Assessment

5 Assessment of Candidate Effect on Student Learning

Teacher Work Sample

1. Description and Use.
The Teacher Work Sample is designed to measure the degree to which the students of
mathematics student teachers learn what they are taught. This assessment requires the
mathematics student teacher to create a unit plan that consists of a minimum of three
lesson plans. The first lesson plan includes a pretest that assesses student knowledge of
the material to be learned. The intervening lesson plan(s) must include, among other
required elements, formative assessments that determine students progress toward
achieving unit learning outcomes. The concluding lesson plan includes a posttest that
measures students increased learning on the covered material. Between the two, the
mathematics student teacher uses the aggregated data from the pretest to design or modify
instruction to teach the intended material to his or her students. The Teacher Work Sample
also requires the student teacher to evaluate his or her assessments against a quality
control standard to determine the degree to which the assessments are fair, accurate,
consistent, and free from bias.

2. Alignment with Standards.
The Teacher Work Sample is aligned with NCTM standards 3 and 5. A table showing the
relationship between NCTM standards and individual assessment elements is located in the
attachment for this assessment.

3. Brief Analysis of Data Findings.
The Teacher Work Sample assessment was revised during the summer of 2012. Since that
time, thirteen mathematics education candidates completed the Teacher Work Sample in
the 20122013 and 20132014 assessment cycles. Of these candidates:
Twelve of the thirteen Teacher Work Sample assessments were determined to be either
Outstanding or Competent;
One was judged to be Outstanding (95 100% mastery), and eleven were judged to be
Competent (80 94% mastery) on this assessment. 1 One candidates performance was
determined to be Emerging Competence (65 79% mastery). 2
The aggregate score for the assessment elements aligned with NCTM standards
included in the Teacher Work Sample was 3.44 on a 4.0 scale (86% mastery).

4. Interpretation of how Data Provides Evidence for Meeting NCTM Standards.
The Teacher Work Sample is designed to determine the degree to which students learn as a
result of the instruction provided by mathematics education student teaching candidates.
Because
The Teacher Work Sample is aligned with elements of NCTM Standards 3 and 5; and

1
Competent for the TESOL education Teacher Work Sample assessment is defined as a minimum of 80% mastery
of the assessment element; Outstanding is defined as a minimum of 95% mastery of the assessment element. The
following footnote explains how competence levels are calculated.
2
Aggregate assessment instrument scores are used to define expected scoring levels for each quality descriptor.
For this assessment, with 52 possible points (13 elements; 4 scoring levels), Outstanding is defined as a score of 47-
52; Competent is defined as a score of 36-46; Emerging Competence is defined as 32-35; Needs improvement is
defined as a score between 0 and 31. Range medians are used for summative descriptions of mastery levels for an
assessment. Range medians are calculated by taking the midpoint of each scoring range and dividing by the total
number of points possible in the assessment, as follows. Outstanding: 49.4/52 = 95% mastery; Competent: 41.6/52
= 80% mastery; Emerging Competence: 33.8/52 = 65% mastery. The Needs Improvement competence level is
defined as any score below 32, or < 65% mastery.

1
 because
Two years of aggregated data show that twelve of thirteen mathematics education
candidates achieved a minimum rating of Competent (80% mastery) on their Teacher
Work Sample Assessments (the thirteenth candidates TWS was rated at 71.1%
mastery); and because
The aggregate score for each of the assessment elements aligned with NCTM standards
exceeded 85% mastery on the Teacher Work Sample Assessment;

The evidence suggests that mathematics education candidates are meeting NCTM standards
as indicated.

5. Assessment 5 Attachments
4.5a Standards Alignment Chart
4.5b NCTM Standards Data Table
4.5c Teacher Work Sample Assignment Description and Assessment Rubric
4.5d Data Table

2
 Attachment 4.5

Assessment 5Assessment of candidate effect on student learning
Teacher Work Sample

Attachment 4.5a
Standards Alignment Chart

NCTM Teacher Work Sample
Standard Assessment Rubric Element
Standard 3.f NCTM Standards: Formative and summative assessments
Standard 5.a NCTM Standards: Students conceptual understanding
Standard 5.b NCTM Standards: Student engagement in developmentally appropriate activities
Standard 5.c NCTM Standards: Documentation of student learning

Attachment 4.5b
Assessment Data

Table A: Mathematics Education Teacher Work Sample Assessment Data, Disaggregated by NCTM
Standard and 20122013 (N=6) and 20132014 (N=7) Assessment Cycles.
Emerging Competent
NCTM Assessment Needs Improvement Outstanding
Competence 80-94%
Standard Cycle < 65% Mastery
65-79% Mastery Mastery
95-100% Mastery
N % N % N % N %
2012-2013
0 0% 0 0% 83.3% 16.7%
Standard 3.f N % N % N % N %
2013-2014
0 0% 0 0% 42.9% 57.1%
N % N % N % N %
2012-2013
0 0% 14.3% 57.1% 16.7%
Standard 5.a N % N % N % N %
2013-2014
0 0% 0 0% 42.9% 57.1%
N % N % N % N %
2012-2013
0 0% 0 0% 66.7% 33.3%
Standard 5.b N % N % N % N %
2013-2014
0 0% 0 0% 42.9% 57.1%
N % N % N % N %
2012-2013
0 0% 0 0% 50.0% 50.0%
Standard 5.c N % N % N % N %
2013-2014
0 0% 0 0% 28.6% 71.4%

3
 Attachment 4.5c

Mathematics Education2012 NCTM Standards

Teacher Work Sample

Assignment description. The premise behind this assignment is that teachers need to not
only be deliberative and purposeful in designing instruction that enables students to
meet learning standards and goals, but they also need to be able to document the degree
to which that happens in their classrooms as a result of their teaching. Given that
understanding, the purpose of this assignment is to provide pre-service teachers with a
deliberate, step-by-step process by which they design a unit of instruction along with an
assessment plan designed to measure the growth in student learning that results from
the planned instruction.

Tasks and procedures

1. Design an instructional sequence that includes a unit plan, an assessment plan,
and a minimum of four lesson plans, which must be part of the unit plan
instructional sequence.
2. Design and administer a pre-assessment to students.
3. Aggregate and analyze data from the pre-assessment.
4. Develop and/or adjust instructional plans based on pre-assessment data.
5. Deliver instruction.
6. Design and administer a post-assessment to students.
7. Aggregate and analyze data.
8. Construct a data display showing both pre- and post-assessment data.
9. Write a reflective commentary on the process, focusing how data were used to
adapt and modify instruction to meet student-learning deficiencies identified in
the assessment process.
10. Provide evidence that you have carried out your plans and have implemented
them successfully.
NOTE: You must provide evidence that the following NCTM standards have been met
as a result of your planning and teaching within the context of your Teacher Work
Sample:
NCTM Standard 5a Verify that secondary students demonstrate conceptual
understanding; procedural fluency; the ability to formulate, represent, and solve
problems; logical reasoning and continuous reflection on that reasoning; productive
disposition toward mathematics; and the application of mathematics in a variety of
contexts within major mathematical domains.
NCTM Standard 5b Engage students in developmentally appropriate mathematical
activities and investigations that require active engagement and include mathematics-
specific technology in building new knowledge.
Instructional Plan. Considerations and required elements:
1. Student characteristics. Discuss the characteristics of students in your classroom
that must be addressed in your instructional and assessment plans. Include
factors such as age, gender, race/ethnicity, special needs,
achievement/developmental levels, unusual cultural or community
characteristics, languages other than English, and other factors that should be
considered in the design of instruction and assessment. This description must
express your knowledge of diversity, specifically how the students in your class
differ in their development and approaches to learning.

4
 2. Unit Plan. Include the lesson plans that include the pre-test and the post-test.
Also include 2 or more additional lesson plans that show how instruction was
implemented using pre-test data.
3. Lesson Plans. A minimum of 4 lesson plans that include the elements described
in the assessment plan instructions. The lessons may be spread over more than 4
class periods and/or days.
4. Reflection and self-analysis. Use the lesson plan post-lesson self-analysis
questions to guide your reflections and responses.
a. Provide examples of instructional decision making based on pre-assessment
data and on students learning or responses during the lessons. Analyze the
feasibility of implementing the strategies you chose based on student pre-test
data.
b. Describe the instructional strategies and activities that contributed most to
student learning. Describe why you think these strategies and/or activities
were effective in helping your students reach the learning objectives of the
lesson(s).
c. Describe what you believe were the two greatest barriers to learning for your
students in this unit. Focus only on factors you can control.
d. Discuss the assessment options you considered for your Teacher Work
Sample, and provide rationale for the assessment instruments you chose to
develop.
e. Describe how you utilized your pre- and post-test assessment results to guide
future instruction.

Assessment Plan.
NCTM Standard 3f Plan, select, and implement formative and summative
assessments reflecting mathematical knowledge, skills, understanding, and performance
that are essential for all students
1. Pre-test. Considerations and required elements:
a. aligned with unit plan standards and learning objectives;
b. appropriate for the level and subject area;
c. clear criteria for assessment of student performance. If the assessment of
student performance is subjective, a rubric must be developed that includes
the essential elements of the performance, and descriptors of unacceptable,
acceptable, and exemplary levels for each element.
d. Data analysis and description. The pre-test data must be aggregated and
displayed in a form that can be readily analyzed and described, and from
which conclusions can be drawn about student understanding and mastery of
the learning outcomes.

NOTE: the pre-test must be included as part of the TWS instructional

sequence.

2. Formative Assessment. Considerations and required elements:

a. informal assessments designed to monitor student learning and mastery of
knowledge and skill outcomes during instruction.
b. formative assessments may include questions and answers (checking for
understanding), games, guided and individual practice assignments, among
others.

5
 NOTE: The formative assessment element of the assessment plan must be
included as a separate, stand-alone element in the assessment plan.

3. Post-test. Considerations and required elements:

a. To ensure that accurate conclusions can be drawn about the degree to which
student learning has increased as a result of the instructional intervention,
the post-test must be either the same as or equivalent to the pre-test.
b. Data analysis and description. The post-test data must be aggregated and
displayed in a form that can be compared to pre-test data, allowing for ready
analysis and description of the differences. NOTE: see Reporting Results,
below.

NOTE: The post-test must be included in a lesson plan in the TWS

instructional sequence.

4. Quality control. The last section of the assessment plan requires an analysis of
the planned assessments to ensure that they are fair, accurate, consistent, and
free from bias.
a. Fairness. Assessments are fair when they assess what students have been
taught, and when the assessments and scoring criteria are accurately
described and clearly understood. Respond to the following prompts:
1.) Using alignment charts or curriculum maps, document how students have
been taught the knowledge and/or skills upon which they will be tested.
2.) Using assessment descriptions and scoring rubrics, document how
students understand what is expected of them on the assessments in your
assessment plan.
b. Accuracy. Assessments are accurate when they measure what they are
designed to measure. Respond to the following prompts:
1.) Using alignment charts or maps, document how assessments are aligned
with unit goals and standards and learning objectives.
2.) Demonstrate that the complexity of the assessment is similar to the
standard(s) with which it is aligned, and that the cognitive demands and
skill requirements are similar.
3.) Demonstrate that the level of effort or degree of difficulty is consistent
with the standard(s) and is reasonable for students at this
age/developmental level.
c. Consistency. Assessments are consistent when they produce dependable
results or results that would remain constant on repeated trials. Respond to
the following prompt:
1.) using your observations of students performances in similar situations,
and/or by using comparisons of results from assessments administered in
similar circumstances, document the degree to which the results from this
assessment are consistent with these other findings.
d. Freedom from bias. Assessments are free of bias when contextual
distractions are removed from the testing situation and when they are free of
racial and ethnic stereotypes, poorly conceived language and task situations,
and other forms of insensitivity that might interfere with student
performance. Respond to the following prompts:
1.) Describe the conditions under which the assessment is administered,
taking into consideration

6
 a.) extraneous noise levels, lighting conditions, any condition that would
cause student discomfort, and the functionality of any equipment
necessary for the assessment situation.
b.) technical considerations, such as proper instructions, well-worded
questions, and appropriate materials reproduction.
2.) Document the review process that determined that the assessment is free
of racial and ethnic bias, stereotypes, poorly written or ungrammatical
test questions, unfair task situations, and other forms of bias.

Reporting Results Documentation of Candidate Effect on Student Learning.

NCTM Standard 5c Collect, organize, analyze, and reflect on diagnostic, formative,

and summative assessment evidence and determine the extent to which students
mathematical knowledge, skills, understandings, and performance have increased as a
result of their instruction

Focusing question. How will you organize, describe and present your Teacher Work
Sample data to demonstrate the degree to which your instruction resulted in improved
student learning?

The purpose of the culminating data display is to document the growth that occurred in
student learning as a result of your instruction. It might be helpful to remember your
audience as you plan and develop this section. Initially, your audience is your student-
teaching supervisor who will use the information you present here to assign a final grade
to your Teacher Work Sample. Ultimately, however, your audience might well be a
principal to whom you present this work as part of your application for a teaching
position. One of the things the principal wants to know about you and all prospective
candidates is whether or not you have the ability to produce expected student learning
outcomes in the students entrusted to you. The work you do here might well be your
best opportunity to separate yourself from other applicants and demonstrate you are the
best-of-the-best, prepared for the teaching position you really want. Proceed
accordingly.

Minimum expectations for this section: data must be included in a table or graph for
each students pre- and post-test results. Pre- and post-test results may be reported in
separate data tables, but your ultimate goal is to document the extent to which student
learning improved as a result of your instruction, so your task is to present the results
thoroughly, yet as clearly and concisely as possible. Required elements include:
a. Pre/post test instrument(s);
b. Data table(s) comparing pre-test scores and post-test scores for individual
students;
c. Summary statistical tables and/or charts showing:
(1) Initial percent of mastery for individual students on the pre-test;
(2) Final percent of mastery for individual students on the post-test;
(3) Average degree of improvement for all students from pre-test to post-test;
(4) Number and percentage of students whose learning increased, stayed the
same, or decreased.

NOTE: The following two pages show you how to set up your tables in Microsoft Excel in
order to produce the charts necessary for your data display.

7
 Period 1
Students Pre-Test Post-Test
A 7 7
B 4 11 This page shows how to construct display charts in
Microsoft Excel from your pre- and post-test data.
C 5 8
D 6 8
E 6 11
F 4 11
G 5 10
H 5 10
I 7 12
J 2 4
K 7 11
L 5 10
M 3 8
N 4 8
O 4 9
P 3 11
Q 4 11
R 1 6
S 4 7
T 5 9

AVG. 4.5 9.1

Period 2
Students Pre-Test Post-Test
A 4 7
B 7 10
C 2 7
D 5 7
E 3 5
F 6 10
G 5 9
H 5 9
I 2 11
J 2 6
K 4 8
L 6 8
M 4 10
N 6 11
O 6 7
P 4 10
Q 1 6
R 2 6
S 3 8
T 2 7

AVG. 3.9 8.1

8
This page shows you how to construct simple data tables to (a) create a
chart comparing class averages for pre- and post-tests, and (b) create a
chart showing the percent of class mastery for both pre- and post-tests
for both classes.

Period 1 Period 2
Pre-test Avg 4.5 3.9
Post-Test Avg 9.1 8.1

Period 1 Period 2
% Pre-Test Mastery 37.90% 32.90%
% Post-Test Mastery 75.80% 67.50%

Revised June 21, 2012

2012 NCTM Standards

9
 Mathematics Education Teacher Work Sample Design and Assessment Rubric

Instructional Plan
Needs Improvement 1 Emerging Competence 2 Competent 3 Outstanding 4
Student characteristics are Student characteristics are All student characteristics The student characteristics
not included in the included in the instructional relevant to the planned unit section is thorough and
instructional plan and/or plan, but the correlation of instruction are included. complete; consideration of
Student the characteristics are not with unit standards, goals, Student characteristics are students special learning
Characteri well considered or written. and learning activities could considered in terms of unit needs is highly correlated
stics be stronger. standards, goals, and with the standards, goals,
learning activities. and learning activities of the
instructional unit.

The unit plan is poorly The unit plan needs The unit plan exceeds the
developed and does not additional work to meet the The unit plan meets the expectations of the Unit
address the expectations expectations and expectations of the Unit Plan Design and Assessment
Unit Plan
and requirements of the requirements of the Unit Plan Design and Assessment Rubric.
Unit Plan Design and Plan Design and Assessment Rubric.
Assessment Rubric. Rubric.
The lessons plans are Lesson plans meet minimal The lesson plans in the TWS The TWS lesson plans
poorly developed; Teacher expectations of the Lesson instructional sequence meet exceed the expectations of
Work Sample expectations Plan Development and the expectations of the the Lesson Plan
are not included or are Design Rubric and/or the Lesson Plan Development Development and Design
Lesson
Plans poorly developed. additional TWS and Design Rubric, and Rubric; the additional TWS
expectations are addressed include all required elements are thoughtfully
but are under developed. elements for the Teacher and carefully designed to
Work Sample. high standards of quality.

The reflection and self The reflection and self The reflection and self The reflection and self
evaluation section is not evaluation section is evaluation section is well evaluation section is
Reflection included or is poorly included, but not all self developed; all LP self exemplary for the depth of
and developed. answer questions are answer questions are thought and the level of
Self addressed and/or the addressed in the response. analysis of the instructional
Evaluation analysis could be developed and assessment issues
in more depth. involved in the TWS
process.

Assessment Plan
Needs Improvement 1 Emerging Competence 2 Competent 3 Outstanding 4
The pretest and posttest Pre and posttest The pretest posttest The pre and posttests are
assessments are assessments are included in assessments are well skillfully developed and are
haphazardly developed; the assessment plan; the developed, are aligned with highly correlated with
little thought has been alignment between lesson objectives, and are lesson objectives. The
Pretest given to alignment with assessments and lesson appropriate for the alignment between
Posttest lesson objectives; objectives is weak and/or knowledge and/or skills assessments and lesson
assessments are not the assessments may not be being assessed. objectives is strong and
appropriate for the appropriate for the clear.
knowledge and/or skills knowledge and/or skills
being assessed. being assessed.
Formative assessments are Formative assessments are Formative assessments are Formative assessments are
not included in the LP included in the lesson, but well developed; essential skillfully developed and
and/or are not well there are too few for the questions are written out in planned. A wide variety of
developed; little breadth or depth of the the LP; a variety of assessments are included,
correlation exists between knowledge and/or skills assessments are included, with consideration given for
Formative
Assessment assessments and lesson being taught; the each related to the students of varying abilities
objectives. correlation between instructional objectives. and circumstances. All
assessments and lesson assessments are highly
objectives could be correlated with
stronger. instructional objectives.

10
Assessment Plan, cont.
Needs Improvement 1 Emerging Competence 2 Competent 3 Outstanding 4
Some quality control Each quality control Each quality control Each quality control element
elements are missing element is addressed in the elementfairness, is addressed in depth; it is
and/or some elements are assessment plan. Some accuracy, consistency, and evident that considerable
poorly or incompletely elements are freedom from biasis thought and effort has gone
Quality
addressed. underdeveloped; additional included in the assessment into ensuring that the
Control
thought and reflection is plan. Thoughtful assessments are fair,
necessary to ensure high consideration is given to the accurate, consistent, and
quality assessments. quality and appropriateness free from bias and are of
of each assessment. high quality.
The candidate demonstrates The candidate demonstrates The candidate demonstrates the The candidate demonstrates
limited ability to use data to potential ability to improve ability to improve student significant ability to improve
improve student learning. student learning. Data tables learning. Data tables comparing student learning. Data tables
Data tables comparing post comparing posttest to pre posttest to pretest learning comparing posttest to pretest
Documenta test to pretest learning test learning results indicate results indicate learning results indicate
tion of results indicate 1. 2549% of students scores 1. 5074% of students scores 1. 75100% of students scores
improved from pretest to improved from pretest to
Candidate 1. < 25% of students scores improved from pretest to
posttest; AND posttest; AND
Effect on improved from pretest to posttest; AND 2. average improvement for all 2. average improvement for all
Student posttest; OR 2. average improvement for students exceeded 15% or students exceeded 20% or
Learning 2. average improvement for all students exceeded 10%, final class mastery exceeded final class mastery exceeded
all students was less than or final class mastery 75% on posttest. 85% on posttest.
10% or final class exceeded 50% on posttest.
mastery < 50% on
posttest.
Significant elements are Most elements are included, All required elements in this All required elements are
missing in this section. Data tables and descriptions section are included. Data included; additional
Data tables and are confusing and/or not tables and descriptions are elements document an
descriptions are not clear; consistently clear; group clear and appropriate; extended analysis of
Reporting students pretest and summary statistics are students pretest and post studentlearning data.
Results posttest scores are not included in the final report. test scores are paired; Group summary statistics
paired or are not displayed group summary statistics include results of analyses
appropriately. Group are appropriate and well to determine significance of
summary statistics are displayed. paired pre and posttest
missing. data.

NCTM STANDARDS
Needs Improvement Emerging Competence Competent Outstanding
The candidate does not The candidate plans The candidate plans and The candidate plans and
plan, select, and formative and summative implements formative and implements formative and
implement formative and assessments, but his or her summative assessments summative assessments
Formative summative assessments. implementation does not reflecting essential reflecting essential
and consistently reflect mathematical knowledge, mathematical knowledge,
summative essential mathematical skills, understanding, and skills, understanding, and
assessments knowledge, skills, performances. performances, and uses the
NCTM 3f understanding, and resulting data to modify
performances. instruction to improve
learning outcomes for all
students.
The candidates students The candidates students The candidates students The candidates students
do not demonstrate have limited understanding demonstrate conceptual demonstrate a highly
conceptual understanding and fluency in understanding and fluency developed conceptual
and fluency in mathematical procedures; in mathematical procedures; understanding and fluency in
Students mathematical procedures; their use of logical they use logical reasoning to mathematical procedures;
they do not use logical reasoning to solve solve problems; they have they consistently use logical
conceptual
reasoning to solve problems;
understandi reasoning to solve problems is inconsistent; productive dispositions
they have enthusiastic
ng problems or have they have productive toward mathematics and
dispositions toward
NCTM 5a productive dispositions dispositions toward reflect on their work; they mathematics and regularly
toward mathematics. mathematics, but do not apply mathematics in a reflect on their work; they
consistently reflect on their variety of contexts within apply mathematics in a
work. major mathematical variety of contexts within
domains. major mathematical domains.

11
NCTM STANDARDS, CONT.
Needs Improvement Emerging Competence Competent Outstanding
The candidate does not The candidates The candidate engages The candidate regularly and
Student engage students in mathematical activities and students in developmentally consistently engages
developmentally investigations are not appropriate mathematical students in developmentally
engagement
appropriate mathematical consistently activities and investigations appropriate mathematical
in
developmen activities and developmentally that require active activities and investigations
investigations. appropriate, or do not engagement and include that require the active
tally
require active engagement mathematicsspecific engagement of all students
appropriate
activities of all students. technology in building new and includes mathematics
knowledge. specific technology in
NCTM 5b
building new knowledge.

The candidate does not The candidate collects The candidate collects, The candidate
collect summative formative, and summative organizes, analyzes, and systematically collects,
assessment evidence or assessment evidence, but reflects on diagnostic, organizes, analyzes, and
determine the extent to does not consistently use formative, and summative reflects on diagnostic,
Documentat which students the resulting data to assessment evidence and formative, and summative
ion of mathematical knowledge, determine the extent to determines the extent to assessment evidence and
student skills, understandings, which students which students uses the resulting data to
learning and performance have mathematical knowledge, mathematical knowledge, modify instructional
NCTM 5c increased as a result of skills, understandings, and skills, understandings, and processes and activities to
his or her instruction. performance have performance have increased enable all students to meet
increased as a result of his as a result of his or her expected learning
or her instruction. instruction. outcomes.

Revised June 21, 2012

2012 NCTM Standards

12
 Attachment 4.5d
Indiana Wesleyan University
Mathematics Education Teacher Work Sample Design and Assessment Rubric
Data Table

NOTE: The data reported below represent a twoyear summary of student performance on the Teacher Work Sample
assessment for the 20122013 and 20132014 assessment cycles (N=13). See Table A, above, for data for individual
cohort years.

Instructional Plan
Needs Improvement Emerging Competence Competent Outstanding
< 65% Mastery 65-79% Mastery 80-94% Mastery 95-100% Mastery
N=1 N=5 N=7
Student Characteristics N=0
7.7% 38.5% 53.8%
N=1 N=6 N=6
Unit Plan N=0
7.7% 46.2% 46.2%
N=1 N=5 N=7
Lesson Plans N=0
7.7% 38.5% 53.8%
Reflection and N=2 N=4 N=7
N=0
Self Evaluation 15.4% 30.8% 53.8%

Assessment Plan
Needs Improvement Emerging Competence Competent Outstanding
< 65% Mastery 65-79% Mastery 80-94% Mastery 95-100% Mastery
Pretest N=6 N=7
N=0 N=0
Posttest 46.2% 53.8%
Formative N=1 N=7 N=5
N=0
Assessment 7.7% 53.8% 38.5%
Quality N=5 N=8
N=0 N=0
Control 38.5% 61.5%
Documentation of
N=5 N=8
Candidate Effect on N=0 N=0
38.5% 61.5%
Student Learning
N=5 N=8
Reporting Results N=0 N=0
38.5% 61.5%

NCTM STANDARDS
Needs Improvement Emerging Competence Competent Outstanding
< 65% Mastery 65-79% Mastery 80-94% Mastery 95-100% Mastery
Number and percentage of mathematics education candidates scoring at each competence level for NCTM
Formative and Standard 3.f (N=13)
summative assessments
N=8 N=5
NCTM 3f N=0 N=0
61.5% 38.5%
Number and percentage of mathematics education candidates scoring at each competence level for NCTM
Students conceptual Standard 5.a (N=13)
understanding
N=1 N=7 N=5
NCTM 5a N=0
7.7% 53.8% 38.5%
Student engagement in Number and percentage of mathematics education candidates scoring at each competence level for NCTM
developmentally Standard 5.b (N=13)
appropriate activities N=1 N=7 N=5
N=0
NCTM 5b 7.7% 53.8% 38.5%
Number and percentage of mathematics education candidates scoring at each competence level for NCTM
Documentation of Standard 5.c (N=13)
student learning
N=5 N=8
NCTM 5c N=0 N=0
38.5% 61.5%

13