effectiveness and accountability report: · pdf fileeffectiveness and accountability report:...

1 | P a g e Updated April 2015

College of Education and Human Services

Effectiveness and Accountability Report: 2014 2009-2010, 2010-2011, 2011-2012, and 2012-2013

An Executive Summary

Megan Schramm-Possinger, Director of Assessment and Research

2009-2012 Data and Corresponding Text Provided by Claire Torres-Lugo

“Educating Professionals Who Impact the Lives of Children and Adults”


Index

Section 1 COEHS Summary Data Florida Licensure Exam: 2009-2010, 2010-2011, 2011-2012, 2012-2013, & 2013-2014

Section 2 COEHS Pass Rates Florida Teacher Certification Exam (FTCE) by Subject Area

Exam: 2011-2012, 2012-2013, & 2013-2014 Section 3 University of North Florida’s State Report Card-Title II Report: Data with

State Comparisons

Section 4 COEHS Program Completers’ First Year Employment Data (2009-2010 thru

2011-2013) Section 5 Satisfaction Survey Results for all COEHS Teacher Education Programs

Completers (2012-2013) Section 6 Employers’ Satisfaction of Beginning Teachers Graduated from COEHS in 2009-

2010, 2010-2011, & 2012- 2013 Section 7 COEHS Average Entrance and Exit GPAs for Candidates and Completers of

Teacher Preparation Programs and Advanced Programs 2010-2011, 2011-2012, 2012-2013, & 2013-2014

Section 8 Graduation Rates for Students Admitted and Enrolled in COEHS Programs Section 9 Employment Retention Rates of COEHS Program Completers Section 10 P-12 Impact Data: Florida’s Value-Added Model (VAM) Scores

Introduction

The College of Education and Human Services is committed to the preparation of educators and administrators who will impact student learning and achievement. This report summarizes data used in important decision-making processes including program effectiveness, curricular changes, and the quality of UNF’s graduates while enrolled in COEHS teacher preparation programs and in the years following graduation. For questions about this report, contact Dr. Megan Schramm-Possinger, at [email protected] Sincerely, Marsha Lupi Interim Dean, College of Education and Human Services

mailto:[email protected]


Section 1 COEHS Summary Data for the Florida Licensure Exam: 2009-2010, 2010-2011, 2011-2012, 2012-2013, & 2013-2014 Section 1 and Section 2 Overview: Candidates in UNF teacher education programs leading to initial certification are required to pass all sections of the Florida Teacher Certification Exam (FTCE) prior to graduation. Upon admission to a teacher education program in the College, candidates are required to demonstrate competency in the areas of Mathematics, Reading, Writing, and English Language Skills by submitting passing scores on all portions of the General Knowledge (GK) test. Prior to graduation, a program evaluation review is conducted to determine if a candidate has successfully completed all program requirements. These exit reviews include passing scores on the Professional Education (PED) and Subject Area Exams (SAE) of the FTCE. As shown in 1.1 and 1.2 below, UNF has had a 100% institutional pass rate for completers in all programs. Data are also disaggregated by program as shown in section 2.

1.1 Summary of Program Completers Initial Teacher Preparation Programs*

Year Program

Completers # Taking the Exam

# Passing the Exam

% Passing the Exam

2013-2014 278 278 278 100

2012-2013 304 304 302 100

2011-2012 265 265 265 100

2010-2011 337 337 337 100

2009-2010 332 332 332 100

Source: Florida Department of Education. *Art K-12, Biology 6-12, Chemistry 6-12, Elementary Education/ESOL K-6, English 6-12/ESOL, Exceptional Student Education ESOL K-12, Hearing Impaired K-12, Mathematics 6-12, MG Math/MG Science 5-9, Music K-12, PreK-Primary Education/ESOL, Physical Education K-12, Physics, Social Science 6-12, and the Educator Preparation Institute (EPI).

1.2 Summary of Program Completers for Other School Professional** Degrees (2009-2010, 2010-2011, 2011-2012, 2012-2013, & 2013-2014)

Year

Program Completers

# Taking the Exam

# Passing the Exam

% Passing the Exam

2013-2014 29 298 29 100

2012-2013 30 30 30 100

2011-2012 42 42 42 100

2010-2011 43 43 43 100

2009-2010 48 48 48 100

Source: Florida Department of Education. **Educational Leadership and Guidance and Counseling PK-12.


Section 2 COEHS Pass Rates Florida Teacher Certification Exam (FTCE) per Subject Area Exam: 2013-2014

Initial Teacher Preparation

Programs-Title II

Name of Licensure Test

(Content)

# of Test

Takers

% Passing State

Licensure Test

Art K-12 Art K-12 2 100%

Biology 6-12 Biology 6-12

Chemistry 6-12 Chemistry 6-12

Elementary Education/ESOL K-6 Elementary Education K-6 121 100%

English 6-12/ESOL English 6-12 12 100%

Exceptional Student Education ESOLK-12

Exceptional Student Education K-12 (Bachelor and Master’s Level)

24 100%

Hearing Impaired K-12

Hearing Impaired K-12 (Master’s Level)

5 100%

Mathematics 6-12 Mathematics 6-12 5 100%

MG Math/MG Science 5-9 Middle Grades General Science 5-9

11 100%

Music K-12 Music K-12 3 100%

PreK-Primary Education/ESOL Age 3-Gr. 3

Prekindergarten/Primary PK-3 23 100%

Physical Education K-12 Physical Education 9 100%

Physics Physics 6-12

Social Science 6-12 Social Science 6-12 23 100%

Educator Preparation Institute Professional Education 40 100%

Subtotal Pass Rate for Initial Preparation Title II Programs

278 100%

Note: Data provided by the FDOE (Title II Report and Standard Reports). All candidates are required to pass the

Professional Education (PED) and the General Knowledge (GK) exams of the FTCE in order to be considered for graduation and a program completer.

Non-Title II Programs


(Content)

# of Test

Takers

% Passing State

Licensure Test

Educational Leadership Florida Educational Leadership Exam

16 100%

Guidance and Counseling PK-12 Guidance and Counseling PK-12 13 100%

Subtotal Pass Rate for Non-Title II Programs

29 100%

Total Unit Overall Pass Rate 307 100%

Note: Data provided by the FDOE (Title II and Standard Reports).




Programs-Title II


(Content)

# of Test

Takers

% Passing State

Licensure Test

Art K-12 Art K-12 3 100%

Biology 6-12 Biology 6-12 2 100%






20 100%


Hearing Impaired K-12 (Master’s Level)

10 100%



9 100%









289 100%





(Content)

# of Test

Takers

% Passing State

Licensure Test


15 100%



30 100%






Programs-Title II


(Content)

# of Test

Takers

% Passing State

Licensure Test

Art K-12 Art K-12 3 100%

Biology 6-12 Biology 6-12 1 100%






21 100%


Hearing Impaired K-12 4 100%



5 100%









265 100%





(Content)

# of Test

Takers

% Passing State

Licensure Test


24 100%



42 100%




Section 3 University of North Florida’s State Report Card-Title II Report:

Data with State Comparisons

Section 3 Overview: In addition to collecting data for program completers as

summarized in Sections 1 and 2, the College collects data on passing FTCE scores for

students enrolled in courses other than the student internship or the final “capstone

course.” The data below summarizes passing rates for students in UNF’s teacher

preparation programs who took the test during the 2012-2013 year as “other enrolled.”

The results of the “other enrolled” students indicates that passing rates for these

students, who are not yet considered program completers, are close if not higher than

the Florida statewide average pass rate (see 3.1 below).

3.1 FLDOE Comprehensive Assessment Data for All Sections in the Florida Teacher Certification Exam (FTCE) for “Other Enrolled” Students 2012-2013

Number

Taking Test

Number

Passing Test

COEHS

Pass Rate

Statewide Average

Pass Rate

Basic Skills or General Knowledge Test (GK)

496

483

97.4%

97%

Professional Education Test

114

110

96.5%

93.8%

Subject Area Exams

85

77

90.6%

92.4%

FTCE (All Sections)

509

485

95.3%

92.9%

Note: “Other enrolled” students include the number of students enrolled in teacher preparation programs taking the FTCE prior to enrolling in an internship course or capstone course.


Data quantifying the results of “other enrolled” students in the Educator Preparation

Institute (EPI), a state approved alternative certification route at UNF, indicate that the

passing rates of UNF’s EPI candidates are closely aligned with other Florida EPI

statewide passing rates (see 3.2 below). The Subject Area Exam was the strongest

area for the 2012-2013 cohort, with 96.7% passing rate exceeding the statewide

average pass rate of 91.1%.

3.2 FLDOE Comprehensive Assessment Data for All Sections in the Florida Teacher Certification Exam (FTCE) for “Other Enrolled” Students 2012-2013

Number

Taking Test

Number

Passing Test

COEHS

Pass Rate

Statewide Average

Pass Rate

Basic Skills or General Knowledge Test (GK)

72 68 94.4% 84.8%

Professional Education Test

81 76 93.8% 85.8%

Subject Area Exams 90 87 96.7% 91.1%

FTCE (All Sections) 107 96 89.7% 79.4%

Note: “Other enrolled” students include the number of students enrolled in Educator Preparation Institute (EPI) who took the FTCE prior to program completion.


Section 4 COEHS First Year Employment Data (2009-2010 through 2013-2014) Section 4 Overview: Once a year, the state identifies program completers and

matches them to employers. These data are used as part of the College’s continuous

improvement efforts as evidenced in UNF’s Institutional Program Evaluation Plans

(IPEPs), institutional strategic plans, institutional reports, departmental program

reviews, and other uses as deemed appropriate. FDOE data indicates that in 2012-2014

58% of UNF’s completers from initial teacher certification programs, including Educator

Preparation graduates, were hired in a public school in the state of Florida. These data

exclude UNF program completers hired in private and/or out of state schools.

4.1 Initial Teacher Preparation Programs* and Educator Preparation Institute # of Program Completers

2012-2013 # of Program Completers

Hired in 2013-2014 (%) Program Completers

Hired in 2013-2014

319 186 58

# of Program Completers 2011-2012

# of Program Completers Hired in 2012-2013

(%) Program Completers Hired in 2012-2013

265 139 52




337 135 40




332 189 56 Source: Florida Department of Education Title II Data. *Art K-12, Biology 6-12, Chemistry 6-12, Elementary Education/ESOL K-6, English 6-12/ESOL, Exceptional Student Education ESOL K-12, Hearing Impaired K-12, Mathematics 6-12, MG Math/MG Science 5-9, Music K-12, PreK-Primary Education/ESOL, Physical Education K-12, Physics, Social Science 6-12, and the Educator Preparation Institute (EPI).

4.2 Other School Professional Degrees* # of Program Completers

2012-2013 # of Program Completers

Hired in 2013-2014 (%) Program Completers

Hired in 2013-2014 29 21 72




69 62 89




43 36 83




48 37 77 Source: Florida Department of Education. *Educational Leadership and Guidance and Counseling PK-12. UNF’s

program completer employment data are provided yearly by the Florida Department of Education (FDOE).


Section 5 Satisfaction Survey Results for all COEHS Teacher Education Program

Completers (2012-2013)

Section 5 Overview: The College tracks completers’ perceptions of their professional competency in the areas listed below. Those surveyed have been employed in public schools in the state of Florida from approximately September 2012 to April and/or May of 2013. Following is a summary of these data for 2012 graduates.

*Multiple modes exist, smallest ones shown. Scale: 1=Highly Effective, 2 = Effective, 3=Developing or Needs Improvement, 4=Unsatisfactory

Measures of Central Tendency N=33 Mean Median Mode Std.

Deviation

q3_rb Overall, how effective do you feel as a teacher? 2.00 2.00 2 .612

q4a_rb How effective was your teacher preparation program in

preparing you to do the following? Align instruction with state-

adopted standards at the appropriate level of rigor

1.64 2.00 2 .603

q4b_rb Sequence concepts and lessons linked to prior knowledge

to ensure coherence

1.67 2.00 2 .645

q4c_rb Design instruction for students to achieve mastery 1.76 2.00 2 .614

q4d_rb Select appropriate formative assessments to monitor

learning

1.88 2.00 2 .781

q4e_rb Use diagnostic student data to plan lessons 1.97 2.00 2 .770

q4f_rb Develop developmentally appropriate learning experiences

that require students to demonstrate a variety of applicable skills

and competencies

1.70 2.00 2 .684

q5a_rb Organize and manage the resources of time and space to

support student learning

1.76 2.00 2 .708

q5b_rb Manage individual and class behaviors through a well-

planned management system

1.94 2.00 2 .747

q5c_rb Convey high expectations to all students 1.55 2.00 1a .564

q5d_rb Respect students’ differing needs and diversity 1.52 1.00 1 .619

q5e_rb Model clear oral communication skills 1.67 2.00 2 .645

q5f_rb Model clear written communication skills 1.64 2.00 2 .603

q5g_rb Maintain a climate of openness, fairness and support 1.42 1.00 1 .561

q5h_rb Develop a climate that fosters inquiry 1.48 1.00 1 .566

q5i_rb Integrate appropriate and available information technologies

that foster student inquiry

1.67 2.00 1 .692

q5j_rb Integrate appropriate and available communication

technologies

1.73 2.00 2 .674

q5k_rb Adapt the learning environment to accommodate the

differing needs and diversity of students

1.70 2.00 2 .637

q5l_rb Utilize appropriate assistive technologies that enable

students to achieve their educational goals

1.88 2.00 2 .740

q6a_rb Deliver engaging and challenging lessons 1.72 2.00 2 .683

q6b_rb Teach literacy strategies across the curriculum through

explicit instruction

1.79 2.00 1 .781

q6c_rb Identify gaps in students’ subject matter knowledge 2.00 2.00 2 .791

q6d_rb Modify instruction to respond to student needs (e.g., gaps in

knowledge, preconceptions or misconceptions)

1.91 2.00 2 .723

q6e_rb Relate and integrate the subject matter with other

disciplines and/or life experiences

1.73 2.00 2 .626



q6f_rb Employ higher-order questioning techniques 1.76 2.00 1 .792

q6g_rb Teach for student understanding using varied and

appropriate strategies and resources

1.64 2.00 2 .549

q6h_rb Differentiate instruction based on an assessment of

differing needs and diversity of students

1.73 2.00 1a .719

q6i_rb Encourage and provide immediate and specific feedback to

promote student achievement

1.70 2.00 2 .637

q6j_rb Utilize student feedback to monitor and support instructional

needs and to adjust instruction

1.79 2.00 2 .650

q7a_rb Analyze and apply data from multiple assessments and

measures to diagnose students’ learning needs

2.12 2.00 2 .857

q7b_rb Analyze and apply data from multiple assessments and

measures to inform instruction based on those needs

2.06 2.00 2 .827

q7c_rb Analyze and apply data from multiple assessments and

measures to drive the learning process

2.09 2.00 2a .805

q7d_rb Design and align formative assessments that match

learning objectives

1.88 2.00 2 .696

q7e_rb Design and align summative assessments to determine

mastery of learning objectives

1.82 2.00 2 .727

q7f_rb Use a variety of assessment tools to monitor student

progress

1.76 2.00 2 .663

q7g_rb Modify assessments and testing conditions to

accommodate learning styles and varying skill levels

1.81 2.00 2 .693

q7h_rb Share the outcomes and implications of student

assessment data with the student and the student’s

parent/caregiver(s)

1.94 2.00 2 .788

q7i_rb Utilize technology to organize and integrate assessment

data

1.94 2.00 1 .827

q8a_rb Design professional goals based on students’ instructional

needs

1.70 2.00 1 .770

q8b_rb Use research to improve instruction and student

achievement

1.85 2.00 1 .795



q8c_rb Review data with colleagues to evaluate learning outcomes

and plan effective lessons

1.73 2.00 1 .801

q8d_rb Collaborate with stakeholders to support student learning 1.88 2.00 2 .781

q8e_rb Collaborate with stakeholders to support continuous

professional growth

1.88 2.00 2 .781

q8f_rb Engage in professional growth opportunities 1.58 2.00 1 .614

q8g_rb Engage in ongoing reflective practice 1.45 1.00 1 .617

q8h_rb Accept constructive feedback 1.45 1.00 1 .564

q8i_rb Apply knowledge and skills learned in professional

development in the teaching and learning process

1.44 1.00 1 .564

q9a_rb Apply the Code of Ethics and Principles of Professional

Conduct to professional and personal situations

1.33 1.00 1 .540

q9b_rb Apply knowledge of rights, legal responsibilities, and

procedures for reporting incidences of abuse or neglect

1.38 1.00 1 .554

q9c_rb Apply policies and procedures for the appropriate use of

technology in the classroom

1.36 1.00 1 .549

q9d_rb Apply policies and procedures for the ethical use of

technology in the classroom

1.36 1.00 1 .549

q9e_rb Appropriately use and maintain student information and

records

1.48 1.00 1 .667


0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

52

Corre

spon

ding Q

uesti

on

Mean

Median

Mode

Measures of Central Tendency for Each of the Questions Above, Scale from 1-4,

One being Highly Effective and Four Unsatisfactory


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

(2012-13) Percentage of Completers Who Believe They Are...

Highlyeffective

Effective

Developing

NeedsImprovement

How well did your teacher ed. program prepare you to...?


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Percentage of Completers Who Feel Prepared to...

Highlyeffective

Effective

Developing

NeedsImprovement

Unsatisfactory


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Percentage of Completers Who Feel Prepared To...

Highly effective

Effective

Developing

Needs Improvement


0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50


Highlyeffective

Effective

Developing

NeedsImprovement


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Percentage of Completers Who Feel Able To...

Highlyeffective

Effective

Developing

NeedsImprovement

Unsatisfactory


As evidenced above, graduates’ self-reported effectiveness in designing inquiry-based

lessons, establishing high expectations of all learners, and maintaining a climate of

openness, fairness and support, illustrates the constellation of core competencies pre-

service teachers at UNF have cultivated. This was mirrored by an open-ended response

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70


Highlyeffective

Effective

Developing

NeedsImprovement

Unsatisfactory


provided by one completer, which said, “Overall I feel like my teacher preparation

program was highly effective in preparing me for my first year of teaching.”

In 2012-2013, the lowest ranked items pertained to completers’ perceived ability to

“Utilize appropriate assistive technologies that enable students to achieve their

educational goals”; “Analyze and apply data from multiple assessments and measures

to diagnose students’ learning needs”; and, “Utilize technology to organize and integrate

assessment data.” Completers’ self-reported ability to analyze student data and use this

information to diagnose their students’ learning needs was not highly ranked among the

2009-2010 cohorts either. These findings, which will be used by UNF faculty to guide

course planning and curricular development, are nonetheless, not surprising as these

skills take time to cultivate and are, to some degree, context-specific – e.g., the

assessment data school’s use depends upon the pedagogical tools they use.


Section 6 Employers’ Satisfaction of Beginning Teachers Graduated from COEHS in 2009-2010 and 2010-2011

Section 6 Overview: Sixty completers from either the Educational Leadership or Guidance Programs and 150 completers from the Teacher Preparation Program were evaluated by school staff in 2011-2012. Of the 210 total completers evaluated, 86% were deemed to be highly effective or effective in their professional roles. Ten percent were not evaluated, and only four percent were deemed “in need of improvement” by their superiors.

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

The admin or teacher was deemed highlyeffective in his or her professional role

The admin or teacher was deemed effectivein his or her professional role

The instructional staff member - in firstthree years of employment - needs

improvement

The instructional staff member or schooladministrator was not evaluated.

2011-2012 Completers, Evaluated by School Leaders (N= 210; 60 Completers: Educational Leadership Program or Guidance Programs;

150 Completers: Teacher Preparation Program at UNF


In previous years, the state’s employment database enabled us to garner detailed feedback from candidates and employers. Following is a summary of data for employers of COEHS program completers in the 2009-2010 and 2010-2011 programs.

Employers’ Satisfaction with COEHS Program Completers

2009-2010 2010-2011

To what degree do UNF beginning teachers compare to other beginning teachers in their ability to:

n

M

SD

n

M

SD

1. . . .use assessment strategies (traditional

and alternative) to assist the continuous development of learners.

126

3.7

.86

76 3.7 .75

2. . . .use effective communication

techniques with students and all other stakeholders.

126 3.8 .84 76 3.7 .74

3. . . .engage in continuous improvement

for self and school. 126 3.9 .80 76 3.7 .75

4. . . .use appropriate techniques and

strategies to promote and enhance critical, creative, and evaluative thinking capabilities of students.

126 3.8 .88 76 3.8 .86

5. . . .use teaching and learning strategies

that reflect students’ culture, learning styles, special needs, and socioeconomic backgrounds.

126 3.8 .88 76 3.8 .79

6. . . .adhere to the code of ethics and

principles of professional conduct of the education profession in Florida.

126 4.0 .87 76 3.9 .87

7. . . .use an understanding of learning and

human development to provide a positive learning environment which supports the intellectual, personal, and social development of all students.

126 3.9 .89 76 3.9 .78

8. . . .demonstrate knowledge and

understanding of subject matter. 126 3.9 .89 76 3.9 .80

9. … create and maintain positive learning

environments in which students are actively engaged in learning, social interaction, cooperative learning and self-motivation.

126 4.0 .89 76 4.0 .83

10. … plan, implement, and evaluate effective instruction in a variety of learning environments.

126 3.9 .85 76 3.9 .89

11. . . .work with various education

professionals, parents, and other stakeholders in the continuous improvement of the educational experiences of students.

126 3.9 .86 76 3.7 .81


12. . . .use and integrate appropriate

technology in teaching and learning processes.

126

3.8

.91

76

3.7

.86

13. . . .write and speak in a logical and

understandable style with appropriate grammar.

126 3.9 .84 76 4.0 .77

14. . . .recognize signs of students’ difficulty

with reading and computational processes.

126 3.7 .86 76 3.7 .83

15. . . .apply appropriate measures to

improve students’ reading and computational processes.

126 3.7 .89 76 3.8 .87

16. . . .demonstrate knowledge and

understanding of the Sunshine State Standards.

126 3.8 .89 76 3.8 .83

17. . . .maintain an orderly and disciplined classroom conducive to student learning.

126 3.9 .90 76 3.8 .89

18. ….use performance data to facilitate and impact student learning.

126 3.8 .92 76 3.8 .81

19. Overall, how satisfied are you with UNF’s first-year teachers’ performance as compared to other beginning teachers in your school?

126 4.1 .72 76 4.1 .88

Note: All ratings were on a five-point scale. 1: Much Weaker; 2: Weaker; 3: About the Same; 4: Stronger; 5:

Much Stronger (Reported by Claire Torres-Lugo)

.

Employers’ perceptions of satisfaction with UNF’s first year teachers’ performance when compared with other first year beginning teachers were rated in a positive way, 4.1 on a 5 point scale for both the 2009-2010 and 2010-2011 academic years (see item 19). Data from employers from 2009-2010 and 2010-2011 showed that the strongest area for the COEHS graduates was their “ability to create and maintain positive learning environments in which students are actively engaged in learning, social interaction, cooperative learning and self-motivation” (item 9) and “ethics and principles of professional conduct” (see item 7). In 2009-2010, three items were perceived to be in need of improvement based on a 5-point scale. These items were item, or the “use of assessment strategies to assist in the continuous development of learners”, item 14, teachers’ ability to “recognize signs of students’ difficulty with reading and computational processes,” and item 15 the application of “appropriate measures to improve students’ reading and computational processes.” In 2010-2011, the lowest ranked items using a 5-point scale were item 1 or “use of assessment strategies to assist in the continuous development of learners”, item 2 or the “use of effective communication techniques”, item 3 “continuous improvement”, item 11 “collaboration with education professionals, parents, and other stakeholders”, item item 12 the ability to “use and integrate appropriate technology in teaching and learning processes,” and item 14 or their ability to recognize signs of student difficulty with reading and computational processes.”

Section 7 COEHS Average GPA for Completers of Teacher Preparation Programs and Advanced Programs 2010-2011, 2011-2012, 2012-2013, and 2013-2014

Section 7 Overview: All applicants seeking admission to the College’s initial teacher

certification programs, at the undergraduate and graduate levels, must first be admitted to

the institution in accordance with the University of North Florida’s established admission

requirements and policies.

Once admitted to UNF, applicants interested in initial teacher preparation or other

school professional programs in the Unit must meet the state’s minimum GPA criteria for

admissions. Criteria for admissions are governed by Florida’s Board of Education (BOE)

rule and statute, 6A-5.066 and F.S. 1004.04(4)(b)(1)(2), respectively. The aforementioned

state statute and rule not only determine minimum admission criteria for applicants but also

specify processes and procedures to maintain continued program approval across all

institutions with initial teacher preparation programs in the State of Florida. The minimum

state required GPA for admission to and exit from teacher preparation programs in the

College is 2.5. Data for two academic years indicate that the average entry and exit GPAs

for completers of COEHS teacher education and advanced programs exceeded the

minimum set by the state.

COEHS Entry and Exit Average GPA for of Teacher Education Programs and Candidates and

Other School Professional Programs*

Academic Year Average Entry GPA Average Exit GPA

2013-2014 3.25 3.61

2012-2013

3.10 3.64

2011-2012

3.25

3.58

2010-2011

3.22

3.61

Source: Teacher Education File managed by the Office of Institutional Research at UNF. The following programs were

included in the calculations: Art K-12, Biology 6-12, Chemistry 6-12, Elementary Education K-6, English 6-12/ESOL, Exceptional Student Education ESOL K-12, Hearing Impaired K-12, Mathematics 6-12, MG Math/MG Science 5-9, Music K-12, PreK-Primary Education/ESOL, Physical Education K-12, Physics, Social Science 6-12, and the Educator Preparation Institute (EPI), School Leadership and Guidance and Counseling K-12.

26 | P a g e

Updated April 2015

Section 8 Graduation Rates for Students Admitted and Enrolled in COEHS Programs Section 8 Overview: This section summarizes the graduation rate of COEHS admits during the 2009-2010 academic year. One important consideration when analyzing this table is to recognize the significant differences between the cohort sizes of the various programs of study. Of most significance is the Elementary Education program which was comprised of a cohort of 121. Approximately 92 of the 121 (76%) students originally identified as Elementary Education majors graduated from the College but not necessarily from the same major or track they started with, in this case Elementary Education. 83 of 121 (69%) graduated from the original major and track. 102 of 240 graduated from the University but not necessarily from the same college, major or track they started with, in this case, Elementary Education.

Section 8 COEHS Graduation for a Cohort of Admits and Enrolled in the 2009-2010

DOE CODE

Program by Major and Track Deg. Level

Cohort Size n

Grad. At Univ. Level(*)

R Grad. At Coll. Level(**)

R Grad. At Major Level (***)

R Grad. At Track Level (****)

R

114 Art Education: Art Education K-12

B 3 33% 67% 33% 33 % 33% 33% 33% 33%

285 Educational Leadership: School Leadership M 54 76% 86% 76% 85 % 76% 85% 76% 85%

287 Math Education: Math 6-12 B 11 36% 55% 27% 45% 9% 18% 9% 18%

288 Science Education: Biology 6-12 B 3 0% 67% 0% 100% 0% 100% 0% 100%

289 Science Education: Chemistry 6-12 B 15 87% 87% 73% 73% 73% 73% 73% 73%

297 Special Education: Deaf Education+

M 6 67% 67% 67% 67% 67% 67% 67% 67%

304 Counselor Education: School Counseling M 17 82% 82% 82% 82% 76% 88% 76% 88%

365

Middle School Education: Math and Science 5-9

B 1 0% 100% 0% 100% 0% 100% 0% 100%

387 PreK-Primary Education B 18 94% 94% 89% 89% 83% 83% 83% 83%

398 English Education: English 6-12 B 8 63% 75% 13% 25% 13% 25% 13% 25%

424 Physical Education: Physical Education K-12

B 7 86% 100 % 57% 71% 14% 14% 14% 14%

430 Special Education: ESE B 17 76% 100% 76% 100% 65% 82% 59% 76%

430 Special Education: ESE M 1 0% 100% 0% 100% 0% 100% 0% 100%

444 Elementary Education: Elementary Education K-6

B 121 84% 88% 76% 79% 69% 71% 69% 71%

Source: Office of Institutional Research and Assessment. Graduation is based on the number of students in year 1 that were retained and graduated in year 4. The “R” to the right of each column represents the retention rates for each of the 4 categories (i.e., the University Level, the College Level, the Major Level and the Track Level). (*) University Level: COEHS students that graduated from UNF but not necessarily from the same college, major or track they started with. (**) College Level: Students graduated from COEHS but not necessarily from the same major or track they started with. (***) Major Level: Students graduated from COEHS but not necessarily from the same track they started with. (****)Track Level: Students retained in COEHS and in the same major and track they started with. + This is a 5 year program.

- - Current data reflects students retained and graduated in year 4 of their program of study. Students taking longer than 4 years to complete their program of study are not accounted for in this table.

- -

27 | P a g e

Updated April 2015

Section 9 Employment Retention Rates of COEHS Program Completers

Section 9 Overview: Based upon FLDOE employment data, the graphs below

depict the number of completers in the 2006-2007, 2007-2008, 2008-2009,

2009-2010, and 2011-2012 cohorts who have been continuously employed at

a public school in the state of Florida, -- with no break in service -- as of 2012.

Graduates hired as substitute teachers, paraprofessionals, school

administrators, administrative-level curriculum developers, and district office

employees were not included in the data presented below.

The first set of graphs indicate the number of completers from each cohort

group who were employed prior to their graduation, the year of their

graduation, or sometime thereafter. Also examined was the same information

disaggregated by discipline, so that trends regarding employment by major,

and at specific times, could be identified.

28 | P a g e

Updated April 2015

Section 9.1

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

7% of completers hiredbetween 1992 and 2005

were continuouslyemployed in 2012-2013

13% of completershired in 2006 were

continuously employedin 2012-2013

61% of completers hiredin 2007 were

continuously employedin 2012-2013

19% of completers hiredbetween the years

2009-2012 werecontinuously employed

in 2012-2013

2006-2007 Graduates Still Employed in 2012-2013

percent of graduates employed from a total of 168

These data indicate that the majority of completers in the 2006-2007 cohort groups were employed in 2007. Completers from this cohort group employed between 1992 and 2005 were largely guidance counselors (N=10), with a smaller number from Exceptional Student Education (ESE) (N=2). The largest numbers of completers in 2006 were those who studied Elementary Education K-6/ESOL Endorsement (N = 17), and the same trend continued in 2007 (N =64). Pre-kindergarten certified teachers (N=14) followed by those who studied Exceptional Student Education K/12 ESOL represent the largest number of teachers hired and in the field. Little variation between disciplines was evident among those hired from this cohort group in 2008, with teachers from one discipline in the field more than others: Elementary Education K-6/ESOL.

29 | P a g e

Updated April 2015

Section 9.2

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%

17% ofcompleters

hired between1980 and 2006

are stillemployed in2011-2012

6% ofcompleters

hired in 2007are still

employed in2011-2012

47% ofcompleters

hired in 2008are still

employed in2011-2012

31% ofcompleters

hired betweenthe years 2009-

2012 are stillemployed in2011-2012

Completer Retention Rates 2007-2008

Number of Completers in2007-2008 from a Total of198

The same trends emerged among those who graduated in 2007-2008, however, the largest number of completers hired between 1980 and 2006 (for this cohort group) were in Elementary Education (N = 16) and Prekindergarten Primary Education (N =6). A somewhat higher proportion of students in the guidance program – from this cohort group -- were hired after their graduation (N=6), and the pattern of students in the guidance program being employed either years before or years after their graduation was a consistent trend among all cohort groups whose data were available. The largest number of completers hired in 2007, 2008, and 2009-2012 were Elementary Education majors, Pre-kindergarten majors, and interestingly (in 2008), Exceptional Student Education K-12 ESOL majors. This is not surprising among Elementary Education and Pre-kindergarten majors, as UNF graduates the highest numbers of students from both of these programs with in the College of Education and Human Services.

30 | P a g e

Updated April 2015

Section 9.3

8%

4%

49%

16%

24%

8% ofcompleters

hired between1991 and 2007

werecontinuouslyemployed in2012-2013

4% ofcompleters

hired in 2008were

continuouslyemployed in2012-2013

49% ofcompleters

hired in 2009were


16% ofcompletes hired

in 2010 werecontinuouslyemployed in2012-2013

24% ofcompleters

hired between2011-2012 were


Completer Retention Rates, 2008-2009

A total of 185 completers graduated in 2008-2009

Much like data from the 2006-2007 cohort group, the largest number of completers hired prior to their graduation were those in Guidance and Counseling (N=5), and the second largest number hired after their graduation in 2010 were from the same discipline (N=7). In addition, the number of students in Social Science (N=4) hired in 2010 was equivalent to the number of students in Prekindergarten Primary Education (N=4) hired the same year. The same was true among this cohort in 2012, with 3 students from the Prekindergarten Program and 3 students in the Social Science Program 6-12, hired that year.

31 | P a g e

Updated April 2015

Section 9.4

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

3% of completershired between2003 and 2007

were continuouslyemployed in 2012-

2013


continuouslyemployed in 2012-

2013



2013

16% of completeshired in 2011 were


2013



2013

Retention Rates Among Completers in 2009-2010

%ages below are derived from a total of 169 completers

Much like trends observed among the past three cohorts, the largest number of students hired prior to their graduation was those in Guidance and Counseling. Surprisingly, a total of 17 completers from the English 6-12 and ESE Programs were hired in 2011 and a total of 9 were hired in 2011, and 2012. Although these variations emerged, general trends regarding the large number of completers from Elementary Ed and Pre-K Primary remain the same, most likely due to the higher percentage of students graduating from these disciplines as compared to others.

32 | P a g e

Updated April 2015

Section 9.5

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

7% who werehired in 1999-

2008 wereretained until

2012-2013

3% who werehired in 2010were retained

until 2012-2013

60% whowere hired in

2011 wereretained until

2012-2013

30% who werehired in 2012were retained

until 2012-2013

Retention Rates from 189 Completers, 2010-2011 Cohort

Percentage of Completersfrom 2010-2011 Cohort

Trends regarding hiring and retention rates among completers for this cohort were consistent with past years with the exception of those hired in 2012: More students in the ESE Program (N=12) were hired and retained as compared to those in the PreK-Primary (N=11); nine students in Social Science (6-12) were hired and seven from Physical Education were hired, which is consistent with the ten Guidance and Counseling Students hired a year after their graduation. These data – showing an expansion in graduation and hiring among those in disciplines other than Elementary Education – is an interesting, positive change.

33 | P a g e

Updated April 2015

Section 9.6

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

3% hired between2003-2009 were

retained until2012-2013

3% who were hiredin 2011 wereretained until

2012-2013

96% who werehired in 2012 were

retained until2012-2013

Retention Rates, 2011-2012 Cohort, %ages based on a total of 151 Completers

Percentage of Completersfrom 2010-2011 Cohort

Data from the past three cohorts indicates an increase in hiring for completers throughout the 2012 timeframe, and this is represented in the graph above.

34 | P a g e

Updated April 2015

Section 9.7: The next set of graphs depicts the total number of completers from each

discipline within each cohort group who have been continuously employed. Please see

below.

2 4

97

5 10

13

3 3 5 4

18

4 0

20

40

60

80

100

120

# of Completers who Graduated in 2006-2007 and are Still Employed

# of Completers whoGraduated in 2006-2007and are Still Employed

35 | P a g e

Updated April 2015

Section 9.8

2 1 1 3

105

4

17 15

4 3 6 1 1

28

6

# of Completers from 2007-2008 Who are Currently Employed

# of Completers from 2007-2008 Who are Currently Employed

36 | P a g e

Updated April 2015

Section 9.9

4 2

97

11 7 24

1 1 4 2 6 18

8

# of Completers, 2008-2009 Cohort Group, Continuously Employed

# of Completers, 2008-2009 Cohort Group, Continuously Employed

2 2

80

9 10 12 3 2 5 1 5

28

10

# of Completers, Cohort 2009-2010, Still Employed


37 | P a g e

Updated April 2015

High retention rates among those in Elementary Ed and Pre-K primary are positive findings

for the UNF College of Education and Human Services.

1

113

9 14 9 2 4 6 2 2 18

9



1

80

3 13 13

1 6 3 2 7 11 11

# of Completers, 2011-2012 Cohort, Still Employed

# of Completers, 2011-2012 Cohort, Still Employed

38 | P a g e

Updated April 2015

Section 9.10

Section 10 Impact Data: Florida’s Value-Added Model Scores

Total2006-2007

Total2007-2008

Total2008-2009

Total2009-2010

Total2010-2011

Total2011-2012

Total Number of Completersfrom Each Cohort Group,

Currently Assuming a Role asTeacher or Counselor

168 197 185 169 189 151

0

50

100

150

200

250

Ab

solu

te V

alu

e

Total Number of Completers from Each Cohort Group, Currently Assuming a Role as

Teacher or Counselor

Trends depicted above indicate two peaks, 2007-2008 and 2010-2011, respectively. The increase in employment and retention among completers from the 2007-2008 cohorts may be associated with the recessionary economic climate during that time, or it may be nothing more than normal variation.

39 | P a g e

Updated April 2015

Section 9.11 The institution collects and analyzes employer data on a yearly basis based

on FDOE employment reports. In the 2012-2013 Academic Year, UNF graduated 319

candidates. Of these graduates, 20 were completers from the EPI (Education Preparation

Institute); 299 were completers from the TCP (i.e., Initial Teacher Preparation Program).

One hundred ninety eight, that is approximately 66% of those who graduated from the TCP,

sought and obtained employment in a Florida Public School. The employment data do not

include UNF program completers hired in private and/or out of state schools. The

employment data provided by the state are used as part of COEHS continuous

improvement efforts as evidenced in UNF’s Institutional Program Evaluation Plans (IPEPs),

institutional strategic plans, institutional reports, and departmental program reviews, as

appropriate. The numbers used herein were calculated by the state.

Subject Areas Either Absolute Value or % of Completers Employed in Each Subject

Area (N = 198) Teacher: Dropout Prevention N=1

Music teacher N=1

Reading Resource 1%

Physical Education 2%

Middle School Math 2%

Art Teacher (Elementary or Secondary) 2%

High School Math 3%

Science (Elementary, Middle or High School) 3%

"Other" (i.e., 1 teacher self-contained sixth grade; 1 teacher “ungraded” elementary; 1 teacher, senior high school classroom; 1

teacher, “other” classroom; 1 teacher, Chapter 1, elementary)

3%

High School ELA 4%

Middle School Foreign Language or ELA 4%

Social Studies (Middle or High School) 4%

Self-contained 4th

Grade 5%

Counselor (Elementary, Middle, or High School)

7%

Self-contained 5th

Grade 8%

Self-contained 1st

Grade 9%

Self-contained 2nd

Grade 9%

Self-contained 3rd

Grade 10%

Teacher of Exceptional Learners (i.e., gifted, autistic, hearing impaired, mentally

handicapped, or classes in which students are emotionally disturbed)

12%

Self-contained Kindergarten 13%

40 | P a g e

Updated April 2015

As per the attached report, these data are relatively consistent with trends exhibited

since 2006; however, by aggregating teachers of gifted, autistic, hearing impaired and the

like, the number of "ESE" completers is relatively high. Finally, the higher representation of

students in elementary education is consistent with the patterns exhibited over the past

several years.

# of Completers, 199 Employed Years of Experience

150 0

22 1

7 2

4 3

6 4

0 5

5 6

2 7

1 8

1 9

1 unknown

41 | P a g e

Updated April 2015

Please see counties in which completers were employed (in absolute

values):

County Number of (2012-2013) Completers Employed in Each County

ALACHUA 1

BAKER 1

BRADFORD 2

BREVARD 2

BROWARD 1

CLAY 23

DADE 1

DUVAL 125

FL VIRTUAL 1

ESCAMBIA 2

FLAGLER 1

HENDRY 1

HIGHLANDS 1

HILLSBOROUGH 4

LAKE 1

LEE 1

NASSAU 5

ORANGE 4

PALM BEACH 1

PASCO 1

PUTNAM 1

SEMINOLE 2

ST JOHNS 15

VOLUSIA 1

The distribution of teachers in the counties above is consistent with commensurate data

from previous years.

42 | P a g e

Updated April 2015

Overview Section 10: Value-Added: VAM Scores, 2012-2013

VAM scores1 were reported for seventeen percent of 2012-2013 COEHS completers

from the Teacher Educator Program (TEP) at UNF (i.e., 17% of the 299 completers from

UNF’s TEP equals and N of 50). Among UNF TEP program completers, VAM scores, on

average, were slightly below “0.” This indicates that, on average, students of completers

from UNF performed neither better nor worse than expected after controlling for all the

factors in the model (please see below). In other words, students of completers from UNF

grew at a rate that was roughly equivalent to that of the state average.

Average Teacher Education Completer VAM Scores, 2012-2013

Reading Score Math Score

X = -0.06453 (6th

hundredths of a point lower

than predicted performance

as per the VAM model.)

X = -0.08521 (8 hundredths

of a point lower than

predicted performance as

per the VAM model.)

As evidenced above, VAM scores for COEHS program completers who teach Math

and Reading were made available by the FLDOE. The mean of all 50 scores in both

Reading and Math was calculated (see table). In addition, 22% and 42% of 2012-2013

completers had VAM scores of “0” in Reading and Math, respectively, indicating this

percentage of students scored as the VAM model would have predicted (i.e., average

performance -- typical of this student population). Thirty-four percent and 32% of 2012-2013

program completers had VAM Reading and Math scores above “0,” respectively. This

indicates that the average students’ of UNF completers performed better than the VAM

model predicted after controlling for factors in the model.

Also noteworthy are the “Average VAM Score of Completers,” which indicate, for

specific disciplines the percentage above or below students of completers’ performance

1 See Appendix A for brief description.

43 | P a g e

Updated April 2015

varied from the state average. To the right of this is the “Clustered Standard Error” or the

standard error of the mean VAM score among completers from UNF. The Standard Error

(SE) indicates the range of scores that are likely to be above or below the Average VAM

Score for Completers.

Discipline %age Above or Below An Average Year’s Growth SE

All -4% .02086

All 7% .02496

All -2% .08428

All -3% .01522

Math 3% .01225

Math -7% .07418

Math -5% .02831

Math 4% .02099

Math -8% .10978

Math -4% .01256

Math 1% .01164

Math -6% .05596

Math 2% .02625

Math 3% .02689

Math 2% .15176

Math -4% .02547

MathProg 8% .02066

MathProg -9% .17218

MathProg -3% .04016

Reading .4% .03282

Reading -3% .26163

Reading -1% .01756

Reading 4% .01564

Reading -10% .11076

Reading -7% .06281

Reading -.3% .04507

Reading -14% .05558

Reading -7% .03347

Reading -9% .02727

Reading -1% .02857

Reading -7% .09191

Reading -3% .01472

ReadProg 1% .0115

ReadProg -1% .06937

ReadProg -5% .03104

All -1% .02224

All -5% .12781

All -6% .01443

All -.1% .01246

All -5% .06566

Math -.01% .04683

Math .5% .01818

44 | P a g e

Updated April 2015

Math -.2% .03478

Math .1% .01893 Rows that did not contain these data were not included in the table above.

Due to the relatively small proportions representing an “average year’s growth,” in

light of the similar quantities of standard error, make it important for readers to interpret

VAM scores from 2012-2013 information cautiously. In addition, the relatively small

percentage of VAM data available for this cohort group precludes the reader from assuming

these data are reliable (even if the reliability ratios for this VAM model show sufficient levels

of discriminant validity [for teachers within the entire State of Florida]).

45 | P a g e

Updated April 2015

Appendix A

The VAM model used in the State of Florida is a “covariate adjustment model,” which

takes students’ observed characteristics (as covariates) and prior test scores to compute “a

conditional expectation for student i based on how other students with similar” -- i.e.,

equivalent school, classroom and student – “measured characteristics and prior test scores

have performed, given the predicted value, ̂ ” (this information comes from

Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test (FCAT) 2.0 Value-Added Model Technical Report

2012-13 November 2013 [authors request the report not be cited]). Although this model is

far more complex than that which is being described here, in essence, data from the VAM

model indicates whether or not the students’ -- of specific teachers -- scores are higher,

lower or the same as their actual scores on the FCAT 2.0 in Reading and Math. (Again,

conditional expectations or the “predicted score” is derived, in part, by computing a weighted

mean of the student level residuals among students with “similar” characteristics.)

Additionally, the magnitude of this difference is indicated by the VAM model as well, with

negative scores representative of students’ standardized test performance, on average, “x”

number of points below that which the model predicted; a score of zero equivalent to that

which the model predicted; and, positive scores representative of students’ standardized

test performance, on average, “x” number of points above that which the model predicted.

For example, a VAM score of +10.0 in Reading indicates that the students’ performance for

a specific teacher in Reading was, on average, 10 points more than what the model

predicted for students whose metrics (characteristics and prior test scores) are similar.

effectiveness and accountability report: · pdf fileeffectiveness and accountability report:...

Documents