The number of candidates in the Curriculum and Instruction graduate programs presenting research at professional conferences will increase from the 2007-2008 academic year.
Indicator
Graduate Candidate Presentations
Annual number of graduate student presentations at professional conferences compared to 2007-2008 academic year.
Criterion
Graduate Professional Presentations
Increase in the number of professional presentations by the graduate candidates in the Department of Curriculum and Instruction.
Finding
Desired criteria (increase in number from 2007-2008) was met.
During the 2007-2008 academic year, there were no presentations at professional conferences by graduate students in Curriculum and Instruction. Because of efforts to require more research and presentations in the Masters programs, there were 2 graduate students who presented at professional conferences during the 2008-2009 academic year.
Action
Continuing To Increase The Number Of Graduate Candidates' Professional Presentations.
The department was able to pay for two graduate students to travel and present their research at professional conferences. We will budget to send 4 graduate students to conferences during the 2009-2010 academic year as well as make the students aware of the funding available through Graduate Studies.
Objective
New Program Development
Develop new doctoral program in Instructional Technology
Indicator
Approval For New Doctoral Program In Instructional Technology
Submit all documentation for obtaining the Preliminary Planning Authority to progress toward implementation of new doctoral program in Instructional Technology.
Criterion
Progress toward Doctorate in Instrutional Technology
Timely completion of all research, writing and information to be submitted to the Curriculum Committee for the 2010 University Curriculum cycle.
Finding
Desired Criteria Achieved, Preliminary Planning Authority for Doctorate of Instructional Technology
Working to get the Doctorate of Instructional Technology researched, planned, approved and implemented is a two year long process. For the 2008-2009 academic year, the first step, obtaining the preliminary planning authority was the objective. The Department was notified of this approved planning authority in April 2009.
Action
Continued Efforts to Develop and Implement the Doctorate of Instructional Technology
Now that we have preliminary planning authority, the department of Curriculum and Instruction will continue the process-preparing the the program for the 2009-2010 curriculum cycle.
Goal
Program Quality And Effectiveness
Objective
Methods Block/Instructional Methods Lesson Plan
The percentage of candidates receiving a score of "3" on the Methods Block/Instructional Methods lesson plan, in each of the Curriculum and Instruction program areas, will exceed 85%.
Indicator
Pass Rates On Methods Block/Instructional Methods Lesson Plan
During the classes of Methods Block, first semester senior year or during the Instructional Methods Course (CI 560), the students write multiple lesson plans. Each student selects the best lesson plan in each content area (math, English language arts, science, and social studies) to submit as their best representation of a Lesson Plan in that content area. The lesson plans are scored/evaluated on information documented in stating the lesson goals, objectives, rationale, standards, materials, classroom setting, student needs, focus, procedures, design of implementation, and closure of the lesson. The Lesson Plan assessment allows our candidates to demonstrate their understanding of: * Establishing a lesson framework; * Designing a supportive learning environment; * Incorporating Instructional strategies; and, * Implementing Evaluation strategies.
Criterion
Pass Rates on Methods Block/Instructional Methods Lesson Plan
At least 85% of candidates during the 2008-2009 academic year will achieve a score of "3" on the Methods Block/Instructional Methods Lesson Plan.
The Methods Block/Instructional Methods Lesson Plans is an appropriate format to measure a variety of learning outcomes. The content of the items in this assessment relate directly to the planning, implementation, and assessment of instruction that teachers encounter when teaching.
Finding
Desired Competence Criteria (85% Pass Rate) Was Not Achieved In C&I Programs On The Methods Block/Instructional Methods Lesson Plan.
The rubric to assess the Methods Block/Instructional Methods Lesson plan was designed to evaluate the candidates on the four major components of the lesson plan (see Indicator). The rubric does not allow for a total overall score. So, we do not have an overall score for the students and will report the percentage of each of the major components. EC-4 Methods Block Lesson Plan Scores: Component #1-69.47%; Component #2-69.9%; Component #3-62.6%; Component #4-56.28. Middle Level Education (4-8) Lesson Plan Scores: Component #1-69.10%; Component #2-48.06%; Component #3-58.07%; Component #4-33.33%. Secondary Education (8-12/EC-12) Lesson Plan: Component #1-64.79; Component #2-61.05%; Component #3-58.05; Component #4-47.19. Post Baccalaureate Alternative Route to Certification Lesson Plan: Component #1- However, if we combine the percentage of candidates who achieved target (score of 3) and those that achieved the acceptable score (2), 9 of the 12 indicators are above the 85%ile
As a point of information, in the past, instructors in the Methods Block used TK20 as a database to collect Pre-Assessment as well as Post-Assessment scores on the Lesson Plan. At the beginning of the semester, before instruction even began on the Lesson Plan, candidates were asked to complete a Lesson Plan as a Pre-Assessment. Then, toward the end of the semester, after the Lesson Plan instruction, they were once again asked to complete a Lesson Plan. All submissions were made into TK20. Since TK20 cannot disaggregate the Pre-Assessment Lesson Plans from the Post-Assessment Lesson Plans, the percentages provided include ALL data, including the scores from the Pre-Assessments that were completed BEFORE any instruction was presented on the Lesson Plan.
Action
Methods Block/Instructional Methods Lesson Plan Scores
Since the standard of 85% was not met, the Curriculum and Instruction faculty will continue to emphasize the criteria for an effective lesson plan. Specifically, the faculty will enhance the candidates' training and practice in the fourth component-assessment. Further, the rubric for the lesson plan scoring will be revised so that an overall performance score can be more easily calculated.
In addition, since the Pre-Assessment scores on Lesson Plans cannot be disaggregated from the Post-Assessment scores on the Lesson Plans, instructors will no longer have students submit their Pre-Assessment Lesson Plans into TK20.
Objective
Teacher Work Sample
The percentage of candidates receiving a score of "3" on their Teacher Work Sample, in each of the Curriculum and Instruction program areas, will exceed 85%.
Indicator
Pass Rates On Teacher Work Sample
The Teacher Work Sample (TWS), adapted from The Renaissance Partnership for Improving Teacher Quality Project (http://fp.uni.edu/itq), is a performance assessment designed to demonstrate evidence of Sam Houston State University candidates' ability to facilitate learning for all students. This sample illustrates the candidate's ability to plan, implement, modify and assess instruction during their student teaching semester.
Prior to the student teaching semester, candidates choose one (12 to 14 week placement) or two (6 to 7 week placements). During the first 6 to 7 weeks of their placement, candidates are required to create and teach a unit as a Teacher Work Sample. After consulting with their mentor teacher about the unit focus, candidates teach a minimum of five lessons from the unit in their mentor's classroom. Additionally, the candidates are evaluated on their unit planning and teaching of unit lessons. They are also required to reflect on their decision-making and teaching practice including their impact on student learning.
The Teacher Work Sample (TWS) focuses on seven teaching processes that are crucial for effective/reflective teaching and must be considered when planning for the learning of all students. Each process is defined by a performance standard, specific task, a student prompt and a rubric that identify the desired performance of the candidate related to that process.
Criterion
Teacher Work Sample (TWS) Scores
At least 85% of candidates during the 2008-2009 academic year will achieve a score 3 on the Teacher Work Sample.
Information on Scoring Procedures:
As recommended by the Renaissance Group, each candidate's Teacher Work Sample is blindly scored by a minimum of two trained scorers. Each scorer evaluates and assigns a score of three(target), two (acceptable), or one (unacceptable) to each indicator, Additionally an overall score of three, two or one is given to each of the seven processes as well as and an overall three, two or one to the entire Teacher Work Sample. If the first two scorers agree on the overall Teacher Work Sample score, the scoring process is complete. However, if the two scorers do not agree the Teacher Work Sample is scored for a third, possibly fourth time, until agreement is reached. For this reason, the data presented in the following charts represents the number of scorings not the number of Teacher Work Samples scored.
Once agreement is reached on the Teacher Work Sample score, the overall scores are sent to the student teachers. The following charts show the overall Teacher Work Sample scores for the student teachers.
Finding
Desired competence criteria not achieved, 71% of candidates during the 2008-2009 academic year scored a "3" on their Teacher Work Sample
Even though the goal of 85% was not achieved, 97% of candidates did meet the minimum standard defined by the Teacher Work Sample by scoring either a "2" or a "3". Instead of just identifying the students that just "met" the standard, the C&I department wanted to identify the percentage of students who scored at the "Target" or exceeds the expectation level.
Action
Improving the Percentage of Candidates Scoring "3" on the Teacher Work Sample
Each of the seven component areas will be more deeply engrained in each of the certification courses. Students are required to write a modified Teacher Work Sample during their methods block. This version will be given extensive and prompt feedback. So, when the candidates complete their TWS during their student teaching semester, they will be even more prepared.
For the 2009-2010 academic year, the department of Curriculum and Instruction will increase the percentage of candidates scoring a "3" on the TWS by two percentage points.
Objective
Certification Examinations
The percentage of candidates passing the Pedagogy and Professional Responsibilities Certification Examination, in each of the Curriculum and Instruction programs, will exceed 80%.
Indicator
Pass Rates On Certification Examinations
All candidates seeking initial certification, advanced teacher certification, or certifications for other school personnel must take one or more of the Texas Examinations of Educator Standards (TExES). These examinations directly correspond to the state content competencies that have been identified for the certification desired. These content competencies are aligned with and based on the appropriate state standards the Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS) statements, which describe the state mandated curriculum for students. Each TExES examination is criterion-referenced and is designed to measure a candidate's level of content knowledge and skills appropriate for educators in the State of Texas.
Each test was collaboratively developed by the State Board of Educator Certification (SBEC), National Evaluation Systems, Inc. (NES), an independent corporation specializing in educational measurements, with additional participation by committees of Texas educators. Individual test items developed to measure the state competencies were reviewed and rated by the various committees of Texas educators to ensure appropriateness of content and difficulty, clarity, and accuracy. These committees also ensured that the test items matched the appropriate competencies and were free from potential ethnicity, gender, and regional biases. The committees also helped prepare scoring rubrics for written response items and training materials for those who would score the tests.
Separate standard-setting panels were convened to review statistical data about candidate scores from initial pilot studies of the tests during their development. Recommendations were forwarded to the SBEC, which made the final decisions about establishing passing scores. TExES examinations are centrally administered by SBEC and NES at pre-determined sites and on pre-established dates across Texas similar to many of the national achievement tests. This regime provides for a professional, equitable, and secure testing environment for candidates. Alternative testing arrangements are also permitted for those requiring special consideration. Sites are selected after a careful review of security and accessibility potential, and the quality of overall testing conditions. Tests are scored centrally.
Criterion
Pass Rates for all Pedagogy and Professional Responsiblities Examination (PPR)
Pass rates on all levels of the Pedagogy and Professional Examinations will exceed 80%. While the accountability system for the state examines scores for each completer cohort and provides for students to repeat the examination if they are not successful on the first attempt, the analysis of pass rates presented here represents the pass rates on the first attempt for all PPR exams taken in 2008-2009.
Finding
Desired competence criteria (80% pass rate) achieved in 6 of 7 program areas areas.
Undergraduate Certification Program: EC-4 PPR 82% of candidates passed 4-8 PPR 87% of candidates passed 8-12 PPR 88% of candidates passed EC-12 PPR 94% of candidates passed
Post-Baccalaureate Initial Certification Program
EC-4 PPR We do not offer this certification at this level 4-8 PPR 100% of candidates passed 8-12 PPR 97% of candidates passed EC-12 65% of candidates passed
All program areas met the desired competence criteria except for the EC-12 Post Baccalaureate Program candidates. There were 17 candidates who took the EC-12 PPR exam. Of these, 11 of these passed the certification exam.
Those candidates that did not pass the certification exam the first time can retake the exam unti they pass it. Candidates have 18 months to pass this exam.
Action
Improving Candidates Pedagogy and Professional Responsibilities Certification Examination Scores
All programs, except EC-12 Post Baccalaureate, met and exceeded the projected 80% pass rate. More focus will be put on the Texas State Pedagogy and Professional Responsibilities Standards in each of the certification courses. Additionally, more emphasis will be placed on the Pedagogy and Professional Responsiblities Standards Portfolio. Students will write justifications for artifacts placed within the portfolio explaining the standard and its relationship to the artifact. For the 2009-2010 academic year, the department goal will be to raise the certification exam score in each program by 2% over the 2008-2009 score.
Goal
Faculty Excellence
Objective
Faculty Excellence
Increase Curriculum and Instruction faculty productivity through contributions to the field in publications, presentations and professional development.
Indicator
Increase In Ratio Of Publication To Professor
Annual professor to publication ratio and professor to presentation ratio for Curriculum and Instruction compared to 2007-2008.
Each professor will report on their FES document all publications and presentations. The total number of publications for all professors will be divided by the total number of professors. This will be converted to a percentage. This percentage will be compared to the percentage from the 2007-2008 FES reports. The same procedures will be followed for presentations.
Criterion
Faculty Presentations
Ratio of Curriculum and Instruction faculty to presentations will exceed the same ratio from the 2007-2008 academic year.
Finding
Desired Criteria (larger Ratio Than 2007-2008) Was Achieved.
The faculty (8) to presentation (27) ratio for the year 2007-2008 was 3.38. For the 2008-2009 academic year, the faculty (13) to presentation (58) ratio was 4.46. These presentations are a mix of state, national and international presentations. Increasing the number of presentations is great for the department but it also exposes Sam Houston State University to more positive public awareness.
Criterion
Faculty Publications
Ratio of Curriculum and Instruction faculty to publication ratios will exceed the same ratio for the 2007-2008 academic year.
Finding
Desired Publication Criteria (larger Ratio Than 2007-2008) Was Achieved.
The faculty (8) to publication (20) ratio for the year 2007-2008 was 2.0. For the 2008-2009 academic year, the faculty (13) to publication(34) ratio was 2.61. These publication appear in a mix of state, national and international journals.
Action
Continuing To Increase The Ratio Of Faculty To Presentations.
During the 2007-2008 academic year, faculty submitted travel requests to the department. If money was available, the travel was approved. Faculty members were unsure as to how much travel would be approved. For the 2008-2009 academic year, $4000 was encumbered for each faculty member to use for professional travel. This seems to have been very effective and will continue into the 2009-2010 academic year.
Action
Continuing To Increase The Ratio Of Faculty To Publication.
For the 2008-2009 academic year, faculty served on fewer committees and spent a little less time in the field to allow more time for research and writing. For the 2009-2010 academic year, faculty will no longer have to advise an average of 50 students. This will free up more time for writing and research.