CAEP Standard 3: Candidate Selectivity (3. 2/3

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Writing Assessment Plans for Secondary Education / Foundations of Educations Department 9 th Annual Assessment Presentation December 3, 2013 Junko Yamamoto.
Advertisements

CONNECT WITH CAEP | | Teachers Know Their Content And Teach Effectively: CAEP Standard 1 Stevie Chepko,
OUTCOMES ASSESSMENT Developing and Implementing an Effective Plan.
Applying Assessment to Learning
Preparing for the Data Team Process 1.  Know the rationale for “Step A” with respect to the data team process.  Experience Step A as a tool to help.
INACOL National Standards for Quality Online Teaching, Version 2.
Nevada CTE & CTECS: Programs, Standards, Assessments & Credentials January, 2014 Nevada Department of Education Office of Career, Technical and Adult.
Purpose Program The purpose of this presentation is to clarify the process for conducting Student Learning Outcomes Assessment at the Program Level. At.
May 8 th Assessment Day 2015 Agenda Introductions Assessment Overview Review General Education Outcomes. Overview of past assessment work. What.
Principles of Assessment
Science & Technology Grades Spring 2007
BY Karen Liu, Ph. D. Indiana State University August 18,
CONNECT WITH CAEP | | Three-Year-Out Review of Assessments (Pending Accreditation Council and CAEP.
Eportfolio: Tool for Student Career Development and Institutional Assessment Sally L. Fortenberry, Ph.D., and Karol Blaylock, Ph.D. Eportfolio: Tool for.
CONNECT WITH CAEP | | CAEP Standard 3: Candidate quality, recruitment and selectivity Jennifer Carinci,
1 An Introduction to Language Testing Fundamentals of Language Testing Fundamentals of Language Testing Dr Abbas Mousavi American Public University.
Understanding Meaning and Importance of Competency Based Assessment
Curriculum Update Curriculum and Instructional Leaders Meeting July 19,
March 26-28, 2013 SINGAPORE CDIO Asian Regional Meeting and Workshop on Engineering Education and Policies for Regional Leaders Programme Evaluation (CDIO.
MISSOURI PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENTS An Overview. Content of the Assessments 2  Pre-Service Teacher Assessments  Entry Level  Exit Level  School Leader.
NCATE for Dummies AKA: Everything You Wanted to Know About NCATE, But Didn’t Want to Ask.
Sharon M. Livingston, Ph.D. Assistant Professor and Director of Assessment Department of Education LaGrange College LaGrange, GA GaPSC Regional Assessment.
CONNECT WITH CAEP | | CAEP Accreditation and STEM Stevie Chepko, Sr. VP for Accreditation
Continuous Improvement. Focus of the Review: Continuous Improvement The unit will engage in continuous improvement between on-site visits. Submit annual.
Deciphering SPA Requirements Kathy Hildebrand, Ph.D., Assistant Dean of Assessment & Continuous Improvement, College of Education Cynthia Conn, Ph.D.,
Chapter 3 of Your Research Project AED 615 Fall 2006 Dr. Franklin.
GET Intermediate Phase CAPS Training 1pas/2012. ASSESSMENT OUTCOMES : At the end of this Activity: participants will be able to differentiate between.
GRADING n n Grading that reflects the actual ability of the student n n Grading as a personal communication.
NOTE: To change the image on this slide, select the picture and delete it. Then click the Pictures icon in the placeholder to insert your own image. COMMON.
School Leadership Evaluation System Orientation SY12-13 Evaluation Systems Office, HR Dr. Michael Shanahan, CHRO.
Educator Recruitment and Development Office of Professional Development The NC Teacher Evaluation Process 1.
CAEP Standard 4 Program Impact Case Study
Data Conventions and Analysis: Focus on the CAEP Self-Study
Lessons from a CAEP Early-Adopter
EVALUATING EPP-CREATED ASSESSMENTS
NCATE Unit Standards 1 and 2
A Pilot Study of the DAPTM Interview in the Online Environment
Phyllis Lynch, PhD Director, Instruction, Assessment and Curriculum
UPDATE Continuous Improvement in Educator Preparation:  A Data-Informed Approach to State Program Review Presentation to the Alabama State Board of Education.
Writing Rubrics Module 5 Activity 4.
Developing a Student Learning Outcomes Assessment Plan and Report
Office of Field and Clinical Partnerships and Outreach: Updates
Program Quality Assurance Process Validation
MENTEP, Brussels Janet Looney
Elayne Colón and Tom Dana
Reports Chapter 17 © Pearson 2012.
Designing and Implementation
Creating Analytic Rubrics April 27, 2017
Clinical Assessment Dr. H
Standard 3 Candidate Quality, Recruitment, and Selectivity
What the PARCC Rubric Means
New Student Experience
Five Required Elements
UTEAC Update 11/7.
Option C Reviewer Update
Building Knowledge about ESD Indicators
Assessment in Higher Education
Clinical Educator and Teacher Candidate Training Chapter for the Candidate Preservice Assessment for Student Teachers (CPAST) Form Developed by the VARI-EPP*
Jeanie Behrend, FAST Coordinator Janine Quisenberry, FAST Assistant
Deconstructing Standard 2a Dr. Julie Reffel Valdosta State University
Standard one: revisions
Developing Instructional rubrics
Community Builder Activity 3 min-2 min
10 Key SSAT Lead Practitioner Skills
Assessment in Higher Education
FEEDBACK Dr. Mohammed Moizuddin Khan Associate Professor.
Sample Scoring Rubrics for PresentationsScoring Rubric for Oral Presentations: Example #1.
Marilyn Eisenwine Committee Chair
Student Learning Outcomes Assessment
Cooperating Teacher and Student Teacher Training Chapter for the Candidate Preservice Assessment for Student Teachers (CPAST) Form Developed by the VARI-EPP*
Presentation transcript:

CAEP Standard 3: Candidate Selectivity (3. 2/3 CAEP Standard 3: Candidate Selectivity (3.2/3.3) & Professional Introduction Videos _______________________ Dr. Elodie Jones, Assistant Professor, Education and Dr. Paul Nienkamp, Associate Professor, History Poll Anywhere: Text ELODIEJONES1 to 37607

https://www.polleverywhere.com/free_text_polls/LJjLf9qs4zkMaKX

Professional Introduction Videos: WHY? Aligning with Standard 3: Candidate Selectivity (3.2/3.3) 3.2: Criteria of admissions (application) 3.3: Additional selectivity factors (dispositions) Meeting the Standard - GPA, ACT and beyond… Origin and development of tools & process Addressing dispositions/soft skills Data collection and curation Assembling a team and piloting Committee changes and tool validation

Hindsight is always clear, or The Development of a Process Grounded knowledge in assessing video Understanding what to assess/ EPP goals Managing the technology (faculty/student) Piloting the tool and gaining feedback Managing data and feedback (TK20)

Moving from Point A to Point P: Progression of Assessment Tools Rubric #1 to pilot (non-CAEP) Development (Spring 2014) Developers knowledge level/Research Use of the tool (Fall 2014) Grader feedback Selectivity changes The grapevine effect

Rubric #1: Initial UNSATISFACTORY PROFICIENT COMMUNICATION SKILLS Language usage and the ability to clearly articulate oral comments (grammar, semantics, syntax) PREPARATION Adequate video background (lighting/distractions, etc.) Attire/Appearance Rehearsed/Prepared video content Sequential and relevant video content Video length Video format (video is able to be played and is in the correct orientation)

Rubric #2 - Piloting Tool #2 to pilot Development Training CAEP-aligned Development Training Use to establish reliability and validity

Revised Rubric From 2 competencies to 7 competencies Communication Skills Preparation Introduction/ Closing Statements Prompt 1: Greatest Strength Prompt #2: Respect for Student Differences Preparation Communication Professionalism Technology Use

And a lot of videos later… Professional Introduction Video Data Data collection that tells us: 605 video’s viewed (Fall 2014-Spring 2017) 509 Pass/96 Not Pass Communication = 2 Not Pass Preparation = 94 Not Pass Criteria for and design of follow-up policies Remake criteria

EPP Video Data Item on Instrument EPP Total Total Communication F 2014 S 2015 F 2015 S 2016 F 2016 S 2017 Total N = 92 135 120 172 86 142 P = 70 115 101 147 76 123 NP = 22 20 19 25 10 Communication 170 2 Preparation 149 23 Total N= 605

Key Take Away(s) and Discussion Establish your EPP’s overall goal and alignment with Standard(s) Establish how/who you will manage the data (e.g., TK20) Establish a flow chart and rubric for validating tools in EPP Training processes in your EPP Where are we going from here…