THE SRU CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

A Conceptual Framework for

Professional Education Programs at

Slippery Rock University of Pennsylvania

Overview

The Conceptual Framework provides a comprehensive structure in which the elements of Vision, Mission, Theme, Coherence, the Dispositions for Teaching and its outcomes, the Framework for Teaching and its outcomes, including the strands of Commitment to Diversity, Commitment to Technology, Commitment to Candidate Proficiencies Aligned with Professional and State Standards, and Assessment of Candidate Proficiencies, provides a coherence, a unity across all professional preparation programs in the College of Education (COE) at Slippery Rock University. Upholding NCATE’s core values, the university and the COE are committed to preparing and enhancing evidence-based best practice in a technological and multicultural 21st Century. Outcomes associated specifically with the Liberal Studies Program and applicable to all academic programs establish a direct link to the Conceptual Framework with the most obvious linkage found in the Assessment of Candidate Proficiencies. Overall, the Initial and Advanced Programs of the College of Education are aligned with the Interstate New Teacher Support and Assessment Consortium (INTSAC) National Standards, the International Society for Technology in Education Standards (ISTE) and the Pennsylvania State Professional Standards set forth by the Pennsylvania Department of Education (PDE). The COE is considering the integration of the National Board of Professional Teaching Standards (NBPTS) into future curriculum revisions. Although the COE embraces Danielson’s (1996) A Framework for Teaching, it is fully aware that not all valuable learning is based solely upon a constructivist approach. Other more traditional teaching and learning styles play an important role and it is the challenge of the instructor to know when to employ each when striving to support standards-and evidenced-based practices toward the preparation of highly qualified professional educators and related professionals.

Revisions to the Conceptual Framework

In the fall 2006 semester, Dr. Jay Hertzog, Dean of the College of Education organized a Conceptual Framework Committee that was comprised of volunteer representatives from College of Education professional programs. During the first meeting, Dr. Hertzog, together with Dr. Herbert Hunt, Assistant to the Dean, identified the desire to a) continue with Danielson’s (1996) A Framework for Teaching as the College of Education’s conceptual framework, b) include the newly adopted COE Mission Statement (9/19/06), c) revise the Vision statement, d) revise the theme, e) maintain the currently existing Dispositions for Teaching used by all of its professional programs, and f) maintain the currently existing strands of Commitment to Technology, Commitment to Diversity, and Commitment to Candidate Proficiencies Aligned with Professional and State Standards. However, the committee was encouraged to examine appropriate additions to the framework that would further support and better articulate outcomes. To begin the process, the committee reviewed the 2006 NCATE Conceptual Framework five structural elements and six expectations to identify strengths and weaknesses of SRU’s COE Conceptual Framework document. These five structural elements and six expectations became the framework for writing the revised manuscript. It was agreed that further revisions (in addition to the aforementioned) would include a theory base, curriculum and policy coherence, an expansion of the strand of Dispositions for Teaching, and the creation of the strand Assessment of Candidate Proficiencies. Figures were created and organized as appendices which are clearly explained in the narrative. To address the revisions or additions of each component of the Conceptual Framework, committee members agreed to adopt a component to either create or revise. Each committee member took back to their professional program the need for program members to discuss the notion of a revised theme (from Teacher as Professional Performer) and bring this input back to the committee for discussion and agreement (to Reflective Candidate as Professional Performer). Input from COE programs reflect the revised COE Vision to address a technological and multicultural 21st Century. Once a draft was created, it was shared with the Teacher Education Advisory Committee (TEAC) for input (see TEAC minutes of 2/9/07), followed by the Dean’s Chair Council (see minutes of 3/20/07). It was then presented to all members of the College of Education for their input and approval (see minutes of 4/24/07), followed by another meeting with the TEAC Committee for a final vote of approval (see minutes of 4/26/07). This process of discussion, revision and approval was continuous throughout the Conceptual Framework Committee’s charge. The goal for completion was early July 2007.

Mission and Vision

College of Education Mission Statement

The mission of the Slippery Rock University College of Education is to prepare teacher candidates and related professionals for service in a diverse global community. Within this context, teaching, scholarship, and service are viewed as a triad in which teaching is enlightened by scholarship and applied through service. This mission correlates with the mission of the University to provide high quality undergraduate and graduate academic instruction while promoting professional performance and addressing educationally related health, environmental, social, cultural, and recreational needs of its students.

The Underlying Vision

The vision of the College of Education embraces and upholds The Vision of the Pennsylvania State System of Higher Education (PASSHE) (www.pde.state.pa.us) whose ultimate commitment is to prepare students from diverse backgrounds to lead productive and meaningful lives by becoming academically, socially and economically successful locally, regionally and globally. Together, this match in vision between the College of Education and PASSHE is in concert with the vision of our University: Slippery Rock University will excel as a caring community of lifelong learners connecting with the world. As illustrated in Figure 1 (see Appendix A) the University and COE’s shared mission and vision work reciprocally to provide high quality instruction through a mission of service that connects scholarship in traditional and non- traditional classrooms which is supported by technology initiatives enjoyed by both teachers and students alike.

Recently, the Vision Statement was refined to a) reflect legislative mandates from the Pennsylvania Department of Education, b) uphold best teaching practices in a technological age of learning by a multicultural student body (NCATE 2006), and c) stimulate metacognition of reflection on learning. The resultant Vision Statement, which must be taken as a work-in-progress, articulates a rationale for the manner in which teacher candidates are prepared at Slippery Rock University.

Slippery Rock University’s College of Education Vision: Professional Educators for a Technological and Multicultural 21st Century

This vision expresses the belief that the professional educator in the 21st century must be a facilitator of learning and possess a specific set of skills, attributes, and dispositions. Many of those dispositions can be identified and applied to students seeking admission to a professional education program. Other dispositions can be developed in the program through a combination of coursework and school and community-based applications. Professional members of the College of Education must model, mentor, observe, confer with, and learn alongside the candidate, helping the candidate assume responsibility for individual learning and ethical behavior. The range of experiences must also help the candidate prepare to understand and respect the diversity that learners bring into the classroom. To serve others through teaching is a profound vision of SRU’s pedagogical democracy because the COE believes in supporting achievement for all students, regardless of language, race, and/or academic level of performance. The Unit’s professional programs continually encourage candidates to learn to use knowledge of social, language, and cultural backgrounds relevant to a student’s learning experiences. Hence, the COE and University visions share the importance of preparing individuals to lead productive and meaningful lives locally, regionally and globally.

The Vision asserts that professional education programs at Slippery Rock University assume that learning is exciting, fulfilling, desirable, lifelong, and supported through the use of technology. A societal goal for curriculum, prepares students to use a variety of technologies that will be necessary as workers and citizens. Its role in education serves as a curriculum resource and helps to stimulate analytical practice and promote reflection. Learning is equated with growth and implies continuous development. Furthermore, learning results from questioning, experimentation, and thoughtful reflection. The view that learning is dynamic applies to development and change for candidate and faculty members. Just as teacher candidates and related professionals are expected to learn and develop, the professional members of the College of Education are expected to learn and develop scholarship that enlightens their practice and service.

Philosophy, Purposes and Goals of the Unit

Reflective Candidates as Professional Performers

The original theme, The Teacher as Professional Performer (1990) has been revised to include teacher candidates as well as other related professionals associated with the COE, hence, the theme, “The Reflective Candidate as Professional Performer.” An initial understanding of the meaning of the concept “professional performer” has been refined. Initially, “professional” was defined as synonymous with excellence and the term “performer” referred to a person who continuously strives for self-improvement and who sustains such efforts even when faced with challenges and adversity. A more comprehensive meaning of the concept had evolved. That is, “professional performer” currently refers to persons who facilitate meaningful and developmentally appropriate active learning for an increasingly diverse and inclusive community of learners in a changing, technology-driven environment. The Reflective Candidate as Professional Performer is a dynamic educator who embraces and uses culturally sensitive socially appropriate pedagogy through the delivery of developmentally appropriate standards-based best practice. They are dedicated and passionate about the profession, and want their students to lean. Every day they approach their practice, it is with vigor regardless of the external circumstances. Teachers and related professionals differentiate instruction and service to accommodate individuals so they may experience success while upholding high expectations for their own performance that directly impacts learning.

What has become recognized throughout teacher education contemporary literature and professional standards is the acknowledgement of the important role of reflective practice. Reflective practice demonstrates an advocacy for teaching as a profession. Reflective teachers and related professionals remain updated in their professional and disciplinary knowledge, better recognize individuals’ abilities and capabilities so that they may apply and innovatively provide their best professional performance to cultivate meaningful learning experiences (Darling-Hammond & Bransford, 2005; Darling-Hammond, 1996; Richardson, 1996). The COE’s professional preparation programs believe in the importance of providing its candidates with opportunities to practice and reflect upon their professional performance. As Palmer (1998) suggests, the best teachers (and we add related professionals) model self-reflection and praxis, cultivating a learning environment of trust and respect. To this end, teachers and related professionals can eventually come to know who they are and how they can professionally perform.

Each professional education program in the College of Education carries out the theme through a planned sequence of content specialization, professional studies, and integrated field-based experiences for the purpose of impacting student learning through performance-based/evidence-based practice. The ultimate goal of the Unit is to prepare teacher candidates and related professionals to possess the knowledge, skills, and dispositions to become highly qualified certified professionals. Four broad goals for the Unit are the development of candidates in the following areas: The Unit’s professionals 1) effectively prepare, plan, and assess lessons and data related to their work, that reflect accurate content knowledge and demonstrate pedagogical insights to accommodate all learners, 2) effectively organize and manage non-instructional elements of the classroom and other educational environments to maximize all learners’ physical, cognitive and social development, 3) successfully implement and support instruction and purposefully adapt lessons and other related work to meet the needs of all learners, and 4) continuously display a commitment to the profession by demonstrating the habits of mind necessary to enhance student learning.

Knowledge Base, Theories, Research, Wisdom of Practice,

and Educational Policies

Dispositions for Teaching. One characteristic of an outstanding teacher (and related professional) is the ability to exhibit a high level of professionalism (Darling-Hammond & Bransford, 2005). Dispositions are an important element in professional preparation leading to certification. These are the values, commitments, and professional ethics that influence behaviors toward students, families, colleagues, and communities. They affect student learning, motivation, and development as well as the professional growth and development of educators. Teacher candidates and related professionals must develop and display professional attributes as they progress through their programs of study. The following dispositions, which apply to the university setting, courses, practicum experiences, and student teaching, are essential for every teacher candidate in the College of Education:

· shows enthusiasm for the teaching/learning process;

· engages in positive, cooperative relationships with faculty, peers, students, and K-12 staff;

· demonstrates a reflective approach towards teaching and learning;

· respects diversity;

· takes initiative to meet or exceed stated course requirements;

· prepares thoroughly and consistently for classes and field experiences;

· models appropriate oral and written language;

· demonstrates respectful behavior during class sessions;

· models appropriate grooming and dress during field experiences;

· participates in professional development opportunities both on and off campus;

· attends and is punctual for class sessions, advisement appointments, and field experiences;

· contacts appropriate personnel in advance when unable to meet a scheduled appointment;

· assumes responsibilities for meeting program and certification requirements and deadlines;

· adheres to established guidelines concerning student conduct as stipulated in university guidelines; and

· accepts feedback and uses suggestions to alter behavior.

The College of Education systematically assesses student dispositions during the completion of the teacher preparation program at the Initial level using a common rubric. Slippery Rock University’s COE realized that dispositions are not assessed at the Advanced level and therefore has formed a committee to develop professional dispositions for this level. More details regarding the process and procedure of their development are included in the description of the Assessment of Candidate Proficiencies strand of the conceptual framework. The disposition assessment is not more important than the other components of the framework; however, the habits of thinking and actions regarding teaching and learning are important elements of developing a learning community that is grounded in understanding and practice (Darling-Hammond & Bransford, 2005).

Professional Commitments

The articulation of the COE’s commitments to knowledge, teaching competence, and student learning are consistently expressed across all programs that are NCATE affiliated and those programs that may not be NCATE affiliated but are associated with the Unit. Its Framework outlines the professional competencies it prepares its graduates to use, and the dispositions valued by its faculty in teachers and other professional school personnel.

Framework for Teaching. The Conceptual Framework evolved significantly as the College of Education shifted towards a greater reliance on performance assessment. Specifically, the professional members in the College of Education embraced A Framework for Teaching (1996) by C. Danielson. This Framework originated from the author's work at the Educational Testing Service (ETS) and the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards and articulates an effective means for communicating the nature of an excellent teacher to students enrolled in teacher education programs, while also suggesting an array of indicators of teaching excellence.

Features of this Framework can be described as public, comprehensive, generic, and dependent on context. It is not a checklist nor does it endorse a particular teaching style. Users benefit from a common language, development of shared values and assumptions, professional conversations, and a reflection on practice. The Framework contains common themes including equity, cultural sensitivity, high expectations, developmental appropriateness, accommodating individual needs, and appropriate use of technology. It is theory-based, grounded in research, reflects a new paradigm of learning and teaching, encourages communities of learners, and emphasizes the role of appropriateness of instruction and the nature of professionalism, (see evidence file). Together, the six themes and theoretical model provide the support for the common goals for all programs within the Unit.

How People Learn: A Theoretical Basis. The National Research Council (2000) recognized the National Academy of Science Committee’s use of using a theoretical model, How People Learn (HPL) to “organize what is known about learning and teaching” (Darling-Hammond, 2005, p 41). While organized as a four-component framework: knowledge-centeredness (What should be taught?, Why is it important?, How is knowledge organized?), learner-centeredness (Who learns, how and why?), community-centeredness (Classroom types, School and school-community environments enhance learning), and assessment centeredness (evidence-based effective learning), Bransford, Derry, Berliner, Hammerness & Beckett presented HPL as a theoretical framework to aide in explaining the role of learning theories in teaching (Darling-Hammond, 2005). Hence, HPL provides a theoretical foundation that outlines the systematic application of the Unit’s use of Danielson’s (1996) A Framework for Teaching (Framework) as its conceptual framework.

Shown as a “window of opportunity for teaching and learning”, Figure 2 illustrates the relationship between the How People Learn theoretical basis (the window frame) and the Unit’s Conceptual Framework for Teaching (a four-pane window). Nested within each domain is one or more of the HPL theoretical components, indicating the connectedness between sound theory and research to conceptually-based professional practice, in this case preparing teacher candidates and other related professionals in the COE.

Danielson argues that excellence in teaching is organized around four domains: (1) Planning and Preparation and Assessment, (2) the Classroom Environment, (3) Instruction and Communication, and (4) Professional Responsibilities. Each domain consists of several components that comprise superior, assessable professional practices. However, Danielson’s Framework for Teaching has been modified by the COE since its adoption to better reflect the unit's mission, philosophy, and emphasis on the preservice level of the profession. These changes are reflected in the titles of domains one (and Assessment) and three (and Communication), and a revision of the various elements under each component. In addition to Dispositions and Diversity, these four domains are the Unit’s candidate proficiencies.

Planning, Preparation, and Assessment. Teachers who excel design instruction that is coherent, include appropriate assessment techniques, and gear instruction to the diversity of students who are in the class. The components of this domain define how a teacher organizes the content that students are to learn, such as:

(1a) Demonstrating Knowledge of Content and Pedagogy

(1b) Demonstrating Knowledge of Students

(1c) Designing Instructional Goals and Objectives

(1d) Demonstrating Knowledge of Resources for Teaching and for Students’ Use

(1e) Designing Coherent Instruction

(1f) Assessing Student Learning

The Classroom Environment. Teachers who excel consider each student individually--the student’s own interests, concerns, and intellectual potential. The components in this domain consist of many of the non-instructional interactions that occur in the classroom such as:

(2a) Creating an Environment of Respect and Rapport

(2b) Establishing a Culture for Learning

(2c) Managing Classroom Procedures

(2d) Managing Student Behavior

(2e) Organizing Physical Space

Instruction and Communication. Teachers who excel emphasize the importance of learning and the significance of the content. The components in this domain relate to the engagement of students with content such as:

(3a) Communicating Clearly and Accurately

(3b) Using Questioning and Discussion Techniques

(3c) Engaging Students in Learning

(3d) Providing Feedback to Students

(3e) Demonstrating Flexibility and Responsiveness

Professional Responsibility. Teachers who excel serve students’ interests in the larger community and are active in professional organizations, the school, the district, and the community. The components in this domain encompass the various roles a teacher assumes outside of, and in addition to, those in the classroom with students, such as:

(4a) Reflecting on Teaching

(4b) Maintaining Accurate Records

(4c) Communicating with Families

(4d) Working in and Contributing to the School and District

(4e) Growing and Developing Professionally

(4f) Showing Professionalism

The Conceptual Framework evolved further when the teacher excellence domains suggested by Danielson were linked to the ten Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (INTASC) Principles. These ten principles articulate knowledge, skills, dispositions, and roles to which new (and continuing) teachers are to aspire and recognized as the Unit’s learning proficiencies for candidates. Linkages, or congruence between the INTASC Principles, the PDE Standards and the Conceptual Framework Domains are emulated across the COE professional programs and cannot occur without a coherent practice of policies that drive the work of the unit.

Coherence: Curriculum Flow.

The College of Education at Slippery Rock University has an established system for addressing, discussing, deciding and implementing course or curriculum additions and/or changes that affect its curriculum as well as its policies, including the revision process of the Unit’s Conceptual Framework that must go university-wide to obtain final approval. The flow of additions/changes regarding curriculum, coined as Curriculum Flow, must go outside of the College of Education to obtain approval. Conceptual framework coherence is illustrated in Figure 3.

Curriculum Flow begins with an addition and/or change presented to a department’s chairperson for input. Following the chairperson’s input, faculty create the additions and/or changes which are then sent to the department’s Curriculum Committee for review and approval. If a curriculum initiative is not approved by this committee, the initiative is returned to the department for further revisions based upon the committee’s recommendations. If the initiative is approved, it then proceeds to the SRU College of Education Curriculum Committee for review and approval. Curriculum changes impacting an undergraduate program, once approved by the COE’s Education Curriculum Committee, next proceeds to the SRU University Curriculum Committee (UCC). Curriculum changes impacting a graduate program, once approved by the COE’s Education Curriculum Committee, next proceed to the university’s Graduate Council (having its own constitutional by-laws) who reviews for approval. Graduate Council approvals move on to the UCC while denials are returned to the department level for revisions based upon the Graduate Council’s recommendations. Curriculum initiatives, whether undergraduate or graduate, being approved by the UCC, are then forwarded to the university provost followed by the university president. The SRU University President has the ultimate authority to make the final decision to approve, at which case the change would then be implemented, or the president may deny the curriculum request, at which case the initiative would stop.

Policy Flow. All policies that pertain to the COE follow a systematic policy flow channel, whereby faculty representing various departments within the COE serve on committees that review, discuss, decide and approve said policies recommended to enhance the professional preparation of its teacher candidates. As seen in Figure 4, the channel begins with the COE Dean and the COE Chairs’ Council who will discuss the need for policy implementation/change.

From there a COE Policy Committee will be formed, comprised of faculty representatives from all COE departments to review, discuss and provide a general recommendation. Next, the policy recommendation is reviewed and discussed by faculty within each department belonging to or affiliated with the COE. From there, departments will direct their input back to the COE Policy Committee for recommendation (and this can go back and forth until the COE Policy Committee recommends the proposed policy). Once the COE Policy Committee recommends approval for the policy, it then flows to the Chairs’ Council for approval and/or modifications. If the Chairs’ Council approves said policy, it then proceeds to the Teacher Education Advisory Committee (TEAC) Committee for discussion, modifications, and approval (following the TEAC constitutional by-laws). Following approval by the TEAC Committee, it then proceeds to the COE faculty body for a vote of approval (COE faculty meetings occur twice during the fall and spring semesters). If the faculty body denies the vote of approval of the policy, based upon significant required revisions, it then loops back to the COE Policy committee for continued refinement. If the faculty body recommends minor changes to be made about the proposed policy, it will only loop back to the TEAC Committee for final discussion and approval. Following this, the policy is once again moved forward to the faculty body for a vote of approval. Once approval is granted by the COE faculty, the policy is implemented.

Slippery Rock University’s College of Education’s commitment to preparing teacher candidates and other related professionals through high quality standards-based instruction, field experiences, clinical practice, and assessment across a candidate’s program is theoretically based upon “How People Learn” (HPL), initially grounded through the INTASC standards and continues to be guided by Danielson’s (1996) A Framework for Teaching. The COE recognizes that across all of its professional preparation programs, the Framework provides a coherence to its curriculum through a common language affecting course syllabi, field experience practice and reflections, student teaching practice and reflections, and assessment of candidate knowledge, teaching competence, and student learning. Furthermore, the Unit is committed to educational excellence through the preparation of socially responsible professionals who matriculate a global perspective to the diverse society of students with whom they teach. The COE moves ahead on the path of preparing individuals who will be professionally committed and value high quality teaching and learning.

Commitment to Diversity

According to the 2000 Census, the total population of the United States is 282.1 million. People of color represent 86.3 million or 30.6% of the population. By 2020, the total population and percentage of people of color living in the United States is expected to increase to 40.6%. This increasing diversity will likely impact all settings – rural, suburban, and urban. In addition to the changing national demographics, the importance of addressing diversity has been a major goal for the State System of Higher Education. In 2004, PASSHE developed its Diversity Strategic Plan 2005-09 (Leading the Way: PASSHE’s Strategic Plan 2005-09) (www.passhe.edu/content/?/about/strategicplan) with goals that focus squarely on the issue of race/ethnicity, women, and other underrepresented minorities in the faculty, staff, and student populations of each university (see evidence files). Slippery Rock University’s diversity plan (http://academics/sru.edu/Education/Diversity) provides the university community with direction and guidelines to attain the state system goal of increasing the on-campus diversity of both students and faculty at the Initial and Advanced levels. Furthermore, through the COE Teacher Quality Enhancement (TQE) Recruitment grant hopes to increase its recruitment, retention, and persistence to graduation of minority candidates.

In addition to increasing the diversity of the campus population, there is a concerted campus-wide effort to expose students to the issues of diversity through the Liberal Studies Program (Goal III: Cultural Diversity and Global Perspective) (www.sru.edu/pages/2255.asp). With the number of people of color increasing, it becomes vital that college graduates become aware of and responsive to the differing needs of the changing societal demands.

The importance of transforming and expanding the capacity of what and how we teach in schools to better accommodate diversity is tantamount to having a successful, fully-functioning democratic society. Multicultural education must be an integral component of the academic structure.

Furthermore, the COE is committed to providing teacher candidates with a quality teacher education program by including experiences in diverse settings which has been demonstrated through a) the infusion of diversity topics into the pedagogy courses, b) by systematically providing diverse field-based experiences for all students, c) infusing multicultural education in program courses, and d) by working with students with special needs. This view embraces diversity as defined by NCATE (2006).

The Unit’s commitment to diversity is embedded within the Framework and related to the unit goals by the integrated themes of equity, cultural sensitivity, high expectations, developmentally appropriateness, and accommodating students with special needs. In the area of equity, Domains 2 and 3 address candidates’ ability to create a learning environment that recognizes and values all learners. Related to the notion of equity, the importance of high expectations for all students relates to Domain 1 in terms of goal setting (1c) and Domain 4, communication with families (4c). The communication with families requires candidates to be culturally sensitive by understanding the students’ unique qualities (1b). Furthermore, candidates’ sensitivity to culture is evidenced in the selection of instructional materials (1e). The theme of developmental appropriateness requires candidates’ attention to the selection of instructional goals (1c), the materials and activities (1e), and assessment strategies (1f) to challenge learners without overwhelming them. Tied closely with an understanding of developmental appropriateness, accommodating students with special needs expands on the areas of the framework previously mentioned by including an awareness of the organization of physical space (2e) and how candidates respond to student behavior (2d).

Although the college provides its students with urban experiences (Pittsburgh, PA; Philadelphia, PA; Las Vegas, NV, Clark County, NV, Wake County, NC), experiences in school districts with diverse populations (Sharon and Farrell), and international experiences (Mexico City and Dublin), the COE also provides students with field –based experiences in rural locations that can have characteristics similar to those of Appalachia (low socio-economic status, low high school completion rates, etc) as well as those in suburban settings. The rural locations, within thirty minutes of campus, enable our candidates to gain insight into the special needs of students from impoverished backgrounds (see evidence files). Documentation of commitment to the COE diversity is evident in the candidate’s portfolio, which includes specific guidelines for documenting candidates’ experiences in diverse settings at the transition points in the program. For example, candidates must document twenty hours of school-based experience in diverse settings before admittance to the COE as well as provide documentation of multiple experiences during the remainder of the program.

Since the last NCATE visit, the College of Education has hired several new faculty members from diverse backgrounds and obtained the Teacher Quality Enhancement (TQE) Recruitment grant. These efforts have helped to diversify the campus population. A new resource for faculty and students is the COE Diversity web page (http://academics.sru.edu/Education/Diversity), launched during the fall 2006 semester. The Standard IV Diversity Committee continues to implement ways to improve the program so candidates are better prepared for the diversity they will see in schools so that students from different racial, cultural, language, and social-class groups can experience equal educational opportunities.

Commitment to Technology

The immersion of technology to support teaching and learning in the 21st Century guides the COE’s belief in the importance of technology to facilitate teaching, learning, and resource acquisition. Beginning with a multimillion dollar upgrade of the infrastructure on campus, classrooms and labs became technologically advanced and offices computer supported Slippery Rock University’s commitment to support technology is reflected through the on-campus organization, Teaching and Learning Technology Roundtable (TLTR) (http://www.sru.edu/pages/777.asp) whose purpose is to support the university’s mission of maintaining high quality academic instruction and effective learning by serving as a forum and recommending body for the uses of appropriate computer technology in university departments and divisions. In addition, the commitment of the university continues technological support by developing faculty technology skills through various workshops and seminars including grant opportunities for enhancing teaching and learning sponsored by TLTR, as well as through a clause in the contract to encourage faculty to participate in the development of web-based and distance technology classes. Technology grants are also provided to the faculty.

Slippery Rock University has developed 145 Prometheus classrooms (smart classrooms), thirteen of which have been designated as priority scheduling for the College of Education. These classrooms are key elements in providing faculty with the materials needed to infuse technology into the presentation of their topics and for their students to use in the development and design of their presentations. In addition, the university has established computing stations/labs for students across campus (three located in McKay Building, the home of the College of Education) and Bailey Library, a state-of-the-art facility for students and faculty alike.

Through a grant acquired by Dr. Joanne Leight, the Department of Physical Education has thirty wireless laptop computers located in smart room 119 of the Morrow Field House (home of the Department of Physical Education). Web-enhanced courses have become increasingly common with on-line courses offered both on and off campus. The Department of Special Education’s graduate program is now offered on-line, as an option. SRU’s Regional Learning Alliance (RLA) in Wexford, PA, approximately forty miles south of the main campus, is equipped with a computer lab to support on-line and distance graduate education.

Computer labs have been installed in each residence hall for the use of the students residing there. With the completion of a campus-wide network, students will have the advantage of connecting to the mainframe for completing computer science assignments, communicating with others worldwide via the Internet, or determining the availability of research materials at SRU's library through the use of PILOT (Pennsylvania Inter-Library Online Technology). In addition, students have word processing applications available to them for completing assignments. Each lab contains three or four Gateway 2000 computers, and an HP LaserJet 4000 printer is available in each computer lab. Students also have access to the new Academic Resource Labs, which have tutors and computers to assist them with their assignments. Student rooms are wired for data service and each room has access to the mainframe, the Internet and all of the programs students can access via the information highway at above T1 speed.

Throughout their professional preparation at SRU, candidates develop technology skills that are integrated throughout courses within their professional program of study. College of Education professional programs site, on all applicable course syllabi, the International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE) Standards, which are recognized and supported by NCATE. These standards are woven into instructional technology courses as well as the rest of teacher preparation courses offered in the College of Education. They are comprised of the following six strands:

I. Technology Operations and Concepts

II. Planning and Designing Learning Environments and Experiences

III. Teaching, Learning, and the Curriculum

IV. Assessment and Evaluation

V. Productivity and Professional Practice VI. Social, Ethical, Legal, and Human Issues

The Framework also addresses the goal of technology by viewing technology as an instructional tool for use by students (1d), or as a recordkeeping tool used by candidates (4b). Altogether, as students develop strong content knowledge, skills and dispositions in their specific field of professional preparation, they can competently integrate developmentally appropriate technologies to facilitate student learning which is consistent with NCATE, ISTE, PDE and SPA standards.

Candidate Proficiencies Aligned with Professional and State Standards

Initial and advanced teacher education programs of the College of Education at Slippery Rock University are aligned with the standards of their respective learned societies (SPAs) that are adopted by the National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE). These standards align themselves with the Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (INTASC) Standards which Pennsylvania uses for their ten learning principles for instructional programs (PA Chapter 354.33 Preparation for Professional Educators) (http://www.teaching.state/pa/us/teaching/cwp/view.asp?A=135&Q=93761). Although not fully implemented, the COE has examined the conceptual framework’s connection to the National Board of Professional Teaching Standards five core propositions which are: 1) teachers are committed to students and learning, 2) teachers know the subjects they teach and how to teach those subjects to students, 3) teachers are responsible for managing and monitoring student learning, 4) teachers think systematically about their practice and learn from experience, and 5) teachers are members of learning communities. Figure 5 illustrates the alignment of these standards with the conceptual framework’s four domains.

The College of Education candidate proficiencies, grounded in the INTASC Standards, are the four Framework for Teaching Domains: Domain 1, Planning Preparation and Assessment; Domain 2, The Classroom Environment; Domain 3, Instruction and Communication; and Domain 4, Professional Responsibilities (Danielson, 1996). All candidates are made aware of the Framework for Teaching domains and indicators and educated upon the Framework’s alignment to national and PA state standards early in their professional preparation program, prior to application for teacher candidacy. Furthermore, all educator programs additionally reflect the standards of the International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE). All COE professional programs’ course syllabi, assessments, and candidate portfolios collectively reflect, through documentation where appropriate, the Framework for Teaching domains, as well as professional (INTASC) and state (PDE) standards used within the Unit as seen in Figure 5.

That said, the professional education programs in Slippery Rock University’s College of Education are in compliance with the standards set forth by the Pennsylvania Department of Education (see evidence files). Furthermore, the College of Education has prided itself on its accreditation through NCATE, and since Pennsylvania is an NCATE state, we also pride ourselves on the accreditation of our programs by their learned societies. Each program within the College of Education, which has a learned society adopted by NCATE, has submitted a program review for accreditation. Each program within the college, which has a learned society, has submitted a program review for accreditation. These submissions include: Special Education (CEC), Physical Education (NASPE), Elementary Education (ACEI), and the various content areas of Secondary Education (Mathematics Education: NCTM, Social Studies Education: NCSS, English Education: NCTE, and Science Education: NSTA), Early Childhood Education (NAEYC), and Modern Foreign Language (ACTFL). While SRU’s Department of Music (recognized by NASM) and SRU’s Counseling and Development Department’s School Counseling Program K-12 (recognized by CACREP) are not NCATE affiliated, they are members of SRU’s College of Education and come under the umbrella of the Unit’s conceptual framework and are included in the NCATE review. These programs follow their own program-specific professional standards to prepare related professionals.

Through this process, candidates develop an awareness of the relationship between their program’s national professional standards and their program’s PDE standards. As well, candidates are made aware of and use these standards in developing their professional materials for learners. Together, through the Unit’s continued adoption of Danielson’s (1996) Enhancing Professional Practice A Framework for Teaching, all candidates are presented with the standards in teacher and related professional preparation early and explained how each Domain directly relates to their professional actions and reactions as a teacher candidate and related professional at Slippery Rock University.

Professional education programs are grounded in arts and sciences content as well as the practicality of day-to-day teaching through our Teacher Education Advisory Committee (TEAC). This committee, comprised of College of Education and arts and science program coordinators, as well as public school teachers and administrators, meets two-three times each semester to discuss issues relevant to developing outstanding teachers (see CD and evidence file). Furthermore, through this organization, the University coordinators are kept aware of the issues related to basic education and begin dialogue to assure that their programs are congruent with those being offered in the K-12 environment.

To determine the effectiveness of the Conceptual Framework domains, the Unit and its programs have developed a set of measures for assessing how well candidate proficiencies are met. A continuous analysis and reform design is the critical element underlying the ongoing operation of the evidence-based professional preparation cycle. The Unit’s Conceptual Framework provides the central focus for preparation and performance-based assessment. Without the Conceptual Framework, the power of candidate proficiencies, as they are aligned with professional and state standards, becomes weak due to the lack of accountability to illustrate the enhancement of the candidates’ impact on student learning through authentic and performance-based assessments.

Assessment of Candidate Proficiencies

Candidate proficiencies within our program, recognized to be the four domains from Danielson’s (1996) Enhancing Professional Practice A Framework for Teaching, are measured by university-based and school-based faculty alike. Each professional education program in the COE applies the Framework’s four domains through a planned sequence of content specialization, professional studies, integrated field experiences and performance-based outcome activities.

The Conceptual Framework has evolved and undergone changes to better reflect the changing nature of the teaching profession. For example, Danielson’s Framework was linked to the INTASC Principles which further redefined the knowledge, skills, dispositions, and roles to which new (and continuing) teachers and other related professionals aspire. In addition, a university-wide programmatic change of the liberal studies program, which was built upon seven goals areas, was closely aligned to the COE Framework, due to the constantly evolving nature of teacher education.

The COE has a system in place by which candidate proficiencies and expectations are assessed. A mapping of the Unit’s common assessments of candidate proficiencies at the initial program level is illustrated in Figure 6 (see Appendix B). Cells containing an “x” indicate an assessment marker for a candidate proficiency that is aligned with an INTASC standard. Across various transition points, candidate measures are earmarked internally (assessed inside the Unit) and externally (assessed outside the Unit). The column titled Unit Assessment identifies the internal and external assessments and their transition points using an alphabetical and numeric code.

A code key located below the chart labels the Unit-wide assessments and transition periods. The coherence applied to COE policy implementation or change, which was previously explained and identified in Figure 4 (page 14), is the process used to determine that the assessments are accurate, based upon national and state requirements adopted by the COE, and consistent throughout the Unit. Figures 7 (see Appendix C), 8 (see Appendix D) and 9 (see Appendix E), illustrate a system by which the assessments of candidate proficiencies include Pennsylvania Department of Education (PDE) requirements.

Undergraduate. At the undergraduate level candidate proficiencies are assessed at three transition points: 1) admission to the COE, 2) field experience, 3) student teaching, and also at graduation and certification. As illustrated in Figure 7 (see Appendix C), internal proficiencies and expectations of candidates required for admission into the COE include: a) accumulation of 48 credit hours; b) minimum QPA 2.8; c) successful completion of six credits of Math (113 or higher); d) successful completion of six credits of English; e) successful score on the Professional Dispositions rubric; f) successful completion of the Professional Portfolio (taking effective for fall 2005 entering freshman); g) and successful completion of an early field experience of which twenty contact hours were with school-age children in a diverse setting. External assessments for candidate proficiencies and expectations include passing scores for Praxis I, Criminal Background Record (Act 34), Child Abuse History (Act 151) clearance, FBI Clearance with the PA Seal, and negative tuberculosis (TB) test results.

Internal proficiencies and expectations of candidates required for the field experiences include: a) minimum QPA of 2.8; b) successful Professional Dispositions score; and c) a review of the professional portfolio by the candidate’s academic advisor. External assessment for candidate proficiencies and expectations include those for the Admission transition point (explained in the previous paragraph) with the exception of Praxis I.

Internal proficiencies and expectations of candidates required for student teaching include: a) a minimum QPA 2.8; b) the Progress Assessment Form; c) Final Evaluation Form; d) Professional Portfolio Assessment Form; and e) the Professional Presentation. External assessment for candidate proficiencies and expectations for this transition point include: Acts 31 and 151 Clearances; FBI Clearance with the PA Seal; negative results of a TB or Chest X-ray test; and a physical examination.

Internal proficiencies and expectations of candidate’s performance and expectations for the graduation transition point include: a) minimum QPA 2.8; b) successful completion of all teacher education requirements; and c) completion of a second diverse experience. External assessments include the PDE 430 and a minimum of 120 credits completed. The certification proficiencies require a minimum 3.0 QPA. External assessments are passing scores of Praxis II, and a minimum 3.0 QPA (required for PA Teacher Certification).

Post baccalaureate. Individuals, who have earned a baccalaureate degree from an accredited institution, may quality for initial certification by completing the prescribed requirements in one or more of the approved undergraduate programs. Admission is granted as either unconditional or conditional as illustrated in Figure 8 (see Appendix D). Unconditional admission has two transition points: 1) in-progress application status; and 2) acceptance. Internal proficiencies and expectations at the first transition point involving in-progress application status include: a minimum undergraduate QPA of 2.8 or graduate QPA of 3.0. Following admission to the university and during the first semester of education course work, the student must contact the department administering the desired certification program to obtain and submit an Application for Admission to Teacher Education. Additional college-level requirements for teacher certification include six credits of mathematics and six credits of English (one composition and one English or American literature). Students having in-progress application status may enroll for up to twelve credits in the COE but cannot register for more than twelve credits without being accepted for admission into the COE. External proficiencies and expectations for in-progress application status include passing Praxis I scores, Act 34 (no record) and Act 151 (no history) records, FBI Clearance with the PA Seal, and negative TB screening results. In addition to these external expectations, students without an initial certificate must take thirty program credits at SRU to be recommended for PA Teacher Certification. Internal proficiencies and expectations for the second transition point, identified as acceptance status, include the minimum undergraduate QPA of 2.8 or graduate QPA of 3.0, and all education courses must be taken at SRU with evidence of successful completion according to COE requirements at the transitions of Field Experience, Student Teaching and Graduation as were previously explained. The acceptance status external proficiencies and expectations include clear records of Act 34 and Act 151, FBI Clearance with the PA Seal, negative TB test results, and a five year statute-of limitation for completing certification requirements that includes the six credits of mathematics and six credits of English (one composition/one literature) if neither were completed in a previous degree. Students must complete the post baccalaureate program with a minimum 3.0 QPA to be recommended for PA Teacher Certification.

Conditional admission into the post baccalaureate program has one transition point. Internal proficiencies and expectations required for a student to be conditionally admitted includes a QPA between 2.5-2.79 in the initial degree program, a three-year lapse of time between completing the bachelors degree and applying for admission, and evidence of Praxis 1 passing scores prior to being granted conditional admission. Once admitted, the candidate must take and pass twelve credits assigned by the post baccalaureate coordinator, with a grade no lower than a C while maintaining a minimum QPA of 3.0 to become unconditionally accepted.

Graduate. Admission to the graduate education program in the COE (as illustrated in Figure 9) include an internal assessment of 2.8 QPA. External assessments that are required to be completed within the first twelve credits include: a) passing GRE or MAT scores; b) Act 31 and 151 Clearances; c) FBI Clearance with the PA Seal; d) Praxis I; and e) negative TB test results. At the graduation transition point, internal assessments include a 2.8 QPA, the Professional Presentation, and an optional Thesis. External candidate assessments include a 3.0 QPA if the candidate is seeking PA teacher certification (required by PDE and the COE for teacher certification).