Lamar University



B.S. in Elementary Education (EC-6 Core Subjects)

Annual Program Report Template

|Year: |2016-2017 |

|Program: |B.S. Elementary Education (EC-6 Core Subjects) |

|Contact person: |Dr. |

Summary of Continuous Improvement Efforts Since Last Report

Provide a brief description of how assessment results have been used for program improvement. Point to a specific example of how an assessment provided the program with data it could use for improvement and what that improvement was. If possible, also show evidence of the improvement. You may look at data from the previous two academic years to support this case.

[Response here.]

Program Highlights Since Last Report

Identify and briefly discuss any successes of the program not captured in assessment results (e.g. enrollment trends, recruitment successes, faculty/candidate/completer accomplishments).

[Response here.]

STANDARD 1 – Content Knowledge and Pedagogical

STANDARD 2 – Clinical Partnerships and Practice

STANDARD 3 – Candidate Quality, Recruitment, and Selectivity

STANDARD 4 – Program Impact

Table 1. Assessment Results and Analyses for Current Cycle

|Stage 1: PLAN |Stage 2: DO |Stage 3: STUDY |

|Departmental Student Learning |Program Student Learning |Assessment |Assessment Method/Location |Benchmark Expectations |Data Results |Actions/Goals Based on Data Results* |

|Goal |Outcome | | | | |What do the data tell you? How will you use |

| | | | | | |these data? How were data from the last |

| | | | | | |cycle used to make changes during this |

| | | | | | |cycle, and what were the results of those |

| | | | | | |changes? |

|Knowledge of content II |Assessment of knowledge of |TExES Teacher |Standardized Exam/ Office of |Minimum | | |

| |content shown through the |Certification Exam: EC-6 |Field Experiences |80% | | |

| |state licensure exam |Core Subjects Content Exam|Gayle Butaud |of graduates pass TExES | | |

| | |#291 | |Pedagogy | | |

| | | | |Knowledge | | |

| | | | |Certification exam on first | | |

| | | | |attempt | | |

| | | | |Average Score - | | |

|Knowledge of content III |Candidates course grades show |Course grades for the |ARGOS |Minimum GPA of 3.2 in | | |

| |their knowledge of both |following courses: | |education courses and | | |

| |pedagogy, as well as content |PEDG 3300 | |certification content | | |

| |of subject taught |PEDG 3332 | |courses | | |

| | |PEDG 3350 | | | | |

| | |PEDG 3351 | | | | |

| | |PEDG 3352 | | | | |

| | |PEDG 4340 | | | | |

| | |PEDG 4350 | | | | |

| | |PEDG 4380 | | | | |

| | |EACH 4303 | | | | |

| | |EACH 4305 | | | | |

| | |READ 3390 | | | | |

| | |READ 3393 | | | | |

| | |READ 4305 | | | | |

| | |PEDG 46XX | | | | |

|Ability to formulate and |Assessment demonstrates |Unit Plan |Scored Rubric/TK20 |Minimum 85% of scored | | |

|implement appropriate lesson |candidates can effectively |PEDG 3350, 3351, 3352 | |rubrics at Competent level | | |

|plans |plan classroom-based | | | | | |

| |instruction | | | | | |

|Ability to positively impact |Assessment demonstrates |Goldbeck’s PEDG 4340 | | | | |

|P-12 student learning |candidates' are able to |Assessment Project (?) | | | | |

| |increase student learning |NO LONGER COLLECTING THIS | | | | |

| |through their use of knowledge| | | | | |

| |of content and pedagogical | | | | | |

| |skills. | | | | | |

|Field experience piece |Candidates exit program |NTACT field Observation | | | | |

| |prepared in the areas of : |(?) | | | | |

| |1) Planning and Preparation, |Clinical Teaching | | | | |

| |2) Classroom Environment, 3) |TK20 | | | | |

| |Instruction, and | | | | | |

| |4) Professionalism. Content | | | | | |

|Evaluation OF Cooperating | School based supervisors | |Office of Field Experiences | | | |

|Teacher |(Cooperating Teachers) are | |Gayle Butaud | | | |

| |competent in regards to their | | | | | |

| |professional relationship with| | | | | |

| |teacher candidates | | | | | |

|Evaluation OF University |Provider based supervisors | |Office of Field Experiences | | | |

|Supervisor |(University Supervisors) are | |Gayle Butaud | | | |

| |competent in regards to their| | | | | |

| |professional relationship with| | | | | |

| |teacher candidates | | | | | |

|Admission Data |The admitted pool of |GPA |Texas State Report |3.2 GPA upon admission into |N=26 | |

| |candidates reflects the | |Provided by Megan Hale, |program |3.2 | |

| |diversity of America’s P-12 | |Coordinator or Admissions | | | |

| |students | | | | | |

|Field Experience/Student |The provider demonstrates |Placement Data |Office of Field Experiences | | | |

|Teaching Placement |efforts to know and address | |Gayle Butaud | | | |

| |community, state, national, | | | | | |

| |regional, or local needs for | | | | | |

| |hard-to-staff schools and | | | | | |

| |shortage fields. | | | | | |

|Dispositions Piece |Candidates | | | | | |

| |should demonstrate beliefs | | | | | |

| |deemed essential for effective| | | | | |

| |educators | | | | | |

| |and to conduct themselves at | | | | | |

| |all times in a professional | | | | | |

| |manner | | | | | |

|Follow-Up Data I |The provider demonstrates that| | | | | |

| |completers effectively apply | | | | | |

| |the professional knowledge, | | | | | |

| |skills, and dispositions that | | | | | |

| |the preparation experiences | | | | | |

| |were designed to achieve. | | | | | |

|Follow-Up Data II |The provider demonstrates | | | | | |

| |through milestones such as | | | | | |

| |promotion and retention, that | | | | | |

| |employers are satisfied with | | | | | |

| |the completers’ preparation | | | | | |

| |for their assigned | | | | | |

| |responsibilities in working | | | | | |

| |with P-12 students. | | | | | |

|Follow-up Data III |The provider demonstrates that| | | | | |

| |program completers perceive | | | | | |

| |their preparation as relevant | | | | | |

| |to the responsibilities they | | | | | |

| |confront on the job, and that | | | | | |

| |the preparation was effective.| | | | | |

|P-12 Student Impact I |The provider documents that | | | | | |

|(value-added measures) |program completers contribute | | | | | |

| |to an expected level of | | | | | |

| |student-learning growth. | | | | | |

|P-12 Student Impact II |The provider documents that | | | | | |

|(student-growth percentiles) |program completers contribute | | | | | |

| |to an expected level of | | | | | |

| |student-learning growth. | | | | | |

Table 2. Continuous Improvement Results Since Last Report

|Stage 4: ACT |

|Actions/Goals Based on Data Results |Status |Discussion of Status |

|*Copy last cycle’s actions/goals and report on progress toward continuous improvement on |C = Complete |If C, describe efforts that led to accomplishment of actions/goals. |

|those here. |P = Progressing |If P, provide update on progress made toward accomplishing actions/goals and what tasks |

| |N = No action taken |remain. |

| | |If N, discuss why action toward accomplishing action/goal has been delayed and what work |

| | |will be initiated toward accomplishment. |

| | | |

| | | |

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download