Exhibit 2.4.g.10 Art Education BS Comprehensive Data Analysis Report (DAR) Summary 2011-2013
AY11:
1. Have the change(s) in response to data that you documented last year had the desired effect on
your program? Please provide specifics referencing prior changes that you submitted in [AY
2008-2009].
Absolutely. First of all, during the spring student teaching semester our number of respondents
increased from14 (out of 23) interns to 23 (out of 29) interns so we are improving in regard to
participation. We value the collection of these data as we strive to make our students the most well
prepared future art teachers in the state.
2. What significant findings emerge from your examination of these data?
In regard to the scores for the INTASC Principles, the Internship Experiences and the Summary Items, the
ARED undergraduate program improved in every single area.
Our Overall Mean went from a 4.46 to a 4.67. In the area of working with learners with Special Needs in
a Pre-internship Opp. our improvement was significant going from 4.07 to 4.35 and even stronger for
the Final Intern Opp. from 4.36 to a 4.70.
In 2010/2011 we continued our partnership with the Abilities Network and began working with Towson
University’s Center for Adults with Autism as we address the needs of learners with special needs in an
intentional way. We have given our students expanded exposure to art education experts in this field
and more opportunities to work with special needs children.
3. How have you involved faculty in your identification of the implications of these data?
We have had mandatory regular art education meetings every Monday afternoon with all professors
who teach the regular coursework to address implications of the data. We discussed the issues of
addressing the needs of gifted and talented students in a more intentional way and also the need to
address the need to re-teach the developmental levels of children before sending our students out to
student teach. We have instituted many changes in the art education curriculum and strategies for
controlling our numbers. Some of our changes are as a result of changes within the art department
foundations curriculum as well as university wide changes.
4. What specific actions will you take in response to these data?
Keep at it and do not become complacent because of our strong scores.
AY12:
1. Have the change(s) in response to data that you documented last year had the desired effect on
your program? Please provide specifics referencing prior changes that you submitted in [AY
2011-2012].
Yes. Last year we noted that our students could benefit from reinforcement in knowledge and skills in
child development. We continued to cover child development and learning theories in our Media and
Techniques class and then expanded that information in Elementary and Secondary Methods and in
Professional Seminar. Our students reported that they felt well prepared in knowing what
developmentally appropriate materials, skills and processes should be considered when teaching
children ages PK -12.
2. What significant findings emerge from your examination of these data?
During the spring student teaching semester our number of respondents was 17 out of 32 student
interns. We value the collection of these data as we strive to make our students the most well prepared
future art teachers in the state. Regarding the INTASC standards, all of our scores were high with out
lowest score being 4.18 under Collaboration with Resource Personnel to Support Learners. The next
lowest score was 4.41 and higher. The Mean score for ARED was 4.65. Our highest score was a perfect
5.00 under Learning Styles and Diversity under the area of Multicultural Perspective.
In regard to Internship Experiences and the Capstone Internship Experiences our scores are quite high in
all areas but our lowest scores were in the areas of providing opportunities to differentiate instruction
and work effectively with English Language Learners (ELL) and in the area of providing opportunities to
differentiate instruction and work effectively with gifted and talented learners. In the summary ARED
scored a 4.65 in Effective overall preparation for 1st year of teaching and a 4.59 in Education advisor
was a valuable resource.
3. How have you involved faculty in your identification of the implications of these data?
We have had mandatory regular art education meetings every Tuesday afternoon with all professors
who teach the regular coursework to address implications of the data. We discussed the issues of
addressing the needs of working with ELL and gifted and talented students in a more intentional way
and also the steps needed to address the re-teach the developmental levels of children before sending
our students out to student teach. We have instituted many changes in the art education curriculum
and strategies for controlling our numbers although it is difficult with many qualified applicants. Some
of our changes continue to be a result of changes within the art department curriculum as well as
university wide changes.
4. What specific actions will you take in response to these data?
We are always striving to improve our practice and our pedagogy. We are committed to stay abreast of
current issues and practices in art education and know that we must not become complacent because of
our strong overall scores.
AY13:
1. Have the change(s) in response to data that you documented last year had the desired effect on
your program? Please provide specifics referencing prior changes that you submitted in [AY
2011-2012].
Yes. Last year we noted that our students could benefit from reinforcement in knowledge and skills in
child development. We continued to cover child development and learning theories in our Media and
Techniques class and then expanded that information in Elementary and Secondary Methods and in
Professional Seminar. Our students reported that they felt well prepared in knowing what
developmentally appropriate materials, skills and processes should be considered when teaching
children ages PK -12.
2. What significant findings emerge from your examination of these data?
During the spring student teaching semester our number of respondents was 17 out of 32 student
interns. We value the collection of these data as we strive to make our students the most well prepared
future art teachers in the state. Regarding the INTASC standards, all of our scores were high with out
lowest score being 4.18 under Collaboration with Resource Personnel to Support Learners. The next
lowest score was 4.41 and higher. The Mean score for ARED was 4.65. Our highest score was a perfect
5.00 under Learning Styles and Diversity under the area of Multicultural Perspective.
In regard to Internship Experiences and the Capstone Internship Experiences our scores are quite high
in all areas but our lowest scores were in the areas of providing opportunities to differentiate instruction
and work effectively with English Language Learners (ELL) and in the area of providing opportunities to
differentiate instruction and work effectively with gifted and talented learners. In the program
evaluation summary ARED scored a 4.65 in Effective overall preparation for 1st year of teaching and a
4.59 in Education advisor was a valuable resource.
3. How have you involved faculty in your identification of the implications of these data?
We have had mandatory regular art education meetings every Tuesday afternoon with all professors
who teach the regular coursework to address implications of the data. We discussed the issues of
addressing the needs of working with ELL and gifted and talented students in a more intentional way
and also the steps needed to address the re-teach the developmental levels of children before sending
our students out to student teach. We have instituted many changes in the art education curriculum
and strategies for controlling our numbers although it is difficult with many qualified applicants. Some
of our changes continue to be a result of changes within the art department curriculum as well as
university wide changes.
4. What specific actions will you take in response to these data?
We are always striving to improve our practice and our pedagogy. We are committed to stay abreast of
current issues and practices in art education and know that we must not become complacent because of
our strong overall scores.