Elementary Education 201213 Page 1 of 11 Elementary Education – Initial Preparation Annual Program Report Academic Year 2012‐13 Pamela M. Jukes November 8, 2013 1. Continuous Assessment Results a. Admission Data Table 1 provides the average admission test scores and admission grade point average (GPA) of Elementary Education candidates approved by the Professional Education Council (PEC) for admission into initial teacher preparation programs during this academic year. Before the Office of Teacher Services submits their names for review and approval by the PEC, candidates must meet minimum requirements established by the state and/or the WKU Professional Education Unit. Table 1. Approved Candidate Test Score Averages Program Elementary Education ACT N Mean 117 24 PPST Math N Mean 21 178 PPST
Reading N Mean
22
177
PPST
Writing N Mean
21
176
SAT N Mean
3
1477
GRE Admission Composite GPA N Mean N Mean
198 3.33
b. Course Based Assessment Data Table 2 provides the percentage of Elementary Education Program candidates (N = 180) scoring at each level of proficiency on critical performances within education courses for this academic year. Proficiency levels are based on a scale of 1 – Standard Not Met, 2 – Standard Partially Met, 3 – At Standard, and 4 – Above Standard. Table 2. CP Proficiency Level Percentages Course 1 2 3 4 EDU 250 0.00 1.38 778.28 20.34 EDU 489 0.00 8.56 85.32 6.12 ELED 345 0.00 0.68 79.8 19.52 ELED 355 0.19 1.33 69.9 28.57 ELED 365 0.00 0.78 82.81 18.82 ELED 405 0.00 0.00 82.18 18.82 ELED 406 0.00 0.88 73.63 25.49 ELED 407 0.00 0.22 70.61 29.17 ELED 465 0.30 1.50 92.79 5.41 LTCY 320 0.40 1.60 62.4 35.60 LTCY 420 0.00 0.00 30.10 69.90 Elementary Education 201213 Page 2 of 11 Table 3 indicates the level of Elementary Education candidates (N = 180) proficiency across critical performances related to the Kentucky Teacher Standards (KTS). Candidates receiving an overall rating of 3 or 4 on a CP are considered to have demonstrated proficiency on the standards associated with the CP. Compared to the unit‐wide results, Elementary Education candidates are typically performing above average. Table 3. Percent of Elementary Education Candidates Scoring Proficient on CPs by KTS Program ELED Unit‐Wide 1 99% 97% 2 3 98% 97% 97% 97% Kentucky Teacher Standards 4 5 6 7 98% 98% 99% 97% 98% 97% 98% 97% 8 9 99% 98% 99% 97% 10 100% 99% *KTS Key: 1 – Content Knowledge, 2 – Designs/Plans Instruction, 3 – Maintains Learning Climate, 4 – Implements/ Manages Instruction, 5 – Assessment/Evaluation, 6 – Technology, 7 – Reflection, 8 – Collaboration, 9 – Professional Development, 10 – Leadership Table 4 indicates the number of Elementary Education candidates (N = 23) who have scored 2 or lower (below proficiency) on critical performances during this academic year. Table 4. Elementary Education Candidates Scoring Below Proficient on CPs Student ID 800+ 800+ 800+ 800+ 800+ 800+ 800+ 800+ 800+ 800+ 800+ 800+ 800+ 800+ 800+ 800+ 800+ 800+ 800+ 800+ 800+ Score 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 Per Student Count 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 4 Elementary Education 201213 Page 3 of 11 800+ 800+ Grand Total 1 3 5 4 6 23 c. Clinical Experiences Data Elementary Education uses the following courses and experiences to evaluate candidate dispositions: ELED 345 ELED 355, ELED 405 and LTCY 420. The program has identified the following courses and experiences where candidates report the diversity of their field experiences: EDU 250, ELED 345, Block I (ELED 355, ELED 365 & ELED 407), Block II (ELED 405, ELED 406 and ELED 407), LTCY 320, and LTCY 420. LTCY 320 has been designated as the experience where candidates must work in settings at or above the average 11% diversity of the schools in the 30+ counties that represent our service area. Table 5 reports how Elementary Education candidates performed on dispositions as they entered and progressed through their program (N = 198) and during their student teaching experience (N = 180). Students are considered “proficient” who average a 3 or higher on each disposition category. Table 5. Elementary Education Proficiency Rates on Unit‐Wide Dispositions Period a. Prior to Student Teaching b. During Student Teaching Values Learning WKU Professional Education Dispositions Values Personal Values Values Values Integrity Diversity Collaboration Professionalism 99.61 99.42 99.8 99.39 98.95 100 100 100 100 100 Over this academic year, Elementary Education candidates (N = 198) reported demographic information on 154 field placements with an average of 14.5% ethnically diverse students, 55.3% students on free/reduced lunch, and 16.6% student with disabilities (based on National Center for Education Statistics and Kentucky Department of Education). Table 6 reveals the percentages of field experiences with various characteristics. Note that candidates could choose all the characteristics that applied for any given experience. Table 6. Percentages of Field Experience by Category Types Working with Student With Special Needs % Candidates working with Students with Physical Impairments % Candidates working with Students with Learning Disabilities % Candidates working with Students with Moderate/Severe Disabilities % Candidates working with Students with Emotional/Behavioral Disorders % Candidates working with Gifted Students 19
61
11
27
48
Elementary Education 201213 Page 4 of 11 % Candidates working with English Language Learners % Candidates working with Students with Visual Impairments % Candidates working with Students with Hearing Impairments % Candidates working with Students with Speech/Language Delays % Candidates working with Students with Development Delays % Candidates working with Students with Autism Spectrum Disorder % Candidates working with Students with Other Impairments Working with Diverse Students % Candidates working with African American Students % Candidates working with Native American/American Indian Students % Candidates working with Latino/Hispanic Students % Candidates working with Asian Students % Candidates working with Students with Special Needs (Aggregate) % Candidates working with Diverse Students (Aggregate) 40
6
5
20
12
14
65
87
13
73
49
85
92
Overall, as can be seen in Table 6, in 16.8% of their field experiences Elementary Education candidates reported working with at least one student with special needs and in 14.5% of their field experiences candidates reported working with at least one student from a diverse ethnic group. d. Culminating Assessment Data As Component 4 of the WKU Professional Education Unit Continuous Assessment Plan (CAP) strategy, all initial preparation candidates complete a culminating assessment of professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills, the Teacher Work Sample (TWS). This assessment is also used to demonstrate candidates’ ability to impact P‐12 student learning. In particular, candidate performances on Assessment Planning and Analysis of Student Learning have been identified as key indicators of candidates’ ability related to student learning. Although in spring 2008 the Professional Education Council agreed that candidates who score a holistic score of at least “2 – Developing” are able to exit the program, for program evaluation purposes our goal is that at least 80% of program candidates will achieve “3 – Proficient” or higher. Table 7 presents the proficiency rate for Elementary Education candidates (N = 180). Table 7. Initial Preparation TWS Proficiency Rates Program Elementary Education Unit‐Wide % Proficient 99% 93% Because the faculty also scores TWS at the indicator level, we are able to use these scores to ascertain candidate success in meeting each component of the TWS. For program evaluation purposes, candidates are considered successful who average at least 2.5 on a three point scale (1 – Not Met, 2 – Partially Met, and 3 – Met) on indicators aligned to a standard. Table 8 Elementary Education 201213 Page 5 of 11 depicts the percentage of Elementary Education candidates who averaged at least 2.5 on the indicators for each TWS Factor: CF – Contextual Factors, LG – Learning Goals, DFI – Design for Instruction, ASL – Analysis of Student Learning, and ROT – Reflection on Teaching. Table 8. Initial Preparation TWS Proficiency Rates of Elementary Education Candidates Program Elementary Education Unit‐Wide CF LG DFI ASL ROT 94% 89% 96% 91% 92% 85% 99% 91% 85% 88% Because the TWS indicators have been aligned to Kentucky Teacher Standards, we can use these scores to ascertain candidate success in meeting each standard related to the TWS.
Table 9 reports these scores as they relate to Kentucky Teacher Standards. Table 9. Percentage of Elementary Education Candidates who “Passed” each Teacher Standard Program Elementary Education Unit‐Wide 1 2 3 5 6 7 9 95% 89% 97% 94% 96% 92% 98% 90% 98% 92% 94% 91% 85% 88% Additionally, all candidates are assessed during their student teaching experience using the Student Teaching Evaluation form. Table 10 reports the percentages of Elementary Education student teachers (N = 180) successful on each standard. For program evaluation purposes, candidates are considered successful who average at least 2.5 on a three point scale (1 – Not Met, 2 – Partially Met, and 3 – Met) on indicators aligned to a standard. Table 10. Elementary Education Proficiency Rates by Kentucky Teacher Standards Program Kentucky Teacher Standards 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 Elementary Education 98% 95% 97% 94% 89% 93% Unit‐Wide 97% 92% 96% 91% 87% 90% 87% 86% 8 9 10 94% 99% 90% 93% 97% 89% e. Exit and Follow Up Data Table 11 delineates the Educational Testing Services reports of the pass rates on the Praxis II content exams of candidates who completed the program in the 2011‐12 academic year (the Elementary Education 201213 Page 6 of 11 most recent year with complete data). The last column allows for pass rate comparison of our candidates to our 2010‐11 results. Table 11. Pass Rates on Content Tests for Initial Teacher Preparation Program/Type of Assessment Candidate N (2011‐12) WKU Pass Rate (2011‐12) WKU Pass Rate (2010‐11) 168 97 98 346 96 98 Elementary Education: Elementary Ed Content Knowledge Elementary Education: Professional Knowledge Annually, the WKU Teacher Survey is sent to student teachers and alumni who potentially have been teaching one or more years. For the 2012‐13 academic year, out of a possible 180 student teachers, 180 (100%) completed the survey. Below are the results for Elementary Education student teachers, 180 of whom responded. Survey items requested the respondent’s perception of WKU preparation on each of the Kentucky Teacher Standards using a scale of 1 “Poor,” 2 “Fair,” 3 “Good,” and 4 “Excellent.” Standards with average scores of 3 or better across items were considered to demonstrate acceptable program quality. Table 12 reports Elementary Education survey results. Table 12. Average Scores on Teacher Standards Questions for Elementary Education Respondents Program Kentucky Teacher Standards 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 Elementary Education 3.60 3.67 3.77 3.56 3.50 3.42 Unit‐Wide 3.49 3.45 3.66 3.43 3.29 3.37 8 9 10 3.51 3.32 3.47 3.30 3.30 3.14 3.36 3.18 Respondents were also able to provide comments. Table 13 presents Elementary Education respondent comments. Table 13. Elementary Education Respondent Comments Focusing more on how you can differentiate instruction and activities for the different learning levels of students in your classroom for math and reading. Also teach more in depth about the learning disabilities a teacher might have in her classroom and how might a teacher in a mainstream classroom accommodate instruction to benefit these students. A suggestion would be to discuss how to collaborate more with teachers and the students who need the extra help. This was touched on during the course of my education career, but I would have liked to learn a little more about collaboration and maybe have put into use in the classroom. During block the highest grade I was placed was in 3rd. This made me feel unprepared for a fifth grade class for my teacher work sample. I was in the third grade class for Elementary Education 201213 Page 7 of 11 block 1. Other wise pre‐ block and block 2 I was assigned 1st grade for both. Also, it would help all students if there was a technology course which dealt directly with the technology required to be used in class. Some of the technology that was available at my school, the collaborating teacher was not comfortable using, not having ever used the equipment myself made it difficult to implement in class. I would much rather have experience prior to such a pivotal moment in my educational career. I believe that Western could have better prepared their students in reading. I feel as if I have had an adequate amount of instruction on all other areas; however, reading and literacy have fallen behind. This is the most critical subject and without reading, children can not perform well in any subject. I believe the literacy classes should be adjusted and hold students more accountable and there should be more literacy classes required. I feel that Western Kentucky University has prepared me to become a great teacher! There is nothing I would change if I could. I feel like all of the teachers I had at the Glasgow campus taught me what I needed to know and much more. Also, the teachers through IVS made sure content was understood by all classes, not just their own. I do not feel that WKU prepares student teachers to work with students with special needs. We are required to take one special education class before student teaching, and this is an online course that does not give adequate preparation for working with actual students. I believe that WKU needs to offer more classes to help classroom teachers understand special needs students, and the protocols required to help these students. I feel that Block classes prepared me well for my student teaching experience. However, it wasn't until Block II that everything started to make sense and connect. Professional development opportunities or "refresher" seminars in areas such as, Bloom's Taxonomy or Creating Assessments, would be very helpful to students like me. Overall, I am very satisfied with my educational experience. I do not feel that WKU prepares student teachers to work with students with special needs. We are required to take one special education class before student teaching, and this is an online course that does not give adequate preparation for working with actual students. I believe that WKU needs to offer more classes to help classroom teachers understand special needs students, and the protocols required to help these students. I feel that the items that I answered 'Poor' to are standards that must be and will be learned with experience in one's own classroom. With that being said, WKU did prepare me to have my own classroom. I am very grateful for the WKU education I have received; it has prepared me for my future as a teacher. I feel very confident in my ability to teach due to the wonderful education at WKU. I have one recommendation for the program. I think students should spend more time in a live classroom. There isn't any replacement for hands‐on experience. I liked the program, and would only change that aspect. Student teaching is intense, and students should spend more time in cooperating schools. Thanks Elementary Education 201213 Page 8 of 11 It would benefit Teacher Candidates to learn how to use technology related to communicating results to students and parents. Teacher candidates would also have benefited from a workshop that shows different ways to incorporate student use of technology into lessons. Many classrooms are not equipped with personal student computers or other technologies, and computer labs are not always available. During student teaching, it was brought to my attention that student use of technology meant that all students in the classroom must have a significant role in technology (each student using technology at the same time). Technology that was reviewed during courses included interactive activities for whole class participation such as "clickers" or "SmartBoard Activities." Which, apparently is not what is expected during student teaching. Teacher candidates would be better prepared if given more opportunities to understand what "Student Use of Technology" means. Prior to student teaching, there was little focus on collaborating with others to teach a diverse group of students. I typically only worked with my assigned teacher. It would have been great to do a collaboration project in Block 1 or 2 to get an idea of what it is like to work with others in the building. The only complaint I have for my educational experience was that not enough emphasis was placed on the Praxis exams. They were brushed off by professors and made to seem unimportant. I made great grades through my block experiences, thought I knew content well, and was very surprised when I got my scores back. Not saying we should be taught everything on the Praxis, because it is our responsibility to study, I just wish the professors took it more seriously. I know some people who still have not pass their exams for certification, and will not before graduation. I wish professors portrayed it to be a bigger deal. If you work very hard, make straight A's in block and are excellent in the classroom there is still a chance you cannot become a certified teacher if you do not pass one silly test. My only complaint is that professors brushed it off to be no big deal and it is a HUGE deal. Other than that, I feel confident in the classroom and like I am ready to have a job. The WKU teacher program is amazing, and I feel blessed to have had the experience that I have had here at the WKU school of teacher education. We never talked about collaboration and leadership plans until student teaching. We all
know what leadership is but we never did anything with it until student teaching. I
think we should have done this before student teaching. Also
Elementary Education 201213 Page 9 of 11 2. Summary of Results by Kentucky Teacher Standards (KTS) and Other Key Conceptual Values Teacher candidates in Elementary Education were very successful in meeting the Kentucky Teacher Standards (KTS). Teacher candidates in this program were at or above the unit‐wide proficiency rate on Critical Performances (CP) in all ten standards. One hundred percent of teacher candidates in the Elementary Education program demonstrated proficiency in KTS 10; 99% demonstrated proficiency in KTS 1, 5, 8 and 9; 98% demonstrated proficiency in KTS 2, 4, 6, and 7; and 97% demonstrated proficiency in KTS 3. 3. Plan for Disseminating the Report The report will be shared with the Unit Head and program area faculty. It will able be shared with the Associate Dean for Accountability and Research and will be posted online for public reference. 4. Key Discussions and/or Decisions Made Based on Assessment Results a. Assessment or Data Collection Changes Based on Assessment Results The Fieldwork Summary Form was updated to reflect changes required by the Education Professional Standards Board. b. Program Curriculum or Experiences Changes Based on Assessment Results. Key discussions are ongoing. The unit is investigating adding an educational technology course to the program to address student teacher feedback related to that standard (KTS 6). The unit adopted a Critical Performance Deficiency policy and program faculty work closely with teacher candidates who score below proficiency on course Critical Performances or Dispositions. Additionally, all field categories mandated by the state have been addressed with the program as follows: Elementary Education Field Hour Requirements Course Number Hours State Field Hours Categories EDU 250 15  Elementary experience SPED 330 15  Middle and Secondary experiences  Students with disabilities ELED 345 15  Elementary experience  Family interactions  Family Resource Center Elementary Education 201213 Page 10 of 11 Block I  ELED 365  ELED 355  ELED 407 Block II  ELED 405  ELED 406  ELED 465 LTCY 320 LCY 420 




Assist teachers Elementary experience Site‐based meeting ELL population Assist teachers 



Elementary experience School board meeting PLC Assist teachers 10 20 
Elementary experience 


Elementary experience Diverse setting Student tutoring 70‐77 c. Decisions about Group/Individual Student Progress Based on Assessment Results. The Elementary Education program has enacted the Proficiency Deficiency Policy to remediate students scoring below proficiency on course Critical Performances (CPs) within the program. Students who score below proficiency on a course Critical Performance are remediated within that course (after receiving feedback on the CP, students are given at least one opportunity to revise the course CP; the revised score will be posted on the Electronic Portfolio). 5. Trends in Assessment Results Over Part Three Years Based on the Culminating Assessment data, the Elementary Education teacher candidates continue to score above the unit‐wide proficiency rate on the culminating assessment, the Teacher Work Sample (TWS). It has increased by 1% for each of the past three years to a current proficiency rate of 99%. Feedback from the Student Teacher Survey indicates the need to engage in leadership, develop proficiency with technology, and more direct experiences planning for diverse students and those with special needs. 6. Recommended Changes SPED 330 has recently been revised to include field experiences, giving the Elementary Education teacher candidates more extensive experiences dealing with student with Elementary Education 201213 Page 11 of 11 special needs. A technology course would help the program to better prepare teacher candidates to effectively utilize technology to foster critical thinking skills thereby enhancing P‐5 student learning. It is also recommended that students have more leadership opportunities to address KTS 10.