department of middle & secondary education and educational ...sec+ed+lead+2019-2020+cpi+… ·...
TRANSCRIPT
1
Department of Middle & Secondary Education and Educational Leadership Academic Year: 2019-2020
Continuous Program Improvement Report
BSED Middle Level Education
Objective Assessed Direct Measure Direct Measure Results Indirect
Measure
Indirect
Measure
Results
Proposed
Action Items
for
Assessment
Tool
Proposed Action
Items for Program
Action Items Implemented this year
Content knowledge
in Middle Level
Praxis II Please see attached. Skyfactor
Survey
Please see
attached.
N/A Comparative review
of required courses to
Praxis content to
identify gaps in skill
set that may be
attributed to
performance on the
exams.
N/A
Content
Knowledge:
Specific to field and
pedagogy according
to national, PA, and
EU standards
Grades Students continue to maintain a C
or better in all required content
courses. Students must have a 2.8
for candidacy and a 3.0 for
graduation.
N/A N/A
Ability to Plan Unit Plan Fall 2019
There were six candidates
enrolled in the undergraduate
Instructional Techniques for
Middle Level Education courses
who completed the required unit
plan culminating project. All
candidates scored at the Target or
Acceptable level on all standard
elements assessed.
Align all
rubrics with
INTASC
standards
A faculty content expert was assigned
for each certification area for all future
SPA reporting. The faculty member
was assigned to a SPA report based on
certifications held area and teaching
experience. The requirements for the
content expert include, but are not
limited to,
✓ Receive SPA reviewer
training
✓ Conduct annual SPA reviews
✓ Receive SPA report writer
training
✓ Stay abreast of changes and
updates to SPA standards or
reporting practices
Spring 2020
There was one candidate enrolled
in the undergraduate Instructional
Techniques for Middle Level
Education courses who completed
the required unit plan culminating
project. The candidate scored at
the Target or Acceptable level on
all standard elements assessed.
2
Department of Middle & Secondary Education and Educational Leadership Academic Year: 2019-2020
Continuous Program Improvement Report
Appropriate
performance in the
classroom -
pedagogy
STPE Fall 2019
There were zero candidates
enrolled in the undergraduate
Student Teaching
✓ Collaborate with department
chair and faculty to revise
assessments as needed
✓ Serve as lead author of SPA
report
Spring 2020
There were five candidates
enrolled in undergraduate Student
Teaching. All candidates scored
at the Target or Acceptable level
on all standard elements assessed.
Positive Impact on
Student Learning
Instructional
Assessment Plan
Fall 2019
There were zero candidates
enrolled in the undergraduate
Student Teaching
Spring 2020
There were five candidates
enrolled in undergraduate Student
Teaching. All candidates scored
at the Target or Acceptable level
on all standard elements assessed.
Professional
Responsibility
Portfolio
Showcase/Interview
Fall 2019 There were six
candidates enrolled in Field
Experience. All candidates
scored at the Target or Acceptable
level on all standard elements
assessed in the Interview; Five
candidates scored at the Target or
Acceptable level on all standard
elements assessed in the Portfolio
Showcase
3
Department of Middle & Secondary Education and Educational Leadership Academic Year: 2019-2020
Continuous Program Improvement Report
Spring 2020
There was one candidate enrolled
in the undergraduate Field
Experience. The candidate scored
at the Target or Acceptable level
on all standard elements assessed
on both the Showcase and
Interview.
4
Department of Middle & Secondary Education and Educational Leadership Academic Year: 2019-2020
Continuous Program Improvement Report
Post Baccalaureate Middle Level Education
Objective Assessed Direct Measure Direct Measure Results Indirect
Measure
Indirect
Measure
Results
Proposed
Action Items
for
Assessment
Tool
Proposed Action
Items for Program
Action Items Implemented this year
Content knowledge
in Middle Level
Praxis II Please see attached. Skyfactor
Survey
Please see
attached.
N/A Comparative review of
required courses to
Praxis content to
identify gaps in skill
set that may be
attributed to
performance on the
exams.
N/A
Content Knowledge:
Specific to field and
pedagogy according
to national, PA, and
EU standards
Grades Students continue to maintain
a C or better in all required
content courses. Students
must have a 2.8 for
candidacy and a 3.0 for
graduation.
N/A N/A
Ability to Plan Unit Plan Fall 2019
There were two candidates
enrolled in the post-
baccalaureate Instructional
Techniques for Middle Level
Education courses. The
candidates scored at the
Target or Acceptable level on
all standard elements
assessed.
Align all
rubrics with
INTASC
standards
A faculty content expert was assigned for
each certification area for all future SPA
reporting. The faculty member was
assigned to a SPA report based on
certifications held area and teaching
experience. The requirements for the
content expert include, but are not
limited to,
✓ Receive SPA reviewer training
✓ Conduct annual SPA reviews
✓ Receive SPA report writer
training
✓ Stay abreast of changes and
updates to SPA standards or
reporting practices
Spring 2020
There were zero candidates
enrolled in the post-
baccalaureate Instructional
Techniques courses.
5
Department of Middle & Secondary Education and Educational Leadership Academic Year: 2019-2020
Continuous Program Improvement Report
Appropriate
performance in the
classroom -
pedagogy
STPE Fall 2019
There were two candidates
enrolled in the post-
baccalaureate Student
Teaching. The candidates
scored at the Target or
Acceptable level on all
standard elements assessed.
✓ Collaborate with department
chair and faculty to revise
assessments as needed
✓ Serve as lead author of SPA
report
Spring 2020
There was one candidate
enrolled in the post-
baccalaureate Student
Teaching. The candidate
scored at the Target or
Acceptable level on all
standard elements assessed.
Positive Impact on
Student Learning
Instructional
Assessment Plan
Fall 2019
There were two candidates
enrolled in the post-
baccalaureate Student
Teaching. The candidates
scored at the Target or
Acceptable level on all
standard elements assessed.
Spring 2020
There was one candidate
enrolled in the post-
baccalaureate Student
Teaching. The candidate
scored at the Target or
Acceptable level on all
standard elements assessed.
Professional
Responsibility
Portfolio
Showcase/Interview
Fall 2019
There were two candidates
enrolled in the post-
baccalaureate Field
Experience. The candidates
6
Department of Middle & Secondary Education and Educational Leadership Academic Year: 2019-2020
Continuous Program Improvement Report
scored at the Target or
Acceptable level on all
standard elements assessed
on both the Showcase and
Interview.
Spring 2020
There were zero candidates
enrolled in post-baccalaureate
Field Experience
7
Department of Middle & Secondary Education and Educational Leadership Academic Year: 2019-2020
Continuous Program Improvement Report
BSED Secondary Education
Objective Assessed Direct
Measure
Direct Measure Results Indirect
Measure
Indirect
Measure
Results
Proposed
Action Items
for Assessment
Tool
Proposed Action Items
for Program
Action Items Implemented this year
Content knowledge in
Middle Level
Praxis II Please see attached. Skyfactor
Survey
N/A.
Response
rate n<6
N/A Comparative review of
required courses to
Praxis content to identify
gaps in skill set that may
be attributed to
performance on the
exams.
N/A
Content Knowledge:
Specific to field and
pedagogy according to
national, PA, and EU
standards
Grades Students continue to
maintain a C or better in
all required content
courses. Students must
have a 2.8 for candidacy
and a 3.0 for graduation.
N/A N/A
Ability to Plan Unit Plan Fall 2019 Update rubrics
for new NCTM
and NCSS
Standards
Revise rubrics
based on NCTE
SPA feedback
Align all
rubrics with
INTASC
standards
A faculty content expert was assigned for each
certification area for all future SPA reporting.
The faculty member was assigned to a SPA
report based on certifications held area and
teaching experience. The requirements for the
content expert include, but are not limited to,
✓ Receive SPA reviewer training
✓ Conduct annual SPA reviews
✓ Receive SPA report writer training
✓ Stay abreast of changes and updates
to SPA standards or reporting
practices
✓ Collaborate with department chair
and faculty to revise assessments as
needed
✓ Serve as lead author of SPA report
English: 1 candidate;
Scored Target or
Acceptable on all
standard elements
assessed.
Math: 2 candidates; Both
scored Target or
Acceptable on all
standard elements
assessed.
Science: 0 candidates
enrolled in Instructional
Techniques course
Social Studies: 2
candidates; Both scored
Target or Acceptable on
all standard elements
assessed.
Spring 2020
English: 0 candidates
enrolled in Instructional
Techniques course
8
Department of Middle & Secondary Education and Educational Leadership Academic Year: 2019-2020
Continuous Program Improvement Report
Math: 1 candidate;
Scored Target or
Acceptable on all
standard elements
assessed.
Science: 0 candidates
enrolled in Instructional
Techniques
Social Studies: 0
candidates enrolled in
Instructional Techniques
course
Appropriate
performance in the
classroom - pedagogy
STPE Fall 2019
English: 2 candidates;
Scored Target or
Acceptable on all
standard elements
assessed.
Math: 0 candidates
enrolled in Student
Teaching
Science: 0 candidates
enrolled in student
teaching
Social Studies: 1
candidate; Scored Target
or Acceptable on all
standard elements
assessed.
Spring 2020
English: 1 candidate;
Scored Target or
Acceptable on all
standard elements
assessed.
9
Department of Middle & Secondary Education and Educational Leadership Academic Year: 2019-2020
Continuous Program Improvement Report
Math: 1 candidate;
Scored Target or
Acceptable on all
standard elements
assessed.
Science: 0 candidates
enrolled in student
teaching
Social Studies: 1
candidate; Scored Target
or Acceptable on all
standard elements
assessed.
Positive Impact on
Student Learning
Instructional
Assessment
Plan
Fall 2019
English: 1 candidate;
Scored Target or
Acceptable on all
standard elements
assessed.
Math: 0 candidates
enrolled in student
teaching
Science: 0 candidates
enrolled in student
teaching
Social Studies: 1
candidate; Scored Target
or Acceptable on all
standard elements
assessed.
Spring 2020
English: 1 candidate;
Scored Target or
Acceptable on all
standard elements
assessed.
10
Department of Middle & Secondary Education and Educational Leadership Academic Year: 2019-2020
Continuous Program Improvement Report
Math: 1 candidate;
Scored Target or
Acceptable on all
standard elements
assessed.
Science: 0 candidates
enrolled in student
teaching
Social Studies: 1
candidate; Scored Target
or Acceptable on all
standard elements
assessed.
Professional
Responsibility
Portfolio
Showcase
Fall 2019
English: 1 candidate;
Scored Target or
Acceptable on all
standard elements
assessed.
Math: 2 candidates; Both
scored Target or
Acceptable on all
standard elements
assessed.
Science: 0 candidates
enrolled in Field
Experience
Social Studies: 2
candidates; Both scored
Target or Acceptable on
all standard elements
assessed.
Spring 2020
English: 0 candidates
enrolled in Field
Experience
11
Department of Middle & Secondary Education and Educational Leadership Academic Year: 2019-2020
Continuous Program Improvement Report
Math: 1 candidate;
Scored Target or
Acceptable on all
standard elements
assessed.
Science: 0 candidates
enrolled in Field
Experience
Social Studies: 0
candidates enrolled in
Field Experience
Professional
Responsibility
Exit Interview Fall 2019
English: 1 candidate;
Scored Target or
Acceptable on all
standard elements
assessed.
Math: 2 candidates; Both
scored Target or
Acceptable on all
standard elements
assessed.
Science: 0 candidates
enrolled in Field
Experience
Social Studies: 2
candidates; Both scored
Target or Acceptable on
all standard elements
assessed.
Spring 2020
English: 0 candidates
enrolled in Field
Experience
Math: 1 candidate;
Scored Target or
Acceptable on all
12
Department of Middle & Secondary Education and Educational Leadership Academic Year: 2019-2020
Continuous Program Improvement Report
standard elements
assessed.
Science: 0 candidates
enrolled in field
experience
Social Studies: 0
candidates enrolled in
Field Experience
13
Department of Middle & Secondary Education and Educational Leadership Academic Year: 2019-2020
Continuous Program Improvement Report
Post Baccalaureate Secondary Education
Objective Assessed Direct
Measure
Direct Measure Results Indirect
Measure
Indirect
Measure
Results
Proposed
Action Items
for Assessment
Tool
Proposed Action Items
for Program
Action Items Implemented this year
Content knowledge in
Middle Level
Praxis II Please see attached. Skyfactor
Survey
N/A.
Response
rate n<6
N/A Comparative review of
required courses to
Praxis content to identify
gaps in skill set that may
be attributed to
performance on the
exams.
N/A
Content Knowledge:
Specific to field and
pedagogy according to
national, PA, and EU
standards
Grades Students continue to
maintain a C or better in
all required content
courses. Students must
have a 2.8 for candidacy
and a 3.0 for graduation.
N/A N/A
Ability to Plan Unit Plan Fall 2019 Update rubrics
for new NCTM
and NCSS
Standards
Revise rubrics
based on NCTE
SPA feedback
Align all
rubrics with
INTASC
standards
A faculty content expert was assigned for each
certification area for all future SPA reporting.
The faculty member was assigned to a SPA
report based on certifications held area and
teaching experience. The requirements for the
content expert include, but are not limited to,
✓ Receive SPA reviewer training
✓ Conduct annual SPA reviews
✓ Receive SPA report writer training
✓ Stay abreast of changes and updates
to SPA standards or reporting
practices
✓ Collaborate with department chair
and faculty to revise assessments as
needed
✓ Serve as lead author of SPA report
English: 0 candidates
enrolled in Instructional
Techniques
Math: 0 candidates
enrolled in Instructional
Techniques
Science: 2 candidates;
All scored Target or
Acceptable on all
standard elements
assessed.
Social Studies: 3
candidates; All scored
Target or Acceptable on
all standard elements
assessed.
Spring 2020
English:
Math: 0 candidates
enrolled in Instructional
Techniques
14
Department of Middle & Secondary Education and Educational Leadership Academic Year: 2019-2020
Continuous Program Improvement Report
Science: 0 candidates
enrolled in Instructional
Techniques
Social Studies: 0
candidates enrolled in
Instructional Techniques
Appropriate
performance in the
classroom - pedagogy
STPE Fall 2019
English: 1 candidate;
Scored Target or
Acceptable on all
standard elements
assessed.
Math: 1 candidate;
Scored Target or
Acceptable on all
standard elements
assessed.
Science: 0 candidates
enrolled in Student
Teaching
Social Studies: 0
candidates enrolled in
Student Teaching
Spring 2020
English: 2 candidates;
Both scored Target or
Acceptable on all
standard elements
assessed.
Math: 0 candidates
enrolled in Student
Teaching
Science: 1 candidate;
Scored Target or
Acceptable on all
15
Department of Middle & Secondary Education and Educational Leadership Academic Year: 2019-2020
Continuous Program Improvement Report
standard elements
assessed.
Social Studies: 3
candidates; Both scored
Target or Acceptable on
all standard elements
assessed.
Positive Impact on
Student Learning
Instructional
Assessment
Plan
Fall 2019
English: 1 candidate;
Scored Target or
Acceptable on all
standard elements
assessed.
Math: 1 candidate;
Scored Target or
Acceptable on all
standard elements
assessed.
Science: 0 candidates
enrolled in Student
Teaching
Social Studies: 0
candidates enrolled in
Student Teaching
Spring 2020
English: 2 candidates;
Both scored Target or
Acceptable on all
standard elements
assessed.
Math: 0 candidates
enrolled in Student
Teaching
Science: 1 candidate;
Scored Target or
Acceptable on all
16
Department of Middle & Secondary Education and Educational Leadership Academic Year: 2019-2020
Continuous Program Improvement Report
standard elements
assessed.
Social Studies: 3
candidates; Both scored
Target or Acceptable on
all standard elements
assessed.
Professional
Responsibility
Portfolio
Showcase
Fall 2019
English: 0 candidates
enrolled in Field
Experience
Math: 0 candidates
enrolled in Field
Experience
Science: 2 candidates;
All scored Target or
Acceptable on all
standard elements
assessed.
Social Studies: 3
candidates; All scored
Target or Acceptable on
all standard elements
assessed.
Spring 2020
English: 0 candidates
enrolled in Field
Experience
Math: 0 candidates
enrolled in Field
Experience
Science: 0 candidates
enrolled in Field
Experience
Social Studies: 0
candidates enrolled in
Field Experience
17
Department of Middle & Secondary Education and Educational Leadership Academic Year: 2019-2020
Continuous Program Improvement Report
Professional
Responsibility
Exit Interview Fall 2019
English: 0 candidates
enrolled in Field
Experience
Math: 0 candidates
enrolled in Field
Experience
Science: 2 candidates;
All scored Target or
Acceptable on all
standard elements
assessed.
Social Studies: 3
candidates; All scored
Target or Acceptable on
all standard elements
assessed.
Spring 2020
English: 0 candidates
enrolled in Field
Experience
Math: 0 candidates
enrolled in Field
Experience
Science: 0 candidates
enrolled in Field
Experience
Social Studies: 0
candidates enrolled in
Field Experience
18
Department of Middle & Secondary Education and Educational Leadership Academic Year: 2019-2020
Continuous Program Improvement Report
Program: M.Ed. Teacher Leadership
Objective
Assessed
Direct
Measure
Direct Measure
Results
Indirect
Measure
Indirect Measure
Results
Proposed Action
Items for Assessment
Tool
Proposed Action Items for
Program
Action Items Implemented
This Year
Content
Knowledge:
National
standards
Comp
Exam
Fall 2019
Spring 2020
All students
taking the
comprehensive
exam were
assigned the
established cut-
off score due to
the revisions
currently taking
place.
Graduate
Student
Satisfaction
Survey
The Educational
Leadership
program had low
response rate;
However, all of the
responses were
positive.
Direct Measure – the
comprehensive exam
continues to be
revised for the M.Ed.
Teacher Leadership
degree.
Indirect Measure –
None.
Direct Measure – program faculty
will continue their revision of
comprehensive exam questions.
Revisions to the course EDLR716
were just approved in spring 2020.
This is the final course revisions for
the current program. Plan to pilot
new comp exam and set new cut-off
score.
Indirect Measure – None.
Program faculty continues to
develop appropriate comp exam
questions based upon course and
program updates.
Content
Knowledge:
National, State,
and EU
standards
Vision
Essay
Program faculty
reviewed the
assessment
results and noted
the majority of all
candidates
scoring within the
Target
Expectations and
Meets
Expectations
performance
levels for all
rubric scoring
areas.
Graduate
Student
Satisfaction
Survey
Educational
Leadership
program had low
response rate;
However, all of the
responses were
positive.
Direct Measure –
None.
Indirect Measure –
None.
Direct Measure – program faculty
will monitor the performance level
for ELCC standard 1.2.
Indirect Measure – None.
Program faculty reviewed
performance level results for ELCC
standard 1.1. Candidate
performance increased from 85% of
candidates scoring at the Target
Expectations performance level to
100% of candidates scoring at the
target level. No further action taken
by program faculty.
19
Department of Middle & Secondary Education and Educational Leadership Academic Year: 2019-2020
Continuous Program Improvement Report
Program: Principal K-12 Post Master’s Certification
Objective
Assessed
Direct Measure Direct
Measure
Results
Indirect
Measure
Indirect Measure
Results
Proposed
Action Items
for Assessment
Tool
Proposed Action Items for
Program
Action Items Implemented
This Year
Content
Knowledge:
National
standards
Praxis II
6990
School Leaders
Licensure
Assessment
(SLLA)
PA has changed
the PRAXIS II
6011 to
PRAXIS II
6990.
All students
met the PA
established cut-
off score for
both tests
during the
2019-2020
academic year.
Graduate
Student
Satisfaction
Survey
The Educational
Leadership program
had low response
rate; However, all of
the responses were
positive.
Direct Measure
– None.
Indirect
Measure –
None.
Direct Measure –
Program faculty will monitor
PRAXIS II 6990 candidate
performance. New cut-off
score is 151. Indirect
Measure – None.
Transition to new required PRAXIS II
test. Program faculty properly informed
all candidates of the new required 6990
test.
Content
Knowledge:
National, State,
and EU
standards
Vision Essay Program faculty
reviewed the
assessment
results and
noted the
majority of all
candidates
scoring within
the Target
Expectations
and Meets
Expectations
performance
levels for all
Graduate
Student
Satisfaction
Survey
The Educational
Leadership program
had low response
rate; However, all of
the responses were
positive.
Direct Measure
– None.
Indirect
Measure –
None.
Direct Measure – Program
faculty will monitor
candidate performance level
for ELCC standard 1.2.
Indirect Measure – None.
Program faculty reviewed performance
level results for ELCC standard 1.1.
Candidate performance increased from
85% of candidates scoring at the Target
Expectations performance level to 100%
of candidates scoring at the target level.
No further action taken by program
faculty.
20
Department of Middle & Secondary Education and Educational Leadership Academic Year: 2019-2020
Continuous Program Improvement Report
rubric scoring
areas.
Professional
and
Pedagogical
Knowledge,
Skill, and
Dispositions
(Application of
Knowledge)
Assessment #7
Leadership
Capacity Project.
Program faculty
reviewed the
assessment
results and
noted the
majority of all
candidates
scoring within
the Target
Expectations
and Meets
Expectations
performance
levels for all
rubric scoring
areas.
Graduate
Student
Satisfaction
Survey
The Educational
Leadership program
had low response
rate; However, all of
the responses were
positive.
Direct Measure
–
Assessment #7
ELCC Standard
2.3.
Indirect
Measure –
None.
Direct Measure –
Program faculty will monitor
candidate performance levels
for the same ELCC standard
2.3.
Indirect Measure – None.
100% of students scored within the
Exceed Expectations (33%) and Meets
Expectations (67%) performance levels
for ELCC 2.3:
Candidates understand and can develop
and supervise the instructional and
leadership capacity of the school staff.
Program faculty discussed a slight
increase in Exceeds Expectations
performance levels (from 30% to 33% of
students). Program faculty feel this is an
appropriate % of candidates exceeding
expectations for this particular standard.
No further actions taken.
Ability to
support student
learning and
development
(Clinical
Experience
Internship)
Assessment #5
Focus Project on
Student
Achievement
Program faculty
reviewed the
assessment
results and
noted the
majority of all
candidates
scoring within
the Exceed
Expectations
and Meets
Expectations
performance
levels for all
rubric scoring
areas.
Graduate
Student
Satisfaction
Survey
The Educational
Leadership program
had low response
rate; However, all of
the responses were
positive.
Direct Measure
– Assessment
#5 ELCC
Standard 3.5.
Indirect
Measure –
None.
Direct Measure – program
faculty will continue to
monitor the candidate
performance level for ELCC
3.5 as it reflects the heart of
the focus project on student
achievement.
Indirect Measure – None.
100% of students scored within the
Exceed Expectations performance level
for ELCC 3.5:
Candidates understand and can ensure
teacher and organizational time focuses
on supporting high-quality school
instruction and student learning. Program
faculty feel this is an appropriate % of
candidates exceeding expectations for
this particular standard. No further
actions taken.
21
Department of Middle & Secondary Education and Educational Leadership Academic Year: 2019-2020
Continuous Program Improvement Report
Program: Superintendent Letter of Eligibility Post-Master’s Certification
Objective
Assessed
Direct Measure Direct
Measure
Results
Indirect
Measure
Indirect Measure
Results
Proposed
Action Items
for
Assessment
Tool
Proposed Action Items
for Program
Action Items Implemented
This Year
Content
Knowledge:
National
standards
Praxis II
6991
School
Superintendent
Assessment
(SSA)
PA has changed
the PRAXIS II
6021 to
PRAXIS II
6991.
All students
met the PA
established cut-
off score for
both tests
during the
2019-2020
academic year.
Graduate
Student
Satisfaction
Survey
The Educational
Leadership
program had low
response rate;
However, all of the
responses were
positive.
Direct
Measure –
None.
Indirect
Measure –
None.
Direct Measure –
Program faculty will
monitor PRAXIS II 6991
candidate performance.
New cut-off score is 162.
Indirect Measure –
None.
Transition to new required PRAXIS II test.
Program faculty properly informed all
candidates of the new required 6991 test.
Content
Knowledge:
National, State,
and EU
standards
Assessment #2
Vision Essay
Program faculty
reviewed the
assessment
results and
noted the
majority of all
candidates
scoring within
the Exceeds
Expectations
and Meets
Expectations
performance
levels for all
Graduate
Student
Satisfaction
Survey
The Educational
Leadership
program had low
response rate;
However, all of the
responses were
positive.
Direct
Measure –
None.
Indirect
Measure –
None.
Direct Measure –
Program faculty will
monitor candidate
performance level for
ELCC standard 1.2.
Indirect Measure –
None.
Program faculty reviewed performance level
results for ELCC standard 1.1. Candidate
performance remained the same with 100% of
candidates scoring at the Meets Expectations.
No candidates (n=5) were scored at the
Exceeds Expectations performance level.
Program faculty discussed this level of
performance is acceptable in this first course
in the program. No further action taken by
program faculty.
22
Department of Middle & Secondary Education and Educational Leadership Academic Year: 2019-2020
Continuous Program Improvement Report
rubric scoring
areas.
Professional
and
Pedagogical
Knowledge,
Skill, and
Dispositions
(Application of
Knowledge)
Assessment #3
Contract Review
Program faculty
reviewed the
assessment
results and
noted the
majority of all
candidates
scoring within
the Exceeds
Expectations
and Meets
Expectations
performance
levels for all
rubric scoring
areas.
Graduate
Student
Satisfaction
Survey
The Educational
Leadership
program had low
response rate;
However, all of the
responses were
positive.
Direct
Measure –
None.
Indirect
Measure –
None.
Direct Measure –
Program faculty will
continue to monitor
candidate performance
levels for the same ELCC
standard 5.1.
Indirect Measure –
None.
100% of students scored within the Exceed
Expectations (8%) and Meets Expectations
(92%) performance levels for ELCC 5.1:
Candidates understand and can act with
integrity and fairness to ensure a district
system of accountability for every student’s
academic and social success.
Program faculty discussed a slight increase in
Exceeds Expectations performance levels
(from 0% to 8% of candidates). Program
faculty noted this % reflects one out of 13
candidates being scored at this performance
level. Program faculty feel this standard
continues to be consistently scored over the
two most recent assessments. No further
actions taken.
Ability to
support student
learning and
development
(Clinical
Experience
Internship)
Assessment #5
Focus Project on
Student
Achievement
Program faculty
reviewed the
assessment
results and
noted the
majority of all
candidates
scoring within
the Exceed
Expectations
and Meets
Expectations
performance
levels for all
rubric scoring
areas.
Graduate
Student
Satisfaction
Survey
The Educational
Leadership
program had low
response rate;
However, all of the
responses were
positive.
Direct
Measure –
Assessment #5
ELCC
Standard 3.5.
Indirect
Measure –
None.
Direct Measure –
program faculty will
continue to monitor the
candidate performance
level for ELCC 3.5 as it
reflects the heart of the
focus project on student
achievement.
Indirect Measure –
None.
100% of students scored within the Exceed
Expectations performance level for ELCC
3.5:
Candidates understand and can ensure that
district time focuses on supporting high-
quality school instruction and student
learning.
Program faculty feel this is an appropriate %
of candidates exceeding expectations for this
particular standard. No further actions taken.
23
Department of Middle & Secondary Education and Educational Leadership Academic Year: 2019-2020
Continuous Program Improvement Report
Program: Supervisor of Special Education Post Master’s Certification
Objective
Assessed
Direct Measure Direct
Measure
Results
Indirect
Measure
Indirect Measure
Results
Proposed
Action Items
for Assessment
Tool
Proposed Action Items for
Program
Action Items Implemented
This Year
Content
Knowledge:
National
standards
Praxis II
5412
School Leaders
Licensure
Assessment
(SLLA)
PA has changed
the PRAXIS II
5411 to
PRAXIS II
5412.
All students
met the PA
established cut-
off score for
both tests
during the
2019-2020
academic year.
Graduate
Student
Satisfaction
Survey
The Educational
Leadership program
had low response
rate; However, all of
the responses were
positive.
Direct Measure
– None.
Indirect
Measure –
None.
Direct Measure –
Program faculty will monitor
PRAXIS II 5412 candidate
performance. New cut-off
score is 146. Indirect
Measure – None.
Transition to new required PRAXIS II
test. Program faculty properly informed
all candidates of the new required 5412
test.
Content
Knowledge:
National, State,
and EU
standards
Vision Essay Program faculty
reviewed the
assessment
results and
noted the
majority of all
candidates
scoring within
the Target
Expectations
and Meets
Expectations
performance
levels for all
Graduate
Student
Satisfaction
Survey
The Educational
Leadership program
had low response
rate; However, all of
the responses were
positive.
Direct Measure
– None.
Indirect
Measure –
None.
Direct Measure – Program
faculty will monitor
candidate performance level
for ELCC standard 1.2.
Indirect Measure – None.
Program faculty reviewed performance
level results for ELCC standard 1.1.
Candidate performance increased from
85% of candidates scoring at the Target
Expectations performance level to 100%
of candidates scoring at the target level.
No further action taken by program
faculty.
24
Department of Middle & Secondary Education and Educational Leadership Academic Year: 2019-2020
Continuous Program Improvement Report
rubric scoring
areas.
Professional
and
Pedagogical
Knowledge,
Skill, and
Dispositions
(Application of
Knowledge)
Assessment #7
Leadership
Capacity Project.
Program faculty
reviewed the
assessment
results and
noted the
majority of all
candidates
scoring within
the Target
Expectations
and Meets
Expectations
performance
levels for all
rubric scoring
areas.
Graduate
Student
Satisfaction
Survey
The Educational
Leadership program
had low response
rate; However, all of
the responses were
positive.
Direct Measure
–
Assessment #7
ELCC Standard
2.3.
Indirect
Measure –
None.
Direct Measure –
Program faculty will monitor
candidate performance levels
for the same ELCC standard
2.3.
Indirect Measure – None.
100% of students scored within the
Exceed Expectations (33%) and Meets
Expectations (67%) performance levels
for ELCC 2.3:
Candidates understand and can develop
and supervise the instructional and
leadership capacity of the school staff.
Program faculty discussed a slight
increase in Exceeds Expectations
performance levels (from 30% to 33% of
students). Program faculty feel this is an
appropriate % of candidates exceeding
expectations for this particular standard.
No further actions taken.
Ability to
support student
learning and
development
(Clinical
Experience
Internship)
Assessment #5
Focus Project on
Student
Achievement
Program faculty
reviewed the
assessment
results and
noted the
majority of all
candidates
scoring within
the Exceed
Expectations
and Meets
Expectations
performance
levels for all
rubric scoring
areas.
Graduate
Student
Satisfaction
Survey
The Educational
Leadership program
had low response
rate; However, all of
the responses were
positive.
Direct Measure
– Assessment
#5 ELCC
Standard 3.5.
Indirect
Measure –
None.
Direct Measure – program
faculty will continue to
monitor the candidate
performance level for ELCC
3.5 as it reflects the heart of
the focus project on student
achievement.
Indirect Measure – None.
100% of students scored within the
Exceed Expectations performance level
for ELCC 3.5:
Candidates understand and can ensure
teacher and organizational time focuses
on supporting high-quality school
instruction and student learning. Program
faculty feel this is an appropriate % of
candidates exceeding expectations for
this particular standard. No further
actions taken.