Missouri Pre-service Teacher Assessment (CAEP 1.1, 1.4, 3.5)

Similar documents
Writing a Basic Assessment Report. CUNY Office of Undergraduate Studies

Understanding and Interpreting the NRC s Data-Based Assessment of Research-Doctorate Programs in the United States (2010)

Learning Objectives by Course Matrix Objectives Course # Course Name Psyc Know ledge

ACADEMIC AFFAIRS GUIDELINES

Requirements for the Degree: Bachelor of Science in Education in Early Childhood Special Education (P-5)

The D2L eportfolio for Teacher Candidates

Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium: Brief Write Rubrics. October 2015

How do we balance statistical evidence with expert judgement when aligning tests to the CEFR?

CONNECTICUT GUIDELINES FOR EDUCATOR EVALUATION. Connecticut State Department of Education

The D2L eportfolio for Teacher Candidates

Environmental Literacy Indicator Tool (Self-Assessment) DRAFT

What does Quality Look Like?

Delaware Performance Appraisal System Building greater skills and knowledge for educators

A Diagnostic Tool for Taking your Program s Pulse

Assessment System for M.S. in Health Professions Education (rev. 4/2011)

New Jersey Department of Education World Languages Model Program Application Guidance Document

Syllabus for PRP 428 Public Relations Case Studies 3 Credit Hours Fall 2012

Xenia High School Credit Flexibility Plan (CFP) Application

Shelters Elementary School

Assessment of Student Academic Achievement

Revision and Assessment Plan for the Neumann University Core Experience

Making the ELPS-TELPAS Connection Grades K 12 Overview

1st Grade Rubrics About Produce Quality Work

Arkansas Tech University Secondary Education Exit Portfolio

Bloomsburg University Bloomsburg, Pennsylvania. Department of Teaching and Learning

The New York City Department of Education. Grade 5 Mathematics Benchmark Assessment. Teacher Guide Spring 2013

Indiana Collaborative for Project Based Learning. PBL Certification Process

EDUC-E328 Science in the Elementary Schools

Kelso School District and Kelso Education Association Teacher Evaluation Process (TPEP)

Non-Secure Information Only

YMCA SCHOOL AGE CHILD CARE PROGRAM PLAN

Spring Valley Academy Credit Flexibility Plan (CFP) Overview

The Impact of Formative Assessment and Remedial Teaching on EFL Learners Listening Comprehension N A H I D Z A R E I N A S TA R A N YA S A M I

Delaware Performance Appraisal System Building greater skills and knowledge for educators

On-the-Fly Customization of Automated Essay Scoring

Number of students enrolled in the program in Fall, 2011: 20. Faculty member completing template: Molly Dugan (Date: 1/26/2012)

Common Core Path to Achievement. A Three Year Blueprint to Success

Create Quiz Questions

Getting Started in Developing the Portfolio

MINNESOTA STATE UNIVERSITY, MANKATO IPESL (Initiative to Promote Excellence in Student Learning) PROSPECTUS

GRADE 5 MATHEMATICS Pre Assessment Directions, Answer Key, and Scoring Rubrics

Development of a scoring system to assess mind maps

ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR GENERAL EDUCATION CATEGORY 1C: WRITING INTENSIVE

How to set up gradebook categories in Moodle 2.

Generic Project Rubrics 4th Grade

Madera Unified School District. Wellness Policy Update

STUDENT ASSESSMENT AND EVALUATION POLICY

PHY2048 Syllabus - Physics with Calculus 1 Fall 2014

Scoring Notes for Secondary Social Studies CBAs (Grades 6 12)

Linking the Ohio State Assessments to NWEA MAP Growth Tests *

Contract Language for Educators Evaluation. Table of Contents (1) Purpose of Educator Evaluation (2) Definitions (3) (4)

Test How To. Creating a New Test

University of New Hampshire Policies and Procedures for Student Evaluation of Teaching (2016) Academic Affairs Thompson Hall

CARITAS PROJECT GRADING RUBRIC

Cooper Upper Elementary School

Evidence for Reliability, Validity and Learning Effectiveness

University of Waterloo School of Accountancy. AFM 102: Introductory Management Accounting. Fall Term 2004: Section 4

S T A T 251 C o u r s e S y l l a b u s I n t r o d u c t i o n t o p r o b a b i l i t y

INSTRUCTION MANUAL. Survey of Formal Education

Activities, Exercises, Assignments Copyright 2009 Cem Kaner 1

Cooper Upper Elementary School

Manchester Essex Regional Schools District Improvement Plan Three Year Plan

Self Assessment. InTech Collegiate High School. Jason Stanger, Director 1787 Research Park Way North Logan, UT

The University of Tennessee at Martin. Coffey Outstanding Teacher Award and Cunningham Outstanding Teacher / Scholar Award

University Assessment Council Minutes Erickson Board Room September 12, 2016 Louis Slimak

A Guide to Student Portfolios

Creating a Test in Eduphoria! Aware

The specific Florida Educator Accomplished Practices (FEAP) addressed in this course are:

i>clicker Setup Training Documentation This document explains the process of integrating your i>clicker software with your Moodle course.

MTH 215: Introduction to Linear Algebra

Great Teachers, Great Leaders: Developing a New Teaching Framework for CCSD. Updated January 9, 2013

ECON 365 fall papers GEOS 330Z fall papers HUMN 300Z fall papers PHIL 370 fall papers

Content Teaching Methods: Social Studies. Dr. Melinda Butler

School Size and the Quality of Teaching and Learning

Running head: LISTENING COMPREHENSION OF UNIVERSITY REGISTERS 1

teacher, peer, or school) on each page, and a package of stickers on which

TRI-STATE CONSORTIUM Wappingers CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY. Online courses for credit recovery in high schools: Effectiveness and promising practices. April 2017

STUDENT LEARNING ASSESSMENT REPORT

BUILDING CAPACITY FOR COLLEGE AND CAREER READINESS: LESSONS LEARNED FROM NAEP ITEM ANALYSES. Council of the Great City Schools

CHALLENGES FACING DEVELOPMENT OF STRATEGIC PLANS IN PUBLIC SECONDARY SCHOOLS IN MWINGI CENTRAL DISTRICT, KENYA

AC : DEVELOPMENT OF AN INTRODUCTION TO INFRAS- TRUCTURE COURSE

Colorado State University Department of Construction Management. Assessment Results and Action Plans

Cynthia Dawn Martelli, Ed.D.

Program Information on the Graduate Certificate in Alcohol and Drug Abuse Studies (CADAS)

A Game-based Assessment of Children s Choices to Seek Feedback and to Revise

eportfolio Guide Missouri State University

FOR TEACHERS ONLY. The University of the State of New York REGENTS HIGH SCHOOL EXAMINATION. ENGLISH LANGUAGE ARTS (Common Core)

GENERAL COMPETITION INFORMATION

ASSESSMENT OVERVIEW Student Packets and Teacher Guide. Grades 6, 7, 8

Welcome to the session on ACCUPLACER Policy Development. This session will touch upon common policy decisions an institution may encounter during the

e-portfolios: Issues in Assessment, Accountability and Preservice Teacher Preparation Presenters:

CERTIFIED TEACHER LICENSURE PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN

Linking the Common European Framework of Reference and the Michigan English Language Assessment Battery Technical Report

Faculty Meetings. From Dissemination. To Engagement. Jessica Lyons MaryBeth Scullion Rachel Wagner City of Tonawanda School District, NY

GradinG SyStem IE-SMU MBA

B. Outcome Reporting Include the following information for each outcome assessed this year:

ECO 3101: Intermediate Microeconomics

(I couldn t find a Smartie Book) NEW Grade 5/6 Mathematics: (Number, Statistics and Probability) Title Smartie Mathematics

Focus Groups and Student Learning Assessment

Transcription:

Missouri Pre-service Teacher Assessment (CAEP.,., 3.5) Description of Data: The Missouri Pre-service Teacher Assessment (MoPTA) is a performance assessment designed to assess teacher candidates performance in the classroom. Students complete the four tasks of the MoPTA during the final two semesters of their program, including the student teaching semester. Task (which is unscored) is The Knowledge of Students and the Learning Environment; Task is Assessment and Data Collection to Measure and Inform Student Learning. Task 3 is Designing Instruction for Student Learning. There are two versions of Task ; one version, Implementing and Analyzing Instruction to Promote Student Learning, requires the teacher candidate to provide a of their teaching in the classroom in which they are student teaching. Teacher candidates who are teaching in school districts where is permitted, must complete this version of Task. Teacher candidates who are student teaching in districts where taping is not permitted are required to complete the alternate version of Task, Planning, Implementing, Analyzing, and Adjusting Instruction to Promote Student Learning. By the end of their student teaching semester, students must upload artifacts and narratives for all four tasks, which are scored by ETS. Each task has multiple Steps: Task : Assessment and Data Collection to Measure and Inform Student Learning o Step : Planning the Assessment o Step : Administering the Assessment and Analyzing the Data o Step 3: Reflecting Task 3: Designing Instruction for Student Learning o Step : Planning the Lesson o Step : The Focus Students o Step 3: Analyzing the Lesson o Step : Reflecting Task (Video): Implementing and Analyzing Instruction to Promote Student Learning o Step : Planning o Step : Implementing the Plan o Step 3: Student Work o Step : Reflecting Task (Non): Planning, Implementing, Analyzing and Adjusting Instruction to Promote Student Learning o Step : Planning the Sequence of Lessons within the Unit o Step : Implementing the Sequence of Lessons within the Unit o Step 3: Analyzing the Sequence of Lessons within the Unit o Step : Reflecting on the Sequence of Lessons within the Unit Page

Each Step of each Task is scored by two raters on a -point rubric (Minimal Evidence, Partial Evidence, Effective Evidence, and Consistent Evidence), with target scores being a 3 (Effective Evidence) or better. Step scores within the Tasks are summed to form a total Task score. Task is double-weighted. All Task scores are summed to create a cumulative score. Although not a degree requirement, students are required to pass all three scored tasks. In 05-06, the staterequired score was points (a score of on each Step). Beginning August, 06, a cumulative score of 37 is required for state certification. In the 0-05 academic year, the School of Education piloted the MoPTA. Four PK- teachers, including one who was part of the original MoPTA writing team and who scored state pilot data, were invited to the UMKC campus to participate, along with faculty, in scoring the student artifacts. A random sample from each program was selected for members of the group to score and analyze. As this was a learning session for faculty, the rubrics were used to score each sub-step (e.g., Task Step., Task Step., etc.) of each Step of each Task. Individual sub-step scores were then averaged to provide a mean overall score for the Task. Data included reflect the mean scores for each Task. Data Derived: This section includes 6 data tables. The tables present results on the Missouri Preservice Teacher Assessment described above. Table : Missouri Preservice Teacher Assessment Early Childhood, Elementary & Middle School Language Arts... 3 Table : Missouri Preservice Teacher Assessment Middle School Math, Science & Social Studies... 3 Table 3: Missouri Preservice Teacher Assessment Secondary English, Math & Science... Table : Missouri Preservice Teacher Assessment Secondary Social Studies, Foreign Languages (K-) & Art (K-)... Table 5: Missouri Preservice Teacher Assessment Special Education... 5 Table 6: Missouri Preservice Teacher Assessment TEPP and the State of Missouri... 5 Page

Table : Missouri Preservice Teacher Assessment Early Childhood, Elementary & Middle School Language Arts Early Childhood Education Elementary Middle School Language Arts 0-05 05-06 06-07 0-05 05-06 06-07 0-05 05-06 06-07 N * 9 7 6 * 3 M.76 8.6 *.35 9.09 8.06.7 * 8.33 7k, 8b 3.3, 7.- SD 0.66.36 * 0.36.06. 0.50 * 0.58 N * 9 7 6 * 3.-.3, 5., 6., 7.- 3 M.8.09 *..6 0.3.60 * 0.67 SD 0.8 0.77 * 0.38 0.9 3. 0.7 *.53 N 8 * 9 7 6 * 0 M.37.00 *.3 3. 3.9.78 * - 6., 7.- SD 0.70 3.6 * 0.5.78 3.66 0.5 * -.-.,.-.,.- N 0 3 * 0 0 0 0 * 3.5, 3.-3.,., 7.- non M - 5.00 * - - - - * 6.00 SD -.00 * - - - - *.65 5.00 * 3.83.56 * (Video and Non- Averaged) 5.00 Page 3 Table : Missouri Preservice Teacher Assessment Middle School Math, Science & Social Studies Middle School Math Middle School Science Middle School Social Studies 0-05 05-06 06-07 0-05 05-06 06-07 0-05 05-06 06-07 N * 8 3 5 * * 3 * 3 M * 9.7 7.00.85 * * 3.0 * 6.67 7k, 8b 3.3, 7.- SD * 0.5 0.00 0.6 * * 0.9 *.5 N * 8 3 5 * * 3 * 3.-.3, 5., 6., 7.- 3 M *.7.33 3.06 * *.03 * 8.33 SD *.8.5 0.75 * * 0.90 *.89 N * 3 5 * * 0 * M * 3.0 0.00 3.00 * * - * 9.00 6., 7.- SD * 0.99 0.00 0.8 * * - *..-.,.-.,.- N * 0 * * 0 *.5, 3.-3.,., 7.- non M * 3.5 6.00 - * * - *.00 SD * 0.96 - - * * - * - (Video and Non- Averaged).0 0.33 * * * 37.00

Table 3: Missouri Preservice Teacher Assessment Secondary English, Math & Science Secondary English Secondary Math Secondary Science 0-05 05-06 06-07 0-05 05-06 06-07 0-05 05-06 06-07 N 9 0 3 5 * * 0 3 * M.63 8.87 8.00 3.0 * *.89 8.33 * 7k, 8b 3.3, 7.- SD 0.5.79 0.00 0. * * 0.79 0.88 * N 9 0 3 5 * * 0 3 *.-.3, 5., 6., 7.- 3 M.79.5.00 3.08 * * 3.6. * SD 0.5.00 0.00 0.6 * * 0.7 0.8 * N 9 0 5 * * 0 3 * M.9.60 5.00 3.30 * * 3.39.33 * 6., 7.- SD 0.5.6.83 0.0 * * 0.5.73 *.-.,.-.,.- N 0 0 * * 0 0 *.5, 3.-3.,., 7.- non M -.0 6.00 - * * - - * SD - 0.00 - - * * - - * 5.39 5.33 * *.77 (Video and Non- Averaged) * Page Mean scores do not include candidate who did not complete MoPTA Task 3 or Table : Missouri Preservice Teacher Assessment Secondary Social Studies, Foreign Languages (K-) & Art (K-) Secondary Social Studies Foreign Languages (K-) Art (K-) 0-05 05-06 06-07 0-05 05-06 06-07 0-05 05-06 06-07 N 7 9 3 * * 8 8 M 3.7 9.00 8. 3.09 * * 3.30 8.8 8.00 7k, 8b 3.3, 7.- SD 0.77 0.7. 0.6 * * 0.38.3.68 N 7 9 3 * * 8 8.-.3, 5., 6., 7.- 3 M 3..00. 3.07 * * 3.38 9.60 0.09 SD 0.5.08.0 0. * * 0.8 3.63 3.8 N 0 7 3 * * 8 8 0 M -.50. 3.67 * *.9.5.0 6., 7.- SD - 0.50.3 0.58 * * 0.6 3.65 7.6.-.,.-.,.- N 0 0 * * 0 0.5, 3.-3.,., 7.- non M - 6.50.00 - * * - -.00 SD -.50.3 - * * - - - 5.50 3.77 * *.66 (Video and Non- Averaged) 39.7

Table 5: Missouri Preservice Teacher Assessment Special Education Special Education 0-05 05-06 06-07 N 0.00 * 0 M.8 * - 7k, 8b 3.3, 7.- SD 0.6 * - N 0.00 * 0.-.3, 5., 6., 7.- 3 M 3.07 * - SD 0.6 * - N 0.00 * 0 M 3.9 * - 6., 7.- SD 0.3 * -.-.,.-.,.- N 0.00 * 0.5, 3.-3.,., 7.- non M - * - SD - * - * - Pilot data: this data was collected prior to full implementation by the Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education and was scored by SOE faculty and stakeholders Table 6: Missouri Preservice Teacher Assessment TEPP and the State of Missouri TEPP TEPP Missouri Missouri 05-06 06-07 05-06 06-07 N 66 57,5,53 M 8.7 8.05 8. 7k, 8b 3.3, 7.- SD 0.36.0 N 66 57,5,53.-.3, 5., 6., 7.- 3 M.8 0.3.7 SD.08 3. N 55,5,53 M 3.38..6 6., 7.- SD 0.98 5.7.-.,.-.,.- N 3,5,53.5, 3.-3.,., 7.- non M 3.6.5.6 SD.8.85 3.39.65.7 Pass Rate 97.78% 87.78% 97% 86.39% Data for 06-07 is for first-attempt only State score data not yet available Page 5