ELEMENT 5: PROFESSIONAL KNOWLEDGE AND SKILLS OF OTHER PROFESSIONAL SCHOOL PERSONNEL
Candidates in the Remedial Reading/Remedial Language Arts Program and in the Intermediate Administration and Supervision Program must demonstrate and adequate understanding of the professional knowledge delineated in the state, institutional and IRA and CSSL/ELCC standards respectively. They are also expected to demonstrate an ability to know the students, families and communities in the schools where they are employed, and be able to use current research to inform their practices; use technology in their practices; and to support student learning through the professional services they provide.
REMEDIAL READING/REMEDIAL LANGUAGE ARTS PROGRAM
The Remedial Reading / Remedial Language Arts Program is committed to evaluating Candidates' content knowledge; pedagogical and professional knowledge, skills and dispositions; and effects on student learning. Assessments are conducted using a variety of instruments and techniques which are utilized at one or more of the four gateways identified in the Unit’s Conceptual Framework, and established in the Unit’s Assessment System. The applicable assessments, as identified in the Program Report, include Competency Assessment Reports (CAR) for specific courses in the Remedial Reading / Remedial Language Arts Program. The evaluations associated with the course-specific CARs are aligned with the Unit’s Conceptual Framework and with IRA requirements. The assessment instruments and rubrics can be found in The Exhibit Room. The assessment data collected in the CARs include the following:
CAR for EDR 505 Early Reading and Language Arts Success (PreK-3)
- Chart of Major Theories (Content) – Candidates complete a chart outlining major theories. This assignment provides feedback on the Candidates’ content knowledge of reading theory.
- Connecticut State Department of Education (CSDE) Lesson Plan (Pedagogy) – Candidates view a reading lesson and, based on an analysis of the lesson, plan the next lesson. This assignment provides feedback on the candidate’s content knowledge of reading, as well as demonstrates if the candidate can effectively plan classroom-based instruction.
- Theory Essay (Content) - reflects knowledge of theory and its relationship to the lesson plan. This assignment provides feedback on the candidate’s ability to link theory and practice within the lesson design.
- Reflection Paper on Professional Development in Literacy (Pedagogy) - This project provides feedback on the candidate’s ability to reflect and learn from a professional development workshop on literacy.
CAR for EDR 507:Developmental Reading and Language Arts (4-6)
- Trade Book Project (Content) - This assignment provides feedback on the ability of the candidate to identify how specific books can be used to promote literacy in the classroom.
- Motivational Lesson (Pedagogy) - This demonstration provides feedback on the candidate’s ability to develop a standards-based lesson which effectively incorporates modeling of reading and writing for real
purposes.
- Reflection of a Professional Development session (Pedagogy) - This project provides feedback on the candidate’s ability to reflect and learn from a professional development workshop on literacy.
CAR for EDR 510 Content Reading Instruction (7-12)
- Contextual Lesson Plan (Pedagogy) - This lesson plan provides feedback on the candidate’s ability to develop a lesson plan using the CT State Department Lesson Plan Template. An essay is included as part of the lesson
plan, which analyzes the lesson plan in terms of the learning process, human growth and development, and diverse learner, and establishes the link from to the theorist to one of the principles of constructivism, behaviorism, interactions, or transactional theory.
- Thematic/Integrated Unit of Study (Content) - This Unit provides feedback on the candidate’s ability to develop a standards-based integrated Unit of study related to a specific discipline.
- Reflection on Professional Development (Pedagogy) - This project provides feedback on the candidate’s ability to reflect and learn from a professional development workshop on literacy.
CAR for EDR 540 Advanced Diagnosis and Remediation
- Development of Diagnostic Analysis (Pedagogy) - The assessments provide the Unit with feedback on the Candidate’s ability to analyze student performance data.
- Development of Remediation/Intervention Plan (Pedagogy) - The intervention plan provides feedback on the candidate’s ability to analyze data and create a remediation/intervention plan.
- Reflection on Professional Development (Pedagogy) - This project provides feedback on the candidate’s ability to reflect and learn from a professional development workshop on literacy.
CAR for EDR 545 Assessment and Evaluation CT Model
- Instructional Grouping Plan (Pedagogy) - This provides feedback on the candidate’s ability to group students for skill development.
- Connecticut Alternative Assessment Unit (Pedagogy) - This Unit provides feedback on the candidate’s ability to develop an alternate assessment based on the Connecticut Model
- Assessment Analysis Plan (Pedagogy) - This plan provides feedback on the candidate’s ability to analyze student performance data by subgroups, as well as to recommend instructional strategies that are aligned to the
assessments.
- Professional Development Presentation (Pedagogy) - This Unit requires a presentation on a specific component of the CT Assessment Model.
CAR for EDR 550: Clinic Experience I
- Case Study (Effect on Student Learning) - The case study on one student provides feedback on the candidate’s ability to improve student performance.
- Motivational Lesson (Pedagogy) - This lesson provides feedback on the candidate’s ability to motivate the student being tutored.
- Observation Protocol (Pedagogy) - This observation provides feedback on the candidate’s ability to observe a literacy lesson and evaluate its effectiveness.
- Professional Development Presentation (Pedagogy) - This presentation provides feedback on the Candidate’s ability to present an instructional lesson to other colleagues.
CAR for EDR 555 Clinic Experience II
Candidates are required to complete the same assignments as in EDR 550 (see above) except that they are to work with a small group of students (3) and complete a case study for each of the students.
Assessments and Candidate Performance
Within the CAR for EDR 505, Criteria 1, 2, 6, 7, and 8 relate directly to content knowledge. The high means and low standard deviations indicate that our Candidates achieve high evaluations related to content knowledge. Criteria 3, 4, 5, and 9 relate directly to pedagogy. The high means and low standard deviations indicate that Candidates achieve high evaluations of their pedagogical skills. Data presented below were collected on sections of courses offered during Spring, Late Spring, and Summer 2007.
Standard 1 Table 24:
CAR for EDR 505
|
|
Criteria
1
Content |
Criteria
2
Content |
Criteria
3
Pedagogy |
Criteria
4
Pedagogy |
Criteria
5
Pedagogy |
Criteria
6
Content |
Criteria
7
Content |
Criteria
8
Content |
Criteria
9
Pedagogy |
|
mean |
2.92 |
3.00 |
2.77 |
2.85 |
2.69 |
2.69 |
2.77 |
2.62 |
2.92 |
|
SD |
0.28 |
0.00 |
0.44 |
0.38 |
0.48 |
0.48 |
0.44 |
0.51 |
0.28 |
|
N |
13 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
13 |
Criteria 1. Psychological, sociological and linguistic foundations
Criteria 2. Reading research and histories of reading
Criteria 6. Learning process
Criteria 7. Human growth and development
Criteria 8. Diverse learners
Criteria 3. Design learning tasks
Criteria 4. Select appropriate resources;
Criteria 5. Differentiate instruction
Criteria 9. Professional development
Within the CAR for EDR 510, Criteria 12, 13, 14 relate directly to content knowledge. The high means and low standard deviations indicate that the Unit’s Candidates achieve high evaluations related to content knowledge. Criteria 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, and 15 relate directly to pedagogy. The high means and low standard deviations indicate that Candidates achieve high evaluations of their demonstrated ability in the area of pedagogy.
Standard 1 Table 25
CAR for EDR 510
|
|
Criteria
1
Pedagogy |
Criteria
2
Pedagogy |
Criteria
3
Pedagogy |
Criteria
4
Pedagogy |
Criteria
5
Pedagogy |
Criteria
6
Pedagogy |
Criteria
7
Pedagogy |
Criteria
8
Pedagogy |
|
mean |
3.00 |
2.75 |
3.00 |
2.83 |
2.92 |
2.83 |
3.00 |
2.92 |
|
SD |
0.00 |
0.62 |
0.00 |
0.39 |
0.29 |
0.39 |
0.00 |
0.29 |
|
N |
12 |
12 |
12 |
12 |
12 |
12 |
12 |
12 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Criteria
9
Pedagogy |
Criteria
10
Pedagogy |
Criteria
11
Pedagogy |
Criteria
12
Content |
Criteria
13
Content |
Criteria
14
Content |
Criteria
15
Pedagogy |
|
|
mean |
3.00 |
3.00 |
3.00 |
3.00 |
3.00 |
3.00 |
3.00 |
|
|
SD |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
|
N |
12 |
12 |
12 |
12 |
12 |
12 |
12 |
|
Criteria 1. Relate to content standards
Criteria 2. Articulate rationale
Criteria 3. Use essential questions
Criteria 4. Include measurable learning objectives,
Criteria 5. Scaffold learning activities
Criteria 6. Include vocabulary components
Criteria 7. Include literacy extension activities
Criteria 8. Reflect unit organization
Criteria 9. Include learning objectives based on developmental needs
Criteria 10. Select appropriate resources, and address the range of student learning differences
Criteria 11. Planning instruction that addresses learning differences
Criteria 12. Understand learning process
Criteria 13. Understand human growth and development theories
Criteria 14. Recognize and accommodate needs of diverse learners
Criteria 15. Engage in reflection on professional development
Within the CAR for EDR 507, Criteria 1, 2 and 3 relate directly to pedagogy. The high means and low standard deviations indicate that the Unit’s Candidates achieve high evaluations of their demonstrated ability to: identify characteristics of sound professional development, model reading and writing and display positive dispositions related to reading.
Standard 1 Table 26
CAR for EDR 507
| |
Criteria 1 Pedagogy |
Criteria 2 Pedagogy |
Criteria 3 Pedagogy |
|
mean |
2.89 |
3.00 |
2.89 |
|
SD |
0.33 |
0.00 |
0.33 |
|
N |
9 |
9 |
9 |
Criteria 1. Identify characteristics of sound professional development
Criteria 2. Model reading and writing
Criteria 3. Display positive dispositions related to reading
Within the CAR for EDR 540, all Criteria relate directly to pedagogy. The high means and low standard deviations indicate that Candidates achieve high evaluations of their demonstrated ability to meet standards in the area of pedagogy:
Standard 1 Table 27
CAR for EDR 540
| |
Criteria1
Pedagogy |
Criteria 2 Pedagogy |
Criteria 3 Pedagogy |
Criteria 4 Pedagogy |
|
mean |
2.83 |
2.75 |
3.00 |
3.00 |
|
SD |
0.39 |
0.45 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
N |
12 |
12 |
12 |
12 |
Criteria 1. Use instructional grouping options
Criteria 2. Use a wide range of assessment tools and practices
Criteria 3. Participate in the initiation, implementation and evaluation of
professional development
Criteria 4. Use assessment information to plan, evaluate, and revise effective
instruction
Within the CAR for EDR 545, all criteria relate directly to pedagogy. The high means and low standard deviations indicate that Candidates achieve high evaluations of their demonstrated ability in the area of pedagogy.
Standard 1 Table 28
CAR for EDR 545
|
|
Criteria 1
Pedagogy |
Criteria 2 Pedagogy |
Criteria 3 Pedagogy |
Criteria 4 Pedagogy |
|
mean |
3.00 |
3.00 |
3.00 |
3.00 |
|
SD |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
N |
8 |
8 |
8 |
8 |
Criteria 1. Use instructional grouping options
Criteria 2. Use a wide range of assessment tools and practices
Criteria 3. Use assessment information to plan, evaluate, and revise
effective instruction
Criteria 4. Participate in the initiation, implementation and evaluation of
professional development
Within the CAR for EDR 550, all criteria relate directly to effect on student learning. The high means and low standard deviations indicate that Candidates achieve high evaluations of their demonstrated ability to impact student learning.
Standard 1 Table 29
CAR for EDR 550
|
|
Criteria 1 |
Criteria 2 |
Criteria 3 |
Criteria 4 |
Criteria 5 |
|
mean |
3.00 |
3.00 |
3.00 |
3.00 |
3.00 |
|
SD |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
N |
16 |
16 |
16 |
16 |
16 |
Criteria 1. Present major components of reading
Criteria 2. Create and use case studies on students
Criteria 3. Work with colleagues to provide feedback
Criteria 4. Use motivational strategies
Criteria 5. Communicate results of assessments to specific individuals
Within the CAR for EDR 555, all criteria relate directly to effect on student learning. The high means and low standard deviations indicate that Candidates achieve high evaluations of their demonstrated ability to have an effect on student learning.
Standard 1 Table 30
CAR for EDR 555
|
|
Criteria 1 |
Criteria 2 |
Criteria 3 |
Criteria 4 |
Criteria 5 |
|
mean |
3.00 |
3.00 |
3.00 |
3.00 |
3.00 |
|
SD |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
N |
10 |
10 |
10 |
10 |
10 |
Criteria 1. Demonstrate knowledge of the major components of reading
Criteria 2. Use assessment information to plan, evaluate, and revise effective
instruction
Criteria 3. Work with colleagues to observe, evaluate and provide feedback
Criteria 4. Motivate learners to be lifelong readers
Criteria 5. Communicates results of assessments to specific individuals
Post-Program Completion Survey of Program Graduates
In 2007 an email survey was sent to 30 graduates of the Unit’s 102 Certification Program. There were twenty-five responses received. The graduates were asked to rate the program on fourteen areas on a three-point scale where 3 means the program prepared the graduate to perform at Target level, 2 equates to Acceptable, and 1 is Unacceptable. The results can be found in Table 31. Based on the data, graduates of the Unit’s Remedial Reading/Remedial Language Arts rate the program quite high in terms of preparing them for their professional endeavors.
INTERMEDIATE ADMINISTRATION AND SUPERVISION PROGRAM
Four key course assessments are used in the EDL program to measure Candidates’ professional knowledge and skills and dispositions: 1) EDL 635 - Supervision, Evaluation and Professional Development - Instructional Analysis Case Study; 2) EDL 698-Administrative Practicum- Internship Part I; 3) EDL 626: Assessment and Evaluation of Learning – School Improvement Simulation; 4) EDL 605: Advanced Curriculum-School Improvement Simulation. Copies of the assessment instruments and rubrics can be found in the Exhibit Room.
CAR for EDL 635 - Supervision, Evaluation and Professional Development
This course provides Candidates with the conceptual knowledge and experiential learning necessary for the successful practice of evaluation and supervision of teachers. Candidates concentrate on Connecticut’s Competencies for Teaching (CCT) and Connecticut’s Standards for School Leaders (CSSL) to guide their knowledge and skill development.
The EDL 635 Instructional Analysis Case Study is administered at the end of the course. Modeled after the Instructional Analysis module of the Connecticut Administrator Test, this assessment requires Candidates to observe short video of a lesson, analyze a variety of lesson related documents and respond to specific questions to demonstrate ability in:
1. Providing Appropriate and Effective Instruction
2. Understanding and Teaching All Learners
3. Assessing Learners and Using Assessment Information
4. Planning for Teacher Support and Professional Development
Standard 1 Table 32
EDL 635 – Supervision, Evaluation and Professional Development
Assessment Data
|
N |
Target |
Acceptable |
Unacceptable |
Pending |
|
119 |
76 |
42 |
0 |
1 |
The data displayed in the table indicate that the majority of the Candidates demonstrated a solid understanding of the instructional analysis process and could apply the Connecticut Standards for School Leaders in appropriate and meaningful ways.
CAR for EDL 698-Administrative Practicum- Internship Part I
EDL 698- Administrative Practicum- Internship Part I is a school improvement project that is undertaken by each Candidate seeking 092 Administrative Certification in Connecticut. This field-based research challenge was recognized by the CSDE at the Unit’s last accreditation in 2003 as being exemplary and of significant value to the Candidate and his/her school district. The Candidate is required to collaborate with his/her district administrators to identify a significant challenge or problem facing a school or district. The Candidate is also referred to the ELCC standards for Educational Leaders and is invited to select a field-based Practicum that will also showcase the Candidate’s unique skills, interests and abilities. The Candidate has access to over 100 Practicum Exemplars to help Candidates to operationally define the performance criteria which are coded to each of the CSSL standards so Candidates can identify school improvement projects that most closely match their particular interests.
Standard 1 Table 33
EDL 698 Administrative Practicum Data
|
N |
Target |
Acceptable |
Unacceptable |
Pending |
|
62 |
38 |
3 |
2 |
19 |
The data displayed in Table 33 indicates that the majority of the Candidates not only demonstrated a significant understanding of the Connecticut Standards for School Leaders and the national ELCC standards but they were able to apply these standards towards the solution of real school and district problems.
CAR for EDL 626 - Assessment and Evaluation of Learning: School Improvement Simulation
During EDL 626, Assessment and Evaluation of Learning, Candidates demonstrate their skills to use data in systematic and diverse ways to promote the improvement of learning at the classroom, district, DRG, and state level through the completion of several case studies, a field study project, a school improvement simulation and a comprehensive final exam.
Modeled after the Connecticut Administrator test, the EDL 626 School Improvement simulation requires Candidates to demonstrate their pedagogical and theoretical knowledge by applying their leadership skills to a complex school scenario. During this case study simulation Candidates take on the role of a new principal and are presented with a variety of documents (including a strategic school profile) from which they respond to a series of questions in three main areas:
1. Identifying Significant Issues/Problems
2. Addressing Significant Issues/Problems
3. Evaluating Your Actions
Standard 1 Table 34
EDL 626: School Improvement Simulation Data Table
|
N |
Target |
Acceptable |
Unacceptable |
|
115 |
52 |
54 |
9 |
The data displayed in the above table indicates that the majority of the Candidates demonstrated a solid understanding of the school improvement process and could apply the Connecticut Standards for School Leaders and ELCC in appropriate and meaningful ways.
CAR for EDL 605 - Advanced Curriculum
The major assessment for students to complete in the Advanced Curriculum course, EDL 605, deals with Achievement of Standards through Assessment: What Really Matters in a School? This assessment and the class sessions preparing students for completing it successfully incorporate all ELCC standards and the CSSL standards through the application of systems thinking. Candidates complete the assessment by:
- Articulating a vision of learning that promotes the success of all students
- Applying research on how people learn to promote the continuous improvement of student learning
- Applying knowledge of teaching to promote effective instructional practices and teacher reflection
- Revealing how different perspectives come into play when dealing with the question,
“What really matters in a school?”
- Demonstrating the importance of collaboration among key stakeholders in establishing school goals
- Explaining the importance of a collaborative culture to foster school improvement
- Realizing the powerful role that standards play in school reform and employing formative and summative assessments to improve student performance
- Applying the school improvement strategy of envisioning desired results, determining current school reality based on data, and deciding on the initiatives that will close the gap between desired results and current reality
- Perceiving the integral relation between school improvement and professional development and ensuring that there is coherent alignment between them; ensuring that teachers are engaged in professional development to achieve school goals and improve teaching and learning
- Demonstrating that sound systemic policies and procedures have to be in place to foster a collaborative culture and effective school and classroom practices
- Drawing on parents and community members as resources to improve the school and student learning.
Standard 1 Table 35
EDL 605 School Improvement Case Study: Data Table
|
N |
Target |
Acceptable |
Unacceptable |
Pending |
|
182 |
57 |
34 |
0 |
1 |
Post Program Completion Survey of Program Graduates In Section One of the Post Program Completion Survey, graduates were polled on whether the Unit’s program in educational leadership prepared them well, adequately, or poorly in the general area of pedagogy. The graduates responded that they were well or adequately prepared at a rate of 96.9%. In addition, another section of the Post Graduate survey was devoted to seeking the graduates’ thoughts on the value of individual courses offered program. Each course was rated on a five-point scale, where “1” meant “of no value” while a five signified “very valuable.” Mean ratings for each course can be seen in Table 36.
Standard 1 Table 36
Survey of Graduates of Intermediate Administration and Supervision Program
| Course |
Mean
Rating |
| EDL 605: Advanced Curriculum |
3.95 |
| EDL 626: Assessment and Evaluation of Learning |
3.86 |
| EDL 635: Supervision, Evaluation and Professional Development |
4.23 |
| EDL 654/655: Contemporary Issues in Leadership |
4.32 |
| EDL 650: Law and Finance |
4.11 |
| EDL 698: Administrative Practicum: Internship Part I |
3.66 |
It is important to note that while these figures are relatively positive they represent only 20% of the graduates who were emailed this survey. It also appeared that those courses directly related to the CAT were perceived as having the “greatest value”.
Previous Page
Back to Standard 1: Candidate Knowledge, Skills, and Dispositions
Next Page