Accreditation

Section III: Evidence for Meeting Each Standard

STANDARD I: CANDIDATE KNOWLEDGE, SKILLS, AND DISPOSITIONS

Prev Page / Table of Contents

The unit requires a sequence of coursework and assessments which prepare candidates to know and demonstrate content, pedagogical, and professional knowledge, skills, and dispositions necessary to help all students learn. Those requirements reflect professional, state, and institutional standards and fulfill the accreditation and certification standards and statutory requirements established by the Maryland State Department of Education (MSDE). The unit is accredited by both NCATE and MSDE, and all programs were most recently approved in April 2001 as a result of Towson University's joint NCATE/MSDE Accreditation Visit in October 2000.

Standard I. Element 1: Content Knowledge for Teacher Candidates (Initial and Continuing Preparation of Teachers)

Ensuring the mastery of appropriate content in general studies in the liberal arts and sciences, as well as in specific academic disciplines and advanced fields of study is the first and foremost theme of the unit Conceptual Framework. Strong academic preparation is the cornerstone of the unit's content and performance-based standards and a key disposition. This is an all-campus responsibility designed to ensure that our candidates are knowledgeable professionals who meet professional, state, and institutional standards through both a theoretical and practical knowledge-base in the liberal arts and sciences, as well as in their specific academic disciplines and advanced fields of study, to meet professional, state, and institutional standards.

Initial Preparation
All candidates acquire a broad undergraduate background of essential intellectual skills through the liberal arts and sciences based on the University's General Education requirements, which serve as a foundation for concentrated study (e.g., content studies and professional education) in their major fields of study (Exhibit 20). In order to plan and teach effectively, it is imperative that all candidates have strong content backgrounds in their respective fields, as well as the skills to convey key concepts to their students. Evidence that coursework leads to disciplinary expertise is documented in the Unit Assessment System at all transition points by multiple assessments (e.g., SPA review, Praxis II, intern evaluations; see Standard II).

TEEB standards for entry to the professional program. Program admission and continuation criteria are developed and approved by the unit/Teacher Education Executive Board (TEEB). The procedures and minimum content requirements for admission to all initial professional education programs, which include demonstrated University General Education course content knowledge (e.g., minimum overall grade point average of 2.75 in Early Childhood, Elementary Education, Special Education; and minimum overall content grade point average of 2.5 in Secondary Education; passing score-as determined by the Maryland State Department of Education- on Praxis I) are identified in the TEEB Standards for Students Enrolled in Teacher Education Programs (Exhibit 4). (Candidates seeking admission to K-12 Teacher Education Programs - Art, Dance, and Physical Education - must contact the Department Chair for specific procedures and content requirements for admission to professional education programs. For example, admission to the Dance and Music Education programs is based on a performance audition.)

Unit and program standards also require that candidates continue to demonstrate content knowledge by maintaining a minimum GPA throughout their programs, including:

• minimum overall grade point average of 2.5 in Secondary Education and remaining K-12 programs; 2.5 in Early Childhood Education, Elementary Education, Special Education, and Art Education,
• minimum average of 2.75 in academic major, applicable only in programs requiring an academic major, and
• minimum average of 3.00 in professional education courses for Early Childhood Education, Elementary Education, Special Education, Integrated Elementary Education and Special Education, and Art Education; 2.75 for Secondary Education and remaining K-12 programs.

Post-baccalaureate initial preparation. The unit has two Maryland-approved, post-baccalaureate routes for initial preparation, the Master of Arts in Teaching (MAT) degree and a post-baccalaureate certification only program (non-degree). In both, the criteria and procedures for admission to the University and the program ensure that candidates have attained appropriate, prerequisite depth and breadth in both general and content knowledge (Exhibit 21).

Unit Assessment System Data Confirming Mastery of Content Knowledge
HEA - Title II aggregate and summary institution level pass-rate data. Based on Maryland's standards, strong evidence of demonstrated content knowledge for initial preparation candidates is found in Table 3 (NCATE-required), which provides a three-year profile of ETS-provided, unit summary pass-rates.

Additionally, the ETS-reported AY 2003-2005 Praxis II data (aggregate and program-specific Institutional Summary Reports) document that Praxis II content test pass-rates for all programs with a minimum of 10 program completers consistently exceeded the 80% requirement (Exhibit 22).

Specialized Professional Association (SPA) review. The sixteen SPA reviews (located on Bookcase 1, Shelf 2) required for initial and continuing preparation programs provide additional evidence that the unit offers programs with a strong content knowledge focus for candidates and that those candidates have demonstrated that they meet the SPA-specific content standards. Table 2 in the Overview (pp. 4-5) documents that eleven of the thirteen were nationally recognized, five with conditions. Three were not recognized; however, two of those reports passed their SPAs' standards for content. (See Exhibit 23, National Recognition Reports.)

As noted in Table 2 (p. 5, footnote), NCATE accepts the decisions of applicable programmatic accrediting agencies as evidence of program content quality." Preparation programs in Dance Education and Music Education (initial) and Speech Pathology, Audiology, and School Psychology (other school personnel) are accredited by their respective accrediting agencies based on their identified standards (Exhibit 8). (Accreditation reports are found on Bookcase 1, Shelf 3 in the Exhibits Room.)

Assessment of capstone INTASC and SPA-aligned internship by mentor teachers and university supervisors. Internship assessment by mentor teachers and University supervisors confirms that candidates are able to demonstrate their content knowledge of the subject matter that they plan to teach, as delineated in professional standards. Until fall 2005, the generic internship assessment tool for candidates' content knowledge was based solely on INTASC Principle 1, the teacher understands the central concepts, tools of inquiry, and structure of the discipline(s) he or she teaches and creates learning experiences that make these aspects of subject matter meaningful for students. Beginning in fall 2005, the internship assessment tool was revised to be program-specific (Exhibit 24) and to include assessment of the respective SPA standards.

Table 4 presents aggregated unit performance data reflecting INTASC Principle 1 that document that candidates demonstrate content knowledge in their capstone internships. Mean scores are in the proficient range (4 on a 5-point scale). (See Exhibit 25 for program-specific data.)

Table 5 documents interns' mastery of SPA-specific content standards as assessed by both mentor teachers and University supervisors during capstone internships spanning two semesters. Mean scores are in the proficient range (4 on a 5-point scale).

Assessment of capstone, INTASC-aligned portfolio by P-16 reviewers (Exhibit 26). In their summative portfolios, candidates provide artifacts (with rationales) that document that they know and have demonstrated knowledge of the subject matter that they plan to teach. Portfolio content is assessed by P-16 reviewers, and the candidate's oral "defense" of his or her portfolio provides a further opportunity to assess the candidate's content knowledge. Table 6 presents aggregated unit portfolio performance data reflecting INTASC Principle 1 which reveal that candidates know and demonstrate content knowledge through a weighted mean score of 4.47 (on a 5 point scale) based on 6 semesters of data for 1423 interns. (See intern portfolios, on Bookcase 2, Shelves 1-5 for representative, program-specific artifacts; also see Exhibit 25 for program-specific data)

INTASC-aligned program evaluation data from graduating interns (Exhibit 27). Direct feedback from graduating interns provides additional affirmation that candidates are academically proficient in the content that they plan to teach. At the end of each semester, the Center for Professional Practice (CPP) conducts an INTASC-based program evaluation by graduating interns. Question 1 on the assessment of the Teacher Education Program asks graduating interns to assess the extent to which they believe their programs resulted in their understanding of the appropriate academic discipline. Table 7 provides data documenting graduating interns' confidence in their content knowledge preparation based on a 4.25 mean score based on 6 semesters of data for 1,531 candidates. (See Exhibit 25 for program-specific data.)

INTASC-aligned surveys of graduates (Exhibit 28). Direct feedback from surveys of graduates one year and three years after graduation provides additional data that confirm that candidates attained academic competence. Based on INTASC standards, the survey asks graduates to assess the extent to which they believe their programs resulted in their understanding of the appropriate academic discipline. Tables 8 and 9 present data from these surveys which affirm that the unit was successful in the standard of attainment of academic competence through means that exceed proficient level (4 on a 5 point scale) based on three years of data for each survey. (See Exhibit 25 for program-specific data.) Mean scores on all graduate surveys show ratings in the proficient range (4 on a 5-point scale).

INTASC-aligned employer survey data (Exhibit 29). Table 10 provides employer assessment data on graduates' first -year performance, confirming that graduates were able to demonstrate content knowledge in their first year of teaching through a mean score of 4.5 on a 5 point scale based on three years of employer surveys.

Continuing Preparation
Although the Unit Assessment System is applicable to all continuing preparation programs, assessment is much more program specific than at the initial level, as is the data collection and decision making. As a result, data presented throughout the report are primarily program-specific.

As identified in Table 2 (pp. 4-5), the unit offers nine graduate programs for the continuing preparation of teachers; all are aligned to the Conceptual Framework, state and institutional standards, and to respective national standards. By intent and design, several focus on advanced academic content study. For example, and reflecting Maryland priorities, the Mathematics Education Program requires 24 credits in advanced mathematics content and has middle school and high school tracks; the Science Education Program requires 24-25 credits in advanced science content, and has biology, chemistry, and earth and environmental science tracks.

Graduate education has always operated on the fundamental assumption of "building on" or "advancing from" an undergraduate experience. The Unit Assessment System documents requirements for entry that are consistent with those of the University Graduate School and of the focus of each program. Accordingly, all programs assess content mastery at entry to the program, and candidates must present evidence of a strong undergraduate academic foundation upon which their program-specific knowledge is constructed. The criteria for admission to all graduate programs include meeting the basic requirements of the Graduate School (e.g., a baccalaureate degree with a minimum 3.0 GPA on a 4-point scale). Additionally, candidates must meet any program-specific requirements that verify prior content knowledge and experiences (e.g., current Maryland teaching certification in mathematics for the M.S. in Mathematics Education) that include understanding of core knowledge and practices that support learning. Graduate School and program-specific admission requirements are clearly delineated in the Graduate Catalog.

Continuing preparation of teachers has been planned to provide systematic instruction and experience that build upon and extend prior knowledge, skills, and dispositions and experiences in the major content of the respective fields, reflecting principles and concepts delineated in professional, state, and institutional standards. (Program descriptions, found in the State Program Reports required by the unit of all programs, delineate the structured sequence of advanced programs (Exhibit 30). Course syllabi document the way in which each course builds upon and extends candidates' prior knowledge and experiences to improve their own teaching and student learning.

Unit Assessment System Data Confirming Mastery of Content Knowledge
Graduate students pursuing these degrees are required to maintain good academic standing and demonstrate content knowledge through coursework. All programs require a minimum of 33 credits and candidates must maintain a minimum 3.0 GPA for all courses taken. There are no Maryland-required academic content examinations for the unit's continuing preparation programs.

Through the Unit Assessment System, content is also assessed at both the midpoint, through a required course assessment, and at completion through a capstone experience. Additional data for each program, including assessment and scoring tools, are found in SPA reports or graduate program-specific assessment notebooks (Exhibit 31). Consistent with the SPA requirement for identified minimal level of competence, Table 11 documents the percent of candidates achieving minimal competence on program-specific assessments of content knowledge ranging from 86-100%, thus confirming that candidates have advanced content knowledge and can explain important principles and concepts delineated in professional, state, and institutional standards.

Follow-up surveys by the Graduate School as well as by individual programs both report high levels of satisfaction among completers with the professional content and knowledge acquired (Exhibit 32).

REDESIGN OF TEACHER EDUCATION

Education programs) or in a performance-based, interdisciplinary program which has rigorous academic requirements (e.g., Early Childhood Education, Elementary Education). The study in the major teaching field and the professional education sequence is extensive, integrated, and comprehensive. (Program checklists that specify required content coursework are found in Exhibit 33.)

As a result of these requirements, completing an initial Secondary Education program is tantamount to completing a dual major. To obtain certification in Secondary Education, candidates must major in one of the thirteen academic certification fields: Biology, Chemistry, Earth-Space Science, English, French, Geography, German, Health, History, Mathematics, Physics, Social Science, or Spanish). The content major provides the basis for understanding the core concepts, skills, ideas, values, facts, methods of inquiry, and uses of technology to meet discipline-specific professional standards.

Instruction in Mathematics and Science for ECED and ELED Candidates
In Early Childhood (ECED) and Elementary Education (ELED), an equally significant commitment to content studies reflects the multi-disciplinary knowledge-base necessary for the broad-field preparation required. Both programs provide a strong academic background in mathematics and science, aligned with the respective national standards and consequently to the Maryland's Voluntary State Curriculum (VSC). Program checklists (Exhibit 33) document the following requirements:

• ECED: twelve credits of content studies in mathematics (Concepts and Structures through Geometry) as preprofessional prerequisites and a math methods course in the professional program; eight credits of content studies in science as preprofessional prerequisites (Biology, Physical Science) and a science methods course in the professional program.
• ELED: twelve credits of content studies in mathematics (Concepts and Structures through Geometry) as preprofessional prerequisites, and six math credits (content and observation courses) in the professional program; fourteen credits of content studies in science (Biology and Physical Science as preprofessional requirements), and six credits of content (Life Science and Earth-Space Science) in the professional program and a science methods course (which includes a field experience) in the professional program.

Assessed Proficiency in Mathematics and Science for ECED and ELED Candidates
The unit assesses mathematics and science content knowledge in several ways that ensure and document that ECED and ELED candidates know and can demonstrate their content knowledge. Specifically:

• know-as noted previously in the TEEB Standards for Students Enrolled in Teacher Education, ECED and ELED candidates must achieve a minimum overall GPA of 2.75 in their General Education courses (above noted preprofessional math and science requirements), and pass Praxis I , to be admitted to the major. Once admitted, candidates must maintain a minimum of 3.0 in coursework, including the additional professional program-specified math and science requirements.
• can demonstrate-as noted previously in the program/major requirements, the summative assessment of the capstone INTASC- and SPA-aligned internship provides data regarding candidate demonstration of their mathematics and science content knowledge. Table 12 presents unit performance data from the capstone internship as evaluated by mentor teachers and University supervisors. Reflecting INTASC Principle 1, data consistently document that ECED and ELED candidates know and can demonstrate content knowledge-including mathematics and science-in their capstone internships with mean scores above 4 based on 6 semesters of data for over 1500 interns. (See Exhibit 25 for program-specific data.)

Table 13 includes assessment data from mentor teachers and University supervisors reflecting SPA-specific content standards. Again the data show that ECED (NAEYC) and ELED (ACEI) candidates know and can demonstrate SPA-specific content standards during their capstone internships based on mean scores that exceed 4 on a 5 point scale for the two semesters of this requirement met by 260 interns.

Surveys of graduates: assessment of proficiency in mathematics and science. Data from surveys of ELED and ECED graduates one year after graduation confirm that candidates attained and demonstrated math and science proficiency. Reflecting on their inservice experience, graduates assess the extent to which they believe their programs prepared them to teach mathematics and science effectively. Table 14 data show that ECED and ELED candidates knew and were able to demonstrate mathematics and science content in professional practice with all mean scores 3.63 or above on a 5 point scale for three consecutive years based on 183 survey responses.

Maryland PreK-12 Content Standards
Aligned with state priorities, there is a unit-wide focus on P-12 content standards alignment (e.g., the Voluntary State Curriculum, Core Learning Goals; see Exhibit 34). Core syllabi document that candidates are provided opportunities to learn and are required to demonstrate knowledge and skills consistent with Maryland K-12 content standards. Examples of these "opportunities to learn" and required demonstrations, including lesson and unit plan requirements, may be found in Exhibit 35.

For example, the required ISTC 301 course, Integrating Instructional Technology, requires every initial candidate to create an online teaching portfolio which includes an identified key assessment, the Instructional Plan for Practical Teaching Experience. The Instructional Plan requirements include identification of linkage to the Voluntary State Curriculum (VSC), Core Learning Goals (CLGs), and Maryland Teacher Technology Standards (MTTS). Each plan has a link to the respective MdK12.org or MSDE website. As documented in Table 15, data from the Instructional Plan for Practical Teaching Experience confirm that candidates possess and demonstrate knowledge and skills consistent with Maryland's P-12 Content Standards, based on mean scores (from 11 sections of the course) of 1.84 on a 2 point scale for including Maryland Content Standards in lesson plans and 1.69 on a 2 point scale for an assessment plan aligned with the identified Content Standard (Exhibit 36).

Additionally, all interns in initial certification programs are required to demonstrate (in their summative portfolios) successful implementation of the Planning Cycle for Evidence of Student Learning (implemented in Fall 05), which requires a planned unit of instruction that is aligned to Maryland content standards (Exhibit 26). The implementation of the Planning Cycle is documented and assessed as a required professional portfolio artifact for INTASC Principle 8, Assessment. (See Standard I, Element 7, pp. 33-35 for details and data). Portfolio data which documents interns' competence in planning effective instruction consistent with Maryland's content is found in Table 16 based on a weighted mean score of 4.53 on a 5 point scale for three semesters of data from 669 interns.

All advanced programs teach and assess priorities for Maryland accountability as appropriate to the respective programs. Table 17 reflects assessment data documenting competence of advanced candidates in Maryland priorities, reported as percents achieving minimal competency, consistent with SPA requirements. Copies of assessments and scoring tools may be found in the individual program SPA reports or in graduate program notebooks in the Exhibit Room (Exhibit 31).

Collaboration to Achieve P-16 Standards Alignment (See Exhibit 37 for details)
Reflecting the Conceptual Framework, the preparation of candidates is an all-university responsibility. Faculty have a rich history of internal and external collaboration to improve the quality of education in schools. Representative examples of internal collaboration include:

• Collaboration among higher education faculty who teach the general, content, and professional education facets of the curriculum is a strength of the Professional Education Unit. The governance structure of the University and the Teacher Education Executive Board (TEEB) provides the philosophical and structural base for maximizing faculty participation and collaboration in program planning and evaluation (Exhibit 4).
• Formal structures identified in the Faculty Handbook (pp. 2-18 ~ 2-19; Bookcase 1, Shelf 2) and in the Towson University Constitution By-Laws of the University Senate provide other examples that ensure the regular collaboration among higher education faculty who teach the general, content, professional, and pedagogical studies. A major example is the formal procedure followed for course and program approval which involves the responsible departmental, college, and university structures.
• Preparation of secondary teacher candidates is the shared responsibility of the Department of Secondary Education and thirteen academic departments from the College of Liberal Arts, Science and Mathematics, and Health Professions. To this end, the SCED and academic departments collaborate to design programs based on specialty organization and state guidelines and standards based on their shared conviction that secondary teachers must have exceptional preparation both in the discipline) and in professional education courses consistent with Maryland's K-12 content standards.

Representative examples of A&S faculty collaboration with education and local school system faculty to achieve P-16 standards alignment:

• Center for Science and Mathematics Education (CSME). An arm of the Fisher College of Science and Mathematics, the CSME Director is a biology professor and the Assistant Director is an elementary education professor. The CSME is a focal point for research efforts, curriculum development, teacher education, and pedagogical reform designed to enhance the P-16 teaching and learning of mathematics, science and technology. Advisory board members representing local schools, universities, agencies of informal education, business, and the Maryland State Department of Education provide counsel in guiding center activities.
• Vertically Integrated Partnerships K-16 (VIP K-16). Involving thirteen Towson science content and science educators, VIP K-16 has two major aims (a) to enrich inservice science teacher knowledge in order to improve high school science instruction to better enable students to meet rigorous state science standards as measured on the Maryland Science High School Assessments, and (b) to improve the teaching skills of college science faculty to improve the quality of undergraduate general education science courses.
• Towson's PhysTEC project. Reflecting National Science Education Standards, and in partnership with several local schools, mentor teachers, and several dedicated teachers-in-residence, PhysTEC has revised elementary physical science preparation to include more guidance and practice learning and teaching science as inquiry.
• Professional development outreach to local school systems. Math faculty developed and continue to provide professional development for mathematics modules to be used in kindergarten (in eleven Maryland school systems) as part of the Maryland Model for School Readiness, and work directly with Baltimore City and Baltimore County teachers to address Maryland's content standards. In response to a request from the Coordinator of Science for BCPS, science and education faculty collaborated with BCPS science personnel to design a new M.Ed. in Elementary Education with an 18-credit focus in science content - aligned with the VSC and CLG -targeted to BCPS teachers to provide content enrichment for middle school teachers to achieve certification to teach middle and high school science.

Standard I. Element 2: Content Knowledge for Other School Personnel

(As with continuing preparation programs, the Unit Assessment System is applicable to other school personnel programs, but assessments are program-specific as is the data collection and decision-making. As a result, data presented throughout the report are primarily program-specific.) As identified in Table 2 (pp. 4-5), the unit offers six graduate programs for other school personnel, including programs in Instructional Leadership and Professional Development (Administrator I: Supervisors of Instruction, Assistant Principals, and Principals), Reading Education (Reading Specialist), Instructional Technology: Education Media Generalist II (Media Specialist), Audiology, Speech-Language Pathology, and School Psychology. All are aligned to the Conceptual Framework, state and institutional standards, and to respective national standards. The M.Ed. in Instructional Leadership and Professional Development was revised in 05-06 in compliance with the new Maryland Instructional Leadership Framework, and received MSDE program approval.

Reflecting the principles and concepts delineated in professional state, and institutional standards, programs for other school personnel provide systematic instruction and experiences that build upon and extend prior knowledge, skills, and dispositions and experiences in the major content of the respective fields. (Descriptions of all programs are found in State Program Reports, which delineate the structured sequences of advanced programs (Exhibit 30)). Course syllabi document the way in which each course builds upon and extends candidates' prior knowledge and experiences to improve their own practice and support environments which are conducive to student learning.

Unit Assessment System Data Confirming Mastery of Content Knowledge
College of Graduate Studies and Research Requirements. The Unit Assessment System documents requirements for entry that are consistent with those of the College of Graduate Studies and Research (CGSR) and of the focus of each program. (CGSR and program-specific admission requirements are clearly delineated in the Graduate Catalog). Accordingly, all programs assess content mastery at entry to the program, and candidates must present evidence of a strong undergraduate academic foundation upon which their program-specific knowledge is constructed. The criteria for admission to all graduate programs include meeting the basic requirements of the College of Graduate Studies and Research (e.g., a baccalaureate degree with a minimum 3.0 GPA on a 4-point scale). Additionally, candidates must meet any program-specific requirements that verify prior content knowledge and experiences (e.g., a bachelor's degree in speech-language pathology for the Speech-Pathology program, minimum 3.2 GPA including specified undergraduate course in psychology for the School Psychology program). Graduate students pursuing these degrees are required to maintain good academic standing and demonstrate content knowledge through coursework. All programs require a minimum of 33 credits and candidates must maintain a minimum 3.0 GPA (3.2 for School Psychology) for all courses taken.

Specialized Professional Association (SPA) reviews. Within the current accreditation process, three programs required SPA reviews which provide additional evidence that the unit offers programs with a strong content knowledge focus and that those candidates have demonstrated that they meet the SPA-specific content standards. Table 1 in the Overview documents that two were nationally recognized with conditions and one was not nationally recognized (a revision of the NSTA SPA was submitted in April, 2007); a review of the National Recognition Reports (Exhibit 23) indicates:

• The reading program was cited by IRA for strong evidence of content knowledge; all "foundational knowledge" standards were met.
• The Instructional Leadership Program has a 100% pass rate on the Praxis II School Leaders Licensure Assessment (SLLA).

The other three preparation programs for other school personnel, as noted in Table 2 (footnote), Audiology, School Psychology, and Speech Pathology, are accredited by their respective accrediting agencies (American Speech-Language and Hearing Association, National Association of School Psychology) based on their identified standards for content, professional knowledge, student learning, etc. (Exhibit 8). Accreditation data may be found in the reports submitted. (The reports are located on Bookcase 1, Shelf 3.)

Program-required midpoint and completion assessments. All graduate programs assess content at the midpoint and at completion through a required course assessment and a capstone experience respectively. Performance data for each program, including assessment and scoring tools, are found in SPA and/or accreditation reports. Consistent with the SPA requirement for an identified minimal level of competence, Table 18 documents the percent of candidates achieving minimal competence on program-specific assessments of content knowledge, confirming that candidates meet professional, state, and institutional standards.

Tests for licensure, certification, and/or program completion. Four programs require passing a content test for licensure, certification, and/or program completion. Assessment data confirming mastery of content knowledge are found in Table 19, which documents pass rates for all 4 programs that exceeded the required 80% pass rate, reaching 100% for all programs for the last two years of data.

Graduate Surveys. Follow-up surveys by the Graduate School as well as by individual programs report high levels of satisfaction with the professional content and knowledge acquired (Exhibit 32).

Standard I. Element 3: Pedagogical Content Knowledge for Teacher Candidates (Initial and Continuing Preparation of Teachers)

Pedagogical content knowledge, including the integration of technology, is a specific focus of Conceptual Framework Theme 2, Best practices, and Theme 4, Utilizing appropriate technologies. Unit programs require faculty to model, and candidates to develop and demonstrate pedagogical content knowledge through curriculum, instruction, protected practice, and field/clinical experiences. To help all students learn, pedagogical content knowledge also includes the broad range of professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills (e.g., child development, repertoire of instructional strategies, diversity) addressed in detail in Standard I, Element 4.

Initial Preparation
To ensure pedagogical content knowledge, each secondary education program as well as interdisciplinary programs (e.g., ECED, ELED) require candidates to complete methods coursework and field and clinical experiences that are content-specific.. Pedagogy courses are taught by content area faculty with knowledge and teaching experience at the level of licensure. Candidates learn about national, professional, state, and institutional standards, and content-specific instructional and assessment strategies, including the use of technology. Course requirements, protected practice, and field experiences provide candidates with a repertoire of program/content-related instructional strategies. Later field and clinical experiences require candidates to successfully demonstrate their ability to use those strategies in practice. (Specific examples of candidates' demonstrated pedagogical content knowledge are found in intern portfolios, Exhibit 35, and in Exhibit 38).

Representative examples, reflecting Maryland's Redesign Institutional Performance Criteria Component I, include:

• the development of lesson plans, including a Safety in Science teaching plan, linking Maryland's Voluntary State Curriculum to instructional planning, and the integration of the Maryland State Department of Education's MdK12.org. Website (School Improvement in Maryland) related instruction, in SCIE 380, Teaching Science in the Secondary School (Exhibit 35),
• the alignment of Maryland's Core Learning Goals and the integration of the MdK12.org. Website (e.g., SCED 355, ELED 685; see Exhibit 35 for relevant samples of candidates' work demonstrating candidates' ability to create meaningful learning experiences for all learners, including the integration of technology), and
• the exploration of "state-related issues such as the Voluntary State Curriculum (VSC), the Maryland School Assessment (MSA), the high school Core Learning Goals (CLG), and the High School Assessments (HSA)" as standards for teaching English in SCED 357, Teaching English in the Secondary School.

Reflect Best Practices," the unit integrates instructional technology within required general education and professional education coursework and field and clinical experiences. Moreover, clinical practice not only allows candidates to use information technology to support teaching and learning, but requires its documented use. (In addition to the data below, see intern portfolios (Bookcase 2) and Exhibit 39 for examples of candidate use of technology to support teaching and learning.)

Unit Assessment System Data Confirming Mastery of Pedagogical Content Knowledge
All programs assess pedagogical content knowledge through SPA assessments prior to entry to clinical practice and candidates must achieve the minimum level of competency in order to enter clinical practice. In order to exit clinical practice and complete their programs, candidates must achieve satisfactory ratings from mentor teachers and University supervisors on their pedagogical content knowledge during their internships on internship evaluations, aligned to both INTASC and SPA standards.

Multiple assessment of candidate mastery of the following INTASC Principles provide the most direct evidence of demonstrated pedagogical content knowledge, including the integration of technology:

• INTASC Principle 1: The teacher understands the central concepts, tools of inquiry, and structures of the discipline(s) he or she teaches and can create learning experiences that make these aspects of subject matter meaningful for students,
• INTASC Principle 4: The teacher understands and uses a variety of instructional strategies to encourage student development,
• INTASC Principle 6: (In unit assessments, INTASC Principle 6 has been modified to focus on and address specifically the instructional integration of technology, and states: the teacher ses knowledge of effective verbal, non-verbal, and media communication techniques, with focus on the instructional integration of technology, to foster active inquiry, collaboration, and supportive interaction in the classroom,
• INTASC Principle 7: The teacher plans instruction based upon knowledge and subject matter, students, the community, and curriculum goals.

Standards-based assessment data confirm that candidates have attained and can demonstrate pedagogical content knowledge, including integration of technology, as delineated in professional, state, and institutional standards. (See Exhibit 25 for program-specific data, disaggregated as appropriate.)

Assessment of the capstone INTASC- and SPA-aligned internship by mentor teachers and university supervisors. As indicated in Table 20, unit performance data confirm that candidates have attained and demonstrated pedagogical content knowledge through mean scores that exceed 4 on a 5 point scale for 6 semesters of data gathered from both mentor teachers and University supervisors rating over 1500 interns on performance related to INTASC Principles 4,6, and 7..

Assessment of the capstone, INTASC-aligned portfolio by P-16 reviewers. As indicated in Table 21, unit portfolio performance data provide consistent evidence corroborating that candidates have attained and demonstrated pedagogical content knowledge through mean scores that also exceed 4 on INTASC Principles related to Pedagogical Content Knowledge.

INTASC-aligned program evaluation data by interns. As indicated in Table 22, unit data of candidates' perceptions consistently affirm that the unit was judged by candidates to be successful in transmitting content pedagogical knowledge, through mean scores that also exceed 4 points on a 5 point scale.

INTASC-aligned surveys of graduates: Assessment of demonstrated pedagogical content knowledge. Reflecting their inservice experience, graduates assess the extent to which they believe their programs resulted in their understanding of the INTASC Principles 1, 4, 6, and 7. As indicated in Tables 23 and 24, unit data, beginning with the class of 2001, affirm that the unit was successful in the standard of attainment of pedagogical content knowledge with mean scores for graduates one year following graduation that range from 3.75 to 4.17 on a 5 point scale. Three classes of graduates who responded three years following graduation to the same survey had mean scores ranging from 3.67 to 4.1.

Employer survey data. As indicated in Table 25, three years of aggregated employer data provide strong confirmation that graduates were able to demonstrate pedagogical content knowledge in their first year of inservice experience with mean scores that rate three cohorts of graduates with mean scores above 4 on a 5 point scale.

Confirmation of professional and pedagogical knowledge is provided in each initial preparation program's SPA Assessment #3, available in the SPA reports.

Continuing Preparation

To ensure pedagogical content knowledge, all graduate programs for continuing preparation of teachers require coursework, research, and a capstone course and/or experiences related to teaching in the respective program/content areas. Candidates learn about and apply institutional, state, national, and professional organization standards, multiple assessment techniques, enhanced planning to promote student learning, use of technology, learning styles, and other teaching methods applicable to their content area.

Through the Unit Assessment System, professional and pedagogical knowledge is assessed at both the midpoint through a required course assessment and at completion through a capstone experience. Additional data for each program, descriptions of program-specific assessment andscoring tools are found in SPA reports or in graduate program-specific assessment notebooks (Exhibit 31). Consistent with the SPA requirement for an identified minimal level of competence, Table 26 documents the percent of candidates in continuing preparation programs achieving minimal competence on program-specific assessments of professional and pedagogical knowledge, confirming that candidates possess and demonstrate pedagogical content knowledge.

Candidates' demonstration of instructional integration of technology in instruction is assessed at the midpoint through a required course assessment and/or at completion through a capstone experience. Performance data for each program, including assessment tools and scoring tools are found in SPA reports. Consistent with the SPA requirement for an identified minimal level of competence, Table 27 documents the percent of candidates achieving minimal competence on program-specific assessments demonstrating/confirming candidates' instructional integration of technology.

REDESIGN OF TEACHER EDUCATION

Reading
The unit provides reading instruction for all initial preparation candidates through state-approved reading courses. As part of the Reading First initiative, Towson submitted the required ECED and ELED reading courses to MSDE in October 2005; all were approved by MSDE on first review. (See Exhibit 40 for MSDE-Approved Reading Coursework.) All initial preparation candidates fulfill the state reading requirements of either four required courses (e.g., Early Childhood, Elementary) or two required courses (e.g., Secondary Education, K-12).

All reading courses are aligned to MSDE Performance Objectives, and INTASC Principles. Additionally, each course includes a matrix aligning the MSDE Performance Objectives, specified learning opportunities/activities, and specified participant assessments (Exhibit 40; includes candidate demonstration of reading proficiencies.).

Assessment of Candidate Proficiency in Reading
Elementary education summative assessment of the capstone INTASC and SPA-aligned internship by mentor teachers and university supervisors: Reading proficiency. In addition to the INTASC 1 (Content) data presented for ECED and ELED in Table 12, additional SPA-designed assessment of elementary education candidates' demonstrated proficiency in reading instruction during their capstone internship confirms that candidates are able to demonstrate their proficiency as delineated in professional standards. Beginning in fall 2005, the ELED internship evaluation tool was revised to include ACEI standards. (See Exhibit 24 for each program's internship assessment.) Specifically, ACEI Standard 2I.1 states that: Interns demonstrate a high level of competence in use of English language arts and they know, understand, and use concepts from reading, language, and child development to teach reading, writing, speaking, viewing, listening, and thinking skills, and to help students successfully apply their developing skills to many different situations, materials, and ideas.

Table 28 reflects two semesters of aggregated data (Fall 2005, Spring 2006) reflecting ACEI Standard 2.1 document that ELED candidates know and demonstrate proficiency in reading instruction in practice during their capstone internship through a mean score of 4.64 based on ratings of 171 candidates.

Early childhood reading proficiency. Consistent with the SPA requirement for an identified minimal level of competence, Table 29 confirms that ECED candidates demonstrated reading proficiencies in their required reading courses by reporting percentages of competence that exceed 95% based on grades of B or better in MSDE approved reading courses.

Secondary education reading proficiency. During their year-long internship, all secondary candidates complete a Content Area Reading Improvement Project (CRIP) which requires them to document, through a pre- to post-test design, their effectiveness in improving student learning of key content concepts using Directed Reading Lessons (Exhibit 41). Table 30 records the range and mean score performance, by program, of the fifty-eight candidates who completed the CRIP in fall 2006 and spring 2007, confirming candidates' proficiency in reading instruction with mean scores for all programs ranging from 3.0 to 3.58 on a 4 point scale. (Detailed information for all candidates, including the assessment and scoring tool may be found in Exhibit 41).

Surveys of graduates: Aggregated unit data assessment of demonstrated reading proficiency. Data from surveys of ELED and ECED graduates one year after graduation confirm that candidates attained and demonstrated reading proficiency. Reflecting on their inservice experience, graduates assess the extent to which they believe their program prepared them to teach reading effectively. The weighted mean rating from the 183 graduates in ECED and ELED from the graduating classes of 2003-2005 who responded to the survey was 3.92, on a scale of 1-5, with 3 a "mildly agree" and 4 an "agree" rating. (See Exhibit 25 for detailed, program-specific data).

Maryland Teacher Technology Standards (MTTS)
The unit has focused on the integration of instructional technology [reflecting the aligned International Society for Technology in Education-National Education Technology Standards (ISTE-NETS) and the Maryland Teacher Technology Standards (MTTS)] within required general education and professional education coursework, and has made significant progress in developing student and faculty expertise in the use of instructional technology to help all students learn. Moreover, this effort has been accompanied by investments in technology as well as the faculty development necessary to use and model technology. In recognition of its demonstrated success in integrating standards-based technology across the professional education program, Towson was awarded the 2003 International Society for Technology in Education-National Education Technology Standards Distinguished Achievement Award (Exhibit 19).

The unit requires candidates to take courses that enable them to gain experience and skills in instructional integration of technology through the application of the MTTS and then demonstrate the MTTS-based knowledge, skills, and experience in the instructional integration of technology. Table 31 illustrates the alignment of the seven MTTS with required courses in general education, instructional technology and in professional education. While Table 31 focuses only on the primary alignment of the two required Instructional Technology courses. (ISTC 201, ISTC 301) with the MTTS, both courses address all seven of the MTTS. (See Exhibit 36 for candidates' online teaching portfolios, demonstrating their knowledge and skills aligned to the MTTS and Maryland content standards, as well as their abilities to incorporate technology concepts and skills into the K-12 content areas).

In addition to the multiple sets of the modified, technology-focused INTASC 6 data presented in Tables 20-25, which document that candidates and graduates successfully integrate technology in their teaching, specific assessment of teacher candidate proficiency for each of the seven MTTS occurs in the required technology sequence. Both the ISTC 201 and 301 syllabi include matrices documenting the alignment of course outcomes and related assessments with MTTS and ISTE-NETS standards. Additionally, as shown in Table 32, data from the key assessments in each course confirm that candidates demonstrate proficiency in each of the seven MTTS through class means that exceed 80% on each assessment (Exhibit 36).

Recognizing that faculty role models who employ technology across academic programs are crucial to achieving technology outcomes, the MTTS skills are also integrated in numerous required content (e.g., ENGL 233 Survey of African-American Literature) and professional and pedagogical education courses at the initial (e.g., EDUC 417, Children's Literature; MATH 420, Applications of Technology for Secondary School Teachers; KNES 423, Adaptive Physical Education; Internships), and advanced levels (e.g., in required graduate research courses-EDUC 605 and 761). (See Exhibit 42, a review of representative syllabi identifying representative, required professional and pedagogical courses and the MTTS-related assignments that are evaluated to ensure candidates' demonstration of program/course-specific applications). (See intern portfolios and Exhibit 39 for representative candidate work).

Standard I. Element 4: Professional and Pedagogical Knowledge and Skills for Teacher Candidates (Initial and Continuing Preparation of Teachers)

courses and field experiences in which they acquire and demonstrate INTASC-aligned professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills. More specifically, all initial preparation programs are aligned to the INTASC Principles and to other professional, state, and institutional standards. As documented in the SPAs, State Program Reports, and the Unit Assessment System, candidates are provided multiple curricular opportunities to develop and demonstrate the knowledge required to meet these standards.

These INTASC-aligned professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills include:

• social, historical, and philosophical foundations of education;
• child/adolescent learning and development;
• professional ethics, law, and policy
• use of research " diversity (including exceptionalities);
• reflection
• other professional roles
• consideration of school, family, community
• motivation/learning community

Table 33 identifies the alignment of the knowledge and skills with the professional studies core, as well as with INTASC Principle(s) from which they are derived and through which they are assessed on multiple INTASC-aligned unit assessments (Tables 34-40). (Reflecting NCATE's descriptive explanation for this element and its definitions for professional and pedagogical knowledge, candidates must possess and demonstrate satisfactorily all of the INTASC/performance-based standards).

Inquiry and Research
The impact of inquiry and research on candidates' fields of study and on educational practice(s) in general are incorporated into the entire professional sequence, beginning with the core human development requirement, the special education requirement, the technology requirement, the foundations requirement and culminating in the capstone/professional year requirement. For example, the required MTTS-aligned ISTC 201 course Using Information Effectively in Education, is focused on research, and includes a required online research portfolio examining current issues in education. (See (Exhibit 44 for examples of the online research portfolios, as well as other candidate examples). Additionally, ISTC 201 requires a key assignment/assessment of an MTTS-aligned research paper; Table 32 provides documentation that candidates possess and demonstrate knowledge and skills in the use of research in teaching, with a mean score of 87.7 of possible 100 points for 16 sections of candidates.

Inquiry and research-based principles of instruction are particularly evident in the revised reading courses (reflecting the Maryland Reading First initiative/scientifically-based coursework-see Standard I, Element 3) and in the upper level content and education courses (e.g., EDUC 401, ELED 469, SCED 341, EDUC 734) in which assignments require inquiry into discipline-specific research (e.g., research abstracts, topical library research). Field experiences that involve guided observation, data collection and analysis are obvious means for candidates to learn about and apply knowledge in the areas of inquiry and research.

Unit Assessment System Data Confirming Mastery of Professional and Pedagogical Knowledge
Standards-based professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills-related data from unit assessments confirm that initial preparation candidates know and demonstrate professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills to facilitate learning. (INTASC data provided is based on NCATE's definition of professional knowledge and pedagogical knowledge).

HEA - Title II aggregate and summary institution level pass-rate data. (Per the June 23, 2006 memorandum from Dr. Donna Gollnick, Senior Vice President, NCATE, Praxis II test scores related to pedagogical and professional knowledge are to be presented in response to Standard I, Element 4).

Evidence of demonstrated professional and pedagogical knowledge by teacher candidates is found in Table 41 (NCATE-required), which provides a summary of unit pass-rates on the Praxis II Professional Knowledge/Pedagogy tests as reported in conjunction with Title II. (See Exhibit 22 for the full ETS reports). The PK tests address pedagogical content knowledge (see Exhibit 45 for the ETS description of the Praxis II Pedagogy tests). Based on Maryland standards for state licensure, the unit aggregate pass-rates for the three-year reporting period ranges from 94% to 98%, documenting unit candidates' pedagogical content knowledge. The pass-rate for all individual programs with a minimum of 10 test-takers for the three-year reporting period clearly document program-specific candidates' pedagogical content knowledge.

Assessment of the capstone INTASC and SPA-aligned internship by mentor teachers and university supervisors. As indicated in Tables 34 and 35, aggregated unit performance data reflecting the INTASC Principles consistently document that candidates can demonstrate professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills through mean scores that exceed 4 points on a 5 point scale for 6 semesters of data based on ratings of more than 1500 interns. (See Exhibit 25 for program-specific data; numbers of evaluations from mentor teachers and University supervisors will not always be exactly the same due to some variation in types of internship assignments).

Assessment of the capstone, INTASC-aligned portfolio by P-16 reviewers. As indicated in Table 36, unit portfolio performance data reflecting the INTASC Principles document that portfolios provided evidence to external reviewers that candidates knew and demonstrated professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills with mean scores exceeding 4 on a 5 point scale for 6 semesters based on ratings of more than 1400 candidates.

INTASC-aligned program evaluation data by interns and graduates. As indicated in Table 37, unit data of graduating interns' perceptions consistently affirm that the unit was successful in the standard of attainment of the INTASC Principles. Data in Tables 38 and 39 also confirm program effectiveness obtained through surveys of graduates, one and three years following graduation, and Table 40 reports data from Employer Surveys of graduates' demonstrated effectiveness. (See Exhibit 25 for specific-program data). Mean scores exceeding 3 on a 5 point scale are reported for 6 semesters of graduating interns; 5 cohorts of completers, one year following graduation; three cohorts of graduates 3 years following graduation; and three years of employer ratings of first year graduates.

Continuing Preparation
Reflecting the Conceptual Framework, all continuing preparation programs are required to document their alignment to institutional, state and/or national standards for professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills, as documented in the State Program Reports. Unit faculty include scholarly inquiry and technology integration in all advanced programs. An applied research-oriented environment provides the best forum and climate for the acquisition of knowledge and impact on professional practice by candidates collaborating with faculty who are involved with their own scholarly inquiry and research. All graduate program research focuses on creating critical consumers and/or producers of published educational research, and conducting action research projects using classrooms and schools as settings for inquiry into reflective practice, and experimenting with the application of theory and instructional and curricular reforms to improve practice in classrooms and schools. (See Exhibit 46 for representative samples of research that demonstrate candidates' ability to use research/research methods and their knowledge about issues and trends to improve practice in schools and classrooms).

In 2004, in recognition of the importance of sound research, the Graduate School initiated awards for the best graduate projects and thesis. Among the six awards given, two have been awarded to unit candidates (Exhibit 47).

Assessment of performance in graduate programs is documented in the Unit Assessment System; program-specific assessments at all four transition points are documented in the Unit Assessment System, and data for those assessments as well as assessments and scoring tools are available in the Exhibit Room in each program's SPA report or Graduate Assessment Notebook. Table 42 documents the minimal level of competence in professional and pedagogical skills that were attained by candidates at midpoints and completion in all continuing preparation programs.

Standard I. Element 5: Professional Knowledge and Skills for Other School Personnel

alignment to the Conceptual Framework and of candidate performance on standards-based assessments aligned to the professional knowledge and skills expected in their respective fields. Core syllabi confirm that the integration of theory and practice informs the learning process, and that coursework ensures that candidates have multiple opportunities to demonstrate their professional knowledge and skill base in support of student learning. (See Exhibit 48 for selected examples of assessments from the SPAs and candidate work demonstrating knowledge of students, families, and communities; use of research to inform practice; and use of technology in practice; and student learning). (Candidate ability to use Research and Technology is also discussed in Standard I, Element 2).

Professional knowledge and skills are assessed at both the midpoint through a required course assessment and at completion through a capstone experience. Performance data for each program, including assessment tools and scoring tools are found in SPA reports. Consistent with the SPA requirement for an identified minimal level of competence, Table 43 documents the percent of candidates achieving minimal competence on program-specific assessments, confirming that candidates possess and demonstrate professional knowledge and skills.

Additional confirmation that the ILPD-Administrator I Program is aligned with professional knowledge and skills as delineated in professional and state standards was provided by a recent state review of the program. In July 2005, the State Board of Education revised the COMAR 13A.12.04.04 Regulation Certification - Supervisors of Instruction, Assistant Principals, and Principals, to the Maryland Instructional Leadership Framework in preparation programs. Each Maryland institution of higher education with an approved administrator preparation program was required to submit an implementation plan by October 2, 2006. Towson revised, aligned, and submitted its plan to a state evaluation team, which approved Towson's revised Administrator I preparation program (Exhibit 49).

Candidates' use of technology is also assessed through the Unit Assessment System at both the midpoint through a required course assessment and at completion through a capstone experience. Performance data for each program, including assessment tools and scoring tools are found in SPA reports (ECED) or in graduate program-specific assessment notebooks (Exhibit 31). Consistent with the SPA requirement for an identified minimal level of competence, Table 44 documents the percent of candidates achieving minimal competence on program-specific assessments of technology use, confirming that candidates know the subject matter that they plan to teach and can explain important principles and concepts delineated in professional, state, and institutional standards.

Standard I. Element 6: Dispositions for All Candidates

The concept of professional conscience has long been one of the major themes of the unit Conceptual Framework, but had previously been only broadly defined. In the current preparation for accreditation, and reflecting state and national professional standards, a statement of unit dispositions for all candidates was adopted as a requirement to operationalize the theme of professional conscience. Through course assignments, work with students, families, and communities during field and clinical experiences, ongoing monitoring by school and University supervisors, and formative and summative disposition assessments, candidates are required to demonstrate the unit's dispositions. Procedures and scoring guides were developed specifically to identify the observable behaviors by which the unit assesses both initial and advanced candidates. These three Essential Dispositions for Educators, which are defined by scoring guides comprising observable behaviors that encompass diversity proficiencies, including fairness and the belief that all students can learn (Exhibit 15), are:

• Commitment to professional practice,
• Caring for the success and well being of all students, and
• Collaboration with colleagues and stakeholders.

Unit Assessment System Data Confirming Mastery of Dispositions
Unit Essential Dispositions. Not only have the unit's Essential Dispositions been specified for the first time, they are systematically introduced to candidates and systematically assessed in all professional preparation programs through a three-stage assessment model. (See Exhibit 16 for all program-specific implementation plans and dispositions materials, including detailed explanations of each stage of assessment and the scoring guides).

Summative dispositions-related data confirm that both initial and advanced candidates demonstrate observable behaviors which reflect the dispositions delineated in professional, state, and institutional standards. Table 45 documents unit performance on the spring and fall 06 summative assessments of the unit's Essential Dispositions for Educators for initial and advanced preparation programs, with mean scores of 2.79 and 2.97 (on a 3 point scale)respectively representing ratings of over 783 candidates during the first two semesters of the requirement. (See Exhibit 25 for program-specific data).

INTASC assessment data. As noted in the NCATE Standards, dispositions are also "assessed along with other performance in candidates' work with students, families, and communities," (2002, p. 19). All initial preparation programs are based on the INTASC Principles, and each program developed a matrix documenting the alignment of required courses with the INTASC Principles primarily addressed in each course). While each INTASC Principle includes dispositions, those most directly aligned with the unit's theme of professional conscience as operationalized through the Essential Dispositions for Educators include, but not are limited to:

• INTASC Principle 3, "The teacher understands how students differ in their approaches to learning and creates instructional opportunities that are adapted to diverse learners."
• INTASC Principle 5, "The teacher uses an understanding of individual and group motivation to create a learning environment that encourages positive social interaction, active engagement in learning, and self-motivation."
• INTASC Principle 9, "The teacher is a reflective practitioner who continually evaluates the effects of his/her choices and actions on others and who actively seeks out opportunities to grow professionally."
• INTASC Principle 10, "The teacher fosters relationships with school colleagues, parents, and agencies in the larger community to support students' learning and well being."

Tables 46, 47, and 48 present summative unit data evaluating candidate performance relative to the

dispositions embedded in INTASC Principles 3, 5, 9, and 10. The data reflect mentor teacher and University supervisor assessment of intern performance during the capstone internship: P-12 evaluators' assessment of candidate portfolios; and data collected through surveys of both graduates and employers. Table 49 presents data from graduates and employers relative to candidate performance embedded in the identified INTASC principles. Mean scores reflect ratings that range from 3.89 to 4.13 on 5 point scales for all instruments.

Standard I. Element 7: Student Learning for Teacher Candidates (Initial and Continuing Preparation of Teachers)

Initial Preparation
As emphasized throughout the Conceptual Framework, the unifying mission of the unit emphasizes the centrality of student learning. In this performance-based setting, teaching effectiveness has become increasingly linked to student achievement. Broadly speaking, all knowledge, skills, and dispositions reflected in national, state, and institutional standards are focused on student learning. Specifically, demonstrated mastery of each of the ten INTASC Principles contributes to candidates' ability to impact student learning. In addition, the unit has increased its curricular and assessment emphasis on candidates' "assessment literacy" (Fullan, 2001; NCATE, 2005; Stiggins, 2000). Candidates must know about, create, and demonstrate a broad repertoire of appropriate, effective, and student-centered assessments in teaching to both prove and improve all students' learning through reflection and consequent adjustment of their teaching. All programs emphasize the interactive and cyclical nature of teaching, learning, and assessment. (All unit faculty have been trained in assessment literacy at several professional development activities (Exhibit 50).)

Numerous program-specific opportunities ensure that candidates develop and practice their skills in teaching and assessment to ensure student learning. Very specific focus on candidates developing and practicing their skills is embedded in the MSDE-required and approved reading courses for initial preparation candidates.

Field and clinical experiences also require candidates to conduct action research and/or service learning projects that focus on learning for all students and to observe, practice and demonstrate teaching for student learning. (See Standard III for detailed descriptions; also see Exhibit 51.)

Two specific unit initiatives implemented in fall 2005 require evidence that candidates can assess and analyze student learning, make appropriate adjustments to instruction, and demonstrate measurable, positive effects on student learning during clinical practice:

• Based primarily on the work of Emerson Elliott and NCATE ("Student Learning in NCATE Accreditation," NCATE, Feb. 1, 2005, Exhibit 52), the unit developed a JPTAAR common lesson plan template, using the initials of the core cluster of activities identified by Elliott as a mnemonic, to further focus candidates on demonstrating and documenting their positive impact on student learning (see Exhibit 52 for the complete template and aligned lesson plans from all programs).
• To ensure unit-wide summative assessment of candidates' impact on P-12 student learning during their clinical practice, the Portfolio Ad Hoc Committee devised a required, JPTAAR-based, "Evidence of Student Learning" artifact for the summative portfolio. Candidates must include artifact(s) (with rationale) to demonstrate mastery of INTASC Principle 8, assessment strategies to evaluate and ensure the continuous intellectual, social, and physical development of the learner. (Numerous INTASC Principles include focus on student learning; INTASC 8 is most directly linked to the focus on assessment and student learning).

Reflecting NCATE and MSDE priorities, the "Planning Cycle for Evidence of Student Learning" identifies the required components for the artifact (e.g., learning goal(s) aligned with MSDE Standards/ Voluntary State Curriculum / Core Learning Goals; preassessment, formative assessment, and summative assessment, analysis and instructional decision-making) to improve student learning and includes the explicit instructions to initial preparation candidates for the required artifact and its role in their portfolio assessment defense. (See Exhibit 26 for details, interns' portfolios for sample candidate work, and Exhibit 34 for alignment of all programs to Maryland Redesign priorities).

Unit Assessment System Data Confirming Mastery of Student Learning
Assessment of the capstone, INTASC-aligned portfolio by P-16 reviewers. Assessment data from the (new INTASC 8 requirement confirm that student learning was clearly demonstrated by teacher candidates during clinical practice. (While performance assessment data for INTASC 8 since 2000 have continuously demonstrated strong performance, only data representing the three semesters of summative data since implementation of the new requirements are included). As indicated previously in Table 16, three semesters of unit portfolio performance data document that candidates use assessment to prove and improve student learning during clinical practice.

Assessment of the capstone INTASC-based internship by mentor teachers and university supervisors. As indicated in Table 50 performance data reflecting the revised INTASC 8 requirements- assessment of and for student learning - confirm that interns understand assessment and were able to impact student learning in their capstone internships through mean scores that exceed 4 on a scale of 5 for more than 1700 interns. (Program-specific data are found in Exhibit 25).

SPA reviews. Additional confirmation is provided from the outcomes of the SPA process. (See Assessment 5 of each initial preparation program's SPA report, located in the Exhibit Room, for data on impact on student learning).

Assessment from graduating interns, graduates and employer surveys. As shown in Table 51, three semesters of direct feedback from graduating interns on their program evaluations- reflecting the revised INTASC 8 requirements--provide additional affirmation that the unit's effort resulted in candidates' understanding of assessment and impact on student learning, based on mean scores exceeding 4 on a 5 point scale from more than 600 interns.

Feedback from graduates who were surveyed one year and three years following graduation and from employers of Towson graduates who rated their performance during their first year of practice also confirm that candidates understand assessment and were able to impact student learning. Tables 52, 53, and 54 document data from those sources with mean scores ranging from 3.98 to 4.43 on 5 point scales from more than 900 survey responders. Surveys of completers of advanced preparation programs may be found in Exhibit 32.

REDESIGN OF TEACHER EDUCATION

The unit provides targeted instruction in Maryland's school accountability system through coursework and field and clinical experiences which are assessed in the Unit Assessment System. (See Exhibit 34 for documentation of alignment of specific courses to Maryland's priorities; see course syllabi for specific program examples).

Continuing Preparation
Core syllabi document that each continuing preparation program focuses on student learning, use of assessments in instruction to prove and improve learning, and development of meaningful learning experiences for all students. Through the Unit Assessment System, impact on student learning is assessed at both the midpoint through a required course assessment and at completion through a capstone experience. Additional data for each program, descriptions of program-specific assessment tools, scoring tools, and data are found in SPA reports or in graduate program-specific assessment notebooks (Exhibit 31). Consistent with the SPA requirement for an identified minimal level of competence, Table 55 documents the percent of candidates achieving minimal competence on program-specific assessments demonstrating/confirming candidate impact on student learning.

Standard I. Element 8: Student Learning for Other Professional School Personnel

In addition to their program/role-specific content (see Standard I, Element 1) and professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills (see Standard I, Element 5), candidates must demonstrate that they can create and support positive environments for student learning. As noted (see Standard I, Element 5), candidates develop program-specific knowledge, skills, and dispositions through required coursework, including the ability to use research and technology to support student learning. The integration of theory and practice in each program informs the learning process, and all candidates engage in and use program-specific research and technology to expand their knowledge and skill in support of student learning.

The SPA assessment data (see Assessment #5 data in all SPA reports) confirm that candidates can develop and apply strategies to create positive learning environments for improving student learning by demonstrating their understanding and ability to build on the developmental levels of students with whom they work; the diversity of students, families, and communities; and the policy contexts in which they work.

The ability to create positive learning environments for and/or impact student learning is assessed at the midpoint and completion of all graduate programs Additional data for each program, descriptions of program-specific assessment and scoring tools are found in SPA reports. Consistent with the SPA requirement for an identified minimal level of competence, Table 56 documents the percent of candidates achieving minimal competence on program-specific assessments demonstrating/confirming candidate ability to create positive learning environments for all students.

Next Page / Table of Contents