1a.2. Table 1a.2.4. Mean Scores for KTS 1 from Key Assessments, Initial Programs1a.2. Table 1a.2.10 Summary Key Assessment Mean Scores for KTS 1, Initial Graduate1a.3. Table 1a.2.1 – Unit Content Knowledge Key Assessments by Program by Pillar1a.3. Table 1a.3.1. Mean GPA by Pillar - Advanced1a.3. Graduate Education Admissions Writing Sample Rubric1a.3. Conceptual Framework1a.3. Quality Enhancement Plan, 20061a.3. Individual Action Plan1a.3. Table 1a.3.2 - KTS 1 measured by Writing Sample, Advanced Level, Pillar IV1a.3. Table 1a.3.3. KTS measured by Targeted Course Grades, Advanced1a.3. Table 1a.3.1. Mean GPA by Pillar - AdvancedTable 1a.3.4. KTS measured by Portfolio (2007-09) and Comprehensive Exam (2009-10), Advanced1a.3. Education Department Faculty Meeting Minutes, January 8-9, 2009, p. 41a.3. Table 1a.3.5. Summary Key Assessment Mean Scores for KTS, Advanced1a.3. Table 1a.3.6. Rank I Special Education PRAXIS II Exam Scores1a.3. Table 1a.3.7. Compilation <strong>of</strong> 2010 Sample Comprehensive Exam responses, KTS 11a.4. <strong>University</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Cumberlands</strong> Employer Survey1a.4. Table 1a.4.1. Alignment <strong>of</strong> Follow-up Studies Questions to Kentucky Teacher Standards1a.4. Table 1a.4.2. Mean Score by KTS and UC Standards, New Teacher Survey1a.4. Table 1a.4.3. Disaggregated Mean Scores for New Teacher Survey by Question1a.4. Table 1a.4.4. Undergraduate All Follow-up Surveys by KTS1a.4. Stop-start-continue survey1a.4. Student Teacher Feedback Spring 20101a.4. Table 1a.4.1. Alignment <strong>of</strong> Follow-up Studies Questions to Kentucky Teacher Standards1a.4. Table 1a.4.2. Mean Score by KTS and UC Standards, New Teacher Survey1a.4. Advanced Program Graduate Survey Spring 20101a.4. Employer Survey (Graduate Program for Teacher Educators)1a.4. Table 1a.4.5. Initial Graduate and Advanced Follow-up Surveys by KTS1b.1. KTIP-IPR1b.1. Summative Evaluation1b.1. Rubrics for Initial Undergraduate e-Portfolio1b.1. External evaluation student teacher’s standards-based unit1b.1. Table 1b.1.1. Mean Scores for KTS 2, 3, 4, and 6 from Key Assessments1b.1. Table 1b.1.2. KTS 2, 3, 4, and 6 Measured by e-portfolio, Initial Undergraduate1b.1. Table 1b.1.1. Mean Scores for KTS 2, 3, 4, and 6 from Key Assessments1b.1. Summative Evaluation1b.1. Table 1a.2.10 Summary Key Assessment Mean Scores for KTS 1, Initial Graduate1b.1. Task C - Lesson Analysis and Reflection, LPS, F091b.1. Task E – modified for <strong>University</strong> <strong>of</strong> 1b.1. Task E, MAT - Assesses and Manages Pr<strong>of</strong>essional Growth, CM,F091b.1. Task F modified for <strong>University</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Cumberlands</strong> MAT Leadership, TC, Sp091b.1. Modified Tasks G through J - Designing <strong>the</strong> Instructional Unit, JLP, Sp101b.1. Table 1b.1.1. Mean Scores for KTS 2, 3, 4, and 6 from Key Assessments1b.2. My Teaching Philosophy, EB, F081b.2. Rationale, EDOL 539, AL, Sp091b.2. Observation Journal, EDOL 549, KB, Sp091b.2. Table 1a.3.8. Compilation <strong>of</strong> 2010 Sample Comprehensive Exam responses, KTS 21b.2. Table 1a.3.9. Compilation <strong>of</strong> 2010 Sample Comprehensive Exam responses, KTS 31b.2. Table 1a.3.10. Compilation <strong>of</strong> 2010 Sample Comprehensive Exam responses, KTS 41b.2. Table 1a.3.12. Compilation <strong>of</strong> 2010 Sample Comprehensive Exam responses, KTS 61b.2. Table 1a.3.3. KTS measured by Targeted Course Grades, Advanced1b.2. Rubric for Graduate Portfolio Assessment1b.2. Table 1a.3.4. KTS measured by Portfolio (2007-09) and Comprehensive Exam (2009-10), Advanced1b.2. Table 1a.3.5. Summary Key Assessment Mean Scores for KTS, Advanced1b.3. Education Graduating Student Survey1b.3. Advanced Program Graduate Survey Spring 201034
1b.3. Employer Survey1b.3. Table 1a.4.4. Undergraduate All Follow-up Surveys by KTS1b.3. Table 1a.4.5. Initial Graduate and Advanced Follow-up Surveys by KTS1b.3. Table 1b.3.6. Aggregated Follow-up Studies Mean for KTS 2, 3, 4, and 6, 2007-20101c.1. EDAD/ADOL 634 Business Management in Public Schools - ISLLC Standard III Case Study1c.1. Lesson Plan Format “KTIP PLUS”1c.1. Tasks G, H, I, J – designing a unit plan1c.1. Field Experience Reflection Rubric – Pillar V1c.1. Incorrect reference in IR to Table 1c.1.1 – link should go with “O<strong>the</strong>r than PRAXIS II PLT scores,Table 1c.1.1. PLT Data for Initial Programs”1c.1. Table 1c.1.2. Mean Scores for KTS 7, 8, 9, and 10 from Key Assessments should be <strong>the</strong> one referenced to <strong>the</strong>sentence, “aligns with KTS 7, 8, 9, and 10 that are measured using e-Portfolio scores at all three Pillars”1c.1. KTIP-IPR1c.1. Summative Evaluation1c.1. Rubrics for Initial Undergraduate e-Portfolio1c.1. External evaluation student teacher’s standards-based unit1c.1. Table 1c.1.2. Mean Scores for KTS 7, 8, 9, and 10 from Key Assessments1c.1. Task E - Pr<strong>of</strong>essional Growth Plan, Undergraduate1c.1. TASK F (From <strong>the</strong> KTIP TPA) Leadership Plan, Undergraduate1c.1. Table 1c.1.2. Mean Scores for KTS 7, 8, 9, and 10 from Key Assessments1c.1. Table 1c.1.3. KTS 7, 8, 9, and 10 Measured by Summative Evaluations, Undergraduate1c.1. Table 1c.1.2. Mean Scores for KTS 7, 8, 9, and 10 from Key Assessments1c.1. Table 1c.1.1. PLT Data for Initial Programs1c.1. MAT reflection, “What I have learned this semester that might not necessarily be overtly graded”1c.1. Task D - Collaborate to Address Special Learning Needs, LC, Sp091c.1. Task E – modified for <strong>University</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Cumberlands</strong> Option 6 - Assesses and Manages Pr<strong>of</strong>essional Growth,AM, Sp091c.1. MAT Leadership Plan, “Everyday Math 101”, JW, F081c.1. Task E – modified for <strong>University</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Cumberlands</strong> MAT - Assesses and Manages Pr<strong>of</strong>essional Growth, EB,F081c.1. Task F modified for <strong>University</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Cumberlands</strong> Option 6 -Leadership, TC, Sp091c.1. Table 1c.1.2. Mean Scores for KTS 7, 8, 9, and 10 from Key Assessments1c.2. Table 1a.2.21c.2. Task A-1. Teaching and Learning Context1c.2. Task C – Lesson Analysis and Reflection1c.2. Task J-1 - Organizing and Analyzing <strong>the</strong> Results (Whole Class)1c.2. Pr<strong>of</strong>essional Code <strong>of</strong> Ethics for Kentucky School Personnel 704 KAR 20:6801c.2. Table 1c2.1. Mean Scores for KTS 2 from Key Assessments1c.2. Table 1c.2.2. Mean Scores for KTS 8 from Key Assessments1c.2. Table 1d.2.1. Mean Scores for KTS 5 from Key Assessments1c.2. Table 1c.1.1. PLT Data for Initial Programs1c.2. Task C (Option 6)- Lesson Analysis and Reflection, CL, F081c.2. Student Teaching Blog (BT, Sp09)1c.2. Task I – Pre-assessment analysis – Option 6 – SH, F081c.2. Task J-1 - Organizing and Analyzing <strong>the</strong> Results (Whole Class) MAT, TA, Sp101c.2. MAT Capstone Rationale Template & Rubric, SH, Spring 20101c.2. Critique, EDUC 533, Sp061c.2. Incorrect link to Table 1c.1.2 for data from mean scores <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> key assessments used throughout <strong>the</strong> programfor KTS 2.1c.2. Table 1c.2.2. Mean Scores for KTS 8 from Key Assessments1c.2. Table 1d.2.1. – Mean Scores for KTS 5 from Key Assessments1c.2. Table 1d.2.2. – Mean Scores for KTS 7 from Key Assessments1c.2. My Teaching Philosophy, EB, F081c.2. Reflective Journal MAT1c.2. Capstone Rationale, MAT, JM, F091c.3. Rationale, EDOL 539, SA, Sp0935
- Page 1 and 2: BOARD OF EXAMINERSReportBoard of Ex
- Page 3 and 4: SUMMARY FOR PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION
- Page 5 and 6: UC, graduate study prepares profess
- Page 7 and 8: 1b. Pedagogical Content Knowledge a
- Page 9 and 10: Table 1c.1.2 provides assessment re
- Page 11 and 12: Professional Dispositions for All C
- Page 13 and 14: Data Collection, Analysis, and Eval
- Page 15 and 16: in the Reading Specialist program a
- Page 17 and 18: directors of student teaching or MA
- Page 19 and 20: AFIs from last visit: Continued - N
- Page 21 and 22: Summary of Findings for Initial Tea
- Page 23 and 24: Recommendation for Standard 4Initia
- Page 25 and 26: 5c. Modeling Best Professional Prac
- Page 27 and 28: professional development experience
- Page 29 and 30: of the minutes and other documentat
- Page 31 and 32: was hired. This position maintains
- Page 33: IV.SOURCES OF EVIDENCEDocuments rev
- Page 37 and 38: 2a.1. Table 2a.1.7. Key Assessments
- Page 39 and 40: 2c.2. Department Minutes, 10/29/082
- Page 41 and 42: 3b.2. Table 3b.2.1 Field Experience
- Page 43 and 44: 3c.4. Table 6.3 Unit Assessment Sys
- Page 45 and 46: 4b.2. Table 4b.3.1 Faculty Demograp
- Page 47 and 48: 6c.6. Faculty Development Funds6d.1
- Page 49 and 50: Christopher LeskiwJames ManningJenn
- Page 51 and 52: Russell Weedman, ArtAdjunct Faculty
- Page 53 and 54: Recent GraduatesDana HaleSteven Mos
- Page 55 and 56: 5.1, 5.2, 5.3, 5.4 field experience
- Page 57: certification), and Rank I, Ed.S. a