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.

Content knowledge is essential to the initial preparation and ongoing professional development of teachers, school counselors, and practicing educators. Therefore, the College is committed to preparing educators who embody its core values and have the knowledge, skills, and dispositions to contribute to a just and democratic society. Preparation programs rely on a Conceptual Framework that emphasizes preparing knowledgeable, effective, and caring educators. These qualities are appropriate to the Hawaiian setting, infuse our work, and connect to program goals and standards. The core value, knowledgeable, ties directly to candidates’ ability to examine divergent educational perspectives and integrate theory and research as a source for content knowledge acquisition. The Professional Standards Matrix illustrates how the core values provide a context for developing and assessing candidates.

Discussion throughout Standard 1 primarily addresses the teachers’ preparation at undergraduate, post-baccalaureate, and graduate levels, and other school personnel (i.e., school counselors). Attention to masters and doctoral degree programs occurs, when appropriate. Additional considerations about advanced programs are assembled in separate program reports in the exhibit room.

1.1 Content Knowledge for Teacher Candidates (Initial Programs)

Initial programs enable candidates to meet Hawaii Teacher Performance Standards, as well as those of the International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE) and national specialty professional associations (SPAs) relevant to each program area. The College offers BEd programs in Elementary and Early Childhood Education, Secondary Education, Physical Education, and general and special education (i.e., dual preparation); Post-Baccalaureate Certificate Programs in Secondary Education and/or Special Education; Master of Education in Teaching (MEdT) in elementary, English, mathematics, science, or social studies education; and an MEd in Special Education in Mild/Moderate or Severe Disabilities, or Deaf Education. Upon program completion, candidates are eligible for an appropriate initial teaching license.

Content Knowledge Tests Used for State Licensure and Program Completion
PRAXIS I
Initial candidates meet or exceed Hawaii’s PRAXIS I minimum scores of 172 (reading), 171 (writing), and 173 (mathematics). For example, during 2004-05, 91-100% of applicants demonstrated scores at or above state scores at admission to the College. PRAXIS I scores are similar for 2001 through 2004; scores are not available for the 2005-06 academic year. Table 1.1 illustrates unit pass rates for PRAXIS I performance. Comparison between unit and state pass rates reveals five occasions across four academic years where institution rates were lower than state rates. Unit pass rates consistently meet or exceed overall state pass rates in 28 of 33 instances for all test types across four academic years.

PRAXIS II
All initial candidates take PRAXIS II subject assessment tests to fulfill state license requirements in particular content areas even though the tests may not be required for program exit. The BEd in Physical Education, as well as MEdT and Post-baccalaureate secondary programs, require successful completion of PRAXIS II tests in their respective areas (i.e., English/Language Arts, mathematics, science, social studies, and physical education) prior to admission.

Table 1.2 shows PRAXIS II pass rates for initial program candidates. Typically, the unit's PRAXIS II scores meet or exceed the state's overall pass rates. PRAXIS II scores are not available for the 2005-2006 academic year.

Decisions as a Result of Program Review Processes
Table I.3 shows that all initial programs currently have state approval or national recognition by NCATE specialty professional associations (SPAs). All SPA reviews, which were submitted prior to September 15, 2006, are pending approval, except for Elementary and Early Childhood Education which is nationally recognized in February, 2007.

Initial Programs Accredited by Other Agencies
As shown in Table I.3, the following initial program is accredited by other agencies:
National Association of Schools of Music (NASM)
           BEd and Post-Baccalaureate Secondary Education: Music

Other Key Assessments and Measures
Program Entry and Grade Point Average
The College assesses candidates’ content knowledge at various transition points, as summarized in Assessment of Initial Program Candidates' Content Knowledge. The first assessment occurs when candidates apply for admission; the College verifies completion of liberal studies prior to acceptance to BEd programs, or upon completion of undergraduate degrees for Post-Baccalaureate, MEdT, and MEd programs. Liberal studies help ensure candidates' subject area content knowledge and skills. See University of Hawaii at Manoa 2006-07 Catalog for liberal studies course descriptions.

Undergraduate and post-baccalaureate candidates must maintain a GPA of 2.75 on a 4-point scale. Math and science pre-service candidates must maintain a GPA of 2.5 on a 4-point scale. As shown in the GPA Tables, candidates generally meet or exceed each program's entry and exit GPA requirements.

Applicants for the MEdT and MEd in Special Education follow admission guidelines specified by the UHM Graduate Division as well as specific program requirements. Applicants must have a baccalaureate degree and entry GPA of 3.0 on a 4-point scale, and submit three letters of recommendation, a resume, and written statement of objectives. The programs also conduct interviews. The Graduate Division and respective college departments maintain data on candidates' progress.

Exit GPA is one measure of candidates' overall ability and understanding of program content. See Table 1.3 for elementary education candidates' average GPA upon program completion. The exit GPA is clearly above the required 2.75 minimum, and does not drop below 3.45 from 2001 through 2005. Three of six programs shown in Table 1.3 continue to operate in the College. The programs for visual and performing arts, ESL, and languages (e.g., Hawaiian) are offered in conjunction with the secondary education program.

Demonstration of subject specific content differs for secondary program candidates. BEd candidates usually apply for acceptance to the College after they begin content area preparation, and they continue taking these courses until student teaching and program completion. Thus, both admission and exit GPA indicate content knowledge, although, in each case, GPA includes course grades not specific to licensure. Table 1.4 shows that BEd Secondary Education candidates' entry GPA meets 2.75 requirements (2.5 for math and science), for all programs except science in 2003. Candidates' exit GPA is almost uniformly above 3.0, with the exception of science in 2005, which exceeds the 2.50 minimum.

MEdT and post-baccalaureate candidates' entry GPA is more meaningful since most enter the College with a bachelor’s degree in a content area specific to a proposed teaching license. Candidates who do not have a content area major must take additional coursework, if necessary, or demonstrate content knowledge through an acceptable entry GPA and passing PRAXIS II subject assessment tests. Entry GPA, however, includes courses other than a content major.

Table 1.5 shows that post-baccalaureate candidates' entry GPA meets or exceeds requirements of 2.75 (2.5 for math and science), in all cases. Most often, entry GPA is above 2.95. Entry GPA for secondary candidates is higher at the post-baccalaureate level than for BEd candidates.

See Elements 1.3 and 1.4 for discussions of exit GPA, as they relate to pedagogical content knowledge, and professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills, respectively.

Course Assignments
Content knowledge assessments also include lesson and unit plans, examinations, and course assignments all of which allow candidates to (a) link discipline-specific knowledge with professional standards and instruction, (b) structure instructional content, and (c) assess and evaluate P-12 students’ learning.

Performance Portfolios
Some initial programs track candidates' attainment of standards through exit portfolios, which reflect Hawaii Teacher Performance Standards and those of specialty professional associations. Faculty members review and rate candidates' proficiencies as acceptable or unacceptable; however, data are not recorded systematically across programs. The Department of Special Education, on the other hand, has required portfolios for initial candidates that address the Council for Exceptional Children standards.

Student Teaching
Student teaching is required in all teacher preparation programs. Discussion in Standard 3 provides a detailed description of student teaching requirements and evaluation processes in which mentor teachers and university supervisors assess candidates using practicum and student teaching evaluation forms. Candidates also engage in self-assessment and reflection.

Mentor teachers evaluate student teachers' content knowledge each semester, using a rating scale specific to each program. The elementary scale includes unacceptable, acceptable, and target ratings, whereas the secondary scale includes novice, developing, proficient, and accomplished ratings. Table 1.16 shows the percent of candidates from 2004-06, with acceptable/target or proficient/accomplished ratings on all HTPS, including HTPS 5, Demonstrates knowledge of content, as determined by mentor teachers. See EECE Final Evaluation of Student Teaching, and Secondary Final Evaluation of Student Teaching.

Interviews with Program Constituents: Data gathered during on site visit.

Survey Data Indications about Content Area Preparation
Tri-annual follow-up surveys of alumni, mentor teachers, and employers (i.e., principals) indicate their beliefs about initial graduates' HTPS proficiencies. The three-year time frame allows alumni to work in the field and reflect upon their preparation as teachers.

Alumni Survey
In Fall Semester 2005, the COE assessed 157 graduates who completed teacher preparation programs in 2000-01. The response rate was 36% (n=56). Table 1.7 indicates respondents' program representation.

Overall means were calculated for ten broad Hawaii Teacher Performance Standards, as well as three performance criteria listed within each standard. Alumni indicated the extent to which they perceive their preparation in each criterion. Response categories ranged from '1' (No Help) to '5' (Extremely Helpful). A mean of 3.0 represents Moderately Helpful. Table 1.17 provides alumni perceptions regarding all HTPS proficiencies, including content knowledge (HTPS 5).

The criterion regarding technology and content knowledge received the lowest overall mean rating of 2.75. Alumni dissatisfaction was a signal for program change; the survey pinpointed need for better attention to technology applications in teacher preparation. See Standard 1, Element 3 for a complete discussion of pedagogical content knowledge and technology.

Mentor Teacher and Principal Surveys
A survey was sent to 933 mentor teachers in Fall Semester 2005, who indicated the extent to which pre-service teachers with whom they worked during 2001 to 2004 met HTPS expectations. Rating categories included does not meet, meets, or exceeds a/the standard. As shown in Table 1.18, mentor assessment indicates that 89.5% of pre-service teachers meet or exceed content knowledge expectations (HTPS 5).

Similarly, a survey was distributed to 98 school principals to determine the extent to which 2000-2001 program graduates employed in their schools met HTPS expectations. Principals' assessments of 124 graduates indicate that 97.6% meet or exceed content knowledge expectations (HTPS 5). See Table 1.19.

Advanced Programs - Professional Development Opportunities

The College offers professional development opportunities for practicing teachers through 500-level classes as well as post-baccalaureate and graduate programs. The 500-level classes, which are designed to enhance teachers' content knowledge, professional practice, and leadership competencies, cannot be used for post-baccalaureate and graduate programs.

Table 1.8 shows the numbers of advanced candidates who have graduated from these programs from 2001 through 2006. The number of graduates for 2005-06 exceeds the total for other years. Several programs graduated more than 100 candidates across the 2001-06 time span, with the highest number represented by Curriculum Studies and Educational Administration.

Decisions as a Result of Program Review Processes
As stated previously, Table I.3 shows that all advanced programs currently have state approval or national recognition by NCATE and its specialty professional associations (SPAs). All SPA reviews, which were submitted prior to September 15, 2006, are pending approval.

Advanced Programs Accredited by Other Agencies
As shown in Table I.3, the following advanced program is accredited by other agencies:
American Library Association
• MS Library Science

Other Key Assessments and Measures
Program Entry and Grade Point Average
Advanced programs assess candidates at different transition points to assure they are developing appropriate knowledge, skills, and dispositions for their fields. The first assessment is based on multiple criteria at program admission. Most often candidates must provide satisfactory evidence of content knowledge (e.g., transcripts that document academic preparation, overall baccalaureate degree GPA of 3.0 on a 4-point scale, letters of recommendation, statement of professional objectives, interview, and acceptable GRE or Miller Analogy scores, if applicable). Assessment of Advanced Program Candidates' Content Knowledge specifies admissions and program requirements.

Course Assignments
Assessment of advanced candidates' content knowledge occurs through course projects, assignments, and examinations; exit GPA; MEd Plan A Thesis or Plan B Research Projects' and PhD Dissertations. See Assessment of Advanced Program Candidates' Content Knowledge for courses that address essential knowledge for the individual discipline.

Exit GPA
Exit GPA provides evidence that candidates master discipline knowledge through courses. Table 1.9 shows the average exit GPA for advanced candidates (2001-06), with a consistent GPA of 3.80 across all programs. It varies slightly by three-hundredths, ranging from 3.82 to 3.85. Averages often conceal data; it is interesting to note that the lowest GPA is 3.63 in Kinesiology and Special Education, and the highest GPA is 3.96 in Curriculum Studies.

MEd Comprehensive Examinations, Theses, or Research Projects
Other assessments of content knowledge include comprehensive examinations, theses, or research projects, which extend candidates’ competence and contribute to the knowledge base in the field. The MEd in Special Education with an emphasis in Interdisciplinary Studies requires a comprehensive examination, thesis or research project. The MS in Kinesiology and Leisure Science and MEd in Curriculum Studies, Educational Administration, Educational Foundations, Educational Psychology, and Educational Technology require a thesis or research project. MEd candidates have a major advisor, who works with them throughout the research phase, and assists in developing and implementing a research plan and its written documentation. As shown in Assessment of Advanced Program Candidates' Content Knowledge, most programs require an oral presentation or defense of the master’s thesis or research paper.

PhD Comprehensive Examinations and Dissertations
PhD dissertations require five (5) readers in addition to the major advisor. The Graduate Division and Chair of the PhD in Education monitor candidates' progress through the program. Candidates progress through a rigorous series of steps that include: (a) advancement to candidacy upon successful completion of most coursework; (b) completion of the comprehensive examination; (c) appointment of a dissertation committee, approval of a research topic, and oral defense of a dissertation proposal; (d) Institutional Review Board approval of the study as meeting protection of human subjects requirements; and (e) completion of a dissertation study as evidenced by a manuscript and public oral dissertation defense.

Performance Portfolios and Internships
Candidates' completion of a portfolio with illustrative artifacts helps evaluate their attainment of program outcomes and determine if they meet national, state, and institutional standards. Internships are integral to some programs and enable candidates to demonstrate content, professional, and pedagogical knowledge, skills, and dispositions.

Interviews with Program Constituents: Data gathered during on site visit.

Survey Data Indications about Content Area Preparation
Follow-up surveys of advanced candidates and their employers regarding content area preparation are not available.

1.2 Content Knowledge for Other School Personnel (School Counseling)

The only preparation program for other school personnel is the MEd. in Counselor Education with an emphasis in School Counseling. Upon program completion, candidates are eligible for a school counseling license. The program is housed in the Department of Counselor Education with the MEd programs in Community Services Counseling and Rehabilitation Counseling. As with initial and advanced programs, the MEd in Counselor Education assesses candidates at multiple points to assure that they are developing appropriate content knowledge, skills, and dispositions. See Assessment of Initial Program Candidates' Content Knowledge.

Content Knowledge Tests Used for State Licensure and Program Completion
Licensure Tests and Results
All candidates must take the PRAXIS II Subject Assessment in School Guidance and Counseling prior to state licensure. Table 1.10 enumerates the number of test takers from 2001 to 2006. All candidates passed the subject assessment and were licensed accordingly, indicating that they possess appropriate content knowledge. Information about the state cut score is unavailable.

Decisions as a Result of Program Review Processes: Not Applicable

Programs for Other School Personnel Accredited by Other Agencies
As shown in Table I.3, the Counselor Education programs are accredited by other agencies:
Council for Accreditation of Counseling and Related Educational Programs (CACREP)
• MEd Counselor Education: School Counseling
• MEd Counselor Education: Community Services Counseling
Council for Rehabilitation Education (CORE)
• MEd Counselor Education: Rehabilitation Counseling

Other Key Assessments and Measures
Program Entry and Grade Point Average
Applicants for the MEd in Counselor Education follow basic entrance requirements for graduate students established by the UHM Graduate Division. They must have a 3.0 entry GPA, acceptable GRE scores (Verbal= 535, Math=550, Writing 4.8) and a bachelor’s degree, and submit three letters of recommendation, a written statement of objectives, and a resume that identifies experiences working with children, students, and/or adults.

Course Assignments
Courses prepare candidates with appropriate content to work as school counselors. Candidates demonstrate adequate content knowledge through exit GPAs, since they typically take required coursework in conjunction with the degree program. Table 1.11 illustrates the average exit GPA of candidates in school counseling from 2001 to 2006. The GPA averages are very high; the lowest is 3.88 on a 4.0 scale because the program is very selective and accepts an estimated 30% of all applicants. Although GPA is not the only measure of content knowledge, it is evident that these candidates are well prepared, based on GPA only.

MEd Theses or Research Projects
Candidates complete either a Plan A Thesis or Plan B Research Project, which is also called a Portfolio Plan. Both documents are scholarly endeavors, and require an extensive and critical literature review. Plan A theses include data collection and analysis to test hypotheses. Plan B papers consider implications for counselors, intervention strategies, and/or guidance activities.

Performance Portfolios and Practicum and Internships
Candidates' completion of a portfolio with illustrative artifacts helps evaluate their attainment of program outcomes and determine if they meet national, state, and institutional standards. Practicum and internships are integral to the program and enable candidates to demonstrate content, professional, and pedagogical knowledge, skills, and dispositions.

Interviews with Program Constituents: Data gathered during on site visit.

Survey Data Indications about Content Area Preparation
Follow-up surveys of school counseling graduates and their employers regarding content area preparation are not available. School counseling alumni completed a survey in 2000-2001, for inclusion in the CACREP Self-Study.

1.3 Pedagogical Content Knowledge for Teachers - Initial Programs

Candidates’ pedagogical content knowledge is measured against institutional, state, and professional standards during courses, field experiences, and portfolio assessments. As candidates progress through programs, they encounter multiple opportunities to acquire and demonstrate pedagogical content knowledge. They engage in instructional activities, including: (a) role play and simulations; (b) case studies; (c) class presentations; (d) designing instructional materials, web-based lesson plans and unit plans; and (e) internet searches and development of research papers as a basis for integrating concepts and skills.

Other Key Assessments and Measures
PRAXIS II Tests
Praxis II Subject Assessment scores show the number and percentage of candidates who pass the tests at state cut scores. See Unit Pass Rate on Pedagogical Content Praxis II Tests (2001-05). In 2004-05, the most recent year for which data are available, the range of those who pass the test is 84% to 92%. These figures are within one or two percentage points of the overall pass rate for all institutions in the state. The scores for 2003-04 show greater variation, whereby the difference between institution and overall state pass rates ranges five percentage points.

GPA
Pedagogical content knowledge can also be measured in part by exit GPA since education courses focus on planning and teaching in the content areas. Table 1.12 shows the exit GPA of MEdT program candidates (n=111), who demonstrate their knowledge of pedagogical content with average GPA scores very close to a 4.0. Although candidates may be required to take content courses for a particular licensure area, the bulk of coursework is related to pedagogy rather than content. See Element 1 for discussion of other initial program candidates' exit GPA.

Course Assignments
Candidates have frequent opportunities to integrate content and pedagogical knowledge as they plan and implement learning experiences for P-12 students. Although specific assignments vary across programs, candidates plan and teach lessons and units of their own design, undertake case studies, and complete a variety of projects that help them to become effective content area teachers.

The methods and technology courses set expectations for candidates to generate portfolio artifacts. Although assessment rubrics are published on the COE electronic database, Fall Semester 2006 is the first semester when artifacts will be posted and reviewed consistently. Over the past year, the TK20 CampusToolsÔ HigherEd product was built into the student information system to affirm candidates’ competencies. See Standard 2, Element 2 and Standard 6, Element 5 for discussions of the TK20 system.

Assessment is formative and summative and tailored to individual programs. The BEd in Elementary Education and BEd and Post-Baccalaureate programs in Secondary Education require candidates to create a Teacher Work Sample (TWS) as a measure of their abilities to plan and implement content area lessons, yet the structure for each program differs. As a result of program review in secondary education, a systematic assessment plan that measures candidates' learning, on a continual basis, against program standards is being implemented in the 2006-07 academic year.

The TWS for secondary programs is completed during student teaching, and functions as an exit portfolio. Artifacts are based on TWS principles and align with the Conceptual Framework, Secondary Program Standards and Hawaii Teacher Performance Standards.

A scoring rubric with categories of unacceptable (0 to < .75), acceptable (.76 - 1.75), and target (1.76 - 2.0) accompanies each TWS step. Table 1.13 shows secondary candidates' average TWS scores. All candidates performed in the acceptable range on TWS Steps 2 and 3, consistently demonstrating skill in planning and teaching content. Post-baccalaureate candidates performed at the target level on several steps, whereas the BEd candidates uniformly did not reach target level. A potential reason for the discrepancy is that Post-baccalaureate candidates take slightly different courses, in some instances, than BEd candidates to meet the same program requirement. These courses may be more in depth and better enable Post-Baccalaureate candidates to apply concepts. In addition, Post-Baccalaureate candidates generally are more mature, and have diverse life experiences. Appropriately, the program is discussing implications of these findings.

Performance Portfolios
Mentor teachers and field experience supervisors model and engage student teachers in reflective practice about effective pedagogy. Evaluation of progress is predicated upon student teachers’ ability to create learning environments where P-12 students demonstrate successful performance on standardized tests and other indicators of achievement. Candidates’ portfolios illustrate their progression as competent teachers who have a broad knowledge of subject area instructional strategies, and present information in clear and meaningful ways.

Student Teaching
Observations, midterm and final evaluations, which occur at various transition points during student teaching, are data sources that (a) become part of student teachers’ permanent files; (b) contribute to decisions about whether they pass student teaching; and (c) help establish candidates’ qualifications for an institutional recommendation for a teaching license. Aggregate assessment of candidates' student teaching performance, portfolio artifacts, and follow-up survey data demonstrate candidates’ acquisition of pedagogical content knowledge.

Mentor evaluations of EECE and dual preparation student teachers' pedagogical proficiencies indicate that 98.11% and 99.41% attained acceptable or target ratings on HTPS 6, Designs and Provides Meaningful Learning Experiences and HTPS 7, Uses Active Student Learning Strategies, respectively. Mentor evaluations of BEd and Post-baccalaureate Secondary Education student teachers indicate that 94.38% and 96.73% attained proficient or accomplished ratings on HTPS 6 and HTPS 7, respectively. See Table 1.16, EECE Final Evaluation of Student Teaching and Secondary Final Evaluation of Student Teaching. Evaluations of BEd and MEd candidates' pedagogical content knowledge proficiencies in special education are based on aligning CEC Content Standards 3, 4, 6, 7, and 8 with HTPS 6, and 7. Data is not available currently for specific pedagogical content knowledge ratings; full utilization of the TK20 system will allow disaggregating data related to pedagogical content knowledge. See Bed Assessment_3, MM Section_IV__3, Sev Assessment_3, and D HOH Assessment_3)

Candidates' Ability to Integrate Technology into Teaching
The ISTE standards help ensure that candidates are knowledgeable about technology and applications of nonverbal and media communication techniques. Course syllabi for ETEC 414, ETEC 430, ETEC 442, and SPED 480 among other classes illustrate technology applications to instruction. Technology is a component of four HTPS (HTPS 4, 5, 6, 7), which require candidates to develop technology-based learning activities and integrate technology into instructional units, lesson plans, and presentations.

Alumni Survey
As stated previously, in Fall Semester 2005, the College surveyed alumni, across all programs, graduated in 2000-01. Table 1.17 illustrates responses regarding their technology competencies on HTPS 4, 5, and 6. Overall response means for the HTPS assessed are less than 3.0, yet there are differences. HTPS 4 is rated as less than moderately helpful on all three criteria, and therefore, should be viewed as weaker overall than the other HTPS. Ratings on the three criteria within HTPS 5 and 6, however, are not uniformly less than 3.0. In fact, in both standards, only the technology and media criteria have ratings lower than 3.0.
If we delete the technology ratings from HTPS 5 and 6, the overall means would be higher. Thus, HTPS 5 and 6 are not weak throughout; alumni perceive the college as moderately helpful in preparing them on the other criteria in these standards.

Analysis of these data and other feedback regarding technology resulted in the following:
• As of Fall Semester 2005, all initial candidates must obtain and use a laptop computer for coursework (see Standard 6, Element 5 discussion of the Laptop Initiative).
• The College uses TK20 to aggregate candidates' academic, demographic, admissions, and graduation data.
• Initial program candidates enroll in ETEC 414 and at least one ETEC elective, as part of core coursework, where they learn to understand and use various technologies with special emphasis on applications to school curricula and classroom settings.
• Candidates must utilize different technologies as they progress through their programs, including communications, accessing and downloading information from electronic reserves, submitting course assignments, using WebCT in courses or participating in online courses, making PowerPoint presentations, accessing electronic library resources, and engaging in distance learning, as needed.
• Courses offered for the Statewide licensure program are either online or hybrid courses which mix online and face-to-face formats.
• Addition of a Technology and Distance Programs (TDP) coordinator helped increase faculty knowledge and implementation of technology in coursework.
• The Office of Technology and Distance Programs offers continuing professional development opportunities for faculty and staff in use of current technologies.

Course Assignments
Table 1.14 illustrates how well candidates plan and incorporate technology into instruction. As stated previously, BEd and Post-Baccalaureate Secondary Education student teachers must produce a teacher work sample (TWS). In the third step, candidates write lesson plans for a 3-week unit, in which they address technology use. The rubric that accompanies this step assesses seven different areas, one of which considers technology applications. Both groups designed instructional plans, at an acceptable level, which included using technology with P-12 students. The average score was higher for Post-Baccalaureate candidates than for BEd candidates.

Interviews with Program Constituents: Data gathered during on site visit.

Survey Data Indications about Pedagogical Content Preparation
Follow-up surveys of alumni, mentor teachers, and employers (i.e., principals) regarding initial graduates' pedagogical content knowledge indicate that candidates are prepared to teach in their content areas.

Alumni Survey
As stated previously, in Fall Semester 2005, the College surveyed alumni, across all programs, graduated in 2000-01. Table 1.17 shows that alumni believe the college provided more than moderate help in preparing them in HTPS 7, Uses active learning strategies. Means on the three criteria are greater than 3.0, resulting in an overall mean of 3.34. However, results for HTPS 6, Designs and provides meaningful learning experiences show only 2 of 3 criteria with means of 3.0 or greater. Alumni believe they received less than moderate help in preparing to create a media-rich environment. The mean for this criterion decreased the overall mean to less than 3.0. Alumni perceptions regarding preparation in media and technology are addressed more fully in the discussion about technology.

Mentor Teacher and Principal Surveys
A survey was sent to 933 mentor teachers in Fall Semester 2005, who indicated the extent to which pre-service teachers with whom they worked during 2001 to 2004 met HTPS expectations. As shown in Table 1.18, mentors' assessment shows that pre-service teachers' pedagogical content knowledge meets or exceeds expectations, as demonstrated in HTPS 6 and 7. Similarly, a survey was distributed to 98 school principals in Fall Semester 2005 to determine extent to which 2000-2001 program graduates employed in their schools met HTPS expectations. As shown in Table 1.19, principals' assessments of 124 graduates show that they meet or exceed expectations (HTPS 6 and 7) in ability to plan and teach content lessons.

Candidates' Evaluations of Student Teaching
Each semester candidates evaluate the teacher preparation programs at the conclusion of student teaching experiences. They complete a survey entitled, Student Teacher Evaluation of COE Program in which they indicate satisfaction with and perceptions of teacher education related to: (a) foundations for teaching; (b) course instruction in the college; (c) academic teaching field preparation; (d) skills and abilities; (e) field experience procedures; and (f) field experiences/student teaching. For purposes of this report, the survey items and results match the concept of pedagogical content. The rating scale ranges from '1' (Strongly Disagree) to '5' (Strongly Agree).

A total of 238 and 168 candidates responded to surveys during the 2003-04 and 2005-06 academic years, respectively. Student teacher survey data analysis represents semesters where the number of respondents is three (3) or greater. Means resulting from semesters with one or two candidates tend to be very high (5.0) or very low (2.0 or 3.0). As shown in Student Teacher Survey Pedagogical Content Knowledge (2003-06), there was almost consistent agreement across programs regarding preparation to teach academic content or a range of elementary school subjects. Candidates also agreed that instructors in academic areas outside the COE were good models of effective teaching and that they could present academic content with clarity.

MEdT candidates completed the survey during Fall Semester 2003. However, the survey was not a good measure of the MEdT inquiry-based program, and several questions were modified the following semester. Ratings for Fall Semester 2003 were uniformly lower for MEdT than other programs, but they improved during Spring Semester 2004. In Fall Semester 2003, MEdT candidates rated preparation to teach in content area as 3.20; the lower rating paralleled another pedagogical question regarding ability to present academic content clearly. However, MEdT candidates' ratings improved during Spring Semester 2004. MEdT evaluation data for the last two academic years are available in the exhibit room. Although the MEdT program has been operational for more than 15 years, candidates in Fall Semester 2003 were clearly unhappy with the program, perhaps due to program and faculty changes.

Candidates' Ability to Utilize Technology Applications in Educational Settings
Advanced programs enable candidates to apply technology in practice; technology is a primary focus in courses. As stated previously, ISTE standards help ensure that candidates are knowledgeable about technology applications, as well as nonverbal and media communications. Course syllabi for ETEC 602, and ETEC 664, among other classes illustrate these applications to educational settings. Candidates use technology to: (a) communicate electronically with instructors and each other; (b) access and download information from electronic reserves; and (c) submit course assignments.

Interviews with Program Constituents: Data gathered during on site visit.

Survey Data Indications about Pedagogical Preparation
Follow-up surveys of advanced program graduates and their employers regarding pedagogical content knowledge indicate are not available.

1.4 Professional and Pedagogical Knowledge and Skills - Initial Programs

Initial Candidates' Broad Professional Knowledge and Skills
Professional and pedagogical studies complement COE core values to prepare knowledgeable, effective, and caring teachers who contribute to a just and democratic society. Studies allow candidates to examine current research and scholarship and learn about human development, learning, and diversity. They also enhance their ability to develop an educational philosophy, integrate knowledge bases, and extend them to educational applications.

PRAXIS II Tests
Candidates must take the PRAXIS II Principles of Learning and Teaching (PLT) Test prior to applying for licensure. The test measures the degree to which candidates master basic pedagogical principles applicable to P-12 classrooms. Candidates typically take the test during the last year or semester of coursework. Table 1.15 shows unit pass rates on PRAXIS II PLT Tests from 2001 through 2005. Unit pass rates range between 89% and 100% and compare favorably with overall state pass rates. Clearly, the unit does an excellent job in preparing candidates pedagogically.

Course Assignments
Course assignments allow candidates to demonstrate professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills. As discussed in Element 3, candidates in the elementary and secondary teacher preparation program develop Teacher Work Samples.

Performance Portfolios and Student Teaching
Performance portfolios allow candidates to demonstrate professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills. See discussion in Elements 1 and 3.

The College relies on multiple assessments to gather evidence about candidates’ pedagogical and professional knowledge and skills during student teaching. Assessments include observations, midterm and final evaluations, and self-reflections. Formative evaluations indicate degrees of student teachers' developing professionalism and understanding about teaching and learning.

Mentor teachers indicate that COE candidates in these programs have adequate knowledge and skills to function effectively in student teaching settings. See Table 1.16, EECE Final Evaluation of Student Teaching and Secondary Final Evaluation of Student Teaching.

Evaluations of BEd and MEd candidates' understanding of and ability to demonstrate collaboration and professionalism in special education are based on aligning CEC Content Standards 6, 9, and 10 with HTPS Standards 4, 9, and 10. Candidates demonstrate professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills through design and implementation of various class projects related to families and collaboration. The projects address CEC Standards 6 Language, 9 Professional Practice, and 10 Collaboration. Evaluations of 122 BEd candidates (Spring Semester 2004 - Spring Semester 2006) indicate that 98% attained overall acceptable or target ratings. Similarly, evaluations of 22 MEd candidates (Summer Sessions 2004 - 2005) show that 95% attained overall acceptable or target ratings. Data is not currently available for communication, professionalism, and collaboration ratings; full utilization of the TK20 system will allow disaggregating evaluation data related to pedagogical content knowledge. See BEd Assessment_6, MM Section_IV_6, and Sev Assessment_6).

Interviews with Program Constituents: Data gathered during on site visit.

Survey Data Indications about Professional and Pedagogical Knowledge and Skills
Follow-up surveys of alumni, mentor teachers, and employers (i.e., principals) indicate that candidates possess appropriate professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills.

Alumni Survey
As stated previously in Fall Semester 2005, the College surveyed alumni across all programs, graduated in 2000-01, to determine perspective on their professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills. As shown in Alumni HTPS Professional / Pedagogical Knowledge / Skills (2005), alumni perceive that they are moderately prepared in HTPS 1, Focusing on the learner, HTPS 2, Creating and maintaining safe and positive learning environments, HTPS 3, Adapting to learner diversity, HTPS 7, Using active learning strategies, and HTPS 9 Demonstrating professionalism. Conversely, they perceive little preparation in HTPS 4 Fostering effective communication in the learning environment, HTPS 5, Demonstrating knowledge of content, and HTPS 10, Fostering parent and school community relationships. These criteria lie within the same areas in which candidates perceive they received most help.

See Table 1.17 and Alumni Program Evaluation HTPS Criteria (2005) for a more complete picture of all standards and criteria within each area.

Mentor and Principal Surveys
As discussed previously, a survey was sent to mentor teachers, in Fall Semester 2005, who indicated extent to which pre-service teachers with whom they worked during 2001 to 2004 met HTPS expectations. Mentor teachers' assessment, overall, indicates that pre-service teachers’ professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills, across all programs, meet or exceed expectations. Yet, the combined percentage is 88.0% in HTPS 3, Adapts to learner diversity, and 78.9% and 77.2% in Uses assessment strategies and fosters parent and community relationships, respectively. See Table 1.18.

Similarly, a survey was distributed to principals in Fall Semester 2005 to determine the extent to which 2000-01 program graduates employed in their schools met HTPS expectations. Principals' assessments of 124 graduates indicate that they meet or exceed expectations regarding professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills. In general, principals feel that COE pre-service teachers function at a high level; each HTPS has a combined rating of over 91%. See Table 1.19.

Candidates' Evaluation of Student Teaching
As discussed in Element 3, the College surveys candidates upon completion of student teaching. In 2003-04, 238 students responded to the survey. With the exception of the MEdT, all programs used the same instrument. In 2005-06, 168 of 255 candidates responded to the survey, yielding a 65.8% response rate. Item responses were disaggregated and recombined to show professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills for teachers in four areas: candidate learning Student Teacher Survey Candidate Learning (2003-06), implementation of instruction Student Teacher Survey Implementation of Instruction (2003-06), professional growth Student Teacher Survey Professional Growth (2003-06), and differentiation and management Student Teacher Survey Differentiation and Management (2003-06).

Overall, candidates rated two areas, implementation of instruction and professional growth, more highly than others, with scores ranging from agree to strongly agree. However, candidates in the Post-Baccalaureate secondary program provided a mix of ratings, with several items in the 3.65 to 3.94 range, demonstrating a little less confidence in their teacher preparation program.

In the area of differentiation and management, candidates across all programs generally responded with a mean of 4.0 or higher in adjusting strategies to respond to cultural differences, using a variety of strategies of effective classroom management, ability to plan and implement curriculum, and ability to resolve classroom management problems, although secondary post-baccalaureate ratings were slightly less for the last category. The area with the greatest variation and resultant ratings in the undecided to agree range relates to students with special needs or difficulties. Non-special education candidates had mixed ratings for adjusting teaching strategies to accommodate students with special needs or disabilities, although there were no means lower than 3.6. Candidates felt even less prepared in the ability to accommodate students with disabilities in the regular classroom.

In the area of candidate learning, candidates felt the need for better preparation to work with exceptional children, which supports the lower ratings in teaching and working with these students. However, three items in are rated quite highly, with the exception of the BEd and Post-Baccalaureate secondary programs, as explained below. Candidates rated the programs as providing knowledge of active learning strategies, and planning curriculum at the daily, unit, and course level. Even though candidates learned these essential skills, they provided mixed ratings to instructors in demonstrating a variety of teaching strategies and greater variation for instructors as good models of effective teaching!

A comment must be made in support of the BEd and Post-baccalaureate programs at the secondary level, which had ratings in the undecided to agree category, for the first three semesters. Yet, since Spring Semester 2005, ratings were 4.0 or higher, if we disregard the item related to exceptional children. Clearly, the secondary programs, recently, have done very good work in preparing candidates for teaching.

In addition to completing survey questions, candidates responded in narrative regarding the best and least helpful elements of the teacher education program and how the program could be improved. Although important differences exist among the programs, with few exceptions the majority of candidates rated their respective programs relatively high on all areas of preparation and experience. Candidates across all programs rated student teaching experiences as the most helpful component of their education. They indicated that hands-on experience is always highly valued. A consistent message over the last two academic years is that student teachers are satisfied with professors, instructors, supervisors, and mentors. Yet, there is parallel dissatisfaction with instructors and coordinators. Candidates see the people with whom they interact as both positive and as a shortcoming. However, when responding to obtaining feedback from professors, mentors, and peers, this was stated as a positive.

In terms of shortcomings, by 2004-05 candidates no longer identified lack of preparation in technology or working with special needs children, which speaks well for the College. Dissatisfaction with lack of financial support during student teaching, as expressed in 2003-04 and 2004-05, changes to dissatisfaction with specific program requirements, such as TK20 and Teacher Work Samples in 2005-2006, when these program requirements were implemented.

A final area of dissatisfaction for the two most recent years was course content that could not be applied to teaching. Programs should take this critique seriously; courses should be examined for relevancy of content. In addition, content may be relevant, but candidates may not understand the relevancy. Thus, instructors might strive to establish better connections between theory and practice. Moreover, some coursework may not be perceived as useful to candidates since they are beginning teachers.

Advanced Programs
The Professional Standards Matrix shows alignment of the College's core values with professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills of the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards (NBPTS) and each program's national specialty professional association, which reflect course content, field experiences, and portfolio requirements. The matrix illustrates how core values provide a context for assessing candidates. See Assessment of Advanced Program Candidates' Content Knowledge.

Assessment Data and Candidates' Broad Professional Knowledge and Skills
Candidates have multiple opportunities to demonstrate in-depth understanding of professional knowledge and skills. Professional knowledge is accomplished initially through coursework; and course grades and cumulative GPA are measures of candidates' proficiency. Candidates must also demonstrate knowledge of their specialty areas in classes, which expand beyond core courses. Doctoral candidates demonstrate the highest levels of professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills under guidance of advisors, who assist with individual program development and monitor their overall professional growth.

Course Assignments and GPA
Assessments that measure candidate learning and performance consist of course assignments and projects, self-reflection, comprehensive examinations, theses, research projects, and portfolios. Candidates' individual grades on course assignments and projects (e.g., case studies, critique of journal articles, and pilot studies, and action research), as well as overall GPA typically exemplify their ability and demonstration of professional knowledge and skills. Yet, completion of the work also attests to their diligence and skills in conceptualizing and accomplishing a task.

Doctoral candidates complete a range of courses, however, they earn competency-based rather than course-based PhD degrees, in which they demonstrate knowledge and skills in a content field. Moreover, they evidence professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills in comprehensive examinations.

Performance Portfolios
Performance portfolios document advanced candidates' attainment of program outcomes and thereby determine if they meet national, state, and institutional standards.

Plan A Theses, Plan B Research Projects, and Doctoral Dissertations
Advanced programs enable candidates to become knowledgeable active participants in and interpreters of discipline-specific research. In some programs, candidates engage in action research to inform and improve educational practices for P-12 students. The ultimate measure of knowledge and skill rests in successful completion of the Plan A Thesis or Plan B Research Project. The theses or research papers evidence candidates' knowledge of the field and their skill in applying knowledge to actual contexts. In some cases, course projects are modified and eventually become a thesis or research paper. For example, the MEd program in K-12 Educational Administration, is considering change in the curriculum analysis project to allow candidates to complete it over the course of an academic year, and use the culminating written project as the actual Plan B research paper.

Doctoral candidates write and defend a research-based dissertation proposal. Their ultimate demonstration of research knowledge and skill occurs at conclusion of the program with the public oral defense of the dissertation.

Candidates' Broad Professional Knowledge and Skills and NBPTS
Specific assessment data regarding advanced candidates' broad professional knowledge and skills, as they relate to NBPTS are not available.

Interviews with Program Constituents: Data gathered during on site visit.

Survey Data Indications about Professional and Pedagogical Knowledge and Skills Preparation
Some advanced programs use department-specific surveys to assess candidates' professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills. For example, the Department of Educational Foundations assesses candidates annually in Spring Semester to ascertain understanding of the Conceptual Framework, foundations of education, and associated skills. Survey data and open-ended comments are a basis for program review. Actions that may result from data analysis include curricular change, adjusting course content, adding classes, and course scheduling. See Standard 2, Element 3 and Tables 2.5 and 2.6, for a complete discussion of data based program changes.

Importance and Satisfaction Survey
The College also surveys advanced candidates every three years to ascertain their perceptions regarding the quality of and satisfaction with academic experiences. The survey includes six categories one of which is demographic information. The Extra-curricular Issues category relates most closely professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills.

In 2003, the College surveyed 783 candidates, of whom 306 responded for a 39% response rate. Candidates examined each item in light of two issues. They rated the quality of their academic experience by indicating the importance of the item on a scale of '1' (Not Important) to '5' (Very Important). Second, they rated satisfaction with their graduate experience on a scale of '-2' (Not Satisfied) to '+2' (Very Satisfied). A score of zero indicates a neutral rating. See Table 1.20.

1.5 Professional Knowledge and Skills for Other School Personnel (School Counseling)

As stated previously, the MEd in Counselor Education aligns with the Conceptual Framework and core values, HTSB School Counselor Performance Standards, and the standards of the Council for Accreditation of Counseling and Related Educational Programs (CACREP). The standards reflect course content, field experiences, and portfolio requirements. Assessment of Initial Program Candidates' Content Knowledge shows points at which candidates’ professional knowledge and skills are assessed.

Program Review Processes and Candidates' Professional Knowledge and Skills
Review of 2001 CACREP documents reveals that the School Counseling Program met all 63 standards, which indicates that candidates are well prepared. Areas in need of improvement concerned: (a) combining practicum and internship classes by levels; (b) hiring faculty with school counseling experiences; and (c) providing additional professional development classes for mentor supervisors. The department has addressed all conditional issues.

Other Key Assessments and Measures
School Counseling candidates have multiple opportunities to demonstrate in-depth understanding of: (a) professional knowledge and skills related to P-12 students, families, and communities; (b) current research to inform practice; and (c) using technology in their practice and to become knowledgeable active participants in and interpreters of discipline-specific research. Assessments that measure candidate learning and performance consist of course assignments, self-reflection, theses, research projects, tapes of counseling sessions, and portfolios, among others.

Interviews with Program Constituents: Data gathered during on site visit.

Survey Data Indications about Professional Knowledge and Skills Preparation
In 2003, the College collected and analyzed assessment data from School Counseling candidates, which indicate satisfaction with all program aspects. Follow-up surveys of program graduates and their employers regarding professional knowledge and skills are not available. School counseling alumni completed a survey in 2000-2001, for inclusion in the CACREP Self-Study.

1.6 Dispositions

All programs align with the conceptual framework, which specifies core values and concomitant dispositions based on professional standards, beliefs, and attitudes; recognition of individual diversity; and the importance of contributing to a just and democratic society. The conceptual framework, core values, and dispositions are included in syllabi and discussed with candidates at the outset of each course.

Faculty members expect that all candidates will have positive effects on students, families, and colleagues. They believe that knowledgeable educators reflect on practice, performance and ethics; seek and integrate professional feedback; and, uphold Hawaiian values of ‘imi ‘ike (to seek knowledge), ‘imi na‘auao (to seek enlightenment), and hö‘ike (to demonstrate and perform). Effective educators work collaboratively and professionally with colleagues, families, and community members; and, uphold Hawaiian values of küpono (honesty, reliability, and excellence), kuleana (responsibility), and laulima (cooperation and joint action). Caring educators respect diversity and honor democratic processes; and uphold Hawaiian values of aloha (love), mälama (caring), lökahi (unity, agreement, harmony), and hö‘ihi (respect).

Key Assessments to Evaluate Candidates' Dispositions
Initial Programs
Each program views candidates' demonstration of personal and professional dispositional qualities very seriously. Most frequently, inappropriate dispositions lie at the center of candidates' difficulties in teacher education. Program processes try to ameliorate dispositional issues promptly to ensure candidates' successful program completion. Often, action is taken with full knowledge and involvement of the candidate, mentor, and university coordinator.

Assessment of dispositions occurs in courses, field experiences, and clinical practice. Faculty and mentor teachers rely on rubrics that assess dispositions related to respect, fairness, equity, and sensitivity to others; effective communication and collaboration; ethical practice, and professional behaviors. See Assessment of Initial Program Candidates' Content knowledge and Assessment of Advanced Program Candidates' Content Knowledge for evaluation of dispositions at specific transition points.

Portfolio Assessment and Student Teaching
Performance portfolios also document candidates' demonstration of professional and personal dispositions.

As discussed in Element 1, mentor teachers evaluate student teachers' HTPS proficiencies each semester, using a rating scale specific to each program. Table 1.16, shows mentor evaluations of EECE student teachers' professional dispositions, as evidenced in HTPS 1, 2, 4, 9, and 10, indicate that they attain acceptable or target ratings. Similarly, mentor evaluations of BEd and Post-Baccalaureate Secondary Education student teachers indicate that they attain proficient or accomplished ratings related to professional dispositions. In addition, see EECE Final Evaluation of Student Teaching, and Secondary Final Evaluation of Student Teaching.

Field and faculty supervisors also assess Elementary and Early Childhood Education (EECE) student teachers on seven dispositions that reflect the conceptual framework and Association for Childhood Education International (ACEI) Standard V, Professionalism: professional and ethical conduct, individual and cultural sensitivity, work habits, effective communication, self-reflection, collaboration, and life-long learning. As illustrated in Table 1.21, assessment of EECE candidates' dispositions indicate that more than two-thirds performed at the target level on five of seven dispositions, particularly in the area of collaboration. Although all candidates performed at acceptable or target levels, the dispositions related to individual and cultural sensitivity and to life-long learning bear additional development in the program.

Candidates' Evaluation of Student Teaching
As discussed in Standard 1, Element 3, the College surveys candidates upon completion of student teaching. In 2003-04, 238 candidates responded to the survey. With the exception of the MEdT program, all programs used the same instrument. In 2005-06 168 candidates responded to the survey.

For purposes of this report, item responses related to understanding the conceptual framework, knowing professional strengths, knowing professional weaknesses, and developing a framework of professional ethics to guide teaching were disaggregated and recombined to show professional dispositions for teachers. The Student Teacher Survey Dispositions (2003-06) illustrates that almost all program candidates agree with three dispositional areas--professional strengths, weaknesses, and developing a framework for professional ethics. Candidates' ratings typically were 4.0 and higher. The exception is the Post-Baccalaureate secondary program (Spring Semester 2006) with ratings that range from 3.5 to 4.0. The first category, understanding the conceptual framework, has mixed ratings. Generally, the BEd and post-baccalaureate secondary programs evidence ratings between 3.2 and 4.0.

Interviews with Program Constituents: Data gathered during on site visit.

Survey Data Indications about Candidates' Demonstration of Dispositions
Mentor and Principal Surveys
As stated previously, a survey was sent to mentor teachers, in Fall Semester 2005, who indicated the extent to which pre-service teachers with whom they worked during 2001 to 2004 met HTPS expectations. As shown in Table 1.18, mentor assessment, in general, indicates that pre-service teachers' professional dispositions (as evidenced in HTPS 1, 2, 4, 9, and 10) across programs meet or exceed expectations. One area that is strikingly lower, however, is the 77.2% rating on HTPS 10, Fosters parent and school community relationships. Fewer pre-service teachers received ‘exceeds’ expectations ratings. Clearly this is an area that mentors feel candidates must develop further. During field experiences and student teaching, programs encourage candidates to seek opportunities to participate in IEP meetings and parent-teacher conferences. Candidate involvement in such meetings depends, in part, upon mentor teachers' encouragement; a proportion of mentors try to protect candidates from such participation because they feel candidates may be overwhelmed.

Similarly, a survey was distributed to school principals in Fall Semester 2005 to determine the extent to which 2000-2001 program graduates employed in their schools met HTPS expectations. As shown in Table 1.19, principals' assessments of 124 graduates indicate that they meet or exceed expectations regarding professional dispositions, as evidenced in HTPS 1, 2, 4, 9, and 10, which had combined ratings of 93% and higher.

Alumni Surveys
As stated previously, in Fall Semester 2005, the College surveyed alumni across all programs, graduated in 2000-01, to determine perspective on their professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills. Table 1.16 shows that alumni perceive they are moderately prepared regarding professional dispositions as evidenced in HTPS 1, Focusing on the learner, HTPS 2, Creating and maintaining safe and positive learning environments, HTPS 4, Fostering effective communication in the learning environment, HTPS 9, Demonstrating professionalism, and HTPS 10, Fostering parent and school community relationships.

Uniformly, the two HTPS with lowest ratings across all programs are HTPS 4, Fostering communication in the learning environment and HTPS 10, Fostering parent and school community relationships. Alumni clearly feel that the preparation programs could better address these components. Initial licensure programs are aware of these areas and work to address them.

Advanced Programs and Other School Personnel

Dispositions are very important in preparing advanced candidates and other school personnel. All programs focus on developing knowledgeable, effective, and caring educators, and match professional standards with the Conceptual Framework to ensure dispositions are integral to the higher education environment. At the program application stage, materials are screened to determine goodness of fit between an applicant's needs and a department's ability to provide adequate curricular and advising support. Care and consideration are demonstrated as each application is regarded individually. Upon entry, graduate candidates and faculty work together to generate and implement a program of study that is tailored to the individual, although core courses are a necessary component. Graduate level courses are often seminars and candidates often meet with faculty members on an individual basis. Dispositions are crucial for their continued progress through graduate programs; the effective candidate is open to input and suggestions as well as creative in thinking. Successful candidates demonstrate a willingness to examine diverse avenues of thought as they explore topics and accept guidance in formulating and implementing research.

Dispositions are crucial in advanced candidates' progress and are taken very seriously, yet most departments do not rate candidates on discrete items such as those found in rubrics. Interactions among faculty and candidates allow for sufficient interplay to address dispositional concerns that arise. In addition, most graduate programs do not prepare candidates to become teachers. Therefore, emphasis on dispositions addresses qualities that enable candidates to obtain advanced degrees. Some candidates are not teachers, and it is possible that they have no interest in becoming teachers; they pursue advanced degrees that enable them to enter other careers. Thus, few advanced programs evaluate candidates' dispositions. The MEd in Special Education with a focus in Interdisciplinary Studies rates candidates' dispositions; the MEd in Counselor Education evaluates dispositions through self-reports and mentor counselors' and field supervisors ratings; and the MEd in Educational Foundations administers a survey that incorporates nine (9) dispositional criteria.

1.7 Student Learning for Teacher Candidate - Initial Programs

Candidates enroll in courses in which they acquire competencies to assess and analyze P-12 students’ development and learning and make concomitant instructional accommodations and adaptations to help them learn. They also have opportunities during field experiences and student teaching to interact with students and reflect upon the appropriateness of instructional strategies. The assessment-instruction process may be observed as candidates: (a) recognize a need to re-teach content; (b) apply comprehension checks to determine understanding; (c) use guided and independent practices; (d) rely on students’ feedback; and (e) identify and rectify students’ incorrect responses.

Other Key Assessments and Measures Related to P-12 Student Learning
Course Assignments
Candidates' instructional plans, student teaching observations and evaluations, and portfolio reflections provide evidence of their capacity to have a positive impact on P-12 students' learning. Each program has specific assessments and exit requirements that provide a holistic view of candidates' abilities and indicate that they meet the program standards. In addition, the exit assessments provide information on how candidates impact student learning. The exit assessments for each program are often detailed in SPA or State Accreditation of Teacher Education (SATE) reports that feature those assessments, which impact student learning.

The following excerpt, from the overview of Teacher Work Sample (TWS), for the BEd and Post-baccalaureate Secondary Education Programs, provides one example of how exit assessments tie to standards and student learning.

Satisfactory completion of the TWS is required for completion of the secondary education program. Teacher work samples, along with classroom observations of student teaching, also provide evidence that teaching residents meet Hawaii and national teacher standards and they can effectively facilitate students’ learning. (Teacher Work Sample Handbook, Fall 2006, p. 1.)

Performance Portfolios and Student Teaching
Performance portfolios include artifacts that consider assessment, instruction, and the development of meaningful learning experiences for P-12 students.

As discussed in Standard 1, Element 1, mentor teachers evaluate student teachers' HTPS proficiencies each semester, using a rating scale specific to each program. As shown in Table 1.16, mentor evaluations of EECE student teachers' performance on HTPS 3, 6, 7, and 8 indicate that they generally attain acceptable or target ratings. Similarly, mentor evaluations of BEd and Post-Baccalaureate Secondary Education student teachers indicate that overall they attain proficient or accomplished ratings on HTPS 3, 6, 7, and 8. It is evident that mentors believe candidates do extremely well in impacting student learning. It is also clear that the assessment standard, HTPS 8, is not a concern that it was previously, which speaks well for a majority of candidates. In addition, see EECE Final Evaluation of Student Teaching and Secondary Final Evaluation of Student Teaching.

As discussed previously, candidates in the BEd and MEd programs in Special Education, on the whole, attain acceptable or target ratings related to competencies in assessment and instructional interventions. They demonstrate these skills in class projects as well as P-12 school settings with students with disabilities and others who are at-risk of educational failure. In addition, special education candidates demonstrate positive impact on P-12 students' learning through various university projects (i.e., behavior change, case study interventions, ecologically based interventions) that differentially address CEC Standards 3 Individual Learning Differences, 4 Instructional Strategies, 5 Learning Environments and Social Interactions, 7 Instructional Planning, 8 Assessment, and 9 Professional and Ethical Practice. Assessment data (BEd Assessment_5, PB Assessment_5, MM Section_IV__5, D HOH Assessment_5, and Sev Assessment_5) show that:
• 144 of 161 BEd candidates (91%) (2001-05) attained acceptable or target ratings on the behavior change project.
• 52 of 58 Post-Baccalaureate and MEd candidates (90%) (2003-06) attained acceptable or target ratings on the case study intervention project.
• 22 of 25 MEd candidates (88%) (2001-05) attained acceptable or target ratings on the ecologically based intervention.

Candidates' Evaluation of Student Teaching
As discussed in Standard 1, Element 3, the College surveys candidates upon completion of student teaching experiences. For purposes of this report, item responses were disaggregated and recombined to show candidates' impact on student learning. The Student Teacher Survey Impact on Student Learning (2003-06) shows ratings for specific programs and semesters. Nine items relate to student learning. The item with ratings less than 4.0 is use of standardized tests to assess student achievement. Candidates may feel that the preparation programs did afford sufficient understanding about applying standardized tests to student learning. Yet, teacher preparation programs often spend more time helping candidates find multiple ways to assess student learning, rather than focusing on standardized tests. This finding actually supports the College's thinking regarding assessment strategies.

Exclusion of this item from analysis shows that the BEd programs in Elementary, Early Childhood, Elementary Special Education, and Physical Education, as well as the MEd in Special Education have similar ratings across all semesters, most often in the 'agree to strongly agree' categories. The BEd and Post-Baccalaureate programs in Secondary Education have more ratings below 4.0 than other programs, although they did not fall below 3.5, if we exclude the item regarding standardized testing.

Several items have very strong ratings across all programs, such as supporting and reinforcing students in their achievements, applying learning theory in teaching, and communicating with students concerning their academic development. Candidates agree that they individualize classroom activities and evaluate student progress in learning a particular subject. Finally, candidates in most programs agree that they promote student inquiry, use portfolios or examples of student work to assess achievement, and communicate with students concerning personal development. Secondary program ratings range from 3.5 to 3.9.

Candidates' ratings of their ability to impact student learning during student teaching provide general and program specific information. In most programs, they feel well prepared to have a positive impact on student learning during student teaching. Candidates in the Secondary programs are positive in some areas and less certain in others although the data do not suggest broad disagreement.

Interviews with Program Constituents: Data gathered during on site visit.

Survey Data Indications about Candidates' Assessment and Instructional Interventions
Follow-up surveys of graduates and their employers indicate the following about the graduates' ability to assess students' learning, use assessment in instruction, and develop meaningful learning experiences.

Mentor and Principal Surveys
As discussed previously, a survey was sent to mentor teachers, in Fall Semester 2005, who indicated the extent to which pre-service teachers with whom they worked during 2001 to 2004 met HTPS expectations. Mentor teachers' assessment, in general, indicates that pre-service teachers (as evidenced in HTPS 3, 6, 7, and 8), across all programs, have a positive impact on and meet or exceed expectations regarding P-12 students' learning, as evidenced by ratings of 88% or higher. HTPS 8, Use of assessment strategies, however, has a combined rating of 78.9%. Mentors, who work most closely with candidates, clearly differ in their opinion from principals. The lower mentor rating for HTPS 8 supports alumni data, which also shows a lack of preparation in assessment.

As shown in Table 1.18, mentor teacher evaluations indicate that 19.4% of student teachers did not meet proficiency in using assessment strategies. In comparison, as discussed in the section about student teaching, more recent mentor evaluations rated 90.8% of student teachers as proficient accomplished or acceptable/target in using assessment strategies. Although causes for this dramatic improvement are not substantiated, several factors may have influenced earlier mentor ratings. In 2001, the Hawaii public schools began implementation of content performance standards in all instructional areas. There was much confusion and teacher opposition to the standards. Mentors’ low rating of candidates may reflect their perspective regarding the assessment process. Also, a majority of candidates represented in the survey are elementary education majors, who often take several education core courses that address assessment prior to program admission. However, since assessment relevancy and its practical application are addressed later in the program, some candidates may not be able to demonstrate knowledge of using appropriate assessments in their field experience. Lastly, mentor surveys are conducted every three years. A mentor may not have a student teacher when the survey is completed and forget the circumstances of assessment. Assessment has improved in more recent years and will be an interesting area to monitor when mentors complete future surveys.

Similarly, a survey was distributed to school principals in Fall Semester 2005 to determine the extent to which 2000-01 program graduates employed in their schools met HTPS expectations. As shown in Table 1.19, principals' assessments of 124 graduates indicate that they meet or exceed expectations regarding their impact on P-12 students' learning, as evidenced in HTPS 3, 6, 7, and 8. Combined ratings in the meets/exceeds column are over 91% for all areas.

Alumni Surveys
As stated previously, in Fall Semester 2005, the College surveyed alumni across all programs, graduated in 2000-01, to determine perspective regarding their impact on P-12 student learning. As shown in Table 1.17, alumni perceive that they are moderately prepared to impact student learning as evidenced in HTPS 3 Adapts to learner diversity, HTPS 6, Designs and provides meaningful learning experiences, HTPS 7, Uses active student learning strategies, and HTPS 8, Uses assessment strategies.

Two factors affect the reliability of these data. First, the survey represented teachers with three years teaching experience. Thus, their opinions reflect an earlier time in teacher education. Second, the number of respondents is not high; several programs have very low response rates.

The most distinctive element that emerges is the generally lower ratings for BEd and Post-baccalaureate programs in Secondary Education. Alumni rated both programs as providing little to moderate help as expressed by means consistently lower than 3.0. The MEdT program was rated at 3.0 or higher, but this is a score from just one individual.

HTPS 8, Uses assessment strategies has generally low ratings of less than 3.0 across all programs, but especially in areas with more respondents--the BEd in Elementary and Elementary Special Education and Post-Baccalaureate program in Secondary Education.

Advanced Programs
Advanced programs prepare candidates with in-depth knowledge as a basis for obtaining master’s or doctoral degrees. The focus is not to make a positive impact on the environment for student learning. However, since many candidates are already teachers, the knowledge they gain and the projects they undertake often relate to the schools, whether a direct application (e.g., implementing modified curriculum), or an indirect influence (e.g., investigating factors that impinge on curriculum). Candidates who work with P-12 students are engaged, because of graduate work, in a very deep level of professional development. The concepts and skills they learn have an impact on the lives of children and youth in school systems in which they work.

Creating positive environments for student learning in schools is at the core of the graduate program in Educational Administration. The learning context is the backdrop within which students, teachers, and subject matter interact. Thus, courses engage candidates in focusing on the components that impact the learning environment. For example, EDEA 645, Principles of School Leadership and EDEA 670 School Supervision examine the impact that leadership has on the learning environment. Moreover, EDEA 650 Human Factors in Organizations and EDEA 610 School-Community Relations address interpersonal relationships in the context of schooling. Finally, EDEA 780F Seminar in Curriculum Administration examines the trends, research, and problems of curriculum and instruction. The program works to enhance candidates' abilities to become effective administrators for high functioning schools. No school functions well without a positive environment for student learning.

1.8 Student Learning for Other School Personnel (School Counseling)

The MEd in Counselor Education aligns with CACREP and follows all standards, including Human Growth and Development, Social and Cultural Diversity, Career Development, and Professional Identity. The program stresses candidates' roles and responsibilities related to developing and supporting positive environments that ensure P-12 students' academic and social development. Courses, practicum (EDGC 703) and internships (EDCG 733 and EDCG 734) afford opportunities for candidates to refine and apply knowledge and skills in practical settings.

Program Review Processes and Candidates' Abilities to Facilitate P-12 Students' Development CACREP program review documents indicate that school counseling candidates understand and build upon (a) developmental levels of P-12 students, (b) diversity of students, families, and communities; and (c) policy contexts within which they work.

Patterns about that emerge after reading the 2001 CACREP report indicate that candidates' believe that they can facilitate P-12 students' development, work with diverse students, and provide learning and counseling experiences to assist all populations to improve their lives and become better citizens. School principals' positive evaluations confirm these patterns.

Other Key Assessments about Candidates' Abilities to Create Positive Environments for Students
Candidates are knowledgeable of child and adolescent growth, development, and learning; learning style differences; and assessment and instructional strategies that promote students’ achievement. They often participate in decision-making and creating policy that impact school cultures and require understanding of development, implementation, and evaluation processes. Course grades, internship observation and evaluation matrices, and portfolios help to identify candidates’: (a) ability to establish positive school environments; (b) awareness of P-12 students’ developmental levels; and (c) familiarity with the school’s social, cultural, and policy contexts.

Interviews with Program Constituents: Data gathered during on site visit.

Survey Data Indications about Candidates' Assessment and Instructional Interventions
Follow-up surveys of School Counseling graduates and their employers regarding the ability to create positive learning and social environments for student learning are not available. School counseling alumni completed a survey in 2000-01, for inclusion in the CACREP Self-Study.

Summary
The College's conceptual framework is the underpinning for candidates’ experiences as they progress through initial and advanced programs. The College is committed to ensuring that candidates demonstrate appropriate content, pedagogical, and professional knowledge, skills, and dispositions to help all P-12 students attain excellence and develop concomitant attitudes and skills necessary to ensure a just and democratic society for all individuals.

Instructional practices and learning strategies require candidates to analyze, apply, and synthesize newly acquired knowledge and skills. Data sources that document candidates’ performance include PRAXIS I and PRAXIS II assessments, NCATE specialty program association (SPA) review documents, exit portfolios, comprehensive examinations, program matrices and assessment plans, and periodic program evaluation survey assessments. In addition, field experiences, student teaching, and internships afford candidates opportunities to demonstrate application of their knowledge, skills, and dispositions as they interact with children and youth, family members, and colleagues. Candidates rely on technology to collect and analyze research data, reflect on professional practices, enhance teaching and learning experiences, and facilitate assessment and record keeping, all of which support and improve students’ development and learning.

TOP