1b.1. (Programs Not Nationally Reviewed) What data from key assessments indicate that candidates in initial teacher preparation programs demonstrate the pedagogical content knowledge and skills delineated in professional, state, and institutional standards? [Data for initial teacher preparation programs that have been nationally reviewed or reviewed through a similar state review do not have to be reported here. Summarize data here only for programs not already reviewed. A table summarizing these data could be attached at Prompt 1b.4 below.]

All undergraduate initial teacher programs are nationally reviewed, except the following: Art Education, Family and Consumer Science Education, Speech Education. Over the past three years, only one candidate in these programs (Family and Consumer Science Education) has been admitted into the teacher education program. Candidates in the above mentioned program are required to take one methods course (CURR 303), special ed (CURR 302), classroom management (CURR 375B), assessment (CURR 304), reading (READ 418A) and technology (CURR 285). Data shows that the candidate score a “2” or above on all signature assessments from these courses pertaining to pedagogical content knowledge and skills. (Exhibit 1c1.1 Undergraduate Signature Assessment Description, Rubrics and Data)

Master of Arts in Teaching (MAT) candidates are required to take at least one course in methods, special education, classroom management, assessment, reading, and technology during their degree program. Candidates complete a signature assessment in these courses which is content specific. Signature assessments (unit plans and teacher worksamples) from the method courses (ELED 510, 511, CURR 503, 556, SPED 505) demonstrate their ability to plan, manage, and instruct in those content areas. Student referral plans created in the special education course (CURR 545A or B) demonstrates the candidate’s ability to instruct students with diverse needs in an inclusive environment within their content area.  Classroom management plans created in (CURR 500 A or B, SPED 503) demonstrate candidate’s ability to manage their classroom within their content area.  The teacher worksample and student referral (EDFN 401, SPED 502) demonstrate the candidate’s ability to assess students in their content area.  The thematic teaching unit and the teacher worksample (READ 502 & 418) demonstrate a candidate’s ability to teach students to read with fluency and comprehension in their content area. The technology portfolio created in EDFN 524 demonstrates the candidates ability to integrate technology into teaching and learning.  Three year aggregated data indicates candidates in the elementary MAT program achieved an average score of 2.47 or above on criteria’s that measured pedagogical content knowledge on their signature assessment.  While candidates in the MAT in English Ed had an average score of 2.15 or higher on criteria’s that measured pedagogical content knowledge in their signature assessment. Candidates in the MAT in Kinesiology, Mathematics and Music achieved an average score of 2.00 or higher on criteria’s that measured pedagogical content knowledge on their signature assessment.  Special Ed candidates averaged a score of 2.07 or higher. (Exhibit 1b1.1 MAT Signature Assessment Description, Rubric & Data)

The final assessment which is administered twice during the internship, once in the fall and once in the spring, measure the candidate’s ability to plan, instruct and assess in their content area throughout their internship. Analysis of the data shows that teacher education candidates scored: MAT in Elementary Ed had an average score of 2.48 in the Fall and an 2.63 in the Spring, MAT in English Education had an average score of 2.67 in the Fall and an 2.50 in the Spring MAT Mathematics Ed had an average score of 2.70 in the Fall and an 2.67 in the Spring, MAT in Science Ed had an average score of 2.33 in both the Fall and Spring semesters, MAT in Special Ed had an average score of 2.50 in the Fall and an 2.63 in the Spring. (Exhibit 1b1.1 MAT Signature Assessment Description, Rubric & Data)

Candidates must take and pass the Principles of Learning and Teaching (PLT) PRAXIS in their respective discipline. The PLT pedagogical licensure exam is required by the state and for graduation from the program. 100% of our initial teacher education program candidates have passed the PLT examination.

1b.2. (Programs Not Nationally Reviewed) What data from key assessments indicate that advanced teacher candidates know and apply theories related to pedagogy and learning, are able to use a range of instructional strategies and technologies, and can explain the choices they make in their practice. [Data for advanced teacher preparation programs that have been nationally reviewed or reviewed through a similar state review do not have to be reported here. Summarize data here only for programs not already reviewed. A table summarizing these data could be attached at Prompt 1b.4 below.]

C&I Masters candidates are required to complete 18 hours of core courses. The signature assessment in each course (CURR 523, 518, 573, 545B and EDLE 500, 505) measures the candidate’s ability to apply theories related to pedagogy and learning along with the ability to use a range of instructional strategies and technologies in their content areas. Candidates in the M.Ed program are teachers working out in the field, which allows them to design and implement the signature assessment within their classroom. Teacher worksamples (CURR 523 & 573), technology integration portfolio (CURR 518), student referral (CURR 545B), school improvement plan (EDEL 500), and a research project (EDLE 505) demonstrate the candidate’s ability to apply theories related to pedagogy and learning and the candidates ability to use a range of instructional strategies and technologies. 

For example candidates in the M.Ed in Curriculum and Instruction with a concentration in Elementary Education had a average score of 2.67 on a 3 point scale or higher on signature assessments related to pedagogy and learning. Candidates in the M.Ed in Curriculum and Instruciton with a a concentration in Reading had an aggregated average score over three years of 2.61 on a 3 point scale or higher on signature assessments realted to pedagogy and learning. (Exhibit 1b2.1 M.Ed. Signature Assessment, Description, Rubric & Data).

Candidates in the Ed.D in Curriculum and instruction are required to complete 15 hours of foundation courses which include: introduction to doctoral research design, applied statistical analyses, evaluation theory and practice, qualitative research in education and sociocultural and diversity issues in education.  Candidates must score a “2” or higher on the signature assessment from these courses and achieve a passing score on the preliminary exam. The Preliminary Examination is designed to measure candidates competence in: 1) educational foundations, 2) research, 3) statistics, and 4) general professional knowledge.  As the data demonstrates, all candidates have all scored a “2” or higher on their signature assessment, and all candidates have passed the preliminary exam in the history of the program, with the exception of 3 candidates. (Exhibit 1a3.5 LEC Signature Assessment Data)

1b.3. What do follow-up studies of graduates and employers indicate about graduates' preparation in pedagogical content knowledge and skills? If survey data have not already been reported, what was the response rate? [If these survey data are included in a previously attached table, refer the reader to that attachment; otherwise, a table summarizing the results of follow-up studies related to pedagogical content knowledge and skills could be attached at Prompt 1b.4 below.]

Data from the graduate follow up survey (2009-2010 academic year) shows that 90% of the graduates rated ULM good or above in terms of preparing them to plan instruction in their content area. In the year 2009, there was a 47% response rate to the administered survey. (Exhibit 1a4.1 Administrator & Graduate Follow Up Survey)

Employer’s surveys are administered every 2 years. In 2005, 32 responses were received of the 145 that were sent out to principals. As the data indicates, 93% of the principals rated ULM graduate teacher candidates with an average or above score in terms of planning and classroom management in their content area. In 2007, 43 responses were received out of 145. As the data shows, 42 out of the 43 candidates were rated average or above in terms of planning in their content area. In terms of being prepared to manage their classroom in their content area, 43 of candidates were rated average or above by their employers. The 2009, the scale on the survey was changed, the data shows that principals rated graduated ULM teacher candidates, 94% of the surveyed, as good or better in terms planning in their content area and 89% of the surveyed rated graduates as good or above in terms of classroom management in their content area. (Exhibit 1a4.1 Administrator & Graduate Follow Up Survey)

1b.4. (Optional Upload for Online IR) Tables, figures, and a list of links to key exhibits related to the pedagogical content knowledge of teacher candidates may be attached here. (Because BOE members should be able to access many exhibits electronically, a limited number of attachments (0-5) should be uploaded.)