Enhancing Education Program Assessments for Accreditation Review

1. Using Assessment Data Helen Thumann Department of Education

2. Some Background • The Dept of Ed has 8 accredited programs • 7 Undergraduate • 1 Graduate • Each accredited by its own professional association • Each professional association has its own standards • Each program has 6 to 8 required assessments that we use for our accreditation review

3. Dept of Ed Assessments • These include • Praxis exams (1 and 2) • Teacher Work Samples • Content assessments • Planning Rubric • Student Teaching Evaluation • Disposition Assessment

4. The Process • We have 4 transition points where each student must submit a portfolio and/or complete performance assessments • Acceptance to program • Acceptance to practicum • Acceptance to student teaching • Completion of program

5. The Process • Each candidate is reviewed and evaluated by at least 2 (usually 3) faculty members at each point • Cut scores for each assessment are set for each transition point • Students who meet the cut scores move on • Students who don’t are usually allowed a chance to re-do • Students can be dismissed from the program or graduate with out recommendation for teaching license

6. The Process • At least once a year we review the scores for all assessments at the transition points to look for trends and/or problems • We use this information to make program revisions • Two Examples: • The Praxis exams • Teacher Work Samples

7. The Praxis Exams • Praxis 1 exams – Pre-professional Skills Test • Reading • Writing • Mathematics • Our accrediting groups require 80% pass rate on each of the three exams • In 2001-2002 academic year our pass rate was 47%

8. What we did • Began requiring students to take the exam • Began providing support for students • Workshops on preparing for praxis • Study groups • Tutoring • We aggregated and analyzed the scores • Found that students who scored below a specific range did not usually pass by graduation

9. What we did • We began requiring students to have above that score on at least 2 exams to enter the program • We began requiring students to pass at least 2 of the Praxis 1 exams before student teaching • In 2006-2007 our Praxis 1 pass rate was 82% • This spring our pass rate for student teachers • Reading 80% • Writing 100% • Math 100%

10. Next Steps • We are working to get support for students in Praxis preparation BEFORE they get into the program • Focusing on the Praxis 2 pass rates and working with Content areas

11. Teacher Work Sample (TWS) • Students must complete a Teacher Work Sample based on an assess – teach – assess cycle in their internship site • The TWS has 7 factors • Contextual Factors • Goals & Objectives • Assessment Plan • Design for Instruction • Instructional Decision Making • Analysis of Learner Progress • Reflection & Self Evaluation

12. TWS (continued) • We began piloting the TWS with student teachers in 2006. • That year our data was incomplete • In fall 2006 we began including pre-TWS be completed in courses prior to student teaching • At least 3 to 4 semesters prior • Students must complete at least 2 pre TWS before Student Teaching • We required students to attend a workshop about the TWS

13. TWS (Continued) • In Summer 2008 TWS scores were compiled and analyzed based on 19 students • Average scores ranged from 74% to 90% on all factors. • Factors with lowest scores – • Factor 3 (Assessment Plan) • Factor 6 (Analysis of student learning) • Factors with highest scores- • Factor 1 – Contextual Factor • Factor 2 – Goals and Objectives

14. TWS (continued) • Did an analysis of who scored what by grad/undergrad status, hearing status, major, program, evaluator and a few other categories • Found that • Graduate students did better than UG students • Deaf Faculty scored harder than hearing faculty • One program had 100% inter-rater reliability

15. Next Steps • Continue to address struggles with Factor 3 and 6 • Work on inter-rater reliability for assessments • Keep monitoring all data for future program changes

16. ANY QUESTIONS?