Response 1

Download a Printable PDF File


1.5 Evidence for the Onsite BOE Team to validate during the onsite visit

(1)   Latest updates on the state review of programs. How have programs responded to the missing information cited by the state? What is the current status of the state program approval process?

Unit’s Response

The unit has fully responded to concerns cited by the State (EPSB) and resubmitted rejoinders. The State (EPSB) completed the review of resubmissions and indicated compliance of all unit programs. The unit has included the State summary report as a part of the accreditation Web site.

(2)   Perspectives on the quality of programs by candidates, completers, and employers. What are school partner perspectives on Spalding candidates meeting standards and being prepared for their jobs? While Praxis scores are high, is this content knowledge making its way into a rich, well-presented curriculum in K-12 schools? What are the response rates on the surveys of employers and completers?

Unit’s Response

The unit has engaged employers of former program completers to provide a perspective on program satisfaction. The unit has contacted follow-up studies with employers of program completers for 2006-2007, 2007-2008, and 2008-2009. Through the unit’s long standing relationship, as well as more contemporary relationships between the school district and many of the current unit faculty, employer surveys administered to 53 principals who supervise or have supervised candidates in their schools. Principals were requested to complete a 16-item survey questionnaire via the online survey tool, Survey Monkey. Data gleaned from the survey indicated employer satisfaction of the skills and preparation of program candidates in both the traditional and alternative initial programs. As some principals had more than one Spalding University graduate on their faculty [See Exhibit 1.5.2.1], each graduate was separately assessed. For that reason, the Unit does not have accurate data on the return rate from principals due to head count duplication. The Unit may consider using the build in IP address register to capture respondents on future surveys administered to principals. In addition, perspective on program satisfaction is evident in program completers’ survey data where 2006-2007, 2007-2008, and 2008-2009 candidates were surveyed. From a return rate of 52 percent (n= 62 from a possible population of 119) the response to survey Question 1c: I was prepared to effectively use instructional strategies that are appropriate for content and contribute to student learning,” indicate that over 98 percent of the respondents considered to have been “fairly prepared” or “well prepared.” [See Exhibit 1.5.2.2 , page 6]. Another perspective of program satisfaction comes not from students but from clinical- and school- based faculty who mentor our candidates in the P-12 schools. We ask our school-based clinical faculty to evaluate our university supervisors [see Exhibit 1.5.2.3] on key indicators. Resulting data in the 2009-2010 administration reported a mean range of between 3.57 and 3.78 on a -point scale on the degree of agreement to with the mentoring work that supervisors complete when overseeing candidates.

(3)   How is data on content knowledge, pedagogical content knowledge, pedagogical and professional knowledge and skills, student learning, and dispositions summarized and used to inform program and unit improvement?

Unit’s Response

For several years, the Unit has used multiple evaluations for assessing the performance of candidates. The unit has identified a set of seven key assessments [see Exhibit 1.5.3.1] for initial programs and 12 for the advanced programs (see Exhibit 1.5.3.2]. Each of the seven key assessments in the initial programs has been fully implement. The Office of the Associate Dean oversees the collection, analysis, and distribution of data. Analyzed and summarized data generated from the Key Assessment are provided. Over the last several years, the unit has had advanced programs over the last several years. Candidate enrollment in all of the unit’s advanced programs has been very low and often sporadic. Many courses offered at the advanced level between AY 2004-2005 and spring 2011were predominantly serviced as independent courses. The MAED program in administration began a phase-out process in 2008 following a state mandate to phase out programs approved prior to May 2008. Other programs including endorsements in Reading and Writing and Instruction Computer Technology averaged one to two candidates per course, per semester and serviced as independent courses. The ESL program did not have candidates (three candidates matriculated in the ESL program and enrolled in independent courses during the fall 2010 semester with grades assigned in during the spring 2011 semester).

Examples of Recent Use of Data to Improve Programs: During the academic year 2008-2009 the University hired a new dean and associate dean with the expectation of reviewing and resuscitating advanced level programs offered at the time and ensures their viability. Following a review of enrollment data over a five-year period, the new dean opened conversations with partner school districts and systematically began a review of Web sites of advanced level programs offered by other universities in our service area. This activity identified a need to develop and implement a new school guidance and counseling program. The unit consistently and routinely analyzes Unit programs, and faculty (collectively) reviews candidate Praxis II data on content knowledge, pedagogical content knowledge, and pedagogical and profession knowledge and skills. Changes have been made based on the analysis of data, and candidates and faculty have used the analysis to make changes that improve candidate success. In during the AY 2009-2010 unit faculty reviewed analyzed data of Praxis II scores for all initial programs. While candidates performed well in most content areas, faculty considered candidate performance in Elementary Content (0014) as unacceptable. The review indicated that only 82 percent (n=12) of program completers were successful. A detailed examination of each of the four Praxis II components (mathematics, English/English language arts, and social science) revealed that candidates struggled most in mathematics, especially candidates in the Master of Arts programs. For that reason, Unit faculty supported the need to add MATH 522 or an equivalent as a pre-requisite for EDU 532. In addition, unit faculty made a recommendation for the implementation of a tutorial program to support candidates in their preparation for Praxis II. In 2010, the Dean of the College assigned Dr. Larry Lewis a three (3) hour release time on his workload to provide a tutorial support program [See Exhibit 1.5.3] that includes test taking skills and strategies.

(4)   Provide evidence that candidate assessment data has been collected, aggregated, disaggregated, and analyzed for the past three years.

Unit’s Response

The unit collect, aggregates, disaggregates, and analyzes data on candidate assessment data. Guidelines and activities to ensure that data is consistently collected, aggregated, and disaggregated and analyzed are published in the unit’s operations guidelines manual [Exhibit 6.1] This data is shared with faculty and other stakeholders for program improvement (see Addendum Exhibit 1.5.4.1; Exhibit 1.5.4.2; Exhibit 1.5.4.3; Exhibit 1.5.4.4; Exhibit 1.5.4.5; Exhibit 1.4.6).

(5)   Pass rates on content tests for candidates in programs with few candidates. How are these candidates performing on state licensure tests? Because some programs had fewer than 10 completers, these data were not available. These data may be presented over a three-year period.

Unit response

The state of Kentucky requires that all applicants for initial certification [Art Education (P-12); Business and Marketing Education (5-12); Chemistry Education (8-12); Elementary Education (p-5); Art Education (P-12); Learning and Behavior Disorders (P-12) Biological Science Education (7-12), Earth Science Education (8-12); English Education (8-12), Mathematics (8-12), Middle Grades Education (5-9); and Social Science Education (7-12); Spanish Education (P-12)] submit passing scores on the Praxis II exam their content areas as well as passing scores on pedagogical content knowledge. Summary of unit performance scores on Praxis II examinations for both traditional and alternative certification routes are provided as exhibits [See Exhibit 1.5.5 ] on the unit’s accreditation website. Also included is data for programs with less than 10 completers.

(6) Assessment data on candidates for each advanced program. What assessments are used? What data are collected on professional knowledge and skills, student learning, and dispositions? What is the unit learning from these candidate assessment data?

Unit response

During the AY2008-2009 began a focused effort in the development of the Unit Continuous Assessment System and the identification of Key Assessments. Because the majority of the assessments used in the “sunseted” MAED Education Administration program were not utilized throughout the Unit, it should not be concluded that there is not a strong relationship existing within the assessment process. The Program assessment includes comparable assessments, such as licensure tests, GPA, employer surveys, and completer surveys, which have counterparts elsewhere within the unit. The unit had not included in the IR data from these assessments due to the limited size of candidates in the advance programs. Exhibit 1.4.1.1 provides sample assessment data collected across advanced programs including the MAED Education Administration program. Assessments used in other advanced programs include both course and field-based assessments. Examples of data generated for advanced programs which include the School Guidance and Counselor, Teacher Leader, and the redesigned principal preparation program are also presented in Exhibit 1.4.1.1. Advance candidates’ assessment data provides evidence of the unit’s success in preparing candidates to promote a positive school culture, provide effective instructional programs, apply best practices to student learning, and design comprehensive professional growth plans.

(7)   How are data reflecting candidate impact on student learning summarized and used for program and unit improvement.  What evidence demonstrates that candidates can assess student learning and use data related to student learning to develop meaningful instruction to improve learning? Are these data disaggregated by program?

Unit’s Response

The action research project which served as the expected product for EDU 610 Research Procedure II for all advanced programs offered prior to fall 2009 provided a rich source of evidence of candidates’ ability to reflect on their practice and identify their strengths and areas needing improvement. Candidates gather both formative and summative evidence of student learning during instruction and use that evidence to monitor and adjust instructional content, strategies, and resources as needed for individuals and groups of students.

(8)   What data are available on advanced candidate disposition evaluations and how are disposition data used for all programs?

Unit’s Response

Assessment of disposition for candidate in advanced programs begins at admission. Faculty from the Graduate Admission and Retention Committee form teams of up to three members to assess applicants during the formal person interview process [See Exhibit 1.5.8.1 as an example] using a unit developed rubric [See Exhibit 1.5.8.2 and Exhibit 1.5.8.3]. The collected data is reviewed, analyzed, and aggregated. [See Exhibit 1.5.8.4 and Exhibit 1.5.8.5]

(9)   Page 9 of IR makes reference to literacy education in a course in the counseling program (SBC 600 Counselor Preparation. The report states that the course addresses KERA (KY Education Reform Act) initiatives. This law was passed in 1990 and resulted in systemic reforms throughout the Commonwealth that have been in place for nearly 20 years now. There are more current initiatives (e.g. KY Core Academic Standards which includes literacy) that should be addressed. How has the unit incorporated the additional initiatives?

Unit response

The Unit acknowledges the findings of the off-site reviewers where KERA initiative statements were found in SGC 600 Counselor Preparation, which is an introductory course in the history, philosophy, techniques, standards, and models of school counseling. The unit recognizes that state of Kentucky has recently signed a resolution directing their respective agencies to implement the Common Core State Standards in English/language arts and mathematics, formalizing Kentucky’s agreement to integrate the standards into the State’s public education system. The unit prepared and submitted the required Program Review Documents on September 15, 2010 based on the guidelines [see KY Program Guidelines under Document 3: Program Experiences] for preparing the syllabi and other program documents. The Unit has, however, begun a systematic and intentional effort [See Exhibit 1.5.9.1] to identify specific courses in programs and experiences to meet Senate Bill I initiatives (Common Core Standards).


Return to referring page.