B.S. in Family and Consumer Sciences Education Assessment in the Major Report By Dr. Diane Klemme, Program Director 2008 Submitted October 1, 2009 Table of Contents Overview ..................................................................................................................................................................................................................1 PRAXIS I: Pre-Professional Skills Test .................................................................................................................................................................1 PRAXIS II: Content Test Summary .......................................................................................................................................................................2 Benchmark Interview Ratings..................................................................................................................................................................................4 Disposition of Teaching Summary at Benchmarks I, II and III .............................................................................................................................12 Reflection Summary at Benchmark I, II and III ....................................................................................................................................................14 Student Teaching Performance Ratings .................................................................................................................................................................15 Alumni Follow-Up Survey ....................................................................................................................................................................................16 Communicating Assessment Data with Constituencies.........................................................................................................................................23 Utilization of Assessment Data to Improve Courses and the Program ..................................................................................................................23 Overview The University of Wisconsin-Stout School of Education (SOE) has gathered assessment data gathered 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, PreStudent 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 The PRAXIS I: Pre-Professional Skills Test (PPST) is required for teacher certification by the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction. To be
accepted into the Teacher Education Program at UW-Stout (Benchmark I), students; typically in their first and second year at UW-Stout, must pass
all three tests: reading writing and mathematics. The PPST is administered through the Educational Testing Services (ETS). The test is administered
as a traditional hand bubble sheet test or by computer at designated sites. ETS provides an annual institution report on all students attempting the
PPST. Data for 2008/09 had not yet been received from ETS as of September 15, 2009. Note that all candidates are required to pass the PPST to
be admitted to the School of Education as part of Benchmark I so the pass rate is 100% upon Benchmark I approval.
A breakdown of FCSE students attempting the PPST and pass rates are as follows:
Teacher
Education
Program
FCSE
undergraduate
TOTALS
2004
2004
# test
attempts
# (and %)
passed
Math
Reading
Writing
16
17
22
11 = 69%
14 = 82%
14 = 64%
2005
# test
attemp
ts
18
18
21
Math
266
215 = 80.8%
Reading
368
Writing
425
PPST
Test
2005
2006
2006
2007
2007
2008
2008
# (and %)
passed
# test
attempts
# (and %)
passed
# test
attempts
# (and %)
passed
# test
attempts
# (and %)
passed
17 = 94%
16 = 89%
16 = 76%
16
19
18
11 = 69%
7 = 37%
10 = 56%
10
14
12
10
14
12
6
10
6
5 = 83%
9 = 90%
5 = 83%
189
151 = 80.0%
204
148 = 72.5%
226
191 = 84.5%
130
102 = 78.5%
214 = 58.2%
239
138 = 57.7%
280
145 = 51.8%
243
184 = 75.7%
150
119 = 79.3%
206 = 48.5%
277
136 = 49.1%
296
161 = 54.4%
257
200 = 77.8%
138
104 = 75.4%
To be included in the above chart, the student must have a current major as of fall 2004 or fall 2005 or fall 2006, and have taken the Praxis I test during that calendar year.
a
b
- includes one double major (ARTED / ECE)
- includes one score “grandfathered in” as a passing score
FCSE AIM Report 2008 Page 1 PRAXIS II: Content Test Summary The PRAXIS II FCSE content exam was revised and the new exam was implemented September 2009. The Management and Consumer Economics
categories were into one. A new category called “career, community and family connections” has been added. Data for 2008/09 had not yet been
received from ETS as of September 15, 2009 and thus have limited data for the Praxis II.
The low passing from the 2008 (old exam) reflects one student’s three attempts to pass the exam.
** The new test data is not accurate as I know of two students that did not pass the exam in Nov 2009. I have revised the information.
Of concern is the timing of the test. Most students are enrolled in content courses during the semester they take the exam and may have limited
knowledge in specific content areas. In attempt to alleviate this situation I did revise the FCSE 4 year plan and move content courses more to the first
two years. Note that all candidates are required to pass the Praxis II to be admitted to student teaching as part of Benchmark II so the pass
rate is 100% upon Benchmark II approval.
Family & Consumer Sciences Education –
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
2004* 2004
20
730
470
590
14/20
70%
3
670
560
590
2/3
67%
2005
2006
2007
5
670
560
590
4/5
80%
12
710
550
590
10/12
83%
15
740
510
590
10/15
67%
2008
11
710
510
590
4/11
36%
New test
2008
7
177
157
159
6/7
86%
* - 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 Score:
03/04
23
730
510
600
600-660
590
18/23
78%
04/05
10
740
490
645
600-710
590
8/10
80%
05/06
18
740
600
665
620-710
590
18/18
100%
06/07
14
740
590
655
630-680
590
14/14
100%
07/08
13
730
530
640
600-710
590
11/13
85%
08/09
Average Percent Correct
FCSE AIM Report 2008 Page 2 FCSE Test
Category
Points
Available
The Family
Human Dev.
Management
Consumer Econ
Nutrition / Food
Clothing / Textiles
Housing
FCS Educ.
FCSE Test Category
The Family
Human Dev.
Management
Consumer Econ
Nutrition / Food
Clothing / Textiles
Housing
FCS Educ.
14-16
13
11-12
13-15
17-20
11
9-12
22-23
03/04
%
85
75
75
58
73
75
77
81
Points
03/04
Available
%
14-16
85
13
75
11-12
76
13-15
60
17-20
72
11
68
9-12
75
22-23
79
FCSE AIM Report 2008 04/05
%
86
80
86
72
70
76
78
79
04/05
%
88
78
82
72
70
75
78
82
Stout
05/06 06/07
%
%
93
85
81
76
84
85
69
69
82
66
78
83
81
72
85
83
07/08
%
79
76
82
64
69
82
77
82
08/09
%
State
National
05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 03/04 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
88
86
83
85
83
87
86
81
79
75
78
77
75
77
76
75
81
85
84
77
77
80
79
81
69
70
66
68
66
68
68
67
76
72
72
75
72
74
71
69
76
76
72
81
72
75
74
73
80
77
73
78
77
79
79
76
83
80
79
78
77
81
78
75
Page 3 Benchmark Interview Ratings Benchmark I Interview Results Calendar Year 2008 FCSE Question Explain personal and professional growth between your initial resume and updated resume. Explain your philosophy of education. Explain three personal characteristics that will make you an effective teacher. Describe yourself as a learner and how that will impact your future teaching. Describe experiences that have impacted your understanding of diversity and human relations and how these might aid you as you work with students and families Explain two subject matter/content artifacts and how these examples illustrate your understanding of the content you will be teaching Completed Alignment Summary Response Unsatisfactory SP08 FA08 N=10 N=4 0
0% 0
0%
Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Satisfactory 10
0
10
0
10
0
10
Unsatisfactory 0
Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Satisfactory 100%
0%
100%
0%
100%
0%
100%
SOE UNIT SP08 FA08 N=96 N=37 0 0% 0
0%
4
0
4
0
4
0
4
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%
10 100% 4 100% 96 100% 37 100%
0
0% 0
0%
0 0%
0
0%
10 100% 4 100% 96 100% 37 100%
0
0% 0
0% 0 0% 0
0%
10 100% 4 100% 96 100% 37 100%
FCSE students receive satisfactory rating on the Benchmark I interviews FCSE AIM Report 2008 Page 4 Benchmark II Interview Results Calendar Year 2008 FCSE 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 0
3
5
0
0
3
5
0
0
0
8
0
0
3
5
0
SP08 N=8 0%
38%
63%
0%
0%
38%
63%
0%
0%
0%
100%
0%
0%
38%
63%
0%
0
3
3
0
0
0
6
0
0
2
4
0
0
2
4
0
FA08 N=6 0%
50%
50%
0%
0%
0%
100%
0%
0%
33%
67%
0%
0%
33%
67%
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; discuss portfolio evidence that: demonstrates your content knowledge demonstrates your knowledge of how children grow and learn FCSE AIM Report 2008 Unsatisfactory Emerging Basic n/a Unsatisfactory Emerging 0
0
6
2
0
1
0%
0%
75%
25%
0%
13%
0
2
0
4
0
1
0% 0 0% 0 0%
33% 7 10% 9 12%
0% 25 35% 25 33%
67% 39 55% 42 55%
0% 3 4% 0 0%
17% 6 8% 5 7%
Page 5 Basic n/a Unsatisfactory demonstrates your ability to create Emerging instructional opportunities adapted to diverse Basic learners n/a Unsatisfactory Emerging demonstrates your ability to teach effectively Basic n/a demonstrates your ability to manage a Unsatisfactory classroom effectively, including organizing Emerging physical space, managing procedures and Basic student behavior, and creating a culture of respect, rapport, and learning n/a Unsatisfactory demonstrates your ability to communicate Emerging effectively with students, parents, and Basic colleagues n/a Unsatisfactory Emerging demonstrates your ability to assess student learning Basic n/a demonstrates your professionalism, including Unsatisfactory ongoing professional development; fostering Emerging relationships with colleagues, families, and Basic the community; and displaying ethical behavior expected of education professionals n/a 3
4
0
0
1
7
0
0
1
7
0
1
1
38%
50%
0%
0%
13%
88%
0%
0%
13%
88%
0%
13%
13%
0
0% 6 8%
5 83% 56 79%
0
0% 3 4%
1 17% 12 17%
3 50% 18 25%
2 33% 38 54%
0
0% 3 4%
0
0% 10 14%
0
0% 5 7%
6 100% 53 75%
0
0% 3 4%
0
0% 14 20%
2 33% 18 25%
10
61
0
15
27
34
0
4
6
66
0
13
21
13%
80%
0%
20%
36%
45%
0%
5%
8%
87%
0%
17%
28%
6 75% 4 67% 36 51% 42 55%
0
0% 0
0% 0 0% 0 0%
0
0% 0
0% 3 4% 3 4%
1 13% 0
0% 9 13% 9 12%
7 88% 6 100% 59 83% 64 84%
0
0% 0
0% 0 0% 0 0%
0
0% 0
0% 13 18% 12 16%
0
0% 1 17% 16 23% 18 24%
8 100% 5 83% 42 59% 46 61%
0
0% 0
0% 0 0% 0 0%
0
0% 0
0% 11 15% 12 16%
3 38% 2 33% 18 25% 24 32%
5
63% 4
67% 42 59% 40 53%
The majority of FCSE participants receive a “basic” on the first four questions. The “selected” section indicates that content questions and diverse
learner question are the most often asked in the FCSE program and in the unit.
FCSE AIM Report 2008 Page 6 Benchmark III Interview Results Calendar Year 2008 Question FCSE SP08 FA08 N=4 N=8 0 0% 0 0%
0 0% 0 0%
2 50% 3 38%
2 50% 4 50%
0 0% 1 13%
0 0% 0 0%
0 0% 0 0%
1 25% 1 13%
3 75% 7 88%
0 0% 0 0%
0 0% 0 0%
0 0% 0 0%
1 25% 1 13%
3 75% 7 88%
0 0% 0 0%
0 0% 0 0%
0 0% 0 0%
0 0% 1 13%
4 100% 6 75%
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%
Response Unsatisfactory Emerging Artifacts from student teaching, reflection Basic ratings Proficient n/a Unsatisfactory Emerging Final Student Teaching Assessments and Basic Recommendations from Cooperating Teachers Proficient n/a Unsatisfactory Emerging Disposition ratings from student teaching from Basic cooperating & University Supervisors Proficient n/a Unsatisfactory Alignment Summary of artifacts meeting all 10 Emerging Wisconsin Teaching Standards & 4 Domains/ Basic Components & reflections/ reflection ratings Proficient n/a FCSE student teachers receive a majority of “Proficient” ratings. All numbers exclude any add‐on certification candidates *Does not include carry‐over candidates FCSE AIM Report 2008 Page 7 Educational Benchmarking Inventory (EBI)
FCSE students complete the EBI (Scale= 1-7 with 1= not at all, 4= moderately and 7= extremely) at the conclusion of their student teaching experience. Five
students completed the inventory in 2008-09 and the top three EBI factors included: satisfaction with faculty and courses (5.96), administrative
services (5.63), assessment of student learning (5.4) and quality of instruction (5.30). Three of the 2008-09 items were the same as the 2007-2008
item: satisfaction with faculty and courses (6.42), administrative services (6.00), and quality of instruction (5.90).
The three lowest factors for 2008-2009 included: management of education constituencies (3.10), research methods, professional development,
societal implications (3.60) and career services (3.90). These are the same as 2007-2008 except in a different order. 2007-2008 lowest items were
career services (4.32), management of education constituencies (4.42), and research methods, professional development, societal implications (4.42).
Typically, the student teaching experience is usually in the top three; this year it was in the top five. Overall, scores were ok – the small number of
respondents does not lend well to making grand comparisons. Twenty-three students has the opportunity to response to the EBI so this is just a
sampling.
FCSE
SOE UNIT
EBI Factor & Item Analysis
03/04
N=5
04/05
N=11
05/06
N=6
06/07
N=17
07/08
N=6
08/09
N=5
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
5.10
5.20
5.00
4.73
4.91
4.55
5.17
5.33
5.00
5.50
5.62
5.47
5.90
6.00
6.00
5.30
5.40
5.20
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
4.42
5.60
4.60
4.00
3.60
4.50
4.83
5.80
4.60
4.80
4.60
4.80
4.40
5.47
6.20
5.60
4.44
4.36
5.09
4.36
3.73
4.09
3.53
4.45
3.64
3.73
3.55
2.91
2.91
4.64
5.55
4.36
4.67
5.33
5.00
4.50
4.17
4.33
3.89
4.17
4.00
4.33
4.00
3.33
3.50
5.12
6.33
4.67
5.16
5.53
5.24
5.06
5.06
4.94
4.54
5.35
4.41
4.88
4.82
4.29
3.47
5.37
5.35
5.47
4.87
5.83
5.33
4.50
3.67
5.00
4.42
4.67
4.67
5.00
4.17
4.00
4.00
5.67
6.80
5.67
4.36
4.80
4.80
4.60
3.60
4.00
3.60
4.80
3.80
4.20
3.40
3.00
2.40
4.67
5.40
5.20
4.70
4.86
4.73
4.83
4.54
4.56
4.24
4.77
4.56
4.42
4.18
3.92
3.51
4.85
5.45
4.96
4.90
4.97
5.05
5.10
4.70
4.70
4.36
5.06
4.55
4.57
4.52
3.94
3.54
5.05
5.82
5.17
5.04
5.38
4.97
5.03
4.87
4.95
4.65
5.16
4.96
4.74
4.54
4.47
4.03
5.18
5.95
5.26
5.00
5.29
5.02
4.98
4.93
4.78
4.51
5.17
4.97
4.58
4.42
4.02
3.89
5.16
5.86
5.34
4.74
4.99
4.77
4.73
4.64
4.60
4.38
4.93
4.67
4.56
4.29
4.13
3.69
5.02
5.60
5.20
FCSE AIM Report 2008 Page 8 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
5.60
6.00
5.60
5.80
-
4.45
5.09
4.73
4.64
-
4.83 4.88
6.00 4.65
5.33 5.29
5.33 6.12
5.29
FCSE
5.50
5.50
5.50
5.33
5.20
4.40
4.00
5.00
4.81
5.05
4.87
4.74
-
5.13
5.25
5.17
4.96
-
EBI Factor & Item Analysis
03/04
N=5
04/05
N=11
05/06
N=6
06/07
N=17
07/08
N=6
08/09
N=5
04/05
N=174
05/06
N=142
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
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
5.00
5.00
4.50
4.50
5.73
5.80
5.60
5.80
5.35
5.40
5.80
5.40
4.80
5.29
5.00
5.20
6.69
7.00
6.75
7.00
6.00
6.00
5.75
7.00
4.67
5.30
5.60
5.25
4.80
4.55
5.26
3.82
3.73
4.30
4.36
4.36
4.18
3.77
4.00
4.27
3.73
3.09
4.82
4.70
4.91
5.86
6.36
6.18
5.64
5.27
5.61
5.09
6.00
5.75
5.30
5.55
5.55
4.90
4.50
6.17
4.17
4.17
4.22
3.83
4.67
4.17
4.13
4.00
4.83
4.00
3.67
5.50
5.50
5.50
5.38
5.67
5.33
5.17
5.33
5.14
5.33
5.17
4.60
4.95
5.50
6.00
3.60
4.71
6.35
5.31
5.53
4.96
5.06
5.06
4.76
4.38
4.76
4.65
4.29
3.82
5.94
5.94
5.94
6.35
6.47
6.41
6.41
6.12
6.09
6.18
6.24
5.69
5.83
6.29
5.69
5.14
5.33
6.67
5.17
4.67
5.22
4.83
5.83
5.00
4.42
4.67
4.67
4.50
3.83
5.42
5.50
5.33
6.42
6.83
6.50
6.50
5.83
6.00
6.33
6.00
5.40
5.44
6.17
5.50
4.67
4.40
5.20
4.40
3.40
4.40
4.20
4.60
4.40
3.10
3.60
3.40
3.00
2.40
5.40
5.40
5.40
5.90
6.40
6.20
6.20
4.80
5.63
5.00
6.20
5.50
4.90
5.00
4.00
4.25
4.70
5.04
4.44
4.26
4.68
4.66
4.70
4.64
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
4.88
5.20
4.58
4.43
4.70
4.56
4.96
4.58
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
FCSE AIM Report 2008 5.09
5.46
5.33
4.97
5.11
SOE UNIT
5.18
5.29
5.23
5.03
5.13
5.15
5.12
5.08
5.03
5.01
06/07
N=156
07/08
N=121
08/09
N=75
5.01
5.59
4.80
4.61
4.93
4.93
5.01
4.86
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
5.04
5.22
4.72
4.68
4.97
4.97
5.04
4.90
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
4.92
4.91
4.61
4.56
4.81
4.85
4.84
4.74
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
Page 9 F11: Fellow Students in Program
Q70. Level of camaraderie
Q71. Commitment to teaching profession
Q68. Academic quality
Q69. Ability to work in teams
FCSE AIM Report 2008 6.00
6.25
6.00
5.75
6.00
4.70
5.00
5.00
4.45
4.36
5.33
5.17
5.67
5.50
5.00
5.51
5.69
5.35
5.59
5.47
5.50
5.00
5.50
6.17
5.00
5.25
5.20
5.60
5.20
5.00
5.34
5.48
5.24
5.26
5.35
5.41
5.51
5.47
5.32
5.39
5.43
5.54
5.42
5.31
5.48
5.35
5.53
5.44
5.20
5.21
5.54
5.66
5.58
5.49
5.45
Page 10 FCSE
SOE UNIT
EBI Factor & Item Analysis
03/04
N=5
04/05
N=11
05/06
N=6
06/07
N=17
07/08
N=6
08/09
N=5
04/05
N=174
05/06
N=142
06/07
N=156
07/08
N=121
08/09
N=75
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
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
6.29
7.00
7.00
6.00
6.50
6.00
5.25
4.20
5.20
4.80
3.80
3.40
4.50
5.66
5.66
5.56
5.38
6.00
6.11
5.27
5.90
3.86
3.70
5.27
3.63
3.00
3.67
4.76
5.75
6.50
5.33
6.17
5.17
5.50
5.83
4.38
4.40
4.20
2.33
3.50
4.00
5.06
6.05
6.59
6.24
5.94
5.88
5.82
5.76
3.85
3.71
4.67
3.70
3.15
3.42
5.49
5.86
6.60
4.80
6.33
5.80
6.00
5.00
4.32
4.67
5.33
4.00
3.83
3.50
5.50
4.97
6.00
5.20
4.60
5.00
4.60
4.40
3.92
3.67
4.00
2.50
3.33
3.00
4.13
5.49
5.61
5.89
5.68
5.82
5.06
5.02
3.83
4.23
4.18
3.57
3.34
3.51
4.07
5.78
5.94
6.03
5.99
6.11
5.34
5.34
4.23
4.31
4.67
3.91
3.62
3.81
4.51
5.69
5.78
5.99
5.92
5.92
5.24
5.29
4.25
4.35
4.75
4.07
3.69
4.02
4.80
5.58
5.80
5.89
5.77
6.00
5.00
5.01
4.06
4.32
4.54
3.82
3.58
3.62
4.48
5.89
6.16
6.16
5.99
5.93
5.59
5.47
3.77
4.02
3.88
3.57
3.25
3.15
4.41
6.00
5.64
5.33
5.94
6.00
4.60
4.27
4.76
5.11
4.77
4.66
5.40
4.36
5.00
5.53
5.17
4.00
4.00
4.54
4.81
4.44
4.42
5.60
4.27
4.83
5.00
5.33
3.80
3.91
4.23
4.45
4.24
4.11
Questions That Do Not Comprise a Factor
03/04
N=5
4.40
4.40
6.40
4.20
5.60
5.40
4.20
-
04/05
N=11
4.82
4.36
5.27
4.45
5.00
5.45
4.18
-
05/06
N=6
5.17
3.67
5.67
5.00
5.33
5.83
3.83
-
06/07
N=17
5.41
5.44
6.29
5.53
5.59
6.00
4.18
-
07/08
N=6
6.00
4.50
6.67
5.17
6.33
6.17
4.50
-
08/09
N=5
5.00
4.20
5.20
4.20
4.60
5.20
5.60
5.00
4.40
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
6.00
4.82
4.50
4.71
5.00
3.50
4.24
4.75
4.97
4.68
4.70
6.00
4.82
5.00
5.56
5.33
4.25
4.75
5.03
5.09
5.18
5.21
FCSE
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
FCSE AIM Report 2008 SOE UNIT
Page 11 Disposition of Teaching Summary at Benchmarks I, II and III Means calculated on a 4-point scale where 1=unsatisfactory, 2=emerging, 3=basic, and 4=advanced basic.
The dispositions of teaching summary at Benchmarks I, II, III show FCSE students are generally improving on the items measured including:
preparedness, continuous learning, positive climate, reflective, thoughtful & responsive listener, cooperative/collaborative and respectful, as they
move through the program. 2008 data not available.
Attendance
Mean (N)
Mean (N)
Mean (N)
Mean (N)
Level
2004
2005
2006
2007
3.52 (25)
3.36 (33)
3.33 (21)
Benchmark I
3.26 (19)
2.78 (18)
3.28 (36)
3.37 (51)
Benchmark II
3.04 (51)
3.44 (16)
3.70 (10)
3.63 (24)
Benchmark III
3.78 (32)
Preparedness
Level
Mean (N)
2004
Mean (N)
2005
Mean (N)
2006
Mean (N)
2007
Benchmark I
Benchmark II
Benchmark III
2.68 (25)
2.61 (18)
3.63 (16)
2.58 (33)
2.89 (36)
3.40 (10)
3.10 (21)
3.02 (51)
3.38 (24)
2.95 (19)
2.96 (51)
3.59 (32)
Continuous Learning
Mean (N)
Level
2004
2.60 (25)
Benchmark I
2.78 (18)
Benchmark II
3.31 (16)
Benchmark III
Mean (N)
2005
2.55 (33)
3.00 (36)
3.00 (10)
Mean (N)
2006
3.10 (21)
3.08 (51)
3.42 (24)
Mean (N)
2007
2.95 (19)
3.29 (51)
3.59 (32)
Mean (N)
2005
2.76 (33)
3.11 (36)
3.20 (10)
Mean (N)
2006
3.05 (21)
3.20 (51)
3.54 (24)
Mean (N)
2007
3.00 (19)
3.37 (51)
3.78 (32)
Positive Climate
Level
Benchmark I
Benchmark II
Benchmark III
Mean (N)
2004
2.68 (25)
2.94 (18)
3.50 (16)
FCSE AIM Report 2008 Page 12 Reflective
Mean (N)
2005
2.15 (33)
2.72 (36)
3.10 (10)
Mean (N)
2006
2.71 (21)
3.04 (52)
3.50 (24)
Mean (N)
2007
2.63 (19)
3.29 (51)
3.63 (32)
Thoughtful & Responsive Listener
Mean (N)
Mean (N)
Level
2004
2005
2.72 (25)
2.29 (33)
Benchmark I
2.94 (18)
2.97 (36)
Benchmark II
3.56 (16)
3.10 (10)
Benchmark III
Mean (N)
2006
2.95 (21)
3.19 (52)
3.83 (24)
Mean (N)
2007
2.95 (19)
3.33 (51)
3.81 (32)
Cooperative / Collaborative
Mean (N)
Level
2004
2.72 (25)
Benchmark I
2.94 (18)
Benchmark II
3.31 (16)
Benchmark III
Mean (N)
2005
2.61 (33)
3.00 (36)
3.00 (10)
Mean (N)
2006
3.29 (21)
3.23 (52)
3.54 (24)
Mean (N)
2007
2.26 (19)
3.37 (51)
3.59 (32)
Mean (N)
2005
2.82 (33)
3.25 (36)
3.50 (10)
Mean (N)
2006
3.24 (21)
3.27 (52)
3.83 (24)
Mean (N)
2007
3.05 (19)
3.39 (51)
3.91 (32)
Level
Benchmark I
Benchmark II
Benchmark III
Mean (N)
2004
2.20 (25)
2.61 (18)
3.25 (16)
Respectful
Level
Benchmark I
Benchmark II
Benchmark III
Mean (N)
2004
3.00 (25)
3.17 (18)
3.69 (16)
FCSE AIM Report 2008 Page 13 Reflection Summary at Benchmark I, II and III Means calculated on a 4-point scale where 1=unsatisfactory, 2=emerging, 3=basic, and 4=advanced basic.
The reflection summary at Benchmarks I, II, III show FCSE students are generally improving on the items measured including: new and
unanticipated learning and connections to domains and teaching standards, as they move through the program. 2008 data not available.
Intended Learning
Mean (N)
2005
2.68 (60)
2.69 (32)
3.47 (15)
Mean (N)
2006
3.26 (19)
3.24 (89)
3.54 (26)
New and Unanticipated Learning
Mean (N)
Mean (N)
Level
2004
2005
2.42 (43)
2.63 (60)
Benchmark I
2.67 (54)
2.59 (32)
Benchmark II
3.54 (26)
3.33 (15)
Benchmark III
Mean (N)
2006
3.32 (19)
3.01 (90)
3.27 (26)
Level
Benchmark I
Benchmark II
Benchmark III
Mean (N)
2004
2.53 (43)
2.63 (54)
3.38 (26)
Mean (N)
2007
3.05 (41)
2.95 (81)
3.65 (40)
Mean (N)
2007
2.88 (41)
3.07 (81)
3.55 (40)
Connections to Domains, Components and Wisconsin Teacher Standards
Mean (N)
Mean (N)
Mean (N)
Mean (N)
Level
2004
2005
2006
2007
2.60 (43)
2.42 (60)
3.05 (19)
Benchmark I
2.54 (41)
2.67 (54)
2.34 (32)
2.76 (90)
Benchmark II
2.58 (81)
3.42 (26)
3.73 (15)
3.58 (26)
Benchmark III
3.73 (40)
FCSE AIM Report 2008 Page 14 Student Teaching Performance Ratings The 2008 student teacher performance rating are completed by the cooperating teachers. The 2008 sample included 10 student teachers. Typically,
FCSE students do fairly well in student teaching and the data supports this. The lowest FCSE mean is related to the standard “Teachers know how to
manage a classroom.” This finding is not necessarily surprising as the experience continually challenges student teachers in variety of classroom
management issues and disciplinary issues.
Student Teacher Course Evaluations Calendar Year 2008 Rating Scale: 1=Unsatisfactory, 2=Emerging, 3=Basic, 4=Proficient FCSE SOE UNIT SP08 FA08 SP08 FA08 N=4 N=6 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 3.88 3.88 0.25
0.25
3.92 3.83 0.2
0.41
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 3.88 3.56 0.25
0.51
3.83 3.67 0.41
0.52
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 3.38 3.5 0.48
0.41
3.53 3.83 0.64
0.26
3.48 3.55 0.46 0.47 3.6
3.66
0.5
0.4
3.5 0.41
3.83 0.41
3.54 0.63 3.74
0.4
3.88 0.25
3.78 0.4
3.59 0.54 3.71
0.4
3.63 0.48
3.83 0.41
3.68 0.52 3.7
0.4
3.5 0.41
3.92 0.2
3.61 0.52 3.74
0.4
Teachers are able to plan different kinds of lessons Teachers know how to test for student progress Teachers are able to evaluate themselves Teachers are connected with other teachers and the community FCSE AIM Report 2008 Page 15 Alumni Follow­Up Survey The Alumni follow-up surveys are at one-year and five-year intervals. The sample numbers are typically not large and the employer data typically
includes very few responses. The vast majority of alumni are employed as FCSE teachers and although
the data suggest the program assisted in employment “Classes prepared for employment -100% year 2006” ,“Education compared to other hires- 100% year
2006” and “Overall effectiveness of program- 80% year 2006. The participants may have some concerns about the current education environment so “Enrollment
in the same program” was less than the majority.
The five-year studies (again not large samples) indicated that 100% employment rate, however not all were in education or a related field. The
“Overall effectiveness of the program” was rated at 100% by 2002 grad and the majority would reenroll in the program.
UW-STOUT UNDERGRADUATE ONE-YEAR FOLLOW-UP
Family and Consumer Science Education, BS
Year Graduated: 1998
2000
2002
Total Graduates Surveyed
Response No.
Response Rate
22
11
50%
24
15
63%
2004
2006
11
4
36%
12
10
83%
9
5
56%
4.3
4.5
4.3
4.8
3.3
-
3.1
3.9
3.9
3.6
3.6
3.6
3.7
3.2
3.8
3.5
3.2
3.2
3.4
3.0
3.0
4.0
3.6
3.6
3.6
3.8
3.2
3.2
3.6
3.4
3.6
3.4
3.4
3.0
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
FCSE AIM Report 2008 3.6
4.2
3.7
4.0
3.1
-
3.8
4.1
3.7
3.9
3.2
-
Page 16 Personal Development
Organizing information
Making decisions
Making decisions ethically
Working in teams
Leadership**
Thinking creatively
Maintaining a sense of mental well-being
4.0
4.3
4.6
4.2
4.1
-
3.9
3.9
4.7
4.3
4.1
-
4.5
4.5
4.8
4.8
4.8
-
3.7
3.7
3.6
4.3
4.1
4.0
4.2
3.6
3.8
3.8
4.2
3.8
3.8
3.4
100%
100%
80%
100%
100%
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)
70% ~86%
75%
60%
100%
$30,260 $25,927 $28,493 $31,429 $31,600
-
-
-
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
56%
56%
22%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
100%
60%
60%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
75%
100%
100%
20%
50%
40%
70%
60%
60%
70%
20%
100%
20%
60%
40%
60%
40%
60%
40%
60%
80%
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)
FCSE AIM Report 2008 73%
73%
82%
70%
91%
73%
82%
82%
93%
73%
93%
93%
87%
73%
87%
67%
Page 17 Education compared to other hires (somewhat & much better)**
100% ^78%
100%
50%
100%
Rate value of your education (good & exceptional)
Rate dev. of interpersonal skills (good & exceptional)
100% ^100%
-
100%
-
50%
70%
40%
80%
Year Graduated: 1998
2000
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
-
2002
-
2004
-
2006
4.2
3.4
2.8
3.9
3.1
4.6
4.0
3.0
2.5
4.0
100%
70%
80%
40%
If You Could Do It Over Again (% Includes Definitely Yes & Probably Yes)
Would you attend UW-Stout?
Would you enroll in the same program?
100%
64%
87%
73%
100%
75%
~ 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
2000
2002
2004
2006
3
6
-
1
1
100%
~4.4
-
4.0
-
3.8
4.2
3.4
3.7
4.2
-
4.0
4.0
4.0
5.0
4.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
4.0
Competencies (Mean Ratings: 5=high)
Writing effectively
Speaking or presenting ideas effectively**
Using mathematics or statistics**
Utilization of technologies**
Creative problem solving**
FCSE AIM Report 2008 4.0
4.3
3.0
3.7
4.0
Page 18 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
4.0
4.0
3.7
4.3
4.3
4.7
4.3
4.0
-
4.8
4.5
4.2
4.8
4.2
4.8
4.5
4.8
-
-
5.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
3.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
5.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
-
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
-
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**
3.7
4.3
4.3
4.0
4.0
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
208-1yr.xls
9/8/08
UW-STOUT UNDERGRADUATE FIVE-YEAR FOLLOW-UP
Family and Consumer Science Education, BS
Year Graduated:
Total Graduates Surveyed
Response No.
Response Rate
Improved Competencies (Mean Ratings: 5=high)
FCSE AIM Report 2008 2000*
28
14
50%
2002
14
6
43%
Page 19 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
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
FCSE AIM Report 2008 3.6
4.0
4.1
4.4
3.9
4.2
3.9
3.7
4.5
4.2
3.5
3.4
3.5
3.4
4.2
4.5
4.2
3.5
3.5
3.7
3.8
3.8
2.5
2.7
2.5
2.3
2.5
2.8
3.8
3.6
3.7
4.6
4.4
4.1
3.7
4.2
4.2
3.7
4.8
3.8
4.5
4.5
100%
93%
$38,769
100%
67%
$35,117
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
Page 20 Unemployed and not seeking job
0%
Other
0%
Classes prepared for employment (well & very well)
72%
Experiential learning prepared for emp. (well & very well)
100%
Co/extra curricular prepared for emp. (well & very well)
64%
Education at UW-Stout (% Includes 4 & 5 on a 5-Point Scale)
General education instruction
86%
Program instruction
86%
Availability of faculty in general education courses
79%
Availability of faculty in program courses
100%
Course availability (according to program sequence)
86%
Academic advising
79%
Laboratory facilities and equipment
79%
Digital environment
54%
Overall effectiveness of program (high & very high)
86%
Education compared to other hires (somewhat & much better)
57%
Rate value of your education (good & exceptional)
86%
Rate dev. of interpersonal skills (good & exceptional)
93%
Year Graduated:
2000
Senior Year Course Work (Mean Ratings: 5= High)
Promoting connections between prgm and career
4.5
Preparation for community, civic and political roles
3.5
Financial management
3.0
Continuing education
3.7
Finding employment
4.5
If You Could Do It Over Again (% Includes Definitely Yes & Probably Yes)
Would you attend UW-Stout?
100%
Would you enroll in the same program?
79%
FCSE AIM Report 2008 0%
0%
67%
100%
67%
60%
67%
60%
100%
67%
67%
67%
67%
100%
75%
50%
50%
2002
4.3
4.0
2.5
3.8
4.2
83%
67%
Page 21 EMPLOYER DATA
Year Graduated:
Response No.
Adequate Educational Preparation
2000
5
5.0
2002
1
5.0
4.8
5.0
4.7
4.8
4.8
5.0
4.4
4.4
5.0
4.8
4.8
4.4
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
4.2
4.2
4.2
4.2
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
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.
9/8/2008
FCSE AIM Report 2008 Page 22 Communicating Assessment Data with Constituencies Data will be communicated to faculty members and the advisory board through informal and formal means. Program faculty will review the data and
identify curricula needs to support ongoing program improvement.
The Assessment in Major report will be given to the program advisory board members during our fall meeting (meeting TBA). At this meeting,
members will discuss recommendations for improvement. This document will also be shared with the University supervising teachers; and they in
turn, will have discussion with cooperating teachers as to some ways of improving the student teaching experience and any other recommendations
for program improvement.
This report will also be shared with faculty in the program, faculty responsible for content classes in the program and SOE administration. Their
feedback and suggestions will be sought. Additionally, information regarding the PPST and content test will be shared with student in the FCSE
101-Introduction to FCSE, FCSE 201- Teaching Strategies in FCSE, and FCSE 380-Consumer Economics to aid them as they prepare to take these
tests.
Utilization of Assessment Data to Improve Courses and the Program Several items have been completed this year to hopefully improve the program including:
o The FCSE 4 year plan was revised to move content classes earlier in the program - this will hopefully increase the passing rate on the
Praxis II content exam
o A special populations survey was included as an assignment in FCSE 341 to assist students in understanding the diverse populations at
one of their pre-student teaching placements.
o The FCSE program did go through a revision spring 2009 to combine the FCSE 301 and FCSE 360 courses – the combined class will
provide students an integrated approached to looking at curriculum and evaluation.
o The program will continue to stress the importance of preparing for the PRAXIS I in the intro class and additional writing assignments
were added to the course in fall 2009.
Improvement for the up-coming year
o The FCSE program continues to receive low EBI marks in relation to research. Student teachers do an action research project during
student teaching but I really don’t think they identify this as research. The University Supervisors will need to reinforce with student
teachers that this is research.
o Refine the student teacher work sample and develop a student teacher observation form. I attended a work sample/evaluation
conference this summer and both these items are a result of attending this conference
o Continue recruiting efforts
FCSE AIM Report 2008 Page 23