Report on Teaching Effectiveness 2016-2017

University of Nebraska at Omaha

Narrative on Final Clinical Experience Data

The following data were collected during the fall of 2016 and the spring of 2017 on candidates completing their student teaching at the University of Nebraska at Omaha. The instrument used to collect data is the same instrument used to evaluate all candidates in Nebraska during student teaching. The Nebraska Department of Education instrument consist of 31 items clustered in 12 categories. The items under each cluster are presented in the chart below with TTC used for “The Teacher Candidate”.

Item Cluster Items under the cluster

Student Development

*TTC understands how students grow and develop (1.1). TTC recognizes that patterns of learning and development vary individually within and across the cognitive, linguistic, social, emotional, and physical areas. TTC implements developmentally appropriate and challenging learning experiences.

Learning Differences

TTC understands individual differences and diverse cultures and communities TTC ensures inclusive learning environments that enable each student to meet high standards.

Learning Environments

TTC works with others to create environments that support individual and collaborative learning. TTC creates environments that encourage positive social interaction, active engagement in learning, and self-motivation. TTC manages student behavior to promote a positive learning environment.

Content Knowledge

TTC understands the central concepts, tools of inquiry, and structures of the discipline(s) he or she teaches. TTC creates learning experiences that make these aspects of the discipline accessible and meaningful for students to assure mastery of content. TTC integrates Nebraska Content Standards and/or professional standards within instruction.

Application of Content

TTC understands how to connect concepts across disciplines. TTC uses differing perspectives to engage students in critical thinking, creativity, and collaborative problem solving related to authentic local and global issues.

Assessment

TTC understands multiple methods of assessment. TTC uses multiple methods of assessment to engage student in their own growth, to monitor student progress, and to guide the teacher candidates and students decision-making.

Planning for Instruction

TTC plans instruction that supports every student in meeting rigorous learning goals. TTC draws upon knowledge of content areas, curriculum, cross-disciplinary skills, technology, and pedagogy. TTC draws upon knowledge of students and the community context.

Instructional Strategies

TTC understands a variety of instructional strategies. TTC uses a variety of instructional strategies to encourage students to develop deep understanding of content areas and their connection and to build skills to apply knowledge in meaningful ways. TTC utilizes available technology for instruction and assessment.

Professional Learning and Ethical Practice

TTC engages in ongoing professional learning. TTC models ethical professional practice. TTC uses evidence to continually evaluate his/her practice, particularly the effects of his/her choices and actions on others (students, families, other professionals, and the community), and adapts practice to meet the needs of each students.

Leadership and Collaboration

TTC seeks opportunities to take responsibility for student learning. TTC seeks opportunities, including appropriate technology, to collaborate with students, families, colleagues, and other school professionals, and community members to ensure student growth.

Impact on Student Learning and Development

TTC works to positively impact the learning and development for all students.

Professional Dispositions

TTC demonstrates passion, self-awareness, initiative and enthusiasm. TTC demonstrates skill in interpersonal relationships, reflective response to feedback, and displays evidence of appropriate social awareness. TTC practices good judgement, flexibility, problem-solving, professional communication and organization. TTC maintains a professional demeanor and appearance, and displays dependability, punctuality, and perseverance.

* TTC = The teacher candidate For each of the items listed above, candidates were evaluated on how often they displayed the identified characteristics. The scale was C for consistently; F for frequently; O for occasionally; R for rarely; N for never. The data charts that follow report the percentage of students scoring at

each level for fall 2016 and spring 2017 semester for the cluster. Scores for both mentor teachers and university supervisors are reported for each subject area on each of the clusters. The state has revised this instrument since it relied on frequency counts and provide little information on the quality of candidate performance. The revised instrument consist of 14 items that are assessed using a four level rubric for each item. Implementation of this instrument was in the fall of 2017. Moving forward this instrument should provide specific feedback and data on each of the 14 indicators. Findings: Over 97% of UNO teacher candidates were found to demonstrate the identified effective teaching behaviors either consistently or frequently for all 31 items across all disciplines.

Advanced Practicum Field Performance Pilot Data from Spring 2017

In spring of 2017, the College of Education piloted a new instrument in the required Advanced Practicum Field Experience course. The instrument identified 14 key attributes of effective teaching and candidates were assessed using a three level rubric. The target level identified the percentage of candidates demonstrating proficiency on the indicator based on criteria denoted on the rubric. The instrument was piloted with 217 Mentor Teachers and University Supervisors over a five week clinical experience. The results are reported on the following pages for all candidates enrolled in the clinical experience. Findings: There were two indicators where at least 30% of candidates failed to meet the “target” level. The two indicators were specific to “Assessment” with 63.5% of students achieving the target level and “Instructional Strategies” with 68% achieving the target level. The two highest performing areas were “Professional Learning and Ethical Practice” with 92.2% achieving target and “Leadership and Collaboration” with 95.4% achieving target. Indicators where at least 20% were below target included “Classroom Awareness”, “Instructional Transitions”, “Routines and Procedures”, “Content Knowledge”, and “Discipline is accessible and meaningful to students”.

Advanced Practicum Field Performance Rubric

(Pilot 2017) N = 219 Mentor Teachers and University Supervisors

Target Mean 80.6%

Target Approaching Target

Below Target N/A

1. Learner Development - Patterns of learning and development 88.1% 10.5% 0.9% 0.5%

2. Learner Development - Developmentally appropriate and challenging learning experiences 84.0% 13.7% 0.0% 2.3% 3. Learning Environment - Classroom Awareness 76.7% 21.5% 1.8% 0.0% 4. Learning Environment - Instructional Transitions 68.9% 27.9% 0.9% 2.3% 5. Learning Environment - Teacher Presence 84.9% 14.2% 0.9% 0.0% 6. Learning Environment - Routines and Procedures 75.3% 23.3% 0.9% 0.5%

7. Content Knowledge - Discipline is accessible and meaningful for students 75.3% 23.7% 0.5% 0.5%

8. Content Knowledge - Nebraska Content Standards and/or professional standards within instruction 89.0% 7.8% 0.9% 2.3% 9. Application of Content - Differing perspectives to engage students in critical thinking, creativity, and

collaborative problem solving 87.7% 11.0% 0.0% 1.4% 10. Assessment - Multiple methods of assessment 63.5% 30.1% 0.0% 6.4%

11. Planning - Supports every student in meeting rigorous learning goals 79.5% 16.4% 0.5% 3.7%

12. Instructional Strategies - Instructional strategies to encourage students to develop deep understanding of content areas to build skills to apply knowledge in meaningful ways 68.0% 30.6% 0.5% 0.9%

13. Professional Learning and Ethical Practice – Models professional decorum 92.2% 7.3% 0.5% 0.0%

14. Leadership and Collaboration – Responsibility for student learning 95.4% 3.2% 1.4% 0.0% Based on the Advanced Practicum Rubric, candidates must be assessed at “Target” on at least 11 of the 14 indicators to meet the designated proficiency. *Only one student did not meet proficiency.

Assessment Presentation

As part of the final clinical experience, candidates prepare an Assessment Presentation based on informal and formal assessment data collected as part of an unit of instruction during student teaching. The Assessment Presentation has been in use for approximately 10 years and candidates were assessed on their presentations using a four-level rubric (Not demonstrated, Beginning, Developing, and Proficient) across three categories: 1) lesson summary, 2) implementation of assessments, data collection, analysis, and evidence of PK-12 student learning, and 3) presentation skills. Below are results from the pilot. Findings: The highest percentage of candidates achieving the “Proficient” level was in the category of Lesson Summary at 76% and the lowest percentage of candidates achieving the “Proficient” level was in the category of Implementing Assessment and Evidence of PK-12 Student Learning with 56%. Based on data from the existing assignment and rubric, a new assignment (Strategies Project) and rubric were designed and piloted in the spring of 2017.

During the spring of 2017, candidates were divided into two groups. The control group was assessed using the existing assignment and rubric and the experimental group was assessed using the newly created Strategies Project assignment and rubric. The control was assessed across the three (3) categories using the four-level rubric. The experimental group was assessed using a three-level rubric with eight (8) categories. The experimental group was provided additional specificity for each of the required categories along with a more detailed rubric. The three levels on the revised rubric were defined as Target, Approaching Target, and Below Target. The designated proficiency for the assignment require candidates to: (a) be assessed by both evaluators at the Target level for four (4) of five (5) instructional strategies and assessment indicators (items 1-5), (b) be assessed by both evaluators at the Target level for two (2) of three (3) evidence-based practice and technology indicators (items 6-8, and (c) have no indicators as below target. Results for both the original and experimental groups are provided below. Findings: Candidates in the experimental group achieved “Target” level at higher percentages across the eight (8) categories than the control group did across the three (3) categories found on the control group rubric. The highest percentage of candidates achieving the “Target” level was in the category of Technology-supported Learning at 100% and the lowest percentage of candidates achieving the “Target” level was in the category of Assessment to Monitor and Engage Learners with 71%. Indicators where at least 90% of the candidates were at the “Target” level included Instruction to Support Content, Assessment to Measure Learner Progress, and Research-supported Instruction. All other categories had at least 80% of the candidates scoring at the “Target” level. Nine (9%) percent of candidates in the pilot did not meet the designated proficiency on their first attempt. Complete results are reported below. Based on the pilot in the spring of 2017, the assignment was slightly modified, the rubric was expanded to ten (10) categories, and the designated proficiency adjusted to accommodate additional criteria in the rubric. Spring 2017 Control Group Using Three Category Rubric

Candidates in the experimental group achieved “Target” level at higher percentages across the eight (8) categories than the control group did across the three categories found on the control group rubric. The highest percentage of candidates achieving the “Target” level was in the category of Technology-supported Learning at 100% and the lowest percentage of candidates achieving the “Target” level was in the category of Assessment to Monitor and Engage Learners with 71%. Indicators where at least 90% of the candidates were at the “Target” level included Instruction to Support

Content, Assessment to Measure Learner Progress, and Research-supported Instruction. All other categories had at least 80% of the candidates scoring at the “Target” level. Complete results are reported below. Strategies Project Pilot Instrument Using an Eight Category Rubric with Experimental Group – Spring 2017