B.S. in Early Childhood Education
Assessment in Major
Submitted by Dr. Jill Klefstad, Program Director
2010
Submitted September, 2011
Table of Contents
Overview ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 2
Overview of the Program .................................................................................................................................................................................................... 2
PRAXIS I: Pre-Professional Skills Test ............................................................................................................................................................................ 3
PRAXIS II: Content Test ................................................................................................................................................................................................... 5
Benchmark Interview Ratings............................................................................................................................................................................................. 7
Student Teaching Performance Ratings ............................................................................................................................................................................ 11
Educational Benchmarking Survey (EBI) (Ratings: 1 - 7) ............................................................................................................................................... 12
Alumni Follow-Up Survey ............................................................................................................................................................................................... 14
Communicating Assessment Data with Constituencies .................................................................................................................................................... 15
Utilization of Assessment Data to Improve Courses and the Program ............................................................................................................................. 15
Overview
The University of Wisconsin-Stout School of Education (SOE) has gathered assessment data from fall semester 2003 through December 2010. In the
School of Education, data is gathered from several sources to inform unit and program decisions. Data in this report are used to develop program
goals, inform curriculum changes, and enhance course delivery in order to improve teacher education candidate learning. This report contains data
from the PRAXIS I: Pre-Professional Skills Test, PRAXIS II: Content Test, Student Artifact Reflections, Candidate Dispositions, Pre-Student
Teaching and Student Teacher Performances, and the Educational Benchmarking Inventory (EBI). This report also describes how assessment data are
used to set programmatic goals, improve the program, program curriculum, and delivery of courses.
Overview of the Program
In 2010, the Early Childhood Education program consisted of 312 undergraduate students, 26 male and 286 female. The numbers in this program
were on a steady decline until 2010 when the numbers increased about 3%. The one-year retention rates are increasing over time. However, the oneyear retention rates within Early Childhood Education are still shown to be lower than the average one-year retention rate in any program. See
Appendix A for more detailed information.
Early Childhood Education AIM Report 2010
Page 2
PRAXIS I: Pre-Professional Skills Test
Like other education majors, all early childhood education candidates must pass all three sections of the PRAXIS I: Pre-Professional Skills Test
(PPST). The three sections consist of reading, writing and mathematics. Due to a database conversion in 2009, Datatel to Peoplesoft, we are now
able to start generating data by program. In addition, we are able to disaggregate each test to report data on pen/paper (P) vs. computerized (C) tests.
There was a year lapse, 2009, when we were unable to generate any data. Note that the pass rates in the table reflect attempts by all candidates
prior to being accepted into the School of Education since all are required to pass the PPST to be admitted to the School of Education as part
of Benchmark I, the actual pass rate is 100%.
PPST Attempts and Pass Rates
Teacher
Education
Program
ECE (EC)
SOE UG
TOTALS
Math
Reading
Writing
Math
2006
# test
attempts
90
126
122
204
2006
# (and %)
passed
57 = 63%
58 = 46%
71 = 58%
148 = 72.5%
2007
# test
attempts
85d
99d
94d
226
2007
# (and %)
passed
65=76%
66=67%
70=75%
191 = 84.5%
2008
# test
attempts
48
50
46
130
2008
# (and %)
passed
30 = 63%
35 = 70%
33 = 72%
102 = 78.5%
Reading
280
145 = 51.8%
243
184 = 75.7%
150
119 = 79.3%
Writing
296
161 = 54.4%
257
200 = 77.8%
138
104 = 75.4%
PPST
Test
Early Childhood Education AIM Report 2010
Page 3
Teacher
Education
Program
2010
PPST Test
# test
# (and %)
attempts
passed
C-Math
49
40 = 82%
P-Math
37
24 = 65%
B-Math
86
64=74%
C-Writing
66
36 = 55%
P-Writing
41
22 = 54%
ECE
B-Writing
107
58=54%
C-Reading
70
38 = 54%
P-Reading
39
19 = 49%
B-Reading
109
57=52%
C-Math
118
93 = 79%
P-Math
80
57 = 71%
B-Math
198
150=76%
C-Writing
116
92 = 79%
P-Writing
97
49 = 51%
SOE
B-Writing
213
141=66%
C-Reading
149
88 = 59%
P-Reading
94
50 = 53%
B-Reading
243
138=57%
C= Computerized; P= Pen & Paper Tests; B=Both Computerized and Pen & Paper Tests
Early Childhood Education AIM Report 2010
Page 4
PRAXIS II: Content Test
Candidates majoring in early childhood education must take and pass the Praxis II content test to be eligible to pass Benchmark II and to student
teach. In the State of Wisconsin, early childhood education candidates are required to take the test in the elementary category which focuses on
content provided in the general education courses. There are four categories: include language arts, mathematics, social studies and science.
Note: 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.
Content Test from ETS
Number of Examinees:
Highest Observed Score:
Lowest Observed Score:
Median:
Average Performance Range:
WI Score Needed to Pass:
Number with WI Passing
Score:
Percent with WI Passing
Scores:
05/06
49
189
124
160
148-168
147
06/07
67
195
129
161
151-168
147
07/08
68
197
132
157
150-167
147
08/09
50
191
134
159.5
149-170
147
09/10
50
189
133
158
149-170
147
40/49
61/67
48/68
43/50
44/50
82%
91%
71%
86%
88%
Average Percent Correct (percentage of items answered correctly by category as compared to State and National results)
Elementary
Test
Category
Language Arts
Mathematics
Social Studies
Science
UW-Stout %
Points
05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09
Available
%
%
%
%
29-30
78
77
77
73
29-30
67
74
71
66
26-30
56
57
58
64
30
62
68
67
65
Early Childhood Education AIM Report 2010
09/10
%
73
66
62
70
State
09/10
%
78
74
64
72
National
09/10%
76
69
63
70
Page 5
PRAXIS II Elementary Education Content Exam
Detail Score Percent Correct Trends
100
95
90
85
80
Language Arts
75
Mathematics
70
Social Studies
65
Science
60
55
50
05/06 %
06/07 %
07/08 %
08/09 %
09/10 %
Percentage of Items Answered Correctly Per Category
Early Childhood Education AIM Report 2010
Page 6
Benchmark Interview Ratings
Benchmark interview means are reported by benchmark level (I, II, and III) or each interview question.
Candidates are required to receive satisfactory ratings in all areas in order to move from pre-education status in to acceptance in the program.
Benchmark I Interview Results Early Childhood Education
Question
Explain personal and professional growth
between your initial resume and updated
resume.
Explain your philosophy of education.
Explain three personal characteristics that will
make you an effective teacher.
Describe yourself as a learner and how that will
impact your future teaching.
Describe experiences that have impacted your
understanding of diversity and human relations
and how these might aid you as you work with
students and families
Explain two subject matter/content artifacts and
how these examples illustrate your
understanding of the content you will be
teaching
Completed Alignment Summary
Early Childhood Education AIM Report 2010
Response
Unsatisfactory
2008
N=48
0%
ECE
2009
N=27
4%
2010
N=37
3%
Satisfactory
Unsatisfactory
Satisfactory
Unsatisfactory
Satisfactory
Unsatisfactory
Satisfactory
100%
0%
100%
0%
100%
0%
100%
96%
4%
96%
4%
96%
0%
100%
97%
99%
0% 0%
100% 100%
0% 0%
100% 100%
3% 1%
97% 99%
Unsatisfactory
0%
0%
100%
100%
Unsatisfactory
0%
7%
Satisfactory
Unsatisfactory
Satisfactory
100%
0%
100%
93%
4%
96%
Satisfactory
0%
SOE
2010
N=80
1%
0%
100% 100%
3%
1%
97% 99%
0% 0%
100% 100%
Page 7
Benchmark II Interview Results Early Childhood Education
ECE
2008 2009
Question
Response
N=56 N=45
Unsatisfactory
0%
0%
Emerging
38% 20%
Describe your Philosophy of Education and
how it has evolved
Basic
62% 80%
n/a
0%
0%
Unsatisfactory
0%
2%
Emerging
39% 22%
Describe what it means to be a "Reflective
Practitioner"
Basic
61% 76%
n/a
0%
0%
Unsatisfactory
0%
0%
Emerging
18% 16%
Describe the WI Teacher Standard and
Domain you feel most competent in
Basic
82% 84%
n/a
0%
0%
Unsatisfactory
0%
0%
Describe the WI Teacher Standard and
Emerging
21% 16%
Domain you have experienced the greatest
Basic
79% 84%
growth
n/a
0%
0%
Unsatisfactory
N/A
N/A
Describe and provide portfolio evidence
Emerging
N/A
N/A
(signed copy of the Instructional Technology
Utilization Rubric) of your competence in
Basic
N/A
N/A
current instructional technology
n/a
N/A
N/A
Reviewers choose 2 of the following; discuss portfolio evidence that:
Unsatisfactory
0%
0%
Emerging
2%
4%
demonstrates your content knowledge
Basic
11% 20%
n/a
87% 76%
Unsatisfactory
0% 16%
demonstrates your ability to create
instructional opportunities adapted to
Emerging
16%
7%
Early Childhood Education AIM Report 2010
2010
N=37
0%
36%
64%
0%
0%
27%
73%
0%
0%
27%
73%
0%
0%
15%
85%
0%
0%
73%
27%
0%
SOE
2010
N=80
1%
41%
58%
0%
1%
34%
64%
0%
0%
31%
69%
0%
0%
32%
68%
0%
0%
52%
48%
0%
0%
0%
100%
0%
0%
53%
2%
27%
71%
0%
3%
40%
Page 8
diverse learners
demonstrates your ability to teach effectively
demonstrates your ability to assess student
learning
Early Childhood Education AIM Report 2010
Basic
n/a
Unsatisfactory
Emerging
Basic
n/a
Unsatisfactory
Emerging
Basic
n/a
32%
52%
0%
5%
0%
95%
0%
16%
23%
61%
0%
77%
0%
0%
11%
89%
2%
13%
40%
45%
47%
0%
0%
17%
83%
0%
0%
26%
74%
0%
57%
0%
4%
25%
71%
0%
2%
41%
57%
0%
Page 9
Benchmark III Interview Results Early Childhood Education
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
2008
N=57
0%
0%
46%
51%
3%
0%
5%
32%
63%
0%
0%
2%
35%
60%
3%
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0%
0%
11%
89%
0%
ECE
SOE
2009 2010 2010
N=41 N=51 N=138
0%
0%
0%
5%
0%
0%
20%
8%
24%
75% 92%
76%
0%
0%
0%
0%
4%
1%
3%
0%
1%
17%
8%
20%
80% 88%
78%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
3%
2%
1%
22% 12%
20%
61% 78%
76%
14%
8%
3%
NA
0%
0%
NA
0%
1%
NA
16%
19%
NA
80%
77%
NA
4%
3%
0%
0%
0%
3% 18%
14%
4%
4%
8%
90% 71%
75%
3%
7%
3%
*Includes Early Childhood: Special Education Cross-Categorical Data
Early Childhood Education AIM Report 2010
Page 10
Student Teaching Performance Ratings
Cooperating teachers rated student teachers on Wisconsin Teacher Standards at the end of each student teaching placement. The data below is
calculated by averaging each student teacher’s final student teaching performance ratings to come up with one final overall score for each student.
Means are calculated on a 4-point scale where 1=unsatisfactory, 2=emerging, 3=basic, and 4=proficient.
Student Teacher Evaluations Early Childhood Education
Rating Scale: 1=Unsatisfactory, 2=Emerging, 3=Basic, 4=Proficient
ECE
2008
2009
2010
N=56*
N=66*
N=51*
Mean
Mean
Mean
Teachers know the subjects they are
teaching
3.73
3.81
3.83
Teachers know how children grow
3.72
3.87
3.83
Teachers understand that children learn
differently
3.69
3.82
3.81
Teachers know how to teach
3.63
3.80
3.81
Teachers know how to manage a classroom
3.66
3.80
3.73
Teachers communicate well
3.61
3.79
3.84
Teachers are able to plan different kinds of
lessons
3.73
3.88
3.76
Teachers know how to test for student
progress
3.60
3.75
3.73
Teachers are able to evaluate themselves
3.69
3.88
3.83
Teachers are connected with other
teachers and the community
3.73
3.79
3.84
Teachers make effective use of
instructional technologies to enhance
student learning.
NA
NA
3.86
*Includes Early Childhood:Special Education Cross-Categorical Candidate
Early Childhood Education AIM Report 2010
SOE
2010
N=120
Mean
3.78
3.82
3.73
3.84
3.65
3.78
3.77
3.75
3.78
3.70
3.91
Page 11
Educational Benchmarking Survey (EBI) (Ratings: 1 - 7)
The Educational Benchmarking Inventory (EBI) of exiting student teachers is administered via computer at the end of student teaching (final
experience) for the purpose of unit assessment. EBI data cannot be published in public domains and is available for internal use only.
Early Childhood Education AIM Report 2009
Page 12
EBI - Institution Specific Questions
Mean Data; Scale (1-Not at all, 4-Moderately, 7-Extremely)
ECE
SOE
09/10 10/11 10/11
N=43 N=28 N=87
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, 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?
5.59
5.68
5.48
5.54
5.57
5.37
5.56
5.61
5.48
5.34
5.36
5.51
5.41
5.36
5.08
4.82
5.11
5.21
5.60
5.50
5.43
5.05
4.93
5.14
6.06
5.71
5.47
5.70
5.68
5.38
*We updated our questions beginning in the 2009-2010 school year
Early Childhood Education AIM Report 2009
Page 13
Alumni Follow-Up Survey
UW-Stout surveys graduates every two years. The next survey will be sent in 2012 for graduates in 2010 and 2006. Graduates of teacher education programs
are sent a one and five year follow up survey. At the five year mark it is quite evident that candidates were pleased with their academic preparation
as evidenced by 100% of the respondents indicating they would attend Stout again and 89% of them indicating they would choose the same program.
Comparison by Program in 2010 Study (2004 and 2008 graduates):
When comparing results by undergraduate program, many statistically significant differences were found. (Programs with less than 15 respondents were not
included in the analysis.) Table 4 focuses on differences by program on three of the overarching questions with asterisks by means that were significant.
Explanations of differences are discussed after the table. Other statistically significant differences can be provided upon request.
Table 4: Program Comparison
Program
Applied Math & Comp. Sci.
Art
Business Administration
Career, Tech. Ed. & Trng.
Construction
Early Childhood Educ.
Engineering Tech.
Graphic Commun. Mgmt.
Hotel/Rest./Tour. Mgmt.
Human Dev. & Fam. Studies
Management
Manufacturing Engineering
Marketing & Bus. Educ.
Packaging
Psychology
Retail Merch. & Mgmt.
Technology Education
Vocational Rehabilitation
Would you enroll in the
same program?
4.38
3.86
3.57
3.40
4.16
4.21*
3.40
3.92
3.56
3.65
3.78
4.37*
3.95
3.88
4.00
3.21*
3.39
3.96
How would you rate the
overall effectiveness of your
program?
4.06
3.98*
3.85
3.80
4.26*
4.04*
4.11*
4.28*
3.86
4.00
3.96
4.21*
4.00
4.08
4.10
3.72
3.32*
4.11
Is your employment directly
related to your program?
3.73
3.34*
3.53*
3.53
4.57*
4.39*
3.61
4.36*
3.68*
3.39
2.68*
3.88
3.60
3.68
3.05*
3.70
4.33*
4.36*
When alumni were asked if they had it to do over again would they enroll in the same program, alumni from the Manufacturing Engineering program and
the Early Childhood program responded statistically higher to this question than alumni from the Retail Merchandising and Management program.
When asked how they rated the overall effectiveness of their program, alumni of the Technology Education program responded statistically lower to this
question than alumni from Art, Construction, Early Childhood Education, Engineering Technology, Graphic Communication Management, and
Manufacturing Engineering.
Early Childhood Education AIM Report 2009
Page 14
When asked if their employment was directly related to their UW-Stout major, many statistical differences were found between programs. Following are a
sample of differences found. These include programs with a greater number of statistical differences. Alumni from the Management program responded
statistically lower to this question than alumni from Construction; Early Childhood Education; Graphic Communications Management; Hotel, Restaurant
and Tourism Management; and Technology Education. Alumni from the Construction program and the Early Childhood Education program responded
statistically higher to this question than alumni from Art, Business Administration, and Psychology.
Communicating Assessment Data with Constituencies
Data will be communicated to faculty members through informal and formal means. Program faculty meet during scheduled discipline area work
group meetings (DAWG) designed to support ongoing program improvement. The early childhood education faculty and staff meet on a regular basis
for the purpose of improving instruction, reviewing course policies and to make recommendations to the program director related to program
revisions. In addition, the Assessment in the Major findings will be shared with the program’s advisory committee, with discussion occurring at the
fall meeting.
Utilization of Assessment Data to Improve Courses and the Program
The findings of the AIM process and report are analyzed and connected with specific program elements (courses, projects, assignments, experiences)
that are seen as direct and indirect contributors to the current and future desired outcomes. Utilizing feedback from program faculty and staff,
cooperating teachers, students, and advisory board members continuous improvement is occurring in the program.
The following are changes or improvements planned for the upcoming years:
2009 Goals
1
2
3
4
A major program revision is in the planning stages, including
revisions of many of the major studies courses, updated philosophy
and goals and the addition of Tenets of Early Childhood Education
Investigate reasons why students leave the major and develop an
action plan based on the gathered data.
As a part of the program revision, investigate ways that students can
feel more confident with formal and informal assessment strategies
to evaluate student progress.
Investigate ways to provide students the opportunity to become
more proficient in instructional technology.
Early Childhood Education AIM Report 2009
Evidence towards meeting goals or rationale for
abandoning
The major ECE program revision was approved May 2011. Each of
the major studies courses were revised to meet the goals and
inclusion of the Tenets of Early Childhood Education.
No action was taken
No action was taken
Students were given opportunities to attend open labs to incorporate
lessons involving the smart board. There was little documentation of
the number of students who attended. Instructors also required some
Page 15
lessons to incorporate smart boards but formal documentation wasn’t
available.
No action was taken
5
Continue to monitor students who are experiencing difficulty and
explore services that may be available to assist.
1
Investigate ways that students can feel more confident with formal and informal assessment strategies to evaluate student progress.
Based on the data obtained from the Student Teacher Evaluations by cooperating teachers, students’ scores were lower than the previous
year (2010) and also in comparison to overall SOE scores in the areas of Teachers planning different kinds of lessons and Teachers know
how to test for student progress . The EBI survey shows a decline in scores in 2010 on Factor 7, Assessment of Student learning, indicating
that students did not feel prepared to use formal and informal assessment strategies to evaluate student progress.
Investigate ways to provide students the opportunity to become more proficient in instructional technology including embedding
instruction into courses.
Based on the data obtained from the Student Teacher Evaluations by cooperating teachers, students’ scores were lower in comparison to
overall SOE scores in the area of Teachers make effective use of instructional technologies to enhance student learning. Students also
scored lower in comparison to overall SOE scores when asked the degree in which students were prepared to use instruction technology
media to foster inquiry, collaboration and interaction in the classroom.
Identify the correlation between ACT scores and passing PRAXIS 1 to better track students who are experiencing difficulty and
explore services that may be available to assist.
The overall data provided for ECE students on Praxis 1: Pre-Professional Skills Test indicates that students still struggle with this test. These
scores could be one reason why students leave the major. The struggle with this test definitely hampers some students to move through the
program with ease.
Align assignments to Wisconsin Teaching Standards and Domains in the new courses approved in Program revision as well as those
courses which were revised.
2010 Goals
2
3
4
Early Childhood Education AIM Report 2009
Page 16
Early Childhood Education, B.S.
Minority enrollment
Male
Female
Total enrollment
SCH
Student FTE
New Freshmen
Transfers
Number of graduates by year:
Number of male graduates
Number of female graduates
Number of minority graduates
Number employed in related major:
Number continuing education:
Number employed in major:
Percent employed:
One-Year Rates in Program
One-Year Retention Rates - Any Program
Six-Year Graduation Rates in Program
Six-Year Graduation Rates Any Program
Average High School Percentile
Average ACT Composite of New Freshmen
Average Cumulative GPA
Freshmen: 1-29.5 credits
Sophomore: 30-59.5 credits
Junior: 60-89.5 credits
Senior: 90 or more credits
Honors Program (FA10)
Learning Comm. Partic.
Study Abroad Students
% of grads who participated in Experiential Learning
Salary Average
Salary Low
Salary High
I would attend UW-Stout again
I would enroll in the same academic program
Three-Year Show Rates - New Freshmen
Three-Year Show Rates - New Transfers
10-11
33
36
304
340
4,531
302
73
20
NA NA
NA
NA
09-10
08-09
25
26
286
312
4,183
279
65
23
46
2
44
3
-
20
33
269
302
4,254
284
72
16
57
7
50
3
22
2
100.0%
51.4%
69.4%
53.3%
73.0%
07-08
13
34
293
327
4,605
307
61
17
74
9
65
1
4
4
34
94.0%
55.7%
62.3%
06-07
04-'05
2004
33.3%
52.6%
55.1%
20.2
NA
108
60
69
103
1
40
100%
NA
NA
NA
57.6%
20.1
2.57
85
60
63
105
NA
NA
NA
55.3%
19.7
2.53
90
59
63
90
$
$
$
52.3%
19.7
2.85
93
72
49
113
2003
2002
2001
2000
2008 Grads
35.0%
58.3%
27.4%
56.5%
31.9%
62.5%
31.9%
51.4%
62.2%
19.5
2.90
102
64
64
121
26,000
16,000
37,000
4.18
4.43
57%
69%
2004 Grads
14
43
308
351
4,920
328
77
29
72
6
66
1
2
3
33
93.0%
64.9%
75.3%
4.44
3.96
Early Childhood Education, B.S.
FR High School Percentile Rank
351
10-11
55.1%
327
57.6%
08-09
Enrollment New FR and Transfer
New FR Enrollment
Transfer Enrollment
340
09-10
07-08
Enrollment Demographics
55.3%
312
Total
Enrollment
52.3%
302
77
06-07
62.2%
29
73
72
FR ACT Avg. Composite score
65
43
10-11
20.2
09-10
20.1
08-09
19.7
07-08
19.7
36
33
61
34
23
26
Male
20
17
16
06-07
308
304
19.5
293
286
Female
FR Avg GPA
269
10-11
09-10
2.57
33
25
06-07
07-08
08-09
09-10
10-11
06-07
07-08
08-09
06-07
09-10
14
10-11
13
07-08
2.90
08-09
06-07
2.85
Minority
Enrollment
09-10
07-08
20
2.53
10-11
08-09
Early Childhood Education, B.S. 2
Employment Numbers
Total
graduates
by year
46
Retention
Rates Any
Program
Experiential Learning
Percent Employed
10-11
09-10
08-09
07-08
06-07
0.0%
10-11
09-10
08-09
07-08
06-07
0.0%
50
65
66
3
3
1
1
6
-
Minority
graduates
-
One Year Retention Rates
Retention
Rates in
Program
44
06-07
-
3
9
07-08
-
07-08
2
Female
graduates
10-11
4
2
06-07
4
7
2
-
22
-
72
-
Male
graduates
-
74
57
08-09
33
09-10
-
08-09
Number
continuing
education
-
09-10
Number
employed
in related
major
34
10-11
Number
employed
in major
Graduates in Program
Six Year Graduation Rates
Graduation Rates In Program
Graduation Rates - Any Program
53.3%
51.4%
55.7%
2004
33.3%
2003
35.0%
51.4%
64.9%
73.0%
69.4%
62.3%
75.3%
Employment Percentages
10-11
09-10
08-09
100%
NA
100%
07-08
06-07
94%
93%
For more information on retention/graduation rates go to:
http://www2.uwstout.edu/content/bpa/ir/retention/indexstu.html
2002
27.4%
2001
31.9%
2000
31.9%
62.5%
56.5%
58.3%
52.6%
Early Childhood Education, B.S. 3
Other
Three- Year Show Rates
10-11
10-11
Salary Data
Salary
High
40
08-09
$37,000
69%
57%
Salary
Average
08-09
Salary
Low
08-09
$26,000
$16,000
SCH
4,920
4,605
4,531
Student
Credit
Hours
10-11
4,183
4,254
09-10
08-09
07-08
06-07
Student FTE
328
307
302
1
Honors Learning Study
Program Comm. Abroad
(FA10) Partic. Students
FTE
Three-Year Three-Year
Show Rates - Show Rates New
New
Freshmen
Transfers
10-11
279
284
09-10
08-09
07-08
06-07