Fresno Assessment of Student Teachers: Education Specialist Mild-Moderate Support Pilot

A MANUAL FOR TEACHER CANDIDATES
SITE VISITATION PROJECT
TEACHING SAMPLE PROJECT
Spring 2022
FRESNO ASSESSMENT OF STUDENT TEACHERS: EDUCATION SPECIALIST MILD-MODERATE SUPPORT PILOT

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Table of Contents ii
Letter from FAST Coordinator iv
FAST Alignment with TPEs v
Site Visitation Project (SVP)
Overview 1
General Directions and Preparation for the Project 2
Parts of the Project 3
Part 1 – PLANNING 3
Part 2 – IMPLEMENTATION 5
Part 3 – REFLECTION 5
Evaluation of the Project 6
Rubrics 7
PLANNING 7
IMPLEMENTATION 8
REFLECTION 10
Site Visitation Project Forms 11
Class Profile 12
Lesson Plan 14
Activity/Strategy Table 16
Self-Evaluation of Lesson 17
Teaching Sample Project (TSP)
Overview and Evaluation 18
Parts of the Project 19
Format 20
SECTIONS
Students in Context 21
Learning Outcomes 23
Assessment Plan 25
Design for Instruction 29
Instructional Decision-Making 32
Analysis of Student Learning 33
Reflection and Self-Evaluation 35
ADDENDUM: Students in Context 36
RUBRICS
Students in Context 37
Learning Outcomes 38
Assessment Plan 39
Design for Instruction 40
Instructional Decision-Making 41
Analysis of Student Learning 42
Reflection and Self-Evaluation 43
FAST Policies and Procedures
Intended Use Policy 44
Accommodations for Students with Disabilities Policy 44
Non-Passing Score Procedure 44
Appeal Policy 45

The Site Visitation Project assesses the candidate’s ability to plan, implement, and reflect upon instruction. The Teaching Performance Expectations (TPE) elements being evaluated are:
TPE 1 - Engaging and Supporting All Students in Learning (Universal: 1.1, 1.3, 1.5, 1.8; MM: 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.6, 1.7)
TPE 2 - Creating and Maintaining Effective Environments for Student Learning (Universal: 2.2, 2.6; MM: 2.1, 2.5, 2.6, 2.8, 2.9, 2.10)
TPE 3 - Understanding and Organizing Subject Matter for Student Learning (Universal: 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.5; MM: 3.1, 3.2, 3.3)
TPE 4 - Planning Instruction and Designing Learning Experiences for All Students (Universal: 4.1, 4.2, 4.7; MM: 3.1, 4.2, 4.3)
TPE 6 - Developing as a Professional Educator (Universal: 6.1)

Overview

For this project you will plan, teach, and evaluate a 20- to 45-minute lesson that is observed by your University Coach and videotaped for a small group of students classified as Mild/Moderate that includes (1) at least one student who has an IEP, (2) at least one student who has an IEP and is classified as an English Learner, and (3) at least one student who has an IEP and who is from an underserved education group. The lesson plan and instruction should address goals and skills aligned with the state adopted subject matter standards, English Language Development (ELD) and/or English Language Arts (ELA) standards and frameworks. At the elementary level, you should plan a lesson in mathematics that infuses English language development. At the secondary level, you should plan a lesson in an academic content area, as deemed appropriate for special education, that infuses ELD and/or ELA standards. You will submit your written lesson plan at least three days prior to implementation to your University Coach through TK20. The lesson will be observed by your University Coach and/or a subject-matter expert and videotaped. After you watch the video, you will evaluate your planning and implementation by selecting a segment of the video to demonstrate subject-specific pedagogy and responding to questions about your lesson. The project will be submitted on Tk20 and evaluated using the Scoring Rubrics at the end of the directions.
Submissions: (1) CLASS PROFILE form, (2) lesson plan, (3) ACTIVITY/STRATEGY TABLE form, (4) 3- to 5-minute unedited video clip, (5) SELF-EVALUATION OF LESSON form.
NOTE: All forms are found on Tk20.

General Directions
These general directions present an outline of the Site Visitation Project requirements. See Parts of the Project (on pp. 2-5) for more detailed instructions and information about the required forms to submit.
To complete this project, you will:
1. Collect information on your students for the class you will teach, using the CLASS PROFILE form, including details pertaining to specific IEP goals and 504 plans. The information should be useful for planning instruction.
2. Plan a lesson that demonstrates your ability to teach a standards-based lesson in mathematics that infuses the development of communication skills. This lesson should respond directly to your students’ learning needs as identified through the CLASS PROFILE and specified in their IEPs. The entire lesson should last between 20 and 45 minutes.
3. Arrange with your University Coach to have the lesson observed at a mutually convenient time.
4. Write a detailed lesson plan for the lesson that will be observed.
5. Complete the ACTIVITY/STRATEGY TABLE form to identify the purpose of specific instructional strategies planned for your lesson.
6. Submit your class profile, lesson plan, and activity/strategy table on Tk20 at least 3 days prior to the observation.
7. Teach the lesson. Your University Coach will observe the entire lesson and it will be recorded on video. The video must be a continuous video of the lesson, start to finish. Do not stop and start the video during the lesson. You are responsible for arranging the videotaping.
8. Save the full unedited video to a secure, private location until the end of the semester.
9. Watch the entire video recording of your lesson and select a 3- to 5-minute unedited segment of the video that demonstrates your ability to utilize appropriate subject-specific pedagogy.
10. Reflect on your implementation of the lesson based on your review of the video and the scoring rubric for this task.
11. Write a detailed evaluation of the lesson by responding to the Self-Evaluation of Lesson questions. Your responses should be based on your review of the video and rubric (see #10 above). Use the SELF-EVALUATION OF LESSON form.
12. Submit your evaluation and video segment on Tk20 within 7 days of the observation.
Preparation for this Project
• Review the Teaching Performance Expectations (TPEs) that are evaluated in this project, including Part 2, Subject Specific Pedagogy for math.
• Review the Scoring Rubrics for this project, located at the end of the directions.
• Discuss with your Mentor Teacher the expectations for this project and make arrangements with your University Coach for a mutually acceptable time for the observation.
Note: In order to ensure the anonymity of students, school site, school district, and other adults, use aliases or identifying codes rather than names in the written documentation of this project.

Specific requirements for this project are given in the next section. The project will be submitted on Tk20 and evaluated using the Scoring Rubrics at the end of the directions.

Parts of the Project
Part 1 – PLANNING (documents submitted on Tk20 at least 3 days prior to the observation) *
❖ Class Profile
❖ Lesson Plan
❖ Activity/Strategies Table
Part 2 – IMPLEMENTATION (arranged with University Coach)
❖ Lesson Observation by University Coach, plus video recording
Part 3 – REFLECTION (submitted on Tk20 within 7 days after the observation)
❖ Selected Video Clip
❖ Self-Evaluation of Lesson

Part 1 – PLANNING
Class Profile
Using the CLASS PROFILE form (located on Tk20), collect information about your students. Information must include a class summary of (a) identified needs (IEP special factors, present levels of academic and functional performance, specially designed instruction and related services, behavioral plans, health/medical protocols, etc.), (b) English proficiency levels, (c) ethnicity, and (d) reading/writing proficiency (with the source of your information). In addition, you will identify other information about individual students. The information you gather should directly inform your planning and instruction to ensure all students have access to the curriculum. This information may include academic strengths and challenges, cultural background, interests, social interactions, attitude, language proficiency, health needs, etc. A review of IEP goals, specially designed instruction, 504 plans, and behavior plans must be part of this process. Interest surveys, observations of interactions and behavior, and conversations are good sources of information. Select the most useful information for your planning. More is not necessarily better.
• Submit the Class Profile with your Lesson Plan and Activity/Strategy Table onTk20 at least 3 days prior to the lesson observation.
Lesson Plan
Write a detailed lesson plan for your lesson. No specific format for the lesson plan is required. Lesson plan templates are available on Tk20.
• The lesson plan must include at least the following elements: Brief summary of the lesson, grade level, topic, subject matter content standards and ELD and/or ELA standards, lesson objective(s), planning considerations, assessment plan, procedures, and closure.
• Submit the Lesson Plan with your Class Profile and Activity/Strategy Table on Tk20 at least 3 day prior to the lesson observation.

Activity/Strategy Table
Complete the ACTIVITY/STRATEGY TABLE form (located on TK20). Use the information below the table to guide your completion of the form. The form is intended for you to think about and document the purpose of the activities or strategies planned for your lesson.
Activity or Strategy Table
List Check ONE for each listed item Purpose
Instructional Activity or Strategy
Brief explanation of the purpose of activity related to the category you’ve identified
X
X
X
X

When planning your lesson, each activity or instructional strategy should have a purpose. There are many factors that may influence your choices. For the Site Visitation Project, address how these four categories influenced your planning decisions.
Subject Specific Pedagogy: The activity or strategy is consistent with the current methods recommended for the subject you are teaching and your specific student population. [Sources of Subject Specific Pedagogy: Teaching Performance Expectations (Universal and Mild to Moderate Support Needs TPEs, especially TPE 3 and related Subject Specific Pedagogy expectations in Part 2 of TPEs), content standards and frameworks.]
Acquisition of Academic Language: The activity or strategy is designed to encourage the acquisition and use of academic language in the subject area.
Knowledge of Your Students: The activity or strategy has been designed to be relevant to the students’ prior experiences, interests, backgrounds, social-emotional development, or current academic status and their specialized learning and communication needs and accommodations/ modifications, as specified in their IEPs.
Student Engagement: The activity or strategy is designed to encourage active participation and communication by all students, connections to real-life contexts, opportunities for inquiry, or reflection.
Complete the table (located in TK20) to show the relationship between your activities or strategies and these four categories. On the table list an activity (or part of an activity) or a strategy that was most influenced by each of the four categories. All four categories must be represented.
Submit the Activity/Strategy Table with your Class Profile and Lesson Plan on Tk20 at least 3 days prior to the lesson observation. Subject Specific Pedagogy
Academic Language
Knowledge of Students
Student Engagement

Part 2 – IMPLEMENTATION
Videotaped Classroom Observation
In order to assess your teaching competence, your University Coach will observe you teaching your prepared lesson. The following procedure should be used for the observation:
1. Schedule a mutually acceptable time and date with your University Coach for the observation.
2. Review the Universal and Mild-to-Moderate Support Needs Teaching Performance Expectations (TPEs) that will be evaluated during this observation. When appropriate given your teaching context, your review should include the Subject Specific Pedagogy TPE related to your content, found in Part 2 of the TPEs.
3. Review the Scoring Rubrics for this project, located after the directions for this project.
4. Remember you must complete, and submit on Tk20, the Class Profile, your Lesson Plan, and the Activity/Strategy Table (as described above) at least 3 days prior to the observation.
5. Prior to the observation, provide your University Coach (and Mentor Teacher if requested) a copy of your lesson plan and supporting materials.
6. Prepare for video recording of the lesson. It is your responsibility to arrange for the video recording.
7. Identify your focus students for the observer. A seating chart or description of the students may be used.
8. Teach the lesson. Your University Coach will observe the entire lesson, and the lesson will be video recorded. The video must be a continuous video of the lesson, start to finish. Do not stop and start the video during the lesson.
9. Save the full, unedited video to a secure, private location until the end of the semester.

Part 3 – REFLECTION
Selected Video Clip
Within 7 days after teaching your Site Visitation Project lesson, watch the entire video of your lesson.
a) Select a 3- to 5-minute unedited video clip to clearly demonstrate an example of a strategy or activity consistent with current subject-specific pedagogy in the content area of instruction.
b) Submit on Tk20 this unedited video clip with your responses to the questions listed in the Self Evaluation of the Lesson.
Self-Evaluation of Lesson
After watching the video and selecting the video clip, prepare a written self-evaluation of your planning and teaching of the lesson by responding to the Self-Evaluation of Lesson questions in the three categories listed below (i.e. Subject Specific Pedagogy, Applying Knowledge of Students, Student Engagement). You will use the SELF-EVALUATION OF LESSON form, located on Tk20. Use examples from the video clip and the entire lesson to support your evaluation.

Subject Specific Pedagogy
1. What were the overall strengths and weaknesses of the entire lesson? On what evidence do you base your conclusions?
2. The following questions refer to your selected 3- to 5-minute unedited video clip.
a. How does the activity or strategy depicted in your video clip demonstrate current subject-specific pedagogy? Use evidence to justify your responses. [Sources for evidence: content standards and frameworks, Universal and Mild-to-Moderate Support Needs Teaching Performance Expectations (especially TPE 3 and related Subject Specific Pedagogy expectations in Part 2 of TPEs), professional readings or experiences, examples from lesson.]
b. How did your knowledge of the content help or hinder the effectiveness of the lesson?
Applying Knowledge of Students
3. The following questions refer to one of the three focal students you identified in the CLASS PROFILE. You must select an identified focal student who has an IEP from the CLASS PROFILE in your response to these questions.
a. How effective was your lesson in providing access to the content for your selected focal student? Be honest about whether you addressed the needs of this student. On what evidence do you base your conclusion?
b. What might you do differently in future lessons to more effectively provide access to content for this student?
Student Engagement
4. Think about how you used interactions (teacher to student(s), student to student) to engage your students.
a. How did you use interactions in your lesson to promote multiple perspectives and equitable participation? Give specific examples.
b. How effective were these interactions in promoting student learning? On what evidence do you base your conclusion?

Evaluation of the Project
The Site Visitation Project 3- to 5-minute unedited video clip and SELF-EVALUATION OF LESSON form should be submitted on Tk20 within 7 days after the observation.
Your University Coach or a subject-matter expert, who has been trained to score this specific task, will use the (1) CLASS PROFILE form, (2) Lesson Plan, (3) ACTIVITY/ STRATEGY TABLE, (4) the observed teaching performance, (5) selected 3- to 5-minute unedited video clip, and (6) SELF-EVALUATION OF LESSON form to evaluate your teaching performance.
Note: In order to ensure the anonymity of students, school site, school district, and other adults, use aliases or identifying codes rather than names in your documentation for this project.
Scores for each section will be based on the Scoring Rubric designed for that section. The rubrics focus on the qualities embedded in each of the TPEs aligned with that section. Levels of proficiency are described across each row. To pass this task you must receive an overall score of at least 2 on each section (PLANNING, IMPLEMENTATION, REFLECTION). Unsuccessful candidates will have an opportunity to remedy any portions rated as not meeting expectations.

Site Visitation Project Scoring Rubrics

PLANNING
1
Does Not Meet Expectations
2
Meets Expectations
3
Meets Expectations at a High Level
4
Exceeds Expectations

Subject Specific Pedagogy
Universal TPE 3.1, 3.3, 3.5
MM TPE 1.1, 1.3, 3.1
The lesson plan includes content and related activities or strategies inconsistent with current subject specific pedagogy and standards, with limited support for acquisition or use of academic language.
Little/no documentation of alignment with IEP goals is provided.
The lesson plan includes content and related activities or strategies:
(a) consistent with current subject specific pedagogy and standards,
(b) that support the acquisition or use of academic language,
(c) that generally align with students’ IEP goals.
The lesson plan includes content and related activities and strategies:
(a) consistent with current subject-specific pedagogy and standards,
(b) that provide multiple opportunities for students to acquire and use academic language,
(c) with some evidence of a plan to monitor students’ access to content that aligns with students’ IEP goals.
The lesson plan includes content and related activities and strategies adapted for specific needs of students:
(a) consistent with current subject-specific pedagogy and standards,
(b) that provide multiple opportunities for students to acquire and use academic language.
(c) with clear evidence of a plan to monitor students’ access to content that aligns with the specifications articulated in students’ IEPs.

Applying Knowledge of Students
Universal TPE 3.2, 4.1, 4.2
MM TPE 3.1, 3.2, 4.2, 4.3
Information about students, gathered by the candidate, provides little or no useful information for planning. Candidate plans activities or strategies that demonstrate little or no understanding of the connection between knowledge of students and promoting access to the content.
Information about students, gathered by the candidate, provides useful information for planning. Based on a general knowledge of students at this grade level, candidate plans appropriate activities or strategies to promote access to the content.
Information about students, gathered by the candidate, provides useful information for planning. Based on knowledge of students in this class, including the details of their IEPs, candidate plans appropriate activities or strategies that include accommodations or modifications to promote access to the content.
Candidate gathers relevant and detailed information on students to be used for planning. Based on knowledge of individuals or groups of students in the class, including their specialized learning and communication needs as specified in IEPs, candidate plans appropriate activities or strategies that include accommodations and/or modifications to promote access to the content specifically referencing these students.

Student Engagement
Universal TPE 1.1, 1.3, 1.5, 4.7
MM TPE 1.1, 4.1
Candidate plans few or inappropriate methods for student engagement.
Candidate’s plan for engaging students is appropriate to the developmental level (e.g. real-life contexts, connections to students’ experiences or interests, opportunities for critical or creative thinking, varied communication strategies/supports).
Candidate’s plan for engaging students includes varied methods appropriate to students, as specified in students’ IEPs (e.g. real-life contexts, connections to students’ experiences or interests, opportunities for critical or creative thinking, varied communication strategies/supports).
Candidate’s plan for engaging students includes varied methods specifically connected to the backgrounds and needs of individuals or groups of students, as specified in students’ IEPs (e.g. real-life contexts, connections to students’ experiences or interests, opportunities for critical or creative thinking, varied communication strategies/supports).

Circle overall rating: PLANNING 1 2 3 4

IMPLEMENTATION
1
Does Not Meet Expectations
2
Meets Expectations
3
Meets Expectations at a High Level
4
Exceeds Expectations

Subject Specific Pedagogy
TPE 3.1, 3.3, 3.5
MM TPE 3.1
Candidate implements instruction inconsistent with subject-specific pedagogy or not in alignment with the identified academic content standard(s). Instruction fails to or inadequately supports students’ acquisition of academic language and/or their specific IEP goals
Candidate effectively implements instruction consistent with subject-specific pedagogy to teach the identified academic content standard(s). Instruction supports the acquisition or use of academic language appropriate for students at this grade level and the development of students’ specific IEP goals
Candidate effectively implements and monitors instruction consistent with subject-specific pedagogy and addressing students’ specific learning, as documented in their IEPs, to teach the identified academic content standard(s). Incorporates effective instructional strategies and materials to support the acquisition and use of academic language for students in this class.
Candidate effectively implements and monitors instruction consistent with subject-specific pedagogy that clearly matches the level and content of the identified academic content standard(s) and the specific learning needs of the students, as specified in their IEP Demonstrates effective integration of instructional strategies and materials to support the acquisition and use of academic language for specific needs of individuals or groups of students in this class.

Applying Knowledge of Students
TPE 1.1, 3.2
MM TPE 1.2, 1.3, 3.2, 4.2, 4.3
Candidate demonstrates little or no awareness of the learning needs, backgrounds, and interests of students at this grade level.
Candidate uses knowledge of the learning needs, communicative needs, backgrounds, or interests of students at this developmental level to provide access to the content for all students.
Candidate uses knowledge of the learning needs, communicative needs, backgrounds, and/or interests of the students in this class to increase access to the content for all students.
Candidate adjusts instruction in response to the specific learning needs, communicative needs, backgrounds, interests, and experiences of individuals or groups of students in the class in order to provide all students equitable access to the content and experiences.

Student Engagement
TPE 1.3, 1.5, 1.8, 2.2, 2.6
MM TPE 1.6, 1.7, 2.1, 2.5, 2.6, 2.8, 2.9, 2.10
Candidate uses inadequate techniques to promote and monitor participation by students in the learning activities. Candidate inadequately expresses or reinforces expectations for behavior. The candidate models few or no positive interactions.
Candidate uses primarily management techniques to promote and monitor participation by students in the learning activities. Candidate expresses and reinforces expectations for social or academic behavior. Candidate models generally positive interactions.
Candidate uses both management and instructional techniques with strategies (e.g. universal design, differentiated instruction, scaffolding, accommodations and/or modifications, real life contexts, opportunities for critical or creative thinking) addressed in student IEPs to promote and monitor active participation by students in the learning activities. Candidate expresses and reinforces expectations for social and academic behavior. Candidate models interactions that create a positive learning environment of respect for diversity and multiple perspectives.
Candidate is able to use primarily instructional techniques, strategies and individualized supports (e.g. universal design, differentiated instruction, scaffolding, accommodations and/or modifications, real life contexts, opportunities for critical or creative thinking) addressed in student IEPs to ensure and monitor active and equitable participation by students in the learning activities. Candidate expresses and reinforces expectations for social and academic behavior as well as supports students with developing positive communication skills and systems to promote positive behavior. Both the candidate and the students consistently model interactions that create a positive learning environment of mutual respect for diversity and multiple perspectives.

Circle overall rating: IMPLEMENTATION 1 2 3 4

REFLECTION
1
Does Not Meet Expectations
2
Meets Expectations
3
Meets Expectations at a High Level
4
Exceeds Expectations

Subject Specific Pedagogy
TPE 6.1
Candidate’s description of strengths and weaknesses of lesson is unrealistic or inadequate. Provides inadequate justification for how the activity or strategy in the selected video clip represents subject specific pedagogy. Demonstrates little awareness of the relationship between content knowledge and planning or teaching.
Candidate realistically describes strengths and weaknesses of lesson. Provides general justification for how the activity or strategy in the selected video clip represents subject specific pedagogy. Demonstrates a realistic understanding of the relationship between content knowledge and planning or teaching.
Candidate realistically evaluates, with evidence, strengths and weaknesses of lesson. Provides specific justification for how the activity or strategy in the selected video clip represents subject specific pedagogy. Demonstrates a realistic understanding of the relationship between content knowledge and effective planning and teaching.
Candidate realistically justifies, with evidence of student learning, strengths, and weaknesses of lesson. Provides specific justification, using a variety of sources, for how the activity or strategy represents subject specific pedagogy. Demonstrates a realistic understanding of the relationship between content knowledge and effective planning and teaching, with relevant evidence.

Applying Knowledge of Students
TPE 3.2
MM TPE 3.2, 3.3
Candidate’s description of the effectiveness of the lesson to promote access to the content for the focus student are unrealistic or inadequate. Provides unrealistic or inappropriate suggestions to improve access to content for students, in general.
Candidate realistically describes how the lesson promotes access to the content for the focus student, using evidence of participation. Provides appropriate suggestions to improve access to content for students, in general.
Candidate realistically evaluates the effectiveness of the lesson to promote access to the content for the focus student, using evidence of student learning. Provides specific and appropriate suggestions to improve access to content for the focus student.
Candidate realistically evaluates and justifies the effectiveness of the lesson to promote access to the content for the focus student, citing specific evidence of student learning. Provides specific and appropriate suggestions to improve access to content and justifies why the suggestions will be effective for the focus student.

Student Engagement
TPE 2.2
MM TPE 1.4, 2.1, 2.9
Candidate provides few or inappropriate examples of interactions from the lesson. Shows little awareness of the effectiveness of engaging students through interactions to promote productive student learning, multiple perspectives, or equitable participation.
Candidate provides general examples of interactions from the lesson. Realistically describes how these interactions promote productive student learning, multiple perspectives, or equitable participation.
Candidate provides specific examples of interactions from the lesson. Realistically evaluates the effectiveness of these specific interactions to engage students in learning and promote multiple perspectives or equitable participation.
Candidate provides specific examples of interactions from the lesson. Candidate realistically evaluates and justifies the effectiveness of these specific interactions to engage students in learning and provides clear evidence of how these interactions promoted multiple perspectives, learning related to the specific content, and equitable participation.

Circle overall rating: REFLECTION 1 2 3 4
Definitions: Describes – this happened then this happened, etc.
Evaluates – this happened, and it was effective/ineffective.
Justifies – this happened, it was effective/ineffective, AND this is why it was effective/ineffective.

FAST POLICIES AND PROCEDURES

INTENDED USE POLICY
[LANGUAGE TO INCLUDE UPON COMMISSION APPROVAL: The Fresno Assessment of Student Teachers—Education Specialist Mild-to-Moderate Support Needs (FAST—ES MM) has been approved by the Commission on Teacher Credentialing as an alternative teacher performance assessment in accordance with the Commission’s Assessment Design Standards and the provisions of EC 44320.2(b)(1). FAST is designed to provide evidence on the pedagogical competence of Education Specialist: Mild-to-Moderate Support Needs Credential Candidates at California State University, Fresno, as measured by the California Teaching Performance Expectations (TPEs), and to provide information useful for determining program quality and effectiveness. Tasks are to be completed in fieldwork placements by teacher candidates and scored by trained scorers using FAST task-specific rubrics.
The candidate’s response to each of the Project prompts must reflect the student’s own unaided work. Unacceptable assistance will result in no credit for the field experience course and the need to request special consideration to retake the course.
Note that the successful completion of all FAST projects is just one of the requirements for earning a California Preliminary Multiple Subject or Single Subject Credential. Consult your university catalog, student teaching handbook and field- and coursework syllabi for information about other requirements.
ACCOMMODATIONS FOR STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES
Teacher candidates with disabilities will be reasonably accommodated in completing the FAST projects. Teacher candidates with disabilities that may affect their ability to complete the projects with reliability are directed to contact their University Coaches and the University Services for Students with Disabilities. The service office will notify the appropriate faculty and coaches regarding necessary accommodations and will assist in providing those accommodations as needed.
NON-PASSING SCORE PROCEDURE
Teacher candidates who fail to earn a passing score of “2” or more on any section of a FAST—ES MM Project in their initial attempt will be given an opportunity to resubmit the revised section for re-scoring.

If a passing score is earned, it will be considered the candidate’s “official score,” but both the failing score and passing score will be recorded and sent to the California Commission on Teaching Credentialing as required.
Request for Special Consideration. If the candidate fails once again to earn a passing score, the candidate may petition for permission to revise and resubmit the assessment a third time by submitting a completed Application for Special Consideration (available in ED100) to the FAST Coordinator within 7 days of receipt of the retake scores.
If the request for special consideration is granted by the committee and the candidate meets all other requirements and competencies, the candidate will be given a grade of “incomplete” in that semester’s field experience, until the candidate successfully completes the project.
If a candidate granted special consideration to revise the non-passing sections a third time is continuing in the credential program, the candidate may be allowed to enroll in the next field experience. The revised project from the prior semester must be submitted by the last day of instruction in that semester and must earn a passing score. A passing score will result in a grade of “credit” replacing the “incomplete,” while failure to meet the committee’s timelines will result in a grade of “no credit.”
APPEAL POLICY
FAST provides the opportunity for teacher candidates to appeal a non-passing score (a score of “1,” “Does Not Meet Expectations”) awarded on any section of any FAST project. The procedure is as follows.
Site Visitation Project
1. The candidate contacts the FAST Coordinator within 7 days of having received their project scores.
2. The candidate completes a Non-Passing Score Appeal and submits it, along with their original work to the FAST Coordinator. In this instance, original work is:
a. Class profile, lesson plan, Activity/Strategy Table
b. Entire video, 3- to 5-minute video segment, self-evaluation of lesson
3. Within 10 days, the FAST Coordinator convenes a panel of three individuals to review the appeal. The individuals on the panel must meet the following criteria:
a. Trained to score the specific task being appealed
b. Have appropriate content area expertise
c. Not involved in the original scoring
4. The panel meets with the original scorer at a time arranged by the FAST Coordinator.
5. The panel reviews the candidate’s response, discusses the classroom performance with the supervisor, documented by the supervisor’s observational notes, and reaches a consensus score.
a. If the consensus score is a passing one, the new score replaces the original score and the candidate is notified by email within 5 days of the panel’s decision.

1. The candidate contacts the FAST coordinator within 7 days of having received the project scores.
2. The candidate completes a Non-Passing Score Appeal Form and submits it, along with their original response to the task, to the FAST Coordinator.
3. Within 5 days, the FAST Coordinator will have the candidate’s response rescored by an individual meeting the following criteria:
a. Trained to score the specific task being appealed
b. Have appropriate content area expertise
c. Not involved in the original scoring
4. If the second scorer agrees with the original score, that score will stand. The FAST Coordinator will inform the candidate and University Supervisor of the decision.
5. If there is not agreement between the original and second scorers, the FAST Coordinator convenes a panel of three individuals to review the appeal within 5 days. The individuals on the panel must meet the following criteria:
a. Trained to score the specific task being appealed
b. At least one person not involved in the original or second scoring
6. The panel reviews the candidate’s response and reaches a consensus score.
a. If the consensus score is passing, the new score replaces the original score and the candidate is notified by email within 5 days of the panel’s decision.
b. If the panel agrees with the original score, that score will stand. The FAST Coordinator contacts the candidate to discuss the results within 5 days of the panel’s decision.

Download the PDF

Download the PDF

This PDF is provided as a print-only reference document and may not be fully accessible to users of assistive technology. For more information, please visit Title II Rule on Digital Accessibility page.