Meeting Date: Thursday, November 15, 2007
PEC Meeting
3:00 P.M.
Minutes
Assessment Design
The Assessment Design flow chart was discussed with particular attention paid to
Transition points:
1. Admission into the program as a transition point. The flow chart indicated that
admission into program will be reviewed by program committee or OPS. OPS doesn’t
know candidates.
2. Faculty members currently fill out recommendations and they go in a file without
having been looked at in many cases. Some programs are reviewing student
credentials and making the recommendations to OPS. It was agreed by consensus that
OPS shouldn’t be the screening place. OPS should only have to make sure that they
are getting the required paperwork for admission to the Teacher Prep Program.
Early-on, the program areas need to establish a process to review the information for
each candidate and make their recommendation to OPS.
It is a requirement that “we” collect and hold program data. In order to fulfill this
requirement program areas must be loading it!
3. Entry into Clinical Experience is another transition point. A program area review of
available data and a recommendation or not to OPS for placement into the clinical
experience should be the result of the review from the program area faculty. Minutes
should be kept of this review process.
The program and unit assessment are currently based on the Conceptual Framework
Standards. The current Conceptual Framework (2002) and Conceptual Framework
Standards (2006) don’t match. A Conceptual Framework Committee is being
formulated to develop a draft of the CF for review by the PEC. This draft should be
ready in early spring for review by the CF.
Further discussion regarding Assessment:
Surveying employers and looking at graduate tests such as Praxis II are requirements
of VITAL and will be implemented to get content assessment at the end of program
and to receive information regarding employer feedback.
2
Applicant qualification data- undergraduate and graduate program areas-should review
the information and then make a recommendation to OPS. Minutes of this process would
qualify as a review.
Key Transition Points Discussion: (Program area meeting to review student progress)
1. Entrance into teacher prep program
2. Midpoint: entry of student teaching faculty agreed too close to being finished
3. Second practicum/entering partnership LSTS
4. Final point- licensure/Praxis
A. Evaluation on student teaching (clinical experience)
B. Praxis II (not required for SPED)
Action Required
Each program area will email a midpoint for their program to Dr. White
Discussion Points
 Requirements for student teaching (natural transition point); currently, these
requirements are not being considered in the data collection process.

Areas need to have a review process (in the flow chart but the information is not
happening).

Quantitative/Qualitative forms - the programs should pick the type of data they want
to have and each program can design what will work best for them.

ADA key attitudes/dispositions that students need to have for the program. Concern
was if the other “gates” were passes for students but we are telling them they don’t
have the dispositions, what justification/documentation/rationale do we have to stand
on?

Must be discussed as a program and the student and should be worked with several
times throughout the program. Still need to review dispositions at the Master’s level.

Some programs have students student teaching currently that are student teaching
without a recommendation from a faculty member from the program.

OPS should receive recommendations from the program area coordinator as the
gatekeeper to the clinical experience. Other program areas not using OPS should
have a similar process in place and keep minutes of the proceedings.
Committee members received web sites for program report information. The PEC agreed
that a Draft of Program Reports would be developed by each program and submitted to
the assessment office by May 15, 2008. The Data points 06-07, Fall 07 would be
3
included in the reports and the draft copy will help us determine what has been changed
and the effect it has had.
Dr. Ballard distributed the Student Teacher Observation Report Form, that were
completed by the University Supervisors during the first clinical placement, to the
Program Area Coordinators. The program area coordinators were advised to use the
information as data points. If they need assistance in creating the set up, they are to
contact Margie Godfrey.
The next meeting date for the committee (unless requested) will be around April 1.