1
Program Director Self-Study Report
For Program:
MS Education
Submitted by Program Director Name:
Renee Chandler
Year:
2011
Planning and Review Committee
1.
UW-STOUT’S STRATEGIC PLAN
1.1 Describe how the program relates to UW-Stout's Strategic Plan.
1.1.1 Describe early and ongoing experiential learning opportunities to students
within the program.
Students in the MS Education program are continuously involved in
experiential learning opportunities because they are typically already immersed
in a career that involves teaching and learning. Their experiences in their own
classrooms/settings provide the background and context for incorporating new
knowledge, skills, and dispositions acquired in the MS Education coursework.
Although all coursework encourages students to apply their learning to their
own context, two new courses, EDUC-745 Assessment for Learning and
EDUC-780 Action Research, are especially geared toward experiential
learning. In these courses, students design a Learner Assessment Plan in which
they strive to maximize student learning in an authentic context. Students
implement the plan, collect data, make data-driven instructional decisions, and
report their results in a formal research report.
1.1.2 What are the initiatives used to increase and support program enrollment,
student retention and graduation rates?
Student enrollment continues to rise due to the collaborative recruitment efforts
of the program director, Stout Online and the Graduate Studies office. Online
recruitment is prevalent with Face Book advertisements and search engine
optimization being critical aspects of our recruitment plan.
Student retention and graduation rates are supported by student services
support from Ms. Amy Gullixson, Stout Online. Ms. Gullixson and the
program director work closely to inform/remind students of registration and
graduation procedures. We also coordinate efforts to troubleshoot issues that
are brought to our attention by students.
2
1.1.3 Respond to the program facts and your program’s creative endeavors related to
the diversity aspects of Inclusive Excellence: “UW-Stout’s plan to intentionally
integrate diversity efforts into the core aspects of everything we do. Diversity
is broadly defined and includes, but is not limited to, race/ethnicity, gender,
sexual orientation, age and disability status.”
Online recruitment is one way that the MS Education program reaches
potential students from diverse backgrounds. With marketing tools such as
FaceBook it is easier to reach a wider audience with more diversity. The
Graduate School is also conducting on-campus recruitment of current
undergraduate students by hosting a series of events in collaboration with the
Multicultural Student Services Office. The MS Education program director
served on the Graduate School Task Force on Recruiting Diverse Students
(2009-2010) in an attempt to identify more effective ways to increase the
diversity of students in graduate programs.
Students in the program encounter diversity in much of their coursework. For
example, in EDUC-745 Assessment for Learning, students are required to
analyze the effects of assessment practices on under-represented or diverse
learners. In EDUC-790 Professional Portfolio, students present artifacts for
each of the National Board Standards. For the section on Commitment to
Learners and Learning, students are asked to demonstrate their ability to use
knowledge of minority group relations to create appropriate instruction for
diverse groups and modify curricula when instructing students with
disabilities. In EDPSY-730, students are required to identify and explain
variables that influence the process and outcomes of education, including
home-school-community-work contexts, motivation, and factors linked to
individual, cultural, and linguistic diversity.
1.1.4 Describe the environmental sustainability initiatives of your program: “UWStout’s attempt to make students, faculty, and staff more aware of the
importance of sustaining our environment through energy conservation, waste
reduction, and other measures that will not bring harm to the environment, and
to provide students with innovative research opportunities in these areas.”
Because the MS Education program is entirely online, there are numerous
impacts related to environmental sustainability: no travel to campus required,
all handouts and other communications are distributed electronically, etc. In
addition there are opportunities for students to take coursework related to
environmental sustainability in the electives portion of their program.
1.1.5 List various training and development opportunities of core faculty teaching
within your program.
All faculty within the School of Education have a $500.00 travel budget per
3
year that can be used for professional development. Additional funds can be
requested through the School of Education Director and the CEHHS Dean with
a preference being given to those either presenting or serving on professional
committees.
UW-Stout faculty who teach courses in the MS Education program also have
access to the same training and development opportunities that are available to
all School of Education faculty. These opportunities include activities
sponsored by the Nakatani Teaching and Learning Center such as participation
in learning communities and technology training. School of Education faculty
are also offered the opportunity to have tuition reimbursed if they complete the
first online teaching course in the ELearning Certificate program. Research
Services also provides funding opportunities for professional development.
2. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROGRAM
2.1
Curriculum Design
2.1.1
State the program objectives.
The MS Education program objectives have recently been revised (2011) and are
outlined below:
1.
Based on research, implement and evaluate instructional strategies and
technologies that help all students learn.
2.
Develop expertise in certain aspects of professional and pedagogical
knowledge and contribute to the dialogue based on their research and
experiences.
3.
Analyze student, classroom, and school performance data and make datadriven decisions about strategies for teaching and learning so that all students
learn.
4.
Articulate an understanding of how students develop and learn and discuss the
role of self-concept, motivation and the effects of learning on peer
relationships.
5.
Demonstrate effective verbal and nonverbal communication techniques as well
as instructional technology to foster active inquiry in the classroom and
establish appropriate relationships with students, colleagues, and parents.
6.
Write reflections that demonstrate an understanding of how theory, research,
and standards impact their teaching and their students’ learning.
7.
Interpret educational research and conduct applied research to improve
4
teaching and learning.
2.1.2
What are the initiatives used to determine the need for program revision,
including but not limited to program enrollment, student retention or student
graduation rates.
The program director uses data collected by SOE assessment and PARQ to
inform program goals that are included in the annual assessment in the major
report. Assessment in the major reports inform the PRC process. Some of the
inputs include committee recommendations, program advisory input, key
faculty input, student survey input, employer and graduate follow-up survey
results, and the program director's review of student program plans and the
professional literature regarding advanced degrees in education. These same
indicators are monitored on an ongoing basis to inform program and curricular
revisions. In addition, recommendations from NCATE, DPI, and previous PRC
reports also are used to inform the program.
2.1.3
Is your program defined as a distance learning program (yes/no)? – Or delete
all together.
Yes
2.1.4
Give examples and explain the ways in which the program intentionally
integrates diversity efforts, functions and contributes to the program.
See response to 1.1.3
2.1.5
UW-Stout “programs are presented through an approach to learning which
involves combining theory, practice and experimentation” (Mission
Statement). Briefly describe the components of your program where students
participate in scholarly activity such as: research, scholarship, experiential
learning and creative endeavor.
There is a strong research component to the MS Education program. During
their first semester of study, students take EDUC-729 Introduction to
Educational Research which provides them with a basic foundation for
conducting research in educational settings. EDUC-745 Assessment for
Learning and EDUC-780 Action Research provide students with the
opportunity to act as teacher-researchers in their own classrooms or other
settings.
2.1.6
Does your program currently have an accreditation or certification agency that
reviews the program? If so, which agency and to what extent do they influence
the structure of the curriculum?
Yes, the MS Education program is reviewed and accredited by the Wisconsin
5
Department of Public Instruction (DPI) and the National Council for the
Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE). The most recent revision of the
MS Education program in 2011 is strongly based upon the recommendations
made by both DPI and NCATE during their Fall 2009 accreditation visit.
More specifically, the new Assessment for Learning and Action Research
courses meet the needs for providing practicing teachers with advanced
opportunities to conduct extensive research on an educational topic that is
directly relevant to their teaching situation. The students now design and
implement a study and report their results and conclusions in a formal research
report. This activity fulfills NCATE’s requirement of a field experience that
was previously lacking from the MS Education program. EDUC-780 Action
Research will more closely align with the NCATE advanced teacher standards,
DPI teacher standards, and the national board propositions and will facilitate
the collection of data relevant to these standards.
2.2 Faculty/Academic Staff Expertise
2.2.1
List the key people in the curriculum. A key instructor is one who teaches at
least one required professional course in your program.
Renee Chandler: EDUC-745, EDUC-790
Alan Block: EDUC-782, EDUC-750
Kay Lehmann: EDUC-729, EDUC-790
Jim Lehmann: EDUC-782, EDUC-790
Ann Brand: EDPSY-730
2.2.2
What additional areas of faculty/academic staff expertise are currently needed?
The enrollment in the MS Education program has increased dramatically in
recent years which leads to a need for more full-time faculty to teach in the
program. Expertise in the areas of assessment and action research as well as
pedagogical skills for online teaching are highly desirable.
2.3
Facilities
2.3.1
What special facilities and or capital equipment currently available are utilized
and how do they strengthen this program? What additional facilities (special
classrooms, labs, additional space involving minor construction) have been
requested and has that been filled?
The MS Education program is entirely online and does not require special
facilities pre se, but it is very important that the university maintain state of the
art infrastructure to support the delivery on online courses.
2.4
Resources for the Program
2.4.1
Evaluate as to currency/up-to-datedness, quality, relevance, and quantity of the
6
library resources to support the program. List or describe any information or
service needs created over the past three years by concentration and course
changes and include a brief statement as to how these needs have been met by
the library.
The online library resources are sufficient for the students in the MS Education
program. The students have access to multiple databases that inform their
research projects.
2.4.2
List any special resources used to meet program and/or student needs such as:
Academic Computing, Instructional Technology Services for curriculum
materials development, ASPIRE, Research Center, Media Self-Instruction Lab,
Academic Skills Center, etc. List or describe any other resources which are
needed to meet the program objectives with a brief statement as to how these
would enhance or maintain the concentration quality.
Because the MS Education program in entirely online, students do not typically
choose to use many of the resources listed above. The most commonly utilized
resource is our Student Services Coordinator through Stout Online, Amy
Gullixson. Ms. Gullixson's guidance and support is frequently cited as a
strength of the program. There will be a need for additional support if the
program continues to grow at its current rate. Students enrolled in EDUC-790
Professional Portfolio Development also use the School of Education's eportfolio lab where they are able to get answers via e-mail or telephone from
the lab assistants.
2.5 Assessment in the Major
2.5.1
3.
Attach your most recent Assessment in the Major report.
Supply evidence of the quality of the graduates of the program.
3.1 Describe the demand for graduates and anticipated changes or trends in such
positions/roles.
The economic situation both nationally and at the state level has significantly affected the
market for advanced degrees in education. To date, the MS Education has maintained
steady enrollment despite the economic challenges that teachers and school districts are
facing. One of the primary goals of the program is to find ways to continue to meet the
needs of educators who are seeking advanced degrees. This goal will be accomplished by
developing coursework that meets the changing needs of today’s educators. The program
director works with the advisory board and key faculty and staff to design, update, and
implement instruction that will have a positive impact on enrollment.
3.2 Interpret the data from the Planning, Assessment, Research and Quality (PARQ) office
of the alumni follow-up surveys.
7
One and five year graduate follow up studies were conducted in 2009. The Office of
Budget, Planning and Analysis provided summaries of the reports to the program director.
The number of respondents to the surveys was low: There was an N of 8 total respondents
to the one-year MSE program study; 4 respondents in the five-year study; no employers
responded to the one-and five-year MSE follow up studies. The return rate on these
surveys has been disappointingly low such that statistically meaningful conclusions cannot
be drawn. The few students who did respond gave responses that indicated a general
satisfaction with their experiences as MSE students at UW-Stout.
Results from the UW-Stout Five-Year and One-Year Follow-Up Survey and the ProgramSpecific survey are summarized in the tables below.
UW-Stout Graduate Five-Year Follow-Up: MSE Program
(1=Very Dissatisfied 2= Dissatisfied 3=Satisfied 4=Very Satisfied)
1. Writing Effectively
2. Speak or Present Ideas Effectively
3. Listen Effectively
4. Utilize Computing and Digital Technology
5. Use Analytic Reasoning
6. Solve Problems Creatively
7. Critically Analyze Information
8. Appreciate and Understand Diversity
9. Develop Global Perspective
10. Organize Information
11. Make Decisions
12. Consider the Ethics of My Profession
13. Work in Teams
14. Lead Others
15. Understand Statistics
16. Identify Future Career Options
17. Develop Resume/Portfolio
18. View Community Service as My Social Responsibility
19. Mentorship by Faculty
20. Program Instruction
21. Availability of Faculty
22. Course Availability (In Terms of Program Sequence)
23. Academic Advising
Year Graduated
2004
N Mean
3 3.67
3 3.67
3 3.33
3 2.67
3 3.33
3 3.00
3 3.67
3 3.67
3 3.33
3 3.67
3 3.33
3 3.33
3 3.33
3 3.67
3 3.00
3 2.67
3 2.33
3 2.67
3 3.67
3 3.67
3 3.67
3 3.67
3 3.33
8
MSE Program Specific Five-Year Follow-up Survey
(1=Strongly Disagree, 5=Strongly Agree)
Please rate the degree the program prepared you to:
1. Understand the content and central concepts of the discipline I teach.
Year Graduated
2004
N Mean
3
4.67
2. Create meaningful learning experiences based on my content
knowledge.
3
4.33
3. Effectively teach language arts including phonics (PK-6, Special
Education, and Reading Teacher licenses only).
1
5.00
4. Effectively teach math skills (PK-6, Special Education and math license
1
only).
5.00
5. Provide instruction that supports student learning and their intellectual,
social and personal development.
3
4.67
6. Create instructional experiences adapted for students who learn
differently.
3
4.67
7. Use my knowledge of minority group relations to create appropriate
instruction for diverse groups.
3
4.33
3
4.33
3
4.67
3
4.67
3
4.33
3
4.33
3
4.33
3
4.33
3
4.33
3
4.67
3
4.33
3
4.33
8. Modify curricula when instructing students with disabilities.
9. Use a variety of learning strategies to encourage critical thinking and
problem solving.
10. Create a learning environment that encourages positive social
interaction, active engagement in learning and self-motivation.
11. Resolve conflicts between students and between students and staff.
12. Assist students in learning how to resolve conflicts.
13. Deal with crises or disruptive situations.
14. Use effective communication techniques, media and technology to
foster active inquiry, collaboration and supportive interaction in the
classroom.
15. Use instructional technology to enhance student learning.
16. Plan instruction based on knowledge of subject matter, students, the
community and curriculum goals.
17. Use formal and informal assessment strategies to evaluate student
progress.
18. Use assessment tools for students with disabilities.
9
19. Use developmental, multiple and measurable assessment tools to
assess student learning over time.
20. Use assessment grounded in research and based on best practices in
education.
21. Use assessment tools with identified benchmarks or levels of
proficiency.
22. Analyze students, classroom, and school performance data; make
data-driven decisions about strategies for teaching and learning.
23. Reflect on teaching and evaluate the effects of choices and actions on
students, parents, and others.
24. Assess and analyze student learning, make appropriate adjustments to
instruction, monitor student learning, and develop and implement
meaningful learning experiences to help all students learn.
25. Foster relationships with colleagues, parents and the community to
support student learning and well-being.
2
4.00
3
4.33
3
4.33
3
4.33
3
4.67
3
4.67
3
4.33
10
UW-Stout Graduate One-Year Follow-Up: MSE Program
(1=Very Dissatisfied 2= Dissatisfied 3=Satisfied 4=Very Satisfied)
1. Writing Effectively
2. Speak or Present Ideas Effectively
3. Listen Effectively
4. Utilize Computing and Digital Technology
5. Use Analytic Reasoning
6. Solve Problems Creatively
7. Critically Analyze Information
8. Appreciate and Understand Diversity
9. Develop Global Perspective
10. Organize Information
11. Make Decisions
12. Consider the Ethics of My Profession
13. Work in Teams
14. Lead Others
15. Understand Statistics
16. Identify Future Career Options
17. Develop Resume/Portfolio
18. View Community Service as My Social Responsibility
19. Mentorship by Faculty
20. Program Instruction
21. Availability of Faculty
22. Course Availability (In Terms of Program Sequence)
23. Academic Advising
Year Graduated
2008
N Mean
8 3.25
8 3.13
8 3.00
8 3.25
8 3.13
8 3.13
8 3.13
8 3.00
8 2.88
8 3.38
8 3.13
8 3.25
8 3.25
8 3.38
8 3.00
8 3.00
8 3.13
8 2.88
8 3.63
8 3.75
8 3.75
7 3.86
8 3.88
11
MSE Program Specific One-Year Follow-up Survey
(1=Strongly Disagree, 5=Strongly Agree)
Please rate the degree the program prepared you to:
1. Understand the content and central concepts of the discipline I teach.
Year Graduated
2008
N Mean
7
4.14
2. Create meaningful learning experiences based on my content
knowledge.
8
4.50
3. Effectively teach language arts including phonics (PK-6, Special
Education, and Reading Teacher licenses only).
4
3.75
4. Effectively teach math skills (PK-6, Special Education and math license
3
only).
4.33
5. Provide instruction that supports student learning and their intellectual,
social and personal development.
7
4.71
6. Create instructional experiences adapted for students who learn
differently.
6
4.50
7. Use my knowledge of minority group relations to create appropriate
instruction for diverse groups.
6
4.33
6
4.33
8
4.63
8
4.50
6
4.17
6
4.33
7
4.29
8
4.38
8
4.38
7
4.57
8
4.25
7
4.00
8. Modify curricula when instructing students with disabilities.
9. Use a variety of learning strategies to encourage critical thinking and
problem solving.
10. Create a learning environment that encourages positive social
interaction, active engagement in learning and self-motivation.
11. Resolve conflicts between students and between students and staff.
12. Assist students in learning how to resolve conflicts.
13. Deal with crises or disruptive situations.
14. Use effective communication techniques, media and technology to
foster active inquiry, collaboration and supportive interaction in the
classroom.
15. Use instructional technology to enhance student learning.
16. Plan instruction based on knowledge of subject matter, students, the
community and curriculum goals.
17. Use formal and informal assessment strategies to evaluate student
progress.
18. Use assessment tools for students with disabilities.
12
19. Use developmental, multiple and measurable assessment tools to
assess student learning over time.
20. Use assessment grounded in research and based on best practices in
education.
21. Use assessment tools with identified benchmarks or levels of
proficiency.
22. Analyze students, classroom, and school performance data; make
data-driven decisions about strategies for teaching and learning.
23. Reflect on teaching and evaluate the effects of choices and actions on
students, parents, and others.
24. Assess and analyze student learning, make appropriate adjustments to
instruction, monitor student learning, and develop and implement
meaningful learning experiences to help all students learn.
25. Foster relationships with colleagues, parents and the community to
support student learning and well-being.
6
4.00
8
4.25
8
4.13
8
4.25
8
4.75
8
4.38
7
4.57
Some tentative generalizations can be made from examining the data from the survey results.
Overall, students agreed that the MSE program provided them with knowledge, skills and
dispositions across a wide range of areas. One area that graduates indicated they felt less
prepared for was: “Use developmental, multiple and measurable assessment tools to assess
student learning over time.” This issue is addressed in the 2011 program revision with the
addition of EDUC-745 Assessment for Learning.
3.3 Interpret the major results from your Program Specific Surveys (students, faculty and
advisory committee) conducted by the Planning and Review Committee.
Student survey results:
The response rate for student surveys was 35%, with 39 students responding. Students were
asked to respond to a series of statements on a Likert scale ranging from 1=Strongly
Disagree to 5=Strongly Agree. Mean scores are summarized in the table below:
Questions from Student Surveys
M.S.
Education
Response
Rate:
39/112 =
35%
1.
My oral communication skills have been enhanced through my
coursework.
3.51
13
2. My critical thinking skills have been enhanced through my coursework.
3. My problem solving skills have been enhanced through my coursework.
4. My written communication skills were enhanced through my coursework.
5. The evaluation procedures for my courses in my program appropriately
measured my learning.
6. My level of knowledge in the design, implementation, and evaluation of
discipline-relevant research was enhanced through my coursework.
7. Instructors in my program are accessible for help outside of regular class
time.
8. Instructors in my program provided current and relevant information.
9. Instructors in my program facilitated student achievement of the stated
objectives as presented in their course syllabi.
10. Library resources are/were adequate for my program.
11. Library resources are/were accessible for my program.
12. Classroom facilities allowed for the efficient use of learning technologies.
13. Classroom facilities are/were well maintained.
14. Laboratory equipment for my program is/was up-to-date.
15. My program director was accessible on a routine basis.
16. My program director clearly and accurately articulated my program
requirements.
17. My thesis/Plan B/field problem advisor was accessible and responsive.
18. My program requirements were completed in a reasonable time.
19. I feel confident that my program has prepared me to be successful in my
profession.
20. Overall, this was a quality program.
4.36
4.13
4.54
4.18
4.21
4.10
4.33
4.31
4.10
4.18
3.46
3.36
3.26
4.26
4.23
3.64
4.08
4.15
4.26
14
21. If I had to do it all over again, I would choose this program.
4.05
Although scores in all areas were more than acceptable, relatively low scores were noted in the
following areas:
1.
My oral communication skills have been enhanced through my coursework.
12. Classroom facilities allowed for the efficient use of learning technologies.
13. Classroom facilities are/were well maintained.
Given the nature of online coursework, it makes sense that scores for these items would be lower
than scores received in other areas.
Specific strengths noted by students include:
1. The courses are well structured and maintained. It is very easy to navigate through the
courses. Additionally, I have found the instructors to be personable, professional, and helpful.
2. The online access of the masters program courses was wonderful. I enjoyed meeting people
from all over the state and even country while growing professionally.
3. The program director is very prompt in addressing concerns and the supporting staff is also
very responsive. They have made the program easy to navigate through in a timely manner.
4.Good professors, excellent collaboration between students in the program, convenient
Major weaknesses of the program as noted by students can be grouped into some common
themes:
1.
Comments about a specific instructor/course.
2.
Difficulty of coordinating a Plan B thesis paper from off-campus.
3.
Complaints about specific offices on campus (e.g., Business Services, Registration, etc.)
Suggestions for program improvement, as noted by students, can be summarized in the following
categories:
1.
Clarifying or eliminating the traditional thesis model.
2.
Making all material accessible (downloadable).
3.
Increasing the number of course choices offered.
4.
Improving the instructional strategies of a specific instructor.
Faculty survey results:
It was difficult to identify "Key Faculty" for the MS Education program because there are no
faculty members assigned solely to this program. Faculty from the School of Education teach
courses for the MS Education, but they also teach courses for other programs. We also have
some highly-qualified adjunct faculty who teach courses in the program.
The survey conducted by PRC was completed by four key faculty members. Their responses are
summarized in the table below:
15
#
Question
1
Quality of
instruction in
the core
courses.
Relevance of
information
presented in
the core
courses.
Quality of
instruction in
support
courses.
Student
mastery of
degree content
by program
graduates.
Communicatio
n between
program
director and
yourself.
Program
director's
leadership.
Department
cooperation in
scheduling an
adequate
number of
course
sections.
Preparation of
students
entering my
course(s).
Quality of
classroom
facilities for
my course(s).
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
0=
Don't
Kno
w
2
1=
Poo
r
2=
Inadequat
e
3=
Adequat
e
4=
Goo
d
5=
Excellen
t
Response
s
Mea
n
0
0
0
0
2
4
3.50
2
0
0
0
0
2
4
3.50
3
0
0
0
0
1
4
2.25
3
0
0
0
0
1
4
2.25
0
0
0
1
2
1
4
5.00
0
0
0
0
3
1
4
5.25
2
0
0
0
1
1
4
3.25
0
0
1
0
2
1
4
4.75
1
0
0
0
1
0
2
3.00
16
1
0
1
1
1
2
1
3
1
4
1
5
1
6
Quality of
laboratory
facilities for
my course(s)
(if applicable).
Clerical
support for my
course(s).
Adequacy of
equipment for
my course(s).
Adequacy of
supplies for
my course(s).
Ability of the
Library
Learning
Center to meet
the needs of
my students.
Ability of the
Library
Learning
Center to meet
research and
professional
needs.
Opportunity to
participate in
the program's
decisions.
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
1.00
0
1
0
1
1
0
3
3.67
1
0
0
0
2
0
3
3.67
1
0
0
0
2
0
3
3.67
0
0
0
1
1
2
4
5.25
0
0
0
0
1
2
3
5.67
0
0
1
0
1
1
3
4.67
Areas that were rated low had at least one responder who entered a score of "0" or "Don't
Know." The results reported to the program director appear to reflect mean scores that include
"Don't Know" responses as zeroes which significantly affects the results as they are reported.
Areas of relative strength included:
5.
Communication between program director and yourself.
6.
Program director's leadership.
14. Ability of the Library Learning Center to meet the needs of my students.
15. Ability of the Library Learning Center to meet research and professional needs.
16. Opportunity to participate in the program's decisions.
Specific comments included statements about the irrelevance of the questions about classroom
and lab facilities, lack of information about what was happening in other courses, need to
strengthen the assessment system, and the high-quality nature of the program.
17
Advisory Committee Survey Results:
The MS Education Advisory Committee meets once per semester to discuss program issues.
Five members of the committee responded to the PRC survey. Their responses indicate that
there is adequate professional representation on the committee (100%) and that as members of
the committee they have had the opportunity to contribute to the improvement of the program
(100%). Only one participant felt that the committee should meet more frequently. Responses
to the question "Were you adequately informed of the following" are summarized in the table
below:
#
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Question
*follow-up surveys of graduates
*placement ratio
current course content
proposed curriculum changes
recruitment/admission practices
trends in the field
short-term goals
long-term goals
Planning and Review Committee recommendations
follow-up on action items from previous meetings
Yes
4
2
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
No
1
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Responses
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
Mean
1.20
1.60
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
*Because the response rates to surveys have been so low, it is not possible to share adequate
information about the follow-up surveys of graduates or placement ratio.
The following strengths were noted by advisory committee members:
1. Flexibility of the program for working adult teachers; program meets teacher needs
2. Well organized, people are running the program that are invested in it!
3. The advisory committee represents a wide range of interested parties and is in itself a major
strength. The committee works well together with the common goal of creating curriculum that
will best serve the teachers and their students in an ever changing environment.
4. Good leadership - Attention to student concerns
5. Renee Chandler and Amy Gullixson provide outstanding leadership, web-based marketing,
and customer relations management services for students enrolled in this program. The array of
professional development elective options aligns with the Wisconsin educators' PDP planning
process and the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards. The e-portfolio course is
a major strength and assists students with the reflective process needed for future employment.
The new Assessment course and action research field experience bring significant improvements
to this program in fall 2011.
Comments regarding program weaknesses were related to improving the quality of instruction in
courses taught by a specific instructor.
The advisory committee did not perceive any issues with course overlap or unnecessary
repetition.
18
Recommendations from the committee include increasing the quality of online instruction and
implementation of the new program revision.
4.
Supply evidence of continuous improvement efforts of the program.
4.1 Describe the strengths and unique features of your program that distinguish it from
similar programs. What are the weaknesses of the program?
The MS Education program is completely online, which allows a wide range of
individuals to participate. Our students have the opportunity to discuss educational
issues with teachers from other states as well as individuals who are teaching overseas.
Additional strengths of the program include the strong core and research component.
The majority of courses in many professional development master's degree programs
consist of electives, and many do not include a research component. Our unique
combination of Assessment for Learning and Action Research fill a current need for
educators who can effectively engage in data-driven decision making.
A relative weakness is a perception of disjointed faculty membership. This viewpoint
stems from a lack of enough program faculty to provide a consistent presence.
4.2 Submit evidence of program response to the concerns and recommendations in your
previous program review.
Recommendations for the Program Director in the 2005 program review include:
1. Work to improve and standardize course delivery options for online cohort.
Response: Now that Learn@UWStout is standardized across campus, this issue
seems to have resolved itself. There are online tutorials in place to assist
students as they familiarize themselves with our online course delivery system.
2. Work to improve communication via email and use of the web to clarify (and avoid
misunderstandings) on such issues as
a. Requirements and transcript review for certification students
b. Students' responsibility for updating contact information
c. Scheduling of core and selective courses
Response: The MS Education website has been updated to include the
information most frequently sought by students. Frequent e-mail reminders are
sent regarding registration for courses, keeping contact information updated,
applying for graduation, etc. All students are encouraged to follow a
standardized course sequence which simplifies the decision-making process and
makes it easier for students to plan their program. The program revision of 2011
removes the certification option, which eliminates the need to address "a" above.
19
3. Work to keep the needs of the online cohort integrated with those of on-campus
students.
Response: The MS Education program is now entirely online which means that
all students' needs are addressed in the same manner.
4. Seek and respond to student feedback regarding the implementation of the new program
revision and quality of curriculum, possibly through the use of surveys.
Response: Feedback regarding the program revision of 2004 informed the
decisions made when revising the program in 2011. Some of the changes include
removing the certification option, changing the research requirement from an
individually completed thesis to a research project completed within the confines of a
required course, and removing a course (EDUC-726 Administration) because it did not
align with any of the program objectives. Student representatives on the advisory
board and survey results indicate that the changes are appropriate.
5. Work to maintain enrollments sufficient to supply program needs.
Response: Enrollment has been increasing steadily from 20 students in 2005 to
133 students in 2010. The MS Education program is self-sustaining from a resource
standpoint.
6. Investigate possibilities for developing a re-licensure plan.
Response: This recommendation relates to certification which is no longer an
option in the MS Education program.
7. Align program with PI-34 requirements.
Response: The implementation of PI-34 has significantly changed teacher
licensure and professional development in the state of Wisconsin. The MS Education
program has responded to this change by offering coursework that can effectively be
integrated into practicing teachers' Professional Development Plans (PDPs). Because
the MS Education program no longer offers initial licensure, the focus has been on
professional development for already licensed educators.
4.3 In the next seven years, what are the major improvements or changes you plan to
implement to improve program quality?
The primary changes that will take place in the next seven years involve the
implementation of the new program revision. Students will take a more active role in
their research by tying it directly to their teaching, and more importantly, to their
students' learning.
5.
Attachments-Please include electronic links.
20
5.1 Submit any other information or documentation that may be helpful to the Planning
and Review Committee in reviewing the quality of the program including
interpretation of data from Institutional Research and PRC data.
5.2 Links of specific program information to be included:
• Program plan sheet: http://www.uwstout.edu/programs/mse/upload/mse_pp.pdf
• Current assessment in the major:
http://www.uwstout.edu/provost/upload/Assessment-in-the-Major-GraduateData.pdf (The newest AIM reports are not posted online as of the writing of
this report. I have included the 2010 report as an appendix to this report.)
• Individual program facts
• Current program advisory committee:
Renee Chandler, MSE program director
Amy Gullixson, Stout Online (and graduate of the program)
Kimberly Martinez, CEHHS/SOE
Joan Vandervelde, SOE
Nancy Berklund, CESA 10 Instructional Services License Renewal Center Coordinator
Carolyn Mertz, Educational Talent Search (and graduate of the program)
Rachael Robert, MSE Student
Sandy White, Stout Online
Ron Walsh, Superintendent of Schools, Elk Mound Area School District
Lee Pritzl, Principal, Tainter Elementary School, Rice Lake
David Valk, Principal, North High School, Eau Claire
Mr. Todd Johnson, Principal, Chippewa Valley Montessori School, Eau Claire
Brian McAlister, Director, School of Education, UW-Stout
Diane Klemme, Interim Coordinating Chair, School of Education, UW-Stout
• Other items requested by the consultant
M.S. in Education Assessment in the Major Report By Dr. Renee Chandler, Program Director
2010 Submitted: October 2011
TableofContents
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Outcomes of Previous Assessments ............................................................................................................................................................................ 2 Questions To Be Answered From This Year’s Assessment ........................................................................................................................................ 2 Methods Used to Gather Data: .................................................................................................................................................................................... 3 Number of Students Involved. ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 3 Level of Students ......................................................................................................................................................................................................... 4 Data Analysis Techniques ........................................................................................................................................................................................... 4 Analysis of Data .......................................................................................................................................................................................................... 4 How Results Are Shared with Key Instructors .......................................................................................................................................................... 12 Plans for Improvements Based on Results ................................................................................................................................................................ 12
Appendix A: MSE Benchmarks........................................................................................................................................................................................ 13 Appendix B: Scoring Rubric for MSE Program Application .......................................................................................................................................... 14 Appendix C: Dispositions Rating Form ........................................................................................................................................................................... 15 Appendix D: MSE Rubric for Portfolio ............................................................................................................................................................................ 18 EducationAIMReport2010
Page1
1.
OutcomesofPreviousAssessments
The MS Education program is in the process of implementing a program revision and a new assessment system. Prior to this report, data available
was limited to enrollment data, follow-up surveys, and portfolio ratings. Fall 2011 marks the start of the implementation of a revised program, but
many of the aspects of the new assessment system were implemented during 2010.
Three levels of benchmark criteria are outlined in the new assessment plan (see Appendix A). Assessment measures critical to these benchmarks that
are addressed in this report include:
 ratings of application essays
 disposition ratings by recommenders identified by student self-ratings and instructor ratings
 e-Portfolio ratings
In addition to the items listed above, this report also includes 2010 demographic data for the MS Education program.
2.
QuestionsToBeAnsweredFromThisYear’sAssessment
The 2010 assessment report will focus on data which addresses the following questions:
 Demographic data: Who are the students in the MS Education program?
 Ratings of application essays: What do we know about the students’ philosophies, goals, and writing skills as they enter the MS Education
program?
 Disposition ratings: What are the relative dispositional strengths and weaknesses of our students as perceived by themselves and their
instructors?
 Portfolio data: How are students performing relative to the National Board Standards?
EducationAIMReport2010
Page2
3.
MethodsUsedtoGatherData:




Demographic data: The UW-Stout Fact Book and other databases on campus have been used to generate the section of this report dedicated
to demographic data.
Ratings of application essays: As the MS Education program-specific applications are processed, the Program Director rates each essay using
the rubric presented in Appendix B. Essay responses are rated on a scale of 0 (Unsatisfactory) to 3 (Proficient/Distinguished) on seven
different factors: 1. Philosophy of Education; 2. Goals as an Educator; 3. Commitment to Learning; 4. Commitment to Excellence; 5. Respect
for Others; 6. Mechanics; and 7. Overall impression. Each of these areas is aligned with the National Board Standards.
Disposition ratings: Accrediting bodies in education (DPI and NCATE) are concerned with candidates’ knowledge, skills, and dispositions.
To address the disposition domain, data was collected from a key instructor and the students using a rating scale (see Appendix C). The
instructor of EDUC-729 (which is typically taken in the first semester of the program) filled out the rubric in Appendix C regarding the
performance of each student. Each student also rated themselves on the same rubric.
Portfolio: All students in the MSE program complete a required course in which they submit a Professional Portfolio. The portfolio is rated
by the instructor of EDUC-790. During the spring and fall semesters of 2010, the program director taught EDUC-790 and rated each
student’s e-portfolio according to the rubric presented in Appendix B. The five areas of assessment align with the National Board Teaching
Standards: 1. Commitment to learners and learning; 2. Content knowledge and content-specific pedagogy; 3. Managing and monitoring
student learning; 4. Systematic reflection and lifelong learning; and 5. Collaboration and participation in learning communities. The
portfolios were scored directly on the Chalk and Wire system on which they were created, allowing for efficient data collection and analysis.
4.
NumberofStudentsInvolved.



The enrollment data presented includes the 121 students enrolled Fall 2010.
A total of 49 applicant essays from Fall 2010 are included in the data presented.
Sixteen students were enrolled in EDUC-790 Professional Portfolio during the Spring semester of 2010 and sixteen students were enrolled in
the Fall semester of 2010. The data from all 32 portfolios will be presented.
EducationAIMReport2010
Page3
5.
LevelofStudents
Only graduate students were involved in the collection of data presented in this report.
6.
DataAnalysisTechniques
Information collected will be placed in tables. Where appropriate, descriptive statistics will be used to analyze the data.
7.
AnalysisofData
EnrollmentData
There were 121 students enrolled Fall 2010 in the MSE online program. About 51 were new students. The characteristics of the students are
summarized in the graphics below (N=121).
EducationAIMReport2010
Page4
ApplicationtoProgram:EssayRatings
As part of the application to program, all applicants write an essay in response to the following prompt: “Attach a statement of approximately 500
words (not to exceed 3 double spaced typewritten pages) which describes your philosophy of education and your goals as an educator. The statement should
clearly give examples of your commitment to learning, your commitment to excellence, and your respect for others. Your statement of purpose may also include
indications of your efforts to create a learning environment in which all can learn and reference other accomplishments that make you a particularly good
candidate for admission to this program. Remember, your personal statement is a very important part of your application. Proper use of grammar and correct
spelling are expected.”
Each essay is read and scored according to the rubric in Appendix B. The mean scores assigned by the program director for 2010 applicants are
summarized in the table and graph below:
Area
Average Score
Philosophy of Education
2.34
Goals as an Educator
2.43
Commitment to Learning
2.47
Commitment to Excellence
2.21
Respect for Others
2.32
Mechanics
2.66
Overall Impression
2.19
EducationAIMReport2010
Page5
The average scores for all areas were between the “Basic/Proficient” and “Proficient/Distinguished” catergories. Mechanics was slightly higher than
the other average scores. This may be because applicants used extra care proofreading the document knowing that accuracy was important. Some
applicants may have also had other individuals proofread their essay prior to submission.
DispositionRatings
During the first semester of the MS Education program most students take the course EDUC-729 Introduction to Educational Research. At the end
of this course, the instructor rated each student on the rubric found in Appendix C. Students also rated themselves using the same rubric. Scores
were assigned as follows:
1 = Unsatisfactory/Emerging
2 = Basic
3 = Proficient
4 = Distinguished
Not Observed (no rating assigned)
Instructor Ratings
Area
Average Score
Initiative, Preparedness, & Continuous Learning
2.83
Academic Excellence through Critical Reflective Thinking
2.94
Expression of Beliefs, Collaboration and Professional Communication
3.00
Adherence to Ethical and Legal Considerations
3.00
Respect for Diversity
3.33
EducationAIMReport2010
Page6
Student Self-Ratings
Area
Average Score
Initiative, Preparedness, & Continuous Learning
3.25
Academic Excellence through Critical Reflective Thinking
3.34
Expression of Beliefs, Collaboration and Professional Communication
3.48
Adherence to Ethical and Legal Considerations
3.48
Respect for Diversity
3.48
EducationAIMReport2010
Page7
On average, students rated themselves higher than their instructor did across all areas. The average student and instructor ratings were lowest in the
area of Initiative, Preparedness & Continuous Learning. Both instructors and students identified Respect for Diversity as an area of relative strength.
EducationAIMReport2010
Page8
MSE Portfolio Results
Students create an e-portfolio as part of the EDUC-790 Professional Portfolio. Starting Spring 2010, the program director taught the course and
evaluated each portfolio using the rubric included in Appendix B. Students were rated according to the following scale:
1 = Unsatisfactory/Emerging
The individual does not yet appear to have the knowledge or skills underlying the area. Fundamental knowledge or
skills are required. Performance is below expected level for a beginning teacher.
2 = Basic:
Beginning knowledge and skill development is evidenced, often due to limited education or experience in the area.
Some teaching and supervision are required.
3 = Proficient:
The individual exhibits knowledge, proficiency, and competence in most aspects of the area. The individual may
seek consultation, professional development, or assistance in some aspects of the area.
4 = Distinguished:
Advanced knowledge and skill development are evidenced in the area. Individuals with this level of skill and
knowledge can teach, mentor and/or supervise others in this domain area.
Mean scores for each of the five areas are presented in the table below:
EducationAIMReport2010
Page9
Areas (Adapted from National Board for Teaching Standards)
1. Commitment to Learners and Learning
a. Understanding of how students develop and learn, respect for differences and belief that all students
can learn is indicated by evidence of differentiation of instruction to meet the diverse needs of
learners.
b. Evidence of a thorough understanding of the school, family, and community contexts is indicated by
evidence of how contextual factors influence instruction and collaboration with the professional
community.
2. Content Knowledge and Content Specific Pedagogy
a. Content knowledge if indicated by evidence of mastery of the subject(s) taught.
b. Knowledge and application of theories related to pedagogy and learning is indicated by evidence of
the use of a broad range of instructional strategies and an explanation of the choices made in
practice.
c. Pedagogical expertise is indicated by evidence of the use of instructional and adaptive technologies
to improve student learning.
3. Managing and Monitoring Student Learning
a. Thorough understanding of the major concepts and theories related to assessing student learning
indicated by evidence of the use of a range of strategies to assess individual students and group.
b. Thorough understanding of student learning is evidenced by an analysis of student, classroom and
school performance at multiple points.
c. Managing and monitoring student learning is indicated by evidence of the use of assessment data to
make data-driven decisions.
4. Systematic Reflection and Lifelong Learning
a. Systematic reflection is evidenced by continuous examination of own practice.
b. Systematic reflection and learning is evidenced by development and monitoring of professional
development goals.
c. Lifelong learning is evidenced by the application of research, analysis of self performance assessment
data, and reflection to improve practice.
d. Awareness of, and the ability to critically analyze current educational research, issues and policies is
indicated by evidence of how research and policies have affected practice.
5. Collaboration and participation in learning communities
a. Professionalism is indicated by evidence of effective collaboration with families, colleagues, and
communities to improve student learning.
b. Evidence is provided of active membership in professional associations.
EducationAIMReport2010
Spring 2010
N=16
Fall 2010
N=16
3.12
2.63
2.81
2.63
2.94
2.69
2.94
2.94
2.94
2.88
Page10
Portfolio Ratings by Area in 2010
2010 MS Education Portfolio Ratings
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
Collaboration a
Participation in Le
Communitie
Systematic Reflec
Lifelong Learn
Managing and Mo
Student Learn
Content Knowled
Content Specific P
Commitment to L
and Learnin
Page11
EducationAIMReport2010
8.
HowResultsAreSharedwithKeyInstructors
This report, in its entirety, will be presented at program advisory committee meetings. Because the MS Education is an online program, many
key instructors are not available for on-campus meetings. For this reason, the report will also be shared electronically with key instructors
who will be given the opportunity to provide feedback.
9.
PlansforImprovementsBasedonResults
Data will be shared with key instructors and the program advisory committee. Future agenda items will include a discussion of the data and
what meaningful changes can be made to improve the program. Initial review of the data suggests the following items for improvement:
1. The economic situation both nationally and at the state level has significantly affected the market for advanced degrees in education.
To date, the MS Education has maintained steady enrollment despite the economic challenges that teachers and school districts are
facing. One of the primary goals of the program is to find ways to continue to meet the needs of educators who are seeking advanced
degrees. This goal will be accomplished by developing coursework that meets the changing needs of today’s educators. The program
director works with the advisory board and key faculty and staff to design, update, and implement instruction that will have a positive
impact on enrollment.
2. An additional goal is to finalize the implementation of the program revision, new coursework, and new assessment system. Once full
implementation has occurred, it will be important to monitor data for continuous improvement.
3. The MS Education program will participate in the Planning and Review Committee process in 2011 which will provide additional data
and insights into program improvement.
EducationAIMReport2010
Page12
AppendixA:MSEBenchmarks
BenchmarkI:AdmissiontoProgram





Philosophy of Education/Statement of Purpose Review (RUBRIC) Official Transcript GPA 2.75 from previous institution or transcript review Current Resume Recommender ratings (3) BenchmarkII:CompletionofAssessmentforLearning(approx.10credits)



Disposition self‐rating EDUC‐729 GPA 3.0 (transcript review) Disposition review (RUBRIC) BenchmarkIII:Graduation





GPA 3.0 (transcript review) Application for Degree Candidacy “B” or better in EDUC‐735 (old program) or EDUC‐780 Action Research (revised program) Disposition review by observer in the field ePortfolio review (RUBRIC) o Table of Contents organized by 5 Teacher Standards o Includes reflective statements for each area of the Portfolio Assessment Rubric o Includes at least one piece of evidence for each area of the Portfolio Assessment Rubric EducationAIMReport2010
PersonResponsible
MSE Program Director MSE Program Director MSE Program Director MSE Program Director MSE Program Director Instructor of Assessment for Learning and/or Intro to Research MSE Program Director MSE Program Director EDUC‐735 Instructor Identified by candidate EDUC‐790 Instructor or PD Page13
AppendixB:ScoringRubricforMSEProgramApplication
Unsatisfactory
0
No evidence
provided by the
candidate.
Emerging
1
Candidate provides some general
statements about education, but
does not articulate a philosophy
of education.
Basic/Proficient
2
Candidate clearly describes
his/her philosophy of education
but does not make effective use of
examples and/or literature to
support their views.
Goals as an Educator
(NBPTS 1, 4; Domain
4)
No evidence
provided by the
candidate.
Candidate provides a weak
statement of goals that are
marginally appropriate for the
program.
Candidate states goals that are
appropriate to their profession,
but the response lacks depth.
Stated goals are consistent with
the goals of the program.
Commitment to
Learning
(NBPTS 1,4,5;
Domain 4)
Commitment to
Excellence
(NBPTS 1,4,5;
Domain 4)
Respect for others
(NBPTS 1,4,5;
Domain 4)
No evidence
provided by the
candidate.
Candidate provides a weak
description of his/her
commitment to learning.
Candidate provides adequate
examples of his/her commitment
to learning.
No evidence
provided by the
candidate.
Candidate provides a weak
description of his/her
commitment to excellence.
Candidate provides adequate
examples of his/her commitment
to excellence.
No evidence
provided by the
candidate.
Candidate provides a weak
description of his/her respect for
others.
Candidate provides adequate
examples of his/her respect for
others.
Mechanics
Major errors in
spelling and
grammar
throughout the
essay.
Not a viable
candidate for the
MSE program at
UW-Stout
Errors in spelling and grammar
are a significant detriment to the
essay.
A few minor errors in spelling
and/or grammar.
Proficient/Distinguished
3
Candidate clearly and articulately
describes his/her philosophy of
education using powerful examples
and/or literature to support their views.
Response reflects systematic thinking
about their own practice.
Candidate clearly and articulately states
goals appropriate to their profession.
Response indicates insight that is
highly reflective and based on analysis
of their own practice. Stated goals are
consistent with the goals of the
program.
Candidate clearly and articulately
provides solid examples of his/her
belief in and commitment to all
students’ learning.
Candidate clearly and articulately
provides solid examples of his/her
belief in and commitment to
excellence.
Candidate clearly and articulately
provides solid examples of his/her
belief in and commitment to respect for
others.
Proper grammar and spelling evident
throughout the essay.
A weak candidate who may be
considered for admission to
program, dependent on other
factors.
An adequate candidate who
should be admitted to program
An impressive candidate who should
be admitted to program
Philosophy of
Education
(NBPTS 1, 4; Domain
4)
Overall Impression
EducationAIMReport2010
Page14
AppendixC:DispositionsRatingForm
Unsatisfactory/Emerging:
Rarely demonstrates the disposition. The area
needs to be improved before the next
disposition rating.
Dispositions
Unsatisfactory/
Emerging
(U)
Basic:
Occasionally
demonstrates the
disposition, but growth is
needed
Proficient:
Usually demonstrates the
disposition with no areas
of concern.
Basic
(B)
Distinguished:
Demonstrates model
dispositions; the individual
could teach, supervise, or
mentor other teachers in this
area.
Proficient
(P)
Not
Observed:Observation
of this disposition did
not take place, for this
student.
Distinguished
(D)
Rating
U
- Did not participate in class activities.
Initiative, Preparedness
& Continuous Learning
- Often missed assignment deadlines.
- Did not meet minimal expectations
in completing assignments.
- Usually participated in class and
discussion board activities.
- Missed some assignment deadlines.
- Met the basic expectations in completing
assignments.
- Demonstrated timely
- Consistently demonstrated timely
participation and consistent
participation and presence on the
presence on the class discussion class discussion boards.
board.
- Exceeded requirements and met
- Met requirements and met
assignment deadlines.
assignment deadlines.
- Exceeded expectations in assigned
- Met expectations in assigned
work and was consistently well
work, prepared for class as
prepared for class as evidenced by
evidenced by completed
completed readings and
readings and assignments.
assignments.
B
P
D
Not
Observed
- Frequently considered multiple
- Made some effort to consider
perspectives when making
multiple perspectives and
reasoned decisions based upon
determine how written discourse
supporting evidence from
affected others.
previous readings and course
experiences.
- Did not consider student
- Occasionally considered
outcomes, research, and
student outcomes, research, and
- Frequently considered student
data when developing
data when developing
outcomes, research and data
educational materials for use educational materials for use in
when developing educational
in classroom and clinical
classroom and clinical situations.
materials for use in classroom &
situations.
clinical situations.
- Read but didn’t analyze
- Ignored feedback
feedback.
- Analyzed feedback and made
- Written discourse reflected
little or no concern for
multiple perspectives or how
others may be affected.
Academic Excellence through
Critical Reflective Thinking
EducationAIMReport2010
- Consistently considered multiple
perspectives when making reasoned
decisions based upon supporting
evidence from previous readings
and course experiences.
- Consistently considered student
outcomes, research and data when
developing educational materials for
use in classroom & clinical
situations.
- Analyzed feedback and made
appropriate adjustments to enhance
U
B
P
D
Not
Page15
some appropriate adjustments to personal growth and learning.
enhance personal growth and
learning.
Observed
U
Expression of Beliefs,
Collaboration and Professional
Communication
- Demonstrated no evidence
of willingness or ability to
articulate ideas or beliefs in
written communication.
- Showed some evidence of the
ability to articulate ideas or
beliefs in written
communications.
- Written communications
were unprofessional and/or
inappropriate to the audience
and setting.
- Some written communications
were professional and
appropriate to the audience and
setting.
- Conveyed ideas or beliefs with
success in written
communications and
demonstrated sensitivity with
respect to language use.
- Consistently communicated ideas
or beliefs with success in written
communication and demonstrated
sensitivity with respect to language
use.
- Most communications were
written in a professional manner
and appropriate to the audience
and setting.
- All communications were
professionally delivered and
appropriate to the audience and
setting.
B
P
D
Not
Observed
U
- Plagiarized the work of
others.
Adherence to Ethical and
Legal Considerations
- Sometimes cited the works of
others.
- Cited the works of others.
- Always appropriately cited the
works of others.
- Frequently articulated thoughts
or demonstrated behaviors that
- Articulated some thoughts that
- Consistently demonstrated
- Breached established rules
considered the rights of course
considered the rights of course
behaviors that safeguarded the
for protecting the rights of
colleagues and/or PK-12 student
colleagues and/or PK-12 student
rights of course colleagues and/or
course colleagues and/or PKlearners.
learners.
PK-12 student learners).
12 student learners.
-Usually exhibited behaviors
- Exhibited some behaviors
- Modeled adherence to the
- Violated ethical/legal
demonstrating adherence to
demonstrating legal/ethical
ethical/legal standards of the
standards of the profession.
ethical/legal standards of the
standards of the profession.
profession.
profession.
B
P
D
Not
Observed
Respect for Diversity
- Showed little or no
acknowledgement of the
belief that all students can
learn during class
discussions.
- Showed some
acknowledgement and
responsiveness to the belief that
all students can learn during
class discussions.
- Showed little or no interest
in learning about educational
strategies to address the
needs of diverse learners.
- Demonstrated some interest in
learning about educational
strategies to address the needs
of diverse learners.
EducationAIMReport2010
- Frequently considered and
demonstrated the belief that all
students can learn in class
discussions or discussion board
communication.
- Sought out information on how
to address the needs of diverse
learners.
- Consistently considered and
demonstrated the belief that all
students can learn during class
discussions by providing solutions,
URL's for web resources or other
resources.
- Demonstrated ways to address the
needs of diverse learners in
educational settings.
U
B
P
Page16
D
Not
EducationAIMReport2010
Page17
AppendixD:MSERubricforPortfolio
Portfolio Assessment Rubric
Student Name: _______________________________________
Reviewer: ___________________________________
Unsatisfactory/Emerging:
Basic:
Proficient:
Distinguished:
Student ID #: ___________________ _____
Date: __________________
Reviewer Signature: ______________________________________________________
The individual does not yet appear to have the knowledge or skills underlying the area. Fundamental knowledge or skills are required. Performance is below expected level for a beginning teacher.
Beginning knowledge and skill development is evidenced, often due to limited education or experience in the area. Some teaching and supervision are required.
The individual exhibits knowledge, proficiency, and competence in most aspects of the area. The individual may seek consultation, professional development, or assistance in some aspects of the
area.
Advanced knowledge and skill development are evidenced in the area. Individuals with this level of skill and knowledge can teach, mentor and/or supervise others in this domain area.
Areas*
Unsatisfactory
1
Basic
2
Proficient
3
Distinguished
4
1. Commitment to Learners and Learning
c. Understanding of how students develop and learn, respect for differences
and belief that all students can learn is indicated by evidence of
differentiation of instruction to meet the diverse needs of learners.
d. Evidence of a thorough understanding of the school, family, and community
contexts is indicated by evidence of how contextual factors influence
instruction and collaboration with the professional community.
2. Content Knowledge and Content Specific Pedagogy
d. Content knowledge if indicated by evidence of mastery of the subject(s)
taught.
e. Knowledge and application of theories related to pedagogy and learning is
indicated by evidence of the use of a broad range of instructional strategies
and an explanation of the choices made in practice.
f. Pedagogical expertise is indicated by evidence of the use of instructional
and adaptive technologies to improve student learning.
3. Managing and Monitoring Student Learning
a. Thorough understanding of the major concepts and theories related to
assessing student learning indicated by evidence of the use of a range of
strategies to assess individual students and group.
b. Thorough understanding of student learning is evidenced by an analysis of
student, classroom and school performance at multiple points.
c. Managing and monitoring student learning is indicated by evidence of the
use of assessment data to make data-driven decisions.
4. Systematic Reflection and Lifelong Learning.
a. Systematic reflection is evidenced by continuous examination of own
EducationAIMReport2010
Page18
b.
c.
d.
practice.
Systematic reflection and learning is evidenced by development and
monitoring of professional development goals.
Lifelong learning is evidenced by the application of research , analysis of self
performance assessment data, and reflection to improve practice.
Awareness of, and the ability to critically analyze current educational
research, issues and policies is indicated by evidence of how research and
policies have affected practice.
5. Collaboration and participation in learning communities
a. Professionalism is indicated by evidence of effective collaboration with
families, colleagues, and communities to improve student learning.
b. Evidence is provided of active membership in professional associations.
*Note: Areas 1-5 from National Board for Teaching Standards
EducationAIMReport2010
Page19