KENNESAW STATE UNIVERSITY
GRADUATE COURSE PROPOSAL OR REVISION,
Cover Sheet (10/02/2002)
Course Number/Program Name ECE 9210 Assessment in Post Secondary Teacher Education
Department Elementary and Early Childhood Education
Degree Title (if applicable) Ed.D. Program
Proposed Effective Date Fall 2006
Check one or more of the following and complete the appropriate sections:
x
New Course Proposal
Course Title Change
Course Number Change
Course Credit Change
Course Prerequisite Change
Course Description Change
Sections to be Completed
II, III, IV, V, VII
I, II, III
I, II, III
I, II, III
I, II, III
I, II, III
Notes:
If proposed changes to an existing course are substantial (credit hours, title, and description), a new course with a
new number should be proposed.
A new Course Proposal (Sections II, III, IV, V, VII) is required for each new course proposed as part of a new
program. Current catalog information (Section I) is required for each existing course incorporated into the
program.
Minor changes to a course can use the simplified E-Z Course Change Form.
Submitted by:
Faculty Member
Approved
_____
Date
Not Approved
Department Curriculum Committee Date
Approved
Approved
Approved
Approved
Approved
Approved
Not Approved
Department Chair
Date
School Curriculum Committee
Date
School Dean
Date
GPCC Chair
Date
Dean, Graduate Studies
Date
Not Approved
Not Approved
Not Approved
Not Approved
Not Approved
Vice President for Academic Affairs Date
Approved
Not Approved
President
Date
Page 1 of 12
KENNESAW STATE UNIVERSITY
GRADUATE COURSE/CONCENTRATION/PROGRAM CHANGE
I.
Current Information (Fill in for changes)
Page Number in Current Catalog
Course Prefix and Number
Course Title
Credit Hours
Prerequisites
Description (or Current Degree Requirements)
II.
Proposed Information (Fill in for changes and new courses)
Course Prefix and Number ECE 9210 _____________________
Course Title __Assessment in Post Secondary Teacher Education
Credit Hours 3
Prerequisites Acceptance to the Ed.D. program
Description (or Proposed Degree Requirements)
Students will inquire into recent research in assessment and the relationships among new
views of knowledge, teacher learning, and assessment of teachers. Emphases will be on
the examination and critique of standards-based assessment movements, increasing
awareness of the role and impact of external accrediting bodies, and the identification of
authentic assessments of meaningful teacher characteristics.
III.
Justification
The intent of this course is to increase the students’ ability to identify and assess the
knowledge, skills, and dispositions they believe to be vital to future teachers at both the
programmatic level and in individual course work. As the institutional assessment and
credentialing of future teachers becomes increasingly standardized and externally
controlled, it is important that future teacher educators be encouraged and prepared to
critique those practices and offer constructive alternatives to them. They must be
prepared to be the creators and enactors of assessment that is meaningful to their setting
and their students.
Page 2 of 12
IV.
Additional Information (for New Courses only)
Instructor:
Text:
Raths, J.D., & McAninch, A.C. (1999). What counts as knowledge in teacher education?
(Advances in Teacher Education, Vol. 5).
Soled, S.W. (Ed.). (1995). Assessment, testing, and evaluation in teacher education.
Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Prerequisites:
Admission to the Ed.D. program
Objectives:
Course objective
Increased knowledge of the various standards regulating
teacher education and professional development.
Doctoral
KSDs
1.a, 1.b, 4.b
Familiarity with the variety of assessments used in
formal teacher education programs.
1.a, 1.b, 4.b
Improved ability to critique national teaching standards
from a variety of pedagogical,
political, cultural, historical, and philosophical
perspectives.
1.b, 1.c, 2.a,
4.a, 5.a, 5.c,
5.f,
6.b, 6.d
The ability to develop professional standards for
teachers.
1.a, 2.d, 3.a,
3.b, 4.a, 4.b,
5.a, 6.c
he ability to articulate personal position on the
characteristics of effective teachers and the means by
1.a, 1.b, 1.c,
2.a, 3.b, 4.a,
Distributed School
Leadership Roles*
Curriculum, Instruction &
Assessment Leader,
Learning & Development
Leader
Change Leader, Data
Analysis Leader, Process
Improvement Leader
Curriculum, Instruction &
Assessment Leader,
Learning & Development
Leader
Change Leader, Data
Analysis Leader, Process
Improvement Leader
Learning & Development
Leader
Performance Improvement
Leader
Operations Leader,
Performance Leader, Data
Analysis Leader, Process
Improvement Leader,
Relationship Development
Leader;
Curriculum, Instruction &
Assessment Leader,
Learning & Development
Leader, Change Leader,
Relationship Development
Leader,
Performance Leader,
Operations Leader,
Data Analysis Leader
Curriculum, Instruction &
Assessment Leader,
PSC/NCATE
Standard
1.1, 1.2, 1.3,
1.4, 1.5, 1.7,
1.8
1.1, 1.2, 1.3,
1.4, 1.5, 1.7,
1.8
1.4, 1.5, 1.6,
1.7
1.1, 1.2, 1.3,
1.4, 1.5, 1.6,
1.7, 1.8
1.1, 1.2, 1.3,
1.4, 1.5, 1.6,
Page 3 of 12
which teachers are assessed.
5.d,, 5.e, 6.d
Expanded familiarity with a variety of means of
authentically assessing teaching performance.
1.a, 1.b, 4.b,
5.f
Improved ability to critique forms of assessment.
1.a, 1.b, 1.c,
2.a, 3.a, 4.a,
4.b, 5.a,, 5.c,
5.e, 6.d
The ability to align research on effective teaching,
standards for assessing high quality teaching and
appropriate and meaningful forms of assessment.
1.a, 1.b, 1.c,
2.b, 2.d, 2.e,
3.a, 3.b, 4..a,
4.b, 4.e, 5..a,
5..b, 6.c,
Improve ability to assess and critique teacher education
programs in relation to the standards they claim to
address and their stated goals.
1.a, 1.b, 1.c,
2.a, 3.b, 4.a,
4.b, 4.c, 4.e,
5.a, 5.b, 5.c,
5.e, 6.d
Learning & Development
Leader, Change Leader,
Relationship Development
Leader,
Performance Leader,
Operations Leader,
Data Analysis Leader
Curriculum, Instruction &
Assessment Leader
Learning & Development
Leader, Change Leader,
Data Analysis Leader,
Process Improvement
Leader
Curriculum, Instruction &
Assessment Leader,
Learning & Development
Leader, Change Leader,
Relationship Development
Leader,
Performance Leader,
Operations Leader,
Data Analysis Leader
Curriculum, Instruction &
Assessment Leader,
Learning & Development
Leader, Change Leader,
Relationship Development
Leader,
Performance Leader,
Operations Leader,
Data Analysis Leader
Curriculum, Instruction &
Assessment Leader,
Learning & Development
Leader, Change Leader,
Relationship Development
Leader,
Performance Leader,
Operations Leader,
Data Analysis Leader
1.7, 1.8
1.3, 1.4, 1.5,
1.6, 1.7, 1.8
1.1, 1.2, 1.3,
1.4, 1.5, 1.6,
1.7, 1.8
1.1, 1.2, 1.3,
1.4, 1.5, 1.6,
1.7, 1.8
1.1, 1.2, 1.3,
1.4, 1.5, 1.6,
1.7, 1.8
Instructional Method
Technology
ISL (Impact on Student Learning)
Field Experience
INTASC Critique
Research Synthesis Paper
Program Critique
Lecture
Method of Evaluation
Page 4 of 12
Each assignment would be evaluated according to a rubric provided to the students at the
beginning of the assignment. The course grade would be assigned according to a
standard percentage scale.
90 – 100% = A
80 – 89 = B
70 – 79 = C
60 - 69 = D
59 and below = F
V.
Resources and Funding Required (New Courses only)
*Course funding is addressed in a comprehensive manner in the comprehensive proposal for the umbrella
Ed.D degree for the Bagwell College of Education.
Resource
Amount
Faculty
Other Personnel
Equipment
Supplies
Travel
New Books
New Journals
Other (Specify)
TOTAL
Funding Required Beyond
Normal Departmental Growth
Page 5 of 12
VI. COURSE MASTER FORM
This form will be completed by the requesting department and will be sent to the Office of the
Registrar once the course has been approved by the Office of the President.
The form is required for all new courses.
DISCIPLINE
COURSE NUMBER
COURSE TITLE FOR LABEL
(Note: Limit 16 spaces)
CLASS-LAB-CREDIT HOURS
Approval, Effective Term
Grades Allowed (Regular or S/U)
If course used to satisfy CPC, what areas?
Learning Support Programs courses which are
required as prerequisites
EECE
ECE 9210
Assess Teach Ed
3
Fall 2006
Regular
APPROVED:
________________________________________________
Vice President for Academic Affairs or Designee __
II Attach Syllabus
Page 6 of 12
KENNESAW STATE UNIVERSITY
BAGWELL COLLEGE OF EDUCATION
DEPARTMENT OF ELEMENTARY & EARLY CHILDHOOD
FALL SEMESTER 2006
I.
ECE 9210 Assessment in Post-Secondary Teacher Education
II.
Instructor Information
III.
Class Meeting Information
IV.
Possible Texts
Raths, J.D., & McAninch, A.C. (1999). What counts as knowledge in teacher education?
(Advances in Teacher Education, Vol. 5).
Soled, S.W. (Ed.). (1995). Assessment, testing, and evaluation in teacher education. Norwood,
NJ: Ablex.
V.
Catalog Course Description
Students will inquire into recent research in assessment and the relationships among new views of knowledge, teacher learning,
and assessment of teachers at the college and university level. Emphases will be on the examination and critique of standardsbased assessment movements, increasing awareness of the role and impact of external accrediting bodies, and the identification
of authentic assessments of meaningful teacher characteristics.
VI.
Purpose/Rationale
The intent of this course is to increase the students’ ability to identify and assess the knowledge, skills, and dispositions they
believe to be vital to future teachers at both the programmatic level and in individual course work. As the institutional assessment
and credentialing of future teachers becomes increasingly standardized and externally controlled, it is important that future
teacher educators be encouraged and prepared to critique those practices and offer constructive alternatives to them. As teacher
leaders they must be prepared to be the creators and enactors of assessment that is meaningful to their setting and their
students.
KENNESAW STATE UNIVERSITY’S CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK:
Collaborative development of expertise in teaching and learning
The Professional Teacher Education Unit (PTEU) at Kennesaw State University is committed to developing expertise among
candidates in initial and advanced programs as teachers and leaders who possess the capability, intent and expertise to facilitate
high levels of learning in all of their students through effective, research-based practices in classroom instruction, and who
enhance the structures that support all learning. To that end, the PTEU fosters the development of candidates as they progress
through stages of growth from novice to proficient to expert and leader. Within the PTEU conceptual framework, expertise is
viewed as a process of continued development, not an end-state. To be effective, teachers and educational leaders must
embrace the notion that teaching and learning are entwined and that only through the implementation of validated practices can
all students construct meaning and reach high levels of learning. In that way, candidates at the doctoral level develop into
leaders for learning and facilitators of the teaching and learning process. Finally, the PTEU recognizes, values and
demonstrates collaborative practices across the college and university and extends collaboration to the community-at-large.
Through this collaboration with professionals in the university, the public and private schools, parents and other professional
partners, the PTEU meets the ultimate goal of assisting Georgia schools in bringing all students to high levels of learning.
Knowledge Base
Teacher development is generally recognized as a continuum that includes four phases: preservice, induction, in-service,
renewal (Odell, Huling, and Sweeny, 2000). Just as Sternberg (1996) believes that the concept of expertise is central to
Page 7 of 12
analyzing the teaching-learning process, the teacher education faculty at KSU believe that the concept of expertise is central to
preparing effective classroom teachers and teacher leaders. Researchers describe how during the continuum phases teachers
progress from being Novices learning to survive in classrooms toward becoming Experts who have achieved elegance in their
teaching. We, like Sternberg (1998), believe that expertise is not an end-state but a process of continued development.
Use of Technology : Technology Standards for Educators are required by the Professional Standards Commission.
Telecommunication and information technologies will be integrated throughout the master teacher preparation program, and all
candidates must be able to use technology to improve student learning and meet Georgia Technology Standards for Educators.
During the courses, candidates will be provided with opportunities to explore and use instructional media. They will master use
of productivity tools, such as multimedia facilities, local-net and Internet, and feel confident to design multimedia instructional
materials, and create WWW resources.
VII.
Course Objectives:
The objectives of this course are consistent with the Bagwell College of Education KSDs for Doctoral Candidates.
Students will develop:
Course objective
Increased knowledge of the various standards regulating
teacher education and professional development.
Doctoral
KSDs
1.a, 1.b, 4.b
Familiarity with the variety of assessments used in
formal teacher education programs.
1.a, 1.b, 4.b
Improved ability to critique national teaching standards
from a variety of pedagogical,
political, cultural, historical, and philosophical
perspectives.
1.b, 1.c, 2.a,
4.a, 5.a, 5.c,
5.f,
6.b, 6.d
The ability to develop professional standards for
teachers.
1.a, 2.d, 3.a,
3.b, 4.a, 4.b,
5.a, 6.c
he ability to articulate personal position on the
characteristics of effective teachers and the means by
which teachers are assessed.
1.a, 1.b, 1.c,
2.a, 3.b, 4.a,
5.d,, 5.e, 6.d
Distributed School
Leadership Roles*
Curriculum, Instruction &
Assessment Leader,
Learning & Development
Leader
Change Leader, Data
Analysis Leader, Process
Improvement Leader
Curriculum, Instruction &
Assessment Leader,
Learning & Development
Leader
Change Leader, Data
Analysis Leader, Process
Improvement Leader
Learning & Development
Leader
Performance Improvement
Leader
Operations Leader,
Performance Leader, Data
Analysis Leader, Process
Improvement Leader,
Relationship Development
Leader;
Curriculum, Instruction &
Assessment Leader,
Learning & Development
Leader, Change Leader,
Relationship Development
Leader,
Performance Leader,
Operations Leader,
Data Analysis Leader
Curriculum, Instruction &
Assessment Leader,
Learning & Development
Leader, Change Leader,
Relationship Development
PSC/NCATE
Standard
1.1, 1.2, 1.3,
1.4, 1.5, 1.7,
1.8
1.1, 1.2, 1.3,
1.4, 1.5, 1.7,
1.8
1.4, 1.5, 1.6,
1.7
1.1, 1.2, 1.3,
1.4, 1.5, 1.6,
1.7, 1.8
1.1, 1.2, 1.3,
1.4, 1.5, 1.6,
1.7, 1.8
Page 8 of 12
Expanded familiarity with a variety of means of
authentically assessing teaching performance.
1.a, 1.b, 4.b,
5.f
Improved ability to critique forms of assessment.
1.a, 1.b, 1.c,
2.a, 3.a, 4.a,
4.b, 5.a,, 5.c,
5.e, 6.d
The ability to align research on effective teaching,
standards for assessing high quality teaching and
appropriate and meaningful forms of assessment.
1.a, 1.b, 1.c,
2.b, 2.d, 2.e,
3.a, 3.b, 4..a,
4.b, 4.e, 5..a,
5..b, 6.c,
Improve ability to assess and critique teacher education
programs in relation to the standards they claim to
address and their stated goals.
1.a, 1.b, 1.c,
2.a, 3.b, 4.a,
4.b, 4.c, 4.e,
5.a, 5.b, 5.c,
5.e, 6.d
Leader,
Performance Leader,
Operations Leader,
Data Analysis Leader
Curriculum, Instruction &
Assessment Leader
Learning & Development
Leader, Change Leader,
Data Analysis Leader,
Process Improvement
Leader
Curriculum, Instruction &
Assessment Leader,
Learning & Development
Leader, Change Leader,
Relationship Development
Leader,
Performance Leader,
Operations Leader,
Data Analysis Leader
Curriculum, Instruction &
Assessment Leader,
Learning & Development
Leader, Change Leader,
Relationship Development
Leader,
Performance Leader,
Operations Leader,
Data Analysis Leader
Curriculum, Instruction &
Assessment Leader,
Learning & Development
Leader, Change Leader,
Relationship Development
Leader,
Performance Leader,
Operations Leader,
Data Analysis Leader
1.3, 1.4, 1.5,
1.6, 1.7, 1.8
1.1, 1.2, 1.3,
1.4, 1.5, 1.6,
1.7, 1.8
1.1, 1.2, 1.3,
1.4, 1.5, 1.6,
1.7, 1.8
1.1, 1.2, 1.3,
1.4, 1.5, 1.6,
1.7, 1.8
*Georgia's Leadership Institute for School Improvement & Georgia Committee on Educational Leadership
Preparation’s Distributed School Leadership Roles
This class will use small and large group discussion/activities, lecture, and writing to explore three aspects of
assessment in the education of teachers: (1) the assessment of the quality and characteristics of preservice
teachers; (2) the assessment of programs intended to prepare future teachers; (3) the assessment of the
standards and forms of assessment themselves. The primary emphasis will be on preservice or future teachers
but some attention will be given to assessing practicing teachers and teacher educators according to various
national standards that exist. Each of those aspects of assessment will be examined according three additional
questions or issues.
Compliance. How do we design assessments that meet existing standards?
Critique. How appropriate and meaningful are those standards?
Creation. How do we identify and assess authentic and meaningful alternative standards?
VIII.
Course Requirements and Assignments
Page 9 of 12
Possible assignments might include:
INTASC Critique - Integrate assigned readings, class discussion, previous research, and outside readings to assess the INTASC
standards themselves. Among the criteria or questions to be considered:
a. To what extent are the standards realistic and appropriate for preservice teachers? For second year teachers?
b. What are the potential benefits and detrimental effects of using the standards?
c. What, if any, options to the standards have been offered?
d. To what extent do the standards lend themselves to meaningful assessment?
e. What is your own perspective on the quality and use of the standards?
Research Synthesis - A paper designed to provide an overview of the knowledge and performances that can or should
be expected of new teachers and the best ways in which to assess those characteristics. It would examine the
contextual, environmental, economic and political factors that hinder or enhance the effective assessment of new
teachers.
Program Critique – Critique three different teacher education programs from around the country, describe the way(s) in
which they assess their students' ability to meet the INTASC standards. The description would include an
overview of the curriculum, field experience requirements and any other contextual information that is necessary.
Use the INTASC standards and research on authentic forms of assessment to critique the potential effectiveness
of those programs according to the following criteria.
a. The authenticity and meaningfulness of the forms of assessment.
b. The degree of alignment or congruence with the INTASC standards.
c. The degree of alignment or congruence with the overall program of study.
d. The level of clarity of expectations, practicality, and other logistical or mechanical characteristics.
Evaluation and Course Grading
Each assignment would be evaluated according to a rubric provided to the students at the beginning of the assignment. The
course grade would be assigned according to a standard percentage scale.
90 – 100% = A
80 – 89 = B
70 – 79 = C
60 - 69 = D
59 and below = F
IX. Policies
Diversity: A variety of materials and instructional strategies will be employed to meet the needs of the different learning styles of
diverse learners in class. Candidates will gain knowledge as well as an understanding of differentiated strategies and curricula
for providing effective instruction and assessment within multicultural classrooms. One element of course work is raising
candidate awareness of critical multicultural issues. A second element is to cause candidates to explore how multiple attributes
of multicultural populations influence decisions in employing specific methods and materials for every student. Among these
attributes are age, disability, ethnicity, family structure, gender, geographic region, giftedness, language, race, religion,
sexual orientation, and socioeconomic status. An emphasis on cognitive style differences provides a background for the
consideration of cultural context.
Kennesaw State University provides program accessibility and accommodations for persons defined as disabled under Section
504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 or the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. A number of services are available to
support students with disabilities within their academic program. In order to make arrangements for special services, students
must visit the Office of Disabled Student Support Services (ext. 6443) and develop an individual assistance plan. In some cases,
certification of disability is required.
Please be aware there are other support/mentor groups on the campus of Kennesaw State University that address each of the
multicultural variables outlined above.
Professionalism- Academic Honesty: KSU expects that graduate students will pursue their academic programs in an ethical,
professional manner. Faculty of the EdS and EdD programs abide by the policies and guidelines established by the university in
their expectations for candidates’ work. Candidates are responsible for knowing and adhering to the guidelines of academic
Page 10 of 12
honesty as stated in the graduate catalog. Any candidate who is found to have violated these guidelines will be subject to
disciplinary action consistent with university policy. For example, plagiarism or other violations of the University’s Academic
Honesty policies could result in a grade of “F” in the course and a formal hearing before the Judiciary Committee.
Professionalism- Participation and Attendance: Part of your success in this class is related to your ability to provide peer
reviews and feedback to your editing groups regarding their research and their writing. Furthermore, responding effectively and
appropriately to feedback from your peers and the professor is another measure of one’s professionalism. In addition, since
each class meeting represents a week of instruction/learning, failure to attend class will likely impact your performance on
assignments and final exams. Please be prepared with all readings completed prior to class. We depend on one another to ask
pertinent and insightful questions
Course Outline
Key topics in their tentative order of presentation
Overview and discussion of INTASC principles
Historical context of assessment in teacher education
Philosophical and theoretical foundations of assessment in teacher education
The nature and role of standards in teaching and teacher education
The role of accrediting agencies and state certification in assessment of teacher education
Issues regarding a teacher knowledge base
Traditional forms of assessment
Performance and portfolio-based assessment
Assessment and diversity issue
Disputes, Legality, and Professionalism
X.
Bibliography
Abdal-Haqq, I. (1998). Professional development schools: Weighing the evidence. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
ATE. (1991). Distinguished company: Distinguished program in teacher education awards,
1977-1989. Reston, VA: Author.
Behar-Horenstein, L.S. (Ed.) (Spring, 1995). Curriculum issues and the postsecondary
preparation of educators. Peabody Journal of Education, 70(3).
Buchman, M., & Floden, R.E. (1993). Detachment and concern: Conversations in the
philosophy of teaching and teacher education. New York: Teachers College Press.
Bullock, A.A., & Hawk, P.P. (2001). Developing a teaching portfolio: A guide for preservice
and practicing teachers. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall.
Campbell, D.M., Cignetti, P.B., Melenyzer, B.J., Nettles, D.H., & Wyman, R.M. (2001). How to
develop a professional portfolio: A manual for teachers. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Chernoff, M.L., Nassif, P.M., & Gorth, W.P. (1987). The validity issue: What should teacher
certification tests measure? Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.
Dill, D.D., & Associates. (1990). What teachers need to know: The knowledge, skills, and values
essential to good teaching. San Fransisco: Jossey-Bass.
Feiman-Nemser, S., & Rosaen, C. (Eds.) (1997). Guiding teacher learning: Insider studies of
classroom work with prospective and practicing teachers. Washington, DC: AACTE.
Goodlad, J.I. (1990). Teachers for our nation’s schools. San Fransisco: Jossey-Bass.
Page 11 of 12
Goodlad, J.I., Soder, R., & Sirotnik, K.A. (Eds.). (1990). Places where teachers are taught. San
Fransisco: Jossey-Bass.
Griffin, G.A. (1999). The education of teachers. Ninety-eighth Yearbook of the National Society
for the study of education. Chicago: NSSE.
Howey, K.R., & Zimpher, N.L. (1989). Profiles of preservice teacher education: Inquiry into the
nature of programs. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
Liston, D.P., & Zeichner, K.M. (1991). Teacher education and the social conditions of
schooling. New York: Routledge.
National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future. (September, 1996). What matters
most: Teaching for America’s future: Report of the National Commission on Teaching
and America’s Future. Woodbridge, VA: Author.
Sikula, J. (Ed.) (1988). Action in teacher education: Tenth-year anniversary issue
(Commemorative Edition). Reston, VA: Association of Teacher Educators.
Page 12 of 12