Transcript Department of Education School of Education and Behavioral Sciences Master of Education Program CIP Code : 130101 Program Code: 650

Department of Education
School of Education and Behavioral Sciences
Master of Education Program
CIP Code : 130101
Program Code: 650
Student - Learning Outcomes
1. Curriculum -
Develop and deliver curriculum based on theoretical
foundations of the discipline (Application)
2. Technology -
Demonstrate the use of technology in support of
teaching and learning (Application)
3. SPA -
Know and/or demonstrate the subject matter,
professional knowledge and skills outlined by the
respective specialized professional association
(Application)
4. Research -
Analyze, utilize, and conduct research critically
(Evaluation)
5. Diversity -
Identify developmental and individual differences and
adjust practices accordingly (Application)
6. Assessment -
Monitor and assess pupil learning (Application)
7. Reflection -
Reflect upon and evaluate his/her own practices
(Evaluation)
*These objectives align with the following standards: National Board for Professional Teaching,
Council for Exceptional Children, International Reading Association, Association for Childhood
Education International
Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010
Alignment of Outcomes
1.
2.
The program outcomes for the Master of Education Program align with these
elements of Cameron University’s mission statement:
•
“fosters a student-centered academic environment that combines innovative classroom
teaching with experiential learning“
•
“…prepares students for professional success, responsible citizenship, life-long learning, and
meaningful contributions to a rapidly changing world;”
Cameron University’s Strategic Plan 2013 has as its first commitment that we are
“becoming the University of Choice by providing students a top quality education.”
All of the program outcomes for the Master of Education Program are in alignment
with this primary core value, specifically, we align with:
•
Maintain and enhance Cameron’s commitment to providing programs of the
highest quality in instruction, research, and service to better meet the needs of the
citizens of the region.
•
Assure efficient, effective course delivery in multiple formats
•
Attract, develop, and retain diverse, high quality faculty and staff
Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010
Alignment of Outcomes
(continued)
3.
These outcomes relate to our students and Southwest Oklahoma in that we:
•
have programs that continue to meet the needs of graduate students in
this area, to include coursework for those who have an alternative
teaching license, and courses designed at the wide variety of teaching
levels (i.e. elementary, secondary, special education, literacy).
•
constantly assess our students’ needs and offer courses at different
sites via ITV and online as the need arises.
•
are continually aiming to attract more diverse students through
recruitment efforts.
Learning Outcomes:
Curriculum, Technology, SPA (content, skills,
professional knowledge), Research, Diversity,
Assessment, Reflection
Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010
Measures of Learning Outcomes
Direct Measures
•
•
•
Portfolio
Analysis of Growth (AOG) Paper
Dispositional Assessments
Indirect Measures
•
Exit Interviews
Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010
5
Report on Actions for Previous Priority Outcomes
Technology
Program
Outcome
Actions Implemented
When
Implemented
Resource
Implications
TECHNOLOGY
•Added 3 Hitachi
StarBoards
•Trained faculty on use
of StarBoards
•Installed summer
2010
•Early fall 2010
•$4,110.00
•None
TECHNOLOGY
Implemented a hybrid
class for EDUC 5143 Multiculturalism
•Spring 2010
•None
TECHNOLOGY
•Purchased 2 laptops for
student and faculty use
•Spring 2010
•$1,600.00
Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010
Technology
Mean Scores
Scale: 1=Poor 2=Below Average 3=Average 4=Above Average 5 = Superior
The minimum average required to pass is 3.00.
1
3
5
2007-2008
Mean
Portfolio
Multimedia Presentation
0%
65%
35%
n=23
3.40
n=29
3.30
n=26
3.70
Analysis of Growth
Knowledge of and ability to
integrate technology
0%
50%
50%
n=25
3.90
n=10
3.61
n=10
4.21
Exit Survey
Ability to integrate
technology in instruction
N/A
N/A
N/A
n=21
4.14
n=28
4.23
n=17
4.77
Exit Survey
Use information technology
N/A
N/A
N/A
n=21
4.06
n=28
4.27
n=13
4.80
Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010
2008-2009
Mean
2009-2010
Mean
Report on Actions for Previous Priority
Outcomes
SPA
Program
Outcome
Actions Implemented
When
Implemented
Resource
Implications
SPA
•Renamed reflection
rubrics so that course
name is included
•Spring 2010
•None
SPA
•Discussed importance of
emphasizing SPA
standards in course at
Graduate Faculty Meeting
•Spring 2010
•None
Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010
SPA
Mean Scores
Scale: 1=Poor 2=Below Average 3=Average 4=Above Average 5 = Superior
The minimum average required to pass is 3.00.
1
3
5
2007-2008
Mean
2008-2009
Mean
2009-2010
Mean
Portfolio
M.Ed. Reflections
from all courses
2%
43%
55%
n=263
3.30
n=128
3.44
n=122
4.00
Analysis of Growth
SPA Standards
0%
70%
30%
n=25
3.72
n=10
3.52
n=10
3.64
Exit Survey
Comprehension of
Professional
Standards in
your area
N/A
N/A
N/A
n=21
4.09
n=28
4.47
n=17
4.41
Exit Survey
Acquired knowledge,
skills, and
Dispositions
delineated in
professional, state,
and institutional
standards
N/A
N/A
N/A
n=21
4.09
n=28
4.36
n=17
4.88
Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010
Report on Actions for Previous Priority
Outcomes
Research
Program
Outcome
Actions Implemented
When
Implemented
Resource
Implications
Research
•Implemented
methodology assignment
in Introduction to Graduate
Research class
•Spring 2010
•None
Research
•Discussed importance of
integrating educational
research in ALL graduate
classes in Graduate
Faculty Committee
meeting and Departmental
faculty meeting
•Fall 2009
•None
Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010
RESEARCH
Mean Scores
Scale: 1=Poor 2=Below Average 3=Average 4=Above Average 5 = Superior
The minimum average required to pass is 3.00.
1
3
5
2007-2008
Mean
2008-2009
Mean
2009-2010
Mean
Portfolio
Assessment
(EDUC 5103
Research
Proposal
Rubric
Methods
Data Criteria 5
& 9)
0%
31.4%
68.6%
n=36
4.20
n=49
3.69
n=51
4.20
Analysis of
Growth
Paper
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Exit Survey
Ability to use
research to
improve
practice
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
n=22
4.50
n=17
4.62
Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010
Student-Learning Outcome and Measurements
DIVERSITY
MEASUREMENT OF PROGRAM OBJECTIVE
PROGRAM
OBJECTIVE 5
Identify
developmental and
individual
differences
and adjust
practices
accordingly
CURRICULUM
AREA OR
TARGET
AUDIENCE
Diversity
EDUC 5143 –
Multiculturalism
in American
Education
Core course
required of all
M.Ed. Candidates
Measurements
1. Portfolio
Assessment:
Annotated
Bibliography
2. Analysis of Growth
Paper
Methods used to
determine
validity of
measurement
instruments
Content validity
– all rubrics were
reviewed by
faculty and
advisory board
3. Exit Survey
Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010
Methods used to
determine
reliability of
measurements
Schedule for
measurements
Inter-rater
Reliability -
Each semester
Beginning Fall 2009
started inter-rater
reliability studies
on portfolio
artifacts.
Last semester
before graduation
Analysis of Growth
rubrics were
reassessed.
Last semester
before graduation
Display of Assessment Data
DIVERSITY
Mean Scores
Scale: 1=Poor 2=Below Average 3=Average 4=Above Average 5 = Superior
The minimum average required to pass is 3.00.
1
3
5
2007-2008
Mean
2008-2009
Mean
2009-2010
Mean
Portfolio
Assessment –
EDUC 5143
Multiculturalism
in American
Education
4%
50%
46%
n=19
3.81
n=39
4.50
n=20
3.20
Analysis of
Growth Paper –
Role and
importance of
diversity
0%
30%
70%
n=2
3.85
n=10
3.86
n=10
3.64
Exit Survey –
Work with
diverse students
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
n=21
4.26
n=17
4.59
Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010
Analysis of Assessment Data
DIVERSITY
5
4
S
C 3
O
R
2
E
S
1
2007-2008
2008-2009
2009-2010
0
Portfolio
AOG
Exit
Program Quality Improvement Survey
Report 2009-2010
Action Plan for Student Learning Outcome
Diversity
Program
Outcome
Action
Implementation
Timeline
Resource
Implications
Diversity
•Change format of class
from 8 weeks to 16 weeks
•Action based on scores
below 3.00 in 3 areas of
Annotated Bibliography
assignment (n=20):
1. Research question: 2.6
2. Topic Rationale 2.8
3. Reading analysis 2.7
•Action was necessary
because the average score
excluding mechanics was
2.9
•Spring 2011
•None
Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010
Student-Learning Outcome and Measurements
TECHNOLOGY
MEASUREMENT OF PROGRAM OBJECTIVE
PROGRAM
OBJECTIVE 2
Demonstrate
the use of
technology in
support of
teaching and
learning
CURRICULUM
AREA OR
TARGET
AUDIENCE
Technology
EDUC 5913 –
Multimedia in
the Classroom
Core course
required of all
M.Ed. Candidates
Measurements
1. Portfolio
Assessment:
Multimedia
Presentation
2. Analysis of Growth
Paper
Methods used to
determine
validity of
measurement
instruments
Content validity
– all rubrics were
reviewed by
faculty and
advisory board
3. Exit Survey
Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010
Methods used to
determine
reliability of
measurements
Schedule for
measurements
Inter-rater
Reliability -
Each semester
Beginning Fall 2009
started inter-rater
reliability studies
on portfolio
artifacts. However,
the rubric for
Multimedia in the
Classroom was not
included in this
study because the
same instructor
teaches this course
each semester.
Analysis of Growth
rubrics were
reassessed .
Last semester
before graduation
Last semester
before graduation
Display of Assessment Data
TECHNOLOGY
Mean Scores
Scale: 1=Poor 2=Below Average 3=Average 4=Above Average 5 = Superior
The minimum average required to pass is 3.00.
1
3
5
2007-2008
Mean
2008-2009
Mean
2009-2010
Mean
Portfolio
Assessments
EDUC 5913 –
Multimedia
Presentation
0%
65%
35%
n=23
3.40
n=29
3.30
n=26
3.70
Analysis of Growth
Paper
Knowledge of and
ability to integrate
technology
0%
50%
50%
n=25
3.90
n=10
3.61
n=10
4.21
Exit Survey
Ability to integrate
technology in
instruction
N/A
N/A
N/A
n=21
4.14
n=28
4.23
n=17
4.77
Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010
Analysis of Assessment Data
TECHNOLOGY
5.00
4.00
S
C
O
R
E
S
2007-2008
3.00
2008-2009
2.00
2009-2010
1.00
0.00
Portfolio
AOG Paper
Exit Survey
Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010
Action Plan for Student Learning Outcome
Technology Action Plan
Program
Outcome
Action
Implementation
Timeline
Resource
Implications
TECHNOLOGY
•Increase use of technology by obtaining a grant for
Apple Ipads
Justification:
•Cameron teacher education students learn on a
weekly basis the need for effective communication of
objectives and content to students. This necessary
skill teaches candidates to create content delivery
vehicles that will motivate and inspire students to
learn.
•Spring 2011
•$5,000
•Emerging technology holds promise that it will
provide a new and more effective platform to
promote student learning. The Apple iPad is at the
forefront of new technology using application driven
tools to provide a new and fundamentally different
way to communicate and retrieve content for users.
•Placing this emergent technology in instructional
technology course work for teaching candidates will
place Cameron’s graduates in the forefront of
teaching.
Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010
Student-Learning Outcome and Measurements
RESEARCH
MEASUREMENT OF PROGRAM OBJECTIVE
PROGRAM
OBJECTIVE 1
Analyze,
utilize, and
conduct
research
critically
CURRICULUM
AREA OR TARGET
AUDIENCE
Research
EDUC 5103 –
Introduction to
Graduate
Research
Core course
required of all
M.Ed. Candidates
Measurements
1. Portfolio
Assessment:
Multimedia
Presentation
2. Analysis of
Growth
Paper
Methods used to
determine validity
of measurement
instruments
Methods used
to determine
reliability of
measurements
Content validity
Inter-rater
Reliability -
Each semester
Beginning Fall
2009 started
inter-rater
reliability
studies on
portfolio
artifacts.
Last semester
before graduation
– all rubrics were
reviewed by
faculty and
advisory board
3. Exit Survey
Research
Proposal
Rubrics were
reassessed .
Analysis of
Growth rubrics
were
reassessed.
Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010
Schedule for
measurements
Last semester
before graduation
Display of Assessment Data
RESEARCH
Mean Scores
Scale: 1=Poor 2=Below Average 3=Average 4=Above Average 5 = Superior
The minimum average required to pass is 3.00.
1
3
5
2007-2008
Mean
2008-2009
Mean
2009-2010
Mean
Portfolio Assessment
(EDUC 5103 Research
Proposal Rubric
Methods Data Criteria
5 & 9)
0%
31.4%
68.6%
n=36
4.20
n=49
3.69
n=51
4.20
Analysis of Growth
Paper
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Exit Survey
Ability to use research
to improve practice
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
n=22
4.50
n=17
4.62
Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010
Analysis of Assessment Data
RESEARCH
5
4
S
C
O
R
E
S
3
2008-2009
2
2009-2010
1
0
Portfolio
Exit Survey
Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010
Action Plan for Student Learning Outcome
Research
Program
Outcome
Action
Implementation
Timeline
Resource
Implications
RESEARCH
•Continue with
implementation of
methodology assignment
because it has been in
effect for spring ’10 and
summer ‘10
•N/A
•None
RESEARCH
Have EDUC 5103
candidates give a
presentation on article
analysis assignment
•Spring 2011
•None
Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010
Published Information on Graduates
Academic Year 09-10
Summer 2009
Fall 2009
Spring 2010
Total
Working In Discipline
Unknown
0
2
(Teaching and Learning)
8
(4 Elementary, 4 Teaching and Learning)
10
0
Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010
0
1
1