Science - Chadron State College

onioneyedtoiletΒιοτεχνολογία

20 Φεβ 2013 (πριν από 4 χρόνια και 3 μήνες)

735 εμφανίσεις

P a g e

|
1


NEBRASKA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

Teacher Preparation Content Program Review



Institution:

Chadron State College

Date Submitted:

Summer 2012

Contact Person:

Roger Kendrick

Phone:
308
-
432
-
6
23
6


Fax:
308
-
432
-
6429

Email:
rkendrick
@csc.edu

Content Group/Area:
Science

And/or

Endorsements and Grade level:

Biology(7
-
12), Chemistry(7
-
12), Earth Science(7
-
12), Natural Science(7
-
12),





a
nd

Physical Science(7
-
12)



Program Level:



X

Initial




Advanced

Is the program offered at more than one site?

Yes


X

No


If yes, lit the sites at which the program is offered:

_________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________
___________________________________

Type of Certificate:
X

Teaching


Administrative



Special Services

Accreditation Status:
X

NCATE


X

State




TEAC


Regional

Specialty Program Area Recognition ( if applicable):

Program Report Status:
X

Initial Review


Rejoinder



Response to Condition









X

X
X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

P a g e

|
2


Section 1: Contextual Information

Introduction

Institutional Overview

Chadron State College, which began as a Nebraska State Normal School in 1911, remains the only four
-
year
institution of higher education in western Nebraska. In 1964 the institution enhanced its mission and the name was
changed to Chadron State College (CS
C). The college has experienced numerous changes and continual growth over
their millennium.

Though small in number, early graduates represented education to a young, rugged, and rural society. Today,
the college prepares students for much more than teach
er education. The institutional role, mission, and objectives
cover comprehensive college curricula
,

which includes basic and advanced programs. Teacher education remains,
however, a central component. In 2010, for example, almost 30% of our student
-
body
pursued degrees in teaching.
These students are primarily from Chadron State’s expansive rural service region
,

which encompasses 26 counties
and approximately 34,700 square miles.


Total institutional enrollment, as of fall 2010, now stands at 2,759 stud
ents, of which 64% are full
-
time. The
majority of these students, a
pproximately 61%, are Nebraskan
s. Traditional students, students under 23 years of age
and single, make up the majority of the enrollment. Generally, students are first
-
generation and are

from small rural
high schools

with
graduating classes of 100 students or less. Non
-
traditional students, students over 23 years of age
or married, comprise 41
%
of our full
-
time undergraduate enrollment, the majority of which are women.

Due to the expan
se of
our

coverage area, Chadron State offers its courses, via interactive telecommunications,
to two locations, Scottsbluff and North Platte, Nebraska
,

in addition to face
-
to
-
face instruction at these sites.

Institutional Charge, Vision and Mission Statem
ents

Statutory charge.

Priorities for Nebraska State Colleges
,

as established by
the s
tate legislature and
reported in the 2006 Coordinating Commission for Postsecondary Education

Comprehensive Statewide Plan
for Postsecondary Education
,

are:




First
instructional priority is the provision of baccalaureate general academic, occupational, and
education degree programs;



Second
instructional priority is to provide master's programs in education and other disciplines
authorized by statute or by the Commis
sion;



Third
priorities are applied research, public service activities, and continuing education activities that
serve their geographic service areas.

The Commission further defines CSC’s programmatic service as a Master's (comprehensive)
College/Universi
ty I Carnegie classification. Chadron State College's programmatic service area includes
baccalaureate level liberal arts, occupational degree programs and professional degree programs in education.



The primary focus of Chadron State College's educational

programs is high quality, comprehensive
undergraduate programs leading to baccalaureate degrees in arts and sciences, business, and teacher
education, all of which are enhanced by a coherent general education program.



Chadron State College’s new baccalau
reate degree programs will reflect the needs of its service area
and the priorities of the State College Board of Trustees.



Chadron State College offers the Master of Education, the Master of

P a g e

|
3


Organizational Management
,

and the Master of Business Administ
ration degrees.
http://www.ccpe.state.ne.us/PublicDoc/CCPE/


Like Peru and Wayne State Colleges (the other two institutions within the Nebraska State College
system), Chadron State is a regional

institution dedicated to teaching,
scholarship
, and community service
,

and serves a defined, geographical region.

Institutional vision and mission statements.

The vision and mission as established by the faculty,
professional staff, and administration
at Chadron State College are:



Vision

Chadron State College aspires to be a premiere institution of higher education in the western high
plains states, innovatively pursuing excellence in teaching, scholarship, and service.



Mission

Chadron State College w
ill enrich the quality of life in the region by providing

educational opportunities, research, service, and programs that contribute significantly to the vitality
and diversity of the region.


The vision and mission set

the focus for the future of the
institution and aid

in the development of the
strategic plan which will guide us into a continuous state of improvement, and is designed to meet the needs
of the region we serve.

Institutional Strategic Plan


Chadron State College has four outcome initiati
ves and twenty accompanying actions to achieve the
initiatives set forth in the plan. The strategic plan for 2011 and beyond is

as follows
:

1.

Initiative One
:
Streamlined, Relevant, High
-
Impact Learning Experiences



Action (1) Revise Essential Learning Progra
m (General Studies)



Action (2) Create integrated and interdisciplinary programs



Action (3) Implement experiential learning for college seniors



Action (4) Expand student literacy to all

areas of technology and
media



Action (5) Create co
-
curricular experienc
es that emphasize

leadership, engagement,
civic responsibility and positive human interaction



Action (6) Refine and redefine course delivery models



Action (7) Promote standards of quality for courses and teaching



Action (8) Establish a technology
-
supporte
d, collaborative and creative teaching and learning
center to provide appropriate resources and tools to create high
-
impact learning experiences


2. Initiative Two
:
Competitive, Customer
-
focused Delivery of Services in


Support of Teaching and Learning



Action (9) Develop a campus
-
wide definition and process for student advising and schedule
building

P a g e

|
4




Action (10) Initiate a review of internal service gaps and establish a plan to improve
communication and timely comple
tion of services



Action (11) Review all campus services for relevance and efficiency



Action (12) Initiate a review of internal service gaps with respect to academic computing
services



Action (13) Establish a deliberate collaborative process to improve comm
unication and
effective teamwork across all areas of the college


3. Initiative Three
:
Optimal Use of Limited Human and Physical Resources



Action (14) Based on the campus
-
wide review of services for relevance and efficiency
(#11above) reallocate human r
esources more effectively according to mission
-
critical
processes and functions as opposed to historical silos



Action (15) Implement a system of assessment and accountability for ensuring quality of
mission critical functions



Action (16) Differentiate and
streamline the role and responsibilities of faculty and staff



Action (17) Initiate a digital document and self
-
service plan for process flow improvement,
accountability, document storage and retrieval, and paper reduction


4. Initiative Four
:
Increased
Revenue



Action (18) Re
-
allocate one or more existing personnel lines to focus exclusively on market
development



Action (19) Develop internal support for grant
-
writing



Action (20) Build on fundraising momentum developed during the Vision
2011Comprehensive
Campaign


Link to Strategic Plan


Education Unit Mission/Philosophy

Chadron State College’s professional
preparation programs are designed to produce “Visionary
Leaders for Lifelong Learning”.


Mission

The mission of the Chadron State College Education Unit, founded on educating Visionary Leaders,
is committed to creating diverse educational environments that

are thoughtfully structured to provide
opportunity for the success of all learners, now and for the future.



To accomplish the mission, CSC provides teacher, administrator, and counselor candidates
with deliberate and appropriate educational experiences.

Knowledge, skills, and dispositions are
developed through extensive classroom and field
-
based interactions. Candidates have opportunities
to develop their

own professional philosophy and teaching style while learning to meet the needs of
learners in au
thentic educational settings. This is accomplished with a vision that embraces tradition,
innovation, and the strength of diversity, always with an eye to the future.

P a g e

|
5


Philosophically, Education Unit faculty
members
act upon a set of beliefs that reflect the importance
placed on the preparation of qualified professional educators who will meet the learning needs of all children
in P
-
12 educational settings. To this end, unit faculty members are dedicated to the devel
opment of
Visionary
Leaders
. The Education Unit believes the educator’s role is to facilitate learning. This facilitation is
accomplished by creating opportunities for all learners to actively engage and participate in their learning
environment, and to p
rocess knowledge delivered through methods appropriate to their individual learning
style. The model is based, to a great extent, on the constructivist theory of learning.

Description of the Education Unit


Organization and Structure

The Education Unit i
s comprised of the Education
Department
and other campus departments
providing

teacher certification endorsement coursework at the initial and advanced levels. Campus
departments offering endorsements are: Applied Sciences; Business; Counseling, Psychology
, and Social
Work; Education; English and Humanities; Health, Physical Education, and Recreation; Library Services;
Mathematical Sciences; Music; Physical and Life Sciences; Social and Communication Arts; a
nd Visual and
Performing Arts.
Link to C
SC

Organizational C
hart


The
CSC
Department of Education houses the initial programs for Elementary Edu
cation, Early
Childhood Education, Early Childhood

Unified Education
, and Special Education
,

as well as

advanced
programs in Reading Specialist, Educational Administration, and Curriculum and Instruction. (Curriculum
and Instruction is not an endorsement p
rogram but rather an advanced, professional master’s degree.) The
Education Department holds the major responsibility for providing professional teacher education curriculum.

The Educatio
n Unit is led by the unit head, the
Academic Dean for Professional
Licensure. The
responsibilities of the academic dean include administrative oversight for program licensures and education
programs. The
d
ean serves as Chair of the Teacher Education Committee which includes teacher educators
from each of the
departments
providing
endorsement areas
,

and faculty teaching the professional teacher
education programs. This committee is at the frontline for recommendation of policy, curriculum and
procedures, and, also reviews assessment data and makes recommendations for chan
ge in curriculum,
program and assessment processes. Membership of the Teacher Education Committee also includes one
student and two public school representatives.

At Chadron State College, curricular changes at the initial and advanced levels are initia
ted within the
departments and then presented to the Teacher Education Committee for advisement input. Initial level
curriculum changes for all programs are presented to the Faculty Senate
’s

Academic Review Committee for
final approval. Advanced level
/

g
raduate program changes are
presented to the Faculty Senate’s
Graduate
Council, for final approval. The major function of these committees is to see that changes align with CSC
and Nebraska State College System policies.

The Education Unit offers teacher
education programs to distant, outreach sites located in North
Platte and Scottsbluff, Nebraska, and in
Sheridan, Wyoming.

The predominant initial education program at
these sites is Elementary Education, where candidates may complete their entire pre
-
se
rvice curriculum.
These programs operate cooperatively with the community colleges in their corresponding locations. At the
advanced level, distant, outreach programs are also offered in North Platte and Scottsbluff, Nebraska
,

for the
School Counseling program. Through a combination of on
-
line delivery and face
-
to
-
face delivery, students
P a g e

|
6


may complete these programs at the distance sites, enabling Chadron State to better meet the needs of the
region.



The Education Unit also o
ffers secondary level, post
-
baccalaureate certification course programs at
these distant, outreach sites and on the main campus. Initial and advanced program course delivery may be
offered and received via interactive television (ITV), on
-
line, or through
face
-
to
-
face instructional formats.

The Unit

The Teacher Education Unit offers certification programs aligned with state and national standards.
Chadron State College offers twenty
-
eight initial
endorsement
programs, four initial supplemental
endorsement
s, and four advanced endorsements.


The following endorsements are currently in the phase
-
out
stage:
S
pecialist
-
Superintendent, secondary field
-
Industrial Education Technology, supplemental
-

Skilled
and Technical Science Education, and

supplemental
-

Dr
iver Education.


Certification programs offered
through the Unit are:

Initial Level Programs (Bachelor of Science Degree (BS))



Secondary Education (7
-
12)

o

Art (K
-
12)

o

Basic Business (
6
-
12) (4
-
9)

o

Biology (7
-
12)

o

Business Marketing and Information Technology
Education (6
-
12)

o

Chemistry (7
-
12)

o

Coaching (7
-
12)

o

Earth Science (7
-
12)

o

Educational Library Media (K
-
12)

o

English (7
-
12)

o

Family and Consumer Sciences Education (7
-
12) (4
-
9)

o

Health (7
-
12)

o

Health and Physical Education (K
-
12)

o

History (7
-
12)

o

Industrial Technolo
gy Education (6
-
12)

o

Language Arts (7
-
12) (4
-
9)

o

Mathematics (7
-
12) (4
-
9)

o

Music (K
-
12)

o

Natural Science (7
-
12) (4
-
9)

o

Physical Education (K
-
6) (7
-
12)

o

Physical Science (7
-
12)

o

Physics (7
-
12)

o

Social Science (7
-
12) (4
-
9)

o

Theatre (7
-
12)

o

Vocal Music (K
-
8)



Middle
Grades (4
-
9)



Elementary Education (K
-
8)



Early Childhood (B
-
3)



Early Childhood Unified Education (B
-
3)

P a g e

|
7




Mild/Moderate Disabilities (K
-
12)



Advanced Level Programs (Masters of Science Degree (MS))



Education
al

Administration

o

School Principal; (K
-
12) (K
-
6) (4
-
9) (7
-
12) Endorsement

o

Special Education Coordinator; (K
-
12) Non
-
endorsement



School Counseling; (K
-
12) (K
-
6) (7
-
12)



Curriculum and Instruction; Non
-
endorsement

o

Secondary Education

o

Elementary Field

o

Elementary Generalist



Reading Specialist; (K
-
12) Endorsement (non
-
degree seeking)


In the 2010
-
2011 academic year, at the initial level, education majors numbered 604. Of these, 125 were part
-
time students. At the advanced level, 164 of the 180 students were enrolled part
-
ti
me. For the 2010
-
2011 academic
year 82 students graduated
at the
advanced level. This represented approximately 55% of the institutions advanced
degrees granted.

Unit Field Experience Requirements


All initial level candidates must complete 100
-

125 cloc
k hours of classroom observation
/participation

within
a
classroom

setting prior to their student teaching capstone experience; this number varies between Secondary and
Elementary level programs
, respectively.

Pre
-
service field experience hours are require
d at all levels throughout the
program, culminating with the student teaching field experience. Field experiences and their respective hourly
requirements are listed below.



EDUC 131: Introduction to Teaching
--

10 clock hours of classroom observation



PSYC

231: Education
al

Psychology
--

15 clock hours of classroom observation



EDUC 300/320: Education Observation & Participation:

o

EDUC 300: 75 clock hours for secondary candidates, and

o

EDUC 320: 100 clock hours for elementary candidates

o

EDUC 480/490: Student Teaching


40 hours per week, over 16 weeks (1


semester)

See
Chadron State College Ge
neral Catalog


for
written evidence.

At the advanced level, the endorsement for Educational Administration requires 250 hours of field experience.
The School Counseling endorsement program requires 450 hours of field experience for K
-
6 endorsement; 450 h
ours
of field experience for 7
-
12 endorsement; and 900 hours for K
-
12 endorsement.

See
Chadron
State College Graduate
Catalog

for written evidence.

Program Transition/Gateway Points: Admission, Retention and Exit

(Initial and Advanced Programs)

Initial Level Gateways.
At the initial level candidates are provided basic information about program
ga
teways (transition points) and assessments. The information is outlined and available online, in the
Teacher
Education Handbook

and the
CSC General Catalog 2011
-
2013


as well as in several edu
cation courses, e.g., EDUC
P a g e

|
8


131: Intro to Teaching; EDUC 300/320: Observation & Participation.

Five (5)

transition points (gateways) serve as a
guide for the candidates. A summary of these transitions/gateways is below.

Gateway 1: Admission to Chadron
State College

Chadron State College admits all graduates of accredited Nebraska high schools and qualified out
-
of
-
state
students. Upon admission to CSC students must: (1) complete the ACT or SAT exam and have official scores sent
directly to the CSC Admiss
ions Office; (2) have official high school/college transcripts sent; (3) submit application
form and fee. Advisors are assigned to all students who gain entry into the college.
Candidates enrolling in teacher
education programs of study have, as their prim
ary advisors, faculty from either the Education
D
epartment
(Elementary and Special Education programs)

or the department responsible for the endorsement (Middle Grades
and Secondary Education programs)
.

Transfer students work through the START Office (Student Transition and Registration Team) to have their
transcripts evaluated for CSC General Studies program requirements. Following the evaluation, the candidate is
assigned an advisor. Transfer students
who have completed an Associate’s Degree from an accredited institution are
given credit for the CSC General Studies program requirements with the exception of six (6) credit hours of upper
division level courses (Ethics and a
global and social/cultural aw
areness

course
). An evaluation is then conducted
related to the teacher education program core competencies as described in the
c
onceptual
f
ramework document.

Gateway 2: Pre
-
Admission to Teacher Education Program

Pre
-
Admission program requirements, stude
nts/candidates must: (1) complete EDUC 131: Introduction to
Teaching with at least a grade of “C” or better; (2) submit the Education Dossier; (3) submit proof of a current
background check and a notarized statement pertaining to criminal history and menta
l fitness, “Felony and Mental
Oath Statement”; and (4) submit application form, including a record of the above listed documents.

Gateway 3: Admission to Teacher Education Program (Candidacy)

Prior to

admission to the Teacher Education Program and enrollment in EDUC 300 or 320: Observation &
Participation, students/candidates must: (1) pass standardized basic skills proficiency test (Praxis I/PPST) with
minimum scores of 170 in reading, 172 in writing
, and 171 in mathematics; (2) submit application form; (3) complete
coursework with at least a 2.5 grade point average on a four
-
point scale; (4) earn a “C” or above in English
composition and oral communication (ENG 135, ENG136, and CA 125) or equivalent
courses; (5) earn a grade of “C”
or above in all professional education core coursework; and (6)
submit proof of a current background check and a
notarized statement pertaining to criminal history and mental fitness, “Felony and Mental Oath Statement”.
Stu
dents/
Candidates who meet all pre
-
requisites may register for EDUC 300 or 320 Observation & Participation
(field experience 75
-
1
25

hours). At this point students are fully admitted into the Education Program and officially
become “candidates.”

Gateway 4a:
Admission to Semester I of the Professional Year (Block)


Pr
ior to admission to Semester I of

the Professional Year (Block), the candidates must: (1a)
elementary
-
level
candidates

must complete
Elementary

endorsement area and at least 50% of another endorse
ment(s) and/or a
supporting minor(s); (1b)
secondary
-
level candidates

must complete
Professional Education coursework

and at least
75% of
secondary content

endorsement; and (1c)
middle
-
level candidates

must complete all of the professional
education course
s and at least 15 of the 18 required credit hours for the first content area of specialization, and at
least 12 of the 18 credit hours of the second specialization;
All candidates

must (2) complete EDUC 300 or 320 with
a grade of “C” or above (75/1
25

hour
s of verified field experience); (3) earn a GPA of 2.50 for all coursework and in
P a g e

|
9


each endorsement and/or supporting minor; (4) complete 90 credit hours and must meet residency requirements;
(5) present five (5) faculty recommendations; (6) be recommended
by the department faculty of the endorsement(s)
area(s); (7) submit a revised Education Dossier; (8) submit proof of a current background check and a notarized
statement pertaining to criminal history and mental fitness, “Felony and Mental Oath Statement”;

and (9) submit
the Application to the Professional Year form.



Gateway 4b: Admission to Semester II of the Professional Year (Teacher Internship)


Prior to placement in Semester II of the Professional Year (Teacher Internship/student teaching),
candidates
must: (1) complete Semester I of the Professional Year (Block) with a grade of “C” or above in all courses; and (2)
submit proof of a current background check and a notarized statement pertaining to criminal history and mental
fitness, “Felony a
nd Mental Oath Statement.”

Gateway 5: Graduation, Certification and Entry to the Profession


Upon graduation, candidates will have met all the teacher certification requirements for Nebraska licensure.
These requirements are: (1) submission of the Applica
tion for Graduation to the Registrar’s Office; (2) completion of
the Teacher Intern (student teaching) experience with a minimum GPA of 2.5 (State of Nebraska requirement); (3)
complete all CSC degree requirements; and (4) submit application for a teaching

cert
ificate. (See
Initial Gateway
Table
.
)

Advanced Level Gateways
.
At the advanced
level candidates are provided the gateway information online
in the
CSC
Graduate Catalog 2011
-
2013

and at the

CSC Graduate website
http://www.csc.edu/graduate/index.csc
).
The candidates must proceed through the following four (4) transition (gateway) points:

Gateway 1: Admission to Graduate Study

Chadron Stat
e College admits all candidates for the Master of Education degree who hold a Bachelor’s
degree in Education from accredited colleges and universities. In addition the candidate must: (1) have earned an
undergraduate GPA of 2.75 or have completed 12 gradua
te hours at CSC with a GPA of 3.25 or higher; and (2)
submit an application for admission to graduate study. (The Graduate Record Examination (GRE) is required for the
Masters of Education in Curriculum and Instruction, Science focus).

Gateway 2: Admission

to Graduate Status (filing Plan of Study)

Admission to Graduate Status requires completion of a Plan of Study within the first 9
-
18 hours of graduate
coursework. Candidates must maintain a 3.00 GPA or higher.

Gateway 3: Application for Oral Examination

A
pplication must be made for the Oral Examination for the Master’s Degree. The candidate must: (1) submit
the application form; (2) complete the majority of coursework and practicum requirements as described by each
department and college policy; (3) maint
ain a minimum GPA of 3.00 for all program coursework; (4) meet all college
requirements for credit hours and residency; and (5) be enrolled in course work necessary to complete the degree.
The student must complete the degree program within a period of sev
en years from the year the student completed
his or her graduate course applicable toward their degree.

P a g e

|
10


Gateway 4: Application for Graduation and Conferring of Degree

Candidate must: (1) complete and submit application for graduation; (2) prepare and present a professional
portfolio document in the area of concentration; (3) complete all requirements successfully as stated on the plan of
study; and (4) pass a final oral

examination.

See

Advanced Programs Gateway Table
.



Key Program Assessments

Initial Level Key Assessments
.
Consistent with each
p
rogram
g
ateway (cited above) are specific program
key assessments
.
Table for Key Assessments for Initial Programs
-
Attachment C

as well as

the


CSC Assessment Plan
for Initial Programs

are presented in each endorsement folio. As the tables illustrate, the key assessments cover
content knowledge; pedagogical and professional knowledge, skill and dispositions
; and effects on student learning.
Multiple assessments are applied for each assessment target.

Advanced Level Key Assessments.

Advanced level assessments for the Educational
Administration, School Counseling, and Curriculum and Instruction are presente
d in the
Table of Key
Assessment Advanced Programs
-

Attachment C
.

The assessments address content knowledge, pedagogical
and professional knowledge, skills and disposition, and effects on student learning. Multiple assessments are
applied to each key area for these programs in the
CSC Assessment Plan for Advanced Programs.

Explanation of

the Conceptual Framework
-
Developing Visionary Leaders for Lifelong Learning

The term “visionary,” in the context of the model, implies a forward looking, far
-
seeing, positive, and
open
-
minded approach to learning. The Education Unit at Chadron State Coll
ege prepares candidates to
provide visionary leadership within the high plains educational settings and to educational environments
beyond this region. The model supports and compliments the Chadron State College Vision and Mission.

The model for “Developi
ng Visionary Leaders for Life Long Learning” is depicted by three
interlocking circles, each representing an interrelated area of the curriculum, for the initial level: General
Studies, Specialty Studies, and Professional Studies. The
General Studies curr
iculum is designed to provide
candidates with a broad liberal

studies background, while the
Specialty Studies curricula is comprised of the
content coursework in each teaching endorsement area offered at Chadron State College. The Professional
Studies cur
riculum is comprised of those core education courses taught by Education Department faculty.
These Professional Studies courses emphasize the pedagogical knowledge, skills, and dispositions candidates
use to effectively teach P
-
12 students. At the gradua
te (advanced) level, the “Visionary Leader” model
continues to build on the pedagogical knowledge, skills, and dispositions developed for the candidate’s
academic and professional career. The General
S
tudies represent
s

the core master’s program (research a
nd
inquiry);
S
pecialty
S
tudies
describes

the
specialized
content necessary for the degree; and the
P
rofessional
S
tudies encompasses the practical and field based learning’s demonstrated by the candidate.

At the advanced
level, Specialty and Professional St
udies often are blended into the same courses and experiences.

P a g e

|
11



The Professional Studies circle of the model embraces the
seven

components

that make up the
conceptual framework for the Unit. These components are: Assessment, Communication, Human
Relations/
Diversity
, Methodology/Technology, Professionalism, Thinking Skills, and Leadership.

These
seven

components are interwoven throughout the

unit’s
professional preparation programs and form the basis
of the constructivist approach in preparing candidates to become Visionary Leaders. The seven components
are introduced and developed within the first three years of the initial candidate’s educ
ational program, and
serve as the basis for each of the
u
nit’s
k
ey
a
ssessments. Advanced level candidates receive their introduction
to the components during the EDCI 631

Introduction to Graduate Studies course.
Following are the seven
components of the Vi
sionary Leader Model and their respective student outcome statements. (The colors of
each
c
onceptual
f
ramework component will be used throughout the folio to visually link
CSC’s

Conceptual
Framework to key assessment data displays.)


Assessment.

Successfu
l candidates will understand both formal and informal strategies to assess the
learner’s intellectual, social, and physical development. The candidate will be able to design and assess
learning activities utilizing the data collected from those assessment

measures to make instructional and/or
curricular decisions to improve student learning.

Communication.

Successful candidates will demonstrate effective communication skills with all
constituents, while respecting diversity and engaging students in the learning enterprise through motivation
and constructive learning applications.

Human Relations/Diversity
.


Successful candidates will develop and maintain a physically inclusive
and emotionally safe classroom environment conducive to effective learning, which encourages the voicing of
student concerns, embraces elements of diversity, and exhibits an understand
ing of child growth and
development.

Methodology/Technology
.

Successful candidates will demonstrate the active willingness to model
and use skills and knowledge to promote learning activities that are consistent with identified learning
objectives, using

varied methodological and technology driven modalities. Similarly, candidates are
constructing their own beliefs about effective teaching practices.

P a g e

|
12


Professionalism
.
Successful candidates will demonstrate conduct befitting a professional educator,
to
include the following dispositions: regular self
-
reflection; positive ethical behavior; respectful attitude;
proper mode of dress; effective classroom management skills; appropriate knowledge of subject matter; and
seeks the opportunity to grow professiona
lly.

Thinking Skills
.
Thinking skills apply to all subjects and to student learning at all levels.
Candidates at all levels will recognize and demonstrate activities that elicit critical thought beyond recall and
comprehension.

Leadership
.

Successful candidates recognize and demonstrate leadership traits that promote the
engagement of individuals in a professional and ethical manner to lead toward common goals.

Candidate Proficiencies Aligned with Professional and State Standards

In
applying the seven components of the Visionary Leader model with their associated outcomes,
candidates meet the professional standards for the Nebraska Department of Education and National Council
for Accreditation of Teacher Education preparing educators
and other professional school personnel for initial
and advanced programs. The matrix shown in Section II will illustrate the alignment of the Nebraska
Standard to the individual endorsements offered at Ch
adron State College.

Section
2:

Key Assessments and Findings

This section will describe the

results for the natural science

endorsement

for
content;
pedagogical and professional knowledge, skills, and dispositions as related to the Chadron State
College
c
onceptual
f
ramework; and
effects

on
student learning.
The section will also briefly discuss
the comparison of
s
cience education candidates to the other
s
cience majors at Chadron State.

(Note:
Science endorsements are available at Chadron State College for
biology, chemistry, earth scienc
e,
physics, physical sciences

as well as natural science; however, there have been no completers during
the fall 2007 through spring 2001 reporting period. All data will be based on the natural science
endorsement candidates.)

Content Knowledge

Content kno
wledge (subject matter)
is assessed with three measures
:

the grade point average
(GPA)
calculated on the

endorsement
curriculum content
,
the content
area assessment
score
provided by the
endorsement area

faculty based on the program

s specialized
performance measures
,
and the candidate’s performance during

student teaching relative to content knowledge
. Grade point
average in the endorsement area is checked prior to the candidate’s admission to the Professional
Year.
(See
Initial Program Gateway Table
,
Table of Key Assessments Initial Programs
, and
CSC
Assessment Plan for Initial Programs
.)

The
Content Area Assessment for Secondary/Specialized
Endorsements

spreadsheet
represents the average
content knowledge
performance

scores
from f
all 2007 through
s
pring 2011.
The spreadsheet displays the three assessments used for content
:

(
a
) endorsement content grade point
P a g e

|
13


average

(GPA)

and the standard dev
iation, (
b
) the content area
assessment
score average and
standard deviation from the
endorsement
department faculty, and (
c
) the content
knowledge
question/rating from the
Teacher Intern Checklist

(TIC)
score
average and standard deviation
from
the
teach
er internship (
student
teaching)

experience provided by the cooperating teacher
, the
college
supervisor
,

and the candidate.

TIC Content?”

refers
to

the
Teacher Intern Checklist
rating
which is
the
knowledge
assessment for the student teaching experience.
The cooperating teacher is the P
-
12
teacher who is working with the candidate within the school. The supervisor is the college faculty
observing the candidate during the internship.

Self


refers to the candidate
’s

assessment of
his or
her

performance.

Fo
r
science

education
candidates
, the content area assessment score is based on a faculty
recommendation
utilizing the
Content Area Assessment Rubric
.
Determination of this content
area
assessment
score comes from performance scores for Seminar I and Seminar II. These seminars
require the students to integrate information from their entire undergraduat
e curriculum as they seek
to understand current knowledge in a key research area. Within the first seminar the
candidates/
students read primary scientific literature papers and prepare a poster that synthesizes the
data from these sources. Multiple faculty

members analy
ze

these posters. In the second seminar the
candidates/
students develop a written literature review on a current research topic and present the
information in an oral exposition. Again
,

multiple faculty members evaluate the presentation.

Section
2:

Table
1

illustrates the content scores for
natural science
candidates, uses averages
and standard deviations on a
4
-
point

scale, and shows the average content knowledge scores for all
non
-
Praxis II endorsement area education candidates.
The cont
ent area score average for science
candidates is 3.52 (.55) while the average content score for secondary candidates is 3.49 (.38).
Natural science candidates are scoring at the same level as the total on this measure. For natural
science candidates, the
multiyear average for (a) the GPA within the endorsement courses is 3.11
(.38), (b) the content area assessment score average is 3.52 (.55), and (c) the candidate internship
content knowledge score averages are: 3.67 (.52) from cooperating teachers, 3.50 (
.58) from college
supervisors, and 3.72 (.44) from candidates. The overall GPA course average for natural science
candidates is slightly lower than all secondary candidates. The education GPA course average of
3.76 (.17) for natural science candidates is t
he same as the average secondary candidate, which is
3.76 (.22). Also, the GPA within the endorsement courses at 3.11 (.38) is slightly lower than the
average secondary candidate at 3.58 (.29).


Natural s
cience endorsement candidates perform at approximat
ely the same level as the other
science majors. The largest portion of the science program at CSC is within the hea
lth professional
programs. Science
education candidates are a minor portion of the total science majors
;
therefore
,

strong comparisons are di
fficult to determine.

Section
2
: Table 1

Natural Science

Candidates


and all Candidates


Content Knowledge Scores


P a g e

|
14




Overall
GPA @
Graduation

Education
Courses
GPA

Endorsement
Content
GPA

Content
Area
Assessment
Score

TIC
Content

?
Cooperating
Teacher

TIC

Content

?
Supervisor

TIC
Content

? Self

Natural Science Total Spring 2008
-

Spring 2011 n = 11; n = 15 with Fall 2007

Average

3.35

3.76

3.11

3.52

3.67

3.50

3.72

SD

0.35

0.17

0.38

0.55

0.52

0.58

0.44

No completers or data from Fall 2007
-

Spring 2011
for the following endorsement areas: biology, chemistry, earth
science, physics, physical sciences

Endorsement Content Areas (K
-
12; K
-
8; 7
-
12) Total Fall 2007
-

Spring 2011
N

= 160;
N

= 175 with Fall 2007 (Fall
2007, used a 5
-
point scale)

Average

3.56

3.76

3.58

3.49

3.75

3.83

3.67

SD

0.29

0.22

0.29

0.38

0.38

0.26

0.39

Scale: 4

Advanced (A
-
level), 3

Proficient (B
-
level), 2

Progressing (C
-
level), 1/0 Unacceptable (D/F level).

Teacher Intern Checklist Question
/Rating

(TIC ?): The intern’s overall knowledge of his/her subject matter.

Fall 2007 data
are not included in the calculation as those scores were calculated on the previously used
5
-
point

scale.

For complete d
ata sets use the following link
:
Natural Sci
ence Key Assessment Content Knowledge
KSD


Natural Science

Content Tab 1


Pedagogical and Professional Knowledge, Skills, and Dispositions

Developmental Key Assessments

Results for the Total Candidate Group
Pedagogical and
professional knowledge, skills, and dispositions are measured as part of CSC’s
Visionary Leader
Conceptual Framework

during EDUC 131 Introduction to Teaching, PSCY 231 Educational
Psychology, and EDUC 300/320 Observation and Participation prior to the Professional Year. Key
program assessments are embedded into each of these co
urses. The key assessments are built around
a clinical experience at each level, and feature an internal and external evaluator model. Professional
education courses include pedagogical knowledge; thus, education course GPA is a measure of
pedagogical know
ledge. This measure is described in the previous section.

Candidates must pass
professional education courses with a “C” or above as described in the Initial Programs Gateway
Table. (
See
Initial Program Gateway Table
,
Table of Key Assessments Initial Programs
,
and

CSC
Assessment Plan for Initial Programs
). Results for each key assessment follow.

Freshman
L
evel

E
DUC 131 Introduction to Teaching

Cooperating P
-
12 teachers and
EDUC 131 professors evaluated freshman level students/candidates on their clinical experiences.
Students/candidates at this level are not divided by endorsement or program, as many have not
declared a specialization. Cooperat
ing teachers’ ratings are related to student/candidate’s
demonstrated behaviors in professionalism and dispositions. Professors’ ratings are based on the
cooperating teachers’ ratings and the student/candidate’s performance on the Observation Report.
P a g e

|
15


(Assi
gnment information and both assessment rubrics may be found in the
EDUC 131 Rubric/Forms

folder
.)

Cooperating teachers rate C
SC students/candidates much higher than EDUC 131 professors.
Cooperating teachers’ ratings range from 3.73 (.51) for Communication to 3.86 (.39) for Attendance.
All ratings fall into the Proficient (
3
) level. Professors consider these ratings, but also eva
luate the
student/candidate’s report of the observation experience. The report describes other dimensions
relating to course content and skills. Professors’ ratings range from 2.77 (.76) for
Methodology/Technology to 3.00 (.86) for Human Relations/Diversi
ty. Ratings generally are at the
Progressing (
2
) level, except Human Relations/Diversity. Overall, cooperating teachers’ rating of
students/candidates is 3.80 (.36); overall professors’ rating of students/candidates is 2.86 (.83). The
ratings are higher an
d the variability is much lower for cooperating teachers’ ratings than it is for
professors’ ratings. This difference may indicate CSC students/candidates performance is more
positive and more uniform in the schools than it is on the classroom observation
report assignment.
(See Section 2: Table 2 below.)

P a g e

|
16


Section
2
: Table
2

EDUC 131 Intro to Teaching Cooperating Teacher’s and Professors’ Summary Data

EDUC 131 Intro to Teaching Summary Data
--
Fall 2007
-

Summer 2011



Cooperating Teachers’ Evaluation

Professors’ Evaluation from Observation Report



Cooperation

Appearance

Attitude

Communication

Attendance

Alertness

Average

SD

Leadership

Assessment

Communication

Human
Relations/
Diversity

Methodology/
Technology

Professionalism

Thinking Skills

Average

SD

Average

Grand
Total
N

=
752


3.81

3.76

3.84

3.73

3.86

3.82

3.80



2.88

2.70

2.94

3.00

2.77

2.92

2.82

2.86



SD

0.43

0.47

0.40

0.51

0.39

0.42



0.36

0.87

0.74

0.88

0.86

0.76

0.87

0.81



0.83

Scale: 4

Advanced (A
-
level), 3

Proficient (B
-
level), 2

Progressing (C
-
level), 1/0 Unacceptable (D/F level).


For complete data sets use the following links:
EDUC 131 Professors Tables
-
Charts

and
EDUC
131 Cooperating Teachers Tables
-
Charts


Sophomore

L
evel

PSYC
231 Educational Psychology

Cooperating P
-
12 teachers and
PSYC 231 professors evaluate sophomore level students/candidates on their clinical experiences.
Students/candidates at this level are not divided by endorsement or program, as many have not
declared

a specialization. Cooperating teachers’ ratings are related to student/candidate’s
demonstrated behaviors in professionalism and dispositions. Professors’ ratings are based on the
cooperating teachers’ ratings and the student/candidate’s performance on th
e Observation Report.
(Assignment information and both assessment rubrics may be found in the
PSYC 231 Rubric/Forms

folder.)

Cooperating teachers rate CSC students/candidates about the same as PSYC 231 professors.
Cooperating teachers’ ratings range from
3.09 (.41) for Communication to 3.21(.30) for Attendance.
All ratings fall into the Proficient (
3
) level. Professors conside
r these ratings, but also evaluate the
student/candidate’s report of the observation experience. The report describes other dimensions
relating to course content and skills. Professors’ ratings range from 3.09 (.96) for Leadership to 3.18
(.98) for Thinki
ng Skills. Ratings are at the Proficient (
3
) level.

Average scores are very similar, but
the variability is much lower for cooperating teachers’ ratings than it is for professors’ ratings. This
difference may indicate CSC students/candidates’ performance
is more uniform in the schools than it
is on the classroom observation report assignment. (See Section 2: Table 3 below.)

P a g e

|
17


Section
2
: Table
3

PSYC 231

Educational Psychology

Cooperating Teacher’s and Professors’ Summary Data

PSYC 231 Educational Psychology

Summary Data
--
Fall 2007
-

Summer 2011




Cooperating Teachers’ Evaluation

Professors’ Evaluation from Observation Report



Cooperation

Appearance

Attitude

Communication

Attendance

Alertness

Average

SD

Leadership

Assessment

Communication

Human
Relations/

Diversity

Methodology/
Technology

Professionalism

Thinking Skills

Average

SD

Average

Grand
Total
N

=
526

3.14

3.13

3.16

3.09

3.21

3.16

3.77



3.09

3.14

3.12

3.13

3.14

3.13

3.18

3.13


SD

0.37

0.41

0.37

0.41

0.30

0.36



0.44

0.96

0.96

0.97

0.96

0.97

0.99

0.98


0.97

Scale: 4

Advanced (A
-
level), 3

Proficient (B
-
level), 2

Progressing (C
-
level), 1/0 Unacceptable (D/F level)


For complete data sets use the following links:
PSYC 231 Cooperating Teachers Tables
-
Charts

and
PSYC 231 Professors Tables
-
Charts


Junior

L
evel

EDUC 300/320 Observation and Participation
Cooperating P
-
12

teachers
evaluate junior level candidates on their clinical experiences. EDUC 300/320 Observation and
Participation professors did not complete an evaluation, but they did grade the candidate and
conducted an informal exit interview. (In the future the pr
ofessor will complete the same evaluation
rubric as the cooperating teacher.) Candidates at this level are divided by program for data purposes,
and they are admitted into the Teacher Education program. Cooperating teachers’ ratings are related
to candidat
e’s demonstrated behaviors in professionalism and dispositions. (Assignments and rubrics
may be found in the
EDUC 300/320

Rubric/Forms

folder.)

Section 2: Table 4 describes the cooperating teachers’ ratings. Cooperating teachers’ ratings
range from
3.
62

(.
62
) for Communication
and Thinking Skills
to 3.
85
(.3
5
) for
Human Relations
Diversity
. All ratings fall into the
Proficient (
3
) level.

P a g e

|
18


Section
2
: Table
4

EDUC 300/320 Observation & Participation

Cooperating Teacher’s and Professors’ Summary Data

EDUC 300/320 Observation & Participation

Summary Data by Conceptual Framework Dimensions Spring 2008


Spring 2011



Leadership

Assessment

Communication

Human
Relations/Diversity

Methodol
o
gy/

Technology

Professionalism

Thinking Skills

Average

Standard Deviation

Elementary Grand Average
N

= 194

3.76

3.75

3.64

3.87

3.67

3.84

3.62

3.76

3.76

Elementary Grand SD

0.44

0.45

0.52

0.33

0.49

0.39

0.51



0.44

Middle Grades
Grand
Average
N

= 3

3.94

3.83

3.50

4.00

3.83

3.75

3.50

3.78



Middle Grades SD

0.12

0.37

0.47

0.00

0.37

0.42

0.50



0.30

Secondary Grand Average
N

= 181

3.73

3.73

3.64

3.81

3.63

3.79

3.65

3.73



Secondary Grand SD

0.49

0.47

0.54

0.42

0.55

0.47

0.52



0.48

Grand Average
Total
N

= 378

3.75

3.74

3.62

3.85

3.65

3.81

3.62

3.74



Grand SD

0.44

0.46

0.52

0.35

0.51

0.43

0.52


0.45

Scale: 4

Advanced (A
-
level), 3

Proficient (B
-
level), 2

Progressing (C
-
level), 1/0 Unacceptable (D/F level)


For complete data sets use the following links:
EDUC 300/320 O and P CF Charts

Professional Year
(Semester II)
Key Assessment
Results

The teacher internship (student
teaching experience) is the culminating performance assessment for the candidates for pedagogical
and professional
knowledge, skills, and dispositions. The full data set
s compare

all candidate
completers from Chadron

State College
,

which includes the elementary, middle grades and
secondary candidates so that the reader can compare all completers. The specific information for
candidates in the mathematics

endorsement is also presented within this discussion of the
peda
gogical

and professional

knowledge, skill
s
, and dispositions.

Candidates may have two different placement experiences. If the student has differen
t

grade
levels, the experiences will reflect two differen
t

levels. If the candidate has two areas of study, t
he
experiences are reflect
ive of
two differen
t

endorsement areas. Generally
,

the elementary and middle
school candidates have two placements, for level and for endorsement area
,

respectively. Secondary
candidate
s
, unless they have two endorsements, genera
lly have one placement experience.

First experience findings reflect the first 8
-
week experience of all elementary education
candidates who have two, 8
-
week placements. Elementary placements are at a primary and an
intermediate level. Elementary educat
ion candidates who have an additional endorsement would
have a placement in that endorsed area as

one of the 8
-
week placements. T
he only time an
elementary education candidate would have a special methods supervisor rating is if they have an
additional sub
ject endorsement (K
-
8
vocal music
, K
-
8
p
hysical
e
ducation, etc.). Secondary
P a g e

|
19


education candidates generally have one, 16
-
week placement. Therefore, secondary candidates’
ratings would be submitted at the end of their experience and be included in the
second experience
data set. If a secondary candidate ha
s

two placements for
different

grade
level
s

or for multiple
endorsements, then there would be a
n additional

summative rating included in the first experience
data.

The pedagogical knowledge, skill and

professional dispositions are examined in light of the
conceptual framework components of
L
eadership
,

P
rofessionalism
,

C
ommunication
,

H
uman
R
elations/
D
iversity
,

C
ommunication,
T
hinking
S
kills,
A
ssessment
,

and

M
ethods/
T
echnology.
Elements within these com
ponents establish the rubric
,
Teacher Intern Checklist

(TIC),

for
determining pe
rformance quality.

Findings for the Total Candidate Group

during the Professional Year Semester II

First
E
xperience

First experience grand averages for conceptual framework (CF)
pedagogical and professional
knowledge (K) items as rated by
c
ooperating
t
eachers range from 3.61
for Thinking Skills to 3.81 for Professionalism. College
s
upervisors’ knowledge ratings range from
3.50 for Thinking Skills to 3.66 for Professionalism. Special
m
ethods
s
upervisors’ knowledge
ratings range from 3.40 for Thinking Sk
ills to 3.73 for Professionalism. Candidates’
s
elf
-
evaluation
rat
ing for

Methodology/Technology
is
lowest at 3.49; while the highest rating
is

3.83 for
Professionalism. Across the board
,

there
is

a general spread of scores from .43 to .60 (standard
deviati
on).

First experience grand averages for CF skills (S) by
c
ooperating
t
eachers range from 3.58 for
Communications to 3.80 for Professionalism. College
s
upervisors’ skills ratings range from 3.44 for
Assessment to 3.62 for Professionalism. Special
m
etho
ds
s
upervisors’ ratings range from 3.28,
Methodology to 3.57, Professionalism. Candidates’ self
-
evaluation
ratings
range from 3.46 for
Assessment to 3.83 for Professionalism. Standard deviations range from .43 to .68 across all
evaluator groups.

First exp
erience grand averages for CF dispositions (D) by
c
ooperating
t
eachers range from
3.66, Assessment to 3.79, Human Relations/Diversity. College
s
upervisors’ ratings range from 3.54,
Thinking Skills to 3.69, Professionalism. Special
m
ethods
s
upervisors’
d
i
sposition ratings range

from 3.54 for Methodology/Technology to 3.73 for a tie between Professionalism and Human
Relations/Diversity. Less deviation
i
s seen in disposition ratings with a range in standard deviations
from .42 to .56.

Grand averages for all
combined CF
pedagogical and professional
knowledge (K) items
a
re:
3.70 (
c
ooperating
t
eachers), 3.58 (
c
ollege
s
upervisors), 3.59 (
s
pecial
m
ethods
s
upervisors), and 3.65
(
c
andidates’
s
elf
-
evaluation. Standard deviations for combined knowledge elements
a
re fairly
similar (.50, .54, .53, .50, respectively). Grand averages for all combined CF skills (S) items
a
re:
3.67 (
c
ooperating
t
eachers), 3.51 (
c
ollege
s
upervisors), 3.43 (
s
pecial
m
ethods
s
upervisors), and 3.60
P a g e

|
20


(
c
andidates’
s
elf
-
evaluation). Standard d
eviations for combined skills items
a
re more spread out
(.52, .58, .65, .53, respectively). Grand averages for all combined CF dispositions (D) items
a
re:
3.72 (
c
ooperating
t
eachers), 3.62 (
c
ollege
s
upervisors), 3.62 (
s
pecial
m
ethods
s
upervisors), and 3.6
7
(
c
andidates’
s
elf
-
evaluation). Standard deviations for combined dispositions items
a
re virtually the
same (.49, .52, .51, .50, respectively).

Overall, even though grand averages for

pedagogical and professional

knowledge, skills, and
dispositions rate a
bove 3.40, skills rate slightly lower than either
pedagogical and professional
knowledge or dispositions by all rater groups. Rater groups (P
-
12
c
ooperating
t
eachers,
c
ollege
s
upervisors,
s
pecial
m
ethods
s
upervisors, and
c
andidates’
s
elf
-
e
valuation) exhibi
t very similar
standard deviations (.45, .50, .51, and .44). The lowest individual average rating
i
s 3.34 for Thinking
Skills (S) by
s
pecial
m
ethods
s
upervisors, and the highest individual rating average
i
s 3.83 for
Professionalism
pedagogical and professi
onal
knowledge (K) by
c
andidates’
s
elf
-
evaluation.

For the first experience, scores from
c
ooperating P
-
12 teachers (CT) tend to be higher on all
c
onceptual
f
ramework items for
pedagogical and professional
knowledge, skills, and dispositions
than those from
c
ollege
s
upervisors (CS),
s
pecial
m
ethods
s
upervisors (SMS), and
c
andidates’ self
-
evaluation (C). This finding is consistent with Dr. Lorie Hunn’s 2009 study,
“Field Experience
Supervision: A Comparison

of Cooperating Teachers and College Supervisors’ Evaluations of
Student Teachers.”

For complete breakdown of first experience
Teacher Intern Checklist

(TIC) data
by conceptual framework dimension (pedagogical and professional knowledge, skills, and
dispositions) and by program groups,
see
1
st

Experience TIC Assessment All Data

spreadsheet.

Second
E
xperience

Second experience g
rand averages for Con
ceptual Framework (CF)
pedagogical and professional
knowledge (K) items as rated by
c
ooperating
t
eachers rang
e

from 3.75
for Thinking Skills and Assessment to 3.89 for Human Relations/Diversity. College
s
upervisors’
knowledge ratings rang
e

from 3.76 for Thinking Skills to 3.86 for Professionalism.
S
pecial
m
ethods
s
upervisors’ knowledge ratings range from 3.63 for Thinking Skills and Assessment to 3.80 for
Leadership and Professionalism. Candidates’
s
elf
-
evaluation rate
s

Methodology/Technol
ogy and
Technology lowest at 3.70

while their highest rating
i
s 3.92 for Professionalism. Across the board
there
i
s a general spread of scores from .28 to .56 (standard deviation).

Second experience grand averages for CF skills (S) by
c
ooperating
t
eache
rs range from 3.63
for Assessment to 3.81 for Professionalism. College
s
upervisors’ skills ratings range from 3.69 for
Communication to 3.80 for Professionalism and Human Relations/Diversity. Special
m
ethods
s
upervisors’ ratings range from 3.33, Assessme
nt to 3.79, Professionalism. Candidates’ self
-
evaluation
ratings
range from 3.64 for Assessment to 3.90 for Professionalism. Standard deviations
range from .30 to .63 across all evaluator groups.

Second experience grand averages for CF dispositions (D) by

c
ooperating
t
eachers range
from 3.70, Assessment to 3.83, Human Relations/Diversity. College
s
upervisors’ ratings range from
P a g e

|
21


3.78, Thinking Skills to 3.87, Professionalism. Special
m
ethods
s
upervisors’
d
isposition ratings
range from 3.63 for Assessment
to 3.87 for Professionalism. Less deviation
i
s seen in disposition
ratings with a range in standard deviations from .35 to .49.

Grand averages for all combined CF
pedagogical and professional
knowledge (K) items
a
re:
3.80 (
c
ooperating
t
eachers), 3.79 (
c
oll
ege
s
upervisors), 3.70 (
s
pecial
m
ethods
s
upervisors), and 3.81
(
c
andidates’
s
elf
-
evaluation
)
. Standard deviations for combined knowledge elements
a
re fairly
similar (.43, .42, .47, .41, respectively). Grand averages for all combined CF skills (S) items
a
re:
3.72 (
c
ooperating
t
eachers), 3.74 (
c
ollege
s
upervisors), 3.53 (
s
pecial
m
ethods Supervisors), and 3.58
(
c
andidates’
s
elf
-
evaluation). Standard deviations for combined skills items
a
re more spread out
(.49, .46, .53, .44, respectively). Grand averages for all combined CF dispositions (D) items
a
re:
3.78 (
c
ooperating
t
eachers), 3.83 (
c
ollege
s
upervisors), 3.76 (
s
pecial
m
ethods
s
upervisors), and 3.82
(
c
andidates’
s
elf
-
evaluation). Sta
ndard deviations for combined dispositions items
a
re virtually the
same (.44, .39, .43, .39, respectively).

Overall, even though grand averages for
pedagogical and professional
knowledge, skills, and
dispositions rate above 3.53, skills rate slightly lower

than either knowledge or dispositions by all
rater groups. Rater groups (P
-
12
c
ooperating
t
eachers,
c
ollege
s
upervisors,
s
pecial
m
ethods
s
upervisors, and
c
andidates’
s
elf
-
e
valuation) exhibit very similar standard deviations (.40, .39, .41,
and .35). The

lowest individual average rating was 3.33 for Assessment skills (S) by
s
pecial
m
ethods
s
upervisors, and the highest individual rating average
i
s 3.92 for Professionalism
pedagogical and professional
knowledge (K) and dispositions (D) by candidates’ self
-
e
valuation.

Special
m
ethods
s
upervisors tend to have the lowest average ratings with the largest standard
deviation. Unlike the first experience data
,

c
ooperating
t
eachers rate grand average skills items and
dispositions slightly lower than did
c
ollege
s
up
ervisors; however, the standard deviation of the
c
ooperating
t
eachers
i
s slightly higher than the
c
ollege
s
upervisors. Candidates’ self
-
evaluation for
the second experience
i
s slightly higher than the other rater groups. Overall, the ratings for the
second experience tend to be higher than the first experience ratings, with smaller standard
deviations. This seems to indicate that candidates improved from the first experience to the second,
if they had two, 8
-
week experiences, and/or the ratings at th
e end of a 16
-
week experience were
higher than those at the end of the first 8
-
week experience. The smaller standard deviation indicates
more consistency of ratings between candidates and raters in the second experience.

For complete
breakdown of second e
xperience
Teacher Intern Checklist

(TIC) data by conceptual framework
dimension
(pedagogical and professional knowledge, skills, and dispositions) and by program
groups, see
2
nd

Experience TIC Assessment All Data

spreadsheet.

Natural Science

Knowledge, Skills, and Dispositions as rated on the
Teacher Intern
Checklist
.

The candidates are rated by the cooperating teacher within the
P
-
12
school, a college
sup
ervisor from the Education Department
,
a college special methods teacher educator from
department housing the natural sciences endorsement (Physical and Life Sciences)
,

and the
P a g e

|
22


candidate themselves. Section
2:

Table
5 displays the results for Natural Science
candidates for the
reporting period of fall 2007 through
s
pring 2011; data are calculated on spring 2008 through spring
2011 data only, as the
Teacher Intern Checklist

moved from a
5
-
point

scale to a
4
-
point

scale
.
(Note:
The science program at Chadron State does offer subject endorsements in biology, chemistry, earth
sciences, and physics; however, during the fall 2007 through spring 2011 period, there were no
completers in these programs. All the science candid
ates for this period are endorsed in the natural
science field endorsement.) For knowledge, skills and dispositions natural science candidates are
performing at or above the Proficient (
3
)
level
. Section 2: Table 5 shows the overall average for the
candid
ates in knowledge, skill, and dispositions. All scores range from 3.68 to 3.89 on a
4
-
point

scale. An examination of the full data set shows a complete analysis of the teacher internship
ratings. The strongest areas of performance within the conceptual fr
amework components
(dimensions) are Leadership

knowledge and skill; Professionalism

knowledge, skill and
disposition; Communication


knowledge; and Human Relation/Diversity

knowledge and
dispositions. Areas showing lower ratings are Communication

skill at
3.39, and Human
Relations/Diversity

skills at 3.38 as rated by the cooperating teachers.

For complete data sets use
the following link:
Natural Science Key Assessment Content Knowledge KSD


Natural Science
Content Tabs 1
-
4


Section
2
: Table
5

Natural

Science

Candidates


Scores for Knowledge, Skills, and Dispositions on the Conceptual
Framework during Teacher Internship (Student Teaching)

Knowledg
e

Skills

Dispositions

Cooperating P
-
12
Teacher

College Supervisor

Special Methods
Supervisor

Self
-

Evaluation

Cooperating P
-
12
Teacher

College Supervisor

Special Methods
Supervisor

Self
-

Evaluation

Cooperating P
-
12
Teacher

College Supervisor

Special Methods
Supervisor

Self
-

Evaluation

Natural Science

Grand Average
N

=

11

3.84

3.78



3.72

3.70

3.68



3.69

3.89

3.76



3.69

Natural Science
Grand SD

0.25

0.27



0.37

0.25

0.33



0.37

0.20

0.31



0.31

Scale (4=Advanced, 3= Proficient, 2=Progressing, 1/0=Unacceptable)

Section
2:

Table
6

illustrates the total means and standard deviation for the sets of evaluators
(cooperating teacher, college supervisor from the Education Department, special methods teacher
educator from the discipline, and the candidate). Generally, the college supervi
sor
s

from the
Education Department rate the candidates

at about

the same level as
the cooperating teacher
s.
All
sets of evaluators’ total scores f
a
ll
within
the Proficient
(
3
)
category.
For complete d
ata sets use the
following link
:
Natural Science K
ey Assessment Content Knowledge KSD


Natural Science Content
Tabs 1
-
4


P a g e

|
23


Section
2
: Table
6

Overall Scores for Teacher Internship (Student Teaching) as rated by

Cooperating Teacher, College
Supervisor, Special Methods Supervisor, and Candidate

Endorsement,
N

Average/SD

Cooperating Teacher

College Supervisor

Special Methods
Supervisor

Candidate Self
-
Evaluation

Natural Science,
N

=
11


3.
81

(.
21
)

3.
74
(.
29
)



3.
70 (.30
)

Scale: 4

Advanced (A
-
level), 3

Proficient (B
-
level), 2

Progressing (C
-
level), 1/0
Unacceptable (D/F level)


Effects on P
-
12
Student Learning


Student learning resulting from candidate performance is measured through a “teacher work
sample.” This section describes the assignment and instrument for completing the teacher work
sample as we
ll as the results for both the elementary and secondary candidates.


Assignment and Evaluation Instrument
s

Teacher work sample data are gathered on several criteria, including
T
able of
C
ontents;
I
nstructional
S
etting/
C
ontext;
A
ssessment
P
lan (pre
-
test/post
-
test, description of data, and display of
data);
I
nstructional
P
lans;
D
ecision
M
aking and
Self
-
reflection/E
valuation; a
nd Professional
Presentation. T
able of
C
ontents and
P
rofessional
P
resentation are considered procedural elements
and a
re indicators of overall quality
. See
Teacher Work Sample Assignment

and
Teacher Work
Sample Grading Rubric
.

The I
nstructional
S
etting/
C
ontext section is related to the candidate’s ability to research and
present
pertinent community, school, class, and individual contextual information. This
informational section shows the candidate’s ability to discern important factors that may impact
instruction. Contextual information assigned to prompt candidates to become sen
sitive to group or
individual diversity factors.

The three
elements of the Assessment P
lan demonstrate the candidate’s ability to plan an
instructional
-
assessment sequence, including congruent pre
-

and post
-
tests. The candidate
demonstrates his or her skil
ls in aggregating and disaggregating data. Candidates are evaluated based
on their ability to show both whole class and individual progress in an effective manner.
Additionally, candidates have the freedom to display other types of analysis, such as compar
isons of
multiple sections of courses or a breakdown of results by item or objective.

The
Instructional P
lan
s

section is evaluated based on the completeness of lessons plans,
including the candidate’s ability to modify lesson plans based on the pre
-
test
data. Candidates
demonstrate the use of formative assessments as part of instruction.

P a g e

|
24


T
he final section,
D
ecision
M
aking and
S
elf
-
reflection/
E
valuation
,

is evaluated based on the
degree to which candidates understand the process of making decisi
ons based
on the use of data.
C
andidates also demonstrate their ability to analyze and reflect upon their own instructional and
assessment practices.
T
he overall goals of the teacher work sample are to guide candidates through
the data
-
driven instructional process,
and ultimately, to eval
uate the candidate’s impact on P
-
12
student learning.

Results for Elementary Education


Elementary education

results indicate scores ranging from 2.98
(1.05)
for Instructional Plans
to 3.74
(.44)
for Instructional Setting/Context (scores on a
4
-
point
scale:
4

Advanced (A
-
level), 3

Proficient (B
-
level), 2

Progressing (C
-
level), 1/0 Unacceptable (D/F level)
.

These results
are

surprising as candidates have the most experience and practice in developin
g lesson/instructional
plans. The Instructional Plan standard deviation

of 1.05

indicates a relatively wide variation of
scores on this criterion.
The scores in the a
ssessment
p
lan area
are

higher than might be expected, as
this is an area that is relative
ly new to candidates and an area that candidates have had less hands
-
on
experience. Candidates demonstrat
e

a moderately high ability to make decisions and reflect on the
data
-
driven instructional experience with a score of 3.34

(.69)
. Overall,
e
lementary
e
duca
tion
candidates perform at a P
roficient

(
3
)

level on the Teacher Work Sample from
f
all 2007
-
s
pring 2011.

See full data set for
Teacher Work Sample Elementary Summary
.

Section
2:

Table
7

Elementary Candidate
s

Teacher Work Sample
--
Fall 2007 th
r
ough Spring 2011



Table of
Contents

Instructional
Setting/Context

Pre
-
/Post
-
tests

Description of
Data

Display

Instructional
Plans

Decision Making,
Self
-
Reflection/
Evaluation

Professional
Presentation

Average
/ SD

Elementary TWS Fall 2007
-

Spring 2011 Totals

Grand Average Total
N

= 184; missing
n
= 5

3.61

3.74

3.30

3.12

3.37

2.98

3.34

3.10

3.32

Grand SD

0.62

0.44

0.73

0.79

0.83

1.05

0.69

0.76

0.53

Scale: 4

Advanced (A
-
level), 3

Proficient (B
-
level), 2

Progressing (C
-
level), 1/0 Unacceptable (D/F level)

Results for Secondary
Education


Secondary education

results indicate scores ranging from 3.09

(1.02)

for Instructional Plans
to 3.54
(.76)
for Instructional Setting/Context (scores on a
4
-
point
scale:
4

Advanced (A
-
level), 3

Proficient (B
-
level), 2

Progressing (C
-
level), 1/0
Unacceptable (D/F level
).

Secondary
e
ducation
results
are

more uniform, but Instructional Plan
is

still lower than might be expected. The
Instructional Plan standard deviation indicates a relatively wide variation of scores on this criterion.
The scores in

the assessment p
lan area were fairly consistent and higher than might be expected, as
P a g e

|
25


this is an area that is relatively new to candidates and an area that candidates have had less hands
-
on
experience. Candidates demonstrate a moderately high ability to
make decisions and reflect on the
data
-
driven instructional experience with a score of 3.25

(.86)
. Overall,
secondary

e
duca
tion
candidates perform at a P
roficient

(
3
)

level on the Teacher Work Sample from
f
all 2007

through
s
pring 2011.

Natural science
can
didates are included in the secondary education data set. See full
data set for
Teacher Work Sample Secondary Summary
.

Section
2
: Table
8

Secondary Candidate
s

Teacher Work Sample
--
Fall 2007 th
r
ough Spring 2011



Table of
Contents

Instructional
Setting/Context

Pre
-
/Post
-
tests

Description of
Data

Display

Instructional
Plans

Decision Making,
Self
-
Reflection/
Evaluation

Professional
Presentation

Average
/ SD

Secondary TWS Fall 2007
-

Spring 2011 Totals

Grand Average Total N = 170; missing
n = 8

3.65

3.54

3.28

3.15

3.19

3.09

3.25

3.05

3.27

Grand SD

0.81

0.76

0.76

0.85

0.99

1.02

0.86

0.87

0.67

Scale: 4

Advanced (A
-
level), 3

Proficient (B
-
level), 2

Progressing (C
-
level), 1/0 Unacceptable (D/F level)

Results for All Candidates


Results for
e
lementary and
s
econdary
e
ducation
Teacher Work Sample are consist
ent
for
both
elementary and secondary
programs

(Middle grade endorsement candidates are included in the
Block group of their choice.)
. Scores f
a
ll within the
P
roficient

(
3
)

level, except for Instructional
Plans for
e
lementar
y
e
ducation

with an average of 2.98

(
1.05
). A relatively high standard deviation
i
s noted in several areas for both programs.

Section
2
: Table
9

All Candidates
-

Teacher Work Sample
--
Fall 2007
th
r
ough

Spring 2011



Table of
Contents

Instructional
Setting/Context

Pre
-
/Post
-
tests

Description of
Data

Display

Instructional
Plans

Decision
Making, Self
-
Reflection/
Evaluation

Professional
Presentation

Average
/ SD

Elementary & Secondary TWS Fall 2007
-

Spring 2011 Totals

Grand Average Total
N

= 354; missing
n
= 13

3.47

3.56

3.35

3.14

3.23

3.02