B.S. in Science Education
Assessment in the Major Report
By Dr. Kevin Mason, Program Director
2014-15
Submitted: October 2015
Table of Contents
Introduction ..............................................................................................................................................................................................................2
Overview ..................................................................................................................................................................................................................2
Previous Goals and Evidence...................................................................................................................................................................................4
PRAXIS I: Pre-Professional Skills Test .................................................................................................................................................................6
PRAXIS II: General Science Content Knowledge Exam Summary .......................................................................................................................9
PRAXIS I and II First Time Test Takers ...............................................................................................................................................................12
Benchmark Ratings ................................................................................................................................................................................................14
Student Teaching Performance Ratings .................................................................................................................................................................20
edTPA ....................................................................................................................................................................................................................22
Educational Benchmarking Inventory (EBI) .........................................................................................................................................................23
Alumni Follow-up Survey .....................................................................................................................................................................................23
Communicating Assessment Data with Constituencies .........................................................................................................................................23
Utilization of Assessment Data to Improve Courses and the Program ..................................................................................................................23
Goals for 2015-16 ..................................................................................................................................................................................................25
Science Education AIM Report 2014-15
Page 1
Introduction
The B.S. in Science Education program officially began in the fall of 2009. Prior to the B.S. in Science Education, the science education program
existed as a concentration within the BS in Applied Science program. The Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction (DPI) approved the first
science certification, in broad field science, at UW-Stout in 2004. The first course in science education was taught in the spring of 2006. In the
School of Education, data is gathered from several sources to inform unit and program decisions. Data in this report is used to develop program
goals, inform curriculum changes, and enhance course delivery in order to improve teacher candidate learning. This report contains data from the
PRAXIS I: Pre-Professional Skills Test, PRAXIS II: Content Test, Student Artifact Reflections, Candidate Dispositions, Teacher Candidate
Performances, Benchmark Interviews, and the Educational Benchmarking Inventory (EBI). This report also describes how assessment data is used to
set programmatic goals and improve the program, program curriculum, and delivery of courses.
Overview
The enrollment in the B.S. in Science Education during the 2014-2015 academic year was 13 candidates. This included nine pre-science education
majors and four science education majors. Historically, the enrollment of the B.S. in Science Education grew dramatically in its first two years, from
16 candidates in 2009-2010 to 30 candidates during the 2010-2011 academic years. Since that time, the enrollment numbers have steadily declined
to 27 candidates in 2011-2012, 23 in 2012-2013,18 in 2013-2014, and now 13 in 2014-2015. This follows a state and national trend of decreasing
enrollments in teacher education programs. In collaboration with the marketing office at the UW-Stout, SOE has developed a marketing strategy for
the next three years to address these enrollment declines.
In regard to gender, the balance of men and women enrolled in the program continues to be good, especially compared to other programs in the
science, technology, engineering, or mathematics (STEM) fields. In 2014-2015, there were five female candidates and eight male candidates. In
2013-2014, there were 9 male and 9 female candidates enrolled. In previous years, the female enrollment was slightly higher than the male
enrollment. In 2012-2013, there were 11 male and 12 female candidates enrolled. In 2011-2012, there were 12 male and 15 female candidates
enrolled. In 2010-2011, there were 12 male and 18 female candidates. In 2009-2010, there were seven male and nine female candidates enrolled.
In 2014-2015, there were no minority candidates enrolled in the program. This is also similar to previous years. There were no minority candidates
in 2013-2014, one in 2012-2013, one in 2011-2012, none in 2010-2011, and none in 2009-2010. To remedy this issue, the School of Education
supports a multicultural recruitment and retention coordinator to recruit underrepresented groups into the education programs at UW-Stout, including
minorities and women in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education.
Three candidates graduated from the program in 2014-2015. Five candidates graduated from the program in 2013-2014, six candidates in 20122013, six candidates in 2011-2012, four candidates in 2010-2011, and one candidate in 2009-2010.
The program admitted three freshmen in 2014-2015. Four freshmen were admitted in 2013-2014, one in 2012-2013, two in 2011-2012, five in 20102011, and four in 2009-2010. It should be noted that the number of freshmen compose only a portion of the new candidates admitted to the program
Science Education AIM Report 2014-15
Page 2
each year. Some of the new candidates enter the B.S. in Science Education as change of majors, transfer students, or students already holding a
bachelor’s degree. In 2014-2015, there were seven new science education candidates enrolled in the Introduction to Math and Science Education
(STMED 101) course. Six new science education candidates were enrolled in STMED 101 in 2013-2014, 10 in 2012-2013, 10 in 2011-2012, and 15
in 2010-2011.
The School of Education and the science education program have engaged in multiple recruiting efforts during the past several years in an attempt to
offset the declining enrollments in education across the state and nation. First, the program collaborates with the university admissions office as they
engage in multiple recruiting efforts at local events to market the science education program. In fact, faculty members in the School of Education
have attended several of these events, including a STEM night at a local high school and a booth at the Northern Wisconsin State Fair. Second, the
School of Education supports a multicultural recruitment and retention coordinator to recruit pre-service teachers to critical shortage areas in
education, such as science, technology, mathematics, and special education. Third, the faculty members in the School of Education have conducted
mailings to secondary teachers and guidance counselors to promote the program. Fourth, the faculty members in the School of Education visit
schools on a regular basis for the supervision of teacher candidates. This provides an opportunity to talk with teachers and bring marketing materials,
such as posters or safety glasses with the Stout logo, to the schools and teachers. Fifth, faculty members in the School of Education have engaged in
grant writing and professional development summer academies with in-service teachers in the state of Wisconsin to increase the awareness and
reputation of the program locally. Sixth, the faculty members have also published and presented at multiple state and national conferences to
increase the awareness and reputation of the program nationally. At each conference, marketing materials such as banners, posters, brochures, and
pens are displayed or distributed. Finally, the Program Director of the B.S. in Science Education received Hobson’s training in the fall of 2014 to
develop automated responses to students who express an interest in the science education program.
Science Education AIM Report 2014-15
Page 3
Previous Goals and Evidence
2014-2015 Program Goals
Ongoing Goals
1 Refer candidates to the CEHHS writing guidelines and the writing center in
science, technology, and math education (STMED) courses for support and
feedback on their writing.
2 Refer candidates to the PPST tutor and enroll in the elective course, EDUC
010 Praxis I: Writing, as needed.
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Refer candidates to the PRAXIS II exam preparation books located in the
Library Learning Center.
Monitor the PRAXIS II exam scores by category and identify long term
trends in candidate performance.
Emphasize philosophies of education and the theories and practices of
classroom management across the curriculum, in a variety of different
courses and contexts.
Continue to compile teacher candidate evaluation data to obtain larger
sample sizes.
Educate candidates in the introduction to math and science education
(STMED 101) course about the e-portfolio artifacts and help lab to improve
candidates’ ability to use an e-portfolio to demonstrate their knowledge and
skills.
Embed learning activities and assignments in science, technology,
engineering, and math education course to address all three categories of the
instructional technology utilization rubric, including administrative software,
presentation software, and interactive whiteboards.
To prepare teacher candidates for the successful completion of the Educative
Teacher Performance Assessment (edTPA).
Science Education AIM Report 2014-15
Evidence Towards Meeting Goals
CEHHS guidelines have been utilized and made available to
candidates enrolled in STMED 101, 185, 360, 390, and 401.
Dang Yang was a guest speaker in the Introduction to Math
and Science Education (STMED 101) course in the fall of
2014.
This has occurred in group and individual advisement
meetings.
This continues to be done in the Assessment in the Major
report.
The philosophy of education artifact in Foundations of
Education (EDUC 326) has been revised. A new Embedded
Signature Assessment (ESA) has been developed to include
theories of classroom management and will be piloted in fall
of 2015.
This continues to be done in the Assessment in the Major
report.
Frode Larsen was a guest speaker in the Introduction to Math
and Science Education (STMED 101) course in the fall of
2014.
These instructional technologies were embedded in the Lab
and Classroom Management (STMED 390) course in the fall
of 2012, 2013, and 2014.
The faculty of the School of Education have developed seven
Embedded Signature Assessments (ESA) that are aligned to
the edTPA Rubrics and INTASC standards. Several ESA’s
were piloted in the spring of 2015 and all seven will be
implemented in courses in fall of 2015.
Page 4
Science Education AIM Report 2014-15
Page 5
PRAXIS I: Pre-Professional Skills Test
All education majors must pass all three sections of the PRAXIS I: Core Academic Skills for Educators (CORE). The three sections consist of
reading, writing and mathematics. Prior to the fall 2013 semester, candidates would take the Pre-Professional Skills Test (PPST) which was available
until the end of the 2013-14 academic year. Also, candidates can meet their Benchmark I requirements through scores on their college entrance
exam. Note that the pass rates in the table reflect attempts by all candidates prior to being formally accepted into the School of Education,
all candidates are required to pass the CORE as part of Benchmark I, therefore the pass rate of candidates accepted is 100%.
PPST Attempts and Pass Rates
Teacher
Education
Program
SCIED
SOE
2010
PPST Test
Math
Math Exemption
Writing
Writing
Exemption
Reading
Reading
Exemption
Math
Math Exemption
Writing
Writing
Exemption
Reading
Reading
Exemption
2011-12
2012-13
2013-14
# test
attempts
7
NA
9
# (and %)
passed
7 (100%)
NA
7 (78%)
# test
attempts
5
NA
7
# (and %)
passed
5 (100%)
NA
4 (57%)
# test
attempts
4
NA
7
# (and %)
passed
4 (100%)
NA
4 (57%)
# test
attempts
2
NA
9
# (and %)
passed
1 (50%)
NA
2 (22%)
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
7
7 (100%)
6
5 (83%)
6
4 (67%)
2
2 (100%)
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
198
NA
213
150 (76%)
NA
141 (66%)
210
NA
287
142 (68%)
NA
138 (48%)
114
1
175
86 (75%)
NA
95 (54%)
70
NA
104
53 (76%)
NA
46 (44%)
NA
NA
NA
NA
1
NA
1
NA
243
138 (57%)
240
135 (56%)
157
86 (55%)
109
48 (44%)
NA
NA
NA
NA
2
NA
3
NA
Beginning in 2013-2014, candidates who received a minimum composite score of 23 on the American College Testing (ACT) exam with a minimum
score of 20 in math, reading, and English are exempted from taking the PPST. As a result, the number of candidates attempting the PPST decreased
in 2013-2014 to only two candidates. Furthermore, because the candidates who were more successful on the ACT are removed from the test taking
sample, the pass rates have decreased significantly in 2013-2014. In 2013-2014, the pass rate was 50% on the math section (1 out of 2 attempts),
22% on the writing section (2 out of 9 attempts), and 100% on the reading section (2 out of 2 attempts). All of these attempts were made by two
candidates. Because of the small sample size, this data is not a good representation of the performance or abilities of all science education
candidates. Rather, it may be more meaningful to examine the trends over past five years.
Science Education AIM Report 2014-15
Page 6
Examining the trends over multiple years, the mean scores for science education candidates have generally exceeded the average scores for the
School of Education in all three categories. In 2010-2011, 100% of candidates passed the math section (7out of 7 candidates), 78% passed the
writing section (7 out of 9 candidates), and 100% passed the reading section (7 out of 7 candidates). In 2011-2012, 100% of candidates passed the
math section (5 out of 5 candidates), 57% passed the writing section (4 out of 7 candidates), and 83% passed the reading section (5 out of 6
candidates). In 2012-2013, 100% of candidates passed the math section (4 out of 4 candidates), 57% passed the writing section (4 out of 7
candidates), and 67% passed the reading section (4 out of 6 candidates).
The data shows that both science education candidates and School of Education candidates, in general, are weakest in the area of writing. The
sample sizes are typically larger for the writing section because it includes candidates who had previously failed and then attempt to re-take the
writing section. The College of Education, Health, and Human Development has developed a set of writing guidelines to improve and foster writing
development for all students in the college. In addition, the School of Education offers an elective course, EDUC 010 Praxis I: Writing, to prepare
education candidates for the writing section of the Pre-Professional Skills Test. Improving the writing of candidates in the B.S. in Science Education
program is an ongoing goal of the program.
In 2013-2014, the Core exam was offered as an alternative to the PPST as the assessment of basic skills in reading, writing, and mathematics.
However, there were no science education candidates who attempted the Core exam in 2013-2014. In 2014-2015, the Core exam replaced the PPST
for pre-service teachers in the state of Wisconsin who are not exempted by their ACT scores. In 2014-2015, one science education candidate
attempted the CORE exam and passed the math, reading, and writing sections.
Science Education AIM Report 2014-15
Page 7
CORE Attempts and Pass Rates
Teacher
Education
Program
SCIED
SOE
2013-14
CORE Test
CORE Math
Math
Exemption
CORE Writing
Writing
Exemption
CORE Reading
Reading
Exemption
CORE Math
Math
Exemption
CORE Writing
Writing
Exemption
CORE Reading
Reading
Exemption
2014-15
# test
attempts
NA
# (and %)
passed
NA
# test
attempts
1
# (and %)
passed
1 (100%)
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
1
1 (100%)
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
1
1 (100%)
NA
NA
NA
NA
15
6 (46%)
122
67 (55%)
NA
NA
1
NA
13
7 (54%)
136
56 (41%)
1
NA
1
NA
14
10 (71%)
113
75 (66%)
3
NA
NA
NA
Science Education AIM Report 2014-15
Page 8
PRAXIS II: General Science Content Knowledge Exam Summary
Science education candidates are required to pass the Praxis II General Science Content Knowledge Exam prior to student teaching. It should be
noted that all candidates are required to pass the Praxis II to be admitted to student teaching as part of Benchmark II so the pass rate is 100% upon
Benchmark II approval.
In 2014-2015, three out of six candidates passed the PRAXIS II General Science Content Knowledge Exam, resulting in a 50% pass rate. Like the
PRAXIS I exam, the candidates who did not pass the PRAXIS II exam are likely to retake the exam until they receive a passing score. Although
some candidates have taken multiple attempts, 100% of B.S. in Science Education candidates have passed the PRAXIS II exam to become eligible
for student teaching since the program began.
Over the past five years, the science education candidates have performed very well on the Praxis II General Science Content Knowledge Exam,
often exceeding national averages in many categories. In 2008-2009, five out of five candidates passed the Praxis II exam, resulting in a 100% pass
rate. In 2009-2010, six out of seven candidates passed the Praxis II exam, resulting in an 86% pass rate. In 2010-2011, ten out of eleven candidates
passed the Praxis II exam, resulting in a 91% pass rate. In 2011-2012, 5 out of 7 candidates passed the Praxis II exam, resulting in a 71% pass rate.
In 2012-2013, 5 out of 10 candidates passed the Praxis II exam, resulting in a 50% pass rate. In 2013-2014, four out of six candidates passed the
PRAXIS II exam, resulting in a 67% pass rate. Due to the small number of candidates taking the exam in any given year, the pass rates have varied
from year to year.
Science Education Praxis Test Code – 10435
Content Test from ETS
08/09
09/10
(0435)
7
5
Number of Examinees:
187
197
Highest Observed Score:
142
161
Lowest Observed Score:
154
154
WI Score Needed to Pass:
10/11
11/12
12/13
13/14
14/15
11
200
146
154
7
177
144
154
10
177
144
154
6
200
139
154
6
170
141
154
Number with WI Passing
Score:
5/5
6/7
10/11
5/7
5/10
4/6
3/6
Percent with WI Passing
Score:
100%
86%
91%
71%
50%
67%
50%
Science Education AIM Report 2014-15
Page 9
In 2014-2015, the candidates scored highest in the areas of Scientific Principles, Physical Science, and Science, Technology, and Society. The mean
score in the Physical Science section exceeded the national averages. The lowest scores occurred in the areas of Life Science and Earth and Space
Science. Due to the small sample sizes, the scores on each section vary from year to year.
Percent Correct (percentage of items answered correctly) by Area
UW-Stout
Points
SCIED Test Category
Available 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13
Scientific Principles
12
82
82
73
66
63
Physical Science
48
74
63
67
61
57
Life Science
23-24
72
75
74
66
69
Earth and Space Science
24
72
66
67
57
60
Science Technology &
Society
12
80
75
83
77
59
13/14
82
70
65
61
14/15
67
68
60
60
National
14/15
70
66
74
67
76
71
72
The trends over the past five years indicate that candidates generally score the highest on Scientific Principles and Science, Technology, and Society
The section with the lowest scores has varied from one year to the next, indicating that the program provides a good balance of curriculum and
instruction in all disciplines of science. Typically, the candidate’s test scores are strongest in the science subject areas in which they will be certified
to teach and weakest in the areas they will not be certified to teach, which would be expected. These trends will continue to be monitored each year
to identify long-term trends.
Science Education AIM Report 2014-15
Page 10
Science Education AIM Report 2014-15
Page 11
PRAXIS I and II First Time Test Takers
Beginning in 2013-14, all teacher preparation programs in the state of Wisconsin are required to report on “the passage rate on the first attempt of
students and graduates of the program on examinations administered for licensure” (Act 166, section 17). In 2014-2015, the science education
program had one first-time test taker attempt the CORE exam. This candidate passed the math, writing, and reading section, resulting in a 100% pass
rate for all three sections. In 2013-2014, the science education program had two first time test takers attempt the PPST exam. One of two candidates
passed the math section (50%), one of two candidates passed the writing section (50%), and two of two candidates passed the reading section
(100%).
Teacher
Education
Program
SCIED
SOE
Teacher
Education
Program
SCIED
SOE
Spring 2013
PPST Test
Math
Writing
Reading
Math
Writing
Reading
# first time
test takers
2
2
2
63
65
63
2013-14
# (and %)
passed
2 (100%)
2 (100%)
1 (50%)
52 (83%)
40 (62%)
40 (63%)
# first time
test takers
2
2
2
56
53
56
2013-14
CORE Test
CORE Math
CORE Writing
CORE Reading
CORE Math
CORE Writing
CORE Reading
# first time
test takers
NA
NA
NA
13
11
13
# (and %)
passed
NA
NA
NA
6 (46%)
5 (45%)
9 (69%)
# (and %)
passed
1 (50%)
1 (50%)
2 (100%)
48 (86%)
25 (47%)
28 (50%)
2014-15
# first time
test takers
1
1
1
87
92
97
# (and %)
passed
1 (100%)
1 (100%)
1 (100%)
56 (64%)
41 (45%)
68 (70%)
In 2014-2015, the science education program had two first time test takers attempt the PRAXIS II General Science Content Knowledge Exam. One
of two candidates passed, resulting in a 50% pass rate. In 2013-2014, three of five first time test takers passed the PRAXIS II exam, resulting in a
60% pass rate. In the spring of 2013, four of six first time test takers passed the PRAXIS II exam, resulting in a 67% pass rate. This data will
continue to be monitored each year to identify trends that might be more useful and reliable for informing programmatic decisions.
Science Education AIM Report 2014-15
Page 12
Spring 2013
SCIED
Content
Test
2013-14
2014-15
# first time
test takers
# (and %)
passed
# first time
test takers
# (and %)
passed
# first time
test takers
# (and %)
passed
6
4 (67%)
5
3 (60%)
2
1 (50%)
Science Education AIM Report 2014-15
Page 13
Benchmark Ratings
Benchmark ratings are reported by benchmark level (I, II, and III) for each requirement or question. On Benchmark I, 100% of science education
candidates passed the benchmark I interview by passing all seven interview questions from 2008 to 2011. Beginning in the spring of 2012, the
benchmark I process was changed to eliminate the interview. Now, candidates in the School of Education submit an application for review, in order
to gain admission into the School of Education. The application is first reviewed by staff in the School of Education office. If the application is
complete, the Benchmark I materials are cleared for review by the program director in each program area. Beginning Spring 2015, further
adjustments were made to the Benchmark I rubric.
In 2014-2015, five of eight science education candidates were cleared for Benchmark I review. Two candidates were denied due to failing scores on
the PPST or CORE exams. One candidate was denied for not having completed enough credits to be eligible. Similarly, in 2013-2014, one of the
two candidates who applied was cleared for review. One candidate was denied because they did not have a passing PPST or Core exam score. In
2012-2013, seven of the ten candidates who applied were cleared for review by the program director in science education. The three candidates with
incomplete applications were denied for insufficient credits, failing PPST scores, and an incomplete e-portfolio, respectively.
Benchmark I Applications
Benchmark I Applications
Cleared for Benchmark I Review
Cleared for Benchmark I Review based on score from college entrance test
Denied: No passing PPST/CORE score
Denied: Low GPA
Denied: Insufficient credits/course work
Denied: Did not receive “C” or higher in English, Speech, Intro, or
Foundation of Education courses
Denied: Missing background check
Denied: Other Reasons
201213
10
7
N/A
1
N/A
2
SCIED
201314
2
1
N/A
1
N/A
N/A
201415
8
5
N/A
2
N/A
1
SOE
201415
156
103
29
27
5
28
N/A
N/A
N/A
2
N/A
1
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
8
N/A
*Individual candidates who apply multiple times per academic year are counted twice or more. There might also be multiple reasons for candidates not clearing for Benchmark I
review. Some candidates might also have been cleared for BM I review based on PPST/CORE scores, even though they would have been cleared based on scores from their
college entrance test. Being cleared for Benchmark I review does not necessarily mean that a candidate went through with it.
Science Education AIM Report 2014-15
Page 14
After being cleared for review, the candidates’ Benchmark I application materials are then forwarded to their program director. In the fall of 2014,
four of four science education candidates passed the Benchmark I review, resulting in a 100% pass rate. Using a new rubric in the spring of 2015,
one of one science education candidates passed the Benchmark I review, resulting in a 100% pass rate. Since the spring of 2012, the science
education candidates have had a 100% pass rate on the Benchmark I review.
Benchmark I Rubric Results (new rubric)
ePortfolio Review Rubric
Foundations of Education (EDUC-326) Final
Project or Program Equivalent
Response
Deficiency
Satisfactory
Deficiency
Satisfactory
Deficiency
Satisfactory
Dispositional Review Rubric
Response
Commitment to Learning: The candidate will
demonstrate a commitment to his/her own and
his/her students’ continuous learning
Respect for Oneself and Others: The candidate
will demonstrate respect for himself/herself and
others through thoughtful and responsive
communication, showing respect and
collaboration
Commitment to Excellence: The candidate
recognizes his/her professional responsibility for
engaging in and supporting appropriate
professional practices for self and others
Deficiency
Signed Statement of Values and Dispositions
Resume
Science Education AIM Report 2014-15
Satisfactory
Deficiency
Satisfactory
Deficiency
Satisfactory
SCIED
Spring
2015
N=1
0%
100%
0%
100%
%
100%
SOE
Spring
2015
N=40
0%
100%
0%
100%
2%
98%
0%
2%
100%
98%
0%
2%
100%
98%
0%
2%
100%
98%
Page 15
Benchmark I Review Results (old rubric)
Artifact Name
Signed Statement of Values and Dispositions
Resume
Philosophy Statement
Two (2) artifacts related to the subject matter the
candidate will teach
Disposition Area
Commitment to Learning: The candidate will
demonstrate a commitment to their own and their
students continuous learning.
Respect for Oneself and Others: The candidate
will demonstrate respect for others through
thoughtful and responsive communication,
showing respect and collaboration.
Commitment to Excellence: The candidate
recognizes his/her professional responsibility for
engaging in and supporting appropriate
professional practices for self and others.
SCIED
2012-13 2013-14
SOE
Fall
2014
N=39
0%
100%
3%
97%
0%
100%
3%
97%
N=5
0%
100%
0%
100%
0%
100%
0%
100%
N=2
0%
100%
0%
100%
0%
100%
0%
100%
Fall
2014
N=4
0%
100%
0%
100%
0%
100%
0%
100%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
No Deficiency
Deficiency
100%
0%
100%
0%
100%
0%
100%
0%
100%
0%
No Deficiency
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
Response
Incomplete
Complete
Incomplete
Complete
Incomplete
Complete
Incomplete
Complete
Spring
2012
N=3
0%
100%
0%
100%
0%
100%
0%
100%
Response
Deficiency
No Deficiency
Deficiency
The science education candidates have experienced similar success on the Benchmark II interview. Since 2008, 100% of science education
candidates have passed the Benchmark II interview. In 2014-2015, three of three science education candidates passed the Benchmark II interview.
The candidates received the highest scores on their philosophy of education, instructional technology utilization, and demonstrating the ability to
teach effectively. The candidates received their lowest scores in describing what it means to be a reflective practitioner and demonstrating the ability
to create instructional opportunities adapted to diverse learners.
Science Education AIM Report 2014-15
Page 16
From 2008-2015, the highest scores have typically been on describing a reflective practitioner, instructional technology utilization, demonstrating
content knowledge, and demonstrating the ability to teach effectively. Conversely, the candidates have traditionally scored lowest on describing their
philosophy of education. The philosophy of education will continue to be an area of emphasis in the program. Since 2010, it has been recommended
that all instructors in science, technology, and math education courses discuss and reinforce philosophies of education as it relates to the content of
the course. The philosophy of education portfolio artifact produced in Foundations of Education (EDUC 326) was also revised in the spring of 2015.
Benchmark II Interview Results
Question
Describe your Philosophy of Education and how it has
evolved.
Describe what it means to be a "Reflective Practitioner."
Describe the WI Teacher Standard and Domain you feel
most competent in.
Describe the WI Teacher Standard and Domain you
have experienced the greatest growth.
Provide Portfolio evidence (signed copy of the
Instructional Technology Utilization rubric) of your
competence in current instructional technology.
Science Education AIM Report 2014-15
Response
Unsatisfactory
Emerging
Basic
n/a
Unsatisfactory
Emerging
Basic
n/a
Unsatisfactory
Emerging
Basic
n/a
Unsatisfactory
Emerging
Basic
n/a
Unsatisfactory
Emerging
Basic
n/a
2008
2009
2010
N=3
0%
33%
67%
0%
0%
0%
100%
0%
0%
0%
100%
0%
0%
33%
67%
0%
NA
NA
NA
NA
N=3
0%
33%
67%
0%
0%
0%
100%
0%
0%
0%
100%
0%
0%
0%
100%
0%
NA
NA
NA
NA
N=6
0%
33%
67%
0%
0%
0%
100%
0%
0%
17%
83%
0%
0%
17%
83%
0%
0%
17%
83%
0%
SCIED
2011- 20122012
2013
N=5
0%
80%
20%
0%
0%
60%
40%
0%
0%
20%
80%
0%
0%
60%
40%
0%
0%
20%
80%
0%
N=6
0%
33%
67%
0%
0%
0%
100%
0%
0%
33%
67%
0%
0%
50%
50%
0%
0%
0%
100%
0%
20132014
N=6
0%
36%
64%
0%
0%
18%
82%
0%
0%
55%
45%
0%
0%
18%
82%
0%
0%
0%
100%
0%
20142015
SOE
20142015
N=3
N=103
0%
3%
0%
40%
100%
57%
0%
0%
0%
2%
100%
33%
0%
65%
0%
0%
0%
1%
0%
27%
100%
72%
0%
0%
0%
3%
33%
34%
67%
63%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
29%
100%
71%
0%
0%
Page 17
Reviewers choose two of the following; discuss portfolio evidence that:
Demonstrates your content knowledge.
Demonstrates your ability to create instructional
opportunities adapted to diverse learners.
Demonstrates your ability to teach effectively.
Demonstrates your ability to assess student learning.
Unsatisfactory
Emerging
Basic
n/a
Unsatisfactory
Emerging
Basic
n/a
Unsatisfactory
Emerging
Basic
n/a
Unsatisfactory
Emerging
Basic
n/a
0%
33%
67%
0%
0%
0%
67%
33%
0%
0%
0%
100%
0%
0%
0%
100%
0%
0%
33%
67%
0%
0%
0%
100%
0%
0%
33%
67%
0%
0%
33%
67%
0%
0%
0%
100%
0%
17%
83%
0%
0%
0%
100%
0%
0%
20%
80%
0%
0%
0%
100%
0%
0%
33%
67%
0%
0%
0%
100%
0%
0%
0%
100%
0%
0%
0%
100%
0%
0%
25%
75%
0%
0%
0%
100%
0%
0%
50%
50%
0%
0%
0%
100%
0%
0%
100%
0%
0%
0%
0%
100%
0%
0%
36%
64%
0%
NA
NA
NA
NA
0%
50%
50%
0%
0%
0%
100%
0%
0%
33%
67%
0%
3%
45%
53%
0%
1%
41%
58%
0%
18%
50%
32%
0%
3%
31%
66%
0%
The Benchmark III Interview occurs at the end of the student teaching semester. Science education candidates have had a 100% pass rate on the
Benchmark III interview since 2008. In 2014-2015, three of three science education candidates passed the Benchmark III interview. The science
education candidates scored highest on the portfolio artifacts from student teaching, the utilization of technology, and the alignment of artifacts to
Charlotte Danielson’s four domains and the ten Wisconsin Educator Standards. In these three categories, 100% of science education candidates
received proficient ratings, the highest rating possible. The lowest ratings on Benchmark III during the 2013-2014 school year occurred on the final
teacher candidate assessment and disposition ratings from the cooperating teacher. On the final teacher candidate assessment, one candidate (33%)
received a proficient rating (the highest possible rating) and two candidates (67%) received a basic rating. Likewise, on the disposition rating, one
candidate (33%) received a proficient rating (the highest possible rating) and two candidates (67%) received a basic rating. These results are
consistent with past years and compare favorably with other candidates in the School of Education on the Benchmark III assessment, as shown in the
right-hand column of the table provided. Professional dispositions and values will continue to be a point of emphasis in the introduction to math and
science education course and the field experiences.
Science Education AIM Report 2014-15
Page 18
Benchmark III Interview Results
Question
Artifacts from student teaching, reflection ratings.
Final Student Teaching Assessments and
Recommendations from Cooperating Teachers.
Disposition ratings from student teaching from
cooperating & University Supervisors.
Instructional Technology Utilization Rubric.
Alignment Summary of artifacts meeting all 10
Wisconsin Teaching Standards & 4 Domains/
Components & reflections/ reflection ratings.
Science Education AIM Report 2014-15
Response
Unsatisfactory
Emerging
Basic
Proficient
n/a
Unsatisfactory
Emerging
Basic
Proficient
n/a
Unsatisfactory
Emerging
Basic
Proficient
n/a
Unsatisfactory
Emerging
Basic
Proficient
n/a
Unsatisfactory
Emerging
Basic
Proficient
n/a
2008
N=0
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
2009 2010
N=3
N=4
0%
0%
0%
0%
0% 25%
100% 75%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
100% 100%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0% 100%
100%
0%
NA
0%
NA
0%
NA 75%
NA 25%
NA
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
100% 100%
0%
0%
SCIED
SOE
2011- 2012- 2013- 2014- 20142012
2013
2014
2015
2015
N=7
N=7
N=5
N=3 N=117
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
9%
100% 100% 100% 100%
91%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
14%
20%
0%
1%
0%
14%
0%
67%
24%
100%
71%
80%
33%
75%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
1%
29%
29%
20%
67%
15%
71%
71%
80%
33%
85%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
14%
14%
0%
0%
4%
86%
86% 100% 100%
96%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
1%
100% 100% 100% 100%
99%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
Page 19
Student Teaching Performance Ratings
Teacher candidates are rated by their cooperating teachers during the student teaching capstone experience in the science education program. The
following data shows how teacher candidates performed relative to each of the ten Wisconsin Educator Standards and on the use of instructional
technology. There were three science education candidates who completed student teaching during the 2014-2015 academic year. Science education
candidates met or exceeded the School of Education average on four of eleven items during the 2014-2015 academic year.
Student Teacher Evaluations
Rating Scale: 1=Unsatisfactory, 2=Emerging, 3=Basic, 4=Proficient
SCIED
20112008
2009 2010
2012
N=0
N=3 N=3
N=7
Mean Mean Mean Mean
Teachers know the subjects they are teaching.
0.00
3.75 3.67
3.86
Teachers know how children grow.
0.00
3.63 3.93
4.00
Teachers understand that children learn differently.
0.00
3.63 3.67
4.00
Teachers know how to teach.
0.00
3.63 4.00
4.00
Teachers know how to manage a classroom.
0.00
3.75 3.93
3.64
Teachers communicate well.
0.00
3.63 3.93
3.71
Teachers are able to plan different kinds of lessons.
0.00
3.88 3.73
4.00
Teachers know how to test for student progress.
0.00
3.88 4.00
3.79
Teachers are able to evaluate themselves.
0.00
3.88 3.87
3.86
Teachers are connected with other teachers and the community.
0.00
3.38 3.87
3.86
Teachers make effective use of instructional technologies to enhance student
learning.
NA
NA
3.93
4.00
20122013
N=7
Mean
3.71
3.57
3.71
3.86
3.43
3.71
3.71
3.57
3.86
3.71
20132014
N=5
Mean
3.73
3.80
3.80
3.90
3.43
3.80
3.53
3.70
3.80
3.80
20142015
N=3
Mean
3.83
3.50
3.83
3.67
3.50
3.67
3.50
3.83
3.67
3.50
SOE
20142015
N=120
Mean
3.75
3.75
3.75
3.75
3.58
3.77
3.73
3.69
3.82
3.77
3.86
3.70
3.83
3.76
In 2014-2015, the science teacher candidates scored highest in knowing the subjects they are teaching, understanding that children learn differently,
knowing how to test for student progress, and the use of instructional technologies to enhance learning. The teacher candidates scored lowest in
knowing how children grow, knowing how to manage a classroom, being able to plan different kinds of lessons, and connecting with other teachers
and the community. Due to the small sample sizes and individual differences, the strengths and weaknesses of teacher candidates vary each year.
Over the past five years, classroom management has been one of the lower rated areas for science education teacher candidates, and all teacher
candidates in the School of Education. This continues to be an area of emphasis in the program. Research shows that this is a difficult skill for
novice teachers to master. The lab and classroom management course (STMED 390) will continue to address both the theory and practices of
Science Education AIM Report 2014-15
Page 20
classroom management. The pre-student teaching and student teaching field experiences provide candidates with opportunities to apply and refine
their classroom management skills. In addition, it will be recommended that all instructors in science, technology, and math education (STMED)
courses discuss and reinforce concepts of classroom management in courses throughout the program, as it relates to the content of each course.
Finally, a new Embedded Signature Assessment (ESA) has been developed by the faculty of the School of Education to measure the candidate’s
ability to analyze the classroom environment and apply theories of classroom management. This ESA will be implemented in the Lab and Classroom
Management (STMED 390) course beginning in the fall of 2015.
Science Education AIM Report 2014-15
Page 21
edTPA
The Educative Teacher Performance Assessment or edTPA is an assessment process completed during student teaching. It is designed by educators
to answer the essential question: "Is a new teacher ready for the job?" The edTPA includes a review of teaching strategies such as lesson plans, video
clips of teaching, and assessment strategies used in teaching. The edTPA will measure the new teacher's ability to effectively teach to all students.
Starting in the 2015-16 academic year, all Wisconsin teacher candidates are required to complete the edTPA. Passing the edTPA will be a
requirement for a Wisconsin teacher license starting in 2016-17.
Science Education AIM Report 2014-15
Page 22
Educational Benchmarking Inventory (EBI)
Science education candidates complete the EBI (Scale= 1-7 with 1= not at all, 4= moderately and 7= extremely) at the conclusion of their student teaching
experience. The Science Education program did not have enough respondents (>5) to disaggregate any meaningful data from this survey.
Alumni Follow-up Survey
UW-Stout surveys graduates every two years. The next survey will be sent in 2014 for graduates in 2012 and 2008. The executive summary and full
report from the Alumni Follow-Up Study are online at the following site: http://www.uwstout.edu/static/bpa/ir/afu/2010index.html
The Science Education program does not yet have sufficient data from alumni follow-up studies conducted by the BPA office. See the full detail of
the report in Appendix B.
Communicating Assessment Data with Constituencies
Data will be communicated to content and core professional education faculty members through informal and formal means. Formally, the data and
findings will be shared with members of the science education advisory board, which includes science content faculty, school of education faculty,
and local K-12 teachers. In addition, science, technology, and mathematics education (STMED) program faculty will meet during scheduled
discipline area work group meetings (DAWG), which are specifically designed to support ongoing program improvement. The agenda and minutes
from these meetings will be kept as an artifact of this collaborative effort to improve the program effectiveness.
Utilization of Assessment Data to Improve Courses and the Program
In conclusion, science education candidates have continued to demonstrate outstanding knowledge and skills based on the assessment data collected
from 2006 to 2015. Candidates have historically performed very well on assessments required for science teacher licensure in the state of Wisconsin.
These include the PRAXIS I Pre-Professional Skills Test (PPST) or CORE Exam and the PRAXIS II General Science Content Knowledge Exam.
The average scores for science education candidates continue to exceed the average scores for the School of Education in most assessment areas.
The data shows that both science education candidates and School of Education candidates, in general, are weakest in the area of writing. To address
this area, the College of Education, Health, and Human Development has developed a set of writing guidelines to improve and foster writing
development for all students in the college. In addition, our faculty and staff have encouraged candidates in each course to take advantage of the
writing center on campus to complete their writing assignments and receive feedback and guidance for improving their writing. Finally, the School
of Education offers an elective course, EDUC 010 Praxis I: Writing, to prepare education candidates for the writing section of the Pre-Professional
Skills Test.
Science education candidates have also performed very well on the assessment data collected by the School of Education. From 2008-2014, the data
shows that 100% of science education candidates have passed Benchmark I, 100% have passed Benchmark II, and 100% have passed Benchmark III.
These results compare favorably with other candidates in the School of Education. Although 2014-2015 was an exception, the long term trend has
shown that science education candidates historically scored the lowest in response to the Benchmark II interview question asking them to describe
Science Education AIM Report 2014-15
Page 23
their philosophy of education. It was recommended in 2010 that all instructors in science, technology, and math education courses discuss and
reinforce philosophies of education as it relates to the content of the course.
For the Benchmark III interview, 100% of science education candidates have passed all of the requirements and were recommended for teaching
licensure since 2008. The lowest ratings during the 2014-2015 school year occurred in the student teacher evaluation and disposition ratings. Once
again, these results are comparable to the performance of other candidates in the School of Education on the Benchmark III assessment. Professional
dispositions and values will continue to be a point of emphasis in the introduction to math and science education course and field experience courses.
Teacher candidates are rated by their cooperating teachers during the student teaching capstone experience in the science education program. Over
the past five years, candidates have scored highest in their ability to teach and lowest in their ability to manage the classroom management.
Therefore, classroom management continues to be an area of emphasis in the program. Research shows that this is a difficult skill for novice teachers
to master. The lab and classroom management course (STMED 390) will continue to address both the theory and practices of classroom
management. In addition, the pre-student teaching and student teaching field experiences provide candidates with opportunities to apply and refine
their classroom management skills. Finally, it was recommended two years ago that all instructors in science, technology, and math education
courses discuss and reinforce the theory and practice of classroom management, as it relates to the content of each course.
The following program goals were established based on the assessment data displayed in this report. Although all of the goals will be retained and
ongoing, there is also evidence that progress has been made toward completing these goals. The newest program goal is to prepare teacher
candidates for the successful completion of the Educative Teacher Performance Assessment (edTPA). The edTPA will be required during student
teaching in the state of Wisconsin beginning in the fall of 2015. It will be consequential for teacher licensure beginning in the fall of 2016. To
accomplish this goal, I have participated on the edTPA committee and provided leadership in the School of Education to prepare for the
implementation of the edTPA. I have attended state and national conferences and lead professional development workshops for faculty and staff in
the School of Education. In the fall of 2014, all teacher candidates in the School of Education will be required to complete the edTPA. From this
experience, we hope to learn how to best prepare and support our candidates for success on this national performance evaluation.
Science Education AIM Report 2014-15
Page 24
Goals for 2015-16
2015-16 Goals
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Refer candidates to the CEHHS writing guidelines and the writing center in science, technology, and math education (STMED) courses for
support and feedback on their writing.
Refer candidates to the PPST tutor and enroll in the elective course, EDUC 010 Praxis I: Writing, as needed.
Refer candidates to the PRAXIS II exam preparation books located in the Library Learning Center.
Monitor the PRAXIS II exam scores by category and identify long term trends in candidate performance.
Emphasize philosophies of education and the theories and practices of classroom management across the curriculum, in a variety of different
courses and contexts.
Continue to compile teacher candidate evaluation data to obtain larger sample sizes.
Educate candidates in the introduction to math and science education (STMED 101) course about the e-portfolio artifacts and help lab to
improve candidates’ ability to use an e-portfolio to demonstrate their knowledge and skills.
Embed learning activities and assignments in science, technology, engineering, and math education course to address all three categories of
the instructional technology utilization rubric, including administrative software, presentation software, and interactive whiteboards.
To prepare teacher candidates for the successful completion of the Educative Teacher Performance Assessment (edTPA).
Science Education AIM Report 2014-15
Page 25