April2019

1

Standard 4.2 – Indicators of Teaching Effectiveness

Introduction Our overall objective of data collection and analysis related to Standard 4.2 is to answer this primary question—Do our completers demonstrate that they can effectively apply the professional knowledge, skills, and dispositions that our educator preparation program (EPP) experiences were designed to achieve? In order to answer this question, we observed alumni teaching in their classrooms, analyzed their plan for the observed lesson, and evaluated their performance using an instrument developed by the EPP. The same participants were also interviewed and provided assessments and assessment data as part of the data collection for 4.1. In addition to the observations and lesson plan analysis, another measure of teaching effectiveness for our alumni are the action research projects completed in the Middle Grades Institute. Each summer, in-service teachers attend an institute and develop an action research project. After enacting the action research during the fall semester, they present the results of their research at the Middle Grades Conference in January. Every year we have alumni from across our licensure programs that participate in the institute.

Methods

Oversight of the data collection and analysis related to the observation data and lesson plan analysis for standard 4.2 as well as the iterative process of using results for continuous improvement is provided by the CAEP Leadership Team composed of the CAEP Coordinator, Dean of the College, Associate Deans, Chair of the Department of Education, Director of Teacher Education, and the Director of Assessment, Data and Accreditation. The Dean’s office has allocated a doctoral student to work with the CAEP Coordinator to facilitate the data collection, data analysis, and dissemination of findings to faculty in collaboration with the CAEP Leadership Team. Participant Selection The sample for data collection for 2018-2019 for CAEP standard 4.2 is from EPP graduates who completed their program in 2016 and are known to be employed in Vermont. At the time of data collection, these graduates were in their third year of teaching; new enough that their practice would still reflect their formal professional preparation but no longer novices. Our goal was to create a sample of 10 or more alumni across all licensure programs in schools across the state. The sample was obtained by first narrowing the list of all 2016 EPP graduates (n=139) to those we were able to confirm were employed in a Vermont school in the fall of 2018. Narrowing the list based on this criterion reduced the study population to 35 recent graduates. Beginning in October 2018, we invited all of the 2016 graduates in the study population to participate in this

April2019

2

study. Invitations were sent by email—up to four times per individual—and included a brief description of the study and a copy of the participant information sheet (included in the appendix). As incentive, participants were offered a $25 Amazon gift card. Ten 2016 graduates agreed to participate in the data collection for 4.2. (These same graduates also participated in the data collection for 4.1.) These graduates represent four of the ten endorsement areas. Note that only seven of the ten endorsement areas are represented in the study population. The number of graduates from the study population in each endorsement area, the number in the sample, and the sample teaching grade levels are detailed in Table 1 below. The schools in which they work represent six of Vermont’s 14 counties. The distribution of schools by Vermont county is detailed in Table 2 below.

Table 1 Number of 2016 Graduates by Endorsement Area

Study Population (N=35) vs. Sample (N=10)

Endorsement Area

Number of Graduates Teaching in VT

Number Participating

Teaching Grade(s) of Study Participants

Art 0 Consulting Teacher 1 Early Childhood 2 Early Childhood Special Education

3 2 Pre-K

Elementary Education 8 1 1st Middle Grades ELA Math Science

1 1

1

4th Music 0 Physical Education 0 Secondary Ed English Math Science Social Studies

2 2 5 3

2 3 1

9-12th 7-12th 9-12th

Special Education 7

Table 2 Number of Study Participant Schools by Vermont County

County Number Participants Addison 1 Caledonia 1 Chittenden 4 Franklin 2 Lamoille 1 Washington 1

April2019

3

Data Collection All ten participants in the study were observed teaching a lesson, and all ten shared the plan for that lesson prior to or at the time of the observation. The observer, a doctoral student and graduate research assistant, took notes during the observation. All of the participants were interviewed following the observation as part of data collection for Standard 4.1 during which they provided additional information about planning for instruction. Data Analysis The observer rated each lesson using a modified version of the Summative Student Teaching Assessment we use to evaluate our pre-service teachers at the end of student teaching. Ratings for planning were based on written plans submitted at the time of the observation, instructional tools used during the lesson (including posted notices of lesson objectives or standards, handouts, ready availability of materials, etc.), as well as the interview data collected for 4.1. A copy of the instrument is included in the appendix. The instrument was piloted for observing in-service teachers in 2017 by two raters, the CAEP Coordinator and the graduate assistant, who observed and rated a videotaped lesson by an in-service teacher. The two raters then discussed initial coding and came to agreement on coding decisions. The observation instrument addresses a total of 16 dimensions across the categories of Planning for Instruction and Classroom Practice. Each dimension is rated on a scale of 1 to 4, defined as follows:

• 1 – Undeveloped • 2 – Developing • 3 – Target • 4 – Advanced

At the time of graduation, pre-service teachers are expected to meet the target in most dimensions. The benchmark we have set for the collective sample of alumni, at 2-3 years after graduation, is a mean of 3.5 (out of 4) for each item on the observation instrument. For individuals, the expectation is that for each participant the rubric ratings should be primarily advanced (4s) with no underdeveloped (1s) or developing (2s).

Findings

Mean ratings on the sixteen dimensions on the Alumni Teacher Observation Tool ranged from 3.0 to 3.9. The benchmark of 3.5 was met for fifteen of the sixteen indicators (3.5 to 3.9 range), and one indicator was below at 3.0. Of the total 159 individual ratings, 68% were advanced, 29% were on target, and 3% were developing. (Note: The dimension Technology Use in the Classroom Practice category was not applicable in one context.) Frequencies and means for each dimension are presented in Tables 3 and 4 below. Ratings for eight of the participants met the expectation that rubric ratings be primarily advanced (4’s). Nine met the expectation of no ratings at developing (2’s) or underdeveloped (1’s).

April2019

4

Planning for Instruction As shown in Table 3, the mean ratings on all of the 7 dimensions of planning for instruction met the benchmark of 3.5 (out of 4). These dimensions are: 1) developmentally appropriate and challenging lessons, 2) inclusive lessons with high expectations for diverse learners, 3) discipline appropriate lessons that are accessible and meaningful, 4) multiple assessment methods aligned with objectives and standards, 5) selecting rigorous learning objectives based on standards, 6) lesson grounded in rigorous standards, 7) and planning use of materials, technology and curricular resources to support and enhance instruction.

Table 3 Dimensions of Planning for Instruction

Frequencies and Means (N = 10)

Dimension Frequencies

Mean 1

Undeveloped 2

Developing 3

Target 4

Advanced

Developmentally Appropriate & Challenging 0 0 3 (30%) 7 (70%) 3.7

Inclusive with High Expectations for Diverse Learners 0 0 3 (30%) 7 (70%) 3.7

Discipline Appropriate, Accessible and Meaningful 0 0 1 (10%) 9 (90%) 3.9

Multiple Assessment Methods Aligned with Objectives and Standards 0 0 2 (20%) 8 (80%) 3.8

Rigorous Learning Objectives Based on Content Standards 0 0 3 (30%) 7 (70%) 3.7

Rigorous Standards to Focus Instruction 0 0 3 (30%) 7 (70%) 3.7

Technology, Instructional Materials, & Curricular Resources 0 0 3 (30%) 7 (70%) 3.8

Classroom Practice As shown in Table 4, the mean ratings on 8 of the 9 dimensions of classroom practice met the benchmark. These dimensions are: 1) differentiating and modifying instruction to meet learner needs, 2) fostering a positive learning environment through active engagement and collaborative learning, 3) connecting concepts and differing perspectives to engage students in higher order thinking, 4) using a variety of instructional strategies to support deep understanding, 5) using assessment data to monitor student progress and adjust instruction, and 6) using multiple methods of assessment to engage learners in their own growth, 7) effective classroom routines and communication strategies, and 8) transition monitoring for active participation. Only one dimension of classroom practice, use of technology to support student learning, had a mean rating (3.0) below the Target level. Since the use of technology has not emerged as a concern for our preservice teachers, we will continue to monitor these data to determine whether the issue is with their preparation or with the access to technological resources.

April2019

5

Table 4 Dimensions of Classroom Practice

Frequencies and Means (N=10)

Dimension Frequencies

Mean 1

Undeveloped 2

Developing 3

Target 4

Advanced

Differentiation & Modifications Based 0 0 3 (30%) 7 (70%) 3.7

Positive Learning Environment for Active, Collaborative Learning 0 1 (10%) 2 (20%) 7 (70%) 3.6

Concept Connections, Questioning, and Perspectives for Higher Order Critical Thinking

0 1 (10%) 3 (30%) 6 (60%) 3.5

Variety of Instructional Strategies 0 0 1 (10%) 9 (90%) 3.8

Technology Use (Note: Not Applicable in one observed context.) 0 1 (10%) 7 (70%) 1 (10%) 3.0

Multiple Assessment Methods to Engage Learners in their Growth 0 0 2 (20%) 8 (80%) 3.8

Monitors Student Progress & Data Use for Instructional Decisions 0 0 4 (40%) 6 (60%) 3.6

Classroom Routines & Effective Communication Strategies

0 1 (10%) 2 (70%) 7 (70%) 3.6

Transition Monitoring to Encourage Active Participation

0 0 5 (50%) 5 (50%) 3.5

Discussion

In summary, the data analysis demonstrates that our alumni are generally effective in applying the professional knowledge, skills, and dispositions that they acquire in our programs. To varying degrees, in every observed class session, students had opportunities to actively engage with accessible standards-aligned content though explorations, think-pair-shares, critical thinking activities, scientist meetings, creative play, and/or active problem-solving. Most of the observed graduates exhibited a very positive affect: their interactions with students conveyed genuine warmth, care, and interest. Based on the observations, informal conversations with the study participants before and after the observations, formal lesson plans, and comments during interviews, recent alumni instructional planning and classroom practice are already deeply impacted by ways that school systems within which they work are implementing the state-wide shift to proficiency-based education at the middle and high school levels. Most of the seven teachers in the study working at these grades levels report regularly working with colleagues to identify learning targets for particular courses or instructional units, develop corresponding proficiency scales and assessment of proficiency and unit planning. The three teachers working at the Prek and elementary levels also work with colleagues to facilitate student learning aligned to standards.

April2019

6

Participants shared their appreciation for their professional preparation at UVM. They reported learning overarching concepts, investigative or exploratory learning approaches, the importance of aligning instruction with assessment, and the importance of collecting and using student data to inform instruction. Suggestions for program improvement include more exposure to planning for and collecting data in a proficiency-based system, more focus on curriculum development, an introduction to effective management of para-educators, and more focus on managing student behaviors. Personal goals for continued learning include better methods of formative and summative data collection and analysis, and designing opportunities for students to assess and monitor their own progress toward meeting learning targets.

April2019

7

Appendices Research Information Sheet

Research Information Sheet Title of Study: UVM’s Educator Preparation Licensure Programs’ Continuous Improvement Protocols Principal Investigator (PI): Barri Tinkler, Ph.D. Funder: University of Vermont, Education Department Introduction You are invited to take part in this research study because you are a recent graduate of one of the University of Vermont’s educator preparation programs and are currently teaching in a Vermont school. This study is being conducted by Dr. Barri Tinkler at the University of Vermont. Purpose The purpose of this study is to allow UVM Educator Preparation faculty to gain a view into the teaching practices of our alumni. Results will be used as part of the continuous improvement process in UVM’s educator preparation programs and as evidence in reporting to the Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation. Study Procedures If you take part in the study, you will be asked to share plans for one lesson and to allow a UVM faculty member or doctoral student (research assistant) to observe your implementation of that lesson. Benefits As a participant in this research study, the primary benefit to you is the opportunity to reflect on your professional practice as a K-12 teacher. Risks We will do our best to protect the information we collect from you during this study. We will not store any information that will identify you to protect your confidentiality. All identifying information will be removed from any documents you share, and the observer will not use your name or school name on records of the classroom observation. Costs Other than your time, there will be no costs to you for participation in this research study. Compensation As a thank you for participating, we will offer you a $25 Amazon gift card. Confidentiality All information collected about you during the course of this study will be stored without any personal identifiers (anonymous). The only people who will have access to the data are UVM Education faculty and their graduate assistants. Voluntary Participation/Withdrawal You may discontinue your participation in this study at any time. There are no consequences for discontinuing this study and withdrawal will in no way impact your relationship with anyone at UVM. If you choose to discontinue your participation in this study, please send an email asking that you be removed from the study. All collected information will be deleted. Questions If you have any questions about this study now or in the future, you may contact Dr. Barri Tinkler, at the following phone number: 802-656-1426. Participation Your participation is voluntary, and you may refuse to participate without penalty or discrimination at any time. By scheduling a time for a classroom observation and sharing lesson plans, you are agreeing to participate in this study. Contact Information Name of Principal Investigator: Barri Tinkler, PhD Address: 409B Waterman, University of Vermont Telephone Number: 802-656-1426 Please print this information sheet for your records before continuing.

April2019

8

AlumniObservationInstrument(4.2)(Revised12-17-17)

PartA:PlanningforInstruction

PerformanceIndicator Undeveloped Developing Target Advanced Rating

Thecandidateusesanunderstandingofhowlearnersgrowanddevelop(incognitive,linguistic,social,emotional,andphysicalareas)todesigndevelopmentallyappropriateandchallenginglearningexperiences.(InTASC1)

Thecandidate’splanningdoesnottakeintoaccountthedevelopmentallevelofthelearners(cognitive,linguistic,social,emotionalorphysicalareas)andisnotappropriateorchallenging.

Thecandidatedemonstratesanunderstandingofhowlearnersgrowanddevelop(incognitive,linguistic,social,emotional,andphysicalareas)andcanselectappropriateandchallenginglearningexperiences.

Thecandidateconsistentlydemonstratesanunderstandingofhowlearnersgrowanddevelop(incognitive,linguistic,social,emotional,andphysicalareas)throughdesigningappropriateandchallenginglearningexperiences.

Thecandidatedemonstratesextensiveunderstandingofhowlearnersgrowanddevelop(incognitive,linguistic,social,emotional,andphysicalareas)throughdesigningappropriateandchallenginglearningexperiences.

Thecandidatedemonstratesanunderstandingofindividualandpopulationgroupdifferences,andissuesofdiversity(includinglearner’spriorknowledge,needs,backgroundorinterest)inordertodesigninclusivelearningexperiencesthatmaintainhighexpectationsforalllearners.(InTASC2)

Selectedlearningexperience(s)demonstratelittleornounderstandingofindividualandgroupdifferences,orissuesofdiversity(includingthestudents’priorknowledge,needs,background,andinterests).Learningexperiencesarenotdesignedtomaintainhighexpectationsforalllearners.

Thecandidatedemonstratesaclearunderstandingofindividualandpopulationgroupdifferences,issuesofdiversity(includinglearner’spriorknowledge,needs,backgroundorinterest)andisabletoselect/applyinclusivelearningexperiencesthatmaintainhighexpectationsforalllearners.

Thecandidateconsistentlydemonstratesaclearunderstandingofindividualandpopulationgroupdifferences,issuesofdiversity(includinglearner’spriorknowledge,needs,backgroundorinterest)andisabletodesigninclusivelearningexperiencesthatmaintainhighexpectationsforalllearners.

Thecandidatedemonstratesextensiveunderstandingofindividualandpopulationgroupdifferences,issuesofdiversity(includinglearner’spriorknowledge,needs,backgroundorinterest)andisabletodesigninclusivelearningexperiencesthatmaintainhighexpectationsforalllearners.

Thecandidatedemonstratesanunderstandingofthecentralconcepts,toolsofinquiry,andstructuresofthediscipline(s)thecandidateteachesanddesignslearningexperiencesthatmakethedisciplineaccessibleandmeaningfulforlearners.

Thecandidate’slessons/unitsdemonstratealimitedunderstandingofcontentpedagogyandlearningexperiencesareunclearorineffectiveinmakingthedisciplineaccessibleandmeaningful.

Thecandidate’slessons/unitsdemonstrateanunderstandingofcontentpedagogyandlearningexperiencesaregenerallyeffectiveinmakingthedisciplineaccessibleandmeaningful.

Thecandidate’slessons/unitsdemonstrateaclearunderstandingofcontentpedagogythroughconsistentlydesigninglearningexperiencesthatmakethedisciplineaccessibleandmeaningful.

Thecandidate’slessons/unitsdemonstratesextensiveunderstandingofcontentpedagogythroughconsistentlydesigninglearningexperiencesthatmakethedisciplineaccessibleandmeaningful.

April2019

9

(InTASC4)

Thecandidate’splanningdemonstratesuseofmultiplemethodsofassessment(formativeandsummative)thatalignwithobjectivesandstandards.(InTASC6)

Thecandidate’splanningdemonstratesalackofunderstandingofrelevant/effectiveassessmentand/orassessmentsdonotconsistentlyalignwithobjectivesandstandards.

Thecandidate’splanningdemonstratesuseofbothformativeandsummativeassessmentsthataregenerallyalignedwithobjectivesandstandards.

Thecandidateconsistentlyplansrelevantmethodsofassessment(bothformativeandsummative)thatareclearlyalignedwithobjectivesandstandards.

Thecandidate’splanningextensivelyutilizesrelevantmethodsofassessment(bothformativeandsummative)thatareclearlyalignedwithobjectivesandstandards.

Thecandidateusesrigorouslearningobjectivesbasedoncontentstandardstoplanlearningexperiencesandperformancetasks.(InTASC7)

The candidate’s lesson/unit objective(s) lack clarity, measurability, and focus. Connections to standards, assessments, and instructional components are not apparent.

The candidate’s lesson/unit objective(s) are somewhat clear, measurable, and focused, and are generally connected to the standards, assessments, and instructional components of the lesson/unit.

Thecandidate’slesson/unitobjectivesareconsistentlyclear,measurable,andfocused,andarefullyalignedwiththestandards,assessments,andinstructionalcomponentsofthelesson/unit.

Thecandidate’slesson/unitobjectivesareextremelyclear,measurable,andfocused,andarefullyalignedwiththestandards,assessments,andinstructionalcomponentsofthelesson/unit.

Thecandidateselectsrigorousstandards(e.g.NextGenerationScienceStandards,CommonCore)tofocusinstruction.(InTASC7)

Standards are not referenced consistently or selected standards are not appropriate for lessons/units.

The candidate selects standards from the Common Core, Next Generation Science Standards, National Core Arts Standards, Vermont Early Learning Standards, and/or Vermont Grade Level Expectations.

The candidate consistently selects appropriate standards from the Common Core, Next Generation Science Standards, National Core Arts Standards, Vermont Early Learning Standards, and/or Vermont Grade Level Expectations.

ThecandidatedemonstratesextensiveskillsinselectingandintegratingappropriatestandardsfromtheCommonCore,NextGenerationScienceStandards,NationalCoreArtsStandards,VermontEarlyLearningStandards,and/orVermontGradeLevelExpectations.

Thecandidateplansfortheuseoftechnologies,instructionalmaterialsandcurricularresourcesthatsupportandenhanceinstruction.(InTASC7)

Candidate’slessons/unitsdemonstratelittleornounderstandingoftheeffectiveuseofresources(includingtechnology)tosupportorenhanceinstruction.

Candidate’slessons/unitsdemonstratesomeunderstandingoftheeffectiveuseofresources(includingtechnology)tosupportorenhanceinstruction.

Candidate’slessons/unitsconsistentlydemonstrateathoroughunderstandingoftheeffectiveuseofresources(includingtechnology)tosupportorenhanceinstruction.

Candidate’slessons/unitsdemonstrateanextensiveunderstandingoftheeffectiveuseofresources(includingtechnology)tosupportorenhanceinstruction.

April2019

10

PartB:EvaluationofClassroomPractice

1.Instruction

PerformanceIndicator Undeveloped Developing Target Advanced Rating

Thecandidatedifferentiatesandmodifiesaspectsofinstructionbasedonindividuallearnerability,interest,andpreferencestoengagealllearners.(InTASC2)

Theinstructiondemonstrateslittleornodifferentiationoraccommodation,andaspectsofthelessonareinappropriateforthelearners.

Theinstructionissomewhatdifferentiatedand/oraccommodatedasappropriateforthelearners.

Theinstructionisthoroughlydifferentiatedand/oraccommodatedasappropriateforthelearners.

Theinstructionisextensivelydifferentiatedand/oraccommodatedasappropriateforthelearners.

Thecandidatecreatesenvironmentsthatsupportindividualandcollaborativelearning,andthatencouragepositivesocialinteractionandactiveengagementinlearning.(InTASC3)

Thecandidateisrarelyabletocreateanengagedlearningcommunitythatsupportsindividualandcollaborativelearning,andsocialinteractionsareminimalamongstudents.

Thecandidateshowssomeabilitytocreateanengagedclassroomcommunitythatsupportsindividualandcollaborativelearningandprovidesoccasionalopportunitiesforpositivesocialinteractionsamongstudents.

Thecandidateconsistentlycreatesalearningcommunitythatsupportsindividualandcollaborativelearning,whichencouragespositivesocialinteractionsandactiveengagement.

Thecandidatecreatestoanextensivedegreealearningcommunitythatsupportsindividualandcollaborativelearning,whichencouragespositivesocialinteractionsandactiveengagement.

Thecandidateunderstandshowtoconnectconcepts,usequestioningtechniquesandusedifferingperspectivestoengagelearnersinhigherorder,criticalthinking.(InTASC5)

Thecandidateisunabletoconnectconceptsandusedifferingperspectivestoengagelearnersinhigherorder,criticalthinking.

Thecandidateoccasionallyconnectsconcepts,usesalimitedvarietyofquestioningtechniquesandsomedifferingperspectivestoengagestudentsinhigherorder,criticalthinking.

Thecandidateconsistentlyconnectsconcepts,usesquestioningtechniquesanddifferentperspectivestoengagelearnersinhigherorder,criticalthinking.

Thecandidateextensivelyconnectsconcepts,usesquestioningtechniquesanddifferentperspectivestoengagelearnersinhigherorder,criticalthinking

April2019

11

Thecandidateunderstandsandusesavarietyofinstructionalstrategiestoencouragelearnerstodevelopdeepunderstandingofcontentareasandtheirconnections,andtobuildskillstoapplyinmeaningfulways.(InTASC8)

Theinstructionalstrategieshavelittleornovarietyanddonotencouragelearnerstothinkcriticallyaboutcontentortomakeconnectionsinmeaningfulways.

Theinstructionalstrategieshavesomevarietyandsometimesencouragelearnerstodevelopadeepunderstandingofcontentandconnectionsinmeaningfulways.

Theinstructionalstrategiesarevariedandconsistentlyencouragelearnerstodevelopadeepunderstandingofcontent,andtomakeconnectionsinmeaningfulways.

Theinstructionalstrategiesarevariedandextensivelyencouragelearnerstodevelopadeepunderstandingofcontent,andtomakeconnectionsinmeaningfulways.

Thecandidateunderstandsthewaysthattechnologycanbeusedtosupportinstructionandassessmentandmodelsappropriateusetoimprovestudentlearning.(ISTE1,2,3)

Thecandidaterarelyusestechnologytosupportstudentlearning.

Thecandidateoccasionallyusestechnologytosupportstudentlearning.

Thecandidateconsistentlymodelsandimplementstheuseoftechnologytoimprovestudentlearning.

Thecandidateextensivelymodelsandimplementstheuseoftechnologytoimprovestudentlearning.

April2019

12

2.Assessment

PerformanceIndicator Undeveloped Developing Target Advanced Rating

Thecandidateusesmultiplemethodsofassessment(formativeandsummative)toengagelearnersintheirowngrowth.(InTASC6)

Thecandidatedoesnotuseeffectivemethodsofassessmentanddoesnotengagelearnersintheirowngrowth.

Thecandidateusessomeassessmentstoengagelearnersintheirowngrowth.

Thecandidateconsistentlyusesrelevantmethodsofassessmenttoengagelearnersintheirowngrowth.

Thecandidateextensivelyusesrelevantmethodsofassessmenttoengagelearnersintheirowngrowth.

Thecandidatemonitorsstudentprogressandusesassessmentdatatomakeinstructionaldecisionsandtoguidetheteacher’sandlearner’sdecisionmaking.(InTASC6)

Thecandidateminimallymonitorsstudentprogressanddoesnotuseassessmentdatatomakeinstructionaldecisionsduringinstruction.

Thecandidateisbeginningtouseassessmentdatatomonitorstudentgrowthandmakeinstructionaldecisionsduringinstruction.

Thecandidateconsistentlycollectsandusesassessmentdatatomonitorstudentprogressandmakeinstructionaldecisionsduringinstruction.

Thecandidateextensivelycollectsandusesassessmentdatatomonitorstudentprogressandmakeinstructionaldecisionsduringinstruction.

April2019

13

3.ClassroomManagement

PerformanceIndicator Undeveloped Developing Target Advanced Rating

Thecandidateestablishesclassroomroutines,procedures,andexpectationstoactivelyandequitablyengagelearnersandusesrespectfulandeffectiveverbalandnonverbalcommunicationstrategies(InTASC3)

Thecandidaterarelyestablishesexpectationsorholdsstudentsaccountableandoccasionallyusesinappropriateorineffectiveverbalandnon-verbalcommunicationresultinginlossofinstructionaltime.

Thecandidategenerallyestablishesclassroomroutinesandexpectations,holdsstudentsaccountableandusesrespectfulandeffectiveverbalandnonverbalcommunicationstrategiestoengageallstudents.

Thecandidateconsistentlyestablishesclassroomroutinesandexpectations,holdsstudentsaccountableandusesrespectfulandeffectiveverbalandnonverbalcommunicationstrategiestoengageallstudents.

Thecandidateextensivelyestablishesclassroomroutinesandexpectations,holdsstudentsaccountableandusesrespectfulandeffectiveverbalandnonverbalcommunicationstrategiestoengageallstudents.

Thecandidatemonitorstransitionsandchangesinthelearningenvironmentandusesavarietyofinstructionalandbehavioralmanagementstrategiestoencouragelearningandactiveparticipation.(InTASC3)

Thecandidaterarelymonitorstransitionsandchangesinthelearningenvironmentand/orinconsistentlyorincorrectlyusesbehavioralmanagementstrategiesandinstructionalstrategiestoaddressthelearningandactiveparticipationofstudents.

Thecandidateisbeginningtorecognizeandmonitortransitionsandchangesintheenvironmentandusesbehavioralmanagementstrategiesandinstructionalstrategiesthatgenerallyencouragelearningandactiveparticipation.

Thecandidateconsistentlymonitorstransitionsandchangesinthelearningenvironmentandusesavarietyofinstructionalandbehavioralmanagementstrategiestoencouragelearningandactiveparticipation.

Thecandidateextensivelymonitorstransitionsandchangesinthelearningenvironmentandusesavarietyofinstructionalandbehavioralmanagementstrategiestoencouragelearningandactiveparticipation.