Home General Documents Institutional Report Conceptual Framework
Exhibit Room Louisiana St. Supp. Rep. SPA Reports  

 

LIST OF EXHIBITS FOR STANDARD 1

Standard 1

Candidate Knowledge, Skills, and Dispositions

1a. Content Knowledge for Teacher Candidates

Initial programs
As emphasized in the CF, teacher education candidates at Southeastern Louisiana University acquire content knowledge through a series of content-based courses, professional development activities, and field/clinical experiences.  Quantitative evidence of content knowledge of initial teacher education documenting competence is derived from four sources: 1) performance on PRAXIS specialty tests, 2) coursework performance, 3) professional development activities, and 4) performance-based assessments in field experiences (FXs) and clinical practice.  Artifacts from each area are uploaded into PASS-PORT to be used in the development of Unit portfolios.  Specialized Program Association (SPA) reports provide detail on each source by program.

PRAXIS
Initial candidates are required to pass a specialty area of the PRAXIS Examination.  Table 3: Pass Rates on Content Tests for Initial Teacher Preparation (Exhibit 1a.1) provides evidence of content knowledge for all initial degree programs.  PRAXIS passing rates are used as part of the Louisiana Board of Regents’ evaluation of teacher education programs in the state. On the academic content area specialty exams, Southeastern had a 100% pass rate.  In comparison to other public and private universities within the state, Southeastern’s scores rank within the top quartile for the state.  The SPA reports indicate that all completers taking the PRAXIS II Content Knowledge Tests within their major areas met or exceeded the state cut scores. 

Course performance
Initial candidates must earn a grade of “C” or better in specialized content area courses in their major.  Content knowledge competence is also demonstrated by achieving a cumulative or degree GPA of 2.50 or better, this being a criterion for eligibility to enroll in senior-level professional education coursework.  In Fall 2007, all candidates were in the 2.50-4.00 range, supporting an indication of competence of content knowledge in their respective majors.  The percentage of candidates fully admitted to the COEHD ranging between 2.50 and 2.99 was 12.93%.  It is of particular interest to note that 87.07% were well above the minimum requirement of 2.50.

Professional development activities (PDAs)
Candidates are required to complete and document a minimum of 25 hours of professional development.  Exhibit 1a.2: Professional Development Activities provides evidence of acquisition of content knowledge through the portfolio evaluation process.  Item # 5 on the E-Folio rubric states “required hours are documented in PASS-PORT.  PDAs reflect acquisition of knowledge and/or skills.”  Exhibit 1a.3: Initial E-Folio Results shows that 397 candidates submitted portfolios during Fall 2007.  Four, or 1%, did not meet the required PDA hours.  However, 202, or 51%, met the required hours, and 191 (48%) exceeded the specified hours.  These activities range from field trips to historic sites to Dyslexia Simulation Workshops and the COEHD Conversation on Diversity series, increasing candidates” content knowledge through experiences outside of the classroom.

Performance-based assessments
Candidates’ content knowledge is assessed through evaluations of lesson plans and observations of teaching performance in their professional teacher education content and methods courses.  Initial candidates are also evaluated several times during the student teaching and/or internship semester.  Unit assessment rubrics used in these courses include items indicating competence of content knowledge and are documented in assessments of lesson plans and summative evaluations of teaching performance.  The data in Exhibit 1a.4: Content Knowledge indicate that our candidates plan, teach, and evaluate content exceptionally well and have steadily improved in these areas over the past three years with an overall content knowledge score on 1-4 scale of 3.80 for Fall 2007.

Initial follow-up surveys
The 2006 Follow-Up Survey of principals (N=26) and mentor teachers (N=28) regarding teacher education graduates at the initial certification level reveals principals rated Southeastern graduates on a 4-point scale most effective in their Content Knowledge as relevant/up-to-date content including concepts, principles, relationships, methods of inquiry, and key issues (3.63) and Content Knowledge: Louisiana State Content Standards and Benchmarks (3.74).  The mentor teachers (N=28) rated graduates as most prepared in the area of Content Knowledge: relevant up-to-date, content including concepts, principles, relationships, methods of inquiry, and key issues (3.73) (LASS 1.15).

The 2005-2006 Follow-Up Survey (LASS 1.16) of employees who are first year teachers (N=28) provides self-reported information by graduates at the initial certification level.  The self-reported data reveal that on a 4-point scale graduates perceived themselves most effective in their Content Knowledge in the areas of Student Achievement (3.89) and Content Knowledge: relevant up-to-date, content including concepts, principles, relationships, methods of inquiry, and key issues (3.73).

The 2006-2007 Follow-up Survey (LASS 1.15) yielded a response from 46 principals in regards to 60 first year teachers that the graduates were effective in their Content Knowledge in the areas of Student Achievement (3.48) and Content Knowledge: relevant up-to-date, content including concepts, principles, relationships, methods of inquiry, and key issues (3.44).

1a. Content Knowledge for Teacher Candidates

Advanced programs
Experienced teachers in advanced level programs build upon and extend their knowledge base to improve their own teaching and student learning through a variety of content-based courses specific to each concentration within the degree program.  Throughout the programs, continuing teacher education candidates engage in critical analysis, synthesis, and inquiry as evidenced by artifacts inclusive of, but not limited to, 1) course performance and projects, 2) professional development activities, 3) written comprehensive exams, and 4) electronic portfolios.

Course performance and projects
Advanced level teacher education candidates must earn a cumulative GPA of 3.0 or better in all graduate coursework with no more than six -hours of coursework with a grade of “C.”  The cumulative GPA of 3.0 or better in all graduate coursework is a criterion for graduation.  Additionally, Unit assessment rubrics used in critical courses (SPED 612, EDUC 657/658) include items indicating competence on content knowledge and are documented in Unit portfolios.  For example, EDF 600, a required core course for all advanced level candidates in the degree program, provides evidence for competence of content knowledge.  Exhibit 1a.5: EDF 600 Project in example of candidate work.

Professional development activities (PDAs)
Candidates are required to complete and document a minimum of 25 hours of PDAs.  During 2006-2007, advanced candidates (N=44) engaged in a variety of PDAs including community service, conferences, and workshops, as well as training programs and actual courses.  Exhibits 1a.6 and 1a.7 document in detail the number of hours by activity type.  The PDAs provide evidence of acquisition of content knowledge through the portfolio evaluation process.  Item # 5 on the E-Folio rubric states that “required hours are documented in PASS-PORT and PDAs reflect acquisition of knowledge and/or skills,” and must be evident to meet Unit level expectations.  Exhibit 1a.8: Advanced PDA Results reveals that these activities occurred at two portal assessment levels in the candidates’ academic program(s).  The Proficiency Portfolio (Portal 8) assessment of candidates had no “unacceptable” PDAs, an improvement over the candidates assessed at the lower level (Portal 7) Emerging Portfolio. 

Written comprehensive examinations
The comprehensive exam, taken during the final semester, includes knowledge in candidates’ concentration areas as well as research methods.  Ninety-four percent of candidates who took the comprehensive exam in 2006-2007 passed.  Exhibit 1a.9: Comprehensive Examinations (2006-2007) provides information for each concentration area.  These data indicate that candidates have mastered the content knowledge required by their degree plans.  For candidates scoring below the acceptable standard, remediation is provided through a committee of University faculty who individualize the remediation program according to the candidate’s needs.  Remediation can include such tasks as additional coursework, independent study, observations, or conferences with faculty as indicated in the individual remediation plan.

Advanced level portfolios
Advanced level candidates in a degree program are required to submit three Unit level portfolios: 1) Emerging, 2) Proficiency, and 3) Capstone.  Each folio requires demonstration of content knowledge which is assessed by the advanced folio rubric item numbers one and two.  Item one requires candidates to submit artifacts as evidence of progress in the acquisition of content knowledge.  Item two requires candidates to connect artifacts to appropriate program national and institutional standards and justify reasons for choosing standards, providing evidence of a clear understanding of content related standards.  The number of candidates meeting expectations is detailed in Exhibit 1a.10: Advanced E-Folio Results.

Advanced follow-up surveys
The Employer Survey is administered by the Office of Institutional Research and Assessment every two years.  In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, the survey was delayed; thus, the 2004 Employer Survey, completed and posted in 2007, is the most current data available.  Unit graduates were assessed on 31 characteristics which were grouped into four areas: Communication Skills; Technical Skills; Workplace Knowledge and Skills; and Professional Traits and Attitudes.  The survey was returned by 41 % of those employers surveyed (N= 146).  Graduates–both initial and advanced completers (N=285)–identified employers.  The largest percentage (36%) of employers responding to the survey–PK-12 education employers (N=53)–were highly favorable regarding Southeastern’s graduates.  In general, 75 % of employers reported that our graduates were “better prepared for employment compared to other employees.”  Specific to content knowledge, the vast majority of the Unit’s graduates were rated “Very Good” (4) or “Excellent” (5) in ability to apply mathematical, scientific, and computer skills and were able to integrate knowledge from diverse areas.

The 2005-2006 Graduate Programs Curriculum & Instruction and Special Education Employee Follow-up Survey (Exhibit 1a.11) is an 11 item survey using a 4-point scale where 1= Unsatisfactory and 4= Exemplary.  Data from this survey of advanced candidates (N=9) indicated that 89% perceived their knowledge of content to be exemplary.  They indicated they understood the content they are to teach as well as the history, structure and real-world applications of that content.  They felt prepared to teach content including prior knowledge students bring to the classroom. Also, 100% of the advanced candidates indicated that they are prepared to use professional standards to develop knowledge, skills and dispositions to become an effective educator.

1b. Pedagogical Content Knowledge for Teachers in Initial Programs

Performance-based assessments
Assessment data from two Unit instruments, the classroom management plan and lesson plan, indicate that on a 4-point scale, candidates in the initial program use skills in connection to pedagogical content knowledge appropriately and consistently with a high degree of competence and confidence in all areas as shown in the high mean scores for individual items as well as the overall average of scores for Fall 2006, Spring 2007, and Fall 2007.  Exhibit 1b.1: Pedagogical Knowledge provides data from several individual items of these two instruments.  Candidates demonstrated pedagogical content in classroom management by scoring 3.54 or higher, indicating competency in planning classroom procedures, individual and group motivation and rewards, preventive and supportive discipline, and parental involvement.  Candidates demonstrated knowledge in lesson planning by scoring 3.53 or higher, showing competency in planning lesson objectives, introductions, procedures, closure, assessment, and materials; as well as in planning lessons that provide developmentally appropriate, student-centered learning opportunities that meet the diverse needs and varied learning styles of learners.  SPA reports provide program specific data, as well as PRAXIS PLT results.

Course performance
Candidates learn mathematical content through courses including topics in elementary number structure, geometry, data analysis, and probability. In the methods courses, candidates use their knowledge of reform mathematical content and pedagogy to effectively teach lessons and assess student knowledge.  The foundation course, EDUC 320, requires candidates to tutor a student in a one-on-one situation and complete a case study furthering their knowledge of possible mathematical weaknesses in students.  These courses focus on the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) content and process standards and principles, as well as the Louisiana Mathematical strands and pervasive themes, including use of manipulatives and application of content to real life situations to impact student learning.  Data are provided in Exhibit 1b.2: NCTM Addendum for secondary student teachers’ competency in meeting these expectations.  These data provide evidence that the LASS A4 (b) Mathematics has been addressed and met with success.

All candidates utilize the Louisiana Reading Competencies in PK-12 classrooms to impact student learning including topics in phonemic awareness, phonics, vocabulary, fluency, comprehension, and writing.  In methods courses, candidates use their knowledge of these reading competencies and other literacy content and pedagogy to effectively teach lessons and assess students’ knowledge.  The reading foundation courses, EDUC 304 and EDUC 308, require candidates to tutor a student in a one-on-one setting and interact with PK-12 students in a variety of settings across the methods and practicum experiences (Exhibit 1b.3: Education 304 Pre-assessment).  Content area reading and informational literacy skills are identified through state and national standards and addressed through instruction and assessment to impact student learning.  These data provide evidence that the LASS A4 (a) Reading has been addressed and met with success. Our state review noted that the State Board of Elementary and Secondary Education (SBESE) Reading Competencies in our courses are aligned with the Louisiana English/Language Arts (ELA) content standards, benchmarks, and Grade Level Expectations (GLEs), as well as with International Reading Association/National Council of Teachers of English (IRA/NCTE) standards.

Technology pedagogical content knowledge
Initial candidates have multiple opportunities to obtain knowledge and skills for infusing technology into the content area of their programs of study. Prior to student teaching, candidates are required to take ETEC 306 or ETEC 475 where technology knowledge and skills are merged with pedagogical content knowledge in the computer lab environment.  Additionally, candidates are required to complete a minimum of 10 clock hours of FX infusing technology into direct instruction in a PK-12 classroom.  The ETEC 306 Technology Portfolio (Exhibit 1b.4) provides evidence of technological knowledge. 

Initial candidates are assessed through Unit based assessment within PASS-PORT, specifically the Lesson Plan Assessment, the Final Report on Student Teaching and the PEC Technology Self-Assessment.  The data from these two instruments in Exhibit 1b.5: Technology Pedagogical Knowledge show a trend of gradual improvement over the course of the three semesters reported.  For example, the Lesson Plan Item # 8 shows a rating of 3.47 (n=94) for Fall 2006, 3.69 (n=194) for Spring 2007, and 3.70 (n=140) for Fall 2007. 

Initial candidates also are required to complete a survey, PEC Technology Self-Assessment, where they assess their technology knowledge and skills.  The 2006-2007 academic year assessment results (Exhibit 1b.6) show that candidates report they have a high level of confidence and that their technology knowledge and skills are both adequate and functional for use in the PK-12 classroom. 

Initial follow-up surveys
Using a 4-point scale for initial level teacher candidates, the 2006-2007 Teacher Education Graduate Follow-Up Survey (LASS 1.15) reports data from principals (N=46) in two school districts.  These data indicate that candidates were most effective in the following areas: Instruction (3.44), Content Knowledge: Louisiana Content Standards and Benchmarks (3.44), Content Knowledge: relevant up-to-date, content including components, principles, relationships, methods of inquiry, and key issues (3.44).  

1b. Pedagogical Content Knowledge for Teachers in Advanced Programs
Within our conceptual framework and aligned with the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards (NBPTS), advanced teacher candidates enhance their pedagogical content knowledge through Master of Education degrees in Special Education (SPED) and Curriculum and Instruction (C&I).  They acquire this knowledge through Core Courses (15 hrs.), Concentration Area Courses (9-18 hrs.) and Support Courses (3-12 hrs).  Thus evidence of pedagogical content knowledge of advanced teacher candidates’ mastery is provided from four sources: 1) course performance, 2) performance-based assessments, 3) written comprehensive examinations or the action research project, depending upon candidate entrance to the degree program, and 4) Unit-level portfolios. 

Course performance
Advanced candidates must earn a grade of “C” or better in each course in the major and a maximum of 6 hours with a grade of “C.”  Content knowledge competency is also demonstrated by achieving a cumulative GPA of 3.0 or better in all graduate coursework, this being a criterion for graduation.  Advanced candidates for the 2006-2007 academic year achieved an overall GPA of 3.7.

Performance-based assessments
Examples of assessments include checklists, exams, portfolios, projects, self-evaluations, case studies, presentations, reflective journals, and administrative interviews.  In EDUC 660, candidates demonstrate the ability to apply knowledge about diversity in the culminating exam (Exhibit 1b.7: EDUC 660 Exam). During courses involving FXs, pedagogical content knowledge is assessed along with a variety of other areas via evaluations of written materials and observations of teaching performance.  In EDUC 661, reading concentration candidates demonstrate this knowledge through planned interventions for low-progress readers in case studies which provide evidence for a wide range of Louisiana Reading Competencies.

Written comprehensive examinations
The comprehensive exam, taken during the final semester, includes pedagogical knowledge.  Ninety-four percent of candidates who took the comprehensive exam in 2006-2007 passed.  Exhibit 1a.9: Comprehensive Examinations, indicates that candidates have mastered the pedagogical content knowledge indicated by their degree plans.  For candidates scoring below the acceptable standard, remediation is provided by a committee of faculty who individualize remediation.  Remediation can include additional coursework, independent study, observations, and conferences with faculty.

Advanced level portfolios
Advanced level candidates submit three Unit level portfolios that demonstrate pedagogical knowledge.  Candidates are required to upload in PASS-PORT artifacts as well as Reflections of Learning that show clear understandings of pedagogical content knowledge used to create their portfolios.  In Reflections of Learning, required at each of the three portfolio levels, candidates reflect on their pedagogical content knowledge and skills and connect these to standards demonstrating their in-depth understanding of the subject matter they teach through various best practices so that all students can learn.  Specifically, item number two states “all artifacts connect to appropriate standard(s); justifies reasons for choosing standard(s); and a clear understanding of the standard(s) is indicated.”  Exhibit 1a.10: E-Folio Results Advanced documents 89% of candidates during the 2006-2007 academic year met or exceeded expectations on artifacts connected to standards which document pedagogical knowledge. The results for the Fall 2007 semester indicate the percentage increased to 95% meeting or exceeding expectations.

Technology pedagogical content knowledge
Advanced candidates are required to successfully integrate technology in to their instruction with PK-12 students as well as their coursework.  Course projects provide additional opportunities for utilization of technology.  From these course-based artifacts candidates then build the required portfolio. For example, in EDUC 652 students construct a concept map on a science topic using inspiration software and upload it into the pass-port system (Exhibit 1b.8: Concept Map). Exhibit 1b.9: Power Point Presentation represents another sample. With respect to technology, candidates are required to use PASS-PORT and Blackboard, as well as word processing, spreadsheets, PowerPoint and multimedia in various assignments throughout their programs. All candidates are required to use a variety of technologies in the delivery of all papers, projects and presentations.  The culminating Action Research Project presentation is another example of using technology.

In addition, some candidates complete a specific course which is primarily computer technology based.  EDL 600 and ETEC 620 provide extensive exposure of the infusion of technology into instruction.  The courses are taken by some advanced candidates in order that the knowledge and skills developed can be used throughout the candidate’s academic program.  The passage rate has been extremely successful and can be reviewed in Exhibit 1b.6. Key technology knowledge is obtained from all advanced programs and evidence of this is in samples of portfolios. 

Advanced follow-up surveys
Data from the 2004 Employer Survey indicate that the vast majority of the Unit’s graduates were rated “Very Good” (4) or “Excellent” (5) in critical thinking skills, organizational skills, ability to plan projects, ability to identify problems, ability to solve problems, and ability to think creatively, skills that are indicative of pedagogical content knowledge. Data from the 2005-2006 Graduate Programs Curriculum & Instruction and Special Education Employee Follow-up Survey (Exhibit 1a.11), using a 4-point scale where 1= Unsatisfactory and 4= Exemplary, indicated 100% of advanced candidates (N=9) perceived that their use of technological tools and/or products of technology to promote learning and expand instructional options were above average or exemplary. Also, 100% of the advanced candidates indicated that they are prepared to use professional standards and were able to incorporate national, state, and institutional standards into their practice as well as 100% indicated that they are committed to their students and learning such as respecting diversity, addressing self-concept, motivation, peer relationships and character and civic responsibility.

1c. Professional and Pedagogical Knowledge and Skills for Initial Programs
As a reflection of the CF and assessment system, candidates’ skills are assessed in relation to the INTASC standards and correlated with the Louisiana Components of Effective Teaching (LCET).  The LCET encompass the following important aspects of teaching for all teacher candidates: Planning, Management, Instruction, Assessment, Technology, and Professional Development.  The LCET are introduced early in the initial degree programs, fostered during the methods courses, and met with a high degree of competence and confidence during student teaching/internship as a final assessment of a candidate’s knowledge and skills.  Details of the Final Student Teaching/Internship Assessment can be found in Exhibit 1c.1.  Program specific data are available in each SPA report. 

The Unit also gathers information about candidates’ professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills through artifacts that are evaluated and submitted as part of a candidate’s Introductory, Developing, and Competency level portfolios. Candidates must relate artifacts to appropriate INTASC standards and write a brief reflection on the chosen standard.  These artifacts are evaluated, and the portfolio as a whole is evaluated as well (Exhibit 1a.3: Initial E-Folio Results).

INTASC Standard 2 addresses candidates’ knowledge of the ways children and adolescents develop and the relationship to learning.  The Unit measures this knowledge/skill through item Instruction #13 of the Final Report on Student Teaching (Competency) and item # 23 of the Summative Evaluation (Competency).  In addition, candidates must connect INTASC Standard 2 to a specific artifact of their choosing, often the Assessment Plan or the Lesson Plan. 

The Unit gathers information on candidates’ knowledge of professional ethics, laws, and policies and information on candidates’ knowledge of the roles and responsibilities of the professional communities through items # 22, #23, #24 of the Professional Attributes and Characteristics Scale (Competency) on a scale of 1-6.  These items assess Knowledge of School Improvement Planning, Knowledge of Louisiana School and District Accountability System (LSDAS), and Knowledge of the Louisiana Educational Assessment Program (LEAP 21).  In addition, item #2 of the rubric for the Lesson Plan assesses to what degree the lesson connects to state content standards, benchmarks, and Grade Level Expectations (GLEs) (Exhibit 1.c2).

INTASC Standard 9 addresses candidates’ knowledge and skills in the use of research in teaching, and the Unit measures this knowledge/skill by Instruction item #4 of the Final Report on Student Teaching.  In addition, candidates must connect this standard to a specific artifact of their choosing, often a Professional Development Activity.  Finally, addenda to the Final Report on Student Teaching, one addendum for each specific program, assesses this knowledge as well; see, for example, items #8.5 and #8.6 on the NCTM addendum (Exhibit 1b.2): “Participates in professional mathematics organizations and uses their print and on-line resources” and “Demonstrates knowledge of research results in the teaching and learning of mathematics.”

INTASC Standard 2 (2.1), Standard 3 (3.5), and Standard 8 (8.6) address candidates’ knowledge and skills in relation to the consideration of school, family, and community contexts and the prior experience of students.  The Unit assesses this knowledge/skill through item Other #6 of the Final Report on Student Teaching.  In addition, candidates must relate these standards to specific artifacts. 

The Louisiana Supplement Standards (LASS) are aligned with both the LCET and INTASC standards.  Thus, candidates demonstrate their skills regarding each of the LASS as evidenced in the Final Report on Student Teaching/Internship/Practicum (LASS 1.17).  Using a four-point scale, University supervisors and mentor teachers rated teacher candidates at a high level of competence.  For 2006-2007, initial level candidates demonstrated their skills regarding the LASS A1-Planning by scoring 3.65 or higher; LASS-A2-Management 3.59 or higher; LASS A3-Instruction, and LASS 4 Curriculum A4 (a) Reading and A4 (b) Curriculum Mathematics 3.43 or higher; LASS A5 Technology 3.68 or higher; and LASS A6 Professional Development 3.69 or higher in demonstrating the ability to reflect and improve their performance and in showing an awareness of purpose of professional organizations.  Initial level candidates demonstrated their skills regarding the LASS A7–School Improvement (awareness of the School Improvement Plan) by scoring 3.73 (N=124) Fall 2006 and 3.79 (N=152) Spring 2007, and 3.67 (N=124) Fall 2006 and 3.66 (N= 152) regarding the ability to plan lessons using the School Improvement Plan.  Candidates were also rated high 3.68 (N=124) Fall 2006 and 3.72 (N=152) Spring 2007 for their skill in grade level and subject area curriculum planning and evaluation (LASS B1–LSDAS and B2–LEAP 21).  The 2004-2005 and 2005-2006 teacher candidate data indicate comparable performance levels. 

Initial follow-up surveys
The 2006-2007 three-year Teacher Education Graduate Follow-Up Survey data (4-point scale) from the principals (N=46) in two school districts reported on 133 third year teachers indicate that they perceived Southeastern graduates to be most effective in Student Achievement (3.65), Instruction (3.65), Planning (3.65), Collaboration (3.60), and Management (3.60).  The lowest scores (3.23) were reported for Diversity and (3.30) for professional development, but still provide evidence of successfully using professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills (LASS 1.15: Summary: Teacher Education Graduate Follow-up Survey for 2006-2007). 

1c. Professional and Pedagogical Knowledge and Skills for Advanced Programs
Evidence of professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills of advanced teacher candidates’ mastery is provided from primarily course performance and projects, the final action research project, for those candidates who entered the degree program in Summer 2006 or later, and electronic portfolios (Exhibit 1a.10: Advanced E-Folio Results).  Various projects and assignments are identified for inclusion in the portfolio as evidence of candidate competency.  Selected artifacts and portal Reflections of Learning are uploaded into PASS-PORT to be used in the evaluation of Unit portfolios.  In Reflections of Learning, advanced level candidates are required to reflect on their professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills and connect these to NBPTS aligned with the conceptual framework/institutional standards. 

All advanced candidates address all the LASS (A1-A6) through these assessments embedded within the elements of Standard 1.  Advanced courses are aligned with the SBESE Reading Competencies which are aligned with the Louisiana ELA content standards, benchmarks, and GLEs, as well as with IRA/NCTE standards.  When advanced candidates connect course-based and unit-based assessments with state and national standards, the connection with SBESE Competencies is also present (LASS 1.14).  Unique to Louisiana are the LASS (A7, B1, B2).  Evidence that the LASS (A7, B1, B2) have been addressed and are met is based on the Advanced Dispositions Form assessment and other key assessments (LASS 1.3, Fall 06 & Spring 07 Data; LASS 1.21, 2006-2007 Faculty Evaluations). 

Course performance and projects
Advanced candidates learn mathematical content through courses that foster knowledge of reform mathematical content and pedagogy to effectively teach lessons and assess student knowledge.  The content and pedagogy are aligned with the NCTM content and process standards and principles, as well as the Louisiana Mathematical strands and pervasive themes which include use of manipulatives and application of content to real life situations to impact student learning. 

All advanced candidates in C&I redesigned programs first implemented Summer 2006 explore teacher leadership and engage in an action research project during EDUC 695, which may address one or more of the LASS.  In EDUC 693, Leadership for Change advanced Elementary and Secondary concentration candidates develop leadership skills (LASS 1.4) and a school improvement plan (LASS 1.5) which is implemented in EDUC 688, Practicum in Elementary and Secondary Education  that addresses not only educational improvement in school settings but also professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills.  Advanced candidates have the ability to reflect on their practice making adjustments to facilitate and enhance PK-12 student learning. 

One example of advanced program candidates addressing these standards as well as the LASS is in EDUC 678, Dyslexia and Related Disabilities in the Classroom, where candidates conduct mini-research projects (LASS 1.6) in the schools to determine how to best teach students with characteristics of dyslexia.  Candidates share these findings with their peers as evidence of collaboration and impact on school improvement and professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills.  Advanced candidates in both SPED and C&I programs know how students learn and facilitate PK-12 student understanding.  Evidence that SPED advanced program candidates address LASS is provided through the CEC SPA report. 

Through the English as a Second Language (ESL) concentration in C&I, advanced candidates enhance their abilities to impact educational improvement by addressing the needs of English Language Learners.  In EDUC 516, Methods for Teaching English as a Second Language, and EDUC 528, Curriculum Design for Teaching English as a Second Language, candidates address issues of curriculum and instruction in meeting the needs of culturally and linguistically diverse learners who represent subgroups in schools where annual yearly progress goals are directly related to school improvement.  LASS 1.22 provides evidence of advanced candidates’ knowledge and performance related to the LASS. 

Advanced level portfolios
Overwhelming evidence that advanced candidates consider the culture of school, family and community contexts in connecting concepts to PK-12 students’ prior experience and applying the ideas to real-world problems can be evidenced in portfolios through selected course artifacts as well as in the previous examples (Exhibit 1a.10: Advanced E-Folio Results). 

National Board for Professional Teaching Standards (NBPTS)
Advanced level degree programs are structured such that candidates build upon and extend their knowledge base to improve their own teaching and student learning through a variety of course requirements and experiences addressing the five propositions of the NBPTS: Teachers are committed to students and their learning; teachers know the subjects they teach and how to teach those subjects to students; teachers are responsible for managing and monitoring student learning; teachers think systematically about their practice and learn from experience; teachers are members of learning communities. 

Advanced level artifacts selected in each course are submitted as part of candidates’ portfolios to demonstrate professional knowledge and skills for teachers in the C&I and SPED programs. The assessment used to evaluate these artifacts and provide Unit information in this element uses six indicators, on a scale of 1-3, aligned with NBPTS Propositions 1-5. An overall average (2.21) and details of candidates’ competencies during the 2006-2007 academic year are provided in Exhibit 1c.3: NBPTS Summary. The assessment data indicate that advanced level candidates in both programs exhibit professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills for teachers at a level slightly above Approaching Expectations in the five NBPTS areas. Candidates are strongest in the areas of knowledge of subjects they teach (2.23), application of specialized knowledge through a variety of teaching strategies (2.23), and the consideration of experiences, experts and research in planning and/or implementation (2.23).  The lowest mean score (2.17) was in the demonstration of collaboration with colleagues, parents/caregivers, and/or consideration of community resources. 

Data related to foundations of education and the ways children and adolescents develop and the relationship to learning is reflected in Items 1, 2, 3, and 4.  Artifacts are assessed on the extent to which they reflect understanding of how diverse students learn in a variety of settings; the creation, organization, connection, and application of knowledge; and how pedagogical knowledge is used to maximize learning in the classroom.  Information regarding candidates’ knowledge of professional ethics, laws, and policies is based on Items 4 and 5 where the artifact is assessed on the extent to which it considers experiences, experts, and research as well collaboration with members of learning communities (e.g. colleagues, parents, community).  Item 4 provides information on the use of research in teaching.  Knowledge and skills in relation to the diversity of student populations is shown in Item 1 and in relation to families and communities in Item 5.  The consideration of school, family, and community contexts is shown in Item 5 and the prior experiences of students in Item 4. 

Advanced follow-up surveys
Data from the 2004 Employer Survey indicate that the vast majority of the Unit’s graduates were rated “Very Good” (4) or “Excellent” (5) in ability to work with persons from diverse ethnic and cultural backgrounds as well as work ethics.  They received this same high rating in listening, written communication, reading, public speaking, and interpersonal skills which all contribute to professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills.  There is a 97% general satisfaction rate (N=141) with Southeastern candidates.  One employer acknowledged her satisfaction with Southeastern’s programs: “I have found SLU graduates to be some of the ‘best prepared’ for the ‘real’ teaching world!!”  Advanced graduates indicated in the 2005-2006 Southeastern Exit Survey data that 95% were satisfied or very satisfied with their real-world experiences in or out of the classroom (LASS 1.11–Table 18). 

Data from the 2005-2006 Graduate Programs Curriculum & Instruction and Special Education Employee Follow-up Survey (Exhibit 1a.11), using a 4-point scale where 1= Unsatisfactory and 4= Exemplary, indicated 100% of advanced candidates (N=9) perceived that they are above average or exemplary in managing and monitoring student learning, in thinking systematically about teaching and in serving as members of learning communities. 

1d. Student Learning in Initial Programs
Candidates develop and implement assessment plans that measure student learning several times during their program, modeled from the required Louisiana Teacher Assistance and Assessment Program (LaTAAP). Candidates plan pre- and post-tests that measure the progress of students in learning lesson objectives and goals.  Assessment plans are implemented in the methods course(s), and student teaching/internship.  Results indicate that candidates are meeting expectations for impacting student learning during FXs and clinical practice.  For the past three semesters, candidates have been evaluated on the following items related to their assessment plans: 1) Develops well constructed assessment instruments/ procedures/ performances, 2) Uses appropriate and effective assessment techniques, 3) Produces evidence of student academic growth under his/her instruction, and 4) Interprets and utilizes standardized/non-standardized test results.  Candidate scores indicate that they are having a significant impact on student learning as evidenced by the results found in Exhibit 1d.1: Assessment Plan Summary. 

Evidence that the Louisiana Supplement Standards (A7, B1, B2) have been met at the initial level is provided in LASS 1.1.  This data set for 2006-2007 includes both undergraduate and alternate certification candidates their student teaching or internship semester.  Self-reported data from the LASS survey indicate that the majority of candidates feel that they have adequate knowledge or are well-informed about this performance standard required of Louisiana teacher candidates and teachers. Using their knowledge of the School Improvement Plan, candidates write a reflection about a teaching experience with students in a FX and describe the impact on student achievement. These constructed responses indicate that candidates use Grade Level Expectations (GLEs) in planning and implementing lesson plans, and that there is a positive impact on student learning.   LASS 1.2 provides examples of constructed responses of initial level candidates. 

Initial follow-up surveys. 
The 2006-2007 three-year Follow-Up Survey data (4-point scale)  from the principals (N=46) in two school districts reported on 133 third year teachers indicating that they perceived Southeastern graduates to be most effective in seven areas which included student learning.  Candidates received a high rating on Student Achievement (3.65) LASS 1.15: Summary: Teacher Education Graduate Follow-up Survey for 2006-2007.  Self-reported data reveal that on a 4-point scale, graduates perceived themselves most effective in their Content Knowledge as it impacts student learning (3.89) as evidenced in LASS 1.16.  Additionally, comments from the districts confirm candidate impact on student learning. 

1d. Student Learning in Advanced Programs
Advanced candidates’ performances of student learning are measured using the NBPTS. Specifically, Proposition 2, Teachers know the subjects they teach and how to teach those subjects to students, and Proposition 3, Teachers are responsible for managing and monitoring student learning, are used to assess student learning in the field through a variety of artifacts (e.g., case studies, assessments, lesson plans etc.).  Results of the NBPTS show that candidates meet expectations on a scale of 1-3 for Proposition 2 (2.23) and Proposition 3 (2.20).  For further insight into advanced candidates’ performances of student learning see Exhibit 1c.3: NBPTS Summary. 

Responses from advanced teacher candidates during their last semester at Southeastern indicate high levels of knowledge about the LASS A7, B1 and B2, which impact student learning.  Fall 2006 results (N=45) on a 6-point self-assessment document school improvement planning (5.61), the Louisiana School and District Accountability System (5.48) and the Louisiana Educational Assessment Program (5.43).  Spring 2007 results for the advanced candidates (N=62) document school improvement planning (5.2), the Louisiana School and District Accountability System (B1=4.4) and the Louisiana Educational Assessment Program (4.8) (LASS 1.3: Fall 06-Spring 07 Data). 

LASS 1.21 provides faculty evaluation results for 2006- 2007 for all advanced program candidates (N=208) from the Advanced Dispositions Form.  These results provide evidence that candidates in advanced programs have met the LASS (A7, B1, B2).  Using a 6-point scale, data indicate that candidates have outstanding knowledge about school improvement planning (5.49), the Louisiana School and District Accountability System (5.48) and for the Louisiana Educational Assessment Program (5.72). 

Additionally, the SPED program uses teacher work sample methodology to measure student learning.  The purpose of the Teacher Work Sample (TWS) assignment is to demonstrate candidates’ ability to plan an appropriate sequence of instruction based on pre-assessment data obtained, provide instruction, conduct assessments to document student learning, and reflect on student achievement and possible changes in teaching that might impact student learning.  Candidates complete the TWS during an assessment practicum that links assessment to instruction.  Results indicate that candidates enrolled in the advanced special education program have a positive impact on student learning by meeting or exceeding expectations.  Evidence of advanced candidate functioning with regard to student learning can be reviewed in Exhibit 1d.2: Teacher Work Sample. 

Advanced follow-up surveys
The 2004 Follow-up Survey, supported by public comments, indicates that employers and graduates are overwhelmingly positive about the impact of Southeastern candidates on PK-12 learning.  This survey is important in that it helped the Unit plan and implement changes in the curriculum.  Data indicate that the vast majority of the Unit’s graduates were rated “Very Good” (4) or “Excellent” (5) in ability to integrate knowledge and info from different areas, and interpersonal skills as well as ability to work with persons from diverse ethnic and cultural backgrounds. Examples of comments included “SLU graduates are better prepared and make fewer mistakes when they enter a classroom,” and “SLU graduates are very prepared to work with students at all levels.”  

From the 2005-2006 Graduate Programs Curriculum & Instruction and Special Education Employee Follow-up Survey (Exhibit 1a.11), using a 4-point scale where 1= Unsatisfactory and 4= Exemplary, data indicated 100% of advanced candidates (N=9) perceived that they are prepared to have a positive impact on student learning.  Further data indicated that 89% perceived themselves to be above average or exemplary in being prepared to take an active role in school improvement in decision-making and creating relevant partnerships for school improvement as well as 89% perceived themselves to be above average or exemplary in being prepared to contribute to testing and measurement practices for the LEAP and overall, Louisiana School and District Accountability System take an active role in school improvement in decision-making and creating relevant partnerships for school improvement.  These follow-up survey data provide further evidence of candidates addressing the LASS. 

1e. Professional Knowledge and Skills for Other School Professionals
Four advanced programs within the COEHD prepare candidates to work with students in PK-12 settings: Educational Leadership (Master’s and Doctoral), Technology Leadership, and School Counseling, which is accredited by CACREP.  Additionally, the College of Nursing and Health Sciences (NHS) offers a Master of Science degree in Communication Science and Disorders which provides candidates opportunities to prepare to work in PK-12 school settings as Speech-Language Pathologists and is accredited by ASHA. The candidates also have opportunities to work with children and adults in medical and rehabilitation settings.  The results of required state licensure exams and/or national certification exams for Educational Leadership, School Counseling, and Speech-Language Pathology are available in Table 4 (Exhibit 1e.1).   

Educational Leadership
The Department of Educational Leadership & Technology (ELT) offers three degrees: Master of Education in Educational Leadership (EDL), Master of Education in Educational Technology Leadership (EDT), and Doctorate of Education in Educational Leadership.   A recent report issued by the Southern Regional Education Board (SREB) cited Southeastern and the other universities for making progress in six key policy areas evaluated. 

There are common Unit assessments for all three degrees in ELT as well as program specific assessments.  Additionally, the University Office of Institutional Research & Assessment conducts a number of assessments on degree programs.  An Exit Survey of all program completers is conducted after each semester.  Summary data on these assessments common to all ELT programs can be found in Exhibit 1e.2.  

Exhibit 1e.3 displays a summary of assessments conducted for the Master in Educational Leadership.  Candidates must pass the School Leadership Licensure Assessment (SLLA) for program completion.  The results of the SLLA for the candidates in 2006-2007 are found in Exhibit 1e.4.  Another key assessment is the Case Study in EDL 660 Exhibit 1e.5 displays the results and summary statement for the Case Study.  Master’s level candidates are required to conduct an action-research project which is evaluated (Exhibit 1e.6).  The Master’s Degree Program in EDL addresses diversity, culture, and climate in all of its seminars (Exhibit 1e.7).  The electronic portfolio is assessed using the Unit rubric (Exhibit 1e.8: School Leader E-Folio Results).  Program assessments and results can also be viewed in the ELCC SPA report.  

The Doctor of Education in Educational Leadership requires all candidates to successfully complete portfolios in PASS-PORT.  Exhibit 1e.9 contains a summary of the portfolio assessment for doctoral candidates completing the Emerging Level portfolio.  To date no candidates have submitted the Proficiency or Capstone. The program addresses the issue of diversity through content in a number of courses.  Specifically, EDL 811, Management of Educational Organizations, requires candidates to conduct an Environmental Scan of their communities. Exhibit 1e.10 contains the template and rubrics for the Environmental Scan, which has specific diversity related content. 

With respect to the Unit’s emphasis on technology, ELT candidates in both programs are required to use PASS-PORT and Blackboard, as well as word processing, spreadsheets, PowerPoint and multimedia (video and podcasts) in assignments.  All candidates are required to use a variety of technologies in the delivery of papers, projects and presentations.  EDL 600 is especially designed for the Master’s program, and ETEC 812, Leadership in the Integration of Emerging Technologies, for the doctoral program.  An example of candidate work is available in Exhibit 1e.11: EDL Technology Work Sample.  

Technology Leadership
This newest advanced degree program did not come into existence until April 2007.  Therefore, no advanced candidates were permitted to enroll in the new program until August 2007.  The candidates that populated educational technology courses during this period of review and redesign were assessed as a part of the overall Unit assessment system and counted as a part of the total data aggregated and reported.  Candidates who took educational technology courses did successfully complete technology portfolios that were assessed using national/international standards and appropriate rubrics.  Complete access to assessed portfolios successfully completed in the degree program as a concentration can be viewed at http://pangea.tec.selu.edu/. 

School Counseling
Southeastern’s school counseling program is accredited by the Council for Accreditation of Counseling and Related Educational Programs (CACREP).  To earn a master’s degree in counseling with a concentration in school counseling, candidates must pass the Counselor Preparation Comprehensive Exam (CPCE) during their final semester.  This exam is distributed by the Center for Credentialing and Education, Inc. (CCE), and is designed to assess the candidates’ knowledge of counseling in the eight core areas defined by CACREP.  The state’s licensing exam for mental health counseling is the National Counselor Examination (NCE).  However, not all school counselors elect to take this post-graduate exam since it is not required to practice school counseling.  The CPCE and the NCE both measure counseling knowledge in the eight core areas defined by CACREP.   

Six of the eight core areas of the CPCE directly assess the school counseling candidates’ knowledge of their students, families, and communities: Human Growth and Development, Social and Cultural Foundations, Helping Relationships, Group Work, Career and Lifestyle Development, and Professional Orientation and Ethics.  Successful completion of the basic skills course (CED 605) also provides evidence that the candidate can interface with candidates, families, and communities in an effective manner.  The use of current research to inform practice is demonstrated through successful completion of each of the counseling videotapes required to enter the practicum and internship experiences.  Research competency is also demonstrated by the 100% pass rates on the CPCE in the area of Research and Program Evaluation.  Data also suggest that candidates use technology in their practice, as measured by the CPCE core areas of Appraisal and Career and Lifestyle Development.  The implementation of both core areas requires the infusion of technology.  Exhibit 1e.12 provides detailed results of the CPCE assessment of counseling candidates. 

Candidate progress is continually assessed throughout the program. In addition, it is formally assessed on four specific occasions: 1) Candidates must earn at least a “B” in the introductory counseling skills course, CED 605: Pre-practicum/Counseling Techniques, in order to advance in the program; 2) Candidates must be interviewed by faculty and satisfactorily complete a counseling videotape before being admitted to practicum; 3) Candidates must satisfactorily complete a counseling videotape and receive faculty approval before being admitted to internship; and 4) Candidates must pass the Counselor Preparation Comprehensive Exam (CPCE) in their final semester in order to graduate.  

Speech-Language Pathology
The Department of Communication Sciences and Disorders provides professional services to school systems, medical, and rehabilitation facilities within the University’s community to assist in strengthening their programs for individuals with communication disorders.  Undergraduate students may complete the program with the necessary hours to obtain a license from the Board of Examiners of Speech-Language Pathology & Audiology (LABESPA) or a certificate from the Louisiana State Department of Education to practice as a speech-language pathology assistant (SLPA).  Graduate students majoring in speech-language pathology obtain academic and clinical training required for the Certificate of Clinical Competency (CCC) in Speech-Language Pathology granted by the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association.  The program leading to a master’s degree in speech language pathology is accredited by the Council on Academic Accreditation in Audiology and Speech-Language Pathology (CAA) of the American Speech Language-Hearing Association (ASHA) (Exhibit 1e.13).  Advanced candidates complete all course work and clinical practicum courses required for state licensure and national certification and pass the national examination in speech-language pathology (PRAXIS) (Exhibit 1e.1) prior to earning the certificate of clinical competence.  Advanced candidates successfully complete a clinical practicum course, CSD 611; assessment of those candidates during 2006-2007 can be found in Exhibit 1e.14 which provides evidence of knowledge and skills. 

Evidence that the Speech-Language Pathology program candidates are competent in knowledge and skills for other school professionals is provided in the CSD Application Form 2005-2006 (LASS 1.18) that is submitted to the accrediting body.  Candidates are evaluated in their clinical experiences using the Clinical Skills Competency Checklist (LASS 1.19) and the Knowledge and Skills Action Form (KASA) (LASS 1.20).  The average scores for advanced candidates’ (N=11) performance indicate a high level of performance in the clinical practicum course (CSD 611) as all scores were 4.75 or greater on a five-point scale for 2006-2007 (LASS 1.13). 

Advanced follow-up surveys
Follow-ups are conducted on all degree program completers and alumni as noted previously.  However, because of the recent beginning of ELT programs, no program completers have been included in these surveys as yet. The degree program administrators are working with the director of Office of Institutional Research & Assessment to include targeted questions specific to each degree program in these follow-up surveys in the future.  The Alumni Survey was conducted in 2003-2004 and results may be found in Exhibit 1e.15.  However, all degree programs offered in the 2006-2007 year have not yet had program completers; the next Alumni Survey is scheduled to be conducted in 2008-2009.  In addition to surveys conducted by the Office of Institutional Research & Assessment, the Master in Educational Leadership has a specific survey (Exhibit 1e.16).  

1f. Student Learning for Other School Professionals
In the EDL master’s program, Seminars 1 and 4 address culture and climate at the building level as impacting student learning through creating a positive environment.  See the syllabi for EDL 660, 661, 662, 663 for specific course objectives.  Successful completion of these courses indicates that this element has been addressed.  Advanced candidates in Educational Leadership programs successfully address the LASS (A7, B1, B2) through key assessments (e.g., Case Study, School Improvement Plan) and follow-up survey data as evidenced in LASS 1.7, LASS 1.8 and LASS 1.9 and cited in the ELCC SPA report.  In the doctoral program through coursework and web-based projects, candidates explore multiple means of creating environments conducive to learning at both building and district levels, 

In addressing LASS A7 with regard to School Improvement, candidates in the counseling program address CACREP standards that stipulate all candidates in the school counseling track complete a 600 hour internship (CED 690) in a school (K-12) setting under the supervision of a licensed mental health provider and/or certified school counselor.  This experience requires the candidate to engage in the day-to-day activities of a practicing school counselor.  Therefore, candidates are required to take active roles in school improvement efforts, high stakes testing (LEAP 21), school and district accountability (LSDAS), and to work with the supervisor to create community partnerships aimed at enhancing the comprehensive school counseling program.  In addition, advanced candidates are provided an overview of their role and various accountability measures that will be encountered in area schools in CED 611, School Counseling and Consulting.  During the internship experience, candidates provide a multitude of services designed to assist students taking this exam, including classroom guidance units on calming test anxiety, time management and test-taking strategies, and effective study skills.  

The Speech-Language Pathology program is accredited by the CAA of the ASHA.  Candidates who work in school settings are members of various teams (e.g., School Improvement, IEP, and School Building Level) in an effort to impact student learning and enhance school improvement thus addressing the LASS which targets the goal of student learning.  The average scores for advanced candidates’ (N=11) performance in these areas indicate a high level of performance in the clinical practicum course (CSD 611) as all scores were 4.75 or greater on a 5-point scale for 2006-2007 (LASS 1.13).  

Advanced follow-up surveys
The Employer 2004 Survey for all advanced programs for other school professionals conducted by Institutional Research is available for review.  Program follow-up survey data from 2003-2007 for candidates in the Educational Leadership program indicate that both employees and employers view Southeastern graduates as competent or exemplary using a four-point scale (LASS 1.10).

Institutional research reported in February 2007 for the Employer 2004 graduates that there is a 97% general satisfaction rate (N=141) with Southeastern candidates.  Advanced graduates indicated in the 2005-2006 Southeastern Exit Survey data that 95% were satisfied or very satisfied with their real-world experiences in or out of the classroom in that 100% of the advanced graduates indicated they were satisfied or very satisfied about their internship (LASS 1.11–EDL & Technology-Table 16; Counseling–Table 17; Speech Pathology-Table 20). 

Follow-Up Survey data for advanced candidates in Speech-Language Pathology indicate that both graduates and employers view Southeastern graduates as competent in their ability to create positive environments for student learning.  See the 2005-2006 CSD Application Form (LASS 1.18).  

1g. Professional Dispositions
The COEHD, in collaboration with our partner colleges and partner schools are responsible for preparing candidates who have the acquired knowledge, skills, and dispositions expected of effective professionals.  Faculty and school personnel evaluate the demonstration of dispositions and feedback is provided about candidate progress.  Dispositions are defined as the values, commitments, and professional ethics that influence behavior toward students, families, colleagues, and communities affecting student learning, motivation, and development as well as the educator’s own professional growth.  Dispositions are guided by beliefs and attitudes related to values such as caring, fairness, honesty, responsibility, and social justice (NCATE, 2001). 

The Unit adopted four major categories of dispositions: 1) Professional Attributes, 2) Professional Characteristics, 3) Professional Relationships, and 4) Fairness.  Punctual attendance and personal presentation are professional attributes, an important key to becoming an effective educator.  Confidence, adaptability, and ambition are professional characteristics increasing the likelihood of accepting leadership roles in the educative community.  Additionally, candidates’ positive interaction with students, peers, faculty, and community persons ensures us of their ability to build professional relationships.  As the fourth category of our disposition assessment is fairness, it is incumbent upon our candidates to display characteristics promoting their belief in the fact all children can learn.  These four categories of dispositions are expected of all teacher education candidates and other school professional candidates in both the University classroom and \ field settings.  Candidates at both initial and advanced levels are assessed using the Professional Attribute and Characteristic Scale. 

Initial candidates’ dispositions
More than 80% of candidates completing methods courses during Fall 2006 achieved high ratings on the components of the four main categories of dispositions (Exhibit 1g.1). Candidates’ results during Spring 2007 show similar results (Exhibit 1g.2).  Although each main category indicated greater than 60% of the candidates achieved each component of the four main categories, the strongest scores are in categories three and four with greater than 80% of the candidates achieving each of those components.  With the initial candidates’ dispositions being addressed during the methods courses’ FXs then evaluated by the instructor at the conclusion of these experiences, we are assured each component of becoming an effective educator described by our conceptual framework is addressed.  A final assessment, Professional Attributes Scale, is completed during the student teaching/internship; results are available in Exhibit 1g.3 for a three-year period.  Item numbers 1–15 are specific to the Unit’s dispositions.

Advanced candidates’ dispositions
As part of its assessment plan, the Unit requires advanced candidates to respond to the Professional Attributes Scale as a pre-assessment readiness survey for Portal 7 and a post-assessment survey in Portal 9.  Results are reported to the Unit.  The 2006-2007 surveys of advanced candidates’ self reporting reveal that they are responsive to the Unit’s four clusters of dispositions:  Professional Attributes; Professional Characteristics; Professional Relationship; Fairness.  Fall 2006 candidates averaged over 5.5 on all items on a 1-6 scale with 6 being the highest level response on the Pre-Disposition and Post-Disposition Surveys (Exhibit 1g.4).  The Unit also collects data on the Professional Attributes Scale instrument where advanced candidates (N=151) are evaluated by faculty on dispositions in 2006-2007 (Exhibit 1g.5). 

Advanced follow-up surveys
The 2004 Employer Survey is the most current data available and indicates that the vast majority of the Unit’s graduates were rated “Very Good” (4) or “Excellent” (5) in professionalism, working in an ethical manner, work attitude, dependability, punctuality, willingness to accept new responsibilities, decision-making, ability to work independently, and ability to work under pressure. From the 2005-2006 Graduate Programs Curriculum & Instruction and Special Education Employee Follow-up Survey (Exhibit 1a.11), using a 4-point scale where 1= Unsatisfactory and 4= Exemplary, data indicated 100% of advanced candidates (N=9) perceived that they exhibit professional dispositions of an effective educator.



 

  

 


Southeastern Louisiana University
© 2007Southeastern Louisiana University
All Rights Reserved
Unofficial and external sites are not endorsed by Southeastern Louisiana University