program evaluation n.
Download
Skip this Video
Download Presentation
Program Evaluation

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 26

Program Evaluation - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 47 Views
  • Uploaded on

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Program Evaluation' - reece-osborn


Download Now An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
program evaluation

Note: Beginning spring 2008 EDSC will use the electronic submission system allowing for the collection of data at the unit level. Until then results are compiled and reported at the program level. Fall 2006 and spring 2007 results are not yet available. The results presented are from 2005-2006, prior to the adoption of the common rubric 4-point scale now used in all initial programs.

Program Evaluation

Single Subject Credential Program

2005-2006

program evaluation process
Program Evaluation Process
  • Participants
    • Master Teachers and Mentors
    • Program Completers
  • Data Collection
    • Surveys are distributed to program completers in their 449S Student Teacher Seminar, and are returned in SASE to the Coordinator of the Single Subject Credential Program.
  • Survey Instrument
    • Program completer competence is rated on a 5-point scale: excellent, good, average, weak, and inadequate.
    • Survey (in print form) consists of 26 items which are later collapsed into 13 categories of the Teaching Performance Expectations.
    • Items were taken directly from language of the Teaching Performance Expectations and include two items per expectation.
  • Data Analysis
    • Data is disaggregated by Master/Mentor Teachers, Program Completers, and a subset, Intern Program Completers.
    • Data is also compared to the previous years. At this time, we have two years of data.
tpe 1
TPE 1
  • Specific Pedagogical Skills for Subject Matter Instruction

5 (Superior) 4 (Good) 3 (Average) 2 (Weak) 1 (Inadequate)

tpe 2
TPE 2
  • Monitoring Student Learning During Instruction

5 (Superior) 4 (Good) 3 (Average) 2 (Weak) 1 (Inadequate)

tpe 3
TPE 3
  • Interpretation and Use of Assessments

5 (Superior) 4 (Good) 3 (Average) 2 (Weak) 1 (Inadequate)

tpe 4
TPE 4
  • Making Content Accessible

5 (Superior) 4 (Good) 3 (Average) 2 (Weak) 1 (Inadequate)

tpe 5
TPE 5
  • Student Engagement

5 (Superior) 4 (Good) 3 (Average) 2 (Weak) 1 (Inadequate)

tpe 6
TPE 6
  • Developmentally Appropriate Teaching Practices

5 (Superior) 4 (Good) 3 (Average) 2 (Weak) 1 (Inadequate)

tpe 7
TPE 7
  • Teaching English Learners

5 (Superior) 4 (Good) 3 (Average) 2 (Weak) 1 (Inadequate)

tpe 8
TPE 8
  • Learning about Students

5 (Superior) 4 (Good) 3 (Average) 2 (Weak) 1 (Inadequate)

tpe 9
TPE 9
  • Instructional Planning

5 (Superior) 4 (Good) 3 (Average) 2 (Weak) 1 (Inadequate)

tpe 10
TPE 10
  • Instructional Time

5 (Superior) 4 (Good) 3 (Average) 2 (Weak) 1 (Inadequate)

tpe 11
TPE 11
  • Social Environment

5 (Superior) 4 (Good) 3 (Average) 2 (Weak) 1 (Inadequate)

tpe 12
TPE 12
  • Professional, Legal, and Ethical Obligations

5 (Superior) 4 (Good) 3 (Average) 2 (Weak) 1 (Inadequate)

tpe 13
TPE 13
  • Professional Growth

5 (Superior) 4 (Good) 3 (Average) 2 (Weak) 1 (Inadequate)

trends
Trends
  • 2005-2006 Data
    • In general, Master/Mentor Teachers rate our candidates slightly lower than our candidates rate themselves. None of the differences are significantly different.
    • Candidates were rated lowest on TPE 7 (Teaching English Learners) and TPE 8 (Learning About Students).
    • Candidates were rated as “good” or higher for all 13 TPE categories.
  • Comparison of 04-05 and 05-06 Data
    • There was a slight decrease in the ratings of candidates by Master/Mentor Teachers in 9 of 13 categories.
    • There was a slight decrease in the ratings of candidates by themselves in 5 of 13 categories.
    • There was a slight decrease in the ratings of intern candidates by themselves in only 1 of 13 categories.
recommendations and goals
Recommendations and Goals
  • Department of Secondary Education
  • SECTEP
  • SECTEP Advisory Council