A Comprehensive Unit Assessment Plan Program Improvement, Accountability, and Research

1. A Comprehensive Unit Assessment PlanProgram Improvement, Accountability, and Research Johns Hopkins University School of Education Faculty Meeting October 26, 2012 Toni Ungaretti Borrowed generously from Jim Wyckoff (October 10, 2010). Using Longitudinal Data Systems for Program Improvement, Accountability, and Research. University of Virginia

2. Why Assessment? Assessment is a culture of continuous improvement that parallels the School’s focus on scholarship and research. It ensures candidate performance, program effectiveness, and unit efficiency.

3. Overview • Program Improvement: By following candidates and graduates both during their programs and over time after graduation, programs can learn a great deal about their programs • Accountability: Value-added analysis of teacher/student data in longitudinal databases is one measure of program accountability • Research: A systematic program of experimentally designed research can provide important insights in how to improve candidate preparation

4. Jim Wyckoff, 2010

5. Program ImprovementSome Questions • Who are our program completers—age, ethnicity, areas of certification? • What characterizes the preparation they receive? • How well do they perform on measures of qualifications, e.g., licensure exams? • Where do our program completers teach/work? What is their attrition?—are they meeting program goals and mission? • How effective are they in their teaching/work? Ultimate impact!

6. AccountabilityWhat Constitutes Effective Teacher Preparation? • Programs work with school districts to meet the teaching needs of the schools where their teachers are typically placed • Programs are judged by the empirically documented effectiveness of their graduates in improving the outcomes of the students they teach • Retention plays a role in program effectiveness as teachers substantially improve in quality over the first few years of their careers.

7. ResearchHow Can Programs Add Value? • Selection: Who enters, how does that matter, and how can we influence it? • Preparation: What preparation content makes a difference? • Timing: Does it matter when teachers receive specific aspects of preparation? • Retention: Why is retention important to program value added and what can affect it?

8. Johns Hopkins UniversitySchool of Education Comprehensive Unit Assessment Plan

9. Assessment Cycle – Close the Loop What students learn What we change Unit and Program Improvement Program Goals include Professional Standards How they learn it What we learn from a review of their learning SOE Vision & Mission Student Learning Outcomes Analysis of Assessment Data Student Learning Outcome Assessment Assessment Tracking Johns Hopkins University School of Education How we track the learning How we know that they learned

11. Major Assessment Points/Benchmarks

12. Alignment of Conceptual Framework to Assessment Plan’s Benchmarks

13. SOE Conceptual Framework Logic Model

14. Program Assessment Plan • Mission, Goals, Objectives/Outcomes aligned with SOE mission and outcomes • National, State, and Professional Standards • Assessments –Descriptions, Rubrics, Benchmarks • Annual Process • Review of findings and recommendations for change • Review of assessments and adjustments • Documentation of stakeholder input – • ALL faculty, students, university supervisors, cooperating teachers, partner schools, MSDE, professional organizations, community members, employers