Document 1940114

Application for State Approval of Teacher Preparation Certificate Endorsement Programs
– COVER PAGE –
Instructions: Please complete the cover page for each phase of the review process. The Education Dean or
Director needs to sign the cover page only when the institution is applying as Phase 1. See the appendices
for more information about certificate endorsement program area or code, or approval types (e.g. new vs.
amended program, traditional vs. experimental program).
I. Institution and Program Information
Institution Name
Lake Superior State University
MDE Elementary Certificate Program (Check
one)
x
Option 2
Level of Program (Check all that apply)
x
Baccalaureate
II. Application Authorization
Name and Title of Education Dean/ Director
Dr. Donna Fiebelkorn
Signature of Education Dean/Director
(Phase 1 only)
III. Contact Information for Questions Related to This Application
Donna Fiebelkorn, Assistant Dean, School of Education
Contact Person’s Name and Title
Contact Person’s Phone Number
906-635-2728
Contact Person’s E-Mail Address
[email protected]
IV. Date of Application
Date of Application for Phase 1
September 27, 2012
Date of this Application
(Leave blank if applying as Phase 1)
V. Type of Request for Approval
In the right hand column, please indicate the
reason for which the institution is seeking
approval. See Appendix A for further
clarification about the types of requests for
approval (i.e. new, slightly amended or
significantly amended programs, and
compliance with State Board requirements).
In the right hand column, please indicate the
application phase the institution is completing.
Circle or highlight one of the following:
This is a new program for the institution.
The institution is amending an existing program.
The institution is complying with newly modified State
Board requirements (e.g. new specialty area standards).
Circle or highlight one of the following:
Phase 1
Phase 2
Phase 3
1 | Page
Please indicate whether the program is
seeking experimental status. See Appendices
A and B for further clarification about
traditional, experimental and alternate routes
to teacher certification.
Circle or highlight if the program is seeking status as:
Experimental Program
VI. EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAM EXPLANATION: To be completed ONLY if your program is applying
as an experimental program. Submitting application as an experimental program means that your
program is requesting suspension of compliance from specific components within administrative rule
390.1153 (otherwise known as 53). See Appendices A and B for further clarification.
a. What is the rationale for the experimental program and how does it relate to current needs and
trends in education?
b. What is the number of candidates in this route?
c. What is the hypothesis being tested?
d. What is the design of the program and how does it differ from comparison groups (e.g. control and
experimental groupings)?
e. What assessments and methods are you using to determine the success of the program?
2 | Page
Attachment 1
– PHASE 1: OVERVIEW OF ELEMENTARY CERTIFICATE PROGRAM –
Instructions: In this section, please provide an overview of the program. This will include an articulation of
the elementary certificate program’s goals (as claims statements) and an explanation of how these goals
relate to the program’s guiding philosophy. Also, please provide a brief explanation of specific structure
and design aspects for the program.
Institution:
Lake Superior State University
Certificate Program: (circle or highlight one)
Date:
September 27, 2012
Option 1
Option 2
I. Specify which endorsements will be used to fulfill Elementary Certificate Requirements.
Option 1
Group/Major:
Group Minor/Minor
(Check all that
apply)
Option 2
(Check all that
apply)
Major/Minor
x

Major/Minor (please list specific
endorsement(s) from category

SM
II. Program Claims Statements and Guiding Philosophy: Below, provide a set of statements (claims
statements) which articulate the Elementary Certificate Program’s goals. Additionally, for each claim
statement, please provide a brief explanation of how each relates to the program’s guiding philosophy.
Please keep the following in mind as claims statements are being drafted:
● Throughout this review process, claims statements will be used to reflect on and refine the program. MDE
requires that the program identify a number of key assessments (ideally between 4-10), which highlight
candidates' proficiencies and demonstrate how they are adequately prepared, as defined by the state
standards, upon completion of the program. Therefore, it is recommended that the number of claims
statements be limited to those which are essential to the program.
● MDE requests that at least one of claims statements be the production of candidates who have deep subject
matter knowledge in all of the subject/content areas as outlined by the Elementary Certificate Standards.
MDE, however, is not defining what deep subject matter knowledge means but rather is requesting the unit
provide a context and definition for deep subject matter knowledge.
● Additionally, you will need to show alignment between claim statements and the PSMT.
Claim Statement 1: Candidates analyze and synthesize ideas, information, and data to make applications of
knowledge in all subject areas defined by the Elementary Certificate Standards, in inquiry, problem solving,
and critical thinking.
One of the essential elements of effective teaching incorporated into the program’s conceptual
framework is content knowledge. This content knowledge encompasses the general areas within the
liberal arts and sciences, as well as the specific content areas specified in the elementary standards.
The importance of strong content knowledge and the ability to apply and expand that knowledge to solve
problems and address real world issues is further supported in the program’s mission and guiding
principles. These principles reflect the expectation that candidates demonstrate mastery of content
areas by completion of the Elementary Planned Program within the specific grade point guidelines prior
to student teaching.
This claim is clearly aligned with the Professional Standards for Michigan Teachers standard that
specifies that teachers are to have an understanding of and appreciation for the subject matter in both
the liberal arts and in specific disciplines of English and literature, social sciences, mathematics, natural
and physical sciences and the arts.
3 | Page
Claim Statement 2: Candidates demonstrate deep subject knowledge through their ability to accurately and
appropriately engage learners in concepts and problem solving from multiple perspectives.
The program’s conceptual framework addresses the connection between content mastery and
pedagogical knowledge, which is the underpinning of this claim. Effective teachers must be able to
adapt and adjust instruction and assessment frameworks to meet the needs of diverse learners in the
classroom. Breadth and depth of content knowledge is essential to being able to engage learners in
examining diverse perspectives and developing deep understanding.
The key alignments of the Professional Standards for Michigan Teachers with this claim are the
standards relating to instructional design and assessment, curricular and pedagogical content
knowledge, and effective learning environments.
Claim Statement 3: Candidates intentionally infuse technological tools into curriculum, instruction and
assessment to enhance differentiation, collaboration, and student achievement.
One of the guiding principles on which the conceptual framework is based is a commitment to learners
and learner-centered processes. Effective use of instructional technology results in stronger learnercentered curriculum, instruction and assessment, resulting in enhanced learning for all students.
Incorporating technology appropriately is also supported in core components of the conceptual
framework, that of research and response. Based on their examination of the emerging body of
research related to technology and learning, candidates further develop their own skills and incorporate
innovative strategies into their planning, instruction, and assessment.
While the seventh of the professional standards for Michigan teachers, the technology standard, is the
most clearly aligned with this claim, there is significant correspondence with the standards focused on
subject matter knowledge, instructional design and assessment, knowledge aligned with state resources,
and effective learning environments as well.
Claim Statement 4: Candidates respond to the results of self-evaluation and reflection for continued
improvement in their implementation of research-based pedagogical practices that result in student learning.
A core component of the conceptual framework is that of reflection, defined by examining one’s own
beliefs and behaviors, the impact of those on the learning process and results, and ways in which theory
and practice interact to inform best practices. An essential element of the conceptual framework that
supports candidates in this aspect of the program is their involvement in a variety of learning
communities. The opportunities to take the content of university coursework out to the real world of P-12
classrooms in the field experience component of the program provide critical experiences for reflection
on and development of research-based practices for enhancing student learning.
The professional standard for Michigan teachers that specifically addresses reflection outlines
responsibilities and relationships to school, classroom, and student. In addition, the standards
addressing instructional design and assessment, and curricular and pedagogical content knowledge
aligned with state resources also are aligned with this claim.
4 | Page
Claim Statement 5: Candidates demonstrate professional dispositions throughout coursework, field
experience, and student teaching.
Professional dispositions are critical to the fundamental cycle, captured in the conceptual framework, of
research, reflection, and response. These dispositions include an orientation to think critically about
one’s own beliefs and impact of actions, to inquire into what works and why, and to hold a high standard
for one’s performance. As defined in the conceptual framework, these dispositions lead to an
expectation that candidates model tolerance, dignity, and shared decision making in the learning
communities with which they interact.
This claim aligns with the Professional Standards for Michigan Teachers standards on responsibilities
and relationships to the school, classroom, and student, and to the greater community, as well as the
standard on effective learning environments.
Claim Statement 6: Candidates demonstrate commitment to equity and democracy in their active
participation in learning communities at the university, school, and community levels.
One of the guiding principles of the program, supporting the conceptual framework, is the belief that all
students can learn. From this belief comes the expectation that an effective teacher creates learning
environments in which all students will be able to learn, which evolves as a teacher engages in the cycle
of research, reflection and response. This cycle contributes to the candidates developing as active
members of a democratic society, which is a fundamental step in being able to create democratic
learning communities in their classrooms.
The professional standards for Michigan teachers standards that align with this claim are those related to
curricular and pedagogical content knowledge, effective learning environments, and responsibilities and
relationships.
Claim Statement 7: Candidates value the uniqueness of each individual through their commitment to
learners and learner-centered processes.
The twin principles of a belief that all students can learn and a commitment to learner-centered
processes are reflected in the conceptual framework and foundations of the program. The expectations
set by these principles are best assessed by candidates’ performance in classrooms and in their
interactions with the P-12 students with whom they work. In addition, however, candidates’ statements
of educational philosophy will reflect consideration of these guiding principles.
The professional standards for Michigan teachers standards that align with this claim are instructional
design and assessment, curricular and pedagogical content knowledge, effective learning environments,
responsibilities and relationships, and technology operations and concepts.
III. Field /Student Teaching and Technology Experiences:
a. Field/Student Teaching:
i. How many field experiences does the program have prior to student teaching? What is the duration
of these experiences?
Field experiences are integrated into the professional education coursework, beginning with the
initial course and continuing through the methods courses leading to student teaching. Candidates
complete a total of 180 hours in local elementary classrooms, in at least six distinct placements.
Year 2 Fall
EDUC250 Diversity in Schools and Society
5 | Page
30 field experience hours
Year 2 Spring
EDUC301 Educational Psychology and Learning Theory 20 field experience hours
Year 3 Fall
EDSE301 Introduction to Special Education
20 field experience hours
Year 3 Spring
EDUC410 Corrective Reading in the Classroom
30 field experience hours
Year 4 Fall
Language Arts-Social Studies Block
40 field experience hours
EDUC411 Language Arts in the Elementary Classroom
EDUC422 Social Studies Methods for the Elementary Teacher
Year 4 Spring
Mathematics-Science Block
40 field experience hours
EDUC420 Mathematics Methods for the Elementary Teacher
EDUC421 Science Methods for the Elementary Teacher
ii. How long is the student teaching experience?
All elementary candidates complete at least 15 weeks in a student teaching experience in an
appropriate elementary classroom placement. Candidates who student teach in the fall semester
participate in in-service staff development activities prior to the beginning of the school year, and
complete their experience prior to the winter break. Those who student teach in the spring
semester are introduced to their classrooms prior to winter break, begin full-time when school
resumes following the break, and complete their experience at the end of April, the end of the
LSSU semester.
In addition to the student teaching experience required for all elementary candidates, candidates
completing the Option 2 program with the Learning Disabilities endorsement will complete an
additional student teaching experience of at least 15 weeks in an appropriate special education
placement. Candidates completing the Option 2 program with the Early Childhood – General and
Special Education endorsement will have student teaching experience at two of the three levels
specified in the ZS standards.
During the student teaching experience, candidates act as full-time school staff members, following
the school calendar and attendance requirements. They participate in all aspects of the school
functions, including faculty meetings, professional development workshops, parent-teacher
conferences, and extracurricular activities.
iii. How do the field and student teaching experiences (and/or the outcomes of these experiences)
support your program’s claims statements?
The field experiences prior to student teaching provide significant opportunities for candidates to
examine the application of the subject knowledge, developed through the required content
coursework, to the standards and expectations of the elementary classroom. In particular, this
helps them in developing alternative ways to present, explain, and engage learners in the subject,
in turn deepening their own knowledge. As candidates move through the program field experience
assignments require that they analyze, in increasing depth, the lessons that others present and
apply that learning to lessons they develop and present themselves. Fully developed, engaging
lessons showcase deep content and pedagogy knowledge. This culminates with the student
teaching experience, during which candidates will be assessed on their ability to engage learners in
developing their own deep subject knowledge.
6 | Page
The intentional integration of technology into curriculum, instruction and assessment is a key
component of the entire program that is highlighted in the selection of field experience placements
and assignments. Initial field experiences include observations of and reflections on effective use
of instructional technology; upper level field experiences in the methods blocks require that
candidates incorporate technology into the design of their own instructional plans. In student
teaching, candidates will continue their work on effective integration of technology in instruction and
in assessment of student learning.
Reflection and response are cornerstones of program’s conceptual framework and the guiding
principles of the field experience component. Candidates observe specific aspects of teaching
during field experience, reflect on the observations and apply their learnings to their personal
development as educators. When candidates present lessons to students in field experiences, they
also reflect upon their own performance and resulting student learning, and respond to the results
of their self-evaluation. This process continues through student teaching and forms a significant
component of the final evaluation of the candidate’s experience.
Field experiences and student teaching provide the most important settings in which candidates
demonstrate their professional dispositions, including their commitment to equity and democracy.
At the completion of each field experience, the elementary cooperating teacher provides feedback
on a candidate’s professional dispositions. That process is also embedded in student teaching, as
well as the assessment of a candidate’s ability to differentiate instruction to meet the needs of each
learner.
iv. How do the field and student teaching experiences allow candidates to gain understanding of and
the ability to teach learners as individuals and from diverse backgrounds? Please explain how the
field experience and student teaching placements are chosen and contribute to the development of
candidates’ understanding of diversity issues.
Candidates are placed in schools and districts of the Eastern Upper Peninsula and in Sault Ste
Marie, Ontario for field experiences. This geographic area includes a diversity of school cultures,
sizes, and student makeup, including a significant native American population. Schools, and
classrooms within the schools, are selected for specific courses based on the expectations and
requirements for the related field experiences.
The Field Placement Director makes initial contact with building administrators, explaining the
expectations and requirements for the field experiences within the program. Follow up meetings
with faculty members help further define appropriate roles for teachers at a given school. For upper
level methods courses, collaboration with curriculum, early childhood, and special education
specialists at the Eastern Upper Peninsula Intermediate School District helps to identify teachers
who have strong pedagogical skills in specific content areas and student populations. The Field
Placement Director confirms each placement with the candidate, the cooperating teacher, and the
course instructor, and maintains a record of each candidate’s placements in order to assure that
he/she has diverse experiences during the pre-student teaching field experiences.
Field experience assignments include observations and reflections on ways in which the
cooperating teacher engages individual learners. The on-campus discussions of diversity, learning
theory, and exceptionalities, in particular, guide candidate’s field experiences, prompting further
discussions of their observations once back in the university classroom. Beyond having candidates
describe what they observe in the elementary classroom, course instructors prompt them to
consider the impact on student learning and to draw conclusions as to the alignment of theory and
practice, and research-based best practices.
Through the range of placements that each candidate experiences, as well as the diversity of
placements for candidates with a specific course, candidates develop an awareness of and
appreciation for diversity at the school, classroom, and individual levels. These factors are
considerations when candidates apply for their student teaching placements in the academic year
7 | Page
prior to that in which they will be student teaching.
Student teaching placements are developed in collaboration with partner schools in the EUPISD and
in Sault Ste Marie, Ontario. Building administrators assist with the identification of effective teachers
who are tenured in Michigan, or with at least four years of effective teaching experience in Ontario.
Prospective student teachers express priorities for their placement. The Field Placement Director
coordinates the interview process through which candidates and cooperating teachers meet and
confirm the placement.
Throughout their student teaching experiences, candidates continue to develop and demonstrate
strategies for determining individual student backgrounds and needs, and for implementing
instruction that reflects the understanding of those needs. This is assessed as part of the periodic
progress reports and the final evaluation process.
b. Technology: Please briefly identify the outcomes and related assessments which demonstrate how
candidates are prepared to use technology as it relates to teaching the various content areas within the
elementary classroom.
The importance of technology to the preparation of candidates is reflected by the inclusion of a
technology program claim: Candidates intentionally infuse technological tools into curriculum,
instruction and assessment to enhance differentiation, collaboration, and student achievement.
Evidence related to this claim is gathered through a key assessment in EDUC350 Integrating
Technology into 21st Century Learning Environments, and this course certainly provides a strong
grounding in technology. However, consideration of the impact and effective use of technology in the
elementary classroom is integrated throughout the professional education course sequence as follows:
EDUC250: Discuss the impact of changing demographics, technology and globalization on education
and on learning.
EDUC301: Describe cognitive processes, how the brain develops, and the potential impact for the
‘digital generation’ in terms of learning.
EDSE301: Identify appropriate uses of assistive technology in special education settings.
EDUC330: Assess uses of technology to support reading instruction and to facilitate reading
assessment.
EDUC410: Utilize online remediation tools and develop technology projects integrating reading with
the content areas.
EDUC415: Integrate instructional technology appropriately into lesson and unit plans, and analyze the
effectiveness of the technology in enhancing student learning.
EDUC411/EDUC420/EDUC421/EDUC422: Explore and evaluate various forms of technology
integration into language arts/mathematics/science/social studies education.
EDUC460: Identify and respond to classroom management issues related to appropriate, ethical use
of instructional technology.
The course outcomes for EDUC350 are:
Explore a variety of technology tools and educational media, assess the merit of each for use in a
21st century learning environment, integrate technology into lesson planning, and defend
integration decisions using learning theory and student learning outcomes.
Construct lesson plans using a process that begins with a student learning outcome, includes
embedded METS and ISTE technology standards into content teaching, and focuses at the lesson,
unit, semester, and curriculum time frames.
These outcomes are assessed through the development and presentation of a lesson plan reflecting
the integration of technology. The presentation of the plan includes an explanation of decisions made
regarding the use of technology for both instruction and assessment of student learning.
The culminating assessment of candidates’ ability to effectively integrate technology into instruction
and assessment in the elementary content areas is in EDUC492 Student Teaching. The related
8 | Page
outcomes that must be demonstrated during that experience are:
Lesson and Unit Planning: Develop short and long term plans that connect with adopted standards
and that reflect knowledge of human growth, development and learning theory.
Lesson and Unit Implementation: Delivery of instruction resulting in meaningful learning experiences
that expand students’ abilities, attitudes, efforts, and achievement.
Use of Materials and Resources: Selection, creation, and incorporation of appropriate technology
and materials.
The key assessment for these outcomes, and for the claim, is observation of classroom instruction
using a technology integration rubric as a measurement tool.
IV. Program Structures:
a. Consistency and Alignment:
i. How does your program ensure consistency across your field and student teaching experiences?
The Field Experience Handbook and Student Teaching Handbook provide the frameworks for these
significant components of the program.
The Field Experience Handbook includes a description, learning outcomes, field experience overview,
and possible field experience activities for each professional education course that requires a field
experience. This is shared with cooperating teachers as part of the placement process, and with
candidates as they enter the program and begin each course. Log sheets and evaluation forms are
included in the Field Experience Handbook, in order to assure consistency in tracking candidate hours
and providing feedback on their performance.
The Student Teaching Handbook includes an overview of the student teaching experience, as well as
the outcomes on which candidates are assessed at periodic progress reports and at the final
evaluation. This provides a consistent set of expectations and policies for the experience. In
addition, roles and responsibilities for each of the members of the student teaching team, i.e.
cooperating teacher, university supervisor, and student teacher, are defined and a matrix for
reviewing those roles is included. The use of clinical supervision in the student teaching experience is
addressed in the handbook, and training is provided to the university supervisors in this supervision
model. An orientation to student teaching is held prior to the beginning of each semester, providing
an opportunity for the members of each student teaching team to begin to work together and for all
those involved with the student teaching component of the program to discuss outcomes and
expectations for a shared understanding.
ii.
What structures are in place for ensuring communication and collaboration between the arts and
sciences and the unit?
The reorganization of the college and school structure at LSSU in summer 2011 realigned reporting
lines for the School of Education, from the College of Arts, Letters and Social Sciences directly to the
Provost’s Office. This has contributed to a more proactive collaboration among the academic
leadership of the College of Arts, Letters and Social Sciences, the College of Natural and Mathematical
Sciences, and the School of Education in order to address program needs. In addition to
communication among the deans of the units at the weekly Provost Council meetings, there is also ongoing review and discussion between designated faculty in each of the academic departments and the
School of Education leadership. It was through this process that the revision of the elementary
planned program, to meet the new standards, was developed and agreed upon. The dual appointment
of a faculty member to the School of Education and the Department of Mathematics, and of a faculty
member to the School of Education and the Department of English strengthens the collaboration
between those departments and education. Consideration is being given the appropriateness of other
such dual appointments.
9 | Page
iii.
Please describe how faculty (both content and education faculty) are kept aware of current issues and
trends in P-12 and state standards as it relates to this particular program?
The School of Education faculty and administration stay current in developments in the P-12 arena
through their involvement in professional organizations that have a broad scope of focus at both the
national and state levels, including ASCD, IRA, NCTM, NSTA, NCTE, and NCSS. Faculty are involved
in grants and professional development activities that include P-12 schools and faculty, which serves
to keep them current as well. The assistant dean serves as a member of the strategic planning
committee for a local charter school, which is also a Native American school.
A very effective source of information about current issues and trends in P-12 education is the local
intermediate school district, the Eastern Upper Peninsula Intermediate School District (EUPISD) The
assistant dean of the School of Education participates in the monthly meetings of the Tri-County
Administrators, coordinated by the EUPISD, and brings information regarding upcoming changes in P12 education back to the faculty at regular School of Education meetings. In addition, the assistant
dean participates as a member of the board of the Upper Peninsula Center for Educational
Development which includes the seven Upper Peninsula ISDs and the three Upper Peninsula educator
preparation institutions
Collaboration with the EUPISD also provides opportunities for university faculty to attend professional
learning opportunities to stay current in education. University content faculty have recently partnered
with the EUPISD and local teachers in grant funded projects focused on teacher professional learning
such as inquiry based science and math assessment workshops. LSSU content faculty are involved
with P-12 schools through events such as regional Science Fair, Pi Day Math Bowl, Mind Trekkers,
and History Day.
Another aspect of the collaboration between the LSSU teacher education program and P-12 schools is
the arrangement with the EUPISD to ‘lease’ half of an ISD employee’s time which converts to a halftime faculty appointment with the school of education faculty. The employee is a former local teacher
who moved to the ISD for a grant funded one to one computing project directorship position. She
brings an understanding of current educational technology into the program, as well as strong
background in science education.
b. Student Diversity: How are the program and unit recruiting for and retaining candidates of diverse
backgrounds (including but not limited to social, cultural, linguistic, and religious diversity)?
The School of Education has established and maintains partnerships with two regional institutions of
higher education that serve as feeder schools for recruitment of candidates of diverse backgrounds.
Sault College is a two-year diploma-granting institution, located in Sault Ste Marie, Ontario, and Bay Mills
Community College is a fully accredited tribal college, located in Brimley, Michigan. At each institution,
candidates complete their general education coursework and the initial professional education course,
EDUC250, before transferring to LSSU for their continuing studies. These partnerships contribute to a
School of Education student body that is approximately 40% Canadian and 10% Native American. The
diversity of social and cultural perspectives that these students bring to class discussions results in all of
the students reflecting on and challenging their assumptions about the concepts and issues addressed in
their professional education coursework, as well as in the other components of their programs.
To help with both recruitment of students into the program, as well as to strengthen the retention of
students as they make the transition to LSSU, the Assistant Dean of the School of Education maintains
regular communication with the designated educational coordinator at each of these institutions.
Meetings with students on the respective campuses help in clarifying program options and in assuring
consistency of expectations.
While the efforts of the program and unit are important in increasing the diversity, LSSU’s small size
means that the institutional initiatives and programs have a larger impact on the diversity in the School of
10 | Page
Education than at a larger institution. One of the current strategic initiatives is that LSSU will attract an
increasing number of students who are academically prepared and reflective of society’s diversity.
School of Education faculty and staff serve on the shared governance committees that are responsible
for developing and implementing the indicators and measures that will shape the plan for accomplishing
this and other initiatives.
c.
i.
Faculty Information:
Methods: How many faculty teach methodology courses in this program? What are the criteria for
selecting faculty to teach these courses?
There are six faculty members who teach the methodology courses in the program, including general
instruction, reading, subject-specific, and technology courses. Criteria for selection are a minimum of
a masters degree, doctorate preferred; teaching experience at the elementary level and/or graduate
credit in the area of specialty.
ii.
Field Experience/ Student Teaching: Who is responsible for overseeing and assessing field
experiences and student teaching? How are field instructors, student teaching supervisors, and
mentor teachers chosen?
The Field Placement Director is responsible for overseeing the placements for the field experiences
and for student teaching, under the supervision of the Assistant Dean. In pre-student teaching field
experiences, a candidate’s performance is assessed by the course instructor and the cooperating
teacher in the field placement, and is factored into the course grade assigned by the instructor. In
student teaching, a candidate’s performance is assessed through a collaborative process involving the
members of the student teaching team: the candidate, the cooperating teacher(s), and the university
supervisor. The university supervisor has the responsibility for submitting the final evaluation of a
candidate to the Assistant Dean, who acts as instructor of record for EDUC492 Student Teaching.
Feedback regarding cooperating teachers and field placement sites is provided by candidates and
instructors to the Field Placement Director and is factored into decisions regarding future placements.
Cooperating teachers for pre-student teaching field experiences are selected through a collaborative
process coordinated by the Field Placement Director. Building or district administrators provide
names of potential cooperating teachers to the Director, based on the specific courses that will be
offered in a given semester, or invites the Director to contact previous cooperating teachers directly.
Cooperating teachers for field experience placements must have at least three years teaching
experience, the appropriate teacher certification for the grade level and/or subject, a history of
satisfactory teacher evaluations, and a commitment to being a mentor and coach for pre-service
teachers. The Director reviews the expectations for the specific course with the prospective
cooperating teacher and determines that a candidate will be able to complete the course requirements
in that placement.
Selection of cooperating teachers for student teaching placements is similar to that for field
experiences, however, student teaching cooperating teachers must be tenured in addition to the
criteria for field experience cooperating teachers. Also, in the placement confirmation process,
prospective cooperating teachers and student teachers meet for an interview, which often includes the
building administrator.
University supervisors are viewed as faculty and, as such, are selected by the Assistant Dean through
an interview process similar to that for other instructors. Criteria include a masters degree in a P-12
content area or in an education field (doctorate preferred); at least five years P-12 teaching
experience; experience as a lead or master teacher, department chair, or administrator; higher
education teaching experience preferred; commitment to the research, reflection, and response cycle
reflected in the program’s conceptual framework; and strong coaching and mentoring skills.
11 | Page
Attachment 2
Form ECXX
– PHASE 1: REQUIREMENTS FOR ENDORSEMENT PROGRAM AREA –
Instructions: In table 1, list the courses required within the Core Subject (major or 2 minors) for Option 1 or
Comprehensive Major for Option 2. Additionally, provide the title, number, and semester hours for course.
Please do the same for the professional sequence (education) courses within table 2.
For the available program options and minimum number of required semester hours, please refer to the
Quick Reference Chart at: http://www.michigan.gov/documents/MinimumRequiredHoursSpecialtyAreaProgramA21931_74344_7.PDF
Institution:
Lake Superior State University
Certificate Program: (circle one)
Option 1
Date:
September 27, 2012
Option 2
Specify which endorsements will be used to fulfill Elementary Certificate Requirements.
Option 1 (Check
Group/Major:
Group Minor/Minor
all that apply)
EX
Option 2
(Check all that
apply)
Major/Minor
x

Program Standards:
Elementary Certification
Major/Minor (please list specific
endorsement(s) from category

S*
SM
Standards Date:
January 2008
Table 1: Core Subject or Comprehensive Major Courses
Provide the following if the institution is applying for Option 1 – List the required subject matter content
courses for all candidates. This information should include courses covering the Planned Program (min 20
hours). Please note, the Planned Program provides additional content to cover the content components of
the Elementary Certificate Standards (e.g. Mathematics, Language Arts, Science, Social Studies, Health
Education, Visual and Performing Arts, Physical Education, World Languages) not covered in the approved
major or double minor route of candidate An institution might have multiple routes of a planned program
depending on the candidates major or double minor choices.
Provide the following if the institution is applying for Option 2 – List the courses that all candidates take within
the Comprehensive Major. These courses must meet the requirements for: Integrated Science, Elementary
Mathematics, English Language Arts, Social Studies, Health, and Physical Education.
12 | Page
Course Title and number
Sem. Hours
MATH103 Number Systems and Problem Solving
4
MATH104 Geometry and Measurement
4
MATH207 Principles of Statistical Measurement
4
BIOL 104 Survey of General Biology
4
NSCI 101 Conceptual Physics
4
NSCI 102 Introductory Geology
4
POLI 110 American Government
4
GEOG 201 World Regional Geography
4
HIST 131 US History I
4
HIST321 Michigan History
2
ENGL 222 English Grammar
3
ENGL 335 Children’s Literature Class
3
ENGL 180 Introduction to Literary Studies
3
CHLD420 Emergent Literacy
3
Total number of SEMESTER HOURS required for each option offered:
* If the institution assigns a different type of credit, please convert to
semester hours.
50
Table 2: Professional Sequence (Education) Courses
In the table below, provide the courses used to address professional sequence and the Professional
Standards for Michigan Teachers (min. 20 semester/credit hours).
Course Title and number
Sem. Hours
EDUC 250 Diversity in Schools and Society
4
EDUC 301 Educational Psychology and Learning Theory
3
EDSE 301 Introduction to Special Education
3
EDUC 330 Reading in the Elementary Classroom
3
EDUC 350 Integrating Technology into 21st Century Learning Environments
3
EDUC 410 Corrective Reading in the Classroom
3
EDUC 415 General Instructional Methods
2
EDUC 411 Elementary Language Arts and Literacy Skills
2
EDUC 420 Math Methods for Elementary Teachers
2
EDUC 421 Science Methods for Elementary Teachers
2
EDUC 422 Social Studies Methods for Elementary Teachers
2
EDUC 423 Arts Methods for Classroom Teachers
2
EDUC 424 Health/Physical Methods for Classroom Teachers
2
EDUC 460 Classroom Management
2
EDUC 480 Internship in Teaching Seminar
2
EDUC 492 Internship/Advanced Methods: [Subject]
10
Total number of SEMESTER HOURS required for each option offered:
* If the institution assigns a different type of credit, please convert to
semester hours.
47
13 | Page
Attachment 3-1
– PHASE 1: SUMMARY FOR CERTIFICATE PROGRAM–
Instructions: This section will help explain how the program plans to evaluate its efficacy. Within the table below provide the following: 1) how the
program’s claims statements align with the Elementary Certificate standards and PSMTs, and 2) upon what evidence (assessments, rubrics, indicators,
etc.) the program uses to determine its effectiveness in preparing candidates.
Institution:
Date:
Lake Superior State University
Program Standards:
Elementary Certification
July 9, 2012
Standards Date:
January 2008
Phase 1 Summary: Paste your claims statements in the left hand column of the chart. Complete the columns for each claim statement.
Claims Statements
Candidates analyze and
synthesize ideas,
information, and data to
make applications of
subject knowledge in
inquiry, problem solving,
and critical thinking.
Candidates demonstrate
deep subject knowledge
through their ability to
accurately and
appropriately engage
learners in concepts and
problem solving from
multiple perspectives.
Candidates intentionally
infuse technological tools
into curriculum, instruction
and assessment to
enhance differentiation,
collaboration, and student
achievement.
14 | Page
Alignment to
Standards
ELE 1
PSMT 1
INTASC 4
Key Assessments
Unit Plan: criteria includes
demonstration of higher order
engagement in content
MTTC Subject Test: passing
scores on elementary, and major
or minors
Rubrics, Scoring Guides,
and/or other Identifiers
Unit Plan Rubric
MTTC analysis of sub-area
scores for evidence of
subject mastery
Placement within Program
Unit Plans assessed in Year 4,
EDUC411, EDUC422,
EDUC420, EDUC421
MTTC taken in Year 4, April,
must be passed prior to
student teaching unless
application for waiver of major
or minors is approved.
ELE 1, 2, 3, 4,
6
PSMT 2, 3, 4
INTASC 1, 2,
3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9
ELE 1, 2, 3, 4,
5, 6
PSMT 1, 2, 3,
4, 7
INTASC 2, 3,
4, 5, 6, 8
Lesson Plan: criteria includes
multiple approaches
Lesson Plan Rubric –
performance assessment
Lesson Plans assessed in Year
4, EDUC411, EDUC422,
EDUC420, EDUC421
Lesson Plan: criteria includes
selection and use of tools, and
reflection on selection and use in
presentation of plan
Lesson Plan Rubric
Lesson Plan assessed in Year 3
Fall EDUC350
Technology Integration in
Instruction: assessment of
technology integration in student
teaching
Technology Integration
Rubric
Technology Integration in
Instruction in student teaching
Candidates respond to the
results of self-evaluation
and reflection for continued
improvement in their
implementation of
research-based
pedagogical practices that
result in student learning.
Candidates demonstrate
professional dispositions
throughout coursework,
field experience, and
student teaching.
Candidates demonstrate
commitment to equity and
democracy in their active
participation in learning
communities at the
university, school, and
community levels.
ELE 3, 5, 6
PSMT 2, 3, 5
INTASC 6, 9
ELE 5, 6
PSMT 4, 5, 6
INTASC I, 2, 3,
4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9,
10
ELE 5
PSMT 3, 4, 5,
6
INTASC 3, 9,
10
Dispositions Reflection: reflection
on candidate-course instructor
conference on candidate selfassessment and instructor
assessment of demonstration of
dispositions
Reflective Portfolio
Dispositions Reflection: reflection
on candidate-course instructor
conference on candidate selfassessment and instructor
assessment of demonstration of
dispositions
Student Teaching Final Evaluation:
assessment on effectiveness in
participation in learning
communities
Reflection Rubric
Portfolio Rubric
Reflection Rubric
Final Evaluation Form
Dispositions Reflection
completed in Year 2
EDUC250, Year 3 EDUC415,
and Year 4 EDUC460
Reflective Portfolio submitted as
application for student
teaching and at the completion
of student teaching
Dispositions Reflection
completed in Year 2
EDUC250, Year 3 EDUC415,
and Year 4 EDUC460
Completion of student teaching
Implications of Disability: research
and presentation on specific
disability and potential impact for
Implications of Disability: Year 3
ELE 3, 4, 5
Candidates value the
student and teacher in the
EDSE301
uniqueness of each
learning environment
Implications of Disability
PSMT 2, 3, 4,
Lesson Plans assessed in Year
individual through their
Unit Plan: learner-centered
Rubric
5,7
4, EDUC411, EDUC422,
commitment to learners
strategies and awareness of
Unit Plan Rubric
EDUC420, EDUC421
INTASC
1,
2,
and learner-centered
individual learning styles and
Classroom Management
Classroom Management Plan
6,
8
processes.
needs
Plan Rubric
assessed in Year 4 EDUC460
Classroom Management Plan:
evidence of focus on individual
learners
* Access the Standards approved by the State Board of Education (SBE) through the following link: http://www.michigan.gov/mde/0,1607,7-1405234_5683_6368-24835--,00.html
** The program may use MTTC scores as one of the assessments. If the program uses MTTC scores, please provide detailed explanation about when the
candidates take the MTTC and how that data is used to demonstrate subject matter proficiency.
15 | Page