History 2010‐11 Page 1 of 7 History Department – Initial Preparation Annual Program Report Academic Year 2010‐11 Tamara Van Dyken October 2011 1. Continuous Assessment Results a. Admission Data Table 1 provides the average admission test scores and admission grade point average (GPA) of social studies 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 Social Studies ACT N Mean 14 24 PPST Math N Mean 1 178 PPST
Reading N Mean
1
181
PPST
Writing N Mean
1
177
SAT N Mean
n/a
n/a
GRE Composite N Mean n/a n/a Admission GPA N Mean
15
3.24
b. Course Based Assessment Data Table 2 provides the percentage of social studies candidates (N = 114) 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 1% 3% 67% 29% EDU‐489 0% 50% 50% 0% PSY‐310 3% 1% 20% 76% SEC‐351 2% 4% 72% 23% SEC‐352 0% 1% 92% 7% SEC‐453 0% 9% 37% 54% SEC‐481 0% 18% 82% 0% Grand Total 1% 6% 66% 28% Table 3 indicates the level of social studies candidates (N = 114) 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, social studies candidates are typically performing at or below average. History 2010‐11 Page 2 of 7 Table 3. Percent of Social Studies Candidates Scoring Proficient on CPs by KTS Program Your Program Unit‐Wide 1 93% 96% 2 89% 95% 3 92% 96% Kentucky Teacher Standards 4 5 6 7 98% 88% 93% 96% 96% 96% 96% 96% 8 94% 96% 9 93% 94% 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 social studies candidates (N = 23) who have scored 2 or lower (below proficiency) on critical performances during this academic year. Table 4. Social Studies Candidates Scoring Below Proficient on CPs Score Student ID Grand Total 1 1 1 2 2
2
6
1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 6 40
48 2
2
2
2
2
2
2 2 2 2 2
2
2
2
2
2
2
c. Clinical Experiences Data Student Count 2 History 2010‐11 Page 3 of 7 Social studies uses the following courses and experiences to evaluate candidate dispositions: EDU 250, SEC 475, and EDU 490. The program has identified the following courses and experiences where candidates report the diversity of their field experiences: EDU 250 and SEC 475. SEC 352 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 social studies candidates performed on dispositions as they entered and progressed through their program (N = 48) and during their student teaching experience (N = 48). Students are considered “proficient” who average a 3 or higher on each disposition category. Table 5. Social Studies 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 98% 100% 100% 100% 98% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Over this academic year, social studies candidates (N = 62) reported demographic information on 77 field placements with an average of 11% ethnically diverse students, 47% students on free/reduced lunch, and 10% student with disabilities (based on National Center for Education Statistics and Kentucky Department of Education). This ethnic diversity percentage continues to be well above the average 11% diversity of the schools in the 30+ counties that represent our service area. 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 % 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 19%
69%
10%
47%
65%
19%
8%
6%
10%
6%
13%
History 2010‐11 Page 4 of 7 % 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) 5%
87%
9%
78%
42%
91%
96%
Overall, as can be seen in Table 6, in 91% of their field experiences social studies candidates reported working with at least one student with special needs and in 96% 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 social studies candidates (N = 8). Table 7. Initial Preparation TWS Proficiency Rates Program Social Studies Unit‐Wide % Proficient 100% 94% 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 depicts the percentage of social studies 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. History 2010‐11 Page 5 of 7 Table 8. Initial Preparation TWS Proficiency Rates of Social Studies Candidates Program Social Studies Unit‐Wide CF 88% 96% LG 100% 94% DFI 88% 90% ASL 75% 91% ROT 100% 96% 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 Social Studies Candidates who “Passed” each Teacher Standard Program Social Studies Unit‐Wide 1 50% 80% Kentucky Teacher Standards (Measured by TWS) 3 5 6 7 8 100% 88% 38% 88% 67% 97% 87% 73% 85% 97% 2 100% 93% 9 100% 95% Additionally, all candidates are assessed during their student teaching experience using the Student Teaching Evaluation form. Table 10 reports the percentages of social studies student teachers (N = 15) 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. Social Studies Proficiency Rates by Kentucky Teacher Standards Program Social Studies Unit‐Wide 1 93% 97% 2 87% 91% 3 80% 96% Kentucky Teacher Standards 4 5 6 7 73% 87% 93% 73% 91% 89% 91% 86% 8 80% 94% 9 87% 90% 10 80% 93% 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 2009‐10 academic year (the most recent year with complete data). The last column allows for pass rate comparison of our candidates to our 2009‐10 results. Table 11. Pass Rates on Content Tests for Initial Teacher Preparation Program/Type of Assessment Social Studies Praxis II Test (1) Social Studies Praxis II Test (2) Candidate N (2009‐10) 24 24 WKU Pass Rate (2009‐10) 88% 96% WKU Pass Rate (2008‐09) 84% 94% Annually, the WKU Teacher Survey is sent to student teachers and alumni who potentially have been teaching one or more years. For the 2010‐11 academic year, out of a possible 15 student History 2010‐11 Page 6 of 7 teachers, 10 (67%) completed the survey. Below are the results for social studies student teachers, 10 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 social studies survey results. Table 12. Average Scores on Teacher Standards Questions for Social Studies Respondents Program Social Studies Unit‐Wide 1 2 3 3.05 3.43 3.02 3.41 3.18 3.52 Kentucky Teacher Standards 4 5 6 7 2.84 3.33 2.72 3.23 3.05 3.29 3.37 3.35 8 9 10 2.50 3.14 3.40 3.36 2.68 3.12 Respondents were also able to provide comments if they answered “poor” for any item. Table 13 presents social studies respondent comments. Table 13. Social Studies Respondent Comments Technology is so important, I believe more could be done. I feel like the leadership aspect was very under‐emphasized. I can only recall doing one planned leadership activity and it seemed very downplayed as far as importance. School REALLY look at leadership opportunities so more of these should be provided for students. I do not feel as if the teacher ed program prepared me for anything when it came to standards 2, 4, 5, or 8. Assignments that would have us prepare many actual lessons, make unit plans and design effective instruction that would include 80‐100 students would have been eternally helpful. Also, I feel that since this is what I’m going to be doing my whole life, there should have been more education classes that could better stress the standards I listed above: either that or make the required courses more qualitative. I believe that the those who are involved in education field should be exposed to more real life classroom environments at the beginning of their major so that they are adequately exposed and prepared to deal with relevant classroom issues. I answered poor about time efficiency. I think that WKU could teach education students about doing a lesson for block and normal scheduling better. WKU students would also benefit from occasionally teaching lessons that took the entire time so they understood better the time frames of a classroom. WKU also did not prepare student teachers for communicating with parents. They did not give good ideas of how to keep in contact with parents throughout the year. I felt that the education I got was very paperwork and standards based and I could have used more practical based knowledge. I understand the importance of knowing how to complie with state regulations but there is a practical side to teaching in the classroom as well. I also felt that WKU did a poor job of preparing students who were going to teach outside of the History 2010‐11 Page 7 of 7 state of Kentucky. WKU did do an excellent job, however, in preparing me for disapline issues in the classroom I had Dr. DuCloux and she did an outstanding job. I did not feel very confident in my content area based on the classes I had been instructed to take at Western. I know my content because I love it and choose to study it on my own but as far as the classes require I was required to take I did not feel they ended up being very beneficial. WKU education should be more in touch with the subject matter the students are learning to better align the two majors and programs. 2. Summary of Results by Kentucky Teacher Standards and Other Key Conceptual Framework Values It appears that contextual factors, design for instruction and analysis of student learning were the areas that students were least prepared for as indicated by the TWS as well as by some of the student responses. Still, 100% of social studies students were “proficient’ in initial preparation of TWS. 3. Efforts to Report and Disseminate Results The results will be shared with the department chair within the current school year. 4. Key Discussions and/or Decisions Made Based on Assessment Results a. Assessment or Data Collection Changes Based on Assessment Results We continue to collect assessment data from our capstone course. In response to that we continued to maintain departmental writing standards within the program. b. Program Curriculum or Experiences Changes Based on Assessment Results No changes currently planned. c. Decisions about Group/Individual Student Progress Based on Assessment Results The most recent PRAXIS II results have demonstrated the overall effectiveness of the Social Studies program.