Lesson planning for effective secondary student learning outcomes.

 Secondary education candidates will be able to plan an effective lesson.

During the classes of Methods Block, normally the first semester senior year, the students write multiple lesson plans. Each student selects the best lesson plan in each content area (math, English language arts, science, and social studies, etc.) to submit as their best representation of a Lesson Plan in that content area. The lesson plans are scored/evaluated on information documented in stating the lesson goals, objectives, rationale, standards, materials, classroom setting, student needs, focus, procedures, design of implementation, and closure of the lesson. The Lesson Plan assessment allows our candidates to demonstrate their understanding of:
*Establishing a lesson framework;
*Designing a supportive learning environment;
*Incorporating Instructional strategies; and,
*Implementing Evaluation strategies.
A rubric is used to score each of the componets in the Lesson Plan. A minimum score of 2 or Acceptable with sub scores of a 2 or better (3 - Target) or the teacher candidate must re-do the lesson plan. The purpose of this assessment is to provide opportunities for the candidates to demonstrate their ability to plan, implements, assess, and modify instruction for diverse groups of learners adn to develop and teach a lesson that involves fundamental concepts in the candidate's content area.

90% of candidates during the 2014-2015 academic year will achieve a score of "3" on the Methods Block Lesson Plan. The lesson plan format is in place and ready to use. From the Findings, the lesson plan rubric will continue to be adjusted to give not only a score on the four sections of the lesson plan, but also to provide an overall score of 3, 2, or 1. Teacher candidates will be given the opportunity to redo and resubmit a lesson plan that scores a 1 (Unacceptable).

The Methods Block Lesson Plans will be appropriate format to measure a variety of learning outcomes. The content of the items in this assessment relate directly to the planning, implementation, and assessment of instruction that teachers encounter when teaching.

Using the Findings from 2013-2014, instructors will focus instruction more specifically on the requirements for the quality completion of the four parts of the Lesson Plan: Establishing the Lesson Framework, Designing Supportive Learning Environments, Instructional Strategies, and Evaluation Strategies. In addition, more emphasis will be placed on the instruction for Evaluation Strategies, the lowest performing part of the Lesson Plan. This will be monitored regularly throughout the school year. Additions to the lesson plan have been made to include literacy strategies, differentiated instruction, accomodations/modifications, and English Language Learner strategies to aid the candidates in recognizing diverse school populations.


We anticipate that our increased focus on evaluation strategies, a  weakness now for two years in a row, will have improved this area.

The lesson plan addresses the teacher candidates' ability to develop a variety of lessons that demonstrate their knowledge and understanding of how to select the appropriate teaching and learning activities; ability to plan for equitable assessment strategies to analyzing student learning; and create learning enviroments conducive to learning experiences. There were 136 candidates to submit a lesson plan. The follow is the aggregate data for each component of the Lesson Plan:

• Establishing the Lesson Framework - 0% scored a 1 (Unacceptable); 12.01% scored a 2 (Acceptable); 87.99% scored a 3 (Target)
• Designing Supportive Learning Environments - 1.47% scored a 1 (Unacceptable); 12.75% scored a 2 (Acceptable); 87.78% scored a 3 (Target)
• Instructional Strategies - 0.49% scored a 1 (Unacceptable); 12.99% scored a 2 (Acceptable); 86.52% scored a 3 (Target)
• Evaluation Strategies - 0% scored a 1 (Unacceptable); 15.44% scored a 2 (Acceptable); 84.56% scored a 3 (Target)

86% of the teacher candidates scored a 3 on the Methods Block Lesson Plan. While the 90% criteria was not met, 100% of the teacher candidates scored a 2 or 3. This is Acceptable and Target ratings. Strategies are continuing to be employed in all of the Secondary Methods courses which address the lower-scoring areas of the lesson plan (Designing Supportive Learning Environments)

Certification is required to teach in public schools.

 Secondary education candidates will be able to demonstrate knowledge, skills, and dispositions of effective teaching and learning of secondary students.

All candidates seeking initial certification, advanced teacher certification, or certifications for other school personnel must take two or more of the Texas Examinations of Educator Standards (TExES) with a minimum score of 240 out of 300 or roughly 80% passing rate to be certified to teach in Texas. These examinations directly correspond to the state content competencies that have been identified for the certification desired. These content competencies are aligned with and based on the appropriate state standards and the Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS) statements, which describe the state mandated curriculum for students. Each TExES examination is criterion-referenced and is designed to measure a candidate's level of content knowledge and skills appropriate for educators in the State of Texas. Each test was collaboratively developed by the State Board of Educator Certification (SBEC), National Evaluation Systems, Inc. (NES), an independent corporation specializing in educational measurements, with additional participation by committees of Texas educators. Individual test items developed to measure the state competencies were reviewed and rated by the various committees of Texas educators to ensure appropriateness of content and difficulty, clarity, and accuracy. These committees also ensured that the test items matched the appropriate competencies and were free from potential ethnicity, gender, and regional biases. The committees also helped prepare scoring rubrics for written response items and training materials for those who would score the tests. Separate standard-setting panels were convened to review statistical data about candidate scores from initial pilot studies of the tests during their development. Recommendations were forwarded to the SBEC, which made the final decisions about establishing passing scores. TExES examinations are centrally administered by SBEC and NES at pre-determined sites and on pre-established dates across Texas similar to many of the national achievement tests. This regime provides for a professional, equitable, and secure testing environment for candidates. Alternative testing arrangements are also permitted for those requiring special consideration. Sites are selected after a careful review of security and accessibility potential, and the quality of overall testing conditions. Tests are scored centrally.

The Pedagogy and Professional Responsibilities (PPR) EC-12 exam is taken by all candidates seeking certification. The test framework is divided into four domains.

• Domain I – Designing Instruction and Assessment to Promote Student Learning (approximately 34% of test)
• Domain II – Creating a Positive, Productive Classroom Environment (approximately 13% of test)
• Domain III – Implementing Effective, Responsive Instruction and Assessment (approximately 33% of test)
• Domain IV – Fulfilling Professional Roles and Responsibilities (approximately 20% of the test)

93% of secondary education candidates will pass the Pedagogy and Professional Responsibilities Certification Examination the first time.

While the accountability system for the state examines scores for each completer cohort and provides for students to repeat the examination if they are not successful on the first attempt, the analysis of pass rates which will be presented here represent the pass rates on the first attempt for all PPR exams taken in 2015-2016, through May of 2016 (completers of the program will not be reported until this day).

From the 2013-2014 findings, strategies to increase the percentage of first time exam takers will continue. In addition, those strategies will include more effort to address the lower-scoring areas so as to increase the percentage passing scores of first time exam takers.

Last year the weakness that emerged revolved around assessment.  We anticipate that our increased focus in this area will show improvement.

97% of secondary teacher candidates passed the EC-12 Pedagogy and Professional Responsibilities Certification Examination. There were 150 attempts and 145 passed.

Candidates demonstrate effective teaching

Secondary education candidates will demonstrate elements of effective teaching.

The Teacher Work Sample (TWS), adapted from The Renaissance Partnership for Improving Teacher Quality Project (http://fp.uni.edu/itq), is a performance assessment designed to demonstrate evidence of Sam Houston State University candidates' ability to facilitate learning for all students. This sample illustrates the candidate's ability to plan, implement, modify and assess instruction during their student teaching semester. Prior to the student teaching semester, candidates choose one (12 to 14 week placement) or two (6 to 7 week placements). During the first 6 to 7 weeks of their placement, candidates are required to create and teach a unit as a Teacher Work Sample. After consulting with their mentor teacher about the unit focus, candidates teach a minimum of five lessons from the unit in their mentor's classroom. Additionally, the candidates are evaluated on their unit planning and teaching of unit lessons. They are also required to reflect on their decision-making and teaching practice including their impact on student learning. The Teacher Work Sample (TWS) focuses on seven teaching processes that are crucial for effective/reflective teaching and must be considered when planning for the learning of all students. Each process is defined by a performance standard, specific task, a student prompt and a rubric that identify the desired performance of the candidate related to that process.
As recommended by the Renaissance Group, each candidate's Teacher Work Sample is blindly scored by a minimum of two trained scorers. Each scorer evaluates and assigns a score of three(target), two (acceptable), or one (unacceptable) to each indicator, Additionally an overall score of three, two or one is given to each of the seven processes as well as and an overall three, two or one to the entire Teacher Work Sample. If the first two scorers agree on the overall Teacher Work Sample score, the scoring process is complete. However, if the two scorers do not agree the Teacher Work Sample is scored for a third, possibly fourth time, until agreement is reached. For this reason, the data presented in the following charts represents the number of scorings not the number of Teacher Work Samples scored. Once agreement is reached on the Teacher Work Sample score, the overall scores are sent to the student teachers.

75% of candidates in the 2014-2015 academic year will achieve a score of "3" on the Teacher Work Sample. As recommended by the Renaissance Group, each candidate's Teacher Work Sample is blindly scored by a minimum of two trained scorers. Each scorer evaluates and assigns a score of three(target), two (acceptable), or one (unacceptable) to each indicator, Additionally an overall score of three, two or one is given to each of the seven processes as well as and an overall three, two or one to the entire Teacher Work Sample. If the first two scorers agree on the overall Teacher Work Sample score, the scoring process is complete. However, if the two scorers do not agree the Teacher Work Sample is scored for a third, possibly fourth time, until agreement is reached. For this reason, the data presented in the following charts represents the number of scorings not the number of Teacher Work Samples scored. Once agreement is reached on the Teacher Work Sample score, the overall scores are sent to the student teachers.

Using the desegregation of data report on the Teacher Work Sample, the focus will be to adjust the instruction on each of the seven processes of the TWS, addressing the areas of weakness reflected in the disaggregated data report. This will be assessed regularly throughout the school year.

Two weaknesses emerged last year were and Contextual Factors and Design For Instruction.  We anticipate that our increased focus in these areas will find these areas improved

The reporting data for the TWS provided by the college now designates the percentage of matching scores.  That is, what percentage of test takers received matching scores of 3 on two blind reviews, what percentage received matching scores of 2, etc.  The score of candidates receiving matching 3's was 57.0%.  The score of candidates receiving matching 2's was 38.0%. If we examine scores of matching 2's and matching 3's (acceptable and target), the score was 95%. The disaggregated candidate mean scores are as follows:

• Contextual Factors - 2.48 a decrease from 2.51 in 2012-2013
• Learning Goals - 2.61 no change from 2012-2013
• Assessment Plan - 2.47 a slight increase from 2.46 in 2012-2013
• Design for Instruction - 2.52 a decrease from 2.54 in 2012-2013
• Instructional Decision Making - 2.63 an increase from 2.58 in 2012-2013
• Analysis of Student Learning - 2.50 an increase from 2.44 in 2012-2013
• Reflection and Self Evaluation - 2.55 an increase from 2.47 in 2012-2013

Each semester, the faculty in the Secondary Methods Program, plan and implement new strategies based on assessment data to assist our candidates in successfully completing the Teacher Work Sample.  This is evident in that 96.6% of all candidates met the minimum standard.  Of the test takers, 53.6% received matching scores of 3, while 44.0% received matching scores of 2.

Since 95% of candidates demonstrated mastery on this assessment, the faculty would like to focus on improving modifications for instruction for all students.  Our candidates must be able to demonstrate planning, implementing instruction, assessing instruction and modifying instruction for all learners.  The TWS component which was lowest overall was Design for Instruction;  therefore, this component will be addressed by the Secondary Methods faculty in order to come up with a plan to improve candidates’ scores.