Addendum Items
The following addendum responds specifically to each item of concern addressed in the Offsite Board Report. The italicized section is the response.
STANDARD 1
1.3 Evidence for the Onsite BOE Team to validate during the onsite visit:
(1) Verify the status of the School Social Work program
(2) Verify the list of NCATE educator preparation programs and their SPA status
(3) Verify key assessments used to assess pedagogical content knowledge
(4) Verify key assessments used to assess professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills
(5) Verify alumni and employer survey results
(6) Verify key assessments used to assess impact on student learning
(7) Verify key assessments used to assess dispositions
STANDARD 2
2.4 Areas of concern related to continuing to meet the standard
b. Alignment of key assessments to professional and state standards is inconsistently identified for these assignments (see additional info on flashdrive)
(3) Little documentation available about candidate assessment data at advanced program levels
2.5 Evidence for the Onsite BOE Team to validate during the onsite visit:
(1) Evidence of survey and key assessment results, including those of graduates and employers, disaggregated by program
(2) minutes of meetings of the Assessment Committee
(3) minutes of meetings of the Assessment Advisory Committee
(4) History and documentation of revisions to the UAS since the previous visit
(5) Minutes of meetings where data was utilized for course/program/unit revisions (GPA, D+3):
(6) Examples of ways, other than the dispositional assessment, how the conceptual framework is aligned to advanced programs
(7) Alignment of key assessments to professional and state standards for each program
(8)Document the ability of the UAS to merge various databases (LiveText, TaskStream, Banner, Faculty work samples, etc.) so that the unit can run needed reports for ongoing assessment and improvement of courses, programs and unit operations (More demonstration available, see assessment coordinator for details)
(9) Evidence and examples as to how the UAS is used to improve unit operations.
(10) Evidence of the use of program checkpoints for all programs, including alternate route programs
(11) Evidence that candidates in advanced programs are monitored through program checkpoints as they move through their program
12) Specific examples, by programs, as to how the key assessments at checkpoints 2-3 are assessed to ensure freedom from bias in their measurements
(13) Examples as to how the unit seeks to establish fairness, accuracy and consistency of its assessment procedures and unit operations.
(14) Disaggregation and comparison of data about candidate performance in the online program and the alternate route programs as compared to those in traditional programs.(Check with assessment coordinator for more offline information if needed)
(15) Process used to track student complaints, their resolution and maintenance of records
16) Explanation and examples about faculty access to candidate data and/or data systems and how access and the data are used for program and performance improvement
(17) Explanation and examples about candidates’ access to their data and how such access improves performance
(18) Evidence that the UAS reflects the conceptual framework
STANDARD 3
3.4 Evidence for the onsite BOE team to validate during the onsite visit
(1) Are candidates’ dispositions only assessed through self assessment? Do cooperating teachers and other faculty offer input and/or feedback regarding candidate dispositions over the course of course work and/or field experiences?
2) Documentation (such as minutes of meetings) indicating specific level and type of collaboration between HCDE officials and UTC in the design and delivery of field experiences for all candidates in initial and advanced programs
(3) Additional information needed regarding specific criteria for clinical faculty
(4) Need assessment data for all programs, not just student teaching
(5) Samples of candidates’ work including reflections
(6) Field experiences for advanced candidates
(7) Data that document specific field experiences by initial and advanced candidates:
STANDARD 4
4.4. Areas of concern related to continuing to meet the standard
4.5 Evidence for the onsite BOE team to validate during the onsite visit
(1) specific data regarding evidence of candidates’ ability to plan and modify instruction for diverse student populations
(2) Do all candidates complete 2010 in order to meet diversity requirement?
(3) Examples of candidates’ work related to key assessments during student teaching
(4) Placement policies for field experiences that ensure diverse placements for all candidates
(5) Evidence of a process of data-based program review/changes related to candidate performance with diverse candidates in addition to the 3 examples cited in the IR
(6) Evidence that alternate certification candidates, advanced candidates and OSP candidates have opportunities to work with diverse students
STANDARD 5
5.4 Evidence for the Onsite Team to validate during the onsite visit
(1) Clarification of the number and ranks of full time faculty members
(2) Documentation that adjunct faculty are licensed in the areas they teach and clinical faculty have experience in school settings they supervise
(3) Information on instructional strategies used by faculty
(4) Information on how faculty integrate diversity and technology in their teaching
(5) Documentation of faculty self-assessment of their effectiveness as teachers
