Institutional Report
Pittsburg State University
Teacher Education Programs
Continuing Accreditation
Joint Visit
Kansas State Department of Education
National Council for Accreditation of
Teacher Education
Submitted April 2010
On-Site Visit October 2010
Table of Contents
The following link can be used to access live exhibits:
http://www.pittstate.edu/college/education/ncate/
I. Overview and Conceptual Framework...……………………………………………….. 1
What are the institution’s historical context and unique characteristics?........................ 1
What is the institution’s mission?.................................................................................... 1
What is the professional education unit at your institution and what is its relationship
to other units at the institution that are involved in the preparation of professional
educators?................................................................................................................. 2
What are the basic tenets of the conceptual framework and how has the conceptual
framework changed since the previous visit?…..…………………………………. 2
II. Standard 1: Candidate Knowledge, Skills, and Professional Dispositions…...………
1.1 What do candidate assessment data tell the unit about candidates’ meeting
professional, state, and institutional standards?.......................................................
1a. Content Knowledge for Teacher Candidates……….…………………………
1b. Pedagogical Content Knowledge and Skills for Teacher Candidates……..….
1c. Professional and Pedagogical Knowledge and Skills…………………………
1d. Student Learning………………………………………………………….…..
1e. Knowledge and Skills for Other School Professionals………………………
1f. Student Learning for Other School Professionals……………………….……
1g. Professional Dispositions for All Candidates………………………………...
1.2 Briefly summarize the most significant changes related to Standard 1 that have
led to continuous improvement…..………...……………………………………..
4
4
4
5
6
6
7
8
8
9
III. Standard 2: Assessment System and Unit Evaluation……..………………………… 11
2.1 How does the unit use its assessment system to improve the performance of
candidates and the unit and its programs?.............................................................. 11
2a. Assessment System………………………………………………………….. 11
2b. Data Collection, Analysis, and Evaluation…………………………………… 12
2c. Use of Data for Program Improvement…………….………………………… 12
2.2.1 Describe work undertaken to move to the Target Level…………..………….…. 13
Development and Implementation of the GUS Electronic Tracking System
(GETS).................................................................................................................…. 13
Assessment System Handbook (CF.1c)……..……………………………………. 14
Advanced Program Knowledge Base Reflects the Conceptual Framework…........ 15
Reviewed and Revised the Initial Program Knowledge Base…………………..... 15
2.2.2 Discuss plans for continuing to improve………….……………………….…… 16
Implement and Analyze Assessment System……….……………………………. 16
LiveText Implementation………………………..……………………………….. 16
Graduate Programs Advisory Committee………..………………………………. 16
Training for Using GETS and for Inter-Rater Reliability….……………………... 16
Share Reports with Professional Community……………….……………………. 17
IV. Standard 3: Field Experiences and Clinical Practice…………………………………. 18
3.1 How does the unit work with school partners to deliver field experiences and
clinical practice to enable candidates to develop the knowledge, skills, and
professional dispositions to help all students learn?............................................... 18
3a. Collaboration Between Unit and School Partners…………………………….. 18
3b. Design, Implementation, and Evaluation of Field Experiences and Clinical
Practice………………………………………………………………………... 19
3c. Candidates’ Development and Demonstration of Knowledge, Skills, and
Professional Dispositions to Help All Students Learn…..…………….……… 20
3.2 Briefly summarize the most significant changes related to Standard 3 that
have led to continuous improvement…………………………………….……. 21
V. Standard 4: Diversity……………………………….………………………………….
4.1 How does the unit prepare candidates to work effectively with all students?.........
4a. Design, Implementation, and Evaluation of Curriculum and Experiences…....
4b. Experiences Working with Diverse Faculty………………………………..…
4c. Experiences Working with Diverse Candidates………………………………
4d. Experiences Working with Diverse Students in P-12 Schools………………..
4.2 Briefly summarize the most significant changes related to Standard 4 that have
led to continuous improvement…. ………..…..………………………………….
22
22
22
23
24
25
25
VI. Standard 5: Faculty Qualifications, Performance, and Development…………..……. 28
5.1 How does the unit ensure that its professional education faculty contributes to
the preparation of effective educators?................................................................... 28
5a. Qualified Faculty…………………..………………………………………… 28
5b. Modeling Best Professional Practices in Teaching………………………….. 29
5c. Modeling Best Professional Practices in Scholarship………………..………. 30
5d. Modeling Best Professional Practices in Service……………………….…… 31
5e. Unit Evaluation of Professional Education Faculty Performance……....…… 31
5f. Unit Facilitation of Professional Development……………..….……………. 32
5.2 Briefly summarize the most significant changes related to Standard 5 that have
led to continuous improvement………………………………………….………. 32
VII. Standard 6: Unit Governance and Resources………………………………………… 34
6.1 How does the unit’s governance system and resources contribute to adequately
preparing candidates to meet professional, state, and institutional standards?...... 34
6a. Unit Leadership and Authority………..…….………………………………. 34
6b. Unit budget……………….……………….………………………………… 35
6c. Personnel………………………………..…………………………………… 35
6d. Unit Facilities……..…………………..…………….……………………….. 36
6e. Unit Resources Including Technology………………………………………. 36
6.2 Briefly summarize the most significant changes related to Standard 6 that have
led to continuous improvement………………………………………………….. 37
Overview and Conceptual Framework
What are the institution’s historical context and unique characteristics?
Founded in 1903, Pittsburg State University (PSU) is a fully-accredited, regional university
located in southeast Kansas. PSU offers more than 100 bachelor’s and master’s level academic
programs in education, technology, business, and arts and sciences. PSU’s highly regarded
academic programs meet the rigorous accrediting standards of a variety of national and
international accrediting bodies and the university is a pioneer in the Higher Learning
Commission effort to assess student learning and educational quality. The historical and
prevailing focus of PSU and the College of Education (COE) is excellence in teaching. PSU
creates a learning environment with cohesive relationships that supports candidates throughout
their program and teaching profession by providing undergraduate and graduate programs and
services to the people of Southeast Kansas and beyond. Teacher Education at PSU embraces a
dynamic, progressive approach to preparing professionals who possess the knowledge, skills, and
dispositions to meet the needs of all students and PK-12 schools as educational research, school
curriculum, and social realities change. To ensure continuous improvement, teams of college,
community, and school representatives meet to design, monitor and revise the Teacher Education
Program. A culture of excellence and continual improvement began with early leaders in
Teacher Education. Milestones include adoption of selected admissions in the late 1940’s and
full-semester student teaching in fall of 1951. With the closing of the campus lab school in 1971,
partnerships with K-12 schools expanded. In the 1980’s field experiences were increased in
education classes prior to the professional semester. In the mid 1990’s a grant funded
Professional Development School (PDS) program was initiated, which has evolved into a
voluntary internship program offering candidates a yearlong field experience. In the 2000’s,
elementary education continued to enhance field experiences in the methods classes, and
secondary programs added field experiences to their techniques classes. In conjunction with
University Supervisors, full-time secondary methods teachers now observe and evaluate
candidates in their content area. The COE Conceptual Framework (CF) supports the mission for
the teacher preparation program with its three goals: to prepare Competent, Committed, Caring
Professionals; to provide service to the various communities of which we are a part; and to
expand the body of knowledge through research and dissemination activities.
What is the institution’s mission?
Pittsburg State University provides undergraduate and graduate programs and services to the
people of Southeast Kansas and beyond. This is accomplished by a unique combination of
academic programs in the four colleges of the university: Arts and Sciences, Business,
Education, and Technology. The University is equally committed to fulfilling its statewide
mission in technology and economic development by facilitating partnerships with secondary
and post-secondary educational institutions, businesses and industries. The University supports
an organizational and interpersonal structure that actively encourages individuals to achieve their
potential. The University provides programs and services that create opportunities for students
and other individuals to develop intellectually, ethically, aesthetically, emotionally, socially and
physically. The University provides intellectual leadership and multicultural experiences that
contribute to the preservation of the heritage of the region and the enhancement of its inhabitants.
1
Finally, the University recognizes the world as interdependent and, thus, seeks to promote a
broad and interactive international perspective. The University fulfills the traditional academic
missions of teaching, scholarship and service. Excellence in teaching is the primary focus of
the University. The University recognizes that active scholarship and creativity add vitality to
teaching, expand and refine the knowledge base and are instrumental to the professional
development of the faculty and staff. Programs of professional and community service promote
and strengthen University endeavors. Pittsburg State University fosters a campus culture of
assessment and accountability that supports strategic planning and the continuous improvement
of its academic programs and administrative processes.
What is the professional education unit at your institution and what is its relationship to
other units at the institution that are involved in the preparation of professional educators?
The primary focus of the university is excellence in teaching, and the primary focus of the
College of Education is preparing Competent, Committed, Caring Professionals, who possess the
knowledge, skills and dispositions to meet the needs of all students. The College of Education
houses the professional education unit at PSU, which is comprised of the departments of
Curriculum and Instruction; Health, Human Performance and Recreation; Psychology and
Counseling; Special Services and Leadership Studies; and academic programs in the Colleges of
Arts and Sciences and Technology. This unique combination of academic programs in the
colleges of Arts and Sciences, Education, and Technology encourages collaboration by
facilitating partnerships with secondary and post-secondary educational institutions and the
community. The College of Arts and Sciences and the College of Technology are involved in all
aspects of the Teacher Education Program as active participants in the development and
assessment of the Teacher Education Program through representation on education committees
including the Council for Teacher Education, the Secondary Education Coordinating Committee,
and the Undergraduate Knowledge Base Committee.
What are the basic tenets of the conceptual framework and how has the conceptual
framework changed since the previous visit?
The mission of the COE is to prepare Competent, Committed, Caring Professionals, provide
service to the various communities of which we are a part, and expand the body of knowledge
through research and dissemination activities. COE core beliefs provide the mainstay for the
Conceptual Framework, creating our vision of teaching for both faculty and candidates. The
Competent Professional has acquired the content knowledge and pedagogical instructional
strategies necessary to effectively teach all students. The Committed Professional practices
reflection and professional development for continuous improvement of teaching and learning.
The Caring Professional possesses the knowledge, skills, and dispositions to identify, evaluate
and address the needs of all students and families when designing and presenting lessons. The
basic tenets guide our mission, vision, goals and form the foundation for the Initial and
Advanced Knowledge Base of the Conceptual Framework. (CF.3) The undergraduate and
graduate knowledge bases, created to evaluate implementation of the Conceptual Framework,
identify and assess essential knowledge, skills and behaviors including dispositions, diversity,
and technology, which guide candidates from their initial field experience through the
2
professional semester. Varied field experiences with the support and continuing evaluation by
University Supervisors, Academic Supervisors, and Cooperating Teachers in the field ensure
candidate progress in meeting designated indicators of the knowledge base and, ultimately, their
success as an educator who meets the varying needs of all students.
Since the last NCATE visit, ongoing committees, which are comprised of college, community,
and PK-12 teachers and administrators, review current best practices and data from both
undergraduate and graduate programs for program improvement. The Initial Knowledge Base,
which included 68 indicators divided into 6 categories (Professional Characteristics,
Relationships with Students, Instructional Planning, Instruction, Classroom Management, and
Evaluation), has been used to assess candidate performance from their initial field experience
through the professional semester. In 2008-2009, the Undergraduate Knowledge Base
Committee recommended retention of the 6 categories of the knowledge base with revision of
the indicators and reduction to 60 indicators. The committee also identified and labeled the
dispositions, diversity, and technology indicators to focus on candidates’ knowledge and skills to
meet the needs of all students. Likewise, the Graduate Knowledge Base Committee created a
new framework of 38 indicators divided into 7 categories (Professionalism, Communication,
Leadership, Instruction and Assessment, Diversity, Technology, and Research). The committee
recommended that the knowledge base, including 17 dispositions, be assessed to determine
candidate progress in course work and field experiences. Recommendations from these
committees were submitted for input and approval by each department in the College of
Education, the Secondary Education Coordinating Committee, and the COE Council for Teacher
Education. Following adoption of the knowledge bases of the CF, the Undergraduate Assessment
Committee reviewed the evaluation instrument that has been used and, finding it to be valid,
agreed to continue using the same assessment tool. The Graduate Assessment Committee
developed an evaluation instrument to assess its knowledge base. Recommendations from these
two committees were reviewed and approved by each COE department, the Secondary Education
Coordinating Committee, and the COE Council for Teacher Education. The revised knowledge
bases of the CF were implemented in the spring semester of 2009.
3
Standard 1: Candidate Knowledge, Skills, and Professional Dispositions
Candidates preparing to work in schools as teachers or other professional school personnel know and
demonstrate the content knowledge, pedagogical content knowledge and skills, and professional
knowledge, skills, and dispositions necessary to help all students learn. Assessments indicate that
candidates meet professional, state, and institutional standards.
1.1
What do candidate assessment data tell the unit about candidates’ meeting
professional, state, and institutional standards?
1a.
Content Knowledge for Teacher Candidates
The College of Education at Pittsburg State University strives to prepare candidates to
become Competent, Committed, Caring Professionals who, by satisfying the local, state, and
national standards of teaching, have developed the knowledge, skills, and dispositions to
facilitate learning in PK-12 classrooms and beyond. The Kansas State Department of Education
(KSDE), which reviews our programs, embraces the Interstate New Teacher Assessment and
Support Consortium (INTASC) standards in its performance standards. All PSU licensure
programs gained approval from KSDE in 2010. (1.1) Each licensure program addresses content
knowledge, pedagogy, professional knowledge and skills, student learning, and dispositions.
KSDE approval of our programs illustrates that program completers have acquired the
knowledge, skills, and dispositions recommended in national, state and local standards. Data
collected and analyzed for the teacher education program review demonstrate the achievement
level of our candidates. (1.2a)
The Master of Science in Teaching is our only program not included in the national
program review or state review. Both the CURIN 850 Current Teaching Practices rubric (1.3a)
and the Comprehensive Exam Rubric (1.3b) show the detail with which the assessments address
the standards of the program. Data from both assessments show improvement during the past
three years, with 100% of candidates achieving “Excellent” in CURIN 850 or “Satisfactory” or
above for the Comprehensive Exam for the 2008-2009 academic year indicating that the
Standard has been met. (1.4a, 1.4b)
Admission requirements for PSU are outlined in the University Catalog. (CF1.d)
Designated transition points, as described in the Teacher Education Handbook (CF1.b), ensure
that only qualified individuals are admitted and continue in the program. Candidates in advanced
programs are required to meet admission standards as identified by the graduate office. All
departments offering school support programs have established rigorous admission criteria
allowing candidates to demonstrate knowledge and skills related to their field of study, analytical
and synthesis skills, and abilities in writing. Details for the general graduate school and
advanced program admission requirements are outlined in the University Catalog and program
guides. (CF1.d)
Throughout the program, content knowledge, as identified by the knowledge base of the
Conceptual Framework, is intentionally assessed in coursework, tests, and work products. Eight
criteria are required for admission to the Teacher Education Program. Of the eight, three
evaluate content knowledge performance data including meeting basic skills requirements,
successful completion of the education gateway course, and meeting specific general education
requirements. There are four methods by which an individual may meet the required basic skills
assessment. The first method is passing the PPST; PSU candidate mean scores are consistently
4
higher than the minimum required score. A second method is passing the College Base test, or
C-Base. Mean scores for program completers listed for each content area show that candidates in
most subject areas surpassed the requirements. The third method is scoring at established levels
for the ACT, minimum of 24. Education majors consistently score near or above the University
and college ACT mean scores. The fourth method is scoring at established levels for the SAT.
Candidate mean scores for the past three years for the PPST, C-Base, and ACT show content
proficiency. (2.2, 1.2e)
School administrators, as well as program completers, provide first and third year
feedback supporting the content strength of teacher candidates. Program completers report that
they are academically well prepared for meeting the challenge of teaching subject area content in
the classroom. (1.6a, 1.6b) Feedback from administrators further supports the high level of
content preparation with which completers enter their first teaching job. (1.7a, 1.7b)
Content exam results for BSE/BME completers show that candidates consistently score
above the Kansas Passing score. Further, over the past three years, at least 80% of candidates
from all 15 content areas passed their content test. (1.2f)
1b. Pedagogical Content Knowledge and Skills for Teacher Candidates
Another major checkpoint is entry into the professional semester, when candidates are
required to meet established academic standards prior to admission. These requirements address
content and pedagogical knowledge and skills. The education program is designed so that all
Curriculum and Instruction courses build upon the foundation established in Explorations, the
initial education course. Candidates are evaluated throughout the program, from their initial
course and field experience (CURIN 261) to the comprehensive evaluation of program
completers following the professional semester, to the employer and personal evaluations
following the completion of the first and third years of teaching.
The CF Knowledge Base, a major strength of the education program at PSU, assesses the
candidates’ development as Competent, Committed, Caring Professionals. The knowledge base
evolved from an extensive review of national INTASC standards, state standards, research
literature, and objectives for the Principles of Learning and Teaching assessment. The resulting
knowledge base, which was revised from the original 68 indicators in 2009, is unified around 60
indicators. A framework of six specific categories assesses knowledge, skills, and dispositions
that are taught and formatively and developmentally assessed throughout the training program.
This comprehensive assessment provides evaluation of performance that includes knowledge of
pedagogy, inquiry strategies, critical analysis and synthesis of the subject as well as candidate
dispositions, diversity, and technology. The Competent Professional is one who has acquired
pedagogical content knowledge and instructional strategies necessary for effective teaching. The
framework of the 60 indicators is divided into 6 categories: Professional Characteristics,
Relationships with Students, Instructional Planning, Instruction, Classroom Management, and
Evaluation. The indicators that form the Instructional Planning and Instruction categories target
the pedagogical content knowledge of the teacher candidates. During the professional semester,
the university supervisor and cooperating teacher evaluate each candidate on these indicators in
the initial stages of the professional semester, at mid-semester, and at the end of the program.
Mean scores attained by teacher candidates for the instructional planning and instruction
categories demonstrate their high level of preparation in pedagogical content knowledge and
instructional strategies. (A.1, A.2, A.4, A.5)
5
1c.
Professional and Pedagogical Knowledge and Skills
Professional and Pedagogical Knowledge and Skills are evaluated with two assessments:
the Principles of Teaching and Learning (PLT) and the Teacher Work Sample (TWS). Mean
scores from the PLT show a high level of competence in professional and pedagogical
knowledge and skill for program completers. Since teacher education faculty believe that the
hands-on experience gained during the professional semester enables candidates to transfer
theory into practice, candidates may choose to take the PLT following graduation. (1.2b, 1.2c,
1.2d, 2.4b)
The required TWS, completed during the professional semester and introduced
incrementally throughout the program, mirrors the knowledge base and provides opportunities to
assess each of the 6 categories of the CF. The TWS is comprised of 7 criterion: Contextual
Information and Learning Environment Adaptations, Learning Goals and Objectives,
Instructional Design and Implementation, Demonstration of Integration Skills, Analysis of
Classroom Learning Environment, Analysis of Assessment Procedures, and Reflection and SelfEvaluation. TWS provides a comprehensive assessment of candidates’ ability to analyze student
learning and to reflect upon the effectiveness of the lesson. This project allows faculty and
supervisors to evaluate the acquisition of knowledge and skills to implement (1) instructional
strategies such as inquiry, critical analysis, and synthesis of learning; (2) assessment of the
learning level of students in their classroom; and (3) knowledge of multiple learning modes and
their application in the learning environment. The Contextual Information and the Reflection
and Self-Evaluation sections of the TWS address this component of the standard; results show
that candidates have gradually improved in Reflection with 96.97% satisfactory or above in
2008-2009 and 100% satisfactory or above in Contextual Information. (A.2, 1.5)
1d. Student Learning
The initial section of the TWS requires the teacher candidate to complete an in-depth
study of the school and the community. Teacher candidates use technology to research data
related to the make-up of families and communities in the schools where they are placed. They
also review the School Report Card to study the demographics and their school, observe the
classroom, and complete a shadow study of one student to understand the context of the class.
Information gathered from their research and observations is then used to plan, present, and
evaluate the unit of study. The Caring Professional considers the needs of individuals and their
families when designing lesson plans and presentation strategies to ensure that all students learn
in a fair environment. Candidates are expected to adapt their lessons while teaching to ensure
that all students achieve. After completing the unit, the teacher candidate prepares a reflection
upon the strengths and challenges encountered in the unit and identifies areas of improvement for
future teaching. Such reflection encourages each candidate to become a reflective practitioner
committed to continuous improvement of teaching and learning. TWS ratings indicate candidate
success in planning, teaching and analyzing results to meet the needs of all students. (A.2)
Assessments of the knowledge base provide rich evidence that teacher candidates and
graduates possess the knowledge, skills and dispositions to structure a learning environment that
is conducive to learning by all students. School administrators evaluate first-year and third-year
teachers according to their level of expertise in the Instructional Planning and Instruction; such
data from employer feedback assesses candidates at a high level of proficiency of pedagogical
content knowledge and dispositions. (1.7a, 1.7b)
6
Candidates, further, demonstrate their abilities to address individual needs of learners in
their portfolios that are aligned with the knowledge base and the KSDE standards. Candidates
are required to include various projects from professional education courses. These projects
illustrate that candidates (a) planned instruction appropriately for diverse students; (b) altered
instruction based on student results, and (c) adapted instruction to accommodate individual
differences. Portfolio mean scores indicate candidate proficiency. (A.1) Most portfolios are
submitted in paper format. Candidates are required to digitally archive artifacts from courses
throughout the program for inclusion in the final portfolio. In 2009-2010, COE e-Portfolio
Committee developed a framework and process to reinstate a required digital portfolio, which
will be implemented in a phased sequence beginning in the Fall of 2010.
1e.
Knowledge and Skills for Other School Professionals
As with initial programs, state review data indicate that advanced program candidates
surpassed the requirements in each subject area. (1.1) In first and third year follow up surveys,
program completers in advanced programs reported that they were prepared with the content
knowledge needed in their position. (1.6e, 1.6f, 1.6g, 1.6h) First and third year administrator
feedback agreed that advanced candidates possessed the knowledge, skills, and dispositions to
effectively perform the responsibilities in their positions. (1.7a, 1.7b, 1.7c, 1.7d, 1.7e, 1.7f)
Previously, advanced candidates were assessed using the same knowledge base as the
initial programs; however in 2008-2009, a separate advanced knowledge base was created by a
committee of college, school, and community stakeholders. The committee identified 7
categories including Professionalism, Communication, Leadership, Instruction and Assessment,
Diversity, Technology, and Research. Candidate performance is formally and informally
assessed at various checkpoints throughout each program using the indicators of the CF
Knowledge Base. An emphasis is placed on the development of knowledge and skills required
in professional and state standards, content knowledge in the specific academic area, and the
inquiry tools those fields require. Graduate research, assignments, and field experiences require
that candidates demonstrate their knowledge through focused inquiry, critical analysis, and
content syntheses. Performance data indicate high levels of achievement in the area of content
knowledge and skills. (1.2g)
Advanced programs at Pittsburg State University have been designed around the
Conceptual Framework to develop appropriate professional and pedagogical knowledge and
skills within their fields and to learn strategies for working with students, families, and
communities. All advanced programs are designed to allow the development of cohesive
relationships among students and faculty. The connection between coursework learned in formal
classes and experiences in field placements ensures that candidates focus on the environmental,
demographic, and policy contexts of the students with whom they will work. The mission of
Pittsburg State University, the College of Education, and Teacher Education emphasizes
personalization while being professional in establishing a positive productive environment
through modeling and interaction. Feedback from graduates and employers verify that
candidates are successful in developing such relationships with colleagues, parents, and students.
(1.6c, 1.6d, 1.6e, 1.6f, 1.7c, 1.7d, 1.7e, 1.7f)
7
1f.
Student Learning for Other School Professionals
Just as in the initial and licensure seeking programs, advanced programs are developed so
that candidates focus on student learning. In the first and third year feedback for each advanced
program, specific questions addressed student learning and graduate preparation to meet the
needs of students. Survey data indicate that program completers view their preparation to
facilitate learning as above average in each program. (1.6c, 1.6d, 1.6e, 1.6f, 1.6g, 1.6h) Both onsite supervisors and program coordinators provide performance feedback by evaluating the field
experiences of candidates as they develop the knowledge, skills, and professional dispositions to
assist all students learn by analyzing student learning, reflecting on their practice, and
participating in field experiences and clinical practice related to their role. Candidate field
experiences are evaluated using the Advanced Knowledge Base, which includes indicators that
evaluate Professionalism, Communication, Leadership, Instruction and Assessment, Diversity,
Technology, and Research. (3.6h, 3.6i)
1g.
Professional Dispositions for All Candidates
When analyzing and revising the knowledge base in the spring of 2009, both the initial
and advanced Knowledge Base Committees defined values, commitments, and professional
attitudes that influence the teacher candidate’s behavior and identified indicators that
demonstrate the candidates’ dispositions, especially the belief that all students, including those
from diverse populations, can learn. Dispositions were reviewed and revised in the Initial
Knowledge Base (1.8a). Eleven dispositions are assessed in the initial field experiences (CURIN
261) and seventeen in the second field experience (CURIN 307) by the cooperating teachers
using a rubric. (l.8b) The mean scores for the past three years indicate that candidates begin the
program with a high level of professional beliefs and attitudes. (1.8g, 1.8h) Assessments by
their university supervisor during the professional semester also indicate that candidates possess
the necessary dispositions. (1.8c)
In the advanced programs, the Knowledge Base Committee identified 17 dispositions
with measurable indicators (1.8d) and a rubric for assessment. (1.8e) Assessments by university
supervisors of the eight programs reveal that advanced candidates demonstrate that they have
developed the dispositions to create learning environments in which all students learn. (1.8f)
For candidates who struggle, the Professional Teacher Candidate Improvement Plan was
developed to formalize an existing procedure. The plan allows early and ongoing intervention for
teacher candidates, who are identified to have areas within the 60 indicators for teacher
effectiveness that need to be addressed in ways beyond normal classroom, advisement, or
mentoring. A major rationale for developing this plan was the need to address dispositions of
teacher candidates who are not at an acceptable level of performance, which is the major reason
teacher candidates fail.
1.2
Briefly summarize the most significant changes related to Standard 1 that have led to
continuous improvement.
As a result of data analysis and research, several changes related to Standard 1 have been
implemented to ensure that candidates develop the knowledge, skills, and dispositions to meet
the Standard as delineated in the Conceptual Framework. These changes ensure continuous
improvement and include revisions in the Teacher Work Sample, review and revision of the
knowledge base for initial programs and the development of a new knowledge base for advanced
8
programs, additions of support for candidate assessments, changes in the online programs,
expansion of minor and graduate opportunities, and implementation of alternate technology.
The Teacher Work Sample (TWS), used during the last visit, was revised to align with
the Kansas Performance Assessment (KPA), which was piloted as a state assessment of
beginning teachers. The COE continues to assess candidates using components of the TWS
throughout the program, and each candidate completes a TWS as an assessment during the
professional semester. During the review of TWS assessment results, some discrepancies and
inconsistencies were identified. To ensure consistency and fairness of the TWS, the COE
implemented the following strategies: University Supervisors received additional training; interrater reliability workshops were held; COE created a curriculum map to determine where the
components of the TWS were taught in the program; and the TWS was aligned with the
Conceptual Framework. In addition, the COE determined that two readers, one university
supervisor and one content/methods teacher, would assess the TWS.
Analysis of the PRAXIS II content test scores for Early Childhood/Late Childhood K-6
candidates identified areas of concern. As a result, all methods teachers prepared materials to
present to candidates on the Thursdays they returned to campus during their professional
semester. Currently, Elementary Supervisors dedicate time in the Thursday sessions to help
candidates prepare for the content tests. Review of secondary content materials and test
preparation is provided by individual departments. For example, some departments use time in
seminars to review concepts and take practice tests. In addition, faculty members work with
candidates individually in varied content areas.
After review of data and research of best practices, the Undergraduate Knowledge Base
Committee revised the knowledge base of the Conceptual Framework. They retained the 6
original categories (Professional Characteristics, Relationships with Students, Instructional
Planning, Instruction, Classroom Management, and Evaluation) but updated the 68 indicators
and reduced the number to 60 to be assessed from the initial field experience through the clinical
experience. The committee also identified specific indicators addressing diversity, dispositions,
and technology. The evaluation form used by supervisors to evaluate teacher candidates was
revised to include these standards. In addition, cooperating teachers can now enter their
evaluation online allowing the teacher candidate to immediately view their evaluation online.
The Graduate Knowledge Base Committee reviewed graduate data and current research; as a
result, they developed a framework of 38 indicators in 7 categories (Professionalism,
Communication, Leadership, Instruction and Assessment, Diversity, Technology, and Research)
to be used to assess candidate progress in course work and field experiences.
Feedback from our candidates and area school districts, as well as the increasing diversity
in the PSU service area, has led to expansion and change of our graduate offerings. English for
Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL) Endorsement and Minor are now offered both face-to-face
and online. After the summer of 2010, the Master of Science Degree in Reading and the Reading
Specialist licensure PK-12 will both be delivered exclusively online. Three new Education
Minors have been approved to meet the expanding needs of our candidates to teach outside the
PSU area and meet the needs of all students. One minor is Technological Literacy, a minor in
technology education. The other two include the Minor in Education Urban and Suburban
Experience and the Minor in International Teaching. Also, with approval of an innovative
Special Education program, PSU now offers a Master of Arts in Teaching with a restricted
license in Adaptive 6-12 Special Education, the only program in Kansas with a direct entry into
9
special education. Also, the Kansas City Fellows Program was broadened to other school
districts and a Master of Arts in Teaching with an emphasis in Secondary Education is now
offered through the Kansas City Metro Center.
Finally, the COE previously used Blackboard as a tool for on-line courses and
assignments. Faculty and candidate feedback suggested that the system was costly and not
consistently used by elementary and secondary faculty. The portfolio was discontinued, but the
artifacts were still completed in designated classes. PSU then implemented ANGEL, which is
now used for class assignments, communication, and online delivery. The COE has just adopted
LiveText. The e-portfolio Committee of the COE has met and developed a framework for the
portfolio based on the knowledge base of the Conceptual Framework; plans are to implement the
portfolio in LiveText in the Fall semester of 2010.
10
STANDARD 2: Assessment System and Unit Evaluation
The unit has an assessment system that collects and analyzes data on applicant qualifications,
candidate and graduate performance, and unit operations to evaluate and improve the performance
of candidates, the unit, and its programs.
2.1
How does the unit use its assessment system to improve the performance of candidates
and the unit and its programs?
The College of Education (COE) Assessment System was developed to align with the
Unit’s Conceptual Framework (CF) and state and professional standards for the specific purpose
of data collection, analysis, and evaluation that leads to program improvement and candidate
success in teaching. The COE Assessment System is structured so that the professional
community regularly examines the validity and utility of the data produced through assessments
and makes modifications to keep abreast of changes in assessment technology and in
professional standards.
2a. Assessment System
The assessment system for Initial programs includes information to make decisions based
on multiple assessments at four different checkpoints (2.1a). These include Admission to
Teacher Education, Admission to the Professional Semester, Completion of the Professional
Semester and the teaching program, and Application for Licensure. A final collection of data
used for program assessment is first and third year feedback from first and third year teachers
and their building principals. Data from all checkpoints are collected by the Office of Teacher
Education, updated as requirements are satisfied and officially analyzed for Admission to
Teacher Education, the Professional Semester, Completion of the Professional Semester, or for
Licensure to Teach. If a candidate struggles at any checkpoint, the candidate, advisor, and
department chair are notified so a plan of action can be developed to remediate the candidate or
to assist in selecting another field of study.
The Advanced program assessment system is also organized around four different
checkpoints (2.1b) including Admission to the Program, Approval of Candidacy, Completion of
the Program, and Application for Licensure. Graduate programs survey their program completers
and their employers to gather feedback for program assessment purposes. Unlike Initial
programs, Advanced programs manage and direct the collection of assessment data for their own
departments and programs. Requirements for admission to the Graduate School and to
Candidacy are shared among the programs but the completion requirements (checkpoint #3) vary
from program to program. Data from all checkpoints are used by program faculty members to
make curricular and program modifications.
The COE continually reviews all procedures and assessments in order to eliminate bias in
assessments and to establish fairness, accuracy, and consistency in procedures and operations.
Confidentiality of candidate information and performance results are primary issues in
collecting, assessing, and summarizing reports for Unit and program review, and for providing
feedback to the candidate. Standard procedures are used to ensure that fairness, accuracy,
consistency, and elimination of bias are always practiced. (2.3a) Possibly the most effective
factor that ensures the elimination of bias in all areas of COE programs is the close relationships
11
between candidates, instructors and advisors. The positive relationships developed result in a
free-flow of feedback.
2b. Data Collection, Analysis, and Evaluation
Through a collaborative evaluation system, extending into local PK-12 schools, the Unit
maintains and updates data derived from its assessment system. This data evaluate the candidates
relative to their qualifications for admission to the programs, as well as their performance during
the program and following graduation. Decisions about candidate performance are based on
multiple assessments initiated at multiple points before program completion. The evaluation of
such assessments is to ensure that, from the initial point where admission to teacher education is
recommended to the actual employment of candidates in their respective fields, the impact of
successful teaching and learning for all students remains the primary focus. The multiple sources
of data show a strong relationship of performance assessments to candidate success.
The Unit has a system to effectively maintain records of formal candidate complaints.
The formal process for candidate complaints follows the PSU grievance policy. When a
complaint is filed, the candidate is advised of the procedure to follow in resolving the complaint.
First is a meeting with the faculty member or individual with whom the complaint is addressed;
if the complaint is not resolved, the candidate next meets with the department chair for a
resolution. If not resolved, the grievance moves to the College of Education Dean followed by
the Provost/Vice President for Academic Affairs. For complaints directly related to admission or
retention issues, the candidate first files a petition with the Committee for Admission to and
Retention in Teacher Education (CARTE). If the CARTE decision is not satisfactory to the
candidate, the next step is to see the Dean. (2.6) Files and complaint information are available in
the Office of Teacher Education for review. (2.7)
All data are regularly and systematically compiled, aggregated, summarized, analyzed,
and reported to all parties involved in COE professional education programs and to PK-12
schools that employ our graduates. It is common practice to disaggregate data according to the
type of program delivery. For example, since beginning the Master of Arts in Teaching (MAT)
with a program on campus and one at the KC Metro Center, assessment results from each
program have been disaggregated, analyzed, and reported in order to ensure that programs in all
locations are of the same quality and that candidates perform equally well in all programs. This
process includes SSLS programs in Leadership and Special Education which are located oncampus and off-campus. MAT program candidate test results are also compared to the
performance of teacher candidates in the traditional teacher education program. Findings from
the MAT vs. traditional program candidates were instrumental in securing support campus-wide
for the MAT Restricted Licensure program. Initially, Arts and Sciences programs questioned the
implementation of the MAT program. Once they saw that MAT candidates performed equally as
well as or better than our traditional candidates on the Praxis II Content Tests, they were
supportive of the program. (2.5b)
2c. Use of Data for Program Improvement
The Unit’s assessment system is comprehensive in that it tracks data on program quality,
unit operations, and candidate performance at each stage of the programs and into the first three
years of teaching for both initial and advanced program completers. When assessing candidate
performance, particular attention is paid to the values, commitments, and professional attitudes
that influence candidate behavior. The CF Knowledge Base for both initial and advanced
12
programs includes indicators related to diversity and dispositions. Ratings from evaluations
completed by cooperating teachers, practicum/internship mentors, university and academic
supervisors, and from first and third year program completers and their principals provide
systematically collected data from all candidate field experiences and into the first three years of
professional practice.
Since 2003, an evaluation system developed for our Initial program, dataStream, has
been used for collecting and storing knowledge base data. Each university supervisor had the
program uploaded onto his or her laptop computer so that student teacher observations were
completed electronically and feedback to the candidate was immediate. For example, at each
observation the supervisor identified knowledge base indicators for commending and some
indicators were targeted for improvement. This information was then shared with the candidate
and cooperating teacher immediately after the teaching session. In addition, supervisors
completed the final evaluation document for each student teacher through the dataStream
program. Data for each of the knowledge base indicators were downloaded into an Excel
spreadsheet and the results were analyzed according to how well the candidates performed on the
six sections of the knowledge base, on diversity indicators, on disposition indicators, and an
overall rating. This was a valuable tool for program improvement and for identifying the
strengths and challenges of each candidate in becoming a Competent, Committed, Caring
Professional. This is a prime example of how faculty share assessment information with
candidates to help them grow and be successful in the classroom.
At the advanced level, candidates receive feedback concerning their progress throughout
their program on academic assignments and Praxis II exams. Candidates are assessed on formal
examinations, presentations, case studies, candidate-created materials, and projects that involve
working with individual candidates to demonstrate skills in assessment, classroom management,
clinical management, and teaching. They complete course evaluations each semester and during
the exit interview, candidates are interviewed regarding the strengths and weaknesses of each
program.
For several years, the Unit has used multiple evaluations for assessing the performance
of candidates, changes have been made based on the analysis of data, (2.8) and candidates and
faculty have used the analysis to make changes that improve candidate success. However, a more
user friendly process for summarizing and sharing results is needed. (2.4a, CF.1c)
2.2.1 Describe work undertaken to move to the Target Level
Since our last KSDE/NCATE visit in 2004, several initiatives have been addressed. We
believe that the changes listed below will strengthen all programs and ensure that candidates
become Competent, Committed, Caring Professionals.
Development and Implementation of the GUS Electronic Tracking System (GETS)
One of the most timesaving and exciting initiatives we have started and will soon have
fully implemented is the new GETS program. Since 2003 we had used a program developed
with File Maker Pro (dataStream) to store all initial program candidate information, placement
sites, names of cooperating teachers and school contact people, form letters, and the initial
program knowledge base used by university supervisors for observations and evaluations
throughout the professional semester. In order to analyze data from the knowledge base, we had
13
to download the files from each supervisor’s computer to a flash drive and then to the computer
to sort in a spreadsheet. The process was tedious and data were easily lost or stored inaccurately.
Initially this system served a purpose but it soon became obsolete and we started brainstorming
how we could secure a system that provided accurate data and that would save secretarial time in
inputting candidate information and storing various assessment data. The President of the
university requested that OIS assign a programmer to work with the Director of Teacher
Education and the Office of Teacher Education Administrative Specialist in order to develop the
system we needed. The original dataStream provided us the knowledge of what we wanted and
how we wanted it to work.
The GETS system was first implemented for the Fall 2009 semester. All sections were
not complete at that time but we were able to identify problems and correct them immediately.
During the fall semester, more was added so that for the Spring 2010 semester, university
supervisors have used the system for observations and evaluations, cooperating teachers now
complete their evaluations using the system, and demographic information is available, in tables,
for all BSE and BME majors and advanced program candidates. Sections of the program that are
set up in a report format include the following:
Admission Summary Report (Checkpoint #1)
Checkpoint 2 Summary
Undergraduate Completion Summary
Admittance Check points
Professional Semester Checkpoints
Education Student Checkpoints
Incoming Freshman Average ACT
Examples of the GETS used for evaluating the Initial CF Knowledge Base can be viewed
in Exhibits 3.6a, 3.6b, 3.6c, 3.6d. While the GETS is currently used only for Initial programs, a
programmer from OIS is working to set up the same type of reporting system and the Advanced
CF Knowledge Base evaluation system. Data needed for the Advanced electronic tracking
system is readily available because the Graduate Office started building a system for graduate
programs campus wide. The real benefit of these systems is that they are tailored to the COE
Conceptual Framework and knowledge bases and reports have been developed that meet our
program and candidate needs.
Assessment System Handbook (CF.1c)
Attempts had been made to set the proposed Assessment System in action starting in
2005. Although we continued to collect, disaggregate, aggregate, analyze, and report the results
to the professional community and candidates, much of the work had to be done manually and
did not allow for timely dissemination of assessment results.
During the past two years, the Assessment System has regained life and the technology
necessary for collecting and analyzing data and reporting the results is close to being ready to
fully implement. The transition from dataStream to GETS for maintaining Initial program
information and generating reports has enabled the unit to provide assessment results to the
candidates more quickly. Using GETS, data can be aggregated and disaggregated much easier
because the data do not have to be manipulated manually. In addition, utilization of GETS
14
increases accuracy because it eliminates a step of manually inputting data and various functions
using Excel.
The Assessment System Handbook (CF.1c) includes information needed by the
professional community and candidates to understand what all is involved in the system. The
Handbook includes the revised CF Knowledge Base for initial programs and the recently adopted
CF Knowledge Base for advanced programs. Unit assessments are identified for initial and
advanced programs for all transition points. This section includes the assessments at each
transition point, the data to be collected, the individuals responsible for collecting data, and the
criteria for meeting requirements at each transition point. The Handbook also includes revised
procedures and a time line for collecting, aggregating, disaggregating, analyzing, and reporting
data. Revisions were the direct result of collaboration among program faculty, candidates,
program completers, and other professionals. Also included is information for ensuring that
assessments of candidate performance, program quality, and unit operations are consistent, fair,
accurate, and free of bias.
In recent years, collection, aggregation and disaggregation, analysis, and sharing of
assessment data has varied across the unit due to differences in programs, transition of personnel,
technical issues, and other discrepancies within the system. While the basic tenets of the system
have been carried out, variation in timelines and methods of data collection have prevented the
full implementation of the assessment system as it was intended. Implementation of improved
information technologies, increased technical support from the University, acceptance of the
system by faculty, and revision of the procedures and timelines will allow the full
implementation of the assessment system. 2009-2010 will be the first year that ALL initial and
advanced programs will have fully implemented the assessment system. This will include the
collection of data for all key unit and program assessments; aggregation, disaggregation, and
analysis of data and completion of annual program and unit reports.
Advanced Program Knowledge Base Reflects the Conceptual Framework
In 2008-2009 the Graduate Knowledge Base Committee met to review and revise the CF
Knowledge Base. The Advanced programs had been using the former initial knowledge base as
well as assessments for each individual program, which made unit wide analysis of data
problematic. PSU administrators and faculty, PK-12 teachers and administrators, and PSU
candidates reviewed research, program data, current practices, and district needs. They
developed a new Advanced Knowledge Base to reflect the CF vision to prepare Competent,
Committed, Caring Professionals. The knowledge base is comprised of 7 categories including
Professionalism, Communication, Leadership, Instruction and Assessment, Diversity,
Technology, and Research. Beginning Spring 2009, each program used the 38 indicators within
these categories to assess the achievement of its candidates and the effectiveness of its program.
Results of the common knowledge base will allow the unit to assess the effectiveness of its
programs and use the data to plan for continuous improvement.
Reviewed and Revised the Initial Program Knowledge Base
The Undergraduate Knowledge Base Committee composed of representatives from PSU,
PK-12 schools, and candidates, reviewed the knowledge base program data and found the system
to be an effective measure of candidate achievement and growth. While retaining the same
system, they also studied educational research, current practices, and needs of area schools to
15
evaluate specific indicators. After reviewing the original 68 indicators of the Initial Knowledge
Base, they revised some indicators, reducing the number to 60. Indicators that assess diversity,
dispositions, and technology were identified; and the original categories, Professional
Characteristics, Relationships with Students, Instructional Planning, Instruction, Classroom
Management, and Evaluation, were retained.
The Initial Knowledge Base is a major strength of the assessment system. Indicators
assess the development of candidates as Competent, Committed, Caring Professionals by
tracking assessments of indicators from Explorations in Education, the beginning education
course, during other field experiences, and throughout the professional semester. Data are
collected from outside sources such as the cooperating teacher and from university supervisors
and academic supervisors. Such data provide powerful information to evaluate the candidate, the
classes, and the program. Data from all assessments are directly entered into GETS for
immediate access by the candidate.
2.2.2 Discuss plans for continuing to improve
Implement and Analyze Assessment System
An Assessment System Evaluation Survey will provide data on the effectiveness of the
assessment system. This data will be initiated by the COE Assessment Committee each spring
and will be sent to all unit faculty. The COE Assessment Committee will tabulate data and
provide a summary report, identifying target areas for improvement of the Assessment System
each year.
LiveText Implementation
Starting with the Fall 2010 semester, LiveText will be populated with candidates
enrolled in Explorations in Education, the introduction to teacher education program at the Initial
level. The implementation of LiveText will enable unit faculty to administer assessments,
collect data, aggregate and disaggregate data, and store data for ongoing evaluation. Although it
is expected to be a 1 to 2 year transition, LiveText will enhance procedures for collection,
analysis, and storage of assessment data. In addition, the department chair and faculty can review
their rubrics and data tables at any time to consider program curriculum changes or for the
annual review of assessments. The advanced programs will start implementation as new cohorts
begin.
Graduate Programs Advisory Committee
Another plan for continued improvement is the creation of a Graduate Programs
Advisory Committee (GPAC) to be included as a part of the advanced programs assessment
system. The GPAC would assess data from key unit assessments for advanced programs prior to
the annual assessment review by the COE Assessment Committee. The GPAC may also serve a
role similar to that of the CARTE such as considering issues in regard to admission or retention
in advanced programs.
Training for Using GETS and for Inter-Rater Reliability
The continuous training of university and academic supervisors on using all strands of the
GETS, and more in-depth training to ensure a high level of inter-rater reliability when scoring
rubrics for the Teacher Work Sample and various program assessments is needed in order to
16
maintain a quality program. We provide GETS training as part of our semester preparation for
the student teaching experience, but we do need to bring in an expert on inter-rater reliability to
train Unit faculty for scoring rubrics. This is a goal which has been discussed and will be
implemented spring and summer semesters of 2011.
Share Reports with Professional Community
The sharing of annual summary reports with faculty, candidates, and other professionals
will be instrumental in our success in fully implementing the assessment system. Open
discussions and honest evaluations of all programs are key to our success. The major means by
which we would continue to strengthen both initial and advanced programs will be to make sure
individuals in leadership roles emphasize the importance of the entire assessment process to
ensuring that programs are strong and that candidates are successfully prepared to become
Competent, Committed, Caring Professional Educators.
17
Standard 3: Field Experiences and Clinical Practice
The unit and its school partners design, implement, and evaluate field experiences and clinical
practice so that teacher candidates and other school professionals develop and demonstrate the
knowledge, skills, and professional dispositions necessary to help all students learn
3.1
How does the unit work with school partners to deliver field experiences and clinical
practice to enable candidates to develop the knowledge, skills, and professional
dispositions to help all students learn?
The PSU Teacher Education Unit is committed to developing field and clinical
experiences based upon the Conceptual Framework (CF) to enhance candidate’s knowledge,
skills, and professional dispositions that develop Competent, Committed, Caring Professionals.
Continuous communication and collaboration with PK-12 school administrators, faculty, and
staff have served the unit and its candidates well, thereby ensuring continuous improvement in
the educational process for all stakeholders. As a result, the unit and candidates promote the
achievement of PK-12 students while increasing the quality of teachers and other school
professionals.
3a.
Collaboration Between Unit and School Partners
The College of Education (COE) works closely with school partners to enhance the
preparation of all candidates. In an effort to ensure that all candidates become Competent,
Committed, Caring Professionals, the unit draws upon the insights of several committees and
councils, which are comprised of representatives from PK-12 schools, the community, the
university, and the candidates. Such partnership groups include the following: the Conceptual
Framework Knowledge Base Committees, which review and revise the knowledge base; the
COE Advisory Council (3.1k), who guide the planning of unit programs and efforts; the COE
Council for Teacher Education, which reviews all programs within the unit and recommends
approval for program changes and additions; and the Assessment Committee, which reviews data
and recommends improvements of the assessment system. The College of Education and PK-12
partnership activities throughout the year also build powerful professional relationships.
Examples of such partnerships include the administrators’ luncheon, which builds relationships
and provides program feedback (3.1m); the administrators’ panel, which offers employment
information to professional semester candidates (3.1n); the Early Career Teacher Academy,
offering training and support to beginning teachers and mentors (3.1o); support letters, showing
support for grants (3.1p); and the annual Administrators’ Conference. (3.1q) Selection of field
placements for all initial programs is a joint decision of the Director of Teacher Education and
the partner schools and is guided by requirements established collaboratively with area PK-12
school personnel. Contracts signed by PK-12 school district administrators are secured before
candidates are placed in a school system. The contracts are maintained in a file in the Office of
Teacher Education. (3.1a, 3.1g, 3.1h)
The advanced program field placements are determined collaboratively by the Office of
Teacher Education, some advanced program coordinators, and the PK-12 school site prior to
candidates beginning their field experiences. Program coordinators assure that field sites provide
quality and appropriate learning experiences for all candidates. Additionally, qualified site
18
supervisors are selected to provide on-site supervision. Candidates are placed in school districts
throughout the tri-state region including southeast Kansas, northeast Oklahoma, and southwest
Missouri.
Five of nine advanced programs require a written contract which outlines the
responsibilities of both institutions during the field experience. The programs which utilize
contract agreements are Building Level Leadership, District Level Leadership, Library Media,
School Counselor, and School Psychologist. (3.1b, 3.1c, 3.1d, 3.1e, 3.1f) The majority of
advanced programs also utilize advisory teams, who provide feedback and input to strengthen
field experience for Building Level Leadership, District Level leadership, Library Media, ESOL,
School Counselor, and School Psychologist. (3.1l)
3b. Design, Implementation, and Evaluation of Field Experiences and Clinical Practice
The unit’s partners directly influence the design, delivery and evaluation of the unit’s
field and clinical experiences through frequent communication and survey data. All initial and
advanced programs adhere to the state standards established by the Kansas State Department of
Education. Initial and advanced candidates develop the required knowledge base which was
created to evaluate implementation of the Conceptual Framework by identifying the essential
knowledge, skills and behaviors including dispositions, diversity, and technology to become
Competent, Committed, Caring Professionals.
Field experiences and clinical practice in initial programs are designed to increase
incrementally in both time and responsibility. From the first field experience in CURIN 261
Explorations in Education, to practicum and internships in area classrooms for initial program
candidates, through the culminating professional semester, PK-12 administrators and teachers are
actively involved in planning and implementing the field/clinical experiences. All candidates
participate in a Diversity Tutoring Project and departments require varied opportunities to
interact with families and the communities such as Math Night and Kansas Kids Fitness Day.
(3.4a) Also, candidates are expected to satisfy the technology indicators enabling them to use
technology to support teaching and learning.
Prior to admission to the professional semester, candidates must meet all criteria to
ensure mastery of the content, pedagogical, and professional knowledge necessary for successful
student teaching. (3.4a, 3.4b) Analysis of candidate and graduate feedback, PLT and Content
Test score results, and feedback from PK-12 administrators provide data to strengthen and
improve the professional semester.
The unit and its school partners share expertise and resources through a variety of
communication modes such as emails, phone calls, and personal contact to convey site specific
details and requirements. Handbooks, agreements and guidelines describe the purposes of field
experiences (3.3j, 3.3l, 3.5b)
Criteria for the clinical faculty are clearly established for all programs. Written
communications show expectations and responsibilities of the school faculty working with
candidates. (3.2, 3.3a, 3.3b, 3.3c, 3.3d, 3.3e, 3.3f, 3.3g, 3.3h, 3.3i, 3.3j) Advanced programs also
require proper educational and licensure requirements and most require at least two years
professional experience working in their area of specialization. (3.3k)
All advanced programs have entry, midpoint and exit criterion in place, which vary for
each program. Individual programs develop their own guidelines which are based on program
requirements, utilizing a variety of assessments. (3.5c, 3.5d, 3.5e, 3.5f, 3.5g, 3.5h, 3.5i)
19
Extensive collaboration continues throughout the advanced program field experiences. Evidence
of the collaboration between the university and the PK-12 school sites where candidates are
placed is displayed in several ways. Many programs correspond in writing with the field sites
during the field experiences, with all programs making ongoing personal contacts throughout the
semester. Both on-site supervisors and program coordinators provide performance feedback by
evaluating the field experiences of candidates as they develop the knowledge, skills, and
professional dispositions to assist all students learn by analyzing student learning, reflecting on
their practice, and participating in field experiences and clinical practice related to their role.
Candidate field experiences are evaluated using the Advanced Knowledge Base, which includes
indicators that evaluate Professionalism, Communication, Leadership, Instruction and
Assessment, Diversity, Technology, and Research. (3.6h, 3.6i)
Candidates’ Development and Demonstration of Knowledge, Skills, and Professional
Dispositions to Help All Students Learn
Assessment of the Conceptual Framework Knowledge Base is a major strength of the
program and provides data for review and continuous improvement. Candidates are evaluated
incrementally on their development of the knowledge, skills, and dispositions, including
indicators addressing diversity and technology. Using the knowledge base indicators designated
as dispositions, cooperating teachers assess candidates in the two foundation courses (3.6e, 3.6f)
and in Overview of Education of Exceptional Students (3.6g). Throughout the program,
candidates reflect upon their interactions with students beginning with a reflective journal in
Explorations in Education, as a component of the lessons they prepare in methods classes, and
finally as a tool for continued improvement and to meet the needs of all students in the Teacher
Work Sample (TWS) prepared during the professional semester.
Using the 60 indicators of the Conceptual Framework, each candidate is evaluated three
times during the professional semester by the university supervisor and cooperating teacher.
From the ratings on the 60 indicators, mean scores are established for the six categories of the
CF: Professional Characteristics, Relationships with Students, Instructional Planning, Instruction,
Classroom Management, and Evaluation. (3.6a, 3.6b, 3.6c, 3.6d) The TWS focuses on student
learning. The 60 indicators of the knowledge base represent the knowledge, skills, and
dispositions necessary to become a Competent, Committed, Caring Professional who, through
effective use of technology, can help all students learn. The TWS requires candidates to prepare
lessons based upon the context of the class, to reflect upon the lesson, and to plan and implement
adaptations to ensure that all students learn. Successful review of all programs by KSDE ensures
that candidates are prepared to create a learning environment and instruction to ensure that all
students are successful.
University supervisor and cooperating teacher evaluations are analyzed for program
improvement and are placed in each candidate’s Teacher Education file. The combination of the
60 indicators, state standards assessments, PPST/ACT scores, GPA’s, PLT and Content Test
results, and successful completion of the both the Teacher Work Sample (TWS) and the
Professional Portfolio ensure that program completers have met national, state, and PSU
standards. If a candidate does not perform to the expected level, he/she is required to return to
campus for further training before considering a second student teaching placement or candidates
are counseled out of teacher education. Program completers are not required to pass the PLT and
Content Test prior to graduation; however, they must pass all required academic assignments
3c.
20
before being recommended for licensure for a one-year nonrenewable license.
A minimum of 150 hours of field experience is required in all advanced programs with
the exception of ESOL (90 hours), Library Media (120 hours) and Reading (94 hours). Each
program identifies a specific number of requirements to successfully complete the semester’s
field experience and to demonstrate the development of skills gained. Rubrics are utilized to
ensure the overall professional development of the candidates, and candidates are evaluated on
the new Advanced Knowledge Base of the Conceptual Framework. (3.6h, 3.6i, 3.6j, 3.6k, 3.6l,
3.6m, 3.6n, 3.6o, 3.6p, 3.6q, 3.6r, 3.6s)
Field and clinical experiences are intentionally designed and assigned by the Director of
Teacher Education to ensure that all candidates work with diverse students in different school
settings. (4.9a, 4.9b, 4.9c, 4.9d)
3.2
Briefly summarize the most significant changes related to Standard 3 that have led to
continuous improvement.
Additions to field experiences in several initial programs represent the most significant
changes related to Standard 3 that have been made which lead to continuous improvement. The
Biology, Chemistry, Mathematics, and Physics Departments have added an internship in the
semester prior to the professional semester. A second clinical experience has been added to
English and Physical Education; an additional forensic experience in an area high school is now
required in Speech/Theatre; and Music added a field experience in a PreK-8 setting. Several
departments including Art, Family and Consumer Sciences, Physical Education, and Technology
Education created field experiences to increase the number and variety of settings in which
candidates work with students. (3.4a)
A majority of the advanced programs have undergone significant changes since the last
NCATE visit. The Educational Leadership candidates complete field experiences throughout
their entire program. A project based component has also been incorporated requiring a full year
action research project. The Library Media program has embedded the CF Knowledge Base
allowing candidates to be evaluated by both the Kansas Library Media Standards and the
Advanced Knowledge Base.
The School Counselor program increased its overall program hours from 45 to 48,
incorporating a course in Diversity Issues in Counseling as well as Contemporary and Ethical
Issues in School Counseling; Group Counseling was dropped as a requirement. Candidates also
now have a choice of elective workshops addressing a variety of timely topics to meet the needs
of the students with whom they work (i.e. self-mutilation behaviors, crisis intervention, ADHD,
poverty, etc.). Additionally, formal training of on-site supervisors will be offered in the future to
more adequately prepare supervisors for their roles when working with practicum and internship
candidates.
The School Psychologist program now requires an electronic activity log, development of
a vita, and a professional development plan which guides activities during the internship year.
Courses in Evidence-Based Interventions and Introduction to Human Neuropsychology have
been added to the curriculum and Physiological Psychology has been dropped.
Another major change from the last review is the addition of the GUS Electronic
Tracking System, which allows for systematic collection or analysis of field experience data to
ensure continuous improvement.
21
Standard 4: Diversity
The unit designs, implements, and evaluates curriculum and provides experiences for candidates to
acquire and demonstrate the knowledge, skills, and professional dispositions necessary to help all
students learn. Assessments indicate that candidates can demonstrate and apply proficiencies
related to diversity. Experiences provided for candidates include working with diverse populations,
including higher education and P-12 school faculty, candidates, and students in P-12 schools.
4.1
How does the unit prepare candidates to work effectively with all students?
The Conceptual Framework of the College of Education (COE) at PSU focuses on
preparing Competent, Committed, Caring Professionals who possess the knowledge, skills, and
dispositions to help all students learn. The unit works to meet the challenges of attracting a
diverse faculty, recruiting and retaining candidates, modifying curricula, and providing clinical
and field experiences that increase opportunities for candidates to work with a diverse
population. The COE Strategic Planning Committee, which evaluated its goals and objectives in
2009, expanded activity in the area of diversity by including specific steps in the COE Action
Plan. (4.0) The plan specifically supports and guides the work of the COE Diversity Committee,
which is comprised of representatives from COE, Arts and Sciences, Admissions, and the Office
of Student Diversity. Annually the committee assesses progress toward meeting diversity goals
and creates mechanisms and strategies for improvement. The Faculty Senate Diversity
Committee, the Tilford Group, the Office of Student Diversity, and the PSU Diversity Taskforce
demonstrate the campus-wide initiative to increase diverse faculty, students, and experiences.
4a.
Design, Implementation, and Evaluation of Curriculum and Experiences
The unit is committed to providing a dynamic learning environment fostering diversity as
it relates to culture, gender, race, language, exceptionality, religion, and socioeconomic
background. During 2008-2009, both the Undergraduate Knowledge Base Committee and the
Graduate Knowledge Base Committee reviewed the Conceptual Framework. The committees
revised the knowledge base (4.1a) and identified specific indicators addressing diversity to
ensure that candidates develop knowledge, skills, and dispositions to create a fair learning
environment. (4.1b) The indicators are integrated throughout the curriculum to ensure that all
candidates develop an understanding and appreciation of diversity and are continually assessed
to determine the effectiveness of the Unit’s efforts to help candidates effectively teach all
learners in all settings. Each of the indicators is assessed throughout the program from the initial
field experiences to the end of the professional semester. Beginning with CURIN 261
Explorations in Education, the entry level course for all elementary and secondary candidates,
assignments focusing on the context of the school they visit provide the foundation for
experiences throughout the program. (4.3e, 4.3f) Both elementary and secondary education
majors gain field experience in SSLS 510 Overview of Education for Exceptional Students by
tutoring students. Also, all elementary majors are required to take CURIN 511 Diversity in the
Classroom; whereas, secondary majors complete required assignments that assess diversity
knowledge, skills, and dispositions in their Techniques 479 course.
During the professional semester, all candidates are assessed and monitored on the
diversity indicators of the Conceptual Framework and attend a diversity day with sessions
focusing on working with a diverse student body including English language learners, students
22
with exceptionalities, and students from poverty. Candidates also complete a Teacher Work
Sample in which they adapt their lesson to meet the needs of all students, including those with
special needs and/or English Language Learners. Diversity indicator ratings from the
professional semester show candidate proficiency. (4.3a, 4.3b, 4.3c, 4.3d, 4.3k) A curriculum
map of courses addressing diversity shows the variety of learning experiences throughout the
program. (4.2) In its review of the CF, the Graduate Knowledge Base Committee created a new
framework of 7 categories, one of which is Diversity. The indicators that assess candidate
knowledge, skills and dispositions to provide a learning environment in which all students can
learn are taught throughout the curriculum of each of the nine programs. (4.1c) The Diversity
Curriculum Map identifies courses in which components of diversity are studied and assessed in
the advanced programs. (4.2) Beginning in the Spring of 2009, diversity indicators are also
assessed during each field experience using assessments specifically designed by each program.
(4.3g, 4.3h, 4.3i, 4.3j)
The Unit offers additional programs focusing on diversity. The ESOL licensure program
is offered at both the initial and advanced levels. The initial program includes six courses that
focus on culture, language acquisition, methodology, linguistics, and assessment, including a
ninety-hour practicum specifically designed to meet the needs of the ELL. Also a minor in
Special Education is available to students seeking a Bachelor of Science in Education degree
leading to a provisional special education endorsement in conjunction with completion of their
BSEd.
Another goal of the Strategic Plan for the College of Education (4.0) “promotes
opportunities for faculty and students to experience and learn from diverse cultures and people.”
Action steps include expanding opportunities for candidates to learn in diverse settings in the
United States and abroad, to support efforts for faculty to study abroad including the KansasParaguay partnership, and highlighting international programs and opportunities on department
and college websites.
4b. Experiences Working with Diverse Faculty
Candidates in the COE interact with professional education faculty, faculty from other
units, and/or school faculty from diverse backgrounds. Concerted efforts to increase the number
of diverse faculty and the variety of learning opportunities produced positive results. Faculty
demographics (4.4a) show that candidates in initial programs work with diverse faculty. As
noted, when combining both adjunct and part time faculty to COE faculty, the percentage of
faculty diversity exceeds that of all PSU faculty members. In the initial program, all elementary
candidates take a required course, Primary Reading, from a full-time Black professor who has
had experience teaching in a large urban school district. Both elementary and secondary
education majors interact with faculty from a variety of racial and ethnic backgrounds in their
general education courses. Also, most departments in Arts and Sciences with education majors
have diverse faculty. During the professional semester, candidates have the opportunity to
interact with a minority university supervisor and with diverse faculty from the Kansas City
Fellows Program, who return to campus for the Diversity Experience Day.
Advanced candidates interact with faculty who teach in the advanced programs as well as
faculty who teach in additional areas, thus increasing their potential contact with diverse faculty.
All faculty members, for both initial and advanced programs, bring to PSU a rich background of
experiences that allows them to prepare candidates for working with diverse populations. This
23
includes years spent in diverse settings in PK-12 schools as teachers, counselors, and
administrators. (5.1) To expand opportunities for candidates to interact with diverse faculty
during their advanced program, the Graduate Council recently adopted a resolution to expand
opportunities for interaction with faculty with varied backgrounds. (4.4b)
Since our last NCATE review, we have added three Black faculty members: one full
time assistant professor, one full time supervisor, and one adjunct. The Professional Education
Unit and the COE employ several strategies to diversify faculty such as advertising faculty
vacancies through professional organization meetings, advertisements in the Chronicle of Higher
Education, Listserv announcements, targeted direct mailings to identified diverse candidates, and
periodicals that have a diverse readership. To ensure a diverse applicant pool for each search, a
number of good faith strategies have been implemented including personal contact to elicit
recommendations for female and minority positions. The University Equal Opportunity Officer
provides leadership in advising all search committees on correct and acceptable employment
practices and procedures in hiring, especially in interacting with diverse candidates. (4.5, 4.7a,
4.7b) The Unit and University employ a number of techniques to enhance the retention of diverse
faculty and staff including assignment of a mentor within departments, a week of in-service
sessions for new faculty hires before classes begin and a year-long induction program, and
attempts to cooperate with other University departments to provide employment for spouses and
partners. The COE Strategic Action plan emphasizes the importance of salary and benefits in
attracting and retaining a diverse faculty.
4c.
Experiences Working with Diverse Candidates
Candidates are expected to interact and work with other candidates from different
socioeconomic groups, at least two ethnic/racial groups, and with English language learners and
students with exceptionalities in both their general and professional education courses and
campus activities. Such participation in diverse cultural backgrounds and experiences is valued
in classes and field experiences. To that end, Pittsburg State University Office of Admission
collaborates with COE to recruit and retain domestic minority students. In addition to traditional
recruiting practices, PSU offers approximately eighty renewable Grant-in-Aid scholarships to
diverse incoming freshmen and transfer students and assists students to meet educational goals
with academic and social resources. (4.7b)
The COE Strategic plan supports such efforts in its Action Plan which includes the
following steps: advocating for support systems for diverse students, exploring the possibility to
offer a program for students with intellectual disabilities, interacting with the diverse community
for advice and counsel, providing scholarships, and actively recruiting diverse students. One
strategy initiated by the COE Diversity Committee is an annual recruiting event sponsored by the
COE and held at PSU. Diverse students from area schools are invited to campus for a day during
which COE representatives describe program opportunities and financial aid information,
conduct a tour of the campus including the Office of Student Diversity and provide opportunity
for interaction with faculty and PSU candidates.
The COE carefully analyzes diversity among candidates to ensure that interaction with
diverse candidates occurs in both the general education and education courses. Data show that
the enrollment of diverse students fluctuated during the past four years, and through analysis we
identified focus areas for improvement. These areas include increasing the number of diverse
declared majors who complete the program, increasing the number of minority females in
24
elementary education, and increasing the number of males in elementary education. (4.6b)
Diversity of all PSU students mirrors the geographical area served by our institution. (4.6a)
The PSU international community on campus offers rich daily interaction as well as
opportunities to celebrate diversity at numerous activities throughout the year. Finally, diverse
candidates in the MAT program at the KC Metro Center interact with candidates on campus by
visiting in methods classes and participating in workshops during the professional semester.
4d. Experiences Working with Diverse Students in P-12 Schools
The COE Action Plan encourages expansion of “opportunities to learn in diverse
settings.” Candidates are expected to develop the knowledge, skills, and dispositions to facilitate
the learning of all students. In field experiences, an intentional effort is made by the Director of
Teacher Education to select diverse field experiences for all candidates. To accomplish this, she
tracks each field experience, making sure that each candidate has the opportunity to work with a
diverse student body through interaction with diverse students in the PK-12 setting. The PSU
COE partners with schools with diverse populations in southwestern Missouri, northeastern
Oklahoma, southeast Kansas, and the Kansas City Metro area. (4.8a, 4.8b, 4.8c) Demographics
from partner schools in each of those states indicate the diversity of the schools. A high
percentage of economically disadvantaged families reside in each state; in addition, the number
of Hispanic students is increasing in some communities in the three states, providing the
opportunity to work with English Language Learners. Also notable is the number of students
with American Indian origin who attend Oklahoma schools. As shown on the Kansas report,
most schools have at least a 10% population of students with exceptionalities.
Candidate field experiences are deliberately made to ensure interaction with a wide array
of students. Candidates are not assigned to the high school from which they graduated. Both the
first and second pre-labs are tracked, and candidates complete their professional semester in a
different school. The Director of Teacher Education considers the placement of each candidate to
allow candidates to work with a diverse student population in diverse school settings to develop
knowledge, skills, and dispositions to effectively teach all students. (4.9a, 4.9c, 4.9d)
In advanced level programs, candidates usually complete their internships in their own
schools. The population of many of these schools is diverse; however, realizing the challenge
for some candidates who do not work in diverse surroundings, the Graduate Council adopted a
Diversity Plan for Graduate Programs in the Spring of 2010. (4.4b) If the candidate’s home
school does not have a diverse population, candidates will be required to spend time in other
settings to meet the expectation that they will work with male and female PK-12 students from
different socioeconomic groups, at least two ethnic/racial groups, and with English language
learners and students with disabilities.
4.2
Briefly summarize the most significant changes related to Standard 4 that have led to
continuous improvement.
Several significant improvements have been made in the past few years to enhance the
Unit’s focus on diversity. The first and possibly most notable is the employment of three Black
faculty members. One is an assistant professor of reading, another is an instructor who
supervises student teachers, and the third is an adjunct instructor who works at the Kansas City
Metro Center. In addition, a new Advanced Knowledge Base was developed and approved by the
faculty which includes specific indicators related to diversity which are being assessed on each
25
advanced program candidate.
Another significant improvement at the university level was the establishment in 2008 of
the Office of Student Diversity. The Director is responsible for minority student organizations
which include the Black Student Association, Hispanics of Today, and Native American Student
Association. Most domestic minority diversity events are planned and implemented in the Office
of Student Diversity. One of the programs created by the Office of Student Diversity is the
Black Student Alumni Reunion. When Pittsburg State University was founded in 1906, it was
one of only a few public universities that admitted all students regardless of ethnicity. This
reunion was historic being the first minority alumni group recognized by Pittsburg State
University. More than 250 Black Alumni members gathered and donated scholarship funds to
the Black Student Association. This reunion has led to the formation of a group of African
American alumni who are committed to helping the College of Education at Pittsburg State
University recruit African American students. Currently the Office of Student Diversity is
organizing the first Hispanic Student Alumni Reunion.
The Office of Student Diversity has increased opportunities for College of Education
candidates to participate in cultural events. Hispanic Heritage Month consisted of events that
included presentations, movies, art shows, panel discussion, and a Latin American music
presentation during halftime of a football game. Black History Month events included guest
speakers, movies, a gospel choir, dance performances, poetry and games to test students’
knowledge about black history events.
The focus on diversity in the College of Education Strategic Plan and the university’s
program agreement with the Kansas Board of Regents has energized the college’s Diversity
Committee. Since 2007, the College of Education Diversity Committee has been committed to
hosting a recruitment day for diverse students from the Southeast Kansas area. High school
juniors and seniors come to the campus for an informational session in the fall. The College of
Education, The Office of Admissions, and Office of Student Diversity then hosts an event during
the spring semester specifically targeting high school seniors.
Further, the College of Education is directly involved with the Kauffman Foundation
Scholars program, which is dedicated to assisting students from urban areas make the most of
their potential to become successful adults. Pittsburg State University hosts the Kauffman
College Residential Institute co-op session. Faculty members submit a proposal and teach a twoto-four hour course for eighth and ninth- grade students from the Kansas City, Missouri and
Kansas City, Kansas areas. Classes are offered through the Math Department, Curriculum and
Instruction, Psychology and Counseling, Chemistry and Family and Consumer Sciences.
Approximately, 60 students are in attendance each year.
Many of the areas served by Pittsburg State University are economically disadvantaged.
In fact, over 80% of the students at Pittsburg State University are receiving financial aid. In
response, the College of Education through the leadership of a department chair and a donor
developed the Center for the Study of Poverty and Student Achievement in 2007 to help area
districts better understand how to “level the playing field” to ensure that all children have an
opportunity to learn regardless of the economic conditions that surround them. Projects thus far
have included direct services to area districts and research on a national project to help
elementary students learn math through a hands-on project. One of the benefits of this initiative
for our candidates has been the incorporation of selected successful instructional strategies in the
Elementary Math Methods course.
26
The Curriculum and Instruction Department recently developed the Urban Suburban
Experience (USE) which has been submitted for approval. The USE minor will enable Pittsburg
State University College of Education graduates to be effective teachers in urban and suburban
school districts throughout the United States. The geographical location of PSU requires
additional experiences to prepare teacher candidates who desire to teach in large and diverse
urban and metropolitan school districts in the United States. The minor will require teacher
candidates to have a field experience in urban and suburban schools. Teacher candidates will
take courses focusing on social, cultural and family issues as well as race and ethnicity. This
minor will also increase marketability and broaden experiences of teacher candidates at PSU.
The Urban and Suburban Experience minor is available to students seeking a Bachelor of
Science in Education. This program consists of seven undergraduate courses for a total of 18
credit hours. The primary goal of the USE minor is to provide students with the opportunity to
become Competent, Committed, and Caring Professionals who will have the knowledge and
ability to teach and serve the needs of students in diverse urban and suburban districts and to
provide support to urban and suburban students’ families, schools, and communities.
27
Standard 5: Faculty Qualifications, Performance, and Development
Faculty are qualified and model best professional practices in scholarship, service, and teaching,
including the assessment of their own effectiveness as related to candidate performance; they also
collaborate with colleagues in the disciplines and schools. The unit systematically evaluates faculty
performance and facilitates professional development.
5.1
How does the unit ensure that its professional education faculty contributes to the
preparation of effective educators?
5a.
Qualified Faculty
The faculty in the Professional Education Unit at Pittsburg State University are
comprised of a community of teacher/scholars who embody the mission of the Unit – to prepare
Competent, Committed, Caring Professionals. The Unit believes that to produce graduates who
can achieve this mission, the faculty must also reflect these ideals as noted in one of the Unit’s
belief statements: Competent, Committed, Caring faculty and staff lead to the development of
Competent, Committed, Caring Professionals. To achieve this belief, the Unit has put in place
the strategies, funding, and systems to recruit, develop, evaluate, and retain highly qualified
faculty. Also, the Unit has placed a focus on the core of academe – teaching, scholarly activity,
and service.
Faculty members are highly qualified with expertise in specific academic areas; not only
do they represent the four departments included in the College of Education (COE) but also
faculty from 12 different University departments who teach in the teacher education program.
Data regarding 78 faculty members indicate that 64 (82%) hold doctorates, 5 (6.4 %) hold
specialist degrees, 9 (11.5 %) have master’s degrees. For the fall semester of 2010, 80 percent of
Unit faculty were in tenured or tenure-earning positions, and 20 percent in annual appointments.
Faculty members without terminal degrees are selected through a rigorous hiring process;
credentials are reviewed and conditions related to professional knowledge and expertise are
verified. In most cases if a terminal degree has not been attained, the faculty member is in the
process of completing a terminal degree program. When a faculty member within the unit does
not hold a license, he or she must possess exceptional expertise or skills. Most faculty members
have held or continue to hold licensure in their professional field. Adjunct faculty members are
hired because they have specialized knowledge and skills that support and enhance the
practitioner aspect of the program and are currently licensed and practicing professional
educators.
One of the unique aspects of the Pittsburg State University program is its commitment to
highly qualified clinical faculty. For example, the Unit currently has six full-time faculty who
provide the supervision for student teaching. Four of these have terminal degrees, one is in the
process of completing a dissertation, and one was hired because of an extensive and highly
successful background as a teacher and educational leader. Clinical faculty have contemporary
professional experiences in school settings at the levels they supervise and hold or have held
licensure in their professional fields. This investment by the university in highly credentialed
supervisors has enabled the Unit to provide high quality supervision for its candidates by
individuals who are knowledgeable about the Unit’s professional knowledge base.
28
The PK-12 teachers who serve as the Unit’s cooperating teachers are selected because of
their credentials (must be fully licensed and preferably meet the highly qualified definition), their
professional experience (they must have at least three years of classroom experience) and their
commitment to help Pittsburg State University prepare the next generation of teachers. (5.2a-l)
The Unit has built and continues to build close relationships with cooperating teachers and
ensure they know the expectations in the knowledge base through the Professional Semester
Handbook (CF.1b), PSU-sponsored workshops, and individual meetings with university
supervisors.
Faculty members responsible for methods and techniques instruction have experience in
the appropriate fields and at the appropriate levels. They stay current through contemporary
experience working directly in PK-12 classrooms, through attendance at local, regional, and
national workshops and conferences, through their own reading and research, and through
extensive interactions with and service to current practitioners and professional organizations.
For example one of the supervisors has been selected for a sabbatical in the spring of 2011 to
develop a book on assisting new teachers and their mentors in the first three years of practice.
This has emerged from a decade of outreach provided by Pittsburg State University to new
teachers and their mentors through the Early Career Teacher Academy.
5b. Modeling Best Professional Practices in Teaching
Teaching is important at Pittsburg State University, and the university mission statement
makes this clear: Excellence in teaching is the primary focus of the University. To this end, an
infrastructure has been put in place to ensure that all faculty members understand and are
supported in achieving this primary emphasis. For example, in the negotiated agreement
between PSU/KNEA and the Kansas Board of Regents, this is codified by setting 50 percent as
the minimum level of effort that can be devoted to teaching (p. 7, 5.5a). An improved new
faculty orientation program was instituted in the past three years that provides training
throughout a new faculty member’s first year with topics that include ensuring student success,
tools for teaching, student advising, utilizing faculty mentors, developing course syllabi, utilizing
technology in the classroom, using the university instructional management system Angel,
working with and embracing diversity, and assessing student learning. Also, each of the colleges
now has an instructional support consultant that assists faculty in improving their instruction.
Faculty are prepared and have experience in the content they teach. They also stay
current in their fields through their own professional reading, personal research, attendance at
conference and workshops, active memberships in professional associations, and interaction with
PK-12 schools.
Faculty utilize a variety of instructional strategies and assessment techniques designed to
meet the varied needs and learning styles of individual and diverse learners. Strategies include
lecture, discussion, demonstration, in-class and out-of-class writing projects, guest speakers,
instructional media, problem solving activities, interactive distance learning, individualized
assignments, exercises, activities, small group projects, laboratory experiences, peer teaching,
role playing, fields trips, and seminar style interaction. An emphasis has been placed on the use
of rubrics in assessment of student learning especially as it relates to assessment of program
standards. Also, faculty utilize Angel which helps in the development of candidate’s technology
skills. These skills include the use of email, word processing, spreadsheets, Smartboards,
29
internet resources, and PowerPoint. Also, some faculty have begun to use Tegrity which is a
lecture capture tool.
Teacher education courses incorporate instructional objectives that are aligned with the
CF Knowledge Base in addition to KSDE and professional education standards. Faculty ensure
that candidates are taught these objectives and assess them according to the indicators included
in the Initial Knowledge Base. The indicators included in the CF Knowledge Base on
technology, diversity, and dispositions have enhanced the faculty’s awareness of and
commitment to preparing candidates to meet the Unit’s expectations in these areas.
Additionally, faculty encourage candidates to minor in either special education or ESOL or both
to deepen their knowledge about educating all students. One of the most comprehensive
assessments of a candidate’s professional knowledge is through the Teacher Work Sample. This
is completed as a part of the professional semester and requires candidate’s to establish a
learning objective, pre-assess student knowledge of the objective, design instruction that
provides the maximum opportunity for all students to learn, assess student learning, and then
reflect on their practice.
Teaching is formally assessed by students each semester using one of two approved
instruments; the Student Perception of Teaching Effectiveness (SPTE), an anonymous
multivariate survey instrument, or the Experiential Student Perception of Teaching Effectiveness
(ESPTE) survey, developed locally to evaluate both laboratory instructors and on-line courses. In
addition to these assessment tools, several departments have developed surveys to generate
additional course information. After reviewing the results of student evaluations, faculty use this
information to assess personal effectiveness, improve instruction, support curricular revision and
in general, better meet the needs of candidates (5.6a, 5.6b).
5c.
Modeling Best Professional Practices in Scholarship
Even though the primary focus of Pittsburg State University is on teaching, professional
education faculty are actively engaged in scholarly activity as a part of their commitment to the
core of academe. The negotiated agreement defines faculty commitment to scholarship at not
less than 20 percent and identifies the areas of research, scholarship, and creative endeavor (pp.
80-82, 5.5a). Additionally, the performance appraisal process, tenure review, and promotion
decisions all consider a faculty member’s performance in this area (5.5b-h).
Over the past three years, faculty have been active in scholarship both in writing and in
presentations as indicated on exhibits 5.1 and 5.3. The number and scope of this scholarship are
recognition of the faculty’s expertise and ongoing interest in furthering knowledge of their
respective disciplines. Also, faculty have averaged over $500,000 of funded grants for the past
three years. It is important to note that external funds received by the Unit were used in
collaboration with local education agencies. Two major grants were received in the past three
years; both were focused on improving the supply of highly qualified teachers. The first was a
teacher enhancement grant that supported efforts of the Unit in the Kansas City area to increase
the number of second career teachers in high need fields. The other grant was to increase the
supply of highly qualified middle school science teachers. Another grant funded by a private
donor funded an experiential math program for upper elementary and middle school students and
provided funding for research on the project to further knowledge about its effectiveness.
Finally, an ongoing research effort in the Department of Psychology and Counseling is focused
on the assessment and remediation of reading difficulties.
30
5d. Modeling Best Professional Practices in Service
Unit faculty are engaged in meaningful service at the university and in the education
community of the region as well as at the state and national levels. Unit faculty serve on a
variety of university, college and departmental committees. Examples of university service
include faculty senate, program review, undergraduate curriculum committee, graduate council,
special task forces, and leadership searches. Examples of college service include curriculum,
assessment, diversity, council of teacher education, planning, constitution, teacher education
accreditation, educational resources, and secondary coordinating council. Examples of
department service include promotion, tenure, and planning.
A majority of faculty spend considerable time working directly with public schools in the
area. Community service has long been a valued tradition at PSU and this collaboration
reinforces the institution’s public service commitment which is to meet the continuing
educational needs of the region's public school personnel. Faculty members offer a wide-array of
in-services to school districts in southeast Kansas, southwest Missouri, and northeast Oklahoma.
Topics include leadership, technology integration, special education, reading, assessment, and
assistance with curriculum development as well as district-level strategic planning. Faculty
regularly present at the Greenbush Service Center of Southeast Kansas and most departments
host on-campus events for PK-12 students. One notable conference hosted annually by the
Department of Curriculum and Instruction is for future educators from high schools throughout
the area. Aside from the various civic, school and church related activities in which faculty are
engaged, the community has come to expect volunteerism from faculty and rely on their
professional expertise for many endeavors.
The faculty maintained memberships in a variety of professional organizations associated
with areas of expertise. Leadership at the local, state, regional and national levels is evident
through membership on executive and/or advisory boards, editorships, offices held, conferences
planned, and papers presented. More than one department has been home to a national president,
and there have been numerous district/regional and state presidents. Examples of professional
service activities over the past three years at the state and national level are numerous as
reflected in exhibit 5.4.
5e.
Unit Evaluation of Professional Education Faculty Performance
The Unit conducts systematic and comprehensive evaluations in the three areas of faculty
endeavor; teaching, scholarship, and service. These efforts serve to ensure the competence and
intellectual vitality of faculty. Procedures involved in all aspects of faculty evaluation are
detailed at length in the PSU/KNEA Contract. (pp. 4-11, 5.5a).
In an effort to promote continuous program improvement, faculty engage in a systematic
review and analysis of program data, performance appraisals, student evaluations and student
feedback. As a result of data analysis, faculty are able to identify strengths as well as those areas
that need improvement.
The University also collects data on the effectiveness of program and career advisement
offered by faculty. These data are collected via an on-line, eleven-item instrument which
31
candidates complete prior to finalizing pre-enrollment. Faculty are provided summary reports
that include responses from their advisees. (6.3d)
5f.
Unit Facilitation of Professional Development
The unit demonstrates a commitment to the professional development of faculty;
providing opportunities for professional growth is viewed as vital to the immediate and longterm success of the teacher education program. In order to assist faculty in meeting their needs,
the COE departments provide a wide-array of opportunities as reflected in exhibit 5.7c.
The University also provides professional development opportunities for Unit faculty.
All new faculty attend orientation sessions prior to the initial semester of employment and during
their first year at PSU. Such topics include assessing student learning, using technology in the
classroom, advising students, developing course syllabi, and preparing course materials. Also,
the recently established Center for Teaching, Learning and Technology (CTL&T) provides
professional development that enhances faculty teaching and student learning. CTL&T goals
support the use of instructional technology and strive to build collaborative networks for
teaching, scholarship and learning. A list of professional development utilized by faculty is
found in exhibit 5.7b.
As part of the annual evaluation process, faculty members identify areas for professional
growth and have the opportunity to receive training and support to develop skills related to these
topics. Also, faculty members are encouraged to attend training sessions or conferences and can
access funds to attend professional conferences. Departments provide financial assistance, and
faculty in the unit receive $500.00 for out of state travel. Financial assistance may also be
obtained from the Office of Academic Affairs if presenting at a professional conference. A list
of faculty participation in professional development at the state and national levels is noted in
exhibit 5.7a.
5.2
Briefly summarize the most significant changes related to Standard 5 that have led to
continuous improvement.
Several changes have led to continuous improvement in the quality of faculty, assessment
of performance, and ongoing professional development. During the last team visit, the Unit was
experiencing difficulty in replacing retiring faculty. Since that time, the Unit has been able to
attract a number of outstanding new faculty. Three of those faculty members have completed
their terminal degrees in the past four years and two more should be completed within the next
year. Also, the Unit has been able to enhance the diversity of the faculty by hiring two African
Americans; a reading methods teacher and a supervisor for the professional semester.
Over the past four years, the faculty evaluation process has been computerized which
provides a much improved method for recording faculty goals and summative assessment.
Additionally, a new evaluation process (ESPTE) has been implemented for use by candidates
evaluating teaching effectiveness in laboratory and online courses. Also, a new process has been
negotiated for those faculty seeking the designation of exceptional performance (pp. 7-8, 5.5a).
Two major changes highlight the university’s commitment to teaching and ongoing
professional development. The first of these is the addition of an instructional support consultant
to assist staff in their instruction and the use of the tools available to them. The College of
Education and the College of Business share a consultant. The second major change is the
recently created Center for Teaching, Learning, and Technology. This is a university-wide
32
center that organizes ongoing professional development for faculty and works with the
instructional support consultants to identify needed training and technology.
33
Standard 6: Unit Governance and Resources
The unit has the leadership, authority, budget, personnel, facilities, and resources, including information
technology resources, for the preparation of candidates to meet professional, state, and institutional standards.
6.1
How does the unit’s governance system and resources contribute to adequately
preparing candidates to meet professional, state, and institutional standards?
6a.
Unit Leadership and Authority
Pittsburg State University (PSU) and the College of Education (COE) operate within a
well-defined system of governance that ensures broad involvement in decision making. The
Kansas Board of Regents (KBOR) is the policy board for the six public universities in Kansas.
PSU also operates under a negotiated agreement between PSU/KNEA and KBOR. The
President of PSU serves as the chief executive officer of the institution and is appointed by the
KBOR. As indicated on the organizational chart for the university (6.2a), the President oversees
the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs, the Vice President for Administration and
Campus Life, and the Vice President for Advancement. The Provost and Vice President for
Academic Affairs is responsible for oversight of the deans and faculty of the four academic
colleges of the university, the Dean of Learning Resources, and the Dean of Continuing and
Graduate Studies.
The College of Education and the Unit derive authority and exert leadership via a welldefined governance and administrative structure. (6.2b) The College of Education’s governance
is designed to interface with the University’s campus-wide governance and committee structure.
The composition of the Unit’s governance activities are described in detail in the College of
Education Constitution. (6.1) The Professional Education Unit at PSU is composed of College
of Education faculty as well as faculty from the other two colleges that are responsible for the
courses required for PK-12 and secondary licensure programs. The Unit is responsible for all
initial and advanced education licensure and endorsement programs at Pittsburg State University.
The dean of the college is recognized as the Unit head and provides the leadership for all
professional education preparation programs. These duties include the coordination of all
accreditation and state program approval activities and the legislation of all curriculum and
policy changes for the Unit. The Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs, in
consultation with the Unit faculty, appoint the Dean. The Dean is evaluated annually by the
Provost. The Dean works closely with the Provost, the other university deans, and appropriate
department chairs and directors to assure that the mission and programs of the Unit are
developed, delivered, and evaluated successfully.
The Unit engages in a number of duties in an effort to attract and retain Competent,
Committed, Caring candidates. The Unit actively participates in all campus-wide recruitment
events throughout the year and holds its own minority recruitment event in the fall of each year.
(6.4a) Admission policies for admittance to teacher education, the professional semester, and all
advanced programs are readily available in the university catalog, teacher education handbook,
and professional semester handbook. (6.4b, 6.5b, 6.5j, 6.5k) University calendars, catalogs,
publications and grading policies as well as Unit newsletters now utilize an electronic format.
34
(6.5a, 6.5c, 6.5d, 6.5e, 6.5f, 6.5g, 6.5h, 6.5l) Academic advisement is an important component of
the COE’s efforts. All students at Pittsburg State University are assigned an academic advisor
upon admission to the University. Once a student declares a major in education, he/she is
assigned an advisor who is an identified member of the Teacher Education Unit faculty.
Candidates assess their advisors each semester on-line prior to enrollment and advisors have
access to the aggregated results of their advisee’s responses. (6.3c, 6.3d) Also the university
provides a number of support services for students including health and counseling as well as a
Center for Student Accommodations that assists students with learning disabilities. (6.3a, 6.3b)
Finally, the Unit utilizes an external advisory committee, the College of Education Advisory
Council, comprised of PK-12 educators and business leaders and the College of Education
Student Advisory Council to gain ideas and feedback for continuous improvement of programs
and services. Additionally, the dean meets formally and informally with the faculty throughout
the year to keep them apprised of issues within the COE and to receive advice and counsel on the
needs of the faculty, students, and college.
6b. Unit Budget
Funds for salaries, wages and capital outlay, across the University, are distributed via the
University budget allocation process. Funds for Other Operating Expenditures (OOE), student
work hours, instructional equipment, and travel are allocated to the appropriate dean’s office and
then passed on to academic departments. OOE funds are the primary source of support for
academic units used for copying, telephone, travel, supplies, and instructional materials. Funds
to support the Office of Teacher of Education come from the dean’s budget. The dean’s office
also receives an allotment each year to support instructional equipment and technology. Finally,
the dean’s office and departments that offer classes and programs off-campus also receive funds
from the dean of continuing and graduate studies which can be used for professional
development of faculty. The budget adequately supports on-campus and clinical work. (6.6)
The Unit receives sufficient budget allocations in proportion to other units on campus.
(6.7) Allocations for the College of Technology exceed those of the COE due in large part to a
number of very expensive programs. Because of the recession over the past two years, the
university has experienced a 12 percent reduction in its state aid and all sectors of the university
have had to make proportional cuts. However, some of the original cuts have been restored, and
the university has made a commitment to affect academic programs only as a last resort.
The university and the Unit have made the ongoing professional development of faculty
and staff a priority. As such, each faculty member is allotted $500 for travel each year and can
receive an additional $875 if presenting at a national conference. Also, funds have been made
available by the dean’s office to assist faculty with research projects and by the departments for
additional support of professional development.
6c.
Personnel
The contract negotiated between PSU/KNEA and KBOR serves as the official document
for the terms of employment which are deemed negotiable. These include class load, the
performance appraisal process, grievance procedures, sick leave, and other important terms of
employment. In addition, guidelines for writing individual professional goals in the areas of
teaching, service, and scholarship are set forth in the contract. (6.8)
35
Faculty assignments are made in accordance with the Unit’s load formula set forth in the
contract. Workload at the undergraduate level considers many variables, but in general, it is
interpreted as 12 hours per academic semester. Graduate workload is traditionally interpreted at
9 hours per academic semester. On-line courses are counted as in-load. Faculty load reports are
generated following the twentieth day of each semester. (6.9) The dean and the appropriate
department chair review these reports. Faculty meet with the department chair to determine
professional goals for each year and a performance review is conducted by the department chair
with each faculty member assessing teaching, scholarship and service. An instructional support
consultant, a technology support consultant, student workers, and graduate assistants are used to
ensure adequate support for Unit faculty and programs.
The Unit has sufficient numbers of full-time faculty to deliver and support its initial and
advanced programs. In the 2009-10 academic year, there were 36 full-time tenured and/or
tenure-earning faculty in the COE, 9 full-time non-tenure earning faculty in the COE, and 33
faculty in other colleges that taught methods courses and/or supervised candidates during their
professional semester for the COE as part of their load. (5.1) Department chairs typically teach
three to six hours per semester. Additionally, the COE employed part-time, adjunct faculty who
were directly involved with the education of teacher education candidates. Adjunct faculty are
approved, by a formal process through the Graduate Council, as having the proper credentials
necessary to enrich the program with current experiences and expertise. In order to better ensure
alignment of expectations of adjunct faculty with the CF Knowledge Base and expectations of
the Unit, an Adjunct Handbook was developed in 2009. (6.5i)
6d. Unit Facilities
The campus is located on 233 acres and has 58 academic, support and resident buildings.
The offices and classrooms used by the COE are housed in three separate university buildings.
The Dean’s office, Office of Teacher Education, and the departments of Curriculum and
Instruction, and Special Services and Leadership Studies are located in Hughes Hall. The
department of Psychology and Counseling is located in Whitesitt Hall, and the department of
Health, Human Performance and Recreation is housed in the Student Recreation Center. The
COE also has an Instructional Resource Center which is housed in Hughes Hall. Hughes Hall
and Whitesitt Hall each have computer labs. Additionally, some COE programs are offered
through the university’s Kansas City Metro Center. (6.10)
Other facilities that candidates in initial and advanced programs utilize include: Axe
Library, a well-equipped and well-funded modern library facility; the Kansas Technology Center
with state of the art programs in a variety of technical fields; the Bryant Student Health Center
which houses student health and counseling services and the center for student accommodations;
and a new Student Recreation Center which includes a wide variety of fitness, recreation, and
leisure areas.
6e.
Unit Resources Including Technology
The Unit enjoys a variety of resources to help ensure the development of Competent,
Committed, Caring Professionals. The Unit uses its Educational Resources Committee to help
identify resource needs. To support the Unit assessment system, two programmers from the
office of information systems are assigned to the COE to help in the development of systems to
collect and summarize data for use by faculty and leadership. Additionally, the Office of
36
Teacher Education has a full-time assessment coordinator who works with the director of teacher
education in collection and representation of data for analysis by faculty and leadership. Further,
the Office of Continuing and Graduate Studies coordinates data systems with the advanced
programs to collect and report needed data. Also, the Office of Institutional Research provides
additional support in the collection and analysis of Unit data. Finally, the Unit is planning to
implement LiveText, a new assessment management system, beginning in the fall of 2010.
Candidates and faculty regularly use the Axe Library which maintains a wide variety of
materials that support the COE and its programs. The library has continually upgraded its
materials, and electronic access ensures ease of use. Currently, the library is planning for the
transition to a new library system and hopes to have this in place within the next year.
Candidates and faculty also use the Instructional Resource Center located in Hughes Hall which
houses a variety of print and media resources specific to COE programs. (6.11a, 6.11b.) The
Unit also receives approximately $103,000 annually for instructional technology. This has
enabled the Unit to provide computers, scanners, and printers in each of the labs. Also, all
classrooms are mediated and have whiteboards. Additionally, some classrooms are equipped
with Smart Boards and document imaging cameras. Further, these funds are used to purchase
instructional software requested by faculty. Finally, these funds have been used to upgrade
distance learning capabilities in Hughes Hall.
Each faculty member has a laptop for use in communication and as an instructional tool.
Remote access is available so faculty members can work from anywhere at any time. An
instructional technology consultant and a hardware consultant are available to provide
professional development and hardware/software support. A variety of professional
development opportunities are provided to faculty by the instructional support consultant and
through the newly created Center for Teaching, Learning, and Technology. These include
support for developing online courses, use of Angel course management software, use of
Microsoft Office, Smartboard training, and Tegrity training. Also, many of the COE
departments now have the instructional support consultant provide technology overviews during
department meetings. Webinars on various issues such as copyright, fair use and hybrid courses
are also available to faculty. (6.12)
6.2
Briefly summarize the most significant changes related to Standard 6 that have led to
continuous improvement.
Three major leadership changes have occurred at Pittsburg State University in the past
year. Dr. Steve Scott, former dean of the College of Education who then assumed the position of
Provost and Vice President of Academic Affairs, became president of Pittsburg State University
in July of 2009. Also, Dr. Lynette Olson, former dean of the College of Arts and Sciences, was
selected as Provost and Vice President of Academic Affairs in March of 2010. Finally, Dr.
Howard Smith, former assistant to the president who then became interim chair of the
Department of Curriculum and Instruction, was selected to become dean of the College of
Education in April of 2010.
There have been several significant changes in personnel. First, the Unit has been able to
recruit two minority faculty, one who teaches elementary reading and one who serves as a
supervisor of student teachers. Also, three of the unit faculty have received their terminal
degrees and two others are currently finishing their dissertations. Additionally, the Unit hired an
37
instructional support consultant that is shared with the College of Business. The consultant is
available for individual as well as group professional development.
A number of facility improvements have been made that have enabled the COE to
continuously improve its programs for and support to candidates. In the summer of 2007, room
316 in Hughes Hall underwent a total renovation allowing for a place for the Unit faculty,
student groups, other campus groups, and external groups to meet and host workshops and
meetings. This is a state-of-the-art room with technology such as a projector, Smart Board,
computer, and two additional flat screen LCD monitors for added visibility. The room also has a
kitchenette that allows for the ability to prepare and serve snacks and meals. In the fall of 2008,
the university opened the Student Recreation Center. Besides providing fitness, recreation, and
leisure opportunities for students, it also houses the Department of Health, Human Performance,
and Recreation and includes mediated classrooms and state-of-the-art labs. In the fall of 2009,
the university opened the Bryant Student Health Center. The center is an outpatient, ambulatory
care facility, directed by a physician and a nursing staff and provides counseling services as well.
It also houses the Center for Student Accommodations which provides support for students with
disabilities. This facility is designed to provide high quality, convenient and cost-effective
health, counseling, and special accommodation services for PSU's approximate 7,200 students.
One of the newest resources added by the university that supports the Unit is the Center
for Teaching, Learning, and Technology. The director was added in 2008, and remodeling of the
center facility was completed in the spring of 2010. The center was created to respond to the
professional development needs across the university and to help coordinate the work of the
instructional support consultants. One of the newest initiatives of the center has been the
implementation of Tegrity, a lecture capture tool. Faculty who have used this new tool and their
students have found it to be a real benefit for students in both face-to-face and online instruction.
Also, in the past three years, the university began providing funds for faculty laptop computers
and ensuring replacement of faculty computers at least every three to four years. Also, a
professional development program has been developed to help faculty prepare for teaching
online. Further, an Adjunct Handbook has been developed to ensure alignment of program and
CF Knowledge Base expectations. Finally, the Unit has developed an assessment system that
collects data from a variety of electronic resources to provide useful information for faculty and
leadership to use in analyzing and making program improvements. On-campus data sources
include support from the Office of Information Services and Continuing and Graduate Studies.
An electronic assessment management system, LiveText, is scheduled to be implemented in the
fall of 2010 to assist in collecting program assessment data.
38