Standard One Compendium 3 – RA1.1 Collaborative Activities

Grambling State University Standard One

Compendium 3

RA1.1 Collaborative Activities

Alignment to National Standard: This compendium, entitled Collaborative Activities, provides evidence for CAEP RA.1 The provider ensures that candidates for professional specialties develop a deep understanding of the critical concepts and principles of their field of preparation and, by completion, are able to use professional specialty practices flexibly to advance the learning of P-12 students toward attainment of college- and career-readiness standards.

- CAEP RA.1.1: Leading and/or participating in collaborative activities with others such as peers, colleagues, teachers, administrators, community organizations, and parents

- CAEP RA.1.2: Providers ensure that advanced program completers have opportunities to learn and apply specialized content and discipline knowledge contained in approved state and/or national discipline specific standards

How Alignment is assured: The College of Education Assessment Coordinator and the program Chair ensure the courses are aligned with specialized ILA standards, InTASC, and CAEP standards. The Louisiana Competencies and appropriate other Standards are included in all syllabi. The Assessment Coordinator maintains alignment and adherence to multiple Louisiana state laws and policy regulations. In Taskstream, the Assessment coordinator utilizes the Watermark standards database to ensure alignment and updates to standards, assessments, and the GSU and program competencies. The ILA Standards is infused into the reading Program, and the CEC standards are utilized by the Special Education program, to assess key ideas and concepts in each program

Evidence Overview

Use of Assessment as Part of the Quality Assurance System: The following assessments are designed to address national and state standards in order to work effectively with diverse P-12 students and their families. Multiple measures are used throughout the graduate candidate’s program to capture and address performance with reflection as a key component in the graduate candidate’s growth.

Purpose of Assessments: These assessments are used by the programs to verify that Grambling State University candidates develop a deep understanding of the importance of collaboration critical to their field of specialization. These assessments provide evidence of candidates leading or participating in collaborative activities with others such as peers, colleagues, teachers, administrators, community organizations, and parents. The Evidence section below provides the information on collaborative activities: The two programs enforce concepts of collaboration in ED 581 Literacy Leadership Seminar course and SPED 542 Methods & Materials for Teaching Children with Exceptional Learning Needs as would be presented below.

Grambling State University Standard One Compendium 3

RA1.1 Collaborative Activities

CAEP RA1.1: Leading and/or participating in collaborative activities with others such as peers, colleagues, teachers, administrators, community organizations, and parents; and

Master of Education Special Education SPED 542 Methods & Materials for Teaching Children with Exceptional Learning Needs

CAEP RA1.2: Providers ensure that advanced program completers have opportunities to learn and apply specialized content and discipline knowledge contained in approved state and/or national discipline specific standards

CAEP RA1.1: Leading and/or participating in collaborative activities with others such as peers, colleagues, teachers, administrators, community organizations, and parents; and

Council for Exceptional Children (CEC) and Louisiana State Standards for Special Education

Master of Education in Curriculum & Instruction: Reading

ED 581 Literacy Leadership Seminar course

CAEP RA1.2: Providers ensure that advanced program completers have opportunities to learn and apply specialized content and discipline knowledge contained in approved state and/or national discipline specific standards

International Literacy Association (ILA)

How the Evaluation is used to Measure Candidate Progress: Candidates who do not successfully demonstrate competency on these assessments by meeting the target with a score of 3.0 Effective: Proficient, conferences with the course instructor to develop strategies for improvement. Candidates may be provided an additional opportunity to re-submit the assessment.

Evidence and Analysis

Details of Assessment Administration:

Master of Education: Reading ED 581 - Literacy Leadership Seminar course

The purpose for this assignment is to provide candidates with the opportunity to examine best practices for developing literacy communities in an effective collaborative atmosphere. The Historical Context for Teaching Reading Portfolio consists of three parts completed during the first half of the ED 581: Literacy Leadership Seminar course. This portfolio focuses on the historical context for teaching reading and a comparison and contrast of approaches/trends for teaching reading across time periods. Candidates share findings and recommendations with peers and school administrators.

GSU has basic rules for each of the rubric levels and how they should be constructed, even though the content specifies the precise criteria for each level under a particular rubric element. These definitions are listed in Table 1.

Novice

This rating is equivalent to having emerging performance skills/content knowledge that can be enriched with additional coursework.

Directions to Candidates:

Grambling State University Standard One Compendium 3 RA1.1 Collaborative Activities

Performance Indicators - Descriptions

Effective: Emerging This rating is equivalent to having the performance skills/content knowledge needed to move forward into student teaching; however, additional remediation might be needed to hone the candidate's performance.

Effective: Proficient (Target)

This rating is equivalent to having the performance skills/content knowledge needed to be an effective student teacher where additional skills will be practiced.

Highly Effective

This rating is equivalent to having the performance skills/content knowledge needed as a highly effective first year teacher.

Part One: You will Interview a parent, grandparent, or other older person about how he or she learned to read. In addition, you will survey teachers, administrators, and other members of the school community to assess current practices, strengths, and weaknesses in literacy instruction. Based on survey results, you will design a literacy program and all components. Consequently, you will inquire about reading materials, instruction, or concepts that the person can remember about early literacy experiences relative to the Essential Components of Reading. Inquire about the principal/school leader’s role in the literacy process. Focus on areas of the program such as assessment, diversity resources including both print and digital literacy, family involvement, and professional development. Discuss ways in which you can collaborate with colleagues to develop or enhance an existing literacy learning community. Utilize the data from the interview to develop a comparative analysis of the traditional methodologies, applicable influential theoretical approaches, and resources used to teach reading/writing with the contemporary approaches for 21st century literacy learning used today. The narrative summation of this information will be shared with the class and submitted to the course professor. The changes in methodologies/approaches used to teach reading skills across time periods will be used to inform prospective literacy leaders about best practices and scientific-based pedagogical strategies. (ILA: 1.1, 1.3, 4.2, 6.2, 7.2)

Part Two of the assignment Historical Trends in Reading you will create a Timeline or Graphic Organizer of the Historical Trends in Reading presented in various sources of current literature such as those listed below. Describe the main theories and relate them to current approaches and methods for teaching reading/language arts. What innovative strategy would you like to recommend for implementation at your school? (ILA 1.1,6.1,6.3)

In Part Three of the assignment, you should focus on your Personal Literacy History. You will create your own literacy history. Chronicle as many memories as you can about learning to read and write. It is suggested that you situate your experiences in pop culture and political/historical/social contexts. Place yourself and your parents in the timeline. As you engage in this reflection, also consider your beliefs about students, teaching, and learning. What do you feel strongly about that is related to teaching reading? How was your principal/school leader involved in literacy or reading instruction? How did your family and community beliefs about the definitions, uses, and importance of literacy influence your development?

Table 1: Rubric Level Definitions

Grambling State University Standard One Compendium

3

RA1.1 Collaborative Activities

and beliefs? After completion, identify the communities and literacies present in your autobiography and compare them to those valued by schools and the historical timeline. Write your literacy history or use another medium to convey your memories (i.e., create a picture book, poster, video, poem or the like). Explain how the historical trends and relevant theories in reading and writing may have influenced your own literacy background. The final presentation of the project will be shared through use of Prezi, PowerPoint or any other technological milieu of your choice to colleagues, faculty and school administrators. Upload to canvas and task stream for grading (ILA 1.3, 6.1,6.2, 6.4,)

Evaluation Instrument

Candidates collaborate with colleagues to administer, interpret, and use data for decision making about student assessment, instruction, intervention, and evaluation for individuals and groups of students. Candidates lead and participate in data team meetings or literacy teams and support their colleagues in analyzing, interpreting, and using results of assessments for instructional decision in classrooms and schools. The rubric is designed to assess the candidate’s performance while implementing selected “interactive coaching” experiences as cited below. This evaluation will provide data on the impact of Reading Specialist/Literacy Coaching experiences as evaluated by the University Reading faculty member.

How is the evaluation used to measure candidate progress: Seventy percent of teacher candidates will achieve a score of 3 or higher on each component of the standards-based rubric. Candidates who do not successfully demonstrate competency on the assessment by meeting the target with a score of 3.0 Basic, conference with the Course Instructor to develop strategies for improvement. Should the candidate continue to perform below the 3.0 Basic threshold, the candidate will be required to repeat the course. Candidates repeating the course are provided personalized support based on the identified need of the candidate to master the competencies.

The Scoring Guide/Rubric for the ED 581 Historical Context for Reading Portfolio

Candidates demonstrate knowledge of the major, theoretical, conceptual, historical, and evidence-based components of reading (e.g. concepts of print, phonological awareness, phonics, word

Interview findings effectively demonstrated understanding of the historically shared knowledge, theories, evidenced based foundations of literacy, role of reading specialist and changes over time in the perceptions of reading and writing development,

Interview findings demonstrated adequate understanding of the historically shared knowledge, theories, role of reading specialist and changes over time in the perceptions of reading and writing development,

Interview findings demonstrated minimal understanding of the historically shared knowledge, theories, role of reading specialist and changes over time in the perceptions of reading and writing development,

Interview findings demonstrated no understanding of the historically shared knowledge, theories, role of reading specialist, and changes over time in the perceptions of reading and writing development, processes, and components

recognition, fluency, vocabulary, comprehension) development throughout the grades and its relationship with other aspects of literacy.

ILA 1.1:

InTASC 4

CAEP RA1.1 & A.1.2

Grambling State University Standard One Compendium

3

RA1.1 Collaborative Activities

processes, and components processes, and components processes, and components

Candidates demonstrate understanding of themselves and others as cultural beings through their pedagogy and interactions with individuals both within and outside of the school community

ILA 4.2

InTASC 5

CAEP RA1.1 & A.1.2

Candidate survey and conducts the needs assessment and demonstrates understanding of himself or herself as a cultural being through his or her pedagogy, reflexivity, and interactions with individuals both within and outside of the school community

• Demonstrates an understanding of others as cultural beings through his or her pedagogy and interactions with others both within and outside of the school community

Candidate surveys and conducts a needs assessment, and demonstrates understanding of self as a cultural being through his or her pedagogy and interaction with others, within and outside of the school community

• Demonstrates understandings of others as cultural beings through his or her pedagogy and interactions with individuals within and the school community

Candidate demonstrates understandings of others as cultural beings through his or her pedagogy and interactions with individuals within and the school community.

Candidate does not demonstrate understanding of himself or herself as a cultural being. Lacks interactional skills and does not demonstrate understandings of others as cultural beings

Scoring Rubric for Part Two: Timeline or Graphic Organizer of Historical Trends

4

Highly Effective

3 Effective Proficient

2 Effective Emerging

1 Novice

Candidates demonstrate knowledge of theoretical, conceptual, historical and evidencebased components of language (e.g. language

Candidate demonstrates knowledge of historical and evidence-based components of language. Timeline or graphic organizer

Candidate demonstrates knowledge of historical and evidence-based components of

Candidate demonstrates knowledge of historical and evidence-based components of

Timeline or graphic organizer demonstrate no understanding of the major theories and empirical research that describe the cognitive,

acquisition, structure of language (e.g. conventions of standard English, vocabulary acquisition and use, speaking, viewing, visually representing) and its relationships with other aspects of literacy

ILA 1.3

CAEP RA1.1 & A.1.2

Grambling State University Standard One Compendium 3 RA1.1 Collaborative Activities

effectively demonstrated understanding of the major theories and empirical research that describe the cognitive, linguistic, motivational, and sociocultural foundations of reading and writing development.

Demonstrates changes over time in the perceptions of reading and writing development, processes, and components.

• Demonstrates knowledge of relationship of language with other aspects of literacy and shares that knowledge with colleague

language. Timeline or graphic organizer demonstrated adequate understanding of the major theories and empirical research that describe the cognitive, linguistic, motivational, and sociocultural foundations of reading and writing development, processes, and components, including word recognition, language, comprehension, strategic knowledge, and reading –writing connections

language. Timeline or graphic organizer demonstrated minimal understanding of the major theories and empirical research that describe the cognitive, linguistic, motivational, and sociocultural foundations of reading and writing development.

linguistic, motivational, and sociocultural foundations of reading and writing development, processes, and components, including word recognition, language, comprehension, strategic knowledge, and the perceptions of reading and writing development, processes, and components.

• Demonstrates no knowledge of relationship of language with other aspects of literacy to share that knowledge with colleague.

Candidates collaborate with and coach peers and experienced colleagues to develop, reflect on, and study their own and others’ teaching practices.

ILA 7.2

CAEP RA1.1 & A.1.2

Candidate collaborates with and coaches’ peers and experienced colleagues to develop, reflect on, self-assess, and study his or her own and others’ teaching practices

• Engages in novice coaching practices with groups

• Uses multiple approaches to engage in purposeful review and critique of his or her own and peers’ pedagogical practices

Candidate collaborates with and coaches’ peers and experienced colleagues to develop, reflect on, and study his or her own and others’ teaching practices.

• Engages in novice coaching practice with groups and individuals (modeling, coplanning, and coteaching)

Candidate Collaborates with and coaches’ peers and experienced colleagues to develop, reflect on, and study his or her own and others’ teaching practices.

• Engages in novice coaching practice with groups and individuals.

Candidate Cannot collaborate with and coach peers and experienced colleagues to develop, reflect on, and study his or her own and others’ teaching practice.

Grambling State University Standard One Compendium 3 RA1.1 Collaborative Activities

Scoring Rubric for Part Three: Literacy History

2017 ILA

Standard/Indicator

4 Highly Effective

3 Effective Proficient

2 Effective Emerging

1 Novice

Candidates demonstrate use their knowledge of adult learning to engage in collaborative decision making with colleagues to design, align, and assess instructional practices and interventions within and across classrooms.

ILA 6.2

InTASC 4

CAEP RA1.1 & A.1.2

Candidate:

• Uses his or her knowledge of adult learning to facilitate collaborative decisionmaking efforts on changes over time in the perception of reading and writing development

• Engages with teachers, literacy coaches, and administrators in designing, aligning, and assessing instruction practices and interventions within and across classrooms

Candidate uses his or her knowledge of adult learning to engage in collaborative decision making with colleagues on changes over time in the perception of reading and writing development.

• Engages with teachers in designing, aligning, and assessing instructional practices and interventions within and across classrooms

Candidate uses his or her knowledge of adult learning to engage in collaborative decision making with colleagues on changes over time in the perception of reading and writing development.

Candidate does not use his or her knowledge of adult learning to engage in collaborative decision making with colleagues to design, align, and assess instructional practices and interventions within and across classrooms. The literacy history demonstrated no correlation between literacy trends and personal literacy background and how changes over time in the perception of reading and writing development, processes.

6.3: Candidates develop, refine, and demonstrate leadership and facilitation skills when collaborating with individuals and groups.

Candidates develop, refines, and demonstrates leadership and facilitation skills when working with individuals and groups.

• Leads group meetings by assisting in setting norms and promoting group discussions, and facilitates leadership of the group members

• Collaborates with colleagues as a means of improving instructional practices.

Candidate develops, refines, and demonstrates leadership and facilitation skills when working with individuals and groups.

• Leads group meetings by assisting in setting norms and promoting group discussion.

Candidate develops, refines, and demonstrates leadership and facilitation skills when working with individuals and groups

Candidate cannot develop, refine, and demonstrate leadership and facilitation skills when collaborating with individuals and groups.

Candidates demonstrate the ability to reflect on their professional practices, communicate survey

Candidate demonstrated understanding of effective positive personal reflections related to literacy

Candidate demonstrated understanding of effective positive personal reflections related to literacy

Candidate demonstrated understanding of positive personal reflections related to literacy history

Candidate demonstrated no understanding of positive and personal reflections related to,

information to various audiences and are critical consumers of research policy and practice.

ILA 6.1: InTASC 9

CAEP RA1.1 & A.1.2

Grambling State University Standard One Compendium 3

RA1.1 Collaborative Activities

history portfolio practices. All findings are presented at a faculty meeting and is discussed in terms of process, product, and recommendations and is made available to all the audiences.

history portfolio practices. All findings are presented at a faculty meeting and is discussed in terms of process, product, and recommendations and is made available to all the audiences.

portfolio practices. Some findings are presented at a faculty meeting and is discussed in terms of process, product, and recommendations and is made available to all the audiences.

literacy history portfolio research, and is presented only to one group of the audience

Candidates consult with and advocate on behalf of teachers, students, families, and communities for effective literacy practices and policies.

ILA 6.4. InTASC 10

CAEP RA1.1 & A.1.2

Based on observations and survey, candidate lists strengths and weaknesses of current program and describes the newly designed literacy program in detail. This program is accompanied by the research to support the recommended change as well as research to one support retaining areas of strength. Program includes varied instructional approaches to include areas of word recognition, language comprehension, strategic knowledge, or reading- writing connections. Documents connection to survey.

program in detail. This program is accompanied by the research to support the recommended change. Program includes varied instructional approaches to include areas of word recognition, language comprehension, strategic knowledge, or reading- writing connections. Documents connection to survey.

Based on observations and survey, paper lists strengths and weaknesses of current program and describes the newly designed literacy program. This program is accompanied by the research to support the recommended change. Program includes varied instructional approaches to include areas of word recognition, language comprehension, strategic knowledge, or reading- writing connections

Assurance of Reliability and Validity

Candidate does not consult with teachers, students, families, and communities for effective literacy practices and policies. • Does not advocate for effective literacy practices and policies and lacks any plan for improvement grounded in research.

To determine the reliability of EPP-created assessments, program leads and faculty (SMEs) participate in training and calibration exercises to make sure that evaluators are using and interpreting rubrics in a consistent manner, which is necessary to ensure inter-rater reliability regarding the consistency of evaluating candidate performance on assessments. Faculty members are also occasionally chosen to take part in a formal inter-rater reliability study. The same pre-selected work sample from a course is scored individually for this study by other members of the faculty. Percent Agreement is calculated using the

Grambling State University Standard One Compendium

3

RA1.1 Collaborative Activities

scores of the faculty members to evaluate the amount of inter-rater reliability. GSU seeks 75% or higher agreement.

To determine the content validity of EPP-created assessments, GSU uses a panel of subject matter experts (SMEs) to determine how well the elements included within the assessment align with the intended outcomes. Using the Lawshe Method (recommended by CAEP), SMEs are provided with a copy of the assessment’s directions and rubric. They are then asked to determine if each element is essential, useful but not essential, or not necessary.

Presentation of Data

Data from Advanced Programs Related on Collaboration:

ED

Data

Grambling State University Standard One Compendium 3

RA1.1 Collaborative Activities

Data from Advanced Programs Related to Collaboration

Grambling State University Standard One Compendium

3

RA1.1 Collaborative Activities

Analysis and Interpretation

ED 581 Leadership Seminar

CAEP Standard RA1.1 Candidates for advanced preparation demonstrate their proficiencies to understand and apply knowledge and skills appropriate to their professional field of specialization so that learning and development opportunities for all P-12 are enhanced through:

• Leading and/or participating in collaborative activities with others such as peers, colleagues, teachers, administrators, community organizations, and parents.

o Data in Table 1 show that within this assessment three elements align to this skill.

o Spring 2019 candidates earned a mean score of 3.6 on these elements, placing their performance within the effective proficient range

o Fall 2021 candidates earned a mean score of 3.5 on these elements, placing their performance within the effective proficient range.

o Spring 2022 candidates earned a mean score of 3.3 on these elements, placing their performance within the effective emerging range.

CAEP Standard RA1.2Providers ensure that advanced program completers have opportunities to learn and apply specialized content and discipline knowledge contained in approved state and/or national discipline-specific standards.

• ILA Standard 1.1:

o Data in Table 1 show that within this assessment, one element aligns to ILA Standard 1.1.

o Across all three data collection cycles, candidates earned a mean score of 4.0 on this element, placing their performance within the highly proficient range.

• ILA Standard 4.2:

o Data in Table 1 show that within this assessment, one element aligns to ILA Standard 4.2.

o Across all three data collection cycles, candidates earned a mean score of 3.8 on this element, placing their performance within the effective proficient range.

• ILA Standard 6.1:

o Data in Table 1 show that within this assessment, one element aligns to ILA Standard 6.1.

o Across all three data collection cycles, candidates earned a mean score of 3.5 on this element, placing their performance within the effective proficient range.

• ILA Standard 6.3:

o Data in Table 1 show that within this assignment, one element aligns to ILA Standard 6.3.

o Across all three data collection cycles, candidates earned a mean score of 3.1 on this element, placing their performance within the effective emerging range.

• ILA Standard 7.2:

Grambling State University

Standard One Compendium 3

RA1.1 Collaborative Activities

o Data in Table 1 show that within this assessment, one element aligns to ILA Standard 7.2.

o Across all three data collection cycles, candidates earned a mean score of 3.5 on this element, placing their performance within the effective proficient range.

Data from this assessment show that candidate mean scores on elements aligned to CAEP Standard RRA1.1 and candidates performed well at the effective proficient range on Standard RA1.1. The mean score for Spring 2022 of 3.4 was a drop from the other semesters. Additionally, data indicate that across all three data collection cycles, candidates performed in the effective proficient range on ILA standards that are aligned with CAEP Standard RRA1.2for the assessments that focus on collaboration.

CAEP RA1.1 and RA1.2Master of Education Special Education (Collaboration)

SPED 542 Internship Observation Evaluation

Details of Assessment Administration:

This observation is to ascertain if the graduate candidate in the advanced program has the knowledge and skills required of a special education teacher seeking Special Education Mild/Moderate certification and participate in those duties and responsibilities in the actual classroom. Candidates are observed in the classroom demonstrating the skills necessary of a special education teacher or documenting that they have participated in activities in the role of a special education teacher.

Directions delivered to the candidate:

This will be an observation of you teaching as a special educator. We will observe you teaching students with exceptional learning needs, as well as ascertain if you have had opportunities to act as a special educator with respect to planning for students with exceptional learning needs, and creating a supportive, inclusive and equitable learning environment. We will be observing you to gauge your use of multiple instructional strategies, formal and informal assessment strategies that meet your students’ needs, and your approach to supporting students’ behavioral needs and strengths. We will observe at least one lesson, using a generic tool, and this addendum to meet the Council for Exceptional Children and State of Louisiana Special Education Teacher Competencies. It is expected that you will achieve an overall score of 3.0/4.00 as a new special educator, with no more than one (1) criteria rated as a “1”. If you do not reach the criteria, we will work with you to assist you in improving your skills so that by the end of the semester, you achieve the required score. If you do not, you may have to spend additional days until the end of the school year to achieve the overall score. This is to ensure that you have the skills to be an effective special educator at the level of your general education certification.

Description of student and student needs

CEC 1

InTASC 1, 2

Grambling State University Standard One Compendium 3

RA1.1 Collaborative Activities

There is no description of student needs, or it is subjective

Description of student(s) with mild to moderate learning needs identifies needs. Additionally, the predictions for the student are tied directly to student behavior. Modifications are listed, but not directly tied to the student's IEP needs.

Description of student(s) with mild to moderate learning needs is objective, identifies strengths as well as needs, and describes interactions with peers. Additionally, the predictions for the student are tied directly to student behavior and are culturally sensitive. Modifications listed are IEP based.

Description of student(s) with mild to moderate learning needs is objective, identifies strengths as well as needs, describes interactions with peers, as well as sets the tone by describing the learning environment physically, and socially, and how class rules affect behavior. Additionally, the predictions for the student are tied directly to student behavior and are culturally sensitive. Modifications listed are IEP based, but promote inclusiveness.

I. Planning for Instruction

Develop long & short-range plans based on general and special education, taking into consideration needs and abilities including use of state standards, Core Standards, IEPs, Section 504 COMPASS 1c

No evidence or inappropriate planning

Some evidence of long & shortrange plans based on general and special education, taking into consideration needs and abilities, but the execution has problems.

CEC 1 CEC 1.2

CEC 3.1

InTASC 2

Satisfactorily planned long- & short-range plans based on general and special education, taking into consideration needs and abilities are mostly matched, use of lesson plans (both M. Hunter, Danielson or 5E and modified used together), include appropriate technologies. The lesson plan has most elements of the model clearly identified. Some modeling and guided practice with at least 1 opportunity for formative eval.

Excellently planned long & short-range plans based on general and special education, taking into consideration needs and abilities are matched, use of lesson plans (both M. Hunter and modified used together seamlessly), include appropriate technologies.

Lesson plan has all elements of the M. Hunter, Danielson, or 5E lesson plan model clearly identified. Explicit modeling and guided practice with numerous

Planning for Language Needs including assessment of content academic proficiency, basic communication, and strategies to build language competence

CEC 5

CEC 5.4

InTASC 1, 2

Grambling State University Standard One Compendium

Novice

3

RA1.1 Collaborative Activities

Effective: Emerging Effective: Proficient Highly Effective opportunities for formative evaluations

The plan does not address the linguistic needs of diverse students, or the plan given is nebulous/general or not developmentally appropriate

The plan includes teaching strategies to meet the needs of students who are diverse due to cultural, linguistic, or ability; however, the plan does not include the use of data to develop the plan

Includes data from prior assessment of language needs for unit. From the data, the plan includes teaching strategies to meet the specific needs of students who are diverse due to cultural, linguistic or ability.

Includes data from prior assessment of language needs for unit. From the data, the plan includes teaching strategies to meet the specific needs of students who are diverse due to cultural, linguistic or ability. Plan includes use of peers, parents to provide an enriching environment to supplement teaching

Planning Provides foundation upon which special educators individualize instruction using IEP/IFSP/ITP/ or language needs

CEC 1.2 CEC 5, CEC 5.1

InTASC 2

Planning – Select, adapt and use [materials] to promote positive learning results and modify learning environments

List of materials used

COMPASS 1c/3c, CEC 2.1

CEC 5 CEC 5.1, ICC5S16

InTASC 4

Does not provide discernable foundation upon which to individualize instruction

Provides minimal foundation upon which to individualize instruction

But not obviously connected to IEP/IFSP/ITP/ or language needs

Provides adequate foundation upon which to individualize instruction using IEP/IFSP/ITP/ or language needs

Provides superior foundation upon which to individualize instruction using IEP/IFSP/ITP/ or language needs

Materials created or used do not reflect developmental, ability and interest appropriateness to fit the needs of the students

Materials created or used reflect developmental, ability and interest appropriateness to fit the needs of some students

Materials created or used reflect developmental, ability and interest appropriateness to fit the needs of many students

Materials created or used reflect developmental, ability and interest appropriateness for a variety of students and candidate discusses choices analytically

Knowledge of the Discipline

Grambling State University Standard One Compendium 3

RA1.1 Collaborative Activities

Novice Effective: Emerging Effective: Proficient Highly Effective

Does not list the central concept of the discipline nor provides any explanation of why it is being taught

Lists the central concepts of the discipline.

Lists and explains the central concepts of the discipline. Explanation includes why it is important to know

CEC 3, CEC 3.1

InTASC 4

Management Use of Evidence-based strategies to ind. Instruction COMPASS 3c/2c

CEC5, CEC 5.1

Management – Use direct motivational and instructional interventions List proactive behavior management / PBS strategies and theorist include paraprofessional role

CEC 2

CEC 2.2

InTASC 3

Instruction –Knowledge of Structure and Content of Discipline

No use of evidence-based strategies to ind. instruction

Some use of evidence-based strategies to ind. instruction

Adequate use of evidencebased strategies to ind. instruction, plus at least one reflection

Lists and explains the central concepts of the discipline. Explanation includes why it is important to know and how it fits into future student learning

Superior use of evidence-based strategies to ind. instruction, plus detailed reflection

No direct motivational and instructional interventions presented

direct motivational and instructional intervention presented

Adequate use of direct motivational and instructional interventions listed; paraprofessional role sketched (if available)

Detailed use of direct motivational and instructional interventions listed with theorist, paraprofessional role outlined (if available)

CEC 3.1

InTASC 4

Does not demonstrates detailed knowledge of structure and/or content of discipline

Demonstrates limited knowledge of structure and/or content of discipline through identifying what students are to do/know,

Demonstrates knowledge of structure and/or content of discipline through identifying what students are to do/know, why it is important, and what they will be able to do if they can apply the content knowledge

Demonstrates detailed knowledge of structure and/or content of discipline through identifying what students are to do/know, why it is important, and what they will be able to do if they can apply the content or structure knowledge

Instruction – Planning to Foster active engagement of all students

COMPASS 3c

Grambling State University

Standard One Compendium 3

RA1.1 Collaborative Activities

Novice

Teaching time not used effectively; students passively engaged only; no collaboration

Effective: Emerging Effective: Proficient Highly Effective

Candidate includes some opportunities for active student engagement, Candidate works collaboratively with only special education teachers

Candidate promotes active student engagement, Candidate works collaboratively with other teachers especially gen. education teachers

CEC 2; CEC 2.1, CEC 2.2

InTASC 3

III. Instruction –Enhance language development

Including providing background knowledge, vocabulary development, speech, syntax, semantics for student production and comprehension of all students incl. ELL and those using augmentative/assistive communication technologies

COMPASS 3c

CEC 5; CEC 5.3, CEC 5.4 InTASC 1, 3, 4

III. Instruction – Modify based on ongoing analysis of ind. Learning progress.

What background knowledge is needed? COMPASS 3d; CEC 3.3

CEC 5; ICC5K22

Candidate’s lesson fails to demonstrate use/development of background knowledge, enhancing vocabulary development, or oral/written proficiencies.

Candidate’s lesson demonstrates one technique for enhancing vocabulary development, or oral/written proficiencies. Candidate’s lesson plan indicates a means of monitoring progress of students but candidate fails to follow through

Candidate’s lesson demonstrates use of background knowledge. Candidate demonstrates techniques for enhancing vocabulary development, and oral/written proficiencies. Candidate monitors progress of students through multiple means in the classroom

Candidate maximizes both allocated time and active student engagement, encourages independence, and self-monitoring. Candidate works collaboratively with other teachers especially gen. education teachers

Candidate’s lesson demonstrates use/development of background knowledge. Candidate demonstrates techniques for enhancing vocabulary development, and oral/written proficiencies. Candidate monitors progress of students through multiple means in the classroom and keeps data generated for analysis and reflection

No analysis of ind. learning progress.

Some analysis of ind. learning progress. Background knowledge is marginally addressed.

Adequate demonstration of ability to modify based on ongoing analysis of ind. learning progress. Background knowledge needed is listed

Reflections demonstrate superior ability to modify based on ongoing analysis of ind. learning progress. Detailed list of background knowledge needed

Novice

Grambling State University

Standard One Compendium 3

RA1.1 Collaborative Activities

Effective: Emerging Effective: Proficient Highly Effective

InTASC 6

III. Instruction – Modify learning environment.

What multiple intelligences and/or modalities are used?

COMPASS 3c

Candidate does not modify learning environment to meet needs of student with mild/moderate disabilities

Candidate modifies learning environment to meet needs of student with mild/moderate disabilities by mentioning the use of additional multiple intelligence and/or modality for student learning

Candidate modifies learning environment to meet needs of student with mild/moderate disabilities by using multiple intelligences and/or modalities for student learning

Candidate modifies learning environment to meet needs of student with mild/moderate disabilities by consistently using multiple intelligences and/or modalities for student learning and demonstration of learning

CEC 2, CEC 3.3 & CEC 5.1

InTASC 1, 3, 4

III. Instruction – Enhance the learning of critical thinking, problem-solving and perf. skills.

What levels of Bloom’s Taxonomy, or Gagne were used? COMPASS 3b,3c

InTASC 1, 4, 5

CEC 5; CEC 5.7

III. Instruction – Individualizing instruction to emphasize development, maintenance and generalization of skills

Strategies to develop background knowledge, differentiate instruction and reteach outlined and defined COMPASS 3c

InTASC 1, 3, 4

Candidate did not address critical thinking, problemsolving and skills

Candidate includes activities to promote problem solving by combining foundational knowledge with HOT thinking

Candidate includes activities to promote critical thinking and problem-solving skills by combining foundational knowledge with HOT thinking

Candidate includes and details activities to promote critical thinking and problem-solving skills by combining foundational knowledge with HOT thinking and performances

Candidate does not outline how s/he individualized instruction to emphasize development, maintenance and generalization of skills

Candidate outlines how s/he individualized instruction to emphasize development, maintenance and generalization of skills by detailing strategies to reteach

Candidate outlines how s/he individualized instruction to emphasize development, maintenance and generalization of skills by listing strategies to develop differentiate instruction and reteach

Candidate outlines clearly how s/he individualized instruction to emphasize development, maintenance and generalization of skills by detailing strategies to develop background knowledge, differentiate instruction and reteach

Novice

Grambling State University

Standard One Compendium 3

RA1.1 Collaborative Activities

Effective: Emerging Effective: Proficient Highly Effective

CEC 5; CEC 5.6

III. Instruction – Multiple types of assessment information.

Use of multiple methods of assessment COMPASS 3d

Candidate does not list any type of assessment information

Candidate lists informal assessment used to collect evidence of student learning

Candidate lists informal assessments used to collect evidence of student learning, connecting to student learning

CEC 4; CEC 4.1

InTASC 6

IV. Professional Development –Ethical considerations . . . sensitive to diversity

Reflection on meeting tenets of CEC Code of Ethics

No reflections

Reflections that imply ethical considerations by relating how lesson planning reflected the CEC Code of Ethics

Reflections that imply analysis and ethical considerations by relating how lesson planning and instruction reflected the CEC Code of Ethics

Candidate lists and justifies varied types of formal and/or informal assessment techniques used to collect evidence of student learning, connecting to student learning, strengths and needs, and proposes alternate methods of assessment that might also provide progress monitoring data

Reflections that imply superior analysis and ethical considerations by relating how lesson planning, instruction and assessment reflected the CEC Code of Ethics

CEC 6; CEC 6.3

InTASC 9

IV. Professional Development Lifelong learners regularly reflect on and adjust their own practice.

Analysis of lesson, reflections on better enrichment, reteaching, and assessment

No reflections, or reflections do not imply professional growth

A few reflections that suggest minimal or superficial professional growth

Some reflections that imply adequate professional growth, and seeking of professional activities, knowledge and information. Reflections demonstrate a beginning use of evidence-based practices

Reflections that imply superior analysis and professional growth, through engagement in lifelong learning, seeking professional activities and knowledge, and multiple uses of evidence-based practices, by seeking more knowledge, but also proposing new questions

Novice

Grambling State University

Standard One Compendium 3

RA1.1 Collaborative Activities

Effective: Emerging Effective: Proficient Highly Effective

CEC 6; CEC 6.4

InTASC 9

Professional Development –Lifelong learning IGC-IIC.6.S3, IGC-IIC.6.K10

InTASC 9

Candidate does not include evidence-based research in reflections.

IV. Professional Development

Current with evidence-based best practices.

Use of websites to enhance future instruction and behavior enhancement

IGC-IIC.6.S3, IGC-IIC.6.K10

CEC 6; CEC 6.4

InTASC 9

Written and/or oral communication competence

No reflections, or reflections do not imply professional growth

A few reflections that suggest minimal or superficial professional growth

Candidates include current evidence-based research studies pertaining to the teaching of that content to students with mild to moderate exceptional learning needs in their reflections, analysis of lesson or future teaching, and explain how it shaped either current or future teaching

Reflections that imply in-depth analysis and professional growth, through seeking knowledge, and multiple uses of evidence-based practices and a discussion of why websites were selected, including new questions that are raised.

Gross number of errors in written and/or oral communication that interfere with comprehension

Multiple errors noted in oral/written communications that result in possible lack of comprehension

All written and oral instructions & materials free of errors. Language is clear, detailed, and concise

Grambling State University Advanced Standard RA.1 Compendium 3 COLLABORATIVE ACTIVITIES

Data from SPED 542 Methods and Materials

Ratings & Evaluation Criteria

A. Using understanding of development to individualize instruction

IEP, IFSP, ITP Development: Collaborates with team members to meet the needs of diverse students to develop appropriate & required IEPs, IFSPs, ITPs (initial, review, interim, transitional or declassified). All sections of the document(s) are completed including general student information, academic and behavioral need areas, current performance, goals and short-term objectives if needed, personnel responsible and appropriate signatures

InTASC 2, 6, 8, 9; LA LE-D; LA C-B; LA IP-A; CEC 1.1; 2.1; CEC 3.2; CEC 5.1, 5.6, 7.1

C. Responding to the varying abilities and behaviors of individuals

IEP Meetings . Participates fully and meaningfully in IEP, IFSP, ITP and/or EYSP conference with educator teams or in actual IEP; is aware of parental procedural safeguards, timelines for completing documents and demonstrates sound conferencing skills InTASC 2, 8, 9; LA LE-D; LA C-B; LA IP-A; CEC 1.1; CEC 2.1 & CEC 7.2, 7.3

D. Use collaborative skills to promote well-being across a range of settings & collaborators

Communication for Inclusion: Skill in communicating and conferencing with students, parents, and other classroom teachers to optimize inclusion experiences for students with special needs in the regular classroom InTASC

2, 6, 8, 10; CEC 7; CEC7.1

E. Develop and implement a variety of educational plans CEC 5; CEC 5.2; 5.5; LA C-A; InTASC 2, 7, 8, Lesson Planning: Uses IEP, IFSP, or ITP with curriculum standards to develop lesson plans to address specific needs and strengths of students, makes objectives of lessons clear, includes and uses appropriate technology, promotes skill development and reinforcement, motivates through effective communication, adapts and/or modifies using principles of universal design and differentiated instruction

F. Develop and implement a variety of educational plans. CEC5; LA C; InTASC 2, 7, 8, 9, 10; Inclusion Opportunities: Assumes role as collaborator, consultant and team member in inclusion opportunities from special education perspective

1. Incorporates appropriate technology to enhance student learning

2. Developments supplementary materials to meet individual needs

3. Adapts instruction and co-teaches in the regular classroom

4. Provides demonstrations for regular teachers and paraprofessionals

5. Assesses school and community environments for inclusion opportunities (circle any/all)

G. Teach to mastery and promote generalization of learning InTASC 2, 3, 7, 8; CEC 5; CEC 5.1; LA C-A National (and State) Louisiana Department of Education Resources Materials. Utilizes Department of Education bulletins, manuals, websites, external links and curriculum (GLE or CCSS) to ensure compliance with state

Spring 2018. N=1 Grades 6-12 Spring 2019 N=1 Grades 1-5

Grambling State University Advanced Standard RA.1 Compendium 3 COLLABORATIVE ACTIVITIES

and federal mandates relative to educating children with special needs and meeting state benchmarks and standards

ENHANCEMENT OF ACADEMIC SKILLS COMPASS 1C, 2C, 3B; LA C, LA IP

A. Consider abilities, interests, learning environments, cultural and linguistic factors. Principles of Universal Design: Uses principles of universal design or designing instruction to serve the greatest number of students through multiple methods, means of assessment, and student product to gauge acquisition of curriculum standards InTASC 2, 7; LA C-D; CEC 3.2 & CEC 5.2, LA IP-A

B. Curricular Knowledge.

Presents and explains the concept to be learned, how it fits into prior learning and knowledge, and sequences the new learning CEC 3; LA IP- C; CEC 5; CEC 5.6 process CEC 5.3; CEC 5.1, InTASC 8

C. Uses & modifies structures, concepts of discipline, and/or tools of inquiry for learners, and modifies general and specialized curricula for accessibility

Differentiated Instruction and UDL: Uses UDL & DI to make structures, concepts and tools of inquiry accessible to learners with specialized needs through individualized teaching Uses assessment information on the IEP, IFSP, ITP and/or EYSP to formulate instructional hypotheses and objectives. CEC 3; CEC 3.1, CEC 3.3; InTASC 4, 5, 8; LA C-A;

F. Modify general and specialized curricula for accessibility

Use of Response to Intervention Principles: In collaboration with the other teachers on team, designs, implements and assesses a multi-tiered system of remediation based upon increasing levels of intervention for all students

CEC 3; CEC 3.1, 3.2; LA C -A; InTASC 8

G. Enhance language development and communication skills: Speech, Language and/or Communication Enhancement: Uses modeling, assessments, knowledge of language delays, language differences, and disorders to enhance appropriate communicative opportunities, promote developmentally and age-appropriate language for students including language skills, social competence, vocabulary, speech practice, use of augmentative and/or assistive technologies. CEC 5.1; CEC 5.4 & 5.3; InTASC 1, 2, 8

H. Enhance language development and communication skills: Models appropriate language (verbal and nonverbal) for students to promote increased effectiveness in verbal and nonverbal communication CEC 5. 2; CEC 5.6; InTASC 8, LA C -D

I. Enhance language development and communication skills Language Expansion/Elaboration/Explanation; Follows student communication with responses that will expand vocabulary, elaborate upon the student’s communication, and/or act as a bridge to explain a communication to other students and/or colleagues LA C-D; CEC 5.1; InTASC 8

J. Enhance language development and communication skills Content Academic Language and Social Language: Uses models, technologies, understanding of subject and social milieu to promote development of student content academic language proficiency and social interaction proficiency. CEC 5.2; CEC 5.6; InTASC 2, 3, 8; LA IP-A, B

STUDENT MOTIVATION AND MANAGEMENT COMPASS 2C, 3B, 3C

Grambling State University Advanced Standard RA.1 Compendium 3 COLLABORATIVE ACTIVITIES

A. Through collaboration with all colleagues, create safe inclusive environments

Social Conduct: Uses interviews, ratings by others, observation, and other data collection procedures to set social behavior goals and objectives consistent with IEP process CEC 6.2; CEC 7.1 CEC6.1; LA LE- A; InTASC 3

B. Use motivational and instructional in terventions

Antecedent Control: Uses rules, routines, schedules, teacher-student interactions, peer interactions to ensure each student’s progress toward social goals CEC 6.1, 6.2; LA LE -B; InTASC 3

C. Use motivational and instructional interventions

Increasing Desirable Behaviors. Uses appropriate applied behavior techniques, including positive reinforcement, shaping and chaining, modeling, contingency contracting and the token economy CEC 6.1, 6.3; InTASC 3; LA LE-H, G, &C

D. Use motivational and instructional interventions

Decreasing Undesirable Behaviors: Uses appropriate applied behavior techniques, extinction, response cost, time- out, contracting, differential reinforcement, overcorrections, negative reinforcement, and p unishment

CEC 6.2, 6.3; InTASC 3; LA LE -F, H

E. Direct motivational and instructional interventions

Behavioral Interventions: Uses structure, planned ignoring, signal interference, life space interviews, and cognitive- behavioral strategies to help students deal constructively with their emotions and behavior CEC 6.3; LA LE- F, E; InTASC 3, 7, 8

F. Through collaboration with all colleagues, create safe inclusive environments

Humanistic Approaches: Uses approaches to maintain a supportive climate for social-emotional growth, including models and approaches e.g., Glasser, Kunjufu, Hammond, Comer, and Rogers CEC 6.1, 6.2, 6.3; InTASC 3, 8; LA LEB, G, H

G. Skills such as critical thinking and problem solving Cognitive Behavioral Modification: Skill in teaching students to use a variety of self-instruction strategies, self-guidance strategies, and executive strategies to direct and maintain appropriate academic and social behaviors

CEC 5.3, 6.2; InTASC 8, LA LE B, G

H. Use technologies to support assessment, planning and delivery Instructional Media and/or Technology: Skill in appropriately using electronic devices and necessary assistive technologies to organize and manage teaching and recordkeeping CEC 5.2; LA IP-A, B, InTASC 8

I. Technology-Assisted Instruction: Assists students in using software, needed assistive technologies, educational websites to review, master skills previously taught in the content areas, as well as vocational education, etc. to produce student work samples indicating acquisition, mastery, maintenance and generalization Includes using and assisting students to use assistive technology if needed CEC 5.2, 5.6; InTASC 8, LA C- C, LA IP-B

J. Emphasize the mastery and generalization of learning Addresses Multiple Intelligences and Learning Styles: Skill in designing and using multisensory approaches to enhance learning by presenting information through more than one sensory modality, learning style, and intelligence area CEC 5; CEC 5.6; LA IP-A; InTASC 2, 8

K. Foster environments where diversity is valued Collaborative Learning: Uses cooperative learning strategies to produce positive relationships between students with and without disabilities. Skill in grouping students together to work toward common instructional objectives. Use peer and cross -age tutoring to individualize instruction,

NA

Grambling State University Advanced Standard RA.1 Compendium 3 COLLABORATIVE ACTIVITIES

motivate students, and increase academic achievement LA LE-D; CEC 6; InTASC 3

ASSESSMENT METHODS AND INTERPRETATION COMPASS 3d

** May have been demonstrated in other Special Education assessment classes e.g., ED 328

A. Regularly monitor the progress of individuals and provide feedback to students

Informal Assessment Procedures: Uses informal assessment information when making instructional decisions about programs, instructional modifications, planning individualized or small group student activities, and in determining program effectiveness. Writes accurate and complete assessment records CEC 4; CEC 4.3; InTASC 6, LA A- A

B. Regularly monitoring the progress of individuals and provide feedback to students

Informal Assessment Procedures: Skill in developing and using informal data collection and assessment procedures, including observation work sample analysis, task analysis, criterion-referenced tests, checklists and scales, and teacher-made tests CEC 4.2; InTASC 6, LA A -A

C. Select and use technically sound informal and formal assessments that minimize bias

Formal Assessment Procedures: Uses informal and formal assessment information in making instruction modifications, planning instruction, program modifications, and in determining program effectiveness. CEC 4.2; InTASC 6; LA A

A. Using understanding of development to individualize instruction IEP, IFSP, ITP Development: Collaborates with team members to meet the needs of diverse students to develop appropriate & required IEPs, IFSPs, ITPs (initial, review, interim, transitional or declassified). All sections of the document(s) are completed including general student information, academic and behavioral need areas, current performance, goals and short-term objectives if needed, personnel responsible and appropriate signatures

C. Responding to the varying abilities and behaviors of individuals

IEP Meetings . Participates fully and meaningfully in IEP, IFSP, ITP and/or EYSP conference with educator teams or in actual IEP; is aware of parental procedural safeguards, timelines for completing documents and demonstrates sound conferencing skills

Template for the Presentation of Evidence by Dr. Michele Brewer and Dr. Amber Vraim

"College of Education Office of Technology, Assessment, and Compliance: Template for

7.1

Grambling State University Advanced Standard RA.1 Compendium 3 COLLABORATIVE ACTIVITIES

D. Use collaborative skills to promote well-being across a range of settings & collaborators

Communication for Inclusion: Skill in communicating and conferencing with students, parents, and other classroom teachers to optimize inclusion experiences for students with special needs in the regular classroom

6.1

6.2

7.1

A. Through collaboration with all colleagues, create safe inclusive environments

Social Conduct: Uses interviews, ratings by others, observation, and other data collection procedures to set social behavior goals and objectives consistent with IEP process CEC 6.2; CEC 7.1

Analysis and Interpretation

Program: Master of Education Special Education

CAEP Standard RA1.1 Candidates for advanced preparation demonstrate their proficiencies to understand and apply knowledge and skills appropriate to their professional field of specialization so that learning and development opportunities for all P-12 are enhanced through:

• Leading and/or participating in collaborative activities with others such as peers, colleagues, teachers, administrators, community organizations, and parents.

o Data in Table 2 show that within this assessment four elements align to this skill.

o The Spring 2018 candidate earned a mean score of 3.25 on these elements placing her performance with the Effective Proficient range.

o The Spring 2019 candidate earned a mean score of 3.5 on these elements, placing her performance within the Effective Proficient range.

o There was a candidate in Spring 2020; however, the schools shut down in March eliminating the opportunity for observation of collaborative activities. This candidate transferred to another program and did not complete the Master of Education in Special Education.

CAEP Standard RA1.2 Providers ensure that advanced program completers have opportunities to learn and apply specialized content and discipline knowledge contained in approved state and/or national discipline-specific standards.

• CEC Standard 1

o Data in Table 2 show that within this assessment, two elements align to CEC Standard 1.

o Across both data collection cycles, candidates earned a mean score of 3.75 on this element, placing their performance within the Effective Proficient range.

• CEC Standard 2:

o Data in Table 2 show that within this assessment, two elements align to CEC Standard 2

o Across both data collection cycles, candidates earned a mean score of 3.75 on this element, placing their performance within the Effective Proficient range.

• CEC Standard 3

RA1.2

Grambling State University Advanced Standard RA.1 Compendium 3 COLLABORATIVE ACTIVITIES

o Data in Table 2 show that within this assessment, four elements align to CEC Standard 3.

o Across both data collection cycles, candidates earned a mean score of 2.88 on this element, placing their performance very slightly below the Effective Proficient range

• CEC Standard 4

o Data in Table 2 show that within this assignment, three elements align to CEC Standard 4. Across both data collection cycles, candidates earned a mean score of 3.17 on this element, placing their performance within the Effective Proficient range.

• CEC Standard 5

o Data in Table 2 show that within this assessment, twelve elements align to CEC Standard 5

o Across both data collection cycles, candidates earned a mean score of 3.25 on this element, placing their performance within the Effective Proficient range

• CEC Standard 6

o Data in Table 2 show that within this assessment, eight elements align to CEC Standard 6.

o Across both data collection cycles, candidates earned a mean score of 3.19 on this element, placing their performance within the Effective Proficient range

• CEC Standard 7:

o Data in Table 2 show that within this assignment, four elements align to CEC Standard 7. Across both data collection cycles, candidates earned a mean score of 3.38 on this element, placing their performance within the Effective Proficient range

Data from this assessment shows that while there are only two applications of data at this time, the overall candidate mean scores on elements aligned to CAEP Standard RA1.1 increased slightly from Spring 2018 to Spring 2019. Data could not be collected in Spring 2020 and the course was not offered between Spring 2021, and Spring 2023. There will be upcoming candidates who will be available to take the course in Spring 2024. Still, data indicate that across both data collection cycles, candidates performed in the “Effective Proficient” range overall on CEC standards (CAEP Standard RA1.2) in this assessment the focus on collaboration. The EPP will focus more upon additional work with making the curriculum accessible to all students; however, the evaluator noted that in one district, the lesson plans provided by the district appeared to be “scripted” and did not appear to allow for extensive modification or adaptation, possibly resulting in the lower score in Standard 3.

Continuous Improvement

Focus Area(s):

Focus Area 1:

M.Ed. in Curriculum & Instruction-Reading: Review of candidate performance on this assessment highlights the importance of collaborative activities throughout all the Advanced programs. Candidates mostly performed at the effective proficient to effective emerging range. We would want them to be at the highly Proficient range. The goal is to encourage more collaboration with teachers from other schools, so during the Annual spring conference they could present their findings and create awareness of best practices. We plan to convince principals, with whom we have a wonderful relationship to grant permission to candidates to attend, conferences.

Grambling State University Advanced Standard RA.1 Compendium 3 COLLABORATIVE ACTIVITIES

Focus Area 2:

M.Ed. in Special Education-Mild/Moderate: There were only two (2) cycles of data so a focus has to be on getting more candidates into the program. Successful collaboration is paramount in special education. Candidates are expected to be active and collaborative partners when working with students with exceptional learning needs. Candidates performed overall in the “Effective Proficient” range, but there were areas where candidates were evaluated as demonstrating skills at the “Effective Emerging” range. This was most evident in working with the curriculum to make it accessible to all students in the general education classroom. We will focus upon those areas, and in working with candidates to engage in more annotations of lesson planning before teaching it to develop teaching strategies that meet district guidelines yet make the curriculum more accessible and supportive to all students, even when working with highly structured lesson plans.

Focus Area 3:

While candidates participated in planning meetings such as IEPs, data from RA Standard 4 indicated that candidates wanted more experiences with taking the leadership in developing those documents. The observations in 2018 and 2019 were done with one observer. In the future, at least two observers should work together to ensure that observations have interrater reliability or should be recorded so that interrater agreement can be assured.