split face logo
Colleges
Share page: 

CAEP Contact

Education Unit Head:
Dr. Howard Smith

CAEP Coordinator:
Dr. Jean Dockers

Assessment Coordinator
Steve Brown

Contact Person
Amanda Hill

Phone: (620) 235-4489
Fax: (620) 235-4421

Address

    110 Hughes Hall
    Pittsburg State Univesity
    1701 South Broadway
    Pittsburg, KS 66762-7564

IR Addendum

Response to Offsite BOE Feedback Report:
Pittsburg State University

Pittsburg State University appreciates the Feedback Report of the BOE Offsite Team detailing the areas of concern and requests for evidence. The following response is prepared to provide additional information regarding the areas of concern from the previous visit and to answer concerns and provide additional evidence requested in the Feedback Report. For each Standard, there are responses to Feedback on correcting previous areas for improvement (AFIs) where applicable; responses to Areas of concern related to continuing to meet the standard; and additional explanation, updated data, or reference to exhibits in the Institutional Report to address Evidence for the Onsite BOE Team. Each response is numbered to correspond with the Standard in the order written in the Feedback Report. We send this response to clarify and update our report and to expedite the process.

STANDARD 1

1.1  Statement about the evidence

The following information is respectfully submitted to correct and answer questions raised in the response to Standard 1.  To clarify available licensure programs, PSU offers the following initial teacher preparation licensure programs: Early/Late Childhood K-6; Early Childhood Unified, Birth-Grade 3; PK-12: Art, French, Music, Physical Education and Spanish; 6-12: Biology, Chemistry, English, History/Government, Mathematics, Physics, Psychology, Speech/Theatre and Technology Education.  Technology Education encompasses the following: Communication Technology; Power, Energy & Transportation Technology and Production Technology. Advanced licensure programs for teachers offered at PSU include Special Education, both Adaptive and Functional.  Advanced programs for other school professionals include Building Leadership, District Leadership, Library Media Specialist, ESOL, Reading Specialist, School Counselor and School Psychologist.  All licensure programs are properly referenced in Exhibit 1.5.1 Licensure Programs and Degrees.  The pass rates for ESOL have improved after 2006-2007. Questions about data for the Masters of Science in Teaching and follow-up data are answered in the following sections.

1.4 Areas of concern related to continuing to meet the standard:

"At the advanced level, data from assessments of candidates' skills, professional dispositions, and impact on P-12 students for non-licensure programs (Master of Science in Teaching and Specialist programs) are not available."
Data showing the assessment of candidate skills, professional dispositions, and impact on P-12 students for the Master of Science in Teaching were inadvertently omitted from two exhibits: A.6 Knowledge Base Mean Ratings-Advanced Programs and 1.8f Knowledge Base Dispositions Mean Ratings-Advanced Programs. The data from Master of Science in Teaching candidates have been included on the revised exhibits, which are included. Our two specialist programs are School Psychology and District Leadership. Data for School Psychology also appears on the two documents mentioned above. On both documents, the District Leadership and Building Leadership data were combined. Data are now disaggregated to reflect both the Building Leadership and the District Leadership Specialist data.

"At the advanced level, data from surveys of graduates and employers is not evident for some programs."

Program survey data from two departments, Special Services and Leadership Studies (SSLS) and Curriculum and Instruction (CURIN) were aggregated by department. This was due to the small numbers in some programs which do not provide sufficient data for analysis. Although collected separately for each program, the data reported on Exhibits 1.6g, 1.6h, 1.7e, 1.7f are combined data from Master of Science in Teaching, Master of Science in Teaching with an emphasis in English for Speakers of Other Languages, and the Master of Science Degree in Reading. The data reported on Exhibits 1.6c, 1.6e, 1.7b, 1.7c show aggregated data for Building Leadership and District Leadership.  Follow-up data for School Psychology and School Counseling were not included in the original exhibits but are included in this response. The disaggregated data are available for view during the visit.

"Three years of data do not seem to be available for all assessments."

The assessment of the CF Knowledge Base for advanced programs, including dispositions, is only available for two years since the Advanced Knowledge Base was newly created. Prior to the creation of a common Knowledge Base, each program assessed Candidates using the standards for their individual programs. Data from Advanced Programs prior to 2008-2009 are available in Exhibit 1.5.4 Advanced Program Dispositions and Knowledge Base Data prior to Advanced Program Knowledge Base. Advanced program checkpoint data are available for one year as that instrument is part of the newly created Assessment System. Prior to this year, checkpoint data were kept in individual departments and within the graduate system. Due to limitations of this system, the checkpoint spread sheet was created to coordinate advanced program data across the Unit.

"There is insufficient evidence that advanced level candidates positively impact P-12 learning."

Data for the Masters in Teaching were inadvertently omitted from Exhibits A.6 Knowledge Base Mean Ratings-Advanced Programs and 1.8f Knowledge Base Dispositions Mean Ratings-Advanced Programs. The exhibits have been corrected to include data from 2008-2009 for the Masters in Teaching Program.  Additional data are shown in the assessment and data table for the course Current Teaching Practices, Exhibit 1.3a CURIN 850 Course Grade Rubric and Exhibit 1.4a CURIN 850 Current Practices Data Table. Projects include a classroom experience asking the candidate to video and analyze himself/herself teaching a lesson by addressing the KSDE Professional Standards. The standards included in the assignment are Standard 8, "The educator understands and uses formal and informal assessment strategies to evaluate and ensure the continual intellectual, social, and other aspects of personal development of all learners" and Standard 3, "The educator demonstrates the ability to provide different approaches to learning and creates instructional opportunities that are equitable, that are based on developmental levels, and that are adapted to diverse learners, including those with exceptionalities."

Data showing performance on the knowledge base including dispositions for School Psychology and District Leadership specialist programs are also listed on the revised A.6 Knowledge Base Mean Ratings-Advanced Programs and 1.8f Knowledge Base Dispositions Mean Ratings-Advanced Programs.  Individual program assessment data, such as District Leadership Assessment #4 Class Project and Assessment # 2 Plan for Instructional Improvement, reported in the KSDE Program Review, also show candidate impact on student learning.

Exhibit 1.5.1 Licensure Programs and Degrees shows a table with the corrected titles of programs. In the original Appendix C, School Psychology and District Leadership were listed but were not designated as Specialist programs. As you noted, the Master of Science in Teaching was inadvertently omitted; the information that should have been in the document includes the following:

Master of Science in Teaching

CURIN 850

Course Grade

 

 

 

 

Final Semester

Comprehensive Exam

 

 

 

 

Completion of Program

Advanced Knowledge Base Evaluation

 

 

 

 

Appendix B and C of the Assessment Handbook were revised to provide each program with the specific list of assessments they submit to the Office of Teacher Education. The revised Appendix C is attached as a document.

"Some IR titles of programs do not match titles in the exhibits."

Some titles in the IR, such as those for follow-up surveys, have been titled by department or by the general area of study, based on the survey instrument used.  The Educational Leadership feedback includes both Building Leadership PK-12 and District Leadership PK-12.  Educational Technology includes information for the Library Media Specialist PK-12.  Special Education feedback includes information for all Adaptive and Functional Special Education programs.  Curriculum and Instruction feedback includes information for the Masters of Science in Teaching, ESOL, and Reading Specialist.

Evidence

1.5.4   Dispositions are identified in the knowledge base of the Conceptual Framework. In the initial programs, dispositions are assessed during each field experience. For all elementary, PK-12, and secondary programs, all dispositions are assessed during the professional semester by the university supervisor and documented for each year and are shown in Exhibit 1.8c Knowledge Base Dispositions Mean Ratings-Initial Programs.  Dispositions are also tracked in the earlier field experiences and appear in the following exhibits: 1.8g Disposition Indicators-Field experience I and 1.8h Disposition Indicators-Field Experience II. Prior to 2008, each advanced program used its own knowledge base, which included dispositions, to evaluate candidates. Examples of these assessments will be available during the onsite visit.  Several of these assessments are included in the KSDE report.  A review of data identified the need to establish a common knowledge base for advanced programs. As a result, the Advanced Program Knowledge Base Committee, which functioned during fall 2008, developed a knowledge base and identified the dispositions.  In spring 2009, each advanced program assessed each candidate's dispositions using the newly developed indicators; the mean scores for the 2008-2009 year are recorded on Exhibit 1.8f Knowledge Base Dispositions Mean Ratings-Advanced Programs. Each program will include the dispositions in the appropriate courses and will assess all dispositions during field experiences.  Please see advanced assessments in program templates in Exhibit 1.5.4 Advanced Program Dispositions and Knowledge Base Data prior to Advanced Program Knowledge Base.

1.5.5  Exhibits for follow-up surveys for initial programs have been updated to include data for surveys completed in Spring 2010. (Exhibits 1.6a, 1.6b, 1.7a, and 1.7b)  Results of follow-up surveys for advanced programs will be compiled and be available for review during the onsite visit.

1.5.8  If deficiencies are observed in candidates by the cooperating teacher and/or the university supervisor, a Professional Development Improvement Plan is developed among the Director of Teacher Education, the university supervisor,  the university advisor, and the Curriculum and Instruction Chairperson in collaboration with the cooperating teacher. The plan addresses deficiencies related to the knowledge base of the Conceptual Framework and identifies steps for improvement and support.  Progress on the plan is continually monitored by the university supervisor and cooperating teacher with review at both mid-term and semester end. Documentation is kept in the Teacher Education Office.

STANDARD 2

2.1  Statement about the evidence

A.  "The unit provides evidence that Standard 2 continues to be met at the Acceptable Level for the initial level programs with exception of the MAT Program."

Data for the Restricted/MAT program consists of program assessments which can be found in the KSDE Document Warehouse and the following exhibits: 

  • 1.5.3a Knowledge Base Dispositions Mean Ratings - MAT (2009 - 2010)
  • 1.5.3b Knowledge Base Dispositions Mean Ratings - MAT (Previous Knowledge Base)
  • 1.5.3c Knowledge Base Ratings - MAT
  • 1.5.3d MAT Diversity Indicators Mean Ratings (2009 - 2010)
  • 1.5.3e MAT Diversity Indicators Mean Ratings (Previous Knowledge Base)
  • 1.5.3f MAT Professional Portfolio Ratings

B1. "The unit does not appear to regularly and comprehensively gather, compile and analyze all identified assessments that are included in the Assessment System..."

The PSU College of Education is implementing a system to regularly collect, aggregate, disaggregate, and analyze data for Advanced Programs.  Common data points within checkpoints are established across all of the Advanced Programs in the Assessment System.

Checkpoint data have been maintained within departments in previous years.  The Graduate System on GUS is currently under construction to provide a means of tracking and collecting checkpoint data electronically.  Checkpoint data for advanced programs for 2009-2010, which has been submitted by each department via Excel spreadsheets, will be available for the onsite visit.

Follow-Up surveys for some advanced programs have deviated from the 1st and 3rd year follow-up due to small numbers of program completers.  For example, some advanced programs may have conducted one follow-up survey for 3-5 years of program completers in order to provide the faculty with more meaningful data to review. Beginning in the 2010-2011 academic year, follow-up surveys will be conducted for 1st and 3rd year program completers for all programs and this will become a more centralized process administered through the College of Education.  

B2. "... and evaluation information on some programs and candidates for the advanced level programs (Educational Technology, Master of Science in teaching, and the Educational Specialist for General Education Administration and the Educational Specialist for Special Education)." 

1. Educational Technology Data

a. KSDE Document Warehouse - Library Media Specialist
b. Knowledge Base ratings - 2008-2009 Library Media (2009-2010 will be available for onsite visit)
c. Checkpoint data (will be available for 2009-2010 for onsite visit) 

2. MS in Teaching Data -

a. Knowledge Base ratings have been included in Exhibits 1.8f and A.6 for 2008-2009 program completers. 2009-2010 data will be available for onsite visit.
b. Follow up Survey Data have been provided - All programs in Curriculum and Instruction, including M.S. in Teaching, ESOL, and Reading Specialist were combined in reports due to the relatively low number of responses in some programs. For the 3 years reported, the number of responses for candidates are as follows: 

 

1st Year Admin

1st Year Graduate

3rd Year Admin

3rd Year Graduate

M. S. in Teaching

55

23

55

12

ESOL

4

3

12

4

Reading Spec.

5

2

4

2

Total

64

28

71

18

 Data will be disaggregated by program in the future.

 c. Checkpoint data for 2009-2010 program completers will be available for onsite visit.

 3. Ed. S. in General School Administration Data -

a. Knowledge Base ratings for 2008-2009- include both Building Level Leadership (M.S.) and District Level (Ed.S.). Data for 2009-2010 program completers will be available for the onsite visit.
b. Follow up Survey information includes data for both Building Level and District Level leadership.
c. Checkpoint data for 2009-2010 program completers will be available for onsite visit.
d. Data can be disaggregated for Building Level and District Level

 4. Ed. S. in Special Education

a. This program became available in 2009. Currently, one candidate has been admitted to the program and is to begin in fall 2010. Limited checkpoint data will be available for the onsite visit.

C. "Based on the Restricted/MAT Program Report (6-15-09) obtained from the KSDE Document Warehouse, the eight identified checkpoints for the MAT program do not align with the four identified checkpoints for the MAT in the assessment system for either the initial or advanced level programs."

There was a discrepancy in the terminology used in the Restricted KSDE Program Report.  The term "checkpoint" was used to identify the key assessments at each of the major checkpoints throughout the program. 

The major checkpoints identified in the Program report (pages 4-5 of KSDE Program Report) include: 

INITIAL: (CHECKPOINT #1) 

  • Checkpoint #1: Interview/transcript review for program admittance
  • Checkpoint #2: Passing of basic skills tests (PPST/C-BASE/ACT/SAT)
  • Checkpoint #3: Course deficiencies removed

MID-POINT (CHECKPOINT #2)

  • Checkpoint #4: Candidacy Approval
  • Checkpoint #5: Pass the appropriate Praxis II content test
  • Checkpoint #6: Satisfactory completion of Teacher Work Sample assessment project

PROGRAM COMPLETER CRITERIA: (CHECKPOINT #3)

  • Checkpoint #7: Satisfactory completion of program portfolio

LICENSURE: (CHECKPOINT #4)

  • Checkpoint #8: Licensure Test--Principles of Learning and Teaching (PLT): Participants seeking state teaching licensure earn a score of 161 or higher.

This information is collected and tracked regularly to monitor progress of candidates within the program; however, because the language and the assessments at each checkpoint are somewhat different than those for Initial programs, the Assessment Handbook will be revised to reflect the process for the MAT program.

2.4 Areas of concern related to continuing to meet the standard

"The Unit's current tool, GETS as the electronic tracking system, is not fully functional for any of the advanced level programs."

GETS is one electronic tracking system that the unit uses to collect and analyze assessment data for Initial Programs. GETS will not be used for Advanced Programs. Instead, the Graduate System, also a part of GUS, is used to collect information on candidates in Advanced Programs.  This system is currently under construction to include all of the necessary fields to reflect each of the data points identified in the Advanced Programs Assessment System. In the past, this information has been maintained within the departments.  Information for the 2009-2010 academic year is currently being compiled using Excel, with the intention of having the Graduate System fully operational during the 2010-2011 academic year.

"Multiple assessments for advanced programs do not appear to be systematically gathered for inclusion in the Assessment System."

Because the Graduate System does not currently include all data fields identified for each of the Checkpoints in the Assessment System, the Office of Teacher Education relies on each of the departments to collect the information about the candidates within their respective programs. Typically, program coordinators will collect information through collaboration with advisors and administrative specialist(s) within the department.  Some information is also available in GUS.  Once the information is gathered within the department, it is then forwarded to the Office of Teacher Education by the program coordinators.  In addition, results from Program Assessments are collected within the department and forwarded to the Office of Teacher Education.  The Office of Teacher Education is responsible for aggregating/disaggregating data for Program and Unit Assessments.  This process will be streamlined once the Graduate System is fully operational and LiveText is implemented, during the 2010-2011 academic year.

"The relationship of Program Assessments to the Unit Assessment System is not described."

Program Assessments are the content specific assessments used to evaluate candidates' knowledge and skills related to the KSDE Standards for each licensure program.  Because each program has different standards, it is not practical to try to aggregate data at the Unit level.  However, the Dean and the College of Education Assessment Committee review results of program assessments to ensure that evidence is provided that candidates from all programs demonstrate the knowledge and skills necessary to teach their content.  Each of the programs review the results to determine if improvements need to be made in individual assessments, courses, or within the program to better prepare candidates within their discipline.

Results of program assessments are forwarded each year to the Office of Teacher Education by the program coordinators.  The results are compiled and sent back to the respective departments for faculty review.  Once LiveText is fully implemented, instructors will evaluate candidates on identified assessments within the system and the Office of Teacher Education will run reports within LiveText and make these reports available to Deans, Department Chairs, and Program Coordinators.  This will streamline the process, saving several steps that we currently must go through.

"The advanced level programs for Other School Professionals are not described in the Assessment System."

Programs for Other School Professionals are all included in the Advanced Programs.

Evidence

2.5.1 Comparison of ratings among university supervisors, which includes disaggregation by candidates' majors, is ongoing and reviewed by the Office of Teacher Education each semester.

In a study conducted in Fall 2007 to determine inter-rater reliability, three different Teacher Work Samples were evaluated by 6 university supervisors.  Mean ratings and standard deviation were determined for each criterion, as well as the overall scores.  The supervisors then met to discuss each of the areas in which there were significant differences in ratings. This included a discussion of the rubric and the expected performance of candidates on each area of the Work Sample.  As a result of the process, there has been less variability in ratings as shown in the Teacher Work Sample 2009-2010 data sheet. As noted, ratings by an adjunct supervisor were higher than the other supervisors. When discounting those ratings, all the other supervisors assessed within one standard deviation of the mean score in each section of the work sample. 

As a result of reviewing the data and to ensure continued inter-rater reliability, the following activities will be implemented:

  • Revise rubric for the Teacher Work Sample to better align with the Knowledge Base
  • Conduct external review for inter-rater reliability
  • Add a second reader for the Teacher Work Sample (Academic Supervisor)
  • Train all supervisors using the revised rubric and Work Samples from previous program completers.
  • Ensure all adjunct faculty have training with the Teacher Work Sample rubric

Fall 2007 Study

2009-2010 Raters

2009-2010 Raters

2.5.3  The COE Advisory Council is comprised of the PSU COE leadership team and representatives from area schools and the service center. The council met three times during the 2009-2010 school year. KSDE program review and the NCATE review status were updated at each meeting. Throughout the year, each program provided updates, and participants were invited to share concerns and suggest solutions for program improvement.

2.5.4 The COE collects and analyzes data for each alternative route, and three years of disaggregated data for candidates on alternate routes is summarized in three exhibits. Exhibit 2.5a Comparison BSE vs. MAT Knowledge Base Ratings compares the Conceptual Framework knowledge base among the elementary, secondary and K-12 BSE candidates with the MAT candidate mean scores. Exhibit 2.5b Comparison BSE vs. MAT PLT-Content Mean Scores compares three years of PLT mean scores in the first chart and compares the program completer content test mean scores of the BSE/BME with the MAT mean scores. Exhibit 2.5c Comparison Advanced Programs On-Campus and Off-Campus shows three years of data for the Educational Leadership Program and the Special Education Program comparing the GPA and Licensure exam scores. The final chart shows three years of data for on and off-campus MAT program completers.

STANDARD 3

Through research and analysis of feedback from candidates and follow-up surveys from graduates and employers, PSU recognizes the need for additional field experiences. Since our last NCATE visit, the Secondary Education Coordinating Committee (SECC) has reviewed the field experiences. Additions and changes in field experience have been discussed and implemented within the programs and individual departments. Internships and demonstration classes have been added within the 479 methods classes. Section 3.4 of this response describes specific changes.

3.3 Feedback on correcting previous areas for improvement (AFI's)

Field experience information for the MAT and the MS in Teaching has been added to Exhibit 3.4b Field Experience Requirements - Advanced Programs. While the MAT is an Advanced Program, candidates are seeking an initial teaching license which means they are following the same requirements as initial program candidates seeking a 6-12 teaching license. The majority of MAT candidates are teaching full-time during the two years they are on a Restricted License. Candidates seeking the MS in Teaching are licensed teachers who are either full-time teachers or who have other employment in a school setting.

AFIs continued from last visit:   

AFI Number & Text

Apply to

AFI Rationale

1.  Not all secondary content areas require adequate field experiences prior to the professional semester.

 

ITP, ADV

While some initial programs have added field experiences to the programs, the French, Spanish and History/Govt. programs field experiences are still limited to the 33 hours in CURIN 261 and 10 hours in SSLS 510 completed early in the program with no other field experiences until the professional semester. Three additional programs, FACS, Music and Chemistry have added only 10-12 hours of field experiences to their programs.

The AFI continued from last visit is addressed in the response to the current areas of concern discussed below since the concerns cover the same areas.

3.4 Areas of concern related to continuing to meet the standard

"There appears to be a minimal number of field experiences required of all candidates in several initial programs."

Rationale: While the majority of initial programs have added field experiences to the programs, the French, Spanish and History/Govt. programs field experiences are still limited to the 33 hours in CURIN 261 and 10 hours in SSLS 510 completed early in the program with no other field experiences until the professional semester.

An error on the original Exhibit 3.4a Field Experience Requirements - Initial Programs has now been corrected. Chemistry candidates are required to take CHEM 369 Laboratory Assistant Practicum I for 60 clock hours and 3 credit hours. They may also take CHEM 469 Laboratory Assistant Practicum II and CHEM 569 Laboratory Assistant Practicum III.

The internship experience completed concurrently with techniques for Biology, Chemistry, and Physics candidates has increased from 10 to 20 clock hours to begin fall 2010. This has been updated in Exhibit 3.4a Field Experience Requirements - Initial Programs.

Spanish and French candidates were required to complete an internship along with their techniques class until the instructor retired. For the past three semesters the techniques class has been taught by an adjunct instructor. A tenure-track instructor has been employed starting this fall semester. He will lead the teacher education program for Modern Languages with a review of field experience requirements a top priority. This issue will be addressed prior to the on-site visit in October.

FACS candidates have the option to complete an internship experience during their techniques class. The department will be reviewing field experience options as soon as the fall semester begins. Candidates currently engage in 12 clock hours of field work during FCS 409 Demonstration Techniques and Instructional Technology. Changes in field experience requirements will be determined before the on-site visit.

Music candidates recently added a field experience working with pre-school children enrolled in the on-campus child care program. This fall they will require additional field experiences at the elementary and pre-kindergarten levels; and they are working to schedule field experiences at the Family Resource Center.

History/Government: The History Department, which houses the teacher education program for history and the social sciences, has been in transition for the past year resulting in no change. However, the History and Social Science Departments have been merged, the former social science chair has remained in the leadership position, and the history education advisor is now directing the history education program. The new department chair and history/government education leader will be leading a program review that includes the addition of field experiences.  New requirements will be determined before October.

Evidence

3.5.1 The Director of Teacher Education and partner schools collaborate to determine the placement of candidates. Each candidate requests three sites and the level for their field placements. (A copy of the placement request sheet is attached.) Candidates cannot be placed in the school district from which they graduated nor a school in which they completed an earlier field experience.  Secondary and PK-12 candidates select either middle school or high school. The Director considers the size and demographics of the school prior to selection to ensure diverse placements; the request sheet, and information sheet, and a personal introduction are sent to the administrator who selects the teacher. Cooperating teachers must have three years of successful teaching experience, be certified by the State Department of Education in the state where employed, be recognized as a masterful teacher and also willing to work with a student teacher.

3.5.2 In advanced programs, program coordinators work with the principals to select placements. In many cases, the Candidates are placed in the schools in which they work. The cooperating educator is selected by the administrator considering the following guidelines: full time teacher or counselor. If a licensed counselor is not located at the school, candidates meet with a counselor from another school to meet state licensure guidelines. (See Exhibit 3.2)

3.5.3  The Office of Teacher Education considers the demographics of schools with each field experience placement. A spreadsheet of school demographics including gender, race/ethnicity, ELL's, SES, and SPED was prepared using state department data for each school as shown in Exhibits 4.8a Partner School Demographics-Kansas, 4.8b Partner School Demographics-Missouri and 4.8c Partner School Demographics-Oklahoma. Placements for each candidate are tracked in the following classes: CURIN 261 Explorations in Education, CURIN 307 Clinical Experience, SSLS 510 Overview of the Exceptional Child, Practicum1 (i.e. CURIN 366 Primary Reading and Language Arts with Practicum, BIOL 479 Techniques for Teaching Biology, CHEM 479 Techniques for Teaching Chemistry, MATH 480 Clinical Experience in Secondary Mathematics Teaching, PHYS 479 Techniques for Teaching Physics), Practicum 2, and student teaching. When making placements, the Director reviews the spread sheet to ensure that each candidate will experience diversity during field experiences.

3.5.4 Exhibit 3.1l Advanced Programs Active Advisory Councils is inaccurate. In addition to the Council for Teacher Education Committee, for which minutes of meetings the past three years are attached, the only active Advisory Council at this time is the School Counseling Program Advisory Team. A packet for their most recent meeting is attached, and minutes of meetings are available on campus.

3.5.8 Candidates enrolled in the Masters in Teaching Elementary and Secondary, a non-licensure program, are classroom teachers who implement, analyze, and reflect upon assignments within their own classes. Data for the Masters in Teaching were inadvertently omitted from Exhibits 1.8f Knowledge Base Dispositions Mean Ratings - Advanced Programs and A.6 Knowledge Base Mean Ratings - Advanced Programs. The exhibits have been corrected to include data from 2008-2009 for the Masters in Teaching Program.  In addition, the assessment for the course Current Teaching Practices, Exhibit 1.3a CURIN 850 Course Grade Rubric, includes a classroom project asking the student to video and analyze him/herself teaching a lesson by addressing the standards. Among the standards included in that assignment are Standard 8, "The educator understands and uses formal and informal assessment strategies to evaluate and ensure the continual intellectual, social, and other aspects of personal development of all learners" and Standard 3, "The educator demonstrates the ability to provide different approaches to learning and creates instructional opportunities that are equitable, that are based on developmental levels, and that are adapted to diverse learners, including those with exceptionalities."

STANDARD 4 

4.1 Statement about the evidence

Providing diversity in faculty, candidates, curriculum and experiences continues as a high priority for PSU. To ensure that all candidates have the opportunity to work in diverse settings, the diversity within each school district is tracked for male/female, White, Ethnicity/Race, English Language Learners, SES, and SPED and considered before placement in the field experiences in CURIN 261, CURIN 307, SSLS 510, Practicum 1, Practicum 2, Internship and Student Teaching. These areas are included in Exhibits 3.5.3a Candidate Placements with Diverse Student Populations - Elementary and 3.5.3b Candidate Placements with Diverse Student Populations - Secondary, which are included in this response.

4.3 Feedback on correcting previous areas for improvement (AFIs)

AFI Number & Text

Apply to

AFI Rationale

1.  Candidates have limited opportunities to interact with culturally diverse faculty.

 

ITP, ADV

All elementary candidates have a reading instructor with diverse background but secondary candidates do not.  Elementary candidates have an opportunity to interact with one diverse faculty member and there are no opportunities for other candidates to have interaction with any diverse faculty members.

The College of Education is "committed to diversity in curriculum, students, and faculty," as noted in the Strategic Plan for the COE, Exhibit 4.0 College of Education Strategic Plan. Since our last NCATE visit, we have employed 2 full time minority faculty members. One reading professor, an African American who brings experience teaching in the inner city schools, is the only professor who teaches CURIN 366 Primary Reading/Language Arts with Practicum, which is a required course for all elementary majors.  An African American full time university supervisor works with candidates during the professional semester, including Thursday meetings held on campus for all student teachers. Each semester, a Diversity Day is planned for one Thursday session during the professional semester. All elementary and secondary education majors are required to attend a variety of sessions that include presentations, some by minority speakers, about such topics as inner city schools, special programs, poverty, and technology. Departments preparing secondary candidates include minority faculty who teach required courses in the major field, providing additional opportunity to interact with diverse faculty. Diverse faculty members also teach some general education classes taken by education majors.

In 2009 an African American taught a required course for the MAT Fellows Program in Kansas City; prior to that he served as Fellow's Coordinator and worked with each candidate in the program. In addition, candidates at the Metro Center interact with diverse faculty in course work and/or with cooperating teachers in their placements, which are all located in diverse city schools.

Since candidates in the advanced programs complete practicum and internships in their home schools, programs struggle to provide opportunities for some candidates to interact with faculty members from diverse racial and ethnic backgrounds. As a result, the COE developed a plan, Exhibit 4.4b Diversity Plan for Advanced Programs, which is to be implemented Fall 2010. The plan requires faculty of advanced courses to include diverse presenters/faculty in their classes.  (Although most advanced program faculty lack racial and ethnic diversity, they have worked as teachers and leaders in schools with high levels of diversity where they learned and used strategies to ensure that all students achieve. They share their experiences with candidates.)  In addition, this plan provides the opportunity for candidates in advanced programs to experience working with diverse students in P-12 schools. If the candidate completes the practicum in his/her home school, and that school lacks diversity, the candidate is required to work in an alternative location for some time during the practicum.

COE Diversity Committee plans and implements activities to enhance the quality of life on campus for minorities as well as recruiting area high school students in planned activities.  Activities include focus groups of minority students to identify challenges they face at PSU and possible solutions to those challenges. An annual activity is a recruiting day sponsored by the COE which brings high school students to campus and provides information about preparing for and attending college. In addition to the initiatives already mentioned in the feedback review, a committee within the Leadership Team of the College of Education is currently creating a comprehensive diversity recruiting plan. The COE is committed to providing opportunities to experience diversity in our curriculum, students, and faculty.

4.4 Areas of concern related to continuing to meet the standard

"Can the unit insure that all candidates have the opportunity to interact with faculty members from diverse racial and ethnic groups?"

Rationale: There appears to be limited opportunities for all candidates to interact with faculty members from diverse racial and ethnic groups.  All elementary candidates have a reading instructor with diverse background but secondary candidates do not.

As noted in 4.3 of this response, all candidates have the opportunity to interact with faculty members from diverse racial and ethnic groups. Although this interaction has been limited, as you can see by our improvement since the last visit, PSU recognizes the significance of such interactions and is working diligently and intentionally to expand opportunities for our candidates.  The Professional Semester Diversity Day, the addition of a minority University Supervisor, and minority faculty within the academic departments provide interaction with diverse faculty for the secondary candidates.

"Can the unit insure that all candidates have experience in working with diverse students in the P-12 school?"

Rationale: The unit did not develop a plan to document candidates have experience working with diverse P-12 students until Spring 2010.

Beginning in 2000, placements of all initial program candidates have been tracked throughout the program to ensure that they interact with diverse students in the P-12 school. For candidates in the advanced programs, their placements have traditionally been in their home schools. Many of those schools provide experience with diverse students, but recognizing that this does not apply to all schools, the COE developed a plan, Exhibit 4.4b Diversity Plan for Advanced Programs, to be formally implemented Fall 2010.

Evidence

4.5a  The PSU Schedule of Classes from Fall 2007 to Fall 2010 show that Dr. Trinity Davis, an African-American teacher, is the only professor to teach CURIN 366 Primary Reading/Language Arts W/Practicum, which is a required course for all elementary majors,  during those years. 

4.5b In 2009-2010, Tyrone Bates, an African-American taught a required class for candidates at the Metro Center, prior to that he served as Fellow's Coordinator and worked with each candidate in the program. For the past two years, Educational Leadership candidates have had one course from Brenda Willis, an African-American woman.  PSU will continue to utilize highly qualified diverse staff in the Kansas City Metro area to teach courses in all programs at the Metro Center.  In addition, candidates at the Metro Center interact with diverse faculty in course work and/or with cooperating teachers in their placements, which are all located in diverse city schools.

4.5c After reviewing data, some advanced programs discovered a lack of opportunity for some candidates to interact with faculty members from diverse racial and ethnic groups. As a result, the COE developed a plan, Exhibit 4.4b Diversity Plan for Advanced Programs, which is to be implemented Fall of 2010. Faculty of advanced courses are responsible to incorporate diverse presenters in their classes.  Although faculty lack racial and ethnic diversity, they have worked as teachers and leaders in schools with high levels of diversity where they learned and used strategies to ensure that all students achieve. They share their experiences with candidates.

4.5d All candidates return to campus for Thursday sessions the first eight weeks of the professional semester. One of those days is reserved to focus on diversity. All elementary and secondary/PK-12 education majors are required to attend a variety of sessions that include presentations by minority speakers and presentations about inner city schools, special programs, poverty, and technology. Sample agendas are attached.  This day is arranged with the coordinator of the Kansas City Master of Arts in Teaching program who invites underrepresented educators who have completed a PSU program and teach in diverse schools in Kansas City Public Schools USD 500 to address student teachers.

4.5e During the 2008-2009 year, the COE developed a plan, Exhibit 4.4b Diversity Plan for Advanced Programs, which is to be implemented Fall 2010. This plan requires candidates in advanced programs to experience working with diverse students in P-12 schools. If the candidate completes the practicum in his/her home school, and that school lacks diversity, the candidate is required to work in an alternative location during the practicum.

STANDARD 5

Evidence

5.5.1  Khamis Siam: PhD; University of Arkansas; Professor; Tenure Track (Please see updated Exhibit 5.1 Faculty Qualifications.)

5.5.2 Current licensure for clinical faculty and a list of their most recent experience working in the P-12 classroom are delineated in Exhibit 5.5.2 Clinical Faculty Licensure and Recency of Classroom Experience.

5.5.3 The university faculty orientation program is conducted through the Center for Teaching, Learning, and Technology. We have included agendas for the past three years. The two day session is held the week prior to the beginning of school to acquaint new faculty with each other, the university, faculty expectations and support systems.  Presentations focus on student and faculty success. Each day begins with a continental breakfast and includes lunch.  Throughout the year, ongoing sessions focus on topics to support new faculty, provide essential information, and encourage networking.  Those annual agendas are provided.

5.5.4 Mentors are appointed within each department. During the two day orientation, mentors are invited to attend the entire day, but one session is scheduled for mentors to prepare them for their role.

5.5.5 The College of Education encourages faculty to collaborate with P-12 schools, faculty, and students through grants, special projects, professional development, and mentor training. Such collaborative opportunities build a learning community which enhances both the P-12 schools and PSU. Examples shown in Exhibit 5.5.5 Examples of Faculty Collaborative Activities demonstrate the range, depth, and frequency of collaborative efforts.

STANDARD 6

Evidence

6.5.1  "Administration of the COE programs at Kansas City Metro Center and collaboration with the COE is not addressed in IR or exhibits."

The PSU-KC Metro Center opened in June 2000.  Since the inception of the center, a college of education tenured faculty member has served as director with the exception of one year.  Faculty members have remained active within their departments while serving as directors (See Table 1).  From 2000 to 2006 the director reported to the Vice-President for Academic Affairs while serving Admission, Alumni Affairs and Academic areas.  Beginning in 2007 the director began reporting to the Dean of Graduate and Continuing Studies and serves more as a "facilities manager."

Table 1

PSU-KC Metro Center Directors

Person/Title

COE Department

Service Dates

Dr. Howard W. Smith

Executive Director PSU-KC

SSLS - Leadership Studies

2000-2006

Ms. Liz Majors

Director PSU-KC

 

2006-2007

Dr. Victoria White

Director PSU-KC

SSLS - Special Education

2008 - Current

Lead Program Faculty has been identified for each program (Table 2) at the center as a response to feedback based on experience.  Lead Program Faculty participates regularly in the departments linking campus and center activities.

Table 2

Lead Program Faculty

Person

Program

Dr. Ed Streich

SSLS - Leadership Studies - Masters of Science

Dr. Anna Friend

SSLS- Special Education - Master of Arts

Dr. Victoria White

SSLS - Special Education -  Masters of Science

Mr. Tom Petz

C & I - Master of Arts in Teaching

Addendum Exhibits

Exhibit Number Exhibit Name Format of Exhibit
CF.1c Unit Assessment System Handbook (Updated) Word
CF.1c (Revised) Unit Assessment System Handbook (Revised) Word
1.2b PLT Mean Scores for Initial Programs (Updated) Word
1.2c PLT Pass Rates for Initial Programs (Updated) Word
1.2d PLT-Content Candidate Summary (Updated) Excel
1.2e Program Completers Key Assessments Three Year Summary Excel
1.2f Content Exam Means anad Pass Rates for Initial Prorams (Updated) Word
1.2g Advanced Program Content Mean Scores (Updated) Word
1.2h Initial Program PLT Summary Excel
1.2i Initial Program Content Summary Excel
1.2j Advanced Program Content Summary Excel
1.2k MAT Program PLT Summary Excel
1.2l MAT Program Content Summary Excel
1.4a CURIN 850 Current Teaching Practices Data Table (Updated) Word
1.4b Comprehensive Exam Data Table (Updated) Excel
1.4.1 Appendix C - Assessment Handbook Word
1.5.1 Licensure Programs and Degrees Excel
1.5.3a Knowledge Base Dispositions Mean Ratings - MAT (2009-2010) Excel
1.5.3b Knowledge Base Dispositions Mean Ratings - MAT (Previous Knowledge Base) Excel
1.5.3c Knowledge Base Ratings - MAT Excel
1.5.3d MAT Diversity Indicators Mean Ratings (2009-2010) Excel
1.5.3e MAT Diversity Indicators Mean Ratings (Previous Knowledge Base) Excel
1.5.3f MAT Professional Portfolio Ratings Excel
1.5.4 Advanced Program Dispositions and Knowledge Base Data prior to Advanced Program Knowledge Base PDF
1.5.6 Ed.S. Program Completers Mean GPA Word
1.5.7 Final Recommendation from KSDE PDF
1.5.8 Professional Development Improvement Plan Word
1.6a First Year Teacher Feedback (Updated) Excel
1.6b Third Year Teacher Feedback (Updated) Excel
1.6c First Year Educational Leadership Completer Feedback (Updated) Excel
1.6d Third Year Educational Leadership Completer Feedback (Updated) Excel
1.6e Educational Technology Completer Feedback (Updated) Excel
1.6f Special Education Completer Feedback (Updated) Excel
1.6g.1 First Year Curriculum & Instruction Advanced Program Completer Feedback Excel
1.6h.1 Third Year Curriculum & Instruction Advanced Program Completer Feedback Excel
1.6i First Year MS Reading Completer Feedback Excel
1.6j Third Year MS Reading Completer Feedback Excel
1.6k First Year ESOL Completer Feedback Excel
1.6l Third Year ESOL Completer Feedback Excel
1.6m First Year MS Teaching Program Completer Feedback Excel
1.6n Third Year MS Teaching Program Completer Feedback Excel
1.7a First Year Teacher Administrator Feedback (Updated) Word
1.7b Third Year Teacher Administrator Feedback (Updated) Word
1.7c Educational Technology Employer Feedback (Updated) Excel
1.7d Special Education Employer Feedback (Updated) Excel
1.7e.1 First Year Curriculum & Instruction Advanced Program Completer Employer Feedback Excel
1.7f.1 Third Year Curriculum & Instruction Advanced Program Completer Employer Feedback Excel
1.7g First Year Educational Leadership Employer Feedback Excel
1.7h Third Year Educational Leadership Employer Feedback Excel
1.7i First Year MS Teaching Program Completer Employer Feedback Excel
1.7j Third Year MS Teaching Program Completer Employer Feedback Excel
1.8c Knowledge Base Dispositions Mean Ratings - Initial Programs (Updated 2009-10) Excel
1.8c.1 Knowledge Base Dispositions Mean Ratings as rated by Cooperating Teachers Excel
1.8f.1 Knowledge Base Dispositions Mean Ratings - Advanced Programs (Updated 2009-10) Excel
1.8g Disposition Indicators - Field Experience I (Updated 2009-2010) Excel
1.8h Disposition Indicators - Field Experience II (Updated 2009-2010) Excel
A.6.1 Knowledge Base Mean Ratings - Advanced Programs (Updated 2009-2010) Excel
2.2 Basic Skills Requirement Mean Ratings Word
2.4b PLT Mean Scores for Initial Programs (Updated) Word
2.4c PLT Pass Rates for Initial Programs (Updated) Word
2.4d PLT-Content Candidate Summary (Updated) Excel
2.4e Program Completers Key Assessments Three Year Summary (Updated) Excel
2.4f Content Exam Means and Pass Rates for Initial Programs (Updated) Word
2.4g Advanced Program Content Mean Scores (Updated) Word
2.5a Comparison BSE vs. MAT Knowledge Base Ratings (Updated) Excel
2.5b Comparison MAT vs. BSE PLT-Content Mean Scores (Updated) Word
2.5c Comparison Advanced Programs On-campus vs. Off-campus (Updated) Word
3.4a Field Experience Requirements - Initial Programs (Updated) Word
3.5.3a Candidate Placements with Diverse Student Populations - Elementary Excel
3.5.3b Candidate Placements with Diverse Student Populations - Secondary Excel
3.5.4 COE Advisory Council Minutes PDF
3.5.4 COE Council for Teacher Education Minutes PDF
3.5.4 COE Curriculum Committee Minutes PDF
3.5.4 School Counseling Advisory Council Agenda PDF
3.5.5 Advanced Program Field Placements Word
4.3k Professional Semester Diversity Indicators Mean Ratings (Updated 2009-10) Excel
4.3l Professional Semester Diversity Indicators Mean Ratings as rated by Cooperating Teachers Excel
4.4c Cooperating Teacher Ethnicity Word
4.5a Course Schedule for Primary Reading and Language Arts with Practicum PDF
4.5b Course Schedule for KC Metro Center PDF
4.5d Strategies for Teaching in a Diverse Setting Word
4.8a Partner School Demographics - Kansas (Updated) Excel
4.8b Partner School Demographics - Missouri (Updated) Excel
4.8c Partner School Demographics - Oklahoma (Updated) Excel
5.1 Faculty Qualifications (Updated) Word
5.5.2 Clinical Faculty Licensure and Recency of Experience Excel
5.5.3a New Faculty Orientation Agenda 2007 PDF
5.5.3b New Faculty Orientation Agenda 2008 Word
5.5.3c New Faculty Orientation Agenda 2008-2009

Word

5.5.3d New Faculty Orientation Agenda 2009 Word
5.5.5 Examples of Faculty Collaborative Activities Excel
6.5i Adjunct Handbook (Updated) PDF