Undergraduate Program Data Analysis Report
Program Name: SEDU
Date: 6/22/15
Contact Person: Gwen Price
Directions:
1. Review the program assessment data located in D2L.
2. List the 6 to 8 assessments for each program in the box provided for Program
Assessments. Examine the data collection for each program. Be sure to review both the
fall and spring data collection. Answer the following questions for each program
assessment placing the information in the appropriate column:
o What does the data indicate for your program?
o What areas of concern if any do you have regarding this assessment?
o What recommendations do you have regarding any revisions for this assessment?
o What program changes if any does this data suggest?
3. Save the template as a Word document and submit it to the NCATE Assessment
Committee via a D2L dropbox provided in the Accreditation-NCATE link by April 9th .
Undergraduate Unit Data
Goal
Content
knowledge
Program
Assessment
Praxis II
Data Analysis
Recommendations Implementation
Date
Analysis of the
Faculty should
Fall 2015
Content specific Praxis request score data
II scores is difficult
for individuals and
due to the low
investigate the subenrollment numbers of scores for
the past academic year. weaknesses and
ETS does not report
strengths. This
pass rates if less than 5 analysis should
candidates take the
lead to discussions
specific test in a given already alluded to
year. Looking at
in some previous
summary score
SPA reports with
reports, our students
Content area
tend to fall within the
faculty.
average score range
for the state and have a
slightly higher median
than the state. Pass
Content
Knowledge
Grades
Planning
Performance
rates are no longer
100% at completion
since successful
passing of the test is
no longer required to
participate in student
teaching. Pass rate for
2014-2015 is 81%
with only completers
in Math (3/7) and
German (1/1) not
passing before
program completion.
All candidates in
Secondary programs
must maintain a 2.8
GPA and obtain a C or
above in each required
course. Data
demonstrates that this
requirement is being
enforced by the SOE.
The average GPA for
all Secondary
completers is 3.58.
Unit Plan data indicate
that all evaluated
candidates are either
Target or Acceptable
on all standards.
N/A
N/A
Continue to use
Fall 2015
Unit Plan to assess
Unit Plan
general and content
specific aspects of
planning. Ensure
that all Techniques
courses are
incorporating the
Unit Plan into the
assessments.
Cooperating teachers
To obtain more
Fall 2015
rate all secondary
meaningful data
TCPP/Danielson student teachers Target based on an
Rubric
or Acceptable on 16 of accepted
the 31 criteria. 1
framework, the
English candidate
Unit is moving
earned Developing in
from the self15 areas with only 2
developed TCPP
other candidates
instrument to the
earning developing in
Danielson Rubric
only 1 of the 31
for Classroom
questions.
Impact on
Student
Learning
IAP
Teaching. This
rubric focuses on
University Supervisors the same 4 subscore candidates
categories of
similarly. All
Planning,
secondary candidates
Performance,
received Target or
Classroom
Acceptable on 17 of
Environment, and
the 31 questions.
Professionalism. It
However, on the other is the rubric
14 questions, more
adopted by the
students earned
State to evaluate
developing with the
in-service teachers
lowest scores being
and has been vetted
seen in the
through many
Pedagogy/Performance validity &
areas.
reliability studies.
Proper use of the
In particular,
rubric should allow
weaknesses were seen the program to
in the use of a variety
more readily
of assessments, clarity discover and
in teaching literacy,
investigate
and planning for
strengths &
students with special
weaknesses. This
needs/ ELL.
rubric will be
completed by both
the University
Supervisor and the
Cooperating
teacher – but will
remove the selfreport data (no
longer used) of the
student teacher.
For Fall 2014 and
Completers
Fall 2015
Spring 2015, all
continue to excel
secondary completers
on the IAP – as
scored Target or
assessment aligned
Acceptable on 75% of with the INTASC
all criteria (20 of 25
standards and used
areas). 1 person
to demonstrate an
scored developing in 3 Impact on Student
areas and 1 person
Learning.
scored unacceptable in Triangulation of
2 areas. Both of these this data with other
were due to a lack of
analysis of data by the
student.
INTASC
standards for
teaching
Portfolio
Showcase and
Interview
performance
related data should
be completed to
ensure the validity
of the assessment.
Each Junior Field
These results are
Spring 2016
student is evaluated by passed along to the
3 faculty members on
University
each of 9 criteria
Supervisor of the
resulting in 71
Student Teacher so
different scores.
that weaknesses
Faculty scored all
can be set as goals
candidates as Target or for the experience.
Acceptable in all
Low scores in the
categories with the
Effective use of
following exceptions:
Educational
Technology were
3 scores/2 students
often accompanied
developing on
by comments that
Learning
candidates had
Environments.
little opportunity to
use this
2 scores / 1 candidate
technology.
developing on
Similar comments
Planning.
were made for
working with
3 scores/ 3 candidates
students with
developing on
special needs. This
Effective Assessment. information and
information like it
4 scores / 3 students
is/and should
developing on
continue to be
Instructional
shared with the
Strategies.
Office of Student
Teaching such that
1 score/ 1 student
placements can be
developing on
made accordingly.
Application of content.
The Secondary
7 scores / 7 students
program should
developing on
assess how the
Learning Differences. curricular change
to move SEDU 306
8 scores / 6 students
Content Literacy
developing on
out of Block and
Effective Technology. earlier into the
program affects
5 scores / 4 students
scores on the
developing and 1 score Language &
/ 1 student
Literacy criteria.
unacceptable on
Literacy.
3 scores / 2 students
developing and 1
scores / 1 student
unacceptable on
Collaboration.
PA
Standards
for teaching
PDE 430
PDE 430 Shortform
data demonstrates that
all completers in 2014
were either Exemplary
or Superior in all 4
categories of Planning,
Performance,
Classroom
Environment, and
Professionalism.
These scores build
upon the confidence
that cooperating
teachers and
University supervisors
showed in the TCPP.
Since this state
required form and
the new rubric to
be used by the Unit
in place of the
TCPP are based on
the same
framework, these
scores should be
compared against
the Danielson
Rubric in
upcoming semester
to determine the
validity of use of
the new
assessment.
Summer 2016
Summary of changes and recommendations:
1. Content specific analysis should be done with the subsections of the Praxis II to determine
weaknesses. Discussions with Content area faculty should be initiated to increase first time pass
rates. (Implement Fall 2015; Assess effectiveness Fall 2016)
2. The new Unit assessment for Student Teaching, known currently as the Danielson rubric, is to be
implemented in Fall 2015. Analysis of the results will occur Fall 2015 to determine candidate
success in meeting criteria. Analysis of the new assessment will take place Summer 2016 by the
Unit Assessment Committee.
3. In looking at the results of the TCPP and Portfolio Interview, in conjunction with other Unit data
such as Alumni Survey results, the department has decided to focus on improving Language &
Literacy scores as well as working with English Language Learners. Once major change resulting
from this focus was the removal of SEDU 306 Content Literacy from the Professional Block. It is
now a 4 credit, stand-alone course that will be taken earlier in the candidate’s program. In this
way, the curriculum will more closely mirror the Middle Level Curriculum, a program with higher
scores in the areas of focus. This will also allow for more focused field experiences in the areas
of content literacy & ELL as well as more opportunity to apply the knowledge within the Block
courses and Junior Field. (Implementing Fall 2015; Assess effectiveness Spring 2016)