Skip to contentSkip to navigation

Get the latest information about Fall 2021 Repopulation and COVID-19. Before coming to campus, take the COVID-19 Daily Screening.

Standard 1 Aspect B

Standard 1b: Evidence shows that, by the time of program completion, candidates exhibit knowledge, skills, and abilities of professional educators appropriate to their target credential or degree, including: Learners; learning theory, including social, emotional, and academic dimensions; and application of learning theory


Data Sources & Analysis:

Data Source 1 CalAPA Leadership Cycle 2 (Rubric 2.1)
Data Source 2 CalAPA Leadership Cycle 1 (Rubric 1.6)
Data Source 3 CalAPA Leadership Cycle 3 (Rubric 3.1)
Data Source 4 P12 PASC Program AAQEP Candidate Self-Assessment

Data Source 1

CalAPA Leadership Cycle 2 (Rubric 2.1) 
After the first semester of the PASC program, candidates exhibit content, pedagogical, and professional knowledge through their fieldwork and coursework experiences that culminate with the submission of CalAPA Leadership Cycle 2. 

In the Preliminary Administrative Services Credential (PASC), a key program framework for cultivating aspiring school leaders who work with adults to impact student learning (academic dimensions) and well-being (social, emotional and behavioral dimensions) is a deep understanding of Adult Learning Theory through an asset-based lens. Focusing on meeting adults where they enter professional learning includes viewing diversity in thought, culture, and traits as positive assets. Candidates also work towards explaining the relationship between different forms of professional collaboration at the school and how these practices have impacted student learning and/or well-being, providing evidence from observations, documentation, surveys, student work, and/or staff consultations. 

The focus of Rubric 2.1 is to evaluate candidates’ ability to describe and analyze the role of current practices of professional collaboration at the school as the current practices relate to student learning and/or well-being. This includes working towards a critique on how current professional collaboration practices at their fieldwork school is supported by, or refutes, evidence-based adult learning theory, processes and/or research and includes an outline of implications for facilitating a community of practice at the school.

Perspective Captured from Data Source:
Assessment of candidate performance is evaluated by CTC selected, Pearson calibrated, and CA Administrative Services Credentialed faculty and school/district/county educational leaders involved in overseeing or preparing school administrators. 

Rationale for using Data Source:
Rubric 2.1 is aligned to assessment of candidate performance of the following AAQEP 1b aligned CAPE: 2C) Knowing and applying research-based principles of adult learning theory and understand how teachers develop across the phases of their careers, from initial preparation and entry, through induction, ongoing learning, and accomplished practice.

Definition of Success for Each Element:
Candidate success would be measured at Level 2 or Level 3 as proficiency with the CTC is currently at a Level 2; however, Fresno State faculty instruct toward all 5 levels with an emphasis on Level 3 or 4. In addition, maintaining mean scores above the state average by rubric will be considered as an element of success criteria.

Displays of Analyzed Data:

Table 1

CalAPA Leadership Cycle 2, Rubric 2.1 for program level and state-wide mean scores by submission year

Submission Year Program State-wide Program Comparison
2018-2019

2.8
>2 yes

(n=72)

2.7

+.1
+ yes

2019-2020

3.8
>2 yes

(n=24)

2.7

+1.1
+ yes

2020-Year to Date 

3.2
>2 yes

(n=16)

2.5

+.7
+ yes

Link to Full Dataset:  CalAPA Date AY 2018-2019, AY 2019-2020, YTD 2020-2021

Interpretation of Data:
Data from Rubric 2.1 highlights that candidates currently perform at and above the current criteria for success of 2 and above, and consistently perform above the state average. Based on the mean rubric scores, evidence shows that candidates are understanding and using knowledge associated with adult learning theory by describing and analyzing the role of current professional collaboration practices at their fieldwork school and how these practices relate to student learning and/or well-being. 

Candidate mean score results on this rubric also indicate a need for faculty to support candidate knowledge and skills to surpass the expectation beyond a Level 3. Faculty need to plan instruction and obtain supporting resources to assist candidates in explaining the relationship between different forms of professional collaboration at the school and how these practices have impacted student learning and/or well-being, providing evidence from observations, documentation, surveys, student work, and/or staff consultations. Additionally, candidates need support on critiquing professional collaboration at their respective fieldwork schools, citing evidence-based adult learning processes and/or research that supports or refutes the practices and outlining implications for facilitating a community of practice at the school.  

Data Source 2

CalAPA Leadership Cycle 1 (Rubric 1.6)
After the 2nd semester of the PASC program candidates exhibit knowledge, skills, and abilities through their fieldwork and coursework experiences culminating with the submission of CalAPA Leadership Cycle 1.  

The second data source is from the CalAPA Leadership Cycle 1, Rubric 1.6. The focus of Rubric 1.6 is to assess candidates’ understanding and application of learning theory for the development of a school vision, mission, and goals-aligned plan informed by a data driven equity audit of statewide indicators of student learning and well-being. The vision, mission, and plan should include strategies to support equitable school improvement. Candidates are also measured on their ability to create a contextually responsive plan including identification of strengths and consideration of needs of the adult learners for buy-in and professional learning for meaningful plan implementation.

Perspective Captured from Data Source:
Assessment of candidate performance is evaluated by CTC selected, Pearson calibrated, and CA Administrative Services Credentialed faculty and school/district/county educational leaders involved in overseeing or preparing school administrators. 

Rationale for using Data Source:  
Rubric 1.6 is aligned to assessment of candidate performance of the following AAQEP 1b aligned CAPEs elements: 1A.1) Developing a student-centered vision of teaching and learning based on the understanding that the school’s purpose is to increase student learning and wellbeing; 3C.1) Using principles of positive behavior interventions, conflict resolution, and restorative justice and explain to staff and community members how these approaches support academic achievement, safety, and well-being for all students, and; 5B.3) Recognizing discriminatory practices, signs of trauma, manifestations of mental illness, and promote culturally responsive, positive and restorative strategies to address diverse student and school needs. Thus, Rubric 1.6 has been chosen as an appropriate measure for the demonstration of candidate demonstration of knowledge of learners; learning theory, including social, emotional, and academic dimensions; and application of learning theory.

Definition of Success for Each Element:
Candidate success would be measured at Level 2 or Level 3 as proficiency with the CTC is currently at a Level 2; however, Fresno State faculty instruct toward all 5 levels with an emphasis on Level 3 or 4. In addition, maintaining mean scores above the state average by rubric will be considered as an element of success criteria.

Displays of Analyzed Data:

Table 2

CalAPA Leadership Cycle 1, Rubric 1.6 for program level and state-wide mean scores by submission year

Submission Year Program State-wide Program Comparison
2018-2019

3.0
>2 yes

(n=63)

2.9

+.1
+ yes

2019-2020

3.6
>2 yes

(n=27)

3.0

+.6
+ yes

2020-Year to Date 

2.8
>2 yes

(n=10)

3.1

-.3
+ no

Link to Full Dataset: CalAPA Date AY 2018-2019, AY 2019-2020, YTD 2020-2021

Interpretation of Data:
Three years of data in relation to Rubric 1.6 highlight that program candidates are overall meeting the current program expectation of 2 and above and are mostly performing above the state-wide average in this area. Based on the trend of data from year one to year two, we are confident that once the full data set for year three is available that it will indicate a result above the state-wide average.

Current evidence of rubric mean score trends show that, overall candidates, are able to develop plans for equitable school improvement for an identified student group well informed by the findings of an equity gap analysis broadly associated with reasonable contributing systemic or institutional factors that considers both the needs of adult learners for buy-in and professional learning for implementation and the potential impact of student learning and well being.

Although candidates are performing at current expectations, further focus on how to be more contextually responsive with the developed problem statement and more clearly aligned to the school’s vision, mission, and/or goals would help increase candidate levels of success. Evidence also indicates that candidates need more assistance on how to more apparently provide research-based evidence in support of their proposed strategies and their implementation for improving student achievement and/or well-being for the specified student group and school. These areas of focus with strengthen PASC program goals in the areas regarding planning for student-centered equitable improvement founded in appropriate respective student and adult learning theories (including social, emotional, and academic dimensions) and the application of these theories.

Data Source 3

CalAPA Leadership Cycle 3 (Rubric 3.1)

After the last semester of the PASC, program candidates are to exhibit the knowledge and skills necessary to support learners; learning theory, including social, emotional, and academic dimensions; and demonstrate the application of learning theory.  

The third data source is from the CalAPA Leadership Cycle 3, Ruric 3.1 which measures the candidate’s ability to describe and analyze the current role teacher coaching, observation, and instructional feedback play at the fieldwork site in preparation for a coaching cycle with a volunteer teacher. Candidates also describe how teachers participate in the selection and purpose of the instructional feedback to meet the unique needs of the volunteer teacher and build trust.

Perspective Captured from Data Source:
Assessment of candidate performance is evaluated by CTC selected, Pearson calibrated, and CA Administrative Services Credentialed faculty and school/district/county educational leaders involved in overseeing or preparing school administrators. 

Rationale for using Data Source:
Rubric 3.1 is aligned to assessment of candidate performance of the following AAQEP 1b aligned CAPEs elements: 2B.3) Supporting and promoting effective instruction and a range of instructional methods and supporting practices that address the diverse educational needs of all students; 2C.1) Using adult learning theory to design, facilitate, and implement various strategies that guide and support staff members in improving their practice; 2D.1) Using knowledge of P-12 student academic content standards and appropriate instructional practices to observe classroom planning and instruction in accordance with LEA policy and practices; 3C.1) Using principles of positive behavior interventions, conflict resolution, and restorative justice and explain to staff and community members how these approaches support academic achievement, safety, and well-being for all students, and; 5B.1) Recognizing any possible institutional barriers to student and staff learning and use strategies that overcome barriers. Thus, Rubric 3.1 has been chosen as an appropriate measure for the demonstration of candidate demonstration of knowledge of learners; learning theory, including social, emotional, and academic dimensions; and application of learning theory.

Definition of Success for Each Element:
Candidate success would be measured at Level 2 or Level 3 as proficiency with the CTC is currently at a Level 2; however, Fresno State faculty instruct toward all 5 levels with an emphasis on Level 3 or 4. In addition, maintaining mean scores above the state average by rubric will be considered as an element of success criteria.

Displays of Analyzed Data:

Table 3

CalAPA Leadership Cycle 3, Rubric 3.1 for program level and state-wide mean scores by submission year

Submission Year Program State-wide Program Comparison
2018-2019

3.1
>2 yes

(n=35)

3.0

+.1
+ yes

2019-2020

2.5
>2 no

(n=37)

2.7

-.2
+ no

2020-Year to Date 

3.3
>2 yes

(n=23)

2.7

+.6
+ yes

Link to Full Dataset:CalAPA Date AY 2018-2019, AY 2019-2020, YTD 2020-2021

Interpretation of Data:
Three years of data in relation to Rubric 3.1 highlight that program candidates are overall meeting the current program expectation of 2 and above and are overall performing just above the State-wide average, with the exception of year two.

Current evaluation of performance based on mean scores highlight the ability of candidates to clearly describe and analyze the current role teacher coaching, observation, and instructional feedback play at the fieldwork site in preparation for a coaching cycle with a volunteer teacher. In addition, data highlights that candidates are able to succinctly articulate plans for and implications of each step of the teacher coaching cycle and observation based on the volunteer teacher’s professional experience, current teaching assignment, and past experience in relation to coaching.

Current student mean scores also demonstrate an area of need in a candidate’s ability to describe how teachers can participate in the selection and purpose of the instructional feedback to meet the unique needs of the volunteer teacher and build trust. Candidates also need further faculty support on how to discuss the ways relevant evidence-based practices and adult learning theory cultivate coaching-based practices for ongoing teacher development to benefit student learning and well being. 

Data Source 4

P12 PASC Program AAQEP Candidate Self-Assessment

Perspective Captured from Data Source:
Candidate retrospective self-report of AAQEP Standard 1a at each semester end interval. 

Specific Elements of Data Source Using:
1b: I understand adult learners and learning theory, including social, emotional, and academic dimensions, and can apply these in practice as an aspiring leader.

Rationale for using Data Source:
The P12 PASC Program AAQEP Candidate Self-Assessment was designed to capture student reflection and growth after each semester in the program in alignment with AQQEP aspects. The results capture one cohort (program graduates in May 2021) over the 3-semester program using a retrospective design to pilot the self-assessment and obtain initial data. This will now be used at the end of each semester as an additional program assessment data point used for reflection and continuous improvement.

Definition of Success for Each Element:
Candidate success would be measured by 1) average of 3 or higher for each semester and 2) evidence of mean growth from semester 1 to semester 3. 

Displays of Analyzed Data:

Table 4

Table of AAQEP Standard 1b Candidate Self-Assessment Response Means for Cohort 0 (Pilot)

Question/Standard Semester 1 (N=14)  Semester 2  (N=14) Semester 3 (N=14)  Mean Growth
(AAQEP 1b) I understand adult learners and learning theory, including social, emotional, and academic dimensions, and can apply these in practice as an aspiring leader.

4.29

>yes

4.36

>yes

4.36

>yes

+.07

+yes

Link to Full Dataset:P12 PASC Program AAQEP Candidate Self-Assessment Descriptives Data for Standard 1 by Semester 

Interpretation of Data:
Overall, student reported mean scale scores for Standard 1b show some growth. Evidence demonstrates that candidates feel they understand adult learners and learning theory, including social, emotional, and academic dimensions, and can apply these in practice as an aspiring leader at a high levels (between a 4 and 5) which exceeds our success criteria of level 3. 

Next Steps for 1b
Based on the analysis of the four data point interpretation sections, the following next steps are recommended: 

Next steps 1b
1. Ongoing realignment of the program re-design approved for Fall 2021 start and theoretical foundations and application in practice. 2. Intentional opportunities for rubric centered peer to peer feedback embedded into the courses based on the integration of theory and research-based approaches to the respective CalAPA 3. Faculty Learning Community focus on reflection and development of theoretical frameworks and the intentional connections between seminal theories and application in practice.

Next Steps Narrative:
In each data point, evidence exists that candidates are able to demonstrate the current level of proficiency of the knowledge and skills required for aspiring administrators. Specifically, the Fresno State PASC program is supporting knowledge, skills, and abilities of professional educators regarding learners; learning theory, including social, emotional, and academic dimensions; and the application of learning theory evident within candidate’s course work and field work experiences as evidenced across data points. 

To support our cycle of continuous improvement for Standard 1b, the program will focus on three key areas as noted in the Table above. Over the past several years faculty have engaged in an intense realignment process to intentionally backwards map the California Administrator Performance Expectations and CalAPA skills, which includes deeper alignment to several theories and concepts, such as Adult Learning Theory, Universal Design for Learning, Differentiated Professional Learning, and Culturally Responsive Teaching and Leading, among other areas.  The revised course outcomes, scope and sequence, and embedded fieldwork expectations will be implemented starting with the Fall 2021 cohorts. 

Aspect C →