Buy custom Program Evaluation essay
NCATE standards provide common vision of the unit’s actions in teaching the educators to work in P-12 educational institutions. It represents general strategies for teaching, establishing of programs and courses, providing scholarships, and unit accountability. In the report below, we evaluated the correspondence of NCATE SIUC’S report to the 3rd NCATE standard and related sub standards.
Standard 3: Field Experiences and Clinical Practice
3a. Collaboration between Unit and School Partners
The 3a rubric’s of the National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE) states that unit and school partners are targeted to be collaborative in planning, realization, and evaluation of the unit’s conceptual framework and the school program. They are mutually involved in their professional development actions and educational projects for teachers and children.
According to the NCATE report of Southern Illinois University Carbondale (SIUC), the unit corresponds to the 3a sub-standard of NCATE standards by establishing cooperation with schools in the region, since 1970. The collaboration takes place through special education centres for teachers with the goal to encourage initiatory field experience, the placement of student teaching, and other career development perspectives for teachers.
Employees of the school and university are working on to design, provide, and estimate the university program. They are both interested in interrelated career development activities and professional programs for candidates on teaching positions.
In order to be on target with this rubrics, the program appointed Clinical Supervisor who acts as interlink between university and partners. While the institutional program is completely acceptable, it is not clear how exactly Clinical Supervisor carries out the role of interlink to involve unit and school partners participate in professional development activities.
In order to meet 4a rubric’s target goal in sharing mutual expertise to support teacher’s learning, the university and school partners created The Advisory Board for Teacher Education to spread ongoing trends in teaching throughout schools and universities and to receive feedback from partners about teacher programs.
The SIUC’s report emphasizes on the scope of professional programs directed on involvement of the advanced faculty level members in shool program implementation. The faculty participates in training school superintendents, counsellors, and principals. Furthermore, the university manages two conferences that offer career development sessions for local school administrators. University participates in a Principal Preparation Redesign Team. The Team comprises of nineteen local school administrators in cooperation with universities’ faculty who are working on upgrading the program for principals, in accordance with new standards of Illinois State. This confirms the fact that both university and school-based faculty are participating in professional development activities, in accordance with rubrics 4a.
Additionally, Southern Illinois University and its school partners are participating in multiple federal and state grants; provide sponsored seminars and workshops in schools, and support other initiatives, oriented to build strong educational collaboration. All in all, the university’s program is on target with the 4a sub-standard.
3.b Design, Implementation, and Evaluation of Field Experiences and Clinical Practice
With the help of the PDS Advisory Council, the university established closer mutual relationships with P-12 school partners. It succeeded into the Southern Illinois School University Partnership. The main goals of these meetings are the adaptation of new programs in field experience and clinical practice, and revision of current projects. The new implemented strategies can be established only with the guidance of administrators and teachers of the schools.
The Clinical Supervisor who works in concrete school locations also developed mutual relationships between the unit and school partners. The Clinical Supervisor estimates all candidates in teachers, while they are working on clinical projects. Clinical Supervisors also work as interlink between administrators and teachers.
In conclusion, the Advisory Board of Teacher Education Program is composed of P-12 teachers, faculty, and administrators. They strive to evaluate the status of the programs and to deal with improvements to the present programs and develop new initiatives.
In conclusion, we can estimate that the rating for this sub-standard is acceptable. The important aspect of the report is that candidates on teaching positions are able to do teaching practices during the field experiences. There is also a strong collaboration between university, schools, teachers, and supervisors. However, in the report,, there was nothing mentioned about an interaction between families of students and teachers that appear to be significant factor in the implementation of NCATE standards.
3c. Candidates’ Development and Demonstration of Knowledge, Skills, and Professional Dispositions to Help all Students Learn
The report offers enough evidence to show that the program is on the target in meeting 3c sub-standard. The conceptual framework offers students variety of opportunities for candidates’ development and representation of skills and knowledge. For instance, the university elaborates students in the multiple activities that stimulate them to consider teaching process and to think about their career in teaching. Moreover, there is a vast variety of bridging tools, like journals and portfolios that help to facilitate reflective practice as a way to promote development in the field of teaching.
Furthermore, the report states that every candidate has to create a capstone portfolio to demonstrate all skills, knowledge and abilities achieved. Every portfolio should be presented and estimated by the faculty members.
The overall report in relation of the 3c rubrics of the NCATE third standard cannot be estimated as acceptable. The report does not demonstrate a variety of multiple evaluation strategies to estimate applicants’ performance and influence on learning. There is no systematization of the results of the teachers’ learning. Unfortunately, the report does not show the mutual cooperation of faculty and candidates in the evaluation of candidate results. Nevertheless, the report shows that clinical practice and field experience gives perspectives for the applicants to show and develop teaching skills, knowledge, and professional orientation.
All in all, the evaluation of the reports shows that the program can receive acceptable results for meeting the third standard. Unfortunately, the rubrics about the development and skills of the candidates in their knowledge and career background did not reach acceptable results. The report could offer more details of the candidate’s assessment for their knowledge and skills. Moreover, there is a lack of details about how exactly school partners and university are involved in mutual teaching activity. The report describes 4a sub-report in the full manner and offers enough evidences for implementation and provision of these substandard. The correspondence of the report to 4b substandard is evaluated as acceptable.
Buy custom Program Evaluation essay