Artifact 1 Table 5 Summary of Endorsement Program Key Assessments 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 based 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 score of 159) for No Child Left Behind. For secondary students, we piloted results for the 2014-2015 academic year. Results will be used as a requirement fro teacher certification at all levels starting September 1, 2015. Just before or during clinical practicum (student teaching) Specific to content area
CEHS Student Teaching Instrument Summative This instrument consists of 14 items 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 Item 1 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 4.1, 4.2, 4.3 Candidate Teacher Survey Summative This is a 23-item instrument that is completed by program completers at the end of the first year of teaching. It is administered by the College of Education and Sciences at UN-L. In March/April at the end of the candidate’s first year of teaching 1 & 2 2 Content - Knowledge 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 Just before or during clinical practicum (student teaching) Specific to content area
score of 159) for No Child Left Behind. For secondary students, we piloted results for the 2014-2015 academic year. Results will be used as a requirement fro teacher certification at all levels starting September 1, 2015. CEHS Student Teaching Instrument Summative This instrument consists of 14 items 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 Item 1 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 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, 5.1, 5.2 Candidate Teacher Survey Summative This is a 23-item instrument that is completed by 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. In at the end of the candidate’s first year of teaching Item 14 3 Learner/Learning Environments
Table 9B Item 4: Planning for Learning 2015-16 Subject Area Scoring Year # Item Endorsement Unacceptable Emergent Sufficient Advanced Total 2015- 2016 4 Planning for learning: Creates usable lessons and unit plans based on knowledge of the discipline, students, and curricular goals Elementary & Special Education 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 12 23.53% 39 76.47% 51 Special Education 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 24 27.91% 62 72.09% 86 Response from College of Education & Human Sciences Student Teaching Instrument Teacher Candidate Summative Evaluation for the 2014-15 Academic Year on Instructional Enactment (Item 3 – Table 10A). Table 10A Item 3: Instructional Enactment 2014-15 Subject Area Scoring Year # Item Endorsement Unsatisfactory Basic Proficient Total 2014- 2015 3 Demonstrates Capacity to implement, modify, and adapt plans that are responsive to students and curricular goals Special Education, K-6 (SPM7) 0 0.00% 4 10.26% 35 89.74% 39
Table 11 Standards 1.1, 1.2 and 1.3: Student Development Indicator Endorsement Information Rare Occasional Frequent Consistent Grand Total 1.1 The teacher understands how students grow and develop. 2014-2015 Special Education 0 0.00% 2 11.76% 3 17.65% 12 70.59% 17 2015-2016 Rare Occasional Frequent Consistent Special Education, Elementary 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 5 25.00% 15 75.00% 20 1.2 The teacher recognizes that patterns of learning and development vary individually within and across the cognitive, linguistic, social, emotional, and physical areas. 2014-2015 Rare Occasional Frequent Consistent Total Special Education 0 0.00% 3 17.65% 2 11.76% 12 70.59% 17 2015-2016 Rare Occasional Frequent Consistent Special Education, Elementary 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 6 30.00% 14 70.00% 20 1.3 The teacher implements developmentally appropriate and challenging learning experiences. 2014-2015 Rare Occasional Frequent Consistent Total Special Education 1 5.88% 2 11.76% 6 35.29% 8 47.06% 17 2015-2016 Rare Occasional Frequent Consistent Total Special Education, Elementary 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 8 40.00% 12 60.00% 20
12 Standards 2.1 and 2.2: Learning Differences Indicator Endorsement Information Rare Occasional Frequent Consistent Grand Total 2.1 The teacher understands individual differences and diverse cultures and communities 2014-2015 Special Education 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 6 35.29% 11 64.71% 17 2015-2016 Rare Occasional Frequent Consistent Total Special Education, Elementary 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 5 25.00% 15 75.00% 20 2.2 The teacher ensures inclusive learning environments that enable each student to meet high demands 2014-2015 Rare Occasional Frequent Consistent Total Special Education 1 5.88% 2 11.76% 4 23.53% 10 58.82% 17 2015-2016 Rare Occasional Frequent Consistent Total Special Education, Elementary 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 4 20.00% 16 80.00% 20 Table 13 Standards 3.1 and 3.2: Learning Environments Indicator Endorsement Information Rare Occasional Frequent Consistent Grand Total 3.1 The teacher works with others to create environments that support individual and collaborative 2014-2015 Special Education 0 0.00% 2 11.76% 3 17.65% 12 70.59% 17 2015-2016 Rare Occasional Frequent Consistent Total
Year Endorsement Strongly Disagree Neither Agree nor Disagree Total 2014 - 2015 create effective instructional plans. Special Education K-6 & ELED K-6 0 0 1 10.00% 5 4 10 Special Education 0 1 1 4.8% 6 21 create effective new lesson SPM7 0 0 0 0.00% 4 1 5 Special Education 0 2 3 13.64% 5 22
Table 22 Item 8: Work Effectively as a Part of an Instructional Team Year Endorsement Neither nor Disagree Agree 2014 - 2015 work effectively as part of an instructional planning team. Special Education K-6 & ELED (SPED7) 0 1 1 2 6 10 Special Education 0 1 1 4.8% 21 work effectively as part of an instructional team SPM7 0 0 0 2 5 Special Education 0 1 4 8 22 2015
My instruction requires student problem solving and/or critical thinking skills SPM7 0 0 1 3 1 5 Special Education 0 0 2 6 22 25 Item 17: Adapt Instruction to Meet needs of Learners With Special Needs Year # Item Endorsement Neither Agree nor Disagree Agree 2014 - 2015 I my instruction to the needs of learners with special needs. Special Education K-6 & ELED K-6 (SPED7) 0 0 0 0.00% 4 6 10 Special Education 0 0 0 0% 21 7.
Subject Area Scoring Year # Item Endorsement Unacceptable Emergent Sufficient Advanced Grand Total 2015- 2016 13 Collaborative Relations and Professional Conduct: Uses effective communication and consultation techniques with other professionals and families for the benefit of student learning Elementary & Special Education 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 12 23.53% 38 74.51% 51 Special Education 0 0.00% 1 1.16% 28 32.56% 57 66.28% 86 Response from College of Education & Human Sciences Student Teaching Instrument Teacher Candidate Summative Evaluation Relationships for the 2014 -15 Academic Year on Reflection and Professional Growth (Item 14 – Table 33A). 33A Item 14: Reflection and Professional Growth 2014-15 Subject Area Scoring
Year # Item Endorsement Unsatisfactory Basic Proficient Grand Total 2014- 2015 14 Reflection and Professional Growth. Demonstrates capacity to continually evaluate how choices and actions affect students and others in the learning community and actively seeks opportunities to grow professionally. Special Education, K-6/ ELED, K-6 (SPM7) 0 0.00% 1 2.56% 38 97.44% 39 Special Education 0 0% 5 10.0% 45 90.0% 50 Response from College of Education & Human Sciences Student Teaching Instrument Teacher Candidate Summative Evaluation for the 2015-16 Academic Year -- Reflective Practices and Professional Growth (Item 14 – Table 33B) -- LIVETEXT version. Table 33B Item 14: Reflective Practices and Professional Growth 2015-16 Subject Area Scoring Year # Item Endorsement Unacceptable Emergent Sufficient Advanced Grand Total 2015- 2016 14 Reflective Practices and Professional Growth: Continually evaluates how choices and actions affects students and Elementary & Special Education 1 1.96% 0 0.00% 12 23.53% 38 74.51% 51