Degree Program Assessment Reports : View Reports

Unit: Institute for Teacher Education
Program: Education: Teaching (MEdT)
Degree: Master's
Date: Fri Nov 16, 2018 - 1:38:01 pm

1) Program Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs) and Institutional Learning Objectives (ILOs)

1. Standard 1: Learner Development

(1. Demonstrate comprehensive knowledge in one or more general subject areas related to, but not confined to, a specific area of interest., 2. Demonstrate understanding of research methodology and techniques specific to one’s field of study., 4. Critically analyze, synthesize, and utilize information and data related to one’s field of study.)

2. Standard 2: Learning Differences

3. Standard 3: Learning Environment

4. Standard 4: Content Knowledge

5. Standard 5: Application of Content

(3. Apply research methodology and/or scholarly inquiry techniques specific to one’s field of study., 4. Critically analyze, synthesize, and utilize information and data related to one’s field of study.)

6. Standard 6: Assessment

(1. Demonstrate comprehensive knowledge in one or more general subject areas related to, but not confined to, a specific area of interest., 2. Demonstrate understanding of research methodology and techniques specific to one’s field of study., 3. Apply research methodology and/or scholarly inquiry techniques specific to one’s field of study., 4. Critically analyze, synthesize, and utilize information and data related to one’s field of study.)

7. Standard 7: Planning for Instruction

(1. Demonstrate comprehensive knowledge in one or more general subject areas related to, but not confined to, a specific area of interest., 2. Demonstrate understanding of research methodology and techniques specific to one’s field of study., 3. Apply research methodology and/or scholarly inquiry techniques specific to one’s field of study., 4. Critically analyze, synthesize, and utilize information and data related to one’s field of study.)

8. Standard 8: Instructional Strategies

(1. Demonstrate comprehensive knowledge in one or more general subject areas related to, but not confined to, a specific area of interest., 2. Demonstrate understanding of research methodology and techniques specific to one’s field of study., 3. Apply research methodology and/or scholarly inquiry techniques specific to one’s field of study., 4. Critically analyze, synthesize, and utilize information and data related to one’s field of study.)

9. Standard 9: Professional Learning and Ethical Practice

(4. Critically analyze, synthesize, and utilize information and data related to one’s field of study., 5. Proficiently communicate and disseminate information in a manner relevant to the field and intended audience., 6. Conduct research or projects as a responsible and ethical professional, including consideration of and respect for other cultural perspectives., 7. Interact professionally with others.)

10. Standard 10: Leadership and Collaboration

2) Your program's SLOs are published as follows. Please update asneeded.

Department Website URL: https://coe.hawaii.edu/academics/institute-teacher-education/med-teaching

Student Handbook. URL, if available online: https://sites.google.com/a/hawaii.edu/medt-candidate-handbook/

Information Sheet, Flyer, or Brochure URL, if available online:

UHM Catalog. Page Number: 210-211

Course Syllabi. URL, if available online:

Other:

3) Please review, add, replace, or delete the existing curriculum map.

Curriculum Map File(s) from 2018:

File (03/16/2020)

4) For your program, the percentage of courses that have course SLOs explicitly stated on the syllabus, a website, or other publicly available document is as follows. Please update as needed.

1-50%

51-80%

81-99%

100%

5) Does the program have learning achievement results for its program SLOs? (Example of achievement results: "80% of students met expectations on SLO 1.")(check one):

Yes, on some(1-50%) of the program SLOs

Yes, on most(51-99%) of the program SLOs

Yes, on all(100%) of the program SLOs

6) Did your program engage in any program learning assessment activities between June 1, 2015 and October 31, 2018?

Yes

No (skip to question 17)

7) What best describes the program-level learning assessment activities that took place for the period June 1, 2015 to October 31, 2018? (Check all that apply.)

Create/modify/discuss program learning assessment procedures (e.g., SLOs, curriculum map, mechanism to collect student work, rubric, survey)

Collect/evaluate student work/performance to determine SLO achievement

Collect/analyze student self-reports of SLO achievement via surveys, interviews, or focus groups

Use assessment results to make programmatic decisions (e.g., change course content or pedagogy, design new course, hiring)

No (skip to question 17)

Investigate other pressing issue related to student learning achievement for the program (explain in question 7)

Other:

8) Briefly explain the assessment activities that took place.

Collect/evaluate student work/performance to determine SLO achievement:

The COE licensure programs engaged in a collaborative effort to develop shared key assessments to assess student learning across all licensure programs. In 2015-16, a cross program committee worked on developing the four shared assessments. In 2016-17, the newly developed assessments were piloted by programs. In 2017-18, the shared assessments were fully implemented in all COE licensure programs.

1. Assessment A – Planning Instruction: Candidates must demonstrate their ability to plan instruction for P12 learners. Evidence for this assessment is a minimum of three lesson plans, which are scored on Domain 1 (Planning and Preparation) of the Charlotte Danielson Framework for Teaching (CDF). The assessment is completed prior to the student teaching semester.

2. Assessment B - Student Teaching Evaluation: Candidates demonstrate their competence as a teacher candidate in the four domains of the Charlotte Danielson Framework for Teaching (CDF): (1) Planning and Preparation, (2) the Classroom Environment, (3) Instruction, and (4) Professional Responsibilities. This assessment is completed during student teaching and is cumulative across the entire semester of work.

3. Assessment C – Effect on P12 Learning: Candidates demonstrate their ability to plan, teach, and assess a unit of instruction/sequence of lessons. This assessment specifically addresses candidates’ ability to plan and teach a unit of instruction/sequence of lessons, analyze student learning through assessment data, and reflect on their teaching practice to improve their instruction. The assessment is scored on designated components and elements of the Charlotte Danielson Framework for Teaching (CDF). This assessment is completed during student teaching.

4. Assessment D - Professional Dispositions: Candidates must demonstrate professional dispositions, including professionalism, communication (verbal and nonverbal), collaboration, reflection, and diversity. This assessment is completed in all field and student teaching experiences.

Collect/analyze student self-reports of SLO achievement via surveys:

Each semester, program completer surveys are distributed by the Dean’s Office to our candidates in their final semester of the program. This data is published in reports aggregated by program in the COE Intranet and is also reported on the COE public website, “Measuring Our Success.”

9) What types of evidence did the program use as part of the assessment activities checked in question 7? (Check all that apply.)

Artistic exhibition/performance

Assignment/exam/paper completed as part of regular coursework and used for program-level assessment

Capstone work product (e.g., written project or non-thesis paper)

Exam created by an external organization (e.g., professional association for licensure)

Exit exam created by the program

IRB approval of research

Oral performance (oral defense, oral presentation, conference presentation)

Portfolio of student work

Publication or grant proposal

Qualifying exam or comprehensive exam for program-level assessment in addition to individual student evaluation (graduate level only)

Supervisor or employer evaluation of student performance outside the classroom (internship, clinical, practicum)

Thesis or dissertation used for program-level assessment in addition to individual student evaluation

Alumni survey that contains self-reports of SLO achievement

Employer meetings/discussions/survey/interview of student SLO achievement

Interviews or focus groups that contain self-reports of SLO achievement

Student reflective writing assignment (essay, journal entry, self-assessment) on their SLO achievement.

Student surveys that contain self-reports of SLO achievement

Assessment-related such as assessment plan, SLOs, curriculum map, etc.

Program or course materials (syllabi, assignments, requirements, etc.)

Other 1:

Other 2:

10) State the number of students (or persons) who submitted evidence that was evaluated. If applicable, please include the sampling technique used.

By Academic Year (AY):

AY 2015-2016: 33 students

AY 2016-2017: 93 students

AY 2017-2018: 83 students

11) Who interpreted or analyzed the evidence that was collected? (Check all that apply.)

Course instructor(s)

Faculty committee

Ad hoc faculty group

Department chairperson

Persons or organization outside the university

Faculty advisor

Advisors (in student support services)

Students (graduate or undergraduate)

Dean/Director

Other: Director of Assessment (compiled survey results)

12) How did they evaluate, analyze, or interpret the evidence? (Check all that apply.)

Used a rubric or scoring guide

Scored exams/tests/quizzes

Used professional judgment (no rubric or scoring guide used)

Compiled survey results

Used qualitative methods on interview, focus group, open-ended response data

External organization/person analyzed data (e.g., external organization administered and scored the nursing licensing exam)

Other:

13) Summarize the results of the assessment activities checked in question 7. For example, report the percentage of students who achieved each SLO.

Degree	MEDT
Academic Period Desc	AY15-16

Assessment	Criterion	Target	Acceptable	Unacceptable	Grand Total
MEdT ELEMENTARY Professional Dispositions	MEdT D1 Professional, Collaborative, and Ethical Conduct	3	9	5	17
	MEdT D2 Respect for Diversity	7	9	1	17
	MEdT D3 Professional Work Habits and Ethics	8	6	3	17
	MEdT D4 Effective Communication and Collaboration	5	8	4	17
	MEdT D5 Professional Reflection and Growth	6	9	2	17
	MEdT D6 Leadership	3	9	5	17

MEdT ELEMENTARY Student Teaching Evaluation	1. Develop		16		16
	2.1 Read	5	11		16
	2.2 Sci		16		16
	2.3 Math	2	14		16
	2.4 Soc St		16		16
	2.5 Art	2	14		16
	2.6 Health	1	9	6	16
	2.7 PE		5	11	16
	3.1 Knowledge	1	14	1	16
	3.2 Diversity	1	13	2	16
	3.3 Critical think		16		16
	3.4 Active learn	1	13	2	16
	3.5 Communicate	1	11	4	16
	4.0 Assess		15	1	16
	5.1 Professional	2	11	3	16
	5.2 Collaborate	4	10	2	16

MEdT SECONDARY Professional Dispositions	D1 Professional, Collaborative and Ethical Conduct	14	2		16
	MEdT D2 Respect for Diversity	15	1		16
	MEdT D3 Professional Work Habits and Ethics	13	3		16
	MEdT D4 Effective Communication and Collaboratioin	14	2		16
	MEdT D5 Professional Reflection and Growth	14	2		16
	MEdT D6 Leadership	15	1		16

MEdT SECONDARY Student Teaching Evaluation	P2 Content Pedagogy	15	1		16
	P3 Learning Environment	15	1		16
	P3a Motivation	15	1		16
	P3b Assessment	15	1		16
	P3c Strategies	15	1		16
	P4 Professional K&S	15	1		16
	P4a Professional Experiences	15	1		16
	P4b Equitable, Ethics	16			16
	P4c Collaboration	14	2		16
	P4d Teaming	16			16

Degree	MEDT
Academic Period Desc	AY16-17

Assessment	Criterion	Target	Acceptable	Unacceptable	Grand Total
MEdT ELEMENTARY Professional Dispositions	MEdT D1 Professional, Collaborative, and Ethical Conduct	23	9		32
	MEdT D2 Respect for Diversity	25	7		32
	MEdT D3 Professional Work Habits and Ethics	20	11	1	32
	MEdT D4 Effective Communication and Collaboration	20	11	1	32
	MEdT D5 Professional Reflection and Growth	23	7	1	31
	MEdT D6 Leadership	18	13		31

MEdT ELEMENTARY Student Teaching Evaluation	1. Develop	16	8		24
	2.1 Read	18	6		24
	2.2 Sci	16	8		24
	2.3 Math	19	5		24
	2.4 Soc St	18	6		24
	2.5 Art	15	8		23
	2.6 Health	15	8		23
	2.7 PE	15	5		20
	3.1 Knowledge	17	7		24
	3.2 Diversity	16	8		24
	3.3 Critical think	18	6		24
	3.4 Active learn	16	8		24
	3.5 Communicate	19	5		24
	4.0 Assess	15	9		24
	5.1 Professional	17	7		24
	5.2 Collaborate	16	8		24

MEdT SECONDARY Professional Dispositions	D1 Professional, Collaborative and Ethical Conduct	24	3		27
	MEdT D2 Respect for Diversity	25	2		27
	MEdT D3 Professional Work Habits and Ethics	16	11		27
	MEdT D4 Effective Communication and Collaboratioin	23	4		27
	MEdT D5 Professional Reflection and Growth	24	3		27
	MEdT D6 Leadership	11	16		27

MEdT SECONDARY Student Teaching Evaluation	P2 Content Pedagogy	7	6		13
	P3 Learning Environment	9	4		13
	P3a Motivation	8	5		13
	P3b Assessment	10	3		13
	P3c Strategies	11	2		13
	P4 Professional K&S	7	6		13
	P4a Professional Experiences	9	4		13
	P4b Equitable, Ethics	9	4		13
	P4c Collaboration	9	4		13
	P4d Teaming	9	4		13

Assessment	Criterion	Distinguished	Proficient	Basic	Unsatisfactory	Grand Total
Assessment A Planning Instruction (COE Shared)	1a Demonstrates knowledge of content and pedagogy	1	9	2		12
	1b Demonstrates knowledge of students		6	5	1	12
	1c Sets instructional outcomes	2	2	8		12
	1d Demonstrates knowledge of resources		6	5	1	12
	1e Designs coherent instruction	4	5	3		12
	1f Designs student assessments	2	9	1		12

Professional Dispositions Assessment (COE Shared)	1 Professionalism		34			34
	2 Communication (verbal and nonverbal)		33		1	34
	3 Collaboration		34			34
	4 Reflection		34			34
	5 Diversity		33		1	34
	Overall Assessment		33		1	34

Degree	MEDT
Academic Period Desc	AY17-18

Assessment	Criterion	Criterion Desc	Distinguished	Proficient	Unsatisfactory	Basic	Grand Total
Assessment A Planning Instruction (COE Shared)	1a	Demonstrates knowledge of content and pedagogy	1	33			34
	1b	Demonstrates knowledge of students	1	32		1	34
	1c	Sets instructional outcomes		32		2	34
	1d	Demonstrates knowledge of resources		34			34
	1e	Designs coherent instruction	1	30		3	34
	1f	Designs student assessments		31		2	33

Assessment B Student Teaching Evaluation (COE Shared)	1a	Demonstrates knowledge of content & pedagogy	12	33		4	49
	1b	Demonstrates knowledge of students	15	31		3	49
	1c	Sets instructional outcomes	10	30	1	8	49
	1d	Demonstrates knowledge of resources	12	32	1	4	49
	1e	Designs coherent instruction	9	33	1	6	49
	1f	Designs student assessments	7	26	1	13	47
	2a	Creates an environment of respect and rapport	16	32		1	49
	2b	Establishes a culture for learning	10	36		3	49
	2c	Manages classroom procedures	10	33		6	49
	2d	Manages student behavior	8	34		7	49
	2e	Organizes physical space	11	36		1	48
	3a	Communicates with students	14	30		5	49
	3b	Uses questioning and discussion techniques	8	31		10	49
	3c	Engages students in learning	12	33		4	49
	3d	Uses assessment in instruction	9	31	1	8	49
	3e	Demonstrates flexibility and responsiveness	12	33		4	49
	4a	Reflects on teaching	15	30	1	3	49
	4b	Maintains accurate records	10	29	1	3	43
	4c	Communicates with families	9	22		9	40
	4d	Participates in the professional community	11	31		5	47
	4e	Grows and develops professionally	11	33		5	49
	4f	Shows professionalism	14	32		3	49

Assessment C Candidate Effect on P-12 Learning (COE Shared)	1c	Sets instructional outcomes	12	31		5	48
	1f	Designs student assessments	9	36		3	48
	3d	Uses assessment in instruction	7	32	1	8	48
	4a	Reflects on teaching to improve instruction	9	29		9	47
	4b	Maintain accurate records	4	35	1	7	47

Assessment	Criterion	Criterion Desc	Meets Expectations	Needs Improvement	Grand Total
Assessment D Professional Dispositions (COE Shared)	1	Professionalism	35	14	49
	2	Communication (verbal and nonverbal)	45	4	49
	3	Collaboration	48	1	49
	4	Reflection	46	3	49
	5	Diversity	48	1	49
	Overall	Overall Assessment	48	1	49

14) What best describes how the program used the results? (Check all that apply.)

Assessment procedure changes (SLOs, curriculum map, rubrics, evidence collected, sampling, communications with faculty, etc.)

Course changes (course content, pedagogy, courses offered, new course, pre-requisites, requirements)

Personnel or resource allocation changes

Program policy changes (e.g., admissions requirements, student probation policies, common course evaluation form)

Students' out-of-course experience changes (advising, co-curricular experiences, program website, program handbook, brown-bag lunches, workshops)

Celebration of student success!

Results indicated no action needed because students met expectations

Use is pending (typical reasons: insufficient number of students in population, evidence not evaluated or interpreted yet, faculty discussions continue)

Other:

15) Please briefly describe how the program used the results.

Our program has had an opportunity to discuss assessment practices on our monthly faculty meeting agenda and continues to make time each month for these discussions. During the June 2015 to October 2018 period, we have discussed results from the program completer surveys to reflect on aspects of our program. We have shared and discussed information about student performance on the common assessments and engaged in collaboration to ensure we are all applying the rubrics in a manner that is generally consistent. Based on student performance and feedback we have adjusted our curriculum map of courses. We also have developed common resources available for each of our core courses.

16) Beyond the results, were there additional conclusions or discoveries? This can include insights about assessment procedures, teaching and learning, and great achievements regarding program assessment in this reporting period.

We have realized the importance of sharing more regularly our assessment practices - not to achieve homogenity or perfect alignment, but as an opportunity to share our ideas and strategies with colleagues to allow them to use those ideas (or not) as they feel most appropriate for their students. While we have always been reflective of evidence of student learning in our program and made adjustments as needed to our program, we are now starting to use the common assessments to further leverage those conversations.

17) If the program did not engage in assessment activities, please justify.

We engaged in assessment activities throughout this period.