Academic Unit: College of Education
Degree Program : Master’s Degree in Foreign Language Education (TESOL track)
Link to Unit’s Mission : To prepare professionals who the knowledge, abilities, and habits of mind to facilitate and enhance learning and development within diverse settings; promote and facilitate the discovery, development, documentation, assessment, and dissemination of knowledge related to teaching and learning; and develop professional partnerships in the larger community.
MLE/TESOL as a program follows the following notions of commitments and goals with respect to great teaching (CGGs) :
 Operate from a sound theoretical and linguistic base with respect to second language education, a means for connecting such a base to practice and vice versa, and interactive, internationally-grounded commitments that promote multilingualism and multiculturalism.
 that MLE/TESOL programs promote a global orientation toward creativity, pertinent methodology, fair assessment, and advocacy by candidates for their students, and their families;
 and finally, that MLE/TESOL programs establish and maintain international connections fostering educational, social, economic, and political progress.
Student Learning Outcome (1 per page)
Stated in Measurable Terms
With respect to Stewards of the Discipline
Assessment Method
Procedures :
Results
(Data Summary and Interpretation)
MLE/TESOL candidates . . .
The foundation of the overall MLE/TESOL
In January and May 2009, two MLE/TESOL faculty
Operate from a sound theoretical and linguistic base with respect to second language education, a means for connecting such a base to practice and vice versa, and interactive, internationallygrounded commitments that promote multilingualism and multiculturalism. assessment is the candidate portfolio, which may be a CD-ROM, web site, or other medium of the candidate’s choice. This portfolio consists of a minimum of six folders. Each folder has a threecolumn rubric, based on both the MLE/TESOL program notions of Commitments and Goals with respect to Great Teaching (CGGs), as well as the
FIU College of Education conceptual framework of stewards of the discipline , reflective inquiry, and members held eight meetings (two hours each) to discuss the content of candidates ’ portfolios. A third
MLE/TESOL faculty member was available to settle any discrepancies in decisions by the first two faculty members. The following results were decided:
Folders #1 and #2
Fall 2008 and Spring 2009: mindful educators. The CGGs may be found at http://www.fiu.edu/~mle/cggs.html
. The elements also take into account the SACS requirements for determining content and discipline knowledge,
3 of 12 candidates achieved the “exceeds standards” level on the stewards of the discipline aspects of these folders. The remaining 9 oral and written communication, and critical thinking. Crosswalks of these interweaved approaches may be observed at http://www.fiu.edu/~tesol/MLETESOL-
AcademicLearningCompact.xls
and candidates achieved the acceptable level.
Six graduating candidates participated in and passed the MLE/TESOL comprehensive exam. The other six passed the FTCE. We conducted an evaluation of MLE/TESOL comprehensive exams., revealed the following:

http://www.fiu.edu/~tesol/MLETESOL-
AcademicLearningCompact.doc
The rubrics guiding the student outcome evaluations may be observed at http://www.fiu.edu/~tesol/MLETESOL-
PortfolioRubrics.html
. A three-column rubric with the titles “approaches standard,” “meets standard,” and “exceeds standard.” These descriptions correspond to the 2002 TESOL/NCATE P-12
Teacher Education standards documents.
Assessment regarding the folders and these outcomes will be related to the stewards of the discipline notions.
Two MLE/TESOL Faculty will evaluate the folders and formulate a set of conclusions based on the results. A third MLE/TESOL Faculty member may be called upon to add input should there be any points of substantial disagreement.
Folders #1 and #2 (Knowledge of the Field)
How this will be assessed
• Candidates have a choice of taking the Florida
Teacher Certification Exam (FTCE) or the
MLE/TESOL Comprehensive Exam, issued in TSL
6908 (Field Component). Results will be analyzed, identifying those aspects of the rubric pertaining most to stewards of the discipline.
Desired results
• All candidates will pass the MLE/TESOL comprehensive exam as part of their capstone
TSL 6908 course, demonstrating achievement at the “meets standard” level.
Folder #3 (Knowledge of pedagogy and the field)
How this will be assessed
• A collection of in-class foreign language
The following positive attributes were indicated:
• Most candidates showed grasp of second language acquisition processes and their application to teaching.
Concerns for future improvement were also indicated:
• We want to make sure candidates can distinguish between methods and theory and make certain that overt connections between the theories and their application are clarified.
• We want to emphasize techniques of data analysis, showing candidates’ use of detailed linguistic elements.
We unfortunately do not have an item analysis of
FTCE results available for analysis.
Folder #3
All 12 candidates achieved the “meets standard” level with respect to the stewards of the discipline aspects in this assessment.
The following positive attributes were indicated:
• Story telling is going well.
• Developing a teacher’s battery of lesson activities
(some classic) is impressive. Students can draw from an abundance of classroom activities.
• Students work traditionally with linguistic building blocks.
• Activities are interactive and communicative.
Concerns for future improvement were also named:
• Candidates seemed constrained by the demands of cooperating teachers in internship settings
• A lack of new creativity persists, even in teachers who have been in the classroom for some time
• Candidates don’t reveal much use of music, art, or drama
• Candidates don’t reveal much attention to online technology as a regular feature of language teaching.

assessment activities and lesson plans
— showcasing candidates’ abilities to plan and teach reading, writing, speaking, and listening in the target language —will be examined and analyzed by an
MLE/TESOL committee, implementing a threecolumn rubric. The aspects of the rubric pertaining most to stewards of the discipline will be identified.
Desired results
• All candidates will show the composite of their knowledge of the field and pedagogy to minimally at an overall level of “meets standard” on the threecolumn rubric.

Academic Unit: College of Education
Degree Program : Master’s degree in Foreign Language Education (TESOL Track)
Link to Unit’s Mission : To prepare professionals who the knowledge, abilities, and habits of mind to facilitate and enhance learning and development within diverse settings; promote and facilitate the discovery, development, documentation, assessment, and dissemination of knowledge related to teaching and learning; and develop professional partnerships in the larger community.
 that MLE/TESOL candidates operate from a sound theoretical and linguistic base with respect to second language education of second language, a means for connecting such a base to practice and vice versa, and interactive, internationally-grounded commitments that promote multilingualism and multiculturalism;
 that MLE/TESOL programs promote a global orientation toward creativity, pertinent methodology, fair assessment, and advocacy by candidates for their students, and their families;
 and finally, that MLE/TESOL programs establish and maintain international connections fostering educational, social, economic, and political progress.
Student Learning Outcome (1 per page)
Stated in Measurable Terms
With respect to Reflective Inquiry
MLE/TESOL candidates . . .
Assessment Method
Procedures :
Results
(Data Summary and Interpretation)
Folder #4
The foundation of the overall MLE/TESOL
Demonstrate orientation toward creativity, pertinent methodology, fair assessment, assessment is the candidate portfolio, which may be a CD-ROM, web site, or other medium of the candidate’s choice. This portfolio consists of a
All 12 candidates were rated in the “meets standard” range. and advocacy by candidates for their students, and their families minimum of six folders. Each folder has a threecolumn rubric, based on both the MLE/TESOL program notions of Commitments and Goals with
The following positive attributes stood out from the results:
• That candidates were likely to engage in respect to Great Teaching (CGGs), as well as the
FIU College of Education conceptual framework of interactive teaching
• That candidates seems to have adequate and stewards of the discipline , reflective inquiry, and mindful educators. The CGGs may be found at appropriate knowledge of content, and
• That candidates were consistently promoting http://www.fiu.edu/~mle/cggs.html
. The elements positive rapport among their students. also take into account the SACS requirements for determining content and discipline knowledge, oral and written communication, and critical
The following considerations for the future were thinking. Crosswalks of these interweaved approaches may be observed at http://www.fiu.edu/~tesol/MLETESOL-
AcademicLearningCompact.xls
and http://www.fiu.edu/~tesol/MLETESOLalso duly indicate:
• That candidates were only superficially using data from the videos to offer deep and specific reflection and analysis of their own teaching.

AcademicLearningCompact.doc
Two MLE/TESOL Faculty will evaluate the folders and formulate a set of conclusions based on the results. A third MLE/TESOL Faculty member may be called upon to add input should there be any points of substantial disagreement.
The rubrics guiding the student outcome evaluations may be observed at http://www.fiu.edu/~tesol/MLETESOL-
PortfolioRubrics.html
. A three-column rubric with the titles “approaches standard,” “meets standard,” and “exceeds standard.” These descriptions correspond to the 2002 TESOL/NCATE P-12
Teacher Education standards documents.
Assessment regarding the folders and these outcomes will be related to the reflective inquiry notions.
Folder #4 (Video: Ability to teach)
How this will be assessed
• All candidates will include video examples of their teaching in their portfolio. In addition, candidates will include self-assessments of their own work, as shown in the video. The composite of this work will be analyzed by an MLE/TESOL committee with respect to the reflective inquiry notions of the three-column rubric.
Desired results
• All candidates will show their teaching abilities minimally at an overall level of “meets standard” on the three-column rubric.
Folder #5 (Impact on students)
How this will be assessed
* All candidates will showcase the work of students they work with in their field experiences and
Folder #5
Of the 12 candidates, 1 was rated as “approaches,”
8 as “meets,” and 3 as “exceeds” on the rubric.
The following positive attributes were observed in the analysis:
• That several candidates wrote comprehensive action research plans based on concrete problems observed during their internships.
We found that candidates had generally followed directions appropriately with respect to the conducting of their action research projects.
However, we decided our demands with respect to detail and information in future rubrics should entail
• Defining more explicitly what is expected of candidates; and
• Preparing candidates toward reporting even more explicit data.

internship. Candidates will also include essay reflections of their work with these students on these assignments. This folder will represent a sample of these experiences. The MLE/TESOL committee will examine the composite of student work and candidate reflection with respect to the reflective inquiry notions a three-column rubric.
Desired results
• All candidates will gauge teaching abilities and assessment considerations, minimally at an overall level of “meets standard” on the three-column rubric.

FLORIDA INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY
Student Learning Outcome Assessment 2008-2009
Academic Unit: College of Education
Degree Program : Master’s of Science in Foreign Language Education (TESOL track)
Link to Unit’s Mission : To prepare professionals who the knowledge, abilities, and habits of mind to facilitate and enhance learning and development within diverse settings; promote and facilitate the discovery, development, documentation, assessment, and dissemination of knowledge related to teaching and learning; and develop professional partnerships in the larger community.
MLE/TESOL as a program follows the following notions of commitments and goals with respect to great teaching (CGGs) :
 that MLE/TESOL candidates operate from a sound theoretical and linguistic base with respect to second language education of second language, a means for connecting such a base to practice and vice versa, and interactive, internationally-grounded commitments that promote multilingualism and multiculturalism;
 that MLE/TESOL programs promote a global orientation toward creativity, pertinent methodology, fair assessment, and advocacy by candidates for their students, and their families;
 and finally, that MLE/TESOL programs establish and maintain international connections fostering educational, social, economic, and political progress.
Student Learning Outcome (1 per page)
Stated in Measurable Terms
With respect to Mindful Educators
Assessment Method
Procedures
:
MLE/TESOL candidates . . . endeavor to establish and maintain international connections fostering educational, social, economic, and political progress.
The foundation of the overall MLE/TESOL assessment is the candidate portfolio, which may be a CD-ROM, web site, or other medium of the candidate’s choice. This portfolio consists of a minimum of six folders. Each folder has a threecolumn rubric, based on both the MLE/TESOL program notions of Commitments and Goals with respect to Great Teaching (CGGs), as well as the
FIU College of Education conceptual framework of stewards of the discipline , reflective inquiry, and mindful educators. The CGGs may be found at http://www.fiu.edu/~mle/cggs.html
. The elements also take into account the SACS requirements for determining content and discipline knowledge, oral and written communication, and critical thinking. Crosswalks of these interweaved approaches may be observed at http://www.fiu.edu/~tesol/MLETESOL-
AcademicLearningCompact.xls
and
Results
(Data Summary and Interpretation)
Folder #6
Out of 12 portfolios, 9 candidates received marks of
“approaches,” 1 of “meets,” and 2 of “exceeds.”
From these philosophy statements, faculty acknowledged the following attributes:
• That all candidates showed a basic understanding of language education techniques.
• That all candidates mention the importance of cultural consideration as a primary component of language education.
• That a handful of candidates are starting to think more fully about advocacy issues related to both their students and the field.
The following concerns were additionally noted:
• A need to give more development to a more coherent philosophy of language teaching that includes the elements reflected in the rubric.
• An overt and more conversational connection between the theories espoused throughout the program and the candidates’ direct application to both their observations of other teachers and

http://www.fiu.edu/~tesol/MLETESOL-
AcademicLearningCompact.doc
Two MLE/TESOL Faculty will evaluate the folders and formulate a set of conclusions based on the results. A third MLE/TESOL Faculty member may be called upon to add input should there be any points of substantial disagreement.
Assessment regarding the folders and these outcomes will be related to the mindful educator notions.
Folder #6 (Philosophy statements)
How this will be assessed
• Candidates will include philosophy statements at the beginning and right before student teaching.
Desired results
• By the end of their program, all candidates will gauge teaching abilities and assessment considerations, minimally at an overall level of
“meets standard” on the mindful educator notions of a three-column rubric. indeed their own performance.

In previous years, SACS documents indicated the MLE/TESOL programs’ venture to establish program portfolios for overall candidate progress throughout the programs. Last year’s report indicated that guiding folders for those portfolios had been established and that rubrics were to be developed to help both candidates and faculty with their implementation. The first rubrics for those folders, as well as their connections to the program’s CGGs and the unit’s conceptual framework have been established. Data based on those rubrics have now been analyzed and are presented here for the first time.
Over the past year, we have seen students attaining a grasp of first and second language acquisition and processes, as well as their ability to implement appropriate teaching strategies based on these processes. They recognize the importance of student-centered learning and the link between culture and language. They additionally understand and implement the dynamics of assessment in both traditional and authentic ways; furthermore, they understand ways in which assessment informs instruction. We also see students exhibiting substantial dispositions toward establishing positive relationships and rapport with students and colleagues in their classrooms, so much so that even some points of advocacy are appearing in some candidates’ writing. Finally, we note candidates’ interest in going abroad. As in past years, candidates have either conducted their internship abroad (this year in Puerto Rico) or immediately pursued overseas experiences (this year in China).
We would like to see even deeper development with respect to data analysis in terms of linguistics and analysis. We would also like to see much more concentration on incorporating music, art, drama, and even more technology in the classes. Our instruction needs to be even more explicit about expectations of what is included in the portfolios and on-going assignments. Such should occur overtly and explicitly in both classroom interactions and advising. The reflective nature of teaching needs further development and intricately detailed practice, not only in classroom settings but also in advising.
Interestingly, the results from the student learning outcomes analysis process very much corroborate with those from the program outcomes analysis.
How these priorities will be specifically addressed will be determined when the MLE/TESOL faculty return to contract in late August 2009, prior to the Fall Semester. The details concerning how these priorities will be distributed through the program in terms of coursework, syllabi, and advising practice will be discussed. Furthermore, rubrics for evaluating the program portfolios will also be updated, using the ideas proposed during
Summer 2009 by the FIU SACS matrices.