Brief Guidelines to Completing an ACEI Program Report: Section IV
DIRECTIONS: The 6-8 key assessments listed in Section II must be documented and discussed in Section IV.
The assessments must be those that all candidates in the program are required to complete and should be used
by the program to determine candidate proficiencies as expected in the program standards. In the description
of each assessment below, the SPA has identified potential assessments that would be appropriate. Assessments
have been organized into the following three areas that are addressed in NCATE’s unit standard 1:



Content knowledge1
Pedagogical and professional knowledge, skills and dispositions
Focus on student learning
For each assessment, the evidence for meeting standards should include the following information:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
A brief description of the assessment and its use in the program (one sentence may be sufficient);
A description of how this assessment specifically aligns with the standards it is cited for in Section III.
A brief analysis of the data findings;
An interpretation of how that data provides evidence for meeting standards; and
Attachment of assessment documentation, including2:
(a) the assessment tool or description of the assignment;
(b) the scoring guide for the assessment; and
(c) candidate data derived from the assessment.
The narrative section for each assessment (1-4 above) is limited to two text pages. It is preferred that each
attachment for a specific assessment (5a-c above) be limited to the equivalent of five text pages, however in
some cases assessment instruments or scoring guides may go beyond 5 pages.
For Program Reports
Although required for NCATE/CAEP, these items are not reflective of meeting the ACEI standards for all candidates.
No dispositions. Dispositions will be gathered at the unit level, and reported as part of the institutional
No survey data. Data for program reports should reflect the performance of all candidates; survey data does not meet this criteria.
No completer data. Data for program reports should reflect the performance of all candidates; at this time, the completer data is not
reflective of the performance of all candidates.
1
In some disciplines, content knowledge may include or be inextricable from professional knowledge. If this is the case, assessments
that combine content and professional knowledge may be considered “content knowledge” assessments for the purpose of this report.
2 All three components of the assessment – as identified in 5a-c – must be attached, with the following exceptions: (a) the assessment
tool and scoring guide are not required for reporting state licensure data, and (b) for some assessments, data may not yet be available.
Brief Guidelines to Completing an ACEI Program Report: Section IV
Section IV
1. Brief description of the assessment and its use in the program (one sentence may be sufficient).
In [Name of Course, Course Number] all candidates must complete the [Name of the Assessment] at the [proficient level] on
each row of the rubric to progress to the next level of the program. Those not meeting proficiency must complete [remediation
plan.}
2. Brief description of how the assessment specifically aligns with the standards noted in Section III.
ACEI Standard
3.2 Adaptation to diverse students—Candidates understand how
elementary students differ in their development and approaches to
learning, and create instructional opportunities that are adapted to
diverse students.
3.3 Development of critical thinking and problem solving—
Candidates understand and use a variety of teaching strategies that
encourage elementary students’ development of critical thinking and
problem solving.
4.0 Assessment for instruction—Candidates know, understand, and
use formal and informal assessment strategies to plan, evaluate and
strengthen instruction that will promote continuous intellectual, social,
emotional, and physical development of each elementary student.
Home Institution
Elementary Education Lesson Plan Rubric
11. Candidate demonstrates that individual child’s diverse
characteristics, needs and learning levels were accounted for when
creating meaningful lesson plans, and provides some examples of
environmental or instructional strategies or accommodations that were
used to support levels of developmental needs with each individual
student.
10. Critical Thinking and Problem Solving. Candidate instructs using
2 & 3 levels of Bloom’s taxonomy using critical thinking, problem solving
and reading.
1. Review and Focus. The “hook” shows some focusing of the students’
attention on the objectives of the lesson. Clear connections from past
and future experiences are few. Activating prior knowledge is evident.
Questions to assess current knowledge are closed or not open-ended.
9. Assessments. The assessments for the lesson are traditional, asking
a few questions of the group to start with, questions for the various parts
of the lesson, and a worksheet as a check for understanding.
Notes: If some items on the rubric do not portray the language of the ACEI standards, do not use them as evidence, i.e. Objective,
student materials, teacher materials).
3. A brief analysis of the data findings;
Report the data as more like results in a research paper. You have the data tables. Tell the reader how the candidates scored on the
rubric. EX: A total of 90% of the candidates met proficiency on all items of the rubric and did not require remediation. The other 8%
passed after meeting remediation requirements. Another 2% did not meet proficiency and did not continue in the program.
4. An interpretation of how that data provides evidence for meeting standards;
Explain that the assessment was designed to assess ACEI standards 1.0, 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4, 3.5, 4.0, and 5.1 and how the data show
evidence for meeting the standards. EX: Three rows of the rubric were aligned to ACEI standard 4.0 (items 1 and 9). All candidates
met proficiency on these rows, thus providing evidence for meeting ACEI Standard 4.0.
5 Evidence must be presented in this section that assessment results have been analyzed and have been or
will be used to improve candidate performance and strengthen the program. This description should not link
improvements to individual assessments but, rather, it should summarize principal findings from the evidence,
the faculty’s interpretation of those findings, and changes made in (or planned for) the program as a result.
Describe the steps program faculty has taken to use information from assessments for improvement of both
candidate performance and the program. This information should be organized around (1) content
knowledge, (2) professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills, and (3) student learning.