Program Learning Outcomes:

  1. Demonstrate basic knowledge of the foundations and concepts related to elementary education.
  2. Demonstrate familiarity with a variety of instruction strategies for elementary school students.
  3. Demonstrate basic knowledge in the following areas: art, communication, humanities, language, literature, science, and social sciences.

Program Histrory

In 1963 The Trust Territory of he Pacific Islands and the University of Hawaii created the Micronesian Teacher Education Center (MTEC) to provide in-service teacher training. MTEC began offering a pre-service associate of science degree program in teacher education in 1969. In 1970 MTEC became Community College of Micronesia (CCM). CCM added an in-service teacher education degree through the merging of the College’s extension program and the district teacher education centers in 1974. CCM was first accredited by the Western Association of Schools and Colleges in 1978. In 1982 the Third-year Certificate of Achievement programs in Elementary and Special Education were added. In 1992 the FSM established COM-FSM as a public corporation, and in 1993 CCM became COM-FSM. Also in 1993, the Certificate of Achievement in Preschool Teacher Education was added. In 1994 the Third-year Certificate of Achievement in Related Services Assistant was added, followed by the Third-year Certificate of Achievement program in Educational Leadership Academy in 1995. In 1996 the Associate of Science Degree program in Early Childhood Education was approved. In 1998 an agreement was signed with the University of Guam (UOG) to establish a branch UOG campus at the National Campus to offer fourth-year courses in elementary education to enable students to earn their bachelor’s degree from UOG. This agreement was followed by a collaborative arrangement between COM-FSM and UOG to offer the fourth-year elementary education program. This arrangement is now known as the COM-FSM/UOG Partnership BA Program. In 2002 a Bachelor of Arts Degree program in Elementary Education was approved by the Board of Regents but the substantive change proposal for this degree program was not approved by WASC. In 2009 the Associate of Science Degree program in Teacher Education- Elementary was phased out and replaced by the Associate of Arts Degree program in Teacher Preparation. In 2011 this program was renamed the Associate of Arts in Pre-teacher Preparation- Elementary. During 2009-2011 the Associate Degree programs in Early Childhood and Special Education were “shelved” due to low enrollment.

Program Description

Originating as a teacher training institution, COM-FSM, through the Division of Education continues the task of bettering education in Micronesia. Programs are carefully designed to equip students with the necessary knowledge and skills to meet the challenges of teaching effectively in a culturally relevant manner. At present the college offers an Associate of Arts in Pre-Teacher Preparation — Elementary and a Third-year Certificate of Achievement in Teacher Preparation – Elementary. The name of the AA program was changed from AA in Teacher Preparation – Elementary to AA in Pre-Teacher Preparation – Elementary to more accurately reflect the focus of this program. The AA-level program provides students with courses rich in content, theoretical foundations and an introduction to the teaching profession, while the Third-year program provides pre-service and in-service students with practical and methods courses to prepare them to meet the needs of students in the elementary classrooms in the FSM.

Through a collaborative effort, the University of Guam offers the Partnership BA in Elementary Education at the National Campus making it possible for students to earn the UOG bachelor’s degree without leaving the FSM. The education associate degree and the third-year certificate program have been articulated to meet the requirements of the bachelor’s degree.

Associate of Arts in Pre-Teacher Preparation — Elementary

Program Learning Outcomes

Students completing the AA degree program in Pre-Teacher Preparation-Elementary will be expected to demonstrate the following competencies:

  1. Demonstrate basic knowledge of the foundations and concepts related to elementary education.
  2. Demonstrate familiarity with a variety of instructional strategies for elementary school students.
  3. Demonstrate basic knowledge in the following areas: art, communication, humanities, language, literature, math, science and social sciences.

Program Course Matrix

Courses

Outcome 1

Outcomes 2

Outcomes 3

AR 101

 

 

I

ED 210a

I

D,M

 

ED 215

I,D

 

 

ED/PY 201

I,D

 

 

EN 200

 

 

I

EN 208

 

 

I

EN/CO 205

 

I

I,D

ED292

I

I,D

I,D

MS/ED 210

I

 

 

Science w/lab

I

 

I

SS 120

 

 

I

SS 125 or SS 170
or SS 171

 

 

I

SS/PY 101

I

 

I

The core courses for the AA degree in Teacher Preparation-Elementary cover different parts of the PLO content. The parts of the PLO content is introduced (I), developed (D) and Mastered (M) in different courses throughout the degree program.

Program Admission Requirements:

Admissions to the AA degree in Teacher Preparation is per the COM-FSM admissions policy as stated in the catalog.

Third-year Certificate of Achievement in Teacher Preparation – Elementary

Program Learning Outcomes:

Students completing the Third-year Certificate of Achievement in Teacher Preparation- Elementary will be expected to demonstrate the following competencies:

  1. Demonstrate comprehension and application of the FSM elementary school curriculum standards.
  2. Apply a variety of teaching approaches to meet learning needs of FSM elementary school students.
  3. Assess and evaluate learning of the elementary student at both the formative and summative levels.
  4. Organize and manage an elementary classroom environment for learning.
  5. Demonstrate comprehension and application of learning theories and principles, human development, language development, educational foundations, socio cultural issues, technology and strategies for teaching students with special needs.
  6. Demonstrate professionalism.

Program Course Matrix

Courses

Outcome 1

Outcomes 2

Outcomes 3

Outcome 4

Outcome 5

Outcome 6

ED/PY 300

I

I

I

I

D,M

D

ED 301a

I

I

 

I,D

D

D

ED 301b

I

D

I,D

 

D

 

ED 302

D

D

I,D

D

D

D

ED 303

D

D

I,D

D

D

D

ED 304

D

D

I,D

D

D

D

ED 305

 

D

 

 

D

D

ED 330

 

D

I

D

D

D

ED 338

D

D

 

D

D

D

ED 392

D,M

D,M

D,M

D,M

D,M

D,M

I = Introduced, D = developed and practiced with feedback, M = demonstrated at the mastery level appropriate for graduation

Program Admissions Requirements:The admission policy for the Third-Year CA in Teacher Preparation-Elementary was modified in the spring of 2011 to read as follows:

Admission Application Deadlines: Applications for admission to the third-year certificate program, along with entrance essays, must be submitted at least two weeks (10 working days) prior to the start date of an early registration period.

Full Admission:  A student will be admitted with full status if he/she

      1. possesses an associate degree in education
      2. has earned a CumGPA of 2.75 or above
      3. has a score of at least 20 on the entrance essay with no individual score below a three

Note:  Entrance essay is scored based on the COMET Rubric.

Probationary Status: A student with the education associate degree may be admitted on probation if he/she

  1. has a minimum CumGPA of 2.5 and
  2. has a minimum score of 15 on the entrance essay with no individual score below a three (3)

A student is required to take EN 220 Writing for Teachers if he/she has a score of 15-19 on the entrance essay or individual score of three (3) in Syntax and /or Vocabulary.

Pre-requisite Courses: Students who enter the program without having completed ED 210a, ED 215, and/or ED/PY 201 need to complete these courses with a grade of ‘C’ or better during the first semester of the program.

Removal from Probationary Status:The student may be removed from Probationary Status after the first semester of the third-year program if the student.

  1. successfully passes EN 220 Writing for Teachers and
  2. Earns a semester GPA of at least 2.75 (with no grade lower than a C) with a minimum of 15 credits.

Should a student begin the program in the summer when 15 credit hours are impossible to attain, the same stipulation as above applies for the summer and fall semester combined (or the first two semesters in any combination) even if the course load in the respective semesters exceeds 15 credit hours.

A three member subcommittee will represent the Division to review third-year applications along with the representatives from Admissions Board and RAR.

There were several significant policy changes in the revised admission policy. Students are now required to have completed an AA or AS in education, excluding early childhood. Previously, students were admitted with a degree in any field. Deadlines have been established for applications. Also, clearer requirements for probationary status have been established including how to move to full admission status.

“Shelved” Programs

During the 2009 to 2011 period, the early childhood, related services, and special education programs have been “shelved” due to lack of enrollment. It should be noted that these programs can be “unshelved” should a need for one or more programs becomes evident and funding becomes available.

Discontinuation of AA in Teacher Education Program/Extension of Third-year in Teacher Preparation Program.

A letter proposing a change to the name Associate of Arts in Teacher Preparation program to Associate of Arts in Pre-Teacher Preparation was transmitted to the Vice President of Instructional Affairs on October 12, 2010. The name AA in Teacher Preparation has been misleading to the departments of education, assuming that students graduating from the program are ready to be in the work force. The Curriculum Committee acted on the proposal during its January 17, 2011 meeting and was approved by the president on March 17, 2011.

Faculty/Staff

The COM-FSM Division of Education has seven (7) full-time faculty, one (1) Coordinator for the UOG/COM-FSM BA Partnership Program, one (1) Peace Corps faculty, one (1) Computer Lab Assistant (on special contract), and one (1) clerk. As of this writing, the art instructor position is vacant.

Paul Gallen

Professor of Education B.A.,
University of Guam M.Ed.,
University of Hawaii
paulg@comfsm.fm

Dr. Richard Womack

Professor of Education/Business
B.A., University of California at Berkeley
M.Ed./Ed.D., University of Nevada, Reno rwomack@comfsm.fm

Magdalena Hallers

Professor
B.A., University of Guam M.Ed., University of Guam mhallers@comfsm.fm

 

Susan Moses

Professor
B.S., University of Illinois
M.Ed., University of Oregon smoses@comfsm.fm

 

Robert Andreas

Associate Professor
B.A., University of Guam
M.A., University of Hawaii, Manoa andreas@comfsm.fm

Dr. Sven Mueller

M.A., Free University, Berlin,
Germany Ph.D., Indiana University, Bloomington

 

Molly Peterson

Peace Corps Volunteer/Instructor
B.S., Saint Bonaventure University M.S., Saint Bonaventure University
mollyp@comfsm.fm

Sylvia Henry

UOG/COM-FSM Partnership
BA Coordinator A.A., College of Micronesia-FSM
BA, University of Guam

shenry@comfsm.fm

Mason Tihpen

Information System Specialist
A.A., College of Micronesia-FSM
B.A. E., University of Guam
masotihp@comfsm.fm

 

Josephine Kostka

Administrative Assistant
A.A. Community College of Micronesia josephine@comfsm.fm

 

 

 

Health Indicators

Program Enrollment

 

 

Programs

Fall 2010

Spring 2011

 

Total

AS in Early Childhood Education

4

3

7

LA/Education

0

1

1

AA in Teacher Preparation

350

367

717

AS in Teacher Ed. Elementary

350

95

445

Third-year Teacher Preparation

84

74

158

Total Enrollment

438

445

883

Note: Enrollment data for summer is not available at OAR or IRPO.

Graduation Outcome

Programs                         Enrollment     Graduates     Graduates

 

%

AS in Early Childhood Education

4

0

0%

LA/Education

0

0

0%

AA in Teacher Preparation

350

8

2%

AS in Teacher Ed. Elementary

144

23

16%

Third-year Teacher Preparation

84

7

8%

Total

578

38

6%



Programs                         Enrollment     Graduates      Graduates

 

%

AS in Early Childhood Education

3

0

0%

LA/Education

1

0

0%

AA in Teacher Preparation

367

8

2%

AS in Teacher Ed. Elementary

95

26

27%

Third-year Teacher Preparation

74

11

15%

Total

540

45

8%

Average Class Size Overall Enrollment by
Course

Overall No. of Sections Offered

Overall Average Class Size

Fall 2010

Spring 2011

Fall 2010

Spring 2011

Fall 2010

Spring 2011

335

329

19

19

17.63

17.31

Seat Cost (SY2010-11)

Division

Student
seats

Credits

Obsolete cost
data

Credits per
seat

Seat cost

Education

718

2,154

$226,170.00

3

$105.00

fall 2010 course completion rate/Course Completion Rate (Pass/Fail

Fall 2010

 

Course

Campus

A

 

B

C

D

F

W

I

Total     Pass (³D)

Fail

Pass%

Fail%

AR 101

National

4

 

4

6

3

1

0

0

18          17

1

94%

6%

ED 210a

National

2

 

19

8

6

0

0

0

35          35

0

100%

0%

ED 215

National

5

 

7

9

1

4

0

0

26          22

4

85%

15%

ED/PY 201

National

1

 

8

6

7

5

0

0

27          22

5

81%

19%

ED292

National

12

 

8

8

0

0

0

0

28          28

0

100%

0%

MS/ED 210

National

1

 

11

10

0

2

0

0

24          22

2

92%

8%

ED/PY 300

National

5

 

10

0

2

0

0

0

17          17

0

100%

0%

ED 301a

National

7

 

14

1

0

1

0

0

23          23

0

100%

0%

ED 301b

National

12

 

5

0

0

1

0

1

19          18

1

95%

5%

ED 302

National

12

 

5

4

0

1

0

0

22          22

0

100%

0%

ED 303

National

10

 

10

0

0

0

0

0

20          20

0

100%

0%

ED 304

National

9

 

7

1

0

0

0

0

17          17

0

100%

0%

ED 305

National

1

 

13

3

0

0

0

0

17          17

0

100%

0%

ED 330

National

7

 

10

1

0

1

0

0

19          18

1

95%

5%

ED 338

National

2

 

1

8

1

2

0

0

14          12

2

86%

14%

ED 392

National

6

 

2

1

0

0

0

0

9           9

0

100%

0%

 

Total:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

335         319

16

95%

5%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Spring 2011

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Course

Campus

A

B

C

D

F

W

I

Total

Pass   (³D) Fail

Pass%

Fail%

 

ED 210a

National

10

7

5

3

1

0

0

26

25        1

96%

4%

 

ED 215

National

3

5

11

3

2

0

0

24

22        2

92%

8%

 

ED/PY 201

National

1

7

12

3

1

0

0

24

23        1

96%

4%

 

ED292

National

13

15

4

2

0

0

2

36

34        2

94%

6%

 

MS/ED 210

National

6

10

11

0

0

0

0

27

27        0

100%

0%

 

ED/PY 300

National

0

3

2

4

2

0

0

11

9        2

82%

18%

 

ED 301a

National

7

9

2

2

0

0

0

20

20        0

100%

0%

 

ED 301b

National

11

4

1

0

1

0

0

17

16        1

94%

6%

 

ED 302

National

6

6

5

2

2

0

0

21

19        2

90%

10%

 

ED 303

National

14

7

1

1

0

0

0

23

23        0

100%

0%

 

ED 304

National

3

9

0

0

0

0

0

12

12        0

100%

0%

 

ED 305

National

10

7

0

0

0

0

0

17

17        0

100%

0%

 

ED 330

National

11

12

1

1

1

0

0

26

25        1

96%

4%

 

ED 338

National

3

7

6

3

0

0

0

19

19        0

100%

0%

 

ED 392

National

11

10

5

0

0

0

0

26

26        0

100%

0%

 

 

Total:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

329

317      12

96%

4%

 

 Students’ Satisfaction Rate

The table below summarizes the number of graduates per campus since fall 2010. Most of the graduates with an Associate degree continue their enrollment in the Third-Year Certificate of Achievement program while those who graduate from the Third-year Certificate of Achievement in Teacher Preparation-Elementary program continue enrollment in the Partnership BA in Elementary Education program offered at the National Campus. Since spring 2009 to spring 2011semester, thirty-eight (38) students have graduated from the Partnership program. Currently, a total of seventeen (17) students are enrolled in the program.

Graduation Rate Fall 2010 & Spring 2011

Graduation Rate Fall 2010 Teacher Prep

Graduation by Program

Program                                                                 No. of Graduates

AS in Early Childhood Education

0

LA/Education

0

AA in Teacher Preparation

16

AS in Teacher Ed. Elementary

49

Third-year Teacher Preparation

18

Total

83

Transfer data

Only the students who graduated from the programs at National Campus are being tracked. The tables below show the number of students from fall 2010 and spring 2011 who continue on with our third-year program; the Partnership BA in Elementary Education Program; and/or went straight back to work after receiving a degree. Those who went back to work are in-service teachers from Pohnpei DOE who need to get their associate degree as required by the FSM Certification.

AA Degree Graduates

 

Student

Semester Graduated

 

State

 

Status

1

Fall 2010

Pohnpei

Continue in Third Year CA

2

Fall 2010

Pohnpei

Continue in Third Year CA

3

Fall 2010

Pohnpei

Continue in Third Year CA

4

Fall 2010

Pohnpei

Continue in Third Year CA

5

Fall 2010

Pohnpei

Continue in Third Year CA

6

Fall 2010

Pohnpei

Continue in Third Year CA

7

Fall 2010

Pohnpei

Continue in Third Year CA

8

Fall 2010

Yap

Continue in Third Year CA

9

Spring 2011

Pohnpei

Continue in Third Year CA

10

Spring 2011

Pohnpei

Continue in Third Year CA

11

Spring 2011

Pohnpei

Continue in Third Year CA

12

Spring 2011

Pohnpei

In-service (Continue in Third Year CA)

 

13

Spring 2011

Pohnpei

In-service (Continue in Third Year CA)

14

Spring 2011

Pohnpei

Continue in Third Year CA

15

Spring 2011

Pohnpei

Continue in Third Year CA

16

Spring 2011

Pohnpei

Continue in Third Year CA

During fall 2010 and spring 2011, 18 students graduated from the TYC in Teacher Preparation- Elementary program.

Third-Year Graduates

 

Student

Semester Graduated

 

State

 

Status

1

Fall 2010

Pohnpei

In-service (Continue in UOG & COM-FSM BA)

2

Fall 2010

Pohnpei

Continue in UOG & COM-FSM BA

3

Fall 2010

Yap

Continue in UOG & COM-FSM BA

4

Fall 2010

Yap

Continue in UOG & COM-FSM BA

5

Fall 2010

Pohnpei

Working at Seinwar Elem. School

6

Fall 2010

Marshall Islands

Continue in UOG & COM-FSM BA

7

Fall 2010

Pohnpei

Continue in UOG & COM-FSM BA

8

Spring 2011

Kosrae

Continue in UOG & COM-FSM BA

9

Spring 2011

Yap

Continue in UOG & COM-FSM BA

10

Spring 2011

Pohnpei

In-service (Continue in UOG & COM-FSM BA)

11

Spring 2011

Yap

Continue in UOG & COM-FSM BA

12

Spring 2011

Pohnpei

In-service (Continue in UOG & COM-FSM BA)

13

Spring 2011

Pohnpei

Continue in UOG & COM-FSM BA

14

Spring 2011

Pohnpei

Continue in UOG & COM-FSM BA

15

Spring 2011

Kosrae

In Kosrae

16

Spring 2011

Pohnpei

Continue in UOG & COM-FSM BA

17

Spring 2011

Pohnpei

Continue in UOG & COM-FSM BA

18

Spring 2011

Pohnpei

Continue in UOG & COM-FSM BA

 

Learning Outcome Assessment

Program Learning Outcome (PLO) Level: The parts of the PLO content is introduced (I), developed (D) and Mastered (M) in different courses throughout the degree program.

Course

PLO#

I, D, M

Reflection/Comments

AR 101

3

I

 

ED 210a

1, 2

I, D, M

Number of students: N=25 (Spring 2011)

Recommendations:
Relate all Final Examination Question to the appropriate CLO and break this out in CLO Groups for evaluation of course.
The ED210 course outline should now reflect the introduction to teaching as an entry course into the profession and should be welcomed.

ED 215

1

I, D

Number of students: N=24 (Spring 2011)

 

 

 

 

 

Recommendations:

  1. Course outline/syllabus needs to be updated to match textbook used.
  2. Changes need to be made to some student learning outcomes (such as 2.b., 2.c., & 2.d). Instead of having them as separate student learning outcomes-combine them.
  3. Rewrite and combine slo 4 and 5; disability by disability to match textbook (recommend. From previous course assessments).
  4. Need to have to separate checkouts for visual impairments and hearing impairments (as recommended before) or give more activities and time for discussing topics before checkout.
  5. Include video viewing and observations of individual’s with disabilities to better understand the different categories/types of disabilities.
  6. Include a slo for a final project on different types of health impairments and disabilities.
  7. Continue to work with state campuses on the common assessments.
  8. Recommendations from ED215 students:
    1. More group work.
    2. More time, more examples, and more activities (role play, simulations, etc.).
    3. Slow down and provide more time to study.
    4. To include more assignments than tests and quizzes.

ED/PY 201

2

I, D

Number of students: N=24 (Spring 2011)
Recommendations:

  1. Changes need to be made to most student learning outcomes and suggested assessment strategies (#2- 4: too specific).
  2. Written checkouts should be for each chapter only (Chapters 11 & 12).
  3. Rewrite student learning outcome numbers 4 & 5 –topics on developmental issues (individual projects).
  4. Include SLO for the first chapter (introduction).
  5. Include a final project (developmental issues) for the course.
  6. Align course outline/syllabus with chapters of textbook (already recommended in previous course assessments).
  7. Develop course outline and work with state campuses for the common assessments.

Additional observations:

  1. One student received an “A” letter grade.
  2. Students with more absences failed to turn in course work.

 

Special comments: explanations on course grading, opportunities to achieve outcomes, how many students receive an A, B, C, etc.

 

 

 

1.   A = 1

  1. B = 7 Students
  2. C = 11 Students
  3. D = 4 Student
  4. F = 1 Student

ED 292

1, 2, & 3

I, D

Number of students: N=36 (Spring 2011)

MS/ED 210

PLO

I

Number of students: N=27 (Spring 2011)

Science w/lab

1

I

 

SS    125    or
SS   170    or
SS 171

3

I

 

SS/PY 101

1 & 3

I

 

Course

PLO

I, D, M

Reflection/Comments

ED/PY 300

1-6

I, D

Final Grades: 3 Bs, 2 Cs, 4 Ds, and 2 Fs.

Comments: Needless to say, I wish I could start all over again with this class. After the slow start and the devastating test results, I thought we should spend as much time as we needed on each topic. As the course went on, however, the students seemed to rely on the fact that we would sometimes even read the passages together if no one volunteered to move the class discussion along, which made us lose much needed time.

ED 301b

1-3, 5-6

I, D

Number of students: N=17 (Spring 2011)

Special comment: If a student scored below 70% on a paper or quiz on the first try, s/he was given a chance to do a make-up.
However, per the course policy, the highest score a student could earn on the second try was 70%. To get students to come to class on time and read the assignment in the textbook, bonus quizzes were given throughout the course. These quizzes were given only during the first five minutes of class and appeared to motivate students to come to class on time. The quizzes were open book so the skill actually being tested was their ability to scan. According to the Best Practices instructor, scanning is a valuable skill that the students should learn. This practice will be continued this summer and next fall.

Final grades: 11 As; 4 Bs; 1 C; and   1 F.  The student who earned the C is a very capable student who attended class regularly but simply failed to submit assignments in a timely manner. Points were deducted for lateness,  and this seriously affected her grade.

 

 

 

The student earning the F stopped attending class towards the latter part of the semester. No reason was given for this action.

Recommendations for improving ED/PY 301b: The recommendations for improvement of this course have been highlighted under the discussions above. In addition, to earn bonus points this semester students were asked to submit a reflection paper summarizing at least three ways to improve the course.
Suggestions offered by the students include: visit the schools; extend the class time; rethink the peer evaluations of teaching demonstrations; have students teach real students; do not allow students to submit late assignments; do not allow students to come to class late;  give students more work on the weekends; do not give so many assignments; spend more time on writing lesson objectives; have students share their translated assignments with each other; bonus quizzes should be from closed books; have students deliver their translated lessons to the entire class; provide more time for assignments that have to be typed, and have a bigger classroom space. All of these suggestions will be taken into consideration when planning lessons and activities for the summer and fall 2011 semesters.

As recommended on the Fall 2010 course level assessment report for this course, a direct link to the FSM Standards and Benchmarks was included with each SLO on the Spring 2011 syllabus. This practice will be continued each semester. Beginning with the summer 2011 semester, a more concerted effort will be made to develop lesson objectives from the standards and benchmarks.

ED 302

1-6

I, D

Number of students: N=21 (Spring 2011)

Suggestions for Improvement:

  1. We need to be clearer on the respective weigh of content and methods. Since the course had methods in its title, I emphasized methods, learning half-way during the semester it is actually content, content, and, again, content that needs to be emphasized.
  2. We also need to pick a different, more appropriate book (for elementary Social Studies).

ED 330

2-6

I, D

Number of students: N=26 (Spring 2011)

Special comment: If a student scored below 70% on a paper or quiz on the first try, s/he was given a chance to do a make-up.
However, per the course policy, the highest score a student could earn on the second try was 70%. Several opportunities to earn bonus points were provided during the course. To get students to come to class on time and read the assignment in the textbook, bonus quizzes were given throughout the course. These quizzes were given only during the first five minutes of class and appeared

 

 

 

to motivate students to come to class on time. The quizzes were open book so the skill actually being tested was their ability to scan. According to the Best Practices instructor, scanning is a valuable skill that the students should learn. This practice will be continued this summer and next fall.

Recommendations for improving ED 330: Areas needing special attention for the spring 2011 semester are highlighted above in bold and/or discussed. Students were required to submit a reflection paper summarizing three recommendations for improving the course. Some of these recommendations are included in the discussions above. Other recommendations focused primarily on general orchestration of the course rather than specific SLOs and included the following: arrange for at least one visit to a local classroom (3 students suggested this), schedule the course for the morning, rethink the way peers evaluate in-class checkouts, have more quizzes, have more role-play activities, do not allow students to be late to class, do not accept work that is submitted late, do not give so many bonus opportunities, wait until everyone is in class and then give the bonus quiz, give partial credit when students only meet part of a bonus requirement, play more games, type the lesson plan and place it in everyone’s folder (The lesson plan is usually written on the board ahead of class.), have more quizzes and tests, include more group presentations, extend the time go to the elementary classrooms to observe, do not extend due dates, do more demonstrations, include how to set up a grading system, obtain written feedback from students, give extra work on the weekends, make tests more difficult, and arrange for a bigger space.

The instructor also had the opportunity to attend two (2) FSM education conferences in October and November. It was learned that the FSM school accreditation standards include a classroom observation and criteria for acceptable classroom management. Links to these standards were incorporated in the spring 2011 ED 330 course syllabus, and copies of the accreditation instruments were included in the student activity booklet that accompanies this course. The instructor will continue to make a direct link between ED 330 and the FSM school accreditation standards.

ED 338

1-6

D, M

Number of Students N=19 Special comments:
A = 3 Student B = 7 Students C = 6 Students D = 3 Students F = 0 Student

 

 

 

Recommendations:

Course outline needs to be updated to match textbook used. Student learning outcomes need to be organized for easier assessment.
Change some SLOs that are very outdated and not based on current studies.
Align course outline/syllabus with chapters of textbook. Include SLO using the National Curriculum Standards (NCS)- linking SLOs & NCS with accommodations.

ED 392

1-6

D, M

Number of students N=26 (Spring 2011)

Recommendations:

  1. Revise text
  2. Add technology to PLO #
  3. Submit new course outline
  4. Schedule class time to allow for travel and one day lab together and administering lesson assessments
  5. Devise an assessment procedure that allows for assessing student knowledge in the FSM and State curriculum content areas particularly the course in the General Education core.

The summaries above were provided by the faculty who taught the courses during fall 2010 and spring 2011. The details of the SLO assessments for each of the courses summarized above are attached as Appendix A to this report.

The attempt to obtain SLO assessment of the other courses listed in the major requirements of the AA degree in Teacher Preparation-Elementary did not get materialized because each instructional division at the National Campus will submit their own SLO assessment to the VPIA office for analysis.

SY 2010-11 Assessment Plan

Evaluation questions

Data sources

Sampling

Analysis

Do our students possess pedagogical

FSM Teacher

All entering 3rd

Comparison of cohort

content knowledge?

Competency

Year; all

scores with FSM

 

Exam

completing 3rd &

certification standards

 

 

4th Year students

& item analysis

Do our students possess subject-area

FSM-NSTT

All entering 3rd

Compare students’

content (reading, writing, math and

 

Year; all

scores with FSM

science) knowledge?

 

completing 3rd &

Certification Standards.

 

 

4th Year students

 

Are the students able to plan, deliver,

Common

All students

Compare student

and assess a lesson in a peer teaching,

observation

enrolled in ED

performance across

role play situation?

instrument

292

campuses for

 

across all

 

competency and

 

campuses

 

consistency.

Are the students able to plan, deliver,

Common

All students

Compare student

and assess a lesson in a local

observation

enrolled in ED

performance across

elementary classroom?

instrument

392

campuses for

 

across all

 

competency and

 

campuses

 

consistency.

Have students become familiar with

Common

All students

Compare student

basic education terminology, basic

assessment

enrolled in ED

performance across

teaching methods, basic principles of

instrument

210a

campuses for

assessment, classroom management,

across all

 

competency and

and lesson planning?

campuses

 

consistency.

Are the students able to identify and

Common

All students

Compare student

differentiate the different disability

assessment

enrolled in ED

performance across

conditions?

instrument

215

campuses for

 

across all

 

competency and

 

campuses

 

consistency.

Are the students able to demonstrate

Common

All students

Compare student

understanding of the physical,

assessment

enrolled in

performance across

cognitive, and social/emotional

instrument

ED/PY 201

campuses for

development of  children and youth

across all

 

competency and

from birth through adolescent stage?

campuses

 

consistency.

Are the students able to fulfill the role

ED 492/498

All students

Analyze student

of a teacher in a local classroom for

INTASC

enrolled in ED

performance levels

an entire semester?

rubrics and

492/ 498

(distinguished,

 

showcase

 

proficient, basic, &

 

portfolio

 

unsatisfactory) using

 

 

 

the INTASC rubrics.

Timeline

Activity

Who is Responsible?

Date

Teacher Competency Exam for all students

Professors: Moses, Hallers, & Gallen

End of fall 2010& end of spring 2011

NSTT Content Exams for all students

Professors: Womack & Andreas via help of NDOE

End of fall 2010& end of spring 2011

ED 292 for all students in ED292

Dr. Womack

End of fall 2010& end of spring 2011

ED 392 for all students in ED 392

Dr. Womack

End of fall 2010& end of spring 2011

ED 210a for all students enrolled in ED 210a

Dr. Womack

End of fall 2010 & end of spring 2011

ED 215 for all students enrolled in ED 215

Prof. Hallers

End of fall 2010 & end of spring 2011

ED/PY 201 for all students enrolled in ED/PY 201

Prof. Hallers

End of fall 2010 & end of spring 2011

ED 492/498 for all 4th Year graduates

Ed. Div. faculty

End of fall 2010 &end of spring 2011

Report on Evaluation Question #1 on School Year 2010-2011 Division of Education Program Assessment Plan.

The first evaluation question on the 2010-2011 Division of Education assessment plan is: Do our students possess pedagogical content knowledge? This question was to be evaluated by a review of FSM Teacher Competency Exam (TCE) data for all entering and completing third- and fourth- year students. Such review was to include a comparison of cohort scores with FSM certification standards and an item analysis of performance on the exam.

FSM Teacher Competency Exam Results. During this past year, the FSM Department of Education officially adopted the COM-FSM competency exam as a component of the National Standardized Test for Teachers (NSTT). The test consists of 100 multiple-choice items, 75 of which target competencies addressed in the third-year program and 25 of which target competencies addressed in the fourth-year program. A score of 53 out of the first 75 items (70%) was established as the bottom cut-off score for certification at the Basic level. Fourth-year students were administered all 100 items, while third-year students were administered only the first 75. Three (3) students in the December 2010 third-year cohort completed all 100 items. It was decided to test students only when they completed the third- and fourth-year programs to avoid students learning from the test due to multiple administrations of the same instrument.

Table No. 1 below summarizes the scores of the December 2010 and May 2011 graduates. Of the 17 third-year graduates, 15 students took the exam. (Although signs were posted announcing the test administration, one (1) December 2010 graduate and one (1) May 2011 graduate failed to take the exam.) Of the 15 third-year graduates, only eight (8) scored 53 or higher. The highest score achieved was 60, while three (3) students scored 53. An additional three (3) students scored between 50-52. Two students scored only 40 on the exam. These scores are consistent with the performance of the students in the third-year courses.

Of the seven (7) fourth-year graduates, four (4) passed the exam considering only the first 75 questions. If all 100 questions are considered, however, only one (1) student achieved a score of 70% or higher.

It should be noted that the names and scores of students who passed the exam will be forwarded to the FSM Department of Education and recorded for certification purposes. According to FSM DOE policy, a student/teacher may attempt to pass the exam three (3) times.

Table No. 1 Teacher Competency Test Scores for December 2010 and May 2011 Third-year and Fourth-year Graduates

Student

 

Program

Graduation Cohort

Score on first 75 items

Score on entire 100 items

TY #1

Third-year

December 2010

40

49

TY #2

Third-year

December 2010

51

N/A

TY #3

Third-year

December 2010

54

67

TY #4

Third-year

December 2010

42

N/A

TY #5

Third-year

December 2010

Did not take

N/A

TY #6

Third-year

December 2010

59

75

TY #7

Third-year

May 2011

53

N/A

TY #8

Third-year

May 2011

60

N/A

TY #9

Third-year

May 2011

43

N/A

TY #10

Third-year

May 2011

40

N/A

TY #11

Third-year

May 2011

Did not take

N/A

TY #12

Third-year

May 2011

49

N/A

TY #13

Third-year

May 2011

52

N/A

TY #14

Third-year

May 2011

53

N/A

TY #15

Third-year

May 2011

58

N/A

TY #16

Third-year

May 2011

53

N/A

TY #17

Third-year

May 2011

57

N/A

 

 

 

 

 

BA #1

BA

December 2010

60

68

BA #2

BA

December 2010

67

85

BA #3

BA

December 2010

55

65

BA #4

BA

December 2010

57

68

BA #5

BA

December 2010

50

58

BA #6

BA

December 2010

49

58

BA #7

BA

May 2011

46

57

Item analysis of the results. The second part of assessment question #1 requires an item analysis of the performance of students on the FSM TCE. The primary topic of each
TCE item is listed in Table No. 2 below along with the number of students who missed each item. Items missed by 30% or more of the students are highlighted in bold type. These results will be shared with faculty in the Education Division so that areas of weakness may be addressed during this school year.

Recommendations for improvement.

1) Several years ago there were two additional parallel competency exams developed that are currently in draft stage. There is a need to finalize these exams so that students/teachers do not learn from repeatedly taking the same test. Discussions have begun with the FSM DOE in this regard.

2) A study manual designed to prepare students/teachers to take the FSM TCE is scheduled to be completed in the next two weeks. This manual should be made available to all teachers and to students in the COM-FSM third- and fourth-year programs to enhance their performance on the exam.

Question #4

Showcase Portfolio: Final Presentation

(5) Strong, convincing, and consistent evidence; quality reflection
(3) Clear evidence and/or reflection&l
(1) Limited evidence and/or limited reflection
(0) No evidence and/or weak reflection

INTASC Principle

5

4

3

1

0

1.   Understanding Content

7

0

1

0

0

2.   Understanding Development

6

1

1

0

0

3.   Understanding Differences

4

2

1

1

0

4.   Designing Instructional Strategies

5

1

1

1

0

5.   Understanding and Using Management Strategies and Motivation

6

1

0

1

0

6.   Communicating to Learners

6

1

1

0

0

7.   Planning Instruction and Using Integration

6

2

0

1

0

8.   Assessment of Student Learning

5

2

0

1

0

9.   Reflecting on Practice

4

3

0

1

0

10. Participating in Professional Community

7

0

1

0

0

Seven out of the eight teacher candidates graduated. One failed to graduate from the program resulting from inefficient teaching performance and lacking evidence of accomplishment of the INTASC principles.

Conceptual Element/Category

 

Performance Levels

Unsatisfactory

Basic

Proficient

Distinguished

 

Is frequently late or

Sometimes late or

Late or absent once

Is never late in class

 

absent

absent with valid

with valid excuse

or absent from class

 

 

excuse

 

(and other assigned

 

 

 

 

activity)

 

 

N=1

N=8

N=8

 

Does not do the

Completes all the

Assigned tasks are

Does the assigned

 

assigned tasks

tasks with some

complete an well

tasks very well;

 

quite often

reliance from others

done; submits them

completes and

 

 

and sometimes

on deadline date

submits them before

 

 

submits them late

 

the deadline

 

 

with valid reason.

 

 

KS:

 

 

N=10

N=7

Commitment to

Is always defensive

Accepts

Accepts

Accepts constructive

Learn (Own

when criticized

constructive

constructive

criticisms, addresses

Learning an

constructively by

criticisms but does

criticisms and does

shortcomings pointed

Student Learning)

peers/supervisors

not do something to

something to

out and monitors own

 

 

improve oneself

improve oneself

progress in the light

 

 

 

 

of those criticisms

 

 

 

N=10

N=7

 

Does not show any effort to improve instructional

Confer with peers and supervisors and carries out their

Make plans of action to improve student learning,

Read books, makes use of information from the internet,

 

practices to

suggestions to

discusses them with

discusses with peers

improve student

improve student

supervisors and

and supervisors ways

learning

learning

implements them

to improve student

 

 

 

learning and carries

 

 

 

them out in

 

 

 

instruction

 

 

N=9

N=8

 

Conceptual Element/Category

 

Performance Levels

Unsatisfactory

Basic

Proficient

Distinguished

 

Does not use

Uses appropriate

Uses appropriate

Uses appropriate

 

appropriate verbal

verbal and non-

verbal and non-

verbal and non-verbal

 

and non-verbal

verbal language

verbal language

language when

 

language when

when

when

communicating at all

 

communicating

communication in

communicating

times and encourages

 

 

class

during group work

others (peers and

 

 

 

and class discussion

students) to do the

 

 

 

 

same

 

 

 

N=9

N=8

 

Does not listen

Listens actively

Listen actively

Listen actively when

EC:

actively when

when

when

communicating at all

Willingness to

communicating

communicating

communicating

times and encourage

Communicate

 

during class

during class and

others (peers and

Enthusiastically

 

discussion

group discussions

students) to do the

 

 

 

 

same

 

 

 

N=10

N=7

 

Loves to talk but

Loves to

Loves to

Loves to

 

does not waif for

communicate

communicate

communicate

 

one’s turn.

appropriately

appropriately and

appropriately and

 

 

(language not

observes the give-

observes the give-

 

 

offensive and waits

and-take process

and-take process;

 

 

for one’s turn)

 

Maintains composure

 

 

 

 

at all times

 

 

 

N=9

N=8

 

Conceptual Element/Category

 

Performance Levels

Unsatisfactory

Basic

Proficient

Distinguished

 

Is frequently

Interacts with

Interacts with

Interacts with others

disrespectful in

others in polite and

others in polite and

in a polite and

interacting with

professional

professional

professional manner ,

students, peers,

manner

manner and works

works with them

teachers, university

 

with them willingly

willingly and values

personnel, and

 

 

their contributions to

others

 

 

any cooperative

 

 

 

endeavor

 

 

N=8

N=9

 

Shows over bias to

Makes statements

Makes statements

Makes statements

RD:

certain groups of

appreciating

appreciating diverse

appreciating diverse

Sensitivity to

people/students

diversity and the

opinions and using

opinions and using

Diversity

and gives negative

contributions made

them to build on

those opinions to

 

statements about

by different groups

knowledge,

build on knowledge,

 

them

 

expectations, etc.

expectations, etc;

 

 

 

 

Actively seeks out

 

 

 

 

opportunities to draw

 

 

 

 

out inputs from

 

 

 

 

diverse groups and

 

 

 

 

incorporating them in

 

 

 

 

one’s work or project

 

 

N=1

N=8

N=10

 

Does not make any

Makes one or two

Makes more than

Makes a lot of

 

provision for

provisions to

two provisions to

provisions to

 

accommodating

accommodate

accommodate

accommodate

 

diversity in group

diversity in group

diversity in group

diversity in group

 

work or addressing

work or in the

work or in the

work or in the

 

diversity in the

classrooms when

classrooms when

classrooms when

 

classrooms when

doing practicum in

doing practicum in

doing practicum in

 

doing practicum in

the schools (e.g.

the schools (e.g.

the schools in terms

 

the schools

differentiated

addressing learning

of content and

 

 

activities for

style preferences,

methodology;

 

 

different ability

differences, in

Addresses

 

 

level)

abilities, gender

exceptionalities in

 

 

 

equity)

class

 

 

N=1

N=10

N=7

Recommendation

  1. Update course outlines with the new requirements and formats.
  2. Update tools/rubrics used in the program.
  3. Incorporate INTASC principles in rubrics used for observation.
  4. Design student learning outcomes for development of unit/lesson plans based on the curriculum standards in the methods courses.
  5. Continue to work with state campuses on uniform assessments for AA Teacher Preparation program and TYC in Teacher Preparation.
  6. Establish a capacity within the instructional divisions to share SLO assessment of courses offered in the major requirements of the AA in Teacher Preparation-Elementary degree program.
  7. Design activities for the “Teacher Corp” Program that will complement the programs being offered by the Division.
  8. Increase quantity and quality of teachers produced.
  9. Strengthen admission requirements for the TYC Teacher Preparation program.
wpChatIcon