Evidence Requested in the ncate offsite Reports Not Provided in the Addendum Submitted by the University of Cincinnati boe visit: November 4-6, 2012 Responses to Concerns and Requests for Further Evidence
Please refer to www.uc.edu/cech-accreditation for the NCATE and CAEP Institutional Reports, Evidence, and further documentation.
In this evidence we have provided the actually data that was unable to be added directly to the addendum to the NCATE IR and the addendum to the CAEP IR. This parallel document includes the evidence requested. Though it was our intent to provide the evidence directly with the narrative for ease of review, a separate document had to be generated due to page limitations in uploading through the aims.ncate.org site. Wherever possible, we placed the evidence directly in the narrative for the convenience of the reviewer. These tables, data, and documentation were unwieldy as part of each addendum. For individuals who will print these documents we have put this evidence in a landscaped format to readily differentiate it from other documents. Please direct any further questions or concerns to Annie Bauer (email@example.com) and every effort will be made to respond within 24 hours.
Evidence requested in the NCATE and Offsite Reports
Analysis of Student Work: You will work collaboratively (special education and English education candidates) with you cooperating teachers to collect and analyze the work of target students to discover student learning needs and determine how best to address them. You will select appropriate student work samples of a single assignment (minimum 12), establish criteria for assessment, and sort and analyze the work to identify what students are able to do as well as their learning needs. Finally, you will develop an overall plan for differentiated instruction.
Define Expectations – What is the specific writing objective? (Consult the Ohio K-12 Academic Content Standards at http://www.corestandards.org/). Be specific:
Describe a writing assignment that was aligned to the Common Core standards. This should be a single assignment that all or most students completed.
Describe how the writing assignment related to the course.
Outline the procedures that were followed when the assignment was made.
Sort Student Artifacts to See the Range – Include the complete data on this process. Where does each piece of writing fall? To accomplish this sorting task you will need to do the following:
Read each artifact and determine if it is far below standard, approaching standard, meeting standard or exceeding standard. Do not score on a curve. Use the standard.
Sort the scored artifacts into four tiers.
Calculate the percentages of artifacts in each tier.
Select a representative case for each tier by placing a circle around the selected name on the chart and placing that artifact on the top of each stack. Each case will represent several of the characteristics from that group of artifacts.
Describe Student Performance (Focus) – What can you celebrate about each artifact (work sample) selected as a representative case?
Make direct connections to the Response to Intervention framework. Special Education students studied Response to Intervention (RTI) in their Law class last year. Many of you were introduced to RTI in your introduction to Special Education course (Dr. Bauer).
Begin with a celebration of what the student has accomplished and only then describe the performance using the standards and indicators to guide description of what is missing.
Describe Learning Needs (Prioritizing Needs, If/Then Chart) – Determine the important learning needs of each standard level in light of the specific writing objective.
In this step we describe the learning needs of each of the 4 representative cases. Identify patterns that become apparent from this analysis and reflect on implications for instruction for this assignment.
Use the Beers’ (2003, p.393) “If → Then” chart to connect (a) knowledge of students, (b) knowledge of content, (c) knowledge of texts, and (d) knowledge of pedagogical strategies to make decisions about the students with whom you are currently working. Pull in earlier data sets (e.g., surveys, interviews, ASW, racial identity, context for learning) and apply the “If → Then” insights you gained from Beers (2003), Tovani (2004) and your other readings to make decisions about your target students.
Explain how you will Differentiate Instruction – how does what you have learned from the analysis of student work influence your choices of instructional strategies to promote student learning. What effective evidence-based teaching strategies can you implement to address the wide array of learning needs in this group? Use each of the If → Then statements that you developed in the last step to describe a different teaching and learning strategy. Include instructional features such as the following:
Multiple and flexible ways of presenting content (how will you teach this content)
Multiple and flexible ways students can express and practice new skill/knowledge
Multiple and flexible ways to engage student affect and student product
Articulate strategies that you can use for all the learners in your classroom.
Identify and integrate the unique Funds of Knowledge (FoK) that students bring to the classroom and how to use those FoK to support learning.
Draw on all that you have learned about yourself and your students throughout the semester thus far. Use all of the data that you collected. Go beyond broad descriptions of the racial, cultural and gender diversity. Describe what your target students can do as well as what they are learning to do. Consider the variety of learners in your class, including individuals and subgroups requiring different strategies.
Make specific APA citations for the multiple (minimum 4) strategies you have selected. Describe in detail why these strategies are a good fit for these learners.