Teacher Education at Purdue Gate C & Gate D Gate C & Gate D Teaching Performances Portfolio Assessments Program Conveners Council August 30, 2005.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
David M. Callejo Pérez & Sebastían R. Díaz West Virginia University Reporting Student Progress.
Advertisements

By: Edith Leticia Cerda
Training for Teachers and Specialists
School Based Assessment and Reporting Unit Curriculum Directorate
Sue Sears Sally Spencer Nancy Burstein OSEP Directors’ Conference 2013
Growing Success Overview
Gwinnett Teacher Effectiveness System Training
Transformative Practices Andrea Whittaker, Stanford University Sharon E. Russell, CalStateTEACH Teacher Performance Assessment: Use to Improve Candidate.
L2 program design Content, structure, evaluation.
SEED MAT Mentor Training MAT Overview Roles and Responsibilities Internship Realities Internship Rotation Cycles Danielson Frameworks.
The Marzano School Leadership Evaluation Model Webinar for Washington State Teacher/Principal Evaluation Project.
EdTPA: Task 1 Support Module Mike Vitale Mark L’Esperance College of Education East Carolina University Introduction edTPA INTERDISCIPLINARY MODULE SERIES.
Applying Assessment to Learning
ETT 429 Spring 2007 Technology Standards. NETS-T Background International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE) created National Educational Technology.
ESEA FLEXIBILITY RENEWAL PROCESS: FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS January29, 2015.
Unit Assessment Plan Weber State University’s Teacher Preparation Program.
Grade 12 Subject Specific Ministry Training Sessions
Virginia Teacher Performance Evaluation System
INACOL National Standards for Quality Online Teaching, Version 2.
What should be the basis of
performance INDICATORs performance APPRAISAL RUBRIC
California Teaching Performance Assessment (CA TPA)
Principles of Assessment
Welcome What’s a pilot?. What’s the purpose of the pilot? Support teachers and administrators with the new evaluation system as we learn together about.
Science & Technology Grades Spring 2007
1 Ohio’s Entry Year Teacher Program Review Ohio Confederation of Teacher Education Organizations Fall Conference: October 23, 2008 Presenter: Lori Lofton.
Instructional Design Hany Alzahri. Instructional Design Instructional Design is a systematic process that is well designed in order to improve the education.
Becoming a Teacher Ninth Edition
Learner-Ready Teachers  More specifically, learner-ready teachers have deep knowledge of their content and how to teach it;  they understand the differing.
CA Teacher Performance Assessments Orientation
Chapter 6 Leading the Data Teams Process: Standards, Assessment, and Instruction.
CHANGING ASSESSMENT AND COMMUNICATION. Belief Statement Grades should be an effective means of communicating academic and social progress The language.
Lynn Thompson Center for Applied Linguistics Startalk Network for Program Excellence Chicago, Illinois October 16-18, 2009 Formative and Summative Assessment.
Stronge Teacher Effectiveness Performance Evaluation System
Today’s Agenda 1.Professional Day 2.Assignment A - SMART Goal and Improvement Plan 3.Assignment B - Honorarium and Schedule 1.Professional Day 2.Assignment.
PRESENTED BY THERESA RICHARDS OREGON DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AUGUST 2012 Overview of the Oregon Framework for Teacher and Administrator Evaluation and.
Classroom Assessment A Practical Guide for Educators by Craig A
Ms. Caley Hughes’s Candidate Teaching Presentation Anonymous: Anything your mind can believe, you can achieve. Believe and achieve. Website.
Kindergarten Individual Development Survey (KIDS) District 97 pilot involvement December 11, 2012.
Park Center – Global Studies Magnet School Staff Meeting Feb. 27.
Website I can not live without books. Thomas Jefferson 1.
Type Date Here Type Presenter Name/Contact Here Making Evaluation Work at Your School Leadership Institute 2012.
ADEPT 1 SAFE-T Evidence. SAFE-T 2 What are the stages of SAFE-T? Stage I: Preparation  Stage I: Preparation  Stage II: Collection.
The Delaware Performance Appraisal System II for Teachers Training Module 3 The DPAS II Process Training for Teachers.
Assessing The Next Generation Science Standards on Multiple Scales Dr. Christyan Mitchell 2011 Council of State Science Supervisors (CSSS) Annual Conference.
PTEU Conceptual Framework Overview. Collaborative Development of Expertise in Teaching, Learning and Leadership Conceptual Framework Theme:
Graduate Portfolio to Document Impact on Student Learning CEC-TED 2004 Albuquerque, New Mexico Deborah S. Wallace, Ph.D. Susan B. Brown, Ph.D.
Workshops to support the implementation of the new languages syllabuses in Years 7-10.
Using PACT Data for National Accreditation Gladys L. Benerd School of Education University of the Pacific Presenters: Betsy Keithcart, Assessment Coordinator.
Department of Secondary Education Program Assessment Report What We Assessed: Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs) and CA State Teaching Performance.
NCATE for Dummies AKA: Everything You Wanted to Know About NCATE, But Didn’t Want to Ask.
TPEP Teacher & Principal Evaluation System Prepared from resources from WEA & AWSP & ESD 112.
Unit Assessment System Teacher Education at Purdue March 4, 2012.
 Field Experience Evaluations PSU Special Educator Programs Confidence... thrives on honesty, on honor, on the sacredness of obligations, on faithful.
BLOCK III EDCI 362 Literacy in the Elementary School, Part I Beverly Cox October 19, 2007.
Assessment Design. Four Professional Learning Modules 1.Unpacking the AC achievement standards 2.Validity and reliability of assessments 3. Confirming.
NCATE STANDARD I STATUS REPORT  Hyacinth E. Findlay  March 1, 2007.
Unit Assessment System Teacher Education at Purdue March 4, 2012.
Why So Much Attention on Rubric Quality? CAEP Standard 5, Component 5.2: The provider’s quality assurance system relies on relevant, verifiable, representative,
Assessment Ice breaker. Ice breaker. My most favorite part of the course was …. My most favorite part of the course was …. Introduction Introduction How.
Identifying Assessments
Valley City State University School of Education and Graduate Studies Aggregate Assessment Data Please click on the action boxes to navigate your way through.
Formative and Summative Assessments 6th-12th Grade.
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.
Learning to Teach System Skill Building Three.
Designing Quality Assessment and Rubrics
Implementing edTPA An Overview.
Understanding Standards: Nominee Training Event
Association of Teacher Educators Jacsksonville, FL. February 18, 2003
Presentation transcript:

Teacher Education at Purdue Gate C & Gate D Gate C & Gate D Teaching Performances Portfolio Assessments Program Conveners Council August 30, 2005

The Task at Hand Develop, Pilot and Implement Gate C and Gate D Portfolio Assessments Based on 2005 UAS Task Force Recommendations Cover Standards-Based Teaching Performances Cover Standards-Based Teaching Performances For Methods & Student Teaching Courses For Methods & Student Teaching Courses Using Indiana Teacher Induction Style Assessments Using Indiana Teacher Induction Style Assessments With a Common Core and Subject-Specific Options With a Common Core and Subject-Specific Options Measuring a Developmental Continuum of Expertise Measuring a Developmental Continuum of Expertise Managed via TaskStream Managed via TaskStream Piloted Fall 2005 and Spring 2006 Piloted Fall 2005 and Spring 2006 Implemented by Spring 2006 and Fall 2006 Implemented by Spring 2006 and Fall 2006

Guiding Principles All Candidate and Program Evaluations Should Be… Useful – Informs stakeholders and helps their workUseful – Informs stakeholders and helps their work Feasible – Can be implemented in the real worldFeasible – Can be implemented in the real world Proper – Adheres to professional, legal, regulatory, and contractual principlesProper – Adheres to professional, legal, regulatory, and contractual principles Accurate – Reliable and valid in its descriptions, inferences and conclusionsAccurate – Reliable and valid in its descriptions, inferences and conclusions – Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation

Gate D Assessment Overview Uses Indiana Teacher Induction-Style Assessments Based on Four Teaching Performances AreasUses Indiana Teacher Induction-Style Assessments Based on Four Teaching Performances Areas Contains a Set of 14 Required, Core CriteriaContains a Set of 14 Required, Core Criteria Allows for Optional, Subject-Specific CriteriaAllows for Optional, Subject-Specific Criteria Ratings Based on a 4-point Continuum of ExpertiseRatings Based on a 4-point Continuum of Expertise

Gate D Assessment Overview Each Criterion-Rating Includes Narrative DescriptorEach Criterion-Rating Includes Narrative Descriptor Performance Area Ratings are for Formative Feedback OnlyPerformance Area Ratings are for Formative Feedback Only Pass/Fail Decision is Based on a Final Holistic Summative Assessment of Overall PerformancePass/Fail Decision is Based on a Final Holistic Summative Assessment of Overall Performance

Everythings Related to Everything Else Gates C & D Portfolio Assessments Mapping Guide

Gate D Features

Four Teaching Performances Areas I. Planning InstructionI. Planning Instruction II. Teaching and Learning ExperiencesII. Teaching and Learning Experiences III. Assessing LearnersIII. Assessing Learners IV. Reflecting on Learning and TeachingIV. Reflecting on Learning and Teaching

Gate D Features 14 Core Formative Feedback Criteria I. Planning InstructionI. Planning Instruction Knowledge of Students Learning Needs & Interests Knowledge of Students Learning Needs & Interests Knowledge of Community, School, & Classroom Factors Knowledge of Community, School, & Classroom Factors Subject Matter Focus of the Unit/Lesson(s) Subject Matter Focus of the Unit/Lesson(s) Strategies & Resources, Including Technology, to Support Student Learning Strategies & Resources, Including Technology, to Support Student Learning Focus of Student Assessment Focus of Student Assessment

Gate D Features 14 Core Formative Feedback Criteria II. Teaching and Learning ExperiencesII. Teaching and Learning Experiences Sound Instructional Strategies, Including Use of Technology Sound Instructional Strategies, Including Use of Technology Inclusive Learning Environment Inclusive Learning Environment Student Communication Opportunities Student Communication Opportunities

Gate D Features 14 Core Formative Feedback Criteria III. Assessing LearnersIII. Assessing Learners Communicating Performance Expectations and Assessment Criteria Communicating Performance Expectations and Assessment Criteria Monitoring Students Daily Learning and Adjusting Instruction Monitoring Students Daily Learning and Adjusting Instruction Summative Assessment of Student Performance Summative Assessment of Student Performance Feedback to Students About the Quality of their Work Feedback to Students About the Quality of their Work

Gate D Features 14 Core Formative Feedback Criteria IV. Reflecting on Learning and TeachingIV. Reflecting on Learning and Teaching Teachers Analysis of Student Learning and Support for Conclusions Teachers Analysis of Student Learning and Support for Conclusions Teachers Reflection on Practice Teachers Reflection on Practice

Gate D Features Option for Discipline-Specific Formative Feedback Criteria Can be Related to Specific Course Assignments or TasksCan be Related to Specific Course Assignments or Tasks Will be Included as Separate Course Assignments in TaskStreamWill be Included as Separate Course Assignments in TaskStream Can Have Their Own RubricsCan Have Their Own Rubrics

Gate D Features A 4-Point Developmental Rating Scale Beginning – Little or No EvidenceBeginning – Little or No Evidence Developing – Limited EvidenceDeveloping – Limited Evidence Proficient – Sufficient EvidenceProficient – Sufficient Evidence Expert – Clear, Consistent, and Convincing EvidenceExpert – Clear, Consistent, and Convincing Evidence

Gate D Features Narrative Descriptors for Each Criterion-Rating Option

Gate D Features One Holistic Summative Assessment Overall Performance Criterion Rates the Overall Teaching Performance Based on the Evidence Provided in the Four Teaching AreasRates the Overall Teaching Performance Based on the Evidence Provided in the Four Teaching Areas One Level of Does Not Pass – BeginningOne Level of Does Not Pass – Beginning Three Levels of Passes Portfolio Assessment – Developing, Proficient, ExpertThree Levels of Passes Portfolio Assessment – Developing, Proficient, Expert

Gate C Assessment Overview Same Basic Structure as Gate D Assessment Except Uses Indiana Teacher Induction-Style Assessments Based on One Teaching Performances AreaSame Basic Structure as Gate D Assessment Except Uses Indiana Teacher Induction-Style Assessments Based on One Teaching Performances Area Planning Instruction Planning Instruction Five Main Criteria are Identical to Gate D CriteriaFive Main Criteria are Identical to Gate D Criteria Includes OPTIONAL Supporting Criteria for Each of the Main CriteriaIncludes OPTIONAL Supporting Criteria for Each of the Main Criteria

The Pilot Study Involves Faculty Teaching Methods and Student Teaching CoursesInvolves Faculty Teaching Methods and Student Teaching Courses Will Integrate Gate Assessments with Existing DesignsWill Integrate Gate Assessments with Existing Designs Includes Optional Templates for Course AssignmentsIncludes Optional Templates for Course Assignments Will Begin Collecting Candidate Work Samples for Developing Benchmarks and Assessment Training to Establish Reliability and Validity EvidenceWill Begin Collecting Candidate Work Samples for Developing Benchmarks and Assessment Training to Establish Reliability and Validity Evidence

Timetable for Implementation Fall 2005 – First Group of PilotsFall 2005 – First Group of Pilots Spring 2006 – Fall Pilots Implement, All Others PilotSpring 2006 – Fall Pilots Implement, All Others Pilot Fall 2006 – All Gate C and Gate D Portfolio Assessments Fully ImplementedFall 2006 – All Gate C and Gate D Portfolio Assessments Fully Implemented Contact: Richard Frisbie Richard Frisbie TaskStream: Christian Mattix Christian Mattix

Using TaskStream