April 3, 2017 1
TABLE OF CONTENTS Brief History.………………………………………………………………………. 3 Mission and Vision………………………………………………………………… 4 Unit Philosophy, Core Beliefs, Dispositions, and Goals……………………………5 Unit Dispositions…………………………………………………………... 7 Unit Goals…………………………………………………………………. 8 Knowledge Base… ................................................................................................... 10 Unit Conceptual Framework……………………………………………… 10 Graphical Representation…………………………………………………...13 Alignment with Standards… ..................................................................................... 14 Alignment with Danielson Framework for Teaching Standards… .......................... 17 Alignment with Additional Standards…................................................................... 18 Knowledge Base in Relation to Unit Goals .............................................................. 19 Candidate and Program Performance Assessment… ............................................... 32 Conceptual Framework References...……………………………………………… 39 Appendix A: Alignment with Standards .................................................................. 45 Appendix B: Teacher Candidate Dispositions and Rubric ....................................... 48 Appendix C: Framework for Teaching ..................................................................... 54 Appendix D: Unit Assessments Alignment to CAEP ............................................... 55 Appendix E: Portfolio Assignment and Rubric ........................................................ 56 Appendix F: Diversity Case Study and Rubric ......................................................... 60 Appendix G: SOE Clinical Experiences Documents……………………………… 62
The Conceptual Framework Revised Edition Brief History The conceptual framework model developed, adopted, and implemented by the University Arkansas Fort Smith (UAFS) unit faculty is based on essential knowledge, professional standards, research, and sound professional practice. The original conceptual framework was developed and implemented by the Arkansas Tech University (ATU) unit when Westark College served as a branch program site. At that time, Arkansas Tech and Westark College offered a joint teacher education program at the University Center (UC) on the campus of Westark College so teacher education programs could be offered in Fort Smith. The program was identical to the program offered on the ATU campus and was governed from the ATU main campus. In 1999, the Westark College branch was visited and accredited by National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE) along with the main campus program. In effect, the program structure, policies and procedures, and requirements at the University Center were identical to those on the main ATU campus. In 2001, the Arkansas General Assembly created UAFS with Westark College and the University Center forming the core so that upper level programs could be offered in Fort Smith without support from other institutions. The existing teacher education program was transferred to the approved offerings of the newly created UAFS. The original conceptual framework model jointly established by ATU and the UC was analyzed and revised in Spring 2002 and Spring/Summer 2003 to better reflect the institutional mission/purpose, unit mission, unit philosophy and beliefs, and the competencies and knowledge bases for general studies, specialty areas, and professional studies of the newly created UAFS. Following a critique by NCATE reviewers, the conceptual framework underwent further refinements in December 2003. Since the conceptual framework is a living document, it is reviewed annually and revised when deemed appropriate by the UAFS School of Education (SOE) faculty, staff, and stakeholders. The conceptual framework emphasizes candidate knowledge of content and students in addition to skills in the areas of pedagogy, reflection, and partnership. The works of Bloom, Danielson, Dewey, Gardner, Goodlad, Levine, Rogers, and Vygotsky are among those who have guided the development of the model.
Mission and Vision Vision UAFS is a regional university organized to focus on teaching and learning. It offers a variety of academic and technical educational program opportunities. The vision of UAFS is to be a “premier regional university, connecting education with careers.” UAFS will be a distinctive institution that truly serves as a leader and a model in the learning enterprise. With a primary focus on five areas that produce high qualified graduates for identified areas of employment need, the University will build vibrant colleges of education, business, health sciences, technology, and arts and sciences. In addition to a strong theoretical base, each UAFS student will have applied learning opportunities in the community relevant to his/her field of study, through apprenticeships, internships, mentoring programs, service learning, student-work positions, and other experiential opportunities. The result will be well-educated graduates armed with a wealth of knowledge and practical experience in their fields. The mission of UAFS is to prepare students to succeed in an ever-changing global world while advancing economic development and quality of place
The Professional Teacher Education Unit Vision The related unit vision is to graduate professionals united to ensure continuous learning and success. This vision is the ultimate objective of the unit’s conceptual framework. It reflects our belief that our focus is on student success, that learning never ceases, and that education must include professionals who unite with others to see that learners are successful. In order to have success, this implies that we must have standards and measurements. This vision is in accordance with David Conley’s definition of vision as “an explicitly shared agreement on values, beliefs, purposes, and goals shared by a significant number of participants in an organizational unit” (1997, p. 7). The Professional Teacher Education Unit has a shared commitment to excellence in teacher preparation through both classroom instruction and field experiences. Designed to serve public and private schools as well as other educational agencies in western Arkansas and eastern Oklahoma, the unit strives to enhance the capacity of the teaching profession to provide equal educational opportunities for all segments of the culture as it directs efforts and resources toward the learner and learning.
The unit agrees with Larry Lashway’s statement, “In reality, visions do little good unless they are used, not only in everyday conversations but in the dozens of daily decision that make up the life of the school. In other words, they must be institutionalized” (1997, p. 93). The unit’s vision is institutionalized through its belief statements, dispositions, and goals that represent the foundation for the conceptual framework. To accomplish this vision, the mission of the unit provides research-based pre-service education, forming partnerships with local schools and/or school districts, collaborating with these educational systems, and utilizing on-going staff development. This is in accordance with the unit’s framework, which includes the learning community in the model. We are to unite to ensure learning and success.
The UAFS Teacher Education Program has an enduring commitment to prepare professionals who are: •
Competent in their chosen areas
Able to integrate subject-matter content with pedagogy appropriate to their fields of study
Culturally responsive and responsible, knowledgeable, and appreciative of the diversity among learners
Committed to self-assessment and reflection
Partners, educational advocates, and leaders at the school level and in the wider community
Users of technology that enhances teaching and learning.
Unit Philosophy, Core Beliefs, Dispositions, and Goals Unit Philosophy James Clawson writes that organizations must have goals and milestones to measure and monitor progress along a strategic path toward the ultimate vision, yet many companies focus on these targets with too little attention to the why, how, and where (1999, p. 111). This unit’s philosophy is articulated in the core beliefs and dispositions that support the conceptual framework, drive the development of programs, and guide the delivery of courses within each program. These core beliefs and dispositions are born of consideration for the unit goal of excellence in teaching; the examination of established national, state, and unit standards for 5
teaching and learning; and the review of curriculum experiences and expectations in all programs. Unit constituents hold these beliefs and dispositions to be central to the accomplishment of national and Arkansas standards for teaching excellence leading to teacher candidates who can be successful in making a significant difference in student learning. These beliefs are intended to influence the teacher candidates beyond the program and throughout professional development. The unit’s core beliefs direct the development and refinement of programs, courses, design of instruction, research, service, and assessment. They influence the unit’s organization and design of what teacher candidates should know, the dispositions they should reflect, the skills they should be able to exhibit, and the kinds of assessment and evaluation used to gauge the performance of the teacher candidate.
Core Beliefs The Unit’s Core Beliefs include the following value statements: 1. All human beings grow, develop, and learn throughout their lifetime. 2. Student learning is the goal; the teacher’s role is to maximize growth, development, and learning opportunities for each individual. 3. Active engagement of students in the learning process is central to effective teaching. 4. Educational opportunities must be developmentally appropriate. 5. Effective teachers possess a strong academic knowledge base. 6. Accountability is an essential part of the teaching/learning process. 7. The effective use of technology can greatly enhance classroom-learning opportunities. 8. Diversity must be valued within the teaching/learning process. 9. Parents and community are essential to the teaching/learning process. 10. Professional educators must be committed to high levels of moral and ethical behavior. 11. Professional educators must be committed to a lifetime of continuous learning focused on outcomes. 12. A positive attitude influences success, and attitude is a choice. Thus, as evidenced by the above beliefs, the unit’s philosophy emphasizes the importance of preparing dedicated, skilled professionals who are able and willing to work with the learning community to provide a variety of experiences to ensure the continuous learning and success of diverse learners as expressed in the conceptual framework. 6
Dispositions The unit defines dispositions as patterns of behaviors that are influenced by beliefs and values. The unit believes seven core dispositions are associated with becoming a highly effective professional educator. The dispositions are aligned with the Core Beliefs stated above. They are also aligned with the Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Principles, which are the Arkansas Teaching Standards (ATS) and the UAFS School of Education Intended Candidate Outcomes (ICOs), and the Danielson Framework for Teaching (FFT). Appendix A contains a diagram that illustrates this alignment. The seven core dispositions for effective teaching are: 1. COLLABORATION – ICOs 9, 10; InTASC/ATS 9, 10; Danielson FFT 4 The act of working with another person or group in order to achieve or do something 2. REFLECTION – ICO 9; InTASC/ATS 9; Danielson FFT 4 Serious thought or consideration 3. INTEGRITY – ICO 9; InTASC/ATS 9, 10; Danielson FFT 4 The ability to demonstrate truthfulness to oneself and to others; demonstrate moral excellence, trustworthiness, professional and ethical behavior in all activities and dealings with university faculty, peers, students, teachers, and school personnel 4. LEARNING INITIATIVE – ICOs 5-10; InTASC/ATS 5-10; Danielson FFT 3, 4 The power or ability to begin or to follow through energetically with a plan or task for learning 5. RESPONSIBILITY – ICOs 9, 10; InTASC/ATS 9, 10; Danielson FFT 4 The act of being accountable for a duty or task that one is required or expected to do 6. RESPECT – ICOs 1-10; InTASC/ATS 1-10; Danielson FFT 1-4 Due regard for the feelings, wishes, rights, or traditions of others. 7. DIVERSITY – ICOs 1-10; InTASC/ATS 1-10: Danielson FFT 1-4 Differences among groups of people and individuals based on ethnicity, race, socioeconomic status, gender, exceptionalities, language, religion, sexual orientation, and geographical area Evaluation of candidate progress in internalizing these dispositions is important. Appendix B contains a rubric developed by the unit to evaluate candidate acceptance of these dispositions. 7
Unit Goals as the Unifying Element James Clawson (1999), writing on strategic thinking, stresses that goals are an outgrowth of the mission, vision, and beliefs of an organization. The unitâ€™s philosophy and purposes as articulated in the core beliefs and dispositions, together with research of best practices, professional standards, and the experiential base of faculty, lead to the basic goals or outcomes of the teacher education program.
Because these goals are an outgrowth of the unitâ€™s vision, mission, philosophy, core beliefs, and dispositions, and because these goals are aligned with the InTASC Principles/Arkansas Teaching Standards and the Danielson Framework for Teaching (FFT) that are integral components of the conceptual model, the goals are the unifying element in this conceptual framework. The School of Education goals are: 1. To use inquiry and reflection as a means to initiate, analyze, and sustain change in teaching and learning. Rationale: The unit believes an effective teacher is an instructional leader who uses reflective decision-making, focuses on best practices, and has a thorough knowledge of students. The unit emphasizes reflection as a vitally important characteristic of a professional educator. 2. To prepare educators in sound curriculum and instructional practices. Rationale: The unit believes that while formal knowledge must be valued and made available to the students, the learner is encouraged to reflect on it and be skeptical about it, rather than accept it thoughtlessly. The teacher must provide a climate that encourages the student to explore new concepts. The unit is very aware of research that indicates that teachers in highly effective schools have taken significantly more undergraduate content courses, particularly in mathematics and science, than those in typical schools. Thus, the unit emphasizes content preparation in all fields leading to teacher licensure. The unit believes that when teachers are concerned about best practices, they plan their instructional goals, activities, materials, and assessment strategies so that they are appropriate for the developmental levels of their students. Thus, the conceptual framework developed by the unit emphasizes the importance of utilizing research-based instructional strategies and best practices. 8
3. To recognize the linguistic and cultural diversity of the population as assets. Rationale: The unit faculty and administration strongly believe that knowledge of diverse learners and communities is critical to effective teaching. The unit is committed to preparing effective teachers who will create learning environments in which all students can maximize their learning. 4. To use technology as a means of transforming teaching and learning, infusing it across the curricula. Rationale: Because teachers and learners cannot afford to be without access to the knowledge and connections available through present and emerging technological resources, the unit faculty has made technology a priority. The unit embraces technology and all candidates create electronic portfolios, and all syllabi reflect the use of technology. Emphasis is placed on assisting P-12 students to maximize their learning through the use of technology.
These goals reflect the mission of the School of Education and are the foundation for its conceptual framework. The SOEâ€™s Intended Candidate Outcomes (InTASC Standards and Arkansas Teacher Standards) are aligned with the Danielson FFT Domains and Components. The chart below demonstrates the primary alignment of the SOE Goals to the standards. Additionally, the SOE goals are in alignment with CAEP Standards.
Arkansas Teacher Standards (ATS)
SOE Intended Candidate Outcomes (ICOs)
Danielson FFT Domains
4a, 4e, 4f
Collaboration Reflection Integrity Learning Initiative Diversity Respect Responsibility
1, 2, 3, 4, 5,6, 7, 8
Goal 3 Goal 4
1, 2, 3, 4, 5,6, 7, 8
1, 2, 3, 4, 5,6, 7, 8
1, 2, 3, 4
Learning Initiative Responsibility Diversity Respect Collaboration
1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 8, 9, 10
1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
1, 2, 4
4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 9
4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9
1, 3, 4
Unit Conceptual Framework The School of Education’s goals, philosophy, core beliefs, and dispositions provide the foundation for the unit’s framework: Professionals United to Ensure Continuous Learning and Success. Each word is important. “Professionals” relates to Core Beliefs 5, 10, 11, 12; Dispositions 2, 3, 5, 6; Goals 1, 2 “United” relates to Core Beliefs 8, 9; Dispositions 1, 6; Goal 3 “to Ensure” relates to Core Beliefs 2, 6; Dispositions 4, 5; Goal 2 “Continuous” relates to Core Beliefs 1, 3, 11; Dispositions 1, 4, 5; Goals 1, 4 “Learning” relates to Core Beliefs 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11; Dispositions 1, 2, 4, 5; Goals 1, 2, 4 “and Success” relates to Core Beliefs 2, 6, 11, 12; Dispositions 1, 2, 4, 5; Goals 1, 2
Description of Conceptual Framework Model The Conceptual Framework derives from the School of Education mission, “Professionals United to Ensure Continuous Learning and Success.” The Framework is informed by two major sources of research in best practices for educators, InTASC (Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium) and Charlotte Danielson’s Framework for Teaching (FFT). InTASC is a program of the Chief State School Officers (CCSSO).
The Arkansas Department of Education adopted the InTASC 2011 Model Core Teaching Standards, which were developed by InTASC, as the Arkansas Teaching Standards (ATS). The Conceptual Framework synthesizes the concepts from these models to represent the UAFS 10
School of Education Intended Candidate Outcomes (ICOs) for teacher candidates. The ICOs are also aligned with the Danielson Framework for Teaching (FFT), edTPA Professional Portfolio, and other unit assessments.
The Framework structure begins at the center as the dominant feature is the teacher’s “Focus on Student Learning.” All of a teacher’s decisions should be made through an analytical thought process that considers the best approaches to student learning. The student learning circle in the center of the model represents the nurturing environment that comes from attention to these elements. The unit agrees with Terrence Deal and Kent Peterson (1999) who conclude that “the core leadership challenge of the coming millennium is to build schools in which every child can grow and every teacher can make a difference. Such sentiments flourish in a culture in which learning and caring are valued and in which stories, rituals, and ceremonies provide zest and buoyancy to the world’s most sacred profession” (p. 141). In the model, all elements then contribute to the student learning circle leading to the preparation of “Professionals United to Ensure Continuous Learning and Success.” Such professionals exit the teacher preparation program with the knowledge, skills, and dispositions needed for success in the classroom. This paradigm illustrates that for education to be effective, learning must never end for the teacher or the pupil. “The most important attitude that can be formed is that of a desire to go on learning” (Dewey, 1938, p. 49). It further illustrates that teacher success requires careful attention to all these dimensions united in a common framework focused on student learning.
The concentric blue rings also represent overall expectations. Thus, technology, communication skills, and sound ethical practice are evident in all teaching decisions. Within the concentric structure, the Framework divides into four quadrants. The first quadrant ensures that teachers consider learner development, learner differences, and the learning environment during instruction and interactions with students. The second quadrant considers the teacher’s need for deep and broad content knowledge. The effective teacher must have an understanding of how to apply content knowledge in ways that engage learners and encourage higher level thinking. The third quadrant delineates the instructional practice through the integration of assessment, planning, and instructional strategies in a coordinated manner. The final quadrant sets expectations for the teacher’s professional learning, ethical practice, and leadership roles. Additionally, this quadrant emphasizes the importance of collaboration with learners, families, colleagues, and community leader to ensure learner growth. 11
Taken as a whole, the Conceptual Framework guides candidates and pre-service teachers through each essential component of successful professional practice. School of Education faculty and staff are committed to the principles of the Framework and model its tenets in their own practice.
UAFS School of Education - Intended Candidate Outcomes InTASC Standards/Arkansas Teaching Standards
Alignment with Standards As noted earlier, the Arkansas Department of Education adopted the 2011 Model Core Teaching Standards developed by Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) as the Arkansas Teaching Standards. The Arkansas Teaching Standards (ATS) are to be used in identifying competencies for all teachers and for advising teacher preparation programs in all Arkansas colleges and universities. The UAFS School of Education adopted the InTASC Standards/Arkansas Teaching Standards as its Intended Candidate Outcomes (ICOs). The standards are aligned with Danielson Framework for Teaching (FFT). The standards have also been aligned with the Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP) Standards. The alignment is illustrated in Appendix D.
The unit philosophy, as embodied in the core beliefs and dispositions and expressed in the unitâ€™s goals, is the context for how professional, state, and institutional standards are addressed in teacher candidate programs at UAFS. These beliefs, dispositions, and goals are in alignment with the 10 InTASC/ATS Standards. The standards have been grouped into four general categories to help users organize their thinking about the standards (Model Core Teaching Standards: A Resource for State Dialog, InTASC, 2011). The four general categories are noted in the quadrants of the Conceptual Framework.
The Learner and Learning Teaching begins with the learner. To ensure that each student learns new knowledge and skills, teachers must understand that learning and developmental patterns vary among individuals, that learners bring unique individual differences to the learning process, and that learners need supportive and safe learning environments to thrive. Effective teachers have high expectations for each and every learner and implement developmentally appropriate, challenging learning experiences within a variety of learning environments that help all learners meet high standards and reach their full potential. Teachers do this by combining a base of professional knowledge, including an understanding of how cognitive, linguistic, social, emotional, and physical development occurs with the recognition that learners are individuals who bring differing 14
personal and family backgrounds, skills, abilities, perspectives, talents and interests. Teachers collaborate with learners, colleagues, school leaders, families, members of the learnersâ€™ communities, and community organizations to better understand their students and maximize their learning. Teachers promote learnersâ€™ acceptance of responsibility for their own learning and collaborate with them to ensure the effective design and implementation of both self-directed and collaborative learning. Standard #1: Learner Development. The teacher understands how learners grow and develop, recognizing that patterns of learning and development vary individually within and across the cognitive, linguistic, social, emotional, and physical areas, and designs and implements developmentally appropriate and challenging learning experiences. Standard #2: Learning Differences. The teacher uses understanding of individual differences and diverse cultures and communities to ensure inclusive learning environments that enable each learner to meet high standards. Standard #3: Learning Environments. The teacher works with others to create environments that support individual and collaborative learning and that encourage positive social interaction, active engagement in learning, and self-motivation.
Content Teachers must have a deep and flexible understanding of their content areas and be able to draw upon content knowledge as they work with learners to access information, apply knowledge in real world settings, and address meaningful issues to assure learner mastery of the content. Todayâ€™s teachers make content knowledge accessible to learners by using multiple means of communication, including digital media and information technology. They integrate crossdisciplinary skills (e.g., critical thinking, problem solving, creativity, communication) to help learners use content to propose solutions, forge new understandings, solve problems, and imagine possibilities. Finally, teachers make content knowledge relevant to learners by connecting it to local, state, national, and global issues.
Standard #4: Content Knowledge. The teacher understands the central concepts, tools of inquiry, and structures of the discipline(s) he or she teaches and creates learning experiences that make the discipline accessible and meaningful for learners to assure mastery of the content. Standard #5: Application of Content. The teacher understands how to connect concepts and use differing perspectives to engage learners in critical thinking, creativity, and collaborative problem solving related to authentic local and global issues.
Instructional Practice Effective instructional practice requires that teachers understand and integrate assessment, planning, and instructional strategies in coordinated and engaging ways. Beginning with their end or goal, teachers first identify student learning objectives and content standards and align assessments to those objectives. Teachers understand how to design, implement and interpret results from a range of formative and summative assessments. This knowledge is integrated into instructional practice so that teachers have access to information that can be used to provide immediate feedback to reinforce student learning and to modify instruction. Planning focuses on using a variety of appropriate and targeted instructional strategies to address diverse ways of learning, to incorporate new technologies to maximize and individualize learning, and to allow learners to take charge of their own learning and do it in creative ways.
Standard #6: Assessment. The teacher understands and uses multiple methods of assessment to engage learners in their own growth, to monitor learner progress, and to guide the teacherâ€™s and learnerâ€™s decision making.
Standard #7: Planning for Instruction. The teacher plans instruction that supports every student in meeting rigorous learning goals by drawing upon knowledge of content areas, curriculum, cross-disciplinary skills, and pedagogy, as well as knowledge of learners and the community context.
Standard #8: Instructional Strategies. The teacher understands and uses a variety of instructional strategies to encourage learners to develop deep understanding of content areas and their connections, and to build skills to apply knowledge in meaningful ways.
Professional Responsibilities Creating and supporting safe, productive learning environments that result in learners achieving at the highest levels is a teacherâ€™s primary responsibility. To do this well, teachers must engage in meaningful and intensive professional learning and self-renewal by regularly examining practice through ongoing study, self-reflection, and collaboration. A cycle of continuous selfimprovement is enhanced by leadership, collegial support, and collaboration. Active engagement in professional learning and collaboration results in the discovery and implementation of better practice for the purpose of improved teaching and learning. Teachers also contribute to improving instructional practices that meet learnersâ€™ needs and accomplish their schoolâ€™s mission and goals. Teachers benefit from and participate in collaboration with learners, families, colleagues, other school professionals, and community members. Teachers demonstrate leadership by modeling ethical behavior, contributing to positive changes in practice, and advancing their profession.
Standard #9: Professional Learning and Ethical Practice. The teacher engages in ongoing professional learning and uses evidence to continually evaluate his/her practice, particularly the effects of his/her choices and actions on others (learners, families, other professionals, and the community), and adapts practice to meet the needs of each learner.
Standard #10: Leadership and Collaboration. The teacher seeks appropriate leadership roles and opportunities to take responsibility for student learning, to collaborate with learners, families, colleagues, other school professionals, and community members to ensure learner growth, and to advance the profession.
Alignment to Danielson Framework for Teaching (FFT) The UAFS School of Education Intended Candidate Outcomes (ICOs) are aligned with the Danielson Framework for Teaching (FFT). The alignment is noted in Appendix A. These 22 essential teaching criteria are part of four interrelated domains and are listed in Appendix C. The alignment of the Danielson Domains with the InTASC Principles is shown below. Domain 1: Planning and Preparation (InTASC 1, 2, 4, 6, 7) Domain 2: Classroom Environment (InTASC 3) 17
Domain 3: Instruction (InTASC 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8) Domain 4: Teacher Professionalism (InTASC 9, 10) The concepts of teaching found in the four Danielson domains represent common strands for translation into manageable, program-specific, sequences of learning expectations and experiences. Each strand serves a specific purpose, and all strands are interrelated and interacting. Every effort is made to integrate the strands rather than to cover each separately within a program. The four domains and 22 components were developed by Educational Testing Service to be in alignment not only with the InTASC Standards but also with National Board for Professional Teaching Standards (NBPTS), and National Association of State Directors of Teacher Education and Certification (NASDTEC) Standards (Educational Testing Service, 1995). Additionally, the Arkansas Department of Educationâ€™s teacher evaluation system, Teacher Effectiveness Support System (TESS), is based on Danielsonâ€™s Framework for Teaching.
Additional Alignment to Standards The UAFS School of Education Intended Candidate Outcomes (ICOs) are aligned with the edTPA Professional Portfolio Tasks. The edTPA Portfolio gives teacher preparation programs access to a multiple-measure assessment system aligned to state and national standards, including InTASC. The goal is to ensure new teachers are able to teach each student effectively and to improve student achievement. The edTPA portfolio goes beyond classroom credits to ask teacher candidates to demonstrate what they can and will do on the job, translating into practice what research shows improves learning (http://edtpa.aacte.org). The edTPA Professional Portfolio includes discipline specific scoring rubrics aligned with specialized professional association standards. The alignment of the edTPA tasks with InTASC and Framework for Teaching is shown in Appendix A and below. Planning and Preparation: InTASC 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8; FFT 1, 2 Instruction: InTASC 1, 2, 3, 4 5, 6, 8; FFT 3 Analysis of Teaching: InTASC 1, 2, 6, 7, 8; FFT 4 Academic Language: InTASC 1, 4, 5, 8 9, 10; FFT 1, 3 Assessment: InTASC 4, 6, 8; FFT 1, 3, 4
The UAFS School of Education Intended Candidate Outcomes are also aligned with the ISTE Standards. Every candidate completes a course in educational technology, and he or she completes an electronic portfolio assignment that is aligned with the ISTE Standards. The assignment and rubric are located in Appendix E. International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE) Standards for Teachers: 1. Facilitate and inspire student learning and creativity (InTASC 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 8; FFT 1, 2, 3) 2. Design and develop digital age learning experiences and assessment (InTASC 5, 6, 7, 8; FFF 1, 3) 3. Model digital age work and learning (InTASC 5, 8, 9; FFT 3, 4) 4. Promote and model digital citizenship and responsibility (InTASC 5, 8, 9, 10; FFT 3, 4) 5. Engage in professional growth and leadership (InTASC 9, 10; FFT 4).
In addition to being in alignment with the unit philosophy, goals, beliefs, dispositions, and Danielson domains and components, the UAFS Intended Candidate Outcomes (InTASC/ATS Principles) are aligned with the standards of the specialized professional associations in all syllabi. Knowledge Base in Relation to the Unitâ€™s Goals Goal 1. To use inquiry and reflection as a means to initiate, analyze, and sustain change in teaching and learning. Primary Alignment to School of Education Goals: InTASC 6, 9, 10 and Danielson FFT Domains 1, 4 The Importance of Reflection (Core Beliefs 1, 2, 11) Another concept underlying the rationale for the conceptual framework is the importance of reflection for professional educators. This framework emphasizes that a teacher is an instructional leader who uses reflective decision-making, focuses on best practices, and has a thorough knowledge of students. (The teacher also has strong content and pedagogical knowledge, a commitment to oneâ€™s profession, and a desire to continue professional development.) The teacher is reflective about what has been taught, how it was taught, and the results of that teaching. As an instructional leader, the teacher reflects concerning plans, methods, and evaluation of learning and the learning environment. 19
Pre-service teachers are encouraged to seek new knowledge through reflective selfexamination, demonstrate a willingness to strengthen instruction by modifying practice, and keep abreast of the pedagogical implications of current research. “At the highest level, decisions require extensive reflection, often involving synthesis and evaluative thinking. The decisions made at lower levels might generally be characterized as process-oriented. At the highest level, the decisions are more likely to be purpose-oriented” (Wilen, Ishler, Hutchison, and Kindsvatter, 2000, p. 136). (InTASC 9 - Professional Learning and Ethical Practice, Danielson FFT Domain 4 - Professional Responsibilities)
The unit agrees with Darling-Hammond and McLaughlin (1995) that teachers learn by doing, reading, and reflecting just as students do. Professional educators improve their teaching practices by collaborating with other teachers, observing students, and reflecting about assessment results derived from student work. The unit believes that when preservice teachers are continuously engaged in reflecting about learners’ understanding and about pedagogy, they develop abilities to probe students’ thinking and to understand and appreciate developmental differences. In fact, Smith, Skarbek, and Hurst (2005) maintain that teachers improve instructionally by reflecting on what works and what does not work. Koeppen and DavisonJenkins (2007) emphasize the vital importance of reflection to teacher candidates: “Through reflection, teacher candidates systematically examine their classroom experiences, make connections to who they are or want to be as teachers, and find ways to foster their teacher identity” (p. 52). The unit emphasizes reflection as a vitally important characteristic of a professional educator. (InTASC 9 - Professional Learning and Ethical Practice, 10 Leadership and Collaboration, Danielson FFT Domain 4 - Professional Responsibilities)
The Importance of Assessment (Core Beliefs 4, 6, 11) The UAFS assessment process is discussed and outlined in a series of gates in the section “Candidate and Program Assessment.” Simply put, the unit believes assessment is crucial to forward progress. Mary Huba and Jana Freed (2000) have written that “assessment is most likely to be useful to faculty and students when we resist the temptation to placate external audiences with glowing accounts of success and develop instead a more balanced approach that reveals both our strengths and weaknesses in helping students learn” (p. 69). The School of 20
Education is excited about the opportunity to not only learn about its strength and weaknesses, but also to model for candidates the critical link between assessment and forward progress.
The unit concurs with Francis Fairclote Jones that all school efforts should be focused on results and to get desired results, there must be assessments based on standards (Jones as cited in Schmoker, 1996, pp. vii & viii). Schmoker writes that research supports the fact that “the combination of three concepts constitutes the foundation for results: meaningful teamwork; clear measurable goals; and the regular collection and analysis of data” (1996, pp. 1-2). Through external and internal reviews, the unit is committed to using results to chart progress, to provide a baseline to plan appropriate instruction, to teach students both the importance and the methodology of assessment, and to graduate candidates who will regard assessment as a critical aspect of teaching and learning. (InTASC 6 - Assessment, InTASC 9 - Professional Learning and Ethical Practice, 10 - Leadership and Collaboration, Danielson FFT Domain 1 Planning, Domain 4 - Professional Responsibilities)
Goal 2. To prepare educators in sound curriculum and instructional practices. Primary Alignment to School of Education Goals: InTASC 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and Danielson FFT Domains 1, 2, 3, 4 The Importance of a Firm Grounding in Content (Core Beliefs 2, 3, 4, 5) Knowledge is both one of the UAFS/InTASC inputs and one of the outputs in this conceptual framework. The unit believes that while formal knowledge must be valued and made available to the students, the learner is encouraged to reflect on it and be skeptical about it, rather than accept it thoughtlessly. Critical thinking, reflection, and problem solving are prized and encouraged. Since much learning is constructed as students work together in social settings, opportunities to interact with others in the learning community are provided. The teacher must provide a climate that encourages the student to explore new concepts. This is in accordance with the research of Vygotsky who has written that “while everyday concepts develop spontaneously, scientific concepts are brought into a child’s consciousness through instruction, and instruction is only useful when it moves ahead of development. Then instruction calls into life a whole number of functions which are in a stage of maturation lying in the zone of proximal development” (Vygotsky translated by Van Der Veer, 1997, p. 29). Freiberg and Driscoll (2000) write that “teaching is and must be a never-ending quest for new 21
knowledge and ideas (content, context, and learning) to expand our teaching repertoires to meet the needs of a changing world” (p. 17-18). (InTASC 1 - Learner Development, InTASC 2 - Learner Differences, InTASC 3 - Learning Environment; Danielson FFT Domain 2 - Classroom Environment). As Darling-Hammond, Bransford, and LePage indicate (2005), if students are to be prepared for life in a complex world, teachers must focus carefully upon what they teach and why (p. 32). The unit is very aware of research that indicates that teachers in highly effective schools have taken significantly more undergraduate content courses, particularly in mathematics and science, than those in typical schools. Thus, the unit emphasizes content preparation in all fields leading to teacher licensure (InTASC 4 Content Knowledge, Danielson FFT 1 Planning and Preparation).
The Importance of Standards (Core Beliefs 6, 11) Learning is to be focused on standards organized sequentially so that students acquire basic skills before moving to higher skills. This concept of standards-based teaching for mastery learning is supported by research based on the work of John Carol and Benjamin Bloom (as cited in Ellis & Fouts, 1997, p. 177). Why does the unit believe standards are important? In 1956, Benjamin Bloom led a committee of college and university examiners that stated “the major purpose of constructing a taxonomy of educational objectives is to facilitate communication” (p. 10). In Handbook II, David Krathwohl, Benjamin Bloom, and Bertram Masia stated that the classification of educational goals can also lead to good evaluation, contrasting and comparing results, and providing coherence in instruction. Benjamin Bloom, George Madaus, and J. Thomas Hastings (1981) cite research on mastery learning conducted in many countries at all educational levels and conclude that “Most of the different subject courses at each level have been shown to yield excellent results under mastery methods” (Bloom, p. 60). (InTASC 5 - Application of Content, InTASC 7 - Planning for Instruction, InTASC 8 Instructional Strategies; Danielson FFT 1, 3). The conceptual framework is based on Specialized Professional Association, CAEP, subjectarea curricular, Arkansas Teaching Standards/InTASC/School of Education Intended Candidate Outcomes, and Danielson Framework for Teaching. It relates to candidate outcomes of essential knowledge, skills, and dispositions that are aimed at preparing graduates to be able to effectively plan instruction; implement a variety of teaching strategies designed to meet the needs of diverse students; assess the performances of students in order to make needed changes 22
in instructional approaches; and work professionally in partnership with students, parents, colleagues, community groups, and governmental agencies to further the educational enterprise. Professionals United to Ensure Continuous Learning and Success use their knowledge of standards and content to design and implement developmentally appropriate and effective practices. (InTASC Principles 2 - Learning Differences, InTASC 6 - Assessment, InTASC 7 - Planning for Instruction, InTASC 10 - Leadership and Collaboration, Danielson FFT Domains 1 - Planning and Preparation, 2 - Classroom Environment, 3 - Instruction, 4 Professional Responsibilities) The Importance of Authentic Learning Experiences & High Levels of Student Engagement (Core Beliefs 1, 2, 3, 4, 5) Student learning is shown in the center of the conceptual framework model. The unit believes learning is facilitated with direct connections to the real world and agrees with Philip Schlechty (1997) that “the authentic nature of the work a student is expected to do is another feature of significance to student engagement, persistence, and satisfaction” (p. 156). (InTASC Principle 1 - Learner Development, Danielson FFT Domain 2 - Classroom Environment & Domain 3 - Instruction) Pre-service teachers are encouraged to look beyond a knowledge transmission approach to a learning facilitation approach to teaching. Teachers take on the role of assisting students in constructing their own knowledge rather than simply transmitting knowledge that is then passively received by students. Weimer (2002) writes that when students take responsibility for their own learning, they come to understand that a causal relationship exists between actions they take and the learning that develops (p. 118). Jean Moon and Linda Schulman (1995) state that “recently, there has been new interest in the idea that children construct their own meanings… Since students are involved in the process of constructing their own meanings, it is important that we provide learning activities that have meaningful and interesting contexts and that place students in active roles” (p. 5). (InTASC Principle 8 - Instructional Strategies, Danielson FFT Domain 3 - Instruction. The unit believes learning opportunities are best when tasks are characterized by high levels of active student engagement. This is supported by Elaine McEwan (2002) who writes that “the highly effective teacher is in complete control of three crucial elements: Organization, time 23
management, and the engagement of students” (p. 48 - 51). Engaged students act involved, look involved, are alert and energetic, and demonstrate a sense of excitement. Teachers are skilled at maintaining appropriate instructional variety, momentum, pacing, and motivation. (InTASC Principle 8 - Instructional Strategies, Danielson FFT Domain 3 - Instruction) Benjamin Bloom (1981) suggests that students who are independent learners can engage in higher order thinking such as analyzing situations, for making decisions, and solving problems; secondly, they possess confidence in their ability to learn and to solve problems; third, they are intrinsically rather than extrinsically motivated; and fourth, they possess a degree of social responsibility that allows them to cooperate with and benefit from others in order to achieve their goal. This student engagement with meaningful work is the heart of this unit’s framework.
The Importance of Utilizing Best Practices (Core Beliefs 1, 2, 3, 4) The conceptual framework’s focus on utilizing best practices and creating a vibrant learning community is supported by numerous writers including Norlander-Case, Reagan, Campbell, and Case (1998), Freiberg and Driscoll (2000), and Weimer (2002). The unit believes that when teachers are concerned about best practices, they plan their instructional goals, activities, materials, and assessment strategies so that they are appropriate for the developmental levels of their students. Charlotte Danielson (1996) writes: “Teachers who are sensitive to developmental patterns choose their instructional goals, activities and materials, and assessment strategies carefully. But attention to child development also influences the other domains. Teachers demonstrate respect in developmentally appropriate ways. They ask developmentally appropriate questions and provide feedback in ways that stretch but do not overwhelm students intellectually” (p. 35). (InTASC Principle 1 - Learner Development, Danielson FFT Domain 1 - Planning & Preparation, Domain 2 - Classroom Environment). Thus, the conceptual framework developed by the unit emphasizes the importance of utilizing best practices. It is understood that no particular instructional strategy will work with every student. The unit agrees with Marzano (2007) that “Individual classroom teachers must determine which strategies to employ with the right students at the right time” (p. 5). The Importance of a Focus on the Individual (Core Beliefs 1, 2, 3, 4, 10) The unit believes that candidates must carefully observe their own and their students’ actions 24
and then find ways to make sense of perplexing or difficult situations. This process involves the identification of those factors important to making the best decision. After a review of some writings of Levine by the School of Education faculty and administration, the unit affirms that conscious attention to learning patterns of individuals is essential to learning for all ages. In discussing student learning, Levine (2002a) advises that “once a problem has been solved, your triumphant child should think back over the process, largely to determine explicitly what he has learned and how it might be applied to the future. This kind of reflection is often omitted and should be integrated with all teaching and learning” (p. 202). (InTASC Principles 2 - Learner Differences, 9 - Professional Learning and Ethical Practice, Danielson FFT Domains 3 Instruction, 4 - Professional Responsibilities). This awareness of the individual becomes the starting point for systematically improving thinking and decision-making. This is consistent with the basic premises undergirding “Developmentally Appropriate Practice” as suggested by Bredekamp and Copple (1997). A developmentalist perspective prioritizes teaching that is sensitive to students’ backgrounds, interests, thinking, and patterns of developmental growth and suggests an approach to teaching and learning that gives students the opportunity for concrete experiences through which they can discover patterns and build concepts as a solid foundation for more abstract learning. Beginning teachers cannot learn about instruction in a vacuum, apart from the actions of students and content. Knowledge related to student diversity, student characteristics, student behaviors, and content interacts with knowledge of pedagogy when making decisions about the instructional process (Banks and Banks, 2001; Banks, 1999; Gay and Howard, 2000). Over fifty years ago, Carl Rogers (1951) concluded that “much of present education appears to be operationally based on the assumption, ‘You can’t trust the student.’ Rogers vigorously disagreed with this assumption. His approach and that of the School of Education at UAFS is that “You can trust the student. You can trust him or her to desire to learn in every way which will maintain or enhance self; you can trust him or her to make use of resources which will serve this end; you can trust him or her to self-evaluate in ways which will make for selfprogress; you can trust him or her to grow – provided the atmosphere for growth is available to him” (p. 427). This unit is committed to a positive focus on individual students. (InTASC Principles 1 - Learner Development, 2 - Learner Differences, Danielson FFT Domain 1 Planning and Preparation, Domain 2 - Classroom Environment, & Domain 3 Instruction) 25
The Importance of a Constructivist Philosophy of Learning (Core Beliefs 3, 5, 10) The conceptual framework is consistent with the constructivist philosophy of Rhea DeVry and Betty Zen (1995) who state that “constructivist classrooms are characterized by mutual, or twoway, respect between teacher and children, that this is a developmentally appropriate approach inspired by Piaget, and that “in this sense, constructivist education is an approach to moral as well as intellectual education” (p. 5-6). (InTASC Principle 4 - Content Knowledge; Danielson FFT Domain 3 - Instruction). The unit embraces constructivism as an approach between learners and content that “…emphasizes learners’ actively constructing their own knowledge rather than passively receiving information transmitted to them from teachers and textbooks. … Knowledge cannot simply be given to students: Students must construct their own meanings” (Stage, Muller, Kinzie, and Simmons, 1998, p. 35 as cited in Weimer, 2002, p. 11). Maryellen Weimer writes about an interview in which Chris Knapper states how much this constructivist philosophy differs from the traditional view of “education by inoculation” which is characterized as a “dose” of content and hope that it will be enough to carry them throughout their working lives. This unit affirms with Weimer (2002) that learning must be a lifelong occupation for students (p. 49). This is illustrated at the top of the conceptual framework model with the words “continuous learning and success.” Goal 3: To recognize the linguistic and cultural diversity of the population as assets. Primary Alignment to School of Education Goals: InTASC 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 and Danielson FFT Domain 1, 2, 4 The Importance of Diversity (Core Beliefs 8, 12) John Dewey (1938) writes: “A primary responsibility of educators is that they not only be aware of the general principle of the shaping of actual experience by environing conditions, but that they also recognize in the concrete what surroundings are conducive to having experiences that lead to growth” (p. 35). The unit faculty and administration strongly believe that knowledge of diverse learners and communities is critical to effective teaching. Knowing more about learners and clients does not end with examining the physical, affective/emotional, cognitive, and spiritual dimensions of development but includes the significant impact of ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and other influencers on development. The unit endorses James Banks’ statement that “… for multicultural education to be implemented successfully, institutional changes must be made, including changes in the curriculum; the teaching materials; 26
teaching and learning styles; the attitudes, perceptions, and behaviors of teachers and administrators; and the goals, norms, and culture of the school” (2001, pp. 3-4). Along with Clewell and Campbell (2007), the unit expects candidates to “make a commitment to their students’ learning that will ensure that the instructional process is meaningful no matter what cultural or linguistic diversity their students bring to the process” (p. 175). A major component in such an environment is a teacher who has command of a set of strategies that can effectively adapt them to take into account varying cognitive, emotional, and social capabilities (Mitchell, 2008, p. 8). (InTASC 5 - Application of Content, InTASC 6 - Assessment, InTASC 8 Instructional Strategies; Danielson FFT 3)
Following research on the disparities in school resources between high and low socioeconomic communities, Jonathan Kozol writes that “many people, even those who view themselves as liberals on other issues, tend to grow indignant, even rather agitated, if invited to look closely at these inequities” (Kozol, 1991, p. 56). John Goodlad (1990) concluded from his research that “belief in the incapability of many children and youth to learn abounds. Horrifyingly large numbers of teachers share this belief; indeed they use it to excuse their own failures” (p. 60). The unit embraces a mindset that there is strength in diversity and believes that recognition of inequalities, while practicing deep respect for each individual, is essential when planning and structuring programs in which all can succeed. (InTASC 1 - Learner Development, 2 - Learner Differences, 3 - Learning Environment, InTASC 7 - Planning for Instruction, InTASC Instructional Strategies; Danielson FFT Domain 1 - Planning and Preparation & Domain 2 - Classroom Environment) The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) reports the minority population is expected to increase by 32 percent between 2005 and 2020, compared to a four percent increase in the white population. Minorities are predicted to represent 39 percent of the total population by the year 2020. The School of Education administration and faculty believe teacher candidates must be “responsive to the learning, emotional, and social needs of ethically and linguistically diverse students with and without disabilities” (Kea, CampbellWhatley, & Richards, 2006). In order to meet the learning needs of all students, teacher candidates must understand that humans learn in many different ways based upon race, socio-economic status, age, gender, ethnicity, background experiences, and other characteristics that define them as individuals. Banks & Banks (2005) report, “Racial, 27
ethnic, language, class, and religious diversity is deepening within the United States as a consequences of worldwide populations movements and the magnetic pull of the American Dreamâ€? (p. iii). (InTASC 1 - Learner Development, InTASC 2 - Learning Differences, InTASC 3 - Learning Environments; InTASC 7 - Planning for Instruction, InTASC 9 Professional Learning and Ethical Practice; Danielson FFT 1, Danielson FFT 2, Danielson FFT 4) Teacher candidates must be prepared to ensure the success of a diverse population of students. Candidates must realize how environmental and contextual factors affect learning (McCormick, 2007). They must be the role models for demonstrating democratic and socially just views and practices. (InTASC 9 - Professional Learning and Ethical Practice, InTASC 10 - Leadership and Collaboration; Danielson FFT 4)
The School of Education administration and faculty are committed to ensuring its candidates: 1. Demonstrate and model respect for diversity 2. Understand the diverse learning and social needs of students as they develop and learn 3. Hold high expectations for all students 4. Plan and implement curriculum to meet the needs of all students 5. Demonstrate effectiveness in working with diverse students.
The School of Education requires ALL candidates to complete a course in diversity. Each candidate develops a case study that requires him or her to select a student with special learning needs in an inclusion classroom from a racially, ethnically, culturally, and/or economically identified background different from his or her own and completes the assignment. The assignment and scoring rubric are located in Appendix F.
The assignment components and alignment to standards are: 1. Demonstrates an understanding of the background of the case study student with exceptionalities (InTASC 1, 2, 4, 7: FFT 1b, 1c, 1d, 1e). 2. Observes/Analyzes characteristics associated with the specific needs of the case study student and the classroom response to those needs (InTASC 1, 2, 7; FFT 1b, 1d). 3. Designs accommodations and modifications for students with special needs and implements them in the inclusion classroom (InTASC 1, 4; FFT 1c, 1e). 28
4. Applies/Justifies accommodations and/or modifications to the classroom, school, and community (InTASC 3, 4; FFT 1e, 2e). 5. Demonstrates an understanding of diversity and how to develop a climate in which students can appreciate diversity (InTASC 2, 3, 10; FFT 2a, 2b, 4c). 6. Objectivity of Observation/Professionalism (InTASC 3, 9, 10; FFT 4a, 4c, 4d, 4e, 4f). The Diversity Case Study is one of several assessments utilized by the SOE to determine the candidates’ proficiencies in meeting the needs of diverse learners. The data are triangulated to ensure all candidates meet expectations.
Goal 4. To use technology as a means of transforming teaching and learning, infusing it across the curricula. Primary Alignment to School of Education Goals: InTASC 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and Danielson FFT Domain 1, 3, 4 The Importance of Technology (Core Beliefs 3, 7) Program instruction in the unit includes a wide range of strategies, techniques, methods, and models appropriate for the engagement of diverse learners or clients with the integration of technology throughout. Because teachers and learners cannot afford to be without access to the knowledge and connections available through present and emerging technological resources, the unit faculty has made technology a priority. The unit embraces the reality that technology represents a significant force of change, making it very important to facilitate the acquisition of the pedagogical aspects of using technology as well as content knowledge. Judy Beck and Harriet Wynn (1998) have described how incorporating technology in teacher education programs involves “moving students from consumers and observers, shifting technology applications from supplemental to central in a given course’s learning activities, moving towards a more sophisticated utilization of technology by students with respect to content and pedagogical knowledge as well as technology knowledge as they progress through their program” (p. 3).
The unit concurs with Howard Gardner (1991): “An effective teacher functions as a ‘studentcurriculum broker,’ ever vigilant for educational prosthetics – texts, film, software – that can help convey the relevant contents, in as engaging and effective a way as possible, to students who exhibit a characteristic learning mode” (p. 246). The unit is committed to such a process 29
(InTASC 4 - Content Knowledge, InTASC 5 - Application of Content, InTASC 6 Assessment, InTASC 7 - Planning for Instruction, InTASC 8 - Instructional Strategies; Danielson FFT Domain 1 - Planning and Preparation, Domain 3 - Instruction, Domain 4 Professional Responsibilities). Furthermore, the integration of technology implies a shift in the role of the teacher toward that of being a “broker” of knowledge and/or resources for learning as outlined in the constructivist philosophy (Persichitte, Cafarella, and Tharp, 1999). (InTASC 4 - Content Knowledge, Danielson FFT Domain 3 - Instruction). Andrew Zucker (2009) indicates that digital technology can help transform schools by engaging and challenging more students. The unit is committed to this transformative process.
Traditional educational practices will no longer allow candidates to be prepared to meet the educational needs of students in today’s classrooms. Technology is a very important aspect of the Conceptual Framework and is informed by research conducted as part of the International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE), National Education Technology Standards (NETS) for Teachers (2008), and the National Educational Standards (NETS) for Students (2007). The standards identify the following categories that are essential for educators: technology operations and concepts; planning and designing learning environments and experiences; teaching, learning and the curriculum; assessments and evaluation; productivity and professional practice; and social, ethical, legal and human issues. (InTASC 5 - Application of Content, InTASC 6 - Assessment, InTASC 7 - Planning for Instruction, InTASC 8 Instructional Strategies, InTASC 9 - Professional Learning and Ethical Practice, InTASC 10 - Leadership and Collaboration; Danielson FFT Domain 1 - Planning and Preparation, Domain 3 - Instruction, Domain 4 - Professional Responsibilities)
Roblyer (2006) stated, “Technology-using teachers never can be a force for improved education unless they are first and foremost informed, knowledgeable shapers of their craft. Before integrating technology into their teaching, educations must know a great deal, for example, about why there are different views on appropriate teaching strategies, how societal factors and learning theories have shaped these views, and how each strategy can address differing needs” (p. 12). The faculty in the UAFS School of Education are committed to preparing candidates who acquire the technological knowledge and skills required to perform in educational settings. The unit is committed to modeling the use of technology in their instruction, providing the resources to faculty and candidates to practice their knowledge and skills in the use of 30
technology, and using technology as a tool for the School of Education assessment system to ensure candidates can demonstrate their proficiencies in meeting unit standards and goals. (InTASC 9 - Professional Learning and Ethical Practice, InTASC 10 - Leadership and Collaboration; Danielson FFT Domain 4)
ISTE’s National Educational Standards for Students (2007) provide a framework to support candidates as they prepare to contribute to the social and civic fabric of their communities. The standards identify higher-order thinking skills and digital citizenship as essential for life-long learning in our global society. Candidates are expected to apply the use of technology in authentic, integrated ways to solve problems, and creatively extend their knowledge and the abilities of their students. (InTASC 5 - Application of Content; Danielson FFT Domain 3). (http://www.iste.org/docs/pdfs/nets-t-standards.pdf?sfvrsn=2 for teachers and http://www.iste.org/docs/pdfs/nets-s-standards.pdf?sfvrsn+2 for students).
Summary The SOE Conceptual Framework is in accordance with the Danielson’s Framework for Teaching (FFT) (Danielson, 2011). The framework was built on the research compiled by ETS and used initially as an observation-based evaluation of first-year teachers. It has been extended to capture the skills of teaching required by experienced practitioners as well. The Arkansas Department of Education adopted Danielson’s FFT as the foundation of its teacher evaluation system, and Educator Preparation Programs (EPPS) have implemented the components and criteria into their programs of study leading to teacher licensure. Graduates of the UAFS School of Education are equipped with the knowledge, skills, and dispositions to be effective educators.
Additionally, the SOE Conceptual Framework is in accordance with these statements by Howard Gardner and Philip Schlechty: “Clearly, the kind of school that I am recommending – one filled with apprenticeships, projects, and technologies – differs significantly from the schools of yesterday and of today. In many ways, it more closely resembles a children’s museum than the one-room schoolhouse of 1850 or the mass-produced comprehensive school of 1950. It is quite likely that students will prefer this more dynamic and engaging educational environment, but unless that environment yields stronger and more robust understandings, it will not have fulfilled its purpose” (Gardner, 1991, p. 224). 31
To this, the School of Education would add that the best of American culture includes respect for each individual leading to that individual having the confidence, knowledge, and ability to plan for short term and long term success. As a unit, our resolve is to prepare Professionals United to Ensure Continuous Learning and Success. Candidate and Program Performance Assessment Assessment of General Competencies The University of Arkansas â€“ Fort Smith initiated an assessment process whereby each academic program developed a plan for assessing academic performance. Each class in every college throughout the university focuses on the assessment of general education competencies deemed important for all students In each course in the School of Education and throughout the University, faculty members incorporate those competencies they believe relevant to particular courses with conscious attention given to assessment of learning. Assessment Related to Specialized Professional Association Outcomes To assure that assessment performance is reflected in desired outcomes beyond these general competencies, each college developed an educational platform for each of its programs. The educational platforms identify the program goals and the knowledge, skills, and dispositions expected of candidates. The platforms provide scaffolding to guide the development of assessment plans and procedures and to inform curricular revisions as the faculty utilizes the assessment data to improve programs, courses, and instruction. The platforms are reviewed periodically. In all cases, programs have been and are being planned to be in alignment with the standards of the specialized professional associations. Course syllabi reflect that alignment. All programs are undergoing assessment in the School of Education work to meet the high standards of the University administration, Arkansas Department of Education, CAEP, and the Specialized Professional Associations. Assessment Related to Performance-Based Standards In teacher education, assessment systems are tied to performance-based standards that describe good teaching as knowing individual students, knowing subject matter content, being able to 32
use a repertoire of teaching strategies, selecting techniques that best fit the situation, and being able to reflect on teaching (Milanowski, Odden, & Youngs, 1998). At UAFS, the teacher education assessment system is based on the performance standards as found in the InTASC Principles, Arkansas Teaching Standards (which are the InTASC Principles and the SOE Intended Candidate Outcomes), Danielson Domains and Criteria, and the unit core dispositions. The Danielson FFT observation system is used as the core of the formative assessment of candidates in the classroom as is the case throughout Arkansas. It is “modeled after an active and constructivist view of learning and teaching in which the students’ life experiences and prior knowledge are regarded as important instructional resources. And, because effective teaching requires a familiarity with the diversity of experience and cultural backgrounds students bring to the classroom, the classroom observation system is infused with a multicultural perspective” (Educational Testing Service, 2002, p. 3). Assessment of the Unit Charlotte Danielson and Thomas McGreal (2000) discuss lessons learned about teacher evaluation. Their conclusions: 1. “New evaluation systems should be directly linked to the mission of the school district. 2. New evaluation and professional development systems should be viewed as continuing processes. 3. New evaluation systems should emphasize student outcomes. 4. There must be a commitment to allocating adequate resources to allow new systems to be successful” (p. 18-19). The unit engages in regular and systematic evaluations directly linked to the vision and mission of the University and the School of Education. The evaluation system and evaluations are reviewed yearly. Results are used to foster student achievement.
Program evaluation serves several purposes. Evaluation systems emphasize student outcomes related to UAFS/InTASC Standards. The University administration has made a commitment to the School of Education to allocate adequate resources for its programs and evaluation systems to be successful. An example is the dedication of a curriculum library for preservice teachers. Another example includes the resources devoted to staff and faculty development. 33
In the context of professional preparation programs at UAFS, program evaluation exists to answer a number of questions. Globally, these questions can be summarized into four categories: •
Each of these leads to assessment measures that are categorized in a series of assessment gates outlined below. Student preparation is evaluated through standardized assessment, review of transcripts, performance-based rubrics, and references. Satisfaction questions lend themselves primarily to surveys although focus groups are sometimes used to assess satisfaction. Student learning requires direct measures of performance including oral fluency, written assessment, or through observation of field-based practice.
Program operation is assessed by the Teacher Education Council (TEC), other standing committees, and public school/university focus groups, faculty, and university administration. Meetings are held with representatives of school districts in the region served by UAFS. Surveys are given to assess satisfaction with forward progress and to offer suggestions for the future. Surveys are given to the public school personnel supervising in all field experiences including the internship.
Assessment of Students Unit assessments are conducted at identified gate points that are presented below. Assessments such as interviews, portfolio evaluation, grade point average, licensure exams, rubrics, rating scales, supervisor and mentor teacher evaluations, and graduate and employer surveys are used throughout the gates. Faculty members also conduct assessments of candidates through analysis of video-tapes, evaluation of written and electronic portfolios, disposition ratings, interviews, case studies, scenarios, authentic assessments such as rubrics, parent and family involvement project summaries, management plans, and advisory conferences. Candidates in Practicum I, Practicum II, and Internship must successfully complete edTPA Portfolio assignments and assessments at the required progressive level for 34
the course. Additionally, candidates must meet the required progressive level for the Danielson FFT observations. The edTPA Portfolio rubrics and the Danielson rubrics are proprietary assessments and are designed to assess the development of the candidate through each of the field experience assignments. Rubrics guide the candidate in a self-assessment process in preparation toward meeting teaching standards. Candidates must satisfactorily complete all edTPA Portfolio assignments and Danielson FFT Domains to pass Internship and be recommended for licensure. Specific Requirements for Retention and Exit from the Program As candidates progress through the teacher education program, they must meet a variety of criteria for admission, retention, and exit. These criteria include passing Praxis scores, portfolio reviews, grade point averages, successful completion of particular courses, satisfactory interview results, satisfactory progress in meeting the unitâ€™s dispositions, and appropriate evaluations from university supervisors and cooperating teachers. The criteria are listed in the seven gates that follow this narrative. Candidatesâ€™ performances are evaluated at each gate. Candidates must demonstrate proficiency of portfolio assignments at the culmination of their Practicum I and Practicum II courses, prior to their entrance into the Internship, and at the conclusion of the Internship. The Administrative Specialist for TEP Admissions screens candidates at Gate 3: Admission to the Teacher Education Program. The Coordinator of Teacher Licensure and Field Placement screens candidates to ensure they meet the required criteria at Gate 5: Admission to the Internship and he/she evaluates all transcripts and Praxis scores at Gate 6: Internship Assessment prior to exit from the program. Candidates are supported in their efforts throughout the program by the UAFS Kelley Academic Success Center that provides free tutoring, skills instruction, and supplemental materials. Faculty advisors and administrators in the School of Education provide guidance and materials regarding such matters as Praxis exams, course selection, and skill development.
The School of Education has a policy for at-risk teacher licensure candidates. Faculty advisors, administrators, mentor teachers, and university supervisors provide support at the pre-admission, admission, internship, and post-graduation phases of the program including counseling regarding program requirements, development of action plans to work on 35
deficiencies, monitoring of growth in terms of noted deficiencies, revision of assignments, and a formal follow-up with recent graduates after their first and fifth years of employment.
Insuring Consistency, Accuracy, and Fairness of Assessments The SOEâ€™s data collection system utilizes a combination of systems including the UAFS Student Information System (BANNER), ARGOS, and LiveText to systematically collect and store all data. Data are collected from applicants for admission to the teacher education program, candidates, graduates of the teacher education program, employers of graduates, P-12 mentor teachers and administration, and unit faculty. Data are summarized and analyzed each semester. An assessment report is updated semi-annually and data are reviewed at the annual Faculty Retreat and University Day SOE meetings. Analysis and resulting program changes are captured in meeting agendas and minutes. These scheduled times consist of sharing and analysis of data for program improvement. Decisions made about candidate performance are based on multiple assessments made at multiple points before program completion. Collected data show a strong relationship of performance assessments to candidate success in the classroom and schools. Data updates are provided to the faculty in regularly scheduled faculty meetings. Faculty review the results, discuss inconsistencies, and offer suggestions for modifications of the assessments or instruments. Data are also made available to the Teacher Education Council and to representative superintendents who are partners with the unit as external reviewers.
In order to ensure fairness and consistency across gates and among the forms used to rate candidates, training sessions are held for any person who assesses candidates. For example, Danielson and edTPA evaluators must participate in periodic recalibration and norming sessions. Unit faculty, mentor teachers, and members of the Teacher Education Council review assessment instruments and rubrics. In terms of the testing required by the state, the Educational Testing Service documents validity and reliability of the required Praxis II assessments. Danielson FFT and edTPA document the validity and reliability of those proprietary assessments.
During the first education course, EDUC 2752 Introduction to Education, candidates are provided with the SOE Candidate Manual which provides a description of all program requirements. Admission requirements are discussed specifically during this course. The Disposition Rating Scale Assessment criteria are discussed in the Introduction to Education 36
course, and candidates are scored for the first time in their professional preparation at the end of that course. The Disposition Rating Scale Assessment is used throughout the teacher preparation program, and candidates are scored by multiple evaluators (both faculty and K-12 partners) â€œeachâ€? semester. In the educational technology courses, candidates are provided with extensive information regarding requirements for the LiveText Electronic Portfolio assignment. Admission to the Teacher Education Program interviews consists of two or more interviewers, including one from the university and one from the P-12 schools. Training is provided ensuring fairness and consistency. If candidates do not pass the interviews, they are counseled by their advisors and allowed to repeat the interview with two different interviewers. In Practicum I, candidates are provided details of the required activities of the course, including the Lesson Plan, Danielson FFT and scoring rubrics, and the edTPA handbooks and scoring rubrics. During Practicum II, candidates build on the information they are provided in Practicum I in a scaffolded approach. Candidates have opportunities to complete edTPA assignments formatively. Prior to Internship, candidates are provided the Internship Handbook, which details required activities, course expectations, and assessment rubrics. During student teaching (internship), interns are observed a minimum of four times by University Supervisors and at least once by their Mentor Teacher, for a total of at least five times over the semester. On each occasion, interns receive verbal and written feedback based on the Danielson FFT rubrics. Multiple reviewers conduct key unit assessments. For example, both the Mentor Teacher and the University Supervisor observe and score the intern at the end of the semester for the summative evaluation. This provides inter-rater reliability and insures fairness and consistency. The edTPA Portfolio is completed during Internship as a summative assessment. It is scored by a university supervisor who is a trained local evaluator. The unit, with the involvement of its professional community, regularly evaluates the capacity and effectiveness of its assessment system, which reflects the conceptual framework and incorporates candidate proficiencies outlined in professional and state standards. The unit examines the validity and utility of the data produced through assessments and makes modifications if necessary. Data collected and analyzed to monitor candidate performance in each gate are also used to provide information for managing and improving program effectiveness. In addition, course evaluations are completed by candidates in each course. Results are shared 37
with unit faculty so they can address any needed changes in their courses. Data derived from candidate evaluations of faculty are compiled and shared by the Executive Director in a one-onone annual evaluation conference with faculty. In addition, faculty submit annual professional development goals which are assessed regarding level of completion. Faculty also engage in a system of peer observation designed to improve instructional performance. Faculty peer evaluations also support efforts to improve unit operations.
Summary Working together with the university discipline specific faculty and partner school districts; utilizing SPA, InTASC/ATS Standards, Danielson FFT Domains and components, and locally developed standards; giving attention to a program based on UAFS/InTASC outcomes aligned with the University’s vision and mission, the Unit’s goals, philosophy, core beliefs, and dispositions; the Unit offers programs of study designed for candidates to graduate as “Professionals United to Ensure Continuous Learning and Success.”
Conceptual Framework References
Banks, J. (1999). An introduction to multicultural education. Boston, Massachusetts: Allyn and Bacon. Banks, J. & Banks, C. (Eds.) (2001). Handbook of research on multicultural education. San Francisco, CA: Josey-Bass, Inc. Banks, J. & Banks, C. (2005). Multicultural education: Issues and perspectives. (5th ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. Beck, J. &Wynn, H. (1998). Technology in teacher education: Progress along the continuum. Washington, DC: ERIC Clearinghouse on Teaching and Teacher Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Services No. ED 424212). Bloom, B. (1981). All our children learning. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Book Company. Bloom, B., Ed. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives, the classification of educational goals. Handbook I: Cognitive domain. New York, NY: D. McKay. Bloom, B., Madaus, G., & Hastings, J. (1981). Evaluation to improve learning. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Book Company. Bredekamp, S., & Copple, C. (Eds.). (1997). Developmentally appropriate practice in early childhood programs. Rev. Ed. Washington, D.C.: National Association for the Education of Young Children. Clawson, J. (1999). Level three leadership: Getting below the surface. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc. Clewell, B. & Campbell P. (2007). Good schools in poor neighborhoods. Washington, D.C.: Urban Institute Press. Council of Chief State School Officers. (2013, April). Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) model core teaching standards and learning progressions for teachers 1.0: A resource for ongoing teacher development. Washington D.C.: Author. 39
Danielson, C. (2011). The framework for teaching evaluation instrument, 2011. Princeton, NJ: The Danielson Group. Danielson, C. (1996). Enhancing professional practice: A framework for teaching. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Danielson, C. & McGreal, T. (2000). Teacher evaluation to enhance professional practice. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service. Darling-Hammond, L. (1997). The right to learn: A blueprint for creating schools that work. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Darling-Hammond, L. & Hyler. M. (Summer, 2013). The role of performance assessment in developing teaching as a profession. Rethinking Schools, 27(4), 10-15. Darling-Hammond, L. & McLaughlin, M. (1995). Policies that support professional development in an era of reform. Phi Delta Kappan, 76(8), 597-604. Darling-Hammond, L., Bransford, J., & LePage, P. (2005). Preparing teachers for a changing world: What teachers should learn and be able to do. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Deal, T.E. & Peterson, K.D. (1999). Shaping school culture: The heart of leadership. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Inc. DeVries, R. & Zan, B. (1995). Creating a constructive classroom atmosphere. Young Children, 52(1), 23-29. Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. New York, NY: The Macmillan Company. Doyle, D. & Pimentel, S. (1997). Raising the standard. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, Inc. Educational Testing Service. (2002). Pathwise classroom observation system orientation guide. (4th ed.). Princeton, NJ: Author. Educational Testing Service. (1995). Teacher performance assessments: A comparative view. Princeton, NJ: Author. Ellis, A. & Fouts, J. (1997). Research on educational innovation. (2nd ed). Larchmont, N.Y.: Eye on Education. 40
Freiberg, H. & Driscoll, A. (2000). Universal teaching strategies. (3rd ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon. Gardner, H. (1999). Intelligence reframed: Multiple intelligences for the 21st century. New York, NY: Basic Books. Gardner, H. (1991). The unschooled mind: How children think and how schools should teach. New York: Harper Collins Publishers. Gay, G., & Howard, T.C. (2000). Multicultural teacher education for the 21st century. The Teacher Educator, 36(1), 1-16. Gestwicki, C. (1999). Developmentally appropriate practice: Curriculum and development in early education. (2nd ed.) New York, NY: Delmar. Goodlad, J.I. (1990). Teachers for our nation’s schools. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Holmes Group (1990). Tomorrow’s Schools: Principles for the design of professional development schools. East Lansing, MI: Author Huba, M. & Freed, J. (2000). Learner-centered assessment on college campuses. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon. International Society for Technology in Education. (2002). National educational technology standards for teachers: Preparing teachers to use technology. Eugene, OR: International Society for Technology in Education. ISTE’s National Educational Technology Standards for Teachers. (2008). Retrieved from http://www.iste.org/docs/pdfs/ nets-t-standards.pdf?sfvrsn=2 Kea C., Campbell-Whatley G., & Richards H. (2006). Becoming culturally responsive educators: Rethinking teacher education pedagogy. Washington, D.C.: National Center for Culturally Responsive Educational Systems and the U.S. Department of Special Education Programs. Koeppen, K. & Davison-Jenkins, J. (2007). Teacher dispositions: Envisioning their role in education. Lanham, MA: Rowman & Littlefield Education. Kozol, J. (1991). Savage inequalities: Children in America’s schools. New York: Crown Publishers. 41
Krathwohl, D.R., Bloom, B.S., & Masia, B.B. (1964). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals: Handbook II: Affective domain. New York: David McKay Company, Inc. Lashway, L. (1997). Leading with vision. Eugene, OR: ERIC Clearinghouse on Educational Management. Levine, M. (2002). A mind at a time. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster. Levine, M. (2002). Educational care. Cambridge, MA: Educators Publishing Service. Marzano, R. (2007). The art and science of teaching: A comprehensive framework for effective instruction. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Maslow, A. (1970). Motivation and personality, (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Harper and Row. McCormick, S. (2007). Instructing students who have literacy problems. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall. McEwan, E. (2002). 10 Traits of highly effective teachers. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, Inc. Milanowski, A., Odden, A., & Youngs, P. (1998). Teacher knowledge and skills assessments and teacher compensation: An overview of measurement and linkage issues. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 12(2), 83-101. Mitchell, D. (2008). What really works in special and inclusive education: Using evidence-based teaching strategies. New York: Routledge. Moon, J. & Schulman, L. (1995). Finding the connections: Linking assessment, instruction, and curriculum in elementary mathematics. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. National Center for Education Statistics. Status trends in the education of racial and ethnic minorities. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2007/minoritytrends/ind_1_1.asp National Education Educational Standards (NETS) for Students (2007) http://www.iste.org/docs/pds//nets-s-standards.pdf?sfvrsn=2 42
Norlander-Case, K.A., Reagan, T.G., Campbell, P., & Case, C.W. (1998). The role of collaborative inquiry and reflective practice in teacher preparation. Professional Educator, 21(1), 1-16. Perry, C. (1995). Oral communication. In C. Cawelti (Ed.). Handbook of research on improving student Achievement (pp. 87-91). Arlington, VA: Educational Research Service. Persichitte, K., Caffarella, E., & Tharp, D. (1999). Technology integration in teacher preparation: A qualitative research study. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 7(3), 219-233. Roblyer, M. (2006). Integrating educational technology into teaching. (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc. Rogers, C. (1951). Client-centered therapy. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Co. Rogers, C. & Freiberg, H. (1994). Freedom to learn. (3rd ed.) Columbus, OH: Charles E. Merrill. Schlechty, P. (1997). Inventing better schools: An action plan for educational reform. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Schmoker, M. (1996). Results: The key to continuous school improvement. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Smith, R., Skarbek, D., & Hurst, J. (2005). The passion of teaching: Dispositions in the schools. Lanham, MA: Scarecrow Education. Uhlenbeck, A., Verloop N., & Beijaard, D. (2002). Requirements for an assessment procedure for beginning teachers: Implications from recent theories on teaching and assessment. Teachers College Record, 104(2), 242-272. University of Arkansas - Fort Smith (2016). 2016-17 Course catalog. Fort Smith, AR: University of Arkansas - Fort Smith. Vygotsky, L., (Rieber, R.W. & Wollock J., Eds.). (1997). The collected works of L.S. Vygotsky: Vol. 3. New York, NY: Plenum Press. Weimer, M. (2002). Learner-centered teaching. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. 43
Wilen, W., Ishler, M, Hutchison, J., & Kindsvatter, R. (2000). Dynamics of effective teaching. (4th ed.) New York, NY: Longman. Zucker, A. (2008). Transforming schools with technology: How smart use of digital tools helps achieve six key educational goals. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
APPENDIX A Alignment of UAFS ICOs/InTASC/ATS, Framework for Teaching, edTPA ICOs/InTASC/ATS
Framework for Teaching
#1. Learner Development The teacher understands how learners grow and develop, recognizing that patterns of learning and development vary individually within and across the cognitive, linguistic, social, emotional, and physical areas, and designs and implements developmentally appropriate and challenging learning experiences.
Planning and Preparation 1b: Demonstrating Knowledge of Students 1c: Setting Instructional Outcomes 1e: Designing Coherent instruction Instruction 3c: Engaging Students in Learning
edTPA Planning • Supporting students’ learning needs Instruction • Engaging students in learning Analysis of Teaching • Using knowledge of students to inform planning Academic Language • Identifying and supporting language demands • Evidence of language use to support content understandings
#2: Learning Differences. The teacher uses understanding of individual differences and diverse cultures and communities to ensure inclusive learning environments that enable each learner to meet high standards.
Planning and Preparation 1b: Demonstrating Knowledge of Students
Planning • Supporting students’ learning needs Instruction • Demonstrating a positive and engaging learning environment Analysis of Teaching • Using knowledge of students to inform planning
#3: Learning Environment The teacher works with others to create environments that support individual and collaborative learning, and that encourage positive social interaction, active engagement in learning, and self-motivation. #4: Content Knowledge The teacher understands the central concepts, tools of inquiry, and structures of the discipline(s) he or she teaches and creates learning experiences that make the discipline accessible and meaningful for learners to assure mastery of the content.
Classroom Environment 2a: Creating an Environment of Respect and Rapport Instruction 3c: Engaging Students in Learning Planning and Preparation 1a. Demonstrating Knowledge of Content and Pedagogy 1e: Designing Coherent Instruction Instruction 3c: Engaging Students in Learning
Planning • Supporting students’ learning needs Instruction • Demonstrating a positive and engaging learning environment • Engaging students in learning Planning • Planning for content understandings • Planning assessment to monitor student learning Instruction • Engaging students in learning • Deepening learning during instruction • Subject-specific pedagogy Assessment • Analyzing student learning • Providing feedback to guide learning Analysis of Teaching • Using assessments to inform instruction
Academic Language • Evidence of language use to support content understandings #5: Application of Content. The teacher understands how to connect concepts and use differing perspectives to engage learners in critical thinking, creativity, and collaborative problem solving related to authentic local and global issues.
Instruction 3a: Communicating with Students 3c: Engaging Students in Learning 3f: Demonstrating Flexibility and Responsiveness
Planning • Planning for content understandings • Planning assessment to monitor student learning Instruction • Engaging students in learning • Deepening learning during instruction • Subject-specific pedagogy Academic Language • Evidence of language use to support content understandings
#6: Assessment. The teacher understands and uses multiple methods of assessment to engage learners in their own growth, to monitor learner progress, and to guide teacher and learner decision- making.
Planning and Preparation 1f: Designing Student Assessments Instruction 3d: Using Assessment in Instruction
Planning • Planning assessment to monitor student learning Instruction • Engaging students in learning • Deepening learning during instruction Assessment • Analyzing student learning • Providing feedback to guide learning • Supporting students’ use of feedback Analysis of Teaching • Using assessments to inform instruction
#7: Planning for Instruction. The teacher plans instruction that supports every student in meeting rigorous learning goals by drawing upon knowledge of content areas, curriculum, cross-disciplinary skills, and pedagogy, as well as knowledge of learners and the community context.
Planning and Preparation 1b: Demonstrating Knowledge of Students 1e: Designing Coherent Instruction
Planning • Planning for content understandings • Supporting students’ learning needs • Planning assessment to monitor student learning Analysis of Teaching • Using knowledge of students to inform planning • Using assessments to inform instruction
#8: Instructional Strategies. The teacher understands and uses a variety of instructional strategies to encourage learners to develop deep understanding of content areas and their connections, and to build skills to apply knowledge in meaningful ways.
Instruction 3b: Using Questioning and Discussion Techniques 3c: Engaging students in learning
Planning • Supporting students’ learning needs • Planning assessment to monitor student learning Instruction • Engaging students in learning • Deepening learning during instruction • Subject-specific pedagogy
Assessment • Analyzing student learning • Providing feedback to guide learning Supporting students’ use of feedback Academic Language • Evidence of language use to support content understandings #9: Professional Learning and Ethical Practice. The teacher engages in ongoing professional learning and uses evidence to continually evaluate his/her practice, particularly the effects of his/her choices and actions on others (learners, families, other professionals, and the community), and adapts practice to meet the needs of each learner.
Professional Responsibilities 4a: Reflecting on Teaching 4e: Growing and Developing Professionally 4f: Showing Professionalism
Analysis of Teaching
#10: Leadership and Collaboration. The teacher seeks appropriate leadership roles and opportunities to take responsibility for student learning, to collaborate with learners, families, colleagues, other school professionals, and community members to ensure learner growth, and to advance the profession.
Professional Responsibilities 4c: Communicating with Families 4d: Participating in a Professional Community 4f: Showing Professionalism
Analysis of Teaching
• Analyzing teaching
• Analyzing teaching
UAFS School of Education Dispositions for Teacher Candidates are listed below. The dispositions are aligned with ICOs, ATS Standards, InTASC Standards, and Framework for Teaching Domains. The dispositions are assessed using the attached rubrics. UAFS Dispositions for Teacher Candidates 1. COLLABORATION – ICOs 9, 10; InTASC/ATS 9, 10; Danielson FFT 4 The act of working with another person or group in order to achieve or do something 2. REFLECTION – ICO 9; InTASC/ATS 9; Danielson FFT 4 Serious thought or consideration 3. INTEGRITY – ICO 9; InTASC/ATS 9, 10; Danielson FFT 4 The ability to demonstrate truthfulness to oneself and to others; demonstrate moral excellence, trustworthiness, professional and ethical behavior in all activities and dealings with university faculty, peers, students, teachers, and school personnel 4. LEARNING INITIATIVE – ICOs 5-10; InTASC/ATS 5-10; Danielson FFT 3, 4 The power or ability to begin or to follow through energetically with a plan or task for learning 5. RESPONSIBILITY – ICOs 9, 10; InTASC/ATS 9, 10; Danielson FFT 4 The act of being accountable for a duty or task that one is required or expected to do 6. RESPECT – ICOs 1-10; InTASC/ATS 1-10; Danielson FFT 1-4 Due regard for the feelings, wishes, rights, or traditions of others 7. DIVERSITY – ICOs 1-10; InTASC/ATS 1-10: Danielson FFT 1-4 Differences among groups of people and individuals based on ethnicity, race, socioeconomic status, gender, exceptionalities, language, religion, sexual orientation, and geographical area 48
UAFS School of Education Candidate Disposition Rubrics Emerging 1
COLLABORATION The act of working with another person or group in order to achieve or do something.
Candidate: Demonstrates a lack of motivation or unwillingness to interact with faculty, peers, learners, families and other professionals. • Communicates poorly or inappropriately. • Contributes to group efforts in ways that are not always positive or effective. • Makes inappropriate responses to the ideas of others. • Fails to access appropriate professional resources in order to improve the overall learning of students. • Is uncooperative with or unresponsive to university, school and/or community personnel who seek resolution to problems.
Candidate: Models and encourages positive interaction with faculty, peers, learners, families and other professionals to achieve a common goal. • Communicates effectively and appropriately. • Makes positive contributions to group efforts. • Responds to requests for collaboration in a positive manner. • Responds without bias to the ideas of others. • Collaborates with other professionals to improve the overall learning of students. • Cooperates with university, school, and/or community personnel to seek resolution to problems in a respectful and reflective manner.
Candidate: Meets expectations for all of level two plus: • Models exceptional communication skills. • Seeks out opportunities to make substantive and meaningful contributions to the group effort. • Volunteers to participate in collaborative efforts. • Responds respectfully and consistently to the ideas of others.
REFLECTION Serious thought or consideration.
Candidate: Responds negatively to constructive feedback or does not make changes to address legitimate concerns. • Communicates a lack of appreciation for the feedback of others. • Demonstrates a lack of appreciation for the ideas and opinions of others. • Loses emotional control when presented with concerns.
Candidate: Responds constructively to professional feedback, making appropriate changes to address legitimate concerns. • Makes others aware that feedback is valued. • Considers the ideas and opinions of others with an open mind. • Maintains emotional control when presented with concerns.
Candidate: Meets expectations for all of level two plus: • Solicits feedback from others. • Seeks clarification and/or assistance as needed.
INTEGRITY The ability to demonstrate truthfulness to oneself and to others; demonstrate moral excellence, trustworthiness, professional and ethical behavior in all activities and dealings with university faculty, peers, students, teachers, and school personnel.
Candidate: • Engages in behavior that negatively impacts the appearance of honest and forthright behavior in activities and dealings with university faculty, peers, students, teachers, and/or school personnel, thus giving an appearance of the lack of personal integrity.
Candidate: Demonstrates recurrently honest and forthright behavior in activities and dealings with university faculty, peers, students, teachers, and school personnel. • Exhibits no evidence of lying, cheating, plagiarizing, or any other type of deception. • Gives no appearance of the lack of personal integrity. • Maintains appropriate confidentiality at all times. • Complies with all rules and regulations appropriate to the school setting. • Follows professional code of ethics • Maintains appropriate interpersonal relationships in all settings.
Candidate: Meets expectations for all of level two plus: • Demonstrates unfailingly honest behavior in all activities and dealings with university faculty, peers, students, teachers, and school personnel • Gives his/her all in ensuring that there is no appearance of lack of personal integrity • Demonstrates a pure sense of honesty, integrity, and ethics in any context.
LEARNING INITIATIVE The power or ability to begin or to follow through energetically with a plan or task for learning.
Candidate: • Makes little attempt to gain knowledge beyond what is assigned. • Completes some but not all assignments. • Shows no interest in professional opportunities. • Exhibits little initiative for scholarly activity. • Projects a negative selfimage or lack of concern for engaging in dialog with others.
Candidate: • Demonstrates a commitment to remain current in knowledge of subject area content. • Completes all assignments on time and at acceptable performance levels. • Attends professional development programs as required and/or recommended by faculty or administration. • Reads professional journals and researches topics as needed to participate in content area or grade level discussions. • Exhibits a positive selfimage as reflected in appropriate appearance, speech, and behaviors.
Candidate: Meets expectations for all of level two plus: • Exceeds expectations in consistently identifying and participating in opportunities to increase or extend both personal and professional learning. • Demonstrates leadership in scholarship by presenting at local, state, or national meetings/ conferences and/or publishing in professional journals. • Exemplifies a high degree of self-efficacy in interacting with others.
RESPONSIBILITY The act of being accountable for a duty or task that one is required or expected to do.
Candidate: • Misses class frequently (more than twice during the semester), and/or was absent from an assigned training session or field experience. • Was late for class or left early on more than two occasions. • Turned in assignments late on more than one occasion. • Does not demonstrate appropriate demeanor or fails to follow class norms such as not texting and not personal web surfing during class even after directed by the instructor.
Candidate: Candidate: • Misses at least one class, • Is always present for class, and/or one training session and/or training sessions and or field experience. field experiences. • Arrives to class late or left • Arrives to class on time and early at least once during stays for the duration of class. the semester. • Turns in assignments on time • At least once during the without fail. semester, turned in • Demonstrates appropriate assignments late. demeanor in class at all times; • Demonstrates appropriate maintains focus and attention on demeanor frequently and learning without direction from follows class norms such the instructor. as not texting and personal • Maintains unfailing professional web surfing after being appearance and hygiene directed by the instructor. appropriate to the setting without directions from the • Maintains professional instructor. appearance and hygiene appropriate to the setting 51
Does not maintain professional appearance appropriate to the setting. (Higher expectations for this during the internship). Does not attend to personal hygiene.
after direction from the instructor.
RESPECT Due regard for the feelings, wishes, rights, or traditions of others.
Candidate: Exhibits lack of respect for self and others. There is minimal evidence or no evidence of appreciation for the knowledge and expertise of others. • Addresses others without use of proper titles. • Demonstrates a lack of regard for the opinions of others. • Argues with those in authority and/or fails to adjust behavior based upon professional feedback. • Exhibits lack of self-control, especially in stressful situations. • Resists following established channels of communication. • Misuses the property of others.
Candidate: Models behavior that is respectful of self and others. • Uses proper titles when addressing others. • Considers the opinions of others without bias. • Accepts decisions made by those in authority and adjusts behavior based upon professional feedback. • Maintains self-control and a positive perspective even in stressful situations. • Follows established channels of communication. • Respects the property of others.
Candidate: Meets expectations for all of level two plus: • Demonstrates deference and appreciation of the knowledge and expertise of others, including teachers, supervisors, peers, and students.
DIVERSITY Differences among groups of people and individuals based on ethnicity, race, socioeconomic status, gender, exceptionalities, language, religion, sexual orientation, and geographical area.
Candidate: • Does not participate in conversations about diversity in positive ways • Makes comments that indicate frustration and irritation towards issues of diversity in the classroom. • Exhibits interest in exploring cultural and diverse perspectives, but does so from own experiences and perspective. • Struggles with different views eventually dismissing them as something the candidate will not have to deal with.
Candidate: • Makes comments that recognize different perspectives • Actively encourages value differences as a topic of conversation • Welcomes ideas of diversity • Includes references towards diversity in conversation
Candidate: Meets expectations for all of level 2 plus • Seeks out, respects and applies multiple perspectives • Actively uses diverse views in class planning and conversations. • Recognizes own bias and understands impact of own beliefs.
APPENDIX C – Charlotte Danielson’s FRAMEWORK FOR TEACHING
DOMAIN 1: Planning and Preparation
DOMAIN 2: The Classroom Environment
1a Demonstrating Knowledge of Content and Pedagogy
2a Creating an Environment of Respect and Rapport
• Content knowledge • Prerequisite relationships • Content pedagogy
• Teacher interaction with students • Student interaction with students
1b Demonstrating Knowledge of Students
2b Establishing a Culture for Learning
• Child development • Learning process • Special needs • Student skills, knowledge, and proficiency • Interests and cultural heritage
• Importance of content • Expectations for learning and achievement • Student pride in work
2c Managing Classroom Procedures
1c Setting Instructional Outcomes
• Instructional groups • Transitions • Materials and supplies • Non-instructional duties • Supervision of volunteers and paraprofessionals
• Value, sequence, and alignment • Clarity • Balance • Suitability for diverse learners
1d Demonstrating Knowledge of Resources • For classroom • To extend content knowledge • For students
2d Managing Student Behavior • Expectations • Monitoring behavior • Response to misbehavior
1e Designing Coherent Instruction • Learning activities • Instructional materials and resources • Instructional groups • Lesson and unit structure
2e Organizing Physical Space • Safety and accessibility • Arrangement of furniture and resources
Designing Student Assessments • Congruence with outcomes • Criteria and standards • Formative assessments • Use for planning
DOMAIN 4: Professional Responsibilities
DOMAIN 3: Instruction
4a Reflecting on Teaching
3a Communicating with Students
• Accuracy • Use in future teaching
• Expectations for learning • Directions and procedures • Explanations of content • Use of oral and written language
4b Maintaining Accurate Records • Student completion of assignments • Student progress in learning • Non-instructional records
3b Using Questioning and Discussion Techniques • Quality of questions • Discussion techniques • Student participation
4c Communicating with Families
3c Engaging Students in Learning
• About instructional program • About individual students • Engagement of families in instructional program
• Activities and assignments • Student groups • Instructional materials and resources • Structure and pacing
4d Participating in a Professional Community • Relationships with colleagues • Participation in school projects • Involvement in culture of professional inquiry • Service to school
3d Using Assessment in Instruction • Assessment criteria • Monitoring of student learning • Feedback to students • Student self-assessment and monitoring
4e Growing and Developing Professionally • Enhancement of content knowledge and pedagogical skill • Receptivity to feedback from colleagues • Service to the profession
3e Demonstrating Flexibility and Responsiveness • Lesson adjustment • Response to students • Persistence
Showing Professionalism • Integrity/ethical conduct • Service to students • Advocacy • Decision-making • Compliance with school/district regulations
APPENDIX D - Unit Assessments - Alignment to CAEP DANIELSON InTASC CAEP CAEP Rubrics Standard(s) Quadrant Component
InTASC CAEP Standard(s) Quadrant
1.1, 1.3, 1.5
Task 1 (Prompts 1, 2, 3)
1.1, 1.3, 1.5
1, 2, 7
Task 1 (Prompt 2,4) Rubrics, 2, 3
Task 1 (Prompt 2, 4) Rubric 2, 3 Task 1 (Prompt 2 a, b, c; Prompt 4 a,b d; Prompt 5b) Rubrics 2, 5 Task 1 (Prompt 1, 5) Rubrics, 1 5
Task 1 (Prompt 1, 3) Rubrics 1, 2
1.1, 1.5, 2.3
Task 1 Prompts (1, 2, 3) Rubric 3
Task 1 (Prompt 1c; Prompt 3 a, b) Rubric 1, 2 Task 1 (Prompts a, b) Rubric 5 Task 3 (Prompts a, b) Rubric 15 Task 2 (Prompt 2) Rubric 6 Task 2 (Prompt 2) Rubrics 6, 7
1.1, 1.4 1.1, 1.4
Task 2 (Prompt 2) Rubric 6; (Prompt 4) Rubric 8 Rubric 6 (Science and PE Handbooks) Task 2 (Prompt 3 a, b) Rubric 7 Task 3 (Prompt 3a) Task 2 (Prompt 3 a) Rubric 7; (Prompt 4 a, b) Rubric 8 Task 1 (Prompt 3) Rubric 2 Task 2 (Prompt 3) Rubric 7
3 3 5
1 1 2
1.1, 1.4 1.1, 1.4 1.1, 1.3, 1.4
1.1, 1.3, 1.5, 2.3 1.1, 1.3, 1.5, 2.3
Task 2 (Prompt3) Rubric 7
Task 1 (Prompt a, b) Rubric 2 Task 2 (Prompt a, b) Rubric 7
Task 1 (Prompt 3 a, b) Rubric 2 Task 2 (Prompt 3 a, b ) Rubric 7 Task 1 (Prompt 5.a) Rubric 5 Task 3 (Prompts a, b, c, d) Rubric 11 (Prompt 2 b, c) Rubrics 12, 13, (Prompt 2 b) Rubric 15
Task 2 (Prompt 5 a, b, c) Rubric 10 Task 3 (Prompt 4 a, b)
1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.5
Elementary Ed Task 4 (Prompt 2a, Prompt 3 c, d, Prompt 4 b)
Task 1(Prompt 3 a, b, Prompt 4 b)
1-C 1-D 1-E
1 10 1, 4
1 4 2
1.1 1.1, 1.2 1.1, 1.5, 2.3
2-A 2-B 2-C 2-D 2-E 3-A
1, 3, 4, 7 3 3 3 3 5
1, 2, 3 1 1 1 1 2
1.1, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5 1.3, 1.4 1.4 1.2, 1.4 1.1, 1.4 1.1, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5
8 1, 3, 4, 5, 8
3 1, 2, 3
1.1, 1.3, 1.5, 2.3 1.1, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 2.3
1.1, 1.3, 1.5, 2.3 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5
4-B 4-C 4-D 4-E 4-F
9 10 10 9 9
4 4 4 4 4
1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.5 1.1, 1.2 1.1, 1.2 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.5 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.5
1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.5
Developing an Electronic Portfolio TESS Domains 1-4; ISTE Standards 1-5; CAEP Standards 1-3 Purpose: An electronic portfolio (e-portfolio) is a digital collection of artifacts meant to represent a professional image for the UAFS teacher candidate. E-portfolio Components: 1. Professional Profile (CAEP 1.5, 2.1; TESS 4e; ISTE 3a, 5a) that includes: a. Pre-professional Profile â€“ autobiographical statement of life prior to teaching b. Post-professional Profile â€“ basics of professional philosophy, reflecting on personal beliefs about teaching and learning 2. Assessment (CAEP 1.5, 3.4; TESS 1f, 3d; ISTE 1c, 2b, 2d) that includes digital examples of the following: a. Pre-assessment (KWL, Pre-test, etc.) b. Formative Assessment (Monitoring for Understanding, Observations, etc.) c. Summative Assessment (Post-test, State Assessments, District Benchmarks, etc.) 3. Assistive Technology (CAEP 1.5; TESS 1a, 1b, 1c; ISTE 2b, 2c) that includes examples of using tools to support the learning of all students: a. Speech-to-Text Software/Apps b. Text-to-Speech Software/Apps c. Assistive Technology Resources for Teachers 4. Lesson Planning (CAEP 1.5, 2.1, 2.3, 3.4; TESS 1a, 1b, 1c, 1d, 1e, 1f; ISTE 2a, 2b, 2c, 2d, 3a, 3d, 4b, 5b): a. Lesson plans are tied to Arkansas State Standards, reflecting content knowledge. b. Lesson plans are tied to ISTE Standards, reflecting technology implementation. 5. Classroom Management (TESS 2c, 2d, 2e; ISTE 2b, 4a, 4c) digital component including the following: a. Classroom rules b. Procedures c. Consequences (guidance techniques) 56
d. Technology tools (software apps and guidance websites) 6. Organization (CAEP 1.5, 2.1; TESS 1e; ISTE 2a) of portfolio: a. Specific and accurate headings and bulleted lists b. LiveText submissions 7. Presentation of Portfolio (CAEP 1.5, 2.3, 3.4; TESS 3a, 3b, 3c; ISTE 1a, 1b, 3c, 3d, 4d): a. Professional delivery b. Audience appropriate
c. Correct grammar/academic vocabulary
Electronic Portfolio Development Category
Unsatisfactory (0-3 points)
Basic (4-6 points)
Proficient (7-9 points)
Distinguished (8-10 points)
Professional Profile: CAEP 1.5, 2.1; Tess 4e; ISTE 3a, 5a
Completed on professional profile. Organization seems flawed and/or missing required information.
Completed one professional profile. It is well organized, visually appealing.
Completed both pre and post professional profiles. Organization seems flawed and/or missing required information.
Completed both pre and post professional profiles. Both are well organized, visually appealing.
Assessment: CAEP 1.5, 3.4; TESS 1f, 3d; ISTE 1c, 2b, 2d
Completed one assessment. Content is minimal OR there are several factual errors.
Completed two different assessments. Includes essential information about the topic but there are 1-2 factual errors.
Provided digital examples of three assessments (Pre-, Formative and Summative). Descriptions do not provide a clear understanding of content knowledge.
Provided digital examples of three different assessments (Pre-assessment, Formative Assessment, Summative Assessment). Descriptions provide a clear understanding of the content knowledge.
Assistive Technology: CAEP 1.5; TESS ; ISTE 2c
Provided one-two examples of Speech-to-Text Software/Apps and one-two examples of Text-to-Speech Software/Apps and no additional Assistive Technology Resources for Teachers.
Lesson Planning: CAEP 1.5, 2.1, 2.3, 3.4; TESS 1a, 1b, 1c, 1d, 1e, 1f; ISTE 2a, 2b, 2c, 2d, 3a, 3d, 4b, 5b
Completed one lesson plan tied to Arkansas State Standards and ISTE Standards.
Provided two examples of Speech-to-Text Software/Apps, two examples of Text-to-Speech Software/Apps and one additional Assistive Technology Resource for Teachers. Completed two lesson plans tied to Arkansas State Standards and ISTE Standards.
Provided two examples of Speech-to-Text Software/Apps, two examples of Text-to-Speech Software/Apps and two additional Assistive Technology Resources for Teachers. Completed three lesson plans that are tied to Arkansas State Standards and ISTE Standards.
Provided three examples of Speech-to-Text Software/Apps, three examples of Text-to-Speech Software/Apps and three additional Assistive Technology Resources for Teachers. Completed four lesson plans that are tied to Arkansas State Standards and ISTE Standards.
Classroom Management: TESS 2c, 2d, 2e; ISTE 2b, 4a, 4c
Completed one of the four required classroom management documents. All required part were completed, organized, and accurate. OR Completed two/three of the four required classroom management documents. Required parts of different documents were missing, unorganized, or not accurate.
Completed two/three of the four required classroom management documents. All required parts were completed, organized, and accurate.
Completed classroom rules, procedures, consequences, and technology tools. Required parts of different documents were missing, unorganized, or not accurate.
Completed classroom rules, procedures, consequences, and technology tools. All required parts were completed, organized, and accurate.
Organization: CAEP 1.5, 2.1; TESS 1e; ISTE 2a
There was no clear or logical organizational structure, just lots of facts. Pages or sections are not setup in Livetext for any section of the portfolio.
Content is logically organized for the most part. Pages or sections are setup in Livetext for one section of the portfolio.
Presentation of Portfolio: CAEP 1.5, 2.3, 3.4; TESS 3a, 3b, 3c; ISTE 1a, 1b, 3c, 3d, 4d
Delivery not smooth and audience attention often lost.
Delivery not smooth, but able to maintain interest of the audience most of the time.
Uses headings or bulleted lists to organize, but the overall organization of topics appears flawed. Pages or sections are setup in Livetext for some of the sections of the portfolio. Rehearsed with fairly smooth delivery that holds audience attention most of the time.
Content is well organized using headings or bulleted lists to group related material. Pages or sections are setup in Livetext for every section of the portfolio. Well-rehearsed with smooth delivery that holds audience attention.
APPENDIX F Diversity Assignment
The case study assignment requires the teacher candidate to select a student with special needs from a racially, ethnically, culturally, and/or economically identified background different from his or her own in an inclusion classroom setting. The candidate should plan to interview the student, relevant teacher(s), and a parent or guardian, if available. • The interview with the student should focus on his or her school work, including academics and involvement in co- and extra-curricular activities. • The interview with the teacher(s) should focus on methods and assessments used to ensure that the students succeeds in the classroom/school environment. • The interview with the parent or guardian should focus on cultural background information and that individual’s goal for the education of his or her child. • An alternative to one of the above might include an interview with a community member who has direct impact on the student’s learning. This interview should focus on how participation in community activities enhances student success. The second component of the case study assignment requires the teacher candidate to observe the student in the classroom. The candidate should focus on how developmental factors, school and classroom organizational structures, special education accommodations or modifications, family and community expectations, and the professional practices of the teacher impact student learning. Interview and observational protocols must be observed, and ethical considerations including confidentiality must be honored. The third component of the assignment requires that the candidate submit a written case study that analyzes the effect of development, environments, and individuals on the student’s success. The rubric below will be used to assess the degree to which the teacher candidate is successful in understanding the background of a student with special needs.
Diversity Rubric Criteria
1. Overview: Demonstrates an understanding of the background of the case study student with exceptionalities. CAEP 1.1,1.2, 1.5, 2.3; InTASC 1, 2, 4, 7; Danielson 1b, 1c, 1d, 1e 2. Observes/Analyzes characteristics associated with the specific special needs of the case study student and the classroom response to those needs. CAEP 1.1, 1.2, 2.3; InTASC 1, 2, 7; Danielson 1b, 1d
Overview is largely incomplete or superficial.
Includes some descriptive information (areas of school history, social behaviors, academic and developmental strengths, communication skills and preferences) of the case study student.
Includes descriptive information (areas of school history, social behaviors, academic and developmental strengths, communication skills and preferences) of the case study student.
Includes detailed, descriptive information (areas of school history, social behaviors, academic and developmental strengths, communication skills and preferences) of the case study student.
Description of observed characteristics associated with the disability or learning difference is incomplete or superficial. Does not use APA style to document references.
Provides some description of the observed characteristics associated with the student’s disability or learning difference and links some analysis to references in research literature, class text and notes but may not document references or use APA style.
Provides description of the observed characteristics associated with the student’s disability or learning difference and clearly links it to references in research literature, class text and notes. Some areas of analysis present detailed descriptions that support concepts conveyed. APA style documents most references.
Provides highly specific description of the observed characteristics associated with the student’s disability or learning difference and clearly links it to references in research literature, class text and notes. Shows how specially designed instruction is being provided in the classroom. APA style documents all references.
3. Designs accommodations and modifications for students with special needs and implements them in the inclusion classroom. CAEP 1.1, 1.5, 2.3; InTASC 1, 4; Danielson 1c, 1e
Minimal information is provided from the case study student’s IEP or 504 Plan.
Summarizes IEP or 504 Plan information about student’s special needs, services, and instructional supports, but some information is limited or missing in required areas.
Summarizes IEP or 504 Plan information and plans accommodations and modifications as specified. Makes effort to implement all accommodations and/or modifications. Provides some information from all required areas.
Summarizes detailed information from the student’s IEP or 504 Plan and specially designs accommodations and/or modifications to implement in the general education classroom. Seeks help from related service providers to implement specially designed instruction. Provides information from all required areas.
4. Applies/Justifies accommodations and/or modifications to the classroom, school, and community. CAEP 1.1, 1.4, 1.5, 2.3; InTASC 3, 4; Danielson 1e, 2e
Minimal descriptions of classroom, school, and community factors are included.
Provides information related to the effect of planned accommodations or modifications, but multiple factors are not described. Information conveys a superficial understanding of physical, organizational, and testing performance factors. Details are lacking in descriptions.
Provides information related to classroom and co- or extra-curricular activities that indicates case study studentâ€™s progress in functioning successfully in the classroom, school, and community. Conveys a general understanding of physical, organizational, and testing performance factors.
5. Demonstrates an understanding of diversity and how to develop a climate in which students can appreciate diversity. CAEP 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4; InTASC 2, 3, 10; Danielson 2a, 2b, 4c
Presents little or no evidence of the ability to define, describe, and/or appreciate diversity. Shows little respect for individual diversity or an understanding of the group strength that is usually derived from appreciating diverse populations and cultures.
Presents some evidence of the ability to define, describe, and appreciate diversity by linking information learned in class and through independent research with foundational knowledge regarding students with disabilities and/or special needs and applied learning experiences that contribute to their academic, social, and behavioral growth.
Presents evidence of the ability to define, describe, and appreciate diversity by linking information learned in class and through independent research with foundational knowledge regarding students with disabilities and/or special needs and applied learning experiences that contribute to their academic, social, and behavioral growth.
6. Objectivity of Observation/Professionalism CAEP 1.1, 1.2, 1.3,2.2, 4.1, 4.2, 4.4; InTASC 3, 9, 10; Danielson 4a, 4c, 4d, 4e, 4f
Language used conveys information in a nonprofessional tone. Influences on student learning are incomplete or superficial.
Uses professional inconsistently throughout the paper. Information related to influences on student learning/behavior is included but lacks detail or is provided from limited perspectives.
Uses professional language throughout most of the paper. Information related to influences on student learning/behavior is included from multiple perspectives.
Provides details relevant to the extent to which planned accommodations and/or modifications impact studentâ€™s academic, social, or behavioral performance. Summarizes and/or shows information from school or state assessments and observations of student in classroom, co- or extracurricular activities, or community events in a graph or chart. Presents detailed evidence of the ability to define, describe, and appreciate diversity by linking information learned in class and through independent research with foundational knowledge regarding students with disabilities and/or special needs and applied learning experiences that contribute to their academic, social, and behavioral growth. Uses professional language throughout the paper. Information related to influences on student learning/behavior is included from all required perspectives.
UAFS School of Education Lesson Plan Format
Name: Subject Area:
Date: Grade Level:
Practicum 1___Practicum II____ Internship____
Textbook: _______________________ Pages: _______________________ Other: _________________________ Bloom’s Taxonomy: My lesson provides opportunities for: __Creating __ Evaluating __ Analyzing __ Applying __ Understanding __ Remembering Types of Activities: __ Co-op Learning __ Independent Work __ Small Group __ Teacher-assisted __ Hands-on Pre-assessment: (What will I use for pre-assessment, and how will I use the results of the pre-assessment?) Standard(s): (Include specific state and national standards.) Objectives: (What should students be able to do at the end of the lesson?) Anticipatory Set, Hook or Engaging the Learner: (How will I gain students’ attention?) Instruction: (How will I present new material and make learning relevant? Bullet the order and content you plan to teach in the lesson. Include proposed questions and anticipated responses from students. Guided and Independent Practice: (How will I motivate students to practice/apply what has just been taught?) Questioning and Closure: Include proposed questions. (How can I bring closure to summarize learning and enhance retention of the material?) Alternate Plan “B”: (What will I do if students do not understand the material? What will I do if technology doesn’t work?) Post-Assessment: (What data will give me information about students’ understanding of the lesson, and how will this assessment be used?) Accommodations: __ Extended Time __ Preferential Seating __ Segmented Assignments __ Assignment Length __ Communication Methods __ Peer Tutors __ Instructional Assistance __ Other Remediation Enrichment Resources/Materials/Equipment: (Technology, Visuals, Supplies, Professional References)
Reflection: Today I…. __Used data to plan the lesson __ Stated my objectives clearly __ Actively engaged students __Integrated Bloom’s Taxonomy __ Provided time for interaction __ Gave feedback__ Kept the lesson aligned with standard(s) and objectives
Reflection: (Complete the checklist and write a summary of your teaching experience. Address your instruction, classroom management, and student engagement. Include self-efficacy, professionalism, and use academic language.)
Mentor’s Signature___________________________________ Date: __________________ Campus Supervisor’s Signature________________________ Date: __________________ (Adapted from Sigmon and Associates plan) Adopted Fall 2015
UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS - FORT SMITH EXPLANATION OF LESSON PLAN COMPONENTS The intent of this document is to outline the components of a lesson plan. It should be used as a guide in conjunction with the Lesson Plan Scoring Rubric when preparing a lesson plan using the UAFS School of Education template. A. PRE-ASSESSMENT: InTASC 6; FFT 1.f; CAEP 1.5; edTPA Task 1; ISTE 2d a. b.
There are different ways to pre-assess, such as the previous day’s post-assessment, questioning, survey, KWL chart. How will the teacher candidate use the results of the pre-assessment to plan achievable objectives for the next lesson?
B. STANDARDS AND OBJECTIVES: InTASC 1, 2, 3, 4, 5; FFT 1.a, 1.c; CAEP 1.1, 1.2,
1.3, 1.4, 1.5; edTPA Task 1; ISTE 2a a. b. c. d. e.
Refer to the applicable state standards, base the specific objectives on them, and explain them in student-friendly language. Align the lesson’s objectives (2-3) to the state standards (and national and international standards, if applicable). Be sure the objectives apply directly to the lesson. Use action verbs from various levels of Bloom’s Taxonomy. Ensure that the objectives are observable and measurable. For example: Students will design individual inventions and create explanatory paragraphs detailing the necessary information about their inventions.
C. ANTICIPATORY SET (ENGAGING THE LEARNER): InTASC 1, 2, 7; FFT 1.b; CAEP
1.1, 2.3; edTPA Task 1; ISTE 2a a. Always focus the students’ attention before beginning a lesson. Use a question, discrepant event, incident, or anecdote related to the objective to engage the learners. b. State the objective(s) in student-friendly language. c. Explain the connection and relevance of the lesson to real-life situation(s). d. Determine the procedures, groupings, and transitions for the lesson.
D. INSTRUCTION including GUIDED AND INDEPENDENT PRACTICE: InTASC 1, 2, 4, 7; FFT 1a, 1b, 1.e; CAEP 1.1, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 2.3; edTPA Task 1, edTPA Task 3; ISTE 1c, 2a, 2c, 2d, 3d a. b. c.
Outline the lesson content and activities and also indicate/calculate the approximate time allotted for each section of the lesson. Develop student-focused instructional strategies. Differentiate instruction: • Design lessons based on students’ learning styles, interests, and developmental readiness levels. • Develop learner-centered activities that relate directly to the objectives. • Group students by shared interests, topics or abilities for assignments. • Assess students’ learning using formative assessments. • Continually assess and adjust lesson content to meet students’ needs. • Manage the classroom to create a safe and supportive environment. • Provide opportunities for students to connect prior experiences with new knowledge and skills and apply them in new and unexpected situations, i.e., experiments, learning centers, research, community outreach projects, etc.
E. QUESTIONING AND CLOSURE a. Note levels of questions to be asked during the lesson; begin with lower level questions and increase difficulty incrementally. b. Bullet each question, type it in plain font, and italicize the anticipated responses below each question c. Refer to new Bloom’s Taxonomy to ensure that questions lead students from lower level to higher order thinking skills (HOTS).
d. e. f. g.
Review of the lesson taught. Prepare questions at three levels of new Bloom’s Taxonomy. Type anticipated responses below each question. Listen closely to students’ responses and type them into the reflection that appears at the end of the lesson plan.
F. ALTERNATE PLAN B: InTASC 1, 2, 4, 7; FFT 1a, 1b, 1c, 1d, 1.e; 1f; CAEP 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 2.3; edTPA Task 1; ISTE 2a, 2c, 2dBe prepared with additional explanations. a. b.
Be prepared with additional explanations. Describe alternative approaches to the lesson.
G. POST-ASSESSMENT: InTASC 6; FFT 1.f; CAEP 1.5; edTPA Task 1; ISTE 2d a. b.
How or in what ways will you measure the degree of competency with which the students met the lesson’s objective(s)? Remember to use alternative, authentic, formative, and summative assessments appropriately.
H. ACCOMMODATIONS FOR DIVERSE LEARNERS: InTASC 1, 2, 3, 4, 7; FFT 1.f; CAEP1.1, 2.3; edTPA Task 1; ISTE 2c, 2d, 3d a. b.
Plan to specifically meet all requirements documented in students’ Individual Education Plans (IEPs) and 504 Plans. Consider the following possible special needs: Learning Disabilities and Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorders, Intellectual Disorders, Behavioral Disorders, Communication Disorders, Autism Spectrum Disorders, Physical and Health Impairments, Visual and Hearing Impairments, Gifted and Talented, English Language Learners. Write accommodations for at least two categories of students with special needs unless a lesson is planned to meet specific needs identified in a context for learning edTPA document.
I. RESOURCES/MATERIALS/TECHNOLOGY: InTASC 5, 7, 8; FFT 1.d, 1.e, 1.f; CAEP1.1, 2.3; edTPA Task 1; ISTE 2c, 2d, 3d a. b.
Technology (software, videos, audio tapes, etc.) Visuals (charts, graphics, books, handouts). Supplies (anything needed for the lesson).
J. PROFESSIONALISM/REFLECTION: InTASC 9, 10; FFT 4.a; CAEP 1.2; edTPA Task 1, Task 3; ISTE 3d d. Identify strengths and self-improvement areas. e. Record growth in self-confidence and self-efficacy. f. Analyze current levels of preparation and quality of teaching. g. Communicate with people who collaborated to ensure success: university supervisor, mentor, colleagues, UAFS instructors.
Lesson Plan Rubric Criteria Emerging Pre-Assessment InTASC 6; FFT 1.f; CAEP 1.5; edTPA Task 1; ISTE 2d
Standards InTASC 4, 5; FFT 1.a; CAEP 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5; edTPA Task 1; ISTE 2a
Objectives InTASC 1, 2, 3, 4, 5; FFT 1.c; CAEP 1.1, 1.3, 1.4,1.5; edTPA Task 1; ISTE 2a
Anticipatory Set (Engaging the Learner) InTASC 1, 2, 7; FFT 1.b; CAEP 1.1, 2.3; edTPA Task 1; ISTE 2a
Instruction InTASC 1, 2, 4, 7; FFT 1a, 1b, 1.e; CAEP 1.1, 1.3, 1.4, 2.3; edTPA Task 1; ISTE 2a, 2c, 2d
Guided and Independent Practice InTASC 1, 2, 4, 7; FFT 1a, 1b, 1.e; CAEP 1.1, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 2.3; edTPA Task 1, Task 3; ISTE 1c, 2a, 2c, 2d, 3d
Minimally refers to what will be preassessed.
Describes what and how pre-assessment will be used.
Clarifies purpose(s) for and uses of pre-assessment.
Standards, objectives, learning tasks, and materials are not aligned with each other. Shows little knowledge and experience with Bloom’s Taxonomy verbs and/or Gardner’s Multiple Intelligences. Skills, concepts and/or content to be taught are inappropriate or unclear for the grade level learners. Tells students what they will be studying. Anticipatory set may be too brief, too long, or unrelated to lesson topic.
Includes at least two specific state, national, or international standards.
In addition to meeting criteria shown in “Proficient”, integrates one of three state, national, or international standards across disciplines. Uses Bloom’s Taxonomy and Gardner’s Multiple Intelligences to create observable and measurable objectives aligned with standards at developmentally appropriate content and grade levels.
Justifies learning tasks with limited attention to students’ prior academic learning or personal/cultural/com munity assets.
Minimally supports students’ learning. Should attend to requirements in IEPs, 504 plans, and the needs of diverse learners.
Shows familiarity with Bloom’s Taxonomy and Gardner’s Multiple Intelligences, states standardsaligned objective(s) clearly, and shows what students will know and be able to demonstrate having learned at end of lesson. Attracts students’ attention with discrepant event, a question, or relevant statement of fact. Gains students’ attention or activates prior knowledge but not both. Connects new learning with prior knowledge and experience. Bullets order and content. Includes proposed questions and anticipated responses from students in lesson plan and follows them sequentially. Employs a variety of teaching and learning activities. Assists and supports students in practicing and applying knowledge and skills aligned with learning outcomes of students with or without IEPs/504 plans. 67
Gains students’ attention and activates students’ prior knowledge. Piques their interest with a unique introduction to the lesson.
In addition to meeting criteria shown in “Proficient”, shows how instruction builds on prior knowledge to support learning of facts and procedures with clear connections to concepts. Utilizes diverse instructional strategies to engage all learners.
In addition to meeting the criteria shown in “Proficient”, monitors students in practicing and applying what they learn and actively contextualize in daily life, documenting progress, including those students with IEPs/504 plans.
Questioning and Closure InTASC 1, 2, 4, 7; FFT 1a, 1b, 1.e; 1f; CAEP 1.1, 1.3, 1.4, 2.3; edTPA Task 1, Task 3; ISTE 1c, 2d
Alternate Plan B InTASC 1, 2, 4, 7; FFT 1a, 1b, 1c, 1d, 1.e; 1f; CAEP 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 2.3; edTPA Task 1; ISTE 2a, 2c, 2d
Post-Assessment InTASC 6; FFT 1.f; CAEP 1.5; edTPA Task 1; ISTE 2d
Accommodations InTASC 1, 2, 3, 4, 7; FFT 1.f; CAEP1.1, 2.3; edTPA Task 1; ISTE 2c, 2d, 3d
Resources/ Materials/ Technology InTASC 5, 7, 8; FFT 1.d, 1.e, 1.f; CAEP1.1, 2.3; edTPA Task 1; ISTE 2c, 2d, 3d
Questions lack cohesion with objectives of lesson. Strays from objectives and assesses minimally. No closure.
Includes a closure that summarizes and elicits relevant responses from students. Plans to ask questions at three levels of Bloom’s Taxonomy and succeeds in two. Appears unprepared Demonstrates new with a plan to use if ways to approach the original falters. topic to engage Omits this portion of reluctant learners. the lesson plan. Explains rationale for changing lesson with students. Fails to set criteria for Explains postperformance at three assessment criteria distinctly observable and/or methods levels. Lacks briefly. Communicates enthusiasm for some expectations and student achievement. is generally positive in Tone may be tone. Uses data as interpreted as evidence of students’ negative. Product or mastery of content and project may not hold skills. Shows value to learners. assessment uses and Offers no evidence of addresses ways for follow-up uses of students to improve data acquisition. content knowledge or skill development. Superficially aligns Includes remediation supports with and/or extended learning outcomes, learning opportunities misses key outcomes for two or more related to a central students with special focus, does not learning or behavioral address IEP/504 plan needs. requirements or needs of diverse learners. Provides incomplete Uses technology, list of resources, visuals, supplies, materials, or and/or professional technologies. Uses of support resources to listed materials are enhance or extend not discernable. learning. Documents student growth in technology proficiencies with work samples from class. Omits summary of teaching lesson. Minimally
Summarizes teaching experience. Addresses instruction, classroom 68
In addition to meeting the criteria shown in “Proficient”, asks specific questions and respects students by hearing their relevant responses and building on their ideas.
In addition to meeting the criteria shown in “Proficient”, uses formative assessment practices to monitor and adjust instruction to meet developmental needs of learners. In addition to meeting the criteria shown in “Proficient”, provides rubric, checklist, or metric that includes specific criteria at a minimum of three different levels. Inspires students to improve with encouraging words and actions. Disaggregates data to determine specific knowledge and skills to each in next lesson.
In addition to meeting the criteria shown in “Proficient”, demonstrates a variety of accommodations and/or modifications, gives ongoing feedback, and documents progress of students with special learning or behavioral needs. Aligns objective(s) to ISTE/NETS-T Standards. Integrates technology across the curriculum. Teaches students to use new applications in addition to demonstrating highly capable technology skills in the classroom. Provides frequent feedback and documents student use of technology in the school and community. In addition to meeting the criteria shown in “Proficient”, uses data to plan next lesson.
InTASC 9, 10; FFT 4.a; CAEP 1.2; edTPA Task 1, Task 3; ISTE 3d
describes instruction, classroom management, proficiency levels, professionalism, and studentsâ€™ use of academic language. Mismatch occurs between language demands and language functions and learning tasks.
management, and student engagement proficiency levels, including selfefficacy, professionalism, and use of academic language. Answers questions: What went well? What did not? How will I improve content and pedagogy before teaching this lesson again?
Lesson Plan Rubric Piloted Fall 2016, Adopted Spring 2017
Composes objectives clearly and in student-friendly language as suggested in Bloomâ€™s Taxonomy. Actively engages students with a variety of instructional strategies. Provides time for interaction. Gives timely, relevant feedback. Keeps the lesson aligned with standard(s) and objectives.
Framework for Teaching (FFT) Scoring Rubrics Domain 1: Planning and Preparation Component Unsatisfactory 1a: Demonstrating knowledge of content and pedagogy
1b: Demonstrating knowledge of students
1c: Setting instructional outcomes
1d: Demonstrating knowledge of resources
1e: Designing coherent instruction
1f: Designing student assessments
Teacher’s plans and practice display little knowledge of the content, prerequisite relationships between different aspects of the content, or of the instructional practices specific to that discipline. Teacher demonstrates little or no knowledge of students’ backgrounds, cultures, skills, language proficiency, interests, and special needs, and does not seek such understanding. Instructional outcomes are unsuitable for students, represent trivial or low-level learning, or are stated only as activities. They do not permit viable methods of assessment.
Teacher demonstrates little or no familiarity with resources to enhance own knowledge, to use in teaching, or for students who need them. Teacher does not seek such knowledge The series of learning experiences are poorly aligned with the instructional outcomes and do not represent a coherent structure. They are suitable for only some students.
Teacher’s plan for assessing student learning contains no clear criteria or standards, is poorly aligned with the instructional outcomes, or is inappropriate to many students. The results of
Teacher’s plans and practice reflect some awareness of the important concepts in the discipline, prerequisite relations between them and of the instructional practices specific to that discipline.
Teacher’s plans and practice reflect solid knowledge of the content, prerequisite relations between important concepts and of the instructional practices specific to that discipline.
Teacher’s plans and practice reflect extensive knowledge of the content and of the structure of the discipline. Teacher actively builds on knowledge of prerequisites and misconceptions when describing instruction or seeking causes for student misunderstanding.
Teacher indicates the importance of understanding students’ backgrounds, cultures, skills, language proficiency, interests, and special needs, and attains this knowledge for the class as a whole.
Teacher actively seeks knowledge of students’ backgrounds, cultures, skills, language proficiency, interests, and special needs, and attains this knowledge for groups of students.
Teacher actively seeks knowledge of students’ backgrounds, cultures, skills, language proficiency, interests, and special needs from a variety of sources, and attains this knowledge for individual students.
Instructional outcomes are of moderate rigor and are suitable for some students, but consist of a combination of activities and goals, some of which permit viable methods of assessment. They reflect more than one type of learning, but teacher makes no attempt at coordination or integration. Teacher demonstrates some familiarity with resources available through the school or district to enhance own knowledge, to use in teaching, or for students who need them. Teacher does not seek to extend such knowledge
Instructional outcomes are stated as goals reflecting high-level learning and curriculum standards. They are suitable for most students in the class, represent different types of learning, and are capable of assessment. The outcomes reflect opportunities for coordination. Teacher is fully aware of the resources available through the school or district to enhance own knowledge, to use in teaching, or for students who need them.
Instructional outcomes are stated as goals that can be assessed, reflecting rigorous learning and curriculum standards. They represent different types of content, offer opportunities for both coordination and integration, and take account of the needs of individual students.
The series of learning experiences demonstrates partial alignment with instructional outcomes, some of which are likely to engage students in significant learning. The lesson or unit has a recognizable structure and reflects partial knowledge of students and resources. Teacher’s plan for student assessment is partially aligned with the instructional outcomes, without clear criteria, and inappropriate for at least some students. Teacher intends to use assessment results to plan for future instruction for the class as a
Teacher coordinates knowledge of content, of students, and of resources, to design a series of learning experiences aligned to instructional outcomes and suitable to groups of students. The lesson or unit has a clear structure and is likely to engage students in significant learning. Teacher’s plan for student assessment is aligned with the instructional outcomes, using clear criteria, is appropriate to the needs of students. Teacher intends to use assessment results to plan for future instruction for groups of students.
Teacher coordinates knowledge of content, of students, and of resources, to design a series of learning experiences aligned to instructional outcomes, differentiated where appropriate to make them suitable to all students and likely to engage them in significant learning. The lesson or unit’s structure is clear and allows for different pathways according to student needs. Teacher’s plan for student assessment is fully aligned with the instructional outcomes, with clear criteria and standards that show evidence of student contribution to their development. Assessment methodologies may have been adapted for individuals, and the teacher intends to use assessment results to plan future instruction for
Teacher seeks out resources in and beyond the school or district in professional organizations, on the Internet, and in the community to enhance own knowledge, to use in teaching, and for students who need them.
assessment have minimal impact on the design of future instruction.
Domain 2: The Classroom Environment Component Unsatisfactory
2a: Creating an environment of respect and rapport
Negativity, insensitivity to cultural backgrounds, sarcasm, and put-downs characterize interactions both between teacher and students, and among students.
Interactions, both between the teacher and students and among students, reflect only occasional insensitivity or lack of responsiveness to cultural or developmental differences among students.
Students play an important role in ensuring positive interactions among students. Relationships between teacher and individual students are highly respectful, reflecting sensitivity to students’ cultures and levels of development.
2b: Establishing a culture for learning
Teacher displays little or no energy, and conveys low expectations for student achievement. The students themselves show little or no pride in their work.
2c: Managing classroom procedures
Much instructional time is lost due to inefficient classroom routines and procedures, for transitions, handling of supplies, and performance of noninstructional duties. There is no evidence that standards of conduct have been established, and little or no teacher monitoring of student behavior. Response to student misbehavior is repressive, or disrespectful of student dignity. The physical environment is unsafe, or some students don’t have access to learning. There is poor alignment between the physical arrangement and the lesson activities.
Teacher’s attempt to create a culture for learning is only partially successful, with both teacher and students appear to be only “going through the motions.” Teacher displays minimal commitment to the work and only moderate expectations for student achievement. Students themselves display little pride in their work. Some instructional time is lost due to only partially effective classroom routines and procedures, for transitions, handling of supplies, and performance of non-instructional duties.
Civility and respect characterize interactions, between teacher and students and among students. These reflect general caring, and are appropriate to the cultural and developmental differences among groups of students. The classroom culture is positive, and is characterized by high expectations for most students, genuine commitment to the work by both teacher and students, with students demonstrating pride in their work.
Little instructional time is lost due to classroom routines and procedures, for transitions, handling of supplies, and performance of non-instructional duties, which occur smoothly.
Students contribute to the seamless operation of classroom routines and procedures, for transitions, handling of supplies, and performance of noninstructional duties.
It appears that the teacher has made an effort to establish standards of conduct for students. Teacher tries, with uneven results, to monitor student behavior and respond to student misbehavior.
Standards of conduct appear to be clear to students, and the teacher monitors student behavior against those standards. Teacher response to student misbehavior is appropriate and respects the students’ dignity.
Standards of conduct are clear, with evidence of student participation in setting them. Teacher’s monitoring of student behavior is subtle and preventive, and teacher’s response to student misbehavior is sensitive to individual student needs. Students take an active role in monitoring the standards of behavior.
The classroom is safe, and essential learning is accessible to most students, and the teacher’s use of physical resources, including computer technology, is moderately effective. Teacher may attempt to modify the physical arrangement to suit learning activities, with partial success.
The classroom is safe, and learning is accessible to all students; teacher ensures that the physical arrangement is appropriate to the learning activities. Teacher makes effective use of physical resources, including computer technology.
The classroom is safe, and the physical environment ensures the learning of all students, including those with special needs. Students contribute to the use or adaptation of the physical environment to advance learning. Technology is used skillfully, as appropriate to the lesson.
2d: Managing student behavior
2e: Organizing physical space
High levels of student energy and teacher passion for the subject create a culture for learning in which both students and teacher share a belief in the importance of the subject, and all students hold themselves to high standards of performance, initiating improvements to their work.
Domain 3: Instruction Component Unsatisfactory 3a: Communicating with students
3b: Using questioning and discussion techniques
3c: Engaging students in learning
3d: Using Assessment in Instruction
3e: Demonstrating flexibility and responsiveness
Expectations for learning, directions and procedures, and explanations of content are unclear or confusing to students. Teacher’s use of language contains errors or is inappropriate to students’ cultures or levels of development. Teacher’s questions are low-level or inappropriate, eliciting limited student participation, and recitation rather than discussion.
Activities and assignments, materials, and groupings of students are inappropriate to the instructional outcomes, or students’ cultures or levels of understanding, resulting in little intellectual engagement. The lesson has no structure or is poorly paced. Assessment is not used in instruction, either through students’ awareness of the assessment criteria, monitoring of progress by teacher or students, or through feedback to students.
Teacher adheres to the instruction plan, even when a change would improve the lesson or of students’ lack of interest. Teacher brushes aside student questions; when students experience difficulty, the teacher blames the students or their home environment.
Expectations for learning, directions and procedures, and explanations of content are clarified after initial confusion; teacher’s use of language is correct but may not be completely appropriate to students’ cultures or levels of development. Some of the teacher’s questions elicit a thoughtful response, but most are low-level, posed in rapid succession. Teacher’ attempts to engage all students in the discussion are only partially successful. Activities and assignments, materials, and groupings of students are partially appropriate to the instructional outcomes, or students’ cultures or levels of understanding, resulting in moderate intellectual engagement. The lesson has a recognizable structure but is not fully maintained. Assessment is occasionally used in instruction, through some monitoring of progress of learning by teacher and/or students. Feedback to students is uneven, and students are aware of only some of the assessment criteria used to evaluate their work. Teacher attempts to modify the lesson when needed and to respond to student questions, with moderate success. Teacher accepts responsibility for student success, but has only a limited repertoire of strategies to draw upon.
Expectations for learning, directions and procedures, and explanations of content are clear to students. Communications are appropriate to students’ cultures and levels of development
Expectations for learning, directions and procedures, and explanations of content are clear to students. Teacher’s oral and written communication is clear and expressive, appropriate to students’ cultures and levels of development, and anticipates possible student misconceptions.
Most of the teacher’s questions elicit a thoughtful response, and the teacher allows sufficient time for students to answer. All students participate in the discussion, with the teacher stepping aside when appropriate.
Questions reflect high expectations and are culturally and developmentally appropriate. Students formulate many of the high-level questions and ensure that all voices are heard.
Activities and assignments, materials, and groupings of students are fully appropriate to the instructional outcomes, and students’ cultures and levels of understanding. All students are engaged in work of a high level of rigor. The lesson’s structure is coherent, with appropriate pace.
Students are highly intellectually engaged throughout the lesson in significant learning, and make material contributions to the activities, student groupings, and materials. The lesson is adapted as needed to the needs of individuals, and the structure and pacing allow for student reflection and closure.
Assessment is regularly used in instruction, through selfassessment by students, monitoring of progress of learning by teacher and/or students, and through high quality feedback to students. Students are fully aware of the assessment criteria used to evaluate their work. Teacher promotes the successful learning of all students, making adjustments as needed to instruction plans and accommodating student questions, needs and interests.
Assessment is used in a sophisticated manner in instruction, through student involvement in establishing the assessment criteria, selfassessment by students and monitoring of progress by both students and teachers, and high quality feedback to students from a variety of sources. Teacher seizes an opportunity to enhance learning, building on a spontaneous event or student interests. Teacher ensures the success of all students, using an extensive repertoire of instructional strategies.
Domain 4: Professional Responsibilities Component Unsatisfactory
4a: Reflecting on Teaching
Teacher does not accurately assess the effectiveness of the lesson, and has no ideas about how the lesson could be improved.
Teacher provides a partially accurate and objective description of the lesson, but does not cite specific evidence. Teacher makes only general suggestions as to how the lesson might be improved.
Teacher provides an accurate and objective description of the lesson, citing specific evidence. Teacher makes some specific suggestions as to how the lesson might be improved.
Teacher’s reflection on the lesson is thoughtful and accurate, citing specific evidence. Teacher draws on an extensive repertoire to suggest alternative strategies and predicting the likely success of each.
4b: Maintaining Accurate Records
Teacher’s systems for maintaining both instructional and noninstructional records are either non-existent or in disarray, resulting in errors and confusion. Teacher communication with families, about the instructional program, or about individual students, is sporadic or culturally inappropriate. Teacher makes no attempt to engage families in the instructional program. Teacher avoids participating in a professional community or in school and district events and projects; relationships with colleagues are negative or self-serving, Teacher does not participate in professional development activities, and makes no effort to share knowledge with colleagues. Teacher is resistant to feedback from supervisors or colleagues.
Teacher’s systems for maintaining both instructional and noninstructional records are rudimentary and only partially successful.
Teacher’s systems for maintaining both instructional and non-instructional records are accurate, efficient and successful.
Students contribute to the maintenance of the systems for maintaining both instructional and non-instructional records, which are accurate, efficient and successful
Teacher adheres to school procedures for communicating with families and makes modest attempts to engage families in the instructional program. But communications are not always appropriate to the cultures of those families. Teacher becomes involved in the professional community and in school and district events and projects when specifically asked; relationships with colleagues are cordial.
Teacher communicates frequently with families and successfully engages them in the instructional program. Information to families about individual students is conveyed in a culturally appropriate manner.
Teacher’s communication with families is frequent and sensitive to cultural traditions; students participate in the communication. Teacher successfully engages families in the instructional program; as appropriate.
Teacher participates actively the professional community, and in school and district events and projects, and maintains positive and productive relationships with colleagues.
Teacher makes a substantial contribution to the professional community, to school and district events and projects, and assumes a leadership role among the faculty.
Teacher participates in professional development activities that are convenient or are required, and makes limited contributions to the profession. Teacher accepts, with some reluctance, feedback from supervisors and colleagues. Teacher is honest and wellintentioned in serving students and contributing to decisions in the school, but teacher’s attempts to serve students are limited. Teacher complies minimally with school and district regulations, doing just enough to “get by.”
Teacher seeks out opportunities for professional development based on an individual assessment of need, and actively shares expertise with others. Teacher welcomes feedback from supervisors and colleagues.
Teacher actively pursues professional development opportunities, and initiates activities to contribute to the profession In addition, teacher seeks out feedback from supervisors and colleagues.
Teacher displays a high level of ethics and professionalism in dealings with both students and colleagues, and complies fully and voluntarily with school and district regulations. Teacher complies fully with school and district regulations.
Teacher is proactive and assumes a leadership role in ensuring the highest ethical standards, and seeing that school practices and procedures ensure that all students, particularly those traditionally underserved, are honored in the school. Teacher takes a leadership role in seeing that colleagues comply with school and district regulations.
4c: Communicating with Families
4d: Participating in a Professional Community
4e: Growing and Developing Professionally
4f: Demonstrating Professionalism
Teacher has little sense of ethics and professionalism, and contributes to practices that are self-serving or harmful to students. Teacher fails to comply with school and district regulations and timelines.
Framework for Teaching/TESS Pre-Conference Interview Questions (1a) How do the lesson concepts fit within the scope of the discipline?
(1b) How do you become familiar with the diversity (culture, learning styles, interest, special needs, etc.) of students in your class?
How do you use knowledge of the diversity in your classroom in planning instruction for students to be successful in reaching the learning goal(s) of the lesson?
(1c) How does your lesson objective connect to prior lessons and future learning expectations?
What do you want students to know and be able to do as a result of this lesson?
(1d) What resources will you utilize to enhance this lesson?
How will these instructional resources help you achieve the learning goals for the lesson?
(1e) Describe the structure of your lesson. How do you use the materials, methods, and activities to differentiate instruction for students to achieve the learning outcomes?
How will you actively engage ALL students in the learning process?
Describe and explain the various groupings of students throughout the lesson.
(1f) What methods of assessment (formative/summative) will you use to determine whether ALL students have mastered the learning goals?
How will you use assessment data to plan for future instruction?
Is there anything else I need to know about the lesson? 74
Framework for Teaching/TESS Post-Conference Interview Questions How would you describe todayâ€™s lesson?
(4a) What evidence is there that students did or did not learn the goals of the lesson?
(4a) What do samples of student work show about studentsâ€™ levels of engagement and understanding during the lesson?
(4a) If you had the opportunity to work with the same students on this lesson again, what would you do the same? What would you do differently?
(4b) Please share your system for recording student assessment results.
(4b) Describe the system you have established to maintain your records of formative and summative assessments.
(4b/4c) How do you provide feedback on assessments for students and/or families? Share your record system to support that feedback.
(4b) What role do your students have in maintaining their own records of learning? How do your students determine their learning status from records and communicate this to their families?
(4c) How do you communicate with parents/guardians? How do they respond to your communications?
(4c) How do you address the concerns of parents/guardians during the school year?
(4c) Please describe the roles that families have in your classroom? What methods do you use to encourage family involvement?
(4c) How do your students participate in conversations with their families and with you, e.g., student led conferences?
(4d) How have you worked with colleagues on learning activities this year? Please describe some successes and areas for improvement for that collaboration.
(4d) What influence has your professional learning experience had on your instruction this year? Describe some specific examples of change resulting from professional learning.
Pre and Post-Observation Questions piloted Spring, full implementation Fall 2016
PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT/OBSERVATION REPORT FORM University of Arkansas - Fort Smith Teacher Candidate Observation Tool Candidate ___________________________ Student I.D #_____________________ School ____________________________ Supervisor ______________________ Mentor _______________________Grade/Subject __________________ Date ________ Practicum I
Internship: Initial Visit (Date) ________
Observation 1 2 3 4 Summative Ratings:
Not Applicable (N/A)
Domain 1: Planning and Preparation 1a. Demonstrating Knowledge of Content and Pedagogy Evidence: 1b. Demonstrating Knowledge of Students Evidence: 1c. Setting Instructional Outcomes Evidence: 1d. Demonstrating Knowledge of Resources Evidence: 1e. Designing Coherent Instruction Evidence: 1f. Designing Student Assessments Evidence:
Domain 2: The Classroom Environment 2a. Creating an environment of Respect and Rapport Evidence: 2b. Establishing a Culture for Learning Evidence: 2c. Managing Classroom Procedures Evidence: 2d. Managing Student Behavior Evidence: 2e. Organizing Physical Space Evidence:
Domain 3: Instruction 3a. Communicating with Students Evidence: 3b. Using Questioning and Discussion Techniques Evidence: 3c. Engaging Students in Learning Evidence 3d. Using Assessment in Instruction Evidence: 3e. Demonstrating Flexibility and Responsiveness Evidence: 3f Integrating technology in Instruction Evidence
Domain 4: Professionalism 4a. Reflecting on Teaching Evidence: 4b. Maintaining Accurate Records Evidence: 4c. Communicating with Families Evidence: 4d. Participating in a Professional Community Evidence: 4e. Growing and Developing Professionally Evidence: 4f. Showing Professionalism Evidence:
Candidate Signature ______________________________________Date ________________ Supervisor Signature _____________________________________ Date ________________ Mentor Signature ________________________________________ Date ________________