Standard 1: Candidate Knowledge, Skills, and Dispositions
| Candidates preparing to work in schools as teachers or other professional school personnel know and demonstrate the content, pedagogical, and professional knowledge, skills, and dispositions necessary to help all students learn. Assessments indicate that candidates meet professional, state and institutional standards. |
Element 1A: Content Knowledge for Teacher Candidates
The unit ensures that teacher candidates for initial certification know and demonstrate content knowledge in the subject area that they plan to teach or work by their scholastic ability to explain and transform into practice the important principles and concepts of their discipline. As indicated on the alignment of Standard 1 with the Conceptual Framework (see Exhibit S1-1), content knowledge is addressed in the element of scholarship with the candidate proficiencies in the areas of methods of inquiry, liberal arts knowledge, communication skills, and knowledge of media and culture. There is an established relationship between content knowledge and the element of reflection with regard to planning instruction and assessment. And there is a link between the Conceptual Framework and content knowledge in terms of creative exploration of the discipline.
Applicants for the unit's baccalaureate programs must be graduates of an accredited four-year high school or academy or must provide documentation of equivalent studies that the University deems acceptable. They are considered, in part, on the basis of their individual academic record and having completed the recommended number of academic units: English (4 units); science (3 units); mathematics (3 units); foreign language (2-3 units); and an additional 4 units from history, social studies, and/or the other fields of study. Official high school transcripts and copies of the required College Entrance Examination Board Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) or the American College Test (ACT) are reviewed, along with a writing sample and letters of recommendation. Grade point average requirements vary by program. The grade point averages and SAT/ACT averages of incoming teacher candidates for 2004 and 2005 in the unit's initial and advanced programs, along with the GPA and SAT/ACT requirements (available on the University's website and the 2004-2006 graduate bulletin, Exhibit G-3) are summarized as Exhibit G-4. A sample undergraduate application is available as Exhibit S1-2. Some of the programs have procedures in place whereby faculty members review applicants' records of prior academic coursework using Admissions Review Rubrics (see Exhibit S1-3). These rubrics are also used to evaluate applicants' demonstrated content knowledge in admissions essays.
In the undergraduate programs, teacher candidates major and/or take substantial coursework in the liberal arts, guided by the requirements for certification by the New York State Education Department. All undergraduates at the University are required to take general education requirements that include ten credits in general education coursework and 24 credits (6 credits each) in the arts, humanities, natural sciences and social sciences. Childhood candidates major in one of eleven liberal arts and science majors. Candidates for the adolescent or art certification major in the discipline they are to teach (in the social studies, they major in either history, political science, anthropology, political science or sociology). Candidates seeking physical education certification or dual certification in physical and health education are required to take additional coursework in biology. Candidates in communication and science disorders are required to take coursework in biology, physics, psychology, linguistics, mathematics, and English. A copy of the undergraduate bulletin covering program requirements is available as Exhibit G-5. Graduate candidates in initial programs must have liberal arts study that is comparable to the requirements for the undergraduate candidates described above (see graduate bulletin, Exhibit G-3).
Tests for Licensure
Table 1-1 summarizes the teacher candidates' performance on the Liberal Arts and Sciences Test, Content Specialty Test, and Assessment of Teaching Skills-Written (LAST, CST, and ATS-W, respectively, part of the New York State Teacher Certification Examinations, described in Standard 2) across the unit during 2004-2005 (official results for 2005-2006 have not been released as of this writing). The columns include the test, the number of candidates tested, the number passed, and the pass rates for the unit and New York State. In terms of content knowledge, Adelphi candidate completers have had 99 percent pass rates on the LAST, in line with the State's average passing rate for this test. Unofficial rates for Adelphi candidates, including those for 2005-2006, are available as Exhibit S1-4. Pass rates for the LAST are the same as last year (99 percent).
|
Table 1-1: Unit Candidate Totals and Pass Rates on NYSTCE LAST, CST, and ATS-W Tests (2004-2005)
|
 |
|
Test/Unit & State Figures
|
ADELPHI
Number of Completers = 454
|
NEW YORK STATE
Number of Completers= 20839
|
|
|
Number Tested
|
Number Passed
|
Pass Rate
|
Number Tested
|
Number Passed
|
Pass Rate
|
|
090/091: ATS-W
|
395
|
393
|
99%
|
17757
|
17629
|
99%
|
|
001: LAST
|
378
|
375
|
99%
|
17733
|
17506
|
99%
|
|
CONTENT SPECIALITY TEST
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
006: Biology
|
2
|
---
|
---
|
507
|
499
|
98%
|
|
008: Earth Science
|
2
|
---
|
---
|
111
|
103
|
93%
|
|
003: English
|
17
|
17
|
100%
|
1307
|
1213
|
93%
|
|
004: Mathematics
|
39
|
39
|
100%
|
930
|
902
|
97%
|
|
002: Multi-Subject
|
147
|
141
|
96%
|
9168
|
8735
|
95%
|
|
005: Social Studies
|
8
|
---
|
---
|
1368
|
1249
|
91%
|
|
079: Visual Arts
|
16
|
16
|
100%
|
420
|
392
|
93%
|
|
073: Health Ed
|
21
|
21
|
100%
|
136
|
132
|
97%
|
|
076: Physical Ed
|
65
|
61
|
94%
|
625
|
568
|
91%
|
|
022: ESOL
|
24
|
22
|
92%
|
344
|
330
|
96%
|
|
065: Literacy
|
49
|
47
|
96%
|
1171
|
1156
|
99%
|
|
060: Students w/ Dis
|
25
|
24
|
92%
|
2969
|
2621
|
88%
|
|
CST Total
|
415
|
388
|
93%
|
19056
|
17900
|
93%
|
Program Reviews: New York State/Specialized Professional Associations
Currently, all of the programs have received approval by the New York State Education Department (NYSED), noted in Table1-2. The table also lists the Specialized Program Associations (SPA's) or related national professional organizations that review the programs and their current review status. Of the 12 initial programs in the unit, eight have been awarded national recognition by the SPA, two were not recognized, one submitted a first report in 2006, and one program does not have a SPA for submission. The applications of the programs to NYSED for approval and notification of approval are available as Exhibit S1-5. The reports to the respective SPA's and notification of SPA status by program are available in SPA report binders in the Exhibit Room and, collectively, as
Exhibit S1-6.
|
Table 1-2: Programs, NYSED and SPA Review Status for School of Education—Initial Programs
|
|
|
Program Name
|
|
Program Level (2)
|
Agency or Association Reviewing Program
(NYSED and Specialized Program Associations, SPA)
|
Current Status of SPA Review/ Date
|
|
Art (K-12)
|
BA
MA
|
ITP
|
NYSED
|
N/A
|
N/A
|
|
Early Childhood Education (B-2)
|
MA
|
ITP
|
NYSED
|
NAEYC
|
First Submitted February 2006
|
|
Early Childhood Special Education
|
MA
|
ITP
|
NYSED
|
CEC
|
Not Recognized September 2006
|
|
STEP Childhood/ *Childhood (1-6)
|
BA/BS
MA
|
ITP
|
NYSED
|
ACEI
|
Nationally Recognized with Conditions Fall 2004
|
|
Health Education
|
MA
|
ITP
|
NYSED
|
AAHE
|
Nationally Recognized July 2005
|
|
STEP English/ English Education (7-12)
|
BA
MA
|
ITP
|
NYSED
|
NCTE
|
Not Recognized August 2006
|
|
STEP Mathematics/ Math Education (7-12)
|
BS
MA
|
ITP
|
NYSED
|
NCTM
|
Nationally Recognized November 2005
|
|
Physical Education
|
BA
MA
|
ITP
|
NYSED
|
NASPE
|
Nationally Recognized 2004/2005
|
|
STEP Science/ Science Education (7-12)
|
BS
MA
|
ITP
|
NYSED
|
NSTA
|
Nationally Recognized with Conditions July 2006
|
|
STEP Social Studies Social Studies Education (7-12)
|
BA
MA
|
ITP
|
NYSED
|
NCSS
|
Nationally Recognized September 2006
|
|
*Special Education (1-6)
|
MA
|
ITP
|
NYSED
|
CEC
|
Nationally Recognized October 2003
|
|
TESOL (K-12)
|
MA
Ad Cer
|
ITP
|
NYSED
|
TESOL
|
Nationally Recognized January 2004
|
Throughout this narrative, reference is made to the SPA reports and how they have informed the work by the faculty to strengthen the programs and the unit overall.
Of the four advanced programs, three have been awarded national recognition by their SPA's. One will first submit in 2008.
|
Table 1-2: Programs, NYSED and SPA Review Status for School of Education—Advanced Programs
|
|
|
Literacy
|
MA
Ad Cer
|
ADV
|
NYSED
|
IRA
|
Nationally Recognized January 2004
|
|
School Psychologist
|
MA
|
ADV
|
NYSED
|
NASP
|
First Submitting 2008
|
|
*Leadership and Technology
|
MA
Ad Cer
|
ADV
|
NYSED
|
ELCC
|
Nationally Recognized January 2005
|
|
*Communication and Science Disorders
|
MA
|
ADV
|
NYSED
|
ASHA
|
Nationally Recognized 2001
|
(1) BA/BS = Bachelor of Arts/Science, MA = Master of Arts, Ad.Cer = Advance Certificate
(2) ITP = Initial Teacher Program, ADV Advance Program for other professional school personnel
* Program currently offered at the off-campus center in Manhattan
Several indicators of candidates' content knowledge—the licensing tests, teacher reports, candidates' work samples, and alumni survey results (see Standard 2)—yielded data for the SPA reports in the initial programs that demonstrated that candidates have excellent content knowledge and a currency in their discipline and field. The results suggest that undergraduates have benefited from having a liberal arts major in the College of Arts and Sciences, such as what the STEP requirements include. Over the past few years there has been a significant improvement in monitoring candidate progress at various stages through the programs, resulting in a 10 to 30 percent candidate dismissal rate.
The central challenge for the programs remaining to be nationally recognized is the inclusion of other course work and dimensions of liberal arts study in them. As many of the programs require greater inclusion of the College of Arts and Sciences in the preparation of candidates, it became obvious that the collaboration needed to be improved. Because of the accreditation process, the communication with Arts and Sciences has become a strength of the programs. In terms of content knowledge, in particular, three of the programs in the College—English, political science, and psychology—are piloting capstone assessments that will provide more insight into the integration of liberal arts knowledge into the educational programs of teacher candidates. Besides working with Arts and Sciences faculty on curriculum, liberal arts faculty members are now on the oversight committees for the unit.
Data from Key Measures/Assignments—Initial Programs
As will be discussed in Standard 2, all programs introduced a pilot portfolio assessment to their candidates. Each program created a template enabling their candidates to collect benchmark assignments for the portfolio. The benchmark assignments contained within the portfolio were designed, implemented, and revised to fit program needs, both for assessing candidates' progress and for evaluating the programs' strengths and weaknesses. Progress is evaluated across several transition points, covered in Standard 2, which include "Induction" (both admissions and, for some programs, introductory coursework), "Exploration" (mostly foundation courses), "Synthesis" (courses typically emphasizing field methods/practice), and "Reflection" (including, for example, student teaching). While the content of these benchmark assignments vary across program (addressed in Standard 2), the knowledge representing the liberal arts disciplines occurs within a number of benchmarks. Typically, content knowledge is related to the Conceptual Framework by emphasizing the candidates' scholarship. Content knowledge is manifested in a variety of ways through the coursework including planning and application of the liberal arts knowledge in the field.
Table 1-3 offers aggregated data for content knowledge, therefore, within each program from candidates' benchmark assignments for 2005-2006. Data for content knowledge from 2004-2005 is available as
Exhibit S1-7 with numbers and percentages for each transition point as comparable to those presented below.
|
Table 1-3: Benchmark Rubric Scores in Content Knowledge By Program (2005-2006)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
100
|
25
|
40
|
30
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
100
|
22
|
43
|
30
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
503
|
138
|
213
|
123
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
27
|
43
|
25
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Table 1-3 (Continued): Benchmark Rubric Scores in Content Knowledge By Program (2005-2006)
|
|
|
|
|
REFLECTION
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
31
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
132
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
N- Number of Candidates D- Distinguished P- Proficient B- Basic U- Unsatisfactory * Adv.Programs
As the table makes clear, candidates demonstrate a steady improvement in content knowledge proficiency over the transition points of the programs. For example, whereas 70 percent of candidates received a "Distinguished" or "Proficient" score on the benchmark at Induction into their programs, that overall percentage increased to 79 percent at the Exploration transition point, 85 percent at the Synthesis point, and 89 percent at Reflection. There is a corresponding decrease in the percentage of candidates receiving an "Unsatisfactory" rating on benchmark assignments across the transition points. As will be shown, these trends corroborate increases in content knowledge reported with other indicators in the programs' assessment plans.
A potential qualification of these results, however, should be discussed. It is common for teacher candidates to register for courses in other programs to fulfill foundations requirements (occurring within "Induction" and "Exploration" transition points above). A unit-wide data collection system on the benchmarks was refined in Summer 2006 to track individual candidate scores of benchmarks in Fall 2006. This will allow differentiation among candidates in foundations courses who complete the benchmark assignments by their "programs of origin." By collecting only those data from candidates in the program where the course is "housed," there is more likelihood that the data will be useful in terms of monitoring candidate progress and evaluation the program's overall effectiveness.
The percentage of candidates enrolled in benchmark field and methods courses who are from that program increases from the "Exploration" to "Synthesis" transition points.
During the student teaching experience ("Reflection" transition point), supervisors, cooperating teachers and candidates themselves evaluate performance at least twice in each placement with respect to areas reflected in the Standards and the Conceptual Framework, including content knowledge. The results of the Pathwise rubric involving knowledge identified in the Conceptual Framework for 2005-2006 are available as Exhibit S1-8. The results suggest that the rubric used for evaluating the teacher candidates needs some refinement, as the largest percentages of candidates received "Distinguished" scores in a number of elements, thereby raising questions about the validity of the scoring system. This will be a focus of the unit faculty's discussion and work during the coming academic year.
Course evaluations provided an important source of data with regard to candidates' reported gains in content knowledge. Seven questions--#1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 12, and 13 (see
Exhibit S1-9 for the entire course evaluation form used across the university)--address the content knowledge gained from the course. Table 1-4 offers a comparison of the average ratings on these questions among the units at the University, beginning in Fall 2004.
Exhibit S1-10 provides the averages for these items for each of the initial and advanced programs during the same four semesters.
|
Table 1-4: Average Ratings for Content Knowledge Questions on Course Evaluations
|
|
|
Schools/ITEM # (UG=Undergraduate; G= Graduate)
|
#1
UG/G
|
#2
UG/G
|
#3
UG/G
|
#4
UG/G
|
#6
UG/G
|
#12
UG/G
|
#13
UG/G
|
|
Arts & Sciences
|
1.6/1.4
|
1.7/1.4
|
1.5/1.7
|
1.9/1.6
|
1.9/1.5
|
1.3/1.1
|
1.5/1.3
|
|
Business
|
1.7/1.7
|
1.7/1.7
|
1.6/2.0
|
2.0/1.8
|
1.9/1.8
|
1.3/1.3
|
1.6/1.5
|
|
Education
|
1.4/1.6
|
1.5/1.6
|
1.8/1.9
|
1.6/1.7
|
1.7/1.7
|
1.2/1.3
|
1.4/1.5
|
|
IAPS: Derner
|
1.7/1.6
|
1.7/1.7
|
2.3/2.2
|
1.6/1.9
|
1.9/1.5
|
1.3/1.3
|
1.5/1.5
|
|
Nursing
|
1.5/1.5
|
1.5/1.6
|
1.8/1.8
|
1.7/1.7
|
1.6/1.6
|
1.3/1.3
|
1.4/1.4
|
|
Social Work
|
1.3/1.6
|
1.3/1.6
|
1.7/1.9
|
1.4/1.7
|
1.6/1.7
|
1.2/1.3
|
1.3/1.5
|
|
ABLE
|
1.4/NA
|
1.4/NA
|
1.8/NA
|
1.6/NA
|
1.6/NA
|
1.2/NA
|
1.3/NA
|
|
General Studies
|
1.7/NA
|
1.8/NA
|
1.9/NA
|
1.9/NA
|
1.9/NA
|
1.4/NA
|
1.5/NA
|
|
Honors College
|
1.4/NA
|
1.4/NA |
