Assessment 2
University of Central Missouri
Master of Science in Literacy Education
Oral Portfolio Presentation Evaluation
Overview of Assessment
Description
The Oral Portfolio Presentation Evaluation is the second culminating assessment of content knowledge in LEVEL FOUR of the program. It is administered to determine student competency across all of the IRA Standards for Reading Professionals, Revised 2003 (International Reading Association, 2004). All candidates complete the Written Portfolio Presentation during the last semester of their program or at the completion of the program. An overview of the Written Portfolio Presentation can be found in the Assessment 1 Attachment in Section 4 of the program report. Once the candidate has completed the Written Portfolio Evaluation, s/he prepares an Oral Portfolio Presentation that will be presented to a committee of Graduate Literacy Education Faculty.
The Oral Portfolio Presentation is completed on the Friday or Saturday prior to exam week. Each candidate develops a PowerPoint presentation that highlights his/her graduate work from the program. The oral presentation provides an overview of the artifacts addressed in the Written Portfolio Presentation. Most of the presentations provide proof of candidate competency demonstrated through classroom applications, analyses and reflections on student learning. During the presentation, the faculty question the candidate about the success of the implementation of the artifact in his/her classroom and the lessons learned from the project. This dialogue provides support of the candidate’s level of proficiency in each Standard. A competency level is determined for the candidate on each of the IRA Standards using the Scoring Guide for Graduate Oral Presentation. The scoring guide and entire assessment process is delineated in the MSE in Literacy Education Portfolio Handbook
Alignment
The Oral Portfolio Presentation Evaluation addresses the following standards and accompanying elements:
Standard 1: Foundational Knowledge.
Candidates have knowledge of the foundations of reading and writing processes and instruction. As a result, reading specialist/literacy coach candidates:
Ø 1.1 Refer to the major theories in the foundational areas as they relate to reading. They can explain, compare, contrast and critique the theories.
Ø 1.2 Summarize seminal reading studies and articulate how these studies impact reading instruction. They can recount historical developments in the history of reading.
Ø 1.3 Identify, explain, compare, and contrast the theories and research in the areas of language development and learning to read.
Ø 1.4 Are able to determine if students are appropriately integrating the components (phonemic awareness, word identification and phonics, vocabulary and background knowledge, fluency, comprehension strategies, and motivation) in fluent reading.
IRA Standard 2: Instructional Strategies and Curriculum Materials.
Candidates use a wide range of instructional practices, approaches, methods, and curriculum materials to support reading and writing instruction: As a result, reading specialists/literacy coach candidates:
Ø 2.1 Support classroom teachers and paraprofessionals in their use of instructional grouping options. They help teachers select appropriate options. They demonstrate the options and explain the evidence-based rationale for changing configurations to best meet the needs of all students.
Ø 2.2 Support classroom teachers and paraprofessionals in the use of a wide range of instructional practices, approaches, and methods, including technology-based practices. They help teachers select appropriate options and explain the evidence-base for selecting practices to best meet the needs of all students. They demonstrate the options in their own (and demonstration) teaching.
Ø 2.3 Support classroom teachers and paraprofessionals in the use of a wide range of curriculum materials. They help teachers select appropriate options and explain the evidence base for selecting practices to best meet the needs of all students. They demonstrate the options in their own (and demonstration) teaching.
IRA Standard 3: Assessment, Diagnosis, and Evaluation.
Candidates use a variety of assessment tools and practices to plan and evaluate effective reading instruction. As a result, reading specialist/literacy coach candidates:
Ø 3.1 Compare and contrast, use, interpret, and recommend a wide range of assessment tools and practices. Assessments may range from standardized tests to informal assessments and also include technology-based assessments. They demonstrate appropriate use of assessments in their practice, and they can train classroom teachers to administer and interpret these assessments.
Ø 3.2 Support the classroom teacher in the assessment of individual students. They extend the assessment to further determine proficiencies and difficulties for appropriate services.
Ø 3.3 Assist the classroom teacher in using assessment to plan instruction for all students. They use in-depth assessment information to plan individual instruction for struggling readers. They collaborate with other education professionals to implement appropriate reading instruction for individual students. They collect, analyze, and use school-wide assessment data to implement and revise school reading programs.
Ø 3.4 Communicate assessment information to various audiences for both accountability and instructional purposes (policymakers, public officials, community members, clinical specialists, school psychologists, social workers, classroom teacher, and parents).
IRA Standard 4: Creating a Literate Environment.
Candidates create a literate environment that fosters reading and writing by integrating foundational knowledge, use of instructional practices, approaches and methods, curriculum materials, and the appropriate use of assessments. As a result, reading specialist/literacy coach candidates:
Ø 4.1 Assist the classroom teacher and paraprofessional in selecting materials that match the reading levels, interests, and cultural and linguistic background of students.
Ø 4.2 Assist the classroom teacher in selecting books, technology-based information, and non-print materials representing multiple levels, broad interests, and cultural and linguistic backgrounds.
Ø 4.3 Demonstrate and model reading and writing for real purposes in daily interactions with students and education professionals. Assist teachers and paraprofessionals to model reading and writing as valued lifelong activities.
Ø 4.4 Use methods to effectively revise instructional plans to motivate all students. They assist classroom teachers in designing programs that will intrinsically and extrinsically motivate students. They demonstrate these techniques and they can articulate the research base that grounds their practice.
IRA Standard 5:
Candidates view professional development as a career-long effort and responsibility. As a result, reading specialist/literacy coach candidates:
Ø 5.1 Articulate the theories related to the connections between teacher and dispositions and student achievement.
Ø 5.2 Conduct professional study groups for paraprofessional and teachers. Assist classroom teachers and paraprofessionals in identifying, planning, and implementing personal professional development plans. Advocate to advance the professional research base to expand knowledge-based practices.
Ø 5.3 Positively and constructively provide an evaluation of their own or others’ teaching practices. Assist classroom teachers and paraprofessionals as they strive to improve their practice.
Ø 5.4 Exhibit leadership skills in professional development. They plan, implement, and evaluate professional development efforts at the grade, school, district, and/or state level. They are cognizant of and can describe the characteristics of sound professional development programs. They can articulate the evidence base that grounds their practice.
UCM
Assessment 2
Oral Portfolio Presentation Evaluation
P.1
University of Central Missouri
Data Analysis for Assessment 2: Oral Portfolio Presentation Evaluation
IRA STANDARD / Fall 08 / Summer 08 / Spring 08 / Fall 07 / Summer 07 / Spring 07 / Fall06 / Summer 06 / Spring 06 / Fall 05
Standard 1
Foundational Knowledge:
Candidates have knowledge of the foundations of reading and writing processes and instruction
Number of Students / 3 / 5 / 2 / 4 / 2 / 2 / 0 / 3 / 0 / 2
Exceptional Level% / 66 / 60 / 50 / 50 / 100 / 33
Proficient Level % / 20 / 100 / 50 / 50 / 33 / 50
Satisfactory Level % / 33 / 20 / 33 / 50
Unsatisfactory Level %
% MEETING THE STANDARD / 100 / 100 / 100 / 100 / 100 / 100 / 100 / 100
Standard 2
Instructional Strategies and Curriculum Materials:
Candidates use a wide range of instructional practices, approaches, methods, and curriculum materials to support reading and writing instruction.
Number of Students / 3 / 5 / 2 / 4 / 2 / 2 / 0 / 3 / 0 / 2
Exceptional Level% / 66 / 60 / 50 / 100 / 50 / 66 / 100
Proficient Level % / 20 / 100 / 50 / 50 / 33
Satisfactory Level % / 33 / 20
Unsatisfactory Level %
% MEETING THE STANDARD / 100 / 100 / 100 / 100 / 100 / 100 / 100 / 100
University of Central Missouri
Data Analysis for Assessment 2: Oral Portfolio Presentation Evaluation
IRA STANDARD / Fall 08 / Summer 08 / Spring 08 / Fall 07 / Summer 07 / Spring 07 / Fall06 / Summer 06 / Spring 06 / Fall 05
Standard 3
Assessment, Diagnosis, and Evaluation:
Candidates use a variety of assessment tools and practices to plan and evaluate effective reading instruction.
Number of Students / 3 / 5 / 2 / 4 / 2 / 2 / 0 / 3 / 0 / 2
Exceptional Level% / 66 / 60 / 75 / 100 / 100 / 66 / 50
Proficient Level % / 20 / 100 / 25 / 33 / 50
Satisfactory Level % / 33 / 20
Unsatisfactory Level %
% MEETING THE STANDARD / 100 / 100 / 100 / 100 / 100 / 100 / 100 / 100
Standard 4
Creating a Literate Environment:
Candidates create a literate environment that fosters reading and writing by integrating foundational knowledge, use of instructional and the appropriate use of assessments.
Number of Students / 3 / 5 / 2 / 4 / 2 / 2 / 0 / 3 / 0 / 2
Exceptional Level% / 66 / 60 / 75 / 100 / 50 / N/A / N/A
Proficient Level % / 20 / 100 / 25 / 50 / N/A / N/A
Satisfactory Level % / 33 / 20 / N/A / N/A
Unsatisfactory Level % / N/A / N/A
% MEETING THE STANDARD / 100 / 100 / 100 / 100 / 100 / 100
University of Central Missouri
Data Analysis for Assessment 2: Oral Portfolio Presentation Evaluation
IRA STANDARD / Fall 08 / Summer 08 / Spring 08 / Fall 07 / Summer 07 / Spring 07 / Fall06 / Summer 06 / Spring 06 / Fall 05
Standard 5
Professional Development:
Candidates view professional development as a career-long effort and responsibility.
Number of Students / 3 / 5 / 2 / 4 / 2 / 2 / 0 / 3 / 0 / 2
Exceptional Level% / 66 / 60 / 75 / 100 / 33 / 100
Proficient Level % / 20 / 100 / 25 / 50 / 33
Satisfactory Level % / 33 / 20 / 50 / 33
Unsatisfactory Level %
% MEETING THE STANDARD / 100 / 100 / 100 / 100 / 100 / 100 / 100 / 100
UCM
Assessment 2
Oral Portfolio Presentation Evaluation
P.1
Interpretation of Data
Evaluation of the data indicates a high level of proficiency for almost all of the candidates across all semesters. Eighty-three percent of the candidates performed at the Exceptional Level or Proficient Level on Standards 1 through 5 across all semesters. Four candidates scored at a Satisfactory Level on Standard 1, two on Standards 2 through 5 across all semesters. It was noted by the faculty that the candidates who scored at the Satisfactory level across the Standards had all experienced some difficulties in the completion of the assignments in the several of the literacy education courses. In addition, three of the four candidates who scored in the Satisfactory level across all semesters had dispositions (shyness) that affected their ability to comfortably complete the oral presentation. As a result of the data evaluation, the faculty implemented a mentoring session offered every Fall and Spring semester in an effort to provide additional support to all students, but especially those who will have more difficulty with the oral presentation.
Student Directions
MSE in Literacy Education
Portfolio Handbook
University of Central Missouri
Updated Fall 2007
Congratulations!
You have reached a pivotal point in your MSE in Literacy Education program. The Literacy Faculty look forward to completing the portfolio evaluation process with you to celebrate your competency in literacy education.
This handbook contains an overview of the process that you will complete and the documents that will be used as you complete the portfolio evaluation for the MSE in Literacy Education.
The following information is included to guide you through the process:
· Portfolio Presentation Process for MSE in Literacy Education
· Proposal for MSE in Literacy Education Portfolio Presentation
· Reflective Narrative Templates for IRA Standards
· International Reading Association Standards for Reading Professionals Curriculum Grid
· Initial Scoring Guide for Graduate Portfolio MSE in Literacy Education Evaluation Process
Dr. Dawna Lisa Butterfield Dr. Anita Philbrick
Professor of Literacy Education Assistant Professor of Literacy Education
Dr. Karen Foster Dr. Ann Powell-Brown
Associate Professor of Literacy Education Associate Professor of Literacy Education
Dr. Carol Mihalevich Dr. Matt Thomas
Professor of Literacy Education Associate Professor of Literacy Education
Portfolio Presentation Process for MSE in Literacy Education
Submission of the Proposal for MSE in Literacy Education Portfolio Presentation: Submit the form entitled Proposal for MSE in Literacy Education Portfolio Presentation to your graduate advisor. This will inform the Literacy Faculty of your plans to complete the portfolio review process for graduation. The Proposal for MSE in Literacy Education Portfolio Presentation form should be submitted to your graduate advisor before the final exam week of the semester before you plan to complete the portfolio review process. The form can be submitted via U.S. mail or e-mail. The campus and e-mail address for the graduate advisors are listed below.
Dr. Dawna Lisa Buchanan/Butterfield
2134 Lovinger
Warrensburg, MO 64093
660-543-8466
Dr. Carol Mihalevich
2133 Lovinger
Warrensburg, MO 64093
660-543-8731
Dr. Ann Powell-Brown
2135 Lovinger
Warrensburg, MO 64093
660-543-8712
Dr. Matt Thomas
2136 Lovinger
Warrensburg, MO 64093
660-543-8729
IMPORTANT
Please note that at a minimum the MSE Candidate must have completed all but six hours of course work listed on his/her Program of Study by the date of the portfolio presentation to be eligible to complete the MSE in Literacy Education Portfolio Presentation. Candidate permission to complete portfolio presentation will be provided by graduate advisor after review of completed work.