160 likes | 283 Views
Assessment Day 2012 Focus: Educator as Member of Communities. Data: Alumni Survey Initial Programs Employer Survey Initial Programs Alumni Survey Advanced and OSP Programs. Alumni Survey – Initial Programs. Conducted March 2011. Administered once every three years.
E N D
Assessment Day 2012Focus: Educator as Member of Communities Data: Alumni Survey Initial Programs Employer Survey Initial Programs Alumni Survey Advanced and OSP Programs
Alumni Survey – Initial Programs • Conducted March 2011. Administered once every three years. • Sent as anonymous Qualtrics survey. • Listing of graduates obtained from ISU Foundation. Potential problem with the recency of graduation of this group. • 1002 emails sent, 878 did not fail, 52 responses received for response rate of 6% (likely artificially deflated due to inactive emails).
College-Based Preparation Frequencies and Percentages (N = 52)
Number of years teaching? • Range from 1 – 32, Mean = 5.9. Were you formally prepared for all areas in which you are teaching? • 86% (n = 44) responded yes. • 14% (n = 7) responded no.
General rating of preparation for first teaching assignment. • Excellent – n = 11 (25.0%) • Good - n = 25 (56.8%) • Fair - n = 5 (11.4%) • Poor - n = 3 (6.8%) What should be included in the curriculum to better prepare new teachers? Open ended question, 3 emergent response themes: • Classroom management skills (10 responses) • More frequent field experiences (11 responses) • Training in classroom technology (3 responses)
Employer Survey – Initial Programs • Conducted May 2011. Administered once every three years. • Sent as anonymous Qualtrics survey. • Sent to all principals in Indiana, asking only those who had hired an ISU graduate in the last 3 years to respond. • 1,924 emails sent, 1724 did not fail, 58 individuals accessed the link, only 18 completed some aspect of the survey. • No way of knowing the response rate, though it is clearly low.
Areas of Hiring Frequencies and Percentages of Respondents Indicating an Area (N = 18)
Demographics of responding schools Locale Rural = 9 (69.2%); Suburban = 3 (23.1%); Urban = 1 (7.7%. School Type Elementary = 5 (38.5%); Middle = 3 (23.1%); High = 5 (38.5%). Number of Teachers Range from 20 to 85, Mean = 43. Enrollment Range from 275 to 1200, Mean = 643. Free and Reduced Lunch % Range from 5 to 80, Mean = 42.3. Minority Enrollment % Range from 0 to 19, Mean = 4.9.
Alumni Survey – Advanced Programs • Conducted October 2011. Administered once every three years. • Sent as anonymous Qualtrics survey. • Listing of graduates obtained from ISU Foundation. • 482 emails sent, 430 did not fail, 32 responses received for response rate of 7.4% (likely artificially deflated due to inactive emails).
Demographics of Respondents Degree earned at ISU • Masters: n = 17 (53.1%) • Educational Specialist: n = 14 (43.8%) • Doctorate n = 1 (3.1%) Licensure held • Teaching license: n = 7 • Principal license: n = 5 • Superintendent license: n = 5 • School Psychologist: n = 4 • Speech Language Pathologist: n = 2 • Special Education: n = 1 • School Counseling: n = 1 • School Services: n = 1 • Career and Tech Ed Director: n = 1
Demographics of Respondents Program from which they graduated • School Administration and Supervision (n = 15) • School Psychology (n = 5) • School Counseling (n = 2) • Principal Licensing (n = 2) • Educational Technology (n = 1) • Special Education (n = 1) Professional Memberships in Organizations • National Professional Organization: n = 18 (62%) • State Professional Organization: n = 26 (90%) • Regional Professional Organization n = 10 (34%) Employed in field in which educated?Yes: n = 31 (96.9%) Employment Status:Full time = 26 (92.9%); Contract = 2 (7.1%)
Means and Standard Deviations of Effectiveness Rating Scale Items
Open Ended Items Strengths of the ISU graduate program • Cohort approach • Practicum experiences • ISU faculty • Flexibility of curriculum Recommendations for improving ISU programs • Faculty recommendations (diversification of faculty teaching cohorts, retention of qualified faculty) • Programming recommendations (weekend and online offerings, increased support during fieldwork, consistency in use of distance education) • Program content recommendations (more info on how to use assessment on a daily basis, increased focus on daily guidance routines, increased emphasis on article 7 of the special education law)