school of education assessment system · the school of education assessment system is designed to...

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.

http://gened.geneseo.edu/outcomes.shtml

http://gened.geneseo.edu/outcomes.shtml

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.

http://www.geneseo.edu/~assess/

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)


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


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


Collection


to:

Status/Most

Recent Update

ATS-W Exam Program

completion/State

licensure exam



Assessment

Committee

Divisions

Provost

N/A

LAST Exam Program

completion/State

licensure exam

*Discontinued

Spring 2013



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


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


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


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


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


Unit Plan and

Evaluation ECED 331/333 Ability to develop and evaluate a

long-range, integrated curriculum

plan


Childhood Education

Reflections on Field

Inquiry Visits EDUC 214 Measures candidate’s reflections on

development, learning, motivation,

instruction, & professionalism


Lesson Plan and

Reflection CURR 213 Assesses candidate ability to create,

deliver, and evaluate a literacy

lesson plan


Reflective Essay CURR 313 Measures candidate’s reflections on

development, curriculum,

instruction, and professionalism


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


Teacher Interview on

Inclusion SPED 319 Measures candidate’s ability to

incorporate selected ACEI

Standards


Childhood with Special Education

Case Study SPED 231 Application of special education

due process procedures and

identification procedures


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


Adolescence Education

Reading & Literacy

Activity Assessment EDUC 215 Assesses candidate ability to plan

literacy-based content area –

specific learning activities


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


Collection


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


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


Collection


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


Curriculum Project ECED 542 Ability to develop, implement, and

evaluate a long-term project and to

document student learning


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


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


Emergent/Early

Literacy Intervention

Project

ECED 546 Knowledge of emergent/early

literacy theory and research and to

design, implement, and present a

research project


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


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

school of education assessment system · the school of education assessment system is designed to...

Documents