Program Report of the Preparation of Foreign Language Teachers

Transcription

Program Report of the Preparation of Foreign Language Teachers
American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages (ACTFL)
NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR ACCREDIATION OF TEACHER EDUCATION
COVER SHEET
Institution:
Weber State University, Utah
Date submitted:
February 2005
Name of preparer: Thomas J. Mathews
Phone No.:
801 626-6345
Email:
[email protected]
Program Documented in this report:
Name of program:
Department of Foreign Languages and Literature
Grade levels for which candidates are being prepared:
Secondary
Degree or award level:
Bachelor's Degree
Is this program offered at more than one site:
NO
Title of the state license for which
candidates are prepared:
Utah Professional
Educator License,
Secondary Education
Program report status:
Initial review
State licensure requirement for national recognition:
NO
Section I • Contextual Information
1. STATE Policies
The Utah State Office of Education (USOE) adopted the INTASC standards in August
2002 for the standards for new teachers to meet in order to move from a level 1
(provisional) to a level II (professional) license. The Weber State Teacher Education
program then adopted these standards as program standards in the Fall of 2002 and
began work restructuring the program to align with these standards.
The USOE has not required beginning teachers to test for licensure. They will begin
requiring Praxis content tests as of July 2005. The teacher education program will
require all students to test in their major and minor areas beginning this fall 2004.
2. FIELD EXPERIENCE
One of the strengths of the WSU Teacher Education programs is the integrated field
experience component associated with each of the professional levels. These provide
opportunity for teacher candidates to be in classrooms where they will observe, assist,
and teach individuals, small groups, or whole classes. Each field experience is valuable
for candidates to see and experience actual application and implementation of learning
from the perspective of a teacher.
Level 1 Field Experience: The Level 1 experience is the same for both
elementary and secondary students and is an induction into the profession for
teacher candidates. Course work in Level 1 includes educational psychology,
interpersonal skills and classroom management; instructional planning and
assessment; and instructional technology. The field experience for this level will
bring together novice teacher candidates with experienced professionals in
actual school settings. Field work will provide teacher candidates the
opportunities to make connections, see relationships, and apply principles being
studied in their university classes. The experience will place teacher candidates
in an authentic public school environment actively engaged and working with a
diverse population of public school students. One of the primary purposes of this
field experience is for teacher candidates to see best practices modeled by
exemplary teachers. Teacher candidates will be in the classroom for a minimum
of 12, 1-3 hour sessions.
Level 2 Field Experience: Candidates are required to observe and collaborate
with the classroom teacher prior to beginning their field experience. Candidates
spend a consecutive two week time period in the classroom during their regularly
scheduled level classes (20-30 hours). During this time they work in
partners/teams to plan, design, implement, and assess lessons. The opportunity
to work with students of diversity (race, language, disabilities, exceptional needs,
etc) is a key point of the field experience.
Clinical Practice: The student teaching experience is the culminating learning
experience in the program. Candidates must apply for clinical practice the
semester before they plan to do their clinical work. The rigorous experience is
carefully planned, guided, assessed, and evaluated. Candidates spend
approximately 70 days (minimum 400 hours) in the classroom for their clinical
practice. The first 15 days are observation/transition days working into full time
responsibility for the classroom under the direction of the collaborating teacher
for the remaining 55 days. Clinical practice assignments are determined
according to the license requirements, concentration, major and minor, and
abilities of the student teachers, with the resources available at the university and
the district schools. The Department of Teacher Education has collaborated with
the local school district partners to develop a plan and process for the selection
and training of collaborating teachers, as well as for placing student teachers.
During clinical practice candidates are assessed on progress by the university
supervisor, collaborating teacher, and the arts and science supervisor
(secondary only). A final evaluation by these supervisors is completed at the end
of the student teaching assignment. All candidates have the opportunity to
assess the program and those supervising their clinical practice.
Secondary candidates must teach in both their major and minor content areas.
Therefore, they often are assigned two collaborating teachers. Student teacher
candidates are required to attend on-campus seminars corresponding to times when the
public schools are not in session. Senior synthesis seminars are held at the completion
of the clinical practice. Student teacher candidates completing additional endorsements
will do clinical practice in their specific area for a minimum of five weeks.
3. Program Admission, Retention, Exit
The teacher education program is a competitive admissions process. A limited number
of applicants are admitted in March for Fall Semester and in October for Spring
Semester. Admission to the teacher education program is a separate process from
Weber State University admission. Candidates are initially admitted to the program on a
provisional basis. Upon successful completion of Levels 1 and 2, they become fully
admitted candidates for licensure.
Prerequisites for application to the program are current enrollment in or completion of
the following classes: English competency (grade C or above in EN1010 and EN2010 or
equivalent);Quantitative literacy (grade C or above in MATH QL1050 or equivalent);
Communication proficiency (grade B- or above in COMM HU1020, COMM 1050, or
equivalent); Computer and Information Literacy.
Students are considered for admission based on a 100-point system: 30 points
maximum for GPA; 30 points maximum for the Collegiate Assessment of Academic
Proficiency (CAAP); 40 points maximum for the interview. Points are awarded based
upon the following criteria.
1. Completion of at least 40 semester hours of general education or relevant
prerequisite courses and (a) have an overall GPA of 3.00 or higher, or (b) 3.25
GPA or higher on the last 30 semester hours.
2. Achieve minimum scores on the Collegiate Assessment of Academic Proficiency
(CAAP) standardized assessment designed to show achievement levels in
reading, writing and mathematics. Current minimum scores required for
admission to the teacher education programs are: Writing- 61, Writing Essay3.0, Math- 54 and Reading-59
3. Successful completion of a formal interview with a three-member faculty
committee. In preparation for the interview students are asked to prepare a twopage statement detailing their (a) reasons for wanting to become a teacher, and
(b) past teaching experiences. Interview questions focus on the student’s
interest/commitment to teaching, understanding of education issues, ability to
relate past experiences to role as a teacher, interpersonal skills, communication
abilities, professionalism, and preliminary evidence of course dispositions.
Students who do not obtain the required interview score are not eligible for
admittance and may reapply for a subsequent semester. If the second interview
score is also below the minimum, students must wait at least one year to
reapply.
Students who already hold a baccalaureate degree must meet the same requirements,
except they are only required to take the Writing Essay portion of the CAAP Test if their
degree less than five years old. Students who are not admitted to the program after their
third application must wait one full year before reapplying.
Students who successfully complete the application process are provisionally admitted
candidates for the first two levels and are fully admitted after successful completion of
level 2. Provisional admission to a specific program is valid for a period of five years.
Candidates not completing the program within the five-year period are required to seek
readmission under the current admission standards.
Retention in the program is based upon the following conditions.
1. Completion of a background check as soon as admitted and before being placed
in a public school for field experiences. Candidates can not enroll in Level 1 or
EDUC 2890/4890 courses until cleared. Admission to the teacher education
programs will be immediately revoked for those with a criminal record which has
not been cleared by the Utah Professional Practices Advisory Commission.
2. Candidates are expected to maintain high professional and academic standards.
Quality of work and timely progress through the program are two (2) criteria
considered as evidence of professional competence.
3. Candidates must maintain a GPA of 3.00 in all university course work, not
receiving a grade lower than a B- in any professional education course work. A
professional education course may be repeated once.
4. Documented violations of the WSU Student Code of Conduct will be considered
grounds for suspension or dismissal from the teacher education program.
5. Provisional status is revoked by an informal hearing organized by the Teacher
Education Admission and Retention Committee. Candidates may appeal the
ruling by following WSU Student Rights and Responsibilities policy.
A minimum of 42 credit hours is required in the secondary education major, with a
minimum of 120 credit hours required for university graduation. To graduate from the
program candidates must meet these graduation requirements, successfully complete
clinical practice, and participation in an exit interview for completion of licensing
materials and graduation clearance.
The Foreign Language Program relies on institutional and unit criteria for admission,
retention and exit from the program with several notable exceptions:
a. only grades of C or better will count toward the degree in content area (a
C- is not acceptable);
b. all foreign language teaching majors and minors must complete ForLang
4400, our course on language pedagogy, before they may begin student
teaching;
c. all candidates must complete a course in phonetics and phonology in the
language they are studying; and all students must complete an Oral
Proficiency Interview and be rated at the Intermediate-High level or better
(following the ACTFL Scale) as well as demonstrate and IntermediateHigh level in writing ability before they may register for ForLang 4400.
4. Relationship of program to the unit’s conceptual framework
The Foreign Language Program fits precisely into the "TREC" framework. As a program
we feel our strength is in providing the "legs on the easel": based on the National
Standards (ACTFL) and Utah State Foreign Language Standards, we strive to provide
our students with knowledge of language and culture, skills in speaking and writing and
analyzing texts, and dispositions that will help them as teachers as well as
ambassadors to other language and culture groups.
5. Program Assessments
All candidates for secondary program licensure are required be admitted to the teacher
education program and complete the professional core courses. Therefore they are
assessed by the unit at the same points as other candidates.
The Foreign Language Program has several unique assessments that compliment
those of the unit. These include:
a. All foreign language teaching majors and minors must demonstrate
Intermediate-High proficiency in both oral and written language before
they are allowed to take the foreign language methods class (ForLang
4400). We are the only program in the state of Utah with such a
requirement.
b. All foreign language majors (including teaching majors) complete a senior
assessment (ForLang 4990) in which they prepare a portfolio in order to
demonstrate their ability to do the following:
i. Speak the target language by taking a computer administered oral
proficiency test;
ii. Write in a variety of styles in the target language;
iii. Use standard grammar and complex structures in the target
language;
iv. Analyze popular and literary texts; and compare the cultures of the
target language with other cultures.
Section I -- Attachment 1 -- Program of Study from Weber State Unviersity Catalog
ESL 2450. Comprehensive Grammar Review (2)
An in-depth review of usage and meaning of all major English verb
tenses, the active and passive voice, the conditional, adjective
clauses, and noun clauses.
LEVEL FIVE
ESL 2510. Written Communication V (3)
The development of longer essays in a variety of styles is emphasized along with a focus on language usage. Paraphrasing,
summarizing, writing response and opinion papers are included.
Library resources are introduced. Computer use in research and
communication is applied.
ELECTIVE COURSES
ESL 2650. Variable Topics for Academic Study (2)
Using unadapted texts and different topics each term, this course
gives students a "sheltered" approach in bridging the difficulty level
between their ESL courses and mainstream academic classes. Special
emphasis is given to authentic texts and classroom assignment.
ESL 2750. Special Projects and Activities
for Language Learning (1-3)
Special projects designed to offer a variety of language and cultural
experiences for the ESL student. Activities offered may include trips,
special interest seminars and or workshops. See class schedule for
description of current activities.
DEPARTMENT
F OREIGN L ANGUAGES & L ITERATURES
Chair: Dr. Tony Spanos
Location: Building 1, Room 111
Telephone Contact: Karlene Morris 801-626-6183
Professors: Gary M. Godfrey, Robert Mondi, Tony Spanos, Jeffery D.
Stokes, Wangari wa Nyatetu-Waigwa; Associate Professors:
Yumi Adachi, Craig Bergeson, Erika Daines, Alicia Giralt, Cheryl
Hansen, Thomas J. Mathews, Eva Szalay; Assistant Professor:
Amalia Garzon, David L. Nielson
T
he Department of Foreign
Languages and Literatures offers courses in language, literature and
culture that enable students to complete various institutional
requirements. We prepare students to function effectively in a
foreign language while gaining an understanding and appreciation
of humanistic ideals and values. Mastery of a foreign language is the
hallmark of a world citizen.
A bachelor of arts degree is offered. Students may select a regular
major, a teaching major or a major with a commercial emphasis in
French, German or Spanish. Regular and teaching minors are offered
in these three languages as well. In addition, a Japanese minor is
offered, and the department participates in Asian Studies and Latin
American Studies minors and in a departmental Honors Program. A
language emphasis for the BIS degree requires a minimum of 18
hours, 15 of which must be upper-division course work. Courses in
other languages may be offered as need and resources allow. The
curriculum is based on a National Standard for measuring proficiency. Each course is designed to foster linguistic skills and to
increase the students' ability to participate in the culture.
Foreign Language Requirement
for the Bachelor of Arts Degree
The Bachelor of Arts degree will include a foreign language or
ASL (American Sign Language) requirement which may be met by
one of the following:
121
1. Documentation of a proficiency level of "Intermediate Low" or
better through an examination administered by the WSU
Foreign Language Department or through an examination by a
recognized testing agency.
2. Completion of WSU foreign language course 2020 with a grade of
"C" or higher, or comparable transfer credit.
3. Completion of any upper-division WSU foreign language course
with a grade of "C" or higher, or comparable transfer credit.
4. Students for whom English is a second language may meet the
B.A. foreign language requirement by verifying their proficiency
in their native (non-English) language in cooperation with the
Foreign Language Department and verifying their proficiency in
English as a Second language by passing the ESL Special
Examination.
5. Documentation of a minimum proficiency level in American Sign
Language through an examination administered by the American
Sign Language/Interpreting program at Salt Lake Community College
(SLCC). The signer must "produce and maintain American Sign
Language with continuity and precision."
6. Completion of SLCC's American Sign Language Course ASLi 1050
with a grade of "C" or higher, or comparable transfer credit.
Obtaining Foreign Language
Credit for Prior Language Experience
Students with prior language experience may obtain lowerdivision foreign language credit by completing one of the following
options:
1. Students may obtain credit for 1010, 1020, HU2010 and 2020 by
passing a higher numbered course with a minimum grade of "C"
2. Students may obtain credit for 1010, 1020 and 2020 through
examination, but only in those languages in which the
Department of Foreign Languages and Literatures has expertise
(usually limited to French, German, Japanese and Spanish). This
examination is administered regularly by the department. Credit
for Humanities General Education (HU2010) cannot be obtained
through examination.
Upon payment of a nominal fee, hours earned through either
option are recorded as "credit" on the transcript and do not affect
the student's GPA. The department may accept results from other
foreign language testing agencies as evidence of proficiency.
Application for credit is to be made at the office of the Department
of Foreign Languages and Literatures.
F OREIGN L ANGUAGE M AJOR
(F RENCH , G ERMAN , OR S PANISH )
BACHELOR DEGREE (B.A.)
» Program Prerequisite: Completion of first and second-year
courses in the language or equivalent preparation.
» Minor: Required.
» Grade Requirements: A grade of "C" or better in courses required
for this major (a grade of "C-" is not acceptable). Also refer to the
general grade requirements for graduation on page 36.
» Credit Hour Requirements: A total of 120 credit hours is required
for graduation – 40 hours of these must be upper division
(courses numbered 3000 and above). For the major, a minimum
of 30 upper division hours is required beyond the prerequisite
lower division courses (prerequisite courses, if needed, total 16
credit hours). At least 6 credit hours of major courses must be
completed at WSU.
Advisement
Foreign Language majors are encouraged to meet with a faculty
advisor at least annually for course and program advisement. Call
801-626-6183 for more information or to schedule an appointment.
General
PROFILE
ENROLLMENT
STUDENT AFFAIRS
ACADEMIC INFO
DEGREE REQ
GEN ED
Interdisciplinary
FYE
HNRS
BIS / BAT
LIBSCI
INTRD MINORS
Applied Science &
Technology
CEET
CS
MFET/MET
CMT
CDGT
ENGR
AUTOSV/AUTOTC
IDT
SST
TBE
Arts & Humanities
COMM
ENGL
FORLNG
DANCE
MUSIC
THEATR
ART
Business & Econ
MBA
MPACC/ACCTNG
BUSADM
FIN
LOM
MGMT
MKTG
ECON/QUANT
IS&T
Education
MEDUC
CHFAM
ATHL/AT
HEALTH/NUTRI
PE/REC
EDUC
Health Professions
CLS
DENSCI
PARAMD
HTHSCI
HAS/HIM
NURSNG
RADTEC
DMS
NUCMED
RADTHR
RESTHY
Science
BOTANY
CHEM
GEOSCI
MATH/MATHED
MICRO
PHSX
ZOOL
Social & Behavioral
Sciences
MCJ/CJ
ECON
GEOGR
HIST
POLSC
PHILO
PSYCH
SOCLWK
GERONT
SOCLGY
ANTHRO
AEROSP
MILSCI
NAVSCI
Continuing Ed
Davis Campus
W E B E R S T A T E U N I VE R S IT Y
2 0 0 4 – 2 0 0 5 C AT A LOG
122
Admission Requirements
Declare your program of study (see page 18). There are no special
admission or application requirements for this major.
General Education
Refer to pages 36-41 of this catalog for Bachelor of Arts
requirements.
Assessment
During their senior year, all foreign language majors will
complete ForLng 4990 in order to help the department assess how
well it has met its goals. Students are encouraged to keep copies of
their best work from each course taken in the major. These
examples will be used in ForLng 4990.
Course Requirements for Bachelor Degree
Prerequisite Courses
Complete the following 16 credit hours
(or demonstrate equivalent proficiency)
ForLng 1010
First Year I (4)
ForLng 1020
First Year II (4)
ForLng HU2010 Second Year I (4)
ForLng 2020
Second Year II (4)
Required Courses (6 credit hours)
ForLng 3060
Grammar & Composition (3)
ForLng 3160
Intro to Literature (3)
ForLng 4990
Senior Assessment (0)
Elective Courses
Select a minimum of 24 credit hours from the following
(choice must include at least one literature course on this list)
ForLng 3220
Phonetics & Phonology (3)
ForLng 3300
Foreign Language Journal (1)
ForLng 3320
Applied Language Studies (1-3)
ForLng 3360
Grammar Review (3)
ForLng 3510
Business Language I (3)
ForLng DV3550 Studies in Culture & Civilization (3)
ForLng 3630
Literature Genres (3)
ForLng 3650
Literature Periods (3)
ForLng 3670
Literature Authors (3)
ForLng 3690
Literature Special Topics in Literature (1-3)
ForLng 3850
Study Abroad (1-6)
ForLng 4300
ForLng 4400
Methods of Teaching a Foreign Language (4)
ForLng 4510
Business Language II (3)
ForLng 4620
Survey of Literature I (3)
ForLng 4630
Survey of Literature II (3)
ForLng 4850
Study Abroad (1-6)
ForLng 4830
Directed Readings (1-3)
ForLng 4920
Short Courses, Workshops . . . (1-4)
ForLng 4960
Senior Seminar & Thesis (3)
F OREIGN L ANGUAGE M AJOR :
C OMMERCIAL E MPHASIS
courses in the language or equivalent preparation.
» Minor: Required.
for this major (a grade of "C-" is not acceptable). Also refer to the
general grade requirements for graduation.
» Credit Hour Requirements: A total of 120 credit hours is required
for graduation – 40 hours of these must be upper division
(courses numbered 3000 and above). For the major, a minimum
of 30 upper division hours is required beyond the prerequisite
lower division courses (prerequisite courses, if needed, total 16
credit hours). At least 6 credit hours of major courses must be
completed at WSU.
Advisement
Declare your program of study (see page 18). There are no special
admission or application requirements for this major.
General Education
Refer to pages 36-41 of this catalog for Bachelor of Arts
requirements.
Assessment
ForLng 1010
First Year I (4)
ForLng 1020
First Year II (4)
ForLng 2020
Second Year II (4)
ForLng 3060
ForLng 3160
ForLng 3510
ForLng 4510
ForLng 4990
Elective Courses
ForLng 3220
ForLng 3300
ForLng 3320
ForLng 3360
Grammar Review (3)
ForLng 3630
ForLng 3650
ForLng 3670
ForLng 3690
ForLng 3850
Study Abroad (1-6)
ForLng 4300
ForLng 4400
ForLng 4620
ForLng 4630
ForLng 4850
Study Abroad (1-6)
ForLng 4830
ForLng 4920
Short Courses, Workshops .. (1-4)
ForLng 4960
2 0 0 4 – 2 0 0 5 C AT A LOG
123
F OREIGN L ANGUAGE T EACHING M AJOR
courses in the language or equivalent preparation. In addition,
teaching majors must meet the Teacher Education admission and
certification requirements (see Teacher Education Department).
» Minor: Required.
for this major (a grade of "C-" is not acceptable). In addition,
teaching majors must achieve an overall GPA of 3.00 for
admission to the Teacher Education program.
» Credit Hour Requirements: A total of 120 hours is required for
graduation – 40 hours of these must be upper division (courses
numbered 3000 and above). For the major, a minimum of 34
upper division hours is required beyond the prerequisite lower
division courses (prerequisite courses, if needed, total 16 credit
hours). At least 6 credit hours of major courses must be
completed at WSU.
Advisement
Teaching majors are encouraged to also consult with advisors in the
Jerry and Vickie Moyes College of Education (call 801-626-6269).
Declare your program of study (see page 18). Teaching majors
must meet the Teacher Education admission and certification
requirements (see Teacher Education Department).
General Education
Refer to pages 36-41 for Bachelor of Arts requirements.
Assessment
ForLng 1010
First Year I (4)
ForLng 1020
First Year II (4)
ForLng 2020
Second Year II (4)
ForLng 3060
ForLng 3160
Introduction to Literature (3)
ForLng 3220
ForLng 4400* Methods of Teaching a Foreign Language (4)
ForLng 4990
Elective Courses
(choice must include at least one literature course from this list)
ForLng 3300
ForLng 3320
ForLng 3360
Grammar Review (3)
ForLng 3510
ForLng DV3550
ForLng 3630
ForLng 3650
ForLng 3670
ForLng 3690
ForLng 3850
ForLng 4300
ForLng 4510
ForLng 4620
ForLng 4630
ForLng 4850
ForLng 4830
ForLng 4920
ForLng 4960
Studies in Culture & Civilization (3)
Study Abroad (1-6)
Study Abroad (1-6)
*Students must pass Oral and Written Proficiency Examinations at the
"Intermediate High" level prior to taking 4400 and student teaching.
(Please see the department advisor.)
F OREIGN L ANGUAGE
DEPARTMENTAL HONORS
» Program Prerequisite: Enroll in General Honors and complete at
least 9 hours of General Honors courses (see the Honors Program
on page 43).
» Grade Requirements: Maintain an overall GPA of 3.3.
» Credit Hour Requirements: Fulfill requirements for departmental, commercial, or teaching majors in French, German or
Spanish, of which at least 9 credit hours must be taken on an
Honors basis. A student may receive Foreign Language Honors
credit in any Foreign Language upper division course.* In
addition, complete a Foreign Language Senior Project.
*Permission from the department chair should be sought before registering
in a course for Honors credit. A written agreement should be reached
with the appropriate professor regarding the work expected for Honors
credit. (See the Honors Program on page 43.)
F OREIGN LANGUAGE
(F RENCH , G ERMAN , J APANESE , OR S PANISH )
MINOR
» Prerequisite Courses: Completion of first and second-year courses
in the language or equivalent preparation.
» Grade Requirements: A grade of "C" or better in courses used
toward the minor (a grade of "C-" is not acceptable).
» Credit Hour Requirements: A minimum of 15 upper division
hours in the foreign language. At least 3 credit hours of minor
courses must be completed at WSU.
Course Requirements for Minor
ForLng 1010
First Year I (4)
ForLng 1020
First Year II (4)
ForLng 2020
Second Year II (4)
ForLng 3060
ForLng 3160
Elective Courses (select a minimum of 9 credit hours)
ForLng 3220
ForLng 3300
ForLng 3320
ForLng 3360
Grammar Review (3)
General
PROFILE
ENROLLMENT
STUDENT AFFAIRS
ACADEMIC INFO
DEGREE REQ
GEN ED
Interdisciplinary
FYE
HNRS
BIS / BAT
LIBSCI
INTRD MINORS
Applied Science &
Technology
CEET
CS
MFET/MET
CMT
CDGT
ENGR
AUTOSV/AUTOTC
IDT
SST
TBE
Arts & Humanities
COMM
ENGL
FORLNG
DANCE
MUSIC
THEATR
ART
Business & Econ
MBA
MPACC/ACCTNG
BUSADM
FIN
LOM
MGMT
MKTG
ECON/QUANT
IS&T
Education
MEDUC
CHFAM
ATHL/AT
HEALTH/NUTRI
PE/REC
EDUC
Health Professions
CLS
DENSCI
PARAMD
HTHSCI
HAS/HIM
NURSNG
RADTEC
DMS
NUCMED
RADTHR
RESTHY
Science
BOTANY
CHEM
GEOSCI
MATH/MATHED
MICRO
PHSX
ZOOL
Social & Behavioral
Sciences
MCJ/CJ
ECON
GEOGR
HIST
POLSC
PHILO
PSYCH
SOCLWK
GERONT
SOCLGY
ANTHRO
AEROSP
MILSCI
NAVSCI
Continuing Ed
Davis Campus
2 0 0 4 – 2 0 0 5 C AT A LOG
124
ForLng 3510
ForLng DV3550
ForLng 3630
ForLng 3650
ForLng 3670
ForLng 3690
ForLng 3850
ForLng 4300
ForLng 4400
ForLng 4510
ForLng 4620
ForLng 4630
ForLng 4850
ForLng 4830
ForLng 4920
ForLng 4960
Studies in Culture & Civilization (3)
Study Abroad (1-6)
Study Abroad (1-6)
Short Courses, Workshops (1-4)
F OREIGN L ANGUAGE
TEACHING MINOR
courses in the language or equivalent preparation. Must satisfy
the Education Certification Program (see the Department of
Teacher Education).
» Grade Requirements: A grade of 2.00, C or better is required. In
addition, teaching minors must achieve an overall GPA of 3.00
for admission to the Teacher Education program.
» Credit Hour Requirements: A minimum of 19 upper division
hours in the foreign language. At least 3 credit hours of minor
courses must be completed at WSU.
Course Requirements for Minor
ForLng 1010
First Year I (4)
ForLng 1020
First Year II (4)
ForLng 2020
Second Year II (4)
ForLng 3060
ForLng 3160
ForLng 3220
Phonetics and Phonology (3)
ForLng 4400*
Elective Courses (select a minimum of 6 credit hours)
ForLng 3300
ForLng 3320
ForLng 3360
Grammar Review (3)
ForLng 3510
ForLng 3630
ForLng 3650
ForLng 3670
ForLng 3690
ForLng 3850
Study Abroad (1-6)
ForLng 4300
ForLng 4510
ForLng 4620
ForLng 4630
ForLng 4850
Study Abroad (1-6)
ForLng 4830
ForLng 4920
ForLng 4960
*Students must pass Oral and Written Proficiency Examinations at the
"Intermediate High" level prior to taking 4400 and student teaching.
(Please see the department advisor.)
I NTERDISCIPLINARY M INORS
The Department of Foreign Languages participates in the Asian
Studies, European Studies and Latin American Studies Minor
Programs. Students who wish to enroll in one of these programs
should indicate their desire to do so with the program coordinator
who will help them work out a proper combination of courses to fit
their particular needs. (See the Interdisciplinary Programs section
of this catalog.)
FOREIGN LANGUAGE COURSES
Oral Proficiency Requirements
The American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages
(ACTFL) has defined a scale for the evaluation of the language
proficiency of students. The ACTFL Proficiency scale has four levels:
Novice, Intermediate, Advanced and Superior. The Department of
Foreign Languages requires that students achieve a determined
proficiency level, depending on the students' goals. In addition,
instructors assume that students entering any class have acquired
the entry-level proficiency indicated for that class. (These levels are
indicated in parentheses following the description of each course
on the following pages: N=Novice; NH=Novice High;
IL=Intermediate Low; IM=Intermediate Mid; IH=Intermediate High.)
Novice (N)
Students at this level have no experience in the language they are
studying. They begin by learning the sound and spelling system
and by memorizing words and phrases. During the course, they will
progress to the point of being able to create simple sentences, to ask
some questions, and to initiate, sustain and conclude simple social
tasks more than half of the time.
Novice High (NH)
At the Novice-High level students progress from the ability to
respond simply with learned utterances to the ability to create
language face-to-face, to ask and answer simple questions, and to
create sentence-level constructions.
Intermediate Low (IL)
At the Intermediate-Low level students continue to build mastery of
personal social-oriented informational tasks and move to a higher
level by practicing informational tasks beyond the immediate and
personal. Students will move from simple-sentence to more
complex sentence-level discourse. They will practice narration,
description and comparison but mastery is not expected.
Intermediate Mid (IM)
Students at this level build on an ability to perform informational
tasks beyond immediate and personal needs while they continue to
practice narration, description and comparison. In addition,
students begin practice in supporting opinions and hypothesizing
in the language. They move from complex sentence-level structures
to paragraph-level discourse.
Intermediate High (IH)
At this level students can function at the Advanced level most of
the time. They still need practice narrating, describing and
comparing, and Linking sentences together smoothly. In addition,
they encounter more tasks that require them to support opinion
and to hypothesize. Students progress from complex sentences to
paragraphs to extended discourse.
2 0 0 4 – 2 0 0 5 C AT A LOG
ATTACHMENT A
Candidate Information
Program: Foreign Language Teaching
Academic
Year
2003-2004
2002-2003
2001-2002
# of Candidates
Enrolled in the
Program
32
46
28
# of Program
Completers1
1
6
5
Note: The enrollment numbers in this report do not represent only Foreign Language
Teaching majors. The university coding system had multiple codes that were incorrectly
used for many social science majors until they were corrected upon graduation. The
enrollment data reported is as accurate as the university system allows to be collected at
this time due to university database conversion.
1
Program completers are defined for Title II purposes as persons who have met all the requirements of a
state-approved teacher preparation program. Program completers include all those who are documented as
having met such requirements. Documentation may take the form of a degree, institutional certificate,
program credential, transcript, or other written proof of having met the program’s requirements.
Section I • Attachment 3
Faculty Information
These three faculty members have taught the methods class—ForLang 4400—within the past five years. Other members
of the department are also interested in teacher training and take an active role in advising, assessing and studentteacher observation.
Name
Thomas J.
Mathews
Degree
Field
University
PhD
Linguistics
Univ. of
Delaware
Assignment
Rank
Tenure
Faculty
Associate
Professor
Yes
Scholarship
Leadership
Service
Mathews, T. J., & Hansen, C. M.
(2004). Ongoing assessment of a
university foreign language
program. Foreign Language Annals
37(4), 630-640.
Mathews. T. J. (2000). The
acquisition of sexist morphology by
native and non-native speakers of
Spanish. Journal of the Utah
Academy of Sciences, Arts &
Letters, 77, 178-184.
Board Member of Southwest
Conference on Language Teaching
(SWCOLT)
Board Member of Utah Foreign
Language Association (UFLA)
P-12 Experience
With three other faculty, presented a
two-day workshop on
"Implementing the standards in
foreign language classes" at
Murray School district (Feb, 2002)
Makes observation of one or two
student teachers each semester.
Tony
Spanos
PhD
Spanish
Univ. of Utah
Faculty
Professor
Yes
Spanos, T., Hansen, C. M., & Daines,
E. (2001). Integrating technology
and classroom assessment.
Foreign Language Annals 34(4),
318-324.
Oversees Spanish section
involvement in High School
concurrent enrollment at WSU.
With three other faculty, presented a
two-day workshop on
"Implementing the standards in
foreign language classes" at
Murray School district (Feb, 2002)
Makes observations of one or two
Jeffery D.
Stokes
PhD
Spanish
Faculty
Professor
Yes
Stokes, J. D. (2005). ¡Qué bien
suena!: Mastering Spanish
Makes observations of one or two
Pedagogy
Indiana Univ.
Phonetics and Phonology. Boston:
Houghton Mifflin.
Stokes, J. D. Fostering
Communicative and Cultural
Proficiency in the Spanish
Phonetics and Phonology Course.
Hispania 87(3), 533-540.
Stokes, J. D. (2001). Factors in the
Acquisition of Spanish
Pronunciation. I.T.L. Review of
Applied Linguistics, 131-132, 6384.
Current President of the Utah Foreign
Language Association (UFLA)
Department of Teacher Education Faculty Secondary
Name
Michael E.
Cena
Degree
Field
University
Ph.D.
Elementary
Education
w/emphasis in
reading
Claudia
Eliason
Ed.D
Educational
Leadership
Penee
Stewart
Ph.D.
Instructional
Psychology
Vicki Napper
Ph. D.
Education
Assignment
Rank
Tenure
Depart
ment
Chair
Associate
Professor
Yes/
Tenured
Curricul
um
Director
/
Level 2
Level 1
Associate
Professor
Yes/
Tenured
Assistant
Professor
Yes
Level 1
Assistant
Professor
Yes
Scholarship
Leadership
Service
• Editorial Board: The Reading
Teacher
• President, Utah Council IRA
• Presented at 49th Annual IRA
Conference: “Beyond Traditional
Phonics Instruction”
• 7th Ed. Of “A Practical Guide to
Early Childhood Curriculum”
• Chair of WSU Storytelling
Committee 2003-present
• Faculty Advisor to WSU IRA
• Co-Editor UCIRA Journal
• WSU Teaching Learning Forum
Committee
• AERA Presentation 2004
• Associate V.P. SITE TIG efolios &
assessment
• Chapter AECT Definitions (Ethics
P-12 Experience
18 years elementary teacher, 4 years
district office, Current Utah Level 3
Elementary license with basic and
advanced reading
9 years Elementary /Preschool
teaching,
Current Utah Level 3
Elementary/Early Childhood License
2 yrs school wide enrichment leader,
1 yrs reading specialist
issues)
• Member USOE Mentor Group
• Board Member Utah ASCD
• Higher Ed Rep: Northern Utah
Curriculum Consortuim
Louise
Moulding
Ph. D.
Evaluation &
Research
Level 1
Assistant
Professor
Yes
Marilyn
Lofgreen
MS
Curriculum &
Instruction
Level 1
Instructor
Specialist
Yes/
Tenured
• Presenting Northern Utah
Curriculum Consortium
• WSU Teaching and Learning
Forum Presentations
• TAPT Program Curriculum
Coordinator
Ann Ellis
Ph.D.
Educational
Psychology
emphasis in
Gifted Ed.
Level 1
Associate
Professor
Yes/
Tenured
Linda
Gowans
Ph. D.
Reading K-12
Level
2S
Professor
Yes/
Tenured
Peggy
Saunders
Ph. D.
Educational
Leadership &
Policy
Level
2S
Assistant
Yes
Mongkol
Tungmala
Ed. D.
Educational
Leadership
Level
2S
ESL
Associate
Yes/
Tenured
• Weber State University Faculty
Senate, College of Education
Senator
• Utah Association for Gifted
Children, Creativity Extravaganza,
Co-chair
• “The Child as Storyteller: Identifying
Characteristics.” presentation at the
annual meeting of the National
Association for Gifted
• Chair Education Subcommittee for
WSU IRB
• Co-Editor Utah Journal of Reading
and Literacy
• Level 2 Chair
• Presentation @ NAME Conference
2004
• University Adjunct Professor
Committee
• College Curriculum Committee
• Award Chair of Intermountain
Teachers of English to Speakers of
Other Languages
• NMERA- Utah Representative
• Member of International TESOL
8 yrs HS science teacher, 7 yrs
district administration, 2 yrs USOE
Current Level 3 Secondary Science
license
13 yrs Elementary, K-12
Administration Endorsement,
Current Utah Level 2 Elementary
License, USOE Curriculum Trainer
6 yrs elementary/ gifted & talented
program teacher
7 yrs Jr.H, HS teaching English,
French, Drama, Speech, 13 yrs
reading specialist
14 yrs Teaching, 3 yrs District
Administration, 3 yrs Assist.Principal,
Utah Level 3 License
14 yrs English/ESL teacher, Current
Level 3 Secondary English/ESl
License, Administrative Endorsement
Section II • Assessments and Related Data
Name of Assessment
Type or Form
1
Assessment of content skill *
Computerized Oral Test
Portfolio
2
Assessment of candidate oral
proficiency
Oral Proficiency
Interview (OPI)
3
Assessment of content knowledge
in language to be taught
Portfolio
4
Assessment of candidate ability to
plan instruction
Assessment of student teaching
Assessment of candidate effect on
student learning
Assessment of writing proficiency in
language to be taught
5
6
7
Essay
When Administered
Senior year or last
semester of content
courses
Before enrolling in
Methods Course
(ForLang 4400)
Senior year or last
semester of content
courses
Before enrolling in
methods course
(ForLang 4400)
Attachments
Assessment
Scoring
Criteria
Data Table
;
;
;
;
;
;
;
;
;
;
;
;
;
;
;
;
;
;
;
;
;
* At this time there is no state required licensure test for foreign languages in Utah. Our program's assessment of skills and
knowledge is administered during the senior year parts of it are reflected in this chart as Assessment 1 and Assessment 3.
Assessment 1
Attachment 1 • Assessment
At this time, the state does not require a licensure test in foreign languages, however,
the Department of Foreign Languages and Literature does an assessment of all
graduating majors in French, German and Spanish. This assessment collects student
data in five areas, based on our department's student learning outcomes. These areas
can be divided into skills (1-3) and knowledge (4-5).
Foreign Language Department Student Learning Outcomes
Upon graduation, students should be able to:
1. Demonstrate speaking and listening proficiency in the language they are
studying.
2. Demonstrate the ability to write in different styles.
3. Demonstrate an adequate command of grammar, mechanics and the ability to
use a variety of sentence structures to express their ideas.
4. Read and understand popular and literary texts in the language; analyze literary
works and discern moral, cultural and aesthetic values.
5. Demonstrate an awareness of the similarities and differences among the cultures
of the language being studied as they compare to other cultures.
These outcomes, although they make no overt reference to the ACTFL National
Standards, do address them as shown in the following table.
Table: Coordination of Student Learning Outcomes and the National Standards
Student Learning Outcomes
Standards
1
2
3
4
Communication
x
x
x
x
Culture
x
Connections
x
Comparisons
x
x
Communities
x
x
5
x
x
x
x
Since Assessment 3 asks specifically for "content knowledge in the language to be
taught", this assessment will be limited to student learning outcomes 1 through 3. These
are described in detail below.
Beginning in 2000, the Department of Foreign Languages and Literature and Weber
State University has required all graduating majors. A brief description follows, however,
this assessment and the portfolio that students create is described in detail in the article
"Ongoing Assessment of a University Foreign Language Program" in Foreign Language
Annals, Vol. 37, pp. 630-640 (Mathews & Hansen, 2004).
All graduating majors put together a portfolio that addresses our department's five
student learning outcomes, the first three of which are addressed in this assessment.
Specifically, students are required to do the following:
1.
Take a computerized oral proficiency test in the language they have studied:
This is a short 10 to 15 minute test using Oral Testing Software developed by
Brigham Young University. Prompts for answers of varying complexity are
selected randomly from a large bank of prompts. Students are given a certain
amount of time to prepare their response and then another period of time to
record. These responses are recorded digitally on a hard drive and can be
accessed in sequence or individually by faculty who rate the text.
2.
Submit at least two exemplary documents (from their courses in the
language) that demonstrate an ability to write in different styles:
Students are expected to include in their portfolios a selection of documents
that demonstrate different writing styles: such as narrative, description,
letters, poetry, essay, analysis, argument, etc.
3.
Submit a document that demonstrates a command of grammar, mechanics
and the ability to use a variety of sentence structures to express their ideas:
Students should submit work they have done in the target language to show
that they have a command of the grammar of the language. This document
can be one of the documents included in section 2, above.
As of yet we have not begun using electronic portfolios, although this will happen in the
near future.
Students use the form shown on the next page as a cover sheet to their portfolio; this
form may also be accessed at http://faculty.weber.edu/tmathews/4990Form.pdf
SENIOR ASSESSMENT FORM
Weber State University
Name:
Student ID:
Major: French
German Spanish
Expected date of graduation: Fall
Spring
Year:
All students graduating with a major in the Department of Foreign Languages and
Literatures are expected to have gained proficiency in the following five areas. Please
document your abilities in the right-hand column. A single paper, composition, or essay,
etc., may be listed as documentation for several different outcomes.
Documentation
Computerized oral proficiency test score:
1. Demonstrate speaking and
listening proficiency in the
language they are studying.
2. Demonstrate the ability to write (Refer to at least two documents in your portfolio)
in different styles.
3. Demonstrate a command of
grammar, mechanics and the
ability to use a variety of
sentence structures to express
their ideas.
4. Read and understand popular
and literary texts in the language;
analyze literary works and
discern moral, cultural and
aesthetic values.
5. Demonstrate an awareness of
the similarities and the
differences among the cultures of
the language being studied as
they compare to other cultures.
(Refer to at least one document)
Assessment 1
Attachment 2 • Scoring Criteria
Since students submit material to address three separate student learning outcomes,
three different rubrics are used to score the material in their portfolios.
1.
Computerized Oral Proficiency Test.
Each test is scored at the end of each academic year by two separate faculty
members using the ACTFL Oral Proficiency Guidelines. If the scores are not
identical, but are only one ranking away (such as Intermediate High and
Intermediate Mid) the lower score is kept to describe the student's proficiency. If
they are separated by one level (such as Intermediate High and Intermediate
Low) then the center (missing) value is chosen to represent the student's rating.
If the two ratings are more disparate than that, then a third rating is made.
The ACTFL Oral Proficiency Guidelines can be found in detail at
http://www.actfl.org/files/public/Guidelinesspeak.pdf
2.
Writing in different styles.
Students should include at least two documents that use different writing styles.
The students meet our standard if they have two different styles from among the
following: description, narrative, exposition, journalism, argument, letters,
instructions.
3.
Command of grammar.
Student refer to one document that demonstrates and command of grammar,
mechanics and the ability to use a variety of sentence structures to express their
ideas. This document is rated using the ACTFL Proficiency Guidelines for Writing
(these can be found at http://www.actfl.org/files/public/writingguidelines.pdf) with
special attention to grammatical accuracy.
The information on the next pages are the evaluation form the department uses to score
each portfolio and the rubric used to make the evaluations for student learning
outcomes 1 through 3.
Foreign Language 4990
Senior Assessment
This form is to be completed using the
"Criteria for the Evaluation of Assessment Portfolios"
Student's Name:
Year Graduated:
Language:
French
German
Spanish
1: Oral Proficiency
Check the proficiency level that best describes this student's SOPI recording.
Intermediate Low
Advanced Low
Superior
Novice
Intermediate Mid
Advanced Mid
Novice High
Intermediate High
Advanced High
2: Writing in Different Styles
Check at least two different styles from the following
argument
journalism
description
letters
exposition
narration
instructions
other
3: Command of Grammar & Structure
Check the proficiency level that best describes this student's written work.
Intermediate Low
Advanced Low
Superior
Novice
Intermediate Mid
Advanced Mid
Novice High
Intermediate High
Advanced High
4: Analyzes Literary and/or Popular Texts
Among the following, check any or all of that apply.
A main idea or purpose of the text are identified and discussed.
There is a thesis and argument as well as a good introduction and conclusion.
Demonstrate a working knowledge of literary terminology
Stylistic features of the text are discussed, and examples of such devices as
simile, metaphor, hyperbole and symbolism are explained.
Grammatical structure, (such as vocabulary and verb tenses) are discussed as
they relate to establishing the meaning of the text.
5: Awareness of Culture
Does this student demonstrate an awareness of the similarities and differences among
cultures?
yes
no
Criteria for the evaluation of assessment portfolios
Observation
Simulated Oral
Proficiency Instrument
At least two documents in
different styles
At least one document
Rubric for Evaluation
ACTFL Oral Proficiency Scale
Students demonstrate at least two different styles
from the following:
• description, • narrative, • exposition, • journalism, •
argument, • letters, • instructions
ACTFL Written Proficiency Scale
("grammar" here includes syntax, breadth of
vocabulary, and discourse rules).
Assessment 1
Attachment 3 • Data Table
The portfolio assessment used in this section is required of all graduating majors in
French, German and Spanish. Data on the first student learning outcome, speaking
proficiency, is tabulated annually and sent the University Academic Affairs Office for
inclusion in annual assessment reports. This data is available at:
http://programs.weber.edu/assessment/participants/forlang.htm
The following data includes all majors, not only teaching majors. For specific information
on the oral proficiency of teaching majors in French, German and Spanish, see
Assessment 2.
Student Learning Outcome 1: Oral Proficiency
The numbers in each table indicate the number of graduating majors who were rated at
the level indicated.
2001-2002 Foreign Language Majors; Computerized Oral Proficiency Test
The average rating for all majors was Intermediate High
Language
French
German
Spanish
TOTAL
Low
Novice
Mid
High
Intermediate
Low
Mid
High
3
5
6
4
9
9
Low
1
1
6
8
Advanced
Mid
High
6
6
Supe
rior
3
3
The average rating for all majors was Advanced-Low
Language
French
German
Spanish
TOTAL
Novice
Low
Mid
High
Intermediate
Low
Mid
High
2
2
9
9
Advanced
Low
Mid
High
1
1
1
7
0
2
9
1
2
Supe
rior
1
1
Language
French
German
Spanish
TOTAL
Low
Novice
Mid
High
Intermediate
Low
Mid
High
3
3
3
10
13
Low
Advanced
Mid
High
2
9
11
11
11
Supe
rior
3
3
Student Learning Outcome 2: Writing in Different Styles
The numbers in the tables below only represent teaching majors in French, German and
Spanish. Because each student was asked to submit at least two documents the
number of students is indicated in parentheses in the "Language" column.
2001-2002 Foreign Language Teaching Majors: Writing Styles
All portfolios submitted met this standard by including at least two styles.
Text Type
DesExpoInstrucJourLanguage
Argument
French
German
Spanish
TOTAL
1
1
cription
sition
4
2
4
8
4
6
tions
nalism
Letters
Narrative
Other
4
1
4
8
3
4
Narrative
Other
1
1
2
1
1
Narrative
Other
2
2
2
4
1
3
2
2
Text Type
French
German
Spanish
TOTAL
Argument
cription
sition
1
1
2
2
2
4
1
2
3
tions
nalism
Letters
Text Type
French
German
Spanish
TOTAL
Argument
cription
1
1
1
3
2
1
3
6
sition
4
4
tions
nalism
Letters
Student Learning Outcome 3: Command of Grammar
Spanish. The numbers in each table indicate the number of graduating majors who
were rated at the level indicated.
2001-2002 Foreign Language Teaching Majors; Command of Grammar
The average rating for all majors was Intermediate High
Language
French
German
Spanish
TOTAL
Novice
Low
Mid
High
Intermediate
Low
Mid
High
Advanced
Low
Mid
High
3
1
1
4
3
4
Supe
rior
1
1
Language
French
German
Spanish
TOTAL
Novice
Low
Mid
High
Intermediate
Low
Mid
High
Advanced
Low
Mid
High
Supe
rior
2
2
1
1
1
1
Language
French
German
Spanish
Low
Novice
Mid
High
Intermediate
Low
Mid
High
1
1
2
Low
2
1
3
Advanced
Mid
High
2
2
Supe
rior
Assessment 2
All Teaching Majors of Teaching Minors in French, German, or Spanish, are required to
complete an Oral Proficiency Interview (OPI) and obtain a proficiency rating of
Intermediate-High, or better, before they may enroll in the departments methods course
ForLang 4400). This requirement is explained in the University Catalog, and all students
are also made aware of it when they declare their major or minor in language teaching.
Students may take the OPI at any time prior to the semester in which they enroll in the
methods course. Most students delay doing the interview until shortly before the course,
but some do so earlier. If they do rate lower that Intermediate-High, they may redo the
interview at a later date, but they may not enroll in ForLang 4400 until they demonstrate
Intermediate-High proficiency.
The OPI is a 20 to 40 minute interview developed by ACTFL. All of the full time faculty
members in the department have been trained by ACTFL to administer the interview. All
interviews are taped and rated separately by the interviewer and a second faculty
member.
Students who have not scored Intermediate-High, or better, cannot take ForLang 4400
and cannot student teach. This assessment of proficiency therefore, takes on the aspect
of an entrance requirement for foreign language teacher education. Non-teaching
majors and minors who wish to take ForLang 4400 are likewise required to complete the
OPI at the Intermediate-High level.
Students can complete a non-teaching major or minor with less proficiency than that
required for teacher candidates, so if they cannot demonstrate Intermediate-High
proficiency, they may not teach, but can switch to a different language major (with
emphasis on literature or commercial language, etc.).
Assessment 2
The ACTFL Oral Proficiency Interview is scored using the ACTFL Oral Proficiency
Guidelines. A complete description of these guidelines is available at
http://www.actfl.org/files/public/Guidelinesspeak.pdf
The proficiency levels of the ACTFL Guidelines are as follows. Our students are
required to be at least Intermediate-High. Each interview is rated separately by two
ACTFL trained raters.
Superior
Advanced High
Advanced Mid
Advanced Low
Intermediate High
Intermediate Mid
Intermediate Low
Novice High
Novice Mid
Novice Low
Assessment 2
2004-2005 Foreign Language Teaching Majors and Minors; Oral Proficiency
Language
French
German
Spanish
TOTAL
Novice
Low
Mid
High
Intermediate
Low
Mid
High
2
1
1
1
1
8
10
Advanced
Low
Mid
High
3
3
2
2
Supe
rior
1
1
Language
French
German
Spanish
TOTAL
Novice
Low
Mid
High
Intermediate
Low
Mid
High
1
2
1
2
2
2
4
Advanced
Low
Mid
High
2
5
7
Supe
rior
2
4
6
Language
French
German
Spanish
TOTAL
Low
Novice
Mid
High
Intermediate
Low
Mid
High
3
2
1
4
1
9
Low
2
4
6
Advanced
Mid
High
1
1
2
Supe
rior
Assessment 3
In the section of this report describing assessment 1, the portfolio that makes up the
Department of Foreign Languages assessment of graduating majors is presented. In
that section, documents supporting student learning outcomes 1 through 3 allow for an
assessment of student skill in the content area.
For this assessment, documents supporting student learning outcomes 4 and 5 will be
used since they deal more particularly with content knowledge in the language to be
taught. For these two student learning outcomes, students are required
1.
submit a document that demonstrated and ability to read and understand
popular and literary texts in the language, and analyze literary works to
discern moral, cultural or aesthetic values
2.
submit a document the demonstrates and awareness of the similarities and
differences among the cultures of the language being studied as they
compare to other cultures.
As of yet we have not begun using electronic portfolios, although this will happen in the
near future.
Students use the form shown on the next page as a cover sheet to their portfolio; this
form may also be accessed at http://faculty.weber.edu/tmathews/4990Form.pdf
SENIOR ASSESSMENT FORM
Weber State University
Name:
Student ID:
Major: French
German Spanish
Expected date of graduation: Fall
Spring
Year:
All students graduating with a major in the Department of Foreign Languages and
Literatures are expected to have gained proficiency in the following five areas. Please
document your abilities in the right-hand column. A single paper, composition, or essay,
etc., may be listed as documentation for several different outcomes.
Documentation
Computerized oral proficiency test score:
1. Demonstrate speaking and
listening proficiency in the
language they are studying.
2. Demonstrate the ability to write (Refer to at least two documents in your portfolio)
in different styles.
3. Demonstrate a command of
grammar, mechanics and the
ability to use a variety of
sentence structures to express
their ideas.
4. Read and understand popular
and literary texts in the language;
analyze literary works and
discern moral, cultural and
aesthetic values.
5. Demonstrate an awareness of
the similarities and the
differences among the cultures of
the language being studied as
they compare to other cultures.
Assessment 3
The department uses the following rubric to evaluate student work submitted to
demonstrate the student learning outcomes dealing with literature and culture.
Criteria for the evaluation of assessment portfolios
Observation
Rubric for Evaluation
Students do some or all of the following, in order of
importance
• A main idea or purpose of the text is identified
and discussed.
• There is a thesis and argument as well as a
good introduction and conclusion.
• Demonstrate a working knowledge of literary
terminology
• Stylistic features of the text are discussed, and
examples of such devices as simile, metaphor,
hyperbole and symbolism are explained.
• Grammatical structure, (such as vocabulary and
verb tenses) are discussed as they relate to
establishing the meaning of the text.
Based on National Standard on Culture (ACTFL)
The form that follows is used by the department to keep a record of each student's
evaluation (the entire form is included in the attachments for assessment 1; here we
have included only the portion that deals with these two student learning outcomes).
4: Analyzes Literary and/or Popular Texts
Among the following, check any or all of that apply.
A main idea or purpose of the text are identified and discussed.
There is a thesis and argument as well as a good introduction and conclusion.
Demonstrate a working knowledge of literary terminology
Stylistic features of the text are discussed, and examples of such devices as
simile, metaphor, hyperbole and symbolism are explained.
Grammatical structure, (such as vocabulary and verb tenses) are discussed as
they relate to establishing the meaning of the text.
5: Awareness of Culture
Does this student demonstrate an awareness of the similarities and differences among
cultures?
yes
no
It can be seen that learning outcome 5, awareness of culture, is our weak spot. We
have familiarized ourselves, as a department with the National Standards, particularly
Standards 2 and 4, which deal with culture (National Standards, 1996; Phillips & Draper,
1999). Nevertheless, at this time we feel only confident enough to make a rating of yes,
the student has an awareness of culture, or no, the student does not have such
awareness. We are currently working on a more discriminating measure.
Assessment 3
Attachment 3 • Data Tables
Although the assessment described in this section is administered to all graduating
language majors, the data here reflect only teaching majors in French, German and
Spanish.
Student Learning Outcome 4: Literary analysis
Spanish. Because most students were able to comply with several of the criteria, the
number of students is indicated in parentheses in the "Language" column.
2001-2002 Foreign Language Teaching Majors; Literary analysis
Language
French
German
Spanish
TOTAL
Main idea
4
4
8
Criteria Included in Sample Documents
Thesis
Terminology Stylistics
4
4
4
4
8
4
8
5
9
Structure
3
4
7
Language
French
German
Spanish
TOTAL
Main idea
2
2
4
Thesis
2
2
4
1
1
Structure
2
2
Language
French
German
Spanish
TOTAL
Main idea
2
1
4
7
Thesis
2
2
2
1
4
2
7
2
4
Structure
1
4
5
Student Learning Outcome 5: Cultural awareness
Spanish.
2001-2002 Foreign Language Teaching Majors; Cultural awareness
Language
French
German
Spanish
TOTAL
Demonstrates Cultural Awareness
Yes
No
3
1
5
8
1
Language
French
German
Spanish
TOTAL
Yes
No
2
2
4
Language
French
German
Spanish
TOTAL
Yes
No
2
1
4
7
Assessment 4
Teaching majors and minors in French, German and Spanish are assessed three times
on their ability to plan instruction:
1.
In Level 2 Secondary teachers are assessed for Critical Performance
Indicators.
Of the five Critical Performance Indicators assessed, the first two shed
light on candidate ability to plan instruction. They read as follows:
Critical Performance Indicator
1. Candidate demonstrates competence in content knowledge in major/minor areas of
study for 6-12 grade students, with preparation of a Teacher Work Sample used in a
field experience classroom.
(Teacher Work Samples, Content Unit Instruction)
M
O
D
O
N
O
2. Candidate uses a variety of differentiated instructional strategies to integrate and
apply knowledge of students’ diverse needs and culture as they integrate core
curriculum and content area standards. Candidate demonstrates the ability to
cultivate a positive learning environment for all students.
M = Standard met, D = Developing Standard, N = Standard Not Met
O
O
O
2.
During student teaching candidates are assessed after each observation
and in their final term evaluation.
The lesson observation form has a section devoted to "Planning for
Instruction" that is as follows:
I. PLANNING FOR INSTRUCTION (reflects INTASC 2, 4, 7, 8)
A. Shows evidence of daily planning based on appropriate short and long-range M D N N/O
instructional goals and objectives
B. Selects teaching methods, activities, assessments and materials appropriate M D N N/O
for students and lesson objectives
C. Considers the developmental needs of all learners when designing
M D N N/O
instruction.
M = Standard Met, D = Developing Standard, N = Standard Not Met, N/O = Not Observed
In addition the Student Teacher Final Term Evaluation form has three
sections, out of ten, that deal with planning for instruction. These sections
are as follows:
Standard # 3 Adapting instruction for individual needs
Appreciates and values student diversity
Creates instructional opportunities that are adapted to diverse learners
Makes appropriate provisions for individual students who have particular learning
differences
M
M
M
D
D
D
N
N
N
Standards #4 Multiple instructional strategies
Uses various instructional strategies (i.e. cooperative learning, questioning) to promote
active learning, critical thinking, problem solving and inquiry
Understands and uses a variety of instructional materials
Understands and uses various technologies
Standard #7
Instructional planning skills
Plans instruction based upon knowledge of subject matter, students, and core
curriculum
Makes appropriate short and long range plans
Plans substantive, detailed daily lesson plans and teacher work samples
Carefully aligns instruction with objectives
M = Standard Met, D = Developing Standard, N = Standard Not Met
3.
M
D
N
M
M
D
D
N
N
M
D
N
M
M
M
D
D
D
N
N
N
In our content methods course (ForLang 4400) each student prepares a
series of peer-lessons that are evaluated by the instructor and by a cohort
of peer students. Specifically, each student prepares a series of five
lesson on 1) teaching listening skills, 2) teaching grammar, 3) teaching
reading, 4) integrating skills, and 5) using technology to enhance learning.
Each of these lessons is assessed with the following form:
Teacher
Evaluated by
Lesson
Date
A
B
C
D
E
Comments
Was the lesson appropriate?
Clarity of the presentation
Preparation
Use of visual or audio aids
(may not be necessary)
Technique
Enthusiasm
Participation of students
Correction of students
Use of L2
Timing and pacing
A: Exceptional B: Better than average C: Average D: Poor E: Not acceptable
Please make any other general comments on the back of this form.
Assessment 4
In the assessments described in parts 1 and 2 above, each standard or sub-standard is
evaluated as either "met," "developing," or "not met." Student observations made by the
university supervisor (from the unit) and content supervisor (from the program) also
allow for an annotation of "not observed."
The student Teacher Final Term Evaluation form is completed by three raters: the
University Supervisor, the Content Supervisor and the Cooperating Teacher.
Assessment 4
Attachment 3 • Data
Data for the Level 2 Critical Performance Indicators are not available for foreign
language candidates separately from other content areas. Check with the unit for
complete Level 2 data.
Data from the foreign language methods class has not been consistently maintained.
Students have generally kept their assessment evaluations and at this time no data is
available.
Student Teaching data is as follows.
In the most recent semester, Fall 2004, there were 7 student teachers either doing a
major or a minor in French or Spanish. Since their assessments were gathered in late
2004 or early 2005, the compilation has not been completed.
In Spring 2004, data have been reported on 2 student teachers, and in Fall 2003, data
were collected on 2 students teachers. Standards 3, 4, and 7 are reported below. For
each student there are two ratings (the Content Supervisor ratings were not included in
the database).
Standard
3.a. Values student diversity
b. Considers needs of learners in
planning
c. Provides for learning differences
4.a. Uses varied strategies to promote
learning
b. Understand varied instructional
materials
c. Uses various technologies
7.a. Plans based on content & curricular
knowledge
b. Makes short and long range plans
c. Substantive daily plans and work
samples
d. Aligns instruction with objectives
Fall 2003
Student Student
1
2
MM
MM
MM
MM
Spring 2004
Student Student
1
2
MM
DM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MD
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
Assessment 5
Student teaching is assessed with two instruments: the Student Teacher Final
Assessment and the Assessment of Candidate Dispositions.
1.
The Student Teacher Final Assessment seeks ratings on 10 standards,
each of which have from two to five sub standards. This complete form is
included on the following pages.
2.
The Assessment of Candidate Dispositions seeks a rating on 9
dispositions. This complete form is included in the following pages.
STUDENT TEACHER FINAL ASSESSMENT
Please print the following:
Student Teacher: __________________________________________________________ Date _____-___________
Collaborating Teacher: ___________________________________ School __________________ Subject/Grade
Level: ____________
This form was completed by: Univ Supervisor ____ Content Supervisor ____ Collaborating Teacher ____
Teacher Candidate _____
When you have completed this form, please mail to: Weber State University, Teacher Education, Coordinator Field
Experience/ Clinical Practice, 1304 University Circle, Ogden, UT 84408-1304.
Directions: Please address the student teacher’s strengths, weaknesses, and their development in each of the following.
Circle the letter which best represents your judgment concerning the student teacher.
RATING SCALE:
performance)
M
=
Standard Met
(evidence of satisfactory
D
=
Developing Standard
(evidence of progress
toward satisfactory performance)
N
=
Standard Not Met
(evidence fails to show adequate
performance)
Standard #1: Knowledge of subject matter
The student teacher:
M
D
N
M
D
N
M
D
N
M
D
N
and everyday life
Comments:
Standard #2
M
D
N
M
D
N
instruction
Comments:
Creates meaningful learning experiences
Demonstrates a solid grasp of the subject matter
Has enthusiasm for the content taught
Helps the students see the connections between classroom knowledge
Knowledge of human development and learning
Understands how children learn and develop
Considers the developmental needs of all learners when designing
Standard # 3 Adapting instruction for individual needs
M
D
N
M
D
N
M
D
N
learning differences
Comments:
Appreciates and values student diversity
Creates instructional opportunities that are adapted to diverse learners
Makes appropriate provisions for individual students who have particular
Standards #4 Multiple instructional strategies
M
D
N
Uses various instructional strategies (i.e. cooperative learning,
questioning) to promote active
learning, critical thinking, problem solving and inquiry
M
D
N
Understand and uses a wide variety of materials
M
D
N
Understands and uses various technologies
Comments:
Standard #5
Classroom motivation and management skills
M
D
N
Creates a positive learning environment
M
D
N
Organizes, allocates, and manages the resources of time, space,
activities, and attention to
provide productive learning
M
D
N
Analyzes the classroom environment and makes decisions and
adjustments to enhance social
relationships, student motivation, and productive work
M
D
N
Anticipates problem behavior and effectively employs a variety of
management strategies
Comments:
Standard #6
M
D
N
M
D
N
M
D
N
M
D
N
M
D
N
Comments:
Standard #7
Communication skills
Uses effective verbal and non-verbal communication
Is a thoughtful and responsive listener
Communicates expectations and assignments clearly
Communicates cultural sensitivity
Commands respect within the classroom
M
D
N
Makes appropriate short and long range plans
M
D
N
Plans instruction based upon knowledge of subject matter, students, the
community,
and curriculum goals
M
D
N
Plans substantive, detailed daily lesson plans and teacher work samples
M
D
N
Carefully aligns instruction with objectives
Comments:
Standard #8
Assessment of student learning
M
D
N
attained
M
D
N
M
D
N
M
D
Comments:
Accurately determines whether desired learning outcomes have been
Clearly communicates assessment results to students
Frequently monitors and adjusts instruction in response to learners
N
Standard #9
Uses a variety of assessments
Professional commitment and responsibility
M
D
N
Uses feedback from multiple sources (i.e. self, students, peers,
cooperating teacher, supervisors)
to refine practice
M
D
N
Seeks out opportunities for professional growth
M
D
practice
M
D
N
Is professional in appearance, behavior, and commitment to ethical
N
Reflects on practice and makes thoughtful changes
Comments:
Standard #10 Partnerships
M
D
N
educational process
M
D
N
M
D
N
Comments:
Communicates with and seeks to involve parents and caregivers in the
Uses community resources as appropriate in the educational process
Strives to develop collaborative teaching relationships
Summary Narrative
In narrative form (preferably word processed) please describe in detail this student teacher. Include the teacher’s strengths,
weaknesses, and address the candidate’s teaching dispositions.
____________________________________________
Signature of observer
______________________________________
Signature of student teacher
ASSESSMENT OF STUDENT DISPOSITIONS
Collaborating Teacher: ________________________________________
School
_________________________
Teacher Education Level: 1_____ 2_____ 3_____ 4_____
This form was completed by:
University Supervisor ____
Collaborating Teacher ____
Arts-Sci Supervisor ______
Student _____
Please evaluate the student in terms of demonstrating the following nine dispositions. Each disposition has several descriptors to
consider in your evaluation. Mark one box for each disposition.
USUALLY SOMETIMES SELDOM
DISPOSITIONS AND INDICATORS
1. Positive Attitude
(enthusiastic, motivated, dedicated, committed, shows
initiative, appropriate sense of humor)
2. Caring/Responsive
(concerned, thoughtful, receptive to the feelings of
others)
3. Ethical/Responsible
(acts in accordance with the rules or standards for
right conduct, adheres to schedules, accountable
and principled decision maker, student advocate)
4. Inclusive
(appreciates and values student diversity;
communicates cultural sensitivity; fair, impartial,
open-minded; unprejudiced, unbigoted)
5. Flexible
(able to make adjustments based on changing
circumstances)
6. Collegial
(collaborative, cooperative; sharing responsibility in
a group endeavor, works effectively with others,
friendly and mutually respectful)
7. Reflective/Resourceful
(thoughtful, insightful; a deliberative decision maker
and problem solver; deals skillfully and promptly with
new situations, difficulties, etc.)
8. Poised
(controlled, confident, self-assured, tactful; shows
restraint over own impulses and emotions)
9. Teachable
(apt and willing to learn, receptive to new ideas and
feedback)
Comments (optional):
____________________________________________
Signature of observer
____________________________________
Signature of student teacher
Assessment 5
Both of these are completed by the Cooperating Teacher, a University Supervisor from
the College of Education and a Supervisor from the Department of Foreign Languages
and Literature.
On the Student Teacher Final Assessment, as can be seen on the form itself, each rater
judges the candidate as having "met" the standard, "developing" the standard, or that
the standard is "not met."
On the Assessment of Candidate Dispositions, each rater marks each attitude, trait or
disposition as "usually" seen in the candidate, "sometimes" observed, or "seldom"
observed.
These assessments are collected and the data is tallied in the College of Education.
Assessment 5
At the time of compiling this report the data on Candidates who participated in clinical
practice Fall 2004 was not available. The forms were not submitted until the first part of
January because some supervisors had not turned in their evaluations. The institutional
reporting department was unable to process the forms in time for them to be included in
this report
Data for the Student Teacher Final Assessment is shown below. Inexplicably, the
Content Supervisor's ratings are not included in the data.
M = Standard Met, D = Developing Standard, N = Standard Not Met
Fall 2003
Standard
1
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
DM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
DM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
DD
DD
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
DM
MM
MM
MM
DM
MM
MM
MM
DM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
Communication Skills
Uses effective communication
Is a thoughtful and responsive listener
Communicates expectations clearly
Communicates cultural sensitivity
Commands respect in the classroom
7
MM
MM
MM
MM
Classroom motivation and management skills
Creates a positive environment
Manages tine, space, etc, to increase learning
Analyzes environment & makes adjustments
Anticipates problem behavior
6
MM
MM
MM
MM
Multiple instructional strategies
Uses varied strategies
Uses varied materials
Uses varied technology
5
Student
2
Adapting instruction for individual needs
Appreciates and values diversity
Creates opportunities for diverse learners
Makes provisions for learning differences
4
Student
1
Knowledge of human development
Understands how children learn
Considers the developmental learners
3
Student
2
Knowledge of subject matter
Creates meaningful learning experiences
Demonstrates a solid grasp of the subject
Has enthusiasm for the content taught
Helps students see connections
2
Spring 2004
Student
1
Makes short and long range plans
Plans based on knowledge of subject etc.
Plans daily lessons and TWS
Aligns instruction with objectives
8
MM
MM
MD
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MD
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MD
MM
MM
MM
DM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
MM
DM
DM
MM
Assessment of student learning
Accurately determines attainment of outcomes
Communicates assessment results to students
Adjusts instruction in response to learners
Uses a variety of assessments
9
MM
MM
Professional commitment and responsibility
Uses feedback from multiple sources
Seeks opportunities for growth
Is professional in appearance, etc.
Reflects on practice and makes changes
10 Partnerships
Seeks to involve parents
Uses community resources as appropriate
Develops collaborative teaching relationships
Assessment 6
Teacher Education Professional Core Critical Performance Indicators
Secondary Education
Each of the program levels have defined critical performances based upon
INTASC Standards that candidates should meet upon completion of the level.
These indicators look at candidates’ knowledge, skills, and dispositions in the
level as a whole. While the artifacts used for identifying student performance
come from individual requirements for level course work, they do not replace
grades in the level courses. At the end of each semester, the faculty for each
professional core level meets together to discuss individual candidate’s
dispositions and critical performances. This meeting is also combined with exit
interviews where candidates share their INTASC portfolios and reflect and
evaluate their performance during the level. The performances for the
candidates at the clinical practice level are evaluated by their university
supervisor(s) and collaborating teacher(s).
Teacher Work Samples (TWS)
A process that enables teacher candidates to demonstrate teaching
performances directly related to planning, implementing, assessing student
learning, and evaluating teaching and learning for a standards-based
instructional unit. The TWS provides opportunity for candidates to develop,
organize, implement, assess, and reflect upon instruction in their assigned
subject and grade level. The focus of the TWS is on student achievement and
competence in knowledge and skills. Therefore, teacher work samples are
teaching exhibits that can provide credible evidence of a candidate’s ability to
facilitate learning of all students. Teacher work samples are one source of
performance relative to national and state teaching standards.
Components of Teacher Work Samples
• Contextual Factors
• Objectives/Learning Outcomes
• Assessment Plan
• Design for Instruction
• Instructional Decision-Making
• Analysis of Student Learning
• Reflection and Self-Evaluation
Content Unit Instruction: Field Experience
The Teacher Work Sample is based on the content unit of instruction during field
experience. In a small group or individually, candidates will design a unit of
instruction guided by the state core curriculum, content knowledge (major/minor),
textbooks, and other sources and in cooperation with the collaborating teacher.
The unit of instruction will contain: objectives/outcomes (curriculum alignment),
pre-post testing, a variety of lesson plans with accommodations for diverse
students, appropriate technology usage, and an evaluation of the lessons as to
whether the objectives were met by students in grades 6-12.
The Level 1 and Level 2 Critical Performance Indicator assessment forms follow:
LEVEL 1 CRITICAL PERFORMANCE INDICATORS
Student ID
Bubble box
Semester: Fall
0
Spring
0
Year
2004 2005 2006
0
0
0
Directions for raters: Fill in only one oval for each criterion. M= Met, D = Developing,
N = Not Met
Definitions: Met: Candidate received an A/A- grade on the artifact.
Developing: Candidate received a B+/B/B- grade on the artifact.
Not Met: Candidate received a C+ or lower grade on the artifact.
Critical Performance Indicators
M
D
N
1. Candidate summarizes and applies learning theory
0
0
(Learning Theories paper)
2. Candidate integrates and applies knowledge of students, learning theory,
curriculum development, and grade level content in designing instruction.
0
0
0. (Teacher Work Sample: Design for Instruction)
3. Candidate demonstrates competence in using both informal and formal
assessment strategies to inform instruction and promote student learning.
0
0
0
(Teacher Work Sample: Assessment Plan)
4. Candidate recognizes a variety of classroom management techniques.
0
0
0
(Classroom Observation Form)
5. Candidate uses knowledge of effective verbal, nonverbal, and media
communication techniques.
0
0
0
(Teacher Work Sample: Media Enhanced Lesson Plan Presentation)
6. Candidate reflects on personal professional practice.
0
0
0
(Portfolio: Reflection Documents)
0
LEVEL 2SECONDARY CRITICAL PERFORMANCE INDICATORS
Student ID
Bubble box
Semester: Fall
0
Spring
0
Year
2004 2005 2006
0
0
0
Directions for raters: Fill in only one oval for each criterion. M= Met, D = Developing,
N = Not Met
Critical Performance Indicators
M
D
N
1. Candidate demonstrates competence in content knowledge in major/minor
areas of study for 6-12 grade students, with preparation of a Teacher Work Sample
0
0
0
used in a field experience classroom.
2. Candidate uses a variety of differentiated instructional strategies to integrate
and apply knowledge of students’ diverse needs and culture as they integrate core
0
0
0
curriculum and content area standards. Candidate demonstrates the ability to
cultivate a positive learning environment for all students.
3. Candidate demonstrates competence in using both informal and formal
assessment strategies to inform instruction and promote student learning.
0
0
0
4. Candidate demonstrates the ability to use a variety of sources of feedback to
reflect on individual performance and that of their students in grades 6-12.
0
0
0
(Teacher Work Samples, journals, video clips, lesson plans with written critiques)
5. Candidate continues portfolio system that provides evidence of knowledge, skills,
and dispositions with addition of artifacts required in level 2.
0
0
0
(Hardcopy portfolio)
Assessment 6
The Critical Performance Indicator assessment form is completed at the end of each
level by the faculty teaching that level. On each indicator, candidates are rated as
having "Met" the criterion, "Developing" the criterion, or having "Not Met" the criterion.
These ratings are in addition to normal term grades in the courses taken in the level.
Portfolios are reviewed with the students in a similar fashion.
Assessment 6
The following table contains data for all of the candidates enrolled in Levels 1 and 2
during Fall semester 2004. No data is available that separates out Foreign Language
Teaching Majors and Minors.
Secondary Candidate Critical Performance Indicators: Fall 23004
Level 1: Includes all candidates enrolled in Level 1 (N = 104)
Met
Developing
Not met
Learning Theory
89
85.6%
5
4.8%
3
2.9%
Instructional Strategies
91
87.5%
11
10.6%
3
2.9%
Assessment
92
88.5%
10
9.6%
3
2.9%
Learning Environment
91
87.5%
2
1.9%
3
2.9%
Communication
98
94.2%
4
3.8%
3
2.9%
Reflective Practitioner
94
90.4%
11
10.6%
3
2.9%
Level 2: Includes all secondary students enrolled in Level 2 Secondary (N = 47)
Met
Developing
Not met
Content Knowledge
42
91.3%
5
8.7%
0
0.0%
Instructional Strategies
44
95.7%
3
4.3%
0
0.0%
Assessment
43
93.5%
4
6.5%
0
0.0%
Professional Development
43
93.5%
4
6.5%
0
0.0%
Program Portfolio
43
93.5%
4
6.5%
0
0.0%
Collaboration/Reflection/
At this time there is no data available of the portfolios for Foreign Language Teaching
candidates.
Assessment 7
All Teaching Majors of Teaching Minors in French, German, or Spanish, are required to
complete a written proficiency test and obtain a proficiency rating of Intermediate-High,
or better, before they may enroll in the departments methods course ForLang 4400).
This requirement is explained in the University Catalog, and all students are also made
aware of it when they declare their major or minor in language teaching. Students may
take the test at any time prior to the semester in which they enroll in the methods
course. Most students delay doing so until shortly before the course, but some do it
earlier. If they do rate lower that Intermediate-High, they may redo the test at a later
date, but they may not enroll in ForLang 4400 until they demonstrate Intermediate-High
proficiency.
The written proficiency test is an essay (at least 300 words) on a topic chosen at
random from a bank of topics. Most of these are best answered at the Advanced level.
Students write their response in a "blue book." They are not allowed to leave once they
begin and they may not use dictionaries or other writing aids. Most students complete
the task in 40 or 50 minutes.
Each essay is read by two faculty members—all of whom are trained by ACTFL in the
proficiency guidelines.
Students who have not scored Intermediate-High, or better, cannot take ForLang 4400
and cannot student teach. This assessment of proficiency therefore, takes on the aspect
of an entrance requirement for foreign language teacher education.
Assessment 7
Each student's essay is scored using the ACTFL Writing Proficiency Guidelines. A
complete description of these guidelines is available at
http://www.actfl.org/files/public/writingguidelines.pdf
The levels of writing proficiency are as follows. Our students are required to be at least
Intermediate-High. Each essay is separately scored by two faculty members.
Superior
Advanced High
Advanced Mid
Advanced Low
Intermediate High
Intermediate Mid
Intermediate Low
Novice High
Novice Mid
Novice Low
Assessment 7
2004-2005 Foreign Language Teaching Majors and Minors; Writing Proficiency
Language
French
German
Spanish
TOTAL
Novice
Low
Mid
High
Intermediate
Low
Mid
High
2
3
3
4
6
Advanced
Low
Mid
High
5
5
Supe
rior
3
3
Language
French
German
Spanish
TOTAL
Novice
Low
Mid
High
Intermediate
Low
Mid
High
3
1
1
5
8
Advanced
Low
Mid
High
2
3
5
Supe
rior
2
2
4
Language
French
German
Spanish
TOTAL
Low
Novice
Mid
High
Intermediate
Low
Mid
High
5
2
6
13
Low
1
1
Advanced
Mid
High
1
1
2
Supe
rior
Section III • Standards Assessment Chart
APPLICABLE
ASSESSEMNTS FROM
SECTION II
ACTFL STANDARD
Content
knowledge
Pedagogical/
professional
KSD
Effect on
student
learning
1. Language, Linguistics, Comparisons. Candidates (a)
;

;#1 ;#2 #3 #4
#5 #6 ;#7
;

#1 #2 ;#3 ;#4
;#5 #6 #7

;
;
#1 #2 #3 ;#4
;#5 ;#6 #7

;
;
#1 #2 #3 ;#4
;#5 ;#6 #7
demonstrate a high level of proficiency in the target language, and
they seek opportunities to strengthen their proficiency; (b) know the
linguistic elements of the target language system, recognize the
changing nature of language, and accommodate for gaps in their
own knowledge of the target language system by learning on their
own; and (c) know the similarities and differences between the
target language and other languages, identify the key differences in
varieties of the target language, and seek opportunities to learn
about varieties of the target language on their own.
2. Cultures, Literatures, Cross-Disciplinary
Concepts. Candidates (a) demonstrate that they understand the
connections among the perspectives of a culture and its practices
and products, and they integrate the cultural framework for foreign
language standards into their instructional practices; (b) recognize
the value and role of literary and cultural texts and use them to
interpret and reflect upon the perspectives of the target cultures over
time; and (c) integrate knowledge of other disciplines into foreign
language instruction and identify distinctive viewpoints accessible
only through the target language.
3. Language Acquisition Theories and Instructional
Practices. Candidates (a) demonstrate an understanding of
language acquisition at various developmental levels and use this
knowledge to create a supportive classroom learning environment
that includes target language input and opportunities for negotiation
of meaning and meaningful interaction and (b) develop a variety of
instructional practices that reflect language outcomes and
articulated program models and address the needs of diverse
language learners.
4. Integration of Standards into Curriculum and
Instruction. Candidates (a) demonstrate an understanding of
the goal areas and standards of the Standards for Foreign
Language Learning and their state standards, and they integrate
these frameworks into curricular planning; (b) integrate the
Standards for Foreign Language Learning and their state standards
into language instruction; and (c) use standards and curricular goals
to evaluate, select, design, and adapt instructional resources.
5. Assessment of Language and Cultures. Candidates
(a) believe that assessment is ongoing, and they demonstrate
knowledge of multiple ways of assessment that are age- and levelappropriate by implementing purposeful measures; (b) reflect on the
results of student assessments, adjust instruction accordingly,
analyze the results of assessments, and use success and failure to
determine the direction of instruction; and (c) interpret and report
the results of student performances to all stakeholders and provide
opportunity for discussion.
6. Professionalism. Candidates (a) engage in professional
development opportunities that strengthen their own linguistic and
cultural competence and promote reflection on practice and (b)
know the value of foreign language learning to the overall success of
all students and understand that they will need to become advocates
with students, colleagues, and members of the community to
promote the field.

;
;
#1 #2 #3 #4
;#5 ;#6 #7

;

#1 #2 #3 #4
;#5 #6 #7
Section IV • Evidence for Meeting Standards
ASSESSMENT 1. CONTENT KNOWLEDGE: Data from licensure tests or professional
examinations of content knowledge.
1. Brief description of the assessment
At this time, the State of Utah does not require a licensure test or other
professional examination in foreign languages.
The Department of Foreign Languages and Literatures at Weber State University
requires all graduating majors to complete ForLang 4990, Senior Assessment, in
which they create a portfolio and submit work to demonstrate their capabilities as
they relate to our five student learning outcomes. The first three of these
outcomes relate to content knowledge—they are as follows:
A.
Students take a computerized oral proficiency test. The test is rated
independently by two faculty members trained by ACTFL in Oral
Proficiency Testing. Ratings are given based on the ACTFL Proficiency
Guidelines for spoken language.
B.
Students submit at least two documents to demonstrate their ability to
write in different styles in their language of study. The raters tally the
different writing styles submitted and compare them to the curricula for
courses in the language majors.
C.
Students submit at least on document that demonstrates their command
of the grammar, mechanics and structure of the language they have
studied. These documents are rated following the ACTFL Proficiency
Guidelines for written language.
2. Alignment of assessment with SPA standards as identified in Section III
This assessment aligns with ACTFL Standard 1.
3. Summary of data findings
Data over the past three years have been included in Section II. Because this
assessment includes three student learning outcomes, the data will be
summarized separately.
A.
All majors are included in this data for oral proficiency, not only teaching
majors.
In 2001-2002 a total of 35 majors took the computerized oral proficiency
test. The average proficiency fell between Intermediate High and
Advanced Low.
In 2002-2003 a total of 25 majors took the test. The average proficiency
was Advanced Low.
In 2003-2004 a total or 36 majors took the test. The average proficiency
was Advanced Low.
B.
Only data from teaching majors is included in the summary of ability to
write in different styles.
Over the three year period for which we have data, 20 majors is French (N
= 6), German (N = 3) and Spanish (N = 11), submitted portfolios. Of those
20 students, nine different styles of writing (or genres) were represented.
These included:
description, with 18 samples
narrative, with 14 samples
exposition, with 13 samples
argument, with 6 samples
brochure, with 3 examples
grammatical exercises, with 3 examples
letters, with 2 samples
poetry, with 2 examples
All of the candidates met our standard (or student learning outcome) by
submitting writing in at least two styles.
C.
This summary of student command of grammar, mechanics and language
structure in their writing, was collected from 20 teaching majors only.
Intermediate-High
Advanced-Low
Advanced-Mid
Advanced-High
Superior
2
9
7
1
1
As we found with oral proficiency, both among teacher education
candidates and foreign language majors in general, the average
proficiency rating on grammar alone, was an Advanced-Low.
4. Interpretation of data as evidence for meeting standards
We have indicated that this assessment is applicable to ACTFL Standard 1,
particularly 1.a. and 1.b.
ACTFL Standard 1.a. proposes that "candidates demonstrate a high level of
proficiency in the target language". The oral test data indicate that our candidates
are at that level.
ACTFL Standard 1.b. proposes that candidates "know the linguistic elements of
the target language system. . ." The analysis of grammatical competence done
on teaching candidates shows that they do know this system with a high level of
proficiency.
ASSESSMENT 2. CONTENT KNOWLEDGE: Assessment that demonstrates
candidates are orally proficient in the languages to be taught, according to proficiency
levels stipulated in Standard 1.a.
All teaching majors and minors in foreign languages (French, German and
Spanish) are required to complete an Oral Proficiency Interview and receive a
rating of Intermediate-High or better BEFORE they may enroll in the
department's teaching methods course (ForLang 4400). Most students complete
the OPI just before taking this course and after most of their other coursework in
the language is completed.
The ACTFL standard addressed by this assessment is Standard 1.
Data collected over the past three years have been included in Section II.
Because only teaching majors and minors participate in this assessment, the
numbers of students assessed may be different from those presented in the
discussion of assessment 1.
• In 2002-2003 a total of 18 students took the OPI as a prerequisite for the
methods course. The average rating was Intermediate-High. One student
was not permitted to take the course and therefore dropped out of the
teacher education language major or minor.
• In 2003-2004, 20 students took the OPI. The average rating was
Advanced-Low, nevertheless, three students were unable to achieve the
Intermediate-High cut-off, and were not permitted to continue in their
course of study.
• In 2004-2005, 18 students took the OPI. The average rating was
Intermediate-High. Two students were not allowed to enroll in the methods
course and have withdrawn from the program.
The standard (1.a.) calls for candidates to demonstrate a high level of proficiency
in the target language. We have established a firm cut-off, establishing
Intermediate-High proficiency as the floor for our candidates.
Of the 56 students who took the OPI in the past three years, 6 of them, or 11%,
were not permitted into candidacy for a language teaching major or minor. Of the
rest, 50 students, 46% of them rated Intermediate-High and 54% rated in the
Advanced levels.
We feel that our candidates for licensure in French, German and Spanish exceed
the oral proficiency levels stipulated in ACTFL Standard 1.a.
ASSESSMENT 3. CONTENT KNOWLEDGE: Assessment of content knowledge in the
languages to be taught.
As part of the portfolio described in assessment 1, students submit
documentation of their performance on two of our student learning outcomes: 1)
Ability to analyze popular and literary texts and 2) Cultural awareness.
Students must submit at least one document that they wrote in their coursework
in the language of study that demonstrates their ability to read and understand
popular and literary texts and to analyze literary works and discern moral, cultural
and aesthetic values. In addition they must submit at least one document that
demonstrates an awareness of the similarities and the differences among the
cultures of the language being studied as they compare to other cultures.
Faculty members rate the submissions for literary analysis looking for the
following traits:
• A main idea or purpose of the text is identified and discussed.
• There is a thesis and argument as well as a good introduction and
conclusion.
• Demonstrate a working knowledge of literary terminology
• Stylistic features of the text are discussed, and examples of such devices
as simile, metaphor, hyperbole and symbolism are explained.
• Grammatical structure, (such as vocabulary and verb tenses) are
discussed as they relate to establishing the meaning of the text.
The cultural awareness document is read by faculty members to determine
weather or not the student has demonstrated such an awareness.
The ACTFL standard addressed by this assessment is Standard 2, particularly
sub standards 2.a. and 2.b.
Over the three year period for which we have data, 20 majors is French (N = 6),
German (N = 3) and Spanish (N = 11), submitted portfolios. All 20 candidates
submitted a document as literary analysis. We checked these documents for the
following characteristics and found the following:
Characteristic sought
Main idea or purpose of the text are identified and discussed
There is a thesis and argument as well as a good introduction and
conclusion
Demonstration of a working knowledge of literary terminology
n
19
19
%
95%
95%
11
55%
Stylistic features of the text are discussed, and examples of such
devices as simile, metaphor, hyperbole and symbolism are explained
Grammatical structure is discussed as it relates to establishing the
meaning of the test.
13
65%
14
70%
The portfolio documents submitted by candidates were also perused for an
indication of an awareness and understanding of culture. Specifically, does the
candidate, "demonstrate an awareness of the similarities and the differences
among the cultures of the language being studied as they compare to other
cultures?" Portfolios were rated as either "yes" such an awareness was evident,
or "no" such cultural awareness appears to be lacking.
Of the 20 portfolios submitted over the past three years by students majoring in
foreign language education, 19 (or 95%) met this student learning objective. One
candidate (5%) did not submit evidence for us to draw that conclusion.
ACTFL Standard 2 asks that students (a) "demonstrate that they understand the
connections among the perspectives of a culture" and that they (b) "recognize
the value and role of literary and cultural texts"
We feel that the data support Standard 2. Ninety-five percent of our candidates
demonstrate and understanding of connection and perspectives of culture, while
all of them were able to submit a document validating their understanding of
literature in the target language.
ASSESSMENT 4. PEDAGOGICAL AND PROFESSIONAL KNOWLEDGE, SKILLS,
AND DISPOSITIONS.
Assessment 4 deals with our candidates' ability to plan instruction. We gather
data through Critical Performance Indicators in Level 1, Level 2 and the Clinical
Experience (Student Teaching); students are assessed by university supervisors
and their cooperating teachers as they do their student teaching (lesson
observation forms); and candidates are assessed by their instructor and their
peers as they do peer-teaching in the foreign language methods course (ForLang
4400).
This assessment is applicable to ACTFL Standards 2, 3 and 4.
Two sets of data are available at this time: the Critical Performance Indicator
assessment from Levels 1 and 2; as well as data from the Student Teaching
Final Term Evaluation. The former has combined data for all teacher education
candidates, the latter is limited to foreign language candidates during student
teaching.
Of the Critical Performance Indicators, two are particularly informative as far as
ability to plan lessons is concerned; these deal with learning theory and
instructional strategies. On these indicators in Level 1, 86% and 88% of
candidates met each standard, respectively. In Level 2 (Secondary) 96% of
students met the Instructional Strategies standard.
Foreign Language students did very well on those assessments in the Final Term
Evaluation that deal with lesson planning. Standards 3, 4, and 7 on this from
contain a total of ten sub-standards. All candidates over a full year met each of
the standards in 8 out of the 10 cases. Two of the candidates were "developing"
one sub-standard each. No candidates were found to "not meet" and of the
standards or sub-standards.
Standard 2.a. requires that candidates "integrate the cultural framework for
foreign language standards into their institutional practices," and 2.c. asks
candidates to "integrate knowledge of other disciplines into foreign language
instruction."
Standard 3.a. proposes an "understanding of language acquisition" and 3.b. "a
variety of instructional practices that reflect language outcomes."
Standard 4, in its entirety, deals with using the ACTFL standards in planning
curriculum and instruction.
We feel that the above data show that our candidates are meeting these
standards with a very high rate of success.
ASSESSMENT 5. PEDAGOGICAL AND PROFESSIONAL KNOWLEDGE, SKILLS,
AND DISPOSITIONS.
The assessment of student teaching is bipartite: it includes the student teacher
final term assessment and the assessment of candidate dispositions. The former
has 10 standards (a total of 36 sub-standards) on which candidates are rated.
The latter seeks a rating on nine dispositions.
This assessment aligns with ACTFL standards 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6.
At this time, no data are available for foreign language candidates' dispositions
assessment.
Data for the student teacher final term assessment reports on four student
teachers, rated during Fall 2003 and Spring 2004; from best two worst their
performance is as follows:
Student 1:
Student 2:
Student 3:
Student 4:
100% "met standard"
• met all 36 standards according to both raters.
98% "met standard"
• standard 8.1. marked as met by one rater and developing by the
other.
93% "met standard"
• five standards (3.1., 6.4., 9.2., 10.1. and 10.2) marked as met by
one rater and developing by the other.
82% "met standard"
• six standards (2.2., 6.1, 3.5, 7.2, 8.2 and 9.2.) marked as met by
one rater and developing by the other.
• two standards (5.3. and 5.4.) marked as developing by both
raters.
• All of standard 10 left unrated by one rater but as met by the
other.
No standard was marked as "not met" for any of our candidates by any of the
raters.
4. Interpretation of data as evidence for meeting standards.
Student teaching is undoubtedly the culminating step in a prospective teacher's
education and certainly a fertile setting for the assessment of teaching skills and
dispositions. We feel that the candidates whose data are summarized above
have exceeded the expectations of standards 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6.
ACTFL Standard 2 relates to cultures, literatures and cross-disciplinary concepts.
Standard 1 on the Assessment for deals with knowledge of subject matter. All of
our candidates met the standard.
ACTFL Standard 3 deals with language acquisition theory and instructional
practices. Standards 2, 3, 4, and 7 on the Assessment relate to these concepts.
Our candidates overwhelmingly met those standards.
ACTFL Standard 4 pertains to integration of ACTFL standards into curriculum
and instruction. Although no assessment standard deals with this specifically,
Standard 7 does address instructional planning skills. Our student teachers all
met standard 7.
ACTFL Standard 5 addresses the assessment of language and cultures. The
student teacher assessment standard 8 similarly deals with assessment. All of
our candidates met this standard.
ACTFL Standard 6 references professionalism. Similarly, standard 9 on the
assessment deals with professional commitment and responsibility. All of our
candidates met this standard.
ASSESSMENT 6. EFFECTS ON STUDENT LEARNING.
Assessment 6 deals with candidate effect on student learning. The best evidence
of such assessment would be found in student teacher portfolios, reviewed at the
end of the student teaching experience. The portfolios contain Teacher Work
sample, including an analysis of student learning. Unfortunately, no data is
available at this time for foreign language candidates.
A second measure described in assessment 6 is the assessment of Critical
Performance Indicators taken at the end of Level 1 and Level 2 (Secondary).
This assessment asks for rating on five or six standards.
This assessment is applicable to ACTFL Standards 3, 4 and 5.
The data available are for all candidates in teacher education and not just foreign
language candidates. Although the number of candidates meeting the standards
is high overall, it is not possible to tell, at this time, where foreign language
candidates fall within the data.
Since the data are not able to shed light on the performance of foreign language
students, as opposed to all candidates in teacher education, it is not possible to
determine whether or not our candidates have met the standards referred to.
ASSESSMENT 7. Additional assessment that addresses ACTFL standards
All teaching majors and minors in foreign languages (French, German and
Spanish) are required to essay under test conditions in the department office.
This essay is read and rated by two faculty members who have been trained by
ACTFL in proficiency testing. All students must receive a rating of IntermediateHigh or better BEFORE they may enroll in the department's teaching methods
course (ForLang 4400). Most students complete this assessment just before
taking this course and after most of their other coursework in the language is
completed.
This assessment aligns with ACTFL Standard 1
Data collected over the past three years have been included in Section II. Since
very few students take the written assessment before the OPI, and since some
students to not perform well enough to continue in the program and therefore do
not take the written assessment at all, the numbers of students taking this written
assessment each year is somewhat less than the numbers reported for the OPI
in assessment 2.
• In 2002-2003 a total of 16 students took the written proficiency test as a
prerequisite for the methods course. The average rating was IntermediateHigh with 81% of the ratings at that level.
• In 2003-2004, 18 students took the writing test. The average rating was
between Intermediate-High and Advanced-Low; 53% of the candidates
were in the Advanced levels.
• In 2004-2005, 17 students took the writing test. The average rating was
Intermediate-High. Thirty-five percent of the candidates were
Intermediate-High and 47% were in the Advanced range.
Standard 1.a. calls for candidates to demonstrate a high level of proficiency in
the target language. Standard 1.b. expects students to know the linguistics
elements of the language, and to accommodate for gaps and learn on their own.
Of the total of 51 candidates who took the written proficiency test in the past
three years, 22 of them, or 43%, performed at the Advanced levels; the rest were
Intermediate-High (although four students were allowed to re-test after an original
rating of Intermediate-Mid; these are students who had previously rated
Intermediate-High or better on the OPI).
We feel that our candidates for licensure in French, German and Spanish exceed
the oral proficiency levels stipulated in ACTFL Standard 1.a. and 1.b.
Section V • Use of Assessment Results to Improve Candidate and Program
Performance
Outcomes assessment data have been collected through the University Outcomes
Assessment Model, the Teacher Education scoring rubrics, and feedback and
information from synthesis students. The following are examples of how the results are
being used and intend to be implemented to improve candidate performance as well as
program change.
Student performance—
• Developed the TWS model to provide a more comprehensive approach to
planning, teaching, and assessing student achievement.
• Using the TWS model, strengthened candidates’ abilities to assess, evaluate,
and interpret student data to determine student achievement
• Provided students with more experiences in understanding and using technology
• Provided students increased opportunities for interactive classroom experiences
• Provided students with training and experience in developing an INTASC or
standards-based portfolio with feedback from faculty each semester
• Provided students with more opportunities to learn about, plan for, and teach in
diverse classrooms
Program performance—
• Developed assessment measures used in each level, during clinical practice, and
for assessing pre-service teacher dispositions
• Created a one-hour course in technology rather than trying to imbed it in another
course
• Modified a course that previously focused on multicultural and bilingual education
to give greater emphasis to responding to the diverse needs of students, families,
and communities.
• Created broader emphasis on interpersonal skills by adding a new department
strand to be emphasized in every class
Curriculum development—
• Revised the core curriculum (professional education required courses) to better
align with national standards and student needs
• Identified Critical Performance Indicators (CPI’s) for all levels
• Increased collaboration between and among faculty assigned to the various
levels and across the unit
• Aligned course outcomes and objectives with INTASC standards
• Increased emphasis on interpersonal skills
• Increased emphasis in all courses on candidates’ abilities to assess student
knowledge, skills, and dispositions