B.S. in Early Childhood Education Assessment in Major 2008 Submitted by Kari Merritt, Program Director Submitted October 27, 2009
Table of Contents Overview ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 1 PRAXIS I: Pre-Professional Skills Test ............................................................................................................................................................................ 1 PRAXIS II: Content Test ................................................................................................................................................................................................... 2 Benchmark Interview Ratings............................................................................................................................................................................................. 7 Disposition Ratings ........................................................................................................................................................................................................... 18 Reflection Ratings............................................................................................................................................................................................................. 20 Student Teaching Performance Ratings ............................................................................................................................................................................ 22 Alumni Follow-Up Survey ............................................................................................................................................................................................... 24 Communicating Assessment Data with Constituencies.................................................................................................................................................... 31 Utilization of Assessment Data to Improve Courses and the Program ............................................................................................................................. 31 Overview 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, 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.
PRAXIS I: Pre­Professional 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. Passing the PPST is required as part of meeting the SOE Benchmark I:
Acceptance into Teacher Education Program and Pre-student Teaching Experiences. In the area of reading, candidates pass rates have remained
relatively consistent during the years of 2004-2006 with the pass rates of 45, 44 and 46% respectively. However, during 2007, the pass rates rose
significantly to 67% and continued to improve in 2008 with a 70% pass rate. Writing test scores took a significant jump for the 2007 year with 75%
of candidates passing this section compared to 58% the previous year and remained relatively constant this year with a 72% passing rate. In the math
section the percentage of early childhood education candidates who passed decreased from 76% to 63% which is comparable to scores in 2006.
PPST Attempts and Pass Rates
2004
# test
attempts
97 a
155 a
132 a b
2004
# (and %)
passed
71 = 73%
69 = 45%
69 = 52%
2005
# test
attempts
77
108
108
2005
# (and %)
passed
57 = 74%
48 = 44%
46 = 43%
2006
# test
attempts
90
126
122
2006
# (and %)
passed
57 = 63%
58 = 46%
71 = 58%
2007
# test
attempts
85d
99d
94d
2007
# (and %)
passed
65=76%
66=67%
70=75%
2008
# test
attempts
48
50
46
2008
# (and %)
passed
30 = 63%
35 = 70%
33 = 72%
Math
266
215 = 80.8%
189
151 = 80.0%
204
148 = 72.5%
226
191 = 84.5%
130
102 = 78.5%
Reading
368
214 = 58.2%
239
138 = 57.7%
280
145 = 51.8%
243
184 = 75.7%
150
119 = 79.3%
Writing
425
206 = 48.5%
277
136 = 49.1%
296
161 = 54.4%
257
200 = 77.8%
138
104 = 75.4%
Teacher
Education
Program
PPST
Test
ECE (EC)
Math
Reading
Writing
SOE UG
TOTALS
To be included in the above table, the student must have a current major, and have taken the Praxis I test during that calendar year.
a
- includes one double major (ARTED / ECE)
b
- includes one score “grandfathered in” as a passing score
Early Childhood Education AIM Report 2008 Page 1 Note: All candidates are required to pass the PPST to be admitted to the School of Education as part of Benchmark I. Therefore, the pass
rate is 100% upon Benchmark I approval.
PRAXIS II: Content Test Candidates majoring in early childhood education must take and pass the 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 that are covered and they include language arts, mathematics, social studies and science.
Early Childhood Education AIM Report 2008 Page 2 According to information generated from Datatel, during 2008, 53 candidates took the content test with 46 candidates receiving a passing score of
147 or higher. This is an 87% pass rate which is a decrease from last year where the pass rate was 92%. This may be due to the fact that some
examinees have taken the test multiple times without achieving a passing score. Data for 2008/09 had not yet been received from ETS as of
September 15, 2009.
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.
Early Childhood Education
(Early Childhood – regular/special education)
(Middle Childhood – regular education)
2004*
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
Content Knowledge – from Datatel
Number of Examinees:
Highest Observed Score:
Lowest Observed Score
WI Score Need to Pass:
Number with WI Passing Score
Percent with WI Passing Score
175
193
122
147
130/176
74%
4
143
169
147
3/4
75%
41
183
134
147
38/41
93%
82
195
125
147
63/82
77%
61
190
128
147
56/61
92%
53
197
128
147
46/53
87%
* - scores from no-fault year – “grandfathered in” as passing
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:
03/04
205
193
122
156
146-164
147
04/05
37
183
134
156
151-169
147
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
150/205
32/37
40/49
61/67
48/68
73%
86%
82%
91%
71%
Early Childhood Education AIM Report 2008 08/09
Page 3 Average Percent Correct (percentage of items answered correctly by category)
Elementary
Test
Category
Language Arts
Mathematics
Social Studies
Science
Elementary
Test
Category
Language Arts
Mathematics
Social Studies
Science
UW-Stout
Points
03/04 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09
Available
%
%
%
%
%
%
24-30
74
74
78
77
77
29-30
63
68
67
74
71
28-30
58
60
56
57
58
29-30
61
66
62
68
67
Points
03/04
Available
%
24-30
79
29-30
70
28-30
61
29-30
63
04/05
%
80
74
63
67
Wisconsin
National
05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 03/04 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
81
80
80
80
79
79
78
78
74
77
76
68
68
69
70
70
62
61
61
61
61
60
59
59
65
69
69
63
64
64
65
66
Early Childhood Education AIM Report 2008 Page 4 Elementary
Test
Category
Language Arts
Mathematics
Social Studies
Science
Elementary
Test
Category
Language Arts
Mathematics
Social Studies
Science
1st Q
Lowest
2nd Q
03/04
04/05
05/06
06/07
07/08
82
40%
45
22%
50
24%
44
21%
15
41%
6
16%
6
16%
1
3%
11
22%
13
27%
13
27%
12
24%
14
21%
8
12%
16
24%
6
9%
24
35%
11
16%
18
26%
9
13%
08/09
03/04
04/05
05/06
06/07
07/08
48
23%
96
47%
73
36%
78
38%
13
35%
14
38%
15
41%
16
43%
17
35%
16
33%
22
45%
15
31%
31
46%
23
34%
22
33%
24
36%
20
29%
26
38%
18
26%
24
35%
3rd Q
08/09
4th Q
Highest
03/04
04/05
05/06
06/07
07/08
60
29%
51
25%
48
23%
56
27%
5
14%
11
30%
8
22%
13
35%
16
33%
13
27%
5
10%
9
18%
17
25%
24
36%
15
22%
22
33%
15
22%
19
28%
22
32%
29
43%
Early Childhood Education AIM Report 2008 08/09
03/04
04/05
05/06
06/07
07/08
15
7%
13
6%
34
17%
27
13%
4
11%
6
16%
8
22%
7
19%
5
10%
7
14%
5
10%
9
18%
5
7%
12
18%
14
21%
15
22%
9
13%
12
18%
10
15%
6
9%
08/09
Page 5 Percentage of Items Answered Correctly Per Category
Early Childhood Education AIM Report 2008 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. As can be
seen, 100% satisfactory ratings are reported in all areas.
Benchmark I Interview Results Calendar Year 2008
ECE Question Explain personal and professional growth between your initial resume and updated resume. Response Unsatisfactory Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Explain your philosophy of education. Satisfactory Explain three personal characteristics that will Unsatisfactory make you an effective teacher. Satisfactory Describe yourself as a learner and how that Unsatisfactory will impact your future teaching. Satisfactory Describe experiences that have impacted your Unsatisfactory understanding of diversity and human relations and how these might aid you as you work with students and families Satisfactory Explain two subject matter/content artifacts Unsatisfactory and how these examples illustrate your understanding of the content you will be teaching Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Completed Alignment Summary Satisfactory Early Childhood Education AIM Report 2008 SP08 N=38 0
0%
FA08 N=10 0
0%
SOE UNIT SP08 FA08 N=96 N=37 0 0% 0
0%
38
0
38
0
38
0
38
100%
0%
100%
0%
100%
0%
100%
10
0
10
0
10
0
10
100%
0%
100%
0%
100%
0%
100%
96 0 96 0 96 0 96 100%
0%
100%
0%
100%
0%
100%
37
0
37
0
37
0
37
100%
0%
100%
0%
100%
0%
100%
0
0%
0
0%
0 0%
0
0%
38 100% 10 100% 96 100% 37 100%
0
0%
0
0%
0 0%
0
0%
38 100% 10 100% 96 100% 37 100%
0
0%
0
0% 0 0% 0
0%
38 100% 10 100% 96 100% 37 100%
Page 7 As evidenced by the high percentage of Basic ratings below, candidates feel quite confident discussing
their competence and growth in the Wisconsin Teacher Standards:
Benchmark II Interview Results Calendar Year 2008 ECE 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 Response Unsatisfactory Emerging Basic n/a Unsatisfactory Emerging Basic n/a Unsatisfactory Emerging Basic n/a Unsatisfactory Emerging Basic n/a SP08 N=30 0 0%
10 33%
20 67%
0 0%
0 0%
12 40%
18 60%
0 0%
0 0%
6 20%
24 80%
0 0%
0 0%
6 20%
24 80%
0 0%
FA08 N=26 0 0%
11 42%
15 58%
0 0%
0 0%
10 38%
16 62%
0 0%
0 0%
4 15%
22 85%
0 0%
0 0%
6 23%
20 77%
0 0%
SOE UNIT SP08 FA08 N=71 N=76 1 1% 1 1%
25 35% 28 37%
44 62% 47 62%
1 1% 0 0%
0 0% 1 1%
23 32% 22 29%
47 66% 53 70%
1 1% 0 0%
0 0% 1 1%
21 30% 17 22%
49 69% 58 76%
1 1% 0 0%
0 0% 0 0%
24 34% 23 30%
45 63% 52 68%
2 3% 1 1%
Reviewers choose 2 of the following categories in which they asked candidates to discuss portfolio evidence that: Unsatisfactory 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%
Emerging 1 3% 0 0% 7 10% 9 12%
demonstrates your content knowledge Basic 3 10% 3 12% 25 35% 25 33%
n/a 26 87% 23 88% 39 55% 42 55%
Early Childhood Education AIM Report 2008 Page 8 demonstrates your knowledge of how children grow and learn demonstrates your ability to create instructional opportunities adapted to diverse learners demonstrates your ability to teach effectively demonstrates your ability to manage a classroom effectively, including organizing physical space, managing procedures and student behavior, and creating a culture of respect, rapport, and learning demonstrates your ability to communicate effectively with students, parents, and colleagues demonstrates your ability to assess student learning demonstrates your professionalism, including ongoing professional development; fostering relationships with colleagues, families, and the community; and displaying ethical behavior expected of education professionals Unsatisfactory Emerging Basic n/a Unsatisfactory Emerging Basic n/a Unsatisfactory Emerging Basic n/a Unsatisfactory Emerging Basic 0
1
1
28
0
4
12
14
0
2
0
28
0
6
8
0% 0 0% 3 4% 0 0%
3% 1 4% 6 8% 5 7%
3% 1 4% 6 8% 10 13%
93% 24 92% 56 79% 61 80%
0% 0 0% 3 4% 0 0%
13% 5 19% 12 17% 15 20%
40% 6 23% 18 25% 27 36%
47% 15 58% 38 54% 34 45%
0% 0 0% 3 4% 0 0%
7% 1 4% 10 14% 4 5%
0% 0 0% 5 7% 6 8%
93% 25 96% 53 75% 66 87%
0% 0 0% 3 4% 0 0%
20% 4 15% 14 20% 13 17%
27% 4 15% 18 25% 21 28%
n/a Unsatisfactory Emerging Basic n/a Unsatisfactory Emerging Basic n/a Unsatisfactory Emerging Basic 16
0
1
2
27
0
3
6
21
0
5
6
53% 18 69% 36 51% 42 55%
0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%
3% 1 4% 3 4% 3 4%
7% 2 8% 9 13% 9 12%
90% 23 88% 59 83% 64 84%
0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%
10% 6 23% 13 18% 12 16%
20% 7 27% 16 23% 18 24%
70% 13 50% 42 59% 46 61%
0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%
17% 6 23% 11 15% 12 16%
20% 8 31% 18 25% 24 32%
n/a 19 63% 12 46% 42 59% 40 53%
Early Childhood Education AIM Report 2008 Page 9 Reflection Ratings (2008)
of ECE Candidates at Benchmark II Interview
2008 Spring (n = 30) and Fall (n =26) Reflection Ratings
As evidenced by the high percentage of Basic ratings above, Early Childhood Education candidates are beginning to develop competence in being a
reflective practitioner at Benchmark II.
Early Childhood Education AIM Report 2008 Page 10 Benchmark III interviews occur at the completion of all student teaching experiences. As would be expected at the completion of the program, a high
percentage of candidates received proficient ratings:
Benchmark III Interview Results Calendar Year 2008 ECE 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 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 Early Childhood Education AIM Report 2008 SP08 FA08 N=39 N=18* 0 0% 0 0%
0 0% 0 0%
17 44% 9 50%
22 56% 7 39%
0 0% 2 11%
0 0% 0 0%
2 5% 1 6%
14 36% 4 22%
23 59% 13 72%
0 0% 0 0%
0 0% 0 0%
0 0% 1 6%
16 41% 4 22%
23 59% 11 61%
0 0% 2 11%
0 0% 0 0%
0 0% 0 0%
5 13% 1 6%
34 87% 17 94%
0 0% 0 0%
SOE UNIT SP08 FA08 N=87 N=56 0 0% 0 0%
5 6% 2 4%
31 36% 25 45%
51 59% 25 45%
0 0% 3 5%
0 0% 0 0%
4 5% 3 5%
27 31% 20 36%
56 64% 32 57%
0 0% 0 0%
0 0% 0 0%
2 2% 2 4%
29 33% 17 30%
56 64% 34 61%
0 0% 2 4%
0 0% 0 0%
1 1% 7 13%
9 10% 10 18%
77 89% 38 68%
0 0% 0 0%
Page 11 Reflection Ratings (2008)
of ECE Artifacts at Benchmark III
2008 Spring (n = 29) and Fall (n =16) Reflection Ratings
As can be seen by the above chart, all Early Childhood Candidates received Basic or Proficient reflection ratings at Benchmark III.
Early Childhood Education AIM Report 2008 Page 12 Disposition Ratings (2008)
of
ECE Candidates by Cooperating Teachers at Benchmark III
2008 Spring (n = 39) and Fall (n =15) Reflection Ratings
As can be seen by the above chart, all Early Childhood Candidates received Basic or Proficient disposition ratings at Benchmark III.
Early Childhood Education AIM Report 2008 Page 13 Educational Benchmarking Survey (EBI) (Ratings: 1 = Not at all, 4 = Moderately, 7 = Extremely)
The Educational Benchmarking Inventory (EBI) of exiting student teachers is administered via computer at the end of student teaching for the
purpose of unit assessment. Categories with the highest means were Student Teaching Experiences, Satisfaction with Faculty and Courses, and
Support Services. Two of the highest rated items were included in these categories and were Quality of University Supervision (6.32) and Quality of
learning experience (6.23). Categories with the lowest means are Research Methods, Professional Development, Societal Implication (4.45),
Management of Educational Contingencies (4.47) and Career Services (4.10). In comparing the means from last year, improvements were seen in six
categories. Of those categories, two saw improvements on all included items (Administrative Services and Support Services).
ECE
SOE UNIT
EBI Factor & Item Analysis
03/04
N=53
04/05
N=41
05/06
N=62
06/07
N=55
07/08
N=50
08/09
N=35
04/05
N=174
05/06
N=142
06/07
N=156
07/08
N=121
08/09
N=75
F1: Quality of Instruction
Q17. Teaching
Q18. Feedback on assignments (other than grades)
F2: Learning Theories, Teaching Pedagogy/Techniques
Q24. Teaching methods (pedagogy)
Q19. Theories of human development
Q21. Learning theories
Q20. Classroom management
Q31. Impact of technology on schools
F3: Research Methods, Professional Development, Societal
Implication
Q27. Professional development
Q30. Professional ethics
Q32. Impact of societal changes on schools
Q23. Inquiry/research skills
Q29. Educational policy
Q28. School law
F4: Aspects of Student Development
Q34. Effectively develop a lesson plan
Q35. Foster intellectual development of students
Q36. Foster social development of students
Q46. Actively engage students in the learning process
Q44. Encourage positive social interaction among students
Q45. Encourage self motivation in students
Q37. Foster student’s personal development
4.17
4.43
3.87
4.47
4.78
4.17
4.62
4.79
4.44
4.87
5.22
4.49
5.13
5.40
4.84
5.06
5.25
4.89
4.37
4.67
4.06
4.65
4.86
4.44
4.93
5.11
4.74
4.90
5.08
4.70
4.83
5.03
4.64
4.56
4.69
5.07
5.04
4.20
3.80
4.86
4.97
5.56
5.08
4.55
4.08
4.91
4.90
5.53
5.13
4.58
4.40
5.16
5.52
5.31
5.17
5.12
4.63
5.18
5.48
5.22
5.02
5.26
4.92
4.76
5.03
4.86
4.72
4.83
4.34
4.70
4.86
4.73
4.83
4.54
4.56
4.90
4.97
5.05
5.10
4.70
4.70
5.04
5.38
4.97
5.03
4.87
4.95
5.00
5.29
5.02
4.98
4.93
4.78
4.74
4.99
4.77
4.73
4.64
4.60
3.76
4.36
4.09
3.98
3.84
3.29
2.98
4.77
5.87
4.93
5.04
5.00
4.89
4.69
-
4.32
5.26
4.45
4.46
4.26
3.90
3.45
5.31
6.05
5.45
5.37
5.68
5.55
5.45
-
4.31
5.40
4.53
4.51
4.47
3.69
3.31
5.37
6.24
5.57
5.63
5.73
5.54
5.28
-
4.81
5.60
5.29
4.73
4.55
4.54
4.23
5.53
5.27
5.73
5.31
5.04
5.49
5.63
5.49
4.80
5.70
5.34
4.92
4.76
4.20
3.86
5.58
6.31
5.88
5.78
5.73
5.57
5.67
4.45
5.03
4.78
4.83
4.28
4.08
3.69
5.34
6.08
5.47
5.53
5.33
5.33
5.33
4.24
4.77
4.56
4.42
4.18
3.92
3.51
4.85
5.45
4.96
4.81
5.05
4.87
4.74
-
4.36
5.06
4.55
4.57
4.52
3.94
3.54
5.05
5.82
5.17
5.13
5.25
5.17
4.96
-
4.65
5.16
4.96
4.74
4.54
4.47
4.03
5.18
5.95
5.26
5.09
5.46
5.33
4.97
5.11
4.51
5.17
4.97
4.58
4.42
4.02
3.89
5.16
5.86
5.34
5.18
5.29
5.23
5.03
5.13
4.38
4.93
4.67
4.56
4.29
4.13
3.69
5.02
5.60
5.20
5.15
5.12
5.08
5.03
5.01
Early Childhood Education AIM Report 2008 Page 14 Q33. Foster classroom collaboration
Q38. Develop curricula
Q41. Foster holistic learning
Q40. Manage behavior of students
F5: Classroom Equity & Diversity
Q52. Teach children from diverse academic backgrounds
Q42. Establish equity in the classroom
Q51. Teach children from diverse ethnic backgrounds
Early Childhood Education AIM Report 2008 4.33
4.68
3.79
4.11
4.60
4.58
4.62
4.60
5.00
5.11
4.87
4.51
4.90
4.84
5.05
4.82
5.19
5.33
4.78
4.64
4.77
4.59
5.12
4.59
5.12
6.33
5.57
5.55
5.14
5.06
5.40
4.96
5.33
5.29
5.04
5.14
5.37
5.45
5.45
5.22
5.25
5.19
4.92
4.89
5.06
5.09
5.23
4.89
4.70
5.04
4.44
4.26
4.68
4.66
4.70
4.64
4.88
5.20
4.58
4.43
4.70
4.56
4.96
4.58
5.01
5.59
4.80
4.61
4.93
4.93
5.01
4.86
5.04
5.22
4.72
4.68
4.97
4.97
5.04
4.90
4.92
4.91
4.61
4.56
4.81
4.85
4.84
4.74
Page 15 ECE
SOE UNIT
EBI Factor & Item Analysis
03/04
N=53
04/05
N=41
05/06
N=62
06/07
N=55
07/08
N=50
08/09
N=35
04/05
N=174
05/06
N=142
06/07
N=156
07/08
N=121
08/09
N=75
F6: Management of Education Constituencies
Q48. Work with colleagues in your school
Q50. Work effectively with parents
Q49. Work with school administrators
Q47. Deal with school politics
F7: Assessment of Student Learning
Q56. Informally assess student learning
Q55. Formally assess student learning
F8: Satisfaction with Faculty & Courses
Q61. Average size of classes
Q58. Accessibility of instructors outside of class.
Q59. Instructor’s responsiveness to student concerns
Q60. Amount of work required of student
F9: Administrative Services
Q64. Availability of courses
Q62. Academic advising by faculty
Q63. Academic advising by non-faculty
F10: Support Services
Q65. Quality of library resources
Q66. Availability of Education School’s computers
Q67. Training to utilize Education School’s computing resources
F11: Fellow Students in Program
Q70. Level of camaraderie
Q71. Commitment to teaching profession
Q68. Academic quality
Q69. Ability to work in teams
F12: Student Teaching Experience
Q76. Quality of university supervision
Q77. Support from teachers in school
Q74. Quality of learning experience
Q75. Quality of cooperating teacher
Q72. Process of securing a position
Q73. Choice of assignments
3.91
3.93
4.82
3.56
3.21
4.68
4.69
4.38
5.10
5.70
4.98
4.7
5.02
4.09
3.86
4.28
4.17
5.15
5.44
5.26
4.74
5.08
5.05
5.19
4.95
5.12
5.75
5.82
6.25
6.09
6.23
4.91
5.18
4.23
4.73
4.71
3.97
3.43
5.11
5.24
5.00
5.61
6.38
5.42
5.24
5.37
4.98
5.00
4.78
5.06
5.50
5.97
5.43
4.89
5.78
5.83
5.68
5.78
5.84
5.50
5.41
6.34
5.97
6.16
4.97
4.97
4.32
4.78
4.85
4.03
3.63
5.02
5.12
4.92
5.35
5.86
5.31
5.15
5.22
4.80
4.73
4.90
4.68
5.25
5.48
5.45
4.84
5.59
5.64
5.69
5.58
5.53
5.76
5.68
6.15
6.10
6.18
5.25
5.34
4.64
4.90
5.24
4.42
4.04
5.04
5.06
5.00
5.39
5.82
5.42
5.19
5.15
5.09
4.96
5.27
5.02
5.42
5.65
5.64
5.11
5.54
5.49
5.49
5.60
5.59
5.81
6.06
5.94
5.96
6.20
5.33
5.33
4.75
5.10
5.00
4.65
4.24
5.49
5.61
5.35
5.56
6.02
5.55
5.43
5.22
4.90
4.80
5.15
4.93
5.27
5.67
5.39
4.61
5.35
5.69
5.41
5.22
5.08
5.76
5.96
6.18
6.00
6.10
5.30
5.00
4.47
4.69
4.78
4.33
4.06
5.11
5.19
5.03
5.66
6.11
5.86
5.49
5.20
5.33
5.34
5.57
4.97
5.63
5.94
5.47
5.19
5.54
5.63
5.60
5.43
5.51
6.05
6.32
6.11
6.23
6.06
5.91
5.66
3.91
4.22
4.02
3.83
3.50
4.93
4.85
4.99
5.33
5.78
5.24
5.07
5.18
4.46
4.35
4.43
4.69
4.99
5.47
5.10
4.37
5.34
5.48
5.24
5.26
5.35
5.49
5.61
5.89
5.68
5.82
5.06
5.02
4.24
4.60
4.45
4.10
3.81
5.06
5.09
5.04
5.36
5.87
5.27
5.14
5.21
4.74
4.72
4.74
4.73
5.27
5.51
5.40
4.89
5.41
5.51
5.47
5.32
5.39
5.78
5.94
6.03
5.99
6.11
5.34
5.34
4.19
4.48
4.47
4.02
3.78
5.23
5.19
5.30
5.50
6.02
5.39
5.28
5.35
5.11
5.06
5.14
5.09
5.54
5.75
5.67
5.16
5.43
5.54
5.42
5.31
5.48
5.69
5.78
5.99
5.92
5.92
5.24
5.29
4.20
4.46
4.33
4.11
3.88
5.29
5.32
5.25
5.44
5.99
5.49
5.26
5.04
4.89
4.89
4.92
4.94
5.29
5.64
5.43
4.66
5.35
5.53
5.44
5.20
5.21
5.58
5.80
5.89
5.77
6.00
5.00
5.01
4.11
4.37
4.37
4.05
3.63
5.12
5.23
5.01
5.58
6.11
5.64
5.32
5.26
5.15
5.27
5.24
4.86
5.52
5.85
5.37
4.98
5.54
5.66
5.58
5.49
5.45
5.89
6.16
6.16
5.99
5.93
5.59
5.47
Early Childhood Education AIM Report 2008 Page 16 ECE
Questions That Do Not Comprise a Factor
Q22. Assessment of learning
Q25. Collaboration with colleagues
Q26. State standards
Q39. Write effective
Q43. Use of multimedia technology in the classroom
Q53. Teach children with diverse leaning styles
Q54. Teach areas in content field*
Q57. Identify child abuse
Q78 Opportunities to collaborate with other student teachers
Q84. How academically challenging were Education courses in
comparison to Non-Education courses on this campus
Q85. Quality of teaching in your Education courses compared to quality
of teaching in your Non-Education courses on this campus
SOE UNIT
03/04
N=53
4.42
4.02
4.76
4.62
4.07
4.98
4.89
-
04/05
N=41
4.87
4.92
5.76
5.32
4.92
5.46
5.34
-
05/06
N=62
4.95
5.30
6.31
5.20
4.75
5.34
4.56
-
06/07
N=55
5.10
5.66
6.20
5.52
4.92
5.65
4.92
-
07/08
N=50
5.24
5.48
5.98
5.12
4.92
5.71
5.54
-
08/09
N=36
4.69
4.78
5.78
5.06
4.78
5.36
5.37
5.00
5.12
04/05
N=174
4.80
4.47
5.13
4.84
4.76
5.09
4.42
-
05/06
N=142
5.14
4.85
5.76
5.01
5.07
5.24
4.31
-
06/07
N=156
5.25
5.12
5.91
5.20
5.27
5.51
4.40
-
07/08
N=121
5.13
4.83
5.65
4.97
5.07
5.41
4.82
-
08/09
N=75
4.92
4.68
5.47
4.88
4.73
5.28
5.29
4.71
4.97
4.09
4.77
5.07
5.62
4.76
4.88
4.24
4.75
4.97
4.68
4.70
4.95
4.77
5.37
5.38
5.84
5.71
4.75
5.03
5.09
5.18
5.21
ECE
SOE UNIT
EBI Factor & Item Analysis
03/04
N=53
04/05
N=41
05/06
N=62
06/07
N=55
07/08
N=50
08/09
N=35
04/05
N=174
05/06
N=142
06/07
N=156
07/08
N=121
08/09
N=75
F13: Career Services
Q79. Assistance in preparation for permanent job search
Q80. Notice of job openings
Q83. Number of interviews had with employers
Q81. Number of schools recruiting on campus
Q82. Quality of schools recruiting
F14: Overall Satisfaction with Your Program
Q88. How inclined are you to recommend your Education program to a
close friend
Q86. Extent that the Education program experience fulfilled your
expectations
Q87. Comparing the experience to the quality of education, rate the
value of the investment made in your Education program
3.42
3.98
3.75
3.00
2.97
3.11
4.67
4.29
4.67
4.52
3.65
4.04
4.25
4.08
3.99
4.20
4.27
3.12
3.51
3.55
4.73
4.21
4.27
4.69
4.24
3.90
3.97
4.91
4.03
4.27
4.46
3.70
3.63
3.66
4.92
4.10
4.44
4.37
3.55
3.60
3.42
4.91
3.83
4.23
4.18
3.57
3.34
3.51
4.07
4.23
4.31
4.67
3.91
3.62
3.81
4.51
4.25
4.35
4.75
4.07
3.69
4.02
4.80
4.06
4.32
4.54
3.82
3.58
3.62
4.48
3.77
4.02
3.88
3.57
3.25
3.15
4.41
5.05
4.16
4.97
5.31
5.17
5.24
4.27
4.76
5.11
4.77
4.66
4.52
4.22
4.83
4.92
5.11
4.85
4.00
4.54
4.81
4.44
4.42
4.43
3.81
4.39
4.50
4.57
4.58
3.91
4.23
4.45
4.24
4.11
According to the 2008 EBI ratings above, Early Childhood Education student teachers believed their education coursework was less likely to prepare
them in the areas of research, professional development, laws, and societal implications relevant the school setting (moderate ratings). The highest
EBI ratings were generated in the areas of: a) knowledge of student development and b) level of satisfaction with the faculty, courses, and student
teaching aspects of the program (above moderate ratings).
Early Childhood Education AIM Report 2008 Page 17 Disposition Ratings* The School of Education developed a system to assess candidate dispositions from the beginning of the program through program completion. From
2004-2007, the dispositions were comprised of eight professional disposition categories: attendance, preparedness, continuous learning, creating a
positive climate, reflective, thoughtful and responsive learner, cooperative/collaborative and respectful. These dispositions of teaching were linked to
the Wisconsin Teacher Standards and are rated on a four point scale in which 1 = unsatisfactory, 2 = emerging, 3 = basic, and 4 = proficient. Mean
scores were then calculated based on this scale. Candidates received disposition ratings from the course instructor for the introduction to the major
course and the Foundations of Education course for Benchmark I. For early childhood education majors, these means improved in five of the eight
categories from to 2006 to 2007. In 2007, the three highest rated dispositions at Benchmark I were attendance (3.51), respectful (3.02) and
preparedness (2.77). The lowest rated disposition was continuous learning (2.36). Benchmark II candidates received disposition rating from two of
their program methods/curriculum class instructors. Benchmark II means fell in all categories. In 2007, the highest rated disposition at Benchmark II
was again respectful (3.79), while the lowest was reflective (3.07). For Benchmark III, cooperating teachers at each student teaching placement rated
each candidate at the completion of student teaching. Means in all eight of the categories rose from 2006-2007. In 2007, cooperating teachers rated
early childhood education candidates highest in attendance and respectful (3.88) and lowest in continuous learning (3.62). However, these differences
may not be statistically or meaningfully significant.
Attendance
Level
Benchmark I
Benchmark II
Benchmark III
Mean (N)
2004
3.30 (125)
3.64 (118)
3.89 (71)
Mean (N)
2005
3.28 (156)
3.62 (308)
3.80 (96)
Mean (N)
2006
3.49 (194)
3.43 (272)
3.86 (72)
Mean (N)
2007
3.51 (162)
3.30 (267)
3.88 (162)
Mean (N)
2004
Mean (N)
2005
Mean (N)
2006
Mean (N)
2007
2.16 (125)
3.07 (118)
3.61 (71)
2.31 (156)
3.29 (309)
3.80 (96)
2.73 (193)
3.46 (272)
3.61 (72)
2.77 (162)
3.39 (267)
3.68 (162)
Preparedness
Level
Benchmark I
Benchmark II
Benchmark III
Early Childhood Education AIM Report 2008 Page 18 Continuous Learning
Program
Benchmark I
Benchmark II
Benchmark III
Mean (N)
2004
2.10 (125)
2.87 (118)
3.51 (71)
Mean (N)
2005
2.09 (156)
3.08 (309)
3.57 (96)
Mean (N)
2006
2.34 (193)
3.22 (272)
3.51 (72)
Mean (N)
2007
2.36 (162)
3.14 (267)
3.62 (162)
Mean (N)
2004
2.15 (125)
3.05 (118)
3.75 (71)
Mean (N)
2005
2.19 (156)
3.29 (309)
3.74 (96)
Mean (N)
2006
2.56 (193)
3.47 (272)
3.71 (72)
Mean (N)
2007
2.56 (162)
3.45 (267)
3.75 (162)
Mean (N)
2004
2.36 (125)
2.88 (118)
3.59 (71)
Mean (N)
2005
2.19 (156)
3.03 (309)
3.63 (96)
Mean (N)
2006
2.37 (193)
3.24 (272)
3.58 (72)
Mean (N)
2007
2.44 (162)
3.07 (267)
3.70 (162)
Mean (N)
2005
2.18 (156)
3.08 (309)
3.72 (96)
Mean (N)
2006
2.53 (193)
3.31 (272)
3.61 (72)
Mean (N)
2007
2.53 (162)
3.26 (267)
3.73 (162)
Positive Climate
Level
Benchmark I
Benchmark II
Benchmark III
Reflective
Level
Benchmark I
Benchmark II
Benchmark III
Thoughtful & Responsive Listener
Level
Benchmark I
Benchmark II
Benchmark III
Mean (N)
2004
2.18 (125)
2.84 (118)
3.69 (71)
Early Childhood Education AIM Report 2008 Page 19 Cooperative / Collaborative
Level
Benchmark I
Benchmark II
Benchmark III
Mean (N)
2004
2.20 (125)
2.92 (118)
3.62 (71)
Mean (N)
2005
2.19 (159)
3.29 (309)
3.69 (96)
Mean (N)
2006
2.54 (193)
3.65 (272)
3.54 (72)
Mean (N)
2007
2.44 (162)
3.59 (267)
3.72 (162)
Mean (N)
2004
2.36 (125)
3.39 (118)
3.83 (71)
Mean (N)
2005
2.28 (156)
3.57 (309)
3.84 (96)
Mean (N)
2006
2.95 (193)
3.85 (272)
3.83 (72)
Mean (N)
2007
3.02 (162)
3.79 (267)
3.88 (162)
Respectful
Level
Benchmark I
Benchmark II
Benchmark III
*A new Disposition assessment procedure was implemented for all teacher education candidates in 2008. Reflection Ratings* Early Childhood Education candidates are required to develop artifacts as evidence of their learning. For each artifact developed from 2004-2007,
candidates were required to write a reflection related to: the intended learning, new or unanticipated learning gained from completing the artifact, and
how each artifact related to Danielson’s domains and components and the ten Wisconsin Teacher Standards. Instructors then graded the artifacts then
rated the reflections associated with that artifact.
Benchmark I means decreased in all three of the categories while they increased in all three at the Benchmark III level. At Benchmark II the mean
increased for Intended Learning and New and Unanticipated Learning and fell in the remaining category.
Intended Learning
Level
Benchmark I
Benchmark II
Mean (N)
2004
2.58 (137)
2.80 (332)
Mean (N)
2005
2.82 (157)
2.79 (580)
Early Childhood Education AIM Report 2008 Mean (N)
2006
3.06 (119)
2.76 (386)
Mean (N)
2007
2.88 (138)
2.82 (426)
Page 20 Benchmark III
3.44 (117)
3.63 (106)
3.49 (147)
3.58 (314)
Mean (N)
2005
2.78 (157)
2.78 (580)
3.57 (106)
Mean (N)
2006
3.03 (119)
2.75 (391)
3.38 (147)
Mean (N)
2007
2.94 (138)
2.87 (426)
3.46 (314)
New and Unanticipated Learning
Level
Benchmark I
Benchmark II
Benchmark III
Mean (N)
2004
2.35 (137)
2.68 (332)
3.24 (117)
Connections to Domains, Components and Wisconsin Teacher Standards
Level
Benchmark I
Benchmark II
Benchmark III
Mean (N)
2004
2.58 (137
2.89 (332)
3.46 (117)
Mean (N)
2005
2.75 (157)
2.95 (580)
3.74 (106)
Mean (N)
2006
2.97 (119)
3.06 (389)
3.53 (146)
Mean (N)
2007
2.86 (138)
2.96 (426)
3.63 (314)
*A new Reflection assessment procedure was implemented for all teacher education candidates in 2008.
Early Childhood Education AIM Report 2008 Page 21 Student Teaching Performance Ratings Cooperating teachers rated student teachers on Wisconsin Teacher Standards. Means are calculated on a 4-point scale where 1=unsatisfactory,
2=emerging, 3=basic, and 4=advanced basic. The mean rose for each teacher standard with the highest mean occurring in the standard #7: Teachers
are able to plan different kinds of lessons (3.93). Additionally, the mean for each teacher standard in the Early Childhood Education program was
higher than the mean for the School of Education as a unit.
Student Teacher Course Evaluations Calendar Year 2008
Rating Scale: 1=Unsatisfactory, 2=Emerging, 3=Basic, 4=Proficient
ECE SOE UNIT SP08 FA08 SP08 FA08 N=40 N=16 N=88 N=47 Mean Std. Dev. Mean Std. Dev. Mean Std. Dev. Mean Std. Dev.
Teachers know the subjects they are teaching Teachers know how children grow 3.55 3.54 0.34
0.32
3.9 3.9 0.23
0.29
3.63 3.52 0.47 0.51 3.79
3.7
0.3
0.5
Teachers understand that children learn differently Teachers know how to teach 3.53 3.41 0.36
0.35
3.85 3.85 0.3
0.3
3.63 3.54 0.5 0.47 3.72
3.68
0.4
0.5
Teachers know how to manage a classroom Teachers communicate well 3.51 3.45 0.35
0.35
3.8 3.76 0.37
0.37
3.48 3.55 0.46 0.47 3.6
3.66
0.5
0.4
Teachers are able to plan different kinds of lessons 3.53 0.39
3.93 0.2
3.54 0.63 3.74
0.4
Teachers know how to test for student progress Teachers are able to evaluate themselves 3.39 0.42
3.81 0.3
3.59 0.54 3.71
0.4
3.61 0.36
3.76 0.45
3.68 0.52 3.7
0.4
Teachers are connected with other teachers and the community 3.59 0.33
3.86 0.25
3.61 0.52 3.74
0.4
As can be seen in the above table, the 2008 mean ratings of Early Childhood Education student teachers indicate Basic to Proficient levels of
competency using the ten Wisconsin Teaching Standards.
Early Childhood Education AIM Report 2008 Page 22 Early Childhood Education Survey
Early Childhood Education majors are surveyed by the program director at the conclusion of their student teaching experience to ascertain strengths
and weaknesses. In turn, this information is shared with early childhood faculty as well as stakeholders to identify changes that need to be introduced
in to the curriculum and program. Means are calculated on a 5-point scale in which 1 = strongly disagree, 2 = disagree, 3 = neutral, 4 = agree and 5 =
strongly agree. In the most recent survey the high rated items included “confident teaching pre K” (5), “overall program quality” (4.8) and “would
choose program again” (4.8). The lowest rated items were “the laboratory equipment is up to date” (3.8), and “classroom facilities meet the needs of
the students” (4.1). Reported below is also a comparison of responses from May 2007 to May 2009. Over the last year gains have been made in the
majority of categories including confidence in student teaching at different levels and advisor accessibility.
Sample Size
1. the library resources and access are adequate
2. My written communication skills have been enhanced
3. My oral communication skills have been enhanced
4. My critical thinking skills have been enhanced
5. My problem solving skills have been enhanced
6. The classroom facilities meet the needs of the students
7. The laboratory equipment is up-to-date
8. My advisor is accessible
9. Instructors are accessible for help outside of class
10. Instructors provide current and relevant information
11. Instructors achieve stated objectives from syllabi
12. Evaluation procedures measure my learning
13. Objectives clear and met
14. Unnecessary repetition
15. Requirements completed in a reasonable time
16. Confident program prepared
17. Overall quality program
18. Would choose program again
19. Ethnic studies discouraged racism
20. developed global perspective
21. Confident teaching preK
22. Confident teaching K
23. Confident teaching primary
Early Childhood Education AIM Report 2008 May 2009
N=21
4.4
4.3
4.2
4.4
4.4
4.1
3.8
4.6
4.4
4.3
4.7
4.3
4.5
2.3
4.4
4.2
4.8
4.8
4.5
4.2
5
4.5
4.3
May 2008
N=19
4.2
3.6
3.8
4.7
4.1
3.3
3.8
4.1
4.4
4.1
4.3
3.7
4.3
3.6
4
4.4
4.6
4.8
4.7
4.3
4.7
4.4
4.6
May 2007
N=30
4.3
4.2
4.3
4.1
4.1
3.7
3.8
3.9
3.9
3.9
3.8
3.9
4.1
3.1
3.9
3.9
4.1
3.8
4.1
3.8
4.3
4.2
4.1
Page 23 Alumni Follow­Up Survey 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.
UW-STOUT UNDERGRADUATE ONE-YEAR FOLLOW-UP
Early Childhood Education , BS
Year Graduated: 1998
2000
2002
Total Graduates Surveyed
Response No.
Response Rate
74
41
55%
102
35
34%
2004
2006
75
30
40%
102
35
34%
66
29
44%
Improved Competencies (Mean Ratings: 5=high)
General Education
Writing effectively
Speaking or presenting ideas effectively**
Listening effectively
Utilization of technologies
Using analytic reasoning
Creative problem solving**
Critically analyzing information**
Maintaining a sense of physical well-being
Appreciating and understanding diversity
Developing a global perspective
Appreciate the value of literature and the arts**
Appreciating the natural or physical sciences
Appreciating social, economic and political forces
Appreciating history in context to current issues
Personal Development
Organizing information
Making decisions
Early Childhood Education AIM Report 2008 3.3
4.0
3.7
3.7
3.2
-
3.2
3.7
3.5
3.5
2.9
-
3.6
3.7
3.8
3.8
3.4
-
3.6
3.8
3.7
3.5
3.3
3.6
3.6
3.4
3.9
3.5
3.6
3.1
3.1
2.9
3.3
3.6
3.4
3.5
3.4
3.7
3.3
3.1
3.8
3.4
3.5
3.1
3.1
3.2
4.0
3.9
3.7
3.6
3.9
4.0
4.1
3.9
4.0
3.7
Page 24 Making decisions ethically
Working in teams
Leadership**
Thinking creatively
Maintaining a sense of mental well-being
4.5
4.3
4.3
-
4.2
4.2
4.0
-
4.3
4.3
4.4
-
3.9
4.0
4.0
4.3
3.9
3.7
4.0
3.9
4.1
3.6
Job Satisfaction
Percent employed (full & part-time)
Employment related to major (very & directly related)**
Mean Salary
If unemployed, current status (%):
Student
Active military service
Full-time homemaker
Unemployed and seeking job
Unemployed and not seeking job
Other
Classes prepared for employment (well & very well)
Experiential learning prepared for emp. (well & very well)
Co/extra curricular prepared for emp. (well & very well)
95%
94%
94%
94%
83%
92%
~97%
~97%
91%
84%
$24,366 $25,194 $26,685 $26,788 $29,265
-
-
-
0%
0%
0%
3%
0%
3%
59%
74%
39%
0%
0%
3%
17%
0%
3%
48%
69%
39%
90%
87%
90%
93%
73%
63%
93%
90%
^74%
^97%
49%
53%
52%
79%
53%
50%
62%
55%
71%
29%
63%
35%
59%
38%
52%
41%
38%
38%
29%
76%
42%
54%
Education at UW-Stout (% Includes 4 and 5 on a 5-point scale)***
General education instruction**
Program instruction**
Availability of faculty in general education courses**
Availability of faculty in program courses**
Course availability (according to program sequence)
Academic advising**
Laboratory facilities and equipment**
Digital environment
Overall effectiveness of program (high & very high)
Education compared to other hires (somewhat & much better)**
Rate value of your education (good & exceptional)
Early Childhood Education AIM Report 2008 83%
85%
88%
90%
83%
68%
73%
70%
73%
93%
74%
86%
69%
83%
71%
53%
61%
77%
^53%
^86%
Page 25 Rate dev. of interpersonal skills (good & exceptional)
-
-
Year Graduated: 1998
2000
Senior Year Course Work (Mean Rating: 5=High)
Promoting connections between prgm and career
Preparation for community, civic and political roles
Financial management
Continuing education
Finding employment
-
-
2002
-
54%
2004
-
54%
2006
4.0
3.4
2.8
3.1
2.9
4.1
3.3
2.8
3.3
2.7
63%
66%
79%
74%
If You Could Do It Over Again (% Includes Definitely Yes & Probably Yes)
Would you attend UW-Stout?
Would you enroll in the same program?
83%
90%
83%
79%
100%
97%
~ Previous years used a 3 point scale (3 pt. responses), in 2000 changed to a 5 point scale (4 & 5 pt. responses)
^ Previous years used a 4 point scale (3 & 4 pt. responses), in 2000 changed to a 5 point scale (4 & 5 pt. responses)
EMPLOYER DATA
Year Graduated: 1998
Response No.
Adequate Educational Preparation
12
100%
2000
2002
2004
2006
9
~4.3
9
3.8
1
8
5.0
4.5
4.2
4.4
4.8
4.4
4.6
4.7
4.5
4.6
4.1
4.0
3.8
3.9
4.0
4.1
4.1
3.9
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
4.5
4.6
4.0
4.4
4.4
4.5
4.4
4.5
Competencies (Mean Ratings: 5=high)
Writing effectively
Speaking or presenting ideas effectively**
Using mathematics or statistics**
Utilization of technologies**
Creative problem solving**
Organizing information
Critically analyzing information**
Making decisions
Early Childhood Education AIM Report 2008 4.4
4.4
4.4
4.0
4.3
4.6
4.3
4.3
Page 26 Working in teams**
Leadership**
Interpersonal skills**
Thinking creatively**
Ability to plan and complete a project**
Consistency in meeting deadlines
4.5
4.2
4.3
4.6
4.6
-
4.8
4.1
4.7
4.6
4.7
-
4.3
3.6
4.4
4.1
4.3
-
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
4.8
4.4
4.9
4.6
4.6
4.4
4.0
4.1
4.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
4.5
4.5
4.4
4.5
Preparation in Comparison to Others (Mean Ratings: 5=high)
Overall preparation for professional employment
Familiarity with current methods required for position
Familiarity with current technologies required for position**
Knowledge of specific job skills required for position**
4.3
4.3
4.4
4.3
4.4
4.3
**Wording revised for 2004 graduates
*** Scale revised for 2004 graduates
~ In 2000 changed to 5 point scale.
NOTE: When only 2004 data is provided, question was new to survey
204-1yr.xls
9/4/08
UW-STOUT UNDERGRADUATE FIVE-YEAR FOLLOW-UP
Early Childhood Education, BS
Year Graduated:
Total Graduates Surveyed
Response No.
Response Rate
Improved Competencies (Mean Ratings: 5=high)
General Education
Early Childhood Education AIM Report 2008 2000*
94
28
30%
2002
72
18
25%
Page 27 Writing effectively
Speaking or presenting ideas effectively
Listening effectively
Utilization of technologies
Using analytic reasoning
Creative problem solving
Critically analyzing information
Maintaining a sense of physical well-being
Appreciating and understanding diversity
Developing a global perspective
Appreciate the value of literature and the arts
Appreciating the natural or physical sciences
Appreciating social, economic and political forces
Appreciating history in context to current issues
Personal Development
Organizing information
Making decisions
Making decisions ethically
Working in teams
Leadership
Thinking creatively
Maintaining a sense of mental well-being
Job Satisfaction
Percent employed (full & part-time)
Employment related to major (very & directly related)
Mean Salary
If unemployed, current status (%):
Student
Active military service
Full-time homemaker
Unemployed and seeking job
Early Childhood Education AIM Report 2008 3.4
3.6
3.8
3.7
3.5
3.8
3.5
3.2
3.9
3.4
3.4
3.2
3.2
2.9
3.4
3.8
3.6
3.7
3.3
3.7
3.5
3.4
3.9
3.4
3.5
3.3
3.4
3.3
3.5
3.7
3.6
4.1
3.9
4.1
3.9
4.1
3.8
4.1
4.3
4.1
4.0
3.8
86%
88%
$30,633
89%
100%
$37,906
0%
0%
18%
0%
0%
0%
6%
6%
Page 28 Unemployed and not seeking job
Other
Classes prepared for employment (well & very well)
Experiential learning prepared for emp. (well & very well)
Co/extra curricular prepared for emp. (well & very well)
Education at UW-Stout (% Includes 4 & 5 on a 5-Point Scale)
General education instruction
Program instruction
Availability of faculty in general education courses
Availability of faculty in program courses
Course availability (according to program sequence)
Academic advising
Laboratory facilities and equipment
Digital environment
Overall effectiveness of program (high & very high)
Education compared to other hires (somewhat & much better)
Rate value of your education (good & exceptional)
Rate dev. of interpersonal skills (good & exceptional)
Year Graduated:
Senior Year Course Work (Mean Ratings: 5= High)
Promoting connections between prgm and career
Preparation for community, civic and political roles
Financial management
Continuing education
Finding employment
If You Could Do It Over Again (% Includes Definitely Yes & Probably Yes)
Would you attend UW-Stout?
Would you enroll in the same program?
Early Childhood Education AIM Report 2008 0%
0%
63%
67%
33%
0%
0%
72%
78%
71%
37%
54%
43%
78%
71%
54%
43%
25%
79%
52%
72%
75%
2000
61%
89%
67%
94%
56%
56%
72%
39%
100%
86%
89%
94%
2002
4.3
3.3
2.7
3.1
3.3
4.6
4.1
3.6
3.7
3.8
79%
72%
100%
89%
Page 29 EMPLOYER DATA
Year Graduated:
Response No.
Adequate Educational Preparation
2000
6
5.0
2002
4
5.0
3.8
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.0
4.3
3.7
4.2
4.5
4.0
4.3
4.2
4.4
4.2
4.5
4.8
3.5
4.0
4.3
4.3
4.0
4.3
5.0
4.8
4.5
4.5
4.8
5.0
4.0
4.3
4.4
4.3
4.3
4.0
4.0
4.5
Competencies (Mean Ratings: 5=high)
Writing effectively
Speaking or presenting ideas effectively
Using mathematics or statistics
Utilization of technologies
Creative problem solving
Organizing information
Critically analyzing information
Making decisions
Working in teams
Leadership
Interpersonal skills
Thinking creatively
Ability to plan and complete a project
Consistency in meeting deadlines
Preparation in Comparison to Others (Mean Ratings: 5=high)
Overall preparation for professional employment
Familiarity with current methods required for position
Familiarity with current technologies required for position
Knowledge of specific job skills required for position
* First time five-year follow-up conducted. Three-year follow-up was conducted in the past.
9/4/2008
Early Childhood Education AIM Report 2008 Page 30 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 across program vested publics including technical content instructors and
the program’s advisory committee.
Utilization of Assessment Data to Improve Courses and the Program 
Share a copy of the assessment report with the Director, Coordinating Chair, Assessment Coordinator, Program Advisory Committee and
Early Childhood Education faculty and staff.

Continue to monitor candidate pass rates on the PPST and PRAXIS to determine the need for curricular or programmatic changes.

Work with UW-Stout’s Career Services office to improve services for candidates in the Early Childhood Education program.

Continue to work at recruiting quality candidates which will include meeting with prospective candidates and advertisement of the
articulation agreement that is in place.

Complete recruitment video highlighting our clinical component.

Investigate retention trends and develop plan for retention based on the data.

Continue to advocate for laboratory updates.

Work with key faculty of curriculum courses to review clinical component.

Investigate creating a professional development opportunities for PK-3 professionals which will strengthen ties to that community.

Develop a five year strategic plan based on assessment data and input from various stakeholders.
Early Childhood Education AIM Report 2008 Page 31