Standards
Standard 1
Content 1
Standard 2
Content 2
Standard 3
Content 3
Standard 4
Content 4
Standard 5
Content 5
Standard 6
Content 6

Logo

Site Map


Conceptual Framework

This section provides an overview of the unit’s conceptual framework(s). The overview should include a brief description of the framework(s) and its development.

1.      Elements of the Unit’s Conceptual Framework

a. The vision and mission of the unit

Vision. The College of Education and Human Development’s vision is reflected in its most recent strategic plan. “The College aspires to be nationally recognized as a regional leader in developing professionals who serve communities and schools throughout the upper Midwest. The professionals who work in the College and study in the College academic programs will be known, individually and collectively, by their learning and teaching, their research and dissemination of knowledge, and their multicultural competence” (E-exhibit 1a.1, pg. 6).

Mission.  The mission of the College of Education and Human Development is to foster healthy human development and learning across the lifespan, beginning in early childhood (E-exhibits 1a.2, pg 1). Within the college, the Teacher Education Unit’s mission is “to support the preparation of educators and other school personnel. Through teaching, research, and service, faculty focus their work on the development of practicing professionals concerned with fostering healthy human development and learning across the lifespan, beginning in early childhood”
(E-exhibit 1a.3, pg 1, ¶ 2).

b. Philosophy, purposes, goals, and institutional standards of the unit

Teacher education at the University of North Dakota is founded upon a philosophy of progressivism. Such progressive education is grounded in constructivist principles and reflective practice; the value of diversity; and a commitment to holistic understandings of learning, teaching, and assessment. The central themes of our conceptual framework: Teacher as Learner, Teacher as Active Agent of Learning and Teacher as Articulate visionary embrace these ideals and drive our goal to develop teachers and school professionals who:

  • are committed to the continuing process of learning with an emphasis on learning to teach;
  • take an active role in promoting the learning of all students; can envision alternative solutions to the challenges posed in schools;
  • embrace diversity and support pluralistic views;
  • and thoughtfully examine the role of technology and apply it effectively in our programs so as to enhance and advance the teaching process (E-Exhibit 1a.3, pg 2, ¶ 2)
c. Knowledge bases

As noted in 1b, theories, research and the wisdom of practice that drive the work of the unit are grounded in constructivism. Constructivist practices in curriculum and instruction provide a seamless connection with a progressive philosophy and inform our evaluation processes and our research.

d. Candidate proficiencies and alignment with standards

The conceptual framework document delineates the general proficiencies expected of our candidates related to knowledge, skills and professional dispositions further clarified in the field experience section of the Undergraduate Teacher Education Program Handbook (Hard Copy Exhibit 1d.1)as follows:

Teacher as Learner:
Teacher Candidates:

  • reflect on teaching by various forms of feedback from instructors, classroom teachers, principals and supervisors
  • respond productively and respectfully to feedback from peers, instructors, classroom teachers, principals, and supervisors
  • engage in lifelong learning by continuing to learn to teach through professional reading and resources, observing, assessing, seeking to make connections among the role the student plays in learning, and the environments in which learning occurs

Teacher As Active Agent of Learning Teaching Qualities:
Teacher Candidates:

  • demonstrate organization through student-centered planning, selection, and preparation of age/grade appropriate materials
  • demonstrate flexibility in modifying ideas, course assignments, materials, plans, lesson implementation, and schedule changes
  • communicate effectively and thoughtfully through well organized and clearly expressed ideas in spoken or written language; demonstrate a clear understanding of grammar and vocabulary; hold high regard for confidentiality
  • appreciate and value diversity through choosing and creating inclusive materials, lessons, assessments, and creating inviting and supportive classroom environments for diverse students' participation and learning, and providing equitable access to instructio

Teacher As Active Agent of Learning Relationships with Others: 
Teacher Candidates:

  • cooperate with peers, instructors/school personnel; resolve differences or misunderstandings respectfully and reflectively
  • collaborate with peers, instructors, school personnel and parents; initiate, suggest, contribute, share ideas and materials
  • establish rapport with K-12 staff, students, and students' families; strive to establish interpersonal connections
  • demonstrate sensitivity to others' feelings, opinions, and cultures

Teacher As Active Agent of Learning Professionalism: 
Teacher Candidates:

  • demonstrate timeliness and attendance consistently in class, group work, appointments, field experiences, and student teaching
  • dress appropriately to match the school's dress codes and expectations when in the school; are well-groomed and demonstrate an understanding of appropriate, professional dress
  • display appropriate attitude and composure proactive for planning, assignment completion, engagement in class and in school; are self assured; display appropriate behavior; and a willing attitude
  • exhibit energy and enthusiasm, take initiative in beginning and completing tasks, consistently stay aware of student activity in the surrounding environment (teacher awareness)
  • respect and support ethical and professional standards, diplomacy, integrity, and commitment

Teacher As Articulate Visionary
Teacher Candidates:

  • Promote success for all students through best practices, informative assessments, and inclusive environments
  • Pursue ways to contribute to others in the profession, participates in professional development opportunities such as conferences and professional organizations
  • Become actively involved in the school community.

The conceptual framework provides a context for assessing candidates’ performance based on professional, state, and institutional standards. Candidates in initial programs must meet the Interstate New Teacher and Support Consortium (INTASC) Principles which are aligned with The Department of Teaching and Learning’s program standards and the appropriate program standards of the North Dakota Standards and Practices Board (E-exhibit 1d.1). Candidates in advanced program for teachers, with the exception of Special Education, must address the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards (NBPTS) which are aligned with the Department of Teaching and Learning’s standards for advanced programs for teachers (E-exhibit 1d.2) and the appropriate program standards of the North Dakota Standards and Practices Board as evidenced in the ESPB program reports. Special Education is nationally recognized and follows the standards developed by the Council on Exceptional Children (see CEC Report). Candidates in advanced programs for other school professionals make use of the standards of their professions to guide candidate learning and performance (Educational Leadership Constituent Council (ELCC), International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE), American Speech and Hearing Association (ASHA) as well the standards of the North Dakota Standards and Practices Board where applicable as evidenced in the ESPB program reports (see link from webpage).

e. Summary of the unit’s assessment system

At the time of our last NCATE visit in October 2001, a weakness in our assessment system was cited by the BOE as follows: “Although the Unit has given some thought to developing an evaluation system, there is no conceptual design for relating the various categories of data currently being collected.  The Unit should begin to develop an information system architecture that will be flexible enough to meet internal as well as external reporting needs (p. 18).”  From the spring of 2002 to date, the unit has been working diligently to ameliorate this weakness. A brief summary of the design of the current unit assessment systems is presented here and a graphic depiction of the system can be found in the electronic exhibit room (E-exhibit 1e.1). A more complete description can be found under Standard 2 in this report.

Responsibility for oversight of the unit assessment system rests with the Dean’s office, specifically with the Associate Dean for Teacher Education who is also the NCATE Coordinator. While each department is responsible for the collection, analysis and evaluation, and use of data for improvement of its individual programs, the Associate Dean tracks progress and where needed coordinates efforts to ensure that each element of Standard 2 is met.

Initial. Candidates in initial programs (with the exception of Music, Visual Arts, and Physical Education) are assessed at five transition points. Praxis scores, several critical tasks, dispositions’ assessments, and follow-up surveys allow faculty to understand how candidates are progressing throughout and beyond their teacher education program. The programs in music and visual arts are accredited by their own professional bodies and follow the assessment requirements of those organizations. We are however, able to monitor the progress of those candidates in the areas of candidate dispositions and student teaching and through follow-up surveys. Candidates in Physical Education are also assessed in the areas of dispositions and student teaching and through follow-up surveys. Other assessments take place within the Department of Physical Education, Exercise Science and Wellness as described in the North Dakota Education Standards and Practices Board (ESPB) program approval report.

Advanced. Candidates in advanced programs for teachers, with the exception of special education, and Instructional Design and Technology have traditionally been assessed at three transitions points; however, a recent extensive revision has been completed. Candidates will be assessed at four points. The revised advanced program assessment system employs the assessment of critical tasks rather than grades for the mid-program transition points. Special Education is nationally recognized and its assessment system meets the requirements of the Council on Exceptional Children (CEC). As with the initial programs, an annual assessment retreat, coordinated by the Department of Teaching and Learning’s Assessment Committee is held to allow faculty to review data and develop action plans for program improvement. The first retreat for graduate programs will be held in January of 2008.

Other School Professionals. Data for other school professionals is managed by the particular departments in which the programs are located. The program in Instructional Design and Technology (within the Department of Teaching and Learning) has its own assessment system that employs the Association for Educational Communications and Technology (ACET) Standards in the assessment of its candidates (E-exhibit 1e.2). The Departments of Educational Leadership and Counseling Psychology and Community Services each have their own assessment plans (E-exhibits 1e.3 and 1e.4). These programs as well as others in the unit report progress at the annual Assessment Day instituted in 2006 and hosted by the Dean of the College of Education and Human Development. The Speech Language Pathology Program is accredited by the American Speech and Hearing Association (ASHA) and this program responds to the assessment requirements of that professional organization. Accreditation reports are requested as needed.

Information related to candidate assessment and unit operations is also managed within the Office of Associate Dean's office and include:

  • undergraduate admissions’ data;
  • candidate dispositions’ data,
  • required candidate assessments during the student teaching semester;
  • annual reports of graduate and administrator surveys;
  • data related to undergraduate student advising;
  • reports related to stakeholders’ focus groups;
  • annual reports submitted to NCATE, AACTE, and ESPB 

Data sources, where appropriate, are compiled into reports that provide additional candidate information to faculty during their annual assessment retreat. In addition, the Office of Teacher Education analyzes and evaluates data to improve its procedures and enhance the candidates’ experience.

2.      Changes to the Conceptual Framework

In the fall of 2005, the Associate Dean for Teacher Education sought guidance from the Teacher Education Committee related to the review and revision of the unit’s conceptual framework. After reading and discussing the framework, the committee felt that the document continued to reflect the units’ philosophy, purposes and goals but the references needed to be updated, more specific information needed to be added about the unit assessment system and the document needed some editing to provide better clarity.  The document remains the same substantively but has been changed in the following ways:

  • A review of the literature was conducted and references reflecting current thinking were added where appropriate. The reference list was updated as well.
  • The document was revised to read more clearly and to include all programs in the unit. Initially, the document referred mainly to the initial and advanced programs for teachers in the Department of Teaching and Learning.
  • A brief description of the unit’s assessment system was added at the end of the document.

The 2001 version of our Conceptual Framework can be seen under 2.1 in E-exhibits.

Electronic Exhibits in Support of the Conceptual Framework
1a.1: 2004 Strategic Plan: College of Education and Human Development:
http://www.und.edu/dept/ehd/strategicplan2004.pdf

1a.2: Organization and Bylaws College of Education and Human Development:
http://www.und.edu/dept/ehd/bylaws.pdf

1a.3: Conceptual Framework Document: 2007

1d.1: Crosswalk of ESPB, INTASC, and Teaching & Learning Undergraduate Program
Standards

1d.2: Crosswalk of ESPB, NBPTS and Teaching & Learning Advanced Program
Standards

1e.1: Graphic of Unit Assessment System

1e.2: Instructional Design & Technology Program Report

1e.3: Link to Educational Leadership Assessment Plan:
http://www.und.edu/dept/datacol/assessment/unsecure/0405/EDL_masters.pdf
http://www.und.edu/dept/datacol/assessment/unsecure/0405/EDL_doc.pdf

1e.4: Link to of School Counseling Assessment Plan
http://www.und.edu/dept/datacol/assessment/unsecure/0405/Coun_MA.pdf

2.1: 2001 Version of Conceptual Framework

Hard Copy Exhibits in Support of the Conceptual Framework
1d.1: Undergraduate Teacher Education Program Handbook