Unit: Institute for Teacher Education
Program: Secondary Education (BEd)
Degree: Bachelor's
Date: Fri Oct 10, 2014 - 1:42:53 pm

1) Institutional Learning Objectives (ILOs) and Program Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs)

1. Knowledgeable: Professional, Legal and Ethical Responsibilities - The teacher candidate demonstrates an understanding of and ability to apply and model ethical and legal responsibilities expected of professional educators. The teacher candidate is reflective, assesses the effectiveness of choices and actions on others, and actively seeks professional growth.

(1b. Specialized study in an academic field, 2a. Think critically and creatively, 3a. Continuous learning and personal growth)

2. Knowledgeable: Foundations of Secondary Education - The teacher candidate can articulate the history and role of public education and contemporary school issues in Hawai‘i and the nation.

(1b. Specialized study in an academic field)

3. Knowledgeable: Philosophical Theories of Education - The teacher candidate understands the ideas and beliefs that have influenced the purpose of education and have shaped contemporary teaching and learning.

(1b. Specialized study in an academic field)

4. Knowledgeable: Psychology of Learning - The teacher candidate demonstrates an understanding of current theories of human learning and development and research in those areas. The candidate demonstrates an understanding of how to apply theoretical concepts in these areas to education.

(1b. Specialized study in an academic field)

5. Caring: Adolescent Development - The teacher candidate understands adolescent culture and how they learn and develop in order to actively engage students in learning opportunities that support the intellectual, social, and personal development.

(1b. Specialized study in an academic field, 3b. Respect for people and cultures, in particular Hawaiian culture)

6. Caring: Inclusion, Equity and Democracy -The teacher candidate acknowledges the diversity of students and schools (e.g., ethnic, cultural, language, religion, disabilities) and uses this understanding to create equitable learning opportunities that facilitate social justice.

(1b. Specialized study in an academic field, 3b. Respect for people and cultures, in particular Hawaiian culture)

7. Effective: Content of the Secondary Curriculum - The teacher candidate understands the purpose, structure, and organization of the high school and middle school curriculum, and the major concepts, tools of inquiry, and structures of the content/subject areas to create meaningful learning experiences for all students.

(1b. Specialized study in an academic field)

8. Effective: Planning and Instructional Strategies - The teacher candidate uses long and short-term curriculum planning to create a variety of instructional strategies and resources that support the intellectual, social, and personal development of diverse learners.

(1b. Specialized study in an academic field)

9. Effective: Assessment and Accountability - The teacher candidate understands and uses developmentally appropriate formal and informal assessment strategies to evaluate and ensure continuous intellectual and social development of the learner.

(1b. Specialized study in an academic field, 2a. Think critically and creatively)

10. Effective: Educational Technology - The teacher candidate uses technology effectively to enhance their productivity and professional practice and implements curriculum plans that include methods and strategies for applying technology to maximize student learning.

(1b. Specialized study in an academic field)

11. Effective: Communication and Relationships - The teacher candidate models effective speaking, writing and listening skills that enable communication and fosters relationships with multiple and diverse audiences.

(1a. General education, 2c. Communicate and report)

12. Effective: Classroom Learning Environment - The teacher candidate uses an understanding of individual and group motivation and behavior. The candidate creates a safe, healthy learning environment and develops a learning community.

(1b. Specialized study in an academic field, 3b. Respect for people and cultures, in particular Hawaiian culture)

2) Your program's SLOs are published as follows. Please update as needed.

Department Website URL:
Student Handbook. URL, if available online: https://coe.hawaii.edu/content/secondary-teacher-education-program-handbook
Information Sheet, Flyer, or Brochure URL, if available online:
UHM Catalog. Page Number:
Course Syllabi. URL, if available online:

3) Select one option:

Curriculum Map File(s) from 2014:

4) For your program, the percentage of courses that have course SLOs explicitly stated on the syllabus, a website, or other publicly available document is as follows. Please update as needed.


5) Did your program engage in any program assessment activities between June 1, 2013 and September 30, 2014? (e.g., establishing/revising outcomes, aligning the curriculum to outcomes, collecting evidence, interpreting evidence, using results, revising the assessment plan, creating surveys or tests, etc.)

No (skip to question 14)

6) For the period between June 1, 2013 and September 30, 2014: State the assessment question(s) and/or assessment goals. Include the SLOs that were targeted, if applicable.

The assessment system for the ITE Secondary Program is aligned with the College of Education’s goal to prepare educators who are knowledgeable, effective, and caring professionals.  By identifying the program standards to be addressed in each of our key program assessments, we are able to collect evidence of our candidates’ knowledge, skills, and dispositions throughout the program.                                        

The assessments for the ITE Secondary Program are the developmental course based portfolio and the Teacher Work Sample. These assessments answer the questions: "What should teacher candidates know and be able to do?" and "How well did our teacher candidates master the standards of the program?" Artifacts for the developmental portfolio are created within program courses. Each course in the Secondary Program has an identified major focus supporting a specific SLO. A menu of assignments that best supports a program standard along with a scoring rubric was developed for each course. The "standardization" provides assurance that all students in the Secondary Program are held to the same standard and consistency in assessing student knowledge essential to a particular course.

7) State the type(s) of evidence gathered to answer the assessment question and/or meet the assessment goals that were given in Question #6.

-Direct evidence (Assessments of student learning – your key program assessments – Include brief description of 3 assessments to show evidence of knowledge, skills, and dispositions)

        1. Praxis II: Candidates must pass this standardized, nationally-normed examination of content knowledge. The data for the Praxis II is available through HEOA Title II is reported for AY 2013-14 (Fall 2013, Spring 2014, Summer 2014).

        2. Student Teaching Evaluation: Candidates demonstrate proficiency in their field experience including classroom management, instruction, assessment, communication, professionalism, and collaboration. Data is reported for AY 2013-14 (Fall 2013, Spring 2014, Summer 2014).

        3. Professional Dispositions:  Candidates must demonstrate professional dispositions, including professionalism, diversity, communication, collaboration, and reflection. Data is reported for AY 2013-14 (Fall 2013, Spring 2014, Summer 2014).

-Indirect evidence: Each semester, program completer surveys are distributed by the Dean’s Office to our candidates in their final semester of the program. This data is published in reports aggregated by program in the COE Intranet and is also reported on the COE public website, “Measuring Our Success.”

8) State how many persons submitted evidence that was evaluated. If applicable, please include the sampling technique used.

ITE Secondary English, N=6

ITE Secondary Mathematics, N=5

ITE Secondary Science, N=3

MEdT Social Studies, N=13

MEdT Total, N=27

Please note that sampling techniques were not needed due to the relatively small number of BEd secondary completers. 

9) Who interpreted or analyzed the evidence that was collected? (Check all that apply.)

Course instructor(s)
Faculty committee
Ad hoc faculty group
Department chairperson
Persons or organization outside the university
Faculty advisor
Advisors (in student support services)
Students (graduate or undergraduate)

10) How did they evaluate, analyze, or interpret the evidence? (Check all that apply.)

Used a rubric or scoring guide
Scored exams/tests/quizzes
Used professional judgment (no rubric or scoring guide used)
Compiled survey results
Used qualitative methods on interview, focus group, open-ended response data
External organization/person analyzed data (e.g., external organization administered and scored the nursing licensing exam)

11) For the assessment question(s) and/or assessment goal(s) stated in Question #6:
Summarize the actual results.

Results are based on three assessments: Praxis II Content Tests, Student Teaching Evaluations, and Professional Dispositions.

1. Praxis II Content Test (Addressing InTASC Standard 5: Demonstrates Knowledge of Content)

All Secondary BEd candidates passed the appropriate Praxis II content test according to their identified level or subject specialty field. Maximum score for any given Praxis II content test is 200. 

BEd Secondary Praxis II Content Knowledge Test (Fall 2013, Spring 2014, Summer 2014)


Total Test Takers



Average Score

Minimum Passing Score


English Language, Literature












Science: General Science






Social Studies







2. Student Teaching Evaluation (Addressing InTASC Standards 1-10)

BEd Secondary (N=27)

All BEd Secondary completers achieved passing scores on each criteria of the general and the secondary subject specific student teaching evaluation analytic rubrics. This evaluation consists of two instruments for the secondary candidates. The first is a general evaluation rubric completed for all secondary candidates. The second instrument is a rubric designed for each of the four subject specific areas (English, mathematics, science, social studies). Both rubrics are aligned with program standards. Target and Acceptable scores were passing. ITE Program Standards #9 Assessment and Accountability received the lowest number of Target scores on this evaluation. 


3. Professional Dispositions (Addressing InTASC Standard 9: Demonstrates Professionalism)

BEd Secondary (N=26) 

All scores were passing as either Target or Acceptable.  The professional disposition criteria with the the highest score outcomes were Professional and Ethical conduct as well as Self-Reflection and Profesisonalism. The lowest scoreing outcome was  Communication and Collaboration. The Professional Disposition with the highest number of Target scores was Professional & Ethical Conduct. 





12) State how the program used the results or plans to use the results. Please be specific.

The following steps have been taken to use the assessment results in the ITE Secondary Program.

Student Teaching Evaluation: ITE Program Standard #9: Assessment and Accountability

During ITE 405H Science Teaching Residency, teacher candidates collect information about student learning and prior knowledge of science concepts in order to tailor instruction to meet the needs of the particular students in the secondary science classes they are teaching. During the course of student teaching teacher candidates collect pre/post unit data that allows them to assess student growth and development. Through formative and summative assessment they evaluate each student’s mastery of science concepts and provide students with ongoing constructive feedback.  

In ITE 406H Science Seminar in Teaching Residency three different class sessions were devoted to teaching teacher candidates how to determine what constitutes acceptable evidence of student learning of science concepts, how to develop assessment rubrics, and; how to evaluate student work. Over the course of the semester teacher candidates put together a Teacher Work Sample [TWS] in which they the 1) Analyze students’ learning styles to determine their learning needs and ability; 2) describe formative and summative assessment opportunities they built into a unit plan they developed and implemented; 3) collect and evaluate pre/post unit assessments to chart students’ mastery of science concepts; 4) reflect on formative and summative assessments to inform subsequent instruction and future implementation of their unit plan. The TWS provides teacher candidates to share assessment data with their mentor, university coordinator and instructor.


In regard to assessment and accountability, we have redesigned our lesson planning template to more explicitly incorporate the formative assessment facilitated by the candidate in her/his instruction. Early in the planning form the candidate must list the formative assessment students will complete in the lesson. A bit later in the planning form, the candidate provides an actual rationale for and description of the formative assessment, and in the lesson "flow" [the teacher action and student action steps] the candidate explicitly notes when the formative will enter the lesson and how it will be facilitated and collected. 


Professional Disposition Standard #2: Communication and Collaboration

In ITE 405H Science Teaching Residency teacher candidates work closely with their mentor and university coordinator [UC] to actively share ideas and seek input as they implement daily science lesson plans as well design and implement a unit plan. Over the course of the semester the university coordinator and mentor teacher observe each teacher candidate 5 times and then immediately debrief the implementation of the lesson. During debriefing, all three work collaborative to discuss aspects of instruction that went well, challenges, and then set goals for subsequent science instruction. Also, teacher candidates are asked to participate in science department meetings at their placement school and are encouraged to work at their placement beyond the end of the university semester through the end of the DOE school year. The majority of teacher candidates elect to take on this additional responsibility.

The ITE 406H Science Seminar in Teaching Residency is designed as a Professional Learning Community in which teacher candidates are encouraged work collaboratively with each other and the instructor to communicate their experiences working in their secondary science student teaching placements. Throughout the semester teacher candidates have substantial in-class workshop time in which they actively share, develop and get/give feedback about science lesson and unit plan design, as well as develop assessment rubrics and evaluate student work. Also, teacher candidates give 2 formal in-class presentations describing their science lesson and unit plan design and implementation with their fellow student teachers and the instructor.


In regard to communication and collaboration, we have begun implementing a "pre" plan of assistance with candidates who struggle to communicate with the UC and mentor early in the semester. This is an actual document that is written by the UC and discussed with the candidate, alongside the disposition form. A plan moving forward for more effective communication is created by the UC and candidate while meeting to discuss the pre-plan of assistance, and documented on the form. Both the UC and candidate sign the form, and the UC communicates the plan to the mentor.



13) Beyond the results, were there additional conclusions or discoveries?
This can include insights about assessment procedures, teaching and learning, program aspects and so on.

One discovery was the steps involved in ensuring that each statewide BEd candidates was assessed with both the general and the subject specific student teaching evaluation and disposition rubrics. A faculty member from UH Manoa was assigned to supervise the student teaching of statewide secondary students and having a home campus faculty member take part improved the evaluation and reporting of statewide BEd data. In previous years when part-time instructors from the neighbor islands evaluated the BEd secondary candidates, it was often difficult to ensure that the proper evaluation rubrics were used and that scores were reported properly. Now, rather than trying to maintain communication regarding assessment with a set of neighbor island faculty on various islands, we now have a home-campus faculty member who goes out to the neighbor islands for candidate student teaching supervision and field seminars. This member attends the secondary program meetings and other meetings where assessment-related issues are discussed as well. Implementing and managing assessments and assessment data has become much more efficient and complete for the statewide candidates within the BEd Secondary Program.  

14) If the program did not engage in assessment activities, please explain.
Or, if the program did engage in assessment activities, please add any other important information here.