A Guide for Compiling a

I. The Spectrum Model

Kean University’s Conceptual Framework for Teacher Education

Kean University’s College of Education prepares its graduates to be informed, dynamic professionals in diverse settings. Toward that end, a basic curriculum model called the SPECTRUM has been adopted to provide teacher education students with the knowledge, skills and dispositions (values) to become informed, dynamic professionals.

Webster defines a spectrum as an array of components, separated and arranged in order of some varying characteristics.[1] Kean University models its SPECTRUM as a series of circles. The center or locus of the circle is the informed, dynamic professional whose development is created by the intersection of three smaller inner circles representing knowledge, skills, and dispositions (values). Each of the small circles is interconnected, giving and receiving input from the classroom, school, community, state, nation and world. Surrounding the inner core is a larger circle that establishes boundaries of professional studies, field experience, academic specialties and general education. The turning of the circles emphasizes that development of an informed, dynamic professional is interconnected, interdependent and interrelated. The colors of the SPECTRUM blend together as do the content, process and context of the College of Education. Each course and field experience contribute to the sum of an educator who is well grounded in basic skills and in content knowledge, is competent in the practices of instruction as measured by the learning success of students, and is a reflective member of the larger community of learners.

I. The Spectrum Model (continued)

Kean University’s Conceptual Framework for Teacher Education

KNOWLEDGE

Knowing subject matter, instructional strategies, learning theory,

and the community where you teach;

based on mastery of content, theory and critical thinking.

SKILLS

Facilitating and assessing P-12 student learning,

managing the classroom;

based on knowledge, practice and experience.

DISPOSITIONS/VALUES

Making a commitment to the profession, having enthusiasm for teaching;

caring, fairness, honesty, responsibility and social justice;

based on beliefs about the world.

II. College Of Education Mission Statement

The mission of the College of Education, based on our conceptual framework, is to prepare informed, dynamic professionals for diverse settings who:

1. demonstrate a broad background in humanities, mathematics, and the sciences, have an in-depth understanding of one academic discipline, and apply this knowledge and understanding in their professional settings;

2. think creatively and critically in solving educational problems and make sound decisions based on their knowledge of theory;

3. design and integrate a variety of instructional strategies and technologies matched to appropriate diverse learning styles;

4. accurately assess, analyze, and monitor student learning; make appropriate adjustments to instruction, and have a positive effect on all students;

5. recognize, respect and respond appropriately to individual and cultural differences;

6. establish professional and collaborative relationships among all educational stakeholders;

7. commit to be life-long learners and advocates of quality schooling for all.

Adopted, College of Education, October 4, 2000

III. College Of Education Learning Outcomes

The College of Education has defined a set of learning outcomes that candidates must meet reflecting the SPECTRUM conceptual framework of Knowledge, Skills and Dispositions (Values). Every individual program within the College also has developed a set of specific learning outcomes reflecting knowledge, skills, and dispositions of particular disciplines. In order to graduate and/or be certified, candidates must show evidence that they have achieved both college and program outcomes. The portfolio is one way in which students demonstrate their achievements. The College of Education learning outcomes that appear below are aligned with the New Jersey Professional Teaching Standards.

Knowledge

(A) Subject Matter

The beginning teacher has a thorough understanding and knowledge of subject matter and national, professional, and New Jersey Core Curriculum Content Standards, and uses such knowledge to create effective learning experiences for students.

(B) Student Learning

The beginning teacher has knowledge of how students learn and develop and creates opportunities for each student’s academic development.

(C) Diversity of Learners

The beginning teacher understands differences in how students learn and knows how to provide instruction to accommodate such diversity.

(D) Classroom Management

The beginning teacher understands classroom management theories.

(E) Assessment

The beginning teacher knows how to assess, evaluate, analyze, and monitor student learning.

Skills

(A) Planning Instruction

The beginning teacher plans instruction based on knowledge of subject matter, of national, professional, and New Jersey Core Curriculum Content Standards, of students, and of curriculum goals and models.

(B) Instructional Strategies/Technologies

The beginning teacher uses a variety of instructional strategies and technologies that encourage each student to develop critical thinking and problem-solving skills.

(C) Learning Environment

The beginning teacher creates a learning environment that encourages active, engaged learning, positive interaction, and self-motivation for all students.

(D) Communication and Technology

The beginning teacher effectively communicates in the classroom by using a variety of communication skills including verbal and nonverbal techniques, technology, and media.

(E) Assessment

The beginning teacher effectively uses formal and informal assessment strategies to evaluate student progress and makes appropriate adjustments to instruction based on his/her assessment.

(F) Student Support

The beginning teacher works with parents/family members, school colleagues, and community members to support student learning and development.

(G) Reflection and Professional Development

The beginning teacher is a reflective practitioner who continually evaluates the effects of her/his choices and actions on others (students, parents, and other professionals in the learning community) and who actively seeks opportunities to grow professionally.

Dispositions/Values

(A) Diversity/Individual Differences

The beginning teacher appreciates individual, cultural, and linguistic differences, shows respect for the diverse talents of all learners, and is committed to helping develop self-confidence and competence.

(B) High Expectations

The beginning teacher believes that all students can learn at high levels and persists in helping all students achieve success.

(C) Community/Culture

The beginning teacher works productively within community and cultural norms.

(D) Positive Climate

The beginning teacher takes responsibility for establishing a positive climate in the classroom and participates in maintaining such a climate in the school as a whole.

(E) Positive Role Model

The beginning teacher recognizes her/his responsibility to serve as a positive role model.

(F) Life-long Learner

The beginning teacher is a life-long learner who seeks out opportunities for continued growth.

Approved, College of Education, October 2001

IV. A Guide to Compiling a Teacher Work Sample Portfolio

A. What is a Teacher Work Sample Portfolio?

A Teacher Work Sample Portfolio documents the candidates’ achievements over the course of a teacher preparation program at Kean University at the core of which is the impact the candidate has on P-12 student learning. It includes the Teacher Work Sample (TWS) files that demonstrate evidence of P-12 student learning. The TWS must show satisfactory achievement of the learning outcomes of the College of Education and the candidates’ program of study, as well as evidence of P-12 student learning. The format of the Teacher Work Sample Portfolio may be traditional print and/or electronic multimedia file.

During the Introductory and Preprofessional Field Experiences each candidate will be responsible for completing certain processes of the Teacher Work Sample Portfolio. Interns will complete an entire Teacher Work Sample Portfolio during the Professional Internship.

B. Instructions for Compiling Teacher Work Sample Portfolio

The candidates’ Teacher Work Sample Portfolio must provide evidence of achievement of learning outcomes of both the College of Education (COE) and the candidates’ academic program, as well as his/her impact on P-12 student learning. Individual programs may have additional learning outcome requirements listed in their program guidelines. The candidates’ Teacher Work Sample Portfolio should be developed in consultation with program faculty, supervisor or clinical instructor.

Every Teacher Work Sample Portfolio is to include the following components:

· A statement of ownership. Complete a cover page that includes (a) name, (b) date submitted, (c) grade level taught, (d) subject taught, (e) university, (f) course number and title, (g) names of university supervisor/clinical instructor and cooperating teacher, and (h) name of school district.

· A Table of Contents that lists the sections and attachments contained within the Teacher Work Sample Portfolio with page numbers.

· A one-page Introduction to the Teacher Work Sample portfolio.

o A scoring rubric for the Introduction can be found on page 14.

· A Philosophy Statement that addresses the candidate’s view of the essence of education based on documentation and experience and supported by research. The focus should be the P-12 student and how the classroom can help develop the P-12 student into an effective citizen based on what has been learned at Kean University. The statement should be built around the SPECTRUM model of the College of Education based on knowledge, skills and dispositions/values. The statement should be kept to a readable length of no more that two to three double-spaced pages. The student should be prepared to discuss this statement in detail with an instructor.

o A scoring rubric for the Philosophy Statement can be found on page 15.

· Charts, graphs and attachments. Charts, graphs and assessment instruments are required as part of the portfolio/TWS document. Other attachments, such as student work, may be provided. However, be very selective and make sure the attachments provide clear, concise evidence of how performance is related to TWS standards and the students’ learning progress.

· Narrative length. A suggested page length for the narrative is given at the end of each component section. There is some flexibility of length across components, but the total length of the written narrative (excluding charts, graphs, attachments and references) should not exceed twenty (20) word-processed pages, double-spaced in 12-point font, with 1-inch margins.

· References and Credits (not included in total page length). If another person’s ideas or material are referred to in the narrative, cite them in a separate section at the end of the narrative under References and Credits. Any standard form for references may be used; however, the American Psychological Association (APA) style is a recommended format (explained in the manual entitled “Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association”).

· Anonymity. In order to insure the anonymity of students in the class, do not include any student names or identification in any part of the TWS.

· All sections of the Teacher Work Sample Portfolio should be placed in a binder and organized by clearly labeled subsections.

· Each Teacher Work Sample will be evaluated on its organization and format, use of standard written English, punctuation, capitalization, etc. and syntax or word choice.

o A scoring rubric for the Writing Mechanics and Organization can be found on pages 16-17.

C. Description of the Teacher Work Sample Portfolio Process

The Assignment

The Teacher Work Sample contains seven teaching processes identified by research and best practices as fundamental to improving P-12 student learning. Each Teaching Process is followed by a Teacher Work Sample Standard, the Task, Requirements, and a Rubric that defines levels of performance on the standard. The Standards and Rubrics will be used to evaluate each Teacher Work Sample. The Requirements help to document the extent to which each of the standards have been met.

Each intern is required to teach a comprehensive unit. Before teaching the unit, contextual factors will be described and learning goals identified based on New Jersey or district content standards. An assessment plan will be created to measure student performance before (pre-assessment), during (formative assessment) and after (post-assessment), and a plan for instruction developed. After teaching the unit, student learning will be analyzed and then instruction will be reflected upon and evaluated as related to student learning.

Successful teacher candidates support learning by designing a Teacher Work Sample that employs a range of strategies and builds on each P-12 student’s strengths, needs, and prior experiences. Through this performance assessment, candidates provide credible evidence of their ability to facilitate learning by meeting the following Teacher Work Sample standards:

· The candidate uses information about the learning-teaching context and P-12 student individual differences to set learning goals and plan instruction and assessment.

· The candidate sets significant, challenging, varied, and appropriate learning goals.

· The candidate uses multiple assessment modes and approaches aligned with learning goals to assess P-12 student learning before, during, and after instruction.

· The candidate designs instruction for specific learning goals, P-12 student characteristics and needs, and learning contexts.

· The candidate uses regular and systematic evaluations of P-12 student learning, to make instructional decisions.

· The candidate uses assessment data to profile P-12 student learning and communicate information about student progress and achievement.

· The candidate reflects on his or her instruction and P-12 student learning in order to improve teaching practice.

D. Candidate Responsibilities for Implementation of the Teacher Work Sample during the Field Experience Sequence

Level I: Introductory Field Experience Students

Candidates enrolled in Introductory Field Experience courses are responsible for developing a Statement of Philosophy and the Contextual Factors process of the Teacher Work Sample under the direction and guidance of the course instructor. Introductory Field Experiences courses include EC 2900; EMSE 2800, 2801, 2802, 5560; FA 2900; MUS 2900; PED 2800; or SPED 2120)

The Introductory Field course instructor will be responsible for assisting students in developing the Philosophy Statement and Contextual Factors, and reviewing and formally evaluating the Philosophy Statement and Contextual Factors using the rubrics for the Philosophy Statement and Contextual Factors and the Teacher Work Sample Portfolio Assessment form found in Section V.

Transfer students who were given credit for an introductory field course at another college or university must meet with their program coordinator or designated faculty member to discuss the start of their Teacher Work Sample Portfolio.

Post-Baccalaureate students may incur problems with beginning the Teacher Work Sample Portfolio because of courses waived, i.e., introductory field; however they are still responsible for completing a Teacher Work Sample Portfolio. Post-Bac students are to be given information about completing the Teacher Work Sample Portfolio at the time of entry into the certification program.

Elementary, Middle & Secondary Education and Early Childhood graduate students who are seeking initial teacher certification are also responsible for completing an Teacher Work Sample Portfolio and will be given information on the Teacher Work Sample Portfolio process through their respective program.

Level II: Preprofessional Field Experience Students

Candidates enrolled in co-requisite courses with the Preprofessional Field Experience are responsible for developing a Mini-Teacher Work Sample that includes the following processes: Learning Goals, Assessment Plan, Design for Instruction, and Instructional Decision-Making. These co-requisite courses are: EC3300, EMSE3123, EMSE3210, EMSE3220, EMSE3230, EMSE3240, EMSE3450, EMSE3410, EMSE3403, FA3900/3901, FA5015/5016, MUS3310/3311, PED3610, 3611, SPED3000, THE3220.

Instructors from these university courses will be responsible for continuing the development of the Mini-Teacher Work Sample Portfolio and will formally evaluate the Mini-Teacher Work Sample Portfolio.

The course instructor will be responsible for assisting students in developing the Mini-Teacher Work Sample Portfolio processes, reviewing each student’s Mini-Teacher Work Sample Portfolio and formally evaluating the Mini-Teacher Work Sample Portfolio using the Teacher Work Sample Portfolio Assessment Rubric and the Teacher Work Sample Portfolio Assessment form found in Section V.

The university supervisor/clinical instructor will support the preprofessional field experience student in the development of the Mini-Teacher Work Sample Portfolio, offering assistance and ensuring that the Mini-Teacher Work Sample processes are appropriate and reflect the SPECTRUM Model. The university supervisor/clinical instructor will not be responsible for formally evaluating the Mini-TWS portfolio at Level II.

Instructors/supervisors should use the Teacher Work Sample Portfolio Assessment Processes as a guide to summarizing a candidates’ performance in each section. It is not necessary to sum the candidates’ score in each descriptor to achieve a total score in each section.

Level III: Professional Internship

Candidates enrolled in co-requisite course with the Professional Internship are required and responsible for developing a complete Teacher Work Sample Portfolio including the seven processes outlined in Section V. These processes are: Contextual Factors, Learning Goals, Assessment Plan, Design for Instruction, Instructional Decision-Making, Analysis of Student Learning and Reflection and Self-Evaluation. These co-requisite courses are: EC 4000; EDUC 4000; EMSE 4900; PED 4610; SPED 4200; EMSE 5314 or 5561.

The capstone course instructor from each course listed above is responsible for the continued development of the Teacher Work Sample Portfolio. The capstone instructor will review each candidates’ Teacher Work Sample Portfolio, providing guidance in the development and reflection of Teacher Work Sample processes and formally evaluating the Teacher Work Sample Portfolio using the Teacher Work Sample Portfolio Assessment Rubric and the Teacher Work Sample Portfolio Assessment form in the evaluation. The Teacher Work Sample Portfolio evaluation will be included in the grade for the capstone course.

Graduate students in EC 5565 and EMSE 5561 will be responsible for completing the Teacher Work Sample Portfolio.

The university supervisor/clinical instructor also is responsible for reviewing and formally evaluating each candidate’s Teacher Work Sample Portfolio and providing assistance in the development process and the accompanying reflections. The university supervisor/clinical instructor will use the Teacher Work Sample Portfolio Assessment Rubric and the Teacher Work Sample Portfolio Assessment form in the evaluation with input from the cooperating teacher.

At Level III, the Teacher Work Sample will be evaluated by both the university course instructor AND the university supervisor/clinical instructor.

E. Evaluating the Teacher Work Sample Portfolio

Level I

The instructor of the Introductory Field Experience course is responsible for scoring the Teacher Work Sample Portfolio using the appropriate rubrics for the philosophy statement and the Contextual Factors process and the Teacher Work Sample Portfolio Assessment form.

Students who were given credit for an introductory field course at another college or university must meet with their program coordinator or designated faculty member to discuss the start of their educational Teacher Work Sample Portfolio.

Elementary, Middle & Secondary Education and Early Childhood graduate students who are receiving initial teacher certification are also responsible for completing a Teacher Work Sample Portfolio and will be given information on the process through their respective program advisors.

Instructors/supervisors are to use the Teacher Work Sample Portfolio Assessment Processes form as a guide to summarizing a candidates’ performance in each section. It is not necessary to sum the candidates’ score in each descriptor to achieve a total score in each section.

Level II

The course instructor of the following courses: EC3300, EMSE3123, EMSE3210, EMSE3220, EMSE3230, EMSE3240, EMSE3450, EMSE3410, EMSE3403, FA3900/3901, FA5015/5016, MUS3310/3311, PED3610, 3611, SPED3000, THE3220 will be responsible for assisting students in developing the Mini-Teacher Work Sample Portfolio processes, reviewing each student’s Mini-Teacher Work Sample Portfolio and formally evaluating the Mini-Teacher Work Sample Portfolio using the Teacher Work Sample Portfolio Assessment Rubric and the Teacher Work Sample Portfolio Assessment form.

The university supervisor/clinical instructor will support the preprofessional field experience student in the development of the Mini-Teacher Work Sample Portfolio processes offering assistance and ensuring that the processes and reflections are appropriate and reflect the SPECTRUM Model. The university supervisor/clinical instructor will not be responsible for formally evaluating the Mini-TWS portfolio at Level II.

Level III

The university course instructor of the following capstone courses: EC4000, EDUC 4000, EMSE 4900, PED 4610 and SPED 4200, is to review each candidate’s Teacher Work Sample Portfolio. He/She also will provide guidance in its continued development and formally evaluate each Teacher Work Sample Portfolio using the Teacher Work Sample Portfolio Assessment Rubric and the Teacher Work Sample Portfolio Assessment form in the evaluation. The Teacher Work Sample Portfolio evaluation will be included in the grade for the capstone course.

Graduate students in EC 5565, EC 5566, and EMSE 5561 will be responsible for completing the Teacher Work Sample Portfolio.

The university supervisor/clinical instructor is responsible for reviewing and formally evaluating each candidate’s Teacher Work Sample Portfolio and providing assistance in the development of the processes and the accompanying reflections. The university supervisor/clinical instructor will use the Teacher Work Sample Portfolio Assessment Rubric and the Teacher Work Sample Portfolio Assessment form in the evaluation with input from the cooperating teacher.

Instructors/supervisors should use the Teacher Work Sample Portfolio Assessment Processes form as a guide to summarizing a candidates’ performance in each section. It is not necessary to sum the candidates’ score in each descriptor to achieve a total score in each section.

The cooperating teacher will use the Teacher Work Sample Portfolio as a catalyst for discussion about best teaching practices. The cooperating teacher will provide input to the university supervisor/clinical instructor regarding the evaluation of the Teacher Work Sample Portfolio.

Each professional intern will have two Teacher Work Sample Portfolio evaluations, one from the university supervisor/clinical instructor and one from the capstone instructor.

Evaluation Form Submission

A copy of the completed Teacher Work Sample Portfolio Assessment form will be submitted to the Teaching Performance Center by the designated instructor of the Level I, II or III course.

For the professional internship, a completed Teacher Work Sample Portfolio Assessment Form will be submitted to the Teaching Performance Center by both the university supervisor/clinical instructor and the Level III course instructor.

INTRODUCTION TO PORTFOLIO

RUBRIC

Trait	1	2	3	4	5
	Unacceptable	Beginning	Developing	Capable	Accomplished
Introduction to Portfolio	Does not define the purpose of the portfolio.	Vaguely defines the purpose of the portfolio.	Adequately defines the purpose of the portfolio.	Clearly and accurately delineates the purpose of the portfolio.	Defines the purpose of the TWS portfolio in a professional and articulate manner.

	There is no description (or a very poor one) of the learning outcomes selected.	There is a brief description of outcomes, but the number is less than required.	There is an acceptable description of learning outcomes.	There is a specific description of the learning outcomes.	There is an exemplary description of the outcomes.

	There are no connections made between the TWS elements and the College of Education Outcomes.	The connections made between the elements of the TWS and the COE Outcomes are minimal	The connections made between the elements of the TWS and the COE Outcomes are satisfactory.	The connections made between the elements of the TWS and the College of Education Outcomes are clear.	The connections made between the elements of the TWS and the COE Outcomes are clear and focused.

	There is no description of the TWS portfolio organization.	The description of the organization of the TWS portfolio is vague and not easily understood.	The description of the TWS portfolio organization is acceptable.	The description of the TWS portfolio organization is logical and in an easy to understand format.	The description of the organization is excellent, well thought out, and logical.

PHILOSOPHY STATEMENT

RUBRIC

Trait	1	2	3	4	5
	Unacceptable	Beginning	Developing	Capable	Accomplished
Philosophy Statement	Offers no evidence that the candidate has the P-12 student as the focus.	Offers minimal evidence that the candidate has the P-12 student as the focus.	Offers adequate evidence that the candidate has the P-12 student as the focus.	Offers significant evidence that the candidate has the P-12 student as the focus.	Offers superior evidence that the candidate has the P-12 student as the focus.

	Offers no evidence that the SPECTRUM model is the framework	Offers minimal evidence that the SPECTRUM model is the framework.	Offers adequate evidence that the SPECTRUM model is the framework.	Offers significant evidence that the SPECTRUM model is the framework.	Offers superior evidence that the SPECTRUM model is the framework.

	Offers no evidence that the candidate understands theory and research.	Offers minimal evidence that the candidate understands theory and research.	Offers adequate evidence that the candidate understands theory and research.	Offers significant evidence that the candidate understands theory and research.	Offers superior evidence that the candidate understands theory and research.

	Offers no evidence that the candidate has gained insight into teaching and learning through field experiences and coursework.	Offers minimal evidence that the candidate has gained insight into teaching and learning through field experiences and coursework.	Offers adequate evidence that the candidate has gained insight into teaching and learning through field experiences and coursework.	Offers significant evidence that the candidate has gained insight into teaching and learning through field experiences and coursework.	Offers superior evidence that the candidate has gained insight into teaching and learning through field experiences and coursework.

Writing Mechanics and Organization

Rubric

Standard: TWS Portfolio is organized clearly, grammatically correct and written in standard English.

Trait	1 Unacceptable	2 Beginning	3 Developing	4 Capable	5 Accomplished
Writing Mechanics	The use of standard written English is unsatisfactory at this level. More than 10 errors in punctuation, capitalization, subject-verb agreement may exist or excessive fragments or run-ons may detract from the overall content of the writing.	The use of standard written English needs attention. More than 9 errors in punctuation, capitalization, subject-verb agreement may exist or 2 or more fragments or run-ons may exist.	The use of standard written English is adequate with no more than 8 errors in punctuation, capitalization, subject-verb agreement may exist or 1 or more fragments or run-ons may exist.	The use of standard written English is good with no more than 5 errors.	The use of standard written English is outstanding with no more than 2 errors in punctuation, capitalization, subject-verb agreement may exist. No fragments or run-ons may exist

Syntax	Syntax and word choice may be unsatisfactory, or the writing may lack cohesion.	Syntax and word choice may need attention, or the writing may lack cohesion.	Syntax and word choice are satisfactory, and the writing is cohesive.	Syntax and word choice are appropriate, and the writing is cohesive.	Syntax and word choice are clearly superior, and the writing is very cohesive.

Writing Mechanics and Organization

Rubric

Standard: TWS Portfolio is organized clearly, grammatically correct and written in standard English.

Trait

Unacceptable

Beginning

Developing

Capable

Accomplished

Organization of TWS Portfolio

Poorly organized with no section dividers.

No table of contents.

Not placed in a binder, no cover page.

Subsection not well defined and papers poorly placed in sections.

Table of contents is brief and vague.

Binder or notebook is in poor condition with a poorly worded, difficult to read cover page.

Subsections are labeled and papers placed in appropriate sections.

Table of contents is well organized.

Binder or notebook is organized with an appropriate cover page.

Subsections are labeled and stand out from folder and papers are placed in appropriate sections.

Table of contents is clear and reader can locate information with ease.

Binder is appropriate and the cover page is professionally done.

Subsections are labeled and tabs stand out from the contents of the portfolio with thoughtful placement of contents in appropriate places.

Table of contents is clear and alerts reader to contents of portfolio; reader can locate material easily.

Binder is attractive and cover page is professional, eyecatching and appropriate.

V. Teacher Work Sample

Performance Requirements

Teaching Processes

Standards and Indicators

Scoring Rubrics

Note: The materials in this document were developed by representatives of the Renaissance Partnership Institutions and are used with their permission. The Renaissance Partnership for Improving Teacher Quality Project http://fp.uni.edu/itg

Overview of Teacher Work Sample (TWS)

The Vision

Successful teacher candidates support learning by designing a Teacher Work Sample that employs a range of strategies and builds on each student’s strengths, needs, and prior experiences. Through this performance assessment, teacher candidates provide credible evidence of their ability to facilitate learning by meeting the following TWS standards:

· The teacher uses information about the learning-teaching context and student individual differences to set learning goals and plan instruction and assessment.

· The teacher sets significant, challenging, varied, and appropriate learning goals.

· The teacher uses multiple assessment modes and approaches aligned with learning goals to assess student learning before, during, and after instruction.

· The teacher designs instruction for specific learning goals, student characteristics and needs, and learning contexts.

· The teacher uses regular and systematic evaluations of student learning to make instructional decisions.

· The teacher uses assessment data to profile student learning and communicate information about student progress and achievement.

· The teacher reflects on his or her instruction and student learning in order to improve teaching practice.

The Assignment

The TWS contains seven teaching processes identified by research and best practice as fundamental to improving student learning. Each Teaching Process is followed by a TWS Standard, the Task, Requirements, and a Rubric that defines various levels of performance on the standard. The Standards and Rubrics will be used to evaluate the TWS. The Requirements help document the extent to which each of the standards has been met.

Teaching a comprehensive unit is required. Before teaching the unit, the contextual factors are to be described, learning goals based on state or district content standards, create an assessment plan designed to measure student performance before (pre-assessment), during (formative assessment) and after (post-assessment), and plan for instruction. After the unit has been taught, analyze and reflect on student learning. Then evaluate the instruction and teaching as they relate to student learning.

Format

· Ownership. Complete a cover page that includes (a) name, (b) date submitted, (c) grade level taught, (d) subject taught, (e) course number and title (f) names of clinical instructor, supervisor, faculty and cooperating teacher, and (g) name of school.

· Table of Contents. Provide a Table of Contents that lists the sections and attachments in the TWS document with page numbers.

· Charts, graphs and attachments. Charts, graphs and assessment instruments are required as part of the TWS document. Other attachments may be provided such as student work. However, please be very selective and make sure the attachments provide clear, concise evidence of teaching performance as related to TWS standards and students’ learning progress.

· References and Credits (not included in total page length). If another person’s ideas or material are referred to in the narrative, these should be cited in a separate section at the end of the narrative under References and Credits. Any standard form for references may be used however, the American Psychological Association (APA) style is a recommended format (explained in the manual entitled “Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association”).

· Anonymity. In order to insure the anonymity of students in the class, do not include any student names or identification in any part of the TWS.

Teacher Work Sample[KU1] [KU2]

Teaching Processes Assessed by the Teacher Work Sample (TWS)

Teaching Processes, TWS Standards and Indicators

Contextual Factors

The teacher uses information about the learning-teaching context and student individual differences to set learning goals and plan instruction and assessment.

v Knowledge of community, school, and classroom factors

v Knowledge of characteristics of students

v Knowledge of students’ varied approaches to learning

v Knowledge of students’ skills and prior learning

v Implications for instructional planning and assessment

Learning Goals

The teacher sets significant, challenging, varied and appropriate learning goals.

v Significance, Challenge and Variety

v Clarity

v Appropriateness for students

v Alignment with national, state or local standards

Assessment Plan

The teacher uses multiple assessment modes and approaches aligned with learning goals to assess student learning before, during and after instruction.

v Alignment with learning goals and instruction

v Clarity of criteria for performance

v Multiple modes and approaches

v Technical soundness

v Adaptations based on the individual needs of students

Design for Instruction

The teacher designs instruction for specific learning goals, student characteristics and needs, and learning contexts.

v Alignment with learning goals

v Accurate representation of content

v Lesson and unit structure

v Use of a variety of instruction, activities, assignments and resources

v Use of contextual information and data to select appropriate and relevant activities, assignments and resources

v Use of technology

Instructional Decision-Making

The teacher uses ongoing analysis of student learning to make instructional decisions.

v Sound professional practice

v Adjustments based on analysis of student learning

v Congruence between modifications and learning goals

Analysis of Student Learning

The teacher uses assessment data to profile student learning and communicate information about student progress and achievement.

v Clarity and accuracy of presentation

v Alignment with learning goals

v Interpretation of data

v Evidence of impact on student learning

Reflection and Self-Evaluation

The teacher reflects on his or her instruction and student learning in order to improve teaching practice.

v Interpretation of student learning

v Insights on effective instruction and assessment

v Alignment among goals, instruction and assessment

v Implications for future teaching

v Implications for professional development

Contextual Factors

To be completed by: Introductory (Level I) and Professional Interns (Level III).

TWS Standard

The teacher uses information about the learning-teaching context and student individual differences to set learning goals and plan instruction and assessment.

Task

Discuss relevant factors and how they may affect the teaching-learning process. Include any supports and challenges that affect instruction and student learning.

Requirements

In the discussion, include:

· Community, district and school factors. Address geographic location, community and school population, socio-economic profile and race/ethnicity. Stability of community, political climate, community support for education, and other environmental factors may also be addressed.

NOTE: NJ School Report Card is a good resource.

· Classroom factors. Address physical features, availability of technology equipment and resources and the extent of parental involvement. Also to be discussed are other relevant factors such as classroom rules and routines, grouping patterns, scheduling and classroom arrangement.

· Student characteristics. Address student characteristics which must be considered as instruction design and learning assessed. Include factors such as age, gender, race/ethnicity, special needs, inclusion, English Language Learners (ELL), achievement/developmental levels, culture, language interests, learning styles/modalities or students’ skill levels. In the narrative, make sure to address student’s skills and prior learning that may influence the development of learning goals, instruction and assessment.

NOTE: Include state/standardized test score data.

· Instructional implications. Address how contextual characteristics of the community, classroom and students have implications for instructional planning and assessment. Include specific instructional implications for English Language Learners (ELL) and special needs inclusion students multiple intelligences and any other factors that will influence how a unit is planned and implemented. Tell why this information is important to a teacher.

Checklist	N	Y

Demonstrates knowledge of community, school, and classroom factors
Demonstrates knowledge of characteristics of students
Demonstrates knowledge of students’ varied approaches to learning
Demonstrates knowledge of students’ skills and prior learning
Uses knowledge to implement instructional planning and assessment

Suggested Page Length: 2-4

Design for Instruction

Rubric

TWS Standard: The teacher designs instruction for specific learning goals, student characteristics and needs, and learning contexts.

Rating → Indicator ↓	1 Unacceptable	2 Beginning	3 Developing	4 Capable	5 Accomplished	Score
Alignment with Learning Goals	No lesson is linked to learning goal. No learning activities are aligned to learning goals.	Few lessons are explicitly linked to learning goals. Few learning activities, assignments and resources are aligned with learning goals. Not all learning goals are covered in the design.	Most lessons are explicitly linked to learning goals. Most learning activities, assignments and resources are aligned with learning goals. Most learning goals are covered in the design.	All lessons are explicitly linked to learning goals. All learning activities, assignments and resources are aligned with learning goals. All learning goals are covered in the design.	All lessons are explicitly linked to learning goals, demonstrating critical thinking and reflection in activities and assignments.
Accurate Representation of Content	Teacher does not demonstrate purpose and relevancy of content.	Teacher’s use of content appears to contain numerous inaccuracies. Content seems to be viewed more as isolated skills and facts rather than as part of a larger conceptual structure.	Teacher’s use of content appears to be mostly accurate. Shows some awareness of the big ideas or structure of the discipline.	Teacher’s use of content appears to be accurate. Focus of the content is congruent with the big ideas or structure of the discipline.	Teacher provides cross-content approach to student learning, stressing depth and breadth of content.
Lesson and Unit Structure	The lessons within the unit do not demonstrate knowledge of how content is created and developed.	The lessons within the unit are not logically organized (e.g., sequenced).	The lessons within the unit have some logical organization and appear to be somewhat useful in moving students toward achieving the learning goals.	Most lessons within the unit are logically organized and appear to be useful in moving students toward achieving the learning goals.	All lessons within the unit demonstrate how knowledge of content is created and organized and integrates knowledge from other fields of content.
Use of a Variety of Instruction, Activities, Assignments and Resources	A single, instructional modality is used with textbook as only reference.	Little variety of instruction, activities, assignments, and resources. Heavy reliance on textbook or single resource (e.g., work sheets).	Some variety in instruction, activities, assignments, or resources but with limited contribution to learning.	Significant variety across instruction, activities, assignments, and/or resources. This variety makes a clear contribution to learning.	Instructional strategic assignments are varied to accommodate individual learners and to achieve lesson goals.
Use of Contextual Information and Data to Select Appropriate and Relevant Activities, Assignments and Resources	Instruction has not been based upon knowledge of subject matter, students or pre-assessment data.	Instruction has been designed with very limited reference to contextual factors and pre-assessment data. Activities and assignments do not appear productive and appropriate for each student.	Some instruction has been designed with reference to contextual factors and pre-assessment data. Some activities and assignments appear productive and appropriate for each student.	Most instruction has been designed with reference to contextual factors and pre-assessment data. Most activities and assignments appear productive and appropriate for each student.	All instruction addresses the diverse needs of individual students and contextual factors of community, school and class.
Use of Technology	Teacher does not use technology during instruction.	Technology is inappropriately used and inappropriate rationale is provided.	Teacher uses technology but it does not make a significant contribution to teaching and learning or teacher provides limited rationale for not using technology.	Teacher integrates appropriate technology that makes a significant contribution to teaching and learning or provides a strong rationale for not using technology.	Teacher integrates a variety of media and technology into instruction and relates both directly to lesson goals.

Processes of Teacher Work Sample Portfolio Assessment Form

1 = Unacceptable 2 = Beginning 3 = Developing 4 = Capable 5 = Accomplished

Introduction to the Portfolio	Section Score	1	2	3	4	5
The purpose is defined.		1	2	3	4	5
The outcomes met by the candidate are described.		1	2	3	4	5
There are relevant connections made between the elements of the TWS and the outcomes.		1	2	3	4	5
There is a description of the organization of the TWS Portfolio		1	2	3	4	5
Philosophy Statement	Section Score	1	2	3	4	5
There is evidence that the candidate has the student as the focus.		1	2	3	4	5
The SPECTRUM Model is used as the framework.		1	2	3	4	5
The candidate understands theory and research.		1	2	3	4	5
The candidate has gained insight into teaching and learning through field experiences and coursework.		1	2	3	4	5
Contextual Factors	Section Score	1	2	3	4	5
Knowledge of community, school, and classroom factors.		1	2	3	4	5
Knowledge of characteristics of student, skills, and prior knowledge.		1	2	3	4	5
Knowledge of students’ varied approaches to learning.		1	2	3	4	5
Knowledge of students’ skills and prior knowledge.		1	2	3	4	5
Implications for instructional planning and assessment.		1	2	3	4	5
Learning Goals	Section Score	1	2	3	4	5
Significance, challenge, variety, and appropriateness for students.		1	2	3	4	5
Clarity.		1	2	3	4	5
Appropriateness for students		1	2	3	4	5
Alignment with national, state, or local standards.		1	2	3	4	5
Assessment Plan	Section Score	1	2	3	4	5
Alignment with learning goals and instruction.		1	2	3	4	5
Clarity of criteria for performance.		1	2	3	4	5
Technically sound multiple modes and approaches.		1	2	3	4	5
Adaptations based on individual needs of students.		1	2	3	4	5
Design for Instruction	Section Score	1	2	3	4	5
Alignment with learning goals.		1	2	3	4	5
Lesson and unit structure with accurate representation of content.		1	2	3	4	5
Use of a variety of instruction, activities, assignments and resources.		1	2	3	4	5
Use of contextual information and data to select appropriate and relevant activities, assignments, resources.		1	2	3	4	5
Use of technology.		1	2	3	4	5
Instructional Decision-Making	Section Score	1	2	3	4	5
Sound professional practice.		1	2	3	4	5
Adjustments based on analysis of learning.		1	2	3	4	5
Congruence between modifications and learning goals.		1	2	3	4	5
Analysis of Student Learning	Section Score	1	2	3	4	5
Clarity and accuracy of presentation.		1	2	3	4	5
Alignment with learning goals.		1	2	3	4	5
Interpretation of data.		1	2	3	4	5
Evidence of impact on student learning		1	2	3	4	5
Reflection and Self-Evaluation	Section Score	1	2	3	4	5
Interpretation of student learning.		1	2	3	4	5
Insights on effective instruction and assessment.		1	2	3	4	5
Alignment among goals, instruction, and assessment.		1	2	3	4	5
Implications for future teaching.		1	2	3	4	5
Implications for professional development		1	2	3	4	5
Writing Mechanics and Appearance	Section Score	1	2	3	4	5
Use of standard English is satisfactory (no more than 8 errors).		1	2	3	4	5
Syntax and word choice is satisfactory, and the writing is cohesive.		1	2	3	4	5
Appearance is adequate with section dividers and a table of contents.		1	2	3	4	5

Teacher Work Sample

Integration of Teacher Work Sample Processes and COE Learning Goals

TEACHING PROCESSES ASSESSED BY THE KEAN COE TEACHER WORK SAMPLE

Contextual Factors

The teacher uses information about the learning-teaching context and student individual differences to set learning goals and plan instruction and assessment.

v Knowledge of community, school, and classroom factors (K-C,D) (S-G) (D-C)

v Knowledge of characteristics of students (K-B,C) (S-B,E) (D-A)

v Knowledge of students’ varied approaches to learning (K-A,C) (S-A,B) (D-A)

v Knowledge of students’ skills and prior learning (K-A,C) (S-A,B) (D-A)

v Implications for instructional planning and assessment (K-E) (S-A,E) (D-B)

Learning Goals

The teacher sets significant, challenging, varied and appropriate learning goals.

v Significance, Challenge and Variety (K-A,B,C) (S-A,B,C) (D-A,B)

v Clarity (S-A,B,C)

v Appropriateness for students (K-B,C) (S-B,C) (D-A,B)

v Alignment with national, state or local standards (K-A,B) (S-A)

Assessment Plan

The teacher uses multiple assessment modes and approaches aligned with learning goals to assess student learning before, during and after instruction.

v Alignment with learning goals and instruction (K-A,B,E) (S-A,B,E)

v Clarity of criteria for performance (K-E) (S-E)

v Multiple modes and approaches (K-D,E) (S-E) (D-A)

v Technical soundness (K-E) (S-D,E)

v Adaptations based on the individual needs of students (K-B,C,E) (S-A,B,C,E) (D-A)

Design for Instruction

The teacher designs instruction for specific learning goals, student characteristics and needs, and learning contexts.

v Alignment with learning goals (K-A,B,E) (S-A,B,E)

v Accurate representation of content (K-A) (S-A,C,D) (D-C)

v Lesson and unit structure (K-A,B,C,D,E) (S-A,B,C,D,F) (D-B,C)

v Use of a variety of instruction, activities, assignments and resources (K-B,C) (S-B,C,G) (D-A,B,C)

v Use of contextual information and data to select appropriate and relevant activities, assignments and resources (K-B,C) (S-A,G) (D-B,C)

v Use of technology (S-B,D)

Instructional Decision-Making

The teacher uses ongoing analysis of student learning to make instructional decisions.

v Sound professional practice (K-A,B,C,D,E) (S-A,B,C,D,E,G) (D-A,B,C,D)

v Adjustments based on analysis of student learning (K-B,C,E) (S-E)

v Congruence between modifications and learning goals (K-A,B,E) (S-A,B,E)

Analysis of Student Learning

The teacher uses assessment data to profile student learning and communicate information about student progress and achievement.

v Clarity and accuracy of presentation (K-E) (S-D,E)

v Alignment with learning goals (K-A,B,E) (S-A,B,E)

v Interpretation of data (K-B,C,E) (S-D,E) (D-B,C)

v Evidence of impact on student learning (K-B,C,E) (S-B,C,E,G) (D-A,B)

Reflection and Self-Evaluation

The teacher reflects on his or her instruction and student learning in order to improve teaching practice.

v Interpretation of student learning (K-B,E) (S-C,E,F,G) (D-A,B,C,F)

v Insights on effective instruction and assessment (K-B,E) (S-B,E,F) (D-B,F)

v Alignment among goals, instruction and assessment (K-A,B,E) (S-A,B,E,F)

v Implications for future teaching (S-F) (D-F)

v Implications for professional development (S-F) (D-F)

● Letters in parentheses refer to COE Learning Outcomes: K = Knowledge, S = Skills, D = Disposition

See pages 4, 5 & 6

VI. RESOURCES

Unit Assessment System: Report to the Indiana Professional Standards Board (1999, December).

Muncie, IN: Ball State University, Teachers College.

Bernhardt, Victoria (2002). The School Portfolio Toolkit; A Planning, Implementation and Evaluation

Guide for Continuous School Improvement. Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education.

Bullock, A. and Hawk, P., (2001). Developing a Teaching Portfolio; A Guide for the Preservice and

Practicing Teacher. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall.

Campbell, D., Cignetti, P., Melenyzer, B., Nettles, D., & Wyman, R. (1997). How to Develop a

Professional Portfolio: A Manual for Teachers. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

Danielson, C, (1996). Enhancing Professional Practice: Framework for Teaching. Alexander, VA:

Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Knight, M. & Gallero, D. (1994). Portfolio Assessment, Applications of Portfolio Analysis. Lanham,

MD: University Press of America.

New Jersey Journal of Supervision and Curriculum Development: Standards and Assessment for Student Achievement. (2001). New Brunswick, NJ: Downtown Printing.

Phi Delta Kappa International & Ball State University Teachers College, (2000). Student Teacher’s Portfolio Handbook, Bloomington, IN: Phi Delta Kappa International.

Rakow, S. (1999). Involving Classroom Teachers in the Assessment of Preservice Intern Portfolios.

Action in Teacher Education.

Spence, R. and Graham, Shari (2000). The High Performance Toolbox. Evergreen CO: Peak Learning

Systems.

Wile, I. (1999). Professional Portfolios: the “Talk” of the Student Teaching Experience. The Teacher

Educator 34 (3), 215-23 1.

Wolf, K. (1996). Developing an Effective Teaching Portfolio. Educational Leadership 53(6), 34-37.

Wyatt, R., III & Looper, S. (1999). So You Have to Have a Portfolio: A Teacher’s Guide to Preparation

and Presentation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, Sage. 16

TEACHER WORK SAMPLE REFERENCES

· http://education.csufresno.edu/rengroup/

· http://www.uni.edu/itq/

[1] WEBSTER’S SEVENTH NEW COLLEGIATE DICTIONARY. SPRINGFIELD, MA: G & C MERRIAM CO., 1972

Angela Caruso	Barbara Lee, Ph.D.
Jo Hoffman, Ed.D	Rosalyn Lenhoff, Ed.D.
Patricia Klein	Mary Jo Santo Pietro, Ph.D.
Beverly Kling, Ed.D.	Charlotte Sciarpelletti
Michael Knight, Ph.D.	Ethel Young, Ph.D.

Dr. J. Amorino	Dr. M. Knight
Prof. M. Bocchino	Dr. B. Lee
Dr. L. Cahir	Dr. L. Lorentzen
Prof. A. Caruso	Dr. M. Mobley
Dr. G. DelRisco	Dr. F. Osborne
Prof. R. Evans	Dr. J. Oussaty
Dr. J. Hoffman	Dr. V. Rodriguez
Dr. L. Schraer-Joiner	Dr. D. Schuman
Dr. D. Joiner

NCATE OFFICE	TEACHING PERFORMANCE CENTER
Kean University	Kean University
College of Education	College of Education
Willis Hall, Room 104	Willis Hall, Room 110
Union, NJ 07083	Union, NJ 07083

Phone: (908) 737-4266	Phone: (908) 737-4185
Fax: (908) 737-4265	Fax: (908) 737-4115
Email: ncate@kean.edu	Email: tpc@kean.edu

Rating → Indicator ↓	1 Unacceptable	2 Beginning	3 Developing	4 Capable	5 Accomplished	Score
Knowledge of Community, School and Classroom Factors	Displays no knowledge of the characteristics of the community, school, and classroom.	Displays minimal, irrelevant, or biased knowledge of the characteristics of the community, school, and classroom.	Displays some knowledge of the characteristics of the community, school, and classroom that may affect learning.	Displays a comprehensive understanding of the characteristics of the community, school, and classroom that may affect learning.	Displays and explains an in-depth understanding of the characteristics of the community, school, and classroom that may affect learning with specific data, cited sources, and/or statistics.
Knowledge of Characteristics of Students	Displays no knowledge of student differences (e.g., development, interests, culture, abilities/disabilities).	Displays minimal, stereotypical, or irrelevant knowledge of student differences (e.g., development, interests, culture, abilities/disabilities).	Displays general knowledge of student differences (e.g., development, interests, culture, abilities/disabilities).	Displays general and specific knowledge of student differences (e.g., development, interests, culture, abilities/disabilities).	Displays and explains in-depth knowledge of student differences (e.g., development, interests, culture, abilities/disabilities).
Knowledge of Students’ Varied Approaches to Learning	Fails to demonstrate understanding of a variety of approaches to learning among students, e.g., multiple intelligences and/or learning modalities.	Demonstrates general understanding of a variety of approaches to learning among students and may know one or two learning modalities but not a variety.	Demonstrates general understanding of a variety of approaches to learning among students and can distinguish between multiple modalities.	Articulates an understanding of varied learning modalities and multiple intelligences.	Articulates general and specific understanding of varied learning modalities and multiple intelligences.
Knowledge of Students’ Skills and Prior Learning	Displays no knowledge of students’ skills and previous learning and does not indicate either is important.	Identifies the value of understanding students’ skills and previous learning but demonstrates its importance for the whole class only.	Identifies the value of understanding students’ skills and previous learning for the group and individuals.	Displays knowledge of understanding students’ skills and previous learning, including special needs students.	Articulates an in-depth understanding of students’ skills and previous learning for the group and individuals including special needs students.
Implications for Instructional Planning and Assessment	Does not provide implications for instruction and assessment based on student individual differences and community, school, and classroom characteristics or provides inappropriate implications.	Provides minimal implications for instruction and assessment based on student individual differences and community, school, and classroom characteristics or provides inappropriate implications.	Provides general implications for instruction and assessment based on student individual differences and community, school, or classroom characteristics.	Provides specific implications for instruction and assessment based on student individual differences and community, school, and classroom characteristics.	Provides specific implications and analyzes decisions for instruction and assessment based on student individual differences (ELL and inclusion students) and community, school, and classroom characteristics.

Rating → Indicator ↓	1 Unacceptable	2 Beginning	3 Developing	4 Capable	5 Accomplished	Score
Significance, Challenge and Variety	Goals are not in evidence.	Goals reflect only one type or level of learning	Goals reflect several types or levels of learning but lack significance or challenge	Goals reflect several types or levels of learning and are significant and challenging.	Goals are significant and challenge thought and expectations including three or more levels and types.
Clarity	Goals are vague or not in evidence.	Goals are not stated clearly and are activities rather than learning outcomes.	Some of the goals are clearly stated as learning outcomes.	Most of the goals are clearly stated as learning outcomes	Goals are clearly stated in behavioral terms.
Appropriateness for Students	Goals presented are inappropriate for the class or set unrealistic expectations for students.	Goals are not developmentally appropriate; nor address pre-requisite knowledge, skills, experiences, or other student needs.	Some goals are developmentally appropriate and address some pre-requisite knowledge, skills, experiences, and other student needs.	Most goals are developmentally appropriate; addresses pre-requisite knowledge, skills, experiences and other student needs are considered.	Goals demonstrates realistic expectations for all students in addition to providing for students’ critical thinking and reflection.
Alignment with National, State or Local Standards	Fails to develop goals aligned with national, state and COE standards	Goals are not aligned with national, NJ standards or COE standards.	Some goals are aligned with national, state or COE standards.	Most of the goals are explicitly aligned with national, state and COE standards.	Goals are aligned with national, state, COE standards and are articulated through the lesson presentations. Alignments are explained.

Learning Goals	Assessments	Format of Assessment	Adaptations
Learning Goal 1 Example: The student will link wild animals with their habitats.	Pre-Assessment	Checklist: game with animal masks & centers representing habitats (tree, lake, burrow, cave)	Repeat and modify instructions, as needed. Demonstrate and assist with cutting, gluing, etc. Provide model of a mask and model how to move to habitat centers. Keep all activities high-interest and brief.
	Formative Assessment	Animal puppets and habitats (e.g., bird and nest) anecdotal records REQ & a picture journals	Provide concrete models and assistance with fine motor tasks, as needed. Provide multiple explanations and model performances. Process writing (i.e., dictations) when needed. Provide verbal cues and plenty of wait time for Q & A.
	Post-Assessment	Checklist: game with animal masks & centers representing habitats