The unit maintains an assessment system that provides regular and comprehensive information on applicant qualifications, candidate proficiencies, competencies of graduates, unit operations, and program quality. Using multiple assessments from internal and external sources, the unit collects data from applicants, candidates, recent graduates, faculty, and other members of the professional community. The unit maintains a record of formal candidate complaints and documentation of their resolution. These data are regularly and systematically compiled, summarized, and analyzed to improve candidate performance, program quality, and unit operations. The unit maintains its assessment system through the use of information technologies.
Initial Programs
As the assessment system has been implemented, processes have been developed for collecting, analyzing, and reporting data on initial candidate performance, program effectiveness, and unit operations. Data from initial candidate assessments are a major source of information for program assessment. The assessment of initial candidate performance, program efficacy, and unit operation is coordinated through the offices of the Education Department and the Dean of Professional and Graduate Studies. Aggregating and summarizing of data are major responsibilities. Although these offices provide direction and support for the assessment program, the faculty as members of Gateway Committees, Education Department, and Teacher Education Committee (Unit), are responsible for implementing, utilizing, and refining the assessment systems in individual courses and programs. An example of the Dean’s responsibilities is collecting and summarizing departmental reports and institutional data into reports such as the Institutional Report Card for NDE, and for accreditation processes such as National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE) and Higher Learning Commission (HLC). Examples of the Education Department’s responsibilities are aggregating and submitting Teacher Intern Checklist data, Teacher Work Sample data (TWS, Rubric), and follow-up survey data to the appropriate Gateway Committee, Education Department, and/or Teacher Education Unit. Gateway Committees are responsible for reviewing data; making curricular or procedural changes; or recommending curricular or procedural changes to the Education Department and/or Teacher Education Committee, as appropriate. Gateway committees generally function at a horizontal, formative level in the assessment system. They provide information to the vertical, summative entities of the assessment system, such as the Education Dept. and Education Unit. The Education Dept. and/or Education Unit gather information, facilitate communication, and make recommendations that involve the entire Unit to appropriate policymaking bodies. The CSC Teacher Education Unit Assessment Plan Summary (Table 2.1) briefly describes the data collection, aggregation, analysis, and reporting functions of the Gateway Committees, the Education Department, the Teacher Education Unit, and other appropriate CSC institutional governance bodies. A full description of the unit assessment plan may be found in the "CSC Teacher Education Unit Assessment Plan" (Complete plan available in Documents Center).
Data are collected on a regular basis from both internal and external sources. Table 2.2 Sources of Data for Initial Programs provides a sample of selected sources. Detailed description of data collected at each program gateway is provided in the CSC Teacher Education Unit Assessment Plan (Complete plan available in Documents Center).
Table 2.1: Chadron State College Teacher Education Unit Assessment Plan Summary
Gateways Aggregation Feedback Loops
|
Prior to and During Gateway |
Formative |
Summative |
|||
|
Under-graduate Gateways |
Components |
Data Collection (Responsible Person/Office) |
Individual Student/ Candidate Decisions |
Ongoing decisions (Gateway Level Team) |
Policy, Procedures & Curricular Decisions (Gateway Level Team &/or Vertical Body) |
|
Gateway 1 |
ACT data |
Institutional Research Office |
Admission requirements only |
no |
Yes (annually) |
|
Gateway 2 |
Observation verification report |
Field Experience Office/GA |
Yes (during Intro to Teaching) |
Yes (each semester & annually) |
Yes (each semester) |
|
Gateway 3 |
Application data PPST O & P exit interview and O & P cooperating teacher evaluation |
Field Experience Office |
Yes (prior) Yes (After -- grade) |
Yes (each semester & annually) |
Yes (annually) Yes (annually) |
|
Gateway 4a |
GPA, coursework requirements, portfolio, faculty recommendations, departmental recommendation Candidate performance & disposition evaluation Candidate evaluation of STS |
Field Experience Office Elementary & Secondary Block Teams Block Teams |
Yes (prior) Yes (during) Yes (during) |
Yes (each semester & annually) Yes (each semester & annually) Yes (each semester & annually) |
Yes Each semester & annually Yes (each semester & annually) Yes (each semester & annually) |
|
Gateway 4b |
GPA Teacher Intern Checklists, TWS, guidebook, elementary checklist |
Field Experience Office Field Experience Office |
Yes (prior) Yes (prior, during & after) |
Yes (each semester & annually) |
Yes (each semester & annually) |
|
Gateway 5 |
GPA Program requirements |
Field Experience Office |
Yes (prior) |
Yes (each semester & annually) |
Yes (annually) |
|
Follow Up |
Follow up Studies |
Field Experience Office |
no |
Yes (annually) |
Yes (annually) |
For complete detail of each cell see "Chadron State College Teacher Education Unit Assessment Plan."
|
Type of Data |
Frequency of Collection |
Collected from Whom |
|
Candidate and Graduate Data |
||
|
Teacher education admission |
Each semester |
Candidates applying for admission to teacher education |
|
Conceptual framework |
Each semester |
Candidates and graduates @ various gateway points (portfolios, teacher intern checklists, follow up surveys, TWS) |
|
Evaluation of candidate field experiences |
Fall semester |
Faculty and PK-12 supervisors and administrators, and candidates |
|
Evaluation of faculty and courses |
Each semester |
Candidates enrolled |
|
Follow-up survey of graduates and employers |
Annually |
Initial program completers and employers |
|
College sources of data include |
||
|
Evaluation of faculty |
Annually |
Dean, VPAA, President |
|
Dean Evaluation |
Annually |
VPAA, President |
|
Review of the Education Department and Teacher Education Unit goals |
Annually |
Dean of Professional and Graduate Studies, Education Dept, faculty, and Teacher Education Unit Faculty |
|
College-wide assessment of programs |
Annually |
Office of Educational Research |
|
Data are also collected from local advisory groups |
||
|
Field experiences and program |
Annually |
Western NE Administrators, Highway 20 Administrators, cooperating teachers |
|
External sources of data include |
||
|
Evaluation of candidate and graduate performance @ various gateway points & individual courses |
Each semester |
P-12 cooperating teachers, administrators, and employers |
|
Program content, assessments, and procedures |
Every 5 years |
NDE, National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education |
|
Program content, assessments, and procedures |
Every 10 years |
Higher Learning Commission (North Central) |
Once formal and informal data are collected, various groups review, tabulate, and
summarize the data. The gathering of data occurs under the supervision of the Dean of Professional and Graduate Studies. The data go through collective evaluation, interpretation, and summarization by the applicable committees (Gateway Committees, Education Department, and Teacher Education Unit Committee) with the Education Department having the primary responsibility for the tabulation and analysis of data for initial programs.
Examples of others who assist with data tabulation and/or analysis include:
• General Studies Committee
• Academic Review Committee
• Institutional Research Office
Summarized data descriptions are generated by Education department faculty or content area departments. Once summary data are available, departments identify strengths and weaknesses that need to be addressed. The department proposes changes to be made within a course, field experience, or other "in-house" requirements. Such things as adding new courses, deleting existing courses, modifying program admission or exit requirements, and adding new programs require review of appropriate advisory committees, administrative entities and governing bodies. During the review process, NCATE Standards and accreditation requirements, INTASC and other professional society principles, NDE and national content area standards, Higher Learning Commission (formerly North Central Association) requirements, and specialty organization accreditation requirements are considered. Alignment with standards and requirements are validated in this process. Initial program change/approval follows the required governance structure of the unit and college as described in Standard 6.
Advanced Programs
Assessment of candidate performance, program efficacy, and Unit operation for
advanced programs is coordinated through the Education Department; Psychology, Counseling and Social Work Department; and Dean of Professional and Graduate Studies offices and follows much the same pattern as that of initial programs. Some data and administrative sequence are different from that of initial programs. Data on the advanced candidates are regularly collected, compiled, analyzed, and reported to improve candidate performance, program quality, and Unit operations. The focus of the ongoing assessments is to determine whether advanced candidates are being prepared in their educational disciplines. The procedures for collecting, analyzing, and utilizing data for Advanced Programs are briefly outlined in the CSC Teacher Education Unit Advanced Programs Assessment Plan Summary (Table 2.3) Full description of the advanced programs assessment plan may be found in the "CSC Teacher Education Unit Advanced Programs Assessment Plan." (Complete plan available in the Documents Center.) Selected sources and methods of these assessments including:
Gateways Aggregation Feedback Loops
|
Prior to and During Gateway |
Formative |
Summative |
|||
|
Graduate Gateways |
Components Specialist program additional requirements (italics) |
Data Collection (Responsible Person/Office) |
Individual Student/ Candidate Decisions |
Ongoing decisions (Gateway Level Team) |
Policy, Procedures & Curricular Decisions (Gateway Level Team &/or Vertical Body) |
|
Gateway 1 |
Application data Initial interview |
Graduate Office |
Admission requirements only |
Yes (annually) |
Yes (annually) |
|
Gateway 2 |
GPA Plan of Study |
Graduate Office |
Yes |
Yes (each semester & annually) |
Yes (annually) |
|
Gateway 3 |
GPA Practicum data |
Graduate Office Practicum Instructor |
Yes Yes |
Yes (each semester & annually) Yes (each semester & annually) |
Yes (annually) Yes (annually) |
|
Gateway 4 |
GPA, program requirements, portfolio, oral exam, Exit reflections, scholarly projects, theses, field studies, and comprehensive written exams. |
Graduate Office |
Yes (prior) Yes (prior) |
Yes (each semester & annually) Yes (each semester & annually) |
Yes (annually) Yes (annually) |
|
Follow Up |
Follow up studies |
Graduate Office |
No |
Yes (annually) |
Yes (annually) |
For complete detail of each cell see "Chadron State College Teacher Education Unit Advanced Programs Assessment Plan.
Assessment Category – Advanced Candidate Data: Advanced candidate evaluations of the faculty and classes, including those completed on-line, are obtained through standardized teaching evaluations. The evaluation is administered in the fall semester. Administration representatives administer these evaluations to candidates each semester. Surveys of advanced candidates occur every year. These groups provide data to the Graduate Council and departments for program review and evaluation.
Assessment Category – Performance Data: Classroom assessment of candidates’ academic performance enables faculty to continually assess and revise program standards. Practica and internships enable candidates to demonstrate achievement of program outcomes. Feedback about the advanced programs is continually provided and received from candidates, field-based supervisors and employers. Comprehensive examinations, portfolios, and final projects and/or theses are required of advanced candidates. The exams or research-based projects assess the candidates’ knowledge of content, skills and in some cases dispositions across the scope of the advanced curriculum. Placement of graduates in their appropriate teaching, administrative, and counseling areas is perhaps the most significant indicator of successful performance of an advanced program.
Assessment Category – Other Data: The Graduate Council and academic departments primarily govern the quality of advanced programs at Chadron State College. Members of the Graduate Council meet monthly to discuss advanced program concerns, vote on changes in advanced programs, and provide quality control to all advanced programs. Annual reports and reviews from each department and the college provide information about the number of candidates in various programs, the number of graduates from these programs, and the success of each of these units related to specific yearly goals. The gathering of data occurs under the supervision of the Dean's office of Professional and Graduate Studies. Once formal and informal data are collected, data go through collective evaluation, interpretation, and summarization by appropriate Gateway Committees. The Gateway Committees are responsible for: 1) making course level and specific program changes, 2) reporting data summaries and recommending program changes to appropriate academic department(s) and 3) reporting to Graduate Council concerning program changes that require their action. Graduate Council includes representatives of advanced education and school counseling programs from across campus and candidates. Others that assist with data tabulation and analysis include the Institutional Research Office. Once summary data are available, departments identify strengths and weaknesses that need to be addressed. The departments and Graduate Council propose changes to be made within a course, program, field experience, or other "in-house" requirements. Such things as adding new courses, deleting existing courses, program admission or exit requirements, and adding new programs require review of appropriate committees. During the review process, NCATE Standards and accreditation requirements, Nebraska Department of Education and national content area standards, Higher Learning Commission (formerly North Central Association) requirements, and specialty organization accreditation requirements are considered. Alignment with applicable state and national standards and requirements are validated in this process. Advanced program change/approval follows the required governance structure of the unit and college as described in Standard 6.