Teacher Education: Reading Certificate, Reading Language Arts Certificate

Transcription

1 Teacher Education: Reading Certificate, Reading Language Arts Certificate College of Education California State University, Sacramento 49

2 Commission on Teacher Credentialing Biennial Report Academic Years Program documented in this report: Reading Specialist Name of Program: Language and Literacy Credential awarded: Reading Certificate; Reading Language Arts Specialist Credential Is this program offered at more than one site? No Program Contact: Kathy Norman, Associate Dean Phone #: If the preparer of this report is different than the Program Contact, please note contact information for that person below: Name: Porfirio M. Loeza Phone #: (916)

3 SECTION A PROGRAM SPECIFIC INFORMATION I. Context Table 18: Total Number of Candidates Enrolled and Completers Number of candidates enrolled** Number of completers 4 (3=Rdg/Language Arts Specialist Credential; 1=Reading Certificate) ** Estimates Fall 2009 Spring (All Rdg/Language Arts Specialist Credential) Most of the students in our certificate/credential programs enroll for the M.A. in Language and Literacy. As such, it is difficult to ascertain precisely whether students are only completing a certificate or credential. CSUS has instituted a policy since 2010 wherein posbaccalaureate students are only able to apply for admissions into the M.A. program. Most of our students are practicing teachers and complete the program on a part time basis. The typical student enrolls in two courses (6 units) every semester. The Reading Certificate and Reading Language Arts Specialist Credential Program are organized into tiers. Several years ago our program instituted a system of tiers or levels. Each tier represents either the certificate or credential level of the program. Tier one represents the four sequence courses for the certificate and tier two represents the second level of courses, a sequence which comprises the credential course. Although students are not cohorted per se, the course schedule attempts to sequence the courses in a way where students sequentially progress through the program. Candidates take Tier 1 classes (12 units) to obtain the Reading Certificate. If candidates wish to obtain the Reading Language Specialist Credential, they build on the Tier 1 knowledge by continuing on to the Tier 2 classes (12 units). Fall Entrance to the Program No significant changes have been made to this program since its approval by CCTC on November 12, There have been no changes in admission requirements and our course content has not been revised. We continue to use Signature Assignments as well as the end-ofprogram portfolio as a summative assessment for both the certificate and credential. The following is our course sequence: 51

4 Year/Tier 1 Reading Certificate (12 units) Fall EDTE EDTE 205 Spring EDTE EDTE Reading Language Arts Specialist Credential (24 units) Fall EDTE EDTE 205 Spring EDTE EDTE 203 Fall EDTE EDTE 207 Spring EDTE EDTE 209 Tier 1 (12 units) EDTE 200 Practicum in Decoding and Fluency: Assessment and Instruction (3 units) EDTE 201 Practicum in Comprehension: Assessment and Instruction (3 units) EDTE 203 Teaching and Assessing Writing in the PreK-12 Classroom (3 units) EDTE 205 Psychology and Sociology of Literacy Instruction (3 units) Tier 2 (12 units) EDTE 202 Language and Literacy Development in Multicultural Settings (3 units) EDTE 206 Leadership in Literacy (3 units) EDTE 207 Advanced Practicum in Reading Difficulties: Assessment and Intervention (3 units) EDTE 209 Literature for the Diverse PreK-12 Classroom: Issues, Models and Strategies (3 units) II. Candidate Assessment/Performance and Program Effectiveness Information a. Primary Candidate Assessments Our program has consistently used the same assessments since our program was approved on November 12, The core faculty in the program has met to review our assessment measures and discuss their effectiveness. We continue to use the following course-embedded assessments to appraise our program. 1. Comprehensive case study of a student in EDTE 200 (fluency emphasis) and EDTE 201(comprehension emphasis) 2. Comprehensive case study of a school/district s literacy program in EDTE Culminating Portfolio 52

5 The table below provides additional details about the nature of each key assessment. Table 19: Overview of Key Assessments (* = Reading Certificate; ** = Reading Language Arts Specialist Credential) Assessment Tool Assessment #1. Comprehensive case study of a student in EDTE 200 and EDTE 201 (* and **) Assessment #2. Comprehensive case study of student with severe reading difficulties in EDTE 207 (**) Assessment #3. Comprehensive case study of a school/district l literacy in EDTE 206 (**) Assessment #4. Culminating Portfolio (* and **) Type of Assessment (formative/ summative) Formative Formative When administered End of each semester (Tier 1) First semester: Tier 2 Details about Administration Individual faculty assesses candidate Instructors of class assess candidate Formative End of Tier 2 Instructor of class assesses candidate Summative End of program Faculty in program collaboratively to assess each candidate CCTC Standards, Performance Outcomes, etc. Addressed 2,3,4, 5, 7, ,3,4, 5, 7, 8-1,13, 14, 15, 16 2,3,4, 5, 6, 7, 8-11, 12, 13, 14, 15 2,3,4, 5, 6, 7, 8-11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, Our program is continuing to use Signature Assignments within each course as formative assessments for our certificate and credential candidates. Each course in the certificate as well as the credential program includes a Signature Assignment. These assignments are intended to be core assignments that are central to the content of the course. In sum, they represent essential content for each course. Signature Assignments used for Formative Assessment EDTE 200 Case Study: Fluency EDTE 201 Case Study: Comprehension EDTE 202 Case Study: Language, Literacy and Culture EDTE 203 Case Study: Self as a Teacher of Writing and Authentic Writing Assessment 53

6 EDTE 205 EDTE 206 EDTE 207 EDTE 209 Case Study: Applying Research to a Reading Curriculum Case Study: Examining a Whole School Case Study: A Seriously Disabled Reader Position Paper: A Professional Perspective on an Issue Related to Juvenile Literature As summarized in Table 18, our program had 4 Program Completers in Fall 2009 and 3 Program Completers in Spring In Table 20 below, we summarize the data related to completer performance as measured by the 4 key assessments detailed in Table 19. Table 20: Aggregate Data on Completer Performance Assessment Tools Fall 2007 N= 3 Spring 2008 N= 3 #1. Comprehensive case study of a student in EDTE 200 and EDTE % 100% #2. Comprehensive case study of a seriously disabled reader in EDTE 207 #3. Comprehensive case study of a school/district l literacy in EDTE 206 #4. Culminating Portfolio 100% 100% b. Additional information about candidate and program completer performance The core measure of completer performance in our program continues to be the three major case studies that are completed in EDTE 200, 201 and 206. Completers also submit either a certificate or credential portfolio. Most students submit this portfolio at the end of their course. Our program previously reported that we completed (1) an Advisory Group Survey and (2) Dispositions Papers for candidates. Our goal with the Advisory Group Surveys was to continue our close relationships with ing professionals in our local school districts. Our attempt was to formalize what has always been a professional relationship. We have periodically asked these individuals to give us feedback about the content of our program and the preparation of our candidates. From this qualitative data, faculty continues to discuss at their monthly area group meetings, concerns expressed by the advisory group. Since the new standards for the Reading Certificate and Reading Language Arts Specialist Credential are currently being published, our goal will be to systematically establish regular Advisory Group meetings to seek their input and continuously assess our program. In addition to the end-of-program portfolio, a consistent practice in our program has been to assess candidates through their performance on the Signature Assignments for each course. As 54

7 previously stated, each course within our certificate and credential has a Signature Assignment. Faculty instructors rate these papers on the following criteria which go beyond the course content: (a) clarity of writing and responsiveness to the assigned task; (b) integration of theory/research to support response; (c) demonstration of willingness to consider alternative perspectives as well as those that differ significantly from their own; and (d) demonstration of higher order thinking/intellectual curiosity. These mirror the core outcomes which all graduate students in the Teacher Education Department must achieve. A passing grade for these papers is a B. These are formative assessments and candidates are allowed to re-write and re-submit these papers so all candidates should ultimately achieve a passing grade, if they opt to re-write these papers. III. Analysis of Candidate Assessment Data Our data (see table 20) indicates that we have a small number of completers for either the certificate or credential relative to the number of students in our M.A. program. We suspect that many of our students complete the M.A. but then do not complete the portfolio which is a requirement for either the certificate or credential. Strengths: a. Candidate Performance: Our candidates continue to exhibit strong assessment skills in the area of decoding. The certificate/credential portfolios reflect depth of understanding in reviewing an entire school/district level literacy program. Our completers show evidence in their portfolios of this skill. b. Program effectiveness: Anecdotal feedback from our local partners confirms that our completers are successful once they read the field. Areas for improvement: a. Candidate performance: Academic writing was previously identified as an area for improvement. CSUS has approved a new Graduate Writing Assessment Requirement. All students must pass this requirement as of Fall 2010 or take an approved course that improves writing skills. b. Program effectiveness: Each course in either the certificate or credential our program has a Signature Assignment. A few of the courses have a rubric for their Signature Assignments that have been reviewed by the core faculty. Our goal for the current year is to establish systematic rubrics for each of our courses and to have them reviewed by the core faculty. A second area for improvement is increasing the feedback we get from our school/district level partners in university s service area. IV.Use of Assessment Results to Improve Candidate and Program Performance Our program is excited and has been waiting for the new standards for the Reading Certificate and Reading Language Arts Specialist Credential. We plan on exploring using one of our courses (possibly EDTE 206) as a graduate capstone class. Another area which we wish to explore is increasing the amount of content that we present in non-traditional formats. This includes greater online content delivery as well as changing course offering to include weekend classes. Since most of our students are ing teachers, our goal is meet the challenge faced in terms of literacy instruction in a diverse state such as California. 55