CAEP STANDARD 1: TEACHERS KNOW THEIR CONTENT AND TEACH EFFECTIVELY STANDARD 1 COMMITTEE.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
The Teacher Work Sample
Advertisements

Writing Assessment Plans for Secondary Education / Foundations of Educations Department 9 th Annual Assessment Presentation December 3, 2013 Junko Yamamoto.
UNDERSTANDING NBPTS STANDARDS
CONNECT WITH CAEP | | Teachers Know Their Content And Teach Effectively: CAEP Standard 1 Stevie Chepko,
Conceptual Framework of McDaniel College. National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE)
1 Why is the Core important? To set high expectations – for all students – for educators To attend to the learning needs of students To break through the.
SUNY Cortland Conceptual Framework … our shared vision for preparing candidates to work in P-12 schools.
Weber State University Teacher Preparation Program Levels, Field Experiences, and Assessments.
E-portfolio in TaskStream (DRF) Signature Assignments Signature Assignments Classroom Community (1 st & 2 nd semesters) Classroom Community (1 st & 2 nd.
Curriculum, Instruction, & Assessment
Weber State University Teacher Preparation Program Levels, Field Experiences, and Assessments.
Unit Assessment Plan Weber State University’s Teacher Preparation Program.
Rationale for CI 2300 Teaching and Learning in the Digital Age.
CERRA NB Toolkit  9-10 Years later, are you still impacting student learning? In new and better ways?  How have you progressed as a teacher?  Have.
Revised Illinois Professional Teaching Standards Rori R. Carson Western Illinois University.
Reflective Pathways from Theory to Practice Brewton-Parker College Education Division.
NTEP – Network for Transforming Teacher Preparation A presentation to the State Board TAC on Tiered Licensure and Career Ladders April 6, 2014.
Matt Moxham EDUC 290. The Idaho Core Teacher Standards are ten standards set by the State of Idaho that teachers are expected to uphold. This is because.
Teacher Certification Next Steps……. How certification works within your current practice Student Growth Criterion 3: Recognizing individual student learning.
Moving to the Common Core Janet Rummel Assessment Specialist Indiana Department of Education.
Department of Physical Sciences School of Science and Technology B.S. in Chemistry Education CIP CODE: PROGRAM CODE: Program Quality Improvement.
1. 2 Why is the Core important? To set high expectations –for all students –for educators To attend to the learning needs of students To break through.
Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (INTASC)
SENIOR SEMINAR IN PHYSICAL EDUCATION What am I responsible for?
Learning Objective III: Diverse Learners Teacher candidates and candidates for other professional school personnel roles exhibit knowledge, competence,
Primary Languages Education.  to recognise and value the contributions that members of MLTAQ make to the teaching and learning of languages.
CONNECT WITH CAEP | Transitioning from NCATE and TEAC to CAEP: How? Patty Garvin, Senior Director,
Connect with CAEP Transformation Initiatives Respond to the Needs of the Profession James G. Cibulka, President,
Thomas College Name Major Expected date of graduation address
NBPTS - SEEKING EXCELLENCE IN SCIENCE TEACHING. EXCELLENCE National Board for Professional Teaching Standards -- Draft Report (1993). National Board for.
Sultan Qaboos University College of Education Course: Instructor:
Committee on the Assessment of K-12 Science Proficiency Board on Testing and Assessment and Board on Science Education National Academy of Sciences.
EdTPA Teacher Performance Assessment. Planning Task Selecting lesson objectives Planning 3-5 days of instruction (lessons, assessments, materials) Alignment.
PTEU Conceptual Framework Overview. Collaborative Development of Expertise in Teaching, Learning and Leadership Conceptual Framework Theme:
A state-wide effort to improve teaching and learning to ensure that all Iowa students engage in a rigorous & relevant curriculum. The Core Curriculum.
Standard 1: Teachers demonstrate leadership s. Element a: Teachers lead in their classrooms. What does Globally Competitive mean in your classroom? How.
1. Administrators will gain a deeper understanding of the connection between arts, engagement, student success, and college and career readiness. 2. Administrators.
Student Name Student Number ePortfolio Demonstrating my achievement of the NSW Institute of Teachers Graduate Teacher Stage of the Professional Teacher.
DPASII Criterion Rubrics for Teachers. Component 1: Planning and Preparation Criterion 1a: Selecting Instructional Goals ELEMENT Value, sequence and alignment.
Assessment System Overview Center for Education Overview for the NCATE BOE Team April 18-22, 2009.
CONNECT WITH CAEP | | CAEP Accreditation and STEM Stevie Chepko, Sr. VP for Accreditation
STANDARD 4 & DIVERSITY in the NCATE Standards Boyce C. Williams, NCATE John M. Johnston, University of Memphis Institutional Orientation, Spring 2008.
Connect with CAEP The Common Core Standards: Transforming Teacher and Leader Preparation with Stronger Accreditation.
Tuning Indiana: Education. Originally focused on: Elementary education Math education Special education.
Curriculum and Instruction: Management of the Learning Environment
Relationships in the 21 st Century Parent Teachers Students Association (PTSA) Goals, Membership, Participation.
SENIOR SEMINAR IN PHYSICAL EDUCATION What am I responsible for?
MT ENGAGE Student Learning Outcomes and Assessment April 27, 2015.
1 Disclaimer This resource is provided for informational and support purposes only. There is no requirement that it be used as- is or as a template by.
Chapter 1 You and Early Childhood Education. Early childhood professionals have an exciting and evolving role in the overall field of education. As you.
Daretta L. Wilson EDU645: Learning & Assessment for the 21st Century Professor: Alan Belcher February 16, 2016.
FLORIDA EDUCATORS ACCOMPLISHED PRACTICES Newly revised.
Council for the Accreditationof EducatorPreparation Standard 1: CONTENT AND PEDAGOGICAL KNOWLEDGE 2014 CAEP –Conference Nashville, TN March 26-28, 2014.
ACS WASC/CDE Visiting Committee Final Presentation Panorama High School March
PGES Professional Growth and Effectiveness System.
Designing Quality Assessment and Rubrics
Draft Elementary Education Preparation Standards: An Opportunity for Review and Feedback James McLeskey Teacher Education Division Conference Tempe,
STANDARD 1 Content and Pedagogical Knowledge
Improving Teaching Practices through the Use of Video-Case Analysis
PPMES-UPRM Methodology & Practice Working Retreat
CAEP Standards.
Valley City State University Conceptual Framework
Valley City State University Conceptual Framework
NJCU College of Education
InTASC Standards: The Basics for Candidates
A Tutorial on Program Supplement Assessments
Teaching and Learning Forum No 4:
A Tutorial on Program Supplement Assessments
Standard one: revisions
Ohio Standards for the Teaching Profession EHHS Conceptual Framework
Presentation transcript:

CAEP STANDARD 1: TEACHERS KNOW THEIR CONTENT AND TEACH EFFECTIVELY STANDARD 1 COMMITTEE

Standard 1 Committee Members Sarah Drake Brown (Co-Chair), Associate Professor of History Lisa Pufpaff (Co-Chair), Associate Professor of Special Education Jerrell Cassady, Professor of Educational Psychology Karen Ford, Associate Professor of Curriculum and Instruction Chris Luke, Associate Professor of Foreign Language Education Linda Martin, Professor of Elementary Education Michael Prater, Associate Professor of ArtDenise Seabert, Chairperson and Professor of Physiology and Health Science Kathy Shafer, Associate Professor of Mathematical Sciences Diane Bottomley, Associate Professor of Elementary Education

CAEP Standard 1: Content and Pedagogical Knowledge The provider ensures that candidates develop a deep understanding of the critical concepts and principles of their discipline and, by completion, are able to use discipline-specific practices flexibly to advance the learning of all students toward attainment of college- and career-readiness standards.

Standard 1.1 Candidates demonstrate an understanding of InTASC Standards at appropriate progression levels categorized by: The Learner and Learning (1, 2, 3) Content (4, 5) Instructional Practice (6, 7, 8) Professional Responsibility (9, 10)

Progress on 1.1 Rubrics developed for 5 of 6 instructional areas across three developmental levels aligned to InTASC Standards and High Leverage Practices Instructional areas: Planning Assessment Instruction Professionalism, Advocacy, & Ethics Classroom Environment Dispositions Stages: Stage 1 roughly equal to freshman year Stage 2 roughly equal to sophomore and junior year and 1 st semester senior year Stage 3 roughly equal to student teaching

Planning Planning rubrics assess: Knowledge of content and pedagogy Knowledge of students Instructional outcomes Knowledge of resources Instructional activities Student assessment Stage 1: analyze lesson written by someone else and write a reflective piece to demonstrate developing knowledge Stage 2a: develop single lesson plan and reflective piece Stage 2b: develop several connected lessons (e.g., Unit) and reflective piece Stage 3: develop a Unit and reflective piece

Assessment Assessment rubrics evaluate: Creation and application of a rubric Creation and application of a traditional assessment At Stage 2 add a case study to demonstrate impact on student learning At Stage 3 add a whole class study to demonstrate impact on student learning

Instruction Instruction rubrics evaluate: Instructional interactions Use of questions and discussions Instructional design Student learning Student engagement

Professionalism, Advocacy & Ethics Provide a menu of activities to be completed in the context of: Classroom Discipline Community with a required reflection on the activities Stage 1 focus = Becoming a responsible teacher education student Stage 2 focus = Becoming a responsible teacher candidate Stage 3 focus = Becoming a responsible professional teacher

Classroom Environment Rubrics evaluate: Culture of learning Interactions in the classroom Classroom management Material management

Dispositions Still under development

Standard 1.2 Providers ensure that completers use research and evidence to develop an understanding of the teaching profession and use both to measure their P-12 students’ progress and their own professional practice.

Progress New rubrics have incorporated the requirements of Standard 1.2 Will be further refined as Program Areas begin identifying/creating specific assignments/artifacts with which to use the new rubrics

Standard 1.3 Providers ensure that completers apply content and pedagogical knowledge as reflected in outcome assessments in response to standards of Specialized Professional Associations (SPA), the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards (NBPTS), states, or other accrediting bodies (e.g., National Association of Schools of Music – NASM).

Progress SPA recognitions and other program accreditations will primarily address this substandard Challenge is that current SPA recognitions and Response to Conditions are using “old” assessments Will have to address this issue in the narrative of the self study

Standard 1.4 Providers ensure that completers demonstrate skills and commitment that afford all P-12 students access to rigorous college- and career-ready standards (e.g., Next Generation Science Standards, National Career Readiness Certificate, Common Core State Standards).

Progress No specific work on this substandard yet, but will begin to develop as Program Areas begin to add specificity to new assessments Diversity must be addressed here Diversity according to CAEP means: Gifted Disabilities Ethnicity Race SES Gender Language Religion Sexual identification Geographic origin

Standard 1.5 Providers ensure that completers model and apply technology standards as they design, implement and assess learning experiences to engage students and improve learning; and enrich professional practice.

Progress NONE yet