SOE Unit Assessment in Major
Report – Graduate & Advanced
Programs
2008
Submitted by Jacalyn Weissenburger, SOE Director,
& Lesley Voigt, SOE Assessment Coordinator
Submitted October 27, 2009
1
Table of Contents
Introduction ..............................................................................................................................................................................................................1
Program Specific Reports ........................................................................................................................................................................................1
Assessment Data Uses .............................................................................................................................................................................................1
Pupil Services...........................................................................................................................................................................................................2
Pupil Services Disposition Review Data .............................................................................................................................................................3
Pupil Services Disposition Ratings ......................................................................................................................................................................3
Reflective Practitioner Mean Ratings ..................................................................................................................................................................5
Pupil Services Portfolio Assessment Data ...........................................................................................................................................................5
Pupil Services Practicum and Internship Data .....................................................................................................................................................6
Pupil Services PRAXIS II Data (School Psychology Data Only) .......................................................................................................................7
One and Five-Year Follow-Up Studies of Graduates ........................................................................................................................................11
Employer Follow-Up Survey Data ....................................................................................................................................................................13
Administrative Programs .......................................................................................................................................................................................14
Administrator Disposition Data .........................................................................................................................................................................14
Administrator Portfolio Data .............................................................................................................................................................................14
CTE Coordinator Portfolio Data ........................................................................................................................................................................14
Administrator Practicum Data (ITC only) .........................................................................................................................................................18
Graduate and Employer Follow-Up Data ..........................................................................................................................................................18
Advanced Teacher and Other Programs ................................................................................................................................................................19
Advanced Disposition Data ...............................................................................................................................................................................19
Advanced Teacher Education Program Portfolio Data ......................................................................................................................................19
Advanced Teacher Education Programs ............................................................................................................................................................20
Graduate Follow-Up Data ..................................................................................................................................................................................20
Advanced Teacher Education Programs ............................................................................................................................................................21
Employer Follow-Up Surveys ...........................................................................................................................................................................21
Communicating Assessment Data with Constituencies .....................................................................................................................................22
Utilization of Assessment Data to Improve Courses and the Unit ....................................................................................................................22
2
School of Education Unit Assessment Report
Graduate Degree and Other Advanced Licensure Programs
Introduction
This report is a summary of the University of Wisconsin-Stout’s School of Education (SOE)
advanced program assessment data gathered from the fall semester 2003 through December
2008. In the School of Education, data is gathered from several sources to inform unit and
program decisions. Data from this report us used to develop unit and program goals, inform
curriculum changes, and enhance course delivery in order to improve candidate learning. This
report contains data from a variety of sources.
Graduate degree programs within the School of Education include the MS in School Counseling,
MS & EdS in School Psychology, MS in Education, MS in Technical Education (previously MS
in Industrial/Technical Education) and the MS & EdS in Career and Technical Education.
Graduate level licensure programs include the Instructional Technology Coordinator, the Career
& Technical Educator Coordinator, and the Reading Teacher programs.
This report is organized into sections based on the following categories: Pupil Services (School
Psychology and School Counseling), Administrative (Instructional Technology Coordinator and
Career & Technical Education Coordinator), and Other (Education, Career & Technical
Education, and Reading).
Graduate students in the MS in Education program who want to gain an initial teacher education
license must meet all the requirements of PI34 including PRAXIS I: Pre-Professional Skills Test
and PRAXIS II: Content Test and student teach at the undergraduate level. Thus, their student
teaching and score report data is included in the program-specific undergraduate Assessment in
the Major report. Similarly, certification-only students who already have an initial teaching
certification can add on certification by meeting PI34 requirements, taking additional coursework
at the undergraduate or graduate level, passing the PRAXIS II: Content Test at and student
teaching. For example, a number of teachers seek certification in Special Education as an add-on
certification to their initial teacher certification. As such, add-on certification student data is
included in the program-specific undergraduate Assessment in the Major Reports.
Program Specific Reports
Program-specific Assessment in the Major reports aid Program Directors in making program
decisions. The program specific reports also describe how this assessment data is used to
improve programs, program curricula, and delivery of courses. In addition, program directors
identify and describe program goals for the upcoming year. Program-specific Assessment in the
Major reports for all of School of Education’s graduate-level degree programs are available on
the web at: http://www.uwstout.edu/soe/SOEAssess.html
Assessment Data Uses
The unit and program assessment reports are shared with members in the School of Education,
the SOE Advisory Board, the SOE Council, individual program advisory committees and other
stakeholders. Advisory committee members discuss trends and make recommendations for
1
improvement to program directors and the SOE Director. The SOE Director and Assessment
Coordinator meet each semester with individual Program Directors to discuss program data,
yearly goals, and progress toward achieving short-term and long-term goals. SOE unit and
program goals are aligned with university goals and priorities. This year, a comprehensive
analysis will also be conducted to ensure SOE unit and program goals align with external
standards developed by certification and accrediting agencies.
The following table includes data on the mean GPA’s of advanced or graduate-level candidates
upon acceptance at Benchmark I:
Program
M.S. in Education
M.S.Ed. in School
Psychology
M.S.Ed. in School
Counseling
M.S. in
Industrial/Technology
Education
M.S. in Career &
Technical Education
Ed.S. in Career &
Technical Education
All SOE
Year
Fall 2006
Fall 2007
Fall 2008
Fall 2006
Fall 2007
Fall 2008
Fall 2006
Fall 2007
Fall 2008
Fall 2006
Fall 2007
Fall 2008
Fall 2006
Fall 2007
Fall 2008
Fall 2006
Fall 2007
Fall 2008
Fall 2006
Fall 2007
Fall 2008
N
21
33
40
11
8
12
25
15
21
2
1
0
13
13
18
1
2
1
72
70***
90
Ave. GPA at
previous
institution (N)*
3.79 (11)
3.75 (14)
3.48 (17)
3.60 (11)
3.51 (8)
3.25 (12)
3.28 (23)
3.43 (15)
3.36 (21)
NA
NA
NA
3.75 (9)
NA
3.55 (10)
NA
NA
NA
3.53 (54)
3.57 (37)
3.40 (60)
% Admit on
Probation
4.8%
3.0%
5.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
8.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
NA
23.1%
7.7%
5.6%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
8.3%
2.9%
3.3%
As can be seen above, more than 90% of all graduate-level candidates were not on probationary
status at the time of admittance to the SOE program. Additionally, the mean GPAs of entering
candidates in advanced degree programs were well above a 3.0 on a 4.0 scale.
Pupil Services
The School Counseling (MS) and School Psychology (MS & EdS) programs at UW-Stout are
those that prepare graduate candidates to assume professions in the schools as Pupil Services
providers. Because both programs been reviewed and designated as fully approved by the
Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction (most recent review 11/2004), they provide
extensive classroom-based and experiential instruction, along with continuous assessment of
student progress, in accordance with Wisconsin’s Educator Licensing Statutes (PI 34).
2
The School of Education has adopted a Pupil Services Performance-Based Assessment System to
ensure that all Pupil Service candidates possess the knowledge, skills, and dispositions required
for successful careers in education. Assessment of student progress occurs at various transition
points or benchmark periods. In addition, candidates in both Pupil Services programs are required
to maintain a paper portfolio with evidence of meeting the content standards of each profession.
In the case of School Counseling, candidates are reviewed at Benchmark I, II, and III. Because of
the length of the School Psychology program, candidates are reviewed at Benchmark I, II, III,
and IV.
For both Pupil Services programs at Benchmark I, candidates are reviewed to determine whether
they will be accepted to the program. At Benchmark II, the portfolio ratings, grades, disposition
ratings of the candidates are reviewed. In the case of School Counseling, a final review of the
candidates occurs after Benchmark III, or at program completion. This review determines the
School Counseling candidate’s eligibility for licensure as a School Counselor in the PK-12
schools in Wisconsin.
In the case of School Psychology, candidates are reviewed at Benchmark III to determine their
eligibility for internship after 60 or more credits. At Benchmark III, the portfolio ratings, grades,
disposition ratings, field practicum ratings, and PRAXIS II Content exam scores are reviewed to
determine their eligibility for initial license as a School Psychologist in the PK-12 schools in
Wisconsin. At Benchmark IV, or post internship, School Psychology candidates are reviewed
again to determine their eligibility for degree completion (EdS).
It should be noted that currently the PRAXIS II Content area exam is not yet in place for
licensure of school counselors in Wisconsin. State implementation of the Praxis exam is
anticipated in fall of 2010.
Pupil Services Disposition Review Data
As part of the Benchmark System for assessing student progress, student dispositions are
reviewed for each Pupil Services candidate at benchmark periods. The eight identified
dispositions areas (attendance, preparedness, continuous learning, positive climate, reflectivity,
thoughtful/responsive listener, cooperativeness/collaboration, and respect) are consistent with
those required of all School of Education students in order to meet state licensing requirements
under PI 34.
Pupil Services Disposition Ratings
The School of Education has a system to assess candidate dispositions from the beginning of the
program through program completion. Dispositions ratings are completed for candidates in the
graduate Pupil Services programs at benchmark periods. The two graduate programs use the
rating scale definitions of: 1 = Unsatisfactory: Rarely demonstrates disposition; 2=Minimal:
Occasionally demonstrates disposition; 3=Satisfactory: Usually demonstrates disposition;
4=Proficient: Consistently demonstrates disposition. In the table below, Benchmark II occurs
after 18 credits in School Counseling and after 30 credits in School Psychology. Benchmark III
occurs at the final review in School Counseling and prior to internship (at 60 + credits) in School
Psychology.
3
Mean (N)
2007
3.87 (36)
3.88 (25)
Mean (N)
2008
3.73 (37)
3.80 (15)
3.75 (33)
3.86 (23)
3.60 (39)
3.63 (15)
Continuous Learning
BM II
3.75 (33)
BM III
3.88 (23)
3.67 (39)
4.0 (15)
Positive Climate
BM II
BM III
3.62 (33)
3.94 (23)
3.70 (39)
3.93 (15)
Reflective
BM II
BM III
3.63 (33)
3.88 (23)
3.72 (39)
3.87 (15)
BM II
BM III
Preparedness
BM II
BM III
Thoughtful & Responsive Listener
BM II
3.82 (33)
BM III
3.97 (23)
3.60 (39)
4.00 (15)
Cooperative / Collaborative
BM II
3.85 (33)
BM III
3.79 (23)
3.78 (41)
3.89 (15)
Respectful
BM II
BM III
3.78 (40)
3.93 (15)
3.79 (33)
3.95 (25)
1 = Unsatisfactory: Rarely demonstrates disposition
2 = Minimal: Occasionally demonstrates disposition
3 = Satisfactory: Usually demonstrates disposition
4 = Proficient: Consistently demonstrates disposition
4
Reflective Practitioner Mean Ratings
Pupil Services
Note: 1 = Unsatisfactory, 2 = Minimal, 3 = Satisfactory, 4 = Proficient
The above data and chart indicates candidates in the Pupil Services programs demonstrated
satisfactory to proficient dispositions at Benchmark II and at Benchmark III in 2007 and 2008.
Additionally, ratings suggest that these candidates demonstrated satisfactory to proficient skills in
being reflective.
Pupil Services Portfolio Assessment Data
Refer to the program-specific Assessment in the Major reports for School Counseling and School
Psychology to examine portfolio data. Aggregate data cannot be reported for the Pupil Services
Programs due to the program-specific content guidelines for each discipline area.
5
Pupil Services Practicum and Internship Data
Mean
2004
N = 16
Mean
2005
N = 11
Mean
2006
N=8
4.00
4.10
3.38
3.00
4.00
3.75
4.00
4.27
4.00
4.00
4.73
4.25
4.00
4.40
3.75
4.00
4.40
3.63
4.00
4.73
4.13
Pupil Services Standards Overall
Mean
3.86
4.38
3.84
Pupil Services Standards
Mean
2004
N=1
Mean
2005
N = 14
Mean
2006
N = 11
Mean
2007
N=8
Mean
2008
N = 10
4.17
4.00
4.13
2.60
4.11
4.11
4.50
4.10
4.44
4.33
4.63
3.80
4.60
4.60
4.88
4.70
4.13
4.56
4.38
Pupil Services Standards
Practicum I
(1=Needs Improvement, 5=Highly Satisfactory)
1. Understands the state teacher
standards
2. Has knowledge of & skill in
learning and instructional
strategies
3. Has knowledge of & skill in
research
4. Has knowledge of & skill in
professional Ethics & ethical
behavior
5. Has knowledge of & skill in
organization& content of effective
pupil services programs
6. Has knowledge of & skill in a wide
array of intervention strategies
7. Has knowledge of & skill in
consultation & collaboration
Practicum II
(1=Needs Improvement, 5=Highly Satisfactory)
1. Understands the state teacher
standards
2. Has knowledge of & skill in
learning and instructional strategies
3. Has knowledge of & skill in
research
4. Has knowledge of & skill in
professional Ethics & ethical
behavior
5. Has knowledge of & skill in
organization& content of effective
pupil services programs
6. Has knowledge of & skill in a wide
array of intervention strategies
7. Has knowledge of & skill in
consultation & collaboration
Pupil Services Standards Overall
Mean
-------------
Mean
2007
N =??
Mean
2008
N =??
-----
-----
4.00
-------------
4.40
4.30
4.63
4.30
4.30
4.70
4.63
4.60
4.32
4.39
4.54
4.01
6
Internship
Pupil Services Standards
1. Understands the State Teacher
Standards
2. Has knowledge of & skill in learning
and instructional strategies
3. Has knowledge of & skill in research
4. Has knowledge of & skill in
professional Ethics & ethical behavior
5. Has knowledge of & skill in
organization& content of effective
pupil services programs
6. Has knowledge of & skill in a wide
array of intervention strategies
7. Has knowledge of & skill in
consultation & collaboration
Pupil Services Standards Overall Mean
Mean
2004
N=
11
Mean
2005
N = 26
Mean
2006
N = 13
Mean
2007
N=7
Mean
2008
N=8
3.33
4.11
4.42
3.57
3.63
3.80
3.80
3.94
4.27
4.33
4.42
3.71
4.14
4.25
4.13
4.13
4.50
4.67
3.71
4.50
3.57
4.25
4.25
3.71
4.50
3.50
4.06
4.25
4.71
4.50
3.86
4.22
4.50
3.74
4.20
4.41
4.43
3.96
4.75
4.32
Means calculated on a 5-point scale where 1=needs improvement, 3=satisfactory, and 5=highly
satisfactory.
Pupil Services PRAXIS II Data (School Psychology Data Only)
School Psychologist Praxis Test Code - 10400
The Wisconsin School Psychologist exam cut score for passing was set in 2005/06. School
Psychologist data from the ETS report and internal data (Datatel and SPSS database) is as
follows:
School Psychologist – internal data
Number of Examinees:
Highest Observed Score:
Lowest Observed Score
WI Score Need to Pass:
Number with WI Passing Score
Percent with WI Passing Score
2004*
10
730
640
6/10
60%
2004
6
810
640
5/6
83%
2005
7
780
590
660
4/7
57%
2006
11
800
640
660
10/11
91%
2007
7
780
680
660
7/7
100%
2008
10
780
640
660
9/10
90%
* - scores from no-fault year – “grandfathered in” as passing
7
School Psychology 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
Score:
03/04
04/05
05/06
06/07
07/08
10
810
640
720
680-730
660
10
740
590
660
630-700
660
9
800
640
740
690-760
660
10
790
610
710
680-740
660
18
820
570
700
690-720
660
8/10
5/10
8/9
9/10
14/18
80%
50%
89%
90%
78%
Comparing the category scores for UW-Stout with Wisconsin and national percent correct shows
that School Psychology had one category where UW-Stout results were same as or higher than
state average percent correct and all five categories were the same as or higher than the national
average percent correct in 2007/08.
School
Psych Test
Category
UW-Stout
Points
03/04 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08
Available
%
%
%
%
%
Diagnosis &
Fact-Finding
Prevent &
Intervention
Applied
Psych Found
Applied Ed
Found
Ethical &
Legal
School
Psych Test
Category
Diagnosis &
Fact-Finding
Prevent &
Intervention
Applied
Psych Found
Applied Ed
Found
Ethical &
Legal
Points
03/04
Available
%
04/05
%
29-30
84
76
81
76
75
29-30
76
72
77
77
75
23-24
73
68
77
76
76
12-14
71
57
70
73
67
19-22
79
74
81
82
74
07/08
%
03/04
%
04/05
%
Wisconsin
05/06 06/07
%
%
National
05/06 06/07
%
%
07/08
%
29-30
85
80
82
82
77
79
77
77
77
75
29-30
78
79
78
79
77
75
74
75
75
76
23-24
75
75
76
77
77
72
71
74
75
75
12-14
72
71
72
74
74
69
67
67
69
70
19-22
81
78
79
80
78
77
76
76
77
77
8
School Psychology PRAXIS II Results:
Percentage of Items Passed Per Category (all attempts per year)
9
10
As can be seen in the above bar graphs, UW-Stout candidates in the School Psychology program
tended to perform better than the national sample in most categories over time when comparing
the percentage of items answered correctly per category. However, UW-Stout students performed
slightly below the Wisconsin representative sample in most categories across five years.
Pupil Services
One and Five-Year Follow-Up Studies of Graduates
The Office of Budget, Planning, and Analysis (BPA) distributes one and five-year follow-up
surveys to graduates of the Pupil Services degree programs. Program Directors have the
opportunity to recommend revisions to their programs specific components based upon the
finding from these surveys. These surveys are conducted every other year. Data from 2008
follow:
2008 SPSY and SCOUN Program
Combined Follow-up Survey Results
(1=Strongly Disagree 2= Disagree 3=Agree 4=Strongly Agree)
Please rate the degree your graduate program prepared you to:
Year Graduated
2002
2006
N
Mean
N
Mean
1. Write effectively
13
3.23
17
3.47
2. Speak or present ideas effectively
13
3.46
17
3.41
3. Listen effectively
13
3.32
17
3.53
4. Utilize computing and digital technology
13
2.77
17
2.94
5. Use analytic reasoning
13
3.15
17
3.24
11
6. Solve problems creatively
13
3.08
17
3.00
7. Critically analyze information
13
3.31
17
3.24
8. Appreciate and understand diversity
13
3.08
17
3.53
9. Develop a global perspective
13
2.85
17
3.12
10. Organize information
13
3.31
17
3.65
11. Make decisions
13
3.23
17
3.59
12. Consider the ethics of my profession
13
3.54
17
3.71
13. Work in teams
13
3.54
17
3.71
14. Lead others
13
3.23
17
3.47
15. Understand statistics
13
3.00
17
3.06
As can be seen in the table above, SOE’s Pupil Services graduates believed they were
particularly well prepared in the areas of ethics and working in teams. Utilizing and computing
digital technology appears to be an area in need of improvement. The 2006 graduates tended to
indicate they were better prepared in most of the above areas than the 2002 graduates.
12
Pupil Services
Employer Follow-Up Survey Data
The Office of Budget, Planning, and Analysis (BPA) distributes surveys to employers of
graduates of the program on an every-other-year basis. The Program Director has the opportunity
to recommend revisions to the program specific component based upon the finding from these
surveys.
Year Graduated
2002
2006
2008 SPSY and SCOUN Program - Employers
Combined Follow-up Survey Results
(1= Very Low to 5 = Very High)
Please rate the degree the employee exhibits
the following competencies:
N
Mean
N
Mean
1. Write effectively
5
4.42
4
4.48
2. Speak or present ideas effectively
5
4.58
4
4.25
3. Use mathematics or statistics
3
4.30
4
3.88
4. Utilize technologies
5
4.42
4
3.78
5. Solve problems creatively
5
4.82
4
4.23
6. Organize information
5
4.82
4
4.78
7. Critically analyze information
5
4.18
4
4.25
8. Make decisions
5
4.70
4
4.00
9. Work in teams
5
4.82
4
4.78
10. Provide leadership
5
4.58
4
4.48
11. Use interpersonal skills
5
4.82
4
4.52
12. Think creatively
5
4.58
4
4.48
13. Plan and complete a project
5
4.82
4
4.78
14. Meet deadlines
5
4.82
4
4.78
13
As can be seen in the above table, employers believe graduates of Pupil Services programs are
viewed as having well developed competencies in all areas assessed. Using mathematics or
statistics and utilizing technologies appeared to be rated somewhat lower than the other areas.
However, due to the small sample size, more information is needed to determine the reliability
and validity of these ratings.
Administrative Programs
The Instructional Technology Coordinator and Career & Technical Education Coordinator
licensure programs at UW-Stout are those that prepare graduate candidates to assume professions
in the schools as administrators. To receive a license as a school administrator in Wisconsin, an
applicant completes an approved program guided by Wisconsin’s Standards for Administrator
Development and Licensure as well as program-specific guidelines or standards.
The School of Education has adopted an Administrator Performance-Based Assessment System
to ensure that all candidates possess the knowledge, skills, and dispositions required for
successful careers as educational administrators. Assessment of student progress occurs at three
transition points or benchmark periods. In addition, candidates in both Administrator programs
are required to maintain a paper portfolio with evidence of meeting the content standards of each
profession.
Administrator Disposition Data
Disposition review data has not been collected on candidates in the ITC and CTE programs.
However, the advisor for the ITC program and the Program Director for MS & EdS programs in
CTE are in process of developing a disposition review system that aligns with the School of
Education’s Statement of Values and Dispositions.
Administrator Portfolio Data
The SOE collects and maintains portfolio data on its Instructional Technology Education (ITC)
and Career & Technical Education (CTE) program candidates. Only one ITC candidate has
completed the program to date. As such, no aggregate data is available for ITC program
completers at this time. However, the following portfolio ratings were available for program
completers of the CTE program from summer of 2007 until summer of 2009.
CTE Coordinator Portfolio Data
SU07 through SU09
Ratings: 1 = Unsatisfactory, 2 = Emerging, 3 = Basic, 4 = Advanced Basic
CTE Coordinator Competency
Portfolio
1. Evaluation for the continued
improvement of career and
technical education.
A. Determine goal, objectives,
PI 34 Standards (93)
5. Developing and implementing on-going evaluation plans
for career and technical education and using the results for
program improvement.
1. Developing policies, long-range plans and advocacy for
N
Mean
13
3
14
strategic direction, mission or
purpose of department and
operational goals for unit.
B. Interview principal, department
chair and/or LVEC based on
administrative competencies.
C. Facilitates the development,
articulation, implementation,
and stewardship of a vision that
is shared by the school
community.
D. Identify foundations of
program evaluation, climate for
change and ethical standards.
E. Plan, communicate program
evaluation and intention, and
identify various stakeholders
and impact on program.
F. Identify important need in
school and develop basic
evaluation plan for their grant
proposal.
2. Understanding and promotion
of comprehensive programs in
career and technical education,
including but not limited to
student organizations, work
based learning, career
assessment, developmental
guidance and postsecondary
transitioning.
A. Identify current practice,
opportunities, challenges/issues
of student organizations, and
role of coordinator.
B. Interpret the need for a C-CTE
program.
C. Recognize an effective student
organization as an integral part
of a C-CTE program.
career and technical education based on current research,
federal and state requirements, and best practices.
6. Developing school, business, and community relations
that support the goals of career and technical education
including creating advisory committees and serving on
economic development committees.
6. Developing school, business, and community relations
that support the goals of career and technical education
including creating advisory committees and serving on
economic development committees.
5. Developing and implementing on-going evaluation plans
for career and technical education and using the results for
program improvement.
11. Strategic planning, group facilitation, conflict
resolution and mediation, and continuous improvement
practices.
5. Developing and implementing on-going evaluation plans
for career and technical education and using the results for
program improvement.
13
3.31
13
3.15
13
3.15
13
3.08
13
3.54
13
3.54
13
3.08
13
3.31
7. Developing and managing budgets and grants.
2. Understanding and promoting the concept of
comprehensive programs in career and technical education
which includes teaching the academic disciplines…
3. Understanding and promoting the concept of
comprehensive programs in career and technical education
which includes co-curricular career and technical student
organizations related to each of the disciplines.
4. Understanding and promoting the concept of
comprehensive programs in career and technical education
which includes planning, coordinating and evaluating
work-based learning as a strategy for career development.
12. Understanding the Wisconsin Developmental Guidance
Model and the Education for Employment Standards,
especially the relationship between comprehensive career
development and career and technical education.
13. Providing leadership in the understanding and
promotion of post-secondary options for students
especially in technical areas including articulation, Tech
Prep, Youth Options, and nontraditional opportunities.
3. Understanding and promoting the concept of
comprehensive programs in career and technical education
which includes co-curricular career and technical student
organizations related to each of the disciplines.
8. Gathering, analyzing and disseminating data related to
career and technical education, including local, state and
national labor market information.
3. Understanding and promoting the concept of
comprehensive programs in career and technical education
which includes co-curricular career and technical student
organizations related to each of the disciplines.
15
D. Identify terminology and
concepts used in career
development.
E. Recall critical elements in
career development and schoolto-work transition process,
including information, training,
assessment, portfolio
representation, interviewing
skills, and personal marketing.
F.
Identify techniques to design,
implement, and evaluate career
guidance programs as part of
the comprehensive WDGM.
3. Developing school business and
community relations that support
the goals of career and technical
education.
A. Document current practice,
opportunities, challenges/issues
of collaboration with TC’s and
business and industry and role
of coordinator.
B. Models collaboration with
families and community
members, responding to diverse
community interests and needs,
and mobilizing community
resources.
C. Understands, responds to, and
interacts with the larger
political, social, economic,
legal, and cultural context that
affects schooling.
D. Plan and communicate program
evaluation and intentions,
identify various stakeholders
and impact on program.
E. Interpret and communicate
findings.
12. Understanding the Wisconsin Developmental Guidance
Model and the Education for Employment Standards,
especially the relationship between comprehensive career
development and career and technical education.
12. Understanding the Wisconsin Developmental Guidance
Model and the Education for Employment Standards,
especially the relationship between comprehensive career
development and career and technical education.
13. Providing leadership in the understanding and
promotion of post-secondary options for students
especially in technical areas including articulation, Tech
Prep, Youth Options, and nontraditional opportunities.
5. Developing and implementing on-going evaluation plans
for career and technical education and using the results for
program improvement.
12. Understanding the Wisconsin Developmental Guidance
Model and the Education for Employment Standards,
especially the relationship between comprehensive career
development and career and technical education.
6. Developing school, business, and community relations
that support the goals of career and technical education
including creating advisory committees and serving on
economic development committees.
5. Developing and implementing on-going evaluation plans
for career and technical education and using the results for
program improvement.
6. Developing school, business, and community relations
that support the goals of career and technical education
including creating advisory committees and serving on
economic development committees.
6. Developing school, business, and community relations
that support the goals of career and technical education
including creating advisory committees and serving on
economic development committees.
8. Gathering, analyzing and disseminating data related to
career and technical education, including local, state and
national labor market information.
15. Understanding the roles and responsibilities of working
in a profit-making business environment through
externships, work experience, and volunteer experiences.
5. Developing and implementing on-going evaluation plans
for career and technical education and using the results for
program improvement.
6. Developing school, business, and community relations
that support the goals of career and technical education
including creating advisory committees and serving on
economic development committees.
11. Strategic planning, group facilitation, conflict
resolution and mediation, and continuous improvement
practices.
8. Gathering, analyzing and disseminating data related to
career and technical education, including local, state and
13
3.15
13
3.38
13
3.23
13
3.23
13
3.54
13
2.92
13
3.23
13
3
16
F.
Plan and implement a
cooperative vocational
education program within the
school and business industry
community.
G. Illustrate the unique
instructional phases of a CCTE
program.
H. Determine methods for
evaluating a C-CTE program.
I.
Recognize critical elements in
career development and schoolto-work transition process,
including information, training,
assessment, portfolio
representation, interviewing
skills, and personal marketing.
J.
Relate needs statements to local
community and business
characteristics and identify
three or more funding sources
related to need area.
4. Understanding financial
administrative practices related
to school finance.
A. Depict institution’s total
operating budget including
funding sources, their
percentages and dollar
amounts.
B. Analysis of funding sources
and likely changes.
C. Ensures management of the
organization, operations,
finances and resources for a
safe, efficient, and effective
learning environment.
D. Develop a basic line item
budget for proposal.
5. Understanding personnel
supervision practices and
professional development.
A. Self assessment on Wisconsin
Standards for development,
organization chart and roles
paper, and interview of LVEC
and/or principle dealing with
national labor market information.
4. Understanding and promoting the concept of
comprehensive programs in career and technical education
which includes planning, coordinating and evaluating
work-based learning as a strategy for career development.
2. Understanding and promoting the concept of
comprehensive programs in career and technical education
which includes teaching the academic disciplines…
14. The integration of career and technical education model
academic standards into K-12 curricula and assessment.
5. Developing and implementing on-going evaluation plans
for career and technical education and using the results for
program improvement.
12. Understanding the Wisconsin Developmental Guidance
Model and the Education for Employment Standards,
especially the relationship between comprehensive career
development and career and technical education.
13. Providing leadership in the understanding and
promotion of post-secondary options for students
especially in technical areas including articulation, Tech
Prep, Youth Options, and nontraditional opportunities.
7. Developing and managing budgets and grants.
8. Gathering, analyzing and disseminating data related to
career and technical education, including local, state and
national labor market information.
13
3.23
13
3.23
13
3
13
3.08
13
3.00
13
3.23
13
3.15
13
3
13
3.54
13
3.31
7. Developing and managing budgets and grants.
7. Developing and managing budgets and grants.
7. Developing and managing budgets and grants.
7. Developing and managing budgets and grants.
11. Strategic planning, group facilitation, conflict
resolution and mediation, and continuous improvement
practices.
7. Developing and managing budgets and grants.
9. Personnel selection and supervisory practices according
to accepted personnel standards.
10. Assessing staff development needs and providing
quality staff development opportunities in career and
technical education including in-services,
workshops/meetings, and sharing research and best
practices.
9. Personnel selection and supervisory practices according
to accepted personnel standards.
17
supervision practices and
professional development
B. Manages by advocating,
nurturing and sustaining a
school cultural and
instructional program
conductive to pupil learning
and staff professional growth.
C. Identify and use evaluation
methods, principles and tools.
6. Implementation of Wisconsin
State Standard (m) Education for
Employment.
A. Identify work based learning.
B. Interview LVEC and/or
principle on Education for
Employment issues and
challenges.
C. Understand, responds to, and
interacts with the larger
political, social, economic,
legal and cultural context that
affects schooling.
D. Plan and implement a
cooperative vocational
education program within the
school and business industry
community.
E. Identify appropriate
coordination techniques for a
CCTE program.
10. Assessing staff development needs and providing
quality staff development opportunities in career and
technical education including in-services,
workshops/meetings, and sharing research and best
practices.
9. Personnel selection and supervisory practices according
to accepted personnel standards.
12. Understanding the Wisconsin Developmental Guidance
Model and the Education for Employment Standards,
especially the relationship between comprehensive career
development and career and technical education.
4. Understanding and promoting the concept of
comprehensive programs in career and technical education
which includes planning, coordinating and evaluating
work-based learning as a strategy for career development.
12. Understanding the Wisconsin Developmental Guidance
Model and the Education for Employment Standards,
especially the relationship between comprehensive career
development and career and technical education.
12. Understanding the Wisconsin Developmental Guidance
Model and the Education for Employment Standards,
especially the relationship between comprehensive career
development and career and technical education.
4. Understanding and promoting the concept of
comprehensive programs in career and technical education
which includes planning, coordinating and evaluating
work-based learning as a strategy for career development.
4. Understanding and promoting the concept of
comprehensive programs in career and technical education
which includes planning, coordinating and evaluating
work-based learning as a strategy for career development.
13
3.23
13
3.08
13
3.23
13
3.46
13
3.15
13
3.23
13
3.08
As can be seen from the above ratings, the CTE program completers achieved mean scores
indicating they had achieved “basic” skills in most program-specific CTE standards. The lowest
rating (mean = 2.92) occurred in the area of: Understands, responds to, and interacts with the
larger political, social, economic, legal, and cultural context that affects schooling.
Administrator Practicum Data (ITC only)
Only one candidate has completed the ITC practicum to date. Thus, no aggregated data is
available.
Graduate and Employer Follow-Up Data
Follow-up surveys are not distributed to non-degree program completers at UW-Stout. As such,
the School of Education plans to develop and distribute a survey to graduates and their
employers starting in fall of 2011. The follow-up surveys will be developed to assess the levels
18
of competencies achieved by program completers using the Wisconsin Administrator Standards
and the program-specific guidelines.
Advanced Teacher and Other Programs
Advanced Disposition Data
Disposition review data has not been collected on candidates in the advanced teacher and CTE
programs. However, the Program Director of the MS in Education and MS in Technology
Education programs are developing a disposition review system that aligns with the School of
Education’s Statement of Values and Dispositions. Likewise, the Program Director for MS &
EdS programs in CTE is in the process of developing a similar disposition review system.
Advanced Teacher Education Program Portfolio Data
Portfolio data has not been collected on candidates in the new MS in Technology Education
program as there are no program completers to date. However, the MS in Education candidates
complete a portfolio in EDUC-790 in which the portfolio ratings constitute 75% of the final
grade. Refer to the table below for portfolio ratings over time:
Composite Rating
Criteria
•
•
•
Evidence of
using web
resources
Evidence of
completed
portfolio
with artifacts,
reflections,
and
technology
Evidence of
portfolio’s
alignment to
goals
Spring
2007
(n = 3)
Summer
2007
(n = 16)
Fall
2007
(n = 14)
Spring
2008
(n = 2)
Summer
2008
(n = 16)
Fall
2008
(n = 8)
4.00
3.87
3.69
4.00
3.93
4.00
Note: 1 = unacceptable, 2 = less quality than expected, 3 = satisfactory performance, 4 = exceptional performance
As can be seen in the above portfolio ratings, advanced teacher educator candidates achieved
satisfactory to exceptional ratings on portfolios submitted in 2007 and 2008.
19
Advanced Teacher Education Programs
Graduate Follow-Up Data
The Office of Budget, Planning, and Analysis (BPA) distributes one and five-year follow-up
surveys to graduates of the advanced teacher education degree programs. Program Directors have
the opportunity to recommend revisions to their program-specific components based upon the
finding from these surveys. These surveys are conducted every other year. Data from 2008
follow:
2008 MS in Ed and MS in ITE (now MS in TE) Program
Combined Follow-up Survey Results
(1=Strongly Disagree 2= Disagree 3=Agree 4=Strongly Agree)
Please rate the degree your graduate program prepared you to:
Year Graduated
2002
2006
N
Mean
N
Mean
1. Write effectively
8
3.38
3
3.00
2. Speak or present ideas effectively
8
3.38
3
3.00
3. Listen effectively
8
3.38
3
3.00
4. Utilize computing and digital technology
8
3.00
3
3.00
5. Use analytic reasoning
8
3.38
3
3.33
6. Solve problems creatively
8
3.63
3
3.00
7. Critically analyze information
8
3.63
3
3.33
8. Appreciate and understand diversity
8
3.38
3
3.00
9. Develop a global perspective
8
3.00
3
3.00
10. Organize information
8
3.50
3
3.33
11. Make decisions
8
3.38
3
3.00
12. Consider the ethics of my profession
8
3.25
3
2.67
13. Work in teams
8
3.38
3
3.00
14. Lead others
8
3.50
3
2.67
15. Understand statistics
8
3.50
3
2.67
As can be seen in the table above, SOE’s advanced teacher education graduates believed they
were particularly well prepared in the areas of using analytic reasoning and organizing
information. Because only three responded from the 2006 group, caution should be applied when
20
making comparisons between the 2002 and 2006 graduates. Data from future follow-up studies
will need to be monitored to determine trends over time.
Advanced Teacher Education Programs
Employer Follow-Up Surveys
The Office of Budget, Planning, and Analysis (BPA) distributes surveys to employers of
graduates of the program on an every-other-year basis. The Program Director has the opportunity
to recommend revisions to the program specific component based upon the finding from these
surveys.
Year Graduated
2002
2006
2008 MS in Ed & MS in ITE (now MS in Tech Ed) Program - Employers
Combined Follow-up Survey Results
(1= Very Low to 5 = Very High)
Please rate the degree the employee exhibits
the following competencies:
N
Mean
N
Mean
1. Write effectively
4
4.50
2
3.5
2. Speak or present ideas effectively
4
4.75
2
3.5
3. Use mathematics or statistics
4
4.50
2
4.0
4. Utilize technologies
4
4.50
2
4.0
5. Solve problems creatively
4
4.00
2
4.0
6. Organize information
4
4.00
2
3.5
7. Critically analyze information
4
4.00
2
4.0
8. Make decisions
4
4.00
2
4.0
9. Work in teams
4
4.25
2
4.5
10. Provide leadership
4
4.00
2
3.5
11. Use interpersonal skills
4
5.00
2
3.0
12. Think creatively
4
4.50
2
3.5
13. Plan and complete a project
4
4.00
2
4.0
14. Meet deadlines
4
4.25
2
3.5
As can be seen in the above table, employers believe graduates of the advanced teacher
education degree programs have well developed competencies in all areas assessed. However,
due to the small sample size of the respondents, more information is needed to determine the
reliability and validity of these ratings.
21
Communicating Assessment Data with Constituencies
Data will be communicated to faculty members and other stakeholders through informal and
formal means. The SOE Council and SOE Advisory Board are designed to guide and support
continuous improvement at the unit level. These stakeholders meet on a regular basis for the
purpose of improving the unit and its programs, reviewing policies and procedures to make
recommendations to the SOE Director related to revisions, updates, and to meet the ever
changing needs of the community, PK-12 schools and technical colleges. In addition, the
Assessment in the Major findings are shared with other stakeholders including technical content
instructors and Wisconsin’s Department of Public Instruction (DPI).
Utilization of Assessment Data to Improve Courses and the Unit
•
Share a copy of this assessment report with the Dean, Provost, SOE Advisory Board,
SOE Council and SOE faculty and staff.
•
Develop a five year strategic plan to develop a benchmarking assessment system to
review dispositions, portfolio, and follow-up survey data for all candidates in graduatelevel SOE degree and non-degree licensure programs.
•
Develop a plan to utilize 2010 School Counseling PRAXIS II data to inform program and
unit needs at the graduate level.
•
Due to the lack of graduate level benchmarking data for programs other than Pupil
Services, develop a survey tool for recent program graduates to assess the need for
programmatic or curricular areas changes in the Reading Teacher, CTE, MS in
Education, and ITC programs.
22