cwu home     site map         
        
    

CTL PROGRAM REPORT
Elementary Education Program

  
 
1.   Please describe your program's assessment process and what standards you are measuring in relation to the NCATE and State standards of knowledge (content, pedagogy and professional), skills (professional and pedagogical) and dispositions. Is the system course based, end of program based, or other? Be sure to reference how the faculty in your program was involved in developing the assessment process. In addition, describe how the assessment of standards relates to the unit's and program's conceptual framework.
 

Program Interpretations and Conclusions:

The Elementary Education Program is using all of the Center for Teaching and Learning and the Washington State Standards. It is the largest educational program and is unique in that it combines courses and faculty from three different colleges and many departments across campus. For this reason, it is tiered with a Director/Coordinator position that was initiated in January, 2008 and with an Advisory Council of representatives from the different colleges, the Department of Education, and the off-campus Centers which for education include centers at Des Moines, Lynnwood, Wenatchee, and Yakima. The representatives on the Advisory Council are responsible for communicating with the instructors who teach the courses for the Elementary Education Program Faculty in the program had meetings, selected representatives, and in person and by e-mail and distance education discussed the standards and assessments that support and show evidence of the program’s conceptual framework. The lead faculty member who regularly teaches a course and is full-time, tenured or tenure-track, when possible, created the syllabus for a course and chose the artifact and rubric aligning them with the standards. They then brought them to the program faculty and the Advisory Council. The artifacts, rubrics, and standards’ alignment are being reviewed each quarter and revisions are being discussed on an on-going continuous basis. More standards are being matched to make more meaningful artifacts as we assess, examine the results, and discuss the data as the process continues. We also found some things that need explanation. For example, why were two courses lumped together, one an Elementary Education program course EDRD 420 and one a Reading minor elective, EDRD419 in the report for the Reading minor?

Assessment for this program is multi-faceted. Roughly half of the students go through the Basic and Breadth program for the first two years here at CWU; the other half go to the community colleges in the state and earn an Associate of Arts degree (AA) or other specific education degrees which by direct transfer agreements, cover the CWU Basic and Breadth requirements. Some of the background knowledge for the content courses in the Elementary Education Program is achieved in these first two years. Usually, the process starts as teacher candidates seek advising to declare their majors and minors sometime toward the end of their 2nd year or beginning of the 3rd year and begin the process of getting admitted into the teacher education programs. In order to do be admitted, they must submit a satisfactory Application for Admission to the Teach Education Programs form, Character and Fitness Supplement form, two Recommendation forms (one of which is by an educator), Fingerprinting and Certification Requirements form, LiveText software proof of purchase, and have a grade point average of a B or 3.0 for the last 45 quarter credits. This satisfactory process enables them to take some of the content courses, Block I. In order to take Block II courses, teacher candidates must pass all subtests of the West-B examination, complete key courses or an AA or a Bachelor’s degree, and complete the dispositional survey. Situational alternatives have been made for the teacher candidates at the centers so the requirements are a little different. For example, the West-B must be taken, and all sections must be passed before admittance into the center teacher education programs.

Situational adaptations have been made for the students at centers to vary these procedures. Students in the centers are often in cohorts and must fully pass all of the requirements including the West-B before being admitted into the education programs. However, since roughly half of our students entering into education programs on the main campus are graduates from our community colleges, we adapt the requirements so that they have courses to take rather than filling a quarter or two with unessential electives.

Block III is student teaching. To qualify, teacher candidates must meet another list of requirements including maintaining a grade point average of B or 3.0, writing acceptable statements of Outlook and Autobiography, completing some specific coursework, and achieving successful scores on all sections of the West-E including math, science, health/fitness, language arts, social studies, and the arts. In order to be recommended for the Washington State Residency Teaching Certificate, students must have completed all the requirements and have had a successful experience as judged by a documentation notebook, passing supervisor rubric, and a passing cooperating teacher rubric.

The Elementary Education Program is in transition as we are aligning our program to be parallel and fully accountable to the 2007 Standards from the 2002 Standards. Some of the courses have been changed as a result of discussions with fellow faculty to make them more responsive to the needs of the K-8 students in our state. An example is the Music 326 course that used to be traditional, theoretical, and historical, all about the foundations of music. It is now more applicable to the way it will be used in the elementary classrooms by focusing on the way it can support the curriculum and yet teach musical elements at the same time. Another example is the EDEL 323 Math for the Elementary Classroom that has proposed being extended and expanded to a 4 or 5 credit course rather than a 3 credit course. Other changes are in progress as the dialogue continues and as the program is brought more in alignment with the topics and the weighting of the 2007 Standards.

Assessment is both course-based and end-of-program based. It is course-based because teacher candidates must earn at least a C while maintaining a B average. Each course in the program has a LiveText artifact that must be acceptable as judged on the Live Text rubric. There are several strands such as writing or technology that run through most of the courses. The sum of all of the LiveText artifacts for each course in the Elementary Program forms the basis of a LiveText Portfolio. We are in the process now of talking about adding more requirements to this portfolio to illustrate the standards.

The end of program is also an important time for the assessment of our program. Have teacher candidates learned what they need "to know and to be able to do" in order to transfer the learning into action with a school environment and its community. Student teaching is the primary time that teacher candidates can apply the knowledge and skills that they have gained to use in the full context of the K-8 teaching environment and show their understandings or areas that need work. Teacher candidates are to prove what they know and can do in this end of program complex, real world experience.

The 2007 Standards are consistent with the frameworks. As teacher candidates become facilitators of learning as expert learners and knowledge specialists, discussions on the statements in the standards of content, on scores on tests, and on background courses from the first two years become important. Teacher candidates must be more knowledgeable in some of the areas. The ability to choose from the fairly open electives in the Elementary Education major may need to be changed or eliminated to allow for the growth in content area work. Our teacher candidates must be able to easily achieve the GLE-EALR’s from OSPI and completely accept and conform to them all in preparing to teach K-8 students.

The facilitator of learning as master of the art and science of teaching is parallel to the pedagogical content and skills that are emphasized across our curriculum. We need to do something to help teacher candidates apply the concepts earlier in the program, but with a rather place bound site in the state, increasing practicum and service learning experiences is difficult. By deploying specific teaching methods (e.g. inquiry, content formation, concept attainment, Socratic seminars), pedagogical content knowledge and skills are incorporated into the curriculum. Each of these methods address content knowledge, higher order thinking skills, and social skills.

There are more changes such as the Science Educators have added a credit to increase from a 3 credit course to 4 credits. Also, theater and dance elements are informally included in EDRD 420 and PE 344, respectively, but need reconsideration. We can suggest adding dance and theater courses to our Elementary Education electives and suggesting them as free electives in Basic and Breadth, at least for on-campus students at the present while we align standards to topics and activities. Then, we can weight the course credit to the weight value of importance of the standards. We are also considering other options such as creating a class that would combine all the arts for the elementary school as do some of the other schools in our state and across the nation.

2. Below is an analysis of the frequency with which your program cites CTL, WA State Standards/Competencies, and/or national standards within your LiveText artifacts, rubrics, and reports. Please examine the charts and write your program's interpretations and conclusions based on the information provided. (e.g., Are the standards dispersed appropriately in your program? Are all the standards represented as you wish them to be? After reviewing this analysis are there changes your program would recommend making to the way you cite standards or assess your candidates using LiveText?)
 


 

Program Interpretations and Conclusions:

The discussion of all of the standards is on-going as our transitions state continues. Many of the artifacts and rubrics are changed as all of the instructors for that course get together and reach consensus about the needs of the artifact to be representative of the curriculum of the course. The Advisory Council also discusses these issues and representatives then go back and discuss the topic with those faculty who teach the courses in those areas and who want to express an opinion.

Another example is how the instructors of the PE 334 Physical Education Activities for the Elementary School perused the Standards and saw that some of the Standards for Dance were incorporated into the content of that class. The boundaries and territorial stances of some of the courses are changing to be more flexible. We have discussed that we need to move toward more integration. PE 334 and Dance could be combined, or even all the Arts could be combined into one course to be more efficient and effective as others in the state have done. We are still evaluating possible alternatives and have not officially recommended any change at this time.

The artifacts should be carefully chosen examples to represent major components of the course. We all agree that we need to keep communication going and improve the quantity and quality of how the program addresses these changes. Our teacher candidates need to be reminded in all courses to work hard and do their best in coursework as well as in the individual artifact demonstrations.

Additionally, the course, EDED 299, which was suggested last fall as a class on portfolio development to be followed by another course toward the end of the program for a seminar to culminate in the portfolio. But, it was not the consensus of the elementary education faculty, and no procedures were made to establish the course by the usual routes at the university by committee approvals and acceptance by the Faculty Senate. Therefore, it is not a part of our program and should be eliminated at this time.

3. Below you will find one sample of your Live Text Report that identifies an aggregation of candidate learning outcome data. Please examine all of your reports in the LiveText exhibit area and discuss the accuracy, consistency, and fairness of the data, as well as what improvements could be made in the program assessment rubrics, courses, artifacts, or reporting. Include your interpretations relative how well your candidates are meeting standards. After examining all of your report data, list any changes your program is considering.
 


 

Program Interpretations and Conclusions:

The Advisory Council discussed some of the reports on several occasions and found them to be accurate, consistent and, therefore, fair. Some changes in the rubrics have been made so that some have a 3-category rubric now when the original was 5-point for a wider possibility for more accurate designation of category. The criterion for the rubrics and the weighting of the points in categories on the rubrics varies from instructor to instructor. Sometimes, one instructor has been delegated to a course, its artifact, and its rubric. There continues to be discussion and tweaking the artifacts and rubrics as instructors work toward consensus of all of the people who teach the course. An example is EDRD 308 Beginning Reading. The delegated person chose the Basal Reader Review. As the faculty who teach the course use this choice, the assignment seemed too trivial. A reflective response paper was added. Now, this artifact activity is even being considered to be changed to another assignment that is more representative of the major concepts of the course.

In regards to the example above, there are changes are in progress to remedy the issues identified in the data. The three areas of particular weakness were identified as 1) Skills-based Objectives, 24% did not meet the competency, 2) Democratic and Constructivist Learning Opportunities, 21% did not meet the competencies, 3) Use of Technology, 31% did not meet the competencies. The course has been re-evaluated with adjustments to create an improvement in these areas but other areas as well. The data is giving us information that has been used to improve our courses and programs.

Another important acknowledgement from the reports was that there was a definite weakness of teacher candidates’ writing skills. The discussion included several ideas:

1) Send the teacher candidates to the Writing Center.

2) Use a common rubric for writing conventions or like the 6+1 Trait Writing rubric in all of our courses and ask instructors to give feedback on writing to all of the teacher candidates. By getting the same message from many instructors, teacher candidates may change, but having the consistency of grading may be problematic.

3) Require a spontaneous writing sample to be graded by the Testing Center in addition to the two short questions with a general rubric and multiple-choice questions of the West B and E. If teacher candidates score low, require them to take ENG 320 English Grammar or other writing classes.

4) Add ENG 320 to the pre-requisites or electives. More options are being considered for all the teacher education programs. The accuracy of the assessment is as good as the representation of the artifact for authentic aspects of the course. The lack of consistency between instructors of the course may indicate that the lead teacher needs to take more of a leadership role so that the content and activities within a course are similar in the delivery of each section whether they are taught by tenure/tenure-track or part-time faculty or are on main campus or in one of our centers. This area needs work. Right now, there is a great deal of variation and academic freedom which may need a bit of harnessing. Some faculty groups work on many drafts of the artifact to bring it to an acceptable standard with consensus. Others put their first attempts in as a finished products. Some faculty meet the standards independently; others have guidance and assistance. We are trying to gain more and more consensus and team spirit in working toward our goals. We need more uniform and standard ways of doing these procedures to really see the effects and results across the population, while allowing academic freedom and creativity at the same time.

As the data is giving us information in all of our courses, we are discussing the issues, reaching consensus as possible, and making changes. We also recognize that the part-time people may need more support and specification to conform to the syllabi for the courses as developed by the lead faculty.

4. Below you will find a chart of the CTL Standards aggregated by course. Please examine the data results and discuss any improvements if any you might consider for your program. Using these data, please reflect upon your candidates' success in meeting standards. Compare these data to the data provided in the WEST B and E charts that follow. Is there consistency in the rates of success? What do these data tell you?
 


 

Program Interpretations and Conclusions:

Since so many teacher candidates achieve the 3.0 grade point average and maintain it during their program, it does not seem unusual that so many of the students achieve the exemplary or proficient levels at first sight. However, questions arise. If the rubrics had 5 categories, would it be possible to see more of a range of variation? Is there something about the EDEL 420 course that teacher candidates score lower? Lack of any scores in the “exemplary” category may be due to instructor’s standards and interpretation s of what an exemplary lesson plan is supposed to look like. Perhaps, we should interview the instructors and teacher candidates who have been involved with this course to get a clear picture of the situation.

Currently, teacher candidates are required to submit to LiveText an inquiry lesson plan and an accompanying reflection paper related to it. There is an overlap of certain teaching strategies that are taught in EDEL 420 and EDCS 311. Both courses teach inquiry methods, and some students take both courses simultaneously; others spread them out. We are discussing ways to improve the content of these courses to better serve the need of our students. Do they need more courses for background knowledge in civics, economics, geography, and history? Teacher candidates can avoid these courses in Basic and Breadth if they choose. Or, is there something else happening there to make the scores lower in that subject than others. The data manifests questions that stimulate dialogue among all who teach the courses.

The comparison to the West-B and West-E allows us to see more of the areas that need remedy and growth. The writing scores are shocking to see that on the first test, 33% of the teacher candidates do not pass. This finding is consistent with the writing element on categories of the artifact rubric scores on many of the reports. We will need to make some changes that will increase the test score on the first attempt. The testing is somewhat general on the West-B and the West-E tests (2 questions to answer in writing and some multiple-choice questions) that a more detailed test seems even more important than ever. Furthermore, the results of the scores on these tests to show low skills in writing are not limited to Elementary Education majors. Faculty on university-wide committees acknowledge the need of writing skills across campus. Some colleges have adapted a standard writing rubric for writing skills across courses. The university has designated some courses that have at least seven pages of writing as “W” courses. Teacher candidates who do their Basic and Breadth on campus are required to take at least four of the designated W courses. However, the students who go to the community colleges with which we have direct transfer agreements may not have such writing experience. This whole area needs much further work as we look at the data to make recommendations for future change.

5.

Please find below the West B data for the teacher residency program. Please use these data, the LiveText data, and the West E data found below to predict candidate success in your program. Given theses summaries, are there changes to your program or to the unit your program recommends the CTL consider?

  • Between 2005-2007, 49% of the candidates passed all three sections of the exam their first attempt, 84% passed the reading portion in their first attempt, 82% math their first attempt, and 65% passed writing their first attempt.
  • The mean number of candidates not passing reading portion is 11%, math 12%, and writing 25%.

CTL WEST B Data Summary 2002 to Present

 
 

Program Interpretations and Conclusions:

Faculty and the Advisory Council have examined and discussed the data and wish to make some program changes based on these discussions for improvements to our programs. The writing skills are so obviously low. Is there an explanation in some of the teacher candidates’ preparations or earlier coursework that affects this score, or is there a change in society that creates this deficiency?

Our students have two writing courses ENG 101 and ENG 102 and usually another one. At CWU, students have to take four courses that have a major writing factor which are to be graded by instructors to work on writing skills. We have a supportive Writing Center highly available for appointments and drop-ins. Why do our students have writing problems? Teacher candidates’ performance in EDRD 420 in which all the conventions on the OSPI’s rubrics are reviewed, still are low. Even when edited by the instructor, the peers, and re-written several times, teacher candidates still score low on the conventions. This area is high priority to remedy. Society and culture may be having a great effect on writing skills when teacher candidates are text messaging and parsimoniously writing on e-mails, but teacher candidates must have situational skills and be exemplary role models as well as experts in this content area.

The comparison to the West-B and West-E allows us to see more of the areas that need remedy and growth. The writing scores are shocking to see that on the first test, 33% of the teacher candidates do not pass. This finding is consistent with the writing element on categories of the artifact rubric scores on many of the reports. We will need to make some changes that will increase the test score on the first attempt. The testing is somewhat general on the West-B and the West-E tests that a more detailed test seems even more important than ever. Furthermore, the results of the scores on these tests to show low skills in writing are not limited to Elementary Education majors. Faculty on university-wide committees acknowledge the need of writing skills across campus. Some colleges have adapted a standard writing rubric for writing skills across courses. The university has designated some courses that have at least seven pages of writing as “W” courses. Teacher candidates who do their Basic and Breadth on campus are required to take at least four of the designated W courses. However, the students who go to the community colleges with which we have direct transfer agreements may not have such writing experience. This whole area needs much further work as we look at the data to make recommendations for future change.

6. The WEST E is administered by ETS as a state requirement for program Exit, measuring content knowledge by endorsement area. ETS has not sent the final corrected data summary at the time of this report, however, the data we keep on a continuously updated basis is described below in the following graph. The graph compares 2005-2006 and 2006-2007 data by endorsement area. We suspect the 2006-2007 data will change after all scores are received from ETS. According to this set of data, 2005-06 pass rates were 90%. Remember all candidates must pass the test to be certified, so they take it multiple times. We are working on authenticating a different process that will show how many times candidate take the test and when. The 2006-07 data indicates pass rates of 87%. If your program is one of those with a pass rate below 80%; what program recommendations are you considering that will positively affect the rate of passing the WEST-E for 2007-2009?
 
 

Program Interpretations and Conclusions:

The Elementary Education Program scores are above the 90% level. However, we must continue to work toward the 100% level on the first try. We need to differentiate what we are doing well and what needs examination and change. The data is helpful in our discussions so that we can detail these areas. Our changes will reflect how to score even higher. It is clear that because the scores are the result of multiple test-taking attempts by some students, the 90% needs improvement. We now allow students to take the test multiple-times. Should we have the rule that if a teacher candidate fails, then, “Three times, you’re out?” Or should we limit it to only once or twice?

It is curious to note that the scores from 2005-2006 were approximately at the 95% while the scores from 2006-2007 were lower, approximately 92%. This score movement needs to be watched carefully as to whether it is a slight variation that will return to the higher levels or if it is a downward turn of which there is great concern. As the number increases university-wide of part-time faculty who may or may not have the required terminal degrees and experience of full-time tenured and tenure-track faculty, more and more of our classes are taught by adjunct faculty.

Our discussion continues. Some teacher candidates do not take the first administration of the test seriously because they use it as a trial-run to see what is on the test before taking it again, knowing that they can still take it again. We might want to limit the number of re-takes but offer some ways of gaining that information such as suggested courses or workshops on campus. We also need to have a way of intervention earlier in the teacher candidates’ education to spot problem areas and give them guidance on how to improve.

By centering our interests on making our program purged of extraneous aspects of the curriculum and by reinforcing the standards based elements, we can improve.

7.

Please find below the EBI teacher and principal data for all program completers. Discuss and report in the space provided what your program recommends the unit should accomplish to improve overall satisfaction, or what your program is doing to improve the trend.

  • This survey is administered through OSPI and is contracted through Educational Benchmarking Inc. These data are collected for all new teachers in public schools by surveying new teachers and their principals.
  • Response rate average over the seven years n=105
  • The graph represents a seven year average satisfaction trend by category
  • Highest satisfaction ratings are in the areas of:
    • Student learning
    • Instructional strategies
    • Management, control and environment
  • Lowest satisfaction ratings are in the areas of:
    • Reading skills
  • 5 year Principal responses followed similar patterns as teachers n=41

 

Program Interpretations and Conclusions:

In the survey, the dips in the categories, program effectiveness and in reading skills, are surprising. The allotment of credits in the Elementary Education Program for reading is a total of 11. There is something wrong that the score is so low. Perhaps, the isolation of reading courses and EDRD 421 Children’s Literature and classroom practicum is the wrong approach for meaningful and consistent knowledge that can be easily applied to real world settings. EDRD 308 is a slow moving course covering only 3 chapters of a book that is used again for the rest of the chapters in EDRD 309 in which there is an experience in teaching children three days a week. Evidently, it is not effective. We have talked about combining EDRD 308 and EDRD 421 so that the weighting is more consistent with the standards and the preparation of using books for reading is naturally combined with the strategies. As mentioned above, the boundaries of the coursework may need to be softer for more flexibility and less territorial and traditional. We also talk of the need for practicum, but EDRD 309 does have a two day a week experience out in the K-8 schools as does SCED 322 and EDEL 323. This issue needs exploring.

Another way of looking at this issue can be seen by the example of reading at CWU which is taught from a wholistic perspective, but many school districts are using parts-specific perspectives (phonics, word skills, structure, memorization). Perhaps, we need to address all perspectives in a more overriding pluralistic approach.

Also, why is the response rate to these questions so low? Do these teachers who are in the field realize by the introductory letter just how important this data collection is in helping to make our program more impacting on student learning?

In regards to the program effectiveness, we are all aware of the OSPI website and the GLE-EALR’s but closer attention to alignment would help our program prepare teacher candidates to be more confident in their performance and effectiveness. As we transition to Standard 5 and become more aware of the K-8 student-based, our aims must be for higher program effectiveness.

8.

Please find below first year and third year teacher survey results summarized by graphing mean responses for each question.

  • This survey is administered by CTL and data trend summary represents 2004-07
  • The average response rate for 2004-2007 is 15%
  • First year teacher N= 375, Third year teacher n =200
  • The graph and subsequent ANOVA demonstrates a significantly higher average satisfaction rating from first year teachers when compared to third year teachers (p<.05)
  • Highest satisfaction ratings are in the areas of:
    • Subject matter knowledge
    • Application of EALR's
  • Lowest satisfaction ratings are in the areas of:
    • Classroom management
    • Involving and collaborating with parents
 

Program Interpretations and Conclusions:

Classroom management and involving and collaborating with parents have been weak areas for sometime. Efforts to integrate some aspects of these topics has been made in the class EDRD 420 such as letter writing home, conferencing with students and with parents, giving parents guidelines of how to support their student’s learning, using reading and writing as rewards not punishments, but the scores are not showing application and confidence. More class time and emphasis needs to be given these topics across the curriculum and integrated into preparation for clear, routine communication with parents as partners for their children’s education.

Classroom management is more easily accomplished with prior planning, clear rules, and industrious, engaged children. We have discussed several options. One is to reduce the professional education sequence by a few credits to allow programs to add more discipline-specific content in their programs because classroom management is highly discipline-specific. For content area teachers, we have discussed several opinions that the management in a music class is much different from science which is much different from physical education and so forth. However, in Elementary Education, perhaps we should look more across the curriculum and be more age specific. We aim to adapt discipline styles to the population toward intrinsic rather than extrinsic reinforcement. Even though stickers and tokens and other concrete rewards work with young children, we ultimately want the goal to be self-monitoring skills and metacognitive action based on intrinsic values.

The development of clear guidelines for subject matter knowledge and application of the EALR’s is the accomplishment of OSPI personnel. The specificity and supportive information found on the OSPI website alone takes the guesswork or idiosyncrasies of individual teacher choices out of the classroom while allowing creativity in how to attain the detailed benchmarks.

9.

Please find below a comparative analysis of candidate dispositions from beginning candidates to finishing candidates. Please comment on the changes you observe in your candidates over time and describe how and why you think this occurs. What does your program specifically do to engage candidates in developing professional teacher dispositions?

  • This inventory is administered by the CTL at admissions (N=645), and again at the end of student teaching (N= 195). Some of the 645 candidates have not yet student taught, which is why the n's are different.
  • There is a significant difference in 12 of 34 items (p<.05) between beginning candidates and candidates completing student teaching
  • Change is in the preferred direction from agree to strongly agree
  • This means somewhere between entry and before exit, the teacher program candidates are developing stronger professional beliefs and attitudes that reflect the underlying values and commitments of the unit's conceptual framework. Future work will include data that tells us where this change is occurring and if there are difference caused by demographic variables. If you want to read more about this disposition instrument, the validation study is published on the OREA web site under research.
 

Program Interpretations and Conclusions:

In the Elementary Education Program, most of the instructors have some percentage of professional points and have methods to specifically inform teacher candidates about the expectations of attitudes and actions. Additionally, an important course to explain rationales for attitudes and behaviors is the EDCS 444 Education Law.

Teacher candidates who take the disposition test as they enter the program may have no background knowledge of the qualities of the expected disposition, but with information in most every course, they can gather those qualities formally and informally in discussions with peers. Also, in the courses EDCS 311, EDEL 420, and other education courses, teacher candidates are taught how to act professionally, as one instructor says, “Act as if you are a teacher. Discussion is necessary. Your presence is essential; we need to hear what you have to say.”

 

10. 

Final Student Teaching Evaluation Report on LiveText

  • The data report is too large to be placed in this document. Please access the data by going to this link on our assessment system web site http://www.cwu.edu/~ectl/ncate2.0/wastate/fsted-ltr.html
  • The report reveals the final assessment of elements found in state standards IV and V
  • Candidates are generally performing at a high level, although there are some candidates as depicted by the colors green and red who are not performing to standard.
  • Examination of those elements indicates some agreement with results provided in the 1st and 3rd year teacher survey.

Please look at these data carefully and discuss with your program faculty some ways the teacher residency program can begin to address the few but common deficits occurring in candidate knowledge and skills relative to the State standard elements. If you need to refer to state standards please refer to this link in the assessment system website: http://www.cwu.edu/~ectl/ncate2.0/wastate/istandards.html

 

Program Interpretations and Conclusions:

Teacher candidates go through the coursework and may exhibit attitudes or behaviors that could predict some problems in the full context and responsibility of student teaching. The idealistic or romanticized attitudes of teaching sometimes prevail or the idea that they can teach the way they were taught. If our faculty used the reporting system that is in place with the Director of Student Teaching, some of these problems might be prevented. For example, if a teacher candidate is absent from class with vague excuses and several instructors note that fact, the student might be able to have some intervention and brought to real-world expectations before going into student teaching where absences are to be kept to a minimal. Many of the teacher candidates who do not succeed in student teaching have given some indication of the potential problems before being placed in the K-8 classroom environment. Another example is the very shy teacher candidates who are so introverted that they are not able to give in-class presentations. More contact with the actual students in the classrooms throughout our program would allow us to assess if the student is shy only with peers and a “Pied Piper” with K-8 children or if they an not suited to teach children.

The areas that show up in the data of the LiveText Report, the Final Student Teaching Evaluation Data, as being in need of attention are all the areas that do not receive good levels of meeting the standards. Eleven of those show some major components of standards that need more emphasis in our programs and need to be integrated more in all of the coursework. They include 1.3 Use of Constructivism: Incorporate student ideas to develop new learning opportunities, 3.1 Instructional Planning for Effective Teaching: Use research and experienced based principles of effective practice to encourage the intellectual, social, and personal development of students, 3.4 Instructional Planning for Effective Teaching: Adapt instructional strategies for exceptional students, 4.4 Classroom Management and Discipline: Apply theory of human development to motivate students, 5.1 Student Performance Assessment: Assess student basic skill level, 5.2 Student Performance Assessment: Assess student reading levels and identifying content area reading requirements, 5.6 Student Performance Assessment: Report assessment results of positive impact of student learning to parents, 6.3 Diverse Populations: Work with parents of students from racial and ethnic populations, 7.1 School, Home, and Community: Participate in the designing of activities that involve parents in the learning process of their children, 7.2 School, Home, and Community: Use community resources to enhance school programs, 7.3 School, Home, and Community: Work cooperatively with parents to support student success. All of these include some aspect of personalizing the education to the students to gain good management and engagement while gaining support from parents and community. After looking at the data, changes can be made to incorporate aspects of these topics into courses to show how to apply them more effectively. For example, in EDRD 420 there is a letter writing activity in which the suggestion is made to write and have students write letters of progress and reflection on student work to parents, but more emphasis can be placed on this issue with alternative approaches. Role-playing parent conferences could be included in the communication aspects of the course.

11.

Please examine these data and report any discussions your program has regarding the reported results.

  • This survey is conducted by Career Services and reported to OSPI. The report, however, has been reanalyzed and the summary reflects the new analysis, which covers 2002-2006.
  • Average response rate = 57%
  • Of that 57%, the average percent of graduates who get jobs in state is 94%
  • The average percent of graduate still seeking a position is 27%
  • Two percent of the 57% have decided not to teach
  • For 2005-2006; 35 % of the program graduates responded to questions regarding ethnicity and gender. Out of the 35% who responded, 90% were Caucasian, 5% were Hispanic, 3% were African-American, and 1.8% were Asian.
 

Program Interpretations and Conclusions:

Some teacher candidates are open to take a position in any part of the state while others are place-bound. Each year, there are some districts that have trouble filling all of their positions, but they are not in popular places in the state. As our teacher candidates’ average age increases, the likelihood of this issue increases. Also, we have some students who are getting a college degree and major in Elementary Education but plan all along to be married and have children, not teach. Also, the profession of being a teacher has lost some of its status in today’s society. Wages and working conditions for teachers are not always supported by the local communities, both financially and psychologically. Compared to some international alternatives, teachers in some other countries are highly respected, viewed as knowledgeable guides for students, and often treated as honored guests who are involved with students over extended periods of time, often 6 or 7 years.

The variations of scores for the different years and the variations in number of respondents may be effected by the general economic climate of the country. For example, in 2002-2003 soon after the trauma of 9-11, there were more people staying in the state and getting teaching positions than any other year. Also, as the "Baby Boomers" are retiring, there are changing patterns of job openings in the state and across the country. Additionally, our state (HECB) Higher Education Coordinating Board had declared some programs as "high demand," but Elementary Education is not one of them at this time. Special funding goes toward those high demand programs.

The ethnicity of the respondents seems in a ratio similar to our population of teacher candidates. It may not be in a similar ratio to the population of students in our state. Also, Elementary Education has had a dominance of females, but that fact is slowly changing as more males are in the profession than a decade or two ago.

   

 

 

 

 

 
© Central Washington University   |   All Rights Reserved