University of Wisconsin-Whitewater
Curriculum Proposal Form #3
New Course
Effective Term:
2161 (Spring 2016)
Subject Area - Course Number: EDFOUND 487/687
Cross-listing: NA
(See Note #1 below)
Course Title: (Limited to 65 characters)
Curriculum Evaluation and Improvement II
25-Character Abbreviation:
Cur Eval & Improve II
Sponsor(s):
Mark Schroeder, Katy Casey, Scott Peters
Department(s):
EDFOUND
College(s):
Education
Consultation took place:
NA
Yes (list departments and attach consultation sheet)
Departments: Curriculum and Instruction and Special
Education
Programs Affected:
NA
Is paperwork complete for those programs? (Use "Form 2" for Catalog & Academic Report updates)
NA
Yes
Prerequisites:
will be at future meeting
EDFOUND 486/686
Grade Basis:
Conventional Letter
S/NC or Pass/Fail
Course will be offered:
Part of Load
On Campus
Above Load
Off Campus - Location
College:
Education
Dept/Area(s): EDFOUND
Instructor:
Mark Schroeder, Scott Peters, Katy Casey, or New Instructor
Note: If the course is dual-listed, instructor must be a member of Grad Faculty.
Check if the Course is to Meet Any of the Following:
Technological Literacy Requirement
Diversity
Writing Requirement
General Education Option: Select one:
Note: For the Gen Ed option, the proposal should address how this course relates to specific core courses, meets the goals of General Education
in providing breadth, and incorporates scholarship in the appropriate field relating to women and gender.
Credit/Contact Hours: (per semester)
Total lab hours:
Number of credits:
3
Total contact hours:
Total lecture hours:
48
Can course be taken more than once for credit? (Repeatability)
No
Yes
If "Yes", answer the following questions:
No of times in major:
No of times in degree:
Revised 10/02
No of credits in major:
No of credits in degree:
1 of 11
48
Proposal Information: (Procedures for form #3)
Course justification:
This is the second of two courses in a series leading to licensure. Starting in the 2014-2015 school
year, all students in Wisconsin public schools will begin taking the new Smarter Balanced
Assessment system in place of the current Wisconsin Knowledge and Concepts Examination.
The same year will also be their first in which the new Wisconsin Educator Effectiveness system
will be implemented for all schools. As part of this system all Wisconsin teachers and principals
will be evaluated in part based on their student test scores. The extent to which assessment is
involved in the lives of every Wisconsin educator and school state member is substantial. For
this reason this course will serve as a partial requirement towards a Department of Public
Instruction non-instructional Program Coordinator license in Standards and Assessment We
believe this knowledge will become more and more important for schools as multiple new
assessment-based initiatives are implemented. This second course will explore other areas
Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction Liaison Cathy Cullen has expressed strong support
and interest in the program as has Linda Nortier – UWW continuing Education Educational
Outreach Coordinator.
* Dual-listed requirements are provided below.
Relationship to program assessment objectives:
 Understand, analyze, and interpret a variety of standardized assessments at the individual,
class, grade, and district levels (Project 1)
 Use multiple sources of data to diagnose issues and make recommendations for
improvement. (Project 2)
 Create assessments to determine school attitudes regarding the value and potential use of
assessment data. (Project 3)
 Develop goals and an implementation plan to lead a data retreat in a school setting.
(Project 3)
This is the second course in a three-course sequence. Completion of the three courses will lead to
a Department of Public Instruction non-instructional Program Coordinator license in Standards
and Assessment.
*Dual-listed requirements are provided below.
Budgetary impact:
This course will require a .25 instructional load for one instructor each academic year.
EDFOUND received approval for an Assessment Coordinator position who will likely assume
the responsibilities for teaching this course.
Course description: (50 word limit)
This course is designed to meet five of the “Standards for Teacher Competence in Educational
Assessment of Students” developed by the American Federation of Teachers (see section “VIII:
Additional Information”). Students will develop skills in choosing and developing assessment
methods appropriate for making instructional decisions at the program level, and will be able to
disseminate their knowledge within a school setting. Knowledge of widely used assessments
Revised 10/02
2 of 11
such as MAP and Smarter Balanced assessments will be used to provide concrete examples of
concepts.
If dual listed, list graduate level requirements for the following:
1. Content (e.g., What are additional presentation/project requirements?)
Because both the undergraduate and graduate sections of the course will lead to the same
license, the content itself will not change (same standards must be met). Instead, the
level of rigor and application will be higher for gradate students as described below under
“intensity”. It is anticipated that graduate students will complete 7-10 additional hours.
2. Intensity (e.g., How are the processes and standards of evaluation different for
graduates and undergraduates? )
Graduate students will complete the assignments that will be broader in scope than
undergraduate students. When it comes to school-level analyses, undergraduate students
will be required to complete an additional grade level while graduate students will be
required to analyze between 3 and 6 additional grades depending on their school’s
composition.
3. Self-Directed (e.g., How are research expectations differ for graduates and
undergraduates?)
Project 1: Reading student achievement data. Graduate students will be required to gather
and secure available data from their school. The time, effort, and direct experience that
goes into obtaining access and gathering the data will be more intensive than that for
undergraduate students, who will be using data samples given by the instructor.
Project 3: Creating an implementation plan: Graduate students will be required to
administer surveys within their school and analyze their results when assessing the
assessment climate within their school. Undergraduate students will also develop
assessment surveys, but will not collect any data.
Course objectives and tentative course syllabus:
Following the completion of this course, students will be able to:
 Understand, analyze, and interpret a variety of standardized assessments at the individual,
class, grade, and district levels
 Use multiple sources of data to diagnose issues and make recommendations for
improvement.
 Create assessments to determine school attitudes regarding the value and potential use of
assessment data.
 Develop goals and an implementation plan to lead a data retreat in a school setting.
Outline:
The course will be structured into three major units on the following topics:
1. Understanding and interpreting program and school-level assessment data.
2. Analysis of assessment data and the development of prescriptive recommendations.
3. Implementation of an action plan.
See attached syllabus for more detail description of the course schedule.
The contact hour computation is as follows:
Revised 10/02
3 of 11
30 hours of in-class instruction and online lectures, videos, and PowerPoint presentations.
Twenty of these hours will be in face to face instruction, and 10 will consist of online lectures.
15 hours of collaborative group discussions.
50 hours reading course materials: handouts, assessment materials, and articles.
50 hours dedicated to project completion
Syllabus
Course:
Evidence-Based Curricular Evaluation and Improvement II: Individual and
Classroom Level (EDFOUND 487/687)
Prerequisite: EDFOUND 424/624 or EDFOUND 425/625 or SPECED 426/626
Classroom:
Time:
Saturdays X to X
Instructor:
Mark Schroeder, PhD. and Scott Peters, PhD.
Contact:
Office: Winther 6051 and Winther 4047
Phone: 262-472-5429
Office Hours: Mondays and Wednesdays 1:00 – 4:00
Email: schroedm@uww.edu; peterss@uww.edu
Texts:
Course Material Packet of Selected Readings and Assessment manuals and
resources
Website:
Desire 2 Learn website: https://uww.courses.wisconsin.edu/
Our conceptual framework, The Teacher is a Reflective Facilitator, is the
underlying structure in our teacher preparation program at UW-Whitewater
that gives conceptual meanings through an articulated rationale to our
operation. It also provides direction for our licensure programs, courses,
teaching, candidate performance, faculty scholarship and service, and unit
accountability. In short, our teacher education program is committed to
reflection upon practice; to facilitation of creative learning experiences for
pupils; to constructivism in that all learners must take an active role in their
own learning; to information and technology literacy; to diversity; and to
inquiry (research/scholarship) and assessment. Therefore, all syllabi
pertaining to courses required for licensure reflect commitment to these
underlying principles.
I. Course Description
This course is designed to meet five of the “Standards for Teacher Competence in Educational
Assessment of Students” developed by the American Federation of Teachers (see section “VIII:
Additional Information”). More specifically, students will develop skills in choosing and
developing assessment methods appropriate for making instructional decisions at the program
Revised 10/02
4 of 11
level, and will be able to disseminate their knowledge within a school setting. Knowledge of
widely used assessments such as MAP, and Smarter Balanced assessments will be used to
provide concrete examples of concepts.
Emphasis will be placed on understanding and interpreting assessment methods and data at
multiple programmatic levels, developing data-based action plans, and disseminating knowledge
to colleagues.
II. Course Objectives
Following completion of this course, students will be able to:
 Understand, analyze, and interpret a variety of standardized assessments at the individual,
class, grade, and district levels
 Use multiple sources of data to diagnose issues and make recommendations for
improvement.
 Create assessments to determine school attitudes regarding the value and potential use of
assessment data.
 Develop goals and an implementation plan to lead a data retreat in a school setting.
III. Hybrid Class Format
This class will be split between live and online instruction as indicated in the course sequence.
During live meetings; students will be expected to apply concepts learned from readings and
online activities. Since much of the course content will be acquired through self-study, students
are responsible for monitoring their own understanding of course concepts and seeking
assistance when needed. Six of the meetings will be live, and the other nine will be virtual.
IV. General Conduct of the Course





Due to the condensed and hybrid nature of this course, regular attendance and
participation in class activities is required. There will be in-class experiences (videos,
small group work, demonstrations, etc.) that cannot be made up outside of class.
If at any time you have questions or are struggling with the content of the course, feel
free to contact me via email or during office hours.
Students should be prepared to participate in class discussion and activities, arrive on
time, and respect the rights of others. This includes professional cell phone behavior,
please no texting or receiving calls during class sessions. I expect that cell phones will be
turned off or muted.
It is expected that all course assignments will be completed in a professional manner,
which means neatly typed and edited for grammar, spelling, and punctuation. All written
assignments are expected to be double-spaced and in 12-point font, unless otherwise
indicated. Assignments are explained in greater detail on D2L.
It is the responsibility of the student to maintain academic integrity with regard to class
assignments, exams, and other course requirements. Academic integrity is essential to the
existence of an academic institution. The responsibility for maintaining that integrity is
shared by all members of the academic community. Further, the University of WisconsinWhitewater supports academic integrity and provides specific guidelines for avoiding
academic misconduct. www.uww.edu/slfye/students/chapter14.html
Revised 10/02
5 of 11

All projects and assignments are due on the specified date. All late assignments must be
approved in advance of the due date to receive partial credit. If arrangements are not
made in advance and the assignment is not handed in by the due date, you will not
receive credit.
V. Course Requirements

Course Projects (75 points): Each of the three sections of the course will have a
corresponding course project that will allow students to apply what they have been
learning to a relatively authentic performance task. Each of the course projects will be
tied directly to course goals:
o Weeks 1 – 7: Understanding/interpreting assessment data at a variety of levels
(grade, program, school, district, state)
 Project 1: Reading Student Achievement data: Identification of strengths
and weaknesses using multiple sources of student achievement data.
Students will use multiple measures and resources to
identify/interpret/diagnose the strengths and weaknesses of three
program/levels: a grade, school, and district.
o Weeks 8 – 11: Application and Diagnosis of Program issues
 Project 2: Diagnosing the issues. Students will examine curricular
alignment between assessments and curriculum, as well as classroom
assessments to identify and articulate school issues and recommend
actions.
o Weeks 12 – 15 Implementation of findings: developing a plan for change.
 Project 3: Creating an Implementation Plan. Students will develop an
implementation plan that will incorporate the following:
 Affective assessments of program buy-in prior to the workshop
 The development of an instruction session
o The development of a compelling rationale and data do
support the recommendations that are being made
o The development of well-defined, measurable objectives.
 Focus on increased comprehension of data and
resources, use of these resources, and ultimate
programmatic improvement
o The development of feedback opportunities to engage
perceived competence of attendees.
 The development of feedback forms to assess the effectiveness of
the retreat for content, skills, and attitudes


Peer reviews, video tutorials, and online materials (25 points): Class members will be
placed in groups with other students to discuss, develop, and critique the analysis of their
peers and provide additional insight and collaboration. The primary focus will be on the
development of one’s own analytic skills, as well as the delivery of the resulting
information and recommendations in a clear, concise, and compelling format.
Submission of one’s own work for review will be required on the due date, and in-class
and online materials will be required for completion.
Additional Graduate Student requirements: Graduate students will complete the
assignments that will be broader in scope than undergraduate students. When it comes to
Revised 10/02
6 of 11
school-level analyses, undergraduate students will be required to complete an additional
grade level while graduate students will be required to analyze between 3 and 6
additional grades depending on their school’s composition.
o Project 1: Reading student achievement data. Graduate students will be required
to gather and secure available data from their school. The time, effort, and direct
experience that goes into obtaining access and gathering the data will be more
intensive than that for undergraduate students, who will be using data samples
given by the instructor.
o Project 3: Creating an implementation plan: Graduate students will be required to
administer surveys within their school and analyze their results when assessing
the assessment climate within their school. Undergraduate students will also
develop assessment surveys, but will not collect any data.
VI. Grading
Percent
100-94
93-90
89-87
86-84
83-80
79-77
Grade
A
AB+
B
BC+
Percent
76-74
73-70
69-67
66-64
63-60
≤ 59
Grade
C
CD+
D
DF
VII. Anticipated Course Sequence: Any changes in sequence will be announced.
Unit 1: Interpreting Data Regarding Student Learning
Week
1 Live
Dates
1/21/2014
2 Online
3 Live
2/4/2014
4 Online
5 Live
Revised 10/02
Focus
Introduction to course
Using program, school, district, and state
assessments.
Intro to first course project.
Review of assessment data formats.
Overview of Wisconsin Educator
effectiveness
Review of Common Core, State, and
District Standards; Interpretation of MAP
and Primary MAP scores I
Interpretation of MAP and Primary MAP
scores II: Walk through of school,
Overview of District.
Using Complementary Data and
Interpreting WKCE/Smarter Balanced
scores I: a look at current data and a look
ahead.
2/18/2014
Readings and Assignments
Project 1 Assigned
Overview and resource list of
covered materials.
Intro to MAP and Smarter Balanced
MAP user guides and annotated
reports; Complete grade level MAP
analysis Materials: Annotated reports and
descriptions, sample report.
Assignment: Complete school level
MAP analysis
Complete grade level and school
level WKCE/SBA analyses.
Using WINNS to look at trends over time WINNS handouts; website
navigation map. District
7 of 11
Comparison Reports
6 Online
7 Live
Instructor led working groups and peer
review/discussion of projects via WebEx.
Project completion and peer review
reports
3/04/2014
Project 1 Draft due – Complete
district analysis
Project reviews due
Unit 2: Application and Diagnosis of Strengths and Weaknesses
Week
8 Live
Dates
3/11/2014
9 Online
Focus
Using data as a source for diagnosis of
a single grade: Identifying strengths
and weaknesses: Curricular alignment
with assessment standards: A
comparison of performance from
different sources.
Using data as a source for diagnosis of
multiple grades: addressing the issues
and making classroom
recommendations within multiple
frameworks (RTI and Educator
Effectiveness).
10 Live
4/01/2014
11 Online
Using data to diagnose school-wide
issues. Curricular alignment and
resource allocation. School-wide
recommendations.
Completion of reports and submission
for sectional review. Integration of
feedback.
Readings and Assignments
Example reports; looking at
assessment and curriculum
mapping. Breaking down
assessments, assessment
formats, and school
programming. Sample grade
report completed.
Sample single grade report
extended to multiple grades.
Group meetings for project 2.
Educator effectiveness
materials; review of curriculum,
role in educator effectiveness,
resources and curriculum.
Grade feedback from group
members due.
Project 2 due.
Unit 3: Implementation: Assessing School Climate, Teacher Attitudes, and Program
Acceptance.
Week
12 Live
Dates
4/15/2014
13 Online
Revised 10/02
Focus
Planning phase I: pre-assessments of
school climate and identification of
liabilities and assets. Assessing goals
and attitudes, finding key examples, and
getting your message out
Readings and Assignments
Excerpt from ‘Unconscious
Branding’ by Douglas Van Praet.
Overview of Autonomy Support in
Education
Planning Phase II: Setting your goals
and providing support
Goal development: Developing goals
in the cognitive, psychomotor, and
affective domains as well as a
supportive infrastructure and
8 of 11
assessments of goal attainment.
14 Live
4/29/2014
15 Online
16 Online
5/13/2014
Planning Phase III: Creating a data
Materials: Summary of Kirkpatrick’s
retreat: goals, structure, assessment, and training effectiveness model; sample
longevity. Planning phase IV: assessing materials
training effectiveness
Completion of plans – group meetings
and projects.
Sub-group meetings and feedback
regarding final proposals
Final Projects Due
Peer reports due - Review of plans
and discussion of planning strengths
and weaknesses.
**The instructor reserves the right to change the course sequence at any time, including topics
covered, reading assignments, and due dates for assignments. As much notice as possible will be
given for such changes. If students do not understand an assignment or if they have an unusual
circumstance that should be brought to the instructor’s attention, it is their responsibility to meet
with the instructor.
VIII. Additional Information
Standards for Teacher Competence in Educational Assessment of Students addressed
1. Teachers should be skilled in choosing assessment methods appropriate for instructional
decisions.
3. The teacher should be skilled in administering, scoring and interpreting the results of both
externally-produced and teacher-produced assessment methods.
4. Teachers should be skilled in using assessment results when making decisions about
individual students, planning teaching, developing curriculum, and school improvement. (partial)
Specific Wisconsin teacher education standards addressed:
To receive a license to teach in Wisconsin, an applicant shall complete an approved program and
demonstrate proficient performance under all of the following standards:
7. Teachers know how to test for student progress.
The teacher understands and uses formal and informal assessment strategies to evaluate
and ensure the continuous intellectual, social, and physical development of the pupil.
8. Teachers are able to evaluate themselves.
The teacher is a reflective practitioner who continually evaluates the effects of his or her
choices and actions on pupils, parents, professionals in the learning community and
others and who actively seeks out opportunities to grow professionally.
Revised 10/02
9 of 11
University Policies: The University of Wisconsin-Whitewater is dedicated to a safe, supportive
and non-discriminatory learning environment. It is the responsibility of all undergraduate and
graduate students to familiarize themselves with the following University policies: Special
Accommodations; Misconduct; Religious Beliefs Accommodations; Discrimination; and,
Absence for University Sponsored Events. (For specific details please refer to the
Undergraduate and Graduate timetables; the “Rights and Responsibilities” section of the
Undergraduate Bulletin; the “Academic Requirements and Policies and the Facilities and
Services” sections of the Graduate Bulletin; the “Student Academic Disciplinary Procedures”
[UWS Chapter 14]; and, the Student Non-academic Disciplinary Procedures [UWS Chapter
17])
Absence for University Sponsored Events: University policy adopted by the Faculty Senate
and the Whitewater Student Government states that students will not be academically penalized
for missing class in order to participate in university-sanctioned events. They will be provided an
opportunity to make up any work that is missed; and if class attendance is a requirement, missing
a class in order to participate in a university-sanctioned event will not be counted as an absence.
A university-sanctioned event is defined to be any intercollegiate athletic contest or other such
event as determined by the Provost. Activity sponsors are responsible for obtaining the Provost’s
prior approval of an event as being university-sanctioned and for providing an official list of
participants. Students are responsible for notifying their instructors in advance of their
participation in such events.
Bibliography: (Key or essential references only. Normally the bibliography should be no more
than one or two pages in length.)
Besser (2011) Standards and assessment: The core of quality instruction. Lead+ Learn Press.
Fernet, C., Guay, F., Senecal, C., & Austin, S. (2012). Predicting intraindividual changes in
teacher burnout: The role of perceived school environment and motivational
factors.Teaching and Teacher Education, 28, 514-525
Jang, H., Reeve, J., & Deci, E. L. (2010). Engaging students in learning activities: It is not
autonomy support or structure but autonomy support and structure. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 102(3), 588.
National Ceneter on Educational Outcomes (2014) Smarter Balanced Asesment Consortium:
Usabilty, Acesibilty, and Acommodations Guidelines. Retrieved from
http://www.smarterbalanced.org/wordpress/wpcontent/uploads/2013/09/SmarterBalanced_Guidelines_091113.pdf
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic
motivation, social development, and well-being. American psychologist, 55(1), 68.
Reeve, J., & Jang, H. (2006). What teachers say and do to support students' autonomy during a
learning activity. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98(1), 209.
Van Praet, D. (2012). Unconscious Branding: How Neuroscience Can Empower (and Inspire)
Marketing. Macmillan.
Revised 10/02
10 of 11
Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction (2014) Wisconsin Educator Effectiveness
Evaluation System Teacher Evaluation Manual 2014-2015, version 4.
*Other resources include current versions of the MAP and MAP primary website samples of
items and item reports (to be obtained the semeseter of the course to maintain levels of
currency) and Smarter Balanced Assessment samples as they become available (not
available as of 8-21-2014).
The University of Wisconsin-Whitewater is dedicated to a safe, supportive and nondiscriminatory learning environment. It is the responsibility of all undergraduate and graduate
students to familiarize themselves with University policies regarding Special Accommodations,
Academic Misconduct, Religious Beliefs Accommodation, Discrimination and Absence for
University Sponsored Events (for details please refer to the Schedule of Classes; the “Rights and
Responsibilities” section of the Undergraduate Catalog; the Academic Requirements and Policies
and the Facilities and Services sections of the Graduate Catalog; and the “Student Academic
Disciplinary Procedures (UWS Chapter 14); and the “Student Nonacademic Disciplinary
Procedures" (UWS Chapter 17).
Revised 10/02
11 of 11