understanding of their standards and the review process. The benefit of this leadership is evident in the record of the many programs that received national recognition, demonstrating a record of performance that conforms to national standards. In fact, faculty from the Library Science Program were invited to present their report as a model for how to manage assessment data and report findings at national conference of the American Library Association in January, 2009.

2. What research related to Standard 1 is being conducted by the unit?

A wide variety of faculty have published scholarly articles and books that support the work of teacher preparation. Below are examples of their work in the last two years:

Aldrich, J., Lamson, S., Wallace, B., & Carter, S. (2008). Professional development schools: Mentoring checklist to enhance effective practices. In I. Guadarrama, J. Ramsey, & J. Nath (Eds.), University & School Connections: Research in Professional Development Schools. Information Age Publishing.

Cochran, L. & Reece, S. (September, 2007) A successful induction into the teaching profession. Techniques. Alexandria, VA: Assocation for Career and Technical Education.

McHenry, B., Cowles, J., & Sesser, G. (2007). Articulating the roles, duties and activities of a professional school counselor in the Missouri Comprehensive Guidance Program: A conversation with education administrators. The Counseling Interviewer. 39(3) 5-9.

Neal, J., & Ehlert, D. (2007). 20 Ways to Add Technology to the Library/Media Center for Students with Disabilities. Intervention in School and Clinic, 42, 119-123.

Yao, Y., Thomas, M., Nickens, N., Downing, J. A., Burkett, R., & Lamson, S. (2008). Validity evidence of an electronic portfolio for preservice teachers. Educational Measures: Issues and Practice 27(1), 10-24.

Faculty are also active presenters of peer-reviewed research at regional, state, and national conferences. Below is a selection of the many presentations listed in the Faculty Accomplishments document (available in the Electronic Documents Center):

Aldrich, J., Wright, M., Yao, Y., Brant, K., & Washer, B. (2007, November 8). Defining excellence in teacher education. Presentation at the Southeastern Regional Association of Teacher Education (SRATE), St. Louis, MO.

Alkire, M.L., & Perrin, B. (2008). Upcycling authentic assessment for the millennial learner in a technology-driven society. AAFCS National Conference, WI.

Antrim, P., Malone, L., & Levine, C. (2008, April ). Collaboration showoffs: Promoting reading through collaboration. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the Missouri

http://faculty.ucmo.edu/ncate09/standards/standard_5/faculty_accomplishments.doc


Standard One59

Association of School Librarians, Osage Beach, MO.

Bowman, J., Burger, K., Hochsprung, L., & Gross, J. (2007, November 2). Graduate student perceptions of their cohort program. Paper presented at the Southern Regional Council on Educational Administration: 48th Annual Conference, Kansas City, Mo.

Brant, K., & Moore, D. (2008). A truly powerful PDS. National PDS Conference, Orlando, FL.

Brown, P., Hoffman, J., & Frazier, R. (2007, October). Supporting preservice and beginning teachers – a special session to learn more about benefits of being a STOM member. Presentation at the Science Teachers of Missouri fall conference, Jefferson City, MO.

Cowles, J. & Sesser, G.R. (2007). The use of videotapes in the preparation of school counselors: Responding to school district concerns. Paper presented at the DESE/Counselor Educators Spring Meeting. Jefferson City, MO.

Downing, J. A., Yao, Y. & Nickens, N. (2007, November). Traditional versus alternative paths to certification: Does it make a difference? Paper presented at the 48th annual conference of SRCEA, Kansas City, MO. Won 2nd place award in UCM Faculty Research Days.

Forth, N., Cowles, J., Gray, J., Kempker, L., Heisterberg, R., & Dusin, B. (2007, November). Clinical supervision of school counselors in training. Paper presented at the Missouri School Counseling Association Fall Conference, Osage Beach, MO.

Grigsby, C., Williams, W. & Zelazek, J. (2007, November). Meeting the needs of education in Missouri: An alternative pathway to teaching excellence. Paper presented at the meeting of the Southeastern Regional Association of Teacher Educators, St. Louis, Mo.

Jurkowski, O. (2008, February 5). Utilizing technology for differentiated instruction. Presentation at Midwest Education Technology Conference (METC), St. Charles, MO.

Mohn, C., & Jinks, M. (2007) Collaborative principal preparation program: Five years later. Paper presented at Southern Regional Council on Educational Administration, Kansas City, MO.

Theiss, D., Grigsby, C., & Moore, D. (2008, April 12). Measuring the achievement of Professional Development Schools to ensure the growth and sustenance of powerful partnerships. Presentation at the Professional Development Schools national conference, Orlando, FL.

Thomas, M.M. (2007, November). Starting at the source: A conversation about long-range plans to assess and promote reading maturity in preservice teachers to improve k-12 literacy development. Presentation at the SRATE 54th Annual Conference, St. Louis, MO.

Yao, Y. & Williams, W. (2007, November). A comparison of MAT teachers with other teachers in terms of their teaching competencies. SRATE, St. Louis, MO.

Standard Two 60

STANDARD 2. ASSESSMENT SYSTEM AND UNIT EVALUATION

The unit has an assessment system that collects and analyzes data on the applicant qualifications, the candidate and graduate performance, and unit operations to evaluate and improve the unit and its programs.

[Note: Include programs for teachers, including graduate programs for licensed teachers, and other school professionals, noting differences when appropriate.]

2a. Assessment System

1. How is the unit assessment system evaluated and continuously improved? Who is involved and how?

How is the unit assessment system evaluated and continuously improved?

The unit assessment system underwent a major revision during the late spring and summer of 2005 in reaction to needs expressed within the unit and external accreditation expectations. First, there was a desire for an observation instrument during student teaching that not only facilitated formative candidate feedback, but also was relatively short and easy to use. Second, the Unit's Conceptual Framework, revised before the 2002 site visit, required the assessment of candidate dispositions. Third, programs needed a better tool to evaluate the ability of our candidates to use data from formative and summative assessment to make instructional decisions. Finally, faculty, students, and community stakeholders expressed a growing consensus that the portfolio was not serving its purpose as a measure of candidate competencies. With the agreement of DESE, the UCM Professional Education Faculty undertook a major revision of the unit assessment system (approved by PEF 4/25/05). Task forces were formed that represented initial teacher education programs from across the university, as well as public schools in the immediate area of UCM.

The revision included development of new assessment measures and updating and realigning existing assessment instruments or procedures. Three new assessments for student teachers were completed by August 2005 and piloted in the Fall 2005 semester: 1) Disposition Assessment, intended to be administered at three points during a candidate's program--by district mentors during students’ initial field experience in EDCI 2100, by faculty prior to admission to student teaching, and by university supervisors near the end of the student teaching semester, 2) Instructional Unit/Lesson Plan, to be completed by university supervisors near the end of the student teaching semester, and 3) Impact on P-12 Learning/Assessment, to be completed by university supervisors near the end of student teaching semester. Based on the first year implementation, modifications were made to the new assessments. While most were cosmetic, the Dispositions Assessment during students’ initial field experience was dropped, because the ratings by district mentors were found to be uniformly too high to be useful. An item related to professional demeanor was also added to the Dispositions instrument. In response to requests by clinical faculty who supervised student teaching, the instrument for Instructional Unit/Lesson Plan was combined with the Impact on P-12 Learning evaluation to simplify and streamline the data collection process. The items remained the same, but with the combined form, supervisors

Standard Two 61

only completed one heading and it reinforced the relationship between planning instruction and assessing instructional effectiveness.

The PEF task forces modified the content and/or the procedure for administering three existing Unit assessments, as follows:

1) Praxis II subject tests. Beginning Fall 2005, candidates are required to take the required Praxis II test(s) prior to the student teaching semester. Previously, candidates were required to take the Praxis II before they graduated. Candidates can complete their degree without passing the Praxis. By moving the date back, the PEF felt it would increase the likelihood that candidates would complete their degree and be eligible for certification at the end of the student teaching semester.

2) Student teaching evaluation. Beginning Fall 2005, the student teacher observation/evaluation instrument was revised. The new format was designed to align with standards and be more holistic, yet facilitate meaningful feedback to candidates on their progress. Some content areas also developed a SPA-specific attachment to be administered with the summative evaluation; it is completed by the district mentor/supervisor. A second alteration of the student teacher evaluation related to the scoring procedure. The original assessment was based on a dichotomous standards-based checklist (i.e., met/unmet) that did not provide distinctions between different performance levels or demonstrate incremental growth. The revised assessment is scored on the same Likert-type scale used for the three new instruments: Not Observed, Does not meet (0), Progressing (1), Meets (2), and Exceeds (3).

3) TEAC (Teacher Education Assessment Committee) Follow-up Survey. Several changes have been made in this instrument since the 2002 site visit. In Spring 2005, as a response to the rapidly-growing Master of Arts in Teaching (MAT) Program, a separate survey was developed and administered for MAT teachers and their employers. Prior to that time, the MAT teachers and their employees were combined with non-degree seeking alternative certification teachers in the survey. In Spring 2006, a technology standard was incorporated in several instruments of the TEAC Survey to reflect the adoption of the 11th MoSTEP standard. In Spring 2007, the first and second year teacher survey was revised to evaluate the teachers’ perceived impact of the UCM teacher education program on their competencies. In previous versions of the survey, the employees were asked to evaluate their own teaching competencies. Similar changes were made in the school year 2007-2008 to the student teacher survey.

The evaluation and improvement of the unit assessment system is an ongoing, continual process. In November 2005, for instance, a PEF task force was charged with examining the benefits and pitfalls of portfolios used in most programs within the unit in light of a change in Missouri's state requirements for teacher education programs. Following the recommendations of the task force, several programs within the unit dropped the requirement of portfolio assessment. Other programs have since then revised their portfolio requirements for their candidates. In August 2008, the college assessment coordinator was appointed to work with various programs within the unit in an effort to introduce the Teacher Work Sample to the unit assessment system. In January 2009, university student teaching supervisors were trained on an expanded scoring rubric for the Dispositions assessment. The new rubric is being piloted in the Spring of 2009 in an effort to assist supervisors with differentiating among the various proficiency levels; in

Standard Two 62

particular, this targets the issue of inflated scores (i.e., an increasing number of "Exceeds" ratings) identified in the Fall 2008 TEC review of the two prior years of student teaching data.

While the primary focus of the 2005 unit assessment revision process was on undergraduate, initial teacher education programs, the UCM advanced programs were also actively involved in the ongoing process of updating their assessments. Because of the specialized nature of the graduate programs leading to advanced roles and licensure, those revisions focused on reflecting the updated conceptual framework and refining alignment to SPA and state standards. Graduate programs that do not have content-specific standards aligned with the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards core propositions. Starting in the fall of 2007, graduate and advanced program coordinators began meeting regularly to identify commonalities in their assessment instruments and procedures and to discuss ways to work together more effectively. Although the difference in program focus defies the use of a universal assessment across those graduate and advanced programs, each program has installed an assessment system that is standards-based, constantly under review and revision, and focused on the candidates' professional knowledge, skills, and dispositions as instructional leaders or professionals in various educational fields.

Who is involved and how?

The constant evaluation and improvement of the unit assessment system is made possible through the joint efforts of administrators, committees, special task forces, and the professional education faculty (PEF) across the various teacher education programs at UCM. For instance, soon after he took office, the Dean of the new College of Education appointed a PEF task force to revisit the conceptual framework for teacher education in light of the mission of the new college, to ensure that it is congruent with instruction in core teacher education courses, and provides the basis for all major assessment measures in the unit. The conceptual framework was approved by the PEF in Fall 2008.

Chaired by the Associate Dean of the college, five special task forces were formed in the Summer of 2005 to revise or develop the unit disposition assessment, Praxis II, student teacher evaluation, differentiated unit/lesson plan, and the unit/lesson work sample evaluation (i.e., impact on p-12 student learning). For the dispositions and student teacher evaluation, the task forces reviewed the current instruments, and modified the instruments to align with the NCATE/DESE standards and unit conceptual framework. For the unit/lesson plan and impact on p-12 student learning, the task forces developed instruments that addressed the various aspects of candidate performance in the classroom in alignment with the NCATE/DESE standards and unit conceptual framework. For the Praxis II, the task force reviewed current policies regarding taking and passing the test for graduation, and revised the policy. For each of the assessments, the various task forces wrote the description of the assessment, and the timeline and procedure for collecting, analyzing, and using the data. Each of the changes or revisions was approved by PEF and was first implemented in Fall 2005.

Modifications in the various instruments of the TEAC (Teacher Education Assessment Committee) Survey have been the responsibility of the TEAC Supervisory Committee. The committee, chaired by the TEAC Coordinator, meets regularly to discuss specific issues of the

Standard Two 63

Survey and makes decisions upon specific changes in the Survey. Except for the TEAC Coordinator, members of the Supervisory Committee also serve on the TEC (Teacher Education Council), the representative body of the PEF. This arrangement helps to ensure that any changes in the TEAC Survey are consistent with the mission of the unit. Since 2005, several rounds of reviews and revisions have taken place for the TEAC Survey, including additions of items to reflect changes in NCATE/DESE standards, the revision of items to align with the evolving conceptual framework of the unit, and the addition of new instruments to reflect new programs in the unit.

Assessment matters are usually handled by the College Assessment Committee, which meets regularly to discuss assessment topics that affect the college and make recommendations to the Dean. Major decisions on unit assessment issues are left to the PEF (Professional Education Faculty) and its representative body TEC (Teacher Education Council). Since the PEF involves every faculty member in teacher education programs at UCM, everyone has the opportunity to provide input and make a difference in the decision making process.

Please complete the following table (Table 6) to indicate the key assessments used by the unit and its programs to monitor candidate performance at transition points such as those listed in Table 6.

Table 6Unit Assessment System: Transition Point Assessments

Program Admission Entry to clinical practice

Exit from clinical practice

Program completion

After program

completionEarly Childhood Ed. (B-3);Elementary Ed. (1-6) -Bachelor's

2.5 GPA; C grade in core and introductory courses; C-Base; initial level portfolio; criminal background check

2.5 GPA; midlevel portfolio; computer proficiency; formative disposition assessment; Praxis II taken

Formative student teacher evaluation; Summative student teacher evaluation; Summative dispositions assessment; Unit plan and impact on P-12 learning assessment; C grade in student teaching

Passing Praxis II; 2.5 GPA; final level portfolio

TEAC annual follow-up surveys of graduates and their employers in the first two years after program completion

Middle School Ed. (5-9) - Bachelor's

2.5 GPA; C grade in core and introductory courses; C-Base; initial level portfolio; criminal background check

2.5 GPA; midlevel portfolio; computer proficiency; formative disposition assessment; Praxis II taken

Student teacher content assessment;Formative student teacher evaluation; Summative student teacher evaluation; Summative dispositions assessment; Unit plan and impact on P-12 learning assessment; C grade in student teaching

Passing Praxis II; 2.5 GPA; final level portfolio


Standard Two 64



Program completion

After program

completionSocial Studies (9-12);Physical Ed. (k-12) - Bachelor's

2.5 GPA; C grade in introductory courses; C-Base; criminal background check; department recommendation based on interview

2.5 GPA; computer proficiency; formative dispositions assessment; Praxis II taken; department approval

Formative student teacher evaluation; Summative student teacher evaluation; content specific assessment;Summative dispositions assessment; Unit plan and impact on P-12 learning assessment; C grade in student teaching

Passing Praxis II; 2.5 GPA; C grade in all professional education courses


Foreign Language (k-12) French & Spanish- Bachelor's

2.5 GPA; C grade in introductory courses; C-Base; criminal background check; department recommendation based on interview

2.5 GPA; computer proficiency; formative dispositions assessment; Praxis II taken; ACTFL advanced level check




Special Ed. - Early Childhood, Cross-categorical (k-12), & Severe Disabilities (k-12) - Bachelor's

2.5 GPA; C grade in introductory courses; C-Base; criminal background check; initial portfolio; department recommendation based on faculty advisor interview

2.5 GPA; computer proficiency; formative dispositions assessment; Praxis II taken


Passing Praxis II; 2.5 GPA; C grade in all professional education courses; final portfolio


Standard Two 65



Program completion

After program

completionEnglish (9-12) - Bachelor's

2.5 GPA; C grade in introductory courses; C-Base; criminal background check; department recommendation based on faculty interview

2.5 GPA; computer proficiency; formative dispositions assessment; Praxis II taken; portfolio


Passing Praxis II; 2.5 GPA; C grade in all professional education courses; portfolio


Mathematics (9-12) - Bachelor's

2.5 GPA; 80% on competency exam; C-Base; criminal background check; department recommendation based on faculty interview

2.5 GPA; computer proficiency; Praxis II taken; portfolio

Formative student teacher evaluation; Summative student teacher evaluation; Math content assessment;Summative dispositions assessment; Unit plan and impact on P-12 learning assessment

Passing Praxis II; 2.5 GPA; C grade in all professional education courses; portfolio


Art Education- (k-12); Family and Consumer Science (k-12); Music Education (k-12); Agriculture Ed. (9-12);Business Ed. (9-12);Science (9-12);Earth Science (9-12);Speech & Theatre (9-12) – Bachelor’s

2.5 GPA; C grade in introductory courses; C-Base; criminal background check; department recommendation





Standard Two 66



Program completion

After program

completionEducational Leadership - Principal (k-8, 9-12) - MSE

2.75 cumulative undergraduate GPA, or 3.0 undergraduate GPA for last 60 hours of course work; GRE; proof of teacher certification

Successful completion of 12 hours of graduate course work; finalization of Program of Study; advisor approval

3.0 cumulative GPA; successful completion of two internship courses

3.0 cumulative GPA; C grade in all courses on Program of Study; program portfolio; School Leaders Licensure Assessment

TEAC follow-up surveys of graduates and their employers; twice in the first four years of program completion

Educational Leadership - Superintendant (k-12) - EDS

3.25 graduate GPA; GRE or School Leaders Licensure Assessment

Successful completion of 12 hours of graduate course work; finalization of Program of Study; advisor approval

3.0 cumulative GPA; successful completion of two internship courses; research paper

3.0 cumulative GPA; C grade in all courses on Program of Study; program portfolio; School Superintendent Assessment


Education Technology - MS

2.75 cumulative undergraduate GPA, or 3.0 undergraduate GPA for last 60 hours of course work; 3 letters of recommendation

Successful completion of 12 graduate hours; finalization of Program of Study; advisor approval

3.0 cumulative GPA; training workshop; Internship evaluation

3.0 cumulative GPA; C grade in all courses on Program of Study; professional development plan


Technology & Occupational Ed. - MS

2.5 GPA in the undergraduate major, or 3.0 GPA during the last 60 semester hours of undergraduate study; 2 letters of recommendation

Successful completion of 12 graduate hours finalization of Program of Study; advisor approval

3.0 cumulative GPA; Thesis, 2 research papers, comprehensive exam, or a Missouri Assessment Center Exam

3.0 cumulative GPA; C grade in all courses on Program of Study


Standard Two 67



Program completion

After program

completionTechnology & Occupational Ed. - EDS

3.25 graduate GPA; master's degree; 2 letters of recommendation


3.0 cumulative GPA; Thesis, 2 research papers, comprehensive exam, or a Missouri Assessment Center Exam



Literacy Ed. (k-12) - MSE

2.5 GPA; proof of teacher certification or professional endorsement; last summative teaching evaluation

Successful completion of core foundational courses in content literacy; finalization of Program of Study; advisor approval

3.0 cumulative GPA; reflective interpretation of student behaviors in reading and writing; critical analysis of impact on student learning; synthesis of current research in content literacy

3.0 GPA; C grade in all courses on Program of Study; written and oral presentation of portfolio


Curriculum & Instruction - EDS

3.25 graduate GPA or GRE (verbal + quantitative = 1000); bachelor's degree; initial teacher certification or professional endorsement; last summative teaching evaluation


3.0 cumulative GPA; Thesis



MSE - Elementary Ed., k-12, & Secondary Ed.

2.5 GPA; proof of teacher certification or professional endorsement; last summative teaching evaluation

Successful completion of core foundational courses in content literacy; finalization of Program of Study; advisor approval

3.0 cumulative GPA; successful completion of capstone and internship courses; portfolio



Standard Two 68



Program completion

After program

completionCounseling - MS

2.5 GPA in total undergraduate courses, 2.75 GPA in the last 60 hours of undergraduate work, and 3.0 GPA in the graduate course; GRE (verbal + quantitative = 900; writing = 3.5); 3 letters of recommendation


3.0 cumulative GPA; portfolio

3.0 cumulative GPA; C grade in all courses on Program of Study; comprehensive exit exam


Counseling - EDS

3.25 graduate GPA; master's degree; GRE (verbal + quantitative = 900; writing = 3.5); 3 letters of recommendation


3.0 cumulative GPA; post-degree supervision plan



Special Ed. (k-12) - MSE

2.75 cumulative undergraduate GPA, or 3.0 undergraduate GPA for last 60 hours of course work; GRE (writing = 3.0)


3.0 cumulative GPA; successful completion of internship



Special Ed. - EDS

3.25 graduate GPA; master's degree;


3.0 cumulative GPA; thesis



Standard Two 69



Program completion

After program

completionLibrary Media (k-12) - MS

2.75 cumulative undergraduate GPA, or 3.0 undergraduate GPA for last 60 hours of course work; 3 letters of recommendation


3.0 cumulative GPA; practicum evaluation; practicum lesson plan



Learning Resources - EDS

3.25 graduate GPA; master's degree; 3 letters of recommendation


3.0 cumulative GPA; thesis



Alternative certification - (5-9; 9-12)

2.5 GPA; C grade in introductory courses; criminal background check; department recommendation


Formative student teacher evaluation; Summative student teacher evaluation; Summative dispositions assessment; Unit plan and impact on P-12 learning assessment; C grade in student teaching; portfolio


TEAC annual follow-up surveys of alternative certification teachers (both current degree candidates and graduates of the last three years) and their employers

MAT- Middle School & Secondary Ed.

2.5 GPA; bachelor's degree; admission to alternative certification program; alternative certificate plan; letters of recommendation


3.0 cumulative GPA; successful completion of two internship courses; portfolios


TEAC annual follow-up surveys of all MAT teachers (both degree completers and candidates) and their employers

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?

Standard Two 70

The unit assessment system at UCM consists of assessments carefully designed and regularly updated to ensure that they provide information regarding candidate proficiencies as outlined in the conceptual framework, state standards, and professional standards. While some of the unit assessment measures focus on the knowledge base of the candidate, the majority of the assessments target the candidate’s ability to translate the knowledge base to their experience in the classroom. In this way, the assessment system is aligned with the unit conceptual framework that is based on the reflective practitioner model. The assessments are also standards-based because the instruments are built directly around INTASC/DESE standards on candidate knowledge, skills, and dispositions and SPA content standards. The following examples illustrate how this is made possible.

The minimum C grade for all core introductory courses required for admission to teacher education at the undergraduate level reflects the emphasis in the unit conceptual framework on the core knowledge base. The requirement ensures that the candidates entering the teacher education programs at UCM have the necessary research-based knowledge base, including foundational theories and models of education, child development and educational psychology, content, and curriculum related to their area of practice, behavior management and motivation, instructional strategies for all students, and assessment and data-based classroom decision-making.

The minimum GPA requirement at various transitional points for both undergraduate and graduate programs reflects the unit emphasis on candidate expertise in content knowledge, pedagogical knowledge, and pedagogical content knowledge as highlighted in the conceptual framework. This expanded knowledge provides the base for the candidate to engage in critical thinking and reflection and become an effective reflective practitioner. The knowledge is also emphasized in both the Missouri Standards for Teacher Education Programs (MoSTEP standards), which are aligned with the INTASC standards, and in the SPA standards.

The requirement for candidates of initial teacher certification to pass the Praxis II subject assessment serves as an additional tool for the unit to ensure that the candidates have the necessary content knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge pertinent to their area of teaching. Such knowledge is a critical component of the reflective practitioner model depicted in the unit conceptual framework. The assessment of content knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge also corresponds with the focus of the first MoSTEP and INTASC standard, which requires that the candidate knows the discipline applicable to the certification area, and presents the subject matter in multiple ways. The importance of content knowledge and content pedagogical knowledge is also emphasized in SPA standards.

A major component of the unit assessment system is the set of assessments that are used during student teaching. They include the formative and summative student teacher evaluations, the summative dispositions assessment, and the impact on student learning assessment. The use of those assessments reflects the unit emphasis on the candidate’s application of the knowledge, skills, and dispositions in the field, a focal point of the reflective practitioner model adopted by the unit. Such assessments represent an authentic way of collecting information regarding candidate competencies as emphasized in the MoSTEP/INTASC standards and the SPA standards. Both the formative and summative student teacher evaluations consist of 11 major

Standard Two 71

entries that match exactly with the 11 MoSTEP standards. The dispositions assessment, while aligned with standards, is primarily focused on the disposition aspect of candidate competencies. The impact on student learning assessment is focused on the candidate's ability to evaluate and reflect on the impact of various instructional strategies on student learning, a focus that is congruent with the reflective practitioner model for the teacher candidate.

The GPA requirement in the graduate programs is another example to show that the unit emphasizes the knowledge base of the candidate, which is in alignment with its conceptual framework and state and professional standards. Most of these programs also require either a thesis or a successful internship experience with or without a portfolio component. Such requirements are in line with the unit’s emphasis on a candidate’s ability to apply their knowledge and skills to the field, consistent with the reflective practitioner model underlying the unit conceptual framework.

The TEAC follow-up surveys of graduates from UCM teacher education programs and their employers represents the unit's effort to collect information on how the candidates are able to apply the knowledge, skills, and dispositions that were developed during their program of study and use them in their professional career. It is an ultimate measure of how successfully a candidate can live up to the reflective practitioner model purported in the unit conceptual framework. The surveys focus on the MoSTEP and INTASC standards for the undergraduate programs and SPA standards for the advanced programs.

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

A number of measures have been taken in the assessment process to ensure the quality of the assessments used in the unit. First of all, the development and refinement of the instruments is based on feedback from all stakeholders, including the students, cooperating teachers, and university faculty. The unit also makes sure that any assessment revision is in alignment with the unit conceptual model and is based on extensive review of the literature. For performance based assessments, carefully designed scoring rubrics with clear criteria are provided. During the implementation stage, clear instructions are provided to ensure that the person completing the instrument understands exactly what to do to complete the assessment. When a scoring rubric is involved, the unit makes sure that the raters go through extensive training. An orientation/training is provided for new faculty and adjuncts every fall. The following examples illustrate how various measures have been taken to ensure the quality of unit assessments.

The electronic portfolio in the early childhood, elementary education, and middle school education programs was first developed about a decade ago. Through the years, the faculty members involved in the portfolio process have been very active in reviewing and refining the system. So far, the portfolio in these three programs has undergone four major revisions, evolving from the original Eport 1 version through the current Eport 4 version. The students are provided with detailed directions and opportunities for practice before they were required to submit portfolio work. In addition to the directions, a scoring guide for the whole portfolio project and a scoring rubric for portfolio reflections are available for both the candidates and the faculty who review the portfolios. The faculty reviewers have multiple opportunities of training

Standard Two 72

and discussions before they start the portfolio review. A workshop, usually a half day retreat, is typically reserved for the training of portfolio, which provides an opportunity for the new faculty to be oriented, and for veteran faculty to be refreshed of the criteria for scoring the portfolio. In addition, bi-weekly meetings among the faculty within the three programs are regularly held to continue the discussions on topics pertinent to portfolio review. The fairness, reliability, and validity of the portfolio scores is also enhanced by a team based scoring approach. The portfolio reviewers are typically assigned to 2 or 3 member teams, so that team members can discuss scoring issues or seek clarifications if they have questions regarding the scoring process. Several members of the faculty in the programs conducted a study on the interrater reliability of the portfolio results, which turned out to be very positive. The results of the study were presented at the 2007 AERA annual conference and subsequently published. Some of the faculty also used a number of strategies to investigate the validity of the portfolio, which resulted in two more studies that have been either published or accepted for publication. The studies, though, confirmed a suspicion held by many faculty members and students: the portfolio was not a sufficiently valid measure of candidate competencies. This finding has prompted the programs and unit as a whole to re-evaluate the unit requirement of portfolio assessment and start looking for an alternative assessment at the unit level.

As a second example, the Teacher Education Assessment Committee Survey (TEAC Survey) is a set of comprehensive assessment instruments given to incoming candidates, student teachers, and graduates (and their employers) from the teacher education programs at UCM. The Survey, originally developed in 1988, was informed by Freeman's (1988) comprehensive review of teacher education follow-up surveys. Since then, the instruments have been periodically revised on the basis of survey responses and feedback from the faculty in the various teacher education programs. The coordinator of the TEAC Survey also contacts the coordinators of the various programs on a regular basis to seek suggestions for potential revision of the instruments, especially when state and national standards for a relevant program have changed. In addition, a TEAC Advisory Committee consisting of representatives from various teacher education programs across the campus is in place to provide advice and make decisions on important issues of the TEAC Survey.

Another example of how the quality of the unit assessment system is ensued may be found in the new assessments for student teaching. As the new assessments were introduced for Fall 2005 and 2006, efforts have been made in the unit for ensuring that they were understood by everyone involved in the process. All student teaching supervisors were trained on the new assessment instruments prior to the beginning of the fall semester. An updated training session was provided in the following January to answer questions and discuss strategies to improve consistency of scoring using the new assessment instruments. A second debriefing session was held in May 2006 to discuss additional ways to improve the quality and reliability of the assessment data.

A further example comes from an advanced program: Library Science and Information Services. Program faculty meet almost weekly to discuss issues related to the program, assessments, candidate performance, and how to adapt to changes in the field (for example, how to modify its key assessment related to the Reference Collection). All faculty in the program review changes made to any assessments. The faculty also meet regularly with the program advisory council to review the program assessments to ensure that they reflect the practice of real librarians.

Standard Two 73

3. What assessments and evaluations are used to manage and improve the operations and programs of the unit?

Although several of the unit assessments were primarily designed to collect information regarding candidate proficiencies in targeted areas, they can also be used to provide information about the effectiveness of a program and therefore inform program improvement efforts. This is made possible through the aggregated and disaggregated data that the unit regularly collects from the assessments. The following assessments are used to provide information regarding program effectiveness as well as candidate proficiencies.

Praxis II Assessment. The average scale score and the percentage passing the test in each program, for instance, to a large extent reflects how effective a program is in helping the candidate acquire the content knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge base.

The Impact on P-12 Student Learning Assessment. The assessment may generate data that show how effectively the candidates as a whole in a program apply their assessment strategies to collect information about student learning, reflect on the assessment data, and make adjustment in their instructional strategies to improve student learning. The aggregated and disaggregated data can reveal how successfully the unit or each program prepares the candidates need to impact student learning.

Dispositions Assessment. The aggregated and disaggregated data can be used to demonstrate how successfully the unit or a program helps the candidates develop the necessary behaviors and attitudes congruent with the MoSTEP/INTASC dispositions standard.

Student Teacher Evaluation. The aggregated and disaggregated data can be used to show how successfully the unit or a program helps the candidates to apply the knowledge, skills, and dispositions that they have developed to the actual classroom setting.

Although most of the assessments used within the advanced programs in the unit are program specific, they can also be used to provide feedback about the quality of each individual program as well as the performance of the candidates. For instance, the aggregated data from the evaluation that the candidates receive during their internship experience to a large extent reflect the quality of the program that the candidates have completed.

Aside from assessments that primarily assess candidate competencies, the unit assessment system at UCM also contains instruments that ask respondents to directly assess the effectiveness of the programs within the unit, and offer suggestions on how to improve the operations and programs. Those instruments constitute the Teacher Education Assessment Committee (TEAC) Survey.

TEAC Survey of Student Teachers. One section of the survey asks student teachers to evaluate the different aspects of the program, including the quality of the courses in their major and minor fields, their student teaching experience, advisement, and faculty

Standard Two 74

support. Another section of the survey asks students to evaluate the impact of their program on their competencies based on the 11 MoSTEP standards.

TEAC follow-up surveys of UCM graduates, including 1st and 2nd Year Teacher Survey, Alternative Certification Teacher Survey, MAT Teacher Survey, and Survey of Graduates from advanced programs. In addition to a section that asks the respondents to evaluate the program impact on their competencies, the surveys also ask them to evaluate the overall effectiveness of the program and offer suggestions for program improvement.

TEAC follow-up surveys of employers of UCM graduates. In addition to the major section of the employer survey which is designed to seek employer perception of the competencies of the graduates, the survey also has a section that invites the employer to give their perspectives on the overall effectiveness of UCM program and provide suggestions for program improvement.

Besides the regular assessments, there have been ad-hoc activities and tasks initiated within the unit to seek additional information from important stakeholders on the operations and programs of the unit. The following are just two examples of such efforts:

In 2006, the Dean of the new College of Education appointed several special task forces to examine the organizational structure, feasibility of joint appointments, the 21st Century learning environment, and measures of excellence. The various task forces used a number of means, such as extensive literature review, research on peer institutions, and meeting with faculty members and K-12 representatives to arrive at recommendations to the Dean.

In 2007, the Dean appointed a special task force to design and administer a survey that was sent out to all district and school administrators in the UCM service areas to seek their feedback on the effectiveness of the unit. The results of the study were summarized in a special report for the Dean.

4. (Optional) One or more tables and links to key exhibits related to the unit assessment system could be attached here. Data in tables should be discussed in the appropriate prompt of 2a. (Links with descriptions must be typed into a Word document that can be uploaded here. The number of attached exhibits should be limited in number; BOE members should access most of the exhibits in the unit's electronic exhibit room.)

Special task forces charged with the revision of the unit assessments in 2005

2b. Data Collection, Analysis, and Evaluation

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? How are the data collected? How often are the data summarized and analyzed?

http://aims.ncate.org/UAS/attachments/S155_A309%2FQ25941_2005_Unit_assessment_task_forces.doc

http://aims.ncate.org/UAS/attachments/S155_A309%2FQ25941_2005_Unit_assessment_task_forces.doc

Standard Two 75

Whose responsibility is it to summarize and analyze the data? (Dean, assistant dean, data coordinator, etc.)

In what formats are the data summarized and analyzed? (Reports, tables, charts, graphs, etc.)

What information technologies are used to maintain the unit's assessment system?

How are the data collected?

A formal procedure is in place to collect assessment data at the unit level in a systematic way. For instance, a variety of assessments are administered during the Professional Education and Student Teaching Semester. University Supervisors observe candidates in their classroom assignments a minimum of three times. On each of the first three visits, supervisors complete the Formative Student Teaching Evaluation, rate the candidates on their knowledge, skills and dispositions based on the MoSTEP standards, and provide constructive feedback. During or immediately following the final visit, Supervisors complete the Summative Assessment. During Student Teaching, candidates are required to develop and teach an instructional unit. The Instructional Unit Plan and component lesson plans are assessed by the University Supervisor. The candidates then teach at least one of the lessons when the University Supervisor is present, and complete a reflective activity describing how they incorporated formative and summative assessment into the unit, how their instruction affected student learning outcomes, and what they would do to improve or follow up on the instructional sequence. The University Supervisor also evaluates and scores this document using an Assessment/Impact scoring guide. A summative Disposition Assessment is completed by the University Supervisor at the conclusion of Student Teaching. The data gathered during student teaching are submitted by the university supervisors to the Office of Clinical Services at the end of each semester in hard copy. The forms are scanned for electronic archival purposes. The candidate student teaching data is hand-entered into a preformatted Excel spreadsheet by a member of the College of Education clerical staff. A minimum of 10% of the entries are hand-checked by the Associate Dean for accuracy/reliability. The original forms are disaggregated by major and forwarded to program coordinators with an electronic copy of the data in spreadsheet form. A pilot effort to provide laptop computers for use by university supervisors is in place for Fall 2009. Representatives of the CoE have also been engaged in conversations with the UCM Information Systems programmers to link the unit data into the university's Banner System.

Program-specific data are collected within the various departments. Most keep a combination of paper and electronic files.

As a major component of the unit assessment system, the TEAC Survey consists of a number of surveys for candidates at different transitional points of their program, as well as employers of the program graduates. The candidates are first surveyed at the beginning of the semester when they take the Educational Foundations course. The survey is administered in the middle of the class by the instructor. The candidates are again surveyed during their student teaching semester, at the midterm conference, with the assistance of the assistant director of the Certification and Student Teaching Office. After they graduate from UCM, in their first few years, they are contacted for a follow-up survey. Most of the graduates are surveyed twice, whereas graduates from the MAT program are surveyed each year. The follow-up surveys have been administered

Standard Two 76

through mail-in surveys to the schools where the graduates teach. Starting from Spring 2009, the follow-up surveys will be conducted through a survey website maintained by the UCM.

The assessment data the unit collects on candidate performance, unit operations, and program quality are summarized and analyzed in a timely fashion, at a minimum of once per year, so as to enable the unit to interpret the data and develop plans to address potential issues suggested by the data. For example, the student teacher assessment data, provided by the student teachers themselves, their cooperating teachers, and their university supervisors, are collected during the student teaching semester. In the case of formative student teaching evaluations, the data are immediately returned to the students for feedback. Copies of summative evaluations are also provided to the student in their exit conference. At the end of each semester, all student teaching evaluations are submitted to the Office of Clinical Services and Certification to be checked for completion and scanned. Once scanned, the hard copy evaluations are forwarded each semester to the Associate Dean of the COE to be summarized and analyzed, generally 30-45 days following the end of the semester. Quantitative data are entered into a spreadsheet, disaggregated by program, and distributed electronically to program coordinators along with the original hard copies of the evaluations. This generally occurs 60-90 days following the end of the semester. During the summer, the fall and spring results are combined into one spreadsheet. Data are imported into SPSS and descriptive statistics (i.e., frequency counts and percentages) are run by the Associate Dean. The results are then entered into table form for all student teachers and by program. The tabled data are reviewed by the Teacher Education Council (TEC), the COE Assessment Committee, university student teaching supervisors, program faculty, and various advisory councils. The review generally occurs early in the fall semester.

The aggregated results from the TEAC Survey are recorded each semester for the Foundations and student teacher instruments. The follow-up survey data provided by the teachers and their employers are collected in the spring of each academic year. Results of the entire survey are then summarized and analyzed towards the end of the spring semester and reported in an annual TEAC report to the Dean.

Whose responsibility is it to summarize and analyze the data?

The Associate Dean of the College of Education, also the unit NCATE coordinator, is responsible for summarizing and analyzing most of the assessment data for the unit. As soon as they become available, the Praxis II and the student teaching assessment data are submitted to her office for aggregation and disaggregation for the unit programs. The TEAC Coordinator, who coordinates the development and administration of the TEAC surveys, is responsible for analyzing and summarizing the TEAC data and reporting the results to the Dean and the PEF.

In what formats are the data summarized and analyzed?

Based on the characteristics of a specific assessment, a number of formats are used to summarize and analyze the data for the unit and programs. For instance, the C-Base and Praxis II test results are often presented in terms of the overall passing rate, along with whatever additional information is provided by the test publisher. For the student teaching assessments, the data are generally presented in terms of the frequency count and percentage of students scoring at each

Standard Two 77

performance level on the instrument's rubric. For the TEAC surveys, the data are summarized in terms of average scores on the Likert scale by each item or standard. Please see the three attachments for samples of the data reports.

In addition to the aggregated and disaggregated data for a specific time period, the assessment data are also compared to previous years to identify trends. For instance, the average of the Spring 2008 student teacher evaluation data on candidate technology may be compared with that of the Spring 2007 data to see if there is any unusual change in the results. Bar graphs are often used to present such trends. Please see the summary section of the TEAC 2008 report that is attached for examples of bar graphs used to represent the trends.

The unit data also may be further analyzed to answer specific questions. For example, during the first year of data collection on the new formative student teaching evaluation, university supervisors indicated they felt that completing a formative evaluation on their fourth and final observation was a waste of time, because it was so similar and close in time to their summative evaluation. Further analysis of that data indicated that the fourth formative scores were very highly correlated with the summative scores; therefore, the fourth formative was eliminated. In 2007, several faculty wondered how alternative certification candidates compared to traditional undergraduate student teachers. An analysis of variance showed that, while all candidates were similar for the most part, alternative certification candidates had significantly higher scores on several items.

What information technologies are used to maintain the unit's assessment system?

Candidate demographic data and academic records are maintained through the Banner system, a highly integrated database that can be shared by all departments and individuals working at UCM. Unfortunately, at this time, assessment data for an individual student cannot be linked to other assessment or to background information for the student through that system. Discussions are in process with UCM Information Services staff to identify the best strategy for linking the various databases currently in use across campus.

In addition to the Banner system, the university has also installed Argos Reporting software, a tool that can be used to access and analyze data stored in the Banner system. With this software, academic program coordinators, department chairs, and faculty are not only able to access individual student data, but also generate reports disaggregated by program or student demographic variables.

Other data generated by the unit assessment system are maintained in UCM Testing Services, or in the Dean's Office or the Office of Clinical Services in the College of Education. Since the reorganization of the College in 2007, a concerted effort has been made to develop both hard- and electronic-copy archives in the Dean's Office that can be made available to faculty and other stakeholders quickly upon request. Program data are collected and maintained in their respective departments.

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

Standard Two 78

The University of Central Missouri has a university wide procedure for dealing with student grievances. The following procedures apply to the whole university as well as the Teacher Education Program:

Level 1: If the grievance involves an instructor, the grievant should seek to resolve the matter informally with the instructor within ten class days of the occurrence of the grievance.

Level 2: If an agreement cannot be reached, the grievant should submit a dated, written complaint to the department chair within five class days of his/her meeting with the instructor. The department chair will review the circumstances, and attempt to arbitrate the matter. The department chair will then prepare a summary report, which will include the decision and the action taken. A copy of the report shall be retained by the department chair along with all other materials pertaining to the case. A copy of the report shall be forwarded to the grievant and the instructor. This shall be completed within five class days of the day of complaint. A determination by the chair that the complaint is patently frivolous shall be stated in the report.

Level 3: If the matter is not resolved after the Level 2 decision to both parties' satisfaction, then a written statement should be submitted to the college dean within five days of the final decision at Level 2. A report should be prepared and informational copies should be sent to the department chair, the instructor, and the grievant. A determination by the dean that the complaint is patently frivolous shall be stated in the report and shall be a final determination in the process with no further appeal.

Level 4: If the matter is still not resolved to all parties' satisfaction after the Level 3 decision, and so long as the dean has not determined the complaint to be patently frivolous, then an appeal may be made by directing a letter to the Provost stating the grounds for the appeal. This should be done within five days of the date of the decision rendered in Level 3. The Provost will review the file in the matter and decide, within ten days to take one of the following decisions:

1. Uphold one or all of the previous decisions;2. Overturn the decisions outright and make an alternative resolution; or 3. Refer the matter to the university grievance committee. The Provost will appoint a

committee of two students and two faculty members to review the matter within ten class days of the receipt of the letter directed to the Provost. The committee will make its recommendation to the Provost within five class days of completing its work. In the event of a tying vote of the committee, the Provost will cast the deciding vote. The Provost shall immediately, upon receipt of the committee's recommendation, notify the grievant in writing of the university grievance committee's decision. Copies of the decision shall be forwarded to the grievant, and if applicable to the instructor, and to the dean of the college involved.

Standard Two 79

The Provost's decision is final and binding on all parties and once communicated, shall be placed in full force and effect immediately.

In addition to the university wide policy, the unit has also in place a policy regarding student appeals specifically related to (a) Admission to Teacher Education or (b) Permission to Student Teach. Under those circumstances, the Director of Clinical Services and Certification considers the appeal. Appeals to the action of the Director of Clinical Services and Certification go to the TEC (Teacher Education Council), which considers the appeal. Appeals of the action of the TEC go to the Dean who considers the appeal. Appeals of the action of the Dean go to the Provost for review. The decision of the Provost is final.

3. (Optional) One or more tables and links to key exhibits related to the data collection, analysis, and evaluation could be attached here. Data in tables should be discussed in the appropriate prompt of 2b. (Links with descriptions must be typed into a Word document that can be uploaded here.)

A summary of 2006-2007 summative student teacher evaluation dataTEAC 2008 survey report

2c. Use of Data for Program Improvement

1. What are assessment data indicating about candidate performance on the main campus, at off-campus sites, and in distance learning programs?

In general, the assessment data generated within the unit have been very positive. They suggest that the Teacher Education Program at UCM has been successful in preparing candidates to develop the knowledge, skills, and dispositions and become an effective reflective practitioner in the teaching profession.

For instance, on the Praxis II subject tests, the passing rates of the UCM candidates each year have been very high in recent years. The average passing rate is around 94%, and in some cases the passing rate is 100%. The results suggest that the candidates have built a solid content base through their studies at UCM.

Out of the 300 candidates who were evaluated on the Summative Student Teacher Evaluation form in the 2007-2008 academic year, about 40% were rated as meeting standards, and about 55% exceeded the standards. Fewer than 10 candidates were rated progressing, and very few students were rated as “not meeting standards” (please see the attached table for student teacher evaluation data for details). Similar results were found for student teacher evaluation for the remaining two years since the student teaching assessments were revised in 2005. The positive results were verified through other assessment measures. For instance, on the 2006-2007 TEAC Survey, the student teachers rated their levels of competencies very positively, with the average ratings ranging from 4.4 to 4.6 on a 1-5 point scale across all eleven MoSTEP standards. The data suggested that both the supervisors and the candidates themselves felt that they were competent as student teachers.

http://aims.ncate.org/UAS/attachments/S155_A309%2FQ25942_TEAC_08.pdf

http://aims.ncate.org/UAS/attachments/S155_A309%2FQ25942_2006_2007_data_tables.xls

Standard Two 80

The unit assessment data also suggested that the graduates from UCM programs were highly effective as inservice teachers. According to the 2006-2007 year TEAC Survey, the principals who hired first and second year teachers from UCM teacher education programs rated their competencies in a very positive way, with the average ratings ranging from 3.9 to 4.1 on a 1-5 point scale. 74% of the principals considered UCM graduates as strongly or very strongly prepared (see the TEAC 2007 Summary Report attached in this section). The results were comparable to what was found in recent years.

The 2006-2007 TEAC Summary Report also revealed very positive findings regarding the competencies of educators graduating from UCM’s advanced teacher education programs. In most of those programs, the average ratings of the educators were between 4 and 4.5 on a 1-5 point scale, according to both the educators themselves and their employers. This is a clear indication that the advanced programs in the unit have been successful in preparing instructional leaders and professionals in various specialized fields.

Aside from the overall strong findings, the unit assessment data also suggest areas that need additional attention. The following is a brief summary of such findings:

Although the summative student teacher evaluation found that there were altogether 92.7% of the candidates in year 2007-2008 who either met or exceeded the standards, the percentage who exceeded the standard related to assessment were 41.7%, the lowest across the 11 standards.

According to the TEAC survey of Foundations students, the candidates considered their preparations in non-western philosophies and cultures as the weakest area when they entered the teacher education program at UCM.

2. How are data regularly used by candidates and faculty to improve their performance?

The unit assessment data pertaining to candidate performance are provided to the candidates in a timely fashion. This is especially the case if the focus of the assessment is formative, that is, to provide feedback for the teacher candidate to make improvement. Candidate use of assessment data is also facilitated with the kind of feedback they receive from the assessments. Most of the assessments concerning candidate performance have a scoring rubric that includes detailed feedback on whether student performance has met specific expectation and what they can do to improve their performance. The candidates also have several opportunities to meet with their university supervisors or school cooperating teachers so that they understand the results of the assessment and know how to make improvement based on the assessment data.

Similar to the way the candidates use assessment data, faculty members within the Teacher Education Program at UCM are able to use assessment data to improve their performance in a timely fashion. As a campus-wide requirement, course evaluations are to be conducted in each class every semester. The student evaluation provides anonymous data regarding faculty performance in various aspects of teaching. Part of the evaluation data are based on a Likert Scale, whereas the rest of the data consist of written comments by students. The results of the student evaluation are summarized and returned to the instructor at the beginning of the next semester, so that the instructor can reflect on the feedback when the context of the class is still

Standard Two 81

fresh in the mind. The relatively quick return of the data also enables the instructor to make timely changes for teaching in the current semester. The data from the student evaluation of teaching is required to be used in the tenure and promotion process.

Aside from the mandatory end of course student evaluation, faculty members have the option of conducting midterm course evaluation on a voluntary basis with assistance from the Center for Teaching and Learning. The confidential data from the midterm evaluation provides additional information for the faculty to improve their teaching effectiveness. The data is usually available for the instructor to access a few weeks after the evaluation is completed. In addition to midterm evaluation of teaching, faculty members also have the option to invite their colleagues and department chairs to observe their classrooms for peer evaluations. The feedback from such observations often has a quick turn-round and provides additional perspectives for faculty members to reflect upon and improve their performance.

3. How are data used to discuss or initiate program or unit changes on a regular basis?

The assessment data collected within the Teacher Education Program at UCM are aggregated at the unit level and disaggregated at the program level so that the information may be used at both levels. A systematic procedure is followed to ensure that the data is interpreted and utilized in a way that informs decision making at the unit and program levels.

The unit data are first reviewed by the Dean of the college, who is also the head of the unit, and the College Advisory Council, before they are presented to the entire PEF (Professional Education Faculty) and its representative TEC (Teacher Education Council). The data of the most recent year is often presented along with similar data of previous years in order to show the trend. Whenever possible, assessment results that warrant special attention are triangulated and verified with information from additional sources. When there is clear evidence of a weakness in the unit, the Dean of the college will ask the PEF and its representative TEC to form a special task force to work on strategies for addressing the issue. Data are also shared as quickly as possible with the university student teaching supervisors, so that issues related to reliability can be addressed immediately.

The use of assessment data at the program level follows a similar procedure. The data are first reviewed by program coordinators, then shared with program faculty and advisory councils. Program specific information is relatively easy to interpret and verify, as faculty members in each program tend to be more familiar with various aspects of their own program. Program coordinators may also seek additional input from faculty and their students to determine if there is clear evidence of program weakness. Once the information regarding a potential weakness in a program is verified, regular meetings may be held at the program and sometimes the department level to discuss strategies and timelines to address the issue.

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

A number of changes have taken place at the unit level over the past three years based on assessment data. A short summary of those efforts follows:

Standard Two 82

Due to the relatively lower ratings in the area of assessment strategies, the Assessment/P-12 Impact form was revised beginning Fall 2007 to include the number of P-12 students in the class and the number of students who successfully completed the unit objectives. Student teaching supervisors were also asked to collect additional information--copies of summative evaluations and reflections--to allow further qualitative analysis concerning student teachers’ use of assessment to impact P-12 student learning.

Another area for improvement targeted candidate experience with diverse populations. In an effort to address this issue, the Office of Clinical Services and Certification started in Fall 2008 to create a database of specific school buildings/ districts that would identify the kinds of diversity experiences that those sites offer our candidates. Efforts are underway to coordinate all early field experiences in EDCI 2100 through that office, to assure that students have multiple opportunities or field experiences in a variety of settings. Discussions have also begun to identify ways to increase the curricular emphasis on knowledge and skills needed to differentiate instruction (e.g., Universal Design, Response to Intervention) and to work successfully with all students (e.g., working with students in poverty, working with students who have limited English proficiency, working with students who have disabilities).

In Fall 2007 and Spring 2008, faculty completed a unit-wide crosswalk of course syllabi to examine where the topics of assessment and diversity were taught and assessed, and how the topics could be reinforced or expanded in the curriculum. Based on the results of the crosswalk, course revisions were made to strengthen candidate competencies related to assessment and diversity. Simultaneously, the core education curriculum (EDCI 2100, EDCI 2240, and EDSP 2100) was reviewed to identify when and how the topics of formative assessment and diversity were introduced in classes taken by all education majors. The group also discovered inconsistencies in the way the conceptual framework was addressed in these courses. Consequently, the three syllabi were realigned, and all faculty teaching those courses were oriented to the changes. Other more far-reaching curriculum modifications are being considered that would impact program plans for all teacher education students.

The finding related to these two areas for improvement were influential in the unit's decision to implement the Teacher Work Sample beginning Fall 2009.

Several programs within the unit that have done extensive work in carefully reviewing the assessment data and identifying potential areas of weakness specific to their programs. They have also taken measures in trying to address the two identified unit targets (i.e., impact on student learning and differentiation of instruction) at a program level, as well as identifying other program-specific objectives.

In the Elementary Education Program, for instance, the faculty has identified three areas of relative weakness based on program assessment: candidates’ ability to develop and use assessment to impact student learning, their exposure to and understanding of diversity issues, and their use of technology in instruction. As part of the effort to address those issues, the program worked with pre-K educators and candidates in hosting a two day

Standard Two 83

assessment conference featuring a renowned assessment expert Robert Marzano. Following the conference, a subcommittee on assessment was set up to examine how assessment was taught in the various courses within the program. The results of the investigation revealed potential areas of gaps and overlapping in the teaching of assessment concepts and skills within the program. A second subcommittee was formed to examine how diversity topics can be most effectively incorporated into different courses within the program, and how to better utilize racially diverse schools in the Kansas City area to provide candidates with meaningful field experience. To address the lack of technology proficiency, the program applied for and obtained a technology grant that brought in a series of technology equipment in all the classrooms used by faculty in the program so as to model technology use for the candidates.

In the Middle School Program, assessment data suggested that the candidates needed more field experience with diverse classrooms. They also felt that full time faculty members were needed to supervise their field experience. In an effort to address such issues, the program recently hired an additional full time faculty who may be used to supervise student field experience. The program has also started to work more closely with the Office of Clinical Services to accommodate for more diversity in the classrooms used for field experience.

Based on course and program level assessment data, the MSE (Master of Science in Education) in Literacy Education Program has increased the required readings of the foundational knowledge of literacy education, and made adaptations in course requirements and field experiences to promote candidates’ developmental growth in reflective thinking. It has also revised the capstone course, Supervision of the Literacy Program, to provide candidates with experience in leadership positions. Finally, to address the candidates’ relative lack of ability to interpret assessment results, the program has revised its curriculum to stratify assignments across the later stages of the program with more opportunities for candidates to interpret student data to guide their instruction.

After careful review of the PRAXIS II data for the candidates, the faculty in the Special Education Program re-examined the content of their courses and realigned the courses with the competencies targeted by the PRAXIS II exam. A regular faculty-led study group was also made available prior to the exam days. As a result of those measures, student performance on the PRAXIS II exam has significantly improved.

In an effort to address the deficiency in candidate content knowledge about science, technology, and society, the Social Studies Program has decided to make the course Technology and Change as a requirement for the majors. To address the deficiency in candidate content knowledge about economics, the program is planning to make another course, Micro-economics, a requirement for the candidates.

In the Mathematics Program, the Summative Student Teacher Evaluation revealed a relative weakness of candidate competency about learners and learning theories. In an effort to address this issue, a new textbook that provides more information about research

Standard Two 84

in mathematics education and learning theories in mathematics has been adopted. The new book also contains chapters on how to meet the needs of all types of learners.

5. How are assessment data shared with candidates, faculty, and other stakeholders?

Depending on the nature of the assessment data, there are different ways by which the data are shared with candidates, faculty, and other stakeholders. In general, the data pertaining to individual performance or proficiency is provided to each individual only. Each candidate taking the PRAXIS II is expected to receive an individual report from the testing company regarding their performance on the test. Candidates completing the portfolio and student teaching assessments also receive diagnostic feedback concerning their performance in the various areas targeted by the assessments. In a similar way, the results of student evaluation of faculty teaching are provided to each faculty member in a confidential manner.

In contrast, the aggregated and disaggregated data pertaining to candidate and faculty performance, and assessment data concerning various aspects of the unit or a specific program, are instead made public and shared with all stakeholders. For instance, the assessment data generated by both the Associate Dean of the COE and the Coordinator of the TEAC Survey are usually submitted first to the Dean, who often shares the information with the College Advisory Council. The information is then presented to the entire PEF (Professional Education Faculty). More detailed information of the assessment data may be presented to the TEC (Teacher Education Council), which is charged with reviewing the data at least annually and setting Unit goals. Data concerning specific programs within the unit are sent to program coordinators, who would in turn share the information with the advisory councils as well as faculty members within each program. In this way, the assessment data regarding unit operations and program quality is made available to everyone involved.

6. (Optional) One or more tables and links to key exhibits related to the use of data for program improvement could be attached here. Data in tables should be discussed in the appropriate prompt of 2c. (Links with descriptions must be typed into a Word document that can be uploaded here. The number of attached exhibits should be limited in number; BOE members should access most of the exhibits in the unit's electronic exhibit room.)

A summary of 2007-2008 Student Teacher Evaluation data

A summary of 2006-2007 TEAC Survey results

Optional

What does your unit do particularly well related to Standard 2?

There are a number of things this unit does particularly well in terms of Standard 2. The following is a brief discussion of them:

Continuous refinement of the assessment system. As indicated earlier, the unit assessment system went through a major revision in 2005, with most of the changes

http://aims.ncate.org/UAS/attachments/S155_A309%2FQ25943_TEAC_07_summary.pdf

http://aims.ncate.org/UAS/attachments/S155_A309%2FQ25943_TEAC_07_summary.pdf

http://aims.ncate.org/UAS/attachments/S155_A309%2FQ25943_Copy_of_2007_2008_data_tables.xls

http://aims.ncate.org/UAS/attachments/S155_A309%2FQ25943_Copy_of_2007_2008_data_tables.xls

Standard Two 85

taking place during student teaching. Nevertheless, the revision and refinement of the unit assessment system has continued to this day, and have expanded to other assessments in the unit, including the TEAC Survey instruments and the portfolio assessment. The changes reflect the fact that the unit assessment system is a dynamic system that is constantly responsive to changes in the institutional context and external expectations.

Clear alignment with the unit Conceptual Framework. A major focus of the current unit assessment system is on the candidate performance during field experience, as evidenced by the multiple measures of student teaching and follow-up surveys of inservice teachers. This is in alignment with the reflective practitioner model that is at the core of the unit Conceptual Framework. There is a consensus in the unit that having a sound knowledge base is not sufficient for a candidate to be an effective teacher. They need to apply the knowledge and skills to the actual classroom and reflect on the impact they have made on their students.

Explicit criteria for judging the quality of performance. When designing measures of candidate performance, the unit takes special care to avoid potential vagueness in the scoring criteria. For instance, there were four task forces that were charged in 2005 with the task of developing the rubrics used for scoring various assessments used for student teaching. Not only did they use specific language to represent the relevant criteria, but also used explicit terms to distinguish the different performance levels. The rubrics have since undergone continuous review and refinement. The unit has also required the use of scoring rubrics or guides for the portfolio project that some of the programs still use at this time. As a result, the candidates know clearly the expectations for them to excel in each area. This also helps with the scoring reliability of the assessment.

Timeliness in data collection and analysis. As discussed earlier, unit assessment data are collected and analyzed in a timely manner. The assessment data are either collected at least once every semester or every year, depending on how often the assessment is administered. As soon as the data are available, they are submitted to various personnel within the unit for summary and analysis. Data from formative assessments have an even quicker turnaround. This process makes it possible for candidates and the faculty member to use the data in a timely manner in making improvements. It also facilitates the use of assessment data for summative evaluation purposes.

Emphasis on data use. The investment in the developing and implementing an assessment could be wasted if the results of the assessment were shelved. The unit has a formal procedure through which major assessment results are disseminated to all interested stakeholders, normally in the fall semester at the PEF. The data presentations are often delivered in a user-friendly format, e.g., Powerpoint presentations that highlight trends in recent years. Data dissemination is then followed by special sessions at the unit or program levels on how to translate the results into specific actions, when there is a clear indication of weakness in the system. The Dean and program coordinators often spearhead such efforts by designating special task forces or subcommittees to develop specific strategies for purposes of improving unit operations or a specific program.

Standard Two 86

What research related to Standard 2 is being conducted by the unit?

Several research projects undertaken by faculty within the unit on portfolio assessment. Faculty members from several programs have in recent years investigated the reliability and validity of the electronic portfolio used in the Early Childhood, Elementary Education, and Middle School Education Programs. The studies have informed the unit when making its decision of dropping the portfolio requirement as a unit-wide assessment and transiting to the teacher work sample system. The results of the studies have also been presented at national and international conferences. Some of the studies have been accepted for publication in peer reviewed journals or for presentation at national or regional professional meetings. See Faculty Achievement Summary in the Electronic Document Center: http://faculty.ucmo.edu/ncate09/standards/standard_5/faculty_accomplishments.doc


Standard Three 87

STANDARD THREE: FIELD EXPERIENCES AND CLINICAL PRACTICE

The unit and its school partners design, implement, and evaluate field experiences and clinical practice so that teacher candidates and other school personnel develop and demonstrate the knowledge, skills, and dispositions necessary to help all students learn.

[Note: In this section institutions must address (1) initial and advanced programs for teachers, (2) programs for other school professionals, and (3) off-campus and distance learning programs.]

3a. Collaboration between Unit and School Partners

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

The University of Central Missouri (UCM) partners with over 120 school districts throughout the state of Missouri and adjoining Kansas counties to provide clinical experiences, including student teaching. A complete list of the districts, including 750 individual schools and their demographic characteristics, is located in the Electronic Document Center. Although Warrensburg is located in a primarily rural area, field experiences and student teaching sites include Kansas City and its suburbs, as well as several suburban St. Louis districts. Clinical sites represent the gamut of socioeconomic and demographic characteristics, ranging from 0 – 100% free and reduced lunch, and from 0 – 100% minority enrollment.

UCM has formalized three partnerships that are worthy of further discussion. Those include relationships with the Professional Development Schools (PDS), Kansas City Area Charter Schools, and the Kansas City Missouri School District (KCMSD).

Professional Development School - The Professional Development School consortium is a formal contractual arrangement between four Warrensburg area public schools and UCM. The four area schools are Johnson County R-VII (Crest Ridge), Holden R-III, Knob Noster R-VIII, and Warrensburg R-VI. School district participation includes all elementary and two middle schools in the four districts; all UCM early childhood, elementary, and middle school majors participate in at least one PDS block during their junior year. A College of Education goal is to expand the PDS toward Kansas City, and to include K-12 and secondary education programs.

Charter Schools - UCM is authorized by the state of Missouri as a sponsor of nine public charter schools located within KCMSD. One of UCM’s aims in agreeing to sponsor charter schools was to partner with colleagues in urban sites to attract potential teachers to urban classrooms and to provide candidates with the skills to be successful in that environment. In their charter school field experiences, students are exposed to diverse school populations and have the opportunity to learn from minority educators. UCM’s nine sponsored charter schools include five elementary, one middle, and three secondary schools, representing approximately 2300 students in grades K through 12. Each charter school has its own unique educational program designed to serve specific student populations, from a French-immersion elementary building to alternative settings for at-risk youth. One of the goals of the College of Education is

http://faculty.ucmo.edu/ncate09/standards/standard_3/evidence_std3_diversity_classification.xls

Standard Three 88

to provide every UCM education major with a meaningful opportunity for involvement in an urban school setting. Therefore, a curriculum change is in process to move the charter school field experience from an elective general education course that also serves non-education majors to the foundation course taken by all undergraduate education majors.

KC Residential Internship Program - UCM participates in a collaborative program with several other area universities and the Kansas City Missouri School District. Through a competitive application process, this program places seniors as education interns in the Kansas City Missouri School District classrooms for an entire year. Students selected as interns will serve under contract as the teacher of record in a KCMSD classroom for the full school year, completing their student teaching during the fall semester under the supervision of a KCMSD mentor teacher. Interns are paid a reduced salary, and the salary savings pay for the release time of the mentor teacher.

Clinical experiences in advanced programs are, by their nature, somewhat different than the undergraduate experience. Most candidates in advanced programs are practicing professionals, employed full-time by school districts. Therefore, they are often part-time students, and cannot be absent from their duties for extended periods of time to complete internships and practica. Most UCM graduate students live and are employed within 50 miles of Warrensburg, in many of the same districts where undergraduate student teachers are placed. The UCM graduate faculty work closely with mentors in the school districts to plan and coordinate capstone activities for advanced candidates. For example, in the special education MSE program, a key part of the internship proposal is a signed statement from a qualified district mentor who agrees to provide regular on-site consultation through the completion of the internship. UCM has secured grant-funding for a unique collaborative approach to help area districts “grow their own” building administrators from within the district. The Collaborate Principal Preparation Program (CPPP) works with potential school leaders and their mentors to develop and apply knowledge and skills on the job. CPPP cohorts are built around a geographic cluster of participating school districts, and courses are taught in a convenient location.

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

Collaboration with school partners encompasses a strong exchange of support for enhancement of academic and professional development programs. Faculty members serve on various advisory committees and boards along with partners from supporting public schools. In turn, public school partners have served on various program advisory boards within the College of Education. Since the last accreditation visit, school district representatives have served as members of the Teacher Education Council, served on search committees, and participated on task forces charged with revising the unit assessment system. Each program in the College of Education also has an advisory council that includes graduates as well as representatives from area schools. Those groups are consulted about curriculum, policies, and assessments. School district administrators from partner schools participated in an open forum held at the university in 2007 that provided valuable input in regard to performance expectations and program improvement. That feedback formed the basis of the new College of Education’s 2008-2009

Standard Three 89

goals, which were discussed and amplified on by the fall 2008 meeting of the COE advisory council.

The University of Central Missouri has formed formal and informal agreements with approximately 120 school districts including urban, suburban, and rural districts, representing over 750 school sites where students can experience practicum and/or student teaching assignments. Feedback is sought on a regular basis from the schools where candidates complete clinical experiences and student teaching, and may lead to changes in curriculum or policy. For example, the curriculum change mentioned in #1 related to changing the course where the charter school visits occur was a direct result of suggestions made by teachers and administrators at those urban sites. Course-embedded field placements are arranged by teachers and students, sometimes formally or as a group, sometimes individually. Student teaching placements with school district supervisors are individually negotiated with each school and school district. The district mentor/supervisor has the opportunity to provide written feedback to the unit on their experience. In addition, their formative and summative evaluation of the candidate’s progress is a critical part of the unit assessment system.

Professional Development Schools - The purpose of this program is to provide a pre-teaching experience before the teacher candidate begins their student teaching semester experience. The consortium provides professional development opportunities for students in early childhood education (B-Grade 3), elementary education (Grades 1-6), and middle school education. Students are enrolled in the appropriate university class by their advisor once the student has met the requirements for admission to teacher education (including a background check, GPA of 2.5 or higher, passing the CBASE examination for teachers, and completion of all prerequisite courses). University instructors work onsite in close collaboration with public school teachers to provide observation and teaching opportunities for university students. Candidates work with their assigned district teachers for four hours per week for the entire semester. During the semester, university students accumulate sixty hours of actual classroom time which involves observation and teaching, as well as 68 hours of classroom time with the university instructor focused on both content and pedagogy. To progress to the student teaching semester, a student must complete the PDS requirements with a grade of “C” or higher. Students are individually evaluated by the public school classroom teachers, as well as by their university instructor, to determine if they well-prepared to progress into their student teaching semester.

Partnership with Kansas City Missouri Charter Schools - The University’s role with charter schools has enhanced its ability to provide a more comprehensive teacher preparation program for its students. Charter school experiences are generally arranged as part of a course, and bus transportation is provided from the Warrensburg campus to the Kansas City area. For the past six years, many of those trips have been made in conjunction as part of a world diversity course. Students participated in two full-day structured observation experiences at different urban schools. As mentioned earlier, a curriculum change is underway to move that experience to the foundations course. Other instructors have also worked with the charter schools to create relevant field experience for their students.

Partnership with the Kansas City Missouri School District-KC Residential Internship Program - The vision of this program is to implement an urban, residential internship experience that

Standard Three 90

prepares highly qualified teachers to meet immediate and long-term instructional needs of the Kansas City Missouri School District. This program places education interns, who are in their senior year at UCM (and other area universities), in Kansas City Missouri School District classrooms for one school year. Students selected as interns serve as a teacher of record in the KCMSD classroom for the full school term, completing their student teaching credit with an on-site mentor, and evaluated by KCMO staff and personnel.

Advanced programs similarly negotiate capstone field experiences with the school districts in which their candidates work. In the special education example mentioned in question 1, the mentor works with the candidate and professor to identify individualized learning goals and measurable outcomes, and provides regular support and feedback during completion of the project. The university supervisor meets with interns three times during the semester to evaluate progress, and conducts at least one site visit that involves a conversation with the district mentor. At the end of the semester, both the district mentor and university faculty participate in assessing completion of the internship goals.

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

Field experiences and clinical practice are essential components of the University of Central Missouri's preparation programs. Aligned to the conceptual frameworks, they provide candidates with opportunities to apply their knowledge, skills, and dispositions in a variety of settings appropriate to the content and level of their program. All undergraduate candidates and other professional school personnel seeking Missouri certification are required to complete field experiences in a variety of settings, with a culminating clinical experience in a state-accredited or approved school setting. Early Field experiences in initial programs are designed by program areas working in conjunction with school partners. The office of Clinical Services and Certification at UCM coordinates culminating clinical practice placements for candidates in initial, undergraduate teacher certification programs. Advanced degree practicum and clinical experiences are designed and coordinated by each graduate program area in collaboration with schools and agencies. As mentioned earlier, many of these internships and practica are completed in the buildings where advanced candidates are employed.

Early Field Experiences - Early filed experiences normally begin during the sophomore year. The early experiences are designed for the student to observe and get some teaching exposure in a school setting and determine whether teaching is indeed their desired career. The scaffolded, course-embedded practicum experiences that occur later are designed for the student to focus on application of content and pedagogy (e.g., classroom management and instructional strategies). Regular, close interaction between university and school-based faculty provides for a quality field experience for our prospective teachers. Students in early field experiences and student teaching experiences are encouraged to go to a variety of rural, suburban and urban districts. The selection of faculty serving as the district mentor resides with the student and classroom teacher, with approval of the university instructor. The teacher must be certified and the school must be an accredited school district. Plans are in process to reassign responsibility for managing all COE field experiences to the Office of Clinical Services and Certification effective fall semester, 2009.

Standard Three 91

PDS – Students enrolling in the Professional Development School blocks are matched by major and grade level of certification sought with a participating teacher in a PDS school. Generally, placement is determined by the program or department.

Student Teaching - All student teaching placements for candidates in initial, undergraduate teacher certification programs are assigned through collaboration between UCM and the receiving public and private schools. These placements are managed by the office of Clinical Services and Certification. The designated school representative is contacted by UCM’s Assistant Director of Clinical Services and Certification. The needs of the building, number of placements, the qualifications and interests of the individual students, and types of placements are discussed. This communication may be electronic or by telephone. Potential district supervising teachers must complete an application, and document that they meet UCM minimum requirements, including: at least three years experience, at least a master's degree, and valid certification in the field being sought by the candidate. Ultimately, student teaching placements are jointly determined by the university and district to ensure the placement is the most positive experience for all stakeholders.

All student teaching applications are processed by the Assistant Director of Clinical Services and Certification. These applications contain descriptive information about individual student teaching candidates. Candidates are allowed to suggest preferred districts or locations, often districts near their residence or where they plan to seek employment. While the University considers candidate preference, it is only one factor in the ultimate placement recommendation. For example, candidates may not be placed in a building where a relative is employed, and generally will not be permitted to student teach in the high school from which they graduated. Faculty in the candidate’s major department may also make recommendations about placement. Candidate information is sent to local district offices and forwarded to district supervisors who express a willingness to accept a student teacher. These district supervisors are selected through collegial relationships with program faculty or on recommendation of school administration and other district supervisors. Once a placement has been secured, the teacher and school both return confirmation of the placement and the candidate is notified in writing.

Contact is made by the university supervisor with the student teacher and school district at least six times during the semester, with at least four contacts being direct supervision. District supervisors formally communicate a variety of perspectives during the student teaching process through the university supervisor and directly with the office of Clinical Services and Certification. A high level of communication between university supervisor and district supervisor takes place throughout the experience. Records of all placements are maintained in a centralized database that is managed by the Office of Clinical Services and Certification.

Advanced Programs – Generally, advanced students complete their internship or practica in the school where they are employed or another site approved by program faculty. Specific information on graduate and advanced field placements is included in individual program reports, under the heading “Description of Field Experiences.” A summary table of advanced program requirements is also included in the Electronic Document Center.

Standard Three 92

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

To some degree, all of UCM’s field experiences involve collaboration between university faculty and our colleagues in the public schools. For most developmental, course-embedded field experiences, the relationship tends to be less formalized. In many cases, students are free to choose an observation site from a list of suggested alternatives, or to identify a site that meets specific criteria related to objectives of the course. In other courses, the instructor arranges the field placement with a specific district colleague or administrator. Some of those arrangements are quite specific, and involve the direct participation of the instructor in the clinical experience. Because of the unique relationship between the Warrensburg district and UCM, the university budgets $10,000 per year as a contribution to the district’s “credit bank.” The funds, administered by the district professional development committee, are allocated to reimburse college tuition for district teachers who host clinical experiences for UCM programs.

Visits to the UCM-sponsored charter schools are made at the request of the instructor by the staff in the UCM Center for Charter and Urban Education. Bus transportation to the Kansas City area for organized charter school visits is subsidized by the university. For the remainder of the clinical experiences, candidates supply their own transportation. There is an active two-way exchange between UCM faculty and charter school personnel, as well as among the charter schools. The interaction includes regularly scheduled meetings and site reviews, as well as ad hoc consultation to meet the needs of the schools and their K-12 students. In the past three years, activities have included faculty professional development training, board development training, consultation in content areas (e.g., adolescent literacy), and consultation to support individual students (e.g., IEP development, functional behavioral assessment). UCM’s sponsorship and oversight activities were initially underwritten by private grants and university funds, and more recently have been supported by state dollars.

As candidates approach their capstone clinical experiences in initial and advanced programs, additional controls are in place to assure that placements are appropriate and well-planned. To be cleared to participate in PDS or student teaching, initial candidates must be fully admitted to teacher education, having met all prerequisites including a background/fingerprint check. Advanced candidates who are not employed in districts must meet a similar set of criteria; most graduate programs require approval of a formal proposal prior to enrollment in internship (See, for example, the MSE in Special Education program report). As the rigor of the field placement increases, so does the collaboration between UCM faculty and staff and our colleagues in the public schools intensify.

At the undergraduate level, the Professional Development School (PDS) consortium provides an excellent example of pooling university and public school resources for the benefit of all stakeholders. The BDS is governed by a Board composed of the superintendent from each of the four participating school districts, the CoE dean, and the chairs of the UCM departments that house the elementary and middle school education programs. The PDS is managed by a full-time director, who is a nonvoting member of the Board. The PDS director is hired as an employee of the Warrensburg district with an annual contribution from UCM of $20,000, as well as

Standard Three 93

contributions from the other participating districts. The pooled funds support the operation of the PDS, as well as an annual faculty professional development day on an agreed-upon topic (e.g., differentiating instruction). UCM budgets an additional $10,000-15,000 each year to underwrite tuition costs for district teachers participating in PDS who take coursework at UCM. Pooling of financial resources supports the collaboration of university and P-12 faculty in building a professional learning community that benefits all stakeholders. Although activities in each PDS vary, based on the needs of the teachers and students, a visitor to a PDS site would be likely to see: UCM faculty modeling effective instructional practices in P-12 classrooms; district faculty modeling pedagogical skills and coaching UCM candidates; UCM candidates providing individual and group instruction to P-12 students; and collaborative professional development experiences (e.g., book discussions, inservice trainings).

District supervisors/mentors who agree to work with a UCM student teacher may choose to receive either a nominal stipend of $100, or to earn one semester hour of graduate credit. This program is administered by the Assistant Director of Clinical Services and Certification.

5. What differences, if any, exist in collaboration with school partners in programs for other school professionals, off-campus programs, and distance learning programs?

The processes of collaboration are very similar. The primary difference lies in the administration and management of these processes. Once the undergraduate begins to prepare for the culminating clinical experience (i.e., student teaching), the Office of Clinical Services and Certification has primary responsibility for placement collaboration with school partners. Prior to this phase, the students’ major department is the primary source of collaboration with school partners. Programs for other school professionals assume the entire responsibility for arranging, supervising, and assessing the clinical experiences of their candidates. UCM does not have any free-standing, off-campus or distance learning programs that result in certification; therefore, regardless of where a course is taught, collaboration and field placement supervision follow the same path as those courses taken on the UCM campus. For example, a student taking EDSP 2100 Education of the Exceptional Child would have essentially the same experience, regardless of whether the course was taken on the Warrensburg campus, as a weekend class at the Central Summit Center in Lee’s Summit, or online. For more information about the collaborative activities of specific programs, see program reports in the Electronic Document Center.

6. (Optional) One or more tables and links to key exhibits related to collaboration between unit and school partners could be attached here. Data in tables should be discussed in the appropriate prompt of 3a. (Links with descriptions must be typed into a Word document that can be uploaded here. The number of attached exhibits should be limited in number; BOE members should access most of the exhibits in the unit's electronic exhibit room.)

Links to: List of Schools/Districts with DemographicsPDS BrochureUSUP Letter Regarding CompensationCharter School WebsiteEDC Program Reports Page

http://faculty.ucmo.edu/ncate09/reports/index.html


http://faculty.ucmo.edu/ncate09/standards/standard_3/evidence_std3_explanation_letter_graduate_credit.doc

http://faculty.ucmo.edu/ncate09/standards/standard_3/PROdevschool09.pdf


Standard Three 94

3b. Design, Implementation, and Evaluation of Field Experiences and Clinical Practice

Table 7Field Experiences and Clinical Practice by Program

[See Standard 3 in the Electronic Document Center.]

2. 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?

In all programs, both initial and advanced field experiences are sequential in difficulty and responsibility; each experience has clearly stated, measurable objectives that relate to the overall goals and objectives of the program. The experiences involve professionals who use practices congruent with knowledge and skills expected of the candidates. Cooperating professionals are provided with information on the program standards and expectations that structure field experiences. Student teachers are monitored on a regular basis by the district and university supervisor; faculty in advanced programs also provide regular monitoring and feedback to candidates during internships and practica. Monitoring activities include observation, formative and summative evaluations, and regular communication through emails and telephone calls. Evaluation data gleaned from unit and program assessments are reviewed at least annually at the program, department, and unit level. Within the CoE, field placement expectations and outcomes are reviewed at least annually with the CoE advisory council, and with advisory councils for individual programs.

UCM’s policy of requiring multiple, developmental clinical placements ensures that candidates experience appropriate spans of age and subject area prior to licensure. The candidates participate in a variety of settings that include diverse populations, students with exceptionalities and students of different cultures and socioeconomic backgrounds. Field experiences are systematically designed and sequenced to provide students with early and continuing experiences to participate and observe in actual classroom environments. These experiences allow the candidate to reflect on their experiences, integrating information from their university classroom with their hands-on experiences with P-12 learners. Throughout their program of study, UCM candidates have multiple opportunities to demonstrate content knowledge, professional and pedagogical knowledge, and skills and commitments in school settings.

Educational Administration-Initial and advanced candidates in the educational administration certification and degree programs must meet qualifications in order to do field study research for their thesis, projects or dissertations. Candidates must have strong recommendations, personal statements that reflect a significant amount of commitment to education and a robust record of academic achievement and talent. Candidates must get permission from districts to do field studies. Finally, candidates must submit their research plans and protocols for review and approval by faculty in the UCM Department of Educational Leadership and Human Development. In summary, candidates are not allowed to do research fieldwork or studies until they are approved at several levels of evaluation and assessment. Candidates must also pass rigorous oral and written preliminary assessments on their research before completing the

http://faculty.ucmo.edu/ncate09/standards/standard_3/index.html

Standard Three 95

program. Generally, candidates in administrative certification programs have taken the majority of their required coursework prior to beginning their formal field experience, but sometimes earlier because of an opportunity for a paid position or other unusual circumstance. Candidates find their own placements with assistance from university personnel if necessary. Most field experiences are completed primarily in the building where the candidate is employed. Missouri standards ensure that quality field experiences are part of each candidate’s program.

Counselor and Psychological Examiner-Field experiences in the Counselor Education Program are a three semester sequence: Coun 5900 Practicum in Counseling (one semester) and Coun 6910 Internship in Prof Coun (two semesters). Candidates apply for practicum and internship near the end of the program. Field experiences are structured so they align with DESE and CACREP standards. Coun 5900 Practicum in Coun focuses on development of skills. Candidates in Coun 6910 Internship in Prof Coun plan their field experiences following the Missouri Comprehensive Guidance Program to insure that they participate in the full array of activities required of Professional School Counselors. A final portfolio that includes all supervision, site activities and course requirements is submitted at the end of each semester. Candidates in the Counselor Education Program submit a “Request for Practicum/Internship” form naming a proposed field placement site and on-site supervisor. Each “Request for Practicum/Internship” form is reviewed to ensure that the placement site is appropriate and the site supervisor qualified. Quality of P-12 partners is assessed by continuous feedback in practicum and internship class as well as formal student evaluation of both site and supervisor.

Candidates for the School Psychological Examiner’s Certificate complete EdSp 4361 Practicum in Behav Mang Tech in conjunction with EdSp 4360 Behav Mang Tech. In addition, candidates also complete EdSp 5351Practicum (Eval of Students with Disab) which includes a minimum of 150 hours activities related to the role and function of School Psychological Examiners.

Library Science Media-Field experiences in the Library Science program are scattered across several courses. They include interviewing practitioners, consulting with school librarians on various strategies and practices, and completing assignments based on real-world school libraries and collections. The major field experience is associated with the practicum experience. Students take the practicum near the end of their course work, spending 95 hours in library media centers working under the direct supervision of experienced and certified library media specialists and a university faculty supervisor. They are placed in libraries in elementary, middle, and secondary settings to broaden their experience as their certification will be K-12. They activities align in their practicum experience with the DESE MoSTEP and AASL standards and the assessment of their course is guided by those standards. The onsite and the university faculty supervisor complete a form consisting of those standards arranged in a check list with space to document how candidates' performance aligns with the standards. Students practice the full range of activities represented by, and compile a notebook of resources organized according to those standards; and they align with students and classroom teachers in the role of the library media specialist.

Special Education Program-The program systematically ensures that our candidates develop proficiencies outlined in our unit’s conceptual framework, state standards, and professional standards through clinical experiences in our advanced programs in a number of ways. As is

Standard Three 96

noted in the UMC’s Conceptual Framework, students at all levels must be able to go beyond textbook knowledge. The practitioner must have had extensive opportunities to convert that knowledge into effective pedagogical skills when working with learners with exceptional needs. The Special Education Advanced Programs rely heavily on the structures of the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards, known as the five propositions. These standards are first presented in EDSP 5100 Introduction to Graduate studies in Special Education, and they are recursive throughout the candidates’ formal programs of study. Additionally, the Program adheres to both the professional standards of the Council for Exceptional Children (CEC) as well as the Missouri Standards for Teacher Education Programs (MoSTEP). The courses that are predominantly field-based/clinical are EDSP 5351 Practicum in Evaluation of Students with Disabilities (which is taken concurrently with EDSP 5350 Evaluation of Students with Disabilities) and EDSP 6980 Internship in Special Education. The program uses assessments for both formative and summative evaluation of candidates in these courses.

Further detail concerning these programs, as well as information concerning field experience requirements of the other advanced and graduate programs may be found in the reports for those programs in the Electronic Document Center.

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

Technology has become an integral part of the teaching process. Use of technology is reviewed as part of the student evaluation process. On the formative evaluation form, technology is an item of assessment. The assessment statement is as follows: Understands theories and application of technology in educational settings and has adequate technological skills to create meaningful learning opportunities for all students. This statement is rated using the following levels: not observed, does not meet, progressing, meets, exceeds. Input for this assessment item is received from the school district supervising teacher and the university supervisor based on observation and information provided by the student.

Technology is also part of the summative evaluation process. On the summative evaluation form, technology is an item of assessment. The assessment statement is as follows: Understands theories and application of technology in educational settings and has adequate technological skills to create meaningful learning opportunities for all students. This statement is rated using the following levels: not observed, does not meet, progressing, meets, exceeds. Input for this assessment item is received from the school district supervising teacher and the university supervisor based on observation and information provided by the student.

Technology is also listed as one of the elements in developing an effective unit or lesson plan; however, that item is not assessed separately. In preliminary discussions on implementation of the Teacher Work Sample (anticipated, Fall 2009), appropriate use of instructional technology has been identified as an element that needs to be addressed in the instructions and scoring rubric.

Clinical Services and Certification has established a Blackboard Web Site for current student teachers. It provides student teachers the opportunity to exchange ideas, brainstorm issues or

Standard Three 97

problems, and communicate with each other on a daily basis. It provides the opportunity for professional growth and development communication among all student teachers.

4. 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 Professional Education Faculty in the College of Education have strong networking connections to P-12 personnel through professional collaborations and relationships with these practitioners. These relationships serve as venues through which school administrators and practitioners work with unit faculty to identify cooperating professionals that have the characteristics essential for creating a successful field and clinical environment for the program candidate.

Selection of school district supervisors is based on experience and successful teaching experience which is indicated by their performance on Performance Based Teacher Evaluations. These evaluations are administered by the administrators within each individual Missouri school district. The school district supervisor must be recommended by the appropriate building principal and approved by the central office at the school district. Performance evaluations of each school district supervisor also are conducted by university supervisors and student teachers at the end of each semester. These evaluations are submitted directly to the office of Clinical Services and Certification to provide assessment information in order to make judgments about selection of school district supervisors for future field/clinical experiences.

The Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education defines minimum qualifications for cooperating educators in the culminating field/clinical experience is as follows: at least three years experience; at least a master degree; and valid certification in the field being sought by the candidate. These qualifications must be met prior to University of Central Missouri selection of cooperating educators. Cooperating educators are required to complete an application and provide evidence of experience, degree, and certification.

Criteria for advanced program supervision vary, based upon the requirements of the specific program. Generally, however, the on-site mentor must have attained the degree and area of certification they candidate is seeking. For example, a candidate wishing to complete the MSE in special education with an emphasis in severe developmental disabilities must have an internship mentor who has completed a master’s degree in special education and is certified in SDD.

Thus, school-based supervisors are recommended by their building and district administration, based on performance-based assessment measures. In addition, UCM evaluates the success of student teaching and internship placements, and uses that information to aid in the selection of future field supervisors.

5. What preparation and ongoing professional development activities does school-based clinical faculty receive to prepare them for roles as clinical supervisors?

Standard Three 98

University supervisors of student teaching include both full-time faculty from professional education unit departments, and adjunct clinical faculty with exceptional experience in P-12 education. Once these individuals have been confirmed as university supervisors, they are directed to a wealth of information on the student teaching website. At the beginning, middle, and end of every fall and spring semester, a meeting of university supervisors is held in conjunction with the three required student teaching conference on the UCM campus. Those meetings are used to share additional communication, and to orient new university supervisors to their responsibilities. Feedback from the unit assessment system is provided each semester by the Associate Dean, and data summaries are reviewed once a year. The purpose of these discussions are to improve the consistency, reliability, and usefulness of assessment information and to provide an opportunity for university supervisors to share their concerns and suggestions. At least once a year, a professional development training is provided at one of the student teaching conferences for all university supervisors by the Regional Professional Development Center. The two most recent trainings have focused on interrater reliability, and on differentiating “meets expectations” from “exceeds” on the UCM unit assessments. Each university supervisor is responsible for sharing this information with the district supervisors of candidates in their group.

As soon as a student teaching placement is confirmed, the district supervisor receives a newsletter from Clinical Services and Certification that outlines information available to them through the department website. All forms and information relative to the responsibilities of the district supervisor are available on this website.

At the beginning of each semester, school-based clinical faculty participate in an orientation conference with their UCM University Supervisor. This meeting will consist of the student teacher, the school district supervisor and the university supervisor. At this meeting, the following items will be reviewed: student teacher handbook, issues related to working with the student teacher (time management, communication with student and university supervisor, time sheets, expectations, attendance policy, videotaping, lesson plans), stages of student teaching, responsibility of the district supervisor, district supervisor information form, inter-visit report, student teacher evaluation and rubric, summative evaluation, and district supervisor reflection. A timeline of all activities and reports are provided to the district supervisor. The district supervisor is also directed to a power point presentation available on the UCM student teaching website. The power point may be reviewed at that time or the district supervisor may choose to view it at a later time. The district supervisor is also made aware of their option to receive either a stipend or graduate credit through the UCM for participation as a student teaching mentor.

6. What evidence demonstrates that clinical faculty provides regular and continuous support for student teachers, licensed teachers completing graduate programs, and other school professionals?

University supervisors meet with student teachers a minimum of five times during the semester. Faculty in advanced programs and programs for other school professionals also monitor practica and internships, but specific requirements vary from program to program.

Student teachers attend a mandatory orientation at the beginning of the semesters conducted by Clinical Services and Certification. This meeting includes an orientation to student teaching, a

Standard Three 99

career services review, a review of the certification process, and student teachers meet with their university supervisor. University supervisors then meet with their candidates to review procedures related to the student teaching process, evaluation forms, observation schedules, and expectations related to student teaching.

Student teachers also attend a mandatory mid-term conference conducted by Clinical Services and Certification. This meeting reviews issues related to student teaching, an employer panel, the certification process, and student teachers meet with their university supervisor to review current issues.

University supervisors conduct a minimum of three observation visits per student teacher per semester. These visits are evenly distributed throughout the semester. The university supervisors will observe the student teacher, conference and discuss what was observed in the lesson and a written report will be provided to the student. During the university supervisor's visit, he/she will visit with the district supervisor to review student performance.

If problems arise in performance of the student teacher, the university supervisor will make additional observations visits. Post observation conference may include the university supervisor, district supervisor, student teacher and building principal. In Library and Information Services, faculty provide students ongoing support during the practicum primarily through email communications. Students journal daily activities and send those journals to their university faculty who provides ongoing feedback. If issues arise, university faculty consult with the candidate's onsite supervisor or visit the candidate. The university faculty schedule an onsite visit late in the practicum to observe candidate teaching, interaction with students and K-12 faculty. The university faculty provide feedback to candidates on their performance.

The Special Education program provides continuous support for graduate students during the capstone clinical experiences in EDSP 6980. Interns must submit a formal proposal for a field-based project that entails 150 contact hours in public schools. The Intern must describe their project, how it will be carried out, and identify measureable outcomes. The project must be approved by the Intern’s Graduate Faculty Advisor. The Internship takes one of two forms, either an action research project or a set of job-shadowing activities designed for candidates pursuing certification as a Special Education Director. Separate evaluations are employed for each type of project. Interns are supervised by full-time faculty members. Interns are visited at least once on-site, and meet as with the instructor on campus on three separate occasions. During these sessions, interns discuss their projects, outline their process, methodology, and expected outcomes. At the end of the semester, they provide an update on their work, and present the instructor of record with a formative evaluation document completed by the site mentor and the Intern, independently. If the Intern experiences difficulty, the instructor may make additional site visits and remain in close contact with both Intern and site supervisor.

Candidates enrolled in Coun 5900 and Coun 6910 meet a minimum of one hour per week of individual supervision with their university and site supervisor. Candidates maintain a log of

Standard Three 100

supervision sessions and meet with their university supervisor a minimum of 3 hours per week for group supervision.

SPE candidates enrolled in EdSp 4361 and EdSp 5351 meet regularly with their university supervisors. School Psychological Examiner candidates submit a portfolio at the conclusion of their course work documenting their achievement of DESE competencies for SPE certification.

7. What differences, if any, exist in the design, implementation, and evaluation of field experiences and clinical practice for programs for other school professionals, off-campus programs, and distance learning programs?

Differences do exist in the management and administration of clinical experiences. Culminating clinical experiences for initial undergraduate programs are managed and administered through the Office of Clinical Services and Certification. Other school professional programs, off-campus programs, and distance learning programs are managed and administered through the individual departments. Several examples are provided here; please see program reports in the Electronic Document Center for more information.

Administration - Candidates in educational administration certification and degree programs must meet qualifications in order to do field study research for their thesis, projects or dissertations. Candidates must have strong recommendations, personal statements that reflect a significant amount of commitment to education and a robust record of academic achievement and talent. Candidates must obtain permission from districts to do field studies. Finally, candidates must submit their research plans and protocols for review and approval by the UCM Department of Educational Leadership and Human Development. Candidates find their own placements with assistance from university personnel if necessary. Most field experiences are completed primarily in the building where the candidate is employed.

Counselor and Psychological Examiner - Field placements for school counseling are determined by candidate and the onsite supervisor with the approval of the campus practicum class instructor. Candidates find their own placements with assistance from university personnel if necessary. Quality of P-12 partners is assured by continuous feedback in practicum class about the supervision being provided and about the practicum site in general.

Library Science Media - Field experiences in the Library Science program are scattered across several courses. They include interviewing practitioners, consulting with school librarians on various strategies and practices, and completing assignments based on real-world school media centers. Students take the practicum near the end of their course work, spending 95 hours in library media centers working under the supervision of experienced and certified library media specialists and a university faculty supervisor. Candidates are placed in libraries in elementary, middle, and secondary settings to broaden their experience as their certification will be K-12.

8. (Optional) One or more tables and links to key exhibits related to the development and demonstration of knowledge, skills, and professional dispositions in field experiences and clinical practice could be attached here. Data in tables should be discussed in the appropriate prompt of 3b. (Links with descriptions must be typed into a Word document

Standard Three 101

that can be uploaded here. The number of attached exhibits should be limited in number; BOE members should access most of the exhibits in the unit's electronic exhibit room.)

3c. Candidates’ Development and Demonstration of Knowledge, Skills, and Professional Dispositions to Help All Students Learn

1. What are the entry requirements for clinical practice? How many candidates are eligible for clinical practice each semester or year? How many complete successfully?

NOTE: Due to space limitations, the information provided for 3c focuses primarily on undergraduate programs that lead to initial certification. Similar processes are followed and assessment data are collected for graduate and advanced programs, based on program-specific criteria. That information can be found in the program reports located in the Electronic Document Center.

The following minimum requirements must be met prior to student teaching placement:

Admission to the Teacher Education Program.

Submission of a completed Request to Student Teach form by December 1 for fall semester or May 1 for spring semester.

Completion of a minimum of 90 hours of university credit prior to the beginning of student teaching.

A cumulative GPA of 2.50 on all university work attempted, on all courses taken at UCM and in the field or fields for which teacher certification is being sought (determined on the basis of courses approved for the teaching area, whether taken at UCM or elsewhere.

A satisfactory appraisal for student teaching from each department or area in which student teaching placement is requested.

Evidence of computer proficiency.

A doctor’s certificate or other evidence of good health if required by the school system where the student teacher is placed.

Students using UCM for certification must have earned a minimum of 6 semester hours of credit at UCM before qualifying for student teaching.

The Teacher Education Council requires that the Praxis II be taken prior to the student teaching semester.

Standard Three 102

SEMESTER/YEAR SUCCESSFUL COMPLETERS CANDIDATES

Fall 05 136 137Spring 06 168 169Fall 06 104 104Spring 07 105 106Fall 07 156 158Spring 08 114 114Fall 08 103 103Spring 09 -- 184

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

The day prior to the official start of the student teaching semester, student teachers meet with their university supervisors at the Student Teacher Orientation Meeting. University supervisors go through the assignments, how those assignments are to be submitted, and how they will be assessed. The observation schedule is discussed along with an explanation of the formative and summative assessment process. The university supervisor also provides the student teacher with contact information including e-mail address, home phone and cell phone numbers.

The university supervisor makes a preliminary visit to the student teacher’s school to meet with the district supervisor, go through the paperwork, and review the university’s PowerPoint inservice. The district supervisor is also given all of the university supervisor’s contact information. The district supervisor is encouraged to provide any feedback to the student teacher and university supervisor as necessary. They may do so informally, or may use the formative evaluation form to document mentoring suggestions.

When university supervisors conduct the required observations of their student teachers, they also meet with the district supervisor before or after the actual observation to seek their feedback. That feedback is obtained before the observation conference between the university supervisor and the student teacher, and incorporated into the feedback provided on Formative Student Teacher Evaluation. For any standard items scored, “Does Not Meet” or “Progressing” the supervisor provides constructive suggestions for professional development that will increase the likelihood that the student will be able demonstrate the desired competency on the subsequent visit.

Near the end of their student teaching semester, the student teacher is required to fill out a Summative Student Teacher Self-Evaluation form that is used during the university supervisor’s summative observation. The instrument is identical to the form filled out by the district and university supervisors. They are encouraged to discuss their self-perceptions and plans for ongoing professional development with both of their supervisors.

Standard Three 103

Toward the end of the student teaching semester, the district supervisor fills out a Summative Teacher Evaluation form that is identical to the form filled out by the university supervisor. If there is a content-specific form for the student’s discipline (e.g., The Student as English Teacher), the district supervisor completes it as well. The evaluation forms are used to provide feedback to the candidate and additional information to the university supervisor and the unit. While the university supervisors are solely responsible for issuing the student teacher’s grade, they seek the district supervisor’s input.

The university supervisor completes the Summative Student Teaching Evaluation, and shares the results with the candidate, along with suggested professional development goals for any standards that remain unmet at the end of the semester.

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

Feedback and reflection are both key components of UCM’s field experiences and clinical practice throughout all the programs, initial or advanced. Constructive feedback is provided to students from a variety of individuals who work both directly and indirectly with the student, including higher education faculty, host school faculty, district and building administrators, and the district supervisor/mentor. In most programs, the portfolio is used to document standards-based artifacts, the feedback from faculty and supervisors, and candidate reflections. Portfolios are used both formatively (to show growth and professional development over time) and summatively (to provide the basis for evaluating knowledge, skills and dispositions at the end of the program).

Student teachers are provided professional feedback in all field experiences from both their district and university supervisors. Working with their student teachers on a daily basis, district supervisors provide informal, formative assessment to the student throughout the semester. District supervisors are required to submit a written summative evaluation to the university supervisor at the conclusion of the student teaching semester. Each student teacher meets at least six times with their university supervisor to discuss relevant topics that are related to the student teaching experience. Three of the visits are actual classroom observations by the university supervisors which incorporate input and feedback from the district supervisors. Student teachers are encouraged to ask building administrators to observe and provide feedback as an additional source of feedback and development.

Candidate skills as a reflective practitioner are targeted by several unit assessment components, including the Disposition Assessment, the Formative and Summative Student Teaching Evaluation, and the Instructional Unit Plan and Assessment.

In each of the formative and summative disposition assessment instruments completed faculty prior to student teaching and by the district and university supervisors during student teaching, candidates are assessed on a reflective practice component. Item #11 on the Disposition Assessment reads: Assesses the effects of choices and actions on others and actively seeks out opportunities to grow professionally in order to promote learner outcomes.

Standard Three 104

On the Student Teaching Evaluation completed by the university supervisor, the district supervisor, and candidates themselves, reflection is tapped by item 1.2.9: Is a reflective practitioner who continually assesses the effects of choices and actions on others. Actively seeks opportunities to grow professionally and utilizes assessment and professional growth to generate more learning for more students.

In the Instructional Unit Plan and Assessment, the candidate must:

Articulate how pre- and post assessments were selected or developed and aligned with learning goals.

Describe how verbal, nonverbal and media communication techniques were used to foster active inquiry, collaboration and supportive classroom interaction.

Describe how formative activities were selected and used.

Describe how formative student progress data and other feedback were used to revise the instructional plan.

Analyze students’ progress or difficulty.

Provide a detailed description of planned follow-up activities for students who were unsuccessful.

Describe what adjustments they would make if they were going to teach this lesson to the same group of students.

Identify opportunities for future professional growth to improve student learning.

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

Candidate performance data are reviewed at each major program benchmark to determine their progress towards meeting the criteria for moving to the next phase of the program. For more detailed information on the unit assessment system for candidates in initial programs, see Standard 2.

For many of the developmental field experiences, a document titled the “Student Teacher Field Experience Evaluation” form is completed by the district supervisor. Among the areas on which the student is assessed concerning knowledge, skills, and professional dispositions on this form are:

Communicated effectively with students and school personnel.

Reflected on the field experience.

Standard Three 105

Developed appropriate relationships with students and school personnel.

Exercised good judgment while displaying professional values and ethics.

Was enthusiastic about learning and teaching.

On the form, the district supervisor also answers the question, “Should this pre-service teacher be allowed to participate in future field experiences?”

To be admitted into the Teacher Education Program, the candidate must show, among other things:

Evidence of having completed a minimum of 48 hours of college credit, have a cumulative GPA of at least 2.50

Completion of the following courses with a grade of C or higher:

a. EDCI 2100, Foundations of Education and Field Experience

b. EDCI 2240, Educational Psychology (or equivalent course)

c. ENGL 1020, Composition I (or equivalent course emphasizing writing skills)

d. College-level mathematics course (at the level of MATH 1111, 1150, or 1620)

e. An oral communication course (COMM 1000 or equivalent course)

Recommendation for admission from the department representing the major area of study in the preparation of teaching (interviews or other means of assessment as determined by individual departments)

Evidence of having passed all sections of the C-BASE for Teachers.

To be approved to student teach, the candidate must have completed at least 90 hours of university credit prior to the student teaching semester. They must have a minimum accumulative GPA of 2.50 on all university course work attempted as well as all courses taken at UCM and in the field or fields for which the candidate is seeking certification. The student must receive a satisfactory appraisal for student teaching from each department or area in which a student teaching placement is requested in the form of a TE-16. This departmental approval must be accompanied by a satisfactory disposition assessment, also issued by the department(s). Also, as required by the Teacher Education Council, the student must take the Praxis II examination prior to the student teaching semester.

During student teaching, candidate knowledge, skills and dispositions are measured by performance on the unit assessment instruments as completed by district and university supervisors. The unit’s goal is for all candidates to Meet or Exceed expectations on each element

Standard Three 106

of each assessment. To successfully complete the program, candidates must achieve a grade of at least a C in student teaching and satisfy all other program-specific requirements for graduation. To receive initial certification, they must also pass the required Praxis II examination.

4. What is the process for candidates to collect and analyze data on student learning and reflect on those data and improve learning during clinical practice?

As mentioned above, the process is addressed primarily by the Instructional Unit Plan and Assessment. The purpose of the Instructional Unit Plan and Assessment is to demonstrate teacher candidate ability to plan effective instruction and to use formative, summative and reflective assessment strategies to facilitate achievement of predetermined learning outcomes by P-12 students.

Implementation Plan - All teacher candidates must demonstrate the ability to develop an instructional unit and related lesson plans. They must also demonstrate the ability to design and implement varied assessment strategies, to implement those strategies in the classroom, to use assessment data and other feedback to modify instruction to help all students master predetermined learning outcomes, and to reflect on their impact on P-12 student learning. The assessment instrument has been developed to align with INTASC and Missouri State Standards, as well as with UCM’s Conceptual Framework. The scoring rubric provides a narrative description of the criteria for determining how to rate each item using the scale Does Not Meet, Progressing, Meets, and Exceeds. A copy of the form will be provided to the student, with the original going to Clinical Services.

Guidelines for Scoring - Every teacher candidate should meet the criteria for all five parts of the assessment (Unit Plan, Lesson Plan, Formative, Summative, Reflection) by the end of the student teaching semester. The graduated ratings are designed to demonstrate developmental progress and skill development during the student teaching experience.

Timeline for Administration/Analysis/Dissemination of Results - The Instructional Unit Plan and Assessment form will be completed during student teaching by the University Supervisor. Candidates will select an instructional unit developed for their student teaching assignment that includes at least five lessons or sessions they believe meet the criteria for an effective unit/lesson plan including formative and summative assessment activities. They will teach the unit, conduct formative and summative assessment, and complete a written reflection on the impact of instruction on P-12 student learning outcomes, following the format provided in the scoring rubric. As part of this assessment, the candidate is required to note how many students were present during the unit and how many met the unit’s instructional objectives. While this evaluation instrument may be used to provide formative data, it is designed to be used primarily as a summative instrument during the student teaching semester. A student who does not meet all criteria may try again on the supervisor’s next visit. Supervisors concerned about a candidate who appears unlikely to achieve a rating of at least Meets in all five areas by the end of student teaching will notify Clinical Services immediately. One copy of each form will be given to the student, with summative comments and recommendations for ongoing professional development (required in areas not marked Meets or Exceeds). The original copy of the last set of forms

Standard Three 107

completed during student teaching will go to Clinical Services, along with a copy of the candidate’s reflection on that unit.

Data will be aggregated and disaggregated by major/certification area each semester and disseminated to PEF representatives for each certification area. Trends related to interrater reliability or subject area will be identified and referred to PEF or TEC for annual review.

NOTE: This instrument will be replaced by the Teacher Work Sample in the Fall of 2009.

6. What differences, if any, exist in the ways candidates develop and demonstrate their knowledge, skills, and professional dispositions to help all students learn in field experiences and clinical practice in programs for other school professionals, off-campus programs, and distance learning programs?

While the UCM graduate programs for other school professionals share common benchmarks, each program has been aligned with either its discipline-specific standards or with the NBPTS propositions. Therefore, each program’s field and clinical experiences focus on different aspects of creating positive environments that facilitate learning for all students. For example, the Ed.S. internship requirements in Special Education consist of a list of standards-based competencies that are specific to individuals seeking to become special education administrators. The required activities and assessments are aligned with those standards, as specified by the state of Missouri. For information on this program, or UCM’s programs for other school professionals, see the program reports in the Electronic Document Center for Counselors, Library/Media Specialists, Reading Specialists, Principals, Superintendents, Psychological Examiners, Career Center Directors, and Special Education Directors.

7. (Optional) One or more tables and links to key exhibits related to the development and demonstration of knowledge, skills, and professional dispositions for helping all student learn could be attached here. Data in tables should be discussed in the appropriate prompt of 3c. (Links with descriptions must be typed into a Word document that can be uploaded here. The number of attached exhibits should be limited in number; BOE members should access most of the exhibits in the unit's electronic exhibit room.)

Standard Four 108

STANDARD FOUR: DIVERSITY

The unit designs, implements, and evaluates curriculum and provides experiences for candidates to acquire and demonstrate the knowledge, skills, and dispositions necessary to help all students learn. Assessments indicate that candidates can demonstrate and apply proficiencies related to diversity. Experiences provided for candidates include working with diverse populations, including higher education and school faculty, diverse candidates, and diverse students in P-12 schools.

[NOTE: In this section institutions must address (1) initial and advanced programs for teachers, (2) programs for other school professionals and (3) off-campus and distance learning programs.]

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

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

As faculty design, deliver and evaluate the courses and programs offered to students at all levels and all areas of the Teacher Education Program (TEP), they integrate the Belief Statement and Mission Statement that inform the philosophy of teaching and learning on our campus. These are:

Belief Statement: The Central educator is a competent, caring, reflective practitioner committed to the premise that all can learn.

Mission Statement: As a cornerstone of the institution for over 130 years, the University of Central Missouri’s Teacher Education Program shapes teachers and other school professionals who are well grounded in theory, display competence in content knowledge, are prepared with strategies, and possess the dispositions to ensure success for all learners. The Teacher Education Program prepares individuals as professional educators for an ever-changing, culturally diverse population. Faculty and candidates provide support and service to schools in meeting their present and future challenges by developing communities that learn through research and scholarly activities. Education preparation is a campus-wide responsibility, a commitment that reflects the honor and worth of serving in a vital profession.

Proficiencies related to diversity in initial certification programs:

The five underlying diversity "principles” which inform the undergraduate competencies are as follows. The candidate:


Commits to high expectations for all students and values the ability/capacity for each student to learn.

Standard Four 109

Commits to development of lessons that are interesting and engaging through a variety of instructional strategies to accommodate all learners, including those from diverse backgrounds, experiences and cultures (e.g., use of technology, grouping, motivating materials).

Commits to making appropriate adaptations and accommodations for students with diverse needs (e.g., resources, technology, alternative forms of demonstrating competency).

Believes students, their families and colleagues should be treated and should treat others with kindness, fairness, patience, dignity and respect.

Dispositions related to diversity in initial certification programs. When teacher candidate dispositions are assessed, the university faculty, district supervisor or university supervisor observes the student and evaluates behaviors that infer teaching dispositions (see Dispositions Assessment). For example, Disposition 1 states that “Candidate commits to high expectations for all students, and values the ability/capacity for each student to learn.” This disposition reflects the TEP Belief Statement that all can learn; it is held as a high priority that teacher candidates possess this disposition and convey it through teaching and interaction. Behaviors that might occur as a result of this belief are persistence in helping all children become successful, listening to students, planning to differentiate instruction to meet the needs of each student, showing in lesson planning and execution awareness of the whole child, scaffolding students as needed, and treating students respectfully by being patient, considerate, and attentive.

Disposition 5 states that “Candidate commits to development of lessons that are interesting and engaging through a variety of instructional strategies to accommodate all learners, including those from diverse backgrounds, experiences, and cultures (e.g., use of technology, grouping, motivating materials). Internalization of this disposition would be inferred via behaviors such as adjusting lesson plans to meet students’ needs, displaying a passion for teaching, treating all students fairly, developing activities that encourage students to become engaged using a variety of modalities to teach lessons, using technology to facilitate learning, and considering alternate perspectives.

Disposition 6 states that “Candidate commits to making appropriate adaptations and accommodations for students with diverse needs (e.g., use of technology).” A commitment to accommodating all kinds of diversity might be evident in a candidate who seems comfortable in discussing diversity, seeks to become acquainted with students as individuals, adapts or revises lesson plans in light of student needs and assessments, asks questions about the culture of students in class, seeks input from available supporting personnel (e.g., counselor, special educator), uses technology appropriately to accommodate student needs, analyzes student work and other data to become informed about individual student strengths and needs, and avoids stereotyping/using broad generalizations.

Disposition 9 states that “Candidate believes students and colleagues should be treated and should treat others with kindness, fairness, patience, dignity, and respect.” A candidate who



Standard Four 110

holds this belief maintains standards of confidentiality, acts as an appropriate representative of the school, interacts appropriately with students and peers, treats students fairly, treats all members of the staff with respect (e.g., paras, custodians, cooks, principal, other teachers), and addresses colleagues, parents of students, peers, and University supervisors respectfully.

Although dispositions may not be taught directly, faculty in the TEP strive to facilitate the development of teacher dispositions by teaching and modeling behaviors that are associated with dispositions. Many of the behaviors described above are addressed both explicitly (see course syllabi for specific objectives related to diversity proficiencies) and implicitly. For example, differentiated instruction and scaffolding are skills that are introduced in the core classes taken by all education majors (EDCI 2100, EDCI 2240, and EDSP 2100 or PSY 4200) and built upon in every methods class through each program. During practica and student teaching, candidates are coached in these proficiencies and guided in their reflections regarding effective teaching and learning for each child. Regardless of major, students learn to utilize technology to broaden the media through which they can reach students, adapt lessons to different exceptionalities, and analyze student work and assessment to learn about individual strengths and needs. Candidates are required to observe in an inclusive and a self-contained setting for children who qualify for special education services; this occurs in one of the earliest field experiences (EDSP 2100 or PSY 4200). Through this experience the candidates are introduced to the intentional practice of accommodating individual needs and utilizing available resources to understand the whole child.

Proficiencies related to diversity in advanced programs:

Advanced programs at UCM enroll students from widely varying backgrounds and interests; they bring educational experience from a multitude of various institutions and a variety of degree programs across the nation. The majority of students in the 17 advanced programs live in the Kansas City metro area and are employed within a school setting or have experience working in a school setting. The schools and clinical settings in which graduate students complete internships, practica and supervision are extremely diverse in student population and demographics. Students in advanced programs are expected to demonstrate the same proficiencies related to diversity as are undergraduates in initial programs, although not all advanced programs are focused on classroom teaching. Graduate students are expected to recognize and respect diversity and be able to work effectively in many capacities with people who illustrate every facet of diversity. Student learning outcomes are included in the Graduate Catalog for each advanced program. The following outcomes are related specifically to diversity proficiencies.

Know and understand how human diversity affects learning and development within the context of a global society and a diverse community of families (Counselor Education)

Know, understand and use planning and goal setting for the personal, social, educational, and career development of the individual (Counselor Education)

Know, understand, and use various methods for delivering responsive counseling services to individuals and groups in school and community settings (Counselor Education)

Standard Four 111

Demonstrate a commitment to students and their learning (Curriculum & Instruction)

Promote the success of all students by collaborating with families and community members, responding to diverse community interests and needs, and mobilizing community resources (Educational Leadership)

Promote the success of all students by understanding, responding to and influencing the larger political, social, economic, legal, and cultural context (Educational Leadership)

Apply strategies to ensure access to resources and information in a variety of formats to all members of the learning community (Library Science)

Design and implement instruction that engages the students’ interests, passions, and needs (Library Science)

Involve parents and colleagues in efforts to grow as teachers (Special Education)

Evaluate instructional decisions and their implementations with students who present communication or literacy learning challenges to their teaching practice (Special Education)

(See course syllabi for specific objectives related to diversity proficiencies.)

2. What required coursework and experiences enable teacher candidates and candidates for other professional school roles to adapt instruction to different learning styles, connect instruction or services to students’ experiences and cultures, communicate with students and families in culturally sensitive ways, incorporate multiple perspectives into teaching, develop a classroom and school climate that values diversity, demonstrate behaviors consistent with the ideas of fairness and the belief that all students can learn?

Initial programs

All undergraduate education students must take three core courses, each of which targets the five underlying diversity "principles" listed in #1 above.

EDSP 2100: Education of the Exceptional ChildEDCI 2100: Foundations of Education and Field ExperienceEDCI 2240: Educational Psychology

The first two courses include field observation and practice, while the third targets research, theory and law devoted to development and accommodation. EDCI 2100 (Foundations of Education) requires a minimum of 30 hours field experience - 15 hours of focused observations and 15 hours of activities/classroom assistance) which provides a solid base for candidate engagement, an understanding of the diversity represented in classroom environments, and the professional dispositions our successful candidates are expected to demonstrate. EDSP 2100 (Education of the Exceptional Child) identifies a range of special needs, and the legal

Standard Four 112

implications and policies and experiences designed to orient candidates to special needs classrooms and resources. This course requires 6-8 hours of observation of students with special needs. Approximately 4 hours of observation must be completed in an inclusive general education setting and 4 hours must be completed in a pull-out special education or clinical program. Candidates complete a final written product that includes an anecdotal observation log, a description of the behavioral, learning, social and communication characteristics of students observed, a teacher interview summary, and a reflection statement.

Thereafter, candidates progress through multiple courses which offer content related to diversity competencies and proficiencies, but the scope and sequence of these are related to the candidate's program of study and specialization. The Department of Curriculum & Instruction offers a general education course, EDCI 2110 World Diversity in America, which is required in some education programs; this course teaches explicitly about cultural diversity (see Table 1 below). However, the overall approach to teaching about and exposing education candidates to all aspects of diversity is to integrate diversity proficiencies into most course content and practicum experience.

Professional Education Faculty (PEF), in reviewing program assessment data from across all programs over the past several academic years, have considered ways to ensure that all students are exposed to many facets of diversity. In the spring of 2009, a curriculum change to the professional education core was approved which will enable the Clinical Services Office to oversee and track all field placements for education majors in the FLDX 2150 Introductory Field Experience course. Currently, across all initial certification programs, a required core class is EDCI 2100 Foundations of Education & Field Experience (3 credit hours). Beginning in Fall 2009, the requirement will change to EDFL 2100 Foundations of Education (2 credit hours) and FLDX Introductory Field Experience (1 credit hour). Candidates will fulfill the required 30 hours in the field by being placed in at least two different settings, each with specific diverse characteristics (urban, rural or suburban; large or small; high proportion of low SES; inclusive and self-contained special education services; language minority students; diverse racial and ethnic population). Candidates learn how to consider the many differences among students from the very first field experience, when they learn how to observe, and evaluate the impact of student characteristics on instructional decision-making, and reflect upon observations and experiences.

Each methods course that a candidate takes will reiterate and build upon the incorporation of multiple perspectives into instruction, adaptation of instruction to different learning styles, connection of instruction to students’ background and experiences, and demonstration of the central tenet of UCM’s Teacher Education belief statement: The Central educator is a competent, caring, reflective practitioner committed to the premise that all can learn. Each program includes an integrative studies course (ICAP or IGEN prefix) that addresses diversity proficiencies in different manners; the Elementary Education and Early Childhood Education programs both require IGEN 3468, Community, School, and Family Connections. This course is taken during the junior year and focuses on the interactions among community, school, and family systems relative to existing and emerging paradigms.

http://faculty.ucmo.edu/ncate09/standards/standard_4/evidence/table1_diversity.doc

Standard Four 113

For diversity proficiencies integrated into content across education courses, please see Electronic Document Center for access to syllabi. In the table provided in 2a are some examples of how competencies, field experiences, and assessments related to all aspects of diversity are included in course content.

Advanced programs

Some examples of advanced program courses in which diversity proficiencies are taught in an explicit manner are provided below. For additional information on specific programs or classes please refer to the Electronic Document Center for course syllabi.

Counselor Education: The intrinsic nature of counselor education is in addressing the needs of diverse populations. Exemplars from courses in the Counselor Education program include:

COUN 5320: Mental Health Issues in Counseling states that candidates will "demonstrate knowledge and understanding of how to apply factors that affect behavior, including developmental crises, disability, addiction, psychopathology and environmental factors in assisting individuals to develop healthy life and learning styles" (MoSTEP 1.4.11). Candidates are required to develop two comprehensive treatment plans which include discussing "client's multicultural/family issues. Interventions are appropriate for these issues."

COUN 5610 requires candidates to work with a variety of groups "including diverse and exceptional populations" (MoSTEP 1.4.1.2) and requires the candidate to participate in an interactive lab with diverse candidates. Assessment includes a reflective and professional development statement related to Disposition #1: Unconditional Positive Regard: “Communicates nonjudgmental warmth and acceptance of others without regard to ethnic group, race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, age and/or disability."

COUN 5710: Introduction to assessment meets the professional CACREP7.f standard. Candidates "know and understand how age, gender, sexual orientation, ethnicity, language, disability and additional cultural factors affect the assessment of individuals, groups and special populations." Candidates administer, score and interpret a Child Behavior Checklist and write a professional statement on the results based on their work with a P-12 student.

Other courses in this program emphasize knowledge, analysis and diagnosis of individuals meeting the NCATE criteria for diversity, writing treatment plans, considerable field experience (100 hours for COUN 5900: Practicum in Counseling), and a minimum of 18 practicum hours in COUN 5520 (Introduction to Play Therapy).

Master of Arts in Teaching. The MAT program offers two options: Middle School teaching and High School Teaching. Many MAT students are teaching and working in the schools full-time while pursuing a master’s degree; many are also completing certification requirements. MAT students are employed in and complete internship requirements in every type of school one can describe; for example, currently these graduate students are placed in rural schools both large

http://faculty.ucmo.edu/ncate09/general/syllabi.html


Standard Four 114

and small, urban and inner city schools , private and public, suburban/mid-size, correctional institutions, and charter schools. The chart below provides some of the internship placements for MAT students to illustrate the many different settings in which students complete requirements.

Many opportunities are provided in every advanced program to consider the many aspects of diversity and the impact of diversity on instruction, administration, counseling, library science, use of technology in education, and career choices.

2a. (Optional) One or more tables related to coursework and experiences for developing diversity proficiencies could be attached here. What the data tell the unit about student learning should be discussed in the response to 4a2 above.

Attach Table 1 here: Coursework & Diversity Proficiencies matrix

3. What data from key assessments indicate candidates demonstrate proficiencies related to diversity, including English Language learners and students with exceptionalities?

The Summative Student Teaching Evaluation (see Attachment 1 in 4a5a) is an instrument that is used as a unit-wide assessment for all initial certification programs. Beyond the assignments and tests that address diversity proficiencies across courses in each program, the Summative Student Teaching Evaluation assesses candidate proficiency in accommodating diverse learners. The table attached in item 4a3a (Table 2) disaggregates data for the assessment item that specifically addresses diversity (MoSTEP 1.2.3). The specific item that addresses candidate proficiencies related to diversity is:

Summative Student Teaching Assessment (DESE MoSTEP 1.2.3) Candidate understands how students differ in their approaches to learning and creates instructional opportunities that are adapted to diverse learners.

University Supervisors rate the candidate according to planning, teaching, assessment, use of assessment information, and reflection upon these components. Ratings on this item indicate that the large majority of candidates meet or exceed the expectations for demonstrating awareness of diversity during student teaching.

The Dispositions assessment (see Attachment 2 in 4a5a) is administered before student teaching and then a second time near the end of student teaching. The University Supervisor rates the candidate based on observations and conferences with the student as well as the district supervisor. The specific items on the Dispositions assessment are below, along with examples of behaviors that may evidence the dispositions.

Disposition 1 Candidate commits to high expectations for all students, and values the ability/capacity for each student to learn.

Evidenced through behaviors such as: Student teacher

Persists in helping all children become successful


http://faculty.ucmo.edu/ncate09/standards/standard_4/evidence/table2_summative_student_teaching_evaluation.doc

http://faculty.ucmo.edu/ncate09/standards/standard_2/summative_student_teacher_evaluation_form.DOC


Standard Four 115

Listens to students

Plans to/attempts to differentiate instruction to meet the needs of each student

Shows in lesson planning and execution that he/she is aware of the whole child

Shows enthusiasm for all subjects/does not convey negative attitudes about any subjects

Encourages independent learners that have the skills and strategies to learn on their own outside of class

Scaffolds students as needed

Allows/encourages/expects student to take more responsibility for his/her own learning

Uses praise effectively to promote intrinsic motivation in students

Seeks feedback and input from cooperating teacher to meet individual student needs

Treats students respectfully (e.g., is patient, considerate, makes eye contact, attentive)

Disposition 5 Candidate commits to development of lessons that are interesting and engaging through a variety of instructional strategies to accommodate all learners, including those from diverse backgrounds, experiences, and cultures (e.g., use of technology, grouping, motivating materials).


Adjusts & revises lesson plans to meet students’ needs

Displays through behavior a passion for teaching as a profession

Demonstrates through behavior a belief that ALL students learn

Treats all students fairly

Differentiates instruction appropriately

Tries new strategies in the classroom when given the opportunity

Develops activities that encourage students to become engaged (hands-on, minds-on)

Uses a variety of modalities to teach lessons (e.g., visuals, hands-on, talking, presenting, projects, etc.)

Discusses with students different ways to learn and understand

Uses technology to facilitate learning

Standard Four 116

Uses effective communication techniques

Uses collaborative learning

Consistently adapts and modifies instruction to flexibly respond to student responses, ideas, and needs.

Considers perspectives different from his/her own

Explores resources (e.g., professional libraries, educational journals, books, Internet)

Disposition 6 Candidate commits to making appropriate adaptations and accommodations for students with diverse needs (e.g., use of technology).


Seems comfortable in discussing different kinds of diversity

Seeks to become acquainted with students as individuals

Interacts in a respectful and supportive way with students and their families

Adapts or revises lesson plans in light of student needs and informal evaluations

Learns about/asks questions about the culture of students in class

Attends/contributes to meetings about student needs (as appropriate)

Seeks input from available supporting personnel (e.g., Counselor, Special Educator)

Uses verbal and nonverbal communication to engage students

Uses technology appropriately to accommodate student needs

Analyzes student work and other data to become informed about individual student strengths and needs

Avoids stereotyping/using broad generalizations

Addresses the diverse needs of students (e.g., exceptionalities, multiple intelligences, learning styles, English language learners, and gifted and talented students)

Works equitably to meet students’ needs

Disposition 9 Candidate believes students and colleagues should be treated and should treat others with kindness, fairness, patience, dignity, and respect. Evidenced through behaviors such as: Student teacher

Maintains standards of confidentiality

Standard Four 117

Acts as an appropriate representative of the school

Interacts appropriately with students and peers

Treats students fairly

Treats all members of the staff with respect—paras, custodians, cooks, principal, other teachers

Addresses colleagues, parents of students, peers, and University supervisors respectfully

Encourages and supports others with words and actions

For each of the three years represented in Tables 2 and 3, the majority of students were rated as “meets” or “exceeds” by University Supervisors, indicating that the large majority of students exhibit behaviors and interactions that infer the belief that all can learn and that all deserve respect and consideration for unique needs. See Table 3 for frequency count and percentage data for disposition items 1, 5, 6, and 9.

3a. (Optional) One or more tables of key assessment data related to candidate’s demonstration of proficiencies related to diversity, including English language learners and students with exceptionalities, could be attached here. What the data tell the unit about diversity proficiencies should be discussed in the response to 4a3 above.

See Diversity Matrix

4. What differences, if any, exist in the ways candidates develop and demonstrate their proficiencies related to diversity in programs for other school professions, off-campus programs and distance learning programs?

In programs for other school professions (i.e, Educational Leadership, Educational Technology, Guidance & Counseling, Library Media Specialist, School Psychological Examiner, Career Education Director) the focus is not instructional accommodations, but rather understanding of and respect for differences in others. This was discussed in a previous item (#4a2). See also Program Reports for more information on how each advanced program addresses proficiencies related to diversity.

Note: There are no differences specific to off-campus or distance learning programs.

4a. (Optional) One or more tables that disaggregate data on diversity proficiencies by on-campus, off-campus, and distance learning programs could be attached here. What the data tell the unit about any differences in performance should be discussed in the response to 4a4 above.

5. (Optional) Links to key exhibits related to diversity proficiencies and assessments could be attached here. (Links with descriptions must be typed into a Word document that can

http://faculty.ucmo.edu/ncate09/programs/index.html


http://faculty.ucmo.edu/ncate09/standards/standard_4/evidence/table3_disposition_evaluation.doc

Standard Four 118

be uploaded here. The number of attached exhibits should be limited in number; BOE members should access most of the exhibits in the unit’s electronic exhibit room.)

4b. Experiences working with diverse faculty

1. What educational interactions do candidates (including candidates at off-campus sites and/or in distance learning programs) have with higher education and school-based faculty from diverse groups?

Candidates have ongoing interactions with higher education faculty from diverse groups through courses, advising, field experiences, and student teaching. Even those faculty who seem to represent a predominately Caucasian/American demographic have, collectively, extensive experiences with diverse populations, ethnicities, special needs and content areas. Many have taught in other nations/regions of the U.S., and a majority have presented at and interacted professionally at national and international professional conferences and symposiums. A substantial number of faculty at UCM were originally citizens of other countries, and contribute their experiences and worldviews to the richness of the TEP culture. UCM attracts faculty, not only from other countries, but from a wide range of U.S. universities. Collaborative research has resulted in multidisciplinary and cross-institutional scholarship (including multicultural education).

Even within a single department one can see great diversity in faculty members. For example, in the English department there are two professors native to the West, one from Montana and one from Utah. While both exhibit traits that are Western such as speech patterns and anti-capitalistic notions, the Montana native claims an anarchist, atheistic political stance while the Utah native is culturally Mormon.

Candidates interact regularly with school-based faculty from diverse groups as well. The programs at UCM, both initial and advanced, are well-represented by our candidates and graduates in schools across the state and beyond the state borders. The geographic location of the University avails to our candidates a unique combination of opportunities for field experience, internships, and student teaching. For example, Knob Noster, Missouri, is located approximately 8 miles from the Warrensburg campus. Knob Noster is home to Whiteman Air Force Base and its school, which is staffed by a mix of local teachers and teachers who have been relocated by the Air Force. Kansas City, Missouri, is located less than one hour west of Warrensburg, and the Kansas City, Missouri, school district employs a staff that is nearly as diverse as its student body. Suburban areas lie between Warrensburg and Kansas City, and the schools in these middle-to-upper class areas staff the classrooms with teachers who are mainly white and from middle-class backgrounds similar to the majority of the student body. Many rural farming regions lie in central Missouri as well, and the staff at rural schools often are “home-grown.” In short, the very diverse staff in area schools reflect the very diverse student populations at area schools. This is described further in section 4d.

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

Standard Four 119

As indicated in #4b.1., PEF faculty have widely diverse backgrounds in terms of type of undergraduate and graduate institution attended, family background, work experience, cultural background, religious preference, community involvement, and other characteristics.

Many faculty members model more than a passing interest in gaining knowledge about diverse places, cultures, and groups. A link to faculty vitae is provided in 4b.6 for many examples. A specific example is also linked in 4b.6: Dr. Richard Frazier, Associate Professor of Science Education, who has taught in Sierra Leone and has brought back to his students at UCM information and illustrations of the culture he visited, provides a brief narrative about his experiences and how he has involved his students.

Dr. Jenny Robins, Associate Professor of Library Science and Information Services, and Dr. Pat Antrim, chair of Educational Leadership and Human Development, provide another example of faculty members who model knowledge and experience in working with students from diverse groups. Along with Floyd Pentlin (a retired high school teacher from Lee’s Summit and UCM adjunct), Drs. Robins and Antrim have made two visits to Don Bosco Charter High School in Kansas City to offer advice on their new school library. Don Bosco is one of the charters overseen by UCM; this school serves high-risk students, and the majority of the student body is of minority race and low socioeconomic status. Drs. Robins and Antrim and Mr. Pentlin have also met with the principal and members of the Don Bosco Board of Directors. In the first meeting the group discussed funding, library layout, and hiring a school librarian. Dr. Antrim followed up that meeting with a written list of recommendations. In the second meeting the group spoke again about the layout of the library and the open library position. Additionally, the UCM group passed on a request for proposals for a grant that might provide funding so that Don Bosco can keep their library open after hours. This project is ongoing during the spring 2009 semester.

The Midwest Center for Charter Schools and Urban Education provided an inservice during the summer of 2008 and invited several unit faculty members to make presentations. Teachers from the UCM charters were invited to attend as a professional development event, arranged by Dr. J. P. Burke, director of the Midwest Center for Charter Schools and Urban Education. This inservice allowed interaction between UCM faculty and public (charter) school teachers and helped unit faculty to better understand the issues that our candidates need to be prepared for in order to teach in urban schools.

Please see individual Faculty Vitae and the Faculty Accomplishments Summary in the Electronic Document Center for additional evidence of diverse faculty experiences, scholarship and competencies.

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

In conducting searches to fill faculty positions, every department attempts to increase the diversity of the faculty by advertising in national publications, on websites of professional organizations that have national and international memberships, and through networks of colleagues who work and teach in different regions. Although it is a continuing university goal to increase the racial and ethnic diversity of faculty at UCM, diversity is represented in a myriad


http://faculty.ucmo.edu/ncate09/general/faculty.html

Standard Four 120

of ways beyond race. Faculty at UCM come from Ivy League universities, Research I institutions, regional colleges and universities, institutions in other nations, and online institutions of higher education. The eclectic backgrounds and interests of the faculty community at UCM are truly amazing. Some faculty members have never strayed far from the Midwest while others come from overseas and from almost every state in the nation. Adjunct faculty, including clinical faculty, add an additional layer of differences. Clinical faculty include the public school faculty at each Professional Development School site. Many adjunct faculty are currently working in the field of education, and some are involved in nonprofit community organizations.

Each program offers different support and efforts to retain faculty depending upon the home department’s policies and structure. Most departments offer mentoring of some kind; in some departments mentorship is more structured than in others. For example, in the Special Education program, Dr. Joyce Downing served for Dr. Theresa Earles-Vollrath when she was a junior faculty member. They met on a regular basis; discussed issues in teaching, scholarship, and service; conducted research and presented together; and Dr. Downing aided Dr. Vollrath in preparing for the promotion and tenure process. For both the Elementary Education and the Early Childhood Education programs, Dr. Jennifer Aldrich has designed and implemented a mentorship program for junior faculty. In addition to having two assigned mentors in the department, each junior faculty is invited to attend a monthly luncheon that includes a professional development topic. Dr. Aldrich or a guest speaker will present information and advice on publishing, presenting, collaborating with colleagues, peer evaluation of teaching, procedural issues for the department, teaching methods, preparing a dossier, etc. Additionally, the mentors and mentees conducted research on the impact of the mentorship program on new faculty satisfaction and presented the research at the Association of Teacher Educators (ATE) Annual Conference in February of 2009.

4. Please complete the following table (Table 8) to identify the gender, ethnic, and racial diversity of professional education faculty members using the U.S. Census categories.

Table 8Faculty Demographics

Prof. Ed. Faculty in

Initial Teacher Preparation Programs

All Faculty in the

Institution N (%) N (%)

American Indian or Alaskan Native

0 (0%) 3 (.45%)

Asian or Pacific Islander

5 (3.356%) 38 (5.76%)

Black, non-Hispanic 5 (3.356%) 23 (3.48%)Latino 2 (1.342%) 5 (.76%)White, non-Latino 136 (91.275%) 587 (88.9%)

Standard Four 121

Prof. Ed. Faculty in

Initial Teacher Preparation Programs

All Faculty in the

Institution N (%) N (%)

Other 1 (.671%) 4 (.61%)Total 149 (100%) 660 (100%)

Female 73 (49%) 290 (44%)Male 76 (51%) 370 (56%)Total 149 (100%) 660 (100%)

*Faculty may be counted in both initial teacher preparation and advanced programs if they teach at both levels.

5. What do the data in table 8 tell the unit about its faculty? Diversity characteristics beyond those in Table 8 should be discussed.

The data in Table 8 tell the unit only about the race and gender breakdown of faculty. As emphasized in the previous sections, and as education courses at UCM emphasize, diversity refers to many characteristics beyond race and/or ethnicity. Table 8 tells the unit only that the large majority of the faculty is white, non-Latino; and that nearly an equal number of males and females comprise the professional education faculty. Compared to the institution, the PEF has slightly higher proportions of Caucasians and females. This table gives no indication of how many faculty members have lived and traveled outside of the United States; how many have experienced poverty or disability; how many have taught in rural, urban, low socio-economic, high ESL or IEP schools; how many speak a second language or are not native speakers of English; what educational and work experiences individuals have had; how many have disabilities; etc. Thus, the table provides very little information about diversity.

6. (Optional) One or more tables or links to key exhibits related to faculty diversity could be attached here. Data in tables should be discussed in the appropriate prompt of 4b. (Links with descriptions must be typed into a Word document that can be uploaded here. The number of attached exhibits should be limited in number; BOE members should access most of the exhibits in the unit’s electronic exhibit room.)

4c. Experiences Working with Diverse Candidates

1. What educational interactions do candidates (including candidates at off-campus sites and/or in distance learning programs) have with peers from diverse groups?

UCM teacher education candidates come from urban, rural and suburban environments, and represent a wide range of learning styles and socioeconomic status. There are very few male candidates in the Early Childhood and Elementary Education programs, although they are better represented at the Middle School and Secondary program level. Most of our undergraduates are

Standard Four 122

young, Caucasian women, but we have an increasing number of non-traditional candidates returning after raising children or choosing to investigate a new/different profession.

UCM offers a variety of rich experiences to enhance interactions with diverse groups on and off campus. The university is proud to have an annual Martin Luther King Jr. celebration with the presentations of Freedom Scholarships going to area High School Students. In addition, there are many student organizations that foster awareness and support for diverse groups. A summary list appears here; to view the full list, go to http://www.ucmo.edu/orgrequest/orglist.cfm?print=yes&

These groups offer opportunities for students to participate in meetings and activities with others who have similar professional or philanthropic interests, or others with similar ethnic, racial, and/or cultural characteristics. Membership in organizations can offer support and a sense of ‘ownership’ in the university and in specific programs of study. Membership in the broader student professional organizations allows candidates exposure to other candidates with differing majors and varied backgrounds who all have a common interest. For example, although the membership in the University of Central Missouri National Science Teachers Association Student Chapter may be a diverse group, all share the common interest in teaching Science.

Faculty advisors for student organizations encourage diverse membership and utilize Blackboard, posters, word-of-mouth, and recruiting activities to disseminate information about the organization and to recruit members inclusively.

Selected list of student organizations:

Africana Studies Club - The Africana Studies Club at the University of Central Missouri explores the essential part played by peoples of African descent in constructing human civilization by analyzing contributions in the disciplines of art, music, history, literature, political sciences, sociology, psychology and others.

Graduate Student Association - The Graduate Student Association is open to and represents all graduate students at UCM.

Leading Educator Advocates for Diversity – This group is for preservice teachers interested in learning about diversity and multicultural issues, as well as performing community service and contributing to The Ted R. & Mary Garten Diversity Scholarship. Lots of fantastic guest speakers.

The Missouri National Education Association - The local student organization is affiliated with the Missouri National Education Association (MNEA), a division of the National Education Association provides support for students entering all areas of education. Membership entitles you to publications that assist you as you begin your career in education; legal protection for job-related incidents; an annual state conference with workshops on CBASE and PRAXIS exams, breakout sessions, awards, and nationally recognized speakers; discounts at thousands of locations nationwide; e-mail listservs for support with members across the state; beginning teacher programs; and

http://www.ucmo.edu/orgrequest/orgview.cfm?caorgID=581






http://www.ucmo.edu/orgrequest/orglist.cfm?print=yes&%20

Standard Four 123

leadership opportunities on the local, state, and national level.organization fills seats on various campus committees and also strives to provide professional development, social, and support activities.

Student Council for Exceptional Children (SCEC) – This group is for special education majors and minors, or for anyone interested in learning more about individuals with disabilities. Activities include social and community service projects, including work with Special Olympics.

National Association for Music Education - CMENC aims to provide opportunities to be acquainted with leaders in the music education profession through participation in clinics, workshops, programs, activities, and demonstrations connected with teaching music.

Student Missouri State Teachers Association - The UCM chapter of the Student Missouri State Teachers Association is the Alpha chapter of this organization. Our monthly meetings are focused on professional development topics. Non-members are always welcome to our meetings.

Teachers of English to Students of Other Languages Student Chapter - TESOL is the graduate student organization for students in the MA-TESL program at UCM. Our purpose is to foster community among various cultures, and bring awareness to issues and trends that ESL/EFL teachers face in the field today.

Technology Education Collegiate Association - Technology Education majors are encouraged to join TECA. We hold regular meetings. We attend regional TECA conferences where our teams compete against other universities in technology contests.

University of Central Missouri National Science Teachers Association Student Chapter - The University of Central Missouri National Science Teachers Association (NSTA) Student Chapter is open to all members of UCM interested in science and/or education. This organization has a primary focus of science educational techniques used at all levels of education.

Women Scholars at Central - The purpose of this organization is to promote the diversity of women students and faculty at UCM; to heighten awareness of current events and issues affecting women; to support the Women's Studies Program; and to promote Women's History Month.

Korean Student Association - In our organization, all the Korean students and teachers will meet together at least once a month. We will play some sports and have dinner together on our traditional holidays.

Taiwan Chinese Student Association - The purpose of this TCSA is to bring together students who have an interest in Chinese culture and related activities and to promote cultural awareness programs.









http://www.ucmo.edu/oca/studentorgs/orgview.cfm?caorgID=531

Standard Four 124

Association of Black Collegians - Association of Black Collegians (ABC) is the governance group to all Black, non-Greek, student organizations on the campus. We serve as the liaison between the students of color and the faculty, staff, and administration of UCM. We also bring Black culture and political thought to the campus and community and help recruit Black faculty, staff, and students.

International Student Organization - The purpose of ISO is to bring together thousands of cultures, represented on the UCM campus by international students, as well as local students and the community of Warrensburg. ISO activities include International Culture Night and Food Show, volunteer services, picnics, sports, parties and more.

Japanese Student Organization - The Japanese Student Organization exists to share Japanese culture, language, and traditions with other students and faculty.

Latino Student Union - The Latino Student Union is a cultural student group dedicated to exploring, teaching, and supporting the Latin American students and Culture on campus and within the local community. It is a multicultural group and welcomes students from all backgrounds to join.

Multicultural Programs Council - The MPC organization will educate the campus community about racial, ethnic and international cultures in a manner that elicits the valuing of differences as well as serve as a unified student voice on multicultural or diversity matters to promote an understanding an acceptance of human differences.

Overseas Chinese Students and Scholars Association - Our organization serves for those who are interested in Chinese culture and hope to be organized as an association to share Chinese culture.

Polynesian Club - We are the Central Polynesian Club. We are here to encourage an appreciation for the Polynesian culture.

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

University. The mission of the UCM Diversity Office is to advocate for a campus climate that is open to the creation of a culturally diverse and inclusive learning environment that promotes personal, intellectual, ethical, and spiritual excellence through understanding, appreciation and acceptance; and that provides higher education opportunity for members of populations historically under-represented in higher education. The organizational structure that enables promotion of this mission includes

The Diversity Office, administrative oversight entity;

The Community Engagement Office, a campus-based multicultural and student advocacy program; and








Standard Four 125

Community Outreach Programs Office in the historic Union Station in Kansas City, MO. (see 4c5 attachment 1)

The Diversity Office oversees many initiatives that help to recruit and retain candidates from diverse backgrounds. Dr. Sonny Castro is the Associate Vice President and Chief Diversity Officer at UCM.

Initiatives already under way include scholarships in the name of Cesar Chavez and Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Scholarship support is also awarded to entering students that complete the three-year Summer Bridge Program. For 2008-09, the following scholarships were awarded: 9 MLK; 2 Cesar Chavez; 8 Summer Bridge; and 5 Diversity. The majority of the scholarships were awarded to minority students from the Kansas City area.

To ensure successful transition to higher education for these students, a mentorship program has been created. The UCM Mentorship Program pairs graduate student mentors with first-year students from populations that have been traditionally under-represented in higher education. The program is aimed at providing the participants a supported and informed transition to college life and providing guidance for them to become successful students and contributing members of the campus community. The mentors (second-year graduate students) provide guidance and direction towards campus resources including financial aid, scholarship opportunities, academic advising, academic enrichment programs, athletic events, campus activities, student organizations, university housing and employment opportunities on campus.

Three major on-campus programs are offered in the summer to middle school and high school students.

- The Aviation Youth Summer Camp is a one-week summer camp focused on introducing multicultural and under-represented students to the field of aviation, primarily through hands-on activities and exposure to aeronautical science and a flight experience. (see 4c5 attachment 2)

- Kauffman Scholars Residential Summer Institute is a partnership between Kauffman Scholars, Inc. and the University of Central Missouri to provide a summer program for students enrolled in the Kauffman Scholars, Inc. Program. (see 4c5 attachment 2)

- The UCM Summer Bridge Program is a three-week residential college experience for Kansas City metro high school students who will be entering their sophomore year. See 4c5 for information on Summer Bridge program and participants (Attachment 3).

Unit. The unit also conducts recruitment activities to broaden the diversity of candidates in programs across the unit. In 2007, President Podolefsky signed an articulation agreement with the Missouri Community College Association. This agreement allows students from two-year institutions who have completed the Associate of Arts in Teaching (AAT) degree to matriculate into the education programs at UCM with the transfer of all completed hours. This articulation agreement will bring students into UCM who may not have otherwise pursued a 4-year degree.

Standard Four 126

Representatives of UCM visit community college campuses and classes to provide unit and program information to aid in recruiting.

3. Please complete the following table (Table 9) to identify the gender, ethnic, and racial diversity of candidates preparing to work in P-12 settings using the U.S. census categories.

Table 9Candidate Demographics

Candidates in Initial Teacher

Preparation Programs

CandidatesIn Advanced Preparation Programs

All Students in

the Institution

*Demographics of Geographical

Area Served by Institution

N (%) N (%) N (%) %American Indian or Alaskan Native

0 (0%) 0 (0%) 68 (.009%) 0.8%

Asian 12 (.65%) 5 (.05%) 109 (.99%) 20%Black, non-Hispanic 66 (3.56%) 41 (4%) 650 (5.88%) 3.6%Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander

see Asian see Asian see Asian 0.2%

Hispanic 24 (1.3%) 13 (1.2%) 172 (1.55%) 2.8%White, non-Hispanic 1464 (79%) 696 (68.8%) 8,298 (75%) 89%Two or more races 2.0%Other 287 (15.5%) 257 (25.4%) 417 (3.77%)Race/ethnicity unknown

1,349 (12.2%)

Total 1853 (100%) 1012 (100%) 11,063 (100%)

100.4%

Female 1356 (73.2%) 757 (75%) 6,174 (55.8%)

25222 (49.8%)

Male 497 (26.8%) 255 (25%) 4,889 (44.2%)

25424 (50.2%)

Total 1853 (100%) 1012 (100%) 11,063 (100%)

50646 (100%)

*see Demographics on sites for Clinical Practice in Initial and Advanced Programs

4. How diverse are candidates in the initial teacher prep and advanced prep programs? Diversity characteristics beyond those in Table 9 should be discussed. What do the data in Table 9 tell the unit about its candidates?

According to the 2008 Fact Book, the undergraduate student body consisted of 44% male, 56% female, 9% minority, and 4% international students from 52 countries. The university has 22 international exchange agreements with institutions worldwide. The candidates in undergraduate


Standard Four 127

and advanced programs in the unit reflect the population of the university in many ways. While 79% of the student population at the university is White/non-Latino, 79% and 69% of the undergraduate education and advanced programs, respectively, are White, non-Latino. The proportion of Black/non-Latino and Asian students is somewhat lower for education majors than for the greater university population. The most significant difference is that in both undergrad and advanced programs, approximately 75% of candidates are female and 25% male, as compared to the greater university population of 56% female and 44% male.

The candidate demographics at UCM are reflective of the demographics in the field of education throughout the country. According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (2007), only about 17% of teachers for preschool through high school are men; 19% in elementary and middle school and 44% in high school. Thus, male candidates at UCM actually exceed the proportion generally found nationwide. Also according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor, Black/non-Latino teachers comprise about 9.1% of educators teaching elementary, middle, and high school and Latino educators comprise less than 7% of that group. Approximately 85-88% of educators teaching elementary, middle, and high school in the United States are White/non-Latino. Therefore, the race demographic of teacher candidates at UCM reflects the national race demographic for educators of preschool, elementary, and secondary level students.

5. (Optional) One or more tables and links to key exhibits related to candidate diversity could be attached here. Data in tables should be discussed in the appropriate prompt of 4c. (Links with descriptions must be typed into a Word document that can be uploaded here. The number of attached exhibits should be limited in number; BOE members should access most of the exhibits in the unit’s electronic exhibit room.)

Links to Exhibits - Attachment 1: Community Outreach Initiatives Attachment 2: Board of Governors’ Briefing (Diversity Office)Attachment 3: Summer Bridge program

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

1. How does the unit ensure that each candidate has at least one field experience with students from ethnic/racial groups different than his/her own, English language learners, students with exceptionalities, and students from different socioeconomic groups?

All candidates have exposure to p-12 students who are diverse in more than one aspect or characteristic, and the majority of candidates are exposed to each aspect of diversity listed above (race/ethnicity, language, exceptionalities, SES) as well as different geographical classifications (rural, urban, suburban) which can also be referred to as a facet of culture.

Ethnic/racial/language diversity. Candidates in early childhood, elementary, and middle school education are required to take EDCI 2110 World Diversity in America. Each semester individual instructors of this course may arrange a field experience/observation option to one or more Kansas City charter schools. The university (Office of Charter Schools and Urban Education) oversees the charter for each of nine charter schools in the inner city. See descriptions of UCM’s charter schools in Attachment 1 4d6. Each of the charter schools serves a

http://faculty.ucmo.edu/ncate09/standards/standard_4/evidence/4d6%20OVERVIEW%20UCM%20CHARTER%20SCHOOLS%2008-09%20attch%201.doc

http://faculty.ucmo.edu/ncate09/standards/standard_4/evidence/Summer_Bridge_report.doc

http://faculty.ucmo.edu/ncate09/standards/standard_4/evidence/BOG_Diversity_Update09.17.08.DOC

http://faculty.ucmo.edu/ncate09/standards/standard_4/evidence/Community_Outreach_Report.doc

Standard Four 128

population that is 90-99% racial/ethnic minority, with the exception of Academie Lafayette (48% racial/ethnic minority student population). More than 2800 candidates have had field experiences in one or more charter schools since 2002.

Dr. Matt Thomas, professor of reading, takes his EDCI 4210 Teaching Reading in the Secondary Schools and also his EDCI 3230 Content Area Literacy in the Middle School classes to visit Alta Vista Charter High School, which serves a 96% Hispanic student population, many of whom are English Language Learners. See Attachment 2 to 4d6 for a description of Dr. Thomas’s work with Alta Vista and its principal, Mr. Ed Mendez (a UCM graduate). Note that the online sections of these courses do not visit Alta Vista.

Exceptionalities. All candidates in initial programs are required to take either EDSP 2100 Education of the Exceptional Child or PSY 2100 Psychology of the Exceptional Child. Both courses have the same objectives and each requires a field experience which consists of 6-8 hours of observations of students with special needs. Approximately 3-4 hours of observation must be completed in an inclusive general education setting and 3-4 hours must be completed in a pull-out special education or clinical program.

SES. All early childhood, elementary, and middle school students participate in Professional Development School blocks in one of the eleven partner schools that UCM has in four different districts. Each of these schools has between 38-48% of the student body qualifying for free/reduced lunch and is designated as a “Socio-Economic Site” by the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education.

The experiences listed do expose nearly all candidates to nearly all types of diversity, but in the past, the unit has not systematically ensured that each candidate has at least one field experience with each of the groups listed. However, changes have been put into place to systematically manage field placements of all candidates to ensure exposure to each of the different aspects of diversity listed above beginning in Fall 2009. The initial field experience required of all initial candidates in the unit takes place in EDCI 2100 Foundations of Education & Field Experience. The field experience component has been separated from the course component and will be overseen by the Office of Clinical Services and Certification to ensure that each candidate is exposed to p-12 student populations that are diverse in terms of race/ethnicity, language, exceptionalities, and SES.

2. 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?

PEF members collaborate to design assignments and rubrics that will foster in candidates the development of knowledge, skills, and dispositions related to diversity during field experiences and clinical practice. The Core Curriculum Committee, established in 2007 to review the content and common assessments used in core classes, recommended and helped to implement changes that would facilitate the development of the knowledge, skills, and dispositions needed to gain insight and connect theory to practice through field experience.

Standard Four 129

In EDCI 2100 Foundations of Education and Field Experience, students are taught methods of observation such as time sampling or time allocation, event sampling, or structured evaluations such as considering the impact of physical environment and p-12 student characteristics on classroom interactions. Candidates are coached in observations and must use inquiry to develop a position on several issues that could color the way an observed event is perceived. They must take the skills learned in class and apply them to be able to successfully complete field-based assignments.

In EDSP 2100 or PSY 4200, the candidate must produce a written product that includes reflection upon observations. University faculty accompany and guide students in all field experiences that are embedded within a course.

University faculty are on-site during Professional Development School practica, as are public school teachers. Both university faculty and public school teachers provide modeling, discussion, evaluation, and coaching of candidates in the classroom and during professional development sessions. University supervisors and district supervisors provide support and mentoring during student teaching, and facilitate and coach the process of reflection.

During all of these experiences, the carefully designed interactions, assignments, and assessments, encourage in candidates the development of the knowledge, skills and dispositions that effective teachers must possess, and several themes run through all coursework tied to field experiences; one theme is awareness of the unique needs of each student and the need to consider all types of diversity among students.

For specific information about course content, objectives, and requirements for field experience as it relates to diversity proficiencies, see course syllabi.

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?

Please see #2 for additional response to this item. Reflection is a central component in our Conceptual Framework and candidates begin to learn how to become a reflective practitioner in their earliest education courses. In many classes candidates present lessons to peers, and are evaluated by peers. During practicum experiences the supervising faculty and classroom teachers provide input and facilitate self-evaluation and critique. PEF faculty work to help candidates focus on impact on student learning, to use assessment results to guide instructional decisions, and to consider how extant research can help to identify best practices and possible interventions for individual students.

4. Please complete the following table (Table 10) to identify the diversity of P-12 students based on their gender, ethnicity, racial, and socioeconomic levels, native language and exceptionalities in the schools in which education candidates do their clinical practice.

Table 10Demographics on Sites for Clinical Practice in Initial and Advanced Programs

See Substitute Table Attached under 6.


Standard Four 130

5. What do the data in Table 10 tell the unit about the diversity of students in the schools in which candidates do their clinical practice?

Note: Data to complete Table 10 are not available. We have constructed a substitute Table 10 to document diversity classification information that is available for more than 750 schools where UCM students complete their clinical practice activities. That document is located in the EDC, and a link is provided in 4b6.

Warrensburg is in a geographic location that allows access to inner city urban schools as readily as small rural schools that house k-12 on the same campus. Sedalia, approximately 30 miles east of the UCM campus, enrolls 14-20% minority students with a high proportion of ESOL students. Part of the district population is from rural areas, and between 45-63% of the population is low socioeconomic status (SES). An hour west of Warrensburg is the metroplex of Kansas City; the KCMO school district has schools with minority populations of up to nearly 100%; many schools have a very high proportion of ESOL and/or low SES students. The Kansas City district struggles with issues of student transience, teacher retention, poor performance on standardized tests, high drop-out rates, and other challenges. A significant part of school population attends charter and private schools in Kansas City. Warrensburg itself is classified as a rural area and is surrounded by rural districts. Some areas such as Sedalia and Lexington have large populations of Hispanic (mainly Mexican) immigrants who follow seasonal farm work. Even physical facilities illustrate how vastly different schools and communities are in this area of the state; in Blue Springs and Lee’s Summit there are many buildings less than 20 years old with state-of-the-art facilities, sports complexes, and labs. In Kansas City some charter schools are housed in former churches or even in a former theater and staff must be resourceful in finding ways to provide library and physical fitness facilities for students. Thus, there is remarkable diversity in the schools where candidates do clinical practice.

6. (Optional) One or more tables and links to key exhibits related to the diversity of P-12 students in schools in which education candidates do their field experiences and clinical practice could be attached here. Data in tables should be discussed in the appropriate prompt of 4d. (Links with descriptions must be typed into a Word document that can be uploaded here. The number of attached exhibits should be limited in number; BOE members should access most of the exhibits in the unit’s electronic exhibit room.)

Links to Exhibits - Attachment 1: Charter School descriptions Attachment 2: Dr. Matt Thomas Alta Vista Charter HS Attachment 3: Kansas City Internship Program Attachment 4: Guadalupe Center Attachment 5: International Studies

Optional


http://faculty.ucmo.edu/ncate09/standards/standard_4/evidence/4d6%20International%20Center.doc


http://faculty.ucmo.edu/ncate09/standards/standard_3/evidence_std3_att16_residents_in_kc_residential_internship.doc

http://faculty.ucmo.edu/ncate09/standards/standard_4/evidence/4d6%20Thomas%20Alta%20Vista%20attch2.doc

http://faculty.ucmo.edu/ncate09/standards/standard_4/evidence/4d6%20OVERVIEW%20UCM%20CHARTER%20SCHOOLS%2008-09%20attch%201.doc


Standard Four 131

Experiences working with diverse students in P-12 schools.

Undergraduates in the TEP at UCM exceed state certification requirements for field experiences, especially those candidates in Special Education, Early Childhood and Elementary Education. Candidates are placed in rural, urban and suburban settings, and some observe in schools abroad through our international study programs, with a few candidates actually student teaching in another country or state. Those candidates who choose to student teach in our area have experience with diverse populations, especially in the areas of special needs, learning challenges and socioeconomic challenges. Our proximity to the Whiteman Air Force Base and some local corporations/businesses send diverse students to the local public schools and this diversity is increasing as more international families arrive in the area. UCM’s field placements, because of the diverse populations that attend the schools in which our candidates complete practica, are really a tremendous strength in our programs and offer authentic exposure and opportunities for candidates to learn about diversity of every definition.

Partnering with schools and community organizations that serve at-risk populations

As mentioned earlier, we are particularly proud of our long-standing collaborate partnerships with schools serving urban and at-risk students. Links to additional exhibits are included in the Attachment in 4d6.


Standard Five 132

STANDARD FIVE FACULTY QUALIFICATIONS, PERFORMANCE, AND DEVELOPMENT

Faculty are qualified and model best professional practices in scholarship, service, and teaching, including the assessment of their own effectiveness as related to candidate performance; they also collaborate with colleagues in the disciplines and schools. The unit systematically evaluates faculty performance and facilitates professional development.

[NOTE: In this section, institutions must address (1) initial and advanced programs for teachers, (2) programs for other school professionals, and (3) off-campus and distance learning programs.]

5a. Qualified faculty

1. Please complete Table 11 to identify the qualifications of the full- and part-time professional education faculty. (These data may be compiled from the tables submitted earlier for national review.)

TABLE 11Faculty Qualification Summary

2. What do the data in Table 11 tell the unit about the qualifications of faculty?

The Professional Education Faculty (PEF) at UCM includes those who hold full-time tenure-track positions, as well as those serving in full- and part-time, non-tenure-track positions. At this point, UCM does not use graduate assistants to teach professional education courses. The PEF membership (as of January 2009) consists of 149 individuals, 101 (68%) of whom have completed a Ph.D., Ed.D., or other terminal degree. Ninety-four tenure-track faculty comprise 63% of the PEF, and are fairly evenly distributed across the ranks, 31 Assistant Professors, 36 Associate Professors, and 32 Full Professors. An additional five of the PEF are doctoral candidates, having completed their program except for the dissertation. A large percentage of the PEF are qualified as members of UCM’s graduate faculty, a membership that must be renewed regularly based on continued professional contributions. PEF members are recognized as exemplary teachers and scholars. They participate in a variety of professional service activities for the university and community, and actively collaborate with colleagues in P-12 schools, as is evidenced by the Faculty Vita available in the Electronic Document Center.

3. What expertise qualifies faculty members without terminal degrees for their assignments?

All but one of the 49 PEF members without terminal degrees hold at least master’s degrees; of those 48 individuals, 12 have also completed an education specialist. These faculty possess special expertise appropriate for their professional fields, including experience in their supervision area and substantial teaching experience at the elementary or secondary levels.

http://faculty.ucmo.edu/ncate09/general/faculty.html

http://faculty.ucmo.edu/ncate09/standards/standard_5/faculty_information.xls

Standard Five 133

Adjuncts who serve as instructors are selected for the match between their knowledge, experience, and skills and a specific course to which they are assigned. University supervisors who are not full-time, tenure-track faculty are selected for their recent public school experience. With one exception, all possess at least a master’s degree and are certified in the areas they supervise, or previously served as a building- and program-level administrator qualified to supervise and evaluate classroom teachers. The one exceptional adjunct is an individual with a bachelor’s degree who is serving as a student teaching supervisor and member of the UCM PEF this spring. That individual has been recognized by the state of Missouri as a STARR Teacher, and is uniquely qualified to mentor future teachers. The Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education defines minimum qualifications for cooperating educators in the culminating field/clinical experience as follows: at least three years experience, at least a master’s degree, and valid certification in the field being sought by the candidate. UCM’s school district supervisor selection also is based on successful teaching experience which is indicated by their performance on Performance Based Teacher Evaluations. The district supervisor/mentor must be recommended by the appropriate building principal and approved by the central office at the school district. A similar process is followed for advanced programs, in that a site supervisor must possess the degree and certification the candidate is seeking as well as a minimum of 3-5 years of successful employment.

4. How does the unit ensure that faculty members are licensed in the areas they teach or are supervising?

While neither UCM nor DESE requires that teacher educators be certified in their instructional area, many hold certificates from Missouri or other states. Of the current Spring 2009 PEF, 115 (77%) have public school experience as teachers, administrators, or other school professionals. Fifty-six PEF members have worked for ten or more years in public schools.

Individuals serving as district supervisors for student teachers must submit their credentials, including transcript and certification, for verification by the Office of Clinical Services and Student Teaching. Criteria for selection include:

The teacher should be a full-time faculty member.

He/She should have a minimum of 3 years teaching experience and have been employed by the school district for at least one year.

He/She should teach in the area of certification and be fully certified by the State of Missouri. Temporary Certification cannot be accepted.

He/she should possess subject matter proficiency and the qualities of a master teacher.

He/she should demonstrate exceptional competence in teaching.

The assignment of a student teacher should be made with the approval of the district supervisor.

Standard Five 134

University faculty who supervise student teachers must be recommended by their department chair or program coordinator, and also must meet the following criteria for selection:

The teacher must be a full or part-time faculty member at UCM.

Should have a minimum of 5 years teaching experience.

The assignment of a student teacher should be made with the approval of the Assistant Director of Clinical Services and Certification.

Possess experience or training in mentoring.

Completed inservice training in supervision of student teachers.

5. What contemporary professional experiences in school settings does higher education clinical faculty have?

Most Professional Education Faculty (PEF) members have contemporary professional experiences in school settings at the levels and in the subject areas that they teach or supervise. UCM engages 149 full-time and part-time faculty, instructors, administrators, and university supervisors in the preparation of pre-service teacher candidates. Cumulatively, these UCM faculty members have accrued years of valuable experience in higher education and in elementary and secondary school settings. Approximately 115 (77%) of the professional education faculty have elementary or secondary school teaching or supervisory experience.

Many members of the PEF actively supervise UCM candidates in school-based field and clinical experiences in conjunction with formative field placements, as part of the Professional Development School collaborative project, or as student teaching supervisors. Others provide consultation to districts in highly specialized areas such as functional behavioral assessment, adolescent literacy, or school governance. Faculty members in the Departments of Educational Leadership and Career and Technology Education serve as mentors to new principals, career centers, and superintendents. A number of faculty work closely with the UCM-sponsored charter schools, providing consultation, training, and oversight activities to charter faculty and board members. Two PEF members are completing the third year of a funded project designed to improve the skills of science teachers, as well as their ability to positively affect the outcomes of their students. While UCM does not have a specific requirement concerning faculty involvement in P-12 education, the voluntary contributions enumerated below provide evidence that the commitment exists (exemplars drawn from 2007-2008 COE Faculty Annual Reports).

Cochran, L. (2007-2008). Content area expert, MCCE Education Mentoring Program.

Earles-Vollrath, T. (2007-2008). ABA Consultation: Belton School District.

Earles-Vollrath, T. (2007-2008). ABA Consultation: Blue Springs School District.

Earles-Vollrath, T. (2007-2008). ABA Consultation: Raymore-Peculiar School District.

Standard Five 135

Grigsby, C. (2007-2008). DESE AMP program – Served as mentor to three new school leaders.

Grigsby, C. (April 2, 2008). Teacher inservice on Understanding by Design instructional model, curriculum alignment PK-12, Warrensburg School District.

Hutchinson, S. (2001-present). Parents as Teachers Advisory Board, Crest Ridge R=VII/ Chilhowee R-IV School Districts.

Hutchinson, S. (2007-2008). Big Sister to 1st grade student at Martin Warren Elementary, Big Brothers & Sisters of Johnson County.

Hutchinson, S. (2005-present). Senior Ethics Day table leader, Warrensburg High School.

Hutchinson, S. (1997-present). Final round presenter, West Central Missouri Spelling Bee, West Central Missouri Public & Private K-8 Schools.

Jinks, M. (January, 2008). Member, AdvancED (formerly North Central) District Accreditation Team for North Kansas City District.

Jinks, M. (2007-2008). Mentor for new superintendent in Higginsville, Missouri, Department of Elementary & Secondary Education.

Jurkowski, O. (2007-2008). Member, UCM Charter School Review Team.

Martin, B. (2007-2008). Mentor for 3 new administrators in Nevada and Warsaw, Missouri, Department of Elementary & Secondary Education.

Martin, B. (2007-2008). Facilitator, Central RPDC Leadership Academy.

Perrin, B. (2007-2008). Member, Warrensburg R-VI Family and Consumer Sciences Advisory Board.

Robins, J. (2007-2008). Member, UCM Charter School Review Team.

Sesser, G. (2007-2008). Planning committee, #3rd annual Counselor Institute, Missouri Department o f Elementary and Secondary Education.

Washer, B. (2007-2008). Content area expert and advisor, MCCE New Teacher Mentoring Program.

Williams, R. (2007-2008). Member, Warrensburg Career Center Advisory Board.

6. (Optional) One or more tables and links to key exhibits related to faculty qualifications could be attached here. Data in tables should be discussed in the appropriate prompt of 5a. (Links with descriptions must be typed into a Word document that can be uploaded here. The number of attached exhibits should be limited in number; BOE members should access most of the exhibits in the unit’s electronic exhibit room.)

Standard Five 136

5b. Modeling Best Professional Practices in Teaching

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

As demonstrated in faculty vitae and the 2007-2008 Faculty Accomplishments Summary, members of the PEF are conscientious about remaining current with the field. The UCM library subscribes to all major peer-reviewed education journals, and provides a designated research librarian to support the needs of the teacher education programs. Faculty, including adjuncts, have access to most journals in electronic format through various professional databases (e.g., Academic Search Premier). In addition, many of the faculty belong to professional organizations that include journal subscriptions as part of their membership, and attend state, regional, and national conferences to present as well as to learn from their colleagues. Research interests of PEF members include: brain-based learning, collaboration, differentiating instruction, teaching induction and mentoring, professional development schools, and reliability/validity of portfolio assessment.

The conceptual framework theme of Reflective Practitioner is demonstrated in a variety of ways in classrooms, as well as in the self-evaluation included in faculty annual reports and dossiers. Faculty do not just teach the conceptual framework; they model it in practice. Here are some exemplars from members of the PEF:

I provide a learner centered academic environment that challenges my students to participate actively and requires them to think reflectively about local and global diversity issues. Learner centered academic environments also allow me to facilitate differentiated instruction for the variety of learning styles that exist in my classroom. As a researcher, I am exploring classroom management theories, critical pedagogy and alternative curricula to add to the body of knowledge in my field.

In all of the courses I teach I emphasize that the most effective teachers are those that continue to learn, grow, and develop as teachers. I require preservice teachers to include a “second thoughts” section in their lesson plans where they can reflect on the lesson after it has been taught. Reading professional journals and attending professional conferences helps me keep current in my field and helps me revise my courses to reflect current research.

Modern education encourages reductionism—specialization—dividing knowledge and developing expertise in fields such as history, math, and physics. As knowledge grows, this specialization is necessary as no one can learn all that needs to be known. But students need to integrate cognitive skills to be able to problem solve, to become life-long learners, and to prepare for careers that don’t even exist yet.

Much of what we do in my courses is the expectation that we all, students, candidates and teachers, research and look for and share information, ideas, and research. I stress the importance of lifelong learning as the field is constantly changing and growing. Therefore, my classes are

Standard Five 137

just as much about how to learn and how to learn on your own as it is the specific items we learn about that semester.

I integrate my own research, student research as well as my own and student reflection as to what the research means not only in the classroom, but in the schools, communities and beyond. Students are encouraged to not only see need (problems), purpose, but impact on a larger scale.

The contents of courses reflect the UCM Conceptual Framework in that they focus on helping pre-service teachers develop creative, analytical thinking and problem solving by engaging them in real life situations such as classroom observation, testing children and collaborative team projects. I attend numerous workshops and conferences to not only keep myself apprised of what is transpiring in my field, but also to bring that timely information to my students so that they are aware of what is going on in the larger world and not just only what is between the covers of their textbooks….My research efforts are shared with my students at all levels, and I encourage them to comment, critique, and discuss that work with their peers and in the classrooms where they are doing field/clinical experiences.

Current research in mathematics education encourages the use of concrete models, multiple representations, and technology….We investigate a variety of models that can be used to teach such concepts as whole numbers, fractions, decimals, geometry and probability. We also use various technology- graphing calculators to investigate statistics and algebra, and computer software to investigate geometry. Appropriate mathematical communication and development of connections within mathematics and between mathematics and other subject areas is modeled. I refer to the Missouri Grade Level Expectations (I was part of the writing team and reviewed the newest Missouri Mathematics Learning Goals) often in class when presenting math content and explaining how it relates to what students will be teaching in grades K-12.

2. How does unit faculty encourage the development of reflection, critical thinking, problem solving, and professional dispositions?

Because all of these themes are included in the UCM Conceptual Framework, there is a unit expectation that reflection, critical thinking, problem solving, and professional dispositions are addressed—in varying degrees—in each professional education course. The following examples illustrate strategies PEF members use in their classes:

The course activities require the students to integrate information from Internet resources, textbook readings, and recorded audio dialogs in their discussion board postings and other writing assignments. These activities require the student to assess the impact of technology on our society and the environment, to evaluate the nature of discussion between experts who do not agree on the correct action to take, as well as to draw the connections between academic concepts presented in the text and current real-world issues related to agriculture, gender, energy, transportation, communication, manufacturing, construction, governing technology, work, military technology, and social organizations.

Standard Five 138

I use multicultural education, critical pedagogy and the ideas of the following theorists: Paolo Freire, Henry Giroux, and Jean Anyon and apply them to current and enduring diversity issues. Those issues include race, SES, diversity and social justice. I use simulation games, social group discussions such as “fish bowl” in order to develop reflection, critical thinking, problem solving and professional dispositions.

In all the courses I teach, the assignments are designed to help students think about the “why,” “what if,” and “how do you know,” and not just the “how” of mathematics and teaching mathematics. I emphasize with both pre and inservice teachers that what we understand about a concept is directly related to how we learned the concept. I attempt to create a student-centered classroom that is a community of learners rather than a group of students watching and listening to the professor.

I have provided students with a variety of vignettes and cases in class in order to develop reflective, critical thinking, problem solving, and professional dispositions. Real life cases have also been used in exams. To help [candidates] become reflective practitioners, class projects such as classroom observation, interviews with teachers/directors, screening and developing instruction/intervention plans have also been used.

My preservice teachers in the junior block (Children’s Literature & Language Arts combined) apply some of what they have learned in a public school setting. Before we go, we review a field protocol which addresses behavior, demeanor and ethics, and the cooperating teachers and all interns have a copy of these. The lesson these students teach in the school has a constructivist approach to learning, and interns reflect after the fact based on prompts attached to both the lesson and a visual recording of their teaching.

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

UCM faculty model the wide variety of instructional and assessment strategies the unit expects candidates to be able to use in the P-12 classroom. Traditional lectures, quizzes, and term papers are supplemented by games, case studies, simulations, reflective essays and journals, self-assessments, and cooperative group activities. Many faculty use a constructivist approach, encouraging students to engage in research and collaboration to form a learning community. Many use instructional technology as a way to communicate with and among students both inside and outside the four walls of the classroom.

A review of course syllabi also illustrates the breadth and depth of cutting-edge pedagogical practices employed by the faculty. During the course of their programs, candidates will be involved in most of the following pedagogical experiences: reflective journals, case studies, project-centered instruction, cooperative presentations and evaluations, video, technology-based projects, inquiry projects, service learning, interviews, action research, documentary analysis, micro-teaching, diversity activities, debates, demonstrations, exhibits, blended learning, portfolios, and other instructional strategies. In advanced programs, faculty mentor candidates as they engage in individual and collaborative research efforts that may culminate in presentations at state, regional, and national conferences.

Standard Five 139

The faculty's strength is also evident in its dedication of time and thought to teacher education curriculum revision. While this is a continuous process, professional education faculty continue to rethink and realign classroom and clinical experiences, build closer links between field and on-campus work, and place greater emphasis on content preparation, instruction, and assessment for learning. Faculty promote the concept of integrating theory into practice by arranging early and continuous field experiences. The faculty has increased its own capacity in the use of educational technology and emphasizes the integration and use of technology in their classroom presentations; leadership, encouragement, and assistance are provided by the Center for Teaching and Learning and from the Professional Enhancement Committee. Through membership in professional organizations, participation in regional and national conferences, partnerships with the Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education and public schools, and involvement in writing discipline-specific program reviews, Professional Education Faculty have assumed a leadership role in the movement to standards-based teacher education.

4. How does unit faculty instruction reflect their knowledge and experiences in diversity and technology?

Helping candidates develop knowledge and skills related to working with diverse populations and using instructional technology are two critical parts—and interrelated parts—of the UCM conceptual framework. Faculty recognize that these are two areas in which they must develop their own knowledge and skill to be able to transmit them to students. Although teacher education students all take one general education course in technology, and one related to global understanding, the two themes are interwoven in all teacher education courses. The following PEF examples illustrate this integration into both content and pedagogy classes:

In all my courses I emphasize the importance of teaching mathematics to students with diverse learning styles, ethnic backgrounds and socio-economic levels. Thus, students in my courses use a variety of manipulative models, scientific and graphing calculators, computer software, and calculator based laboratories.

Students participate in the course using communication technologies. Instant messaging, Skype, and Blackboard Messages are used for individual communication, Blackboard Discussion Board for group interaction, and Adobe Acrobat Connect Professional for a virtual office meeting place.

The course uses online newspapers, audio and video podcasts and other Internet information resources. The instructor produces podcast interviews with technologists that provide real-world examples of the textbook concepts for the course.

When I think of diversity, I consider the diversity of performers (skills, non-skilled; fit, non-fit, rhythmic, non-rhythmic) because those elements are often left out. People tend to think of ethnicity, special populations, etc. In the gymnasium there is a different “diversity.”

Standard Five 140

In technology I demonstrate and help students create instructional media that allows learning experiences that cannot be offered through any other medium. This is another method of reaching the diverse learning population that I teach as well as prepare them to do the same for their students.

Diversity, particular in serving students with special needs, is a topic in two of my courses. In addition, Introduction to Reference requires students to build a reference collection that reflects our multi-cultural society. [My students] are assessed on their sensitivity to these requirements.

My courses are online so they are all technology based. They are delivered via the Blackboard course management system. Numerous web pages have been created for these courses to supplement instruction. Also I use a program I created, StoneSoup, in the course, Using Online Resources, for student to use to create lesson plans. I have also created presentations using Microsoft Breeze, a product that combines voice and slides.

I am from a culturally and linguistically different background and that enabled me to address cultural diversity in working with children with and without disabilities and their families. Early childhood special education deals with the use of assistive technology to meet the needs of children with disabilities. Power point slides embedded with video clips have been used in my instruction.

My instruction reflects the fact that my students are very different from each other. As a result, I use pre-assessment to understand student background, and use differentiated instruction and assessment in my courses.

The fact that I am Canadian and have lived and worked in so many places across North America certainly inform my work and my knowledge about diversity. I have had the privilege of travelling extensively as well. I am a voracious reader, which has informed my professional life as well as my personal views. The wide range of materials I have studied further inform my knowledge about diverse ethnicities, religions, physical and mental abilities, cultures, orientations and experiences. I do my best to share diverse books and topics in every class I teach. All of my students are required, in at least one assignment, to address diversity.

In terms of technology, I’m not a maverick or a maven, but I am competent with power points, smart boards, online communication and posting, and have a working (but not expert) knowledge of online tools and sites (such as Second Life).

Since before I came to UCM, I have had a strong involvement with, and interest in, technology and how it is a tool for special education teachers. I have served on a number of state-wide panels/taskforces that had a focus on educational technology, published a number of articles on educational technology, presented papers on technology at the state and national levels, and continue to engage in research pursuits that pertain to educational technology. My research along these lines is shared with my students in nearly every

Standard Five 141

course that I teach, and I encourage them to view technology for what it is: a tool for advancing their knowledge and effectiveness and not just an end to itself.

I have been actively engaged in research dealing with the charter schools in Missouri since I came to UCM. By Missouri State Statute, these charters can only exist in the urban centers of St. Louis and Kansas City, and the student composition of the schools is largely minority, largely poor, culturally and ethnically diverse. It has been my experience that we should use these schools to further our students’ understanding of our diverse society, and see first-hand how exposure to this rich heritage enhances their own learning and that of their future students.

5. How does unit faculty systematically engage in self-assessment of their teaching?

Most UCM faculty engage in various types of self-assessment over and above what is required by university policy. The examples that follow illustrate the range of self-evaluation activities used by PEF faculty members:

I review my courses every semester to make changes/polish/or upgrade them. Sometimes I am adding technology that I have learned to use, or that my students need to use; I update book titles/awards/resources to reflect current trends and outstanding examples; I also make adaptations based both on my formal teaching evaluations (which I still collect from every class, although I am not required to do so) and information garnered from post course surveys in which I ask for student feedback specifically related to the course work.

I engage in self assessment through: evaluating the degree of mastery of the students’ assessments, teacher evaluations, eliciting student opinions and overall student climate during and after class and outside observation of my class by other colleagues.

Every semester I start a new folder containing the course calendar and syllabus. Over the course of the semester I add printouts of student interactions and other notes to consider for improvement of the course for the following semester.

Last year I used the Quality Reache: Inter-Institutional Quality Assurance in Online Learning Peer Course Review Rubric to self-review [one of my classes].

Every semester I provide the students with the opportunity to submit a mid-semester course evaluation to provide me with information to make improvements to the course during the semester.

I engage in a variety of professional development activities that allow me to discuss mathematics and teaching mathematics with a number of colleagues/peers. I encourage students to provide me with feedback relative to me teaching and the resources made available to them in my courses.

Standard Five 142

I review end of semester course evaluations, have participated in the Quality Reache program for assessment of online instruction, and review evaluations after giving conference presentations. On a more informal basis I am always reviewing how the discussion threads are going and the kind of work submitted by candidates on their assessments. I make notes to remind myself how to tweak instruction so that it can be improved for the next time.

I regularly look at what the students produce. I also ask them questions about what we are doing. Their input impacts the next semester. I take our Professional Development Plan seriously and try to apply something new every semester.

I perform video assessment; I do in depth analyses each semester on assessments, and content understanding; I maintain daily informal assessment.

I would write a journal on my teaching and interaction with students. I also plan on observing my colleagues and have them observe me as well.

A technique that we have also been using for some time now that has proven helpful is the use of the PRAXIS II reports that we get from ETS. We, as a faculty, sit down and examine the extent to which our students are mastering these items. If we see a pattern emerging, which we have in the past, we decide where we need to address the issue. For example, if our students are not doing so well with items that deal with legal matters or IEP/IFSP development, we strengthen what we then teach in our EDSP 4700 IEP Writing and the Law. This is done every semester.

Open and candid discussions about twice per semester also allow my students to provide me with formative feedback about what I doing right, and wrong, in my classes. Because I use scoring rubrics for all of my assignments, and students know that I stick to them rigorously, they feel free to speak their minds to me, and I make every attempt to make changes in how I do business if warranted.

I give post-course surveys and read the results of my student evaluations. I review student achievement and revisit my own work if they are not succeeding. I consult with colleagues and welcome visitors to my classroom. My students are usually very comfortable to offer feedback. I engage in research that keeps me in touch with the public school classroom, read and write scholarly articles, collaborate with colleagues across disciplines in research and engage in peer coaching/evaluation.

I know it’s a bit corny, but at the end of the day, if I have students who are not doing well, I look in the mirror and genuinely ponder what my responsibility is in the situation. If I encounter a situation in which I have little experience or expertise, I am more than willing to ask for help from an expert, and learn something in the bargain.

[I self-evaluate] through self-reflection, feedback from students, and my assessment of their interest level and ability to actually apply concepts/theories.

Standard Five 143

6. (Optional) One or more tables and links to key exhibits related to faculty teaching could be attached here. Data in tables should be discussed in the appropriate prompt of 5b. (Links with descriptions must be typed into a Word document that can be uploaded here. The number of attached exhibits should be limited in number; BOE members should access most of the exhibits in the unit's electronic document room.)

5c. Modeling Best Professional Practices in Scholarship

Systematic inquiry into the areas related to teaching, learning, and the education of teachers and other school professionals. Scholarship includes traditional research and publication as well as the rigorous and systematic study of pedagogy and the application of current research findings in new settings. Scholarship further presupposes submission of one’s work for professional review and evaluation.

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

The expectation of UCM is that all faculty members will be engaged in scholarly activity. As defined by the Faculty Guide, “Scholarship includes discipline-related inquiry and/or creative activities. As the faculty member advances through the ranks such activities are expected to reflect increasing scholarly maturity” (III-17). The Faculty Guide lists the following as evidence of scholarship: publications, papers or other presentations at professional conferences, production or exhibition of creative works, grants and awards, research projects, and other activities relevant to the discipline. Each College is allowed to further specify the types of evidence considered appropriate.

Although excellence and effectiveness in teaching are of primary importance to the mission of the unit, all PEF faculty are expected to engage in scholarly activity in their discipline. The nature of those scholarly activities varies somewhat among disciplines, but includes both traditional publications and presentations, as well as inquiry related to effectiveness of instruction.

2. In what types of scholarship activities are faculty engaged? How is their scholarship related to teaching and learning? What percentage of the unit's faculty is engaged in scholarship? [NOTE: Review the definition of scholarship in the NCATE glossary.]

All Professional Education Faculty in the unit are expected to engage in scholarly activities, whether they hold full- time, tenure-track appointments, or are classified as part-time, non-tenure-track faculty. The PEF has an extraordinary record of scholarly accomplishments, including from books, book chapters, journal articles, and book reviews and monographs. During the past year alone, PEF members in the College of Education published 1 book, 6 book chapters, 13 articles in professional journals, and more than 6 other types of published scholarly work (e.g., book reviews, monographs).

Faculty members were also active presenters at national, regional, and state professional conferences, with a total of approximately 100 papers, roundtables, and poster sessions during the 2007-2008 academic year alone. National presentations included conferences sponsored by:

Standard Five 144

Association of Teacher Educators, Association for Childhood Education, American Association of Family and Consumer Sciences, American Association of School Librarians, Association for Counselor Education and Supervision, Association for Psychological Science, American Education Research Association, University Council for Education Administration, Phi Delta Kappa International, Council for Exceptional Children, American Counseling Association, International Reading Association, National Science Teachers Association, Council for Children with Behavior Disorders, Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education, Professional Development Schools, and the American Industrial Hygiene Conference.

UCM faculty also are actively engaged as participants on editorial and review boards for professional journals, conferences, grant competitions, and other scholarly peer-reviewed activities.

A review of the 2007-2008 Faculty Accomplishments summary indicates that UCM faculty are engaged in nationally-recognized scholarship, consistent with the UCM vision statement. Further, the titles of faculty publications and presentations demonstrate a direct connection between faculty scholarly activities and the teacher education mission of the unit.

[Link to Faculty Achievements Summary.]

3. (Optional) One or more tables and links to key exhibits related to faculty scholarship could be attached here. Data in tables should be discussed in the appropriate prompt of 5c. (Links with descriptions must be typed into a Word document that can be uploaded here. The number of attached exhibits should be limited in number; BOE members should access most of the exhibits in the unit's electronic exhibit room.)

5d. Modeling Best Professional Practices in Service

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

All full-time UCM instructional faculty are expected to engage in service that benefits candidates, colleagues, the institution, P-12 education, and the greater professional and educational communities. The Faculty Guide defines services as “the provision of academic and program support at department, college, and university levels as well as participation in professional discipline-related organizations at state, regional, national or international levels” (III-18). Suggested activities include evidence of: involvement in university, college, and/or departmental government and/or committees, participation in university sponsored programs, sponsorship of university societies, uncompensated teaching overload, student recruitment, coaching, recognition by professional organizations, membership in professional organizations, and participation in professional development activities related to service. The College of Education further recognizes and encourages faculty involvement in P-12 educational settings.

2. In what types of service activities are faculty 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?


Standard Five 145

UCM faculty members have a wealth of opportunities to provide service within the university at all levels. With the exception of first-year faculty, who are encouraged in some departments to focus on their teaching, virtually every PEF member serves on one or more committees, task forces, or governance groups. During the 2007-2008 school year, the PEF was represented on the Faculty Senate and all of its committees as well as all university-level faculty senate committees concerned with academic affairs (e.g., curriculum, assessment, strategic planning), and the Academic Council of Chairs.

Within the unit, most PEF members are active in the Teacher Education Council, or have served on one of the various task forces charged with revising curriculum, the assessment system, or the conceptual framework.

On a local level, faculty are engaged in P-12 schools in a variety of capacities, as described in 5a.5. The 2007-2008 Faculty Accomplishments summary includes more than 40 examples of service to the public schools.

On a state and national level, PEF members are generally members of multiple professional associations. Many serve as peer reviewers, conference planners, or officers for those groups as well.

For a more complete list, see the Faculty Accomplishments summary in the Electronic Documents Center.

3. (Optional) One or more tables and links to key exhibits related to faculty service could be attached here. Data in tables should be discussed in the appropriate prompt of 5d. (Links with descriptions must be typed into a Word document that can be uploaded here.)

5e. Unit Evaluation of Professional Education Faculty Performance

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

All faculty are required to participate in regular student course evaluations. Each college has developed and implemented their own evaluation form and procedures. In the past, university policy required that courses be evaluated each semester for adjunct and first- and second-year faculty only, and annually for all other faculty. However, many PEF faculty requested evaluations each semester. Effective in fall 2008, the UCM Faculty Guide specifies that every course will be evaluated every semester. Each college is in the process of approving the instrument they will use, and those instruments will be available online for courses scheduled during the spring 2009 semester. [NOTE: The unit currently does not employ any graduate teaching assistants.]

Standard Five 146

Faculty members submit an annual report each May, listing in detail all activities completed or in progress in the areas of teaching, service, professional development, and research. The Department Chair, Dean, and Provost review annual reports. Material contained in annual reports is used for multiple purposes: (1) entries become a crucial component of promotion and/or tenure dossiers; (2) activities reported in annual reports become foundation materials for preparation of annual faculty evaluations; (3) material reflected in annual reports, when considered collectively, influence the determination of goals established via the strategic planning process at the department, college, and university levels. Although information from the annual reports is summarized at the department, college and university level, the faculty evaluations performed by the chair are not considered public information. Rather, they are used as a professional development and mentoring tool. Within the College of Education, the annual report and chair evaluation provide an opportunity for each faculty member to identify annual professional development goals and discuss progress with the chair. Tenure-track faculty are also evaluated through the promotion and tenure process. The UCM promotion and tenure policy specifies that faculty must demonstrate effectiveness in teaching and provides a list of possible evidence that individuals may wish to use. Acceptable evidence includes: courses taught, teaching preparations, teaching assignments away from campus, supervision of students, student counseling and advising, directing theses or dissertations, serving on graduate research committees, supervision of research problems/special projects/readings, contributions to curriculum development, preparation of instructional media, and research in instructional methods or techniques. [NOTE: The Faculty Guide does not define effective teaching.]

College of Education promotion and tenure guidelines provide examples of both excellence and effectiveness in teaching:

Excellence in Teaching

Examples of evidence of excellence in teaching may include but are not limited to the following: Experimentation and/or Research in Instructional Methods and Techniques. Briefly

describe the project(s), mentioning the hypothesis being tested or the purpose of the investigation, the procedures utilized, number of students involved, and the results and outcome of the work.

Conventions, Clinics, Institutes, Workshops, Post-Doctoral Course Work, Internships, Sabbaticals, and Other Programs. List here professional development activities that contribute to teaching effectiveness and/or subject mastery. These activities should be listed by date, title and sponsoring agency.

Chair/peer evaluations of teaching.

Distinguished teaching awards or other recognition.

Grants that enhance teaching skills.

Standard Five 147

Invitations from other educational institutions or agencies to demonstrate effective teaching.

Teaching portfolio.

Effectiveness in Teaching

Examples of evidence of teaching effectiveness may include but are not limited to the following:

Student course and teaching evaluation data.

Chair/peer evaluations of student learning.

Statements from colleagues who have observed the candidate in the classroom and student performance.

Student pre/post content knowledge before and after a course.

Reflection on the implementation of professional development plans for improvement of the candidate's teaching skills to enhance student performance.

Exit exam data.

Support of student learning through program review.

Accreditation review that focuses on student learning.

Course audit.

Supportive data from student portfolio.

2. How well do faculty perform on the unit's evaluations? (A table summarizing faculty performance could be attached at the end of Element 5e.)

As noted in 5e.1, each college uses a different evaluation form, and thus the results of faculty course evaluations are not comparable across the unit. Further, faculty evaluations have not been generally considered public information on this campus; therefore, results have not been shared across colleges. As a result of the recent college reorganization, the College of Education has been in the process of developing its own evaluation form. Spring 2009 will be the benchmark for this instrument.

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

As indicated in 5b.5, faculty take their student evaluations very seriously, as well as other information gathered through reflection and self-assessment. Each faculty member in the College

Standard Five 148

of Education is encouraged to set annual professional development goals in the areas of teaching, scholarship, and service. PEF faculty in other colleges follow a similar process.

4. (Optional) One or more tables and links to key exhibits related to the unit's evaluation of professional education faculty could be attached here. Data in tables should be discussed in the appropriate prompt of 5e. (Links with descriptions must be typed into a Word document that can be uploaded here. The number of attached exhibits should be limited in number; BOE members should access most of the exhibits in the unit's electronic exhibit room.)

5f. Unit Facilitation of Professional Development

1. How is professional development related to needs outlined in faculty evaluations? How does this happen?

As indicated in 5e, a process is in place whereby individual faculty members complete an annual report and are evaluated by their department chair. The strengths and concerns identified through this review are summarized through the departmental annual report. The dean of each college reviews the information received from each department, and writes a college report that is submitted to the provost. The issues identified as faculty professional development needs may lead to action an any of the aforementioned levels. At the department level, development needs of an individual faculty may result in a plan for that faculty member to attend a professional conference, partner with a more experienced colleague/mentor, or engage in a particular line of research. Areas of common concern may be addressed at department meetings, brown bag sessions, retreats, or by bringing in a presenter on a specific topic. At the college level, faculty needs may result in an allocation of resources, a college-level professional development meeting, or bringing in outside speakers for a symposium. At the university level, professional development needs may be referred to the Center for Teaching and Learning, the major vehicle for faculty and staff development across campus.

2. What professional development activities are offered to faculty related to performance assessment, diversity, technology, emerging practices, and the unit's conceptual framework? What, if any, other professional development activities have been available to faculty over the past 2-3 years?

Under the auspices of the Information Technology and Instruction (ITI), the UCM Center for Teaching and Learning (CTL) coordinates an extensive offering of professional development opportunities for faculty and staff. Individual programs are geared toward both junior and senior faculty. The Center provides, for example, extensive programming for faculty development, teaching tools, funding for speakers with specialized expertise areas, a faculty fellows program for integrating learning technology in the classroom, and instructional research and design grants to obtain release time for faculty members. CTL also provides funding for technology travel grants. Over the past five years, CTL has provided an average of 450 faculty training events per year, including new faculty orientation. Many of the topics are related to effective use of instructional technology, including: Access, Adobe Acrobat Connect, Blackboard, Microsoft Publisher, Second Life, SynchronEyes, Camtasia, Ingeniux, ITV technology, PowerPoint,

Standard Five 149

Photoshop, Podcasting, Streaming Video, Breeze Presenter, and iTunes. CTL also provides sessions on student motivation, creating an inclusive classroom environment, creating a faculty course portfolio, dealing with difficult people, contemplative pedagogy, designing group work for student success, streamlining media and copyright issues, creating communities of inquiry, developing an orientation for distance and commuter students. PEF members are regular attendees at these sessions, and some of the sessions have been facilitated by education faculty.

In addition to hosting formal professional development sessions, CTL also works closely with the Carnegie Academy for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (CASTL) committee to promote the scholarship of teaching and learning at UCM through activities such as Faculty Research Days each year, in which UCM faculty can be recognized for their achievements and research within their various disciplines. A Peer Review program is available for faculty that need assistance in transforming their instructional methods and attempting new techniques, as well as a Teaching Consultants group that is available for collaboration to form teambuilding relationships with other colleagues in or out of their discipline. Faculty may also apply for funding from CTL to travel to conferences, purchase multimedia equipment, secure release time for research, and develop online classes. Teacher education faculty are represented on the CASTL committee, as presenters and reviewers for Faculty Research Days, as peer review mentors for other faculty, and as Teaching Consultants.

In addition to programming offered by the CTL, the College of Education and the unit have also offered a number of programs specific to teacher education. Topics have included standards-based assessment, portfolio assessment, preparing a dossier, writing for publication, and teacher work samples.

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

Enrollment in ITI/CTL courses has been aggregated by department rather than by program or individual. Therefore, it is not possible to determine the frequency with which specific individuals or groups attend professional development sessions. However, a review of enrollment data for the past two years indicates that professional education departments constitute approximately one-fifth of session attendees.

A review of 2007-2008 COE faculty annual reports indicates 71% of faculty members listed at least one professional development event related to teaching; those indicating participation attended an average of 5 events (range = 1-14). These session included CTL/ITI trainings on campus as well as professional conferences, workshops, and symposia. The same group reported attending a total of 53 conferences and workshops related to scholarship. Most of those events were regional, state, or national professional meetings.

6. (Optional) One or more tables and links to key exhibits related to the unit's facilitation of professional development could be attached here. Data in tables should be discussed in the appropriate prompt of 5f. (Links with descriptions must be typed into a Word document

Standard Five 150

that can be uploaded here. The number of attached exhibits should be limited in number; BOE members should access most of the exhibits in the unit's electronic exhibit room.)

Optional



Standard Six 151

STANDARD 6. UNIT GOVERNANCE AND RESOURCES

The unit has the leadership, authority, budget, personnel, facilities, and resources, including information technology resources, for the preparation of candidates to meet professional, state, and institutional standards. [NOTE: In this section, institutions must address (1) initial and advanced programs for teachers, (2) programs for other school professionals, and (3) off-campus and distance learning programs.]

6a. Unit Leadership and Authority

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

The teacher education unit at the University of Central Missouri (UCM) utilizes a collaborative model to ensure that all faculty and programs have input to the planning, delivery, and operation of all programs for the preparation of educators. New processes and structures were implemented in 2007-2008 to support this collaborative model.

The Unit at the UCM is led by the dean of the College of Education, as defined in the Professional Education Faculty (PEF) Guidelines and By-laws (See Professional Education Faculty By-laws and Teacher Education Committee Guidelines). The PEF is comprised of all faculty who teach professional education courses, supervise student teachers, or administer departments with teacher education programs. The authority of the PEF is exercised through the Teacher Education Council (TEC) which is made up of ten voting members elected from faculty representing each of the colleges that have a teacher education program; and the dean, associate dean, and dept. chairs in the College of Education as non-voting members. The membership and voting rights of the TEC were changed in 2007-2008 to ensure appropriate representation of all programs. Through a collaborative process, faculty and administrators work to ensure that all aspects of the planning, delivery and operation of all programs serve the best interests of students and the profession. The TEC has the authority to approve all curriculum and policies related to teacher education at UCM, and makes recommendations to the Unit Head. Faculty and administrators from across the four colleges are actively involved in all aspects of governance, including NCATE Standards committees.

The College of Education’s College Administrative Council (CAC) consists of the four department chairs, the Associate Dean, and the Administrative Assistant to the Dean. The CAC has been in place for more than a decade. The CAC is concerned with faculty and curricular issues that pertain to only the academic departments.

Beginning in 2007, Dean Wright created the College Leadership Team (CLT) which is comprised of the four department chairs, the Associate Dean, the President of the College Assembly, the Director of Clinical Services and Certification, the college’s Development Officer, the directors of each of the funded centers in the college, and the Administrative Assistant. The funded centers of the college include the Midwest Center for Charter Schools and Urban Education, the Central Regional Professional Development Center, the Missouri Center for Career Education, the Midwest Clinic for Autism Spectrum Disorders, and Workshop on

http://faculty.ucmo.edu/ncate09/reports/TEC_policies.pdf



Standard Six 152

Wheels. The purpose of creating the CLT was to broaden the representation and perspective brought to the governance of the College of Education. This is consistent with the collaborative, participatory leadership style that characterizes the College of Education.

The unit includes 24 undergraduate certification programs in four colleges (College of Arts, Humanities and Social Sciences; College of Science and Technology; College of Health and Human Services; and the College of Education) and 18 graduate programs.

The COE and Unit have adopted a philosophy of continuous improvement based on the premise that “good is the enemy of great” (Good to Great, Jim Collins). Many significant changes have occurred in the Unit during the past two years as this philosophy was implemented. The changes are driven by best practices and influenced by Powerful Teacher Education by Linda Darling-Hammond.

After creation of the College of Education in January 2007, Interim Dean Wright created four task forces with broad representation in the college and representation from the PEF. These task forces included Defining Excellence, Organizational Structure, Joint Appointments, and 21st Century Learning Environment (See individual Task Force charges and COE Task Force Summaries). The Defining Excellence task force completed their work first to better inform the work of the other task forces. Concurrently, the Dean and Assoc. Dean were conducting a SWOT analysis (See SWOT Analysis Summary).

Based on feedback from the task force on Organizational Structure, individual conversations with leaders in the PEF, and the majority of faculty in the COE, Dean Wright authorized a reorganization within the COE. The graduate program in Educational Technology was moved from the Dept. of Educational Leadership and Human Development to the Dept. of Career and Technology Education, effective January 2008. The Dept. of Curriculum and Instruction would be dissolved to create two new departments: the Dept. of Elementary and Early Childhood Education, and the Dept. of Educational Foundations and Literacy. The purpose of this reorganization was to place greater emphasis on the importance of elementary and early childhood education. Secondly, it also served to move “service” courses into a separate department. The new department chair for Educational Foundations and Literacy was charged with meeting with every program in the PEF to ensure that they were actively involved in the proposed curriculum revisions to the Professional Education Block. The core courses in the Professional Education Block underwent an extensive review and revision during 2008.

During 2007 the TEC restructured their membership to align with the new college structure on campus. This change also included a change in voting members. Specifically, COE department chairs no longer had voting rights, although they could run for election as a faculty representative. Programs in the PEF outside the COE now have a majority of voting members (6), compared to the COE with 4 voting members. These changes were supported by the Unit Head as consistent with the new philosophy.

To provide the opportunity for more input and discussion regarding Teacher Education practices, the Unit Head created a P-12 and Secondary Education Special Interest Group (SIG) in 2007. The purpose of this SIG is to provide direct input to the Unit Head on all matters of concern

http://faculty.ucmo.edu/ncate09/standards/standard_6/SWOT%20Analysis%20Summary.doc

http://faculty.ucmo.edu/ncate09/standards/standard_6/COE%20Task%20Force%20Summaries.doc

http://faculty.ucmo.edu/ncate09/standards/standard_6/COE%20Task%20Force%20Summaries.doc


Standard Six 153

related to teacher education curriculum and policies. This group was consulted as revisions to the Teacher Education Block and Field Experiences were being planned, as well as the shift from portfolio to the Teacher Work Sample as the culminating unit assessment. In addition, a Unit Assessment Coordinator was added in 2008 to work with all of the teacher certification programs to design and implement the UCM Teacher Work Sample.

Through leadership discussions, it was decided that it was the appropriate time to implement the Teacher Work Sample (TWS) as the final Unit Assessment. To ensure the success of this transition in such a compressed time frame, the dean appointed Dr. Nicole Nickens as the Unit Assessment Coordinator. In this capacity she was charged to work with each program in the PEF to determine what, if any, changes would be necessary by the programs. A committee with broad representation across the PEF is currently working on the parameters of the TWS, along with an implementation schedule. It was an ambitious undertaking to make this transition in less than a year. This is evidence of the excitement and commitment faculty have made since the college reorganization.

The dean conducted Focus Group studies with each of the West Central District Administrator groups that meet on UCM’s campus (superintendents, secondary principals, and elementary principals) (See Administrator Focus Group Summary). This provided an opportunity to receive direct, candid feedback about the strengths and areas of concern with the Teacher Education Program. This information was combined with several other input sources used by the dean to provide guidance to the COE.

To promote more inclusivity, respond to the Organizational Structure Task Force, and achieve better governance for the COE, Dean Wright created the College Leadership Team, which brought representation of all of the college units together. The CLT helped determine the mission, vision, and strategic goals of the COE; created promotional materials; and promoted greater understanding and cooperation between the academic departments and the funded centers (See COE 2008-9 mission & goals 10-1-08).

The COE created the Alliance for Innovation and Research in Education (AIRE) to bring all of the funded activities in the college into a focus on forming partnerships to improve P-12 education. We are currently soliciting support from foundations and other non-educational entities who share a concern for improving public education. We have also included our Professional Development Schools partnership in AIRE. To further support AIRE, the college’s indirect costs from the funded projects have been pooled to hire a grant writer to help faculty develop grants to support AIRE’s mission. The search is currently underway.

The Educational Innovation Incubator Lab is the college’s effort to address, in part, the recommendations of the 21st Century Learning task force report (See Educational Innovation Incubator proposal). The EIIL is being set-up spring 2009, and should go online for fall semester. The purpose is to promote an innovative teaching and learning environment that takes advantage of the latest technology. An oversight committee will accept proposals from faculty each semester for implementation the following semester. The accepted proposals will be funded for the requested equipment. Faculty will conduct assessment of the effectiveness of the new

http://faculty.ucmo.edu/ncate09/standards/standard_6/Educational%20Innovation%20Incubator%20proposal.doc


http://faculty.ucmo.edu/ncate09/standards/standard_6/CoE%202008-9%20mission%20and%20goals.doc

http://faculty.ucmo.edu/ncate09/standards/standard_6/Administrator%20Focus%20Group%20Summary.doc

Standard Six 154

technology or procedure, and share this research with other faculty. In this way, effective technology can be expanded across campus and less effective ones can be screened out.

2. What members of the professional community participate in program design, implementation, and evaluation? In what ways do they participate?

The professional education community is very involved in the design, delivery, and evaluation of the teacher education program at the University of Central Missouri. In addition to the PEF, TEC, and the K-12 & Secondary Special Interest Group for campus involvement described above, the Unit actively seeks input and participation from the professional education community we serve. Each program or department has an advisory committee or other method to regularly seek feedback from the professional education community.

The dean created a new College Advisory Committee in 2008 comprised of broad representation by district type and personnel. This College Advisory Committee provided feedback on current programs and significant input to the planning for the redesign of programs and field experiences (See College of Education Advisory Committee Members and Advisory Committee minutes).

The Professional Development Schools (PDS) partnership has an active governing board that includes the superintendent of each of the four partner districts, the dean and dept. chairs of the College of Education, and a part-time Director. UCM elementary, early childhood, and middle school faculty and candidates are regularly engaged with public school teachers and students each semester through the PDS program. The governing board of the PDS is responsible for the regular evaluation of candidates in the teacher education program, as well as the PDS program. Based on these data, the governing board makes recommendations to the COE regarding program design and implementation.

The West Central District Superintendents, Secondary Principals, and Elementary Principals groups all meet at UCM monthly. COE administrators regularly attend these meetings, as do faculty from Educational Leadership. During 2007 the dean conducted a focus group study with each administrator group separately regarding the perceived strengths and areas of concern for teacher preparation at UCM. This data was compiled and presented to the faculty in 2008, and contributed significant guidance to program and curricular changes proposed by the dean. These recommendations are currently either being implemented or planned for implementation (See Focus Group Summary).

The Central Regional Professional Development Center (RPDC) is housed within the College of Education, and its Director serves on the College Leadership Team. Through the work of the Central RPDC, the college has an additional avenue to maintain close working relationships with practitioners. The Central RPDC provides a wide range of professional development services to meet the needs of teachers and administrators charged with the academic success of their students. The Central RPDC serves as a school improvement resource for 78 districts within the region and a number of districts outside of the region (See Central RPDC End of Year Report).

Similar to the RPDC, the Missouri Center for Career Education (MCCE) provides a variety of services to career educators. These services include a new teacher induction program, statewide

http://faculty.ucmo.edu/ncate09/standards/standard_6/RPDC%20End%20of%20Year%20Report%2007-08.xls

http://faculty.ucmo.edu/ncate09/standards/standard_6/Administrator%20Focus%20Group%20Summary.doc

http://faculty.ucmo.edu/ncate09/standards/standard_6/Advisory%20Committee%20Meeting%20Minutes%2013%20Nov%202008.doc

http://faculty.ucmo.edu/ncate09/standards/standard_6/College%20of%20Education%20Advisory%20Committee%20Members%202008.doc

Standard Six 155

coordinated mentoring, and mentoring for new career education administrators. The MCCE also provides curriculum development, research, professional development, and a free-loan library (See MCCE End of Year Report).

Departments and/or degree programs at all levels also have advisory committees comprised of P-12 community representation (usually including some former students). As an example, when the MS in Technology and Occupational Education degree was revised, the process started with a state-wide advisory committee representing different constituencies. The end result was a complete transformation of the degree, not just course revisions. This revision was driven by best practices and the needs of the profession.

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

All students have access to an academic advisor, and/or a faculty advisor, and online resources guiding them towards full admission and student teaching requirements. The academic advisors are housed in each College, and work with their majors; in addition, some see only freshmen and sophomores, other centers see all undergraduate students. Education students also have faculty advisors, who meet with them at all levels (undergraduate and graduate).

Students within the College of Education also have access to a Blackboard site for an online component of advising; all professional advisors have access to this site as well to share information with their education students. Students have access to a degree audit for undergraduate and graduate levels, which not only lists the classes and requirements that they have and still need, but also directs them to the Certification and Student Teaching websites for more information. The Asst. Director of Clinical Services meets with each student teacher individually before the student teaching semester.

A variety of publications are available to students to assist them in being familiar with policies, practices, and procedures relative to teacher education. The Student Teacher Handbook (See Student Teacher Handbook) is a key resource for students. In addition, the Director of Clinical Services and Certification meets with all prospective candidates in the EDCI 2100 Foundations of Education class to provide guidance and orientation.

Unit leaders meet regularly with the College of Education advising staff, and they in turn meet regularly with other advising staff on campus.

Graduate students seeking certification meet one-on-one with the Director of Certification and receive an individualized plan for certification. This plan is shared with their graduate advisor if the student is seeking a graduate degree. Graduate advisors work hand-in-hand with the certification office. Some graduate programs have their own handbooks that describe their program-specific guidelines.

The Office of Career Services is an excellent resource for advising students in job search strategies and listing educator openings. Each year Career Services hosts an Education Career Fair (Teacher Placement Day) that brings hundreds of school districts to campus. Students can


http://faculty.ucmo.edu/ncate09/standards/standard_6/MCCE%20End%20of%20Year%20Report%208.29.08.doc

Standard Six 156

register in advance for interviews. In addition, students can walk through the Career Fair and meet face to face with district representatives, leave resumes, and in some cases even schedule interviews (http://www.cmsu.edu/career/students/edmajors/ ).

Please see the Placement Rates for the College of Education (See COE Placement Rates).

4. 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?

There are a number of different places where students can obtain information about the admission policies of the university and the Teacher Education Program specifically, including the UCM website, undergraduate catalog, graduate catalog, and informational fliers in the advising office and Clinical Services office. It is the responsibility of the unit head to ensure that these policies are consistently represented. The undergraduate and graduate catalogs are reviewed by the dean’s office prior to publishing. The dean’s office is also responsible for maintaining the sections of the website that address teacher education policies (Link to Teacher Education Policies: http://www.ucmo.edu/c2008/) (See page 109 under the College of Education in the 2008 UG catalog).

Individual program areas do some recruiting off-campus, but primarily meet with prospective students on campus. Most off-campus recruiting is handled by the Admissions Office that has full time recruiters (http://www.cmsu.edu/admissions/). These recruiters meet with individual programs to ensure they accurately present program opportunities and requirements. Graduate programs report to the Graduate School. There are policies that apply to all graduate programs, and program specific requirements. Each program area is responsible for ensuring the accuracy of their specific requirements.

Link to Undergrad and Graduate catalogs: http://www.ucmo.edu/academics/catalogs/.

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

There are multiple checks and balances on the academic calendar, catalog, and all UCM publications. Specifically, the academic calendar is maintained by the Provost’s office, which includes Enrollment Management. The Associate Provost is responsible for coordinating and ensuring the accuracy of the calendar and catalog with respect to university policies. Individual policies, such as in teacher education, are the responsibility of the Unit Head, who interacts with the Associate Provost.

Deadlines are published well in advance. The Teacher Education Council (TEC) works with the Unit Head to ensure that teacher education policies are accurate and current. The Unit Head meets with each dept. chair multiple times to ensure that the program requirements are accurate. The Unit Head is provided a “page proof” of the catalog as a last check for accuracy.

http://www.ucmo.edu/academics/catalogs/

http://www.cmsu.edu/admissions/

http://www.ucmo.edu/c2008/

http://faculty.ucmo.edu/ncate09/standards/standard_6/COE%20Placement%20Rates.xls

http://www.cmsu.edu/career/students/edmajors/

Standard Six 157

6. (Optional) One or more tables and links to key exhibits related to unit leadership and authority could be attached here. Data in tables should be discussed in the appropriate prompt of 6a. (Links with descriptions must be typed into a Word document that can be uploaded here. The number of attached exhibits should be limited in number; BOE members should access most of the exhibits in the unit's electronic exhibit room.)

6b. Unit Budget

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?

The Unit does not have a budget per se. The College of Education’s budget is used to support most of the Unit’s expenses. Faculty in K-12 and secondary certification programs are supported by their respective departmental budgets. For example, mathematics teacher educators are supported by the Dept. of Mathematics and Computer Science, College of Science and Technology. Institutional dues and expenses tied to teacher education are paid by the College of Education (COE).

As noted in other parts of this report, the COE was formed in January 2007. Formerly, the departments of Curriculum and Instruction, and Educational Leadership and Human Development were part of the College of Education and Human Services (CEHS). At the time of the university reorganization, one other dept. was added to the new COE, for a total of 3 departments plus Clinical Services, Advising and the Charter Schools office. The Charter Schools office received funding from the state for the first time that same year (2007).

The COE reorganized and now has 4 departments. The current FY 2009 COE budget is $6,376,927 to support 4 departments, advising, and clinical services and certification. College-funded personnel include 60 tenured/tenure-track faculty, 8 non-tenure track faculty, 13 full-time professional and support staff, approximately 45-50 adjunct instructors per semester (in addition to faculty overloads), and 20-25 part-time clinical faculty who supervise student teachers.

The General Operations portion of the COE budget is $35,581. This pays for Unit expenses as well as general college office expenses, such as phones, copier, postage, etc. This budget also pays institutional dues totaling $10,350 annually (NCATE, AACTE, MACTE). The Lectureship line in the budget is currently $117,161. The COE spends approximately three times this much in hiring adjunct instructors to teach courses, clinical faculty to supervise student teachers, and faculty overloads.

The university has a budgeting system in place that allows us to supplement our base budget. We are able to do so by two budgeting provisions: roll forward funds, and Extended Campus revenue share. The COE benefits from these university fiscal practices.

Specifically, beginning approximately 5 years ago, we are allowed to roll funds forward at the end of the fiscal year. Unused funds in vacant faculty lines, for example, roll into the General Operations for the next fiscal year (benefits do not).

Standard Six 158

In addition, the COE has been very proactive in expanding programs and course offerings through Extended Campus. UCM uses a “revenue share” model for courses offered through Extended Campus. Due to the initiative of the faculty and departments in the COE, this revenue share has proven to be lucrative over the past several years. Indeed, the teacher education program would have been seriously jeopardized without this additional revenue source. The COE shares the funds with each department in accordance with the proportion earned. In total, each year the revenue share from Extended Campus that the college office retains (15%) has exceeded the General Operations budget allocated in the base budget.

The College of Education is funded comparably with other clinical programs on campus, such as Nursing and Communication Disorders. Although they have slightly larger budgets, they also have higher costs (See Comparative College Data 2008, and FY 2009 Academic Affairs Budget).

2. What changes to the budget over the past few years have affected the quality of the programs offered?

See response 6b #1 above describing the effect of reorganization and the creation of the new College of Education.

It is not really possible to track the past 7 years due to the university reorganization. Some additional funds were used by Academic Affairs to create the new college structure. It can be stated, however, that departmental budgets have essentially remained flat during this period.

The former College of Education and Human Services had 3 new faculty positions added to the former Curriculum & Instruction department, due in part to the large enrollments and the number of Professional Education courses provided to the undergraduate teacher education program.

Student enrollment in the MAT program has grown considerably since the program’s inception 7 years ago. Currently, there are over 500 active graduate students in this program. Most undergraduate program enrollment has remained relatively stable, with just minor fluctuations (See College Majors 2003-2008). At the time of this writing, Career Services had not been able to create the same table for the Unit.

See response 6b #1 above describing the effect of reorganization and the creation of the new College of Education.

It is not really possible to track the past 7 years due to the university reorganization. Some additional funds were used by Academic Affairs to create the new college structure. It can be stated, however, that departmental budgets have essentially remained flat during this period.

The former College of Education and Human Services had 3 new faculty positions added to the former Curriculum & Instruction department, due in part to the large enrollments and the number of Professional Education courses provided to the undergraduate teacher education program.

http://faculty.ucmo.edu/ncate09/standards/standard_6/College%20majors%202003-2008.xls

http://faculty.ucmo.edu/ncate09/standards/standard_6/FY%202009%20Academic%20Affairs%20Budget.xls

http://faculty.ucmo.edu/ncate09/standards/standard_6/Comparative%20College%20data%202008.xls

Standard Six 159

Student enrollment in the MAT program has grown considerably since the program’s inception 7 years ago. Currently, there are over 500 active graduate students in this program. Most undergraduate program enrollment has remained relatively stable, with just minor fluctuations (See College Majors 2003-2008). At the time of this writing, Career Services had not been able to create the same table for the Unit.

3. (Optional) One or more tables and links to key exhibits related to the unit's budget could be attached here. Data in tables should be discussed in the appropriate prompt of 6b. (Links with descriptions must be typed into a Word document that can be uploaded here. The number of attached exhibits should be limited in number; BOE members should access most of the exhibits in the unit's electronic exhibit room.)

6c. Personnel

1. What are the institution's workload policies? What are the 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, and dissertation advisement)? How do workload policies differentiate between types of faculty positions?

Department chairs and the Associate Dean receive 50% reassigned time for their administrative responsibilities, consistent with university policy. Beginning in 2008, the COE provided 25% reassigned time to program area coordinators who assumed more responsibility for scheduling, curricular revisions, recruitment, and related duties.

Institutional workload policy for tenured and tenure-track faculty includes 12 credit hours per semester for undergraduate instruction. Instructors may be assigned to teach 15 credit hours as a full load when they have no other responsibilities for advising, research, or service. There is some variation of the workload policy. For example, science departments count their contact hours, rather than the course credit hours. There is not a uniform institutional policy for graduate load. The COE uses a 9 credit hour load for graduate teaching. Faculty are expected to maintain at least 5 office hours per week.

All faculty have advising responsibilities, except in unusual circumstances where other duties have been assigned. Some faculty advise both undergraduate and graduate students. The advising load in the MAT program has been exceptionally heavy due to the large number of active students enrolled (over 500). Faculty are not provided reassigned time for advisement.

Faculty in the Cooperative Doctorate program with the University of Missouri-Columbia also have dissertation supervision responsibilities.

Faculty are encouraged to participate in research and partner with P-12 schools. Scholarship is an expectation of tenured and tenure-track faculty. Productivity expectations have changed over the past decade. Faculty in the unit, and the COE specifically, have been very active in seeking external funding (See COE Grant Activity Composite).

http://faculty.ucmo.edu/ncate09/standards/standard_6/COE%20grants%20history%20Composite.xls

http://faculty.ucmo.edu/ncate09/standards/standard_6/College%20majors%202003-2008.xls

Standard Six 160

Small grants are available through the Center for Teaching and Learning to support some projects, including reassigned time. However, there is no provision for reassigned time for most faculty to engage in research and service activities. (See COE to UCM CTL comparison).

2. What are the workloads of faculty for teaching and clinical supervision?

In the Teacher Education Unit, the standard teaching load for undergraduate courses is 12 credit hours per semester. The graduate load is 9 credit hours per semester.

Faculty involved in the Professional Development Schools (PDS) program receive 25% reassigned time to allow for work in the partner schools.

Student teaching supervision is assigned to faculty and clinical faculty load at the rate of .66 credit hours per student. Eighteen student teachers would be considered a full load. The COE is trying to expand the role of faculty in student teaching supervision.

Beginning Spring 2009, five faculty from Elementary and Early Childhood Education and one from Educational Foundations and Literacy will begin supervising student teachers. Faculty supervising student teachers in these programs is a new phenomenon, and is a direct result of a recommendation from the Task Force on Defining Excellence and other input.

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)?

Tenured and tenure-track faculty are expected to be excellent in teaching and productive in scholarship and service. The normal teaching load in the Teacher Education Program would allow faculty to have active involvement in service and some scholarship productivity. In the COE, however, most faculty regularly teach overloads. A few faculty have taught double-overloads. These overloads are necessary in addition to employing large numbers of adjuncts and clinical faculty to meet student demand. (See College of Education Fall 2008 Course Sections by Faculty Type)

Enrollment has been strong in teacher education programs generally. There has been a significant increase in the past 7 years with the introduction of the Masters in Arts of Teaching degree, coupled with alternative certification. There have been over 500 active students in this degree program each of the past 5 years. There have also been several hundred students seeking alternative certification not in the MAT degree program during this time period.

We try to hold course enrollments to reasonable numbers, although occasionally additional students are added to a course section when circumstances warrant to serve student needs. Generally, rather than increasing class size, we have chosen to add additional sections of courses. In part, this explains the demand for faculty overloads and the number of adjunct faculty employed.

http://faculty.ucmo.edu/ncate09/standards/standard_6/COE%20Fall%2008%20Course%20Sections%20by%20Faculty%20Type.xls

http://faculty.ucmo.edu/ncate09/standards/standard_6/COE%20Fall%2008%20Course%20Sections%20by%20Faculty%20Type.xls

http://faculty.ucmo.edu/ncate09/standards/standard_6/COE%20to%20UCM%20CTL%20comparison.xls

Standard Six 161

In total, the COE has had reasonable research/scholarship productivity for our institution. However, it often requires exceptional effort when faculty are routinely teaching overloads.

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?

Adjunct and clinical faculty are carefully selected based on their expertise, currency in the field, and commitment to the Conceptual Framework. Each department has an orientation for adjunct faculty. Course syllabi are standardized for courses with multiple sections, although faculty enrich each course with their own unique background and experiences.

During the 2007-2008 academic year we began an extensive review of the core courses in the Professional Education block. Significant revisions have been made to these courses. We are moving toward common assessments as well. The COE is preparing an orientation unit for adjunct faculty who teach any of the courses in the Professional Education block.

Clinical faculty who supervise student teachers go through an orientation each semester. In addition, we provide a training session on how to use the assessment form, with practice application, to ensure inter-rater reliability.

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

There are both professional and support staff that work in the Teacher Education Unit. Professional staff work in areas like advising and clinical services and certification. Each department office has at least one support staff, and often student workers as well. Some departments have graduate assistants that perform administrative functions rather than teaching. The support staff in the COE is consistent with other units on campus.

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

The university provides $600 of support for most faculty through the Center for Teaching and Learning. The primary support for faculty professional development comes from Extended Campus revenue share, as described above. This is not a budgeted source, but rather a reward for work above university expectations. This revenue has provided faculty with approximately $1000 per year per person in the COE.

7. (Optional) One or more tables and links to key exhibits related to personnel could be attached here. Data in tables should be discussed in the appropriate prompt of 6c. (Links with descriptions must be typed into a Word document that can be uploaded here.)

Standard Six 162

6d. Unit facilities

1. How adequate are unit facilities--classrooms, faculty offices, library/media center, and school facilities--to support teaching and learning? [Note: Describe facilities on the main campus as well as the facilities at off-campus sites if they exist.]

Generally, instructional facilities are in good condition throughout campus. The university has been proactive in providing electronic multimedia classrooms. The number of classrooms is appropriate for the number of course sections, in part due to the number of online course sections that have been created during the past 7 years. The number of multimedia/electronic classrooms and labs is significant (See Electronic Classroom Inventory).

All faculty have private offices. We have done some shuffling of faculty offices following the reorganization in the College of Education in summer 2008. In addition, one large (60 seat) classroom was reduced in size (40) to accommodate the construction of a new department office.

The Child Development Lab (CDL) will open a new renovated space in summer 2009. This is a much improved facility for the children, and for our candidates.

The James C. Kirkpatrick Library is an exceptional facility and a tremendous asset for both faculty and students. Completed in 1999, the 33-million-dollar James C. Kirkpatrick Library building houses a state-of-the-art library, many collections, the Harmon Computer Commons, the University Museum and Archives, and classrooms. With 200,000 square feet of floor space and a “footprint” the size of a football field, the building includes a wide variety of spaces required to serve the Central community’s needs, including space appropriate for group and individual study, meetings, and classes. Library users may choose from traditional and relaxed seating areas, spaces conducive to relaxing and visiting with friends and colleagues, and out-of-the-way places where they may study in solitude. The concept of the “library as place” has received attention in recent literature, and Kirkpatrick Library’s faculty and staff have sought to provide a welcoming environment for many kinds of user needs. Group study rooms, all with computers, offer students the ability to work together on projects. Photocopiers, scanners, and many computer workstations are available for library users. The library’s wireless environment allows users the freedom to choose their desired study location. Jimmy K’s Campus Canteen, on the first floor, provides a comfortable place for library users to take a break or eat a meal. See 6e.3. below for complete details.

UCM has a 40,000 sq. ft. satellite facility in Lee’s Summit, the Central Summit Center (CSC). The CoE offers more courses at this facility than any other unit on campus. Due to the volume of students served through CSC, the facility has quadrupled its space in the past 7 years. It is an exceptional, modern facility, equipped with multimedia classrooms and computer labs. Located within the Summit Technology Center, the Summit Center includes 26 multi-use classrooms. The summit Center also offers

Three interactive television classrooms

Video conference rooms

http://faculty.ucmo.edu/ncate09/standards/standard_6/Electronic%20Classroom%20Inventory.xls

Standard Six 163

Three computer labs

Wireless Internet

A student lounge

A bookstore

(See web site: http://www.ucmo.edu/summitcenter/ )

The CoE is committed to expanding its service to the urban and suburban Kansas City area. We anticipate that demand will cause CSC to expand again, or seek another facility.

2. (Optional) One or more tables and links to key exhibits related to unit facilities could be attached here. Data in tables should be discussed in the appropriate prompt of 6d. (Links with descriptions must be typed into a Word document that can be uploaded here.)

6e. Unit resources including technology

1. What information technology resources support faculty and candidates? What evidence shows that candidates and faculty use these resources?

There are a number of dedicated laboratories for students in the Teacher Education Program, plus mobile technology available for classroom use and/or student checkout. For example, in the COE we have multiple mobile laptop carts available in Lovinger, used heavily by Elementary and Early Childhood education majors. The college computer laboratory in Lovinger also has numerous digital still and digital video cameras for student checkout. These are used frequently by students during their PDS semester. In addition, there are a number of dedicated Ecove handheld units used primarily by Elementary and Early Childhood education majors to document classroom interactions.

Several programs have dedicated facilities, such as in Business Teacher Education and the pre-engineering Technology Education program. Pre-engineering education in high schools has been sweeping the country (there are over 5000 students in the KC area alone in these courses). The premiere national program in pre-engineering is Project Lead the Way (PLTW). UCM was the 2nd university in the United States certified to prepare undergraduate candidates that will be nationally certified to teach this curriculum. The curriculum revisions will be effective in the 2009 catalog.

UCM has made a significant investment in using BlackBoard online course support. All courses have a BlackBoard site, not just online courses. The BlackBoard campus support team is incredibly supportive and helpful. Two graphs are provided to summarize our BB use over the past 2-3 years. The first graph shows the number of unique logins each day for the past 2 1/2 years (since we moved to ASP support). It shows a 9-12% increase in number of logins per day. This percentage of increase also holds true for number of hits per day - averaging 78,457 hits per

http://www.ucmo.edu/summitcenter/

Standard Six 164

day for the current semester (See Unique-Logins file). The second graph is the number of tests / surveys taken on BB each day. The projected increase will mean that during finals week this semester there will be one day that there will be over 13,000 tests taken on BB. (See BB Assessments file)

All faculty receive a new, up-to-date computer every three years. This faculty upgrade program has been a huge benefit to departments that do not have the resources in their budgets to purchase computers for faculty.

The CoE has taken a leadership role on campus by planning and implementing an Educational Innovation Incubator Lab (See Educational Innovation Incubator proposal). The purpose of the Incubator Lab is to provide faculty the opportunity to use the latest technology in class instruction, coupled with research into the effectiveness of the innovation. It is not a “computer lab.” Rather, each semester faculty will submit proposals for innovative technology and instructional techniques they would like to implement. A committee will select which proposals will be funded for the following semester. Although the Incubator Lab will be open to campus, it is primarily a CoE initiative.

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

The Unit’s assessment system has been lea by the Associate Dean (NCATE Coordinator) with faculty participation across the entire PEF. Beginning in 2008, a Unit Assessment Coordinator was also added. This was necessitated by our desire to move to the Teacher Work Sample as our Unit-wide assessment during the same semester as our NCATE/DESE review. Both of these individuals have been provided reassigned time. These individuals have been fully supported in attending conferences focused on assessment.

Beginning in 2009, all faculty and clinical faculty involved with student teacher supervision will be provided a laptop computer to record assessments in the field. The next phase is to be able to submit the assessments directly into banner student data via the web. Currently, we are working with the Information System staff on campus to develop a method of recording the Unit’s assessment data directly into the campus Banner system. This should be available during the 2009 school year.

3. What library and curricular resources exist at the institution? How does the unit ensure they are sufficient and current? How does the unit ensure the accessibility of resources to candidates, including candidates in off-campus and distance learning programs, through electronic means?

The CoE is very fortunate to have a dedicated library faculty, Barbara Wales, assigned to the college. Many departments make very good use of her expertise and service. In addition, the library has a dedicated budget for the college.

Library Services supports the College of Education in its efforts to graduate candidates who are knowledgeable and effective practitioners in various fields: school counselors, classroom teachers, special educators, library media specialists, and administrators. The resources and


http://faculty.ucmo.edu/ncate09/standards/standard_6/BB%20assesments.tiff

http://faculty.ucmo.edu/ncate09/standards/standard_6/BB%20assesments.tiff

http://faculty.ucmo.edu/ncate09/standards/standard_6/Unique_logins.tiff

Standard Six 165

services of Kirkpatrick Library enable the reflective educator to analyze and evaluate their knowledge and practice in terms of theory, research, and their own experiences. The library strives to provide resources that reflect a wide variety of opinions and cultural differences. The knowledge and information skills education candidates acquire as they use the services and resources of the library contribute to their ability to serve as effective educators.

Completed in 1999, the 33-million-dollar James C. Kirkpatrick Library building houses a state-of-the-art library, many collections, the Harmon Computer Commons, the University Museum and Archives, and classrooms. With 200,000 square feet of floor space and a “footprint” the size of a football field, the building includes a wide variety of spaces required to serve the Central community’s needs, including space appropriate for group and individual study, meetings, and classes. Library users may choose from traditional and relaxed seating areas, spaces conducive to relaxing and visiting with friends and colleagues, and out-of-the-way places where they may study in solitude. The concept of the “library as place” has received attention in recent literature, and Kirkpatrick Library’s faculty and staff have sought to provide a welcoming environment for many kinds of user needs. Group study rooms, all with computers, offer students the ability to work together on projects. Photocopiers, scanners, and many computer workstations are available for library users. The library’s wireless environment allows users the freedom to choose their desired study location. Jimmy K’s Campus Canteen, on the first floor, provides a comfortable place for library users to take a break or eat a meal.

The library’s second floor now includes a News Area—a space with current newspapers, a large-screen television, constantly set to a news channel, and comfortable seating. Soft furniture, including leather recliners, has been added in the last two years. Library policies regarding cell phone usage and food and drink have been relaxed in recent years, recognizing that today’s students seek a comfortable environment in which to study, conduct research, and collaborate with others.

The Harmon Computer Commons, located on the first floor of the library, is a fully networked electronic environment. The 300 workstations provide access to informational resources, productivity tools, group work areas, and teaching labs. These resources are designed to fully integrate the informational resources of the library with the technology acquired, disseminated, and utilized by the university community. Four multipurpose class spaces are connected to the commons area; computers allow for instruction in a hands-on environment.

The library’s home page includes a wealth of information about the library’s collections, services, and departments. The library’s mission statement affirms its commitment to serving the needs of its primary users (members of the Central community) and, to a lesser extent, all Missouri citizens and others beyond the state. The library is dedicated to serving a population that is diverse in nature, including users with special needs.

Because communication with users and potential users is vital to its effectiveness, Library Services constantly seeks ways to improve communication methods. The library’s web pages are continually updated, news about the library is posted on the home page, and users’ comments and suggestions are invited via an online “Comment Box.” The library newsletter, InfoOne , is published once or twice annually, with information about personnel changes, new services, and library acquisitions.

http://library.ucmo.edu/publications/infoone/index.htm

http://www.ucmo.edu/surveys/?formID=518

http://library.ucmo.edu/about/mission.htm

http://library.ucmo.edu/

http://library.ucmo.edu/hcc/

Standard Six 166

A growing number of Central students are distance learners. They may participate in weekend classes, online courses, or classes held at Central’s Summit Center. Library Services is committed to serving the needs of distance education students, faculty, and staff and strives to provide these users with services equivalent to those other patrons receive. The library’s growing web presence, increasing number of electronic databases, and provision of reference services in nontraditional ways all serve to enhance service to distance learners.

Reference assistance is provided in a variety of different methods; in addition to face-to-face assistance, reference help is available via phone, email, and chat. Marian Davis, the library’s Distance Education Librarian, routinely offers library instruction sessions at the Summit Center; in addition, many bibliographers provide instruction there as well. Some librarians offer instruction sessions via online presentations. The Distance Learning Librarian also maintains a web page with valuable links to resources for distance learners.

Library Services appreciates the historical significance of teacher education at the University of Central Missouri, as well as the continuing importance of this essential role. Library faculty and staff are dedicated to providing a high level of service to all users, including the future educators who prepare at Central.

4. (Optional) One or more tables and links to key exhibits related to unit resources, including technology, could be attached here. Data in tables should be discussed in the appropriate prompt of 6e. (Links with descriptions must be typed into a Word document that can be uploaded here.)

Optional


The College of Education has been extremely resourceful, dedicated, and hard working. Despite several years of flat budgets, our faculty have had the resources necessary to maintain an active professional development agenda. Many faculty have been able to attend international conferences overseas as well. As indicated above in 6b.1, this is made possible because UCM has a revenue share model with courses offered through Extended Campus, and CoE faculty are incredibly hardworking.

Students have been well served. We have worked diligently to cultivate a strong cadre of adjunct and clinical faculty. When more than a few students are on a wait list for a course we open an additional section. Students are able to stay on their graduation schedule as planned because we ensure as many course sections are offered as needed.

The Unit has spent the past two years engaging in significant visioning. We reached out to our P-12 partners for input and honest, candid feedback. We have been willing to make difficult decisions to achieve our goals, including reorganization and resource reallocation.


http://guides.library.ucmo.edu/disted/

http://library.ucmo.edu/reference/

http://www.ucmo.edu/summitcenter/

Standard Six 167

Date post:	21-May-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	doanxuyen
View:	214 times
Download:	1 times