Campus Assessment of Student Learning Outcomes

What are the student learning outcomes in your unit?

Initial Licensure Programs—Communication; Higher Order Thinking Skills; Technology; Learning and Development; School Culture and Diversity; Instructional Design and Delivery; Classroom Management; Assessment and Evaluation; Professional Development

Advanced Programs—Reflection; Collaboration and Professional Development; Assessment; Classroom Management; Learning and Development; Knowledge and Instruction; Educational Equity; Formal Inquiry

Educational Leadership Program—Vision of Learning; School Culture and Instructional Program; Management; Collaboration with Families and Community; Integrity, Fairness, and Ethical Behavior; Political, Social, Economic, Legal, and Cultural Context

Which outcome did you assess this academic year?

The School of Education assesses candidates on all program outcomes each semester in courses and field experiences.

How did you assess their skills before, during and / or at the end of the semester/ academic year?

There are two major ways by which the Unit assesses candidates’ knowledge, skills and dispositions. The first is through the use of rubrics in scoring outcome artifacts. Candidates are required to complete artifacts, such as lesson or unit plans, essays, presentations, etc. in courses to demonstrate program outcomes. Course instructors, or in the case of field experiences, cooperating teachers and university supervisors, use rubrics to score the artifacts on a scale of 1 to 4. Candidates must earn scores of 3 or higher on all outcome artifacts in order to progress through their programs.

The artifact scoring process is a major part of assessing candidates’ progression through program “checkpoints”, which are periodic evaluations of candidates’ completion of specific program requirements. Checkpoints are completed prior to entry to a program, at roughly the midpoint, and at the completion of programs, which includes licensure for Initial and Educational Leadership programs. In addition to artifact scores, scores on the Praxis and SLLA tests, course grades, g.p.a., and required course completion are the major assessments done in checkpoints.

The other major way by which candidates are assessed is through performance in field experiences. Course instructors, field cooperating teachers/mentors/principals, and university supervisors use survey and open-ended instruments to evaluate candidate performance on each of the conceptual framework outcomes.

Please summarize the data you have collected this semester / academic year.

As part of its Unit Assessment System, the School of Education collects the following data each semester/year: candidate performance of conceptual framework outcomes in courses and field/student teaching experiences; candidate demonstration of professional dispositions in courses and field/student teaching experiences; candidate self-assessment of professional dispositions; field cooperating teacher/mentor/principal evaluation of field experience programs; field cooperating teacher/mentor/principal evaluation of university supervisors; candidate evaluation of field cooperating teacher/mentor/principal; candidate progression through program checkpoints; program exit surveys; graduate follow-up surveys; advising evaluations; course evaluations; and PRAXIS and SLLA scores.

Please describe any programmatic changes you have made or are planning to make based on the data you have collected.

The Assessment Committee re-designed the Advanced Program disposition forms after several semesters of data showed little variation among candidates’ responses at the beginning, middle, and end of their programs. In addition to evaluating how much the candidate values each disposition, a component was added to both the instructor/mentor assessment of candidate and the candidate self-assessment to measure how well a candidate exhibits the disposition.

The School of Education suspended the Undergraduate and Graduate Convocations based on data showing that candidates gained little new information from their attendance. Rather, the SOE intends to replace the convocations with topical sessions and seminars relevant to students at various stages of program completion.

Response rates regarding Initial and Advanced Follow-up Surveys have historically been very low in the SOE. As a result of several semesters of limited data, the SOE created online follow-up surveys. The Initial and Advanced Online Follow-up Surveys have been piloted and have achieved much higher response rates. The Educational Leadership Online Follow-up Survey is in the final phases of implementation and will be placed online in the coming months.

**Note: Please use this template to provide the responses to the prompts above.**