Program: Kinesiology & Rehab Sci (BS)
Degree: Bachelor's
Date: Thu Oct 08, 2009 - 1:15:36 pm
1) List your program's student learning outcomes (SLOs).
Our goal as a college is to prepare highly-qualified beginning teachers who are knowledgeable, effective, and caring professionals who contribute to a just, diverse, and democratic society. Specifically, the KRS program learning outcomes are aligned with the standards of the National Association for Sport and Physical Education (NASPE), upon which our accreditation with the National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE) is based. We received national recognition as an accredited program with conditions in through year 2012. The alignment of the NASPE Standards with the Hawaii Teacher Standards follows.
HST Standard 1: Focuses on the Learner
NASPE 2. Understand how individuals learn and develop and can provide opportunities that support their physical, cognitive, social, and emotional development.
HST Standard 2: Creates and maintains a safe and positive learning environment
NASPE #4. Use an understanding of individual and group motivation and behavior to create a safe learning environment that encourages positive social interaction, active engagement in learning, and self-motivation.
HST Standard 3: Adapts to learner diversity
NASPE #3. Understand how individuals differ in their approaches to learning, and create appropriate instruction adapted to these differences.
HST Standard 4: Fosters effective communication in the learning environment
NASPE #5. Use knowledge of effective verbal, nonverbal, and media communication techniques to enhance learning and engagement in physical activity settings.
NASPE #9. Use information technology to enhance learning and to enhance personal and professional productivity.
HST Standard 5: Demonstrates knowledge of content
NASPE #1. Understand physical education content and disciplinary concepts related to the development of a physically educated person (Content Knowledge).
HST Standard 6: Designs and provides meaningful learning experiences
NASPE #6. Plan and implement a variety of developmentally appropriate instructional strategies to develop physically educated individuals, based on state and national (NASPE K-12) standards.
HST Standard 7: Uses active learning strategies
NASPE #4. Use an understanding of individual and group motivation and behavior to create a safe learning environment that encourages positive social interaction, active engagement in learning, and self-motivation.
HST Standard 8: Uses assessment strategies
NASPE #7. Understand and use assessment to foster physical, cognitive, social, and emotional development of students in physical activity.
HST Standard 9: Demonstrates professionalism
NASPE #8. Reflect on practice, and evaluate the effects of their actions on others (e.g., students, parents/guardians, fellow professionals), and seek opportunities to grow professionally.
NASPE #9. Use information technology to enhance learning and to enhance personal and professional productivity.
HST Standard 10: Fosters parent and school community relationships
NASPE #10. Foster relationships with colleagues, parents/guardians, and community agencies to support students' growth and well-being.
2) Where are your program's SLOs published?
Department Website URL: http://coe.hawaii.edu/krs/bed
Student Handbook. URL, if available online: Information Sheet, Flyer, or Brochure URL, if available online: NA UHM Catalog. Page Number: Course Syllabi. URL, if available online: http://coe.hawaii.edu/krs/bed Other: NCATE Report Other: 3) Upload your program's current curriculum map(s) as a PDF.
- File (03/16/2020)
4) What percentage of courses have the course SLOs explicitly stated on the course syllabus, department website, or other publicly available document? (Check one)
0% 1-50% 51-80% 81-99%
100%5) State the SLO(s) that was Assessed, Targeted, or Studied
All of our SLO’s are assessed in multiple forms over the course of the program. For 2008-09, we focused on seven program assessments of student learning:
(1) PRAXIS II Content Knowledge Examination,
(2) Sport Proficiency assessments,
(3) Unit and Lesson Plans,
(4) Field Experiences evaluation and observational assessments,
(5) Teaching Residency (student teaching) evaluation at both elementary and secondary levels,
(6) Project-Based Learning,
(7) Portfolio Assessment.
Our primary focus in 2008-09 has been on evaluating and revising Assessment #3: Unit and Lesson Plans, and the associated rubrics and scoring sheets.
6) State the Assessment Question(s) and/or Goal(s) of Assessment Activity
We sought to determine how well students could “plan instruction”, i.e., plan a variety of developmentally appropriate instructional strategies to develop physically educated individuals, based on state and national (NASPE) standards.
We also sought to determine whether our current assessment tools and procedures for this SLO were indeed providing a consistent set of performance standards for assessment of “Instructional Planning” for K-12 pupils. Assessment of this SLO included the following: Assessment 3: Unit and Lesson Plans
7) State the Type(s) of Evidence Gathered
Evidence was gathered from:
Assessment 3: Unit and Lesson Plan course assignments - which help to assess students’ capacity for planning of K-12 instruction. Data were gathered from 5 different courses.
8) State How the Evidence was Interpreted, Evaluated, or Analyzed
Instructors independently assessed student performance as part of their regular class performance. Interpretation was based on our scoring guides. Data scored as either “unacceptable”, “acceptable”, or target”. These data were scored and reported by individual faculty members. An analysis of this data across all six KRS courses occurred at the end of Spring semester, 2008.
9) State How Many Pieces of Evidence Were Collected
We assessed all of our PETE students via these targeted classes: KRS 270, 334, 371, 372, 404, 443. In addition, Praxis II data is also gathered. Seven forms of data in all.
10) Summarize the Actual Results
Results were obtained via faculty using a common scoring rubric. Average scores across six different “unit plan” and “lesson plan” assignments were as follows (n= 4-6 students):
Unacceptable = 0.5 students (avg.)
Acceptable = 3.1 students (avg.)
Target = 2.8 students (avg.)
11) Briefly Describe the Distribution and Discussion of Results
Results were distributed to KRS faculty, COE assessment officer, NCATE accreditation team.
Discussion of results:
We were able to interpret our SLO achievement as satisfactory, based on the data gathered across all five courses. On average, 85-90% of our teacher candidates earned “acceptable” or “target” scores” for their ability to produce comprehensive lesson plans and unit plans.
12) Describe Conclusions and Discoveries
Consensus agreement on scoring rubrics was not always reached among KRS faculty, relative to the quality of teacher candidate performance. One issue was that two new faculty had joined the program, and we also realized the need for more collaborative work to improve our “inter-rater reliability” as a faculty team across all six KRS courses.
13) Use of Results/Program Modifications: State How the Program Used the Results --or-- Explain Planned Use of Results
Results have prompted the KRS faculty to revamp the scoring guide for assessing teacher-candidate performance in the area of K-12 instructional planning. We are in the process of developing a protocol to improve consistency in the scoring process, including modifying the scoring rubric used to rate teacher candidate performance. This process is scheduled to be completed during the 2009-10 academic year.
14) Reflect on the Assessment Process
As mentioned above, the assessment process forced the faculty to confront differences in degrees of scoring, and to increase collaboration in the assessment process.
15) Other Important Information
none
16) FOR DISTANCE PROGRAMS ONLY: Explain how your program/department has adapted its assessment of student learning in the on-campus program to assess student learning in the distance education program.
N/A
17) FOR DISTANCE PROGRAMS ONLY: Summarize the actual student learning assessment results that compare the achievement of students in the on-campus program to students in the distance education program.
N/A