common metrics 2013 transition to teaching survey · hezel associates, llc. december 2013 . to...

Common Metrics 2013 Transition to Teaching Survey

Network for Excellence in Teaching (NExT) Bush Foundation

St. Cloud State University Report

Prepared by: FHI 360

Hezel Associates, LLC

December 2013

To ensure accuracy in reporting, a review process was instituted for all of the common metrics reports. An advance copy of this report is being provided to this institution's common metrics group key contact, to give the university thirty (30) days for review and comment before reports are distributed to the Bush Foundation. Within this period, the university may submit written request to Hezel Associates to delay this report up to an additional sixty (60) days in order to revise it to protect any confidential information that may have inadvertently been included in the advance copy. This report will be released 30 days from the date of delivery or upon written confirmation that the university's review has found that standards stipulated in the data sharing agreement have been met.

Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 1.4.j.7: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel

Introduction The Network for Excellence in Teaching (NExT), a partnership of 14 institutions of higher education (IHEs) and the Bush Foundation, aims to transform how university-based teacher education programs prepare new, effective teachers in Minnesota, North Dakota, and South Dakota. The NExT institutions have collaborated to develop and administer a set of four common surveys to measure their progress toward this goal. Teacher candidates and graduates at each of the IHEs complete three surveys: upon entry into the teacher education programs; at exit; and one year after graduation (known as the transition to teaching survey). Supervisors of NExT graduates working in the teaching field also complete a survey during the graduates’ first year of employment. This report presents the findings from the transition to teaching (TTS) surveys administered to first-year teachers during the spring of 2013.1 The TTS (see Appendix B) collects information on recent graduates’ licensure and job status, perceptions of their teacher preparation programs, current school contexts, and personal demographics. The findings section highlights useful data emerging from the TTS completed by St. Cloud State University (SCSU) graduates from the 2011-12 academic year. Quantitative data for NDSU and the NExT aggregate are presented in tabular format in Appendix A. This appendix also provides comparisons to 2011 data on a series of questions selected by the common metrics group; these data are presented in tables 1, 8, 13, 19, and 30. Survey Administration NExT IHEs were responsible for providing contact information for their 2011-12 graduates to Hezel Associates, which administered the survey. Hezel Associates sent paper copies of the survey to graduates’ mailing addresses and electronic versions to their email addresses. Hezel Associates provided several reminders to each possible respondent, and many IHEs conducted their own efforts to promote survey completion. Among SCSU respondents, 20 of 60 reported that they were prompted to complete the survey by email messages from Hezel Associates, nine were prompted by a message from their alma mater, and three were prompted by a mailed letter from Hezel. Continued efforts by SCSU to promote survey completion might lead to a greater number of survey responses and, consequently, more useful data sets. Response Rate The 2013 TTS response rate for SCSU was 16 percent (62 out of 393; see table 1).2 In comparison, the NExT aggregate response rate was 31 percent. The response rate reported here for the TTS is calculated by using the number of 2011-12 teacher education program completers for whom Hezel Associates has contact information as the denominator and the number of alumni who responded to the survey as the numerator. The NExT aggregate response rate is somewhat misleading because the TTS sample does not include all of the students who completed teacher education programs at NExT institutions during the 2011-12 academic year. SCSU was one of the only IHEs who provided contact information for all of their graduates so the 23 response rate is more accurate than other NExT institutions. Using the exit survey data reported by NExT IHEs for 2011-12, SCSU’s response rate remains at 23 percent compared to

1Hezel Associates administers the TTS survey and performs statistical analysis. Hezel collaborates with FHI 360 to report findings to each IHE. 2SCSU’s response rate was higher in 2012 (21 percent) and the survey was administered to fewer students (n=60).


the NExT aggregate response rate of 30 percent (687 out of 2310). SCSU’s response rate is lower than the NExT aggregate; however, there is still opportunity for improvement. Using this Report In light of the very low response rate, data presented in this report should be used with caution. Survey respondents are not necessarily representative of SCSU graduates as a whole. While these findings could prompt discussions about ways to improve coursework, clinical experiences, and efforts to connect graduates with teaching jobs, the low response rate limits the extent to which these data should be used to inform decision making. If the response rate improves over time, TTS data should help SCSU’s teacher education faculty and staff understand the impact of changes to their curricula on their graduates’ level of preparedness to enter the profession. Findings The findings reported are based on percentages for the 16 percent who completed the TTS. SCSU respondents applied for jobs at high rates and most were able to find full-time teaching positions that were being renewed for the 2013-14 academic year. Compared to the NExT aggregate, SCSU respondents felt less prepared for the realities of teaching, but implement promising strategies at an equal rate. SCSU respondents reported working in schools with positive school climates and professional environments; however, they lacked the resources necessary to teach. SCSU respondents also had less favorable perceptions of their teacher preparation program compared to the NExT aggregate. The findings reported below provide more detail on these data. Survey Section A

Section A of the survey asks about graduates’ job search experiences as well as licensure and employment status (see tables 3-33 of Appendix A). Below are highlights of SCSU graduates’ responses to section A.3 When higher response rates are attained, TTS data should be combined with data from exit surveys to help develop strategies that enable graduates to find jobs in teaching. These data might also be used to inform teacher recruitment strategies so SCSU can enroll students who are likely to find employment upon graduation.

Of the SCSU respondents,79 percent applied for a teaching license during or after completing their teacher preparation program (table 3).

Of the graduates who decided to enter teaching, 96 percent applied for a license in Minnesota. Ninety-six percent of the graduates who applied were granted a license in Minnesota (table 6).

Among SCSU respondents, the majority are employed full-time (74 percent), 15 percent are employed part-time, and 12 percent are unemployed and seeking work. More 2013 respondents were employed full-time compared to the 2012 cohort (59 percent employed full-time) (table 8).

Among SCSU respondents, 36 percent applied for a job outside of teaching (table 10) and the most popular reason for applying for a non-teaching job was to ensure earning until a teaching position is obtained (68 percent) (table 11).

3 Note: tables use the number of respondents to each question when calculating percentages. The number of respondents therefore varies by table.


A large majority of SCSU respondents applied for a teaching position (82 percent) (table 12). The percentage of respondents who applied for a teaching position increased in 2013 (82 percent) from 2012 (72 percent) (table 13).

Table 14 illustrates how many applications for a teaching position each candidate submitted. Thirty-eight percent submitted between one and five applications, 18 percent submitted between six and ten, ten percent submitted between 11 and 15, 14 percent submitted between 16 and 20, while 20 percent submitted more than 20 applications.

Among SCSU respondents, 32 percent applied for jobs over 150 miles away from their hometown (table 15). Although the majority of SCSU respondents (84 percent) applied for jobs further than 25 miles away from their hometown, 55 percent said that their ideal location for a job would be zero to 25 miles away from their hometown (table 16).

All SCSU respondents (88 percent) received at least one job interview and 68 percent interviewed at least twice (table 17). Of the respondents who interviewed for a teaching position, 41 percent believe they were very well prepared with 57 percent feeling somewhat prepared and two percent not being prepared. Overall, SCSU respondents in 2013 felt less prepared for interviews than the 2012 cohort (table 19).

Among SCSU respondents who applied for teaching positions: o The majority (76 percent) were offered a job (table 22). o Of those offered teaching positions, 44 percent received one offer and 20 percent

received two (table 24). o Of those who received an offer, 95 percent accepted a position in teaching (table

25), with 77 percent teaching in a traditional public school, 18 percent in a public charter school, and none in a private school (table 31).

Of the SCSU respondents who accepted a full-time teaching position, 51 percent had their contract renewed while the remaining 28 percent of graduates did not get their contract renewed (table 28).

Of the SCSU respondents with full-time teaching jobs 73 percent had a formal mentoring/induction program available to them (table 32).

The majority of SCSU respondents with a job plan to teach for 11 or more years (87 percent).

Survey Section B

Section B of the survey asks respondents to rate their levels of preparedness in four aspects of teaching: instructional practice; diverse learners; learning environment; and professionalism (tables 34-41). Graduates were asked to respond using the following scale: does not apply; disagree; tend to disagree; tend to agree; and agree.4 Highlights of SCSU graduates’ responses to section B are detailed below. When response rates are higher, teacher education programs might use these data to make changes to their curricula, both coursework and clinical experiences. As changes are made to the teacher preparation curricula, programs can use future TTS results to determine the impact of the updated coursework and clinical experiences. These data could also be used to compare supervisors’ perspective on graduates’ level of preparedness in the supervisor survey.

4 The findings highlighted here collapse the ‘tend to agree’ and ‘agree’ categories. See the tables in Appendix A for detail on ‘tend to agree’ and ‘agree’ responses.


Of the instructional strategies listed on the survey, at least 52 percent of the small number of SCSU respondents agreed that they were prepared to use them (table 34). Nevertheless, SCSU respondents felt relatively less prepared to

o Plan instruction for the whole class while differentiating for diverse learning needs (68 percent).

o Use assessment data to diagnose gaps in students’ knowledge and skills (67 percent).

o Design and teach lessons that promote students' abilities to formulate questions that elicit multiple views on a topic (68 percent).

o Design and teach lessons that promote students' abilities to develop solutions to abstract problems (67 percent).

o Design and teach lessons that promote students' abilities to create solutions to global problems (52 percent).

o Design and teach lessons that promote students' abilities to work collaboratively with teams to solve complex problems (67 percent).

Of the instructional strategies listed on the survey, SCSU graduates felt best prepared to: o Effectively teach the subject matter in my licensure area (92 percent). o Align instruction with state subject matter standards of what students should

know and be able to do (92 percent). o Select instructional strategies to align with learning goals (92 percent). o Integrate a variety of media and educational technologies into instruction (92

percent). o Plan lessons with clear learning objectives/goals in mind (92 percent).

Overall, SCSU respondents reported feeling less prepared to address the needs of diverse learners (table 36). Relatively few respondents felt prepared to:

o Understand the unique needs of refugees among my students (38 percent). o Design instruction for special education students with physical and other health

impairments (58 percent). o Design instruction for special education students with sensory impairments (48

percent). o Design instruction for special education students within the autism spectrum

disorder (56 percent). o Design instruction for students with mental health needs (56 percent). o Use community and home resources to foster student learning (58 percent). o Effectively teach students who have experienced trauma and/or displacement (44

percent). At least 79 percent of SCSU respondents agreed that they felt well prepared on all items

related to professionalism (table 40). They indicated they were best prepared to: o Value professional development opportunities to improve teaching (92 percent). o Uphold legal responsibilities as a professional educator and student advocate

(90percent). o Collaborate with teaching colleagues (90 percent). o Use colleague feedback to support my development as a teacher (90 percent).


Survey Section C

This section of the survey asks respondents about the practices they implement as a teacher, as opposed to what they were prepared for, in areas related to instructional practice, diverse learners, learning environment, and professionalism (tables 42-49).5

At least 72 percent of SCSU respondents reported implementing each of the instructional practices listed on the survey, with one exception (table 42).

o This held true even for practices where respondents felt relatively less prepared (see Section B above).

o The only practice where fewer than 72 percent of graduates had implemented the practice was “I design and teach lessons that promote students' abilities to develop solutions to abstract problems” (67 percent).

A large majority (at least 70 percent) of SCSU respondents agreed that they had implemented strategies related to diverse learners in their teaching practice (table 44). Again, this was the case even in areas where graduates reported feeling relatively less prepared (see section B).

Nearly all SCSU respondents (97 percent or more) reported that they had used strategies related to creating a learning environment (table 46).

Nearly all SCSU respondents (81 percent or more) reported that they had engaged in teaching practices related to professionalism (table 48).

Survey Section D

Section D of the survey asks respondents about their current school context, specifically about the school climate, professional environment, and resources available (tables 50-57).6 Below are highlights of SCSU graduates’ responses to section D. Again, the N is very low. With higher response rates, teacher education programs might use this data to gain a better understanding of the realities that their graduates face during their first year of teaching.

An equal number of SCSU respondents taught in elementary schools (47 percent) and middle schools (47 percent), compared to 35 percent in high schools, and none in early childhood schools (table 56).7

Of SCSU respondents the majority reported teaching in a subject in which they are licensed (86 percent) (table 57).

SCSU respondents who were employed as teachers reported that they work in schools with generally positive climates (table 50). For example, 97 percent reported they work in schools where they feel the school is a physically safe and secure place and where the school encourages engagement with the community. Only 86 percent, however, believed students are respectful of one another.

5 The findings highlighted here collapse the ‘tend to agree’ and ‘agree’ categories. See the tables in Appendix A for detail on ‘tend to agree’ and ‘agree’ responses. 6 The findings highlighted here collapse the ‘tend to agree’ and ‘agree’ categories. See the tables in Appendix A for detail on ‘tend to agree’ and ‘agree’ responses. 7 Total percentage is over 100 since graduates were allowed to mark more than one school setting.


SCSU respondents who were employed as teachers reported that they worked in schools with positive professional environments (table 52). Respondents indicated that they feel:

o Respected as a colleague by faculty and staff (97 percent). o The principal is an effective leader (97 percent).

SCSU respondents were slightly less positive about the availability of resources at their schools (table 54). For example, only 69 percent reported they had adequate time for planning, and only 72 percent reported they had the necessary supplies available as needed and that their classroom was equipped with the furniture and space necessary for flexible instructional activities.

Survey Section E

Section E of the survey asks respondents about their backgrounds, their general impressions of their teacher preparation programs, and their first year as teachers (tables 58-66).8 As response rates increase, the findings in this section may be used to inform recruitment and, in conjunction with the other common metrics surveys, to improve the teacher preparation curricula.

A large majority of SCSU respondents are white (95 percent). The SCSU cohort is also largely female (87 percent) (tables 59 and 60).

Most SCSU respondents (90 percent) are committed to the teaching profession and feel that the rewards of teaching are worth the efforts put in to become a teacher (90 percent). (table 63)

Among SCSU respondents, 61 percent believe they were effectively prepared to teach in a variety of settings (urban, suburban, and rural) (table 63).

Among SCSU respondents, 72 percent would recommend their teacher preparation programs to a prospective teacher (table 64).

8 The findings highlighted here collapse the ‘tend to agree’ and ‘agree’ categories. See the tables in Appendix A for detail on ‘tend to agree’ and ‘agree’ responses.


APPENDIX A: TABULATED RESPONSES FOR TRANSITION TO TEACHING SURVEY - NExT


Table 1. Response Rate

Number of appropriate

contacts provided for TTS

distribution*

Number of contacts with valid postal or

email address** Number of responses

Response rate***

St. Cloud 2013 398 393 62 15.8%

St. Cloud 2012 337 281 60 21.4%

NExT Aggregate 2310 2244 687 30.6%

*Note: The appropriate timeframe for graduation for the 2013 cohort spanned 9/1/11-8/31/12. Any contacts provided with no graduation date were assumed to be the correct cohort. Each IHE reported its cohort size. **Note: Our response rate calculations were based on the number of graduates that were reachable. Some TTS communications were not deliverable for the provided postal or email address. ***Note: The survey format for St. Cloud respondents was 61.3% online and 38.7% hard copy. For the NExT aggregate, 76.4% of graduates responded online and 23.6% of graduates returned hard-copy surveys.

Table 2. Which communication method most prompted you to complete this survey today?*

St. Cloud n=60

NExT Aggregate n=687

n Percent n Percent

Email message(s) from Hezel Associates

20 33.3% 263 40.1%

Mailed letter from Hezel Associates

24 40.0% 127 19.4%

Message from my university/college

15 25.0% 245 37.3%

Other** 1 1.7% 21 3.2%

*Note: This is a new question added in 2013 to understand effective dissemination strategies for the TTS. **Note: Other responses from St. Cloud students included: both email and mail (n=1). PART A. LICENSURE AND JOB STATUS

Table 3. Did you apply for a teaching license either during, or after, completing your teaching education program?

St. Cloud n=61


n Percent n Percent

Yes 48 78.7% 607 91.7%

No 13 21.3% 55 8.3% Source: Q. A1


Table 4. If no, why did you not apply for a teaching license? Mark ALL that apply.*

St. Cloud n=13

NExT Aggregate n=63

n Percent of Cases

n Percent of Cases

I have not yet taken the state licensure exams.

1 7.7% 5 7.9%

I have not yet passed the state licensure exams.

12 92.3% 47 74.6%

I plan to teach in an organization that does not require a license.

0 0 4 6.3%

I enrolled (or plan to enroll) in graduate school to pursue an additional teaching certification or endorsement.

0 0 6 9.5%

I enrolled (or plan to enroll) in graduate school to pursue a non-teaching career.

0 0 0 -

I am not planning to pursue a career in teaching.

0 0 5 7.9%

Other** 2 15.4% 8 12.7%

Source: Q. A1 Includes respondents who answered “no” to the question in Table 3 and in some cases, exceeds the number of respondents that indicated “no” due to either not responding to the prior question or not properly following the skip pattern in the hard copy survey version. *Note: Total percentage may exceed 100, due to being a “mark all that apply” question and the total n may exceed the number of respondents. **Note: Other responses from St. Cloud students included: found employment in private sector (n=1) and I received a job outside of the profession. I do plan to apply for my license soon. (n=1).


Table 5. Identify the state(s) in which you applied for a teaching license. Mark ALL that apply.**

St. Cloud n=48


n Percent of

Cases n

Percent of Cases

Minnesota 46 95.8% 504 82.6%

Iowa 0 - 6 1.0%

North Dakota 0 - 90 14.8%

Wyoming 0 - 6 1.0%

Wisconsin 0 - 18 3.0%

Illinois 1 2.1% 5 0.8%

South Dakota 1 2.1% 42 6.9%

Nebraska 1 2.1% 5 0.8%

Other* 3 6.3% 22 3.6%

Source: Q. A2 Includes respondents who answered “yes” to the question in Table 3 and in some cases, exceeds the number of respondents that indicated “yes” due to either not responding to the prior question or not properly following the skip pattern in the hard copy survey version. *Note: Other states reported by St. Cloud respondents included Alaska (n=1); Colorado (n=1); and Texas (n=1). **Note: Total percentage may exceed 100, due to being a “mark all that apply” question and the total n may exceed the number of respondents.


Table 6. In which state(s) did you earn a teaching license? Mark ALL that apply.**

St. Cloud n=47


n Percent of

Cases n

Percent of Cases

Minnesota 45 95.7% 494 82.3%

Iowa 0 - 5 0.8%

North Dakota 0 - 83 13.8%

Wyoming 1 2.1% 7 1.2%

Wisconsin 0 - 16 2.7%

Illinois 1 2.1% 5 0.8%

South Dakota 1 2.1% 42 7.0%

Nebraska 1 2.1% 4 0.7%

Other* 3 6.4% 22 3.7%

Source: Q. A3 Includes respondents who answered “yes” to the question in Table 3 and in some cases, exceeds the number of respondents that indicated “yes” due to either not responding to the prior question or not properly following the skip pattern in the hard copy survey version. *Note: Other states reported by St. Cloud respondents included Alaska (n=1); Colorado (n=1); and Texas (n=1). **Note: Total percentage may exceed 100, due to being a “mark all that apply” question and the total n may exceed the number of respondents.

Table 7. Please describe your current employment situation by choosing the appropriate response. Select only ONE response.

St. Cloud n=61


n Percent n Percent

Employed part-time 9 14.8% 141 21.3%

Employed full-time 45 73.8% 488 73.6%

Unemployed and seeking work 7 11.5% 26 3.9%

Unemployed and not seeking work

0 - 8 1.2%

Source: Q. A4


Table 8. Comparison of St. Cloud 2012 and 2013 responses to current employment situation

2012 n=59

2013 n=61

n Percent n Percent

Employed part-time 16 27.1% 9 14.8%

Employed full-time 35 59.3% 45 73.8%

Unemployed and seeking work 7 11.9% 7 11.5%

Unemployed and not seeking work

1 1.7% 0 -

Source: Q. A4

Table 9. Do you plan to seek a licensed teaching position within the next 12 months?

St. Cloud n=58


n Percent n Percent

Yes 46 79.3% 439 70.1%

No 12 20.7% 187 29.9%

Source: Q. A5

Table 10. Did you apply for a job outside of teaching?

St. Cloud n=61


n Percent n Percent

Yes 22 36.1% 166 25.2%

No 39 63.9% 493 74.8%

Source: Q. A6


Table 11. If yes, why did you apply for a job outside of teaching? Mark ALL that apply.**

St. Cloud n=22


n Percent of

Cases n

Percent of Cases

No teaching positions available in my field

2 9.1% 22 13.3%

A limited number of teaching positions available in my field

8 36.4% 63 38.2%

Ensure earnings until a teaching position is obtained

15 68.2% 80 48.5%

Family or personal reasons 4 18.2% 36 21.8%

More future prospects outside of teaching

2 9.1% 21 12.7%

Better location of jobs outside of teaching

1 4.5% 11 6.7%

Preferred work environment of jobs outside of teaching

1 4.5% 29 17.6%

Better salary or pay for jobs outside of teaching

4 18.2% 30 18.2%

Better benefits packages for jobs outside of teaching

2 9.1% 8 4.8%

Able to find adequate employment (full-time or part-time) outside of teaching

10 45.5% 45 27.3%

More certainty of job security for jobs outside of teaching

2 9.1% 12 7.3%

Better evaluation and accountability policies outside of teaching

0 - 2 1.2%

Other* 3 13.6% 29 17.6%

Source: Q. A6 Includes respondents who answered “yes” to the question in Table 10 and in some cases, exceeds the number of respondents that indicated “yes” due to either not responding to the prior question or not properly following the skip pattern in the hard copy survey version. *Note: Other reasons provided by St. Cloud respondents included: additional income (n=1); couldn't pass social studies teaching exam since I wasn't a history emphasis (n=1); and It took too long to get my license approved and therefore no district would accept my applications. (n=1). **Note: Total percentage may exceed 100, due to being a “mark all that apply” question and the total n may exceed the number of respondents.


Table 12. Did you seek employment as a licensed teacher?

St. Cloud n=61


n Percent n Percent

Yes 50 82.0% 557 84.0%

No 11 18.0% 106 16.0%

Source: Q. A7

Table 13. Comparison of 2012 and 2013 St. Cloud graduates who sought employment as a licensed teacher

2012 n=58

2013 n=61

n Percent n Percent

Yes 42 72.4% 50 82.%

No 16 27.6% 11 18.0%

Source: Q. A7

Table 14. How many teaching job applications did you submit?

St. Cloud n=50


n Percent n Percent

1-5 19 38.0% 224 40.4%

6-10 9 18.0% 115 20.7%

11-15 5 10.0% 60 10.8%

16-20 7 14.0% 52 9.4%

More than 20 10 20.0% 104 18.7%

Source: Q. A7a Includes respondents who answered “yes” to the question in Table 12.


Table 15. When applying for teaching jobs, what was the furthest location from your hometown that you applied?

St. Cloud n=50


n Percent n Percent

0-25 miles 8 16.0% 169 30.5%

26-50 miles 16 32.0% 133 24.0%

51-100 miles 9 18.0% 64 11.5%

101-150 miles 1 2.0% 29 5.2%

More than 150 miles

16 32.0% 160 28.8%

Source: Q. A7b Includes respondents who answered “yes” to the question in Table 12.

Table 16. When applying for teaching jobs, what was your ideal location for a job based on distance from your hometown?

St. Cloud n= 49


n Percent n Percent

0-25 miles 27 55.1% 354 63.6%

26-50 miles 12 24.5% 65 11.7%

51-100 miles 1 2.0% 23 4.1%

101-150 miles 0 - 9 1.6%

More than 150 miles

1 2.0% 23 4.1%

Indifferent 8 16.3% 83 14.9%

Source: Q. A7c Includes respondents who answered “yes” to the question in Table 12.


Table 17. How many teaching job interviews did you receive?

St. Cloud n=50


n Percent n Percent

None 6 12.0% 40 7.2%

1 10 20.0% 141 25.3%

2-3 19 38.0% 213 38.2%

4-5 8 16.0% 105 18.8%

6-10 6 12.0% 52 9.3%

11 or more 1 2.0% 7 1.3%

Source: Q. A7d Includes respondents who answered “yes” to the question in Table 12.

Table 18. How well prepared do you think you were for your teaching job interview(s)?

St. Cloud n=44


n Percent n Percent

Very well prepared

18 40.9% 267 51.5%

Somewhat prepared

25 56.8% 234 45.2%

Not prepared 1 2.3% 17 3.3%

Source: Q. A7e Includes respondents who answered “yes” to the question in Table 12 and those that did not answer “none” in Table 17.

Table 19. Comparison of St. Cloud 2012 and 2013 responses to “How well prepared do you think you were for your teaching job interview(s)?”

2012 n=41

2013 n=44

n Percent n Percent

Very well prepared

21 51.2% 18 40.9%

Somewhat prepared

20 48.8% 25 56.8%

Not prepared 0 - 1 2.3%

Source: Q. A7e Includes respondents who answered “yes” to the question in Table 12.


Table 20. How confident were you in your performance in your teaching job interview(s)?

St. Cloud n=43


n Percent n Percent

Very confident 20 46.5% 265 51.4%

Somewhat confident

22 51.2% 235 45.5%

Not confident 1 2.3% 16 3.1%

Source: Q. A7f Includes respondents who answered “yes” to the question in Table 12 and those that did not answer “none” in Table 17.

Table 21. How well do you think you performed in your teaching job interview(s)?

St. Cloud n=43


n Percent n Percent

Very well 25 58.1% 312 60.3%

Somewhat well 18 41.9% 196 37.9%

Not well 0 - 9 1.7%

Source: Q. A7g Includes respondents who answered “yes” to the question in Table 12 and those that did not answer “none” in Table 17.


Table 22. Did you receive job offers for a teaching position?

St. Cloud n=50


n Percent n Percent

Yes 38 76.0% 466 83.4%

No 12 24.0% 93 16.6%

Source: Q. A8

Table 23. If no, why do you think you did not receive any job offers? Mark ALL that apply.**

St. Cloud n=14


n Percent of Cases

n Percent of Cases

Jobs in my licensure area are very competitive.

8 57.1% 68 66.0%

My interview(s) did not go well.

0 - 13 12.6%

I only applied for a limited number of positions.

3 21.4% 27 26.2%

I limited my job search to a small geographic area.

2 14.3% 32 31.1%

I started my job search late.

3 21.4% 24 23.3%

My teaching profile did not reflect my abilities.

1 7.1% 5 4.9%

Other* 3 21.4% 22 21.4%

Source: Q. A8 Includes respondents who answered “no” to the question in Table 22 and in some cases, exceeds the number of respondents that indicated “no” due to either not responding to the prior question or not properly following the skip pattern in the hard copy survey version. *Note: Other reasons reported by St. Cloud respondents included: I had not received my teaching license yet, and not enough experience. (n=1); No Experience (n=1); and No License (n=1). **Note: Total percentage may exceed 100, due to being a “mark all that apply” question and the total n may exceed the number of respondents.


Table 24. How many offers for a teaching position did you receive?

St. Cloud n=50


n Percent n Percent

0 12 24.0% 94 16.8%

1 22 44.0% 267 47.8%

2 10 20.0% 131 23.4%

3 5 10.0% 38 6.8%

4 1 2.0% 16 2.9%

5 0 - 8 1.4%

More than 5 0 - 5 0.9%

Source: Q. A9 Table 25. Did you accept an offer for a teaching position?

St. Cloud n=38


n Percent n Percent

Yes 36 94.7% 449 97.2%

No 2 5.3% 13 2.8% Source: Q. A10 excludes respondents who answered “0” to the question in Table 24.


Table 26. If no, why did you turn down a teaching position offer? Mark ALL that apply.*

St. Cloud n=1

NExT Aggregate n=16

n Percent of Cases

n Percent of Cases

Family or personal reasons 0 - 4 25.0%

Other job offers 1 100.0% 4 25.0%

Location of the teaching position(s)

0 - 4 25.0%

School environment of the teaching position(s) (i.e., school atmosphere, working relationships)

0 - 3 18.8%

Few future career prospects in teaching

1 100.0% 1 6.3%

Salary or pay of the teaching position(s) was inadequate

1 100.0% 5 31.3%

Benefits package was inadequate

1 100.0% 2 12.5%

Percentage of appointment was inadequate

0 - 2 12.5%

Uncertainty in job security 0 - 0 -

Evaluation and accountability policies for teachers

0 - 0 -

Other 0 - 6 37.5%

Source: Q. A10 Includes respondents who answered “no” to the question in Table 25 and in some cases, exceeds the number of respondents that indicated “no” due to either not responding to the prior question or not properly following the skip pattern in the hard copy survey version. *Note: Total percentage may exceed 100, due to being a “mark all that apply” question and the total n may exceed the number of respondents.


Table 27. Are you currently teaching?*

St. Cloud n=61


n Percent n Percent

Yes 39 63.9% 499 75.5%

No 22 36.1% 162 24.5% Source: Q. A11 *Note: Respondents that answered “no” to this question skipped ahead to Part E (see Table 588).

Table 28. Teaching Employment Status:

St. Cloud n=39


n Percent n Percent

Full-time — contract renewed 20 51.3% 283 59.5%

Full-time — contract not renewed

11 28.2% 114 23.9%

Part-time — contract renewed 2 5.1% 32 6.7%

Part-time — contract not renewed

6 15.4% 47 9.9%

Source: Q. A11a Includes respondents who answered “yes” to the question in Table 27.

Table 29. Type of teaching position:

St. Cloud n=38


n Percent n Percent

Regular teaching position 26 68.4% 390 78.5%

Short-term substitute 3 7.9% 31 6.2%

Long-term substitute 6 15.8% 44 8.9%

Other* 3 7.9% 32 6.4%

Source: Q. A11b Includes respondents who answered “yes” to the question in Table 27. Some graduates who responded “no” to the question in Table 27 elected to answer this question in the hard copy survey version. *Note: Other types of teaching positions reported by St. Cloud respondents included: EDL after school (n=1); Graduate assistant and substitute teacher (n=1); and Intervention Education Assistant (n=1).


Table 30. Comparison of St. Cloud 2012 and 2013 responses to type of teaching position:

2012 n=30

2013 n=38

n Percent n Percent

Regular teaching position 22 73.3% 26 68.4%

Short-term substitute 2 6.7% 3 7.9%

Long-term substitute 1 3.3% 6 15.8%

Other 5 16.7% 3 7.9%

Source: Q. A11b Includes respondents who answered “yes” to the question in Table 27.

Table 31. Type of school:

St. Cloud n=39


n Percent n Percent

Traditional public school 30 76.9% 355 71.4%

Public charter school 7 17.9% 59 11.9%

Private school 0 - 35 7.0%

Other* 2 5.1% 48 9.7%

Source: Q. A11c Includes respondents who answered “yes” to the question in Table 27. Some graduates who responded “no” to the question in Table 27 elected to answer this question in the hard copy survey version. *Note: Other school types reported by St. Cloud respondents included: Alternative level 4 (n=1) and Intensive English Center Instructor and traditional public school (n=1).

Table 32. Is a formal mentoring/induction program available to you in your school or district?

St. Cloud n=37


n Percent n Percent

Yes 27 73.0% 307 63.3%

No 10 27.0% 178 36.7% Source: Q. A11d Includes respondents who answered “yes” to the question in Table 27.


Table 33. How long do you plan on teaching?

St. Cloud n=39


n Percent n Percent

1-2 years 0 - 14 2.8%

3-5 years 2 5.1% 32 6.5%

6-10 years 3 7.7% 55 11.1%

11 or more years 34 87.2% 395 79.6%

Source: Q. A11e Includes respondents who answered “yes” to the question in Table 27. Some graduates who responded “no” to the question in Table 27 elected to answer this question in the hard copy survey version.


PART B. YOUR TEACHER PREPARATION—COURSEWORK & FIELD/CLINICAL EXPERIENCE: WHAT WERE YOU PREPARED TO DO? Table 34. Instructional Practice: To what extent do you disagree or agree that your teacher preparation program prepared you to…*

Does Not

Apply Disagree

Tend to Disagree

Tend to Agree

Agree

n % n % n % n % n %

understand processes of inquiry and ways of knowing that are central to the subjects I teach.

St. Cloud; n=25 0 - 0 - 3 12.0% 11 44.0% 11 44.0%

NExT Aggregate; n=407 3 0.7% 2 0.5% 20 4.9% 126 31.0% 256 62.9%

effectively teach the subject matter in my licensure area.

St. Cloud; n=25 0 - 0 - 2 8.0% 14 56.0% 9 36.0%

NExT Aggregate; n=407 3 0.7% 8 2.0% 31 7.6% 116 28.5% 249 61.2%

align instruction with state subject matter standards of what students should know and be able to do.

St. Cloud; n=25 0 - 0 - 2 8.0% 13 52.0% 10 40.0%

NExT Aggregate; n=407 5 1.2% 6 1.5% 24 5.9% 132 32.4% 240 59.0%

identify clear subject matter learning goals for students.

St. Cloud; n=25 0 - 0 - 4 16.0% 10 40.0% 11 44.0%

NExT Aggregate; n=408 0 - 3 0.7% 26 6.4% 123 30.1% 256 62.7%

understand how students' learning is influenced by their social/emotional development.

St. Cloud; n=25 0 - 1 4.0% 2 8.0% 13 52.0% 9 36.0%

NExT Aggregate; n=406 0 - 6 1.5% 31 7.6% 124 30.5% 245 60.3%

account for students' prior knowledge and experiences in instructional planning.

St. Cloud; n=25 0 - 1 4.0% 4 16.0% 12 48.0% 8 32.0%

NExT Aggregate; n=409 1 0.2% 4 1.0% 30 7.3% 120 29.3% 254 62.1%

plan instruction for the whole class while differentiating for diverse learning needs.

St. Cloud; n=25 0 - 1 4.0% 7 28.0% 7 28.0% 10 40.0%

NExT Aggregate; n=407 3 0.7% 12 2.9% 59 14.5% 139 34.2% 194 47.7%

understand the advantages and limitations of various instructional strategies for the subject(s) I teach.

St. Cloud; n=24 0 - 0 - 4 16.7% 10 41.7% 10 41.7%

NExT Aggregate; n=405 1 0.2% 10 2.5% 27 6.7% 170 42.0% 197 48.6%

select instructional strategies to align with learning goals.

St. Cloud; n=24 0 - 0 - 2 8.3% 10 41.7% 12 50.0%

NExT Aggregate; n=405 0 - 7 1.7% 28 6.9% 139 34.3% 231 57.0%


Does Not

Apply Disagree

Tend to Disagree

Tend to Agree

Agree

n % n % n % n % n %

integrate a variety of media and educational technologies into instruction.

St. Cloud; n=25 0 - 0 - 2 8.0% 9 36.0% 14 56.0%

NExT Aggregate; n=408 2 0.5% 13 3.2% 47 11.5% 143 35.0% 203 49.8%

group students in a variety of ways for instructional purposes.

St. Cloud; n=23 0 - 0 - 7 30.4% 8 34.8% 8 34.8%

NExT Aggregate; n=402 2 0.5% 8 2.0% 48 11.9% 146 36.3% 198 49.3%

design long-range instructional plans that meet curricular goals.

St. Cloud; n=24 0 - 0 - 6 25.0% 8 33.3% 10 41.7%

NExT Aggregate; n=407 3 0.7% 12 2.9% 59 14.5% 155 38.1% 178 43.7%

regularly adjust instructional plans to meet student needs.

St. Cloud; n=24 0 - 0 - 4 16.7% 9 37.5% 11 45.8%

NExT Aggregate; n=403 2 0.5% 3 0.7% 33 8.2% 124 30.8% 241 59.8%

plan lessons with clear learning objectives/goals in mind.

St. Cloud; n=24 0 - 0 - 2 8.3% 9 37.5% 13 54.2%

NExT Aggregate; n=403 1 0.2% 3 0.7% 9 2.2% 94 23.3% 296 73.4%

design instruction and learning tasks that connect core content to real-life experiences for students.

St. Cloud; n=24 0 - 0 - 5 20.8% 8 33.3% 11 45.8%

NExT Aggregate; n=406 1 0.2% 7 1.7% 30 7.4% 127 31.3% 241 59.4%

apply basic measurement concepts to the development of sound classroom assessments.

St. Cloud; n=24 0 - 0 - 3 12.5% 9 37.5% 12 50.0%

NExT Aggregate; n=402 3 0.7% 9 2.2% 51 12.7% 147 36.6% 192 47.8%

strategically use a variety of assessments to monitor student learning.

St. Cloud; n=24 0 - 0 - 5 20.8% 6 25.0% 13 54.2%

NExT Aggregate; n=406 2 0.5% 6 1.5% 41 10.1% 130 32.0% 227 55.9%

use student self-assessment strategies.

St. Cloud; n=24 0 - 0 - 5 20.8% 9 37.5% 10 41.7%

NExT Aggregate; n=404 3 0.7% 14 3.5% 71 17.6% 143 35.4% 173 42.8%

provide feedback to students to improve their performance.

St. Cloud; n=24 0 - 0 - 4 16.7% 9 37.5% 11 45.8%

NExT Aggregate; n=406 3 0.7% 7 1.7% 42 10.3% 134 33.0% 220 54.2%

understand the role and interpretation of standardized testing in schools.

St. Cloud; n=24 0 - 1 4.2% 5 20.8% 10 41.7% 8 33.3%

NExT Aggregate; n=404 7 1.7% 22 5.4% 64 15.8% 152 37.6% 159 39.4%


Does Not

Apply Disagree

Tend to Disagree

Tend to Agree

Agree

n % n % n % n % n %

use assessment data to diagnose gaps in students’ knowledge and skills.

St. Cloud; n=24 0 - 2 8.3% 6 25.0% 6 25.0% 10 41.7%

NExT Aggregate; n=405 6 1.5% 23 5.7% 67 16.5% 145 35.8% 164 40.5%

design and teach lessons that promote students' abilities to draw conclusions based on the best analysis.

St. Cloud; n=23 0 - 1 4.3% 6 26.1% 8 34.8% 8 34.8%

NExT Aggregate; n=403 7 1.7% 11 2.7% 59 14.6% 157 39.0% 169 41.9%

design and teach lessons that promote students' abilities to analyze how parts of a whole interact with each other to produce overall outcomes in complex systems.

St. Cloud; n=24 0 - 1 4.2% 6 25.0% 8 33.3% 9 37.5%

NExT Aggregate; n=405 10 2.5% 16 4.0% 66 16.3% 157 38.8% 156 38.5%

design and teach lessons that promote students' abilities to formulate questions that elicit multiple views on a topic.

St. Cloud; n=31 1 3.2% 1 3.2% 8 25.8% 9 29.0% 12 38.7%

NExT Aggregate; n=454 15 3.3% 13 2.9% 58 12.8% 171 37.7% 197 43.4%

design and teach lessons that promote students' abilities to develop solutions to abstract problems.

St. Cloud; n=30 2 6.7% 2 6.7% 6 20.0% 10 33.3% 10 33.3%

NExT Aggregate; n=453 15 3.3% 14 3.1% 70 15.5% 173 38.2% 181 40.0%

design and teach lessons that promote students' abilities to create solutions to global problems.

St. Cloud; n=31 2 6.5% 3 9.7% 10 32.3% 6 19.4% 10 32.3%

NExT Aggregate; n=453 18 4.0% 26 5.7% 94 20.8% 158 34.9% 157 34.7%

design and teach lessons that promote students' abilities to work collaboratively with teams to solve complex problems

St. Cloud; n=30 1 3.3% 1 3.3% 8 26.7% 9 30.0% 11 36.7%

NExT Aggregate; n=452 13 2.9% 12 2.7% 48 10.6% 157 34.7% 222 49.1%

Source: Q. B1a-aa *Note: Due to an extant error in the response option layout in the TTS hard-copy for some matrix questions (B1a-w), most data for this question represents online respondents.


Table 35. Instructional Practice: To what extent do you disagree or agree that your teacher preparation program prepared you to…*

St. Cloud*** NExT Aggregate

n Mean** SD n Mean SD

understand processes of inquiry and ways of knowing that are central to the subjects I teach.

25 3.32 0.690 404 3.57 0.612

effectively teach the subject matter in my licensure area.

25 3.28 0.614 404 3.50 0.724

align instruction with state subject matter standards of what students should know and be able to do.

25 3.32 0.627 402 3.51 0.678

identify clear subject matter learning goals for students.

25 3.28 0.737 408 3.55 0.648

understand how students' learning is influenced by their social/emotional development.

25 3.20 0.764 406 3.50 0.702

account for students' prior knowledge and experiences in instructional planning.

25 3.08 0.812 408 3.53 0.675

plan instruction for the whole class while differentiating for diverse learning needs.

25 3.04 0.935 404 3.27 0.819

understand the advantages and limitations of various instructional strategies for the subject(s) I teach.

24 3.25 0.737 404 3.37 0.719

select instructional strategies to align with learning goals.

24 3.42 0.654 405 3.47 0.701

integrate a variety of media and educational technologies into instruction.

25 3.48 0.653 406 3.32 0.802

group students in a variety of ways for instructional purposes.

23 3.04 0.825 400 3.34 0.764

design long-range instructional plans that meet curricular goals.

24 3.17 0.816 404 3.24 0.807

regularly adjust instructional plans to meet student needs.

24 3.29 0.751 401 3.50 0.679

plan lessons with clear learning objectives/goals in mind.

24 3.46 0.658 402 3.70 0.548

design instruction and learning tasks that connect core content to real-life experiences for students.

24 3.25 0.794 405 3.49 0.709




apply basic measurement concepts to the development of sound classroom assessments.

24 3.38 0.794 399 3.31 0.778

strategically use a variety of assessments to monitor student learning.

24 3.33 0.711 404 3.43 0.734

use student self-assessment strategies.

24 3.21 0.816 401 3.18 0.846

provide feedback to students to improve their performance.

24 3.29 0.779 403 3.41 0.745

understand the role and interpretation of standardized testing in schools.

24 3.04 0.751 397 3.13 0.877

use assessment data to diagnose gaps in students’ knowledge and skills.

24 3.00 0.859 399 3.13 0.892

design and teach lessons that promote students' abilities to draw conclusions based on the best analysis.

23 3.00 1.022 396 3.22 0.799

design and teach lessons that promote students' abilities to analyze how parts of a whole interact with each other to produce overall outcomes in complex systems.

24 3.04 0.905 395 3.15 0.839

design and teach lessons that promote students' abilities to formulate questions that elicit multiple views on a topic.

30 3.07 0.908 439 3.26 0.797

design and teach lessons that promote students' abilities to develop solutions to abstract problems.

28 3.00 0.907 438 3.19 0.816

design and teach lessons that promote students' abilities to create solutions to global problems.

29 2.79 0.943 435 3.03 0.904

design and teach lessons that promote students' abilities to work collaboratively with teams to solve complex problems

29 3.03 1.048 439 3.34 0.780

Source: Q. B1a-aa *Scale: 1=Disagree; 2=Tend to disagree; 3=Tend to agree; 4=Agree. **Note: “N/A” responses were excluded from the mean calculation. ***Note: Due to an extant error in the response option layout in the TTS hard-copy for some matrix questions, most data for this question represents online respondents.


Table 36. Diverse Learners: To what extent do you disagree or agree that your teacher preparation program prepared you to…*

Does Not

Apply Disagree

Tend to Disagree

Tend to Agree

Agree

n % n % n % n % n %

effectively teach students from culturally and ethnically diverse backgrounds.

St. Cloud; n=27 0 - 0 - 6 22.2% 12 44.4% 9 33.3%

NExT Aggregate; n=428 5 1.2% 20 4.7% 58 13.6% 137 32.0% 208 48.6%

design and modify assessments to accommodate students with diverse learning needs.

St. Cloud; n=27 0 - 0 - 7 25.9% 9 33.3% 11 40.7%

NExT Aggregate; n=426 4 0.9% 11 2.6% 68 16.0% 146 34.3% 197 46.2%

understand the unique needs of refugees among my students.

St. Cloud; n=26 3 11.5% 2 7.7% 11 42.3% 5 19.2% 5 19.2%

NExT Aggregate; n=425 27 6.4% 51 12.0% 110 25.9% 118 27.8% 119 28.0%

access resources, programs, and other school personnel for students needing special assistance.

St. Cloud; n=27 0 - 1 3.7% 5 18.5% 12 44.4% 9 33.3%

NExT Aggregate; n=424 3 0.7% 26 6.1% 74 17.5% 146 34.4% 175 41.3%

design instruction for special education students with cognitive impairments.

St. Cloud; n=26 0 - 0 - 9 34.6% 7 26.9% 10 38.5%

NExT Aggregate; n=425 11 2.6% 28 6.6% 97 22.8% 144 33.9% 145 34.1%

design instruction for special education students with emotional/behavioral impairments.

St. Cloud; n=27 0 - 0 - 9 33.3% 9 33.3% 9 33.3%

NExT Aggregate; n=427 11 2.6% 34 8.0% 123 28.8% 130 30.4% 129 30.2%

design instruction for special education students with physical and other health impairments.

St. Cloud; n=26 0 - 0 - 11 42.3% 8 30.8% 7 26.9%

NExT Aggregate; n=425 13 3.1% 29 6.8% 102 24.0% 139 32.7% 142 33.4%

design instruction for special education students with sensory impairments (deaf, blind).

St. Cloud; n=27 1 3.7% 1 3.7% 12 44.4% 7 25.9% 6 22.2%

NExT Aggregate; n=427 19 4.4% 48 11.2% 120 28.1% 128 30.0% 112 26.2%

design instruction for special education students within the autism spectrum disorder.

St. Cloud; n=27 0 - 1 3.7% 11 40.7% 6 22.2% 9 33.3%

NExT Aggregate; n=427 16 3.7% 36 8.4% 108 25.3% 151 35.4% 116 27.2%

design instruction for special education students with specific learning disorders.

St. Cloud; n=27 0 - 0 - 9 33.3% 10 37.0% 8 29.6%

NExT Aggregate; n=427 10 2.3% 32 7.5% 102 23.9% 143 33.5% 140 32.8%


Does Not

Apply Disagree

Tend to Disagree

Tend to Agree

Agree

n % n % n % n % n %

design instruction for students with mental health needs.

St. Cloud; n=27 1 3.7% 1 3.7% 10 37.0% 9 33.3% 6 22.2%

NExT Aggregate; n=424 15 3.5% 41 9.7% 117 27.6% 151 35.6% 100 23.6%

design instruction for gifted and talented students.

St. Cloud; n=27 0 - 2 7.4% 7 25.9% 13 48.1% 5 18.5%

NExT Aggregate; n=427 11 2.6% 37 8.7% 99 23.2% 156 36.5% 124 29.0%

design instruction for English language learners.

St. Cloud; n=27 0 - 0 - 10 37.0% 7 25.9% 10 37.0%

NExT Aggregate; n=427 12 2.8% 28 6.6% 91 21.3% 136 31.9% 160 37.5%

use community and home resources to foster student learning.

St. Cloud; n=26 0 - 1 3.8% 10 38.5% 8 30.8% 7 26.9%

NExT Aggregate; n=425 5 1.2% 23 5.4% 91 21.4% 163 38.4% 143 33.6%

effectively teach students who have experienced trauma and/or displacement.

St. Cloud; n=27 1 3.7% 3 11.1% 11 40.7% 7 25.9% 5 18.5%

NExT Aggregate; n=423 11 2.6% 67 15.8% 142 33.6% 127 30.0% 76 18.0%

Source: Q. B2a-o *Note: Due to an extant error in the response option layout in the TTS hard-copy for some matrix questions, most data for this question represents online respondents.


Table 37. Diverse Learners: To what extent do you disagree or agree that your teacher preparation program prepared you to…*



effectively teach students from culturally and ethnically diverse backgrounds.

27 3.11 0.751 423 3.26 0.867

design and modify assessments to accommodate students with diverse learning needs.

27 3.15 0.818 422 3.25 0.818

understand the unique needs of refugees among my students.

23 2.57 0.945 398 2.77 1.018

access resources, programs, and other school personnel for students needing special assistance.

27 3.07 0.945 421 3.12 0.909

design instruction for special education students with cognitive impairments.

26 3.04 0.829 414 2.98 0.926

design instruction for special education students with emotional/behavioral impairments.

27 3.00 0.871 416 2.85 0.955

design instruction for special education students with physical and other health impairments.

26 2.85 0.832 412 2.96 0.935

design instruction for special education students with sensory impairments (deaf, blind).

26 2.69 0.834 408 2.75 0.988

design instruction for special education students within the autism spectrum disorder.

27 2.85 0.884 411 2.84 0.934

design instruction for special education students with specific learning disorders.

27 2.96 0.949 417 2.94 0.941

design instruction for students with mental health needs.

26 2.77 0.808 409 2.76 0.935

design instruction for gifted and talented students.

27 2.78 0.863 416 2.88 0.938

design instruction for English language learners.

27 3.00 0.847 415 3.03 0.936

use community and home resources to foster student learning.

26 2.81 0.877 420 3.01 0.882

effectively teach students who have experienced trauma and/or displacement.

26 2.54 0.895 412 2.51 0.973

Source: Q. B2a-o *Scale: 1=Disagree; 2=Tend to disagree; 3=Tend to agree; 4=Agree. **Note: “N/A” responses were excluded from the mean calculation. ***Note: Due to an extant error in the response option layout in the TTS hard-copy for some matrix questions, most data for this question represents online respondents.


Table 38. Learning Environment: To what extent do you disagree or agree that your teacher preparation program prepared you to…*

Does Not

Apply Disagree

Tend to Disagree

Tend to Agree

Agree

n % n % n % n % n %

develop and maintain a classroom environment that promotes student engagement.

St. Cloud; n=26 0 - 1 3.8% 3 11.5% 7 26.9% 15 57.7%

NExT Aggregate; n=425 0 - 8 1.9% 33 7.8% 119 28.0% 265 62.4%

respond appropriately to student misbehavior.

St. Cloud; n=26 0 - 1 3.8% 5 19.2% 9 34.6% 11 42.3%

NExT Aggregate; n=425 0 - 42 9.9% 73 17.2% 128 30.1% 182 42.8%

create a learning environment in which differences such as race, culture, gender, sexual orientation, and language are respected.

St. Cloud; n=26 0 - 0 - 4 15.4% 8 30.8% 14 53.8%

NExT Aggregate; n=425 1 0.2% 10 2.4% 27 6.4% 111 26.1% 276 64.9%

use classroom management techniques that foster self-control and self-discipline among students.

St. Cloud; n=26 0 - 1 3.8% 6 23.1% 9 34.6% 10 38.5%

NExT Aggregate; n=423 0 - 30 7.1% 64 15.1% 133 31.4% 196 46.3%

effectively organize the physical environment of the classroom for instruction.

St. Cloud; n=26 0 - 2 7.7% 3 11.5% 8 30.8% 13 50.0%

NExT Aggregate; n=422 2 0.5% 29 6.9% 39 9.2% 106 25.1% 246 58.3%

use effective listening techniques when communicating with students.

St. Cloud; n=26 0 - 1 3.8% 4 15.4% 7 26.9% 14 53.8%

NExT Aggregate; n=424 1 0.2% 15 3.5% 37 8.7% 125 29.5% 246 58.0%

communicate with students using non-biased language.

St. Cloud; n=26 0 - 1 3.8% 3 11.5% 7 26.9% 15 57.7%

NExT Aggregate; n=424 3 0.7% 14 3.3% 36 8.5% 122 28.8% 249 58.7%

stimulate effective classroom communication among students.

St. Cloud; n=26 0 - 2 7.7% 3 11.5% 10 38.5% 11 42.3%

NExT Aggregate; n=425 1 0.2% 21 4.9% 40 9.4% 140 32.9% 223 52.5%

clearly communicate expectations for appropriate student behavior.

St. Cloud; n=26 0 - 1 3.8% 4 15.4% 7 26.9% 14 53.8%

NExT Aggregate; n=423 0 - 21 5.0% 36 8.5% 118 27.9% 248 58.6%

use effective communication skills and strategies to convey ideas and information to students.

St. Cloud; n=26 0 - 1 3.8% 3 11.5% 9 34.6% 13 50.0%

NExT Aggregate; n=417 0 - 17 4.1% 22 5.3% 130 31.2% 248 59.5%

Source: Q. B3a-j *Note: Due to an extant error in the response option layout in the TTS hard-copy for some matrix questions, most data for this question represents online respondents.


Table 39. Learning Environment: To what extent do you disagree or agree that your teacher preparation program prepared you to…*



develop and maintain a classroom environment that promotes student engagement.

26 3.38 0.852 425 3.51 0.721

respond appropriately to student misbehavior.

26 3.15 0.881 425 3.06 0.997

create a learning environment in which differences such as race, culture, gender, sexual orientation, and language are respected.

26 3.38 0.752 424 3.54 0.720

use classroom management techniques that foster self-control and self-discipline among students.

26 3.08 0.891 423 3.17 0.934

effectively organize the physical environment of the classroom for instruction.

26 3.23 0.951 420 3.35 0.912

use effective listening techniques when communicating with students.

26 3.31 0.884 423 3.42 0.796

communicate with students using non-biased language.

26 3.38 0.852 421 3.44 0.786

stimulate effective classroom communication among students.

26 3.15 0.925 424 3.33 0.842

clearly communicate expectations for appropriate student behavior.

26 3.31 0.884 423 3.40 0.843

use effective communication skills and strategies to convey ideas and information to students.

26 3.31 0.838 417 3.46 0.775

Source: Q. B3a-j *Scale: 1=Disagree; 2=Tend to disagree; 3=Tend to agree; 4=Agree **Note: “N/A” responses were excluded from the mean calculation. ***Note: Due to an extant error in the response option layout in the TTS hard-copy for some matrix questions, most data for this question represents online respondents.


Table 40. Professionalism: To what extent do you disagree or agree that your teacher preparation program prepared you to…*

Does Not

Apply Disagree

Tend to Disagree

Tend to Agree

Agree

n % n % n % n % n %

value professional development opportunities to improve teaching.

St. Cloud; n=38 0 - 0 - 3 7.9% 13 34.2% 22 57.9%

NExT Aggregate; n=493 1 0.2% 4 0.8% 16 3.2% 97 19.6% 376 76.1%

access the professional literature to expand my knowledge about teaching and learning.

St. Cloud; n=38 0 - 0 - 5 13.2% 15 39.5% 18 47.4%

NExT Aggregate; n=492 1 0.2% 7 1.4% 37 7.5% 145 29.4% 303 61.5%

reflect on and use student data to inform my instruction.

St. Cloud; n=38 0 - 1 2.6% 7 18.4% 10 26.3% 20 52.6%

NExT Aggregate; n=491 1 0.2% 5 1.0% 41 8.4% 133 27.1% 311 63.3%

uphold my legal responsibilities as a professional educator and student advocate.

St. Cloud; n=38 0 - 1 2.6% 3 7.9% 9 23.7% 25 65.8%

NExT Aggregate; n=492 1 0.2% 8 1.6% 25 5.1% 99 20.1% 359 73.0%

actively engage with parents/guardians about issues affecting student learning.

St. Cloud; n=38 0 - 2 5.3% 4 10.5% 11 28.9% 21 55.3%

NExT Aggregate; n=491 6 1.2% 17 3.5% 47 9.6% 135 27.5% 286 58.2%

collaborate with teaching colleagues. St. Cloud; n=38 0 - 2 5.3% 2 5.3% 7 18.4% 27 71.1%

NExT Aggregate; n=492 0 - 7 1.4% 17 3.5% 103 20.9% 365 74.2%

collaborate with other school personnel about the well-being of my students.

St. Cloud; n=38 0 - 3 7.9% 2 5.3% 9 23.7% 24 63.2%

NExT Aggregate; n=492 2 0.4% 17 3.5% 24 4.9% 126 25.6% 323 65.7%

use colleague feedback to support my development as a teacher.

St. Cloud; n=38 0 - 3 7.9% 1 2.6% 9 23.7% 25 65.8%

NExT Aggregate; n=491 2 0.4% 11 2.2% 19 3.9% 114 23.2% 345 70.3% Source: Q. B4a-h *Note: Some graduates who responded “no” to the question in Table 27 elected to answer this question in the hard copy survey version.


Table 41. Professionalism: To what extent do you disagree or agree that your teacher preparation program prepared you to…*

St. Cloud NExT Aggregate


value professional development opportunities to improve teaching.

38 3.50 0.647 493 3.71 0.564

access the professional literature to expand my knowledge about teaching and learning.

38 3.34 0.708 492 3.51 0.698

reflect on and use student data to inform my instruction.

38 3.29 0.867 490 3.53 0.692

uphold my legal responsibilities as a professional educator and student advocate.

38 3.53 0.762 491 3.65 0.665

actively engage with parents/guardians about issues affecting student learning.

38 3.34 0.878 485 3.42 0.806

collaborate with teaching colleagues.

38 3.55 0.828 492 3.68 0.611

collaborate with other school personnel about the well-being of my students.

38 3.42 0.919 490 3.54 0.745

use colleague feedback to support my development as a teacher.

38 3.47 0.893 489 3.62 0.670

Source: Q. B4a-h *Scale: 1=Disagree; 2=Tend to disagree; 3=Tend to agree; 4=Agree **Note: “N/A” responses were excluded from the mean calculation.


PART C. YOUR TEACHING PRACTICE: WHAT DO YOU DO AS A TEACHER? Table 42. Instructional Practice: To what extent do you disagree or agree that you do the following in your teaching practice?

Does Not

Apply Disagree

Tend to Disagree

Tend to Agree

Agree

n % n % n % n % n %

I align instruction with state subject matter standards.

St. Cloud; n=36 3 8.3% 0 - 3 8.3% 6 16.7% 24 66.7%

NExT Aggregate; n=481 40 8.3% 4 0.8% 11 2.3% 79 16.4% 347 72.1%

I set clear subject matter learning goals for students.

St. Cloud; n=36 3 8.3% 0 - 0 - 9 25.0% 24 66.7%

NExT Aggregate; n=480 19 4.0% 2 0.4% 10 2.1% 104 21.7% 345 71.9%

I design activities in which students learn skills to address issues central to the subject matter.

St. Cloud; n=36 2 5.6% 0 - 0 - 9 25.0% 25 69.4%

NExT Aggregate; n=482 17 3.5% 1 0.2% 6 1.2% 89 18.5% 369 76.6%

I design activities in which students engage with subject matter from a variety of perspectives.

St. Cloud; n=36 2 5.6% 0 - 1 2.8% 10 27.8% 23 63.9%

NExT Aggregate; n=482 17 3.5% 1 0.2% 22 4.6% 125 25.9% 317 65.8%

I consider students’ prior knowledge or experience in my instructional planning.

St. Cloud; n=36 1 2.8% 0 - 0 - 10 27.8% 25 69.4%

NExT Aggregate; n=481 13 2.7% 0 - 3 0.6% 98 20.4% 367 76.3%

I create activities that are appropriate for my students’ social/emotional development.

St. Cloud; n=36 1 2.8% 0 - 0 - 9 25.0% 26 72.2%

NExT Aggregate; n=482 13 2.7% 0 - 6 1.2% 100 20.7% 363 75.3%

I create assignments that are at the appropriate levels of difficulty for my students’ diverse learning needs.

St. Cloud; n=36 1 2.8% 0 - 0 - 7 19.4% 28 77.8%

NExT Aggregate; n=481 20 4.2% 1 0.2% 14 2.9% 126 26.2% 320 66.5%

I align instructional strategies with learning goals.

St. Cloud; n=36 1 2.8% 0 - 0 - 8 22.2% 27 75.0%

NExT Aggregate; n=478 14 2.9% 3 0.6% 10 2.1% 88 18.4% 363 75.9%

I use a variety of instructional strategies to support student learning for the subject(s) I teach.

St. Cloud; n=35 1 2.9% 0 - 0 - 6 17.1% 28 80.0%

NExT Aggregate; n=481 10 2.1% 1 0.2% 13 2.7% 92 19.1% 365 75.9%


Does Not

Apply Disagree

Tend to Disagree

Tend to Agree

Agree

n % n % n % n % n %

I group students in a variety of ways for instructional purposes.

St. Cloud; n=36 1 2.8% 0 - 0 - 14 38.9% 21 58.3%

NExT Aggregate; n=481 20 4.2% 4 0.8% 34 7.1% 115 23.9% 308 64.0%

I integrate a variety of media and educational technologies into my instruction.

St. Cloud; n=36 4 11.1% 0 - 1 2.8% 8 22.2% 23 63.9%

NExT Aggregate; n=479 23 4.8% 6 1.3% 27 5.6% 124 25.9% 299 62.4%

I design long-range instructional plans that meet curricular goals.

St. Cloud; n=36 3 8.3% 0 - 2 5.6% 10 27.8% 21 58.3%

NExT Aggregate; n=481 28 5.8% 8 1.7% 27 5.6% 149 30.8% 270 56.1%

I plan lessons with clear learning objectives/goals in mind.

St. Cloud; n=36 2 5.6% 0 - 0 - 9 25.0% 25 69.4%

NExT Aggregate; n=479 18 3.8% 1 0.2% 7 1.5% 98 20.5% 355 74.1%

I regularly adjust instructional plans to meet students’ needs.

St. Cloud; n=36 1 2.8% 1 2.8% 0 - 6 16.7% 28 77.8%

NExT Aggregate; n=481 11 2.3% 1 0.2% 3 0.6% 74 15.4% 392 81.5%

I strategically use a variety of assessments to monitor student learning.

St. Cloud; n=36 1 2.8% 0 - 1 2.8% 10 27.8% 24 66.7%

NExT Aggregate; n=480 19 4.0% 0 - 26 5.4% 147 30.6% 288 60.0%

I design instruction and learning tasks that connect core content to real-life experiences for students.

St. Cloud; n=36 1 2.8% 0 - 1 2.8% 10 27.8% 24 66.7%

NExT Aggregate; n=474 19 4.0% 5 1.1% 19 4.0% 122 25.7% 309 65.2%

I ask my students to self-assess their own learning.

St. Cloud; n=36 1 2.8% 1 2.8% 5 13.9% 14 38.9% 15 41.7%

NExT Aggregate; n=480 28 5.8% 13 2.7% 64 13.3% 160 33.3% 215 44.8%

I provide feedback to students to improve their performance.

St. Cloud; n=36 1 2.8% 1 2.8% 0 - 12 33.3% 22 61.1%

NExT Aggregate; n=479 12 2.5% 2 0.4% 13 2.7% 128 26.7% 324 67.6%

I design and modify assessments to accommodate students with diverse learning needs.

St. Cloud; n=36 2 5.6% 1 2.8% 1 2.8% 9 25.0% 23 63.9%

NExT Aggregate; n=479 22 4.6% 4 0.8% 25 5.2% 136 28.4% 292 61.0%

I use assessment data to diagnose gaps in students’ knowledge and skills.

St. Cloud; n=36 2 5.6% 1 2.8% 2 5.6% 11 30.6% 20 55.6%

NExT Aggregate; n=478 24 5.0% 9 1.9% 32 6.7% 134 28.0% 279 58.4%


Does Not

Apply Disagree

Tend to Disagree

Tend to Agree

Agree

n % n % n % n % n %

I design and teach lessons that promote students' abilities to draw conclusions based on the best analysis.

St. Cloud; n=36 1 2.8% 1 2.8% 2 5.6% 12 33.3% 20 55.6%

NExT Aggregate; n=478 33 6.9% 3 0.6% 28 5.9% 158 33.1% 256 53.6%

I design and teach lessons that promote students' abilities to analyze how parts of a whole interact with each other to produce overall outcomes in complex systems.

St. Cloud; n=36 1 2.8% 1 0.8% 4 11.1% 9 25.0% 21 58.3%

NExT Aggregate; n=477 36 7.5% 7 1.5% 44 9.2% 147 30.8% 243 50.9%

I design and teach lessons that promote students' abilities to formulate questions that elicit multiple views on a topic.

St. Cloud; n=36 1 2.8% 1 2.8% 1 2.8% 13 36.1% 20 55.6%

NExT Aggregate; n=477 32 6.7% 5 1.0% 42 8.8% 144 30.2% 254 53.2%

I design and teach lessons that promote students' abilities to develop solutions to abstract problems.

St. Cloud; n=35 2 6.7% 2 6.7% 6 20.0% 10 33.3% 10 33.3%

NExT Aggregate; n=479 36 7.5% 6 1.3% 38 7.9% 163 34.0% 236 49.3%

I design and teach lessons that promote students' abilities to create solutions to global problems.

St. Cloud; n=36 3 8.3% 1 2.8% 6 16.7% 11 30.6% 15 41.7%

NExT Aggregate; n=478 44 9.2% 9 1.9% 85 17.8% 155 32.4% 185 38.7%

I design and teach lessons that promote students' abilities to work collaboratively with teams to solve complex problems.

St. Cloud; n=36 1 2.8% 1 2.8% 2 5.6% 13 36.1% 19 52.8%

NExT Aggregate; n=479 33 6.9% 7 1.5% 39 8.1% 128 26.7% 272 56.8%

Source: Q. C1a-z


Table 43. Instructional Practice: To what extent do you disagree or agree that you do the following in your teaching practice?*



I align instruction with state subject matter standards.

33 3.64 0.653 441 3.74 0.544

I set clear subject matter learning goals for students.

33 3.73 0.452 461 3.72 0.522

I design activities in which students learn skills to address issues central to the subject matter.

34 3.74 0.448 465 3.78 0.461

I design activities in which students engage with subject matter from a variety of perspectives.

34 3.65 0.544 465 3.63 0.584

I consider students’ prior knowledge or experience in my instructional planning.

35 3.71 0.458 468 3.78 0.431

I create activities that are appropriate for my students’ social/emotional development.

35 3.74 0.443 469 3.76 0.456

I create assignments that are at the appropriate levels of difficulty for my students’ diverse learning needs.

35 3.80 0.403 461 3.66 0.547

I align instructional strategies with learning goals.

35 3.77 0.426 464 3.75 0.521

I use a variety of instructional strategies to support student learning for the subject(s) I teach.

34 3.82 0.387 471 3.74 0.509

I group students in a variety of ways for instructional purposes.

35 3.60 0.497 461 3.58 0.667

I integrate a variety of media and educational technologies into my instruction.

32 3.69 0.535 456 3.57 0.666

I design long-range instructional plans that meet curricular goals.

33 3.58 0.614 453 3.50 0.690

I plan lessons with clear learning objectives/goals in mind.

34 3.74 0.448 461 3.75 0.481

I regularly adjust instructional plans to meet students’ needs.

35 3.74 0.611 470 3.82 0.414




I strategically use a variety of assessments to monitor student learning.

35 3.66 0.539 461 3.57 0.599

I design instruction and learning tasks that connect core content to real-life experiences for students.

35 3.66 0.539 455 3.62 0.622

I ask my students to self-assess their own learning.

35 3.23 0.808 452 3.28 0.811

I provide feedback to students to improve their performance.

35 3.57 0.655 467 3.66 0.554

I design and modify assessments to accommodate students with diverse learning needs.

34 3.59 0.701 457 3.57 0.639

I use assessment data to diagnose gaps in students’ knowledge and skills.

34 3.47 0.748 454 3.50 0.715

I design and teach lessons that promote students' abilities to draw conclusions based on the best analysis.

35 3.46 0.741 445 3.50 0.646

I design and teach lessons that promote students' abilities to analyze how parts of a whole interact with each other to produce overall outcomes in complex systems.

35 3.43 0.815 441 3.42 0.735

I design and teach lessons that promote students' abilities to formulate questions that elicit multiple views on a topic.

35 3.49 0.702 445 3.45 0.711

I design and teach lessons that promote students' abilities to develop solutions to abstract problems.

34 3.44 0.746 443 3.42 0.705

I design and teach lessons that promote students' abilities to create solutions to global problems.

33 3.21 0.857 434 3.19 0.819

I design and teach lessons that promote students' abilities to work collaboratively with teams to solve complex problems.

35 3.43 0.739 446 3.49 0.721

Source: Q. C1a-z *Scale: 1=Disagree; 2=Tend to disagree; 3=Tend to agree; 4=Agree **Note: “N/A” responses were excluded from the mean calculation.


Table 44. Diverse Learners: To what extent do you disagree or agree that you do the following in your teaching practice?

Does Not

Apply Disagree

Tend to Disagree

Tend to Agree

Agree

n % n % n % n % n %

I differentiate my instruction to meet the needs of special education students.

St. Cloud; n=36 3 8.3% 0 - 2 5.6% 8 22.2% 23 63.9%

NExT Aggregate; n=480 35 7.3% 5 1.0% 18 3.8% 129 26.9% 293 61.0%

I differentiate my instruction to meet the needs of gifted and talented students.

St. Cloud; n=36 8 22.2% 0 - 5 13.9% 7 19.4% 16 44.4%

NExT Aggregate; n=479 67 14.0% 6 1.3% 51 10.6% 136 28.4% 219 45.7%

I differentiate my instruction to meet the needs of English language learners.

St. Cloud; n=36 8 22.2% 0 - 3 8.3% 6 16.7% 19 52.8%

NExT Aggregate; n=478 122 25.5% 5 1.0% 24 5.0% 98 20.5% 229 47.9%

I access resources, programs, and other school personnel for students needing special assistance.

St. Cloud; n=36 2 5.6% 0 - 2 5.6% 5 13.9% 27 75.0%

NExT Aggregate; n=478 19 4.0% 4 0.8% 10 2.1% 110 23.0% 335 70.1%

I use my knowledge about the home communities of the students I teach.

St. Cloud; n=36 0 - 0 - 0 - 7 19.4% 29 80.6%

NExT Aggregate; n=479 12 2.5% 1 0.2% 13 2.7% 110 23.0% 343 71.6%

I use community and home resources to foster student learning.

St. Cloud; n=36 1 2.8% 0 - 2 5.6% 11 30.6% 22 61.1%

NExT Aggregate; n=478 23 4.8% 6 1.3% 37 7.7% 139 29.1% 273 57.1%

I advocate for students from diverse backgrounds.

St. Cloud; n=36 1 2.8% 0 - 0 - 6 16.7% 29 80.6%

NExT Aggregate; n=474 28 5.9% 1 0.2% 3 0.6% 90 19.0% 352 74.3%

Source: Q. C2a-g


Table 45. Diverse Learners: To what extent do you disagree or agree that you do the following in your teaching practice?*



I differentiate my instruction to meet the needs of special education students.

35 3.83 0.382 445 3.60 0.625

I differentiate my instruction to meet the needs of gifted and talented students.

36 3.36 0.867 412 3.38 0.756

I differentiate my instruction to meet the needs of English language learners.

34 3.65 0.691 356 3.55 0.684

I access resources, programs, and other school personnel for students needing special assistance.

35 3.74 0.611 459 3.69 0.557

I use my knowledge about the home communities of the students I teach.

34 3.56 0.746 467 3.70 0.527

I use community and home resources to foster student learning.

35 3.77 0.490 455 3.49 0.702

I advocate for students from diverse backgrounds.

34 3.71 0.629 446 3.78 0.447

Source: Q. C2a-g *Scale: 1=Disagree; 2=Tend to disagree; 3=Tend to agree; 4=Agree **Note: “N/A” responses were excluded from the mean calculation


Table 46. Learning Environment: To what extent do you disagree or agree that you do the following in your teaching practice?

Does Not

Apply Disagree

Tend to Disagree

Tend to Agree

Agree

n % n % n % n % n %

I develop and maintain a classroom environment that promotes student engagement.

St. Cloud; n=36 0 - 0 - 1 2.8% 8 22.2% 27 75.0%

NExT Aggregate; n=481 8 1.7% 1 0.2% 12 2.5% 83 17.3% 377 78.4%

I create a learning environment in which differences such as race, culture, gender, sexual orientation, and language are respected.

St. Cloud; n=36 1 2.8% 0 - 0 - 6 16.7% 29 80.6%

NExT Aggregate; n=481 10 2.1% 1 0.2% 2 0.4% 55 11.4% 413 85.9%

I manage student misbehavior appropriately.

St. Cloud; n=36 0 - 0 - 0 - 9 25.0% 27 75.0%

NExT Aggregate; n=481 4 0.8% 1 0.2% 16 3.3% 140 29.1% 320 66.5%

I use classroom management techniques that foster self-control and self-discipline among students.

St. Cloud; n=36 0 - 0 - 0 - 7 19.4% 29 80.6%

NExT Aggregate; n=480 5 1.0% 3 0.6% 19 4.0% 125 26.0% 328 68.3%

I effectively organize the physical environment of the classroom for instruction.

St. Cloud; n=36 0 - 1 2.8% 0 - 9 25.0% 26 72.2%

NExT Aggregate; n=481 22 4.6% 5 1.0% 13 2.7% 88 18.3% 353 73.5%

I use effective listening techniques when communicating with students.

St. Cloud; n=36 1 2.8% 0 - 0 - 9 25.0% 26 72.2%

NExT Aggregate; n=480 4 0.8% 1 0.2% 6 1.3% 89 18.5% 380 79.2%

I communicate with students using non-biased language.

St. Cloud; n=36 0 - 0 - 0 - 7 19.4% 2 80.6%

NExT Aggregate; n=479 3 0.6% 0 - 1 0.2% 88 18.4% 387 80.8%

I stimulate effective classroom communication among students.

St. Cloud; n=36 1 2.8% 0 - 0 - 9 25.0% 26 72.2%

NExT Aggregate; n=480 6 1.3% 2 0.4% 16 3.3% 112 23.3% 344 71.7%

I clearly communicate expectations for appropriate student behavior.

St. Cloud; n=36 0 - 0 - 0 - 9 25.0% 27 75.0%

NExT Aggregate; n=479 5 1.0% 0 - 13 2.7% 92 19.2% 369 77.0%

I use effective communication skills and strategies to convey ideas and information to students.

St. Cloud; n=36 0 - 0 - 0 - 10 27.8% 26 72.2%

NExT Aggregate; n=480 3 0.6% 1 0.2% 7 1.5% 99 20.6% 370 77.1%

Source: Q. C3a-j


Table 47. Learning Environment: To what extent do you disagree or agree that you do the following in your teaching practice?*



I develop and maintain a classroom environment that promotes student engagement.

36 3.72 0.513 473 3.77 0.492

I create a learning environment in which differences such as race, culture, gender, sexual orientation, and language are respected.

35 3.83 0.382 471 3.87 0.369

I manage student misbehavior appropriately.

36 3.75 0.439 477 3.63 0.559

I use classroom management techniques that foster self-control and self-discipline among students.

36 3.81 0.401 475 3.64 0.591

I effectively organize the physical environment of the classroom for instruction.

36 3.67 0.632 459 3.72 0.570

I use effective listening techniques when communicating with students.

35 3.74 0.443 476 3.78 0.457

I communicate with students using non-biased language.

36 3.81 0.401 476 3.81 0.397

I stimulate effective classroom communication among students.

35 3.74 0.443 474 3.68 0.557

I clearly communicate expectations for appropriate student behavior.

36 3.75 0.439 474 3.75 0.492

I use effective communication skills and strategies to convey ideas and information to students.

36 3.72 0.454 477 3.76 0.476

Source: Q. C3a-j *Scale: 1=Disagree; 2=Tend to disagree; 3=Tend to agree; 4=Agree **Note: “N/A” responses were excluded from the mean calculation.


Table 48. Professionalism: To what extent do you disagree or agree that you do the following in your teaching practice?

Does Not

Apply Disagree

Tend to Disagree

Tend to Agree

Agree

n % n % n % n % n %

I seek professional development opportunities to improve teaching.

St. Cloud; n=35 0 - 0 - 0 - 6 17.1% 29 82.9%

NExT Aggregate; n=481 5 1.0% 3 0.6% 14 2.9% 76 15.8% 383 79.6%

I read professional literature related to teaching.

St. Cloud; n=36 0 - 1 2.8% 6 16.7% 8 22.2% 21 58.3%

NExT Aggregate; n=482 3 0.6% 16 3.3% 53 11.0% 156 32.4% 254 52.7%

I identify needed improvements in my teaching based on student data.

St. Cloud; n=36 2 5.6% 1 2.8% 1 2.8% 7 19.4% 25 69.4%

NExT Aggregate; n=479 17 3.5% 2 0.4% 12 2.5% 100 20.9% 348 72.7%

I collaborate with other school personnel about the well-being of my students.

St. Cloud; n=36 1 2.8% 1 2.8% 0 - 6 16.7% 28 77.8%

NExT Aggregate; n=478 11 2.3% 1 0.2% 0 - 56 11.7% 410 85.8%

I actively engage with parents or guardians about issues affecting student learning.

St. Cloud; n=36 2 5.6% 1 2.8% 2 5.6% 8 22.2% 23 63.9%

NExT Aggregate; n=479 22 4.6% 4 0.8% 26 5.4% 110 23.0% 317 66.2%

I collaborate with teaching colleagues.

St. Cloud; n=36 1 2.8% 0 - 1 2.8% 6 16.7% 28 77.8%

NExT Aggregate; n=478 10 2.1% 0 - 6 1.3% 60 12.6% 402 84.1%

I use colleague feedback to support my development as a teacher.

St. Cloud; n=36 2 5.6% 1 2.8% 0 - 7 19.4% 26 72.2%

NExT Aggregate; n=480 10 2.1% 2 0.4% 5 1.0% 59 12.3% 404 84.2%

Source: Q. C4a-g


Table 49. Professionalism: To what extent do you disagree or agree that you do the following in your teaching practice?*



I seek professional development opportunities to improve teaching.

35 3.83 0.382 476 3.76 0.528

I read professional literature related to teaching.

36 3.36 0.867 479 3.35 0.807

I identify needed improvements in my teaching based on student data.

34 3.65 0.691 462 3.72 0.530

I collaborate with other school personnel about the well-being of my students.

35 3.74 0.611 467 3.87 0.351

I actively engage with parents or guardians about issues affecting student learning.

34 3.56 0.746 457 3.62 0.635

I collaborate with teaching colleagues.

35 3.77 0.490 468 3.85 0.395

I use colleague feedback to support my development as a teacher.

34 3.71 0.629 470 3.84 0.426

Source: Q. C4a-g *Scale: 1=Disagree; 2=Tend to disagree; 3=Tend to agree; 4=Agree **Note: “N/A” responses were excluded from the mean calculation.


PART D. YOUR SCHOOL CONTEXT: WHAT IS YOUR SCHOOL LIKE?

Table 50. School Climate: To what extent do you disagree or agree with the following statements?

Does Not

Apply Disagree

Tend to Disagree

Tend to Agree

Agree

n % n % n % n % n %

The school is a physically safe and secure place.

St. Cloud; n=36 0 - 0 - 1 2.8% 8 22.2% 27 75.0%

NExT Aggregate; n=479 4 0.8% 4 0.8% 15 3.1% 98 20.5% 358 74.7%

Students are respectful of one another.

St. Cloud; n=36 0 - 1 2.8% 4 11.1% 12 33.3% 19 52.8%

NExT Aggregate; n=479 4 0.8% 16 3.3% 54 11.3% 181 37.8% 224 46.8%

Teachers have high standards for students.

St. Cloud; n=36 0 - 1 2.8% 3 8.3% 8 22.2% 24 66.7%

NExT Aggregate; n=475 4 0.8% 5 1.1% 32 6.7% 116 24.4% 318 66.9%

Teachers respect the dignity and worth of all students.

St. Cloud; n=36 0 - 1 2.8% 3 8.3% 6 16.7% 26 72.2%

NExT Aggregate; n=477 5 1.0% 5 1.0% 14 2.9% 105 22.0% 348 73.0%

The faculty and staff have positive relationships with students' parents/guardians.

St. Cloud; n=35 0 - 1 2.9% 3 8.6% 7 20.0% 24 68.6%

NExT Aggregate; n=477 10 2.1% 4 0.8% 20 4.2% 112 23.5% 331 69.4%

The school encourages engagement with the community.

St. Cloud; n=36 0 - 0 - 1 2.8% 7 19.4% 28 77.8%

NExT Aggregate; n=478 7 1.5% 4 0.8% 22 4.6% 107 22.4% 338 70.7%

Source: Q. D1a-f


Table 51. School Climate: To what extent do you disagree or agree with the following statements?*



The school is a physically safe and secure place.

36 3.72 0.513 475 3.71 0.568

Students are respectful of one another.

36 3.36 0.798 475 3.29 0.798

Teachers have high standards for students.

36 3.53 0.774 471 3.59 0.666

Teachers respect the dignity and worth of all students.

36 3.58 0.770 472 3.69 0.582

The faculty and staff have positive relationships with students' parents/guardians.

35 3.54 0.780 467 3.65 0.605

The school encourages engagement with the community.

36 3.75 0.500 471 3.65 0.609

Source: Q. D1a-f *Scale: 1=Disagree; 2=Tend to disagree; 3=Tend to agree; 4=Agree **Note: “N/A” responses were excluded from the mean calculation.


Table 52. Professional Environment: To what extent do you disagree or agree with the following statements?

Does Not Apply

Disagree Tend to

Disagree Tend to Agree

Agree

n % n % n % n % n %

I feel respected as a colleague by faculty and staff.

St. Cloud; n=36 0 - 0 - 1 2.8% 11 30.6% 24 66.7%

NExT Aggregate; n=478 4 0.8% 4 0.8% 18 3.8% 116 24.3% 336 70.3%

I receive valuable professional guidance from faculty mentors or colleagues regarding the school's culture.

St. Cloud; n=36 1 2.8% 2 5.6% 0 - 12 33.3% 21 58.3%

NExT Aggregate; n=474 7 1.5% 12 2.5% 40 8.4% 115 24.3% 300 63.3%

Staff development in my school/district has been useful to me.

St. Cloud; n=36 1 2.8% 2 5.6% 5 13.9% 13 36.1% 15 41.7%

NExT Aggregate; n=477 17 3.6% 25 5.2% 56 11.7% 137 28.7% 242 50.7%

The administration is responsive to the needs of beginning teachers.

St. Cloud; n=36 2 5.6% 0 - 1 2.8% 14 38.9% 19 52.8%

NExT Aggregate; n=476 16 3.4% 29 6.1% 60 12.6% 115 24.2% 256 53.8%

My principal is an effective leader. St. Cloud; n=36 1 2.8% 0 - 0 - 10 27.8% 25 69.4%

NExT Aggregate; n=477 34 7.1% 23 4.8% 47 9.9% 110 23.1% 263 55.1%

Teachers share high standards for each other's professionalism and practice.

St. Cloud; n=36 0 - 0 - 3 8.3% 11 30.6% 22 61.1%

NExT Aggregate; n=477 7 1.5% 6 1.3% 23 4.8% 142 29.8% 299 62.7%

Teachers are continually learning and seeking new ideas to enhance their practice.

St. Cloud; n=36 1 2.8% 0 - 1 2.8% 13 36.1% 21 58.3%

NExT Aggregate; n=477 9 1.9% 5 1.0% 26 5.5% 139 29.1% 298 62.5%

Teachers have influence over establishing the curriculum.

St. Cloud; n=36 1 2.8% 1 2.8% 5 13.9% 11 30.6% 18 50.0%

NExT Aggregate; n=476 13 2.7% 15 3.2% 38 8.0% 129 27.1% 281 59.0%

Source: Q. D2a-h


Table 53. Professional Environment: To what extent do you disagree or agree with the following statements?*



I feel respected as a colleague by faculty and staff.

36 3.64 0.543 474 3.65 0.595

I receive valuable professional guidance from faculty mentors or colleagues regarding the school's culture.

35 3.49 0.781 467 3.51 0.759

Staff development in my school/district has been useful to me.

35 3.17 0.891 460 3.30 0.883

The administration is responsive to the needs of beginning teachers.

34 3.5 0.563 460 3.30 0.922

My principal is an effective leader.

35 3.71 0.458 443 3.38 0.873

Teachers share high standards for each other's professionalism and practice.

36 3.53 0.654 470 3.56 0.649

Teachers are continually learning and seeking new ideas to enhance their practice.

35 3.57 0.558 468 3.56 0.650

Teachers have influence over establishing the curriculum.

35 3.31 0.832 463 3.46 0.780

Source: Q. D2a-h *Scale: 1=Disagree; 2=Tend to disagree; 3=Tend to agree; 4=Agree **Note: “N/A” responses were excluded from the mean calculation.


Table 54. Resources: To what extent do you disagree or agree with the following statements?

Does Not

Apply Disagree

Tend to Disagree

Tend to Agree

Agree

n % n % n % n % n %

Teachers have adequate time in their schedules for planning.

St. Cloud; n=36 1 2.8% 2 5.6% 8 22.2% 12 33.3% 13 36.1%

NExT Aggregate; n=477 12 2.5% 59 12.4% 92 19.3% 143 30.0% 171 35.8%

Necessary teaching supplies are available as needed.

St. Cloud; n=36 0 - 3 8.3% 7 19.4% 10 27.8% 16 44.4%

NExT Aggregate; n=477 7 1.5% 31 6.5% 80 16.8% 140 29.4% 219 45.9%

Necessary technology resources are available to support my teaching.

St. Cloud; n=36 0 - 3 8.3% 3 8.3% 13 36.1% 17 47.2%

NExT Aggregate; n=478 10 2.1% 42 8.8% 51 10.7% 143 29.9% 232 48.5%

My classroom is equipped with the furniture and space necessary for flexible instructional activities.

St. Cloud; n=36 0 - 3 8.3% 7 19.4% 10 27.8% 16 44.4%

NExT Aggregate; n=476 16 3.4% 41 8.6% 76 16.0% 119 25.0% 224 47.1%

Available curricular materials, such as textbooks, are appropriate for my students' developmental level and learning needs.

St. Cloud; n=36 0 - 5 13.9% 2 5.6% 13 36.1% 16 44.4%

NExT Aggregate; n=477 17 3.6% 27 5.7% 48 10.1% 138 28.9% 247 51.8%

Source: Q. D3a-e


Table 55. Resources: To what extent do you disagree or agree with the following statements?*



Teachers have adequate time in their schedules for planning.

35 3.03 0.923 465 2.92 1.034

Necessary teaching supplies are available as needed.

36 3.08 0.996 470 3.16 0.935

Necessary technology resources are available to support my teaching.

36 3.22 0.929 468 3.21 0.961

My classroom is equipped with the furniture and space necessary for flexible instructional activities.

36 3.08 0.996 460 3.14 0.995

Available curricular materials, such as textbooks, are appropriate for my students' developmental level and learning needs.

36 3.11 1.036 460 3.32 0.882

Source: Q. D3a-e *Scale: 1=Disagree; 2=Tend to disagree; 3=Tend to agree; 4=Agree **Note: “N/A” responses were excluded from the mean calculation.

Table 56. What grade level(s) are you teaching? Mark ALL that apply.*

St. Cloud n=34


n Percent of

Cases n

Percent of Cases

Early childhood 0 - 5 12.5%

Elementary 16 47.1% 225 48.4%

Middle or Junior High 16 47.1% 155 33.3%

High school 12 35.3% 148 31.8%

Source: Q. D5 *Note: Total percentage may exceed 100, due to being a “mark all that apply” question and the total n may exceed the number of respondents.


Table 57. Are you teaching any subject for which you are not licensed?

St. Cloud n=35


n Percent n Percent

Yes 5 14.3% 70 15.0%

No 30 85.7% 396 85.0% Source: Q. D6


PART E. YOUR BACKGROUND

Table 58. Did you ever have a paid or volunteer position working with…? Mark ALL that apply.*

St. Cloud n=48


n Percent of Cases

n Percent of Cases

Low-income children 38 79.2% 441 82.1%

Children in a rural or remote setting 19 39.6% 196 36.5%

New immigrants 21 43.8% 221 41.2%

Children in an urban setting 24 50.0% 319 59.4%

English language learners 30 62.5% 374 69.6%

Children with special needs 41 85.4% 391 72.8%

Source: Q. E1. Respondents that marked “no” to question A11 were directed to proceed to Part E, however, the “n” dropped for the remainder of the survey to varying degrees in comparison to the “n” in Table 1. *Note: Total percentage may exceed 100, due to being a “mark all that apply” question and the total n may exceed the number of respondents.

Table 59. What is your gender?

St. Cloud n=61


n Percent n Percent

Male 8 13.1% 145 22.2%

Female 53 86.9% 508 77.7% Source: Q. E2


Table 60. What is your race/ethnicity? Mark ALL that apply.*

St. Cloud n=61


n Percent of Cases

n Percent of Cases

American Indian or Alaskan Native 0 - 5 0.8%

Asian 2 3.3% 17 2.6%

Black or African American 1 1.6% 12 1.9%

Hispanic or Latino 3 4.9% 13 2.0%

Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander

1 1.6% 6 0.9%

White, non-Hispanic 58 95.1% 608 94.4%

Other** 1 1.6% 6 0.9%

Source: Q. E3 *Note: Total percentage may exceed 100, due to being a “mark all that apply” question and the total n may exceed the number of respondents. **Note: St. Cloud respondents who selected “other” did not provide a description.

Table 61. Is English your native language?

St. Cloud n=60


n Percent n Percent

Yes 58 96.7% 636 97.7%

No 2 3.3% 15 2.3% Source: Q. E4

Table 62. Do you speak a language other than English fluently?

St. Cloud n=60


n Percent n Percent

Yes 7 11.7% 91 14.1%

No 53 88.3% 556 85.9% Source: Q. E5


Table 63. To what extent do you disagree or agree with each of the following statements?

Does Not

Apply Disagree

Tend to Disagree

Tend to Agree

Agree

n % n % n % n % n %

If I had to do it all over again, I would choose the same teacher preparation program.

St. Cloud; n=60 0 - 8 13.3% 7 11.7% 19 31.7% 26 43.3%

NExT Aggregate; n=655 3 0.5% 44 6.7% 70 10.7% 172 26.3% 364 55.7%

I would recommend my teacher preparation program to a prospective teacher.

St. Cloud; n=60 0 - 7 11.7% 10 16.7% 15 25.0% 28 46.7%

NExT Aggregate; n=651 3 0.5% 38 5.8% 81 12.4% 160 24.6% 369 56.7%

I am not as happy about teaching as I thought I would be.

St. Cloud; n=60 5 8.3% 37 61.7% 5 8.3% 10 16.7% 3 5.0%

NExT Aggregate; n=648 35 5.4% 330 50.9% 137 21.1% 78 12.0% 68 10.5%

I am committed to the teaching profession.

St. Cloud; n=60 2 3.3% 2 3.3% 2 3.3% 11 18.3% 43 71.7%

NExT Aggregate; n=649 15 2.3% 13 2.0% 37 5.7% 127 19.6% 457 70.4%

The rewards of teaching are worth the efforts I put in to become a teacher.

St. Cloud; n=60 1 1.7% 3 5.0% 2 3.3% 11 18.3% 43 71.7%

NExT Aggregate; n=646 20 3.1% 15 2.3% 36 5.6% 154 23.8% 421 65.2%

I was effectively prepared to teach in a variety of school settings (urban, suburban, rural).

St. Cloud; n=59 0 - 7 11.9% 16 27.1% 17 28.8% 19 32.2%

NExT Aggregate; n=647 14 2.2% 50 7.7% 103 15.9% 247 38.2% 233 36.0%

Source: Q. E6a-f


Table 64. Comparison of St. Cloud 2012 and 2013 responses to “I would recommend my teacher preparation program to a prospective teacher”*

Disagree Tend to Disagree Tend to Agree Agree

n % n % n % n %

2012; n=59 6 10.2% 9 15.3% 14 23.7% 30 50.8%

2013; n=60 7 11.7% 10 16.7% 15 25.0% 28 46.7%

Source: Q. E6b *Note: “N/A” responses were excluded from the 2012 frequency calculation; therefore they have been removed from this table.


Table 65. To what extent do you disagree or agree with each of the following statements?*



If I had to do it all over again, I would choose the same teacher preparation program.

60 3.05 1.048 650 3.32 0.916


60 3.07 1.056 648 3.33 0.907

I am not as happy about teaching as I thought I would be.***

55 1.62 0.972 613 1.81 1.037

I am committed to the teaching profession.

58 3.64 0.718 634 3.62 0.690

The rewards of teaching are worth the efforts I put in to become a teacher.

59 3.59 0.790 626 3.57 0.711

I was effectively prepared to teach in a variety of school settings (urban, suburban, rural).

59 2.81 1.025 633 3.04 0.920

Source: Q. E6a-f *Scale: 1=Disagree; 2=Tend to disagree; 3=Tend to agree; 4=Agree **Note: “N/A” responses were excluded from the mean calculation. ***Note: This question has negative wording, therefore low mean scores are desirable.

Table 66. Comparison of St. Cloud 2012 and 2013 responses for “To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statement?”*

2012 2013



59 3.15 1.031 60 3.07 1.056

Source: Q. E6b *Scale: 1=Disagree; 2=Tend to disagree; 3=Tend to agree; 4=Agree **Note: “N/A” responses were excluded from the mean calculation.


APPENDIX B: 2013 TRANSITION TO TEACHING SURVEY


APPENDIX C: INFORMED CONSENT FORM AND SURVEY MESSAGING


Bush Foundation NExT Project TTS Informed Consent Form –Hard Copy Version

Why are we conducting the Transition to Teaching Survey (TTS)?

The results of this survey will be primarily used for program improvement. In addition, NExT institutions may use the aggregate survey results for other purposes, including but not limited to program accreditation reporting and identification of professional development needs in schools.

What are the benefits of the TTS?

Your participation in the TTS will help the teacher education program at your alma mater monitor project implementation and operations for program improvement. In addition, the findings may help your alma mater with institutional approval processes.

What are the procedures?

Your participation in this survey is voluntary. Graduates from NExT institutions are asked to complete the TTS to describe their teacher preparation experience and current teaching environment. If you are not currently in a teaching position, you are still requested to complete a limited portion of the survey, and it will take about 10 minutes. If you are teaching, this survey will take approximately 20 minutes to complete. You may complete the survey after consenting to participate at the end of this document.

Your responses will be shared with your university, including personally identifiable information. Hezel Associates will provide a report using only aggregated data to your alma mater and the Bush Foundation. Your university will be responsible for protecting your identity and data privacy rights when reporting and sharing the findings.

Your immediate supervisor’s name and contact information is requested in this survey. We intend to distribute a Supervisor Survey for the chief purpose of improving teacher preparation at the college or university from which you graduated.

What other options are there?

You may skip individual questions in the survey. You may also choose to refuse or discontinue participation altogether without penalty or reprisal, but you will be helping your alma mater improve its teacher education program(s) if you answer all questions.

What are the risks?

Since personally identifiable information is being collected by Hezel Associates and then shared with your alma mater, there are two potential, but minimal risks: confidentiality infringement and presentation of personally identifiable information. Protection of study participants is a top priority, and we consistently work to ensure all information that is stored and transferred remains on a password-protected platform and is confidential. The raw data will only be shared with your institution (not with your immediate supervisor or anyone else at the school where you teach). Hezel Associates applies internal quality assurance reviews of data and reports to prevent the stated risks. Hezel Associates and your alma mater are subject to federal standards for the protection of participants in research, the application of which includes maintaining anonymity in any public release of findings.


Contacts and Questions

If you have general questions, concerns, or complaints about the study, you may contact Hezel Associates or your alma mater:

Kirk Knestis, Director of Research and Evaluation, [email protected], 315-422-3512 x221

Tracy Herman, Project Leader, [email protected], 585-217-6722

<Insert university-specific name and contact information for hard copy version>

If you have any difficulties or questions about completing the questionnaire, you may contact Tracy. If you have any questions regarding your rights as a participant in the study, you may contact Dana Gonzales at Solutions IRB (the body that oversees our protection of study participants) at 1-855-226-4472 or email [email protected]. If you wish to address someone else, you may contact Justin Christy from the Bush Foundation at [email protected] or 651-379-2244.

Statement of Consent: I have read all the above information and received answers to any questions I asked. I may photocopy this form for my records. I am 18 years of age or older, and I consent to

participate in this study.

First and Last Name (required): __________________________________

University/College Name where you obtained your teaching degree (required): _____________________________________

Student University ID # (helpful, but not required): ___________________________

**Please note, in order to use your TTS data, we must have your name, university/college name, and consent selection marked. In addition, please keep this form attached to the survey.

I consent to the following:

Yes No

Participation in the Transition to Teaching Survey O O

Distribution of the Supervisor Survey to my employer* O O

Permission for my university/college to contact me for follow-up to my TTS responses

O O

*Mark “no” if you are not employed as an educator.

Please provide a phone number and/or email where you’d like to be contacted for follow up: ___________________________________________


A. First Email Contact Message

Subject Header: <Institution Name> Education Program Needs Your Feedback

From Line: [email protected]

Dear <name>,

We are contacting you on behalf of <institution name> to request your participation in the Transition to Teaching Survey (TTS), which asks about your employment status and the extent to which you feel prepared for teaching responsibilities. This survey is a follow-up to the entry and exit survey that you probably completed during your teacher preparation program and completing it—whether you’re teaching or not—will support program improvement efforts as part of the Network for Excellence in Teaching (NExT).

The survey can be found by clicking on or copying and pasting the link below into the address bar within your browser.

http://www.hezel.com/cgi-bin/rws5.pl?FORM=TransitiontoTeachingSurvey2013

The first page is a required consent form that describes the purpose and procedures for the survey as well as steps taken to ensure confidentiality of your responses. We ask for your consent to distribute a supervisor survey (if applicable), which will help us learn more about our training through their perspective. As you complete the survey, please click on the “next” and “back” buttons at the bottom of each page, rather than using the arrows within your browser.

Within two weeks, you will receive a hard copy version of this survey with a pre-paid return envelope. The return address on the envelope you will receive will be Hezel Associates–please watch for it. If you have changed your mailing address or your name (e.g., taken a married name) recently, please provide current information to [email protected].

As noted above, your participation in the TTS will inform improvements in the teacher education program(s) at your alma mater. Please respond to either the electronic link or the hard copy of the survey—but do not respond to both.

If you have any questions about the survey, please contact Tracy Herman at [email protected]. Thank you for your participation.

Insert IHE Rep Name Insert IHE Rep Name 2 (optional) Tracy Herman Insert Rep Title Insert Rep 2 Title Project Leader Insert Institution Name Insert Institution Name Hezel Associates


B. Mailed Letter

<Insert institutional logo> <Insert Bush Foundation logo>

Greetings,

We are contacting you on behalf of<institution name>to request your participation in the Transition to Teaching Survey (TTS), which asks about your employment status and the extent to which you feel prepared for teaching responsibilities. This survey is a follow-up to the entry and exit survey that you probably completed during your teacher preparation program and completing it—whether you’re teaching or not—will support program improvement efforts as part of the Network for Excellence in Teaching (NExT).

Note: If you have already completed the online version of the survey due to previous invitations, you can disregard the rest of this letter. Thank you for your participation.

If you have not yet completed the survey, you have two options. Enclosed is a paper copy that you may complete and return in the postage paid envelope by April 22. Please make sure you sign and return the consent form with your completed survey; we cannot use your responses without it.

If you prefer to complete the survey online, you may use the following link:


The first page is a required consent form that describes the purpose and procedures for the survey as well as steps taken to ensure confidentiality of your responses. We ask for your consent to distribute a supervisor survey (if applicable), which will help us learn more about our training through their perspective. As you complete the survey, please click on the “next” and “back” buttons at the bottom of each page, rather than using the arrows within your browser.

In order for your alma mater to better support you after graduation, we would like to know if you had a name change since you graduated (e.g., change in marital status), a new mailing address, and/or a new email address. Please send your updates to [email protected]. She will send an updated contact database to the teacher education department at your alma mater for post-graduation professional support and communications. It will not be shared for marketing or fundraising purposes.

As noted above, your participation in the TTS will inform improvements in the teacher education program(s) at your alma mater. Please respond to either the electronic link or the hard copy of the survey—but do not respond to both.

If you have any questions about the survey, please contact Tracy Herman ([email protected])

Thank you for your participation in this effort to improve educational offerings for future students. Insert IHE Rep Name Insert IHE Rep Name 2 (optional) Tracy Herman Insert Rep Title Insert Rep 2 Title Project Leader Insert Institution Name Insert Institution Name Hezel Associates


C. Second Email Message

Subject Header: Survey Link for Transition to Teaching Survey

Greetings, By now you should have received an email and/or mailed letter inviting you to complete the Transition to Teaching Survey (TTS), which asks about your employment status and the extent to which you feel prepared for teaching responsibilities. Your participation in the TTS will help to improve teacher education through the Network for Excellence in Teaching (NExT). If you have not yet completed it, please do so electronically or in hard copy format by April 22. The survey can be found by clicking on or copying and pasting the link below into the address bar within your browser.


As you proceed through the survey, please click on the “next” and “back” buttons at the bottom of each survey page rather than using the arrows in your browser. If you have any questions about the survey, please contact Tracy at [email protected]. On behalf of <institution name>, thank you for your participation in this effort to improve educational offerings for future students. Insert IHE Rep Name Insert IHE Rep Name 2 (optional) Tracy Herman Insert Rep Title Insert Rep 2 Title Project Leader Insert Institution Name Insert Institution Name Hezel Associates


D. Third Email Message

Subject Header: Reminder: Complete Transition to Teaching Survey

Greetings, This is a reminder to complete the Transition to Teaching Survey recently sent via email and hard copy by April 22. Regardless of your employment situation, your participation in this survey is critical to program improvement efforts at < institution name>. The link to the online version is provided below. http://www.hezel.com/cgi-bin/rws5.pl?FORM=TransitiontoTeachingSurvey2013

As you proceed through the survey, please click on the “next” and “back” buttons at the bottom of each survey page, rather than using the arrows in your browser. If you have any questions about the survey, please contact Tracy at [email protected]. On behalf of <institution name>, thank you for your participation in this effort to improve educational offerings for future teacher candidate students. Insert IHE Rep Name Insert IHE Rep Name 2 (optional) Tracy Herman Insert Rep Title Insert Rep 2 Title Project Leader Insert Institution Name Insert Institution Name Hezel Associates


E. Fourth Email Message

Subject Header: Final Reminder - Transition to Teaching Survey Closes April 22

Greetings, This is a final reminder to complete the Transition to Teaching Survey, which will close on April 22. Your participation is critical to your alma mater and the Network for Excellence in Teaching. You may complete either a hard copy or electronic version (please do not complete both). To complete the online survey simply click on the link below: http://www.hezel.com/cgi-bin/rws5.pl?FORM=TransitiontoTeachingSurvey2013

As you proceed through the survey, please click on the “next” and “back” buttons at the bottom of each survey page, rather than using the arrows in your browser. If you have any questions about the survey, please contact Tracy at [email protected]. On behalf of <institution name>, thank you for your participation in this effort to improve educational offerings for future teacher candidate students. Insert IHE Rep Name Insert IHE Rep Name 2 (optional) Tracy Herman Insert Rep Title Insert Rep 2 Title Project Leader Insert Institution Name Insert Institution Name Hezel Associates


common metrics 2013 transition to teaching survey · hezel associates, llc. december 2013 . to...

Documents