2013-14 School of Education Undergraduate Unit Assessment /
School of Education
Undergraduate Unit Assessment /
DPI 2014 Annual Report
2013-14
By: Dr. Brian McAlister, Director & Submitted: October 2014
Dr. Anthony Beardsley, Assessment Coordinator
Table of Contents
Introduction
The School of Education (SOE) celebrates the 129 undergraduate students that were awarded a degree in education and 23 students that were awarded a degree in Career, Technical Education and Training during the 2013-2014 academic year. SOE undergraduate programs are committed to achieve the vision and mission of the university and have compiled impressive data that supports that commitment. Each program has documented gains in specific areas of focus which are reported within their program AIM reports (see table 1). This Unit Report will provide overview data and analysis as well as provide specific input into what has been learned from the existing assessment system and what has been initiated as a result.
Program
Art Education
Early Childhood Education
Family Consumer Sciences Education
Marketing and Business Education
Science Education
Special Education
Technology & Science Education
Technology Education
Career, Technical Education and Training
# of 2013/2014 Graduates (# Endorsed Candidates for Licensure)
20 (18)
55
10
(44)
(9)
6
5
17
0
16
23
(5)
(5)
(15)
(0)
(14)
N/A
Page 2
School of Education Response to previous AIM Report(s) and Department of Public Instruction
Annual Report
All assessment reports were shared with the Dean, Provost, School of Education Advisory Board, School of Education Council, and
School of Education faculty and staff.
Consistently monitored candidate pass rates on the PPST and PRAXIS II to determine need for curricular and/or programmatic changes (see table 1).
Investigated potential need for increased emphasis in the curricular areas of assessment and classroom management strategies based on EBI and Student Teacher data over time.
Selected programs worked with UW-Stout’s Career Services office to improve services for candidates in the School of Education.
SOE made the following improvements to the assessment system: a.
Designed a more efficient system of acquiring raw data regarding student participation on the PPST b.
Reviewed dissemination options for program data c.
Updated and improved the SOE Webpage d.
Provided current links to Program reports on the SOE Webpage
Improved the design of the data tracking system for the PRAXIS tutors to effectively monitor the effectiveness of the program.
Improvements to the clinical placement process continued to be initiated as provided in DPI recommendations.
Based on recommendations from DPI Consultant Paul Trilling, course content and activities for EDUC-727 were adjusted in order to place an increased emphasis on the School of Education’s conceptual framework and assessment system. Collaboration with the field experience coordinator and two tenured professors teaching the course took place during the design of the modifications to the format and delivery of the course. Course objectives were not changed as a result of the modifications. The changes were implemented during the summer of 2012 in both sections of the course. Student feedback indicated that the content and structure of the course was well received (Appendix J).
Supervision of Pupil Services, an online training module, was created during the summer 2012 session. The module was pilot tested during late summer/fall 2012 and went live on the web during the fall 2012 term.
Page 3
Previous Goals and Evidence
2013-2014 Goals
1 Implement the new Career and Technical Education doctoral Program. a.
First cohort to begin in the fall of 2013. b.
Initiate collection of evaluation data for the program.
Evidence of Success
The first doctoral program in the history of University of Wisconsin-Stout, an Ed.D. in Career and Technical Education, was approved by UW-System and the Higher Learning Commission.
The first cohort started in fall 2013. Recruitment for the second cohort occurred during 2013-14.
The first Assessment in the Major report for this program will be submitted in fall 2014.
2 Continue to integrate the edTPA within the teacher preparation process. a.
Scale up the implementation process by increasing the number of teacher candidates who complete an edTPA b.
Engage faculty in the process of local evaluation for completed edTPAs. c.
Initiate a seminar to assist students and faculty as edTPAs are attempted. d.
Identify specific courses where embedded signature assignments will be located and a process to evaluate effectiveness.
The edTPA Implementation Committee has been active throughout the year.
Members have attended as well as presented at both national and state level conferences addressing the challenges of initiating the edTPA. a.
The number of teacher candidates has increased every semester:
Spring 2013 = 2 students; Fall 2013 = 10 students; Spring of 2014 =
20 students; and we project that all teacher candidate will be completing an edTPA by the Fall of 2014 b.
Faculty engagement in the edTPA has been at a high level throughout the year. Committee meetings, workshops, and one-on-one training sessions have been offered and were well attended. c.
Seminars have been conducted every semester since the beginning of the edTPA initiative. Three seminars are required for teacher candidates and specific content is covered to assist with the completion of the edTPA d.
A Curriculum Mapping Workshop was held during the 2013 spring semester to begin the process of matching courses to specific edTPA
Rubrics.
Page 4
3 Continue to improve the assessment process with valid and reliable measures. a.
Identify significant edTPA milestones to be included within the
Benchmark system. b.
Monitor and evaluate student progress with the new CORE test c.
Monitor and evaluate student progress with the new Reading test
4 The SOE Marketing Committee will be separated into two subcommittees: one for graduate/CTE programs and one for undergraduate licensure programs. a.
Increased enrollment of underrepresented populations will be a goal for both sub-committees. b.
The evaluation design for collection and reporting will be streamlined.
5 Develop action plans to address the recommendations from the
Technology Task Force.
A Benchmark Committee has been formed to update and enhance the existing Benchmark System. Recommendations will be presented to the SOE
Counsel for adoption. a.
Using Chapter PI 34 and edTPA as points of reference, the committee began the process of identifying the specific milestones needed to be met to address each Benchmark. b.
The CORE test has been available for student use starting in
September 1, 2013. Results are being collected and will be monitored and evaluated as necessary. c.
The FORT (Reading) test has been available for student use starting
January, 2014. Results are being collected and will be monitored and evaluated as necessary.
This goal has been changed because of a new initiative that University
Marketing is rolling out during the fall of 2014. They plan to collaborate with program directors to create a program specific marketing plan for each program in the university. The SOE was lucky enough to get ahead of the curve. We started working with marketing during the summer of 2014 on four of our high need areas, Family Consumer Science, Marketing and
Business Education, Technology Education and Science Education. Program specific marketing plans for the rest of the SOE programs will be occurring during 2014-2015.
This initiative was held up while the School of Education drafted a plan to revise our bylaws. The SOE governance committee met over the summer of
2013 and brought a proposed bylaws change that included a plan to create a
SOE technology committee. This change, if approved, will create a systemic change by embedding this work more permanently into the fabric of the
School of Education.
Page 5
6 Explore the viability of creating common professional courses by piloting courses for the CTE related undergraduate programs in
TECED, MBE, and FCSE.
The Family and Consumer Science Education, Marketing/Business
Education and Technology Education programs collaborated to revise a set of Career and Technical Education courses so that they could be used as a common professional core for a new distance delivery initiative to better meet a broader market. It is believed that this approach may allow us to serve an audience of place bound individuals regardless of their location in the state. We are launching this new initiative this fall and will have the ability to track their performance as compared to our candidates following our tradition campus track.
Page 6
Table 1: The following table provides links to each program’s assessment in the major report. Each report documents what each program is learning from our assessment system.
Program 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14
Art Education http://www.uwstout.edu/soe/assess/upload/10-12-
2012-ART-ED-2011-12-Program-AIM-Report.pdf
http://www.uwstout.edu/soe/assess/upload/ARTED-AIM-
Report-2012-13.pdf
http://www.uwstout.edu/soe/assess/upload/ARTED-AIM-
Report-2013-2014.pdf
Early Childhood Education http://www.uwstout.edu/soe/assess/upload/10-12-
2012-ECE-2011-12-Program-AIM-Report.pdf
http://www.uwstout.edu/soe/assess/upload/ECE-AIM-
Report-2012-13.pdf
http://www.uwstout.edu/soe/assess/upload/ECE-AIM-
Report-2013-2014.pdf
Family and Consumer Science
Education http://www.uwstout.edu/soe/assess/upload/10-12-
2012-FCSE-2011-12-Program-AIM-Report.pdf
Marketing and Business
Education
Math Education http://www.uwstout.edu/soe/assess/upload/10-12-
2012-MBE-2011-12-Program-AIM-Report.pdf
N/A
Science Education
Special Education
Technology Education
Technology and Science
Education
School Counseling http://www.uwstout.edu/soe/assess/upload/10-12-
2012-SCIED-2011-12-Program-AIM-Report.pdf
http://www.uwstout.edu/soe/assess/upload/10-12-
2012-SPED-2011-12-Program-AIM-Report.pdf
http://www.uwstout.edu/soe/assess/upload/10-12-
2012-TE-2011-12-Program-AIM-Report.pdf
http://www.uwstout.edu/soe/assess/upload/10-12-
2012-TE-and-Sci-2011-12-Program-AIM-Report.pdf
School Psychology MS &
Ed.S. http://www.uwstout.edu/soe/assess/upload/10-12-
2012-SCOUN-2011-12-Program-AIM-Report.pdf
http://www.uwstout.edu/soe/assess/upload/10-12-
2012-SPSY-AIM-2011-12.pdf
http://www.uwstout.edu/soe/assess/upload/FCSE-AIM-
Report-2012-13.pdf
http://www.uwstout.edu/soe/assess/upload/MBE-AIM-
Report-2012-13.pdf
N/A http://www.uwstout.edu/soe/assess/upload/SCIED-AIM-
Report-2012-13.pdf
http://www.uwstout.edu/soe/assess/upload/SPED-AIM-
Report-2012-13.pdf
http://www.uwstout.edu/soe/assess/upload/TECED-AIM-
Report-2012-13.pdf
http://www.uwstout.edu/soe/assess/upload/TE-SCIED-
AIM-Report-2012-13.pdf
http://www.uwstout.edu/soe/assess/upload/FCSE-AIM-
Report-2013-2014.pdf
http://www.uwstout.edu/soe/assess/upload/MBE-AIM-
Report-2013-2014.pdf
N/A http://www.uwstout.edu/soe/assess/upload/SCIED-AIM-
Report-2013-2014.pdf
http://www.uwstout.edu/soe/assess/upload/SPED-AIM-
Report-2013-2014.pdf
http://www.uwstout.edu/soe/assess/upload/TECED-AIM-
Report-2013-2014.pdf
http://www.uwstout.edu/soe/assess/upload/TE-SCIED-
AIM-Report-2013-2014.pdf
http://www.uwstout.edu/soe/assess/upload/SCOUN-AIM-
Report-2012-13.pdf
http://www.uwstout.edu/soe/assess/upload/SPSY-AIM-
Report-2012-13.pdf
http://www.uwstout.edu/soe/assess/upload/SCOUN-AIM-
Report-2013-2014.pdf
http://www.uwstout.edu/soe/assess/upload/SPSY-AIM-
Report-2013-2014.pdf
Page 7
Progress Implementing the Teacher Performance Assessment (edTPA)
Wisconsin is committed to preparing effective teachers. As a part of that commitment the School of Education is making certain that all Stout initial license applicants are ready to teach prior to applying for a license. The Teacher Performance Assessment (edTPA) has been selected as the means for determining readiness to teach and will be required for all student teachers beginning in the fall of
2015. By the fall of 2016, a passing score on the edTPA will be required to be approved for licensure.
In preparing for this new assessment, SOE has engaged in a number of training activities and has explored creative strategies for infusing supporting concepts within the curriculum. The following specific activities have been completed this year:
1.
Leadership team members have attended edTPA sessions at state and national conferences.
2.
Faculty members have presented sessions reviewing progress and sharing insights about the edTPA at state and national conferences.
3.
Faculty members have created introductory videos for student and new faculty use.
4.
A seminar support system has been initiated to provide specific content and allow for dedicated time for students to create their edTPA documents and share with other students.
5.
SOE Director continues to provide state level leadership working with the UW-System grant to provide state-wide training opportunities for private and public teacher training institutions.
6.
A team of faculty members attended the edTPA state-wide workshops.
7.
A faculty level edTPA Implementation Committee continues to provide leadership and support to faculty and students during the phase-in process.
8.
A Committee has been established to review and revise the Benchmark System to make the system complimentary to the edTPA process.
9.
Five faculty members have been trained and approved for national scoring of the edTPA.
Benchmark Tracking
The UW-Stout School of Education Assessment System is designed so that candidate progress in the undergraduate and graduate programs is reviewed at various points and data is gathered from multiple assessment measures.
Page 8
Benchmark I: Acceptance into Program/School of Education
The UW-Stout School of Education Assessment System is designed so that candidate progress is reviewed at various points.
Benchmark I is the first level of assessment. The purpose of the Benchmark I review process is to determine student readiness to become a teacher candidate in one of the programs within the School of Education at the University of Wisconsin-Stout.
Note: Professional education and program-specific activities including: pre-clinical and clinical experiences; methods, curriculum, and evaluation courses which are available only after student is accepted into teacher education via the Benchmark I review .
Students must complete the following to be cleared for Benchmark I Review:
1.
Completed 40 semester credit hours.
2.
Cumulative GPA of 2.75 at Stout.
3.
Passed the Wisconsin background check.
4.
Passed the PPST or CORE tests (score reports must be provided to the School of Education: HERH 267)
5.
Reading 175/322
Math 173/318
Writing 174/320
CORE Reading 156
CORE Writing 150
CORE Math 162
OR
Scores from one of the following three college entrance tests:
The ACT Test: Composite Score of 23 with minimum score of 20 on English, Math, and Reading.
The SAT Test: Composite Score of 1070 with minimum score of 450 on Math and Verbal.
The GRE Revised General Test: Composite Score of 298 with minimum score of 150 on Verbal and 145 on Math.
6.
Completed/Currently Enrolled in the required college English and speech courses; ENGL-101, ENGL-102, SPCOM-100
(minimum grade of "C" required for Benchmark; some program standards may be higher).
7.
Completed/Currently Enrolled in Introduction to the major course (minimum grade of "C" required for Benchmark; some program standards may be higher).
8.
Completed/Currently Enrolled in EDUC-326 Foundations of Education course (minimum grade of "C" required for
Benchmark; some program standards may be higher).
Page 9
The Benchmark I Review Process consists of three phases:
PHASE 1 - Application Review:
Benchmark I Application is due by February 15th for spring review and September 15th for fall review.
The candidate will receive an e-mail indicating their Application Review Status (cleared/not cleared) and provided instructions for the
Portfolio Review if they have been cleared to proceed.
PHASE 2 - Portfolio Review:
The ePortfolio will be checked to verify that it includes the following artifacts:
1.
Signed School of Education Statement of Values and Dispositions
2.
Resume
3.
Philosophy Statement
4.
Two (2) artifacts related to the subject matter the candidate will teach
PHASE 3 - Dispositional Review:
A group of program faculty will convene to perform a formal dispositional review of each candidate.
Upon completion of all three phases, candidates will be notified via e-mail whether they have successfully passed the Benchmark I
Review. 99 students successfully earned Benchmark I status during 2012-13.
PRAXIS I: Pre-Professional Skills Test/CORE Tests
Educational Testing Service Institutional Report
The PRAXIS I: Pre-Professional Skills Test (PPST) is required for teacher certification by the Wisconsin Department of Public
Instruction. Teacher candidates are not admitted into the teacher education program until they pass the PPST. The PPST is administered through the Educational Testing Service (ETS).
The PPST consists of three tests: Reading, Writing and Mathematics. All three tests must be passed to meet the SOE Education’s
Benchmark I requirements. These tests can be taken in a handwritten format in traditional testing settings at designated sites and times or by computer at designated sites.
Beginning with fall 2013 semester, candidates could alternatively choose to take the CORE reading, writing and mathematics tests instead. Also, candidates could meet their Benchmark I requirements through scores on their college entrance exam. In fall 2014, the
CORE tests have replaced the PPST which is no longer available.
Page 10
ETS provides an annual institutional academic year summary report on all students attempting the PPST/CORE and passing rates. It also compares scores of UW-Stout students to those at the state level and the national level. See Table 2, 3 and 4 for a specific data on each test area.
Note that according to PI34.14 (1) (b) Exceptions under par. (a) Relating to the established passing scores on standardized tests or
SCD designed or approved assessments, or the minimum cumulative grade point average may be granted to no more than 10% of the total number of students admitted to the initial or advanced programs for each admission period.
In 2013-14 three exemptions were granted for the PPST Reading test, and one for the PPST Writing test.
PPST Reading
Table 2
PPST Reading
Number of Examinees:
Highest Observed Score:
Lowest Observed Score:
Median:
Average Performance Range:
Type of
Test
Paper
Comp
Paper
Comp
Paper
Comp
Paper
Comp
Paper
Comp
UW-Stout
10/11
95
131
184
185
158
162
178
177
175-180
172-180
UW-Stout
11/12
99
121
184
186
159
162
175
177
172-180
175-180
UW-Stout
12/13
39
109
185
185
162
160
176
176
173-178
171-179
WI Passing Score:
Number of attempts with WI
Passing Score:
Paper
Comp
Paper
Comp
175
72/95
83/131
175
65/99
93/121
175
24/39
69/109
Percentage of attempts with WI
Passing Score:
Paper
Comp
76%
63%
66%
77%
62%
63%
*Official ETS results report student’s highest test score. ETS no longer provides national pass rates
UW-
Stout
13/14
11
87
180
185
160
158
175
176
170-179
172-179
175
6/11
52/87
55%
60%
Wisconsin
13/14
279
2.638
185
186
155
156
175
177
170-179
174-181
175
144/279
1.914/2638
52%
73%
Page 11
Table 2 continues: average percent correct (percentage of correct answers by category)
Reading Test
Category
Points
Available
Type of
Test
UW-
Stou t
UW-
Stout
UW-
Stout
UW-
Stout
State
10/11 11/12 12/13 13/14 13/14
National
13/14
Literal
Paper 74% 70% 72% 65% 66% 64%
17-21
Comprehension
Comp 70% 76% 73% 76% 78% 78%
Critical and Inferential
Comprehension
18-23
Paper 70% 68%
Comp 75% 74%
66%
69%
62%
69%
62%
73%
58%
73%
These scores reflect the fact that this year many of the students with higher scores on the ACT were not required to take the PPST
Reading test.
Page 12
Page 13
PPST Writing
Table 3: The PPST Writing test results show Stout students percentage passing is lower than the state average.
PPST Writing
Type of Test
UW-
Stout
10/11
UW-
Stout
11/12
UW-
Stout
12/13
UW-
Stout
13/14
Number of Examinees:
Highest Observed Score:
Lowest Observed Score:
Median:
Paper
Comp
Paper
Comp
Paper
Comp
Paper
Comp
97
133
181
183
164
167
175
174
110
134
184
184
164
167
174
175
34
122
181
185
166
164
175
175
9
80
178
181
171
166
173
174
Average Performance Range:
Paper
Comp
173-176 172-176 173-176 172-175
173-176 172-177 173-176 172-176
Paper
WI Passing Score: 174 174 174 174
Number with WI Passing
Score:
Percent with WI Passing
Comp
Paper
Comp
Paper
56/97
87/133
58%
59/110
89/134
54%
21/34
86/122
62%
4/9
50/80
44%
Score: Comp 65% 66% 70% 63%
*Official ETS results report student’s highest test score. ETS no longer provides national pass rates
Wisconsin
13/14
189
2,676
185
189
154
152
173
175
171-175
173-177
174
94/189
1,879/2,676
50%
70%
Page 14
The ETS institutional report indicates that our candidates had a better pass rate on the computerized version of the PPST Writing test vs. the paper and pencil version.
Table 3 continues: average percent correct (percentage of items correctly per category)
Writing Test
Category
Grammatical
Relationships
Structural
Relationships
Points
Available
11-13
14-16
Type of
UW-
Stout
10/11
UW-
Stout
11/12
UW-
Stout
12/13
UW-
Stout
13/14
State
13/14
Test
Paper 56% 56% 56% 49% 54%
Comp 55% 58% 59% 55% 59%
Paper 60% 57% 60% 54% 51%
Comp 59% 58% 59% 57% 61%
National
13/14
52%
59%
50%
60%
Idiom/Word Choice
Mechanics
Essay
10-12
12
Paper 53% 55% 50% 44% 48%
Comp 58% 61% 61% 60% 62%
Paper 63% 63% 63% 65% 62%
Comp 63% 62% 65% 63% 64%
46%
61%
58%
63%
In all four writing test categories, UW-Stout students scored very close to the state average.
Page 15
Page 16
PPST Mathematics
Table 4
PPST Mathematics
Number of Examinees:
Highest Observed Score:
Lowest Observed Score:
Median:
Average Performance Range:
WI Passing Score:
Type of
Test
Paper
Comp
Paper
Comp
Paper
Comp
Paper
Comp
Paper
Comp
Paper
Comp
Paper
Comp
UW-
Stout
10/11
81
115 120 91 68
188
188
164
163
188
188
154
163
189
189
165
157
184
186
162
164
179 177 178 172
177 177 178 178
175-183 172-183 172-181 167-177
174-180 174-181 174-182 175-182
173
UW-
Stout
11/12
90
173
UW-
Stout
12/13
36
173
UW-
Stout
13/14
9
173
Wisconsin
13/14
236
2,418
189
190
159
150
176
179
170-181
174-183
173
Number with WI Passing
Score:
64/81
94/115
67/90
101/120
26/36
76/91
4/9
58/68
Percent with WI Passing
Score:
Paper
Comp
79%
82%
74%
84%
72%
84%
44%
85%
*Official ETS results report student’s highest test score. ETS no longer provides national pass rates
154/236
2,023/2,418
65%
84%
The PPST Mathematics test results based on the ETS institutional report continue to reflect that Mathematics is our students’ strongest area.
Page 17
Table 4 continues: average percent correct (percentage of correct answers by category)
Mathematics
Test Category
Number and operations
Algebra
Geometry and
Measurement
Data Analysis and Probability
Points
Available
11-13
7-8
7-9
10
Type of
Test
Paper
Comp
Paper
Comp
Paper
Comp
Paper
Comp
UW-
Stout
UW-
Stout
UW-
Stout
UW-
Stout
10/11 11/12 12/13 13/14
58% 54% 57% 50%
64%
64%
71%
61%
67%
59%
76%
65%
62%
69%
63%
69%
65%
72%
70%
59%
71%
64%
71%
65%
76%
70%
46%
73%
59%
68%
50%
78%
State National
13/14
56%
71%
58%
74%
65%
69%
57%
78%
13/14
52%
69%
52%
71%
58%
66%
52%
76%
UW-Stout teacher candidates scored lower than the state averages but compare favorably to the national averages.
Page 18
Page 19
CORE Tests
Table 5
2013-14
CORE Test
CORE Math
CORE Writing
CORE Reading
# test attempts
15
13
14
# (and %) passed
6 (40%)
7 (54%)
10 (71%)
*Unofficial pass rates. ETS did not provide official
CORE data for the 2013-14 academic year
PPST/CORE First Time Test Takers
Beginning in the 2013-14 school year, all teacher preparation program 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).
Table 6(a)
PPST Test
Math
Writing
Reading
Table 6(b)
Spring 2013
# first time test takers
63
65
63
# (and %) passed
52 (83%)
40 (62%)
40 (63%)
# first time test takers
56
53
56
2013-14
# (and %) passed
48 (86%)
25 (47%)
28 (50%)
2013-14
CORE Test
CORE Math
CORE Writing
CORE Reading
# first time test takers
13
11
13
# (and %) passed
6 (46%)
5 (45%)
9 (69%)
Page 20
The Praxis Lab
The Praxis Tutor Lab employs two graduate students as Praxis Tutors. The Tutors assist undergraduate teacher education students in their preparation for the Praxis I: Pre-Professional Skills Test. Praxis Tutors assist with test registration; individual skills development in reading, writing, and mathematics; and serve as a central PPST resource center in order to direct students to other oncampus or off-campus Praxis resources. The Praxis Lab saw a steep decline in the number of visits and the number of different students visiting this resource center. There were two primary reasons for this decline. First, the Wisconsin Department of Public
Instructions (DPI) revised their teacher licensure requirements to allow ACT scores to meet the Praxis I test requirement. Second, the testing company “ETS” revised their Praxis I test, and through this transitional period, many students opted to hold on any test preparation or test attempts until the test changes were fully implemented. Now that all the state policies have been fully implemented, we anticipate that more students will begin utilizing the Praxis Lab regularly again.
Table 7(a)
Praxis Lab numbers – 2013-14
Students who met Tutors having not taken a PPST test 17
Students seeking information about PRAXIS II
Students who changed Major after visiting the lab
0
4
Students who met Tutors having failed a PPST test 22
Total students who met with PRAXIS Tutors 43
Table 7(b)
Students meeting with PRAXIS Tutors after failing a PPST test 2013-14
Met Tutor and passed next time
Met Tutor and did not pass next time
Met Tutor and have not re-taken PPST test yet
Total students who met Tutors having failed a PPST test
N %
14 64%
6 27%
2 9%
22 100%
Page 21
The ePortfolio Lab
In 2013-14 the ePortfolio Lab employed five undergraduate students as ePortfolio tutors (two in fall, three in spring). The tutors assist teacher education students with creating and preparing their electronic portfolios for Benchmark I, II, & III. Additionally, ePortfolio tutors make class presentations about the Chalk & Wire Portfolio System, the UW-Stout School of Education portfolio platform.
During the 2013 fall semester there were 110 tutorial sessions provided for education students at the ePortfolio Lab.
During the 2014 spring semester there were 37 tutorial sessions provided for education students at the ePortfolio Lab (incomplete number).
Benchmark I Applications
Table 8
Benchmark I Applications
Cleared for Benchmark I Review
Cleared for Benchmark I Review based on score from college entrance test
Denied: No passing PPST score
Denied: Low GPA
Denied: Insufficient credits/coursework
2012-13
SOE
141
101
N/A
16
9
4
2013-14
163
119
25
19
5
11
Denied: Did not receive “C” or higher in English, Speech, Intro, or Foundation of
Education courses
3 4
Denied: Missing background check
Denied: Other Reasons
5
6
5
9
*Individual students who apply multiple times during the academic year may be counted two or more times. There might also be multiple reasons for candidates not clearing for the Benchmark I review. Some students 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 completed the process.
Page 22
Benchmark I Review Results
Table 9
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
Response
Incomplete
Complete
Incomplete
Complete
Incomplete
Complete
Incomplete
Complete
SOE
Spring
2012
N=74
0%
100%
0%
100%
0%
100%
0%
100%
2012-13 2013-14
N=86 N=84
2% 0%
98%
1%
99%
100%
0%
100%
0%
100%
3%
97%
1%
99%
6%
94%
Response
Deficiency 0%
No Deficiency 100%
1%
99%
0%
100%
Deficiency 0%
Commitment to Excellence: The candidate recognizes his/her professional responsibility for engaging in and supporting appropriate professional practices for self and others
No Deficiency 100%
Deficiency 0%
No Deficiency 100%
0%
100%
1%
99%
0%
100%
0%
100%
Page 23
Benchmark II: Admission into Student Teaching
Benchmark II is the second level of review of candidate’s progress in the SOE assessment system. As part of the process, faculty /staff reviewers interview initial teacher candidates to determine whether students may proceed to the student teaching portion of their program. The reviewers evaluate candidates’ ability to provide ePortfolio evidence of their higher level knowledge, skills, and disposition aligned to the SOE Conceptual Framework and Standards. Candidates that successfully complete the Benchmark II review are eligible for student teaching placement pending satisfactory completion of all required courses and evidence of passing the
PRAXIS II: Subject Assessment(s).
During the Benchmark II interview, candidates are expected to demonstrate evidence of their:
Ability to communicate effectively.
Ability to articulate and provide portfolio evidence of content knowledge.
Command of the pedagogical knowledge, skills, and dispositions.
Understanding of the roles and responsibilities of a teacher.
Proficiency in adapting instruction to meet the needs of all students.
Benchmark II Application:
Student Teacher candidates complete the Benchmark II Application two semesters prior to their student teaching term.
Benchmark II Interview:
Student Teacher candidates are eligible to interview if they have:
Submitted a completed Benchmark II Application form.
Earned a minimum cumulative GPA of 2.75.
Taken or registered to take the Praxis II Assessment Test.
Completed or enrolled in Pre-Student Teaching Field Experience(s).
(Minimum grade of "C" required for Benchmark II; some program standards may be higher)
Completed or enrolled in Education core courses.
(Minimum grade of "C" required for Benchmark II; some program standards may be higher)
Page 24
Benchmark II Prerequisite Checklist is available for students insure all requirements have been met.
Student Teaching Placement
Student teaching placements are coordinated for those candidates who have:
Satisfied all Benchmark II requirements
Passed the Benchmark II interview
Passed the Praxis II: Subject Assessment(s)
101 undergraduate students successfully earned Benchmark II status in their majors in 2013/14.
PRAXIS II Content Test
All Wisconsin teacher education students must pass a PRAXIS II content specific test for acceptance into Benchmark II and become eligible to student teach. No exceptions are granted by the School of Education for the PRAXIS II.
Praxis II report data is general and does not clearly differentiate among undergraduate teacher education students, graduate teacher education students, teachers who want to add-on an additional teacher certification or the “certification only” category.
Note that the number of examinees taking a designated content test varies by content test area.
Note: The pass rate of PRAXIS II tests reported in 2013-14 was 82%.
Page 25
Business Education began new test in 2010/11, Art Education and Technology Education began new tests in 2011-2012.
Due to low n, ETS did not provide 2013/14 data on the Business Education and Marketing Education PRAXIS II tests.
Page 26
Praxis II First Time Test Takers
Beginning in the 2013-14 school year, all teacher preparation program 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).
Table 10
Praxis II
Content Test
ARTED
Business Ed.
ECE
FCSE
Marketing
Ed.
SCIED
SPED
TECED
Spring 2013
# first time test takers
8
4
27
5
# (and %) passed
6 (75%)
4 (100%)
23 (85%)
4 (80%)
3
6
9
6
3 (100%)
4 (67%)
5 (56%)
6 (100%)
2013-14
# first time test takers
12
# (and
%) passed
8 (67%)
2
22
10
2 (100%)
19 (86%)
9 (90%)
3
5
17
11
1 (33%)
3 (60%)
9 (53%)
11 (100%)
Page 27
Interview Results
Table 11(a)
Benchmark II Interviews – Fall 2013
Major
ARTED
ECE
FCSE
Math Ed.
MBE
SCIED
SPED
TECED
Applied
4
3
10
7
7
10
4
1
Passed First
Interview
4
3
10
7
7
9
4
1
Passed
Second
Interview
NA
0
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
All SOE 46 45 0
Table 11(b)
Major
ARTED
Benchmark II Interviews – Spring 2014
Applied
7
Passed First
Interview
7
Passed
Second
Interview
NA
ECE
FCSE
27
3
25
3
2
NA
Math Ed.
MBE
SCIED
SPED
TECED
0
3
2
9
5
NA
1
2
9
4
NA
2
NA
NA
1
All SOE 56 51 5
Page 28
Table 12: Benchmark II Interview Results SOE Unit
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
Response
Unsatisfactory
Emerging
Basic
Not Observed
Unsatisfactory
Emerging
Basic
Not Observed
Unsatisfactory
Emerging
Basic
Not Observed
Unsatisfactory
Emerging
Basic
Not Observed
Unsatisfactory
Emerging
Basic
Not Observed
2008 2009 2010
2011-
2012
2012-
2013
2013-
2014
N=147 N=129 N=80 N=123 N=128 N=119
1% 2% 1% 1%
36% 29% 41% 39%
62% 69% 58% 60%
1% 0% 0% 0%
1% 2% 1% 0%
31% 22% 34% 30%
66% 76% 64% 70%
1% 0% 0% 0%
1% 2% 0% 1%
26% 19% 31% 26%
72% 79% 69% 73%
1% 0% 0% 0%
0% 2% 0% 2%
32% 26% 32% 32%
66% 72% 68% 66%
2%
NA
0%
NA
0% 0%
0% 0%
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
52% 29%
48% 71%
0% 0%
2%
39%
59%
0%
1%
30%
69%
0%
2%
30%
68%
0%
2%
31%
66%
0%
1%
26%
73%
0%
0%
31%
69%
0%
1%
16%
84%
0%
0%
38%
62%
0%
0%
24%
76%
0%
0%
24%
76%
0%
Table 12: Benchmark II Interview Results SOE Unit continued
Reviewers choose 2 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 0%
Emerging 11%
2%
14%
2%
27%
2%
30%
Basic 34% 31% 71% 69%
Not Observed 55% 53% 0% 0%
Unsatisfactory 0%
Emerging 18%
8%
8%
3%
40%
5%
35%
Basic 31% 34% 57% 60%
Not Observed 51% 50% 0% 0%
Unsatisfactory 0%
Emerging 10%
0%
3%
4% 3%
25% 34%
Basic 7% 12% 71% 62%
Not Observed 83% 85% 0% 0%
Unsatisfactory 0%
Emerging 17%
1%
17%
2%
41%
4%
40%
Basic 23% 36% 57% 56%
Not Observed 60% 46% 0% 0%
2%
34%
64%
0%
2%
43%
55%
0%
0%
44%
56%
0%
1%
45%
54%
0%
0%
25%
75%
0%
1%
43%
56%
0%
0%
42%
58%
0%
1%
35%
64%
0%
Page 30
Benchmark III: Program Completion
Benchmark III is the final review that occurs at the culmination of student teaching (clinical practice). Upon graduation most candidates are endorsed for appropriate licensure.
110 undergraduate students graduated meeting the requirements to obtain an initial license to teach in Wisconsin.
The UW-Stout School of Education Assessment System is designed so that candidate progress is reviewed at various points. Benchmark III is the final review that occurs at the culmination of student teaching (clinical practice). Upon completion of all degree requirements, candidates are endorsed for appropriate licensure.
Complete the following to be cleared for Benchmark III Review:
1.
Portfolio Assessment
2.
Final student teaching (clinical practice) assessment(s) including two written observations per quarter
3.
Recommendation letter(s) from Cooperating Teacher(s)
4.
Disposition rating(s) from Cooperating Teacher(s)
5.
Instructional Technology Utilization Rubric
6.
Review of alignment summary
Student Teacher Performance Ratings
The School of Education uses Danielson’s domains and the Wisconsin Teacher Standards as components of the framework for student teacher competency evaluations. Cooperating teachers utilize these competencies to rate student teachers on their final performance evaluation.
Student teaching placements vary among programs. The numbers have been tabulated by averaging the scores per item per candidate rather than on each experience.
Early Childhood Education candidates complete three student teaching placements at the preschool, kindergarten and primary levels.
Art Education student teachers complete two nine-week student teaching placements at the elementary and secondary levels.
Family and Consumer Sciences Education, Marketing and Business Education, Science Education, and Technology Education student teachers complete two nine-week student teaching placements at the middle school and high school levels.
Special Education candidates complete a semester long student teaching placement at either the elementary, middle or high school level depending on their individual licensure needs.
Page 31
Table 13: Student Teacher Evaluations SOE Unit
Rating Scale: 1=Unsatisfactory, 2=Emerging, 3=Basic, 4=Proficient
Teachers know the subjects they are teaching
Teachers know how children grow
Teachers understand that children learn differently
Teachers know how to teach
Teachers know how to manage a classroom
Teachers communicate well
Teachers are able to plan different kinds of lessons
Teachers know how to test for student progress
Teachers are able to evaluate themselves
Teachers are connected with other teachers and the community
Teachers make effective use of instructional technologies to enhance student learning.
2008 2009
SOE UNIT
2010
2011-
2012
2012-
2013
2013-
2014
N=135 N=152 N=120 N=151 N=134 N=183
Mean Mean Mean Mean Mean Mean
3.71
3.61
3.68
3.61
3.54
3.61
3.64
3.65
3.69
3.68
3.80 3.78
3.73 3.82
3.76 3.73
3.78 3.84
3.71 3.65
3.71 3.78
3.80 3.77
3.65 3.75
3.80 3.78
3.64 3.70
3.80 3.82
3.74 3.71
3.75 3.72
3.78 3.75
3.66 3.60
3.73 3.77
3.80 3.74
3.76 3.63
3.78 3.86
3.80 3.71
3.75
3.70
3.72
3.71
3.58
3.72
3.72
3.61
3.82
3.76
NA NA 3.91 3.83 3.80 3.74
Page 32
Page 33
3.80 3.77 3.74
Each of the program/certification areas has been analyzed to determine patterns in student teacher competency ratings from cooperating teachers. The highest and lowest component rating means and the Wisconsin Teacher Standards rating means for each program for years
2011-12 through 2013-14 are displayed below.
Table 14(a): The highest teacher standard means for 2011/2012-2013/2014 are as follows:
Wisconsin Teacher Standard
Academic
Year 2011-
2012
Wisconsin Teacher Standard
1: Know subjects teaching
Tied - Highest mean
7: Able to plan different kinds of lessons
Tied – Highest mean
3.80
3.80
9: Able to evaluate themselves
Highest mean
1: Know subjects teaching
2 nd
Highest Mean
Academic
Year 2012-
2013
3.86
3.82
Wisconsin Teacher Standard
9: Able to evaluate themselves
Highest mean
10: Connected with other teachers
2 nd
Highest Mean
Academic
Year 2013-
2014
3.82
3.76
10: Connected with other teachers
Tied – Highest mean
6: Communicate well
3rd Highest mean
11: Make effective use of instructional technologies
3rd Highest mean
Table 14(b): The lowest teacher standard means for 2011/2012-2013/2014 are as follows:
Wisconsin Teacher Standard
Academic
Year 2011-
2012
Wisconsin Teacher Standard Academic
Year 2012-
2013
5: Classroom management lowest mean
10: Communicate well
2 nd
lowest mean
3.66
3.73
5: Classroom management lowest mean
8: Know to test for student progress
2 nd
lowest mean
3.60
3.63
Wisconsin Teacher Standard
5: Classroom management lowest mean
8: Know to test for student progress
2 nd
lowest mean
Academic
Year 2013-
2014
3.58
3.61
Page 34
Interview Results
Table 15: Benchmark III Interview Results SOE Unit
Number
1
2
3
4
5
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
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
3%
32%
63%
2%
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0%
5%
33%
62%
0%
0%
0%
6%
13%
81%
0%
2008 2009
SOE UNIT
2010
2011-
2012
2012-
2013
2013-
2014
N=143 N=127 N=138 N=133 N=108 N=127
0%
5%
39%
0%
2%
24%
0%
0%
24%
0%
2%
24%
0%
2%
23%
0%
2%
16%
53%
3%
74%
0%
76%
0%
74%
0%
75%
0%
83%
0%
1%
20%
43%
36%
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0%
2%
24%
72%
2%
0%
0%
9%
15%
75%
1%
8%
23%
69%
0%
1%
0%
17%
82%
0%
0%
5%
32%
62%
0%
0%
0%
25%
5%
71%
0%
1%
20%
76%
3%
0%
1%
19%
77%
3%
1%
1%
20%
78%
0%
0%
0%
14%
8%
75%
3%
6%
23%
71%
0%
0%
3%
19%
79%
0%
0%
7%
25%
68%
0%
0%
0%
1%
3%
96%
0%
2%
13%
85%
0%
0%
2%
6%
92%
0%
0%
5%
19%
76%
0%
0%
0%
1%
1%
98%
0%
Page 35
Foundations of Reading Test (FORT)
Beginning January 2014 all graduates from the ECE, SPED, and Reading Teacher programs are required to pass the Foundations of Reading
Test to be eligible for licensure in the state of Wisconsin.
Table 16 (a)
Spring 2014
# test attempts
# (and %) passed
All SOE 94 72 (77%)
First time test takers, Table 16 (b):
Spring 2014
# first time test takers
# (and %) passed
All SOE 81 63 (78%)
Page 36
Educational Benchmarking Inventory (EBI) for Exiting Student Teachers
(Ratings are on a 7 point scale with “1” indicating either strong disagreement or being very dissatisfied and “7” indicating either strong agreement or being very satisfied)
The Educational Benchmarking Inventory (EBI) of exiting student teachers is administered via computer at the end of student teaching for the purpose of unit assessment. Of the 182 student teachers attempted to survey, 118 surveys were returned. This is an overall response rate of
65%. Please note that EBI modified the factors in the 2013-2014 academic year. Historical program data can be found in table 18.
Table 17: EBI Factor Means Highest Difference to Lowest Difference
(Rating Scale “1” disagreement/very dissatisfied –“7” strong agreement/ very satisfied)
Factor 1. Satisfaction: Quality of Instruction
Factor 2. Satisfaction: Faculty and Courses
Factor 3. Satisfaction: Classmates
Factor 4. Satisfaction: Advisor
Factor 5. Satisfaction Career Services
Factor 6. Satisfaction: Student Teaching Experience
Factor 7. Satisfaction: Diverse Experiences
Factor 8. Learning: Subject Matter, Pedagogy, Classroom Management
Factor 9. Learning: Aspects of Student Development
Factor 10. Learning: Classroom Equity and Diversity
Factor 11. Learning: Use of Technology
Factor 12. Learning: Management of Education Constituencies
Factor 13. Overall Satisfaction
Factor 14. Overall Learning
Factor 15. Overall Program Effectiveness
2013-14
N=118/182
5.81
5.97
5.75
6.11
4.74
5.78
5.52
6.45
6.43
6.19
6.33
6.4
6.05
6.23
5.57
Page 37
Trend Analysis of All EBI Factors
(Rating Scale “1” disagreement/very dissatisfied –“7” strong agreement/ very satisfied)
The above graph indicates SOE teacher education candidates rate “Satisfaction: Faculty and Courses” “Satisfaction: Classmates” and
“Learning: Management of Education” as the three highest factors. Career Services is rated low, however, the employment rate remains very high for UW-Stout Graduates.
Table 18: 2007/08-2012/13 EBI Factor Means Highest Difference to Lowest Difference
(Rating Scale “1” disagreement/very dissatisfied –“7” strong agreement/ very satisfied)
EBI Factor
Factor 1: Quality of Instruction
2007/8 2008/9 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13
4.93 4.83 5.09 5.23 5.16 5.32
4.74 5.22 5.22 5.28 5.40 Factor 2: Learning Theories, Teaching Pedagogy/Techniques 5.04
Factor 3: Research Methods, Professional Development,
Societal Implications
4.65
Factor 4: Aspects of Student Development
Factor 5: Classroom Equity and Diversity
Factor 6: Management of Educational Constituencies
Factor 7: Assessment of Student Learning
Factor 8: Satisfaction with Faculty and Course
Factor 9: Administration Services
5.18
4.93
4.19
5.23
5.50
5.11
Factor 10: Support Services
Factor 11: Fellow Students in Program
Factor 12: Student Teaching Experiences
Factor 13: Career Services
Factor 14: Overall Program Effectiveness
Factor 15: Overall Learning
Factor 16: Overall Satisfaction
5.54
5.43
5.69
4.25
4.80
NA
NA
4.38
5.02
4.81
4.11
5.12
5.58
5.15
5.52
5.54
5.89
3.77
4.41
NA
NA
4.74
5.34
5.15
4.40
5.48
5.71
5.36
5.74
5.91
5.82
4.11
4.63
NA
NA
4.90
5.41
5.36
4.59
5.54
5.92
5.70
5.64
5.95
6.07
4.49
4.70
NA
NA
4.81
5.41
5.30
4.58
5.86
5.76
5.28
5.52
5.46
5.85
4.13
4.82
NA
NA
4.94
5.52
5.64
6.04
4.40
5.48
5.99
6.01
5.33
5.20
4.55
5.51
5.86
5.56
Page 39
Table 19: EBI SOE Specific Questions Related to Wisconsin Teacher Standards
(Rating Scale “1” disagreement/very dissatisfied to “7” strong agreement/ very satisfied)
Each EBI participating institution can add ten questions to the EBI Teacher Education Exit Assessment which are institution specific. UW-Stout adds ten questions closely related to the Wisconsin Teaching Standards. Those results are provided in the table below. Our questions were updated in the
2009-2010 school year.
EBI - Institution Specific Questions
Mean Data; Scale (1-Not at all, 4-Moderately, 7-Extremely)
To what degree were you prepared to create meaningful learning experiences for students based on your content knowledge?
To what degree were you prepared to provide instruction that fosters student learning and intellectual, social and personal development?
To what degree were you prepared to create instructional experiences adapted for students who learn differently?
To what degree were you prepared to use a variety of learning strategies including the use of technology to encourage critical thinking and problem solving?
To what degree were you prepared to manage classroom behavior and create a learning environment that encourages positive social interaction, active engagement in learning and self-motivation?
To what degree were you prepared to use instructional technology and media to foster active inquiry, collaboration and interaction in the classroom?
To what degree were you prepared to plan instruction based on knowledge of subject matter, students, and the community and curriculum goals?
To what degree were you prepared to use formal and informal assessment strategies to evaluate student progress?
To what degree were you prepared to reflect on teaching and evaluate the effects of choices and actions on pupils, parents and others?
To what degree were you prepared to foster relationships with colleges, families and the community to support student learning and well-being?
SOE
09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13 13/14
N=127 N=87 N=74 N=87 N=118
5.42
5.29
5.21
5.32
4.91
5.05
5.35
5.14
5.60
5.16
5.48
5.37
5.48
5.51
5.08
5.21
5.43
5.14
5.47
5.38
5.64
5.44
5.53
5.49
5.12
5.47
5.55
5.57
5.83
5.16
5.48
5.46
5.35
5.34
5.02
5.12
5.40
5.22
5.64
5.15
5.81
5.72
5.76
5.77
5.57
5.53
5.81
5.54
5.86
5.83
Page 40
School of Education Mission and Vision
Mission
"The School of Education faculty and staff will engage in exemplary teaching, research, and service to ensure that graduates of the School become successful professional educators."
Vision
"The School of Education faculty and staff have the vision of preparing teachers and other professional educators who are reflective practitioners and engage in evidence-based practice."
School of Education 2014-2015 Goals
1.
Explore the potential expansion of the Ed.S. in Career and Technical Education to become an Ed.S. in Education a.
Complete marketing research to determine the viability of this and the viability of adding additional administrative licenses b.
Draft a request to make this change.
2.
Continue to integrate the edTPA within the teacher preparation process. a.
Scale up the implementation process by increasing the number of teacher candidates who complete an edTPA b.
Engage faculty in the process of local evaluation for completed edTPAs. c.
Review that viability of integrating a seminar to assist students permanently. d.
Identify specific courses where embedded signature assessments will be developed and a process to evaluate their effectiveness.
3.
Continue to improve the assessment process with valid and reliable measures. a.
Identify and develop embedded signature assessments to be included within the Benchmark system. b.
Monitor and evaluate student progress with the new CORE test c.
Monitor and evaluate student progress with the new Reading test
4.
The SOE Marketing Committee will be separated into two sub-committees: one for graduate/CTE programs and one for undergraduate licensure programs. a.
Increased enrollment of underrepresented populations will be a goal for both sub-committees. b.
The evaluation design for collection and reporting will be streamlined.
5.
Establish a new Technology Committee for the School of Education carry on the work of the SOE Technology Task Force.
6.
Pilot common professional courses by for the CTE related undergraduate programs in TECED, MBE, and FCSE, create a way to code students and a system for the evaluation of this track.
* Note: a new process for developing SOE goals is being considered. These are being offered in the interim.
Page 41
Appendix A: Art Education
Praxis Test Code – 0134 (new test)
In the 2011-12 academic year, the Art Content Knowledge 0134 PRAXIS II test replaced the Art Content Knowledge 0133 PRAXIS II test. The combined pen & paper/computer Art Education test data from the ETS institutional report is as follows:
Content Test from ETS
Number of Examinees:
Highest Observed Score:
Lowest Observed Score:
WI Score Needed to Pass:
Number with WI Passing
Score:
Percent with WI Passing Score:
11/12
17
184
142
158
12/17
71%
12/13
18
186
150
158
16/18
89%
13/14
14
186
135
158
11/14
79%
Page 42
Appendix B: Business Education
Praxis Test Code – 0101
The data below shows that Business Education candidates consistently have a close to 100% pass rate on the Business Education Test. Combined pen & paper/computer Business Education test data from the ETS institutional report is as follows:
Content Test from ETS
10/11 11/12 12/13 13/14
Number of Examinees:
Highest Observed Score:
8
189
14
186
8
184
4
NA
Lowest Observed Score:
WI Score Needed to Pass:
Number with WI Passing Score:
155
154
8/8
150
154
13/14
158
154
8/8
NA
154
NA
Percent with WI Passing Score: 100% 93% 100% NA
* Due to the low number of UW-Stout completers for the 2013-14 content test, no score reports are sent from ETS.
Page 43
Appendix C: Elementary Education
Praxis Test Code - 0014
Elementary Education candidates pass rate took a minor dip the previous academic year. The combined pen & paper/computer Elementary
Education test data from the ETS institutional report is as follows:
Content Test from ETS
Number of Examinees:
Highest Observed Score:
Lowest Observed Score:
WI Score Needed to Pass:
Number with WI Passing Score:
Percent with WI Passing Scores:
08/09
50
191
134
147
43/50
86%
09/10
50
189
133
147
44/50
88%
10/11
50
191
134
147
44/50
88%
11/12
57
184
100
147
53/57
93%
12/13
52
183
136
147
43/52
83%
13/14
25
185
135
147
22/25
88%
Page 44
Appendix D: Family & Consumer Sciences Education
Praxis Test Code – 0121
The data below shows that Family Consumer Science candidates have had a fairly consistent pass rate on the Family & Consumer Sciences
Education Test. Combined pen & paper/computer Family & Consumer Sciences Education test data from the ETS institutional report is as follows:
Content Test from ETS (0121) 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13 13/14
Number of Examinees:
Highest Observed Score:
Lowest Observed Score:
WI Score Needed to Pass:
Number with WI Passing Score:
18
197
151
159
15/18
4
NA
NA
159
3/4
13
190
144
159
12/13
18
185
146
159
15/18
15
183
146
159
12/15
14
185
151
159
12/14
Percent with WI Passing Score: 83% 75% 92% 83% 80% 86%
Page 45
Appendix E: Health Education
Praxis Test Code - 0550
In the 2013-14 academic year, the Health Education 5551 PRAXIS II test replaced the Health Education 0550/5550 PRAXIS II tests. The Health
Education PRAXIS II is only available in computer format. The UW-Stout test data from the ETS institutional report is as follows:
Content Test from ETS 13/14
Number of Examinees:
5
Highest Observed Score: 174
Lowest Observed Score: 163
WI Score Needed to Pass: 151
Number with WI Passing Score:
5
Percent with WI Passing Score: 100%
Page 46
Appendix F: Marketing Education
Praxis Test Code – 0561
The new Marketing Education Praxis II test was not administered during the fall 2008 semester. ETS does not offer that test during every testing date. The first date this test was offered during the 2008-2009 school year was in January. Candidates pass rate has taken a major dip the previous two academic years. The combined pen & paper/computer Marketing Education test data from the ETS institutional report is as follows:
Content Test from ETS
Number of Examinees:
Highest Observed Score:
Lowest Observed Score:
WI Score Needed to Pass:
Number with WI Passing Score:
08/09
19
191
145
153
17/19
09/10
18
185
156
153
18/18
10/11
11
191
169
153
11/11
11/12
12
178
133
153
9/12
Percent with WI Passing Score: 89% 100% 100% 75%
* Due to the low number of UW-Stout completers for the 2013-14 content test, no score reports are sent from ETS.
12/13
10
178
140
153
6/10
60%
13/14
3
NA
NA
153
NA
NA
Page 47
Appendix G: Middle School Subjects – Special Education
Praxis Test Code – 0146
Special Education candidates take the Middle School Subjects content test in the state of Wisconsin. The pass rate has fallen by 40% in the last two years. Combined pen & paper/computer Middle School Subjects test data from the ETS institutional report is as follows:
08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13 13/14
Content Test from ETS
Number of Examinees:
Highest Observed Score:
Lowest Observed Score:
Score Needed to Pass:
Number with Passing Score:
Percent with WI Passing Score:
28
181
128
146
20/28
71%
28
174
131
146
18/28
64%
24
192
130
146
20/24
83%
23
175
126
146
15/23
65%
37
176
113
146
16/37
43%
23
187
128
146
16/23
70%
Page 48
Appendix H: Science Education
Praxis Test Code – 0435
In the last two years, the pass rate on the PRAXIS II General Science Exam has decreased significantly. Combined pen & paper/computer General
Science test data from the ETS institutional report is as follows:
Content Test from ETS
08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13 13/14
(0435)
Number of Examinees: 5 7 11 7 10 6
Highest Observed Score: 197 187 200 177 177 200
Lowest Observed Score: 161 142 146 144 144 139
WI Score Needed to Pass: 154 154 154 154 154 154
Number with WI Passing
Score:
Percent with WI Passing
Score:
5/5
100%
6/7
86%
10/11
91%
5/7
71%
5/10
50%
4/6
67%
Page 49
Appendix I: Technology Education
Praxis Test Code – 0051
In the 2011-12 academic year, the Technology Education 0051 PRAXIS II test replaced the Technology Education 0050 PRAXIS II test. The combined pen & paper/computer Art Education test data from the ETS institutional report is as follows:
Content Test from ETS
11/12 12/13 13/14
Number of Examinees:
Highest Observed Score:
Lowest Observed Score:
22
200
161
WI Score Needed to Pass: 159
Number with WI Passing Score: 22/22
Percent with WI Passing Score: 100%
17
200
162
159
17/17
100%
12
200
167
159
12/12
100%
Page 50
Appendix J: Program and Course Revision for 2013-14
Program/Course Revisions Fall 2013
Program
Career and Technical
Education
Change
CTE 302/502 Principles of Career and Technical
Education
CTE 360/560 Cooperative Occupational
Education Programs
CTE 405/605 Methods of Teaching Career and
Technical Education
CTE 438/638 Course Construction for
Vocational Educators
CTE 440/640 Instructional Evaluation in Career and
Technical Education
CTE 901: Introduction to the Ed.D. in Career and Technical Education Program
CTE 902: Philosophy and Practice of CTE
CTE 903: Educational Leadership in Career and
Technical Education
CTE 904: Social and Economic Issues in Career
Date of
Modification
11/21/13
10/17/13
Additional Information
Course Revisions-changes to variable credits, course description, and course objectives.
Change in title, number of credits, course description and course objectives.
Change in number of credits, course content and objectives.
Change in title, number of credits, course description and course objectives.
Change in prerequisites, number of credits, course content and objectives.
*All revised so they can be used as part of the new online core in FCSE/MBE and
TECED.
New Course Proposals
Courses developed to support the new doctorate- Ed.D.
Page 51
Education
& Technical Education
CTE 905: CTE Curriculum Systems
CTE 906: Applied Statistical Analysis for
Education
CTE 911: Comparative Systems in CTE
CTE 912: Education Policy and Leadership
CTE 913: Program Planning, Development and
Evaluation
CTE 914: Research Seminar
CTE 915: Quantitative Research Methods
CTE 921: Qualitative and Mixed Methods
Research
CTE 922: Strategic Planning and Administration in CTE
CTE 950: CTE 950 Dissertation
CTE 995: CTE 995 Dissertation
EDUC 452/652 Universal Design in Face to
Face and E-Learning
EDUC 445/645 School-wide Positive Behavioral and Intervention Support
EDUC 447/647 Teaching Students with Autism in the Inclusive Classroom
EDUC 453/653 Middle School through Adult 6
– Traits Writing Instruction
EDUC 454/654 PK through Elementary 6 –
Traits Writing Instruction
EDUC 455/655 Strategies for Dealing with
Disruptive Behavior
EDUC 456/656 Bullying in Schools
EDUC 457/657 Effective Classroom
Management
EDUC 458/658 Curricular Integration of
Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math
11/21/13
12/19/13
11/21/13
New Course Proposals – all
Professional Development
Course – not used for any program leading to licensure.
Page 52
Transdisciplinary
(STEM)
EDUC 459/659 Methods of Teaching Middle
School Math
TRDS 210: Technology, Fab Lab and Society
TRDS 220: Insights into Innovation and Ideation
10/17/13 New Course Proposal approved to be offered for the new
General Education
Requirements at UW-Stout.
Page 53
Program
Art Education
Education
Family and Consumer
Science
Marketing and Business
Education
Program/Course Revisions Spring 2014
Change
ARTED 108 Introduction to Art Education
ARTED 208 Contemporary Theory &
Curricular Practices in Art Education
EDUC 210 Impacts of Technology on Learning
EDUC 303/503 Educational Psychology
B.S. in Family and Consumer Science
B.S. in Marketing & Business Education
Date of
Modification
04/17/14
04/17/14
04/17/14
03/27/14
Additional Information
Course Revisions- change in prerequisite requirements.
Change in title and number of credits, prerequisite requirements. Change in content to increase content pedagogy in alignment with edTPA.
Course Revision- change in number of credits, course content and objectives to be in alignment in new university
Gen Ed requirements.
Course Revision – change in course content and objectives to reflect current theory.
Program Revision to reflect changes in university general education requirements and to create a new professional core option for distance delivery students.
Program Revision to reflect changes in university general education requirements and to create a new professional core option for distance delivery students.
Page 54
MBE 301/501 Methods & Strategies for
Teaching Marketing
MBE 365 Integrated Software Applications for
Instruction
MBE 366 Integrated Media Applications for
Instruction
04/17/14
Special Education
Technology Education
SPED 472/672 Foundations of Autism
Spectrum Disorder
SPED 473/673 Behavioral Interventions and
Positive Behavior Supports
SPED 474/674 Augmentative Communication and Social Skills
SPED 475/675 Assessment and Methodology of Autism Spectrum Disorder
SPED 476/676 Practicum in Autism Spectrum
Disorder
SPED 481/681 Student Teaching: Special
Education
B.S. in Technology Education
03/27/14
03/27/17
Course Revision – change in title, content and objectives.
Course Revisions
Revision to course subject
Acronym updates from ICT
365 to MBE 365 and ICT 366 to MBE 366 (moved to SOE from STEM college).
New Course Proposals to support the Autism Spectrum
Disorder certificate (not a license in WI but is in MN).
Program Revision to reflect changes in university general education requirements and to create a new professional core option for distance delivery students.
Page 55
