All Academic, Inc. Research Logo

Info/CitationFAQResearchAll Academic Inc.
Document

Standards-Driven Performance of Teacher Candidates Using Multiple Work Products for State Accreditation
Unformatted Document Text:  a) Determine the use of the data. Our faculty members need to decide if they will deny graduation to a teacher candidate based on the results of any of the assessments. b) Dictate what will be done with the data. Some examples are: identify certification-related program weaknesses and improve a program and/or identify weaknesses and make improvements in unit-defined areas of importance (e.g., the conceptual framework).c) Help teacher candidates 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. Section II: Outcomes and Methods A . Learner/participant outcomes : Participants will learn how to design and implement course work products to better demonstrate that their teacher education candidates have mastered the standards. They will learn a systematic way to implement an assessment process so that they can objectively identify the areas they need to target for improvement. The process provides an empirical basis for evaluating and continuously improving teacher preparation programs. B. Methods : Format: Roundtable discussion: including the different purposes of preparing for the two accrediting units at the national and state level, a historical perspective from 'whence we came' in our department, how to help faculty "buy into" this very different format of evaluation, and a question/answer session. Handouts -- 1) to show the multiple work products and assessment measures used to meet state standards and 2) to engage participants in the design of a scoring rubric, how to weight certain elements, and sample candidate work products of all three levels. References: Ambach, G. (1996). Standards for teachers: Potential for improving practice. Phi Delta Kappan, 78(3), 207-210. Cochran-Smith, M. & Fries, M.K. (2001). Sticks, stones, and ideology: The discourse of reform in teacher education. Educational Researcher, 30(8), 3-15. Denner, P. R., Salzman, S. A., & Harris, L. B. (2002, February). Teacher work sample assessment: An accountability method that moves beyond teacher testing to the impact of teacher performance on student learning. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education, New York. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED463285)Fredman, T. (2002, February). The TWSM: An essential component in the assessment of teacher performance and student learning. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education, New York. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED464046)LaMarca, P. M., Redfield, D., & Winter, P.C. (2000). State standards and state assessment systems: A guide to alignment. Washington DC; Council of Chief State School Officers

Authors: Baucom, Louise., Piel, John. and Green, Michael.
first   previous   Page 3 of 4   next   last



background image
a) Determine the use of the data. Our faculty members need to decide if they will deny
graduation to a teacher candidate based on the results of any of the assessments.
b) Dictate what will be done with the data. Some examples are: identify certification-
related program weaknesses and improve a program and/or identify weaknesses and
make improvements in unit-defined areas of importance (e.g., the conceptual framework).
c) Help teacher candidates 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.
Section II: Outcomes and Methods

A
. Learner/participant outcomes
:
Participants will learn how to design and implement course work products to better
demonstrate that their teacher education candidates have mastered the standards. They
will learn a systematic way to implement an assessment process so that they can
objectively identify the areas they need to target for improvement. The process provides
an empirical basis for evaluating and continuously improving teacher preparation
programs.
B. Methods
:
Format: Roundtable discussion: including the different purposes of preparing for the
two accrediting units at the national and state level, a historical perspective from 'whence
we came' in our department, how to help faculty "buy into" this very different format of
evaluation, and a question/answer session.
Handouts -- 1) to show the multiple work products and assessment measures
used to meet state standards and 2) to engage participants in the design of a scoring
rubric, how to weight certain elements, and sample candidate work products of all three
levels.

References:
Ambach, G. (1996). Standards for teachers: Potential for improving practice. Phi Delta
Kappan, 78
(3), 207-210.
Cochran-Smith, M. & Fries, M.K. (2001). Sticks, stones, and ideology: The
discourse of reform in teacher education. Educational Researcher, 30(8), 3-15.
Denner, P. R., Salzman, S. A., & Harris, L. B. (2002, February). Teacher work sample
assessment: An accountability method that moves beyond teacher testing to the impact of
teacher performance on student learning
. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the
American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education, New York. (ERIC Document
Reproduction Service No. ED463285)
Fredman, T. (2002, February). The TWSM: An essential component in the assessment of
teacher performance and student learning.
Paper presented at the annual meeting of the
American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education, New York. (ERIC Document
Reproduction Service No. ED464046)
LaMarca, P. M., Redfield, D., & Winter, P.C. (2000). State standards and state
assessment systems: A guide to alignment.
Washington DC; Council of Chief State
School Officers


Convention
Need a solution for abstract management? All Academic can help! Contact us today to find out how our system can help your annual meeting.
Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf.
Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets!
Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more!
Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering.
Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more!
Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches!
Click here for more information.

first   previous   Page 3 of 4   next   last

©2012 All Academic, Inc.