B.S. Technology and
Science Education
Assessment in the Major
Report
By Dr. Brian McAlister & Dr. David
Stricker
2014-15
Submitted: October 2015
Table of Contents
Overview ..................................................................................................................................................................................................................2
Overview of the Program .........................................................................................................................................................................................2
Previous Goals and Evidence...................................................................................................................................................................................3
PRAXIS I: Pre-Professional Skills Test/CORE Tests ............................................................................................................................................5
PPST/CORE/ First Time Test Takers ......................................................................................................................................................................7
PRAXIS II: Content Test ........................................................................................................................................................................................8
Benchmark Reviews ................................................................................................................................................................................................8
Benchmark II .........................................................................................................................................................................................................10
Benchmark III ........................................................................................................................................................................................................13
Student Teaching Performance Ratings .................................................................................................................................................................15
Educational Benchmarking Inventory (EBI) .........................................................................................................................................................16
Communicating Assessment Data with Constituencies .........................................................................................................................................16
Utilization of Assessment Data to Improve Courses and the Program ..................................................................................................................16
2015-16 Goals ........................................................................................................................................................................................................16
Technology & Science Education AIM 2014-15
Page 1
Overview
The University of Wisconsin-Stout School of Education (SOE) has gathered assessment data from fall semester 2003 through 2014/2015. However,
the BS in Technology and Science Education officially began in the fall of 2009. In the spirit of the Assessment in the Major report, a list of
assessment tools used to collect data will be presented in this report. Specifically, data gathered from these tools is used to develop program goals,
inform curriculum changes, and enhance course delivery in order to improve teacher education candidate learning. This report contains data from
the:
PRAXIS I: Pre-Professional Skills Test (PPST) and Core Academic Skills for Educators (CORE)
PRAXIS II: Content Test
Benchmark I, II, and III reviews
Student Teaching Performance Ratings
Educational Benchmarking Inventory (EBI)
2006 and 2010 Alumni Follow-up Survey
The report will also describe how assessment data is used to set programmatic goals, improve the program, program curriculum, and delivery of
courses.
Overview of the Program
In 2013-14, the Technology & Science Education program consisted of nine Technology and Sciences Education candidates, six categorized as preeducation majors and three that were fully admitted into the program.
Technology & Science Education AIM 2014-15
Page 2
Previous Goals and Evidence
1
2
3
4
5
6
2014-15 Goals
Increase candidate exposure to classrooms, teachers, and students.
a. School of Education staff and Technology Education faculty
and staff are currently identifying schools, contemporary
technology education programs, and qualified cooperating
teachers that would serve as observation sites for pre-student
and teacher candidates (Ongoing Goal).
b. Attention will continue to be focused on developing preservice teachers’ and Technology Education Collegiate
Association’s efforts to work with peers, professionals and
students through competitive events, field trips, and lab
activities (Ongoing Goal).
Collaborate with STEM and other colleges/institutions as improving
lab experiences and access for candidates is a key element for
candidates to thoroughly understand their content and, as a result, it’s
interdisciplinary power (Ongoing Goal).
Seek input from the BSTE advisory committee that includes, among
others, current candidates and alumni, STEM education
professionals from other institutions and states, UW-Stout STEM
college faculty, and Technology Education faculty (Ongoing Goal).
Visit schools, host professional development opportunities, and
increase online and mail marketing campaigns in order to increase
program enrollment (Ongoing Goal).
Collect data and refine planning for student candidates to begin work
toward the Teacher Performance Assessment (edTPA). Work with
SOE faculty and staff to create an implementation plan for edTPA
through revised courses and assessment system (Ongoing Goal).
Refer candidates in science, technology, and math education
(STMED) courses to the Writing Center here at Stout
Technology & Science Education AIM 2014-15
Evidence towards meeting goals or rationale for abandoning:
We have added opportunities in STEMED 160, Intro to Technology
and Science Education, for candidate to visit and interact with k-12
teachers and students in the region. In addition, candidates
participate in lesson delivery at the primary level in TECED 325,
Technology for Elementary School Children. This is in addition to the
Pre-student Teaching experience.
TEECA continues to sponsor a number of competitive events. In
addition, they volunteer to serve in leadership positions with events
sponsored by the STEM college.
Communicated with STEM faculty regarding candidate employment
and professional development opportunities that are germane to the
positions they aspire to attain.
Facilitated bi-annual BSTE advisory board meetings
Hosted professional development opportunities, and increased online
and mail marketing campaigns with the goal of increasing program
enrollment. Worked with University Marketing to establish a
marketing plan for BSTE. Marketed a new online option within the
program. In addition, we launched a new STEMED ambassadorship
program to reach out to influential teachers and leaders.
All candidates completed edTPA starting in the Fall of 2014. Some
were commissioned to submit their portfolios to Pearson for scoring.
Results were analyzed each semester and compared against local and
national scoring.
Referred candidates in science, technology, and math education
(STMED) courses to the Writing Center.
Page 3
7
(http://www.uwstout.edu/writingcenter/) for support and feedback in
order to increase PPST performance.
Instructors in science, technology, and math education (STMED)
courses will identify opportunities for candidates to demonstrate
their philosophies of education within existing curricula in order to
foster a working knowledge of their philosophy and subsequently
increase candidate Benchmark II interview performance.
Technology & Science Education AIM 2014-15
Instructors purposely targeted opportunities to reinforce candidates
abilities to articulate details of their philosophy of education as they
develop over their academic career.
Page 4
PRAXIS I: Pre-Professional Skills Test/CORE Tests
All education majors must pass all three sections of the PRAXIS I: Core Academic Skills for Educators (CORE). The three sections consist of
reading, writing and mathematics. Prior to the fall 2013 semester, candidates would take the Pre-Professional Skills Test (PPST) which was available
until the end of the 2013-14 academic year. Wisconsin state policy allows the unit to provide an exception for up to 10 % of any cohort. Also,
candidates can meet their Benchmark I requirements through scores on their college entrance exam. Note that the pass rates in the table reflect
attempts by all candidates prior to being formally accepted into the School of Education, all candidates are required to pass the CORE as
part of Benchmark I, therefore the pass rate of candidates accepted is 100%.
Table 1 - PRAXIS I: Pre-Professional Skills Test (PPST) Completion Data
Teacher
Education
Program
TSE
SOE
2010
PPST Test
Math
Math
Exception
Writing
Writing
Exception
Reading
Reading
Exception
Math
Math
Exception
Writing
Writing
Exception
Reading
Reading
Exception
2011-12
2012-13
2013-14
# test
attempts
1
# (and %)
passed
1 (100%)
# test
attempts
0
# (and %)
passed
NA
# test
attempts
0
# (and %)
passed
NA
# test
attempts
1
# (and %)
passed
1 (100%)
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
1
1 (100%)
0
NA
1
0 (0%)
1
1 (100%)
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
1
1 (100%)
0
NA
0
NA
1
1 (100%)
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
198
150 (76%)
210
142 (68%)
114
86 (75%)
70
53 (76%)
NA
NA
NA
NA
1
NA
NA
NA
213
141 (66%)
287
138 (48%)
175
95 (54%)
104
46 (44%)
NA
NA
NA
NA
1
NA
1
NA
243
138 (57%)
240
135 (56%)
157
86 (55%)
109
48 (44%)
NA
NA
NA
NA
2
NA
3
NA
Technology & Science Education AIM 2014-15
Page 5
CORE Attempts and Pass Rates
Teacher
Education
Program
TSE
SOE
2013-14
CORE Test
CORE Math
Math
Exemption
CORE Writing
Writing
Exemption
CORE Reading
Reading
Exemption
CORE Math
Math
Exemption
CORE Writing
Writing
Exemption
CORE Reading
Reading
Exemption
2014-15
# test
attempts
NA
# (and %)
passed
NA
# test
attempts
NA
# (and %)
passed
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
15
6 (40%)
122
67 (55%)
NA
NA
1
NA
13
7 (54%)
136
56 (41%)
1
NA
1
NA
14
10 (71%)
113
75 (66%)
3
NA
NA
NA
No candidates from Technology and Science Education applied for Benchmark I during the 2014-15 academic year.
Technology & Science Education AIM 2014-15
Page 6
PPST/CORE/ First Time Test Takers
Beginning in the 2013-14 school year, all teacher preparation programs in the state of Wisconsin are required to report on “the passage rate on the
first attempt of candidates and graduates of the program on examinations administered for licensure” (Act 166, section 17). As noted in the table
below, no candidates Technology and Science Education candidates attempted the exam during the 2014-15 academic year.
Teacher
Education
Program
TESE
SOE
Teacher
Education
Program
TESE
SOE
Spring 2013
PPST Test
Math
Writing
Reading
Math
Writing
Reading
# first time
test takers
NA
NA
NA
63
65
63
2013-14
# (and %)
passed
NA
NA
NA
52 (83%)
40 (62%)
40 (63%)
# first time
test takers
1
1
1
56
53
56
2013-14
CORE Test
CORE Math
CORE Writing
CORE Reading
CORE Math
CORE Writing
CORE Reading
# first time
test takers
NA
NA
NA
13
11
13
# (and %)
passed
NA
NA
NA
6 (46%)
5 (45%)
9 (69%)
Technology & Science Education AIM 2014-15
# (and %)
passed
1 (100%)
1 (100%)
1 (100%)
48 (86%)
25 (47%)
28 (50%)
2014-15
# first time
test takers
NA
NA
NA
87
92
97
# (and %)
passed
NA
NA
NA
56 (64%)
41 (45%)
68 (70%)
Page 7
PRAXIS II: Content Test
Note that all candidates are required to pass the Praxis II to be admitted to student teaching as part of Benchmark II so the pass rate is 100% upon
Benchmark II approval.
All candidates seeking a Wisconsin teaching license in Science and Technology Education must pass both content tests (Praxis II) in the area for
which they will be certified. Future tables will summarize Science and Technology Education candidates’ PRAXIS II results. Note that all candidates
are required to pass the Praxis II in Technology Education and Broad Field Science to be admitted to student teaching as part of Benchmark II so the
pass rate is 100% upon Benchmark II approval in 2009.
Benchmark Reviews
The UW-Stout School of Education Assessment System is designed to review candidates’ progress at three intervals during the program. Candidates
are considered pre-education majors until they have passed the Benchmark I review. In this instance, the review determines a candidate’s readiness
to become a teacher candidate in the Technology Education program. Beginning Spring 2015, adjustments were made to the Benchmark I Interview
rubric. Later, candidates are reviewed again during the Benchmark II review and interview to determine whether they are equipped to proceed to the
student teaching portion of the program. Benchmark III is completed at the end of student teaching and before a candidate is recommended for
licensure. This includes the artifacts from student teaching and recommendations by cooperating teachers.
TE:SE
2014-15
3
3
SOE
2014-15
156
103
Cleared for Benchmark I Review based on score from college entrance test
N/A
29
Denied: No passing PPST score
Denied: Low GPA
Denied: Insufficient credits/course work
Denied: Did not receive “C” or higher in English, Speech, Intro, or Foundation of
Education courses
Denied: Missing background check
Denied: Other Reasons
N/A
N/A
N/A
27
5
28
N/A
2
N/A
N/A
8
N/A
Benchmark I Applications
Cleared for Benchmark I Review
*Individual candidates who apply multiple times per academic year are counted twice or more. There might also be multiple reasons for candidates not clearing for Benchmark I
review. Some candidates might also have been cleared for BM I review based on PPST/CORE scores, even though they would have been cleared based on scores from their
college entrance test. Being cleared for Benchmark I review does not necessarily mean that a candidate went through with it.
Technology & Science Education AIM 2014-15
Page 8
Benchmark I Rubric Results (new rubric)
ePortfolio Review Rubric
Foundations of Education (EDUC-326) Final
Project or Program Equivalent
Response
Deficiency
Satisfactory
Deficiency
Satisfactory
Deficiency
Satisfactory
Dispositional Review Rubric
Response
Commitment to Learning: The candidate will
demonstrate a commitment to his/her own and
his/her students’ continuous learning
Respect for Oneself and Others: The candidate
will demonstrate respect for himself/herself and
others through thoughtful and responsive
communication, showing respect and
collaboration
Commitment to Excellence: The candidate
recognizes his/her professional responsibility for
engaging in and supporting appropriate
professional practices for self and others
Deficiency
Signed Statement of Values and Dispositions
Resume
Technology & Science Education AIM 2014-15
Satisfactory
Deficiency
Satisfactory
Deficiency
Satisfactory
TE:SE
Spring
2015
N=1
0%
100%
0%
100%
%
100%
SOE
Spring
2015
N=40
0%
100%
0%
100%
2%
98%
0%
2%
100%
98%
0%
2%
100%
98%
0%
2%
100%
98%
Page 9
Benchmark I Review Results (old rubric)
Artifact Name
Two (2) artifacts related to the subject matter the candidate will
teach
Response
Incomplete
Complete
Incomplete
Complete
Incomplete
Complete
Incomplete
Complete
Disposition Area
Response
Commitment to Learning: The candidate will demonstrate a
commitment to their own and their students continuous learning
Deficiency
Signed Statement of Values and Dispositions
Resume
Philosophy Statement
Respect for Oneself and Others: The candidate will demonstrate
respect for others through thoughtful and responsive
communication, showing respect and collaboration
Commitment to Excellence: The candidate recognizes his/her
professional responsibility for engaging in and supporting
appropriate professional practices for self and others
TE:SE
2013-14
Fall
2014
N=2
N=1
0%
0%
100%
100%
0%
0%
100%
100%
0%
0%
100%
100%
0%
0%
100%
100%
SOE
Fall
2014
N=39
0%
100%
3%
97%
0%
100%
3%
97%
0%
0%
0%
100%
100%
100%
0%
0%
0%
No Deficiency
Deficiency
100%
0%
100%
0%
100%
0%
No Deficiency
100%
100%
100%
No Deficiency
Deficiency
Benchmark II
In order to be considered for a Benchmark II review, Technology and Science Education majors must have completed or be currently enrolled in a
pre-student teaching field experience; have completed or be currently enrolled in core education courses and obtained at least a “C” in these same
courses which includes: Education Psychology, Multiculturalism, Cross-Cultural Field Experience, Secondary Reading and Language Development,
Inclusion, and Lab and Classroom Management. In addition, candidates must have a cumulative GPA of 2.75 at UW-Stout.
Technology & Science Education AIM 2014-15
Page 10
Candidates are rated by two reviewers at an unsatisfactory, emerging, or basic level - with a rating of emerging or basic considered to be sufficient
evidence for a candidate to be allowed to move forward in the program. No candidates attempted to complete a Benchmark II interview in 2014-15
(see Table 2).
Table 2 - Benchmark II Interview Results
Benchmark II Interview Results
Question
Describe your Philosophy of Education and how it has
evolved.
Describe what it means to be a "Reflective Practitioner."
Describe the WI Teacher Standard and Domain you feel most
competent in.
Describe the WI Teacher Standard and Domain you have
experienced the greatest growth.
Provide Portfolio evidence (signed copy of the Instructional
Technology Utilization rubric) of your competence in current
instructional technology.
Technology & Science Education AIM 2014-15
Response
Unsatisfactory
Emerging
Basic
n/a
Unsatisfactory
Emerging
Basic
n/a
Unsatisfactory
Emerging
Basic
n/a
Unsatisfactory
Emerging
Basic
n/a
Unsatisfactory
Emerging
Basic
n/a
20112012
N=2
0%
50%
50%
0%
0%
50%
50%
0%
0%
50%
50%
0%
0%
50%
50%
0%
0%
0%
100%
0%
TE:SE
SOE
2012- 2013201420142013
2014
2015
2015
N=0
N=0
N=0
N=103
N/A
N/A
N/A
3%
N/A
N/A
N/A
40%
N/A
N/A
N/A
57%
N/A
N/A
N/A
0%
N/A
N/A
N/A
2%
N/A
N/A
N/A
33%
N/A
N/A
N/A
65%
N/A
N/A
N/A
0%
N/A
N/A
N/A
1%
N/A
N/A
N/A
27%
N/A
N/A
N/A
72%
N/A
N/A
N/A
0%
N/A
N/A
N/A
3%
N/A
N/A
N/A
34%
N/A
N/A
N/A
63%
N/A
N/A
N/A
0%
N/A
N/A
N/A
0%
N/A
N/A
N/A
29%
N/A
N/A
N/A
71%
N/A
N/A
N/A
0%
Page 11
Reviewers choose 2 of the following; discuss portfolio evidence that:
Unsatisfactory
0%
N/A
Emerging
100%
N/A
Demonstrates your content knowledge.
Basic
0%
N/A
n/a
0%
N/A
Unsatisfactory
0%
N/A
50%
N/A
Demonstrates your ability to create instructional opportunities Emerging
adapted to diverse learners.
Basic
50%
N/A
n/a
0%
N/A
Unsatisfactory
0%
N/A
Emerging
0%
N/A
Demonstrates your ability to teach effectively.
Basic
0%
N/A
n/a
0%
N/A
Unsatisfactory
0%
N/A
Emerging
100%
N/A
Demonstrates your ability to assess student learning.
Basic
0%
N/A
n/a
0%
N/A
Technology & Science Education AIM 2014-15
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
3%
45%
53%
0%
1%
41%
58%
0%
18%
50%
32%
0%
3%
31%
66%
0%
Page 12
Benchmark III
Benchmark III is the culminating assessment for candidates in the Technology and Science Education program. Benchmark III must be completed
before a pre-service teacher can be recommended for licensure. The assessment requires that all coursework is completed, that all program-specific
requirements are met, a satisfactory student teaching assessment is achieved, and that a complete electronic portfolio receiving a basic or higher
proficiency rating is submitted. In order to facilitate this, candidates complete a student teaching experience at both the middle school and high
school level.
Technology & Science Education AIM 2014-15
Page 13
Benchmark III Interview Results
Question
Artifacts from student teaching, reflection ratings.
Final Student Teaching Assessments and Recommendations
from Cooperating Teachers.
Disposition ratings from student teaching from cooperating &
University Supervisors.
Instructional Technology Utilization Rubric.
Alignment Summary of artifacts meeting all 10 Wisconsin
Teaching Standards & 4 Domains/ Components & reflections/
reflection ratings.
Technology & Science Education AIM 2014-15
Response
Unsatisfactory
Emerging
Basic
Proficient
n/a
Unsatisfactory
Emerging
Basic
Proficient
n/a
Unsatisfactory
Emerging
Basic
Proficient
n/a
Unsatisfactory
Emerging
Basic
Proficient
n/a
Unsatisfactory
Emerging
Basic
Proficient
n/a
20112012
N=1
0%
0%
100%
0%
0%
0%
0%
100%
0%
0%
0%
0%
100%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
100%
0%
0%
0%
0%
100%
0%
TE:SE
SOE
2012- 2013201420142013
2014
2015
2015
N=1
N=0
N=0
N=117
0%
NA
NA
0%
0%
NA
NA
0%
0%
NA
NA
9%
100%
NA
NA
91%
0%
NA
NA
0%
0%
NA
NA
0%
0%
NA
NA
1%
0%
NA
NA
24%
100%
NA
NA
75%
0%
NA
NA
0%
0%
NA
NA
0%
0%
NA
NA
1%
0%
NA
NA
15%
100%
NA
NA
85%
0%
NA
NA
0%
0%
NA
NA
0%
0%
NA
NA
0%
0%
NA
NA
4%
100%
NA
NA
96%
0%
NA
NA
0%
0%
NA
NA
0%
0%
NA
NA
0%
0%
NA
NA
1%
100%
NA
NA
99%
0%
NA
NA
0%
Page 14
Student Teaching Performance Ratings
Student Teacher Evaluations Technology and Science Education
Rating Scale: 1=Unsatisfactory, 2=Emerging, 3=Basic, 4=Proficient
Teachers know the subjects they are teaching
Teachers know how children grow
Teachers understand that children learn
differently
Teachers know how to teach
Teachers know how to manage a classroom
Teachers communicate well
Teachers are able to plan different kinds of
lessons
Teachers know how to test for student
progress
Teachers are able to evaluate themselves
Teachers are connected with other teachers
and the community
Teachers make effective use of instructional
technologies to enhance student learning.
2012-13
N=1
Mean
4.00
3.00
TE:SE
2013-14
N=0
Mean
NA
NA
2014-15
N=0
Mean
NA
NA
SOE
2014-15
N=120
Mean
3.75
3.75
3.00
4.00
3.00
4.00
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
3.75
3.75
3.58
3.77
3.00
NA
NA
3.73
3.00
3.00
NA
NA
NA
NA
3.69
3.82
3.00
NA
NA
3.77
3.00
NA
NA
3.76
Final student teaching evaluations are aligned with the School of Education’s conceptual framework (Danielson’s Framework for Teaching) and the
10 Wisconsin Teaching Standards. Teacher candidates finishing their student teaching experiences are evaluated by their cooperating teachers on a
four point scale 1=Unsatisfactory, 2=Emerging, 3=Basic, 4=Proficient. Final student teaching evaluations are aligned with the School of Education’s
conceptual framework (Danielson’s Framework for Teaching) and the 10 Wisconsin Teaching Standards. Teacher candidates finishing their student
teaching experiences are evaluated by their cooperating teachers on a four point scale. A score of one indicates a lower ranking while a score of 4
indicates a higher ranking. Technology and Science Education candidates’ rankings are compared to the School of Education students’ ranks in the
table above. No BSTE and Science Education candidates were involved in student teaching in 2014-15.
Technology & Science Education AIM 2014-15
Page 15
Educational Benchmarking Inventory (EBI)
The Educational Benchmarking Inventory (EBI) has been administered via computer to exiting teacher candidates during the fall and spring terms
since 2003. Eighty-eight questions and fourteen EBI factors are collected for the purpose of unit assessment and are rated on a scale from 1 to 7 with
1= not at all, 4= moderately and 7= extremely). EBI data for candidates in this major were not available at the time of this report because there were
no teacher candidates.
Communicating Assessment Data with Constituencies
Communicating data with faculty members, advisory board members, and candidates within the program will be done using various methods. The
report will be shared with faculty members during scheduled discipline area work group meetings (DAWG) designed to support ongoing program
improvement. Program faculty and staff then discuss ways to better meet the needs of candidates throughout the program. Action plans for desired
change result from work group meetings. The B.S in Technology and Science Education program advisory board, which includes candidates, will
receive a copy of the Assessment in the Major report during the fall advisory meeting. Their comments and recommendations for improvement will
be encouraged. University supervisors will be asked to share the AIM report with cooperating teachers and solicit feedback from them regarding
improvements for the program. The report will be made available to candidates within the Technology and Science Education program and an
opportunity provided for feedback. Data from the AIM report will also be used in program revision processes.
Utilization of Assessment Data to Improve Courses and the Program
The program goals listed below were established for the 2013-2014 academic year. Many of these goals will be retained, although evidence has been
provided to show progress made toward their attainment. The goals for the 2014-2015 school year are listed subsequently and reflect needs
demonstrated in the data and summaries above:
2015-16 Goals
1
Continue top seek opportunities for candidate’s diverse and rich exposure to classrooms, teachers, and students.
a. School of Education staff and Technology Education faculty and staff are currently identifying schools, contemporary technology
education programs, and qualified cooperating teachers that would serve as observation sites for pre-student and student teacher
candidates (Ongoing Goal).
Attention will continue to be focused on developing pre-service teachers’ and Technology Education Collegiate Association’s efforts to work
with peers, professionals and students through competitive events, field trips, and lab activities (Ongoing Goal).
2
Collaborate with STEM and other colleges/institutions as improving lab experiences and access for candidates is a key element for candidates to
thoroughly understand their content and, as a result, it’s interdisciplinary power (Ongoing Goal).
Technology & Science Education AIM 2014-15
Page 16
3
Seek input from the BSTE advisory committee that includes, among others, current candidates and alumni, STEM education professionals from
other institutions and states, UW-Stout STEM college faculty, and Technology Education faculty (Ongoing Goal).
4
Explore ways to collaborate with STEM and CTE related program in the marketing of our programs in order to increase enrollment (Ongoing
Goal).
5
Integrate edTPA data into the assessment in the major report. Use data effective to establish goals for program improvement.
6
Work with SOE faculty and staff to revise the assessment system to integrate embedded signature assessment aligned with standards and the
edTPA.
7
Refer candidates in science, technology, and math education (STMED) courses to the Writing Center here at Stout
(http://www.uwstout.edu/writingcenter/) for support and feedback in order to increase PPST performance.
8.
Instructors in science, technology, and math education (STMED) courses will identify opportunities for candidates to demonstrate their
philosophies of education within existing curricula in order to foster a working knowledge of their philosophy and subsequently increase
candidate Benchmark II interview performance.
Technology & Science Education AIM 2014-15
Page 17