NCATE

Review Report on Association Standards

Summarized Findings

Association for Childhood Education International

 

Name of Institution:       Eastern Michigan University                        Date of Review: Spring 03

                                   

State:    MI                               Location:  __X___ Main Campus                  Review Type:  _____ Initial

                                                                                       _____Alternative Location                                         ___X__ Rejoinder

 

Name of Program Reviewed:                                                                Grades Levels Prepared For: _____                             

                Classification:                                                                                                       Level:    

                ___x__ Elementary Education                                                                           __x___ Baccalaureate

                _____  Combined (specify):                                                                               _____ Post-Baccalaureate, Initial

                                _____ Elementary/Special Education                                               _____ Master's, Initial

                        _____ Elementary/Early Childhood

                                _____ Elementary/ ______________                                            

 

 

Part I: Analysis of the Evidence Provided for Each Standard:

(Comments added for each standard not met or for noteworthy items)

 

General Comment:

The materials presented in the rejoinder did help to clarify what is happening and the rationale behind various decisions.  It is hoped that there will be samples of all three levels of work in the near future.  Totals from the aggregated data (the Michigan proficiency test) indicate that some students must occasionally submit unacceptable work, even if they then rework the assignment.  In order to accurately view all levels of work a few of this level should also be included.  The assessment and performance in regard to dispositions is still extremely weak.

 

Standard 1: Development, Learning and Motivation:                                                p Met    xNot Met

            Comments:  This standard is close to being met, but it appears to lack sufficient data indicating dispositions to be accepted.

 

Standard 2a: Central Concept, Tools of Inquiry, and Structures of Content:            x Met   p Not Met            Comments:

 

Standard 2b: English Language Arts:                                                            x Met   p Not Met Comments:

Standard 2c: Science                                                                                       x Met   p Not Met

           

Standard 2d: Mathematics:                                                                                         x Met   p Not Met            Comments:      This standard is met, but is still a weak area.  More emphasis on candidates evaluating the student learning and understanding the relationship of math to the real world would improve this area and increase compliance with the NCTM standards as well.

                                                                                                                         

 

 

Standard 2e: Social Studies:                                                                                      p Met    xNot Met Comments:

The planned changes and rejoinder comments should bring this standard into focus.  The integration of social studies into so many other teacher preparation courses should make this a successful standard.  At present it is still unclear.

 

Standard 2f: The Arts:                                                                                                 x Met   p Not Met

            Comments:

 

Standard 2g: Health Education:                                                                              x Met   p Not Met

            Comments:

 

Standard 2h: Physical Education:                                                                           x Met   p Not Met            Comments: 

 

Standard 2i: Connections Across the Curriculum:                                                  x Met   p Not Met            Comments:

Standard 3a: Integrating and Applying Knowledge for Instruction:                     x Met   p Not Met            Comments:

 

Standard 3b: Adaptation to Diverse Students:                                                         x Met   p Not Met            Comments:

 

Standard 3c: Development of Critical Thinking, Problem Solving, and               x Met   p Not Met

                        Performance Skills:                                                                                       

Comments:

 

Standard 3d: Active Engagement in Learning:                                                        x Met    p Not Met            Comments:

 

Standard 3e: Communication to Foster Collaboration:                                          x Met    p Not Met            Comments: 

 

Standard 4: Assessment for Instruction:                                                                  x Met   p Not Met            Comments:

 

Standard 5a: Practices and Behaviors of Developing Career  Teachers:               x Met   p Not Met            Comments:

Evidence provided is minimal.

 

Standard 5b: Reflection and Evaluation:                                                                 x Met    p Not Met            Comments:

 

Standard 5c: Collaboration with Families:                                                            x Met    p Not Met            Comments:

 

Standard 5d: Collaboration with Colleagues and the Community:                        p Met      x Not Met            Comments: This standard is still not clearly met.

 

Part II:  Overall Comments

 

Program Strengths:

The integration of the entire constituent group in the decision making process should make your changes more lasting, but this seems to have slightly delayed your implementation and reporting of the outcomes based program.

 

Program Concerns/Weaknesses:

Most all evidence still focuses on peer teaching and course assignments.  This does not give us evidence that candidates can construct and implement learning opportunities for students.

Limited aggregated data presented.

Evidence is not drawn from samples representing a complete range of the candidates’ performances.

 

General Comments:

Dispositions determined by one item on an end of program assessment seem very unreliable.   This may also be reflected in the limited definition of “reflection” that has been presented.  Reflection is not merely for use with candidate/student interactions.

 

Summary of Program Quality:

This report indicates that candidates are involved in many excellent activities in university classes.  It is still difficult to identify the types of field experiences the candidates actually have and what is expected from them during those field experiences.

 

Because this program is a work in progress and changes to be made have been outlined in process if not product, it is difficult to give full approval to the program. 

 

Part III: Recommendation for Site Visit

Recommendations for On-Site Team:

Be sure to examine the plan that has been presented here and to determine if data have been collected that show a variety of levels of candidate performance as well as knowledge, skills and dispositions. 

 

Part IV:  ACEI's  Decision

 

 

            p Program Nationally Recognized                                   Program Not Nationally Recognized  

 

            x Program Nationally Recognized, Conditionally*

 

* Represents the judgment of the ACEI Reviewers that currently available assessment results, coupled with plans for gathering additional information about candidate performances, constitutes a strong case for “National Recognition.”  In essence, the reviewers have determined that the program is expected to develop full capacity for demonstrating candidate proficiencies across the Elementary Education Standards, and to achieve unqualified “National Recognition” within a two-year period from the date of the review.  Program faculty are expected to provide a Supplemental Program Report within that period, as the basis for confirming or denying “National Recognition.”