Computer Science Education (K-12)

2.1.1: The program shall indicate how it will instruct and assess each candidate's progress and mastery of the Uniform Core Curricula (UCC) in coursework and field experiences, as defined in Rule 6A-5.066(1), Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.) to include:

• Candidate instruction and assessment in the Florida Educator Accomplished Practices (FEAP) across content areas;
• Use of state-adopted content standards provided under s. 1003.41, F.S., and prescribed in Rule 6A-1.09401, F.A.C., to guide curricula and instruction;
• Scientifically-researched and evidence-based reading instruction (satisfied by an approved Reading matrix; see "Technical Assistance for ITP Requirements" document for further instructions);
• Content literacy and mathematical practices;
• Strategies appropriate for instruction of English language learners prescribed in Rule 6A-4.0244, F.A.C.;
• Strategies appropriate for instruction of students with disabilities;
• Strategies to differentiate instruction based on student needs;
• Strategies and practices to support evidence-based content aligned to state standards and grading practices;
• Strategies appropriate for the early identification of students in crisis or experiencing a mental health challenge and the referral of such student to a mental health professional for support;
• Strategies to support the use of technology in education and distance learning; and
• Strategies and practices to support effective, research-based assessment and grading practices aligned to the state's academic standards.

• FEAP Curriculum Map
• Uniform Core Curricula (Other UCC) Curriculum Map (ITP)
• Reading matrix in a Word document (refer to Rule 6A-5.066(2), F.A.C., and the Resources page for the matrix template)
• ESOL matrix (if applicable, required for certain program areas per Rule 6A-5.066(2), F.A.C., to address the 2025 ESOL Standards)

---

The Bachelor of Science in Computer Science Education (K–12) program at the University of South Florida ensures that each candidate is systematically instructed in and assessed on the Uniform Core Curricula (UCC) through an integrated sequence of professional education coursework, specialized computer science coursework, and supervised clinical experiences. Instruction and assessment occur across coursework and are reinforced through early field experiences and a culminating final field experience (internship). Candidate mastery is assessed through course-embedded assignments, performance-based assessments, portfolio artifacts, and supervised evaluations during clinical experiences. Detailed alignment of coursework to the Florida Educator Accomplished Practices (FEAPs) and UCC components is documented in the FEAP Curriculum Map, Uniform Core Curricula Curriculum Map, Reading Matrix, and ESOL Matrix.

Use of State-Adopted Content Standards to Guide Curricula and Instruction
Candidates are instructed in the use of Florida's state-adopted academic standards, including the Florida Computer Science Standards adopted under Rule 6A-1.09401, Florida Administrative Code. Coursework requires candidates to design standards-aligned lesson plans, instructional units, and assessments. This alignment is explicitly addressed in EDE 4504 (Creating and Differentiating Learning Environments) and EDG 4437 (Teaching and Learning Computer Science for Teachers). During clinical experiences, including EDG 4438 (Early Field Experiences) and EDG 4439 (Final Field Experience), candidates apply these standards in K–12 classroom settings through instructional delivery and assessment of student learning.

Content Literacy and Mathematical Practices
Content literacy is addressed through RED 4333 (Content Area Reading), where candidates learn to integrate reading and writing strategies across content areas. Mathematical practices are addressed through MAE 4310 (Teaching Elementary School Mathematics), where candidates develop strategies to support mathematical reasoning and problem solving. Candidates demonstrate mastery through lesson planning, instructional delivery, and implementation during clinical experiences, including EDG 4439.

Strategies Appropriate for the Instruction of English Language Learners
Strategies for instruction of English language learners are addressed through TSL 4080 (ESOL Curriculum and Pedagogy). Candidates develop skills in planning, delivering, and assessing instruction for linguistically diverse learners. These strategies are applied and assessed during clinical experiences.

Strategies Appropriate for the Instruction of Students with Disabilities
Instruction related to students with disabilities is provided through EEX 4070 (Integrating Exceptional Student Education in the Regular Classroom), where candidates learn inclusive practices, accommodations, and modifications. Candidates apply these strategies in coursework and clinical experiences.

Strategies to Differentiate Instruction Based on Student Needs
Differentiated instruction is a core component of EDE 4504 (Creating and Differentiating Learning Environments), where candidates learn to design instruction based on diverse learner needs, including variations in readiness, learning styles, language proficiency, and exceptionalities. Candidates demonstrate mastery through lesson planning and instructional implementation. During EDG 4439 (Final Field Experience), candidates complete a Teacher Work Sample, in which they plan and implement differentiated instruction, analyze student learning data across diverse groups, and adjust instruction based on student needs.

Strategies and Practices to Support Evidence-Based Content Aligned to State Standards and Grading Practices
Candidates are prepared to implement evidence-based instructional strategies aligned to state standards through coursework and clinical experiences. Instructional planning and delivery are addressed in EDE 4504 and EDG 4437, while candidates apply these practices during EDG 4438 and EDG 4439. Candidates demonstrate mastery through lesson design, instructional delivery, and analysis of student performance.

Strategies Appropriate for the Early Identification of Students in Crisis and Referral
Candidates learn to identify students in crisis and apply appropriate referral procedures in EDE 4504 (Creating and Differentiating Learning Environments). These competencies are reinforced in clinical experiences, including EDG 4438 and EDG 4439, where candidates apply these strategies in K–12 settings and demonstrate appropriate response and referral practices.

Strategies to Support the Use of Technology in Education and Distance Learning
Technology integration is embedded throughout the program and is a central component of the computer science coursework sequence, including EDG 4430 through EDG 4437. Candidates learn to integrate digital tools and design instruction for both in-person and online learning environments.

Strategies and Practices to Support Effective, Research-Based Assessment and Grading Practices
Assessment literacy is developed through EDF 4430 (Measurement for Teachers), where candidates learn to design, implement, and analyze formative and summative assessments aligned to learning objectives and state standards. During EDG 4439 (Final Field Experience), candidates complete a Teacher Work Sample, a performance-based assessment in which they plan, implement, assess, and analyze student learning, demonstrating data-driven instructional decision-making and effective grading practices.

Florida Educator Accomplished Practices (FEAPs)
Instruction and assessment of the Florida Educator Accomplished Practices are embedded across professional education coursework and clinical experiences. Candidates demonstrate mastery through lesson planning, instructional delivery, assessment design, reflection, and performance during EDG 4438 and EDG 4439. Candidates are assessed through course assignments, portfolio artifacts, and evaluations by university supervisors and mentor teachers.

---

2.1.2: As part of the initial application process, the program provides information on the courses that will be included in the program.

• Excel spreadsheet

---

2.2.1: The program describes how it will ensure each candidate is prepared to pass each portion of the FTCE prior to program completion, including the General Knowledge examination, the appropriate Subject Area examination(s) and the Professional Education examination.

• Narrative on how the program is preparing candidates to pass the FTCEs

---

2.2.1 Narrative on how the program is preparing candidates to pass the FTCEs

The Bachelor of Science in Computer Science Education (K–12) program at the University of South Florida is designed to ensure that each candidate is prepared to successfully pass all required components of the Florida Teacher Certification Examinations (FTCE), including the General Knowledge (GK) Examination, the Professional Education Test, and the Computer Science K–12 Subject Area Examination.

The program follows a structured sequence in which candidates first complete the professional education coursework, followed by the Computer Science certification coursework. The professional education courses provide the pedagogical knowledge and instructional foundations aligned with the competencies assessed on the FTCE Professional Education Test. Candidates are required to pass the FTCE General Knowledge Examination and the FTCE Professional Education Test prior to participation in the final clinical experience (internship). The FTCE Computer Science K–12 Subject Area Examination is required prior to program completion.

The Computer Science certification coursework (EDG 4430–EDG 4437) is specifically designed and developed to align with the competencies and skills assessed on the FTCE Computer Science K–12 Subject Area Examination. Each course addresses specific FTCE competencies, including computational thinking and problem solving, data types and data structures, programming logic, programming languages, computer systems and networking, historical and social issues in computing, and computer science pedagogy. Through coursework, applied assignments, and assessments, candidates demonstrate mastery of these competencies in preparation for the subject area examination.

In addition to coursework, candidates are provided access to a University of South Florida College of Education AI-supported FTCE preparation platform available to all candidates at no cost. The platform includes structured modules aligned to FTCE competencies, interactive instructional content, practice quizzes, and full-length practice examinations that simulate the FTCE testing environment. The system provides immediate feedback on candidate responses and includes an integrated AI learning assistant that offers explanations, guided support, examples, and step-by-step problem-solving assistance to reinforce understanding and address misconceptions.

The College of Education also provides semester-based FTCE preparation workshops for the General Knowledge and Professional Education examinations. These workshops offer candidates additional opportunities to review content, develop test-taking strategies, and receive faculty guidance prior to taking the FTCE.

Candidate readiness for FTCE examinations is monitored through performance in coursework aligned to FTCE competencies, participation in preparation resources, and faculty advisement. Candidates who do not demonstrate readiness are provided with additional support and targeted remediation to ensure they are prepared to successfully complete all required FTCE examinations prior to program completion.

---

2.2.2: The program provides curriculum maps, showing how the coursework is aligned to the Competencies and Skills for Teacher Certification prescribed in Rule 6A-4.0021, F.A.C., for the following FTCEs:

• Subject Area(s) identified in the program application
• Professional Education

2.3.1: The program describes a plan to remediate program completers who were referred by the employing Florida school district during the first two years immediately following program completion.

• Narrative on how the program is remediating program completers referred to them by the employing Florida school district

---

2.3.1 Narrative on how the program is remediating program completers referred to them by the employing Florida school district

The Bachelor of Science in Computer Science Education (K–12) program at the University of South Florida provides a structured remediation process to support program completers who are referred by their employing Florida school district within the first two years following program completion.

When a program completer is identified by a school district as needing additional support, the College of Education will initiate contact with the completer and, when appropriate, the employing school district to determine the specific areas of need. Based on this information, the program will develop an individualized remediation plan aligned with the Florida Educator Accomplished Practices (FEAP) and the areas identified for improvement.

Remediation support may include targeted professional development, instructional coaching, access to program resources, and guided practice focused on specific areas such as instructional planning, classroom management, assessment, or content-specific pedagogy. Program faculty will work directly with the completer to provide support and ensure that the remediation activities are relevant and effective.

The program also utilizes available data sources, including employer feedback, evaluation results, and Value-Added Model (VAM) data when available, to inform the remediation process and ensure that support is aligned with demonstrated areas of need. Through this structured and responsive approach, the program ensures that completers receive meaningful assistance to improve their instructional effectiveness and support student learning outcomes.

---

2.3.2: The program describes a plan to monitor program completers who were referred by the employing Florida school district during the first two years immediately following program completion.

• Narrative on how the program is monitoring program completers referred to them by the employing Florida school district to ensure the needed assistance outlined in the remediation plan is provided

---

2.3.2 Narrative on how the program is monitoring program completers referred to them by the employing Florida school district

The Bachelor of Science in Computer Science Education (K–12) program at the University of South Florida implements a structured monitoring process to ensure that program completers referred by their employing Florida school district receive the support outlined in their remediation plan during the first two years following program completion.

Following the development of an individualized remediation plan, program faculty maintain ongoing communication with the program completer and, when appropriate, with the employing school district to monitor progress. The program establishes regular check-in points to review the completer's progress toward meeting the goals identified in the remediation plan and to ensure that the support being provided is effective.

Monitoring is conducted through multiple data sources, including feedback from school administrators, formal evaluation results, and available student learning data such as Value-Added Model (VAM) reports. These data are used to assess the completer's improvement in the identified areas of need and to determine whether additional support or adjustments to the remediation plan are necessary.

Program faculty document all monitoring activities and maintain records of communication, support provided, and progress toward remediation goals. If a completer is not demonstrating sufficient progress, the program will revise the remediation plan and provide additional targeted support to ensure continued improvement.

Through ongoing communication, data-informed decision making, and systematic documentation, the program ensures that referred completers receive continuous support and that the assistance outlined in the remediation plan is implemented effectively.

4.1.1: The program describes the annual process for how it will collect aggregated data on program candidates and program completers to use for monitoring purposes on each of the following:

• Impact of p-12 student learning for all employed program completers;
• Program completers' performance as evidenced by the Annual Program Performance Report (APPR);
• Program completer and employer satisfaction surveys;
• Assistance provided to any program completer as a result of the 2-year guarantee;
• Impact of p-12 student learning for all program candidates during field experiences;
• Program candidates' culminating field experience performance evaluations;
• Program candidates' FTCE subtest results at the competency level; and
• Other data results under consideration by the program (if applicable).

• Narrative on how the program will collect aggregated data for each of the bulleted items listed above for both program candidates and completers for monitoring purposes
• Assurance statement that the program will report the satisfaction survey results annually to the Department

---

Impact of P–12 Student Learning for All Employed Program Completers

The program will annually collect and analyze aggregated data on the impact of P–12 student learning for all employed program completers through the use of Value-Added Model (VAM) scores provided by the Florida Department of Education (FLDOE). These data are made available to educator preparation programs through the state's Annual Program Performance Report (APPR) and associated data files.

Florida's VAM is a statistical model that measures the contribution of individual teachers to student learning growth by comparing students' actual performance on statewide assessments to their expected performance. Expected performance is determined using multiple covariates, including prior student achievement, attendance, mobility, English Language Learner status, Students with Disabilities status, gifted status, class size, and other relevant factors. This approach ensures that the resulting scores isolate the educator's impact on student learning while controlling for external variables.

The program will use aggregated VAM data for program completers employed in in-field instructional positions in Florida public and charter schools. These data reflect student learning growth outcomes for P–12 students assigned to program completers and are typically based on the most recent available academic year, as reported by the FLDOE. A VAM score of zero indicates that student performance met expected growth, while positive or negative scores indicate performance above or below expectations, respectively.

On an annual basis, program leadership and faculty will review aggregated VAM results to evaluate the effectiveness of program completers in supporting P–12 student learning. This review will include analysis of trends over time, when available, to determine consistency and stability of completer impact. The program acknowledges that sample sizes may vary and may not represent all completers; however, the data remain a critical external measure of program effectiveness.

The program will publicly report aggregated VAM outcomes as part of its commitment to transparency and continuous improvement. Additionally, results will be shared with program faculty and leadership to inform data-driven decision-making. Findings will be used to identify program strengths and areas for improvement, leading to targeted enhancements in curriculum, clinical experiences, and candidate support systems to improve future completer impact on student learning.

The program also recognizes that VAM data availability may be affected by statewide assessment transitions or emergency conditions (e.g., COVID-19 disruptions or implementation of new assessments such as the Florida Assessment of Student Thinking aligned to B.E.S.T. standards). In such cases, the program will continue to analyze the most recent available data and supplement with additional evidence, when appropriate, to ensure ongoing monitoring of completer effectiveness.

---

Program Completers' Performance as Evidenced by the Annual Program Performance Report (APPR)

The program will annually collect and analyze aggregated data on program completers' performance as evidenced by the Annual Program Performance Report (APPR) issued by the Florida Department of Education (FLDOE) on the eIPEP system. The APPR serves as the state's official accountability system for educator preparation programs and provides a comprehensive evaluation of program effectiveness based on multiple outcome-based performance metrics.

The APPR includes aggregated data on program completers across several key indicators, including placement rate, retention rate, student learning growth, student performance by subgroups, and results of completers' annual evaluations. These metrics are legislatively mandated and are used by the state to determine the overall effectiveness of teacher preparation programs in producing high-quality educators.

Each year, the program will review its APPR summative rating, which is calculated on a scale where scores above 3.5 indicate Full Approval with Distinction, scores between 2.4 and 3.5 indicate Full Approval, and scores below 2.4 may result in possible denial of approval. In addition to the overall rating, the program will analyze disaggregated data across each of the APPR components to identify strengths and areas for improvement.

Program leadership and faculty will engage in a systematic annual review process of APPR results. This process will include examining trends over time, comparing performance across program areas when applicable, and identifying patterns in completer outcomes such as employment, retention, and evaluation results. The program will use these findings to inform continuous improvement efforts, including revisions to curriculum, candidate support structures, and clinical experiences.

APPR results will be shared with program faculty, leadership, and relevant stakeholders to ensure transparency and collective responsibility for program quality. Aggregated APPR data will also be used in conjunction with other program data sources to support data-driven decision-making and continuous program improvement.

Through the intentional use of APPR data, the program ensures ongoing monitoring of completer performance and alignment with state expectations for educator preparation, ultimately supporting improved program outcomes and positive impact on P–12 student learning.

---

Program Completer and Employer Satisfaction Surveys

The program will annually collect and analyze aggregated data on program completer and employer satisfaction through surveys administered in alignment with requirements established by the Florida Department of Education (FLDOE). These surveys are designed to gather feedback on the effectiveness of the program in preparing completers for the teaching profession and to assess employer perceptions of completer readiness and performance in the field.

The program will utilize state-provided survey instruments, when available, or institutionally developed surveys aligned to the Florida Educator Accomplished Practices to ensure that survey items reflect the knowledge, skills, and dispositions expected of effective educators. Surveys will be administered to program completers and their employers during the first year of employment to capture relevant and timely feedback on program effectiveness.

Collected survey data will be aggregated and reviewed annually by program leadership and faculty. The analysis will focus on identifying trends in completer preparedness, instructional effectiveness, classroom management, and professional responsibilities, as well as employer satisfaction with completer performance. Response rates and patterns will also be monitored to ensure data quality and representativeness.

Findings from satisfaction surveys will be used to inform continuous improvement efforts within the program, including modifications to curriculum, clinical experiences, and candidate support structures. The program will also triangulate survey data with other data sources, such as APPR results and candidate performance data, to develop a comprehensive understanding of program effectiveness.

The program will ensure that aggregated satisfaction survey results are reported annually to the Florida Department of Education as required. Additionally, results will be shared with program faculty and stakeholders to support transparency and collaborative program improvement.

Appendix A: Program Completer Satisfaction Survey

Purpose
The purpose of this survey is to gather feedback from program completers regarding the effectiveness of the educator preparation program in preparing them for success in the classroom.

Instructions
Please rate the extent to which the program prepared you in each area using the scale below: 1 = Not Prepared; 2 = Partially Prepared; 3 = Prepared; 4 = Well Prepared

Section I: Instructional Design and Lesson Planning (FEAP 1)

• Planning standards-based instruction aligned to state standards
• Designing lessons that engage students in meaningful learning
• Differentiating instruction to meet diverse student needs
• Using data to plan instruction

Section II: The Learning Environment (FEAP 2)

• Establishing a safe and respectful classroom environment
• Managing student behavior effectively
• Creating a positive and inclusive learning environment

Section III: Instructional Delivery and Facilitation (FEAP 3)

• Delivering clear and accurate content
• Using effective questioning and discussion techniques
• Integrating technology into instruction
• Monitoring student understanding during instruction
• Adjusting instruction based on student needs
• Providing timely and constructive feedback to students

Section IV: Assessment (FEAP 4)

• Designing and using formative and summative assessments
• Interpreting student data to guide instruction

Section V: Continuous Professional Improvement (FEAP 5)

• Reflecting on practice to improve teaching
• Using student data to improve instructional effectiveness
• Engaging in professional learning opportunities

Section VI: Professional Responsibility and Ethical Conduct (FEAP 6)

• Demonstrating professionalism and ethical behavior
• Collaborating with colleagues and stakeholders
• Adhering to school and district policies

Section VII: Program Effectiveness

• Overall, how well did the program prepare you for your first year of teaching?
• How effectively did your field and clinical experiences prepare you for the classroom?
• How prepared did you feel to positively impact student learning?

Open-Ended Questions

1. What aspects of the program were most beneficial?
2. What areas of the program need improvement?
3. What additional support would have better prepared you for your first year of teaching?

Appendix B: Employer Satisfaction Survey

Purpose
The purpose of this survey is to gather feedback from employers regarding the preparedness and effectiveness of program completers.

Instructions
Please rate the performance of the teacher using the scale below: 1 = Unsatisfactory; 2 = Needs Improvement; 3 = Effective; 4 = Highly Effective

Section I: Instructional Design and Lesson Planning (FEAP 1)

• Plans and delivers standards-based instruction
• Designs engaging and rigorous lessons
• Differentiates instruction for diverse learners
• Uses data to guide instructional planning

Section II: The Learning Environment (FEAP 2)

• Maintains a safe and respectful classroom
• Manages student behavior effectively
• Creates a positive and inclusive learning environment

Section III: Instructional Delivery and Facilitation (FEAP 3)

• Demonstrates strong content knowledge
• Engages students in learning
• Uses effective questioning and discussion strategies
• Monitors student understanding
• Adjusts instruction based on student needs
• Provides effective feedback to students

Section IV: Assessment (FEAP 4)

• Uses appropriate assessments to monitor student learning
• Analyzes student data to inform instruction

Section V: Continuous Professional Improvement (FEAP 5)

• Reflects on instructional practice
• Uses data to improve teaching effectiveness
• Engages in professional learning and growth

Section VI: Professional Responsibility and Ethical Conduct (FEAP 6)

• Demonstrates professionalism and ethical conduct
• Collaborates with colleagues and stakeholders
• Adheres to school and district policies

Section VII: Overall Performance

• Overall effectiveness as a first-year teacher
• Impact on student learning
• Readiness for the teaching profession

Open-Ended Questions

1. What strengths does this teacher demonstrate?
2. What areas need improvement?
3. How can the preparation program better prepare future teachers?

---

Assistance Provided to Program Completers as a Result of the 2-Year Guarantee

The program will implement a comprehensive system to monitor, support, and remediate program completers during the two-year period immediately following program completion or initial certification, in accordance with Florida Statute 1004.04.

The program will annually collect and review aggregated data related to program completers who are employed in Florida public or charter schools during the two-year guarantee period. Data sources will include employer feedback, annual evaluation ratings, and formal notifications or referrals from employing school districts.

In alignment with state requirements, any program completer who receives a performance evaluation rating of Developing or Unsatisfactory, or who is identified by the employing school district or charter school as needing additional support, will be provided targeted assistance by the program at no cost to the completer or employer. Support services will be initiated upon request from the employing district or upon identification through program monitoring processes. The program maintains communication protocols with employing districts to ensure timely identification and support of completers requiring assistance.

For each identified completer, the program will collaborate with the employing school district or charter school to develop an individualized professional development plan. This plan will include clearly defined areas of need, specific learning outcomes, targeted support strategies, and a timeline for completion. Support may include, but is not limited to, instructional coaching, mentoring, targeted professional development, classroom observation and feedback, and access to relevant program resources.

The program will document all assistance provided, including the type of support, duration, outcomes, and evidence of improvement. Aggregated data on completer support and remediation will be reviewed annually by program leadership and faculty to identify trends, common areas of need, and opportunities for program improvement.

Findings from the two-year guarantee process will be used to inform continuous improvement efforts within the program, including enhancements to curriculum, clinical experiences, and candidate preparation. This process ensures that the program not only complies with state requirements but also maintains responsibility for the ongoing success and effectiveness of its completers in supporting P–12 student learning.

---

Impact of P–12 Student Learning for All Program Candidates During Field Experiences

The program will annually collect and analyze aggregated data on the impact of P–12 student learning for all program candidates during field experiences through multiple performance-based assessments embedded within clinical practice.

A primary measure of candidate impact on student learning will be the completion of a comprehensive Teacher Work Sample (TWS) during the culminating field experience. The Teacher Work Sample is a performance-based assessment that requires candidates to plan, instruct, assess, and analyze a multi-lesson instructional unit. As part of the TWS, candidates will demonstrate their ability to analyze contextual factors, develop standards-aligned learning goals, design and implement instruction, and utilize pre- and post-assessment data to measure P–12 student learning growth. Candidates are required to analyze student performance data, including subgroup performance when applicable, and provide evidence of student learning gains through data displays and written analysis.

The Teacher Work Sample also requires candidates to engage in instructional decision-making based on student data and to reflect on their effectiveness in promoting student learning. This process ensures that candidates demonstrate the ability to use data to inform instruction, differentiate teaching strategies, and evaluate their impact on student outcomes.

In addition to the Teacher Work Sample, candidates will be evaluated throughout their field experiences and culminating internship by both university supervisors and cooperating teachers. These evaluations are aligned to the Florida Educator Accomplished Practices and include specific indicators related to candidate impact on student learning, including planning standards-based instruction, delivering effective instruction, using assessment data to guide instruction, and demonstrating measurable student learning gains.

Evaluation data from both the Teacher Work Sample and clinical performance assessments will be collected, aggregated, and reviewed annually by program leadership and faculty. The program will analyze candidate performance trends related to student learning impact, including strengths and areas for improvement across cohorts.

Additional data sources may include candidate portfolios, lesson plan evaluations, and formal observation instruments that document candidates' ability to positively influence P–12 student learning during clinical experiences.

Findings from these data sources will be used to inform continuous improvement efforts within the program, including enhancements to coursework, clinical experiences, and candidate support. This systematic approach ensures that candidates are effectively prepared to demonstrate a measurable and positive impact on P–12 student learning prior to program completion.

---

Program Candidates' Culminating Field Experience Performance Evaluations

The program will collect and analyze aggregated data on program candidates' performance during the culminating field experience through multiple formal evaluation instruments aligned to the Florida Educator Accomplished Practices (FEAPs).

During the culminating internship, each candidate will be evaluated using two primary assessment instruments: (1) a Professional Behavior Assessment (Disposition Evaluation) and (2) an Intern Evaluation Form aligned to FEAP indicators. These instruments are designed to assess both instructional performance and professional dispositions to ensure candidates demonstrate the knowledge, skills, and professional behaviors required of effective educators.

Each candidate will be formally evaluated by both the university supervisor and the cooperating teacher at two key points during the semester: midterm and final. This results in a total of four formal evaluations per candidate, ensuring multiple measures and perspectives on candidate performance. Evaluations are conducted using standardized instruments within the program's data management system, CampusFolio, which allows for systematic collection, aggregation, and analysis of candidate performance data.

The Intern Evaluation Form assesses candidate performance across FEAP-aligned domains, including instructional planning, learning environment, instructional delivery, assessment, and professional responsibilities. The Professional Behavior Assessment evaluates candidate dispositions such as professionalism, communication, collaboration, ethical conduct, and responsiveness to feedback.

If a candidate receives a rating below satisfactory on any evaluation, the university supervisor and/or cooperating teacher will initiate an intervention process. This includes a formal meeting with the candidate to discuss areas of concern, provide targeted feedback, and outline specific expectations for improvement. Concerns may relate to instructional performance, professional dispositions, or overall internship progress.

When concerns are identified, the university supervisor or cooperating teacher will complete the appropriate evaluation form (FEAP-based or disposition-based) and notify program leadership. The program will implement a structured support process, including the development of a Student Improvement Plan (SIP). The SIP outlines specific areas for growth, targeted support strategies, measurable outcomes, and a timeline for improvement. Program leadership, the university supervisor, and the cooperating teacher collaborate to support the candidate and monitor progress toward successful completion of the internship.

In addition to formal evaluations, candidates receive ongoing feedback through observations, conferencing, and mentoring throughout the internship experience. This continuous feedback model supports candidate growth and ensures alignment with program expectations.

Aggregated data from all evaluation instruments are reviewed annually by program faculty and leadership to identify trends in candidate performance, including strengths and areas for improvement across FEAP domains and dispositions. These data are used to inform continuous program improvement, including revisions to coursework, clinical experiences, and candidate support structures.

This comprehensive evaluation system ensures that all candidates demonstrate the competencies necessary to positively impact P–12 student learning and meet the expectations of the teaching profession prior to program completion.

Appendix C: Intern Evaluation Form (FEAP-Aligned)

Purpose
The purpose of this evaluation is to assess program candidates' performance during the culminating field experience based on the Florida Educator Accomplished Practices (FEAPs).

Instructions
Please rate the candidate's performance in each area using the scale below: 1 = Unsatisfactory; 2 = Developing; 3 = Effective; 4 = Highly Effective

Section I: Instructional Design and Lesson Planning (FEAP 1)

• Planning standards-based instruction aligned to Florida standards
• Designing lessons that engage students in meaningful learning
• Differentiating instruction to meet diverse student needs
• Using student data to plan instruction
• Developing clear and measurable learning objectives

Section II: The Learning Environment (FEAP 2)

• Establishing a safe and respectful classroom environment
• Managing student behavior effectively
• Creating a positive and inclusive learning environment
• Promoting student engagement and respect

Section III: Instructional Delivery and Facilitation (FEAP 3)

• Demonstrating accurate and appropriate content knowledge
• Using effective instructional strategies to engage learners
• Using questioning and discussion techniques to promote critical thinking
• Monitoring student understanding during instruction
• Adjusting instruction based on student needs
• Providing timely and constructive feedback to students

Section IV: Assessment (FEAP 4)

• Designing and implementing formative and summative assessments
• Using assessment data to guide instructional decisions
• Analyzing student performance to determine learning gains
• Demonstrating measurable impact on student learning

Section V: Continuous Professional Improvement (FEAP 5)

• Reflecting on teaching practice to improve effectiveness
• Using feedback from supervisors and cooperating teachers
• Demonstrating professional growth over time
• Engaging in professional learning opportunities

Section VI: Professional Responsibility and Ethical Conduct (FEAP 6)

• Demonstrating professionalism and ethical behavior
• Collaborating with colleagues, families, and stakeholders
• Maintaining reliability, attendance, and punctuality
• Adhering to school and district policies

Section VII: Overall Performance

• Overall effectiveness in the internship experience
• Readiness to enter the teaching profession
• Ability to positively impact P–12 student learning

Comments
Strengths:
Areas for Improvement:
Additional Feedback:

Appendix D: Professional Behavior (Disposition) Assessment

Purpose
The purpose of this assessment is to evaluate candidate professional dispositions and behaviors expected of educators in accordance with program expectations and professional standards.

Instructions
Please rate the candidate's dispositions using the scale below: 1 = Unsatisfactory; 2 = Developing; 3 = Effective; 4 = Highly Effective

Section I: Professionalism

• Demonstrates ethical behavior and integrity
• Maintains appropriate professional appearance
• Demonstrates responsibility and accountability
• Exhibits reliability, punctuality, and preparedness

Section II: Communication

• Communicates effectively with students
• Communicates professionally with colleagues and supervisors
• Demonstrates appropriate verbal and written communication skills
• Responds appropriately to feedback and guidance

Section III: Collaboration

• Works effectively with cooperating teachers and school staff
• Participates in team meetings and school activities
• Demonstrates respect for diverse perspectives
• Engages in collaborative problem-solving

Section IV: Commitment to Student Learning

• Demonstrates care and respect for all students
• Maintains high expectations for student success
• Supports diverse learning needs
• Promotes a positive learning environment

Section V: Reflective Practice

• Demonstrates openness to feedback
• Reflects on teaching and professional practice
• Identifies areas for growth and improvement
• Applies feedback to improve performance

Section VI: Professional Responsibility

• Adheres to school, district, and program policies
• Maintains confidentiality
• Demonstrates appropriate use of technology and resources
• Exhibits professional judgment in decision-making

Overall Disposition Rating

• Overall professional behavior and readiness for the teaching profession

Comments
Strengths:
Areas for Improvement:
Additional Feedback:

---

Program Candidates' FTCE Subtest Results at the Competency Level

The program will annually collect and analyze aggregated data on program candidates' Florida Teacher Certification Examinations (FTCE) performance at the competency level. These data will be obtained through the Pearson candidate performance reporting system, which provides detailed score reports for each FTCE examination, including overall performance and disaggregated results by individual competencies.

The program will review candidate performance across all required FTCE components, including the General Knowledge Test, Professional Education Test, and relevant subject area examinations. Each FTCE assessment is aligned to specific competencies established by the Florida State Board of Education, including competencies directly aligned to the Florida Educator Accomplished Practices (FEAPs), particularly within the Professional Education Test.

The Pearson reporting system provides diagnostic, competency-level data that identify candidate strengths and areas for improvement. In addition, the system provides comparative data that allows the program to analyze candidate performance relative to statewide averages on each competency. These comparisons enable the program to identify areas where candidates perform above or below state benchmarks and evaluate program effectiveness in preparing candidates for certification requirements.

The program will monitor both first-attempt and subsequent FTCE performance to identify trends in candidate progression and readiness for certification. Aggregated data will be reviewed annually by program faculty and leadership, with particular attention to competencies where candidate performance falls below state averages or program expectations.

Findings from FTCE data will be used to inform continuous improvement efforts, including alignment of coursework to FTCE competencies, revisions to instructional strategies, and enhancements to candidate support systems. The program will ensure that coursework is intentionally aligned to FTCE competencies, including targeted preparation for the Professional Education Test and the Computer Science K–12 subject area examination.

In addition, the program will provide targeted support to candidates based on competency-level performance, which may include focused review modules, faculty support, practice assessments, and structured preparation experiences. These supports are designed to address identified areas of need and improve candidate success on FTCE examinations.

Through the systematic collection, analysis, and application of FTCE competency-level data, the program ensures that candidates are effectively prepared to meet state certification requirements and demonstrate the knowledge and skills necessary for success in the classroom.

---

Other Data Results Under Consideration by the Program

The program will utilize additional data sources within its assessment system, CampusFolio, to monitor program effectiveness and support continuous improvement. CampusFolio is an assessment system developed and utilized by the University of South Florida College of Education and is used to systematically collect, manage, and analyze candidate and program data.

One key data source is the Internship Placement Diversity Report. The program ensures that each candidate is placed in diverse school settings during field experiences and the culminating internship. When placements are entered into CampusFolio, detailed information is recorded, including university supervisor, cooperating teacher, grade level, and school site information. The system incorporates embedded school demographic data, allowing the program to track candidate placements across multiple diversity indicators, including student gender, ethnicity, English Language Learner status, and socioeconomic status as indicated by free and reduced lunch data.

CampusFolio generates reports that allow the program to monitor the diversity of candidate placements across cohorts. The system also flags placements that do not meet program expectations for diversity, allowing program leadership to make adjustments to ensure that candidates have equitable and comprehensive clinical experiences across diverse educational settings.

In addition to placement data, the program will analyze candidate progression and completion data, including retention rates, successful completion of program milestones, and time to program completion. These data are used to monitor candidate progression through the program and identify potential barriers to completion.

The program will also review key assessment data collected within CampusFolio, including performance on major program assessments such as the Teacher Work Sample, clinical evaluations, and course-based assessments aligned to program standards. These data provide additional evidence of candidate readiness and performance across multiple points in the program.

Aggregated data from these additional sources will be reviewed annually by program faculty and leadership to identify trends, ensure program effectiveness, and inform continuous improvement efforts. These data will be used in conjunction with other required program metrics to provide a comprehensive understanding of candidate performance and program outcomes.

Table: Program Assessment and Data Collection System Overview

Assurance Statement

The program assures that completer and employer satisfaction survey results will be collected, aggregated, analyzed, and used to inform continuous program improvement. Findings will be shared with program faculty and stakeholders, and summary results will be made publicly available on the program's website. In addition, all required survey data and reports will be submitted annually to the Florida Department of Education through the eIPEP system in accordance with state requirements and reporting timelines.

4.2.1: The program describes the process or plan for monitoring:

• Candidate's performance on the Uniform Core Curricula (UCC) in coursework and field experiences;
• Florida Teacher Certification Examination (FTCE) results to ensure each candidate possesses the competencies and skills relevant for professional practices and work characteristics in his or her certification subject area;
• Candidate's impact on student learning growth; and
• Other program expectations (if applicable).

• Narrative on how the program will monitor candidates' performance on the UCC
• Narrative on how the program will monitor the FTCE results for each candidate
• Narrative on how the program will monitor candidates' impact on student learning growth
• Narrative on how the program will monitor other program expectations (if applicable)

All narrative responses above should include descriptions of the following:

• Who is responsible for this monitoring?
• What specific data elements are used for this monitoring?
• What data sources are used?
• How often does the monitoring occur and where is this information stored by the program?

---

Candidate Performance on the Uniform Core Curricula (UCC) in Coursework and Field Experiences

The program implements a comprehensive and systematic process to monitor candidate performance on the Uniform Core Curricula (UCC) across both coursework and field experiences. Candidate performance is assessed through aligned coursework, key program assessments, and clinical evaluations to ensure mastery of UCC competencies and readiness for professional practice.

Responsibility for Monitoring:
Course instructors are responsible for evaluating candidate performance in UCC-aligned coursework through key assignments and course-based assessments. University supervisors and cooperating teachers are responsible for evaluating candidate performance in field experiences and the culminating internship using FEAP-aligned evaluation instruments. Program leadership, including the program coordinator and academic advisors, are responsible for overseeing the monitoring process, reviewing aggregated data, and ensuring appropriate interventions and program improvements are implemented.

Data Elements:
Data collected include scores on key assignments aligned to UCC competencies, rubric-level ratings, overall proficiency levels, and candidate performance trends across courses. Additional data elements include field experience evaluation ratings, including Intern Evaluation Forms and Professional Behavior Assessments, which measure candidate performance across FEAP domains such as instructional planning, learning environment, instructional delivery, assessment, and professional responsibility. These data provide both quantitative and qualitative evidence of candidate performance on UCC-aligned competencies.

Data Sources:
Data are collected through candidate submission of key assignments and assessments within the CampusFolio system, as well as through formal field experience evaluations completed by university supervisors and cooperating teachers. CampusFolio serves as the central repository for all candidate performance data, including coursework assessments, clinical evaluations, and program-level key assessments. Field experience data sources include FEAP-aligned evaluation instruments administered at multiple points during the internship, as described in Section 4.1.1.

Frequency and Data Storage:
Monitoring of candidate performance occurs continuously throughout each academic term as candidates complete coursework and field experiences. Course-level data are collected and entered into CampusFolio during each term, while field experience evaluations are conducted at midterm and final during the internship. All data are stored, maintained, and aggregated within CampusFolio, which allows for real-time tracking and longitudinal analysis of candidate performance.

Program faculty and leadership review candidate performance data at the end of each academic term and on an annual basis to identify trends, strengths, and areas for improvement. Candidates who receive scores below satisfactory on key assessments or evaluations are identified through CampusFolio and referred for additional review. The program coordinator and academic advisor collaborate with the candidate to develop targeted support strategies, which may include remediation, additional coursework, or structured intervention plans.

Findings from UCC performance data are used to inform continuous program improvement, including revisions to curriculum, instructional practices, and candidate support systems. This systematic monitoring process ensures that candidates demonstrate proficiency in UCC competencies and are effectively prepared to meet the expectations of the teaching profession.

---

Program Monitoring of FTCE Results for Each Candidate

The program implements a comprehensive and systematic process to monitor candidate performance on the Florida Teacher Certification Examinations (FTCE) to ensure that each candidate demonstrates the competencies and skills required for professional practice within their certification area.

Responsibility for Monitoring:
Program faculty are responsible for supporting candidate preparation within coursework aligned to FTCE competencies. The program coordinator and academic advisors are responsible for monitoring individual candidate FTCE performance, reviewing results, and identifying candidates who may require additional support. Program leadership oversees the analysis of aggregated FTCE data and ensures that findings are used to inform program improvement.

Data Elements:
Data collected include overall FTCE scores, pass/fail status, first-attempt and subsequent attempt results, and detailed competency-level performance data for each examination, including the General Knowledge Test, Professional Education Test, and relevant subject area examinations. Additional data elements include candidate performance trends across testing attempts and comparison data relative to statewide performance on individual competencies.

Data Sources:
FTCE data are obtained through the Pearson candidate performance reporting system, which provides detailed individual and aggregated score reports, including competency-level diagnostic data. These data are reviewed alongside program records and candidate progress data maintained within CampusFolio.

Frequency and Data Storage:
Monitoring of FTCE performance occurs on an ongoing basis as candidates complete required examinations throughout the program. Individual candidate results are reviewed upon receipt of score reports, and aggregated data are analyzed at the end of each academic term and annually. FTCE performance data and related candidate records are stored and maintained within CampusFolio and program data systems to support longitudinal tracking and analysis.

Candidates who do not meet required performance levels or who demonstrate weaknesses in specific competency areas are identified through this monitoring process. The program coordinator and academic advisors work collaboratively with candidates to provide targeted support, which may include focused review sessions, faculty guidance, practice assessments, and additional preparation resources aligned to FTCE competencies.

Aggregated FTCE data are reviewed annually by program faculty and leadership to identify trends in candidate performance and areas where program improvements may be needed. Findings are used to inform alignment of coursework to FTCE competencies, enhance instructional strategies, and strengthen candidate support systems. This systematic monitoring process ensures that candidates are prepared to successfully meet certification requirements and demonstrate the knowledge and skills necessary for effective teaching.

---

Program Monitoring of Candidates' Impact on Student Learning Growth

The program implements a comprehensive and systematic process to monitor candidates' impact on P–12 student learning growth during field experiences and the culminating internship. This process ensures that candidates demonstrate the ability to positively influence student learning through data-driven instruction and reflective practice.

Responsibility for Monitoring:
University supervisors and cooperating teachers are primarily responsible for monitoring candidates' impact on student learning during field experiences and the internship. They evaluate candidate performance through direct observation, assessment of instructional practices, and review of student learning data. Program faculty support this process through coursework and assessment design, while the program coordinator and academic advisors oversee the monitoring process, review aggregated data, and ensure that appropriate interventions and program improvements are implemented.

Data Elements:
Data collected include candidate performance on Teacher Work Samples, including pre- and post-assessment results, analysis of student learning gains, subgroup performance data, and evidence of instructional decision-making. Additional data elements include evaluation ratings related to student learning impact on FEAP-aligned Intern Evaluation Forms, including indicators such as use of assessment data, monitoring student progress, and demonstration of measurable student learning gains. Qualitative data, such as reflective narratives and supervisor feedback, are also collected to provide evidence of candidate impact on student learning.

Data Sources:
Data are collected through multiple sources, including Teacher Work Samples submitted in CampusFolio, formal evaluations completed by university supervisors and cooperating teachers, and candidate coursework and clinical artifacts. CampusFolio serves as the central repository for all candidate assessment data, including student learning evidence, evaluation scores, and supporting documentation. Field experience evaluations and observation data are collected at multiple points during the internship, as described in Section 4.1.1.

Frequency and Data Storage:
Monitoring occurs continuously throughout field experiences and the culminating internship. Teacher Work Sample data are collected during the internship, while formal evaluations by university supervisors and cooperating teachers are conducted at midterm and final. Ongoing observations and feedback sessions provide additional monitoring throughout the clinical experience. All data are stored, maintained, and aggregated within CampusFolio, allowing for continuous tracking and longitudinal analysis of candidate performance.

Candidates who demonstrate limited impact on student learning, as evidenced by assessment data or evaluation ratings, are identified through this monitoring process. University supervisors and cooperating teachers, in collaboration with the program coordinator and academic advisors, provide targeted support and intervention, which may include additional coaching, focused feedback, and structured improvement plans.

Aggregated data on candidate impact on student learning are reviewed at the end of each academic term and annually by program faculty and leadership to identify trends, strengths, and areas for improvement. Findings are used to inform continuous program improvement, including enhancements to coursework, clinical experiences, and candidate support systems. This systematic monitoring process ensures that candidates are prepared to effectively support and improve P–12 student learning outcomes.

---

Program Monitoring of Other Program Expectations (if applicable)

The program implements a comprehensive and systematic process to monitor additional program expectations beyond coursework, certification, and student learning outcomes. These expectations include candidate professional dispositions, adherence to program requirements, progression through program milestones, and participation in diverse clinical experiences. This monitoring process ensures that candidates demonstrate the professional behaviors, readiness, and experiences required for success in the teaching profession.

Responsibility for Monitoring:
Course instructors, university supervisors, and cooperating teachers are responsible for monitoring candidate professional behaviors and performance within coursework and field experiences. Program faculty support monitoring through assessment design and evaluation of candidate progress. The program coordinator and academic advisors are responsible for overseeing candidate progression, reviewing data, identifying concerns, and ensuring that appropriate interventions and supports are implemented.

Data Elements:
Data collected include professional disposition ratings, attendance and participation records, adherence to program requirements, completion of program milestones, and candidate progression data. Additional data elements include placement information related to field experiences, including school demographics, grade levels, and diversity indicators such as student ethnicity, English Language Learner status, and socioeconomic status. These data provide evidence of candidate readiness, professional conduct, and exposure to diverse learning environments.

Data Sources:
Data are collected through multiple sources within the CampusFolio system, including Professional Behavior (Disposition) Assessments, field experience and internship placement records, and candidate progression tracking tools. CampusFolio incorporates embedded school demographic data, allowing the program to monitor placement diversity and ensure candidates experience a range of educational settings. Additional data sources include course records, advisor reports, and program-level tracking systems.

Frequency and Data Storage:
Monitoring occurs continuously throughout the program as candidates progress through coursework, field experiences, and key program milestones. Disposition assessments and field experience data are collected during each term, with formal evaluations conducted at midterm and final during the internship. Placement data are entered at the time of assignment and monitored throughout the clinical experience. All data are stored, maintained, and aggregated within CampusFolio, which serves as the central system for tracking candidate performance and program outcomes.

CampusFolio generates reports and flags when candidates do not meet program expectations, including concerns related to professional dispositions, progression, or placement diversity. Candidates identified through this process are referred for additional review. The program coordinator and academic advisors collaborate with faculty, university supervisors, and cooperating teachers to provide targeted support, which may include advising, remediation, or structured intervention plans.

Aggregated data related to these program expectations are reviewed at the end of each academic term and annually by program faculty and leadership to identify trends and ensure program effectiveness. Findings are used to inform continuous program improvement, including enhancements to candidate support systems, clinical placement processes, and program policies. This systematic monitoring process ensures that candidates meet all program expectations and are fully prepared for successful entry into the teaching profession.

---

4.2.2: The program describes the process or plan for providing remediation for candidates not meeting program performance expectations.

• Narrative on process/plan for providing remediation for candidates in the three areas specified in Criterion 4.2.1

---

Process for Providing Remediation for Candidates Not Meeting Program Performance Expectations

The program implements a comprehensive and systematic remediation process to support candidates who do not meet program performance expectations in coursework, clinical practice, certification requirements, or professional dispositions. This process is aligned with best practices in educator preparation and is designed to provide early identification, targeted intervention, and continuous monitoring to ensure candidate success.

Identification of Candidates Needing Remediation:
Candidates are identified for remediation through ongoing monitoring systems described in Section 4.2.1, including performance on UCC-aligned coursework, FTCE results, impact on student learning, and professional expectations. Candidates who receive ratings below satisfactory on key assessments, clinical evaluations, FTCE competencies, or disposition assessments are flagged within the CampusFolio system or identified by faculty, university supervisors, or cooperating teachers.

Responsibility for Remediation:
The remediation process is a collaborative effort involving program faculty, university supervisors, cooperating teachers, the program coordinator, and academic advisors. University supervisors and cooperating teachers play a critical role in identifying performance concerns during field experiences, while program faculty identify concerns within coursework. The program coordinator oversees the remediation process, ensures consistency, and monitors candidate progress.

Development of a Remediation Plan:
Once a candidate is identified, a formal remediation process is initiated. A meeting is conducted with the candidate, university supervisor, cooperating teacher (if applicable), program coordinator, and/or academic advisor to review areas of concern. Following this meeting, an individualized remediation plan (e.g., Student Improvement Plan) is developed.

The remediation plan includes:

• Clearly defined areas of deficiency aligned to UCC competencies, FEAPs, or FTCE competencies
• Specific, measurable goals for improvement
• Targeted support strategies and required activities
• Resources and supports to be provided (e.g., coaching, tutoring, additional coursework, targeted practice)
• A defined timeline for completion and progress monitoring

This structured approach ensures that remediation is targeted, measurable, and aligned to program expectations.

Implementation and Monitoring of Remediation:
The candidate's progress is monitored continuously throughout the remediation period. University supervisors and cooperating teachers conduct ongoing observations and provide feedback during field experiences, while faculty monitor progress in coursework. Regular meetings are held with the candidate to review progress toward established goals.

Progress monitoring includes:

• Follow-up evaluations and observations
• Review of updated assessment data and assignment performance
• Documentation of candidate improvement within CampusFolio

Monitoring occurs at defined intervals, as outlined in the remediation plan, and continues until the candidate demonstrates satisfactory performance.

Data Sources and Storage:
All remediation-related data, including evaluation results, remediation plans, progress documentation, and outcomes, are stored within CampusFolio and program records. These data are used to track individual candidate progress and to inform program-level analysis of remediation trends.

Outcomes and Continuous Improvement:
Upon completion of the remediation plan, candidate performance is formally reviewed. Candidates who demonstrate improvement and meet program expectations are returned to good standing. Candidates who do not meet expectations may be subject to additional remediation, reassignment of field placement, or dismissal from the program, in accordance with program policies.

Aggregated remediation data are reviewed annually by program faculty and leadership to identify patterns in candidate performance and areas where additional program support may be needed. Findings are used to inform continuous program improvement, including revisions to coursework, clinical experiences, and candidate support systems.

4.3.1: The program describes the process or plan, and the evidence used to monitor the quality of the following:

• Coursework;
• Connections between program coursework and field experiences;
• Observation and feedback provided to the program candidates by the university/college supervisors and cooperating teachers; and
• Training provided to both university/college supervisors and cooperating teachers who supervise program candidates.

• Narrative on how the program will monitor the quality of its coursework, connections between coursework and field experiences, observations and feedback, and training provided to postsecondary faculty supervisors and cooperating teachers
• Types of evidence the program will collect to monitor the quality of its program

---

4.3.1 Monitoring Program Quality

Monitoring the Quality of Coursework, Clinical Connections, Supervision, and Training

The program implements a comprehensive and systematic process to monitor the quality of coursework, the alignment between coursework and field experiences, the effectiveness of observation and feedback provided to candidates, and the training of university supervisors and cooperating teachers. This process ensures program coherence, high-quality clinical experiences, and continuous program improvement.

Monitoring the Quality of Coursework

The program monitors the quality of coursework through the systematic review of candidate performance on key assessments, course-based assignments, and alignment to the Uniform Core Curricula (UCC), Florida Educator Accomplished Practices (FEAPs), and FTCE competencies. Coursework quality is evaluated through candidate performance data, including rubric-based assessments, course completion rates, and progression data collected within the CampusFolio system.

Program faculty and the program coordinator review aggregated course-level data at the end of each academic term and annually to identify trends in candidate performance. Particular attention is given to courses aligned to FTCE competencies and professional preparation standards. Findings are used to inform revisions to course content, instructional strategies, and assessment design to ensure that coursework effectively prepares candidates for clinical practice and certification requirements.

Monitoring Connections Between Coursework and Field Experiences

The program ensures strong alignment between coursework and field experiences by embedding clinical applications and performance-based assessments, such as the Teacher Work Sample, within the curriculum. Candidate performance in both coursework and clinical settings is analyzed to ensure coherence between theoretical preparation and practical application.

Program faculty, university supervisors, and cooperating teachers collaborate to monitor candidate ability to apply knowledge and skills learned in coursework within field experiences. Data sources include course assessments, field evaluations, and candidate artifacts submitted through CampusFolio.

Research emphasizes that high-quality teacher preparation programs require strong alignment between coursework and clinical experiences to improve candidate effectiveness and preparedness. The program uses this aligned data to identify gaps between instruction and practice and to make targeted improvements to coursework and clinical design.

Monitoring Observation and Feedback Provided to Candidates

The program monitors the quality of observation and feedback provided to candidates through structured evaluation processes during field experiences and the culminating internship. University supervisors and cooperating teachers conduct formal observations and provide written and verbal feedback using standardized, FEAP-aligned evaluation instruments.

Candidates receive multiple observations at defined intervals (e.g., midterm and final), along with ongoing informal feedback. Research indicates that frequent observations combined with actionable feedback improve candidate effectiveness and instructional practice.

Program leadership reviews evaluation data, feedback quality, and candidate progress to ensure that feedback is consistent, timely, and aligned to program expectations. Candidate performance trends and evaluation data are analyzed to assess the effectiveness of supervision and to inform improvements in observation practices.

Monitoring Training of University Supervisors and Cooperating Teachers

The program ensures the quality of supervision by providing training and clear expectations for university supervisors and cooperating teachers. Training includes orientation to program requirements, evaluation instruments, FEAP alignment, and effective mentoring practices.

Research shows that cooperating teachers require specific training to effectively mentor candidates and provide meaningful feedback. The program monitors the effectiveness of this training through evaluation data, candidate feedback, and supervisor performance.

Program leadership reviews feedback from candidates and supervisors to assess the consistency and quality of mentoring and evaluation practices. Findings are used to improve training content, clarify expectations, and strengthen collaboration between the university and partner schools.

Types of Evidence Collected to Monitor Program Quality

The program collects multiple sources of evidence to monitor the quality of coursework, clinical experiences, supervision, and training, including:

• Candidate performance on key assessments and course-based assignments
• Teacher Work Sample results and analysis of student learning
• Field experience and internship evaluation data (FEAP-aligned)
• Observation records and feedback documentation from supervisors and cooperating teachers
• Candidate progression and completion data
• FTCE competency-level performance data
• Completer and employer satisfaction survey results
• Placement data, including diversity of clinical experiences
• Feedback on supervisor and cooperating teacher effectiveness
• Documentation of training participation for supervisors and cooperating teachers

All evidence is collected, stored, and analyzed within CampusFolio and program data systems to support ongoing monitoring and continuous improvement.