Program(s) Covered by this Folio Press tab in last column to add rows Institution Accreditation Status: X National X State Is this a Nationally Accredited Program? X Yes No If Yes, list Accrediting Organization: CAEP Attach National Letter to Sheet Report to the Nebraska Department of Education
REGULAR FOLIOS Name of Assessment used for the following areas: Type or Form of Assessment Brief Description of Assessment, including indicated information obtained from Assessment When Assessment is Administered Specific Items 1 Content-Praxis II or GPA Cumulative GPA Summative Numerical computation of grades on quality points earned divided by credit hours completed Ongoing—throughout one’s college career. Cumulative GPA is what is reported. Specific to content area Praxis II Comparison to a Standard For elementary students, this test has been used to document one being highly qualified (minimum of 159) for No Child Left Behind. For secondary students, we piloted results for the Just before or during clinical practicum (student teaching) Specific to content area
Education and Human Sciences at UN-L. 3 Learner/Learning Environments CEHS Student Teaching Instrument Summative This instrument consists of 14 that is completed by the student teacher supervisor and cooperating teacher on the basis of one being proficient, basic or unsatisfactory on each item. At the end of the Clinical Experience 2 & 3 Administrator Survey Summative This is a 21-item instrument that is completed by school administrators at the end of a candidate’s first year of teaching. It is now administered by the Nebraska Department of Education. In March/April at the end of the candidate’s first year of teaching Standards 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 3.1, 3.2, 3.3 Candidate Teacher Survey Summative This is a 23-item instrument that is completed by program completers at the end of the first year of In March/April at the end of the candidate’s first year of teaching Items 3 & 4
program completers at the end of the first year of teaching. It is administered by the College of Education and Human Sciences at UN-L. 5 Instructional Practices - Effectiveness CEHS Student Teaching Instrument Summative This instrument consists of 14 that is completed by the student teacher supervisor and cooperating teacher on the basis of one being proficient, basic or unsatisfactory on each item. At the end of the Clinical Experience Items 2, 3, & 5 Administrator Survey Summative This is a 21-item instrument that is completed by school administrators at the end of a candidate’s year of teaching. It is now administered by the Nebraska Department of Education. In March/April at the end of the candidate’s first year of teaching Standards 6.1, 6.2
2 Major Transition Points Acceptance into University (Prior to Freshman year) Acceptance into Teacher Education program (Sophomore year) Acceptance into Student Teaching (Semester before Student Teaching) Program Completion/ Graduation Student Teaching) -- Completion of specific number of high school units. -- Appropriate ACT /SAT score --Credit hour minimum --Minimum grades in specific courses -- PPST -- Faculty recommendations -- Completion of Prof. & Personal Fitness Form -- Admission to TEP -- Credit Hour /overall 2.75 GPA minimum -- 2.5 GPA in content area courses, no grade below a C --2.5 GPA in Prof. ed – specific grade requirements for methods courses -- Criminal History -- 120 + credit hours -- successful completion of Student Teaching -- Maintain GPA minimum requirements -- Completion of a senior check --Met all financial obligations -- Apply for degree
Special Education 3.82 3.68 59 Childhood 3.81 3.70 25 Content area 2015-2016 Secondary Education 3.54250 3.55747 108 Elementary Education 3.36632 3.56379 153 Special Education 3.80480 72 Childhood Education 3.74777 40 Content area Table 1B Grade Point Average in the Content Area and Cumulative GPA Year Code Subject Area/Content GPA Cumulative GPA Total Students Notes 2014-2015 BECE 3.21 2.79 1 Business & Cooperative Education BMIT 3.35 3.32 6 Business, Marketing & Information Education CYEC 3.85 3.74 18 Inclusive Early Childhood Education CYFC 3.37 3.24 4 Family & Consumer Science Education 6-12 ECED 3.57 3.65 6 Elementary Education & Childhood Education
Responses from First Year Candidate Survey: Items Related to Preparation to Teach Content Knowledge (Item 1) and Prepared to Teach Content Area (Item 2). 5 Item 1: Prepared to Content Area Year # Item Endorsement Strongly Disagree Disagree Neither Agree nor Disagree Strongly Agree Grand Total 2014 - 2015 1 I am well prepared to teach in my content area. Math (EMATH) 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00% 9 2 11 Early Childhood Education 0 0% 0 0% 1 8.3% 9 2 16.7% 12 Elementary Education 0 0% 3 6.1% 3 6.1% 30 13 26.5% 49
Table 15 Item 4: Adapts to Developmental Strategies of Learners Year # Item Endorsement Strongly Disagree Disagree Neither Agree nor Disagree Agree Strongly Agree Grand Total 2014 - 2015 4 I adapt to different developmental stages of learners. Math (EMATH) 0 0 1 9.09% 8 2 11 Early Childhood Education 0 0% 0 0% 1 8.3% 8 3 25.0% 12 Elementary Education 0 0% 0 0% 4 8.2% 22 23 46.9% 49
Secondary Education 0 0% 0 0% 9 18.4% 29 11 22.4% 49 Special Education 0 0% 0 0% 2 9.5% 10 9 42.9% 21 4 I adapt to different developmental stages of learners EMATH 0 0 0 0.00% 6 1 7 Early Childhood Education 0 0 0 0.00% 3 5 8 Elementary Education 0 0 8 16.00% 22 50 Secondary Education 0 0 27.87% 13 61
curricular goals Early Childhood Education 0 0.00% 1 2.94% 8 23.53% 25 73.53% 34 Elementary Education 0 0.00% 2 1.08% 53 28.65% 130 70.27% 185 Secondary Education 0 0.00% 2 2.27% 47 53.41% 39 44.32% 88 Special Education 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 24 27.91% 62 72.09% 86
communities that invite students’ engagement and learning, encourages positive social interaction and Childhood Education 0 0% 1 2.0% 48 98.0% 49 Elementary Education 0 0% 9 7.2% 116 92.8% 125 Secondary Education 0 0.0% 12 10.0% 108 90.0% 120 Special Education 0 0% 5 10.0% 45 90.0% 50
Childhood Education 0 0.00% 1 2.94% 11 32.35% 22 64.71% 34 Elementary Education 0 0.00% 1 0.55% 51 28.18% 129 71.27% 181 Secondary Education 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 39 45.35% 47 54.65% 86 Special Education 0 0.00% 1 1.20% 19 22.89% 63 75.90% 83
Year Endorsement Strongly Disagree Neither Agree nor Disagree Total 2014 - 2015 create effective instructional Math (EMATH) 0 0 1 9.09% 3 11 Early Childhood Education 0 0 0 0% 4 12 Elementary Education 0 0 3 6.1% 20 49 0 0
Year Endorsement Neither Agree nor Disagree 2014 - 2015 work effectively as part of an instructional planning team. Math (EMATH) 0 1 1 1 11 Early Childhood Education 0 0 1 8.3% 7 12 Elementary Education 0 2 3 6.1% 24 49 0
Elementary Education 0 1 4 23 46.9% 49 Secondary Education 1 3 11 14 28.6% 49 Special Education 0 0 1 13 61.9% 21 apply effective methods to manage the classroom environment EMATH 0 0 2 1 14.29% 7 0 0
Special Education 0 1 1 4.55% 11 22 Narrative: on evidence from observations during student teaching, first year teacher survey responses, and administrator surveys (Tables 16A-19), UNL Mathematics TEPs were well prepared in creating useable and engaging lesson and unit plans based upon knowledge of the discipline, students, and curricular goals and were somewhat able to adapt these plans to meet curricular goals and needs of students (Tables 17B). There were also some Mathematics TEP completers who neither agreed nor disagreed with the statement “I create effective instructional plans” (Table 21). In addition, most UNL Mathematics TEPs frequently or consistently demonstrated an understanding of a variety of instructional strategies and used this variety to encourage students’ development of deep understanding of mathematics (Tables 20-21, 26). Both administrator and first year teacher results (Table 23-25) indicate areas of needed growth include the use of technology, classroom management, engaging students in problem solving, and adapting to the needs of students with special needs. 0
Special Education 0 0% 5 10.0% 45 90.0% 50 Response from College of Education & Sciences Student Teaching Instrument Teacher Candidate Summative Evaluation on Planning for Learning for 2015-2016 Academic Year on Collaborative Relations and Professional Conduct (Item 13—Table 32B)—LIVETEXT version. Table 32B Item 13: Collaborative Relations and Professional Conduct 2015-2016 Subject Area Scoring Year # Item Endorsement Emergent Sufficient Advanced Grand Total 2015- 2016 13 Collaborative Relations and Professional Conduct: Uses effective communication and consultation techniques with other Mathematics 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 17 100.00% 0 0.00% 17
grow professionally Early Childhood Education 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 16 47.06% 18 52.94% 34 Elementary Education 1 0.54% 1 0.54% 66 35.68% 117 63.24% 185 Secondary Education 0 0.00% 5 6.25% 47 58.75% 28 35.00% 80 Special Education 1 1.16% 0 0.00% 31 36.05% 54 62.79% 86