Pilot Visits in Fall 2010 through Spring 2012
Pilot Visits in Fall 2010 through Spring 2012
Online Institutional Report (IR) Template: Continuous
Improvement Option
June 2010
Pilot institutions with visits in spring 2010 have written their
institutional report (IR) in the current format with prompts for
each element of a standard. Pilot institutions with visits in fall
2010 have the option of using either the current format or the new
template with three prompts per standard as outlined below. Pilot
institutions with visits in spring 2011, fall 2011, and spring 2012
will be testing the new IR template outlined below. Adjustments to
the new template may be made as we learn from institutions and BOE
members that have tested it. Pilot institutions should participate
in web seminars each semester to learn about any changes. In
addition, NCATE staff will communicate any changes to pilot
institutions via email.
For the new template, units may submit their institutional
report (IR) in one of the following three formats:
1. The online template in NCATE’s database, Accreditation
Information Management System (AIMS) with prompts and limited
characters for the response.
1. Word document following the online prompts without character
limitations, which is uploaded in AIMS upon completion. The IR
should be no longer than 41 pages if the unit is moving toward the
target level on only one standard; it could be a maximum of 49
pages if the unit is moving to the target level on all six
standards.
1. Word document that is written holistically without prompts,
which is uploaded in AIMS upon completion. The IR should be no
longer than 41 pages if the unit is moving toward the target level
on only one standard; it could be a maximum of 49 pages if the unit
is moving to the target level on all six standards.
The new online template prompts are at the standards level with
three prompts per standard as indicated in the next section.
Content of Institutional Report
A. Overview & Conceptual Framework
1. What are the institution’s historical context and unique
characteristics (e.g., HBCU or religious)?
Alabama Agricultural and Mechanical University, a historically
black college and university (HBCU), was organized in 1875 through
the untiring efforts of its founder and first President, William
Hooper Council, an ex-slave. The school doors opened on May 1,
1875, as the Huntsville Normal School. Industrial education was
added in 1878, generating widespread attention. This helped to
garner financial support from the Slater and Peabody Funds and
private contributors. Under the second Morrill Act of 1890, AAMU
became a land grant institution and moved to its present location
in 1891.
2. What is the institution’s mission? [one paragraph]
Alabama Agricultural and Mechanical University reflects the
uniqueness of the traditional land-grant institution combining
teaching, research, service, liberal arts, and vocational fields.
The University offers baccalaureate, masters, educational
specialist, and doctoral level degrees (that are compatible with
the times) to all qualified and capable individuals who are
interested in further developing their technical, scientific,
professional, and scholastic skills and competencies. The
University operates in the three-fold function of teaching,
research, extension and other public service. Alabama A&M
University, a center for excellence, provides an educational
environment for the emergence of scholars, scientists, leaders,
critical thinkers, and other contributors to a global society. In
cooperation with business, industry, governmental agencies, and
other private and community-based institutions, Alabama A&M
University provides a laboratory where theory is put into practice
globally. Further, the University is committed to:
1. Excellence in education and the creation of a scholarly
environment in which inquiring and discriminating minds may be
nourished;
2. Education of students for effective participation in local,
state, regional, national, and international societies;
3. Search for new knowledge through research and its
applications;
4. Provision of a comprehensive outreach program designed to
meet the changing needs of the larger community;
5. Programs necessary to address adequately the major needs and
problems of capable students who have experienced limited access to
education, and
6. Integration of state-of-the-art technology into all aspects
of University functions.
In cooperation with businesses, industry, governmental agencies,
and other private and community-based institutions, Alabama A&M
University provides a laboratory where theory is put into practice,
in a productive environment.
3.What is the professional education unit at your institution
and what is its relationship to other units at the institution that
are involved in the preparation of professional educators? [1-2
paragraphs]
The School of Education is the unit responsible for teacher
education. Within the context of other units of the University, the
School of Education’s mission is consistent with the teaching,
research, extension and public service mission of the University.
The teaching mission is to prepare P-12 teacher candidates and
other school personnel to be effective educators as service
professionals with knowledge, skills, and dispositions that help
all students learn and that lead to a State of Alabama Professional
Educator’s Certificate. The research mission is to promote and
facilitate the development and dissemination of high-quality
knowledge, abilities, and dispositions relating to effective
teaching and learning. The service mission is to establish and
maintain collaborations and partnerships that facilitate changes to
improve education.
The School of Education enrolls approximately 26% of the student
body in its baccalaureate, master’s, educational specialist, and
doctoral degree programs. The programs and services of the School
of Education are administered through five academic departments and
two service units. A dean provides executive leadership and is
advised by the Teacher Education Council (link to description of
Council in Assessment Handbook). The Alabama State Department of
Education approves all teacher education programs for licensure for
the baccalaureate degree (Class B), alternative masters and regular
master’s degree (Class A), and the educational specialist degree
(Class AA).
4.What are the basic tenets of the conceptual framework and how
has the conceptual framework changed since the previous visit? [1-2
paragraphs]
The Alabama A&M University Conceptual Framework for the
teacher education program has grown out of a rich tradition of
preparing teachers for North Alabama, for the southern region, and
for the nation. The vision of the teacher education program is to
equip teachers and other personnel with a rich repertoire of
research-based strategies for instruction, assessments, and
educational technologies that focus on providing educational
services to youths, their families and to the communities where the
youths live. To do this, the unit has conceptualized candidate
learning and operations as occurring within four distinct areas in
which the unit will help prepare teachers and other school
personnel who are capable of:
· planning for effective instructional experiences;
· preparing activities and experiences that help all students
learn;
· performing in a professional and ethical manner to ensure
student learning;
· and continually assessing proficiencies of candidates to
determine candidate knowledge and inform educational activities and
experiences for continuous improvement.
The areas described above represent the four interrelated
processes of the Professional Education Unit’s Conceptual
Framework. These four processes represent what Mitzel (1969)
initially characterized as the variables of Presage, Context,
Process and Product, which he used to guide his study of the
interplay between what teachers do (teaching) and what students do
(learning) in a classroom environment. Dunkin and Biddle (1974)
later presented a model based on the work of Mitzel that guided
their study of the complex nature of teaching and learning. The
Alabama A&M University Professional Education Unit has
conceptualize this model to understand the variables involved in
how candidates develop as professional educators, and has extended
this model to help conceptualize how the Professional Education
Unit contributes to and enhances that development.
Since the last reaffirmation of accreditation by NCATE, the Unit
has improved its processes for assessing the Conceptual Framework.
An assessment plan has been added to the Conceptual Framework
document and student learning outcomes have been explicitly linked
with institutional and state department standards.
5.Exhibit Links
Exhibits
1. Links to unit catalogs and other printed documents describing
general education, specialty/content studies, and professional
studies
i. Alabama A&M University Undergraduate Catalog
ii. Alabama A&M University Graduate Catalog
iii. Undergraduate Teacher Education Program Handbook
2. Syllabi for professional education courses
i. Undergraduate Initial Preparation Program Syllabi
ii. Alternative Master’s Initial Preparation Program Syllabi
iii. Advanced Master’s Preparation Program Syllabi
iv. Educational Specialist Preparation Program Syllabi
v. Educational Leadership Preparation Program Syllabi
3. Conceptual framework(s)
i. School of Education Conceptual Framework
4. Findings of other national accreditation associations related
to the preparation of education professionals (e.g., ASHA, NASM,
APA, CACREP)
i. American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA)
B. Standard 1. Candidates preparing to work in schools as
teachers or other school professionals know and demonstrate the
content knowledge, pedagogical content knowledge and skills,
pedagogical and professional knowledge and skills, and professional
dispositions necessary to help all students learn. Assessments
indicate that candidates meet professional, state, and
institutional standards.
1.What do candidate assessment data tell the unit about
candidates’ meeting professional, state, and institutional
standards? For programs not nationally/state reviewed, summarize
data from key assessments and discuss these results. [maximum of
three pages]
(A more detailed description is found in the Electronic Exhibit
Room)
Undergraduate Initial Programs
Content Knowledge
Candidates in the undergraduate initial program know the content
that they plan to teach and can explain important principles and
concepts delineated in professional, state, and institutional
standards.
On the Level III Field Experience Evaluation, on average,
candidates received an overall score of 3.41 (3=Good, 4=Exemplary)
on the “Content Knowledge” portion of the state standards (Alabama
Quality Teaching Standards). All program completers pass the
content examinations. Praxis II data for undergraduate completers
show that 100% of candidates completing the program have passed the
Praxis II content exam in their areas.
Pedagogical Content Knowledge and Skills
Teacher candidates understand the relationship of content and
content-specific pedagogy delineated in professional, state, and
institutional standards. Level II Field Experiences Evaluations
show that during the Level II practicum experience candidates,
“Used appropriate methods of teaching “(3.65/4.00); “Used a variety
of instructional strategies effectively” (3.55/4.00); and “Planned
and delivered demonstrations and/or lessons” (3.63/4.00).
Candidates also have a broad knowledge of instructional strategies
that draws upon content and pedagogical knowledge and skills
delineated in professional, state, and institutional standards to
help all students learn. On average, candidates achieved an overall
GPA of 3.27/4.00 in PSY 403 Educational Psychology. This
professional course exposes candidates to research-based
instructional strategies. Level II Field Experience Evaluation data
reveal that during the Level II practicum experiences candidates
“Used a variety of instructional strategies effectively”
(3.55/4.00). In addition, candidates can facilitate student
learning of the content through presentation of the content in
clear and meaningful ways and through the integration of
technology. Level II Field Experiences Evaluation data reveal that
during the Level II practicum, candidates effectively “Used
technology equipment and/or available equipment to enhance
instruction (3.67/4.00) and “Used supplemental materials/equipment,
including technology, to enhance student learning” (3.60/4.00).
During the internship, the candidate’s ability to promote student
learning is evaluated a number of times.
Professional and Pedagogical Knowledge and Skills
Candidates can apply the professional and pedagogical knowledge
and skills delineated in professional, state, and institutional
standards to facilitate learning. The Teacher Preparation
Performance Profile of First-year Teachers data for 2007, 2008, and
2009 averaged across these years show that 100% of the first-year
teachers trained at AAMU who responded indicated that they were
“Satisfied” to “Very Satisfied” with “Preparation in pedagogical
and professional knowledge” received at AAMU. Eighty-Nine (89%) of
the first-year teachers indicated they were “Satisfied” to “Very
Satisfied” with “Preparation in pedagogical and professional skills
necessary to help all students learn.” In addition, candidates
consider the school, family, and community contexts in which they
work and the prior experience of students to develop meaningful
learning experiences. Level III Field Experience Evaluation data
show that candidates exhibited “Ability to use students’ prior
knowledge and experiences to introduce new subject-area related
content” (3.46/4.00); “Ability to develop culturally responsive
curriculum and instruction, i.e., model, teach, and integrate
multicultural awareness, acceptance, and appreciation into ongoing
instruction” (3.37/4.00); and, “Ability to communicate in ways that
demonstrate sensitivity to diversity such as appropriate use of eye
contact, interpretation of body language and verbal statements, and
acknowledgement of and responsiveness to different modes of
communication and participation” (3.51/4.00). Candidates also have
the ability to reflect on their practice. On average, using the
Employer’s survey, principals have assessed AAMU-prepared teachers
as 3.95/5.0 on their “Ability to reflect on professional practice.”
Further, candidates know major schools of thought about schooling,
teaching, and learning. They acquire this knowledge in
pre-professional and professional courses while taking FED 200
Introduction to Teacher Education (3.32/4.00) and FED 300
Foundations of Education (3.08/4.00). The Senior Exit Exam data
also indicates that candidates possess this knowledge. During the
2007-2010 time period, candidates score, on average, 91% on this
exam. Finally, candidates are able to analyze educational research
findings and incorporate new information into their practice as
appropriate. While enrolled in PSY 403 Educational Psychology,
candidates gain knowledge of research through learning about
research-supported instructional strategies. On average, candidates
achieved a 3.27/4.00 GPA in this professional course.
Student Learning
Candidates can assess and analyze student learning, make
appropriate adjustments to instruction, and monitor student
progress. During some limited experience with this during the Level
II practicum, Level II Field Experiences Evaluations show that
candidates “Effectively assessed students” (3.56/4.00). Finally,
candidates are able to develop and implement meaningful learning
experiences for students based on their developmental levels and
prior experience. Level II Field Experiences Evaluations show that
during the Level II practicum experience, candidates effectively
“Taught developmentally appropriate activities” (3.64/4.00). Level
III Field Experience Evaluation data indicate that candidates
effectively demonstrate “Ability to use knowledge about human
learning and development in the design of a learning environment
and learning experiences that will optimize each student’s
achievement” (3.42/4.00); and, “Ability to recognize individual
variations in learning and development that exceed the typical
range and use this information to provide appropriate learning
experiences” (3.44/4.00).
Professional Dispositions
Candidates are familiar with the professional dispositions
delineated in professional, state, and institutional standards, and
their work with students, families, colleagues and communities
reflects these professional dispositions. During interviews for
admission to teacher education, undergraduate initial candidates
demonstrate professional dispositions through their presentation
skills. Teacher Education interview data indicate that candidate,
on average, have effective skills in “Oral Presentation” (2.7/4.0);
“Oral Expression” (2.5/4.0) and “Written Expression” (2.7/4.0). The
Teacher Preparation Performance Profile of First-year Teachers data
for 2007, 2008, and 2009 averaged across these years show that 100%
of the first-year teachers trained at AAMU who responded indicated
that they were “Satisfied” to “Very Satisfied” with “Preparation in
pedagogical and professional dispositions necessary to help all
students learn.”
Graduate Initial Programs
Content Knowledge
Candidates in the graduate initial programs know the content
that they plan to teach and can explain important principles and
concepts delineated in professional, state, and institutional
standards. Adequate content knowledge is demonstrated in the
First-Year Follow-up Data, Survey data from principals, Level II
Field Experiences Evaluations, Level III Field Experience
Evaluation data, and The Teacher Preparation Performance Profile of
First-year Teachers data for 2007, 2008, and 2009. In addition, the
Basic Skills Assessment of the Alabama Prospective Teachers Testing
Program (APTTP) assesses basic content knowledge. The Basic Skills
Assessment assesses our candidates’ basic knowledge in the areas of
reading, mathematics, and writing. During the 2007-2011 time period
graduate initial candidates achieved an average reading score of
5.59 (Passing=4); a writing score of 3.43 (Passing=3); and, an
applied mathematics score of 5.16 (Passing=4). All program
completers pass the content examinations. Praxis II data for
graduate initial completers show that 100% of candidates completing
the program have passed the Praxis II content exam in their
areas.
Pedagogical Content Knowledge and Skills
Teacher candidates understand the relationship of content and
content-specific pedagogy delineated in professional, state, and
institutional standards. Graduate initial candidates demonstrate
their pedagogical content knowledge on the comprehensive
examinations. Candidates in elementary and early childhood
2007-2010 averages for Elementary and Early Childhood comprehensive
exams candidates scored above average on a 5 point scale in all
four content areas. Combining both program averages yield the
following results, Foundation 2009 (3.05), 2010 (3.7), Curriculum
2009 (2.73), 2010 (3.7), Assessment 2009 (2.7), 2010 (3.7) and
General Knowledge 2009 (2.6), 2010 (3.14). Survey date from
principals indicate candidates have “Knowledge of the major content
area (4.50/5.00). Candidates have a broad knowledge of
instructional strategies that draws upon content and pedagogical
knowledge and skills delineated in professional, state, and
institutional standards to help all students learn. Data from Level
II Field Experiences Evaluations and Level III Field Experiences
Evaluations, survey data from principals indicate that candidates
have “Knowledge of how to teach the assigned subject (4.50/5.00).
Candidates facilitate student learning of the content through
presentation of the content in clear and meaningful ways and
through the integration of technology. In addition to Level II
Field Experiences Evaluation data, Level III Field Experiences
Evaluation data, and The Teacher Preparation Performance Profile of
First-year Teachers data for 2007, 2008, and 2009, survey data from
principals indicate that graduate initial candidates have the
“Ability to use technological resources that enhance student
learning” (4.25/5.00), and “Knowledge of classroom management
skills that facilitate student learning” (4.75/5.00).
Professional and Pedagogical Knowledge and Skills
Candidates can apply the professional and pedagogical knowledge
and skills delineated in professional, state, and institutional
standards to facilitate learning. The abilities here are reflected
in the The Teacher Preparation Performance Profile of First-year
Teachers data for 2007, 2008, and 2009, and Level II Field
Experience Evaluation data, survey data from principals. The
abilities of graduate initial candidates to consider the school,
family, and community contexts in which they work and the prior
experience of students to develop meaningful learning experiences
is reflected in the Level III Field Experience Evaluation data. The
Level II Field Experiences Evaluations, First-Year Follow-up data,
and survey data from principals indicate that graduate initial
candidates reflect on their practice. Principals indicate that
graduate initial candidates effectively demonstrate the “Ability to
reflect on professional practice” (4.67/5.00). Grades in the
pre-professional courses indicate that graduate initial candidates
know major schools of thought about schooling, teaching, and
learning. Candidates acquire this knowledge in FED 501 Foundations
of Education (3.97/4.00); and, FED 521 Multicultural Education
(4.00/4.00). Performances on the comprehensive examinations (e.g.,
Art Education, Elementary & Early Childhood Education, Business
Education, Family and Consumer Sciences, Physical Education, and
Special Education) demonstrate candidates are able to analyze
educational research findings and incorporate new information into
their practice as appropriate.
Student Learning
Level II Field Experiences Evaluations and Level III Field
Experience Evaluation data demonstrate that graduate initial
candidates can assess and analyze student learning, make
appropriate adjustments to instruction, and monitor student
progress, and that candidates are able to develop and implement
meaningful learning experiences for students based on their
developmental levels and prior experience.
Professional Dispositions
Level II Field Experiences Evaluations, Level III Field
Experience Evaluation data, and The Teacher Preparation Performance
Profile of First-year Teachers data for 2007, 2008, and 2009, and
Survey data from principals indicate that first year teachers
trained in the graduate initial program at AAMU have the “Ability
to relate with students” (4.75/5.00); “Ability to relate with
parents of students” (4.50/5.00); “Ability to relate with
colleagues/other professionals” (4.75/5.00); and, “Ability to be a
life-long learner” (4.67/5.00).
Advanced Programs
Content Knowledge
The teacher preparation program ensures that candidates in the
advanced program have an in-depth knowledge of the content that
they teach. Admission requirements mandate that advanced candidates
have at least a 2.50 GPA prior to admission to Graduate School.
Candidates are also required to maintain a 3.00 cumulative GPA
before being recommended for certification. Survey data from
principals indicate that advanced candidates demonstrate “Knowledge
of the major content area” (4.00/5.00).
Pedagogical Content Knowledge and Skills
Candidates demonstrate an in-depth understanding of the content
of their field and of the theories related to pedagogy and
learning. Survey data from principals indicate advanced candidates
demonstrate “Knowledge of how to teach the assigned subject”
(4.00/5.00), and the “Ability to teach children with
exceptionalities” (3.67/5.00). Each candidate must also complete
12-semester hours in the teaching field at the graduate level. In
addition, candidates in the advanced program must complete
professional studies coursework. Performance in these courses
demonstrates candidates are able to select and use a broad range of
instructional strategies and technologies that promote student
learning and are able to clearly explain the choices they make in
their practice.
Professional and Pedagogical Knowledge and Skills
Survey data from principals indicate that advanced candidates
reflect on their practice and are able to identify their strengths
and areas of needed improvement. Principals indicate that advanced
candidates trained at AAMU have the “Ability to reflect on
professional practice (4.33/5.00). Candidates engage in
professional activities. Candidates in advanced programs are
practicing professionals and are constantly required to engage
students, their families and are engaged in the communities where
they are working. Advanced candidate are required to complete a
practicum and internship where they are required to engage
students, families and the community. All candidates must earn at
least a grade of “B” in these courses. All advanced candidates must
enroll in “FED 503 Research” or an equivalent research course where
they learn current research methodologies, policies and best
practices relating to student learning.
Student Learning
Candidates have a thorough understanding of the major concepts
and theories related to assessing student learning and regularly
apply these in their practice. All advanced candidates can develop
and administer appropriate assessment tools and use results in the
best interest of students. All advanced candidates demonstrate the
ability to affect student learning. Candidates have a thorough
understanding of the knowledge base needed for analyzing student
learning and practice that is evident in skills and practice during
internship. All candidates are required to administer a pre and
post test to assess student learning and then use data collected to
make data driven decisions that recommends changes in the learning
environment and teaching strategies.
Other School Professionals
Knowledge and Skills
Candidates for other professional school roles have adequate
understanding of the knowledge expected in their fields and
delineated in professional, state, and institutional standards. In
addition, comprehensive examination data in the Educational
Leadership content indicate that candidates have adequate
understanding of the knowledge expected (5.29/6.00). Comprehensive
examination data in other areas reveal acceptable levels of
candidate knowledge in the field: School Counseling (76% pass rate,
2007-2010); and, Psychometry (100% pass rate, 2007-2010).
Candidates know their students families, and communities.
Internship data in Educational Leadership for the year 2007
indicate that the average score for the School Community Relations
related internship objectives was 9.5/10, and for 2008 the average
score was 9.16/10. For 2009 the average score during the Community
and Stakeholder Relationships course was 15.53/16.0. Other school
professionals can use data and current research to inform their
practices; use technology in their practices; support student
learning through their professional services. All of these
competencies are exhibited as the candidate completes the various
courses in the Educational Leadership program. These objectives are
tied to courses in which the candidate completes a residency
placement in the schools. Their abilities in these areas are
assessed during this residency placement. The Internship in
Educational Leadership data reveal that, on average, 2007-2008
cohort scored 9.25/10.0 for all of the standards, and the 2009-2010
cohort scored 15.3/16.0 for all of the standards. Eighty percent or
more of the program completers pass the content examinations. The
pass rates on the Praxis II content exams in these areas during the
2007-2010 time period is above 80%: Educational Leadership (94%);
Reading Specialist (100%); and School Counseling (100%).
Student Learning
Candidates can create positive environments for student
learning; understand and build upon the developmental levels of
students with whom they work; understand the diversity of students,
families, and communities, and understand the policy contexts
within which they work. All of these abilities are covered in the
Educational Leadership program during residency placements in
Curriculum & Instruction, Planning for Instructional
Improvement, School & Community Relations, & Legal and
Ethical Aspects of School Operations. The Internship in Educational
Leadership data reveal that, on average, 2007-2008 cohort scored
9.25/10.0 for all of the standards, and the 2009-2010 cohort scored
15.3/16.0 for all of the standards. In addition, on the “Student
Learning/Instruction and Leadership” portion of the comprehensive
examination in Educational Leadership during the 2007-2010 time
period, candidates scored, on average, 5.20/6.00.
Professional Dispositions
Mentor principals are asked to rate Educational Leadership
candidates on these dispositions. The average score on disposition
evaluations for candidates is 3.87/4.00. The data indicates that
candidates are familiar with the professional dispositions
delineated in professional, state, and institutional standards, and
their work with students, families, colleagues and communities
reflect these professional dispositions, and demonstrate classroom
behaviors that are consistent with the ideal of fairness and the
belief that all students can learn. Candidates in the Instructional
Leadership program are formally interviewed prior to admission to
the program to determine, in part, if they possess adequate
dispositions as instructional leaders. The Educational Leadership
Program Admission Data, 2007-2010 reveals that candidates admitted
to the program scored, on average, 23.1/30.0 on the interview
assessment.
2.Please respond to 2a if this is the standard on which the unit
is moving to the Target Level. If it is not the standard on which
you are moving to the standard level, respond to 2b.
2a.Standard on which the unit is moving to the Target Level
[maximum of five pages]
1. Describe work undertaken to move to the Target Level
1. Discuss plans for continuing to improve
2b.Continuous Improvement [maximum of three pages]
1. Briefly summarize the most significant changes related to
Standard 1 that have led to continuous improvement. (If no
significant changes related to this standard have occurred since
the previous visit, indicate “None” in this section.)
There are two significant changes that were made to improve the
admission to the Teacher Education process related to Standard 1.
The interview process was reviewed and changed and changes were
made to the course content of FED 200 Introduction to Education
both admission requirements to Teacher Education. Data taken from
the interview rubric suggested that candidates were not asked
probing questions about content knowledge and instructional
strategies related to classroom teaching. The data also suggested
that candidates were only providing limited information concerning
the Conceptual Framework. After some discussions, the Teacher
Education Committee (the School of Education policy making body)
concluded that FED 200 would serve as the primary course (of the
four pre-professional required courses) to provide the foundation
of information for the candidates’ interview as it relates to the
Conceptual Framework. As a result the content in FED 200 now
concentrates specifically on helping candidates thoroughly
understand the Conceptual Framework while they also receive general
content knowledge and instructional strategies for beginning
teachers.
Prior to 2007 candidates were interviewed by faculty members
chosen at random. The committee concluded that candidates in
teacher certification programs should also be interviewed with
school administrators as well as university faculty. Having school
principals on the interview committee serves to introduce or
reintroduce school administrators to the Conceptual Framework and
it gives candidates real life experiences to the expectations of
building school principals. Candidates must now also participate in
a pre-interview process. This process prepares candidates for the
interview, i.e. explaining protocol concerning their power point
presentation, attire, and addressing the interview panel.
Once candidates have completed the interview, their scores are
tabulated by a designated faculty member. The scores are turned
into the Certification Officer who gives written notification to
the candidates, the candidates’ advisor and the department chair of
the results. The department chair or advisor goes over the results
with the candidates.
3.Exhibit Links
Exhibits
1. State program review documents[footnoteRef:1] and state
findings. (Some of these documents may be available in AIMS.) [1:
Program review documents will be available in NCATE’s database,
AIMS, for programs reviewed through the national program review
process. If programs were reviewed through the national process or
through a state process that required the review of assessments and
assessment data, then no other assessment data for those already
reviewed programs are required for this standard.]
2. Title II reports submitted to the state for the previous
three years (Beginning with the 2010 annual report, Title II
reports should be attached to Part C of the annual report and will
be available to BOE teams in AIMS.)
i. 2010-Part C of the AACTE/NCATE Annual Report
ii. 2009-Part C of the AACTE/NCATE Annual Report
iii. 2008-Part C of the AACTE/NCATE Annual Report
iv. 2007-Part C of the AACTE/NCATE Annual Report
3. Key assessments and scoring guides used by faculty to assess
candidate learning against standards and the outcomes identified in
the unit’s conceptual framework for programs not included in the
national program review process or a similar state process
i. Undergraduate Initial Teacher Preparation Program
1. Pre-Professional Dispositions
2. Teacher Education Interview
3. Professional Dispositions
4. Level II Field Experiences Evaluation
5. Level III Field Experiences Evaluation
6. First-Year Follow-up Survey
7. Employer’s Survey
ii. Alternative Master’s Initial Teacher Preparation Program
1. Level II Field Experiences Evaluation
2. Level III Field Experiences Evaluation
3. First-Year Follow-up Survey
4. Employer’s Survey
5. Comprehensive Examinations
1. Art
2. Elementary & Early Childhood Education
3. Business/Marketing Education
4. Family & Consumer Sciences Education
5. Physical Education
6. Special Education
iii. Advanced Teacher Preparation Programs
1. Comprehensive Examination
1. Elementary & Early Childhood Education
2. Business/Marketing Education
3. Family & Consumer Sciences Education
4. Physical Education
5. Special Education
iv. Other School Personnel Preparation Programs
1. Educational Leadership
1. Interview Assessment
2. Writing Assessment
3. Portfolio Assessment
4. Internship Assessment
5. Comprehensive Examination
4. Data tables and summaries that show how teacher candidates
(both initial and advanced) have performed on key assessments over
the past three years for programs not included in the national
program review process or a similar state process
i. Undergraduate Initial Teacher Preparation Program
1. Pre-Professional Dispositions
2. Teacher Education Interview
3. Professional Dispositions
4. Level II Field Experiences Evaluation
5. Level III Field Experiences Evaluation
6. First-Year Follow-up Survey
7. Employer’s Survey
ii. Alternative Master’s Initial Teacher Preparation Program
1. Level II Field Experiences Evaluation
2. Level III Field Experiences Evaluation
3. First-Year Follow-up Survey
4. Employer’s Survey
5. Praxis II Content Exams
6. Comprehensive Examinations
1. Art
2. Elementary & Early Childhood Education
3. Business/Marketing Education
4. Family & Consumer Sciences Education
5. Physical Education
6. Special Education
iii. Advanced Teacher Preparation Programs
1. Comprehensive Exams
1. Elementary & Early Childhood Education
2. Business/Marketing Education
3. Physical Education
iv. Other School Personnel Preparation Programs
1. Performance Assessment Templates
2. Comprehensive Exams
1. Educational Leadership
2. School Counseling & School Psychometry
3. Praxis II Content Exams
1. Educational Leadership, Reading Specialist, School
Counseling, School Psychology
5. Samples of candidate work (e.g., portfolios at different
proficiency levels)
6. Follow-up studies of graduates and data tables of results
i. First-Year Follow-up Survey
7. Employer feedback on graduates and summaries of the
results
i. Employer Survey
8. List of candidate dispositions, including fairness and the
belief that all students can learn, and related assessments,
scoring guides, and data
i. Dispositions
ii. Pre-Professional Dispositions Evaluations Results
iii. Professional Dispositions Evaluations Results
C. Standard 2. The unit has an assessment system that collects
and analyzes data on applicant qualifications, candidate and
graduate performance, and unit operations to evaluate and improve
the performance of candidates, the unit, and its programs.
1.How does the unit use its assessment system to improve the
performance of candidates and the unit and its programs? [maximum
of three pages]
Assessment System
The unit has an assessment system that reflects the conceptual
framework and professional and state standards and is regularly
evaluated by its professional community. The unit’s assessment
system can best be conceptualized using a 4 x 5 matrix for
undergraduate and graduate initial programs, and a 4 x 4 matrix for
advanced and other school personnel programs. This matrix is
organized using the four interrelated processes of the unit’s
conceptual framework and the different levels of the unit’s teacher
preparation program. The unit’s system includes comprehensive and
integrated assessment and evaluation measures to monitor candidate
performance and manage and improve the unit’s operations and
programs. The matrix is categorized by “Candidate Learning” and
“Unit and Program Effectiveness.” At each level, there are
evaluation measures (e.g., Undergraduate Matrix, Alternative
Master’s Matrix, Advanced Programs Matrix, Educational Specialist
Programs Matrix and Educational Leadership Matrix), or benchmarks,
that candidates must satisfactorily reach before advancing to the
next level. These benchmarks serve as data points used to monitor
candidate performance and manage and improve the unit’s operations
and programs. The above matrices indicate that decisions about
candidate performance are based on multiple assessments at
admission into programs, appropriate transition points, and program
completion. The unit has taken effective steps to eliminate bias in
assessments and is working to establish the fairness, accuracy, and
consistency of its assessment procedures and unit operations.
Data Collection, Analysis, and Evaluation
The Undergraduate Assessment System Matrix, Alternative Master’s
Assessment System Matrix, Advanced Master’s Assessment System
Matrix, Educational Specialist Assessment System Matrix, and
Educational Leadership Assessment System Matrix, all demonstrate
how the unit maintains an assessment system that provides regular
and comprehensive information on applicant qualifications,
candidate proficiencies, competence of graduates, unit operations,
and program quality. Using multiple assessments from internal and
external sources (see Key Assessments for Undergraduate Programs,
Key Assessments for Alternative Master’s Programs, Key Assessments
for Advanced Teacher Preparation Programs, and Key Assessments for
Educational Leadership Programs), the unit collects data from
applicants, candidates, recent graduates, faculty, and other
members of the professional community. Assessment Calendars for
each program (i.e., Undergraduate Initial Programs Assessment
Calendar; Graduate Initial Programs Assessment Calendar; Advanced
Master’s Assessment Calendar; Educational Specialist Assessment
Calendar, and Educational Leadership Assessment Calendar)
demonstrate that candidate assessment data are regularly and
systematically collected, compiled, aggregated, summarized, and
analyzed to improve candidate performance, program quality, and
unit operations.
The unit maintains records of formal candidate complaints and
documentation of their resolution. The unit maintains its
assessment system through the use of information technologies
appropriate to the size of the unit and institution. The unit
utilizes the university Banner System, LiveTexts, and a series of
desktop computers to store and manage data as part of the units
assessment system First-year Follow-up and Employer Surveys are
distributed, collected and analyzed using SurveyMonkey™. Candidate
learning outcomes are collected and analyzed using the LiveText™
program. All assessment reports for the unit are collectively
stored in the School of Education Electronic Documents Room, using
the PBWorks system. Data is regularly shared with faculty during
school meetings, TEC meetings and at the annual summer data retreat
with school leadership. During preparation for admission to the
internship all candidates undergo a rigorous assessment of which
each candidate receives a copy in the mail. Faculty, candidates and
the general public have access to the Electronic Documents Room
where all candidate assessment data is kept, subsequently,
candidate assessment data are regularly shared with candidates and
faculty to help them reflect on and improve their performance and
programs.
Use of Data for Program Improvement
The unit regularly and systematically uses data, including
candidate and graduate performance information, to evaluate the
efficacy of its courses, programs, and clinical experiences. The
unit analyzes program evaluation and performance assessment data to
initiate changes in programs and unit operations.
2.Please respond to 2a if this is the standard on which the unit
is moving to the Target Level. If it is not the standard on which
you are moving to the standard level, respond to 2b.
2a.Standard on which the unit is moving to the Target Level
[maximum of five pages]
1. Describe work undertaken to move to the Target Level
1. Discuss plans for continuing to improve
2b.Continuous Improvement [maximum of three pages]
1. Briefly summarize the most significant changes related
Standard 2 that have led to continuous improvement. (If no
significant changes related to this standard have occurred since
the previous visit, indicate “None” in this section.)
The unit has engaged in a number of continuous improvement
initiatives over the last three years. However, the most
significant and far reaching continuous improvement initiatives
include the following: 1) conducted two Praxis II studies, 2)
conducted a university wide curriculum review and Praxis II
curriculum alignment study, and 3) engaged in a facilities
enhancement project. The two Praxis II studies were conducted so
that the unit could develop a greater understanding of the academic
background and knowledge needed for candidates to pass Praxis II.
The studies enabled the unit to develop an academic profile of
candidates who passed the test which subsequently assisted us to
better recruit candidates and to advise currently enrolled
candidates. The study results were used to assist the unit to
establish Saturday morning Praxis II review sessions that were
strategically targeted to assist candidates. Upon implementing the
Saturday morning review sessions analysis of this data revealed
that we need to conduct a more intense university review of teacher
education programs. The overall university curriculum review and
Praxis II alignment allowed the unit to closely study where in the
curriculum candidates receive specific instruction on Praxis II
test competencies or to discern that specific content was omitted
from the curriculum. During the curriculum review and alignment
initiative it was determined that individual programs needed to
establish a capstone course to assist candidates or some special
review course aimed specifically to assist candidates to pass
Praxis II . This study in ongoing and will continue until all
university teacher education curriculums are aligned to Praxis II
examinations. Upon review of the school budgets and an assessment
of school facilities the unit requested additional resources from
the university to enhance school facilities. As a result of these
assessments the university provided additional Title III and
capital funds to conduct renovations in school of education
facilities. These renovations resulted in major building upgrades
to include enhanced flooring, installation of two teaching
laboratories, installation of a Smart/lecture room and bathroom
upgrades.
3.Exhibit Links
Exhibits
1. Description of the unit’s assessment system in detail
including the requirements and key assessments used at transition
points
2. Data from key assessments used at entry to programs
i. Undergraduate Initial Teacher Preparation Program
1. Teacher Education Interview Data
2. Basic Skills and Speech-Language-Hearing Screening Data
3. Grade Point Averages in Pre-Professional Courses for
Candidates Admitted to the TEP
4. Grade Point Averages in Professional Courses for Candidates
Admitted to the Internship
ii. Alternative Master’s Initial Teacher Preparation Program
1. Basic Skills and Speech-Language-Hearing Screening Data
2. Grade Point Averages in Pre-Professional Courses for
Candidates Admitted to the TEP
3. Praxis II Content Exam
iii. Other School Personnel Program
1. Praxis II Content Exam
2. Transition Point Data
3. Procedures for ensuring that key assessments of candidate
performance and evaluations of unit operations are fair, accurate,
consistent, and free of bias
4. Policies and procedures that ensure that data are regularly
collected, compiled, aggregated, summarized, analyzed, and used to
make improvements.
5. Samples of candidate assessment data disaggregated by
alternate route, off-campus, and distance learning programs
6. Policies for handling student complaints
7. File of student complaints and the unit’s response (This
information should be available during the onsite visit.)
8. Examples of changes made to courses, programs, and the unit
in response to data gathered from the assessment system
D. Standard 3. The unit and its school partners design,
implement, and evaluate field experiences and clinical practice so
that teacher candidates and other school professionals develop and
demonstrate the knowledge, skills, and professional dispositions
necessary to help all students learn.
1.How does the unit work with the school partners to deliver
field experiences and clinical practice to enable candidates to
develop the knowledge, skills, and professional dispositions to
help all students learn? [maximum of three pages]
The unit and its school partners design, implement, and evaluate
field experiences and clinical practice so that teacher candidates
and other school professionals develop and demonstrate the
knowledge, skills, and professional dispositions necessary to help
all students learn. The mission is accomplished through the
following procedures, policies, and processes: The Director of
Field Experiences and School Partnerships represents the Unit in
collaborations with school partners as decisions are made regarding
placements at all levels of the field experiences program. The unit
collaborates intensively with the four local school districts:
Huntsville, City, Madison City, Madison County, and Decatur City.
The unit has a signed memorandum of understanding agreements with
each of the four school districts.
At the Class B undergraduate and Alternative A graduate level,
the design of the field experience program requires a minimum of
205 hours of diverse field experiences prior to the internship. The
requirements include opportunities to examine the opening and
closing of the school year and experiences with each of the
following: Title 1 (low income) schools, schools that include
children with exceptionalities and special needs, schools with high
populations of English Language Learners, urban schools, and rural
schools (see placement school site demographics 2007 – 2010 for
Level I, Level II, and Level III). There are approximately 300
placements each semester, made by, or in conjunction with, the
Office of Field Experiences and School Partnerships (OFE & SP).
The OFE & SP is administered by a director who reports to the
dean of education. There are three levels of field experiences:
Level I, Level II, and Level III. The management system for
ensuring diversity of placements, e.g., experiences with low income
schools, exceptional learners, urban students, rural student, and
ELL learners, is that the field experiences are attached to
specific courses as candidates complete the various programs of
study at the university (see field experiences model and
table).
Level I of the field experiences program (the early
pre-professional experiences) enables candidates to complete a
minimum of 50 hours of observations and reflective activities in
P-12 schools. These experiences are diverse and offer opportunities
for gaining experiences with children in poverty, with
exceptionalities, and English Language Learners. Generally, the
experiences are acquired during 7 days. Three days are completed in
Title 1/low income schools while candidates are enrolled in FED
200, Introduction to Education or FED 521 Multicultural Education
/FED 501 Foundations of Education (graduate level courses). The
other four days of experiences are gained when candidates’ are
enrolled in SPE 201 Introduction to Exceptional Learners or SPE 501
Introduction to Exceptional Learners (graduate equivalent). (see
OFE & SP Model and Program Management System to Ensure
Diversity). An additional 14 hours are completed (beyond the 50
attached to the courses) when candidates complete experiences at
the opening (first day) of the school year and the closing (last
day) of the school years (see opening and closing policies). Level
I supports the “planning” phase of the School of Education’s
Conceptual Framework. (See Level I Handbook)
Level II of the field experiences program (practicum) requires a
minimum of 155 hours of planning and teaching micro lessons,
designing and/or administering examinations, and engaging in
professional activities associated with teaching and classroom
management. The hours are acquired as part of professional courses
in pedagogy as well as in program-specific methods courses.
Candidates alternate semesters in rural and urban schools (see OFE
& SP Model and Program Management System to Ensure Diversity).
Level 2 supports the “preparing” phase of the School of Education’s
Conceptual Framework. (See Level II Handbook)
Level III of the field experiences program is the internship, a
full semester of supervised teaching and engagement by candidates
in professional activities within the assigned schools. Cooperating
teachers and university supervisors, collaboratively, provide
oversight and evaluations of candidates’ abilities to facilitate
student learning (see responsibilities of supervisors, cooperating
teachers, and interns). Candidates complete a capstone electronic
portfolio, through LiveText, of the artifacts, teacher work sample
(see teacher work sample requirement), and reflections completed
during the internship. Level III supports the “performing” and
“assessing proficiencies” phases of the School of Education’s
Conceptual Framework. (See Level III handbook).
Diversity in experiences is ensured as candidates progress
through the program. The Huntsville City Schools require that area
universities, such as, Alabama A & M University, UAH, Oakwood,
and Athens State University, rotate school clusters (see cluster
school documents for 2007 – 2010) each year, as a result of a
previous desegregation lawsuit. Diversity is tracked through the
programs through various field experiences assigned to various
courses within the program areas.(See school site placements and
demographics 2007-2010)
The design of the program is strengthened through the
involvement of principals from the local school districts as active
members of the Teacher Education Council (see minutes and sign in
sheets from meetings). The other members of the Council are
representatives from each of the various teacher education programs
offered at Alabama A & M University. The function of the
council is to design and approve policies and procedures for the
Unit. A Field Experiences Advisory Committee and Recent P-12
Experiences Advisory Committee (with members represented by the
various school districts) provide critical expertise and relevance
in collaborating on the design of the program and in developing
policies and procedures that govern the program and with any
revisions of the design, delivery, and assessment of the field
experiences program or the written policies and procedures
contained in the handbooks.
The implementation and evaluation of the program is facilitated
by the joint involvement of P-12 and university collaborators, as
is indicated in the Collaborator Chart. (See Chart 1 -
Collaborators for Field Placements – Implementation)
All candidates complete all levels of the field experience
program. As can be seen from the numbers in the placement table, a
considerable amount of collaboration takes place between the unit
and its school partners. (See Chart 2 Candidate Placement Table
Fall 2007 – Spring 2010)
The implementation and evaluation of the program is facilitated
through a foundation of policies, procedures, assessments, and
other relevant forms relating to field experiences that are
included within a handbook for each level of the program (see
Office of Field Experiences and School Partnerships webpage with
Level I, Level II, and Level III handbooks and other documents)
Field experiences provide opportunities for candidates to engage
in a variety of real-world activities relating to their roles as
professional educators. Within each level of the field experience
program, candidates’ activities become more engaged as is
illustrated in Chart 3. The assessments collected at each level of
the field experiences, Level I, Level II, and Level III, along with
the electronic portfolio, with teacher work sample, allow the unit
to gain knowledge and insight regarding the program and the
candidates professional repertoire of the knowledge, skills, and
dispositions, to make an impact on student learning. (See Chart 3
Implementation and Evaluation of Field Experiences)
The clinical faculty is diverse and reflective of the population
of candidates completing the program (see table for diversity of
cooperating teachers 2007 – 2010). The criteria for selection of
school faculty and clinical faculty are clear and communicated to
all parties involved. All cooperating teachers of interns, for
example, must have a master’s degree and a minimum of three years
of teaching experience (see letter sent to principals with
requirements). The school principal makes the recommendation for
the cooperating teacher, in collaboration with The Director of
Field Experiences and School Partnerships. University faculty that
teach methods courses and/or supervise interns are required to have
engaged in recent experiences in schools (at least a minimum of 10
hours per semester), co-teaching or instructing courses at the
school sites (see recent P-12 experiences requirements). The
assignments and selections of university supervisors and methods
courses instructors are completed through the departments by the
department chairpersons.
Various assessments are administered during each level of the
field experiences and are collected and analyzed by The Office of
Field Experiences and School Partnerships. During Level I of the
field experiences, candidates are assessed by the course instructor
and the classroom teachers after completing each field experiences,
using a Level I assessment form that is in the Level I handbook
(see Level I Assessment Rubric). Specifically, the Level I
Assessment Rubric addresses professional disposition necessary to
make an impact on student learning (See Level I Assessment Analysis
Table).
During Level II of the field experiences, candidates are
assessed by the course instructor and the cooperating teacher after
completing each field experiences, using a Level II assessment form
(see Level II assessment rubric) that is in the Level II handbooks.
. Specially, the Level II assessment rubric goes beyond looking at
professional dispositions and moves into examining the knowledge
and skills needed for candidates to be successful during the
internship (see Level II Assessment Analysis Table).
Prior to admission to the internship, candidates are evaluated
to verify that the grade-point average has remained at the
acceptable level (minimum of 2.50 in all areas for undergraduate
and minimum of 3.00 in all areas for graduate work). Candidates
provide documentation that the Praxis II examination has been
passed and that criminal background checks do not contain
information that would disqualify him or her from the Internship.
Candidates are formally admitted to the Teacher Education Program
after completing the admission requirements, which include an
interview, with a panel composed of school principals and
university faculty and a professional power point presentation by
the candidate (see sign in sheets from interviews). Data on
candidates who have been admitted to the Internship show that they
are knowledgeable in the subjects they intend to teach as reflected
in their performance on Praxis II and that they have successfully
passed the criminal background check (see Chart 4 Candidates
Admission Qualifications for the Internship).
At Level III, the internship, multiple measures are used to
assess the performance of interns During the internship, assessment
data from the following instruments are collected and analyzed: (1)
Pre-internship survey (self assessment) (see Pre-survey Table 2007
– 2010), (2) Post-internship survey (self assessment) (see
Post-survey Table 2007 – 2010, (3) Cooperating Teacher
Questionnaire (see Cooperating Teacher Questionnaire Table 2007 –
2010), (4) Internship Abilities Evaluation (AQTS) (see AQTS Table
2008 – 2010), and (5) Internship Assessment Instrument - Educate
Alabama (replaces PEPE) (see assessment instrument), and (6)
electronic portfolio (including a teacher work sample) submitted
through LiveText.
Sixty-one candidate abilities are evaluated using the Alabama
Quality Teaching Standards. Each candidate is evaluated by the
cooperating teacher who uses two different instruments. One
instrument, used in past years, was a modification of the
Professional Educators Performance Evaluation (PEPE). By using the
PEPE, candidates were given a preview of what performances would be
considered during their first year of teaching. During the Spring
of 2010, the PEPE-like internship assessment was replaced with a
formative continuum based on the Alabama Continuum for Teacher
Development (EDUCATEAlabama) with five standards for pre-service
and beginning teachers (see rubrics for PEPE and EDUCATEAlabama).
It is during the internship that the abilities or skills to make an
impact on student learning are developed, strengthened, and
assessed. The Cooperating Teacher Questionnaire looks at the
strength of the teacher preparation program, not the intern
specifically. The results are used to refine or modify the Unit to
more effectively provide a strong teacher education program. When
looking at the table, it was noted that the Unit’s program was
marked lower in one area, that being “ability to use community
resources to enhance the instructional program”. After receiving
the feedback, The School of Education initiated and implemented
Alabama Reading Initiative (ARI) and Alabama Math Science and
Technology Initiative (AMSTI) training prior to or during the
internship. The utilization of state and community resources
provided a greater pool of resources for the candidates and
strengthened the performances during the internships.
Advanced Programs - Traditional master’s degree candidates
complete a minimum of ten hours of field experiences while enrolled
in FED 501 Foundation of Education or FED 521 Multicultural
Education. Ed. S candidates complete a minimum of ten hours of
field experiences while enrolled in FED 600 Advanced Curriculum
Development. Candidates select a study with a class or group of
students who have demographics that are the opposite of the
demographics for the children, they are currently teaching (see
field experiences for traditional students). The placements and
documentation are maintained through the OFE & SP. The
development of the study is supervised and later assessed by the
course instructor.
Placements, assessments, and handbooks for advanced clinical
practice for other school personnel are made by the respective
program coordinators in collaboration with school district
administrators and agency directors. The OFE & SP receives
reports of completion of clinical placements and assessments from
the respective program areas
Clinical practice for other school professionals is sufficiently
extensive and intensive for candidates to demonstrate proficiencies
in the professional roles for which they are preparing. Candidates
in programs for other school professionals engage in field
experiences and supervised clinical practice that require them to
analyze data, use technology, apply current research, and apply
knowledge related to students, their families, and communities.
During the first 12 hours of coursework, candidates in the
respective programs, in advanced programs for teachers, complete a
field project in which they apply coursework in a classroom
setting, analyze the extent of learning by P-12 students, and
reflect on the practice, based upon specific theories of teaching
and learning. The candidate develops a portfolio of his/her field
project and submits it to a committee of faculty members for review
and comment. (See other school personnel programs and
handbooks)
A description of the instructional leadership program delineates
collaboration in the design, delivery, and assessment: The
residency/internship in Instructional Leadership is designed to
insure that candidates have meaningful and practical experiences in
actual school settings during the course of the instructional
leadership preparation program. It is designed to place candidates
in the cooperating school during critical times of instructional
planning. The collaborative model requires that LEA’s provide
release time for candidates and for the university to work with
LEA’s so that the candidates’ experiences are comprehensive and
valuable. The internship experiences are the total sum of practical
experiences, either field or clinical, as part of every course
taken for preparation, plus residency. The residency is
uninterrupted service in an active school with students present.
The residency is no less than ten (10) consecutive days in the
school setting with students present and allows interns to
experience leadership in as many of the Alabama Leadership Standard
indicators and SREB’s Critical Success factors as possible. As part
of the internship, candidates prepare and maintain a comprehensive
portfolio which indicates the level of experiences and knowledge
gained in instructional leadership through observing, participating
and leading. The portfolio is juried by the university supervisor,
mentoring supervisor, and the intern before the candidate is
recommended by the university for the instructional leadership
certification.
The internship experience is demonstrated throughout the
program. The make-up of the program calls for students to begin
working on mastery of ability outcomes at the onset of the program.
The internship objectives per semester coincide with the specialty
area courses that students take each semester; therefore, students
perform ability related objectives in the internship reflective of
the courses in which they are enrolled.
The program has a one (1) semester hour internship incorporated
within the first three semesters of coursework, and an additional
three (3) semester hour residency/internship incorporated either in
the summer or the spring semester depending on when the student
begins the program. During the three hour residency/internship the
student performs the ten (10) day residency requirement. The
objectives to be fulfilled during the ten (10) day residency are
objectives identified by the university, objectives identified by
the mentor based on the district’s needs, and objectives identified
by the student based on a need for more development. The residency
location is based on collaboration between the university
supervisor and the district liaison. (See documents and handbook
for advanced programs).
2.Please respond to 2a if this is the standard on which the unit
is moving to the Target Level. If it is not the standard on which
you are moving to the standard level, respond to 2b.
2a.Standard on which the unit is moving to the Target Level
[maximum of five pages]
1. Describe work undertaken to move to the Target Level
1. Discuss plans for continuing to improve
2b.Continuous Improvement [maximum of three pages]
1. Briefly summarize the most significant changes related to
Standard 3 that have led to continuous improvement. (If no
significant changes related to this standard have occurred since
the previous visit, indicate “None” in this section.)
The following are the most significant changes to Standard 3
since the last visit:
2. The School of Education has signed Memorandum of
Understandings (MOU)s with all four of the local school
districts.
2. The requirements for hours of field experiences, prior to
admission to the internship, was increased from a minimum of 155
hours to a minimum of 205 hours prior as one prerequisite for
admission to the internship.
2. Candidates complete experiences at the opening of the school
year and at the closing of the school year. A minimum of one day (7
hours) at each, the opening and closing, is required. Candidates
initiate the experiences through the school administrators and
complete and submit documentation of the experiences to the Office
of Field Experiences and School Partnerships (see Level 1 handbook
or opening and closing documents)
2. Candidates complete experiences with English Language
Learners (ELL). The School of Education has added a Professional
Development School Partner, McDonnell Elementary School, because of
its high ELL population. The school is unique, in that over
one-third of its population is ELL, and the school houses a full
service Boys and Girls Club, whose Director is Hispanic and fluent
in Spanish. (link to McDonnell Elementary School’s webpage) Butler
High School houses the program for high school and the Director and
Center for English Language Learners for the school district.
2. The School of Education maintains it Professional Development
School Partnership with Montview Elementary School that was started
in 2005. The focus of the partnership has evolved, however. The
school is now an exemplary site for the parenting laboratory that
is housed at the school.
2. Interns complete extensive training during or before the
internship, to include the following: Lee vs. Macon Training, three
full days of Alabama Reading Initiative Training (ARI), and Alabama
Mathematics, Science, and Technology (AMSTI) training.
2. The School of Education is currently examining the
feasibility of a full year of internship with the remainder of
methods courses and field experiences being completed during the
first semester of the internship, allowing for the second semester
of the internship to focus on the role of the teacher. At the
beginning of the Fall 2010 school year, The Director of Field
Experiences and School Partnerships and the Dean of the School of
Education met with and presented a proposal to each of the area
superintendents (Huntsville, Madison County, Madison City, and
Decatur) for a full year of internship. The proposal was then
presented to local principals.
2. Interns complete an electronic portfolio, rather than a hard
portfolio, during the internship. The electronic teacher work
sample is assessed during the midterm point of the internship. All
interns complete and submit a teacher work sample via LiveText.
2. The PEPE assessment has been replaced with a more anecdotal,
formative continuum assessment (during the internship), based on
the Alabama Continuum and standards for pre-service and beginning
teachers called EDUCATEAlabama. This assessment is aligned with the
state changes in assessments. The AQTS assessment is the summative
assessment collected during the internship. The EDUCATE Alabama
Assessment Rubric examines the pre-service candidates ability to
perform effectively in the following areas: content knowledge,
teaching and learning, literacy, diversity, and professionalism
(see rubric). The AQTS Abilities Rubric examines the intern’s
ability to perform effectively in the following areas: content
knowledge, teaching and learning, literacy, diversity, and
professionalism (see rubric).
2. An Advisory Committee for Recent P-12 Experiences was formed
– composed of university faculty and school administrators to
identify appropriate activities for university faculty to co-teach
or shadow highly effective practitioners, in order to gain recent
classroom teaching experiences..
2. The Teacher Education Council added school administrators to
its membership, in order to help with collaboration.
2. The interview committee for admission to teacher education
changed the process for interviews. The committee is now comprised
of university faculty and school
administrators. Candidates demonstrate proficiencies through a
power point presentation as a part of the interview process.
2. The advanced programs in corporate field experiences into the
coursework. Traditional master’s degree candidates complete a
minimum of ten hours of field experiences while enrolled in FED 501
Foundation of Education or FED 521 Multicultural Education. Ed. S
candidates complete a minimum of ten hours of field experiences
while enrolled in FED 600 Advanced Curriculum Development.
Candidates select a study with a class or group of students who
have demographics that are antithetical of the demographics for the
children, they are currently teaching. The placements and
documentation are maintained through the OFE & SP. The
development of the study is supervised and later assessed prior to
the completion of the coursework by the course instructor.
Placements, assessments, and handbooks for advanced clinical
practice for other school personnel are made by the respective
program coordinators in collaboration with school district
administrators and agency directors. Clinical practice for other
school professionals is sufficiently extensive and intensive for
candidates to demonstrate proficiencies in the professional roles
for which they are preparing. Candidates in programs for other
school professionals engage in field experiences and supervised
clinical practice that require them to analyze data, use
technology, apply current research, and apply knowledge related to
students, their families, and communities. During the first 12
hours of coursework, candidates in the respective programs, in
advanced programs for teachers, complete field projects in which
they apply coursework in a classroom setting, analyze the extent of
learning by P-12 students, and reflect on the practice, based upon
specific theories of teaching and learning. The candidates develop
portfolios of field projects and submit to a committee of faculty
members for review and comment.
2. The instructional leadership program was redesigned,
including the field experiences requirements. A description of the
instructional leadership program delineates collaboration in the
design, delivery, and assessment: The residency/internship in
Instructional Leadership is designed to insure that candidates have
meaningful and practical experiences in actual school settings
during the course of the instructional leadership preparation
program. It is designed to place candidates in the cooperating
school during critical times of instructional planning. The
collaborative model requires that LEA’s provide release time for
candidates and for the university to work with LEA’s so that the
candidates’ experiences are comprehensive and valuable. The
internship experiences are the total sum of practical experiences,
either field or clinical, as part of every course taken for
preparation, plus residency. The residency is uninterrupted service
in an active school with students present. The residency is no less
than ten (10) consecutive days in the school setting with students
present and allows interns to experience leadership in as many of
the Alabama Leadership Standard indicators and SREB’s Critical
Success factors as possible. As part of the internship, candidates
prepare and maintain a comprehensive portfolio which indicates the
level of experiences and knowledge gained in instructional
leadership through observing, participating and leading. The
portfolio is juried by the university supervisor, mentoring
supervisor, and the intern before the candidate is recommended by
the University for the Instructional Leadership Certification. The
internship experience is demonstrated throughout the program. The
make-up of the program calls for students to begin working on
mastery of ability outcomes at the onset of the program. The
internship objectives per semester coincide with the specialty area
courses that students take each semester; therefore, students
perform ability related objectives in the internship reflective of
the courses in which they are enrolled. The program has a one (1)
semester hour internship incorporated within the first three
semesters of coursework, and an additional three (3) semester hour
residency/internship incorporated either in the summer or the
spring semester depending on when the student begins the program.
During the three hour residency/internship the student performs the
ten (10) day residency requirement. The objectives to be fulfilled
during the ten (10) day residency are objectives identified by the
university, objectives identified by the mentor based on the
district’s needs, and objectives identified by the student based on
a need for more development. The residency location is based on
collaboration between the university supervisor and the district
liaison.
2. Beginning Fall 2011, the following courses, graduate and
undergraduate will require a 10 hour (minimum) action research
service learning component. The courses are the following:
undergraduate – FED 300 Foundations of Education (all undergraduate
candidates are required to take, graduate – FED 503 Research (all
masters level are required to take, FED 603 Advanced Educational
Research (all Ed.S. candidates are required to take).
3.Exhibit Links
Exhibits
1. Memoranda of understanding, contracts, and/or other documents
that demonstrate partnerships with schools
1. Criteria for the selection of school faculty (e.g.,
cooperating teachers, internship supervisors) – Contained in Level
III Handbooks, pp. 10-12, 52-68, 69-90)
1. Documentation of the preparation of school faculty for their
roles (e.g., orientation and other meetings) – Agendas from
cooperating teacher and supervisor meetings
1. Descriptions of field experiences and clinical practice
requirements in programs for initial and advanced teacher
candidates and other school professionals – Level I, II, and III
Handbooks
1. Guidelines for student teaching and internships – Level III
Handbook, pp. 13-51
1. Assessments and scoring rubrics/criteria used in field
experiences and clinical practice for initial and advanced teacher
candidates and other school professionals (These assessments may be
included in program review documents or the exhibits for Standard
1. Cross reference as appropriate.)
E. Standard 4. The unit designs, implements, and evaluates
curriculum and provides experiences for candidates to acquire and
demonstrate the knowledge, skills, and professional dispositions
necessary to help all students learn. Assessments indicate that
candidates can demonstrate and apply proficiencies related to
diversity. Experiences provided for candidates include working with
diverse populations, including higher education and P–12 school
faculty, candidates, and students in P–12 schools.
1.How does the unit prepare candidates to work effectively with
all students?
[maximum of three pages]
Unit leadership, faculty, and staff have worked very diligently
to ensure excellence in all areas regarding program diversity to
include curriculum development, field experiences, clinical
practice, and diversity among faculty and candidates. The unit has
extended tireless energy and resources to ensure that candidates
have extensive experiences on and off campus that will enable them
to effectively teach all children. Diversity in the conceptual
framework is addressed in the program commitments and serves as a
strand that runs through all institutional standards, which are:
1.) exhibiting effective communication, 2.) displaying current
professional knowledge and abilities, 3.) maintaining a positive
and supportive learning environment, 4.) facilitating learning by
all students, 5.) effectively assessing student learning, 6.)
engaging in continuous professional development and 7.) exhibiting
professional dispositions at all times. All unit faculty integrate
knowledge, skills and dispositions regarding diversity as strands
in the seven institutional standards in their daily instruction
evidenced in course syllabi. Candidates not only learn diversity
content but are also taught to understand cultural context of
learning and how they are to use their knowledge and skills to
teach all students. The curriculum (courses) is structured such
that all candidates are tracked throughout the program to ensure
that they have a diverse experience. Diversity content and
experiences are integrated throughout the curriculum and the
structure of all field experiences and clinical practice ensure
that all candidates have diversity throughout the program. For
example, at Level I, field experience candidates complete at least
three full days, when taking FED 200, FED 500 or FED 521 in a Title
I (low income) school. Also at Level I, they complete at least 4
days working in classrooms with exceptional learners and ELL
students, when enrolled in SPE 201 and SPE 501. At Level II,
candidates in the program areas alternate field experiences
(attached to the methods courses) between semesters with urban and
rural settings.
Periodic assessments are administered and are shared with
candidates through classroom instruction and at Teacher Education
Council meetings. Also, faculty members regularly review the
assessment data at Unit faculty meetings. The Candidate
Self-Assessment Report outlines the unit expectations for candidate
knowledge skills and dispositions in the area of diversity. This
document is an assessment that is given periodically to interns and
candidates enrolled in CSD 421 – Multicultural Issues and FED 521 –
Foundations of Multicultural Education. This self-assessment
instrument is used to assess candidate perceptions of their
knowledge skills and abilities in these areas.
Diversity in teaching and learning is a mentality that is
continuously cultivated with candidates. In a survey of the Unit
faculty, 100% stated that they infuse diversity into their
coursework, which totaled 114 different courses. In the general
education curriculum, all candidates study art/music, literature,
and psychology from different cultures and periods as a core
requirement. All candidates must successfully complete FED 200
Introduction to Teacher Education, FED 300 Foundations of
Education, HDF 211 Child Growth and Development or FED 212 Human
Growth and Development, and FED 403 Educational Psychology, which
provide the foundation for understanding stages of development,
learning styles, multiple intelligences, learning disorders,
learning theories, research, best practices, and sociocultural
aspects of education. FED 404 Tests and Measurements provides
candidates with the knowledge to assess the learning of all
students. In SPE 201 Introduction to Exceptionalities, candidates
learn how diversity relates to exceptionalities and associated
teaching strategies. In ECE 301 Methods/Materials for Teaching
Language Arts and MUS 327 Methods/Materials for Teaching Elementary
Music, candidates ascertain specific techniques to address English
as a second language (ESOL), such as "Singlish," a method of
teaching English through singing selected songs.
Candidates learn to incorporate diversity content and learning
styles into lesson plans while in the methods courses, and this
continues into the internship. Candidates also discover how to
interact with actual students in their practica and internship. The
candidates’ abilities to relate to their own students are evaluated
using multiple methods such as the Teacher Education Interview
Evaluation Rubric, A variety of cultural perspectives are
highlighted in the methods courses as well as during the
internship. In order to further cultivate these competencies, the
Curriculum Laboratory, Learning Resources Center, and Computer
Laboratories are available to all candidates.
Candidates also interact with university faculty from a broad
range of academic and culturally diverse groups. Candidates not
only have the ability to gain a wealth of knowledge and experience
from faculty who have taught in all grade levels, but the
professional education faculty members have varied socioeconomic
backgrounds as well. This affords the candidates the opportunity to
learn from someone who may be from a different part of the country
or even another continent. The Unit has faculty representing
national and international territory. For example, since the 2004
NCATE visitation, the Unit has recruited faculty from Albania,
Africa, and Jamaica as well as faculty who have studied in regions
different from their native environment. Candidates have an
opportunity to interact with diverse faculty members through
classes, advising, and student and departmental organizations.
These exchanges are valuable for the candidates, providing an
experience that facilitates the development of tolerance, respect,
and understanding of persons who may be culturally and socially
different from them.
Candidates engage in learning with other candidates from a wide
array of diverse groups. The Unit has candidates from urban and
rural hometowns, candidates with disabilities, racial and ethnic
backgrounds, as well as candidates from various social, political,
and religious views. As indicated in the National Survey of Student
Engagement (NSSE) - AAMU 2008 Report, over half of the candidates
engage in serious discussions with peers from diverse environments.
This type of atmosphere ensures that the Unit is helping to enrich
educational experiences.
Alabama A&M University is among the most diverse campuses in
the United States, with 95% of its student population consisting of
individuals from minority backgrounds. The institution is a hub of
learning for students who hail from over 40 countries. The School
of Education is representative of individuals from a variety of
backgrounds and continues to promote diversity among its future
educators. Candidates are continuously involved in experiences in
traditional and contemporary learning programs with individuals
from diverse backgrounds. The diversity of our candidates is
illustrated in the tables below.
Candidates are invited to serve on numerous committees that help
shape the vision and direction for the School of Education.
Examples of these committees are: Candidate Assessment, Clinical
and Field Experiences, Student Development/Appeals, Faculty
Professional Development, Special Programs/Occasions, and
Teaching/Learning Resources. Candidates also served on the NCATE
Conceptual Framework and Standard 1 committees.
Candidates also interact with professional education faculty
from a broad range of academic and culturally diverse groups.
Candidates are able to participate in at least 115 registered
student organizations that focus on building leaders to inspire
others, uplifting the school, and supporting the community. These
student organizations are an essential part of the University. They
provide students with a variety of opportunities to explore their
academic, professional, political, social, cultural, recreational,
spiritual, and community service interests. Student organizations
allow students to develop interpersonal, organizational and
leadership skills in a supportive, challenging, and diverse
environment.
One of the Unit’s professional education organizations that
promote excellence in diverse candidates is Kappa Delta Pi. Every
Fall semester, Kappa Delta Pi hosts a forum in which the Dean and
Chairpersons are expected to attend and participate in mandatory
meetings with students where the students share their ideas and
concerns about the Unit.
Another of our extraordinary organizations is the Student
Council for Exceptional Children (SCEC). This is a student chapter
for the National Council for Exceptional Children (CEC). CEC, a
non-profit association, accomplishes its mission which is carried
out in support of special education professionals and others
working on behalf of individuals with exceptionalities, by
advocating for appropriate governmental policies, by setting
professional standards, by providing continuing professional
development, by advocating for newly and historically underserved
individuals with exceptionalities, and by helping professionals
achieve the conditions and resources necessary for effective
professional practice.
Additionally, when Graduating Seniors were surveyed and asked if
the University contributes to the personal growth of the
candidates’ ability to relate well to diverse backgrounds, positive
results were rendered by 82% (Fall 2007) and 85% (Spring 2008) of
the population surveyed. 78% indicated that they were quite
satisfied with Disability Services, while 83% responded positively
during the Spring 2008 semester. The aim of the Unit is to take
this information and build upon the wonderful things that are
happening at the University in order to produce a well-trained
professional who is committed to excellence related to
diversity.
The School of Education faculty believe that it is essential to
facilitate a climate in college courses that is supportive and
nurturing of all candidates so that class members become a
community of learners. Small and large group