View
5
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
ASSESSMENT SYSTEM
August 2011
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Institutional Context 1
SUNY System 1
SUNY-Geneseo 2
Assessment Principles 3
Development of the Current SOE Assessment System 4
Assessment System Specifications 7
Initial Candidate Assessment 7
Advanced Candidate Assessment 13
Faculty Assessment 15
Program/Unit Assessment 15
Use of Technology 16
Use of Assessment Data 16
Appendices 18
Fairness, Accuracy, and Consistency Statement 18
Assessment System Overview 19
Key Assessments and Dissemination 20
Transition Points 25
Data Collection Timeline 27
Data Sources Chart 28
Annual Program Assessment Report 29
Data Gathering Graphic 30
Data Reporting Graphic 31
1
INSTITUTIONAL CONTEXT
The Shear School of Education’s assessment system reflects its conceptual framework as well as
professional and state standards. Designed to collect and analyze data regarding candidates and
unit operations to evaluate and improve teacher education programs, the assessment system is
integrated with assessment at SUNY-Geneseo and the SUNY System.
SUNY System Assessment
The SUNY Board of Trustees adopted resolutions in 1998 and 2004 that strengthened the
University’s longstanding commitment to rigorous and regular assessment of academic
programs. In 2010, the Board updated its policies to reduce unnecessarily duplicative
assessment requirements for campuses while maintaining high standards. Effective in the 2010-
11 academic year, each SUNY campus is required to develop and implement plans for the
regular assessment and review of institutional effectiveness. Each campus is permitted to
develop assessment plans that are consistent with its mission and goals, while maintaining
academic rigor and meeting or exceeding external standards. The Regulations of the
Commissioner of Education, state that every registered academic program shall”…show
evidence of careful planning. Institutional goals and the objectives of each curriculum and of all
courses shall be clearly defined in writing, and a reviewing system shall be devised to estimate
the success of students and faculty in achieving such goals and objectives…”
Campus-based general education assessment plans are required to include the student learning
outcomes to assess all general education areas in a three-year cycle, and to involve program faculty
in the development and implementation of the assessments Academic majors are assessed every five
to seven years, with the use of external reviewers whenever possible.
In 2003, the School of Education was one of the 15 teacher education programs in the SUNY
system to participate in a Fund for the Improvement of Postsecondary Education (FIPSE)
project, the SUNY Teacher Education Program Assessment (TEPA) Project. In this three-year
project, the teacher education programs collaborated with SUNY System Institutional Research
to develop, implement, and enhance campus assessment systems to improve teacher education
programs and beginning teacher competency.
2
Project outcomes included:
1. Increased quality of teacher education programs and their associated assessment systems.
2. Reallocation of institutional resources for program assessment.
3. Assessment of important candidate characteristics that are difficult to measure, such as
professional dispositions and impact on K-12 learning.
4. Teacher certification exam analyses that support content area program improvements.
5. System and campus databases for managing teacher assessment data
6. Increased collaboration among SUNY teacher education campuses to support assessment.
7. Access to NYSED data on SUNY in-service teacher graduates.
SUNY Geneseo Assessment
Assessment at Geneseo is a comprehensive process focused on continuous improvement. In 2002,
SUNY-Geneseo developed a Plan for the Assessment of General Education at Geneseo. The
assessment of the general education program is on a three-year cycle: critical writing and reading,
numeric and symbolic reasoning, and the humanities were assessed in 2008-2009; social science,
foreign language, fine arts, and information management were assessed in 2009-2010; natural
science, U.S. history, non-western traditions, and oral discourse were assessed in 2010-2011.
In addition, every academic major at Geneseo has developed its own assessment plan. Although each
department or school’s plan is different, reflecting the knowledge and skills unique to the
appropriate academic discipline(s), all the plans describe a cycle of defining outcomes, measuring
student learning, and using the results to advance teaching and learning.
Every year, departments and the designated General Education areas submit assessment results to the
SUNY-Geneseo Academic Assessment Committee, which includes faculty, staff, and students from
across the campus. The committee reviews these reports in order to provide feedback to departments
and programs on assessment procedures, not to judge whether departments or programs are
successfully teaching students. Departmental assessment coordinators meet with the committee
annually to review the report and consider suggestions for improvement. The Academic Assessment
Planning Committee supports the systematic use of performance-based assessments.
In compliance with the SUNY Assessment Initiative, every five to seven years, academic majors
undergo a campus-based assessment review that includes an external reviewer. The School of
Education’s most recent self-study was completed through NCATE in 2006. SUNY-Geneseo’s
comprehensive, outcomes-based assessment process enhances the education of all students within
SUNY-Geneseo and strengthens the knowledge, skills, and dispositions of the candidates entering
the School of Education programs.
3
ASSESSMENT PRINCIPLES
Done well, assessment is an ongoing, recursive, reflective process that engages teachers and
learners with each other. While the documentation provided by the development of a formal
assessment system is an important and necessary indicator of the quality of a teacher education
program, particularly within a public institution, such documentation is meaningful only in the
context of engagement between teacher and learner. In that effective assessment in the service of
learning involves many interactions and iterations between teachers and learners, any
documentation should be recognized as an abstract representation of the processes and products
of learning.
The Shear School of Education’s conceptual framework is the foundation of the assessment
system, in the service of its mission:
To prepare future teachers to be reflective, critical thinkers, adept at problem solving, and
committed to the development of communities of inquiry, to ensure that all students have
the opportunity to learn the skills necessary for a productive life and responsible
citizenship.
This mission is reflected in the strands and outcomes of our conceptual framework, represented
by the graphic below:
The School of Education assessment system is designed to systematically collect, aggregate, and
analyze data regarding candidate performance, faculty performance, and operational
performance, to provide information for decision-making at the candidate, program, and unit
level. The primary function of the assessment system, however, is to document candidate
competence and monitor candidate progress towards fulfilling the requirements for teacher
certification. It is in the service of that goal that data also is gathered regarding faculty
performance and other organizational resources to evaluate program and unit effectiveness.
4
The assessment system is based on the following core principles, which reflect the constructivist
philosophy that is the foundation of the School of Education’s conceptual framework:
1. Effective assessment has clearly articulated goals.
2. Effective assessment is multidimensional, using diverse methods and measures over time.
3. Effective assessment is based on knowledge of the intellectual, emotional, and social
needs of learners.
4. Effective assessment is ongoing and cumulative.
5. Effective assessment involves self-assessment and reflection.
DEVELOPMENT OF THE CURRENT SOE ASSESSMENT SYSTEM
The faculty, staff, and teacher candidates of the School of Education have regularly revisited
issues pertaining to vision, mission, and goals, as well as curriculum development. Major
revisions in New York State guidelines for teacher education were announced in the late 1980s,
again in 1998, and in 2004. Currently the pace of change regarding teacher preparation in New
York State is very brisk with much discussion centering around programs that emphasize
common core standards and field experiences that are clinically-rich. On each occasion, the
School of Education has carried out extensive reworking of goals and objectives, as well as
major curriculum changes. The policy mandates that resulted from the Board of Regents’ 1998
policy document “Teaching to Higher Standards: New York’s Commitment,” required the
redesign and re-registration of all teacher education programs, with an increase in required field
experience hours prior to student teaching, and testing for initial teacher certification, among
other changes.
During the same period, New York State required all teacher education programs to become
nationally accredited. The faculty in the School of Education chose accreditation through the
National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE). As part of the NCATE
accreditation process, the School of Education began the development and implementation of a
performance- and rubric-based assessment system in a phased process that has consistently
included input from the professional community.
Phase 1
As the accreditation process was initiated in late 2001, the School of Education consulted with its
professional communities in creating a comprehensive, outcomes- and performance-based
assessment system for teacher education. Dr. Richard Arends, an NCATE consultant, was
brought in to provide assistance and guidance during a full-day retreat held in August 2002. The
5
assessment plan developed by the Assessment Committee was brought before the School of
Education Advisory Committee and the Special Education Advisory Committee, both of which
included education faculty, liberal arts and sciences faculty, P-12 administrators and faculty, and
candidates, for review and feedback.
With the approval of this plan and its acceptance by NCATE as fulfilling an accreditation
precondition, faculty began to develop or revise common course assignments, rubrics, and
evaluation forms at the program and unit levels. In spring 2003, the School of Education
proposed raising the minimum required grade point average (GPA) for admission and retention
from 2.50 to 2.75. This proposal was approved by the College Faculty Senate for freshmen
entering in fall 2004. Other changes included revising the existing learning admission
requirement and the student teaching and field experience evaluation forms to better reflect the
unit’s revised conceptual framework. Program reports were submitted to the appropriate
professional associations.
The assessment plan called for candidates in the Early Childhood, Childhood, and Childhood
with Special Education programs to create a Field Inquiry Portfolio. In 2003-2004, guidelines
were developed, along with rubrics for key assignments at the unit and program levels. The Field
Inquiry Portfolio requirement was first implemented by the Early Childhood program, followed
by the Childhood and Childhood with Special Education programs in fall 2004. Common rubrics
for key assignments at the unit level were designed by the Assessment Committee and approved
by School of Education faculty in spring 2004. Systematic data collection using the new rubrics
began in spring 2004. The local alumni survey was first administered in 2003. The employer
survey was developed in spring 2003 and piloted in fall 2004.
Preliminary data on key assignments common to all programs have been aggregated and reported
to the faculty at large each semester. Program data have been aggregated and reported first to
program faculty in programs that were required to submit rejoinders or revised reports, then to
faculty in nationally recognized programs as part of the normal cycle of data review.
Phase 2
In fall 2005, the conceptual framework was reviewed by the newly constituted Teacher
Education Advisory Committee, which includes representatives from the liberal arts and science
departments, the Department of Communicative Disorders and Sciences, SUNY-Geneseo
administration, representatives from our P-12 partners, and the School of Education. As a result,
the six outcomes were organized into three strands: 1) Teacher as Scholar, representing the
rigorous liberal arts and science education at SUNY-Geneseo; 2) Teacher as Constructivist
Educator, representing the ability of candidates to meet the learning needs of all children; and 3)
6
Teacher as Reflective Practitioner, representing the professional commitment of candidates to
inquiry and reflective practice. Similarly, the expected dispositions for candidates in School of
Education programs were organized into three strands: Developing a Professional Stance,
Demonstrating Active Engagement in Teaching, and Welcoming Diversity. Consequently,
rubrics for common key assignments were revised to reflect the new organization.
Phase 3
This phase involved the continued development and implementation of the assessment system
which has five primary goals: 1) simplification and routinization of the candidate collection and
reporting procedures; 2) continued development of the reporting capabilities of the data
management system; 3) evaluation of the current method for generating unit-level data; 4)
continued efforts to establish rubric reliability and validity; and 5) analysis of data from the
current iteration of performance assessments and rubrics and revision or refinement as necessary.
Phase 4
In the fall of 2010, the TaskStream program was initiated to replace our outdated Access
database. Beginning in the fall of 2011, TaskStream will be used to track all program and unit
key assignments at the initial level providing faculty and staff with current data in an efficient,
useable manner. Beginning in the fall of 2012, all advanced program candidates and faculty will
be using TaskStream. This system enables us to aggregate data for all candidates within each
program and across the unit. Teacher candidates maintain their key assignments in their own
electronic portfolios. In addition, TaskStream is also used to maintain field experience and
student teaching placement information.
ASSESSMENT SYSTEM SPECIFICATIONS
Initial Candidate Assessment
Each teacher certification program clearly identifies the minimum requirements for competency,
and works with the Admissions and Retention Office to provide remediation for candidates who
may need more support or time to meet those requirements. Candidates in the Early Childhood,
Childhood, and Childhood with Special Education programs must maintain their own records of
performance in portfolios as they move through their programs. In course assignments, the
development of lesson and unit plans, portfolios, field experiences, and student teaching,
expectations for outcomes and rubrics for evaluation are clearly defined, with the goal of
developing candidates’ capacity to meet the needs of diverse learners and have a positive effect
on student learning.
7
Assessment of candidate performance is embedded in coursework, learning activities, and field
experiences that are aligned with the professional standards for each program, as well as the
unit’s conceptual framework. The assessment system incorporates formative and summative data
that is used to track candidate development and program effectiveness. Each program leading to
initial certification has developed a plan for the collection of data that addresses the professional
standards of the appropriate discipline. All initial program assessment plans currently are
organized around four checkpoints.
1. Admission to the program
2. Admission to student teaching
3. Exit from student teaching/program completion
4. After graduation
At each point, multiple measures of candidate performance generate data for analysis. External
data includes GPA in a candidate’s major, concentration, or certification courses; licensure test
scores; and employment data. Internal assessment data comes from key assessments within
courses, which must be successfully completed for a candidate to pass the course and progress to
the next block of courses.
Each semester, the Dean’s office requests from Records and Registration a list of candidates that
indicate their block, overall GPA, and major declaration. Candidates with GPAs below the
minimum required are referred to the Admissions and Retention office for the development of a
remediation plan or counseling.
According to College policy, students who have completed 60 credit hours must declare a major.
Candidates who have not applied to the School of Education by the time they have earned 60
credit hours are given a warning in writing that they must submit an application to and be
accepted by the School of Education or they will not be allowed to proceed to the next block of
courses. If candidates have not been accepted into the School of Education and do not have the
necessary GPA, they are counseled out of the program. Admission deadlines are June 1,
December 1, and February 1 (for transfer students). These deadlines are published on the School
of Education website; candidates must download the application from the website.
8
Initial Checkpoint 1: Admission to the School of Education
College students who enter SUNY-Geneseo with the intention of becoming teacher candidates at
the elementary level are given “pre-major” codes. Currently, transfer students and adolescence
students do not have pre-major codes, but the Office of the Dean of the College is developing
pre-major codes for liberal arts and sciences students who enter SUNY-Geneseo with the
intention of seeking adolescence certification. Applications for admittance into teacher
certification programs may be submitted after the student has successfully completed two full
semesters of college-level coursework at SUNY-Geneseo or elsewhere.
Admission requirements for freshmen and transfer students with fewer than two full-time
semesters of transfer credit include:
2.75 cumulative GPA
Successful completion of INTD 105 (a C- or better)
25 documented hours of a service learning experience (15 for Adolescence programs)
Completed application by deadline
Admission requirements for transfer students with two or more full-time semesters of transfer
credit, who apply at the same time they apply to SUNY-Geneseo, include:
Successful completion of a course equivalent to INTD 105 (a C- or better)
25 documented hours of a service learning experience (15 for Adolescence programs)
Completed application by deadline
All applicants must complete a Service Learning Project, which is designed to provide an initial
experience working with children at the level in which an applicant intends to seek certification.
A full description of the service learning requirement is included in the application, available
online.
Applications are reviewed by the Admissions and Retention Office and applicants are informed
in writing of their admission or denial. If the reason for the denial of admission is based on GPA,
applicants are encouraged to work with the Admissions and Retention office and reapply when
they have achieved the minimum GPA. Applicants who are denied admission to a teacher
education program for any reason have the right to appeal based on extenuating circumstances.
9
Initial Checkpoint #2: Admission to Student Teaching
The New York State Education Department requires all teacher education programs to include at
least 100 hours of fieldwork in diverse settings with diverse students prior to student teaching.
Teacher candidates at SUNY-Geneseo fulfill this requirement through service learning and field
experiences and practica that are associated with courses. The Office of Field Experiences and
Student Teaching tracks candidates’ fulfillment of this requirement. Candidates are evaluated by
course instructors on projects, assignments, and performance during the field experience or
practicum. Candidate performance in practicum also is evaluated formally by cooperating
teachers.
One year before their anticipated semester of student teaching, candidates must attend an
orientation session and file paperwork with the Office of Field Experience and Student Teaching,
indicating their intent to student teach. Applications are reviewed for completeness, completion
of prerequisite courses, GPA, and the absence of incompletes.
The semester before student teaching, candidates in the Childhood, Childhood with Special
Education, and Early Childhood programs are required to submit Field Inquiry Portfolios for
review by faculty. These portfolios are the record of candidates’ performance on the key
assignments selected by program faculty as measures of candidate progress toward the
proficiencies identified in the conceptual framework and program standards. They are designed
to give candidates an opportunity to document and reflect on the growth of their knowledge and
skills over the course of their teacher education experience. Common key assignments are those
required for candidates in all programs; program key assignments are those required for
candidates in particular programs. Rubrics for common key assignments assess candidate
performance in relation to the knowledge, skills, and dispositions identified in our conceptual
framework as fundamental to the profession of teaching. Rubrics for program key assignments
assess candidate performance in relation to the appropriate professional standards.
10
Field Inquiry Portfolio: Key Assignments
Key Common Unit Assignments
Course(s)
Statement of Philosophy & Beliefs INTD 203
Oral discourse EDUC 204, EDUC 214, SPED 234, EDUC 354
Differentiated Lesson Plan w/ Technology CURR 316, SPED 205
Unit Planning
Student Teaching Feedback and Evaluation
Impact on Student Learning
CURR 317, INTD 301 or 302
EDUC 331/332/333,SPED 391, EDUC 340/350
EDUC 331/332/333,SPED 391, EDUC 340/350
Program Key Assignments Course(s)
Early Childhood
Lesson Plan and Reflection
Reflections on Field Inquiry Visits
Child Case Study
CURR 213
EDUC 214
ECED 351
Lesson Plans ECED 353, EDUC 214, CURR 213, CURR 316
Documentation Panel ECED 353
Advocacy/Community Project ECED 352
Diverse Learner Assessment Record ECED 355
Parent Communication Activity
Reflective Essay
Classroom Management Plan
EDUC 354
CURR 313
EDUC 326
Childhood
Reflections on Field Inquiry Visits EDUC 214
Lesson Plan & Reflection CURR 213
Reflective Essay CURR 313
Classroom Management Plan EDUC 326
Home/School Newsletter EDUC 354
Teacher Interview on Inclusion SPED 319
11
Program Key Assignments
Course(s)
Childhood w/Special Education
Reflection on Field Inquiry Visits SPED 234
Lesson Plan & Reflection*
Reflective Essay*
Home/School Newsletter*
Individualized Education Program
Collaboration Notebook
CURR 213
CURR 313
EDUC 354
SPED 382
SPED 385
* Childhood Program Assessments
Adolescence
Reading and Literacy Activity EDUC 215
Nature of Science Essay (Science) INTD 300
Problem-Solving Assignment (Math) INTD 301
Candidates in each program complete all unit key assessments as well as required assessments
tailored for each program.
Candidates who are denied admission to student teaching have the right to appeal. Appeals are
reviewed by the Admissions and Retention office, an appeal committee that includes three
faculty members, and the Dean.
Initial Checkpoint #3: Exit from Student Teaching/Program Completion
Student teachers are observed daily by the cooperating teacher and at least three times per
placement by the college supervisor. Feedback from the college supervisors is provided to
student teachers at the end of each observation orally and in writing. Student teachers are
evaluated formally twice during each placement, once at midterm and once at the end of the
placement, by the cooperating teacher, the college supervisor, and by the student teacher, using
the appropriate student teaching evaluation form. The evaluation forms for student teaching were
revised with input from the P-12 community in the spring and summer of 2003. As program
changes occur, the evaluation forms are modified to reflect those changes.
12
Initiated in the fall of 2005, the Impact on Student Learning assignment was introduced during
the student teaching semester. This assessment asks candidates to document, analyze, and
evaluate student learning. The resulting reports are evaluated by the college supervisors using a
common rubric. (The rubric was later modified for clarity and to better fit the assignment.)
Student teachers are also required to complete a Professional Portfolio, to document a
candidate’s knowledge and skills for presentation to prospective employers. (The TaskStream
program is now available for candidates to create electronic portfolios.) Candidate transcripts are
reviewed to ensure that they have completed all College and unit requirements for graduation
and recommendation for certification.
Initial Checkpoint #4: After Graduation
The Office of Career Services, with the assistance of the Office of Institutional Research,
conducts an annual follow-up survey of Geneseo graduates. Particular attention is paid to
employment and graduate or professional school status. The School of Education also has
conducted an alumni survey in the fall of 2010.
In fall 2004, the School of Education piloted an employers’ survey, which asked school
administrators to evaluate the performance of Geneseo graduates hired in the previous three
years. A second administration of the survey was sent out in August, 2006 with the most recent
survey conducted in the fall of 2010.
Although some candidates take the state licensure tests before graduation, the tests are not
required for program completion, although candidates must pass the tests in order to receive
certification. Licensure test scores are imported from NYSED. Each year, Career Services
compiles and publishes results from an annual follow-up survey. Results from all sources of data
after graduation are shared with program faculty each year for review and program improvement.
Advanced Candidate Assessment
Assessment of candidate performance in advanced programs is embedded in coursework,
learning activities, and clinical experiences that are aligned with the professional standards for
each program, as well as the Graduate Conceptual Framework. All advanced candidates must
attain at least a 3.00 GPA by the end of their graduate program. Each program for which there
are advanced professional standards has developed a plan for the collection of program data that
13
addresses the professional standards of the appropriate discipline. Unit-level assessment of
advanced candidates is organized around three checkpoints:
1) Admission to Program
2) Entry to Clinical Practice/Capstone Course
3) Exit from Clinical Practice/Capstone Course
4) After Graduation
Advanced Checkpoint #1: Admission to Advanced Program
Applicants to advanced teacher education programs must have a baccalaureate degree from an
accredited institution, with an undergraduate record that indicates potential for graduate study. In
addition, depending on the program, applicants are required to hold an initial or provisional
teaching certificate, which ensures that the applicants have passed the appropriate NYS licensure
tests and have cleared a criminal background check. All applicants must also submit letters of
recommendation. Some advanced programs have additional admission requirements. Literacy,
for example, requires an essay. Admissions data is shared with program faculty and the Dean’s
office for program and operational performance review and improvement.
Advanced Checkpoint#2: Capstone Experience
Every advanced program requires successful performance in a capstone course, thesis, research
project, or comprehensive exam for program completion. Literacy and Early Childhood
Education programs include clinical components while candidates in Multicultural Education
and Adolescence programs are typically teaching in area schools and are able to use their
classrooms as clinical settings. All candidates must also have attained a cumulative GPA of at
least 3.00 for successful program completion. Results of the program capstone experience are
aggregated by the Assessment Office and shared with program faculty program review and
improvement.
Advanced Checkpoint #3: Exit from Clinical Practice/Capstone Course
All candidates must provide evidence of successful completion of all program requirements and
have attained a cumulative GPA of at least 3.00 Results of the program capstone experience are
aggregated by the Assessment Office and shared with program faculty for review and
improvement.
14
Advanced Checkpoint #4: After Graduation
Graduates of advanced programs were not included in the past versions of the alumni survey and
the employer’s survey, but will be included in the next administration of each. Of the advanced
programs, Literacy is the only one for which a Content Specialty Test (CST) is required.
Graduate candidate performance on the Literacy CST is aggregated by the Assessment Office
and shared with program faculty program review and improvement.
Faculty Assessment
The evaluation of faculty performance covers three areas: teaching, scholarship, and service. The
Personnel Committee conducts annual observations of faculty who are not yet tenured and of
faculty who are anticipating applying for promotion. Faculty members seeking continuing
appointment (tenure) and promotion are evaluated by the College Faculty Personnel Committee,
then by the Provost and the President. In addition, all faculty who teach during the regular
academic year are required to submit Student Opinion of Faculty Instruction forms. This data is
compiled by the Office of Institutional Research and shared with the Dean. Faculty are required
to submit activity reports at the end of each academic year, detailing their accomplishments and
activities in the areas of scholarship and service. These reports are submitted to the Dean’s office
and the Provost’s office for review. Faculty also are evaluated annually by the Personnel
Committee and the Dean for Discretionary Salary Increases.
PROGRAM/UNIT ASSESSMENT
Candidate Data Collection
Data from candidate assessments are a primary source of data for program assessment. Faculty
evaluate candidates’ performance using common rubrics and evaluation forms for key
assessments. Data on candidate performance on key course assignments, in field experiences,
and in student teaching are submitted via TaskStream to the Assessment Office for aggregation
and reporting to program faculty for analysis. Alumni and employer survey data are collected
and aggregated by the Assessment Office and reported to faculty. Rubric and performance data
are entered into the data management system (TaskStream (Initial) and Access (Advanced) at the
end of each semester. State licensure test scores are imported from NYSED. The SUNY-
Geneseo follow-up survey, and the School of Education alumni and employers’ surveys, are
currently administered electronically.
15
Since fall 2004, data on candidate performance in key assessments had been collected by the
Assessment Office at the end of each semester for entry into the Access data management
system. Beginning in the fall of 2010, program and unit data have been collected for the initial
program through TaskStream and via our Access data base for the advanced program. Data from
program assessments is then aggregated for review and analysis by program faculty in the
process of submitting SPA reports. The unit’s Assessment Committee is responsible for
collecting and analyzing unit data with input from the faculty.
In response to feedback from an informal external review in June 2006, the Executive
Committee approved the Assessment Committee’s proposal to simplify data reporting and to
assign data analysis and review to program faculty committees. In the normal cycle of
assessment and review, data from the previous year’s assessments are presented to program
faculty for review at the beginning of each academic year. Program faculty forward their
findings to the Assessment Committee at the end of the year; the Assessment Committee reviews
data from all programs focusing on one of the three strands of the conceptual framework on a
three-year rotating basis.
Records of formal candidate complaints and appeals and their resolution are maintained by the
Assistant to the Dean and the Office of Field Experiences and Student Teaching. Appeal and
waiver forms are available for candidates to download from the School of Education Outbox;
they are also available from the Admissions and Retention office.
The School of Education ensures fairness, validity, and non-bias in candidate assessment by
aligning assessments and evaluation forms with the conceptual framework and state and
professional standards, by holding faculty work sessions to develop inter-rater reliability, and by
having a formal process for candidate complaints and appeals.
Faculty Data Collection
The Personnel Committee evaluates data on faculty performance in the process of promotion and
continuing appointment (tenure) review. Faculty must submit materials to the Personnel
Committee by February 1 for Term Renewals and Continuing Appointments, and March 1 for
Promotions. Peer observations take place in the semester prior to the submission of materials.
Results from the Student Opinion of Faculty Instruction surveys, administered at the end of the
fall and spring semesters, are aggregated and reported by the Office of Institutional Research. At
the end of each academic year, faculty submit activity reports on their accomplishments in
scholarship and service. Aggregated data on faculty performance are reviewed by Dean’s office
annually.
16
Program and Unit Data Collection
The School of Education assessment system monitors operational performance through the
analysis of data on resources and productivity, including budget allocations, expenditures, course
enrollments, and faculty work load and accomplishments, as well as data from the College
Senior Survey, Alumni Survey, and Student Opinion of Faculty Instruction survey. These data
are generated by internal and external sources, including the Office of Institutional Research, the
Office of the Dean of the College, and the Budget Office. Data are aggregated by the Assessment
office and reported to the Dean’s office for review.
Use of Technology
The database management system used by the School of Education Assessment System is
TaskStream. TaskStream enables us to aggregate data for each candidate within each program
and across the unit. In addition, TaskStream is used to maintain field experience and student
teaching placement information. All initial teacher candidates are required to have a
TaskStream account with all key assignments being submitted to faculty electronically. Rubrics
are completed by faculty, returned to the candidates and recorded in the database. Data is
instantly available for analysis by both faculty and staff. Starting in the fall of 2012, all
advanced candidates will be required to have a TaskStream account.
The assessment system also includes data from Banner (SUNY-Geneseo’s Oracle-based data
management system), data generated within the School of Education, as well as external data,
such as licensure test scores. Data from Banner and external sources are imported into
TaskStream.
USE OF ASSESSMENT DATA
The School of Education assessment system is designed to provide relevant data to faculty and
administrators as they make decisions about candidates, curriculum, programs, policies and
procedures. Operating within the context of the SUNY System, SUNY-Geneseo, state and
national standards for teacher education, and the School of Education conceptual framework, the
assessment system gathers data in three areas: 1) candidate knowledge, skills, and dispositions;
2) faculty knowledge, skills, and dispositions; and 3) program and unit effectiveness.
17
Data on candidate knowledge, skills, and dispositions in the three strands of the conceptual
framework has been analyzed to establish a baseline. Data is then analyzed in a three-year
rotating cycle, focusing on one strand per year. Data on faculty knowledge, skills, and
dispositions, and program and unit effectiveness are analyzed on an annual basis.
The following diagram illustrates the operation of the assessment system as a decision-making
tool. Contextual data represent all external requirements and mandates that the unit must
incorporate into its decision-making process. These contextual factors influence the unit inputs,
which include the qualifications of candidates and faculty, the unit’s conceptual framework
proficiencies, and programmatic curricular policies and procedures. Data regarding these inputs
feed into the data process. The data process entails the management, analysis, and reporting of
data collected from the various sources at different levels of the system. Program faculty are
primarily responsible for the analysis of aggregated data. Results of the analyses, including
recommended changes or decisions, are then sent to the appropriate School of Education
committees and the Teacher Education Advisory Committee for review and action.
18
APPENDICES
Assuring Fairness, Accuracy, Consistency, and the Elimination of Bias
The School of Education at SUNY Geneseo uses the following strategies to ensure fairness,
accuracy, consistency, and the elimination of bias throughout its assessment system:
The unit ensures that the assessments are aligned with the unit’s conceptual
framework, and that the appropriate program standards are reflected in syllabi and
key assessments, and faculty implementation.
Both initial and advanced teacher candidates are informed of all requirements in the
teacher education program during orientations, advising sessions, and special
meetings designed to explain procedures for program matriculation. Information
about the conceptual framework, dispositions, and program requirements is available
on the College’s website and discussed with the candidates by their advisors and
course instructors.
Rubrics for the key program assessments are shared with the candidates before they
are used. Thus, candidates know what they will be assessed on, what is expected of
them, and the level of proficiency associated with each scoring decision.
The Assessment Committee has developed a process that describes the steps that must
be taken when a change is made in a key program assessment or unit assessment: (1)
Change is initiated by faculty or division, (2) the division that raised the change votes
on approval of change, (3) if approved, all impacted divisions review the proposed
change and vote for approval, and (4) if approved, the assessment committee reviews
and votes on the proposed change.
Once each year, the results of each key assessment are compared to other internal or
external assessments that measure comparable knowledge, skills and/or dispositions
to determine that key assessments are consistent in the results they provide. This
review is documented by the unit in meeting minutes and includes, but is not limited
to, the review of course grades, the review of data from student teaching, and results
of licensure exams.
Data are triangulated wherever possible to enhance the reliability of findings. For
example, many of the same questions are asked on the Graduate Follow-up Survey
and the Employer Survey. For all initial program candidates, the same Student
Teaching Feedback and Evaluation Form is completed by the candidate, the
cooperating teacher, and the college supervisor at mid-term and at the completion of
the placement. The evaluation is completed as part of a three-way conversation at the
end of the placement.
Context
SUNY Geneseo
Characteristics & Mission
SUNY System Characteristics
& Mission
State and National Standards
Inputs
Candidate Qualifications
Faculty Qualifications
Unit Conceptual Framework
Curricula, Policies and Procedures
Data Sources
Candidate K, S, D
GPAs
Course Assessments & Evaluations
Field Assessments & Evaluations
Surveys
Faculty K, S, D
SOFIs/Course Evaluations
Publications/Presentations
Service
Surveys
Program/Unit Effectiveness
Enrollments
Faculty Loads
Certifications and Placements
Faculty Qualifications
Administrative Supports
Data Process
Data Used By
Dean of the School of Education
Teacher Education Advisory Committee
SOE Committees
Program Faculty
Application
Decisions About
Candidates
Faculty
Curriculum
Programs
Policies
Procedures
Gather Select
Analyze Report
Assessment System Overview
20
SUNY Geneseo School of Education: Key Assessments and Dissemination Plan
Key Common Unit
Assignments
Course(s) Description/What it measures Data
Collection
Dissemination Disseminated
to:
Status/Most
Recent Update
Admission Essay N/A Measures candidate’s dispositions
at entry to program
10/19/2010
Statement of
Philosophy and Beliefs INTD 203 Measures conceptual framework
proficiencies Each semester Each semester Divisions
Assessment
Committee
6/3/2010
Oral Discourse EDUC 204
EDUC 214
SPED 234
EDUC 354
Measures organization, expression,
presentation, and reasoning Each semester Each semester Divisions
Assessment
Committee
2/23/2009
Differentiated Lesson
Plan with Technology CURR 316
SPED 205
Measures candidate’s ability to plan
effective lessons (aligned with
conceptual framework)
Each semester Each semester Divisions
Assessment
Committee
12/13/2010
Unit Plan CURR 317
INTD 301/ 302
Measures candidate’s ability to plan
effective unit (aligned with
conceptual framework)
Each semester Each semester Divisions
Assessment
Committee
9/11/2007
Practicum Evaluation Various Blocks
EC (353)
CH (317)
CH/SPED
(Blocks II, IV, V)
ADOL (Block II)
Measures candidate performance
during practicum – rating form Each semester Each semester Office of Field
Experiences
Assessment
Committee
Student Teaching
Feedback and
Evaluation Form
EDUC
331/332/333
SPED 391, EDUC
340/350
Measures teacher candidate
performance during student
teaching – rating form.
Each quarter Each semester Divisions
Office of Field
Experiences
Assessment
Committee
Impact on Student
Learning EDUC
331/332/333
SPED 391
EDUC 340/350
Measures candidates’ ability to
assess student performance and plan
appropriate instruction
Each semester Each semester Divisions
Assessment
Committee
9/11/2007
Content Specialty
Exam
Program
completion/State
licensure exam
To demonstrate professional
competence Fall Fall TEAC
Assessment
Committee
Divisions
Provost
N/A
21
Key Common Unit
Assignments
Course(s) Description/What it measures Data
Collection
Dissemination Disseminated
to:
Status/Most
Recent Update
ATS-W Exam Program
completion/State
licensure exam
To demonstrate professional
competence Fall Fall TEAC
Assessment
Committee
Divisions
Provost
N/A
LAST Exam Program
completion/State
licensure exam
*Discontinued
Spring 2013
To demonstrate professional
competence Fall Fall TEAC
Assessment
Committee
Divisions
Provost
N/A
Alumni Survey N/A Feedback from graduates by major
as well as overall unit Every three
years (2010,
2013, 2016)
Every three
years
TEAC
Assessment
Committee
Divisions
Provost
12/2010
Employer Survey N/A Feedback from employers on
Geneseo graduates ( first three
years of teaching)
Every three
years (2010,
2013, 2016)
Every three
years
TEAC
Assessment
Committee
Divisions
Provost
12/2010
Exit Survey Program
completion
Feedback from graduates regarding
program strengths/weaknesses Each semester Divisions
Assessment
Committee
Provost
Program Key
Assignments
Course(s) Description/What it Measures Data
Collection
Dissemination Disseminated
to:
Status/Most
Recent Update
Early Childhood Education
Child Case Study ECED 351 Knowledge of child development
theory and research and child study
methods
Each semester Each semester Divisions 2/18/2009
Advocacy/Community
Project
* ECED 352 Ability to gather data related to a
child welfare issue and to take
appropriate action
Each semester Each semester Divisions
Professional
Development Activity ECED 352 Demonstration of engagement in
the service activities of a
professional organizational
Each semester Each Semester Divisions 10/14/2010
22
Lesson Plans and
Reflections CURR 213
ECED 353
Increasing ability to plan and
evaluate instruction
Each semester Each semester Divisions 2/18/2009
Documentation Panel ECED 353 Ability to document children’s
learning for a multi-day project Each semester Each semester Divisions 10/14/2010
Diverse Learner
Assessment Record ECED 355 Ability to gather data from
classrooms and teachers about
diverse learners
Each semester Each semester Divisions 2/18/2009
Parent Communication
Activity EDUC 354 Knowledge of family
communication strategies Each semester Each semester Divisions 2/18/2009
Family Community
Project ECED 331/333 Ability to Investigate community
resources and apply that knowledge
to curriculum planning or parent
communication
Each semester Each semester Divisions 2/18/2009
Unit Plan and
Evaluation ECED 331/333 Ability to develop and evaluate a
long-range, integrated curriculum
plan
Each semester Each semester Divisions
Childhood Education
Reflections on Field
Inquiry Visits EDUC 214 Measures candidate’s reflections on
development, learning, motivation,
instruction, & professionalism
Each semester Each semester Divisions 10/13/2010
Lesson Plan and
Reflection CURR 213 Assesses candidate ability to create,
deliver, and evaluate a literacy
lesson plan
Each semester Each semester Divisions 10/13/2010
Reflective Essay CURR 313 Measures candidate’s reflections on
development, curriculum,
instruction, and professionalism
Each semester Each semester Divisions 10/13/2010
Classroom
Management Plan EDUC 326 Research paper with reflections Each semester Each semester Divisions 11/10/2010
Home/School
Newsletter EDUC 354 Measures candidate’s skill in
communicating effectively with
parents
Each semester Each semester Divisions 10/13/2010
Teacher Interview on
Inclusion SPED 319 Measures candidate’s ability to
incorporate selected ACEI
Standards
Each semester Each semester Divisions 10/13/2010
Childhood with Special Education
Case Study SPED 231 Application of special education
due process procedures and
identification procedures
Each semester Each semester Divisions 10/13/2010
Reflections on Field
Inquiry Visits SPED 234 *see above Each semester Each semester Divisions 10/13/2010
Lesson Plan &
Reflection * CURR 213 *see above Each semester Each semester Divisions 10/13/2010
23
Reflective Essay * CURR 313 *see above Each semester Each semester Divisions
Home/School
Newsletter * EDUC 354 *see above Each semester Each semester Divisions 10/13/2010
Individualized
Education Program SPED 382 Ability to write effective IEP
(aligned to CEC Standards) Each semester Each semester Divisions 3/10/2010
Collaboration
Notebook SPED 385 Notebook to include:
Professionalism, Record Keeping,
Comm. Skills, and Instructional
strategies
Each semester Each semester Divisions 4/28/2010
Adolescence Education
Reading & Literacy
Activity Assessment EDUC 215 Assesses candidate ability to plan
literacy-based content area –
specific learning activities
Each semester Each semester Divisions 11/28/2007
Nature of Science
Essay (Science) INTD 300 Asks candidate to demonstrate their
grasp of the nature of science Each semester Each semester Divisions
Advanced Program
Key Assignments
Course(s) Description/What it measures Data
Collection
Dissemination Disseminated
to:
Status/Most
Recent Update
Literacy B-12
Miscue Analysis Case
Study CURR 510 IRA Standards-Foundations of
Literacy Each semester Each semester Divisions 12/21/2010
Master File and
Reflection CURR 511 IRA Standards-Curriculum
Planning and Coaching Each semester Each semester Divisions 5/10/2010
Case Report
Assignment CURR 512 IRA Standards-Assessment Results
Assesses candidate abilities to carry
out, evaluate, and report on detailed
clinical diagnoses of struggling
readers
Each semester Each semester Divisions 5/10/2011
Clinical Case Report CURR 513 IRA Standards-Assessment Based
Instruction and Coaching Each semester Each semester Divisions 7/1/2009
Practicum Case Study CURR 522 This course no longer exists (same
as CURR 512) Each semester Each semester Divisions 4/27/2011
Action Research
Project and
Professional
Development Plan
CURR 535 IRA Standards-Literacy research,
action research, coaching Each semester Each semester Divisions 5/10/2010
24
Advanced Program
Key Assignments
Course(s) Description/What it measures Data
Collection
Dissemination Disseminated
to:
Status/Most
Recent Update
Early Childhood Education
Child Development
Mini-Research Study ECED 541 Knowledge of child development
theory and research and ability to
design, implement, and present a
mini-research study
Each semester Each semester Divisions 6/15/2007
Curriculum Project ECED 542 Ability to develop, implement, and
evaluate a long-term project and to
document student learning
Each semester Each semester Divisions 6/15/2007
School/Community
Advocacy Project ECED 543 Ability to gather data from
stakeholders on a school or
community issue, to develop and
present a policy brief, and to
recommend actions
Each semester Each semester Divisions 6/15/2007
Parent Involvement
Project ECED 544 Knowledge of family theory and
research, ability to assess and
address needs of diverse parent, and
ability to plan and evaluate a parent
workshop
Each semester Each semester Divisions 6/15/2007
Emergent/Early
Literacy Intervention
Project
ECED 546 Knowledge of emergent/early
literacy theory and research and to
design, implement, and present a
research project
Each semester Each semester Divisions 6/15/2007
Internship Curriculum
Inquiry Report and
Mentor Teacher
Evaluation
*Near end of
Program
Ability to apply knowledge and
skills previously gained in
coursework to a field setting and to
design and implement research-
based projects
Each semester Each semester Divisions 3/10.2010
A) Professional
Portfolio and
Comprehensive
Examination;
B) Professional
Portfolio and Action
Research Project or
Thesis
* End of Program Ability to synthesize and reflect on
own learning and future
professional goals and to
demonstrated advanced levels of
knowledge or expertise
Each semester Each semester Divisions 8/24/2010
25
Table A: Unit Assessment System by Transition Points (Initial Certificate)
Admission To School of
Education (TP-1)
Admission to Student Teaching (TP-2) Exit from Student Teaching/Program Completion
(TP-3)
After Graduation
(TP-4)
2.75 Cumulative GPA (or 3.00
Cumulative GPA for transfer
students who apply to the SOE
at the same time they apply for
admission to SUNY Geneseo)
Minimum of 2.75 Cumulative GPA and
in the major and area of concentration
Successful completion of a minimum of 33 days of
teaching experience with a qualified cooperating
teacher in an approved P-12 setting including a
minimum of one week of solo teaching for each
quarter – total of a minimum of 66 days
Completion of State
Licensure
Tests/registration for
certification
Successful completion of
INTD 105 (C- or better) or an
approved course equivalent for
transfer students
Minimum competency (C-) or better in
required courses/ No incomplete grades
Demonstrate the identified outcomes as evidenced
by Midterm and Final self-evaluations, evaluations
of cooperating teachers, and clinical faculty (from a
minimum of 3 formal observations)
Alumni Survey and
follow-up survey
(conducted by Career
Services and
Institutional Research)
25 documented hours of a
service learning experience (15
for Adolescence programs)
Senior standing (two-thirds of all major
and concentration coursework
completed)
Provide evidence of their impact on student learning Alumni Survey
(School of Education)
Every three years
Successful completion of
admissions essay
A minimum of 100 hours of field
experience in diverse settings with
diverse students
Demonstrate dispositions that characterize effective
teachers
Employer Survey
(School of Education)
Every three years
Submission of Field Inquiry Portfolios
including a minimum of “Acceptable”
ratings on all key assignments (Early
Childhood/Childhood and Childhood
with Special Education candidates)
Completion of a professional portfolio
Successful completion of all key
assignments for all candidates
Completion of all requirements for the college and
the major including academic concentrations (except
for Adolescence candidates), required related
courses, and the SOE/College writing requirement
Completion of Application to Student
Teach
(diversity requirement/ Non-Western Traditions
course)
Successful completion of Child Abuse
and Blood Borne Pathogens training
Completion of exit survey
Fingerprinting Completion of minimum of 120 academic credit
hours
Audit of academic record/completion of all college
requirements
26
Table B: Unit Assessment System by Transition Points (Advanced Certificate)
Admission(TP-1) Prior to Clinical
Experience/Capstone Project (TP-2)
Exit from Clinical
Experience/Capstone Project -
Program Completion (TP-3)
After Graduation
Completion of baccalaureate degree
from accredited institution with
minimum GPA of 3.00
Successful completion of entry level
coursework
Every advanced program requires
successful performance in a
capstone course, thesis, research
project, or comprehensive
exam.
Alumni survey
Teaching certificate Minimum “Acceptable” ratings on
key assignments
Candidates must meet all
requirements for their major ( more
detail needed here)
Employer’s survey
Some programs require: essay,
personal interview, letters of
reference, demonstration of
appropriate dispositions
Successful completion of Clinical
Experience/Capstone Project
3.00 GPA Content Specialty Test for New
York State licensure (Literacy only)
27
Data Collection Timeline
DATA TYPE FREQUENCY SOURCE
Candidates
Admissions data Semester Admissions (BANNER)
Admissions review for dispositions Semester Assistant-to-the-Dean
Performance on key assessments Semester Program faculty
Performance in practica and student teaching Semester Program faculty, cooperating teachers
Completion of clock hours of clinical
experience
Semester Program faculty, field experience office
Enrollment and retention Annually Institutional Research, admissions and retention
office
Grade distribution report Annually Institutional Research
Senior survey Annually Institutional Research
Freshman class profile Annually Institutional Research
Degrees awarded Annually Institutional Research
Licensure test scores Semester Institutional Research
Follow-up survey Annually Career Services, Institutional Research
Employers survey Every 3 years Assessment office
Faculty
Induced workload matrices Annually Institutional Research
Student Opinion of Faculty Instruction survey Semester Institutional Research
Alumni survey Every 3 years Assessment office
Employment review As needed Search committees, Dean’s office, Provost’s
office
Continuing appointment, promotion, and
tenure review
As needed Personnel committee, Dean’s office, Provost’s
office
Faculty activity reports review Annually Dean’s office
Supervisor evaluations Semester Field experience office
Cooperating teacher evaluations Semester Field experience office
Operations
Faculty and department summary book Annually Institutional Research
Department profile Annually Institutional Research
Faculty workload/faculty/student ratios Annually Institutional Research
Library resources As needed Milne Library
Financial data/budget Annually Budget office
Assessment
Review of conceptual framework Annually TEAC
Review of program assessment plans and data Annually Program faculty
Review of unit assessment plan and data Annually TEAC, Dean, Assessment committee
28
Data Sources
Area of Assessment Internal Sources External Sources
Candidate
Performance
Key Assignment Evaluations
Field & Practicum Evaluations
Capstone Experience Evaluations
GPAs
Licensure Test
scores
Awards
Grants
Employer Surveys
Alumni Surveys
Faculty
Performance
Observations
Faculty Activity Reports
Committee Service
Mentoring
Continuing Appointment (Tenure)
reviews
Promotion reviews
SOFIs
Alumni Surveys
Grants
Awards
Publications
Presentations
Operational
Performance
Staffing
Faculty Loads
Enrollments
Expenditures
Candidate Complaints & Appeals
Enrollments
Demographics
Budget
Allocations
29
SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
ANNUAL PROGRAM ASSESSMENT REPORT
Name of Program: __________________________________
Date submitted: ____________________________________
Person submitting report: ____________________________
1. Indicate the month(s) when the SOE’s assessment/evaluation system was discussed as
documented in agendas and minutes.
2. Describe the alignment studies completed this year within your program.
3. Provide a brief summary of this past year’s results.
4. What significant changes will the program make based on data? (Include what data you used and
what you are changing in the chart below)
Data Source Current Status Program Change How will you assess
change?
5. List the assessments you are using as evidence of candidate knowledge, skills, and dispositions
for your SPA.
Assessment #1: Content Knowledge CST, ATS-W, LAST * until Spring 2013
Assessment #2: Content Knowledge ______________________________
Assessment #3: Ability to Plan Instruction __________________________
Assessment #4: Assessment of Student Teaching _____________________
Assessment #5: Candidate effect on Student Learning_________________
Assessment #6: Additional Assessment ____________________________
Assessment
Office
Program
Faculty
Candidates
Admissions &
Retention Office
NYSED,
Alumni,
Employers
Institutional
Research, Budget
Office, Banner
DATA GATHERING
Liberal Arts &
Sciences
Departments
Communicative
Disorders &
Sciences
Assignments/
Performance
Candidate
Performance Data
Application
Admissions &
Retention Data
ASHA Report
Candidate
Performance Data
External Operational
Data
Candidate
Performance Data
Assessment
Office
SOE
Assessment
Committee
Program
Faculty
SPAs
Candidates Liberal Arts
& Sciences
Departments
SOE
Executive
Committee
SUNY
Geneseo
Assessment
Committee
School of
Education
Head of the PEU
(Provost’s Designee: Dean
of the School of
Education)
Teacher
Education
Advisory
Committee
Data Reporting
Program
Reports
Data
Findings
Aggregated
Performance &
Operational Data
Data, Findings &
Recommendations
Data &
Findings
Data, Findings &
Recommendations Data, Findings &
Recommendations
Data, Findings &
Recommendations
Recommendations
Recommended