Summary of the Case New York University Teacher Education Program 1 The Summary of the Case is written by the auditors and approved by program faculty. The Summary reflects the auditors understanding of the case the faculty are making for accreditation. Authorship and approval of the Inquiry Brief: The Inquiry Brief was written by Robert Tobias, Rosa Maria Pietanza, and Joseph P. McDonald, and was approved by the Teacher Education Program faculty on May 27, 2011. Introduction: New York University, founded in 1831, is a leading research university with an enrollment of 50,000 who study at six campus centers in Manhattan and Brooklyn as well as campuses in London, Madrid, Paris, Berlin, and elsewhere in Europe, or in Beijing, Shanghai, Accra, Tel Aviv, or Buenos Aires, or in Abu Dhabi. Despite its large student body and many locations, NYU is deliberately decentralized and functions as a collection of small to moderate-sized teaching and learning communities. In 1890 NYU opened the School of Pedagogy, the first university-based graduate school dedicated to the advanced education of teachers and school administrators, in direct opposition to the proposition that practical knowledge alone is sufficient preparation for teaching. Today the School of Pedagogy has evolved into the Steinhardt School, which in addition to teacher education also houses programs in media, applied psychology, physical and occupational therapy, nutrition, music, and the visual arts. The NYU Teacher Education Program is built on five core values: 1. To be in and of the city and engaged deeply in New York schools. 2. To integrate theory and practice pro-actively rather than expect students to do it on their own. 3. To promote intercultural openness as a tool for teaching and in this sense to be in and of the world. 4. To value content knowledge (disciplinary, interdisciplinary, and inter-professional), and also pedagogical knowledge as crucial for effective teaching. 5. To engage habitually in organizational self-scrutiny, and in the process to contribute to the knowledge base for effective teaching and teacher education. The Teacher Education Program consists of 61 full-time faculty members, plus additional adjunct faculty and supervisors. The program graduated 447 students in 2009-2010 and enrolled 1111 full- and part-time students in Fall 2010 in the following options: Table 1 New York University Teacher Education Program Options
Option Name Teaching Educational Theatre, All Grades Level completers in previous (September 2009 through May 2010) students enrolled in current (Fall 2010) UG, grad 21 70 Teaching Music, All Grades UG, grad 18 96 Teaching Dance, All Grades grad 17 40 Teaching Art, All Grades grad 13 45 Childhood Education grad 7 31 Early Childhood Education grad 5 21 Teaching English, 7-12 UG, grad 37 113 Teaching a Foreign Language 7-12 (Chinese, French, German, Hebrew, Italian, Japanese, Latin, Russian, or Spanish) Science Education (Teaching Biology, Chemistry, Physics & Earth Science, 7-12) UG, grad 19 42 UG, grad 23 38 Teaching Mathematics, 7-12 UG, grad 34 73 Teaching Social Science, 7-12 UG, grad 37 58 Bilingual Education grad 0 0 Literacy (B-6, 5-12) grad 8 21 Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages grad 21 34 Special Education: Childhood grad 5 8 Special Education: Early Childhood grad 1 1 Dual Certification: Educational Theatre, All Grades & English Education, 7-12 Dual Certification: Educational Theatre, All Grades & Social Studies, 7-12 Dual Certification: Teaching a Foreign Language 7-12 & TESOL Dual Certification: Childhood Education/Childhood Special Education Dual Certification: Early Childhood Education/Early Childhood Special Education grad 12 33 grad 2 8 grad 26 50 UG, grad 76 206 UG, grad 59 103
Option Name Teaching French as a Foreign Language/Joint Degree GSAS Level completers in previous (September 2009 through May 2010) students enrolled in current (Fall 2010) grad 6 20 Program claims: Claim 1: NYU Teacher Education Program graduates are competent and qualified in their content knowledge. Claim 2: NYU Teacher Education Program graduates are competent and qualified in their pedagogical knowledge and in their pedagogical content knowledge. Claim 3: NYU Teacher Education Program graduates are competent and qualified in their clinical knowledge, meaning their knowledge of school and classroom contexts and of students. Claim 4: NYU Teacher Education Program graduates are caring professionals. That is, they interact with students in ways that unconditionally accept students as they are, and work confidently and competently to address the students educational needs. Evidence supporting the claims GPAs (Claim 1, Claim 2, Claim 3, Claim 4: Learning how to Learn) The faculty used the GPA of courses related to the subjects candidates will teach to assess content knowledge (Claim 1), courses in the pedagogical core to assess pedagogical knowledge (Claim 2), student teaching and practicum courses to assess teaching skill (Claim 3), and courses in the common core for undergraduate students and overall undergraduate GPA for graduate students to assess learning how to learn (Claim 4). Validity of the GPAs is based on alignment with the claims they are assessing, and on correlation with the New York State Teacher Certification Exams. For the four claims, the set of graduates between 2006 and 2010 met the faculty s goal of an average of 3.0, with the exception of the undergraduate students in the common core. New York State Teacher Certification Exams (Claim 1, Claim 2, Claim 4: Learning how to Learn) The faculty used the Content Specialty Test to assess content knowledge (Claim 1), the Assessment of Teaching Skill-Written to assess pedagogical knowledge (Claim 2), and the Liberal Arts and Sciences Test to assess the learning how to learn crosscutting theme (Claim 4). Validity of the NYSTCEs is based on alignment with New York State regulations, New York State public school curriculum frameworks and
standards, and the curriculum of New York State teacher education programs. Between 2006 and 2010 approximately 1900 students took each test, and for each of the three tests the set of students achieved the faculty s goals of a pass rate of at least 90% and an effect size of at least 0.80. Domain Referenced Student Teacher Observation Scale (Claim 1, Claim 2, Claim 3, Claim 4, Learning how to Learn) The DRSTOS is based on the Danielson teaching framework and on the INTASC standards. Trained supervisors rate students using all available evidence collected during the entire semester, including formal and informal observations, journals, lesson plans, interviews and discussions, and portfolios. The set of 440 masters students met the faculty s goal of 80% achieving an average score in each domain of 3.0 or better, but the set of 235 undergraduate students achieved this goal only in the domain of learning how to learn. Educational Beliefs and Multicultural Attitudes Survey (Claim 3, Claim 4, Multicultural Understanding) The EBMAS is a 39-item survey that measures four factors: general teacher efficacy, personal teacher efficacy, caring/social justice, and multicultural attitudes. Students responded to positive and negative statements of beliefs using a 6-point scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 6 (strongly agree). A total of 671 students were surveyed between September 2009 and June 2010. The faculty set a cut score of 4.5, and found that undergraduate and graduate students met this score for four of the five scales associated the claims. In each case the scale not met was associated with Claim 3. End of Term Feedback Questionnaire (Claim 1, Claim 2, Claim 3) Students take this questionnaire at the end of their student teaching placement and answer questions about the degree to which the experience has enhanced their professional knowledge and expertise using a 5-point scale ranging from 1 (very poorly) to 5 (very well). A total of 1,311 students responded to this questionnaire between 2006 and 2010. The faculty set a cut score of 4.0, and found that undergraduate and graduate students met this score for the items related to all three associated claims. Exit and Follow-Up Surveys (Claim 1, Claim 2, Claim 3, Claim 4, Multicultural Understanding, Technology) The faculty administered Program Exit Surveys and One-Year Follow-Up Surveys to students regarding their preparedness to teach using a 4-point scale ranging from 1 (not well [prepared] at all) to 4 (very well prepared). Responses for the Program Exit Survey included 232 students who completed in 2009 and 2010 (a 38% response rate), and for the One-Year Follow-Up included 322 students who graduated between 2007 and 2009 (a 34% response rate). The faculty set a cut score of 80% moderately and very well prepared, and found that students met this for most items on the Program Exit Survey, with exceptions for both undergraduate and graduate students in the area of technology, and for graduate students in the areas of clinical
and caring skills, while on the One-Year Follow-Up students met this score outright only on diverse cultural skills, achieving mixed results on most of the other items except caring and technology skills. Graduate Tracking Study (Claim 4) Particularly given that one of the program s goals is to prepare teacher for the New York City schools, the faculty determined whether graduates teaching in the city were employed at schools representative of the demographics of the city schools overall, and whether they remained in NYC schools after one to five years, as markers of commitment and caring teaching skill. The study involved over 1000 students who graduated between 2004 and 2009, and the set of students met the faculty s goal of being employed at the full spectrum of New York City Schools, and having a 5%-10% greater retention rate than NYC teachers overall. Value-Added Modeling Effects on Pupils Standardized Test Scores (Claim 3) The faculty worked with the New York City Department of Education to obtain the VAM scores for 191 NYU graduates teaching in NYC public schools. These scores are the average differences between students predicted and actual scores as measured by standardized tests in English language arts and mathematics, with a score of 0 indicating that the actual scores were exactly as predicted. The faculty divided the graduates into six different experience levels (less than one year, one year, two years, three years, four years, and five or more years). The faculty set a cut score of a 0.20 effect size and found that four of the six experience groups met this score for ELA and two groups met the score for math. Internal audit: The faculty used a sample of 36 current candidates who were either junior or senior undergraduate students or second- or third-semester graduate students. The students transcripts were used to select courses, faculty teaching those courses, and facilities and resources associated with those courses to audit. The coordinators identified a set of 28 probes, covering the four quality control domains of curriculum, faculty, candidates, and resources. One probe from each domain was randomly selected to examine each student transcript. The findings from this very thorough internal audit revealed a quality control system that for the most part was working as designed, with some notably strong elements of the system including accessibility of data and knowledge of the faculty and staff. Furthermore, the audit has served as the basis of a continuing process of self-inquiry under the auspices of the Teacher Education Working Group. Plans for program improvement The faculty reported on eight areas in which they have progressed in the five years of their first accreditation term. These areas included improvements in the alignment of the program with the needs of the New York City Public Schools, the measurement of
program outcomes through the addition and enhancement of assessments and through the increased study of the program, and the tracking of program outcomes. Going forward, the faculty plan to use the findings in the current Inquiry Brief to identify and address areas for further program improvements. Statement regarding commitment and capacity: The faculty concluded that New York University is committed to the Teacher Education Program and that there is sufficient capacity to offer a quality program. 1 The New York University Teacher Education Program offers options at the undergraduate level in Teaching Educational Theatre, All Grades, Teaching Music, All Grades, Teaching English, 7-12, Teaching a Foreign Language 7-12 (Chinese, French, German, Hebrew, Italian, Japanese, Latin, Russian, or Spanish), Science Education (Teaching Biology, Chemistry, Physics & Earth Science, 7-12), Teaching Mathematics, 7-12, Teaching Social Science, 7-12, Dual Certification: Childhood Education/Childhood Special Education, and Dual Certification: Early Childhood Education/Early Childhood Special Education, and at the graduate level in Teaching Educational Theatre, All Grades, Teaching Music, All Grades, Teaching Dance, All Grades, Teaching Art, All Grades, Childhood Education, Early Childhood Education, Teaching English, 7-12, Teaching a Foreign Language 7-12 (Chinese, French, German, Hebrew, Italian, Japanese, Latin, Russian, or Spanish), Science Education (Teaching Biology, Chemistry, Physics & Earth Science, 7-12), Teaching Mathematics, 7-12, Teaching Social Science, 7-12, Bilingual Education, Literacy (B-6, 5-12), Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages, Special Education: Childhood, Special Education: Early Childhood, Dual Certification: Educational Theatre, All Grades & English Education, 7-12, Dual Certification: Educational Theatre, All Grades & Social Studies, 7-12, Dual Certification: Teaching a Foreign Language 7-12 & TESOL, Dual Certification: Childhood Education/Childhood Special Education, Dual Certification: Early Childhood Education/Early Childhood Special Education, and Teaching French as a Foreign Language/Joint Degree GSAS.