NCATE Institutional Report

Message from the Dean

Statement of Professional Commitment

Glossary

Part I: Overview of Pacific University

Overview of The College Of Education (cont.)

Part II: Conceptual Framework
Development of the Conceptual Framework Education Consortium Policies & Bylaws Complete Conceptual Framework Shared Vision Figure 1 Philosophical Focus of the Conceptual Framework Coherence The College of Education Mission Statement	Student-Centered Classrooms Professional Commitments and Dispositions Commitment to Diversity Commitment to Technology Candidate Proficiencies Aligned with Professional and State Standards Orientation Format References

Part III: Evidence for Meeting Each Standard

Standard One: Candidate Knowledge, Skills, and Dispositions
Element One: Content Knowledge for Teacher Candidates
Programs for Initial Preparation of Teachers Table 1.1.1 Verification of Content Knowledge for Teacher Candidates in Initial Teaching License (ITL)Programs State Program Approval Table 1.1.2 Pacific University College of Education Programs Approved by TSPC Content Preparation and GPAs of Candidates Prior to Admission Standardized Assessment Evidence: Initial Preparation of Candidates Table 1.1.3 Comparison of Mean GPAs and Mean Test Scores by Program and Year TSPC-Approved Content Area Tests Table 1.1.4 Praxis II Content Area Aggregate Scores among ITL Program Completers Work Sample Evaluation Work Sample Evaluation Form Work Sample Scoring Guide	Work Sample Evaluation (cont.) Table 1.1.5 Work Sample Evaluation of Content Knowledge of ITL Candidates Effectiveness in Student Teaching Table 1.1.6 Summary Ratings of Candidates on Content Knowledge (Subject Matter) During Student Teaching Programs for Advanced Preparation of Teachers Portfolio Development Continuing Teaching License Candidates Table 1.1.7 Praxis II Content Area Aggregate Scores for Advanced Programs Completers Special Education Table 1.1.8 Work Sample Evaluation of Content Knowledge of Special Education Candidates Table 1.1.9 Summary Ratings of Candidates on Content Knowledge (Subject Matter) During Special Education Internships Reading Endorsement, ESOL Endorsement, and Other Endorsements
Element Three: Pedagogical Content Knowledge for Teacher Candidates
GPAs in Pedagogical Content Knowledge Courses Work Samples Table 1.3.1 Pedagogical Content Knowledge for ITL Teacher Candidates from Work Samples Student Teaching Summary Evaluations Table 1.3.2 Pedagogical Content Knowledge Summary from ITL Student Teaching Evaluations Pedagogical Content Knowledge of Appropriate Use of Technology Table 1.3.3 Ratings for ITL Candidates on Application of Technology in Work Samples Student Teaching Evaluations Table 1.3.4 Ratings for Candidates on Application of Technology During Student Teaching	Program Assessment by Graduates Table 1.3.5 Candidate Evaluation of Program in Pedagogical Content Knowledge and Use of Instructional Technology (ITL and SpEd), 2006-07 Pedagogical Content Knowledge for Advanced Programs Candidates Draft Portfolio Assessment Scoring Guide Special Education Table 1.3.6 Pedagogical Content Knowledge for Special Education Candidates Table 1.3.7 Ratings for Candidates on Application of Technology During Special Education Internships Table 1.3.8 Ratings for Candidates on Application of Technology in Special Education Work Samples
Element Four: Professional and Pedagogical Knowledge and Skills for Teacher Candidates
Initial Teaching License (ITL) Work Samples Table 1.4.1 Ratings of Work Sample Items Demonstrating Professional and Pedagogical Knowledge and Skills among ITL Candidates Student Teaching Evaluations Midplacement Student Teaching Evaluation Form Student Teaching Summary Evaluation Form Table 1.4.2 Evidence of Professional and Pedagogical Knowledge and Skills During ITL Student Teaching Program Assessments Table 1.4.3 ITL Candidates’ Professional and Pedagogical Knowledge and Skills by Candidates Table 1.4.4 ITL Candidates’ Professional and Pedagogical Knowledge and Skills by Mentors, Alumni, and Principals/Employers	Advanced Programs Program Assessment Data by Advanced Program Graduates Special Education Table 1.4.5 Ratings of Work Sample Items Demonstrating Professional and Pedagogical Knowledge and Skills of Special Education Interns Table 1.4.6 Evidence of Professional and Pedagogical Knowledge and Skills During Special Education Internships Table 1.4.7 Special Education Candidate Self-Evaluation of Professional and Pedagogical Knowledge and Skills Program Assessment by School District Administrators
Element Six: Dispositions for All Candidates
Dispositions for All Candidates Dispositions Action Form Dispositions Faculty Evaluation Candidate Disposition Self-Assessment Disposition Procedure Table 1.6.1 Number of Candidates with Disposition Problems Identified by Academic Year	Student Teaching Evaluations Table 1.6.2 Evidence of Professional Behaviors, Ethics and Values During ITL Student Teaching Special Education Table 1.6.3 Evidence of Professional Behaviors, Ethics and Values During Special Education Internships
Element Seven: Student Learning for Teacher Candidates
Preferred Assessment Methods Faculty Survey Courses Focused on Gathering Evidence of Student Learning for Candidates in Initial Licensure Programs Assessment of Knowledge and Skills Work Samples Table 1.7.1 Ratings of ITL Work Sample Items Demonstrating Assessment and Analysis of Student Learning Student Teaching Evaluations Table 1.7.2 Analysis of Student Learning During ITL Student Teaching Program Assessment by Graduates and Other Stakeholders Table 1.7.3 Evaluation of Candidates’ Ability to Promote Student Learning	Program Assessment by Graduates and Other Stakeholders (cont.) Table 1.7.4 Ratings of Special Education Work Sample Items Demonstrating Assessment and Analysis of Student Learning Table 1.7.5 Candidate Analysis of Student Learning During Special Education Internships Table 1.7.6 Special Education Candidate Self-Evaluation of Ability to Promote Student Learning Other Advanced Programs Assessments Advanced Programs Handbook

Standard Two: Assessment System and Unit Evaluation
Element One: The Assessment System
Initial Teaching License Candidate Assessments Student Knowledge and Skills Self-Evaluation Candidate Field Experience Evaluation by Mentor Teacher Table 2.1.1 Candidate Assessment and Evaluation Table 2.1.2 Overview of Candidate Assessment Plan – Initial Teaching License Table 2.1.3 Overview of Candidate Assessment Plan – Advanced Programs Table 2.1.4 Overview of Candidate Assessment Plan – Initial Teaching LicenseSpecial Education Master Calendar for Assessments Master Assessment Calendar Data in the Assessment System COE Admissions Flow Chart	Admissions Procedures – Initial Teaching License Admission to Advanced Programs Scoring Guides Used to Assess Candidate Performance Elimination of Bias and Assurance of Fairness, Consistency, and Reliability Regular Review of Program and Unit Table 2.1.5 Program Assessment Ratings by Candidates, Alumni, Mentor Teachers, Principals and Employers Table 2.1.6 Program Assessment Ratings by Advanced Program Candidates and Alumni Comprehensive and Integrated Set of Evaluation Measures Table 2.1.7 Summary of Integrated Sets of Evaluation Measures and Assessment Applications
Element Two: Data Collection, Analysis, and Evaluation
Evaluation of Candidate Proficiencies Evaluation of Program Table 2.2.1 Data Collection and Evaluation of Program by Stakeholders Formal Candidate Complaints	Retention Rate of Candidates in COE Licensure Programs Table 2.2.2 Retention Rate of Candidates in COE Licensure Programs
Element Three: Use of Data for Program Improvement
Data-Driven Model for Improvement of Course, Program and Unit Operations MAT 5th Year & Flex Interview Questions SPED Interview Questions

Standard Three: Field Experiences and Clinical Practice
Element One: Collaborations Between Unit and School Partners
Collaboration Between School Districts and the College Of Education
Element Two: Design, Implementation, and Evaluation of Field Experiences and Clinical Practice
Table 3.2.1 Overview of Field Experiences and Clinical Practice by COE Program Stages of Development During the Field Experience Mentor Teacher Responsibilities Mentor Selection Evaluation of Mentors and Field Sites Table 3.2.2 Candidate Evaluation of Mentor Teacher University Supervisor Responsibilities	Selection and Evaluation of University Supervisors Table 3.2.3 Mentor Teacher Evaluation of University Supervision Table 3.2.4 Candidate Evaluation of University Supervisor Relationship to Conceptual Framework P-12 Diversity in Field Settings Technology in the Field Experiences
Element Three: Candidate Development and Demonstration of Knowledge, Skills, and Dispositions
Assessment of ITL Candidates During Field Experiences Commitment to P-12 Learning	Candidate Reflection Field Placements For AP Candidates

Standard Four: Diversity
Element One: Design, Implementation, and Evaluation of Curriculum and Experiences
Learning Communities Course Cultural Competence Program Assessments Table 4.1.1 Candidate Evaluation of Promoting Growth in Cultural Competence in Program Assessment Work Sample Assessment Table 4.1.2 Ratings of Work Sample Items Demonstrating Professional and Pedagogical Knowledge and Skills in Working with Diverse Students	Student Teaching Assessment Table 4.1.3 Evidence of Candidates Pedagogical Content Knowledge and Ability to Positively Impact All Learners
Element Two: Experiences Working with Diverse Faculty
Faculty Characteristics Table 4.2.1 Faculty Demographics Faculty Efforts Toward Growth in and Promoting Cultural Competence Table 4.2.2 Faculty Experiences and Knowledge Related to Diversity: Content Analysis of Questionnaire Responses	Adjunct And Part-Time Faculty Demographics Position Announcements And Recruitment Efforts
Element Three: Experiences Working with Diverse Candidates
Table 4.3.1 Student and Candidate Demographics, 2006-07 Progress Toward the State's Goal 1991 Oregon 10-year Minority Teacher Report	Scholarship Support For Candidate Recruitment
Element Four: Experiences Working with Diverse Students in P-12 Schools
Field Placement Diversity Chart Field Placement Diversity Profile	Touch the Future Program Other Opportunities To Work With Diverse Audiences

Standard Five: Faculty Qualifications, Performance, and Development
Element One: Qualified Faculty
Table 5.1.1 Full-Time Faculty Degrees, Rank, and Years of Service Table 5.1.2 Full- and Part-time Faculty Degrees and Rank Table 5.1.3 Years of Full-time Faculty Experience in Teaching in P-12 Schools	Table 5.1.4 Qualifications Cited by Faculty without Terminal Degrees Table 5.1.5 Full- and Part-time Faculty Interactions with P-12 Schools During Last Two Years
Element Two: Modeling Best Professional Practices in Teaching
Table 5.2.1 Conceptual Framework Themes Reflected Throughout Instruction	Table 5.2.2 Faculty Responses to ‘How do you teach critical thinking?’
Element Three: Modeling Best Professional Practices in Scholarship
Examples of Recent Faculty Publications	Faculty Publications, Presentations, and Grants Survey (excel)
Element Four: Modeling Best Professional Practices in Service
University and Community Service
Element Five: Collaboration
Element Six: Unit Evaluation of Professional Education Faculty Performance
Chapter IV, University Handbook	Table 5.6.1 Candidate Evaluation of University Supervisor
Element Seven: Unit Facilitation of Professional Development
Supplemental Pay Policy	Professional Development Grant Proposal Form

Standard Six: Unit Governance and Resources
Element One: Unit Leadership and Authority
Chapter II, University Handbook Unit Leadership and Authority Figure 2 COE Administrative Structure Figure 3 COE Faculty Governance Chart COE Policies and Procedures Handbook College Of Education Website	Student Services Collaboration With P–12 Practitioners in Program Design, Delivery, and Evaluation Pacific University Education Consortium Membership Relationship Between COE And Other Units On Campus Professional Development on Effective Teaching For Faculty in Other Units of the Institution
Element Two: Unit Budget
Table 6.2.1 Ratio of COE Revenue for Direct COE and Indirect University Support Table 6.2.2 Revenues/Expenses for Pacific University Graduate and Professional Programs	Table 6.2.3 Comparison of Budget Ratios Among Pacific University Graduate Programs 2006-07
Element Three: Personnel
The Unit’s Use Of Part-Time Faculty Table 6.3.1 Ratio of Part-Time (Adjunct) and Full-Time Faculty	Support Personnel Faculty Professional Development Activities
Element Four: Unit Facilities
Element Five: Unit Resources Including Technology
Access to Exemplary Library, Curricular, and Electronic Information Resources

General Information

Calendars
- Eugene Programs Calendar (Excel)
- Forest Grove Programs Calendar
COE Admissions Flow Chart
COE Handbooks
Eugene University Supervisor Meetings
- Agendas
Faculty Meeting Minutes
Forest Grove University Supervisor Meetings
- Minutes
Internship Agreements

NCATE Steering Committee
- Minutes
Pacific University Education Consortium
Program Revisions
- Program Design Principles
- Program Revision Principles
Student Course Waiver Form
Title II Report Cards
TSPC
- Pacific University Annual Reports