Standard 1

Standard 2

Standard 3

Standard 4

Standard 5

Standard 6

Standard 7

Standard 8

Standard 1 Supporting Artifacts

Narrative

Standard 1 - Candidate Knowledge, Skills, and Dispositions

Candidates preparing to work in schools as teachers or other professional school personnel know and demonstrate the content, pedagogical, and professional knowledge, skills, and dispositions necessary to help all students learn. Assessments indicate that candidates meet professional, state, and institutional standards.

As stated in our conceptual framework, the unit prepares exemplary, reflective professionals to serve a diverse, global community. The unit has a long history of preparing candidates at both initial and advanced levels with exemplary content knowledge in their major fields. Grounded in national and state standards, our conceptual framework delineates the proficiencies we expect our candidates to develop. These proficiencies include content knowledge, pedagogical content knowledge, professional and pedagogical knowledge, skills, and disposition, and the ability to engage in professional practice that will result in positive effects for all students. 

Standard 1.1 Content Knowledge for Teacher Candidates

Initial level

The unit expects its candidates both at the initial and advanced levels to have a thorough grounding in the content knowledge of their fields of professional practice consistent with the standards that govern those fields. Admission to the University of Georgia is competitive and selective. The Office of Undergraduate Admissions makes admittance decisions for first-year candidates. First-year candidates entering the university in fall 2005 had an average high school GPA of 3.74; the average combined SAT (verbal and math) scores was 1242; the average ACT was 27.

General Core Curriculum. In programs for the initial preparation of teachers, content knowledge is developed through the university core curriculum requirements and course work in subject matter components or teaching majors. To qualify for graduation, all candidates must complete 60 semester credit hours in general education course work including English composition, speech communication, mathematics, biological and physical sciences, fine arts, literature, philosophy, history and culture of the United States, cultures other than the United States, political science or economics, sociology or anthropology and courses appropriate for entry into the major. 

All students graduating from the university must satisfy the following requirements:  (1) Regent’s Essay and Writing skills courses; (2) demonstration of oral communication and basic computer skills appropriate for a graduate in the major; (3) cultural diversity; (4) environmental literacy; (5) Georgia and United States history; (5) Georgia and United States constitution.

Admission to Programs. As reflected in Table 1.1, nine out of sixteen of the teacher education degree programs in the unit are high demand majors that require separate admissions applications and require minimum GPAs ranging from 2.5 to 2.75; the remaining programs require a 2.5 GPA for admission into the degree program and exemption from or a passing score on Praxis I. Praxis I is used to assess the basic content knowledge of candidates in reading, writing, and mathematics for admission to the teacher education programs. To qualify for admission to the program, candidates must achieve an overall composite score of 526 and passing scores in all parts of the Praxis I: 322 in reading, 320 in writing, and 314 in mathematics. We allow candidates the opportunity to demonstrate performance relative to basic content knowledge in reading, writing, and mathematics through alternative means by having Praxis I equivalents on the following standardized tests: SAT minimum verbal 480 and Math 520; ACT minimum verbal 21 and Math 22; GRE minimum verbal 490 and quantitative 540. Effective spring 2003, the SAT requirement was changed to a minimum composite score of 100. Due to the extremely high SAT scores of candidates admitted to the university, with few exceptions the unit’s candidates satisfy Praxis I through SAT equivalents. 

Programs in the arts (art education, dance education, and music education) require a portfolio review or audition for admission to the major. Table 1.1 shows the content areas the restricted degree programs use to evaluate and select candidates for the restricted majors. All programs require candidates to maintain a minimum 2.5 GPA in order to student teach.

Table 1.1 Minimum GPA and Content Area Selection Criteria for Restricted Majors

Degree Program	Minimum GPA	Content Area GPAs used as Selection Criteria
Art Education	2.5	Completion of two foundation courses (ARST 1050 and ARST 1060) or (ARST 1050 and ARST 1080) Portfolio review
Early Childhood	2.75	English 1101 and 1102 2 lower division Mathematics Science with a lab Science without a lab
English Education	2.6	2 2000-level English classes EFND 2030 EPSY 2020
Foreign Language Education	2.6 and 3.0 in Area F	EFND 2030 EPSY2030 2 2000 level foreign languages 3000 level foreign language Speech Communication class
Health and Physical Education	2.5	Health and Wellness class EPSY 2030 EFND2030
Middle School Education	2.75	ENGL 1101 and 1102 1 lower division math 2 content specialization courses EFND 2030 EPSY 2020 look at program sheet for remaining
Music Education	2.5	Entrance audition for first year students Passing subsequent music performance skills exam in the first and second years Recommendations of Music Education faculty through a formal interview at the end of the second year
Social Studies Education	2.5	7 lower division social science classes EFND2030 EPSY2020 SPED 2000
Special Education	2.7	ENGL 1101 and 1102 2 lower division mathematics courses Science with lab Science without lab 4 lower division social science classes

While Table 1.1 shows minimum GPA to be admitted to these programs, often initial candidates in these restricted majors have GPAs that are higher. Successful candidates admitted to the early childhood education, social studies, education, and several other of the unit’s programs typically have GPAs well above 3.0.

In 2000 each university major program developed an assessment system to evaluate the extent to which its candidates meet the student outcomes of the major. These assessment plans were reviewed at both the university and unit level and programs were provided with feedback for improvement. Assessment systems continue to be refined as programs make improvements in their curricula and assessment procedures. Increasingly, assessment measures at the unit level have been incorporated into program level assessment systems to assist the unit aggregate and interpret data across all educator preparation programs. These assessment systems use multiple measures and a variety of assessments to determine candidates’ mastery of content needed for successful professional practice. Undergraduate programs are required to submit brief major assessment reports annually that detail the expected student outcomes, assessment measures, summary and interpretation of data collected, and improvements made to the programs as a result of the assessment system. Comprehensive assessment reports are submitted to the university every three years. Graduate programs developed assessment systems and follow a similar evaluation process with assessment reports due and evaluated every three years. The assessment systems for both initial and advanced candidates articulate the assessments specific to the unit’s programs.

Academic Major Coursework. All candidates are required to maintain a 2.5 grade point average by their programs; the unit has a policy requiring all candidates to earn the grade of “C” or better in their major coursework. Candidates in secondary education programs, complete the equivalent of a major in their content area. Using national and state standards as the basis for content knowledge, all programs give candidates multiple opportunities to demonstrate their content knowledge through the evaluation of course assignments such as philosophy statements, reflective journals, research papers, curriculum planning projects and electronic portfolios.

Fieldwork and Student Teaching. Through well-supervised field placements and clinical experiences, the faculty is able to assure itself that its teaching candidates do not simply have content knowledge, but can translate that knowledge to learners in age-appropriate ways. Evidence of mastery of content knowledge comes from multiple sources, such as self evaluation (i.e., reflective journals, portfolios), and fieldwork evaluations from mentor teachers and university supervisors. Within these field experiences, university supervisors and mentor teachers evaluate candidates’ content knowledge. Since programs use the conceptual framework which includes the GSTEP framework to guide their assessment systems, they evaluate Principle I Content and Curriculum: Professionals demonstrate a strong knowledge of content areas appropriate for their certification levels. For example, in agricultural education candidates scored an average of 4.50 on this principle on a 5 point scale indicating a high level of content knowledge across the candidates. In social studies education in spring 2005, 100% of the 24 BSED candidates and 96% of the 15 MED candidates met or exceeded GSTEP Principle I and the NCSS content standards as judged by both university supervisors and mentor teachers. Since fall 2004, many of the programs have implemented the use of LiveText to facilitate the alignment of state standards with evaluation tools by programs, and candidates use of standards-based, content rich curriculum plans. LiveText enables program faculty to track assessment data across candidates within the program.

Program Completion. Successful exit from the program depends on completion of all program, course, and field experience requirements leading to degree completion and a recommendation for initial teaching certification in the candidates’ major. Many programs require candidates to complete capstone courses, as well as submit portfolios for evaluation. The unit’s candidates are not required to take Praxis II to complete their programs, but in order to be recommended for certification in the state of Georgia, all candidates must pass the appropriate Praxis II, Subject Assessments. In AY2004, 98% of the college's candidates passed this demonstration of content mastery in 2004. Candidate Praxis II scores are tracked by the unit’s certification officer and within the unit’s assessment system.

As part of the exit process, the unit administers a survey to all teacher education candidates to determine their perceptions of their knowledge, skills, and dispositions upon leaving the unit. In addition, the survey asks candidates to respond to questions regarding faculty quality and unit capacity. In fall 2004, 98% of the 87 respondents indicated they were knowledgeable of the subject specific content in their teaching field. In spring 2005, 98% of the 338 candidates reported they were knowledgeable of their subject specific content. The increased response rate of the spring survey (96%) was due to improved survey administration by the unit. In both fall and spring 2004-05, 99% of the candidates reported that they were able to explain important principles and concepts in their fields. One hundred percent of the 2004 candidates and 97% of the spring 2005 candidates believed they were prepared to develop units and lessons that reflect state and national standards. 

The quality of our graduates is further attested to by the guarantee of quality adopted by the Board of Regents of the University System in 1998.  The guarantee promises that teacher candidates who graduate from a system school: (1) know content; (2) know how to teach; (3) know technology; and (4) know how to help all students learn. These four elements are measured by seven performance outcomes that all teacher candidates prepared at a system school must meet:

1. Demonstrate sufficient depth in all content fields included on the teacher certificate to bring students from diverse groups to high levels of learning.
2. Be able to set high student-learning standards for all students in the school classroom and organize curriculum, instruction, and assessment around the standards.
3. Be able to customize instruction for individual students or groups of students in the school classroom that reflect students’ own experiences. Learning styles, interests, cultures and special needs.
4. Be proficient in using data on student learning and achievement in the school classroom to set benchmarks and to monitor student progress toward continuous improvement.
5. Demonstrate the effective use of telecommunication and information technologies in the school classroom as tools for learning.
6. Demonstrate effective management of school classrooms.
7. Show evidence of accomplishment in the school classroom in brining P-12 students from diverse groups to high levels of learning and achievement.

Within the first two years after a teacher candidate’s graduation from unit, school districts that determine that the performance of a teacher who is teaching in-field is less than effective have the right to request that the university system “take back” the teacher. If taken back, the teacher receives additional preparation at no cost to the teacher or school district. During the last 7 years that the guarantee has been in effect, the unit has taken back and successfully remediated only one individual.

Board Of Regents Reports

Advanced Level

Applicants to all advanced programs must submit standardized test scores as part of their application materials to assess their content knowledge upon entry to the programs; scores must be less than 5 years old. The Graduate School provides flexibility to programs to set minimum scores for standardized admissions examinations. Typically to qualify for admission to advanced programs for continuing teachers, candidates must have a minimum combined score of 850 (M.Ed.) and 900 (Ed.S.) To qualify for admission to the Ed.D. or Ph.D. programs in the unit, candidates must typically have combined GRE scores of 950 and 1000 respectively. Programs may set their qualifying scores slightly higher than this if they choose. For example, potential candidates applying to the social studies education program must have a combined GRE score that totals at least 1100.

To provide an example of the quality of advanced candidates at admission, summary scores from several programs are provided here. The mean MAT scores of candidates in the M.Ed. program in early childhood and elementary education from fall 2001 through fall 2005 ranged from 395 to 447; for Ed.S. candidates who submitted MAT scores, the range was 412.50 to 449 (1 candidate). The mean GRE scores for M.Ed. candidates from fall 2001 through fall 2005 for this same program ranged from 403.33 to 502 on the verbal subtest and from 422 to 581.54 on the quantitative subtest. In all but one semester, the mean total score was greater than 900. For Ed.S. candidates, the range of mean scores on the verbal subtest was from 430 (1 candidate) to 530, and the range on the quantitative subtest was from 360 (1 candidate) to 605. For 4 of the 5 semesters for which Ed.S. candidates submitted GRE scores, the mean total score was greater than 950.

In addition to standardized test scores as indicated above, programs evaluate candidates’ undergraduate grade point averages to ensure content knowledge as part of the admissions process. For example, in fall 2004, the average undergraduate GPA of M.Ed. candidates in the advanced early childhood education and elementary education programs was 3.34; in spring 2005 the average undergraduate GPA was 3.64. In fall 2004, for this same program, the average undergraduate GPA for Ed.S. candidates was 3.41. For social studies advanced M.Ed. candidates in fall 2004, the average undergraduate GPA was 3.75. For middle school advanced M.Ed. candidates, the program assessed the two subject area specializations to determine the average GPA (language arts/reading, mathematics, science, social studies). The average GPA for these candidates ranged between 3.67 and 3.93 for these specializations. In mathematics education, the average number of mathematics content courses taken by masters candidates in spring 2005 was 7.4 with an average GPA for these courses of 3.51. The most recent data reported for Ed.S. candidates in mathematics education was from summer 2004 where the average number of mathematics content courses was 6 with an average GPA of 3.66.

In addition to these measures, to qualify for advanced programs, candidates submit letters of recommendation from professionals knowledgeable about their content knowledge, skills, and dispositions. These letters require an evaluation of the extent to which the candidates would be expected to succeed in the unit’s advanced programs. To qualify for doctoral programs in the unit, candidates typically submit a letter of intent, a curriculum vitae, a writing sample, scores on the GRE, transcripts from all undergraduate and graduate coursework, and reference letters as part of the admission process. Graduate faculty in the programs review all applicant admissions files to make final decisions. While programs differ slightly in the way the faculty administer the admissions process, all programs require substantial documentation in the form of standardized test scores, recommendation letters, writing samples, and in many cases, interviews. 

Within the masters, specialist, and doctoral programs for the continuing preparation of teachers, content knowledge is developed through core professional courses determined by each program, typically in educational research, curriculum, and social foundations of education. All programs have cultural diversity requirements for advanced candidates to increase their knowledge and skills in working with diverse populations. These courses provide a strong foundation in research methodology, research in the content area, and content specific to the field of study within the programs.

While programs differ in their assessment systems, all advanced programs for continuing teachers have either exit examinations or applied projects as culminating evaluations to determine the extent they meet student outcomes for the specific content and professional knowledge, skills, and dispositions in their fields (see specific program graduate assessment reports). At the masters and specialist levels, exit examinations and/or applied projects are typically used to assess candidates’ knowledge, skills, and dispositions necessary to help all students learn. At the doctoral level, all candidates are required to pass written and oral comprehensive examinations, write and defend a dissertation prospectus or proposal, and pass a written and oral defense of a research-based dissertation. Each candidate at the doctoral level has a faculty advisory committee to mentor the candidate and to provide continuous guidance and evaluation of progress.

The high quality of the unit’s graduate preparation has been documented in the ratings of the U.S. News and World Report. In the 2005 edition, four of the unit’s professional education programs were ranked among the top ten programs in the nation (elementary education, secondary education, counseling and human development, and vocational education) with programs in special education, educational psychology, and higher education administration ranked among the top 20. Additionally, the college is ranked 4th among education colleges in the South; 18th among public universities in the nation; and 27th overall nationally.

Standard 1.2 Content Knowledge for Other Professional School Personnel

Graduate study at the University of Georgia is known for its rigor and high standards. Admission is competitive. Gifted education, educational administration, school counseling, school library media, speech language pathology, and other professional preparation programs are offered exclusively at the graduate level to assure strong content preparation. Beginning with strong candidates, the programs that prepare professionals for educational positions outside the traditional classroom setting require rigorous coursework that roots their candidates firmly in the concepts and modes of inquiry central to their field. These programs ensure that candidates know and demonstrate a thorough understanding of the central concepts and principles of their fields as well as research methodologies. Program curricula, instruction, and assessments are aligned with the standards of the specialty professional organizations and many of the unit’s programs have consistently maintained national accreditation by these organizations (APA, CACREP, ASHA, ELCC). In the nature of graduate study, with its close, collaborative work between candidates and faculty, candidate outcomes in these programs are constantly monitored and assessed.

Program Admission. Admission into programs preparing other school personnel requires a bachelor’s degree from an accredited educational institution. The following elements are used to evaluate a candidate’s application: grade point average, GRE scores, recommendation letters, and personal statements. Several programs require minimum GPA and GRE scores. For example, admission to the Ph.D. program in school psychology requires an undergraduate grade point average of 3.0 or above, a graduate grade point average of 3.5 or above and a combined score of 1000 on the Verbal and Quantitative portions of the Graduate Record Examination. The master’s program in school library media specialist program requires a minimum GRE score of 800 and a 2.6 undergraduate GPA; the educational specialist program requires a minimum GRE score of 1000 and the following minimum GPAs: a 3.3 graduate GPA and a 2.6 undergraduate GPA. 

Academic Coursework.All programs preparing other school personnel ensure that candidates learn and demonstrate an understanding of the central concepts, tools of inquiry and structures of their field. Candidates in advanced professional programs demonstrate their knowledge through course assignments requiring inquiry, research, critical analysis and synthesis. Candidates across all these programs must maintain a GPA of 3.0.  Graduate coordinators monitor these data regularly to make sure candidates maintain that average or they must drop from the program. 

Program Completion.Candidates in other school personnel programs are eligible to exit the program once all coursework, field placements and internships have been successfully completed. Like teacher candidates, passing the appropriate PRAXIS II examination is required in order to be recommended by the unit for certification in service fields in the State of Georgia. Candidates in other school personnel programs have Praxis II pass-rates of between 98 and 100%. In addition candidates in doctoral programs are required to complete and defend a dissertation. 

Candidates successfully completing the unit’s advanced certification programs have maintained a 3.0 GPA and have completed all necessary program level program requirements and assessments. For example, in 2004-05 in the educational administration program, candidates graduating with an M.Ed. had an average GPA of 3.96 and of those taking the Praxis II, 100% passed it.  Ed.S. candidates graduating from this program had an average GPA of 3.97. All M.Ed. candidates successfully passed the required practicum, comprehensive examination, and portfolio assessment measures for the educational administration program.

Standard 1.3 Pedagogical Content Knowledge for Teacher Candidates

Initial Level

Pedagogical content knowledge comprises that specialized knowledge of the metaphors, examples, analogies, drills, and explanations that exemplary professionals employ to translate or represent their content knowledge to learners. It rests fundamentally on thorough content knowledge; hence the unit’s strong emphasis on full grounding in subject matter. But the skilled turn from content knowledge to pedagogical content knowledge is the key to transforming a knower into a teacher. Pedagogical knowledge is the domain of teacher education curriculum and instruction. Importantly, there can logically be no unit-wide stipulation of the pedagogical content knowledge of all the unit's candidates. By definition, pedagogical content knowledge differs by subject matter; it differs by the developmental levels of learners; and it differs by the practitioner's understanding of the diverse cultures of the learners and the modes of meaning-making and stocks of cultural experience nurtured within those cultures.

In the unit’s programs for the initial preparation of teachers, pedagogical content knowledge is developed through core courses specific to each teaching major (e.g. social studies curriculum and teaching methods, agricultural education curriculum planning and teaching procedures). Through these courses and their concurrent field experiences, candidates develop the ability to use multiple explanations and instructional strategies to make subject matter meaningful to students. Courses and field experiences also develop candidates’ ability to integrate technology into teaching and learning. To maximize this domain of pedagogical content knowledge, the programs within the unit require sequences of courses that vary depending upon the subject matter and grade level. Elementary Education, divided into programs in Early Childhood Education and Middle School Education, have an extensive sequence that introduces the pedagogical content knowledge essential to the multiple subject matter of elementary school classrooms, along with other courses that modify and integrate that knowledge. Secondary education programs and such K-12 programs as music education or art education build on subject matter majors with course sequences that move candidates from content knowledge to pedagogical content knowledge and introduce professional pedagogical skills and knowledge. Special areas such as career and technical education have special subject matter requirements as a foundation to the specialized pedagogical content knowledge and skills required for their areas.

Mastery of coursework in various programs is insufficient, however. Exemplary professionals of any craft achieve that status only through carefully supervised practice and assessment. All teacher preparation programs in the unit provide multiple opportunities, through peer teaching settings, tutoring, small group instruction, and whole class experience, for practice under the professional supervision of mentor teachers and university faculty. Moreover, the candidates practice their pedagogical content knowledge with a diversity of learners - urban and rural, minority and majority, poor and prosperous, differentially-abled and differentially gifted. Pedagogical content knowledge in these field experiences is assessed by both university supervisors and mentor teachers to assure quality professional practice.

At many points within the teacher education program, from gaining content knowledge through transforming that knowledge into pedagogical content knowledge to supervised practice, candidates observe master university faculty reflecting on ideas and teaching, receive instruction on the multiple contexts for professional reflection, and are guided in a variety of ways to reflect upon their own knowledge and their own practice. Pedagogical content knowledge is assessed during the program through the pre-internship in which candidates demonstrate their ability to plan, deliver, and assess a standards-based unit of instruction, analyze student learning, and reflect on the results of their instruction for professional development and future practice. For example, candidates in the health and physical education program in the 2002-03 and 2003-04 academic years performed at the acceptable or target levels 92% and 86% of the time, respectively in the design of unit and daily lesson plans. In the field experience component of many programs, candidates learn to engage in formal, written reflections on the intent of their lessons, the actual event, its outcomes, and what they would do differently; in some programs, they are encouraged to link their daily experiences with the ethical and social issues explored in Foundations of Education classes. Most programs require electronic or paper portfolios, all of which are intended to promote reflection on intentions, means, ends, and contexts. While assessment of pedagogical content knowledge may vary slightly from program to program, it is typically assessed through evaluation of candidates in field experiences, evaluation of lesson and unit planning and implementation, through the completion of a portfolio, an exit survey self-assessment, and more recently, follow up studies of alumni and employers.  

Exit surveys administered to teacher candidates in fall 2004 (N=87) and spring 2005 (n=338) indicated that candidates across all programs in the unit agreed or strongly agreed they were prepared to develop units and lessons that reflect state and national standards (100% in 2004; 97% in 2005); were able to use a variety of assessment techniques (98% in 2004; 96% in 2005); were able to use assessment results to plan their instruction (93% in 2004; 91% in 2005); were prepared to use teaching methods appropriate to the specific curriculum topic (100% in 2004; 99% in 2005); and were able to effectively integrate technology in their teaching (95% in 2004; 94% in 2005). 

Advanced Level

In the unit’s programs for the continuing preparation of teachers, pedagogical content knowledge is developed through the specialty studies for each program that targets in-depth understanding of the subject matter in the degree specialty area (e.g. middle school, early childhood, special education, etc.). Pedagogical content knowledge of candidates in the unit’s programs is assessed through specific courses that address advanced levels of knowledge and skill in both instruction and assessment. Performance is judged on multiple course-based assessments and reflected in the grade point average at program exit. A 3.0 grade point average for courses listed on the program of study is required for any degree at the university. Candidates in the unit’s programs typically exceed this minimum expectation. At the current time, surveys for advanced teacher candidates are not conducted at the unit level, but exit surveys and alumni surveys are conducted in several departments as part of the program’s graduate assessment system. For example, a spring 2005 on-line alumni survey of candidates in the children’s literature, English education, reading education, and teaching of additional languages programs indicated a high satisfaction with these programs. When asked “How well did your UGA program serve your career needs?” over 85% responded with either “very good” or “superior.” Alumni responding to this survey reported 35 recent honors, awards, publications, offices, or other distinctions including teacher of the year, star teacher, National Board Certified Teacher, and many different leadership positions at local, state, and national levels.  

Standard 1.4 Professional and Pedagogical Knowledge and Skills for Teacher Candidates

Initial Level

The unit distinguishes between pedagogical content knowledge, defined above, and professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills. The former refers to the modes of representing content knowledge for learners; professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills refers to the myriad strategies, activities, and contingencies that exemplary professionals employ daily in the process of representing content knowledge. It includes modes of classroom orchestration, patterns of interpersonal behavior, skillful and appropriate deployment of educational technologies, habits of planning and contingent realization of plans, and mobilizing other pedagogical and professional skills to achieve learning for all children. It also includes the ability to carry out those multiple tasks while bearing in mind issues of contexts, diversities of learners, ethical and moral imperatives, and other overlapping lenses that create the constant indeterminacy of the teaching moment. For example, in EFND 2030 Social Foundations of Education, a requirement of all teacher preparation programs, candidates encounter conflicting ideas regarding the means and ends of schooling, examine the contradictions between ideals of equity and democracy and the workings of class, race and power in actual schools, and explore the implications of the history and sociology of education in relationship with their own aspirations as teachers. This course is aligned with the Council for Social Foundations (CSFE) national standards and assessed by faculty in that program to ensure high quality professional knowledge and skills for teacher candidates. In addition, EPSY 2020 Learning and Development in Education and SPED 2000 Survey of Special Education, both required courses, provided substantial grounding in the professional knowledge of human teaching and learning for all candidates including those with exceptionalities. Candidates must obtain a grade of C or better in these required courses.

In their statements of candidate outcomes regarding professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills, teacher education programs in the unit use one form or another of the language of "mastery of pedagogy" for specific subject matter in specific contexts. They stress planning and using instructional strategies, activities, and materials geared to learners' development, and expect candidates to know and apply a variety of strategies. They expect candidates to know and be able to apply learning theories and the principles of the growth and development of learners. Most programs stress self-monitoring and adjustment in the midst of the teaching moment. Candidates are expected to reflectively apply their understandings of the mediating effect of cultural and social differences on learning in order to maximize learning.

Programs employ multiple means to assess candidates' stock of professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills. All put an emphasis on evaluation of lesson and unit plans. Many speak in one way or another of pre- and post-lesson self-assessments. Program faculty evaluate candidates' efforts to assess and respond to particular teaching contexts, such as culturally or racially diverse classrooms or communities. The unit’s insistence upon reflective professionals is echoed throughout the programs in assessment modalities that include various forms of candidate reflection on the adequacy and appropriateness of applying particular pedagogical skills and knowledge in concrete contexts. Above all, programs expect to most accurately assess these knowledges and skills in field experiences, where supervisors, with candidates, can accurately gauge the exact application of the knowledge and skill, and judge the impact on learning and classroom climate.

Advanced Level

In the unit’s programs for the continuing preparation of teachers, professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills are developed through the specialty studies for each program that specifically target advanced knowledge and skills in the planning, delivery, and assessment of meaningful learning experiences for all students. Advanced professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills are also developed through clinical experiences required for the program including practica and or internships, exit examinations, and capstone experiences unique to each program. Each advanced program for continuing teachers has an assessment system with decision points at entry, during course work, exiting the program, and in the follow up of its alumni. Candidates’ skills in these programs are assessed through multiple course-based assessments reflected in the grade point average at program exit. A 3.0 GPA for the courses listed on the program of study is required for any degree or certification. 

Professional and pedagogical knowledge for advanced teacher candidates is assessed through successful passing of exit portfolios and comprehensive examinations. For example, between fall 2001 and fall 2004, 24 (100%) of the advanced candidates in the middle school masters program passed the program’s exit examination on the first attempt. In the social studies education program, between fall 2002 and fall 2004, 10 (100%) advanced candidates passed the program’s exit examination on the first attempt. In the early childhood and elementary education program 66 advanced teacher candidates at the masters level took the program’s exit examination between fall 2001 and fall 2004. Of those 58 or 88% passed the examination on the first attempt; 8 (12%) passed on the second attempt. In this same program between fall 2001 and fall 2003, 7 Ed.S. took the exit examination and 6 passed on the first attempt, the other passed on the second attempt.

Advanced teacher candidates’ professional knowledge and skills are also demonstrated in special honors and awards as well as professional presentations at state, regional, and national conferences as well as their publications. Faculty and advanced candidates work collaboratively on research projects that lead to presentations and publications. For example, in the 2005 graduate assessment report, the science education program summarized the accomplishments of its recent graduates with 17 first-authored research publications and presentations and 4 grants.

In addition, course evaluations by graduate candidates indicate a high degree of student satisfaction with the course content and level of instruction they receive in the unit. Key indicators are candidates’ rating of the overall value of each course and their rating of the teaching ability of instructors. Programs that work with advanced teacher candidates average above 4.0 on a 5-point scale. For example, in the Department of Language and Literacy Education which houses the English, foreign language education, children’s literature, and TESOL programs, the aggregate ratings were 4.22 (value of course) and 4.30 (teaching ability) in spring 2004.

Alignment of EPSY 2020 Coverage with Professional Standards

Standard 1.5 Professional Knowledge and Skills for Other School Professionals

All programs in the unit that prepare other school personnel – educational administration, school counseling, school library media, school psychology, speech language pathology- are aligned with the unit’s conceptual framework as well as the state and national standards of the appropriate national professional association. Speech language pathology maintains ASHA accreditation; school psychology is accredited by APA; school counseling by CACREP; and school library media by AECT (submitted to ALA in September 2005). Each of these programs has consistently been judged by these associations to meet national standards. 

All advanced programs that prepare other school personnel have assessment systems and a variety of assessments that provide formative and summative evaluation data for the candidates and for program improvement. All are based on current theories that inform their fields and include extensive field-based practicum experiences. Through course work and clinical practice, candidates in these programs have an in-depth knowledge of their fields as delineated by the standards of their fields. They know their students, families, and communities, use current research to inform their practice, collect and analyze data related to their work, reflect on their practice and use research and technology to support and improve student learning. Professional knowledge and skills for other school personnel are demonstrated by the maintenance of at least a 3.0 GPA, successful completion of field and clinical experiences, rigorous research training in quantitative and qualitative methods, successful completion of comprehensive examinations as well as masters theses and doctoral dissertations. Throughout the programs for other school personnel, faculty and clinicians work closely with candidates as they develop their professional skills. For example, in the speech language pathology program, candidates receive feedback from instructors regarding their basic knowledge of the subject matter, as well as the content and writing style relative to any written papers or design of research projects. Relative to the clinical component of the program, candidates receive formal assessments from their clinical supervisors concerning the content and mechanics of their formal reports, their interpretation of test results, as well as feedback regarding the manner in which they conduct their clinical practicum sessions at the end of each session. Regular and systematic formative and summative assessment is a hallmark of these programs.

Candidates’ professional knowledge and skills are also demonstrated in special honors and awards as well as professional presentations at state, regional, and national conferences as well as their publications. Faculty and advanced candidates work collaboratively on research projects that lead to presentations and publications. For example, in the Department of Educational Psychology and Instructional Technology, the 2005 graduate assessment report listed 50 conference presentations and 34 publications that resulted from faculty-candidate research studies. This department reported numerous student awards. 

Standard 1.6 Dispositions for All Candidates

Professionals inevitably have skills, but one of the attributes that sets them apart from other skilled workers is dispositional. Professionals have habits of mind and habits of the heart - dispositions, attitudes, value orientations, and habitual ways of being that inform the application of their skills and that condition their relationships with one another and all with whom they come into professional contact. The faculty of the unit values and seeks to nurture the professional dispositions of exemplary, reflective professionals. It considers the following as the core dispositions of such professionals:

1. Understand and use subject-specific content and pedagogical content knowledge (how to teach their subjects) that is appropriate for diverse learners they teach;
2. Appreciate disciplinary knowledge, including disciplinary structures and ways of thinking;
3. Stay current in their subject areas as engaged learners and/or performers in their fields;
4. Interpret and construct school curriculum that reflects state and national content area standards;
5. Believe that all children can learn at high levels and hold high expectations for all;
6. Sensitive, alert, and responsive to all aspects of a child’s well-being;
7. Informed about and adapt their work based on students’ stages of development, multiple intelligences, learning styles, and areas of exceptionality;
8. Establish respectful and productive relationships with families and seek to develop cooperative partnerships in support of student learning and well-being;
9. Create a learning community in which students assume responsibility, participate in decision-making, and work both collaboratively and independently;
10. Organize, allocate, and manage time, space, activities, technology and other resources to provide active and equitable engagement of diverse students in productive tasks;
11. Recognize the value of and use knowledge about human motivation and behavior to develop strategies for organizing and supporting student learning;
12. Sensitive to and use knowledge of students’ unique cultures, experiences, and communities to sustain a culturally responsive classroom;
13. Involve learners in self-assessment, helping them become aware of their strengths and needs and encouraging them to set personal goals for learning;
14. Develop and use valid, equitable grading procedures based on student learning;
15. Use assessment data to communicate student progress knowledgeably and responsibly to students, parents, and other school personnel;
16. Are committed to using assessment to identify student strengths and needs and promote student growth;
17. Understand and use a variety of instructional strategies appropriately to maintain student engagement and support the learning of all students;
18. Monitor and adjust strategies in response to learner feedback;
19. Vary roles in the instructional process (e.g. instructor, facilitator, coach, audience) in relation to the content and purposes of instruction and the needs of students;
20. Use appropriate resources, materials, and technology to enhance instruction for diverse learners;
21. Value and engage in planning as a collegial activity;
22. Continued examination and extension of their knowledge of the history, ethics, politics, organization, and practices of education;
23. Understand and implement laws related to rights and responsibilities of students, educators, and families;
24. Follow established codes of professional conduct, including school and district policies;
25. Systematically reflect on teaching and learning to improve their own practice;
26. Seek opportunities to learn based upon reflection, input from others, and career goals;
27. Advocate for curriculum, instruction, learning environments, and opportunities that support the diverse needs of and high expectations for all students;
28. Assume leadership and support roles as part of a school team.

While some of the above dispositions are also knowledge or skill related, all have at their core professional values. The unit promotes those dispositions through a range of means. First, its faculty models those dispositions in its daily interactions with candidates, with mentor teachers and others in field settings, and with one another. Second, through its insistence on strong scholarship in content knowledge the unit expects candidates to gain positive attitudes toward ideas and intellectual rigor. Third, many of the unit's own courses explicitly embed specific dispositions, particularly those related to diversity, democracy, professionalism, and attention to the contexts of educational activity. Some of those dispositions are planted in courses infused with diversity content, many in foundations of education courses, and many in curriculum and instruction courses. Fourth, few educators spend time with educational professional candidates without engaging in, essentially, direct instruction regarding professional dispositions; it is simply in the nature of being passionate about fostering exemplary professionals to advise and direct candidates toward dispositions appropriate to the education profession.

Assessing candidate dispositions has been more problematic than identifying them, not only in the unit but throughout teacher education's history, and particularly in the last half century. Much of the effort to create a science of education carried with it the implicit assumption that if an attribute could not be reliably taught to all, and accurately measured objectively, the attribute was not a proper objective to expect and assess. The move away from process-product thinking and research in education has allowed colleges of education to move back toward an understanding of the moral nature of teaching that was more fully embraced earlier in the twentieth century. So, too, at the University of Georgia. Since the last accreditation visit, the unit has adopted the GSTEP framework that articulates the dispositions listed above and in the conceptual framework expected of its candidates. Programs developed assessments aligned with this framework and thus, have begun to assess these dispositions through reflection papers, philosophy statements, portfolios, university supervisor and mentor teacher evaluations, candidate self-assessments, follow up surveys, and other program specific assessments. In most of the recently submitted program reports, program faculty identified field experience evaluation instruments as measures where dispositions are assessed by both university faculty and school mentors. The results of these data are reported in individual program reports. At the unit level, the dispositions of the candidates are measured through the teacher candidate exit survey and more recently developed and implemented alumni and follow up surveys. 

In self-assessment of their dispositions, teacher candidates responding to exit surveys in fall 2004 (N=87) and spring 2005 (n=338) indicated that candidates across all programs in the unit agreed or strongly agreed on the following examples of items dealing with dispositions: candidates believed that they interact and work with individuals from diverse ethnic, racial, gender and socioeconomic groups equally well (99% in 2004; 98% in 2005); follow established codes of professional conduct, including established school and district policies and regulations (98% in 2004; 99% in 2005); are sensitive, alert, and responsive to all aspects of a child’s well being (99% in 2004; 99% in 2005); are prepared to establish respectful and productive relationships with families (99% in 2004; 98% in 2005); and believed they were advocates for learning environments that support the diverse needs of all students (98% in 2004; 100% in 2005).

One element used by advanced programs to assess candidates’ dispositions is letters from referees. Generally, applicants are asked to submit three reference letters with their applications. Referees are asked to provide an overall recommendation based on the candidate’s academic record, special abilities, ambition and determination. Referees can provide applicants with one of the following recommendations: Recommend strongly, recommend, recommend with reservation and cannot recommend. With regard to elementary education, referees for fall 2005 applicants to the M.Ed. indicated that they strongly recommended the candidates to the program 91.3% of the time, the other 8.7% marked that they recommended the applicants. Referees provided the Ed.S. candidates with a strongly recommend rating of 100%, while the Ph.D. referees gave applicants a strong recommendation 83.33% of the time and a recommend 16.67% of the time. Social studies education also assesses candidate dispositions through the use of referee letters. Referees for applicants to Master level programs indicated that they strongly recommended the candidates to the program 91.67% (M.A.), 86.67 (M.Ed., Plan A) of the time, 8.33% (M.A.), 6.67 % (M.Ed.) marked that they recommended the applicants. Referees provided the Ed.S. candidates with a strongly recommend rating of 100%, while the referees for doctoral level programs gave applicants a strong recommendation 93.33% (Ed.D.), 89.74 (Ph.D.) of the time and a recommend 6.67% (Ed.D.), 10.26 (Ph.D.) of the time.

Standard 1.7 Student Learning for Teacher Candidates

Initial Programs

The unit’s teacher education programs include among their candidate outcomes the expectation that their candidates can demonstrate a positive impact on student learning. While it is clear that the course work in curriculum and pedagogy as well as field experiences provide venues for learning about and implementing lessons, units, and activities that foster PK-12 student learning, program faculty and candidates continue to struggle with means to demonstrate this impact on student learning within the programs. Most programs have incorporated a component within their portfolio systems that require documentation of student learning. There is a sense across programs that assuring student learning depends upon solid pedagogical knowledge and skill, and hence the faculty speaks under this heading about candidate self-monitoring and adjustment, being skillful in applying a broad range of pedagogical strategies, and so on. Programs stress the need for candidates to possess many modes of formal and informal assessment of student learning. Assessment of student learning occurs in various sites for candidate reflection and in evidence from field experiences. Programs typically require that candidates include artifacts of student learning such as examples of classroom work and student assessments and their reflection of those artifacts within their portfolios. Survey data from exiting candidates indicate that they believe that they are prepared to develop age-appropriate strategies for organizing and supporting individual student learning and behavior (100% in fall 2004; 98% in spring 2005) and that they are prepared to effectively evaluate student progress toward the achievement of learning outcomes in the classroom (100% in fall 2004; 98% in spring 2005).

In June 2003, the Educator Workforce Research and Development Division of the Georgia Professional Standards Commission published A Report on the Readiness of First Year Teachers in Georgia Public Schools. This report provided the results of the 2002 Beginning Teachers Survey, which asked beginning teachers and their principals to assess the teachers level of readiness. The purpose of the study was to investigate how successfully PSC-approved teacher education programs prepare teachers and to provide information on the level of readiness of beginning teachers in Georgia’s public schools.  Although 1,357 beginning teacher responded, only 986 teachers had corresponding surveys from principals. Of these paired responses, almost 10% or 95 beginning teachers were University of Georgia graduates. The 97.9 % of the beginning teachers within the paired sample from UGA reported that they were ready to teach. This self-assessment of readiness was affirmed by the principals, 93.8% of whom responded that the beginning teachers from UGA were ready. Table 1.2 compares the UGA beginning teachers responses with their principals in items related to impacting student learning.

Table 1.2 UGA Teachers’ and Principals’ Responses to Questionnaire Items

Item	% of UGA Beginning Teachers who agreed or strongly agreed	% of Principals who agreed or strongly agreed
I was able to group my students effectively for instruction	95.8%	95.8%
I had successful strategies for handling special learning stiutations (e.g., special needs, gifted)	89.5%	97.9%
I was able to integrate technology, including internet, computers and available software, in my instruction	75%	93.7%
I was successful in motivating students to achieve at high levels	95.8%	89.5%
I was able to use a variety of classroom assessments strategies to monitor and adjust my instruction	95.8%	93.7%
I used resources available to me to help me do a better job of teaching my students	95.8%	93.7%
I was able to create a productive learning environment in my classroom	100%	95.8%

Advanced Programs

In the unit’s programs for continuing preparation of teachers, PK-12 student learning is addressed throughout the program course work and experiences. Candidates develop the ability to accurately assess and analyze student learning, make appropriate adjustments to instruction, monitor student learning, and positively affect the learning of all students. For example, candidates in several programs complete action research projects in which they identify a classroom-based problem to investigate linked to student learning and achievement.

Programs also use course grades to measure advanced teacher candidate’s skills. For example, elementary education considers candidate proficiency in research, evaluation and assessment to be particularly important indicators of a candidate’s ability to impact student learning because in these courses, candidates learn to monitor student learning continuously, to assess and analyze student learning on the basis of carefully gathered data, and to make adjustments to curriculum and instruction and study the consequences of those adjustments in a scholarly manner. In the M.Ed. program, the average number of research, evaluation and assessment courses taken by program completers ranged from 1.0 to 1.44 and the mean GPAs in those courses ranged from 3.5 to 4.0. For the Ed.S. completers, the average number of research, evaluation and assessment courses taken by candidates was 3 and the mean GPAs in those courses ranged from 3.67 to 4.0. With regard to completers of the Ph.D. program, the average number of research, evaluation and assessment courses taken by program completers ranged from 6 to 8 and the mean GPAs in those courses ranged from 3.69 to 4.0. Social studies also uses candidates grades in research, evaluation and assessment as an indicator of impact on student learning.  At the master’s level, the means in those courses ranged from 3.0 to 4.67, the mean GPA at the Ed.S. level was 3.0 and at the Ph.D. level, the mean GPA ranged from 3.67 to 4.0. In advanced programs in middle school, candidates grades in selected EDMS courses are used to assess candidates’ ability to provide supportive learning environments. In the Master’s program, candidates who completed the program in Fall 2004 earned a 4.0 average GPA in EDMS 7050 Teaching Young Adolescents, EDMS 7080Curriculum Planning for the Middle School, EDMS 7090 instructional Strategies for the Middle School and EDMS 7100 Evaluation of Middle School. Candidates in the Ed.S. program also earned 4.0 GPAs in selected EDMS courses and the Ph.D. candidates earned 4.0 GPAs in EDMS 9080 Theory and Practice in Middle Grades Curriculum, EDMS 9090 Socio-Cultural Issues in Early Adolescence, EDMS 9120 Comparative and International Perspectives in Middle Grades Education and EDMS 9150 School Reform and Young Adolescents. 

Standard 1.8 Student Learning for Other Professional School Personnel

In the unit’s programs for the preparation of other school personnel, P-12 student learning is addressed throughout the program course work and site-based internships. Candidates develop the ability to critique and reflect on their work within the context of student learning and to establish educational environments that support student academic and school success. Through professional and collaborative course-based and internship experiences, candidates collect and analyze data related to student learning and apply strategies for improving student achievement within their won professional roles. For example, candidates pursing a masters degree in educational administration are required to engage in a capstone experience in the EDAP 7800 Practicum in which they demonstrate their abilities to meet the ELCC standards that promote the success of all students by facilitating a school vision, promoting a positive school cultural, providing an effective instructional program, and by collaborating with families and communities. The twelve candidates involved in this practicum in 2005 were rated by their program faculty as having successfully demonstrated their abilities to positively impact student learning at the school level. At the completion of this leadership program, candidates develop a portfolio that includes a professional growth plan for a single teacher as well as a staff development plan for a selected group of teachers. This demonstration of supervision further evidences positive impacts on student learning. In spring 2005, 15 candidates (93.7%) were rated as proficient and one candidate was rated with distinction (6.3%) on the portfolio assessment.

Although further removed from student learning than classroom teachers, there is an expectation across all the unit’s programs that educational professionals have responsibility for enhancing the learning experience of students through the services each render to the educational enterprise.

In summary, the unit’s programs are grounded the in unit, state, and national standards to ensure that all candidates have the opportunities to develop into the exemplary, reflective professionals expected by their faculty. Unit and program level assessment systems ensure close monitoring of candidate progress through delineated decision points from entry through program follow up. Technology and diversity is infused and pervasive throughout the unit’s programs and assessment systems to better prepare candidates to create effectively learning environments for all PK-12 students.