B.S. in Art Education
Assessment in the Major Report
2008
By Joseph Haid, Program Director
Submitted October 1, 2009
Table of Contents
Overview ..................................................................................................................................................................................................................1
PRAXIS I: Pre-Professional Skills Test .................................................................................................................................................................1
Recommendations ................................................................................................................................................................................................2
PRAXIS II: Content Test Summary .......................................................................................................................................................................3
Educational Benchmarking Inventory (EBI) .........................................................................................................................................................10
Disposition of Teaching Summary at Benchmarks I, II and III.............................................................................................................................14
Reflection Summary at Benchmark I, II and III ....................................................................................................................................................16
UW-Stout Graduate Follow-up Summary .............................................................................................................................................................17
Communicating Assessment Data with Constituencies .........................................................................................................................................20
Utilization of Assessment Data ..............................................................................................................................................................................20
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 generated 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: Pre-Professional Skills Test
PPST Attempts and Pass Rates
Teacher
Education
Program
ARTED
SOE UG
TOTALS
PPST
Test
Math
Reading
Writing
2004
# test
attempt
s
19 a
23 a
29 a
2004
2005
2005
2006
2006
2007
2007
2008
2008
# (and %)
passed
# test
attempts
# (and %)
passed
# test
attempts
# (and %)
passed
# test
attempts
# (and %)
passed
# test
attempts
# (and %)
passed
14 = 74%
12 = 52%
17 = 59%
22
23
21
15 = 68%
15 = 65%
16 = 76%
15
12
19
10 = 67%
12 = 100%
8 = 42%
22
18
25
19 = 86%
15 = 83%
21 = 84%
19
23
20
15 = 79%
19 = 83%
16 = 80%
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%
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
- includes one double major (ARTED / ECE)
Datatel System indicates that 100% of students who took the PRAXIS: I Math test in 2004 and 2005 passed the test by 2006.
Therefore, the pass/fail criteria for each test attempt were recalculated based on the math passing score of 173.
Note that 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.
Art Education AIM Report 2008
Page 1
100
80
60
Math
Reading
40
Writing
20
0
2005
2006
2007
2008
Percentage Pass Rate during Calendar Year
(n = 8 to 21)
The PPST Math Test results were higher in 2006 (100%) and 2007 (86%), than in 2008 (79%). The 2008 PPST Math Test results were somewhat
lower than the other areas. However, the 2007 and 2008 Reading and Writing results appear better than the 2005 and 2006 results for the art
education students.
The addition of a 1-credit elective course in Writing for the past two years appears to have contributed to higher test results in the Writing section. I
believe the test results will continue to improve as more students take advantage of this and other tutorial services on campus.
Recommendations
1. Attention can be placed on incorporating more writing assignments throughout their curriculum.
2. Developing a 1-credit elective course in Reading might boost the pass percentage overall.
Art Education AIM Report 2008
Page 2
PRAXIS II: Content Test Summary
According to the ETS report, Art Education had an overall average pass rate of 91% in 2008, which is higher than in 2007. The highest and lowest
scores were also slightly lower (2007) from (188) highest score to (174) in 2008. The lowest score was also slightly lower, from (150) in 2007 to
147) in 2008. In summary, out of 10 students who took the test in 2007, only one student did not pass on their first try in 2008. Students all passed the
test on their second attempt. Our students are well versed in the discipline as proof of the percentage rating of 91%. Data for 2008/09 had not yet
been received from ETS as of September 30, 2009.
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.
Content Test
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:
ETS
03/04
Datatel* Datatel
2004
2005
ETS
05/06
Datatel
2006
Datatel
2007
Datatel
2008
32
22
8
8
8
10
11
191
178
186
186
194
188
174
146
146
157
155
155
150
147
162.5
-
-
164
-
-
-
160-171
-
-
158-168
-
-
-
155
155
155
155
155
155
155
29/31
19/22
8/8
8/8
8/8
9/10
10/11
91%
86%
100%
100%
100%
90%
91%
*scores from no-fault year – “grandfathered in” as passing
Art Education AIM Report 2008
Page 3
Average Percent Correct (average number of items answered correctly by UW-Stout Art Education students)
Art Test Category
Traditions in Art,
Architecture, Design & the
Making of Artifacts
Art Criticism & Aesthetics
The Making of Art
Art Test Category
03/04
%
UW-Stout
%
05/06 06/07 07/08
%
%
%
40-46
59%
55%
63%
52%
27-31
43-48
64%
72%
67%
79%
73%
83%
63%
76%
03/04
%
05/06
%
State
%
06/07
%
07/08
%
40-46
61
63
65
60
64
63
65
60
27-31
43-48
66
73
75
82
72
78
68
78
70
75
73
78
70
77
68
76
Points
Available
Points
Available
Traditions in Art,
Architecture, Design & the
Making of Artifacts
Art Criticism & Aesthetics
The Making of Art
Art Education AIM Report 2008
08/09
%
08/09 03/04
%
%
National
%
05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09
%
%
%
%
Page 4
Benchmark I Interview Results Calender Year 2008
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
Art Education AIM Report 2008
Response
Unsatisfactory
ARTED
SP08
FA08
N=11
N=4
0
0% 0
0%
Satisfactory
Unsatisfactory
Satisfactory
Unsatisfactory
Satisfactory
Unsatisfactory
Satisfactory
11
0
11
0
11
0
11
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%
11 100% 4 100% 96 100% 37 100%
0
0% 0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
11 100% 4 100% 96 100% 37 100%
0% 0
0%
0
0% 0
0% 0
11 100% 4 100% 96 100% 37 100%
Page 5
Benchmark II Interview Results Calender Year 2008
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
1
0
4
0
0
0
5
0
0
1
4
0
0
0
4
1
ARTED
SP08
FA08
N=5
N=4
20% 0
0%
0% 0
0%
80% 4 100%
0% 0
0%
0% 0
0%
0% 0
0%
100% 4 100%
0% 0
0%
0% 0
0%
20% 0
0%
80% 4 100%
0% 0
0%
0% 0
0%
0% 0
0%
80% 4 100%
20% 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; discuss portfolio evidence that:
demonstrates your content knowledge
demonstrates your knowledge of how children
grow and learn
demonstrates your ability to create
Art Education AIM Report 2008
Unsatisfactory
Emerging
Basic
n/a
Unsatisfactory
Emerging
Basic
n/a
Unsatisfactory
0
0% 0
0
0% 0
5 100% 3
0
0% 1
0
0% 0
0
0% 0
1
20% 1
4
80% 3
0
0% 0
0% 0 0% 0 0%
0% 7 10% 9 12%
75% 25 35% 25 33%
25% 39 55% 42 55%
0% 3 4% 0 0%
0% 6 8% 5 7%
25% 6 8% 10 13%
75% 56 79% 61 80%
0% 3 4% 0 0%
Page 6
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
Emerging
Basic
n/a
Unsatisfactory
Emerging
Basic
n/a
Unsatisfactory
Emerging
Basic
0
2
3
0
0
1
4
0
0
1
0%
40%
60%
0%
0%
20%
80%
0%
0%
20%
0
0% 12 17%
2 50% 18 25%
2 50% 38 54%
0
0% 3 4%
0
0% 10 14%
0
0% 5 7%
4 100% 53 75%
0
0% 3 4%
0
0% 14 20%
1 25% 18 25%
15
27
34
0
4
6
66
0
13
21
20%
36%
45%
0%
5%
8%
87%
0%
17%
28%
n/a
Unsatisfactory
Emerging
Basic
n/a
Unsatisfactory
Emerging
Basic
n/a
Unsatisfactory
Emerging
Basic
4
0
0
1
4
0
0
4
1
0
0
1
80%
0%
0%
20%
80%
0%
0%
80%
20%
0%
0%
20%
3
0
0
1
3
0
0
1
3
0
0
0
42
0
3
9
64
0
12
18
46
0
12
24
55%
0%
4%
12%
84%
0%
16%
24%
61%
0%
16%
32%
n/a
4
80% 4 100% 42 59% 40 53%
75%
0%
0%
25%
75%
0%
0%
25%
75%
0%
0%
0%
36
0
3
9
59
0
13
16
42
0
11
18
51%
0%
4%
13%
83%
0%
18%
23%
59%
0%
15%
25%
Students made the highest scores in Describe what it means to be a "Reflective Practitioner" at 100% in both SP08 and FA 08 and demonstrates your
content knowledge. This category is encouraged throughout the program and especially the student’s knowledge of their discipline. The faculty and facilities in
Studio Art and Art History are of excellent qualities. Students made the greatest growth in demonstrates your content knowledge, up from 75% in FA08 to 100%
in SP08. Considerable gains are noted in many other areas and demonstrates your ability to assess student learning, up from 20% in FA08 to 80% in SP08. Overall
ratings in most categories are above the Mean from the SOE Unit.
Art Education AIM Report 2008
Page 7
Benchmark III Interview Results Calender Year 2008
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
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
3
0
ARTED
SP08
FA08
N=3
N=6
0% 0
0%
0% 0
0%
0% 0
0%
100% 6 100%
0% 0
0%
0% 0
0%
0% 0
0%
0% 0
0%
100% 6 100%
0% 0
0%
0% 0
0%
0% 0
0%
0% 0
0%
100% 6 100%
0% 0
0%
0% 0
0%
0% 0
0%
0% 0
0%
100% 6 100%
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%
All numbers exclude any add-on certification candidates
*Does not include carry-over candidates
The results from this Interview data was a perfect score, which indicates excellent performance rating from their student teaching experiences, through the
cooperating teachers in the classroom.
Art Education AIM Report 2008
Page 8
Student Teacher Course Evaluations Calendar Year 2008
Rating Scale: 1=Unsatisfactory, 2=Emerging, 3=Basic, 4=Proficient
ARTED
SOE UNIT
SP08
FA08
SP08
FA08
N=3
N=5
N=88
N=47
Mea Std.
Std.
Std.
Std.
n
Dev. Mean Dev. Mean Dev. Mean Dev.
Teachers know the subjects they are teaching
4
0
3.76 0.25
3.63 0.47
3.79
0.3
Teachers know how children grow
4
0
3.35
0.6
3.52 0.51
3.7
0.5
Teachers understand that children learn
differently
4
0
3.65 0.42
3.63
0.5
3.72
0.4
Teachers know how to teach
4
0
3.34 0.85
3.54 0.47
3.68
0.5
Teachers know how to manage a classroom
3.83 0.29
3.42 0.66
3.48 0.46
3.6
0.5
Teachers communicate well
4
0
3.54 0.62
3.55 0.47
3.66
0.4
Teachers are able to plan different kinds of
lessons
4
0
3.45 0.67
3.54 0.63
3.74
0.4
Teachers know how to test for student progress
3.83 0.29
3.43 0.56
3.59 0.54
3.71
0.4
Teachers are able to evaluate themselves
4
0
3.54 0.51
3.68 0.52
3.7
0.4
Teachers are connected with other teachers and
the community
3.83 0.29
3.76 0.43
3.61 0.52
3.74
0.4
All categories resulted in higher ratings from last semester. Almost all categories received a Proficiency rating. The student teaching
component in the curriculum has been given more focus to aligning their knowledge with the Wisconsin State Standards. assessment,
classroom management, and subject knowledge, skills and disposition through their education and art education course work are
highlighted and integrated throughout the curriculum.
Art Education AIM Report 2008
Page 9
Educational Benchmarking Inventory (EBI)
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. EBI data cannot be published in public domains and is available for internal use only.
The overall ratings from almost ALL categories have gone up from 2007. Particularly noted is the increase in Student Teaching Experience
F12 (2007 5.58 to 2008 6.25), F4: Aspects of Student Development (2007 4.25 to 2008 4.50), and F11: Fellow Students in Program (2007 5.18
to 2008 6.00). The lower categories are found in assessment F7, facilities F8, and student support services F13, which is a campus-wide, not
an individual program concern, however assessment understanding in course work for the discipline will be a main focus when the a new
course proposal is sent forward in fall 2009. These are a common concern found in national statistics in other institutions.
It is important to note that there were only 4 students who completed the data, which indicates that these ratings could change dramatically
if only one student is not satisfied with their program for any number of reasons. The low number of participants are also due to the smaller
size of the program compared to others in SOE.
Art Education AIM Report 2008
Page 10
EBI Factor & Item Analysis by Program
Likerk Scale 1-7
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
Q33. Foster classroom collaboration
Q38. Develop curricula
Q41. Foster holistic learning
Q40. Manage behavior of students
Art Education AIM Report 2008
ArtEd
SOE UNIT
04/05
N=7
05/06
N=8
06/07
N=10
07/08
N=10
08/09
N=4
04/05
N=174
05/06
N=142
06/07
N=156
07/08
N=121
08/09
N=75
3.93
4.00
3.86
4.94
5.00
4.88
4.55
4.70
4.40
4.22
4.44
4.00
4.25
4.50
4.00
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
4.66
4.86
4.14
4.86
4.43
5.00
4.19
4.29
4.33
4.71
3.86
4.29
3.71
4.44
5.57
5.00
4.43
5.00
4.14
4.43
4.41
5.00
3.57
3.14
4.62
4.75
4.25
4.88
4.75
4.50
4.33
5.13
4.25
4.25
5.00
4.00
3.38
4.56
5.25
4.63
4.63
4.63
4.50
4.50
4.50
4.63
4.25
4.38
4.52
4.80
4.50
4.70
4.00
4.60
4.05
4.70
4.50
4.40
3.90
3.90
2.90
4.63
4.60
4.70
4.40
4.10
4.50
4.70
4.50
4.20
5.60
4.40
4.80
4.34
4.40
4.40
4.20
3.80
4.90
4.00
4.90
4.22
4.30
3.90
3.50
3.20
4.25
5.20
4.50
3.80
4.40
4.10
3.90
4.30
4.80
3.90
3.60
4.35
4.25
4.50
4.50
3.50
5.00
4.04
4.75
4.50
3.75
4.00
4.00
3.25
4.50
3.75
5.00
4.75
5.00
4.50
5.00
4.75
3.50
4.50
4.00
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
4.81
5.05
4.87
4.74
4.70
5.04
4.44
4.26
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
5.13
5.25
5.17
4.96
4.88
5.20
4.58
4.43
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
5.09
5.46
5.33
4.97
5.11
5.01
5.59
4.80
4.61
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
5.18
5.29
5.23
5.03
5.13
5.04
5.22
4.72
4.68
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
5.15
5.12
5.08
5.03
5.01
4.92
4.91
4.61
4.56
Page 11
ArtEd
EBI Factor & Item Analysis by Program
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
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
Art Education AIM Report 2008
SOE UNIT
04/05
N=7
05/06
N=8
06/07
N=10
07/08
N=10
08/09
N=4
04/05
N=174
05/06
N=142
06/07
N=156
07/08
N=121
08/09
N=75
3.62
3.43
4.00
3.43
3.21
3.29
3.00
3.43
3.14
4.93
4.86
5.00
4.82
5.29
5.00
4.86
4.14
3.40
3.71
3.00
3.00
3.33
4.86
2.83
2.14
5.21
5.57
5.57
4.43
5.29
5.21
5.29
5.86
5.43
4.63
4.50
4.88
4.50
3.94
4.25
3.88
3.88
3.75
4.69
4.63
4.75
5.88
6.00
5.75
5.75
6.00
3.75
4.00
3.00
4.71
5.54
6.14
5.38
5.38
5.41
5.63
5.38
5.38
5.25
5.69
5.75
6.00
6.25
4.30
4.20
4.10
4.60
3.12
3.50
3.00
3.00
3.00
4.55
4.20
4.90
5.52
6.30
5.00
5.30
5.50
4.30
4.70
3.90
4.38
5.23
5.80
5.11
4.56
5.00
5.20
5.20
4.50
5.10
5.65
5.60
5.80
6.20
4.40
4.50
4.00
4.70
3.72
4.00
3.80
3.50
3.60
5.15
5.10
5.20
5.52
5.80
5.50
5.30
5.50
4.77
5.20
4.20
5.67
5.38
5.67
5.25
4.89
5.18
5.40
5.00
5.20
5.10
5.58
5.60
5.90
5.50
4.67
4.75
4.50
4.75
3.50
3.75
3.25
3.75
3.25
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.50
4.75
4.75
5.00
3.92
4.50
3.00
4.00
5.75
6.25
5.67
5.00
6.00
6.00
6.00
6.25
5.75
6.25
7.00
6.50
6.75
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
5.34
5.48
5.24
5.26
5.35
5.49
5.61
5.89
5.68
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
5.41
5.51
5.47
5.32
5.39
5.78
5.94
6.03
5.99
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
5.43
5.54
5.42
5.31
5.48
5.69
5.78
5.99
5.92
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
5.35
5.53
5.44
5.20
5.21
5.58
5.80
5.89
5.77
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
5.54
5.66
5.58
5.49
5.45
5.89
6.16
6.16
5.99
Page 12
ArtEd
SOE UNIT
EBI Factor & Item Analysis by Program
04/05
N=7
05/06
N=8
06/07
N=10
07/08
N=10
08/09
N=4
04/05
N=174
05/06
N=142
06/07
N=156
07/08
N=121
08/09
N=75
Q75. Quality of cooperating teacher
Q72. Process of securing a position
Q73. Choice of assignments
5.29
4.67
4.57
2.10
2.60
2.20
2.00
1.80
1.67
3.24
6.38
5.00
4.75
4.75
5.00
4.88
4.57
4.57
5.14
3.67
6.30
4.80
5.20
3.56
4.67
4.20
3.11
2.80
3.50
4.00
6.00
5.00
5.50
4.44
4.00
4.86
4.33
4.17
4.33
3.80
6.25
5.00
6.00
2.85
3.25
3.25
2.75
2.50
3.00
3.83
5.82
5.06
5.02
3.83
4.23
4.18
3.57
3.34
3.51
4.07
6.11
5.34
5.34
4.23
4.31
4.67
3.91
3.62
3.81
4.51
5.92
5.24
5.29
4.25
4.35
4.75
4.07
3.69
4.02
4.80
6.00
5.00
5.01
4.06
4.32
4.54
3.82
3.58
3.62
4.48
5.93
5.59
5.47
3.77
4.02
3.88
3.57
3.25
3.15
4.41
2.86
3.33
3.75
3.50
4.30
3.90
3.90
3.60
4.25
3.75
4.27
4.00
4.76
4.54
5.11
4.81
4.77
4.44
4.66
4.42
3.43
3.75
3.80
3.90
3.50
3.91
4.23
4.45
4.24
4.11
04/05
N=7
5.29
3.14
5.29
4.57
3.71
5.33
5.00
-
05/06
N=8
4.38
4.25
5.88
4.63
4.63
4.75
4.63
-
06/07
N=10
4.80
3.80
6.60
4.90
4.90
5.30
3.50
-
07/08
N=10
4.70
4.30
5.70
4.50
4.90
5.30
4.90
-
08/09
N=4
4.50
4.75
5.50
4.75
5.25
5.25
5.00
3.50
4.50
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
4.00
4.75
3.90
3.80
3.50
4.24
4.75
4.97
4.68
4.70
3.86
4.63
4.20
4.56
3.75
4.75
5.03
5.09
5.18
5.21
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
ArtEd
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
Art Education AIM Report 2008
SOE UNIT
Page 13
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.
Attendance
Mean (N)
2004
3.38 (29)
3.19 (32)
Mean (N)
2005
3.04 (25)
3.08 (13)
3.50 (20)
Mean (N)
2006
3.31 (29)
3.00 (1)
3.88 (8)
Mean (N)
2007
3.24 (50)
3.38 (29)
3.63 (30)
Mean (N)
2004
2.55 (29)
3.13 (32)
Mean (N)
2005
2.48 (25)
3.00 (13)
3.55 (20)
Mean (N)
2006
3.28 (29)
4.00 (1)
3.88 (8)
Mean (N)
2007
3.18 (50)
3.28 (29)
3.57 (30)
Continuous Learning
Mean (N)
Level
2004
Benchmark I
2.59 (29)
Benchmark II
Benchmark III
3.19 (32)
Mean (N)
2005
2.40 (25)
3.08 (13)
3.65 (20)
Mean (N)
2006
3.24 (29)
4.00 (1)
3.63 (8)
Mean (N)
2007
3.06 (50)
3.45 (29)
3.70 (30)
Mean (N)
2005
2.72 (25)
3.23 (13)
3.55 (20)
Mean (N)
2006
3.45 (29)
4.00 (1)
3.88 (8)
Mean (N)
2007
3.32 (50)
3.41 (29)
3.60 (30)
Level
Benchmark I
Benchmark II
Benchmark III
Preparedness
Level
Benchmark I
Benchmark II
Benchmark III
Positive Climate
Level
Benchmark I
Benchmark II
Benchmark III
Mean (N)
2004
2.76 (29)
3.22 (32)
As a SOE we are no longer the Dispositions and Reflection Ratings as of fall 2008.
Art Education AIM Report 2008
Page 14
Reflective
Mean (N)
2005
2.32 (25)
2.85 (13)
3.45 (20)
Mean (N)
2006
3.38 (29)
4.00 (1)
3.88 (8)
Mean (N)
2007
3.14 (50)
3.38 (29)
3.63 (30)
Thoughtful & Responsive Listener
Mean (N)
Mean (N)
Level
2004
2005
Benchmark I
2.69 (29)
2.64 (25)
Benchmark II
3.08 (13)
Benchmark III
3.25 (32)
3.65 (20)
Mean (N)
2006
3.21 (29)
4.00 (1)
3.88 (8)
Mean (N)
2007
3.12 (50)
3.41 (29)
3.63 (30)
Cooperative / Collaborative
Mean (N)
Level
2004
Benchmark I
2.62 (29)
Benchmark II
Benchmark III
3.16 (32)
Mean (N)
2005
2.60 (25)
2.92 (13)
3.45 (20)
Mean (N)
2006
3.31 (29)
4.00 (1)
3.75 (8)
Mean (N)
2007
3.40 (50)
3.52 (29)
3.47 (30)
Mean (N)
2005
2.84 (25)
3.38 (13)
3.80 (20)
Mean (N)
2006
3.55 (29)
4.00 (1)
4.00 (8)
Mean (N)
2007
3.44 (50)
3.45 (29)
3.80 (30)
Level
Benchmark I
Benchmark II
Benchmark III
Mean (N)
2004
2.69 (29)
3.25 (32)
Respectful
Level
Benchmark I
Benchmark II
Benchmark III
Mean (N)
2004
3.34 (29)
3.25 (32)
Art Education AIM Report 2008
Page 15
Reflection Summary at Benchmark I, II and III
Intended Learning
Mean (N)
Level
2004
Benchmark I
2.07 (15)
Benchmark II
1.89 (9)
Benchmark III
3.10 (20)
Mean (N)
2005
2.82 (28)
2.52 (21)
3.29 (17)
Mean (N)
2006
3.41 (22)
2.62 (13)
3.25 (8)
New and Unanticipated Learning
Mean (N)
Mean (N)
Level
2004
2005
Benchmark I
2.07 (15)
2.79 (28)
Benchmark II
2.00 (9)
2.57 (21)
Benchmark III
3.20 (20)
3.35 (17)
Mean (N)
2006
3.55 (22)
2.31 (13)
3.13 (8)
Mean (N)
2007
2.66 (44)
2.30 (27)
3.38 (26)
Mean (N)
2007
2.70 (44)
2.48 (27)
3.38 (26)
Connections to Domains, Components and Wisconsin Teacher Standards
Mean (N)
Mean (N)
Mean (N)
Mean (N)
Level
2004
2005
2006
2007
Benchmark I
2.27 (15)
2.68 (28)
3.18 (22)
2.45 (44)
Benchmark II
2.11 (9)
2.37 (19)
2.23 (13)
2.33 (27)
Benchmark III
3.00 (20)
3.35 (17)
3.38 (8)
3.35 (26)
Art Education AIM Report 2008
Page 16
UW-Stout Graduate Follow-up Summary
Add description/analysis here.
Year Graduated
2002
Art Ed Program Specific Follow-up Survey
(Scale: 1=Not at all 2= Moderately 3=Extremely)
1. Create meaningful learning experiences for students based on your content knowledge?
2. Provide instruction that supports student learning and intellectual, social and personal development?
3. Create instructional experiences adapted for students who learn differently?
4. Use a variety of learning strategies to encourage critical thinking and problem solving?
5. Create a learning environment that encourages positive social interaction, active engagement in learning
and self-motivation?
6. Use effective verbal and nonverbal communication techniques, media and technology to foster active
inquiry, collaboration and supportive interaction in the classroom?
7. Plan instruction based on knowledge of subject matter, students, the community and curriculum goals?
8. Use formal and informal assessment strategies to evaluate student progress?
9. Reflect on teaching and evaluate the effects of choices and actions on pupils, parents and others?
10. Foster relationships with colleagues, parents and the community to support student learning and
wellbeing?
Art Education AIM Report 2008
3
1.33
3
1.67
3
3
3
2.00
1.33
1.67
3
1.67
Year Graduated
1998
(Degree of Influence 1=None 5=Strong)
1 Year
Developing a Global Perspective
Mean
2.33
1.67
1.67
1.67
Student Data
1 Year
Appreciating and Understanding Diversity
BS Art Education
N
3
3
3
3
N
-
Mean
-
2000
N
-
Mean
-
2002
N
-
Mean
-
2004
N
7
Mean
3.7
2006
N
-
Mean
-
Student Data
Year Graduated
Page 17
(Degree of Influence 1=None 5=Strong)
BS Art Education
N
-
(Degree of Influence 1=None 5=Strong)
BS Art Education
N
4
All UG Initial Teacher Programs Combined
-
N
-
2002
Mean
-
N
7
2004
Mean
3.6
N
-
2006
Mean
-
Year Graduated
2000
2002
Mean
N
Mean
2.8
3
2.7
-
56
3.5
Student Data
5 Year
Developing a Global Perspective
(Degree of Influence 1=None 5=Strong)
BS Art Education
N
4
All UG Initial Teacher Programs Combined
-
Year Graduated
2000
2002
Mean
N
Mean
2.5
3
2.7
-
55
3.2
Student Data
5 Year
Writing Effectively
(Degree of Influence 1=None 5=Strong)
BS Art Education
N
4
All UG Initial Teacher Programs Combined
-
Art Education AIM Report 2008
N
-
2000
Mean
-
Student Data
5 Year
Appreciating and Understanding Diversity
5 Year
Speaking or Presenting Ideas Effectively
1998
Mean
-
Year Graduated
2000
2002
Mean
N
Mean
2.5
3
3
-
56
3.55
Student Data
Year Graduated
Page 18
(Degree of Influence 1=None 5=Strong)
BS Art Education
N
4
All UG Initial Teacher Programs Combined
-
2000
Mean
3
-
N
3
2002
Mean
3.3
56
3.93
Student Data
5 Year
Listening Effectively
(Degree of Influence 1=None 5=Strong)
BS Art Education
N
4
All UG Initial Teacher Programs Combined
-
Year Graduated
2000
2002
Mean
N
Mean
2.8
3
2.3
-
56
3.61
Student Data
5 Year
Utilization of Technologies
(Degree of Influence 1=None 5=Strong)
N
Year Graduated
2000
2002
Mean
N
Mean
BS Art Education
4
3.3
3
3.3
All UG Initial Teacher Programs Combined
-
-
56
3.73
Art Education AIM Report 2008
Page 19
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. In addition, the AIM findings will be shared across program vested
publics including technical content instructors. Action plans resulting in desired change will be the artifacts resulting from work group meetings.
Each Art Ed faculty member will be charged to lead an area of improvement.
Utilization of Assessment Data to Improve Courses and the Program
The findings of the AIM process and report are analyzed and connected with specific program elements (courses, projects, assignments, experiences)
that are seen as direct and indirect contributors to the current and future desired outcomes.
The following are changes or improvements planned for the upcoming year.
1. A revision on all curriculum, instruction and practice in the Art Education courses has been completed, which include, ARTED 108, ARTED
208, and ARTED 308 courses in Art Education.
2. Revised ARTED 108 Introduction to Art Education to eliminate overlapping content with EDUC 326 Foundations of Education.
3. Propose a methods course that addresses curriculum, instruction, assessment and practice. That supplements the ARTED 208 observation
course, with more knowledge about the field prior to pre-service observation.
4. Work with the Department of Art and Design Chair, to ensure that our students are getting basic content knowledge in the Praxis II
categories.
5. Continued communication with the studio art faculty of the Art and Design Department who teach, esthetics, critical thinking, (ART-407
Aesthetics) and studio art courses about Praxis II contents and to ensure required artifacts from Studio and Art History courses are selected for
art education student’s e-Portfolio.
6. More opportunities to provide students in their Studio Art requirements with group critiques and discussions of art works produced from their
courses and to incorporate more writing and reflection assignments in the Foundation and Introduction courses in the field.
Art Education AIM Report 2008
Page 20
7. More continued student activities with regards to Freshman retention in the form of informational meetings and support services on campus
for our students.
8. Communicate with key instructors, including Art and Design instructors, cooperating teachers, and other program stakeholders on a
regular basis through the Advisory Committee Board, to ensure continuity of course content to align with program objectives and
network for informational dissemination.
9. Incorporate Teacher Work Samples to assess the effects of student teachers’ instruction in the capstone course ARTED 308 in Art
Education, beginning spring 2010.
Art Education AIM Report 2008
Page 21