2010

Introduction ..............................................................................................................................................................................................................2
Overview ..................................................................................................................................................................................................................2
PRAXIS I: Pre-Professional Skills Test .................................................................................................................................................................3
PRAXIS II: Content Test Summary ........................................................................................................................................................................5
Benchmark Interview Ratings ..................................................................................................................................................................................7
Student Teaching Performance Ratings .................................................................................................................................................................12
Educational Benchmarking Inventory (EBI) .........................................................................................................................................................13
Alumni Follow-up Survey .....................................................................................................................................................................................13
Communicating Assessment Data with Constituencies .........................................................................................................................................13
Utilization of Assessment Data to Improve Courses and the Program ..................................................................................................................13
Science Education AIM Report 2010 Page 1

The BS in Science Education officially began in the fall of 2009. Prior to the BS 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 broadfield science certification at UW-Stout in 2004. The first course in science education was taught in the spring of 2006. The University of Wisconsin-Stout School of Education (SOE) has gathered assessment data from fall semester 2003 through December 2008. 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 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,
Benchmark Interviews, and the Educational Benchmarking Inventory (EBI). This report also describes how assessment data is used to set programmatic goals, improve the program, program curriculum, and delivery of courses.
The enrollment of the B.S. in Science Education grew dramatically from 16 students during the 2009-2010 academic school year to 30 students during the 2010-2011 academic school year. In 2009-2010, 4 new freshmen enrolled. In 2010-2011, there were 5 new freshmen. This indicates that many of the new students enter the B.S. in Science Education as sophomores, juniors, and seniors. In 2009-2010, there were 7 male and 9 female students enrolled. In 2010-2011, there were 12 male and 18 female students. This indicates a positive gender balance, especially for a science field.
Due to the newness of this program, there is very little trend data available. In regards to enrollment, trends show this program almost doubling enrollment each year.
Science Education AIM Report 2010 Page 2

The Pre-professional Skills Test (PPST) is one indicator that the program uses to assure its graduates’ general education skill set. It is a critical benchmark exam that students must pass prior to full acceptance to the program. The table below highlights the pass rates across test sections (Math,
Reading, and Writing). Due to a database conversion in 2009, Datatel to Peoplesoft, we are just 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. It should be noted 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%. Overall, students in the B.S. in Science Education have performed very well on the PPST as compared to other School of
Education students from 2006-2010.
In 2010, 100% of students passed the math section (n=7), 78% passed the writing section (n=9), and 100% passed the reading section (n=7). The average scores for science education students exceeded the average scores for the School of Education in all three categories. The data shows that both science education students and School of Education students, in general, are weakest in the area of writing. 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 students for the writing section of the Pre-Professional Skills Test.
PPST Attempts and Pass Rates
2006 2006 2007 2007 2008
Teacher
Education
Program
SCIED
SOE UG
TOTALS
PPST
Test
Math
Reading
Writing
Math
Reading
Writing
# test attempts
1
1
1
204
280
296
# (and %) passed
1 = 100%
1 = 100%
1 = 100%
148 = 72.5%
145 = 51.8%
161 = 54.4%
# test attempts
4
4
3
226
243
257
# (and %) passed
4 (100%)
4 (100%)
3 (100%)
191 = 84.5%
184 = 75.7%
200 = 77.8%
2008
# test attempt s
1
1
2
130
150
138
# (and %) passed
1 (100%)
1 (100%)
2 (100%)
102 = 78.5%
119 = 79.3%
104 = 75.4%
Science Education AIM Report 2010 Page 3

Teacher
Education
Program
SCIED
SOE
PPST Test
C-Math
P-Math
B-Math
C-Writing
P-Writing
B-Writing
C-Reading
P-Reading
B-Reading
C-Math
P-Math
B-Math
C-Writing
P-Writing
B-Writing
C-Reading
P-Reading
# test attempts
4
3
7
5
4
118
80
198
116
9
4
3
7
97
213
149
94
2010
# (and %) passed
4 (100%)
3 (100%)
7 (100%)
4 (80%)
3 (75%)
7 (78%)
4 (100%)
3 (100%)
7 (100%)
93 (79%)
57 (71%)
150 (76%)
92 (55%)
49 (51%)
141 (66%)
88 (59%)
50 (53%)
B-Reading 243 138 (57%)
C= Computerized; P= Pen & Paper Tests; B=Both Computerized and Pen & Paper Tests
Science Education AIM Report 2010 Page 4

Science education students are required to pass the Praxis II General Science 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 2008-2009, five students attempted the Praxis II General Science exam and five students passed, resulting in a 100% pass rate. In
2009-2010, seven students attempted the Praxis II General Science Exam and six students passed, resulting in an 86% pass rate. Scientific methodology has been an area of strength in 2009 and 2010. In both years, the science education students scored above state averages in the category of scientific methodology. In 2010, the science education students scored greater than or equal to national averages in four out of five categories: scientific methodology, physical science, life science, and earth science. The students scored below national averages by one point in the category of science, technology, and society. In 2009, students scored below the national average in the category of life science. These results are expected to vary from year to year due to the small sample sizes and varying strengths and weaknesses of the students taking the exam. Students in the science education program may pursue science teaching certifications in broadfield science, biology, chemistry, or physics. Therefore, the student’s test scores would be expected to be strongest in the areas they will be certified to teach and weakest in the areas they will not be certified to teach. As a result, the combined data over the two years is a better indicator of performance than the trends or changes between years. Overall, students in the
B.S. in Science Education program have performed well on the Praxis II General Science Exam, with a pass rate of 92% over the past two years.
Science Education
Praxis Test Code – 10435
Percent Correct (percentage of items answered correctly) by Area
Content Test from ETS
08/09 09/10
SCIED Test
Category
Points
Available
UW-Stout State National
(0435)
08/09 09/10 09/10 09/10
Number of Examinees: 5 7
Scientific
Methodology
Highest Observed Score: 197 187
12 82 82 77 72
Physical Sciences 48 74 63 67 62
Lowest Observed Score: 161 142
Life Sciences 23-24 72 75 79 75
Median: 164 163
Earth Sciences 24 72 66 68 65
Average Performance
Range:
WI Score Needed to Pass:
163-173
154
161-176
154
Science
Technology &
Society 12 80 75 82 76
Number with WI Passing
Score:
5/5 6/7
Percent with WI Passing
Score:
100%
Science Education AIM Report 2010
86%
Page 5

85
80
75
70
65
60
55
50
08/09
09/10
Science Education AIM Report 2010 Page 6

Benchmark interview means are reported by benchmark level (I, II, and III) for each interview question. The data shows that 100% of science education students passed the benchmark I interview by passing all seven interview questions in 2009 and 2010. This compares favorably with the overall School of Education results shown in the final columns on the right. Likewise, 100% of science education students passed the benchmark II interview as shown on the following page. The science education students scored the highest in response to the questions on reflective practice and state standards and scored the lowest in response to questions on their philosophy of education and classroom management. The students in the science education program develop their philosophy of education in EDUC 326 Foundations of Education, typically completed in the freshmen year.
It will be 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. Classroom management is a topic that is currently addressed in STMED 390 Lab and Classroom Management.
Similarly, it will be recommended that all instructors in science, technology, and math education courses discuss and reinforce concepts in classroom management as it relates to the content of the course. In the benchmark III interview, 100% of science education students passed at the proficient level.
Science Education AIM Report 2010 Page 7

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
Response
Unsatisfactory
Satisfactory
Unsatisfactory
Satisfactory
Unsatisfactory
Satisfactory
Unsatisfactory
Satisfactory
Unsatisfactory
Satisfactory
SCIED SOE
2008 2009 2010 2010
N=5 N=2 N=6 N=80
0% 0% 0% 1%
100% 100% 100% 99%
0% 0% 0% 0%
100% 100% 100% 100%
0% 0% 0% 0%
100% 100% 100% 100%
0% 0% 0% 1%
100% 100% 100% 99%
0% 0% 0% 0%
100% 100% 100% 100%
Explain two subject matter/content artifacts and how these examples illustrate your understanding of the content you will be teaching
Unsatisfactory 0% 0% 0% 1%
Completed Alignment Summary
Satisfactory
Unsatisfactory
Satisfactory
100% 100% 100% 99%
0% 0% 0% 0%
100% 100% 100% 100%
Science Education AIM Report 2010 Page 8

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
SCIED SOE
2008 2009 2010 2010
Response N=3 N=3 N=6 N=80
Unsatisfactory 0% 0% 0%
Emerging 33% 33% 33%
1%
41%
Basic 67% 67% 67% 58% n/a 0% 0% 0%
Unsatisfactory 0% 0% 0%
Emerging
0%
1%
0% 0% 0% 34%
Basic n/a
100% 100% 100% 64%
0% 0% 0% 0%
Unsatisfactory 0% 0% 0%
Emerging 0% 0% 17%
0%
31%
Basic n/a
100% 100%
0% 0%
83%
0%
69%
0%
Unsatisfactory 0% 0% 0%
Emerging 33% 0% 17%
0%
32%
Basic n/a
67% 100% 83% 68%
0% 0% 0% 0%
Unsatisfactory NA NA
Emerging NA NA
0%
17%
0%
52%
Basic n/a
NA NA
NA NA
83% 48%
0% 0%
Reviewers choose 2 of the following; discuss portfolio evidence that: demonstrates your content knowledge demonstrates your ability to create instructional
Unsatisfactory 0% 0% 0%
Emerging 33% 0% 0%
2%
27%
Basic n/a
67%
0%
33% 0%
67% 100%
Unsatisfactory 0% 0% 0%
71%
0%
3%
Science Education AIM Report 2010 Page 9

opportunities adapted to diverse learners demonstrates your ability to teach effectively demonstrates your ability to assess student learning
Emerging 0% 0% 17% 40%
Basic n/a
67% 0%
33% 100%
83%
0%
Unsatisfactory 0% 0% 0%
57%
0%
4%
Emerging
Basic n/a
0%
0%
100%
0%
33% 100%
67%
0%
0%
25%
71%
0%
Unsatisfactory 0% 0% 0%
Emerging 0% 0% 20%
2%
41%
Basic n/a
0% 33% 80% 57%
100% 67% 0% 0%
Science Education AIM Report 2010 Page 10

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
SCIED SOE
Response
2008 2009 2010 2010
N=0 N=3 N=4 N=138
Unsatisfactory 0% 0% 0%
Emerging 0% 0% 0%
Basic
Proficient n/a
0%
0% 100%
0%
0%
0%
25%
75%
0%
0%
0%
24%
76%
0%
Unsatisfactory 0% 0% 0%
Emerging 0% 0% 0%
Basic
1%
1%
0% 0% 0% 20%
Proficient n/a
0% 100% 100% 78%
0% 0% 0% 0%
Unsatisfactory 0% 0% 0%
Emerging 0% 0% 0%
Basic
0%
1%
0% 0% 0% 20%
Proficient n/a
0% 0% 100%
0% 100%
Unsatisfactory NA NA
0%
0%
76%
3%
0%
Emerging
Basic
Proficient
NA NA
NA NA
NA NA
0% 1%
75% 19%
25% 77% n/a NA NA 0%
Unsatisfactory 0% 0% 0%
Emerging
3%
0%
0% 0% 0% 14%
Basic
Proficient n/a
0% 0% 0% 8%
0% 100% 100% 75%
0% 0% 0% 3%
Science Education AIM Report 2010 Page 11

Student teachers are rated by their cooperating teachers during the student teaching capstone experience in the program. The following data shows how the student teachers performed relative to each of the ten Wisconsin Educator Standards. In 2010, the science student teachers scored the highest (above 3.90 out of 4.00) in the following areas: teachers know how children grow, teachers know how to teach, teachers know how to manage a classroom, teachers communicate well, teachers know how to test for student progress, and teachers make effective use of instructional technologies to enhance student learning. The science student teachers scored the lowest (below 3.70 out of 4.00) in the following areas: teachers know the subjects they are teaching and teachers understand that children learn differently. However, the data is based on a sample of only three student teachers in 2010. As data continues to be collected, conclusions will be formed based on multiple years of data.
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.
SCIED SOE
2008 2009 2010
N=0 N=3 N=3
2010
N=120
Mean Mean Mean Mean
0.00
0.00
3.75
3.63
3.67
3.93
3.78
3.82
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NA
3.63
3.63
3.75
3.63
3.88
3.88
3.88
3.38
NA
3.67
4.00
3.93
3.93
3.73
4.00
3.87
3.87
3.93
3.73
3.84
3.65
3.78
3.77
3.75
3.78
3.70
3.91
Science Education AIM Report 2010 Page 12

Science education students 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.
UW-Stout surveys graduates every two years. The next survey will be sent in 2012 for graduates in 2010 and 2006. 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 data from alumni follow-up studies conducted by the BPA office.
Data will be communicated to content and core professional education faculty members through informal and formal means. Program faculty meet during scheduled discipline area work group meetings (DAWG) designed to support ongoing program improvement. In addition, the AIM 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. Action plans resulting in desired change will become the artifacts resulting from work group meetings.
In conclusion, science education students have continued to demonstrate outstanding knowledge and skills based on the assessment data collected from 2006 to 2010. Students have performed very well on assessments required for science teacher licensure in the state of Wisconsin. These include the Pre-Professional Skills Test (PPST) and the PRAXIS II General Science Content Knowledge Exam. On the PPST exam, 100% of students passed the math section (n=7), 78% passed the writing section (n=9), and 100% passed the reading section (n=7) in 2010. The average scores for science education students exceeded the average scores for the School of Education in all three categories. The data shows that both science education students and School of Education students, 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, the School of Education offers an elective course, EDUC 010 Praxis I: Writing , to prepare education students for the writing section of the Pre-Professional Skills Test. On the PRAXIS II exam, 86% of the students passed the exam in 2010 (n=7), as compared to 100% in
2009 (n=5). The difference in the yearly data is the result of one student not passing the exam in 2010. Scientific methodology has been an area of strength in 2009 and 2010. The area of weakness in 2009 was life science, while the area of weakness in 2010 was science, technology, and society.
These results are expected to vary from year to year due to the small sample sizes and varying strengths and weaknesses of the students taking the exam. As a result, the combined data over the two years is a better indicator of performance than the trends or changes between years. Overall, students in the B.S. in Science Education program have performed well on the Praxis II General Science Exam, with a pass rate of 92% over the past two years.
Science Education AIM Report 2010 Page 13

Science education students have also performed very well on the assessment data collected by all teacher education programs in the School of
Education. From 2008-2010, the data shows that 100% of science education students have passed benchmark I (n=13), 100% have passed benchmark II (n=12), and 100% have passed benchmark III (n=7). In 2010, the science education students scored the highest in response to the questions on reflective practice and state standards and scored the lowest in response to questions on their philosophy of education and classroom management. Although philosophy of education is addressed mostly in EDUC 326 Foundations of Education, it will be recommended that all instructors in science, technology, and math education courses discuss and reinforce philosophies of education in all STMED courses as well, as it relates to the content of the course. Likewise, it will be recommended that all instructors in science, technology, and math education courses discuss and reinforce concepts of classroom management in all STMED courses, as it relates to the content of the course.
Finally, student teachers are rated by their cooperating teachers during the student teaching capstone experience in the program. This assessment is aligned to the ten Wisconsin Educator Standards. In 2010, the science student teachers scored the highest (above 3.90 out of 4.00) in the following areas: teachers know how children grow, teachers know how to teach, teachers know how to manage a classroom, teachers communicate well, teachers know how to test for student progress, and teachers make effective use of instructional technologies to enhance student learning. The science student teachers scored the lowest (below 3.70 out of 4.00) in the following areas: teachers know the subjects they are teaching and teachers understand that children learn differently. However, the data is based on a sample of only three student teachers in 2010. As more science education students complete their student teaching and more data is collected, these results will be compiled and conclusions may then be formed based on this evidence.
The following are changes or improvements planned for the upcoming years:
1 Monitor life science scores on PRAXIS II exam and respond if the trend continues.
2 Monitor the benchmark II scores on philosophy of education, how children grow, and classroom management and respond if the trend continues.
3 Encourage students to connect with teachers and other community members by stressing professionalism and volunteer experiences prior to student teaching.
The life science scores increased from 2009 to 2010. In 2010, the lowest score was in the category of science, technology, and society.
Due to the small sizes and varying strengths and weaknesses of the students completing the exam, these trends will need to be monitored over multiple years.
The scores remained low on philosophy of education and classroom management. This will be discussed with the faculty and staff who teach EDUC and STMED courses and can be addressed across the curriculum in a variety of different courses.
The scores on this item in the student teacher evaluations have increased. This will continue to be monitored and emphasized throughout the program, beginning in the introductory course.
Science Education AIM Report 2010 Page 14

1 Implement CEHHS writing guidelines in the School of Education (EDUC) and science, technology, and math education (STMED) courses.
2 Continue to encourage students to consult with the PPST tutor and enroll in the elective course, EDUC 010 Praxis I: Writing, if needed.
3 Continue to encourage students to utilize the PRAXIS II exam preparation books located in the Library Learning Center.
4 Continue to monitor the PRAXIS II exam scores by category and identify long term trends in student performance.
5 Encourage faculty and staff to emphasize philosophy of education and classroom management across the curriculum, in a variety of different courses and contexts.
6 Continue to compile student teacher evaluation data to obtain larger sample sizes.
Science Education AIM Report 2010 Page 15

Science 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
-
12
18
30
419
28
5
6
-
-
-
-
-
-
09-10
-
7
9
16
237
16
-
-
-
-
-
4
3
1
08-09
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
NA NA
NA
NA
NA
75.0% NA
75.0% NA
-
07-08
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
NA
NA
NA
06-07
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
NA
NA
NA
48.4%
19.8
NA
8
4
8
10
1
1
-
100%
NA
NA
NA
59.5%
20.3
3.18
5
2
1
8
NA
NA
NA
0.0%
-
-
NA
-
-
-
0.0%
-
-
NA
-
-
-
0.0%
-
NA
-
-
-
-
NA
NA
NA
04-'05
NA
NA
2004
NA
NA
2003
NA
NA
2002
NA
NA
2001
NA
NA
2000 2008 Grads 2004 Grads
NA
NA
NA
NA
62%
63%

10-11
09-10
08-09
07-08
06-07
10-11
09-10
08-09
07-08
06-07
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
FR High School Percentile Rank
48.4%
59.5%
Science Education, B.S.
Enrollment Demographics
30
Total
Enrollment 16
-
10-11
09-10
08-09 -
07-08 -
06-07 -
FR ACT Avg. Composite score
19.8
20.3
Male
12
18
7
-
FR Avg GPA Female 9
3.18
-
Minority
Enrollment
-
5
Enrollment New FR and Transfer
New FR Enrollment Transfer Enrollment
4
-
6
3
-

Number
employed
in major
Employment Numbers
-
Number
employed
in related
major -
Number
continuing
education
-
Total
graduates
by year
Male
graduates
Female
graduates
Minority
graduates
Science Education, B.S. 2
Graduates in Program
1
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
One Year Retention Rates
Retention
Rates in
Program
10-11
09-10
08-09
07-08
06-07
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
Retention
Rates -
Any
Program
Experiential Learning
Percent Employed
10-11
09-10
08-09
07-08
06-07
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
Employment Percentages
10-11 09-10 08-09
100%
NA NA
07-08
NA
06-07
NA
75.0%
2004 0.0%
Six Year Graduation Rates
Graduation Rates In Program Graduation Rates - Any Program
0.0%
75.0% 2003 0.0% 0.0%
2002 0.0%
2001 0.0%
2000 0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
For more information on retention/graduation rates go to: http://www2.uwstout.edu/content/bpa/ir/retention/indexstu.html
-
-
-
-

Other
10-11
1 1
Science Education, B.S. 3
Three- Year Show Rates
10-11
63%
Salary
High
08-09 $-
Salary Data
Salary
Average
08-09 $-
62%
Salary
Low
08-09 $-
419
Student
Credit
Hours
10-11
28
-
Honors
Program
(FA10)
Learning
Comm.
Partic.
Study
Abroad
Students
Three-Year
Show Rates -
New
Freshmen
Three-Year
Show Rates -
New
Transfers
FTE
10-11
SCH
237
09-10
-
08-09
Student FTE
16
09-10
-
08-09
-
07-08
-
06-07
-
07-08
-
06-07