Dispositions for All Candidates

The graduate teacher candidates’ dispositions are assessed at three points during the program by the candidates themselves, at the end of each course by their instructors and at the midterm and final evaluation of the student teaching internship. Reported in Table 1.11 are self-evaluation scores of the candidates’ at entry, at midpoint in the program and at exit from the program.

Dispositions are derived from the Department’s Conceptual Frameworks and are supported by research that certain dispositions are necessary to become teacher leaders who possess not only the content and pedagogical knowledge and skills, but also the self-efficacy to succeed in providing all students with the greatest opportunity to learn and thrive in the environments where they teach.

While each of the cohorts showed steady growth from entry to midpoint to exit, the greatest gain was from entry to midpoint for all cohorts.  Specifically, the largest gains for each of the cohorts were the following in descending order:  #7: Self-Confidence and Courage; # 5: Collaboration and Communication; and #6: Use of Feedback and Self-Evaluation to Change.  The changes indicate the effectiveness of required systematic reflections throughout the programs of study.

The undergraduate students self assess dispositions upon applying for candidacy and when moving from the preprimary to primary levels of the program. Faculty assess the candidates at these same points and at the completion of the program. Any discrepancy between self and faculty assessment at the first two points is discussed during individual sessions with the faculty advisor.

At completion of the program, all of the candidates scored above the average score of 5 in each of the areas, with mean scores ranging from 6.5 (Think outside of boundaries, the lowest) to 6.9 (Engagement in tasks). Rubrics are completed by Methods IV and Role of Art instructors after receiving feedback from field supervisor and mentoring classroom teacher. Scores are then compared and averaged. These rubrics were developed during the initial years of the program when it was in collaboration with the Erikson Institute and have been very effective in establishing differences in self and faculty perception of candidates. They are currently under revision to more clearly demonstrate how they align with the program’s conceptual framework.