Skip to Content Request Info

2019-20 Reporting Measures

Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation

CAEP Annual Reporting Measures

 

Ottawa University

CAEP Reporting Measures

2019-2020

 

Programs reviewed by CAEP in October 2020

Initial Programs --

Early Childhood/Early Childhood Special Education

Elementary Education

Secondary Education: Biology, Business, English, History, Mathematics, Music (Vocal & Instrumental)

Art Education

Music Education: Vocal and Instrumental

Physical Education

 

Advanced Programs --

Educational Leadership (MAEd)

School Counseling (MAEd)

School Psychology (EdS)

 

 

1. Impact on P-12 learning and development
(Component 4.1)

Ottawa University’s EPP works closely with its completers to collect valid and reliable assessment data regarding their impact on student learning. The EPP works with completers via focus groups to collect information demonstrating student learning growth. The School of Education deployed a multi-level assessment system utilizing purposeful sampling to ensure completers from all programs will be represented. The EPP’s system also employs multiple research methodologies. Once fully implemented, the School provides rich data describing impact on P-12 student learning through case studies and focus group results compiled over a three-year period. Additionally, the School continues to engage in an ambitious project exploring the working lives of early career teachers. We believe this work provides a research component capable of offering a clearer perspective, both in terms of capturing the impact our completers establish in their classrooms as well as providing evidence of our efforts to improve our programs.

Since Kansas and Arizona are non-reporting states regarding P-12 student learning and development by teacher education completers, it is the goal of the EPP to offer alternative ways in which completer impact on P-12 learning and development can be obtained by the EPP. To meet that goal, the EPP collects data to accumulate relevant information regarding the influence EPP completers have concerning P-12 student learning and development.

Focus groups discussed questions around the InTASC standards and the relationship their impact on student learning:

1) Learner development

2) Learner differences

3) Learning environments

4) Content knowledge

5) Application of content

6) Assessment

7) Planning for instruction

8) Instructional strategies

9) Professional learning and ethical practice

10) Leadership and collaboration

 

Focus Groups

Spring 2020

1st Focus Group

Nine graduates were interviewed in the Spring 2020. The graduates reported that they felt confident in all ten InTASC standards. They shared specifically that the student in their classrooms were gaining positive results on assessments. In addition, they shared that their content understanding, tones of the learning environment and knowledge of learners assisted their abilities in producing applicable instruction that results in positive student progress and student performance. One aspect that they asked for from the faculty was to have additional support meetings in the future just to continue to share insights and ideas about improving the education and teaching world.

Focus Groups

Spring 2021

2nd Focus Group

Ten graduates were interviewed in the Spring 2021. The graduates reported the current issues regarding instructing in the CoVID times and their thoughts regarding all ten InTASC standards. Though they had yet to receive their state exam results, they shared how their students were gaining positive results on meeting mastery on unit exams. They also commented about they had worked to create a positive environment for their online and ground-based learners. They particularly discussed how they had worked on creating an inclusive learning environment through uses of various technologies. Confidence and appropriate experiences gained during their preservice years assisted with this ability to be flexible in their learning environment given. The encourage the university to continue to have professional development for ELL needs and social-emotional needs.

Focus Reviews: Stronge Checklist Evaluations

In addition to focus groups, lesson reviews were conducted on our graduates by our education faculty. The same evaluation system was used to review the graduates ability to impact student learning as used in our preservice program. The propriety assessment used is a progression assessment is used for evaluation on preservice teachers and career teachers.

Spring 2020

Graduates reviewed in Spring 2020 (and Fall 2019) showed progress and positive results in student growth. Data accountability was noted in their classrooms. Metacognitive strategies were apparent in questing and lesson design. Technology use and developmentally appropriate lesson construction was evident. Site administrators reported that they were pleased with these graduates.

Spring 2021

Graduates reviewed in Spring 2021 demonstrated positive results in student growth. Data accountability and positive learning environment cultures were established. The graduates were using higher level questioning, metacognitive strategies, technology applications and developmentally appropriate practices. Site administrators commented about the resilience of these graduates in this uncertain, challenging time.

Advanced program focus groups summaries:

Fall 2020

School Counseling Program Focus Group Survey Results

Of the 66 graduates between the years of 2016-2020, contact information was located for 52 individuals. Twenty-four respondents, representing seventeen different Arizona school districts, answered the survey which was made available over a period of one month.

When rating their comfort level on a scale of 1-5, respondents reported:

Area

1

2

3

4

5

Individual Counseling

 

4%

12%

42%

42%

Group Counseling

16%

12%

16%

46%

10%

Classroom Guidance

4%

n/a

12%

46%

38%

 

When rating their impact on a scale of 1-5, respondents reported:

Area

1

2

3

4

5

Student Achievement

n/a

4%

33%

33%

29%

Student Attendance

4%

8%

42%

46%

n/a

Student Behavior

4%

4%

33%

46%

12%

 

The 24 respondents reported fulfilling the following leadership iroles within their current employment:

Position

Number

Lead counselor

6

Part of administrative team or instructional cabinet

4

Part of the PBIS leadership team

4

Members of district-level teams or committees

3

 

Spring 2021

School Psychology graduates provided their recommendation letters from their supervisors for evaluation. Their recommendation letters discussed their ability to monitor and use data for assessments and outcome needs. The supervisors also expressed leadership and willingness to learn and reflect on school processes and progress of the learners. These candidates are considered positive contributors to the school and districts student needs.

 

2. Indicators of teaching effectiveness
(Component 4.2)

The case study and focus group assessment system described above is designed to also gather data concerning completer teaching effectiveness. In addition, the EPP collects valid and reliable assessment data by utilizing instrumentation such as student teacher evaluations (used by our clinical faculty), Disposition Assessments (priority assessment instruments), signature assignments, monitoring of GPA transition points, and state exams which show an effective level of performance by our licensure candidates. In addition, throughout their entire program of study, candidates are exposed to academic research in coursework and use both observational and practicum experiences to gain current, real-world knowledge of the profession: historical and philosophical foundations, aspects of developmental psychology, researched-based methods, the art and science of teaching, and data-driven strategies.

All teacher education candidates (initial and advanced) must complete all transition points throughout their program of study including field experiences. Research-based activities in the foundational courses and student teaching encompasses aspects of ethics, standards, and laws. Just as transition points to are used to monitor progress, so do the assessments and time allotted to field experiences from related practicum and student teaching lessons. In addition, both assessments used in lesson evaluation have a teaching disposition component. Prior to student teaching, the candidates also take a Code of Professionalism Exam based on the "KSDE Educator Code of Conduct.”

The InTASC Signature Assignment data is a set of progression data. Completers from the new data set had yet to complete a full cycle of data at that time. In prior years, all candidates were (and are still required) to complete Signature Assignments with a grade of “B” or higher. Candidates who failed to score a grade of “B” or higher were placed on a Individualized Review Plan. This plan provides guidance to the candidate to complete the Signature Assignments per progression needs. If the candidate is unsuccessful, the candidate is removed from the program. Therefore, all completers (2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19, & 2019-20) have scored a “B” or higher on their Signature Assignments.

Candidates also

 

3. Satisfaction of employers and employment milestones
(Component 4.3 | A.4.1)

2019-20

Survey Results

Overall, the program results are within the acceptable levels. No questions fell below the weighted average of 3.0. The principals of first year teachers return was low – but the weighted average of questions was all above 3.33. The comments noted regarded learning to use technology and communication skills notably with parents. Third-year principal’s responses were all above the 4.0 mark. Their comments centered around getting in the field early during training and particularly noted dyslexia training, which is a new focus at the state level. Overall, the third-year principals noted highly skilled teachers.

The continued emphasis on lifelong learning and reflection is noted in many responses. Some of the major themes noted in the short answer and open-ended questions included: management, use of data/assessment, and reading strategies. These are all areas that seem to come up frequently and seem to be trending. There are no strong areas for consideration by the university, but the results will be reviewed to continue shaping a responsive and rigorous program that will prepare preservice teachers to be effective classroom teachers.

Future

A continued effort will be made to track graduates not in the state of Kansas by self-report of the graduates and to increase response rate. Also, some way to increase the response rate by shareholders would be a great addition. Continuing to get the survey out earlier, which is limited due to state reporting parameters, would be good. The response rate is always lower than desired. Any needed changes to the survey to fall in line with new standards and conditions will also be continually considered. This year was especially challenging due to the shortened school year and the novel corona virus.

Employers/Principals:

Year-One -- N=3

Year-Two -- N=12

 

4. Satisfaction of completers
(Component 4.4 | A.4.2)

2019-20

Survey Results

The responses from the third-year teachers are positive and show educators committed to the profession by their responses indicating continuing professional development through district activities and seeking higher level degrees (master’s). These veteran teachers mentioned technology and reading strategies of areas to focus on.  For first year teachers, the lowest average weighted score was question 8 (Thinking about all the added demands in education today (testing, record keeping, working with parents, differentiation, meetings, federal and state guidelines) in the classroom, do you think you were:). This score was 3. The comments mentioned classroom management/organization as an area to emphasize as well as more observations/hands-on experiences in classroom.

Completers:

Year-One -- N=4

Year-Two -- N=6

 

5. Graduation Rates (initial & advanced levels)

Candidates in the initial teacher education programs must successfully meet several requirements and are expected to apply to the School of Education usually in their Junior year. After that, in most cases, teacher education requirements will be completed from 2 to 2 1/2 years. The following table, extrapolated from qualified seniors for Initial program candidates, includes the following: Early Childhood, P-12, Elementary and Secondary education majors in the School of Education.

Our School Psychology program takes 3 to 4 years to complete. The School Counseling and Educational Leadership program take 1 1/2 to 2 years to complete.

Graduation Rates (initial and advances – all candidates):

2018-19

N= 288 all candidates/81 graduates = 28.12% graduated in 2018-19

2019-20

N=327 all candidates/84 graduates = 25.69% graduated in 2019-20

6. Ability of completers to meet licensing (certification) and any additional state requirements; Title II (initial & advanced levels)

Teacher Education candidates are required to fulfill the following requirements prior to being offered an Institutional Recommendation indicating readiness for licensure/certification:

  • Full acceptance into the Education Program;
  • Fulfillment of all Basic Skill exam requirements (initial program);
  • Completion of all required coursework with a grade of "C" or better in all Pre-Professional/Professional Education and content area coursework, excluding Teaching Profession I/Early Childhood Foundations grade requirement of “B” or better (initial program);
  • Attain minimum GPA of 3.0 or better in all Pre-Professional/Professional Education and content area coursework (initial program);
  • Minimum cumulative GPA of 3.0;
  • Attainment of an AVP fingerprint clearance (AZ) or background check (KS);
  • Successful passing of state licensure/certification exams;
  • Proof of liability insurance prior to Student Teaching;
  • Completion of 20-hours of community service identified on the appropriate form (initial program);
  • Completion of the disposition evaluation;
  • Successful completion the student teaching experience with a GPA of 3.0 or higher; and
  • Completion of the program exit interview.

The chart below signifies both initial candidates indicating the scores for Professional and Subject Knowledge tests for 2019-20. In light of COVID, not all candidates took the exam.

In 2019-2020, all advanced candidates met licensing requirements.

A university licensure/certification officer is appointed by the EPP to oversee all requirements.

State Exams - Kansas 2019-2020

OUMW

State-KS (Pass) Principles
of Learning & Teaching
>=160 (P/F)

State-MW (Pass) Subject
Knowledge Score Varies
by Exam

Pass

 26

 27

Fail

 3

 2

No Score
Reported

 N/A

 N/A

 

State Exams - Arizona 2019-2020

OUAZ

State AZ Professional
Knowledge: K-12 >= 160
(AEPA) SED/NES >=220
(P/F)

State-AZ (Pass) Subject
Knowledge Score Varies
by Exam

Pass

 16

 19

Fail

 3

 0

No Score Reported

 4

 0

 

 

Title II Reports:

Kansas

2021 Title II Report for Academic Year 2019-2020

2020 Title II Report for Academic Year 2018-2019

2019 Title II Report for Academic Year 2017-2018

2018 Title II Report for Academic Year 2016-2017

2017 Title II Report for Academic Year 2015-2016

2016 Title II Report for Academic Year 2014-2015

2015 Title II Report for Academic Year 2013-2014

Arizona

2021 Title II Report for Academic Year 2019-2020 - Traditional

2021 Title II Report for Academic Year 2019-2020 - Alternative

2020 Title II Report for Academic Year 2018-2019 - Traditional

2020 Title II Report for Academic Year 2018-2019 - Alternative

2019 Title II Report for Academic Year 2017-2018 - Traditional

2019 Title II Report for Academic Year 2017-2018 - Alternative

2018 Title II Report for Academic Year 2016-2017 - Traditional

2018 Title II Report for Academic Year 2016-2017 - Alternative

2017 Title II Report for Academic Year 2015-2016 - Traditional

2017 Title II Report for Academic Year 2015-2016 - Alternative

 

7. Ability of completers to be hired in education positions for which they have prepared (initial & advanced levels)

The EPP serves teacher education candidates and advanced-level staff in both Kansas (OUMW) and Arizona (OUAZ). Qualifications (depending on the program) includes holding a valid teaching license from that state with a bachelor's degree or an advanced degree and successful completion of the state approved teacher preparation program. The EPP is regionally accredited, and each (individual) program is approved by the states of Kansas and Arizona as applicable. As noted above, seeking licensure/certification is a challenging yet rewarding endeavor.

2019-2020 Completers

97% of Kansas completers (undergraduate and graduates only) reported having a school contract within three months of completion. The other completers chose not to report.

94% of Arizona completers (undergraduate and graduate) reported having a school contract within a month of completion. The other completers chose not to report.

2018-2019 Completers

70% of Kansas completers (undergraduate only) reported having a school contract within one month of completion. 3% of the Kansas completers went on to graduate school after completion and did not pursue a teaching position within the first two years of completion. The other completers chose not to report.

81% of Arizona completers (undergraduate and graduate) reported having a school contract within the second week of completion. The other completers chose not to report.

8. Student loan default rates and other consumer information (initial & advanced levels)

Default Rates

2015

7.6%

2016

6.8 %

2017

8.1 %

2018

N/A

2019

N/A

 

Due to COVID pandemic, the federal reports for the data for 2018-19 and 2019-20 have yet to be reported to the university.

 

 

 

Back to top
/Academics/School-of-Education/Reporting-Measures/Reporting-Measures-(1)