Interdisciplinary Early Childhood Education IECE – Initial Preparation

advertisement

Interdisciplinary Early Childhood Education IECE 2009-10 Page 1 of 8

1.

Interdisciplinary Early Childhood Education IECE – Initial Preparation

Annual Program Report

Academic Year 2009-10

October 30, 2010

Continuous Assessment Results

a.

Admission Data

Table 1 provides the average admission test scores and admission grade point average (GPA) of

Interdisciplinary Early Childhood Education (IECE) 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.

Program

ACT

Table 1. Approved Candidate Test Score Averages

PPST

Math

PPST

Reading

PPST

Writing

SAT

GRE

Composite

Admission

GPA

IECE

N

Mean

7

22

N

Mean

1

177

N

Mean

1

180

N

Mean

1

173

N

Mean

N

Mean

N

Mean

10

3.29

b.

Course Based Assessment Data

Table 2 provides the percentage of IECE candidates (N = 43) 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

IECE 321

IECE 322

IECE 325

IECE 421

IECE 422

EXED 330

EXED 419

EXED 422

EXED 432

EDU 489

LTCY 310

LME 318

Grand Total 1

20

11

32

61

14

100

55

63

60

100

32

56

13

47

68

39

86

45

38

20

100

68

33

88

53

Interdisciplinary Early Childhood Education IECE 2009-10 Page 2 of 8

Table 3 indicates the level of IECE candidate (N = 43) 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, IECE candidates are typically performing above average.

Table 3. Percent of IECE Candidates Scoring Proficient on CPs by KTS

IECE

Program

1

100

2

100

Student ID

3

99

1

Kentucky Teacher Standards

4 5 6 7

100 100

2

99 99

8

99

Student Count

9

95

10

100

Unit-Wide 98

98 97 96 98 98 98 98 97

97

*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 IECE candidates (N = 2) who have scored 2 or lower (below proficiency) on critical performances during this academic year.

Table 4. IECE Candidates Scoring Below Proficient on CPs

Score

800503644 1 1

800507077 1 1

Grand Total 2 2

c.

Clinical Experiences Data

The Interdisciplinary Early Childhood Education program uses the following courses and experiences to evaluate candidate dispositions: admission to teacher education, prior to student teaching, and upon program exit. The program has identified the following courses and experiences where candidates report the diversity of their field experiences: IECE 421. IECE

421 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 IECE candidates performed on dispositions as they entered and progressed through their program (N =14) and during their student teaching experience (N = 14). Students are considered “proficient” who average at 3 or higher on each disposition category.

Table 5. IECE Proficiency Rates on Unit-Wide Dispositions

Period

Prior to Student Teaching

Values

Learning

100

WKU Professional Education Dispositions

Values Personal

Integrity

Values

Diversity

Values

Collaboration

100 100 100

Values

Professionalism

100

During Student Teaching

100 100 100 100 100

Interdisciplinary Early Childhood Education IECE 2009-10 Page 3 of 8

Over this academic year, IECE candidates (N = 2) reported demographic information on 2 field placements with an average of 2% ethnically diverse students, 59

% students on free/reduced lunch, and

18

% 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

% 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

50

50

50

100

50

% Candidates working with Students with Special Needs (Aggregate) 100

% Candidates working with Diverse Students (Aggregate) 50

Overall, as can be seen in Table 6, in 100% of their field experiences IECE candidates reported working with at least one student with special needs and in 50% 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,

Interdisciplinary Early Childhood Education IECE 2009-10 Page 4 of 8

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 Interdisciplinary Early Childhood Education candidates (N = 19).

Table 7. Initial Preparation TWS Proficiency Rates

Program % Proficient

IECE

Unit-Wide

100

100

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 IECE candidates who averaged at least 2.5 on the indicators for each

TWS Factor: CF – Contextual Factors, LG – Learning Goals, AP – Assessment Plan, DFI – Design for Instruction, IDM – Instructional Decision Making, ASL – Analysis of Student Learning, and

RSE – Reflection and Self-Evaluation.

Table 8. Initial Preparation TWS Proficiency Rates of IECE Candidates

Program

CF LG

Teacher Work Sample Components

AP DFI IDM ASL RSE

IECE

Unit-Wide

100

96

100

98

89

91

100

98

95

94

95

87

100

93

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 IECE Candidates who “Passed” each Teacher Standard

Program

IECE

Unit-Wide

1

100

97

Kentucky Teacher Standards (Measured by TWS)

2 4 5 6 7

100

98

95

95

89

90

95

96

100

95

9

100

91

Additionally, all candidates are assessed during their student teaching experience using the

Student Teaching Evaluation form. Table 10 reports the percentages of IECE student teachers

(N = 14) 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.

Interdisciplinary Early Childhood Education IECE 2009-10 Page 5 of 8

Program

9 10

IECE

Unit-Wide

93

94

100

89

100

93

100

88

86

84

100

94

100

86

93

92

100

95

93

88

e.

Exit and Follow Up Data

During the fall of 2006, EPSB suspended the use of the IECE Specialty Exam, which had until that point been administered to all IECE students prior to certification. The EPSB formed a field panel of experts who designed a test and a standard setting study was completed during the summer of 2008. Beginning spring of 2009, the new test was administered and new cut off scores determined. The test will continue to be administered through December of 2010 with no minimum cut off score and beginning January 2011 a minimum 166 will be required.

Annually, the WKU Teacher Survey is sent to student teachers and alumni who potentially have been teaching one or more years. For the 2009-10 academic year, out of a possible 419 student teachers 410 (98%) completed the survey; out of a possible 1521 alumni, 217 (14%) completed the survey. Below are the results for Elementary Education student teachers and alumni, 283 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 IECE survey results.

Table 12. Average Scores on Teacher Standards Questions for IECE Respondents

Program

1 2 3

Kentucky Teacher Standards

4 5 6 7 8 9 10 tch exp

IECE

Unit-Wide

3.39 3.38 3.64

3.34 3.33 3.54

3.52

3.48

3.23

3.20

Respondents were also able to provide comments if they answered “poor” for any item. Table

13 presents IECE respondent comments by years of experience (0 = Student Teaching).

Table 13. IECE Respondent Comments

Comments

3.40

3.30

3.25

3.29

3.42

3.10

3.37

3.32

3.09

3.10

0 Give more practical hands-on experiences, discuss in greater length/depth in class, give examples.

0

Table 10. IECE Proficiency Rates by Kentucky Teacher Standards

1 2 3

Kentucky Teacher Standards

4 5 6 7 8

IECE majors need to have a class relating to RTI. IECE majors are not prepared for a kindergarten classroom and they should be.

2. Summary of Results by Kentucky Teacher Standards and Other Key Conceptual Framework

Values

Overall, from the data collected pertaining to student performance on the KY Teacher

Standards and the IECE Teacher Standards, the students in the IECE Undergraduate initial

Interdisciplinary Early Childhood Education IECE 2009-10 Page 6 of 8

preparation program are performing very well. Graduates from our IECE program are qualified and eligible for certification for working with young children, both with and without disabilities and their families from birth through five years of age. Our students are sought after in the region’s school districts as well as by First Steps, Kentucky’s Early Intervention System for the state. WKU IECE graduates have a reputation of being well prepared.

Our graduates are performing well on the critical performance indicators and program staff will continue to monitor and update those critically performance expectations to meet current research and best practices in the field of early childhood special education.

Table 14 below illustrates the relationship between the KY Teacher Standards and IECE Teacher

Standards. IECE graduates are expected to demonstrate mastery of both the KY as well as the

IECE Teacher Standards.

Table 14 Comparison of IECE and Kentucky Teacher Standards

IECE Teacher Standards KY Teacher Standards

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

Designs and Plans Instruction

Creates Maintains Environments

Implements Instruction

Communicates Learning Results

Reflects Evaluates Professional

Practices

Collaborates with Colleagues, Families,

Others

Engages in Professional Development

Supports Families

9.

Demonstrates Implementation of

Technology

10.

Provides Leadership within School,

Community, Profession

2

3

4

5

7

8

9

6

10

Referring back to Table 3, graduates from WKU's Interdisciplinary Early Childhood Education

(IECE) initial preparation programs score proficient or higher on 5 out of 10 KY Teacher

Standards, 97% on 3 standards, 99 % on 4 standards and 95% on 1 standard. When results from

IECE students are compared unit wide, IECE graduates are performing above on 9 out of 10 standards and 2% below on one standard related to professional development. IECE program faculty will continue to monitor assessment data and determine if changes are needed.

During the 2009 - 10 academic year, disposition data were collected on students prior to student teaching. 100% of IECE students demonstrated WKU professional education dispositions. During student teaching, students were evaluated again and all dispositions were demonstrated at proficiency.

Interdisciplinary Early Childhood Education IECE 2009-10 Page 7 of 8

By referring back to Table 7, 100% of IECE teacher candidates demonstrated proficiency on the

TWS. Looking at individual components of the TWS provides information for IECE faculty. IECE candidates demonstrate proficiency levels above the unit on 6 of the 7 components. Data indicate that IECE candidates perform below unit standards on 1 of the 7 components: assessment plan.

Reviewing data collected during student teaching on proficiency rates related to KTS, IECE student teachers received ratings between 86% – 100%. Looking at overall standard performance, IECE candidates were rated as proficient on 5/10 of the teacher standards.

Candidates received a proficiency score of 93% on 3 standards: content knowledge, collaboration and leadership. The lowest rated standard was related to assessment and evaluation.

By referring back to Table 12 results from the teacher survey on standards, IECE graduates reported “good” preparation on 10/10 standards, with scores ranging between 3.09 and 3.64

Both the Student teaching evaluation and student teacher evaluation are written based on the

Kentucky Teacher Standards. The IECE program is developed based on the KY IECE teacher standards. Faculty have developed and are utilizing a crosswalk between the two sets of standards in hopes reducing confusion for candidates and cooperating teachers as they complete evaluations.

3.

Efforts to Report and Disseminate Results

IECE program faculty meets on a regular basis during fall and spring semesters of each academic year to review and analyze program area assessment results. One faculty member has been responsible for undergraduate program area assessment and coordination of data within the program since 2008. This “Data Collection Coordinator” reports to the IECE faculty on issues pertaining to program assessment; needed changes; data required from each course; and on overall program assessment matters. In addition, the Data Collection Coordinator prepares the Unit Action Plan data and related NCATE documents. All reports are reviewed by

IECE program faculty before submitting to the department head and other responsible parties within the college and university. Each year, program assessment data is reviewed and evaluated for information which warrants program changes and course modification.

Besides sharing of program assessment results within the IECE program, results are disseminated to the IECE advisory board. The IECE advisory board is comprised of faculty members who teach courses within the IECE program from related disciplines (e.g., Psychology,

Communication Disorders, and Social Work) as well as field experts and parents of children with disabilities. Feedback is solicited from this advisory board in regard to additional modifications or changes to the IECE program.

Interdisciplinary Early Childhood Education IECE 2009-10 Page 8 of 8

4. Key Discussions and/or Decisions Made Based on Assessment Results

a.

Assessment or Data Collection Changes Based on Assessment Results b.

IECE program faculty will consider data collection of diversity and dispositions data beyond IECE 421.

Program Curriculum or Experiences Changes Based on Assessment Results

As a result of data collected during the 2008-2009 cycle, modifications in presentation of TWS content and related experiences was included with the 2009 – 2010 cohort of

IECE candidates. Specifically, discussion board assignments and think pair shares have provided opportunities for candidates to give and receive feedback on individual TWS components and making appropriate modifications.

c.

Decisions about Group/Individual Student Progress Based on Assessment Results

Comparing data from 2008–2009 and 2009-2010 cohorts indicate an increase in TWS scores, specifically in Assessment plan, analysis of student learning and reflection and self evaluation. The table below compares scores on these specific components from both cohorts.

IECE Candidates

08-09

AP

67%

ASL

50%

RSE

58%

09-10

89% 95% 100%

As data indicate, instructional modifications in presentation and activities related to the

TWS appear to have an impact on overall student performance. Curricular changes mentioned in section b above, will be continued through this next academic year as well and results analyzed.

Download