oglala lakota collegewarehouse.olc.edu/local_links/assessment/docs/academic_annual_reports/... ·...

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15

OLC EDUCATION DEPARTMENT 2015-2016 Annual End of Year Report 1 | P a g e

OGLALA LAKOTA COLLEGE Annual End of Year Department Report

2015-2016

Submitted by:

Department: EDUCATION DEPARTMENT

Name of Dean of Education:

Dr. Shannon Amiotte, EdD Educational Administration, MS in Curriculum & Instruction, BS in Elementary Education & Special Education, National Board Certification: Early Childhood through Young Adult Exceptional Needs

Name and Academic Credentials of Full Time Faculty: Name of Secretary:

Dorraine Benson, MS in Curriculum & Instruction, BS in Multi-Subject K-8 Education Thomas Raymond, MS in Elementary Education-Emphasis in Elementary Administration, including Preschool, BS in Elementary Education Linda Olsen, MS in Elementary School Administration, BS in Elementary & Special Education Tammy Bauck, EdD Instructional Technology & Distance Education, MS in Curriculum and Supervision, MS in Educational Leadership and Administration, BS in Elementary Education Alicia Zephier-Janis, AAS in Office Technology and AA degree in Early Childhood Education

NAMES OF THE DEGREES OFFERED IN THE PROGRAM: (check box that applies)

Degree Title Endorsement AA AAS BA BS MA

K-8 Elementary Education

X X

Early Childhood Education

X X

K-12 Lakota Studies X X

Physical Science Degree

X

K-12 Special Education X

Indian Studies X

NUMBER OF COURSES/SECTIONS OFFERED: (list whole number)

Chair F/T Faculty OLC Staff Adjunct Total

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15


Summer 2015 0 3 0 0 3

Fall 2015 2 27 0 28 40

Spring 2016 4 16 0 20 40

# FTE PRODUCED: (list whole number)

# Courses

Chair *F/T Faculty

OLC Staff

Adjunct Total

Summer 2015

ECH 3 0 1.75 0 0 1.75

MATH 1 0 1.75 0 0 1.75

Fall 2015

ECH 14 0 3.35 0 1.86 5.21

ED 23 1.5 2.75 0 4.47 13.93

EDECH 8 0 3.75 0 2.25 6

EDLK 1 0 1.75 0 0 1.75

SCI 1 0 2.16 0 0 2.16

MATH 2 0 3.25 0 0 3.25

EXED 2 0 0 0 2 2

Spring 2016

ECH 8 0 3.56 0 2.75 6.31

ED 15 15.75 3.47 0 4.63 23.85

EDECH 12 0 2.93 0 4.1 7.03

EDLK 2 1 0 0 0 1

SCI 4 0 1.58 0 0 1.58

MATH 2 0 4 0 4 8

EXED 5 0 0 0 1.7 1.7

SCED 1 0 0.75 0 0 0.75

*F/T Faculty includes all those within the Education Department and other Full-time faculty within other Academic Departments

SCHEDULING

Semester #Courses Offered

# Courses Made

# GRC’s Offered

# GRC’s Completed

#Courses Offered

Summer 2015 3 3 0 0 3

Fall 2015 44 37 13 13 44

Spring 2016 54 40 12 9 54

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15


Department and Student Demographic Data

Ratio for Adjunct faculty and full time faculty, student to faculty ratio student male/female ratio (please create table and add data).

Fall 2015 Spring 2016

Adjunct to Full Time Faculty ratio

20 adjuncts 4 Full-time faculty*

20 adjuncts 4 Full-time faculty*

Education Students to Faculty ratio

234 students 4 Full-time faculty*

235 students 4 Full-time faculty*

Male to Female student ratio

50 Male students 184 Female students

49 Male students 186 Female students

*Full-time faculty includes only those faculty within the Education Department

Number of First Generation, First Time full time entering students in your degree area.

Fall 2014 Fall 2015 Fall 2016

First Time full time First Generation Students

97 11 NA

Part Time full time First Generation Students.

75 2 NA

Number of early alerts made within the department

Department Name Fall 2015 Spring 2016 Total

EDUCATION 2 14 16

Number of early alerts resolved

Department Name Fall 2015 Spring 2016 Total

EDUCATION 1 8 9

What improvements can be made within the department based on the data for early alerts? Early alerts are best dealt with on a case-by-case basis through communication directly with the

students, and as appropriate their center counselor and/or director. Copies of alerts filed should

be logged and maintained within the department. Students who have had early alerts filed on

more than one occasion or by more than one instructor within the education department should

be subject to departmental staffing. These students may need additional support or counseling,

and possibly advising into a degree area which may be more suited to their needs and interests.

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15


Optional: Add other department and student demographic data here to identify trends and information needed to inform decision making in relation to curriculum, program design, and retention strategies for continuous improvement.

PROGRESS ON ANNUAL ACADEMIC DEPARTMENT GOALS AND STRATEGIES IDENTIFIED IN THE

ANNUAL DEPARTMENT INSTITUTIONAL EFFECTIVENSS PLAN (IEP).

The College’s institutional effectiveness plan is an OLC wide process of planning and outcomes assessment for the purpose of documenting that the college is achieving its mission and goals, and based on assessment data, continuously improving operations, programs and services (OLC IEP, 2013). The IEP helps to ensure compliance with Criterion 4 and 5 of the Higher Learning Commission. The purpose of this section of the Academic Department Report is to demonstrate how each academic department closes the loop on assessment. An IEP is created at the beginning of each academic year, using the student learning assessment results from the prior year. The IEP has two parts, the first part is the Annual Action Plan for Student Learning Outcomes and the second part is the Annual Action Plan. The Annual Action Plan for Student Learning Outcomes is created by implementing the Department Assessment Plan and rotation schedule. The Annual Action Plan for Student Learning Outcomes is reported in the next section. The Annual Action Plan (the second part) is created using the recommended strategies developed from the results of the implemented Annual Action plan for Student Learning Outcome Assessment. The Annual Action Plan puts into action the recommended strategies during the academic year to improve student learning, faculty performance, and program performance. Together the Annual Action Plan and Annual Action Plan for Student Learning Outcomes make up the Department IEP. The Department IEP helps to streamline the Annual Action Program Strategies in relation to; Student learning outcomes, admissions, persistence, retention, and completion; as well as department co-curricular activities, aligned to Oglala Lakota College’s strategic plan. Therefore, the Departments IEP Report reflects how data is used to demonstrate continuous improvement, institutional performance, and identify Institutional short-term and long term priorities. The Full Department IEPs are available on the Department’s assessment webpage.

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15


VISION STATEMENT

To graduate highly qualified professional, motivated, reflective teachers who possess and

practice Wolakolkiciyapi in a multicultural, changing world. The professional teacher

education program views Wolakolkiciyapi as reflection and conduct of the Lakota virtues as a

means of improving self and others.

MISSION STATEMENT

Graduates from our programs will be proficient as competent reflective teachers of content,

theory, and application with an emphasis on Lakota Virtues (character education) while

emphasizing community empowerment through reflection of traditional Lakota perspectives.

STRATEGIC GOALS

STRATEGIC GOAL 1: Produce teachers who demonstrate excellence in the field of

education.

Objective 1.1: 100% of the education programs will be fully accredited by SD BOE.

Objective 1.2: 80 % of OLC teacher preparation graduates will meet or exceed Praxis Exam

cut scores.

Objective 1.3: Students participating in orientation will achieve a score of 80% or higher on

post-test.

STRATEGIC GOAL 2: Integrate Lakota Perspective across the Teacher Preparation courses.

Objective 2.1: 80% of teacher candidates will meet Lakota Perspective requirement by

achieving a rubric score/rating of 3.5 or better.

Objective 2.2: 100% of Education Department Faculty will incorporate Lakota Perspectives

into classes.

STRATEGIC GOAL 3: Strengthen the department by improving recruitment, retention,

persistence and completion rates of candidates.

Objective 3.1: Increase recruitment by 2% per year (10% over five years).

Objective 3.2: Increase retention by 2% per year (10% over five years).

Objective 3.3: Increase persistence by 2% per year (10% over five years).

Objective 3.4: Increase completion rates by 2% per year (10% over five years).

The following plan was created from 2015-2016 Education Department Institutional

Effectiveness Report: Part 2: Education Department Annual Action Report for Student Learning

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15


Outcomes. The strategies were created directly from the evidence in student learning and

program effectiveness. The strategies were implemented during the 2015-2016 academic year.

OGLALA LAKOTA COLLEGE

EDUCATION DEPARTMENT ANNUAL ACTION REPORT FOR STUDENT

LEARNING OUTCOMES:

AY 2015-2016

OLC Strategic Goal 1: OLC will produce graduates who demonstrate excellence in their chosen areas of study and fields of endeavor.

Departmental Strategic Goal 1: Produce teachers who demonstrate excellence in the field of education.

Departmental Strategic Objective 1.2: 80% of OLC teacher preparation graduates will meet or exceed Praxis Exam cut scores.

Strategies Criteria Assessment Tools

Analysis: Direct/Indirec

t

Results

Recommendations

Student Learning Outcome 2.2: Strategy 1: Show proficiency in each of the specific content areas to motivate students, build understanding and encourage application of knowledge, skills and ideas to real-world

80% of OLC teacher candidates will meet or exceed the required Praxis Content Knowledge Exam cut score.

Praxis Exam Score Reports from ETS.

While OLC is meeting the SD DOE and Title II 80% Pass Rate expectation for program completers (graduates), the overall pass rates for candidates remain extremely low. By and large the Praxis Elem Ed Content

Title II Data: The OLC Pass Rate for graduates (program completers) has been 100% for the past 3 academic years as reported by ETS Client Services. Data for all Test Takers

Strategy: Provide co-curricular activities in the form of Praxis resources and preparation sessions. Action Step: Collaborate with department chairs and instructors of general education core requirements to complete a crosswalk alignment of course content with the new Praxis Elem Ed

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15


problems and issues.

Knowledge exam assesses candidate attainment of core requirements. Work must continue to improve overall pass rates for the various Praxis subject area exams.

(Sept – May): K-6 Elem Content # Students: 11 Pass Rate: 36% Ed Young Child # Students: 1 Pass Rate: 0%

Content Knowledge exam (5018).

Student Learning Outcome 3.2: Strategy 1: Relate effective strategies that enhance the learning potential of students based upon behavior characteristics, developmental stages, and various learning styles and multiple intelligences.

80% of OLC teacher candidates will meet or exceed required Praxis Principles of Learning & Teaching (PLT) Exam cut score.


While OLC is meeting the SD DOE and Title II 80% Pass Rate expectation for program completers (graduates), the overall pass rates for candidates remain extremely low. By and large the Praxis PLT exams assess candidate attainment of professional core and professional requirements. Work must continue to

Title II Data: The OLC Pass Rate for graduates (program completers) has been 100% for the past 3 academic years as reported by ETS Client Services. Data for all Test Takers (Sept – May): K-6 PLT Exam # Students: 7 Pass Rate: 14%

Strategy: Provide co-curricular activities in the form of Praxis resources and preparation sessions. Action Step: Incorporate Praxis Prep in Professional and Professional Core coursework (i.e. professional vocabulary; multiple choice mid-term and final exams; descriptive, analytic and reflective writing; reading comprehension strategies; and/or study skills strategies.

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15




LEARNING OUTCOMES:

AY 2015-2016

improve overall pass rates for the Praxis PLT exams.

ECH PLT Exam # Students: 3 Pass Rate: 0%

OLC Strategic Goal 1a: Foster wolakolkiciyapi by promoting the acquisition and use of the Lakota language with the College and the communities it serves.

Departmental Strategic Goal 2: Integrate Lakota Perspective across the Teacher Preparation courses.

Departmental Strategic Objective 2.1: 80% of teacher candidates will meet Lakota Perspective requirement by achieving a rubric score/rating of 3.5 or better.


Analysis: Direct/Indirect

Results

Recommendations

Student Learning Outcome (SLO) 1.1: Effectively demonstrate the inter-relatedness of Wolakolkiciyapi, character education, education that celebrates diversity, and

80% of teacher candidates will achieve a rubric score/ rating of 3.5 or higher.

5-Point Analytic Rubrics for required common course assessments of courses identified for assessment.

Overall teacher candidates are demonstrating Wolakolkiciyapi, character education and critical pedagogy at acceptable to commendable levels. Analytic rubrics

Overall 80% of teacher candidates achieved a rubric score/rating of 3.5 or higher. (n=15, 12/15 = 80%)

Continue incorporation and modeling the inter-relatedness of Wolakolkiciyapi, character education, and critical pedagogy through use of the required common course assessments to evaluate this

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15


critical pedagogy.

Student ratings were collected from: ED 213 and ED 313 Spring 2016 and ED 463 Fall 2015

(provided to students as part of assignment guidelines) were used to reinforce the expectations to demonstrate the interrelatedness of Wolakolkiciyapi, character education and critical pedagogy. ED 213 and 313 are professional core courses that serve as prerequisites for professional coursework.

100% of the teacher candidates achieved a rubric score/rating of 3.0 (acceptable) or higher. Lakota Perspective Research Paper Average Rating = 4.15, (n=15)

student learning outcome.

Student Learning Outcome (SLO) 1.2: Integrate traditional Lakota values, such as honor, courage, generosity, and respect, in their communications and interactions with others to

80% of teacher candidates will achieve a rubric score/ rating of 3.5 or higher on required common course assess-ments.

Lakota Values Rating (5-point rating scale) 5-Point Analytic Rubrics for required common course assessments of courses identified

Overall teacher candidates are incorporating and modeling Lakota perspectives into their coursework. Student ratings were collected from: ECH 243, ECH 253, ExEd 333, EDECH 403, and ScEd 443.

90% of teacher candidates achieved a rating of 4.0 or higher (n=80/89 =90%). Lakota Values Rating Scale Average Rating:

Continue to monitor, model and foster the desired protocol for positive interactions utilizing the Lakota Values rating and required common course assessments to evaluate this student learning outcome.

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15


support the Lakota belief that all children are sacred (wakanyeja kin wakan pi).

for assessment.

Analytic rubrics (provided to students as part of assignment guidelines) were used to reinforce the expectations to incorporate Lakota perspectives and language in to assignments.

AY 2015-2016: 4.4 Overall 90% of teacher candidates achieved a rubric score/rating of 3.5 or higher. (n=67, 60/67 = 90%) Instructional Unit Spring 2016 = 4.55 (n=22, 86%) Lesson Planning Spring 2016 = 4.64 (n=22, 95%) Instructional Project= 4.29 (N=17, 100%) Education Philosophy = 2.3 (n=6, 50%)

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15


A. Describe how the Department Program goals and objective (s) align to OLC’s strategic plan

and OLC’s mission?

The Education Department’s program goals and objectives were designed to lend

support to the college’s strategic plan and mission. Each of the Education Department

strategic goals aligns directly with an overall college strategic goal or goal/objective. For

example:

Ed Dept. Goal 1: Produce teachers who demonstrate excellence in the field of education.

OLC GOAL 1: Graduate students who have the necessary skills for Indian Country Jobs.

Strategic objectives and strategies of the Education Department to meet this goal include

maintaining programs that are fully accredited by the SD DOE / SD BOE and having

graduates that pass the required teacher licensure exams enabling them to become fully

certified and licensed by the South Dakota Department of Education. The OLC teacher

preparation program was approved for 5-year continued accreditation by the South Dakota

Board of Education on November, 2014.

We continue to assist candidates in passing the Praxis exams through co-curricular activities

in the form of Praxis Preparation sessions. Five Praxis Preparation Sessions were sponsored

by the OLC Education Department this academic year. These sessions included an overview

of the exams, navigation of the ETS Praxis website (including registering for an account and

an exam), a diagnostic pretest, development of individual study plans based on test results,

and test-taking strategies (test taking tips, strategies for multiple choice items and practice in

writing to constructed response classroom scenarios).

Ed Dept. Goal 2: Integrate Lakota Perspective across the Teacher Preparation courses.

OLC GOAL 1, Objective C: Integrate the Lakota perspective into all courses and programs

offered.

Strategic objectives and strategies of the Education department to meet this goal includes

alignment to two student learning outcomes: 1) SLO 1.1: Effectively demonstrate the inter-

relatedness of Wolakolkiciyapi, character education, education that celebrates diversity, and

critical pedagogy; and 2) SLO 1.2: Integrate traditional Lakota values, such as honor,

courage, generosity, and respect, in their communications and interactions with others to

support the Lakota belief that all children are sacred (wakanyeja kin wakan pi). Teacher

candidates are consistently incorporating and modeling Lakota perspectives into their actions

and coursework as measured by the Lakota values rubric developed in collaboration with

education majors and through the common course assessments including analytic rubrics

targeting criteria in this area. Education instructors continue to work towards modeling and

incorporating Lakota contexts (Lakota Language, Lakota Perspective, Lakota History, Lakota

Cultural Context) into education courses.

Ed Dept. Goal 3: Strengthen the department by improving recruitment, retention, persistence

and completion rates of candidates.

OLC GOAL II, Objective A: Improve student success in retention, persistence, and

completion rates.

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15


Strategic objectives and strategies of the Education department to meet this goal include: 1)

utilizing a departmental tracking system to monitor student enrollment and progress; 2)

providing advisement beyond college-wide registration week and mid-semester advising; and

3) providing orientation to ensure students are aware of program requirements and have

developed plans of completion. The Education Department participated in the OLC First

Annual Career and Job Fair. The Education Department Fall 2015 retention rate of 57% (as

reported by the OLC Assessment Office for Fall 2014 full-time/first-time/ bachelor degree

seeking entering freshmen that returned Fall 2015) is higher than OLC’s average retention

rate of 44% over the six-year period 2009-2014 (as reported in the 2014-2015 AROLCC.)

This year’s persistence data (based on those students who enrolled in the fall and re-enrolled

for the spring) will serve as departmental baseline rates as last year’s data was based on the

persistence of entering freshman only. This year’s completion rates will also serve as

baseline data, as this is the first year Education Department graduation data is based on 4/6/8

year rates, rather than just the number of graduates. Student data reports from the Assessment

Office have been beneficial in further defining outcomes in this area. The Education

Department will continue improve programming and processes to support the outcomes of

this goal.

B. Explain how your department allocates its resources in alignment with the Department

mission and priorities using the student learning outcome data.

Department resources are used to meet apparent student needs which are reviewed and

analyzed each semester to determine student and district center course needs. Student

evaluations plays an important role in the process. Instructional personnel, both full-time and

adjunct are then assigned to meet student needs. Students who are not meeting program or

course expectations are counseled by center and instructional staff and recommendations for

improvement are implemented.

C. Explain how the department links its processes for assessment of student learning;

evaluation of operations, planning and budgeting.

The Education Department utilizes the assessment of student learning to evaluate what we do

and what we need to change to make improvements in program performance. Planning

meetings are held by the department and by individual members of the department with

center directors and staff. Meetings of department chairs and center directors are held each

semester to assist in this process. In addition, budget meetings are held with the OLC VP of

Business. Unfortunately, budgeting could play a more important role than it does. Due to

lack of funds and only one grant the Education Department cannot provide the services it

would like to provide to meet the needs of our students.

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15


D. What Department program strategic objectives will need to continue to be improved for

next year?

All department strategic objectives need to continue to be improved next year.

All three objectives of Strategic Goal 1 (Produce teachers who demonstrate excellence in the

field of education) were met. However, the Education Department needs to continue

monitoring trends and changes in SD DOE accreditation, licensure and reporting processes

with an emphasis on the new Council for the Accreditation of Educator Programs (CAEP)

Standards. In addition, the Department needs to continue to provide co-curricular activities in

the form of Praxis resources and preparation sessions to improve overall (not just graduate)

pass rates for the various Praxis licensure exams.

One of the two objectives in Strategic Goal 2 (Integrate Lakota Perspective across the

Teacher Preparation courses) was met. While teacher candidates are meeting the Lakota

Perspective requirements, the Education Department feels it is important to continue

monitoring, modeling and fostering the desired Lakota protocol for positive interactions and

to continue incorporating and modeling Lakota Perspectives, with specific focus on Lakota

language, in education courses. While full-time faculty members are incorporating and

modeling Lakota perspectives into their coursework at an overall average rating of 3.91

(based on the four Lakota Context items in the student course surveys), in only 73% (rather

than 100%) of the courses taught were the average ratings above 3.5. The Department

recommends adjusting the criteria to 80% of full-time faculty; and has identified specific

strategies and action steps to make improvements.

The Education Department cannot say we met, nor can we say we failed to meet the four

objectives of Strategic Goal 3 (Strengthen the department by improving recruitment,

retention, persistence and completion rates of candidates). Data reporting methods have

changed and comparative information to demonstrate 2% growth in recruitment, retention,

persistence, and completion rates was not available for this year’s analysis. Data reported this

year will serve as baseline data for future comparisons to know whether our strategic

objectives and action steps are making a positive impact on student retention, persistence and

completion rates. Enrollment information provided by the Assessment Office and improved

access to student information systems will help us to monitor and refine efforts in this area.

TRENDS IN DEPARTMENT ENROLLMENT FOR 2015-2016 ACADEMIC YEAR

Academic Department Admissions requirements: (This does not include General Education or

Foundational Studies, Please list admission criteria here. If you do not have it, please explain

why. When should we expect it to be completed? If you do not have data then explain why and

describe the steps to improve tracking of enrolled students into the program for next year.

Make sure that the recommendations are listed on your IEP for next year).

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15


Education Department Teacher Preparation Program Entrance Requirements for all Programs:

The following requirements must be met for acceptance into the program:

A completed application for admission submitted the Dean of Education

A letter requesting admission to the Dean of Education

Three letters of recommendation from professional currently in the field of education

A portfolio, which must be in progress and up to date and include the ED283 or ECH243

journal entries

If required for the student’s degree program: A copy of a passing score on the PRAXIS II

Content Knowledge examination for the appropriate area. (Note: Students pursuing the

Birth to Preschool Early Childhood Degree may “opt out” of taking PRAXIS II exams)

Submission of proof of successful background check from any law enforcement agency

to the Education Department (at student’s own expense)

Submission of proof of passing a drug test (at student’s own expense)

Completion of the required 15 credit hours of Lakota Studies courses

Successful completion of an Associate of Arts in Education degree or successful

completion of ED283 Foundations of Education or ECH203 Introduction to Early

Childhood Education

Successful completion of the Education Department’s Entrance Interview to Teacher

Preparation Program (a minimum score of 70% is required)

A grade point average (GPA) of 2.8 or better

The current 2015-2016 OLC catalog includes the following note: All entrance

requirements must be fully met beginning Fall 2014

EDUCATION DEPARTMENT Teacher Preparation Program Admission Data

Year # Students Applied to

Degree Program

# Students Accepted

Into Program

with Provisions

# Did not Meet

Entrance Requirements

for admittance

# Met Entrance

Requirements to be fully

admitted into program

2015 2 2 0 2

2016 13 6 5 *2

2017 NA NA NA NA

*The number of students indicated on chart above means that the students have met all entrance requirements

including passing the Praxis II Content Knowledge which allows them to be fully accepted and the remaining 5 have

been recommended for entrance and will be fully accepted upon successful completion of meeting all entrance

criteria established

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15


Data for Entrance requirements

(Please put raw data and scores to support table here. Please put all data that supports your

admission requirements) E

ntr

an

ce I

nte

rvie

w R

ati

ng

Sco

re (

InT

AS

C s

tan

dard

s)

Co

mp

lete

d A

A o

r

ED

28

3/E

CH

20

3

Co

mp

lete

d 1

5 h

rs.

La

ko

ta

Stu

die

s

Lett

er

to D

ea

n o

f E

D

Pa

ssed

Pra

xis

Co

nte

nt

Kn

ow

led

ge

3 l

ett

ers

rec

om

men

da

tio

n

Un

off

icia

l T

ra

nsc

rip

t

Cu

rren

t S

tatu

s S

heet

Co

py

of

Back

gro

un

d c

hec

k o

n

file

Co

py

of

dru

g t

est

on

fil

e

Cu

mu

lati

ve G

PA

of

2.8

or

bett

er

Co

mp

lete

d S

op

hom

ore

Ex

perie

nce

Student 1 90%

Student 2 73%

Student 3 80%

Student 4 70%

Student 5 68%

Student 6 47%

Student 7 84%

Student 8 65%

Student 9 82%

Student 10 55%

Student 11 66%

Student 12 81%

Student 13 73%

Student 14 0%

Student 15 0%

Student 16 0%

Student 17 0%

Student 18 0%

Student 19 0%

Overall %

Complete 68% 21% 42% 53% 11% 37% 79% 58% 5% 5% 58% 89%

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15


Analysis of data: (What does this data mean?)

All applications, including those of the two students who were accepted into the program, were

initially incomplete, missing one or more documents. Applicants are informed of their

application status and provided the opportunity to submit missing documents. To date, several

are still missing required information.

Six of the 19 applicants, 31%, either did not schedule or cancelled their interviews.

The InTASC specific questions may be addressing content beyond entering candidate knowledge

base. While interviewers felt candidates had been scored accurately based on their ability to

answer the questions, they did not agree with the interview outcome for three of the individuals

who did not achieve the minimum score as nothing these candidates said, or did not say,

indicated they would not make a good teacher. Candidates who were further along in their

programs and/or who had classroom experience (either through field experiences or work

experience) scored significantly higher. Despite the educational/experience advantage some

candidates may have had, education students serving on the committee noted that interview

content was related to text readings and course discussion in Foundations of Education.

While 13 of 19 applicants attended a Praxis Prep Session, and at least 7 of them submitted Praxis

Fee Waivers to ETS during the 2015-2016 AY, only two candidates actually registered for and

took the required exam. Both of those candidates achieved the qualifying score.

Two applicants, who applied but did not schedule interviews, failed to meet the current 2.8

minimum GPA requirement.

Recommendations: (please use data to make recommendations for improvement)

1. Consider revising entrance interview items to address prerequisite qualities and attributes

for effective teachers vs. actual knowledge of teaching and learning practices.

2. Encourage candidates to follow through with meeting Praxis requirements – not only

attending preparation sessions, but also scheduling and taking the exams.

3. Encourage students to follow-through with scheduling and keeping scheduled interview

appointments.

4. Encourage students to submit complete application packets. Continue to provide

checklists of all items necessary to have complete applications.

5. Advise and encourage freshman and sophomore level students to maintain a 3.0 GPA or

higher in order to meet the new Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation

(CAEP) program entrance standards to be implemented in the 2016-2017 academic year.

Advise applicants who are working to bring up their GPA that they will also need to meet

the 3.0 requirement.

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15


Describe how the data helps you plan for shifts in trends for student enrollment and

promising practices in the professional degree area.

Entrance requirements set high expectations for all potential teachers. They are established to

endure only those candidates who have the greatest likelihood of meeting the requirements for

becoming a teacher matriculate into the program. The data indicates that has entrance into the

program is held to the established standards, enrollment is likely to decrease. This trend is likely

to continue until the entrance requirements become internalized and potential candidates

demonstrate full commitment to becoming a teacher and accept responsibility for meeting all

expectations. To assist potential candidates, the Education Department will need to focus on

orientation and support sessions geared towards freshman and sophomore level students who

have identified Education as their major field of study.

TRENDS IN DEPARTMENT PERSISTENCE RATES FOR 2015-2016 ACADEMIC YEAR

Full Time-Degrees Declared Enrollment Persistence Persistence Rate

K-8 Elem Ed (AA) 9 5 56%

Early Childhood (AA) 17 10 59%

K-12 Lakota Studies 15 10 67%

7-12 Physical Science 3 2 67%

K-8 Elem Ed (BS) 59 51 86%

Early Childhood (BA) 31 20 65%

Part Time-Degrees Declared Enrollment Persistence Persistence Rate

K-8 Elem Ed (AA) 8 5 63%




K-8 Elem Ed (BS) 29 15 52%


Degrees Declared - Overall Totals

Enrollment Persistence Persistence Rate

K-8 Elem Ed (AA) 17 10 59%




K-8 Elem Ed (BS) 88 66 75%


OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15



Persistence data is based on those students who enrolled in the fall and re-enrolled for the spring.

Last year’s persistence data was based on the persistence of entering freshman only. This year’s

data will serve as departmental baseline rates.


Strategy: Continue to provide advisement during institution wide registration week and mid-

semester advising periods, as well as through scheduled appointments with students

throughout each semester

Action Steps: Provide college centers with updated advisement lists to share appointment

schedules with college center staff.

Advise students in developing, updating and revising individual plans of study as

necessary.

Utilize the departmental tracking system to establish a course rotation cycle and schedule

courses to support continued progress towards chosen degrees.

Describe how the data helps you plan for shifts in trends for student persistence and


It is difficult to plan for shifts in trends for student persistence with any accuracy based

on the data available. It is evident, however, that proper advisement, individual plans of study

leading towards completion, and course offerings to meet student needs are necessary to support

teacher candidates in making continued progress towards their programs of study. The

departmental tracking system and increased access to student information through the

Assessment Office and within Jenzebar are promising practices that lend support to the

Education Department’s efforts to increase student persistence.

TRENDS IN DEPARTMENT RETENTION RATES FOR 2015-2016 ACADEMIC YEAR

OLC defines retention as First-time, full-time Degree seeking entering freshmen who enroll

from fall to fall at the institutional level. Academic Departments must look at department

specific retention rates.

Department Retention Rates

2014-2015

Retention Rates

2015-2016

Education 45% 57%

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15



This is the first year Ed Dept. retention rates are based on Full-time/First-time/Bachelor Degree

seeking student data. Retention rate is based on the fall 2014 full-time/first-time/Bachelor degree

seeking entering freshmen that returned fall 2015.


1. Continue to utilize the departmental tracking system to advise students and provide

additional guidance to those students who are at-risk.

Strategy: Continue to provide advisement during institution wide registration week and mid-

semester advising periods, as well as through scheduled appointments with students

throughout each semester.

Action Steps: Provide college centers with updated advisement lists and share appointment

schedules with college center staff.

Make special effort to contact each entering freshmen and assist them in developing an

individual plan of study.

Describe how the data helps you plan for shifts in trends for student retention and


It is difficult to plan for shifts in trends for student retention with any accuracy based on

the data available. It is evident, however, that proper advisement, individual plans of study

leading towards completion, and orientation to the teacher preparation program are necessary to

support entering freshmen. The departmental tracking system and increased access to student

information through the Assessment Office and within Jenzebar, in particular being able to

identify entering freshmen who’ve declared an education major, are promising practices that lend

support to the Education Department’s efforts to increase student retention.

OLC Strategic Goal III: OLC will provide learning experiences that foster student preparedness, academic success, and involvement in the life of the college.

Departmental Strategic Goal 3: Strengthen the department by improving recruitment, retention, persistence and completion rates of candidates.

Departmental Strategic Objective 3.2: Increase retention by 2% per year (10% over five years).

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15




t

Results

Recommendations

Strategy 1: Complete and utilize a departmental tracking system to identify and assist at-risk students.

Increase retention by 2%.

Department Tracking Reports

This is the first year Ed Dept. retention rates are based on Full-Time/First-Time/Bachelor Degree Seeking student data.

Fall 2015 Retention Rate (n= 13/23 = 57%) The Ed Dept. retention rate is higher than OLC’s 6-year average of 44%.

Continue to utilize the departmental tracking system to advise students and provide additional guidance to those students who are at-risk.

Strategy 2: Develop a plan for advising beyond the traditional registration week and mid-semester advising to ensure all students have a faculty advisor, regularly schedule advising appointments, and share this plan with the college centers.

Increase retention by 2%

Advising Logs

Retention rate is based on the Fall 2014 full-time/first-time/bachelor degree seeking entering freshmen that returned Fall 2015. OLC’s average retention rate is 44% over the six-year period 2009-2014. (AROLCC 2014-2015)

Fall 2015 Retention Rate (n= 13/23 = 57%) Ed Dept. Advising: Registration Week New = 4 Existing = 64 Mid-Semester New = 1 Existing = 66

Strategy: Continue to provide advisement during institution wide registration week and mid-semester advising periods, as well as through scheduled appointments with students throughout each semester. Action Steps: Provide college centers with updated advisement lists and share appointment schedules with college center staff.

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15


Make special effort to contact each entering freshman and assist them in developing an individual plan of study.

TRENDS IN DEPARTMENT COMPLETION RATES FOR 2015-2016 ACADEMIC YEAR

OLC uses the following formula to gather graduation rates for the Institution. Graduation rates

are calculated as a percentage using the following criteria: first time entering degree seeking

students, who complete a program of study will be recorded in 4, 6, and 8 year cohorts.

Academic Departments must look at department specific completion rates.

Graduation rates for spring 2015

Education Department

SPRING 2015 Total

Graduates (N=139)

4 yrs.

4 year Avg.

6 yrs.

6 yr. Avg.

8 yrs.

8 year Avg.

Total

Avg.

Total Number of Graduates

139

Associate of Arts Degree in

Elementary Education

2

0

0%

0

0%

0

0%

0

0%

Transfer-in students:

Number of degrees awarded

49

Bachelor of Science Degree in

K-8 Elementary Education

*One student was a

dual major who received both

BS/ElemEd & BA/ECH

6

0

0%

2

33%

0

0%

2

33%

Student Completion

beyond 8 years

42

Bachelor of Science in K-12 Lakota Studies

1

0

0%

0

0%

0

0%

0

0%

Total Number of Degrees Awarded

within 4, 6, 8 years

48

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15


Describe how the data helps you plan for shifts in trends for student completion Analysis of

data: (What does this data mean?)

It is difficult to plan for shifts in trends for student completion with any accuracy based on

the data available. It is evident, however, that proper advisement, individual plans of study

leading towards completion, and course offerings to meet student needs are necessary to support

teacher candidates in making continued progress towards their programs of study. In addition,

orientation to program and licensure requirements, Praxis Prep co-curricular activities, and

refined status sheets (approximating the minimum 120 hours for Bachelor degree programs) will

assist candidates in achieving program completion. The departmental tracking system and

increased access to student information through the Assessment Office and within Jenzebar are

promising practices that lend support to the Education Department’s efforts to increase student

completion.

1. Provide data for each retention strategy and the impact/results of the strategy to retain

students. (This is taken from your IEP)

Bachelor of Science in Physical

Science 7-12 Secondary

Education with Endorsements

available in Earth Science, Math, and

Biology

0

0

0%

0

0%

0

0%

0

0%

Overall Graduation

Rate

35%

Associates of Early Childhood

9

1

11%

0

0%

0

0%

1

11%

Bachelor of Arts Degree in Early

Childhood Education

*One student was a dual major who received both

BS/ElemEd & BA/ECH

1 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%

K-12 Special Education

Certification

0

0

0%

0

0%

0

0%

0

0%

TOTALS 18

1

2%

2

6%

0

0%

3

7%

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15


TRENDS IN DEPARTMENT CO -CURRICULAR ACTIVITIES FOR 2015-2016 ACADEMIC YEAR

OLC defines co-curricular activities supporting student learning outside of the classroom. Co-

curricular activities are held at three levels: Academic unit Level, non-academic unit level

(District Centers), and Institutional level. This section requires you to report specifically to the

co-curricular activities held at the Academic level. This section will help to demonstrate

effectiveness of each activity. Academic Departments participate in Institutional activities.

These can be reported in your IEP strategies.

1. List your Department Co-Curricular Learning outcomes. - 80% of OLC Teacher Preparation Program graduates will meet or exceed the required

Praxis exam cut score.

- Students will demonstrate understanding of program requirements by achieving a score

of 80% or higher on the post test.

2. Explain how the Department Co-Curricular Learning outcomes aligned to the institutional learning outcomes. (refer OLC Co-Curricular framework) The Education Department Co-Curricular Learning Objectives were developed to meet the Overall Co-Curricular Goal of the Institution: OLC provides assistance to students to improve retention, persistence, and completion. In particular, the Education Co-Curricular Learning Objectives align with OCCO 3: OLC provides access to a diverse set of information resources to support students’ achievement of their learning outcomes (Academic Purposes of OLC; OLC Strategic Goal II; General Education Outcomes 1-11)

3. List number and title of each Department Co-Curricular Activity offered during Academic year.

Praxis Preparation Sessions - 5

Education Department Orientation Sessions - 11

4. Provide data for each activity and the impact/results of the activity to support student

learning and engagement. (this is taken from your IEP)


Analysis: Direct/Indirect

Results

Recommendations

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15


Strategy 1: Provide co-curricular activities in the form of group Praxis Preparation sessions.

80% of OLC Teacher Prep graduates will meet or exceed required Praxis Exam cut score. Note: Cut scores vary based on the exam.

Attendance Roster Praxis Exam Score Reports from ETS.

While OLC is meeting the SD DOE and Title II 80% Pass Rate expectation for program completers, this data does not tell the whole story. Eligibility for graduation (program completion) hinges on completion of the approved program of study and meeting the qualifying score on the Praxis exams – hence a 100% pass rate. Candidates who do not achieve the Praxis cut score are not eligible for graduation and are not considered program completers. Program improvements to support candidates in achieving qualifying Praxis scores

Title II Data: The OLC Pass Rate for graduates (program completers) has been 100% for the past 3 academic years as reported by ETS Client Services. Five Praxis Preparation Sessions were held (CRCC 9/13/15; PRCC 10/3/15; PHCC 1/30/16; PRCC 2/6/16; CRCC 2/28/16) and attended by 57 candidates. 42+ candidates applied for ETS Praxis Fee Waivers – of which the majority have yet to register for and take the exam.

Strategy: Continue to provide co-curricular activities in the form of Praxis resources and preparation sessions. Action Steps: Continue day-long Praxis Prep Sessions that include diagnostic practice exams and study plan development. Implement shorter (1/2 hr. – 1 hr.) Praxis Orientation Sessions to introduce Freshman and Sophomores to the Praxis Series exams. Update the Moodle Elementary Content Knowledge Review Site using the new Learning Express Test (5018) Study Guide released May 2016. Develop a Moodle Principles of Learning and

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15


included: 1) enforcement of entrance and student teaching requirements; 2) implementation of Praxis Prep Sessions that included practice exams and development of study plans based on results; 3) candidate support in applying for ETS Praxis Fee Waivers; and 4) development of a Moodle Praxis Support Site. Work must continue to improve overall pass rates for the various Praxis exams.

48 candidates were registered as users in the Moodle Elem Ed Content Review Site. The site was frequented by 15 students who logged in as registered users and 35 students who logged in as guest users. End of Year Raw Data for all Test Takers (Sept – May): K-6 Elem Content # Students: 11 Pass Rate: 36% K-6 PLT Exam # Students: 7 Pass Rate: 14% Ed Young Child # Students: 1 Pass Rate: 0%

Teaching (PLT) Review Site. Develop a Moodle Praxis Review Site for the Education of Young Children exam. Offer structured, in-depth Praxis review w/ faculty guidance. Encourage candidates to form study groups at their local college centers.

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15


ECH PLT Exam # Students: 3 Pass Rate: 0%

Strategy 2: Provide individual and/or group advising and assist students in developing and following through with individual study plans through scheduled advising times.

80% of OLC Teacher Prep graduates will meet or exceed required Praxis Exam cut score. Note: Cut scores vary based on the exam.

Advising Dates/Roster Praxis Exam Score Reports from ETS

While OLC is meeting the SD DOE and Title II 80% Pass Rate expectation for program completers (graduates), the overall pass rates for candidates remain low. Continue work to improve overall pass rates for the various Praxis exams.

Title II Data: The OLC Pass Rate for graduates (program completers) has been 100% for the past 3 academic years as reported by ETS Client Services. Data for all Test Takers (Sept – May): K-6 Elem Content # Students: 11 Pass Rate: 36% K-6 PLT Exam # Students: 7 Pass Rate: 14% Ed Young Child # Students: 1 Pass Rate: 0%

Continue providing individual and/or group advising to assist students in developing and following through on individual Praxis study plans.

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15


ECH PLT Exam # Students: 3 Pass Rate: 0% 64 new and existing students participated in registration week and scheduled mid-semester advising during AY 2015-2016. Advising included review of student progress towards meeting program requirements (including Praxis exams), registration, and development of individual plans of study. 42+ candidates applied for ETS Praxis

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15



While OLC is meeting the SD DOE and Title II 80% Pass Rate expectation for program

completers, this data does not tell the whole story.

Eligibility for graduation (program completion) hinges on completion of the approved program

of study and meeting the qualifying score on the Praxis exams – hence a 100% pass rate.

Candidates who do not achieve the Praxis cut score are not eligible for graduation and are not

considered program completers.

End of year raw data for all test takers (Sept – May) tells a different story: 1) K-6 Elem Content

Knowledge (n=11) Pass Rate 36%; 2) K-6 PLT Exam (n=7) Pass Rate 14%; 3) Education of

Young Children (n=1) Pass Rate = 0%; and 4) ECH PLT Exam (n=3) Pass Rate: 0%. Work must

continue to improve overall pass rates for the various Praxis exams, not just for graduates.

Program improvements during the 2015-2015 academic year to support candidates in achieving

qualifying Praxis scores included: 1) enforcement of entrance and student teaching requirements;

2) implementation of Praxis Prep Sessions that included practice exams and development of

study plans based on results; 3) candidate support in applying for ETS Praxis Fee Waivers; and

4) development of a Moodle Praxis Support Site for the Elementary Education Content

Knowledge exam.

While candidates who participate in orientation sessions are demonstrating understanding of

program requirements (10/10 scored 100% on the orientation post-test), attendance at these

sessions is very low. Education Department Orientations were held at each of the college centers

the college centers (2 at CRCC) during fall 2015 and spring 2016 registration periods. However,

only three students participated in full orientation and completed pre/posttests. Students who

came to meet with Education Faculty during registration week came for advising rather than to

attend an orientation session. One adjunct instructor requested a full Education Orientation as

part of class. Seven students participated and completed pre/posttests.


1. Continue to provide co-curricular activities in the form of Praxis resources and preparation

sessions.

Fee Waivers – of whom the majority has yet to take the exam.

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15


Action Steps:

Continue day-long Praxis Prep Sessions that include diagnostic practice exams and study

plan development.

Implement shorter (1/2 hr. – 1 hr.) Praxis Orientation Sessions to introduce freshman and

sophomores to the Praxis Series exams.

Update the Moodle Elementary Content Knowledge Review Site using the new Learning

Express Test (5018) Study Guide released May 2016.

Develop a Moodle Principles of Learning and Teaching (PLT) Review Site.

Develop a Moodle Praxis Review Site for the Education of Young Children exam.

Offer structured, in-depth Praxis review w/ faculty guidance.

Encourage candidates to form study groups at their local college centers.

Collaborate with department chairs and instructors of general education core

requirements to complete a crosswalk alignment of course content with the new Praxis

Elem Ed Content Knowledge exam (5018).

Incorporate Praxis Prep in Professional and Professional Core coursework (i.e.

professional vocabulary; multiple choice mid-term and final exams; descriptive, analytic

and reflective writing; reading comprehension strategies; and/or study skills strategies.

Continue providing individual and/or group advising to assist students in developing and

following through on individual Praxis study plans.

2. Continue to provide orientation sessions for education majors.

Action Steps:

Maintain the current orientation content for freshman and sophomores.

Develop an orientation session targeting the needs of juniors and seniors (i.e. program

updates to meet accreditation and licensure requirements).

Collaborate with center directors and staff to schedule Ed Dept. Orientations so that they

coincide with College Center orientation activities.

Continue to provide orientation as part of coursework during the first three weeks of

class.

Maintain appropriate documentation for each orientation session held.

GENERAL EDUCATION

Provide a list of General Education courses housed in your department.

There are no General Education courses housed within the Education Department.

Provide the list of General Education Learning outcomes relevant to the courses.

Not Applicable – there are no General Education courses housed within the Education

Department.

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15


Provide a list of the Junior or Senior level courses aligned to the General Education Learning

outcomes. (If your department did not complete this task, please explain why this was not

complete, when we should expect it to be complete, and steps to overcome challenges to

ensure that this is completed. List the steps on your IEP).

Education Department Courses Aligned for Assessment under General Education

Outcomes

General Education Outcome 1: Apply cultural values in a learning atmosphere.

Any ED, or ECH, or EDECH, or ExEd, or LkEd, or ScEd, or EDLK course being offered

can be used to assess this outcome.

General Education Outcome 2: Written and Oral Communication: Communicate effectively in

writing using both Lakota and English.

ED 213, or ED 303E, or ED 313, or ED 463, or ECH 233, or ECH 323

General Education Outcome 3: Written and Oral Communication: Demonstrate oral

communication skills in both Lakota and English.

ED 303E, or Sci 204, or Sci 214, or EDECH 453, or LkEd 413, or LkEd 433, or

LkEd 453

General Education Outcome 4: Quantitative Reasoning: Apply quantitative analytic skills.

EDLK 489

General Education Outcome 5: Critical Thinking: Examine concepts and theories across multiple

contexts and disciplines.

ECH 323, or Sci 204, or Sci 214, or Math 223, or Math 233, or Math 243, or LkEd 433,

or LkEd 453, or ScEd 403, or ScEd 413, or ScEd 443, or EDECH 403, or EDECH 413,

or EDECH 423, or EDECH 433, or EDECH 443, or EDECH 453, or EDECH 463

General Education Outcome 6: Critical Thinking: Critically review resource material.

ED 303E, or Sci 204, or Sci 214, or Math 223, or Math 233, or Math 243, ExEd 433, or

ExEd 443, or ExEd 493, or LkEd 433, or LkEd 453, or ScEd 403, or ScEd 413, or ScEd

443, or EDECH 403, or EDECH 413, or EDECH 423, or EDECH 433, or EDECH 443,

or EDECH 453, or EDECH 463

General Education Outcome 7: Critical Thinking: Develop ideas to address contemporary issues.

ED 283, or ED 323, or ECH 203, or ExEd 313, or LkEd 413, or EDLK 473

General Education Outcome 8: Critical Thinking: Critically examine sovereignty.

ED 303E, or Ed 463

General Education Outcome 9: Technology: Demonstrate proficiency in the use of standard

computer technologies.

Any ED, or ECH, or EDECH, or ExEd, or LkEd, or ScEd, or EDLK course being offered

can be used to assess this outcome.

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15


General Education Outcome 10: Diversity: Examine the importance of diversity.

ED 303, or ED 323, or ED 463, or ED 483, or ECH 233, or ECH 323, or ECH 403, or

ECH 423, or ExEd 333, or ExEd 433, or ExEd 443, or LkEd 433, or LkEd 453, or ScEd

403, or ScEd 413, or ScEd 443, or EDECH 403, or EDECH 413, or EDECH 423, or

EDECH 433, or EDECH 443, or EDECH 453, or EDECH 463

General Education Outcome 11: Diversity: Examine the contexts of Lakota social organizations,

communities and global networks.

ECH 253, or ECH 423, or ExEd 473, or ScEd 403, or ScEd 413, or EDLK 473

Education Department Courses Aligned for Assessment under General Education Outcomes

Provide a, matrices of your department/program outcomes aligned to OLC General Education

Core Values. (If your department did not complete this task, please explain why this was not

complete, when we should expect it to be complete, and steps to overcome challenges to

ensure that this is completed. List the steps on your IEP).

Program Learning

Outcomes

GE

1

GE

2

GE

3

GE

4

GE

5

GE

6

GE

7

GE

8

GE

9

GE

10

GE

11

P1.LO1: Candidates exhibit

Lakota cultural values in all

learning contexts.

X X X

P1.LO2: Candidates recognize

the diverse influences

impacting the development

and learning of young

children and effectively utilize

strategies to enhance the

learning potential of all

children.

X X X


the importance of co-

curricular activities involving

respectful family and

community relationships to

enhance the learning potential

of young children.

X X X

P1.LO4: Candidates will

engage in reflective activities

to gain an understanding of

developmentally appropriate

practices in educating young

children.

X X X X X

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15


P2. LO1: Candidates exhibit


learning contexts.

X X X


the diverse influences

impacting the development

and learning of young

children and effectively utilize

strategies to enhance the

learning potential of all

children.

X X X

P2.LO3: Candidates

demonstrate proficiency

integrating solid content

knowledge and sound

pedagogical understandings to

design and implement

academic and co-curricular

experiences that include

families and communities to

promote positive development

and learning for young

children.

X X X X X

P2.LO4.1: Candidates

demonstrate understanding of

the goals, benefits, and uses of

effective assessment strategies

to positively impact the

learning and development of

young children.

X X X X X X

P2.LO4.2: Candidates engage

in continuous, reflective

learning, following ethical

guidelines to make informed

decisions to advocate for

young children and their

families.

X X X X X X



learning contexts.

X X X

P3.LO2: Candidates utilize

developmental concepts and

theories to construct learning

opportunities that support the

individualities of children and

young adolescents.

X X X X X

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15


P3.LO3: Candidates

demonstrate proficiency in

content area concepts when

planning academic and co-

curricular learning activities,

projects, and explorations for

students, families and

communities that augment

learning experiences.

X X X X X

P3.LO4: Candidates engage in

reflective practices to develop

an understanding of best

practices for teaching and

learning.

X X X X X X



learning contexts.

X X





individualities of children and

young adolescents.

X X X X


demonstrate proficiency in

content area concepts when

planning academic and co-

curricular learning activities,

projects, and explorations that

augment learning experiences.

X X X X X


develop and implement

instructional units that

demonstrate sound

pedagogical practices to foster

active engagement in

learning, critical thinking, and

problem solving for K-8

students.

X X X X X

P4.LO4.1: Candidates utilize

formal and informal

assessment strategies to

monitor and plan for

instruction that will promote

continuous growth and

learning for K-8 students.

X X X X X

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15




learning contexts, and

demonstrate proficiency in the

acquisition, understanding,

and use of the Lakota

language.

X X X X X





individualities of K-12

students.

X X X

P5.LO3: Candidates exercise

their understanding of Lakota

history, culture, and

psychology combined with

sound pedagogical practices

when developing and

implementing instructional

units in order to engage and

motivate K-12 Lakota

students, and their families

and communities, in academic

and co-curricular activities.

X X X X X X X

P5.LO4.1: Candidates utilize

culturally relevant authentic

assessments to evaluate

student learning and

achievement.

X X X X X X

P5.LO4.2: Candidates engage

in continual reflective practice

to connect culture, language,

and content in meaningful

ways to develop cultural

competence.

X X X X X X X



learning contexts.

X X X

P6.LO2: Candidates develop

learning activities and

explorations that convey the

important concepts, ideas and

principles of contemporary

science to secondary students.

X X X X X

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15


P6.LO3: Candidates engage a

variety of strategies and

methodologies when

developing instructional units

that engage students in

scientific and technological

processes while maintaining a

safe and supportive learning

environment.

X X X X X


develop effective assessment

strategies and utilize the

results to guide and modify

instruction.

X X X X X


demonstrate ethical practices

as they involve students in

scientific studies related to

locally important issues and

effectively collaborate with

community agencies in co-

curricular scientific

explorations.

X X X X X X



learning contexts.

X X X


demonstrate understanding of

special education principles,

theories, laws and policies

conjoin with diverse human

issues to impact the delivery

of special education services.

X X X X X


distinguish the similarities and

differences in human

development and the

characteristics of K-12

students with special learning

needs in order to provide

individualized instruction that

is meaningful for the student.

X X X X X


evidence-based instructional

strategies to modify learning

environments and curricula to

X X X X X

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15


enhance learning experiences,

promote positive self-esteem,

build life skills, and engage

students in critical thinking

and problem solving

activities.


develop long-range

individualized education plans

that are translated into

shorter-range goals and

objectives based on an

individual’s abilities and

needs, and modified based on

assessment of the individual’s

learning progress.

X X X X X


demonstrate ethical practices

and effectively collaborate in

co-curricular activities with

families, other educators,

related service providers, and

community agencies to

advocate for the learning and

well-being of individuals with

special educational needs.

X X X X X X

The following table lists all the General Education Learning Outcomes assessed each year for

the courses that are housed in your Department. The outcomes must match the General

Education Rotation schedule.

Year

Fall Semester Gen Ed Outcome / Education

Course Assessed

Spring Semester Gen Ed Outcome / Education

Course Assessed

2014-2015 GE 4: Quantitative Reasoning

EDLK 489 (Artifact: Impact on

Student Learning Project)

GE 3: Oral Communication Skills

(Lakota/English)

ECH 233 (Artifact: Instructional

Project – Translation/Reading of

Children’s Book in Lakota)

2015-2016 GE 9: Technology GE 6: Critical Thinking

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15


ED 483 Not Offered / Not

Assessed

ED 213 (Artifact: Lakota

Perspective Research Paper)

2016-2017

General Education Outcome 6: Critical Thinking Results

Tota

l Sco

re

Wo

lako

lkic

iyap

i

Exp

lan

atio

n o

f

Issu

es

Evid

ence

Infl

uen

ce o

f C

on

text

an

d

Ass

um

pti

on

s

Stu

den

t’s

Po

siti

on

Co

ncl

usi

on

an

d

Rel

ate

d O

utc

om

es

Lit 203 (N=27) 8.04 0.81 1.76 1.61 1.11 1.41 1.41

Geog 213 (N=7) 11.29 1.29 2.50 1.71 1.86 2.14 2.07

ED 213 (N=3) 14.17 2.83 2.67 2.33 1.83 2.33 2.17

SoSc 383 (N=4) 14.88 2.63 2.88 2.63 2.38 2.25 2.13

ALL (N=41) 9.71 1.22 2.06 1.78 1.41 1.68 1.65 Mean sub- and total scores (red=benchmark not met, orange=benchmark met, green=1st milestone, light blue=2nd

milestone, dark blue=capstone).

Analysis of data: (What does this general education data mean to your department?)

The Education Department Common Course Assessment, the Lakota Perspective Research

Paper, has strong alignment with the General Education Outcome 6 Critical Thinking (Critically

Review Resource Material) Rubric. Education Department artifacts scored at the 2nd and 1st

milestone levels.

Recommendations: (please use the general education data to make recommendations for

improvement within your department)

General Education Recommendations to the Education Department:

1. Continue to emphasize the use of scholarly materials as basis for research papers.

2. Continue to include assignments that require students to critically review source material

(already in lower level courses).

General Education Recommendations to All academic departments:

1. Emphasize the use of scholarly materials as basis for academic papers starting in 100-

level courses.

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15


2. Require students to critically review source material across all levels.

3. Revise alignment of general education and upper-level courses with general education

outcomes.

4. Participate in general education assessment in most semesters.

5. Participate in a workshop to discuss how students can exemplify Wolakolkiciyapi in a

variety of assignments.

6. Consider requiring students to complete information literacy orientation provided by

OLC’s Woksape Tipi

What improvements to curriculum, programing, and faculty professional development have

you made as a result of the general education assessment data?

The Education Department did not submit artifacts for the fall 2015 General Education scoring

as the course we believed had the strongest alignment to the outcome was not being offered.

However, upon receiving a copy of the scoring rubric (May 13, 2016) we found that a

technology artifact from any of our courses could have been submitted to demonstrate

proficiency in the use of standard computer technologies. Had we received the rubric at the

beginning of the semester we could have selected a course and artifact(s) to submit for

participation in the process. Note: The Fall 2015 General Education Assessment Report was

completed on May 8, 2016 and emailed to Department Chairs on Friday, May 13th.

The Spring 2016 General Education Assessment Report was completed on May 26, 2016 and

emailed to Department Chairs on May 27th (Spring 2016 assessment days were May 11-13th and

the last day for faculty was May 13th.) Education Department faculty will review the findings

and recommendations during the fall 2016 assessment days at the beginning of the semester

(August 15-19th) and will determine program improvement strategies for implementation at that

time.

ASSESSMENT OF STUDENT ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT

The Annual Action Plan for Student Learning Outcomes is the first part of the IEP. The Annual

Action Plan for Student Learning Outcomes is created by implementing the Department

Assessment Plan and rotation schedule. The Annual Action Plan for Student Learning Outcomes

is aligned to OLC’s Strategic plan in relation to the Assessment, HLC Criterion 4 and 5.

The Annual Action Plan for Student Learning Outcome reports the results of student assessment data to demonstrate; what student have learned, faculty and Adjunct faculty professional development needs for improvement and program performance. The Student Learning outcomes provide data and evidence linked to recommendations for continued improvement. The Annual Action Plan for Student learning Outcome Part 1 of the IEP, articulates what student learning outcomes were assessed, what measures were used, when the assessment occurred,

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15


who assessed the courses, student, etc. and identified the nature of the assessment methods. More importantly identifies how the data will inform annual action strategies for continuous program and institutional improvement. I. Student Learning Objectives

1. Provide the list of Student Learning Out comes for each Degree Area: a. Student learning outcomes (including criteria) assessed this year.

Education Department Goal 1: Demonstrate Lakota cultural understanding and practice in the

classroom.

Program 1 – Associate of Arts Degree in Early Childhood Education

P1.LO1: Candidates exhibit Lakota cultural values in all learning contexts.

Program 2 – Bachelor of Arts Degree in Early Childhood Education


Program 3 – Associate of Arts Degree in Elementary Education


Program 4 – Bachelor of Science Degree in K-8 Elementary Education


Program 5 – Bachelor of Science Degree in K-12 Lakota Studies Education

P5.LO1: Candidates exhibit Lakota cultural values in all learning contexts, and

demonstrate proficiency in the acquisition, understanding, and use of the Lakota

language.

Program 6 – Bachelor of Science Degree in Physical Science Secondary Education


Program 7 – Exceptional Education Preparation Program K-12


Course-Level Student Learning Outcomes (all degree programs)

SLO 1.1: Effectively demonstrate the inter-relatedness of Wolakolkiciyapi,

character education, education that celebrates diversity, and critical pedagogy.

SLO 1.2: Integrate traditional Lakota values, such as honor, courage, generosity,

and respect, in their communications and interactions with others to support the

Lakota belief that all children are sacred (wakanyeja kin wakan pi).

SLO 1.3: Encourage and create opportunities for family and community

involvement in learning experiences.

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15


Education Department Goal 2: Exhibit a solid academic base for understanding the disciplines

and how they interrelate.


P1.LO2: Candidates recognize the diverse influences impacting the development and

learning of young children and effectively utilize strategies to enhance the learning

potential of all children.


P2.LO2: Candidates recognize the diverse influences impacting the development and

learning of young children and effectively utilize strategies to enhance the learning

potential of all children.


P3.LO2: Candidates utilize developmental concepts and theories to construct learning

opportunities that support the individualities of children and young adolescents.



opportunities that support the individualities of children and young adolescents.



opportunities that support the individualities of K-12 students.


P6.LO2: Candidates develop learning activities and explorations that convey the

important concepts, ideas and principles of contemporary science to secondary students.


P7.LO2.1: Candidates demonstrate understanding of special education principles,

theories, laws and policies conjoin with diverse human issues to impact the delivery of

special education services.

P7.LO2.2: Candidates distinguish the similarities and differences in human

development and the characteristics of K-12 students with special learning needs in

order to provide individualized instruction that is meaningful for the student.


SLO 2.1: Integrate pedagogical studies with content knowledge to create

meaningful and research-based learning experiences.

SLO 2.2: Show proficiency in each of the specific content areas to motivate

students, build understanding and encourage application of knowledge, skills and

ideas to real-world problems and issues.

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15


SLO 2.3: Devise effective strategies that enhance the learning potential of

students based upon communication and cognitive processes, cultural contexts,

knowledge construction, and higher-level thinking skills.

Education Department Goal 3: Possess pedagogical and classroom management skills for the

creation of a school ecology inclusive of the diverse abilities and needs of children.


P1.LO3: Candidates recognize the importance of co-curricular activities involving

respectful family and community relationships to enhance the learning potential of

young children.


P2.LO3: Candidates demonstrate proficiency integrating solid content knowledge and

sound pedagogical understandings to design and implement academic and co-curricular

experiences that include families and communities to promote positive development and

learning for young children.


P3.LO3: Candidates demonstrate proficiency in content area concepts when planning

academic and co-curricular learning activities, projects, and explorations for students,

families and communities that augment learning experiences.


P4.LO3.1: Candidates demonstrate proficiency in content area concepts when planning

academic and co-curricular learning activities, projects, and explorations that augment

learning experiences.

P4.LO3.2: Candidates develop and implement instructional units that demonstrate

sound pedagogical practices to foster active engagement in learning, critical thinking,

and problem solving for K-8 students.


P5.LO3: Candidates exercise their understanding of Lakota history, culture, and

psychology combined with sound pedagogical practices when developing and

implementing instructional units in order to engage and motivate K-12 Lakota students,

and their families and communities, in academic and co-curricular activities.


P6.LO3: Candidates engage a variety of strategies and methodologies when developing

instructional units that engage students in scientific and technological processes while

maintaining a safe and supportive learning environment.


P7.LO3: Candidates utilize evidence-based instructional strategies to modify learning

environments and curricula to enhance learning experiences, promote positive self-

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15


esteem, build life skills, and engage students in critical thinking and problem solving

activities.


SLO 3.1: Communicate the contributions of historical approaches and modern

theorists to the study and assessment of the biological/physical, social, emotional,

and intellectual development of a child.

SLO 3.2: Relate effective strategies that enhance the learning potential of

students based upon behavior characteristics, developmental stages, and various

learning styles and multiple intelligences.

SLO 3.3: Develop strategies for managing a safe, orderly and equitable

classroom environment that fosters positive self-esteem, social interaction, active

learning and self-motivation of children.

SLO 3.4: Develop and implement lessons that demonstrate valid techniques for

teaching in the various subject areas.

SLO 3.5: Formulate instructional plans for learning centers, learning games,

projects and/or explorations that enhance learning experiences.

SLO 3.6: Plan integrated, thematic units of study that will engage children in

meaningful exploration of concepts and issues related to the various content areas.



LEARNING OUTCOMES:

AY 2015-2016

OLC Strategic Goal 1: OLC will produce graduates who demonstrate excellence in their chosen areas of study and fields of endeavor.

Departmental Strategic Goal 1: Produce teachers who demonstrate excellence in the field of education.

Departmental Strategic Objective 1.2: 80% of OLC teacher preparation graduates will meet or exceed Praxis Exam cut scores.



t

Results

Recommendations

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15


Student Learning Outcome 2.2: Strategy 1: Show proficiency in each of the specific content areas to motivate students, build understanding and encourage application of knowledge, skills and ideas to real-world problems and issues.

80% of OLC teacher candidates will meet or exceed the required Praxis Content Knowledge Exam cut score.


While OLC is meeting the SD DOE and Title II 80% Pass Rate expectation for program completers (graduates), the overall pass rates for candidates remain extremely low. By and large the Praxis Elem Ed Content Knowledge exam assesses candidate attainment of core requirements. Work must continue to improve overall pass rates for the various Praxis subject area exams.

Title II Data: The OLC Pass Rate for graduates (program completers) has been 100% for the past 3 academic years as reported by ETS Client Services. Data for all Test Takers (Sept – May): K-6 Elem Content # Students: 11 Pass Rate: 36% Ed Young Child # Students: 1 Pass Rate: 0%

Strategy: Provide co-curricular activities in the form of Praxis resources and preparation sessions. Action Step: Collaborate with department chairs and instructors of general education core requirements to complete a crosswalk alignment of course content with the new Praxis Elem Ed Content Knowledge exam (5018).

Student Learning Outcome 3.2: Strategy 1: Relate effective strategies that enhance the learning

80% of OLC teacher candidates will meet or exceed required Praxis Principles


While OLC is meeting the SD DOE and Title II 80% Pass Rate expectation for program completers (graduates),

Title II Data: The OLC Pass Rate for graduates (program completers) has been 100% for

Strategy: Provide co-curricular activities in the form of Praxis resources and preparation sessions.

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15


2. Explain how the Student learning objectives reflect the mission of the College and Community.

The goals of the teacher preparation program are identified within the conceptual framework of

the education unit. The goals are based upon the unit’s core beliefs and are supported by a

research knowledge base. Furthermore, the goals are an extension of the OLC vision, mission

and purposes. The program learning outcomes and course-level student learning outcomes

identify the knowledge, skills and abilities teacher candidates will develop and be able to

demonstrate upon completion of their program of study. The student learning outcomes are

articulated in course syllabi and are supported by action steps. In the form of instructional

activities and assignments, designed to facilitate their development. The goal of the Education

Department is mastery of knowledge and skills; therefore, candidates have multiple opportunities

for revision of assignments at the course level.

potential of students based upon behavior characteristics, developmental stages, and various learning styles and multiple intelligences.

of Learning & Teaching (PLT) Exam cut score.

the overall pass rates for candidates remain extremely low. By and large the Praxis PLT exams assess candidate attainment of professional core and professional requirements. Work must continue to improve overall pass rates for the Praxis PLT exams.

the past 3 academic years as reported by ETS Client Services. Data for all Test Takers (Sept – May): K-6 PLT Exam # Students: 7 Pass Rate: 14% ECH PLT Exam # Students: 3 Pass Rate: 0%

Action Step: Incorporate Praxis Prep in Professional and Professional Core coursework (i.e. professional vocabulary; multiple choice mid-term and final exams; descriptive, analytic and reflective writing; reading comprehension strategies; and/or study skills strategies.

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15


This assessment process spirals from the course-level student learning outcomes to individual

degree program learning outcomes to the Education Department Goals which feeds directly into

the Institutional Assessment Cycle.

3. Explain how the student learning objectives for your department are aligned at the

course and program level (Show evidence or explanation. You can attach a matrix as

an appendix or explain why this has not happen and step to accomplish this task. If

the matrix is a large document, you can describe and attach link to your department

web page).

National Teacher Preparation Standards

OLC Education Department Unit

Goals, Program Learning Outcomes

& Student Learning Outcomes

INTA

SC All

Program

s

ACEI Element

ary

Educatio

n

NAEY

C Early

Childho

od

NSTA Physical

Science

CEC Exceptio

nal

Educatio

n

P5.L

O3

Candidates exercise their understanding

of Lakota history, culture, and

psychology combined with sound

pedagogical practices when developing

and implementing instructional units in

order to engage and motivate K-12

Lakota students, and their families and

communities, in academic and co-

curricular activities.

1, 2, 3,

5, 7

1, 2, 3 1, 4, 5 1, 2, 3,

4

1, 2, 3,

5, 7

P6.L

O3

Candidates engage a variety of

strategies and methodologies when

developing instructional units that

engage students in scientific and

technological processes while

maintaining a safe and supportive

learning environment.

1, 2, 3,

5, 7

1, 2, 3 1, 4, 5 1, 2, 3,

4

1, 2, 3,

5, 7

P7.L

O3

Candidates utilize evidence-based

instructional strategies to modify

learning environments and curricula to

enhance learning experiences, promote

positive self-esteem, build life skills,

and engage students in critical thinking

and problem solving activities.

1, 2, 3,

5, 7

1, 2, 3 1, 4, 5 1, 2, 3,

4

1, 2, 3,

5, 7

SLO

3.1

Communicate the contributions of

historical approaches and modern

theorists to the study and assessment of

the biological/physical, social,

2 1 1 3 2

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15


emotional, and intellectual development

of a child.

SLO

3.2

Relate effective strategies that enhance

the learning potential of students based

upon behavior characteristics,

developmental stages, and various

learning styles and multiple

intelligences.

3 1, 3 1, 4 3 3

SLO

3.3

Develop strategies for managing a safe,

orderly and equitable classroom

environment that fosters positive self-

esteem, social interaction, active

learning and self-motivation of

children.

5 1, 3 1, 5 3, 4 5





INTA

SC All

Program

s

ACEI Element

ary

Educatio

n

NAEY

C Early

Childho

od

NSTA Physical

Science

CEC Exceptio

nal

Educatio

n

SLO

3.4

Develop and implement lessons that

demonstrate valid techniques for

teaching in the various subject areas.

1, 7 2, 3 4, 5 1, 2, 3,

4

1, 7

SLO

3.5

Formulate instructional plans for

learning centers, learning games,

projects and/or explorations that

enhance learning experiences.

1, 7 2, 3 4, 5 1, 2,

3,4

1, 7

SLO

3.6

Plan integrated, thematic units of study

that will engage children in meaningful

exploration of concepts and issues

related to the various content areas.

1, 7 2, 3 4, 5 1, 2,

3,4

1, 7

Goal

4 Engage in critical analysis, reflective

practice and forecasting that will

positively affect student learning.

INTA

SC All

Program

s

ACEI Element

ary

Educatio

n

NAEY

C Early

Childho

od

NSTA Physical

Science

CEC Exceptio

nal

Educatio

n

P1.L

O4

Candidates will engage in reflective

activities to gain an understanding of

developmentally appropriate practices

in educating young children.

9 5 6 8 2.9

P2.L

O4.1

Candidates demonstrate understanding

of the goals, benefits, and uses of

8 4 3 8 8

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15


effective assessment strategies to

positively impact the learning and

development of young children.

P2.L

O4.2

Candidates engage in continuous,

reflective learning, following ethical

guidelines to make informed decisions

to advocate for young children and their

families.

9 5 2,6 4 9,10

P3.L

O4

Candidates engage in reflective

practices to develop an understanding

of best practices for teaching and

learning.

9 5 6 8 3,9





INTA

SC All

Program

s

ACEI Element

ary

Educatio

n

NAEY

C Early

Childho

od

NSTA Physical

Science

CEC Exceptio

nal

Educatio

n

P4.L

O4.1

Candidates utilize formal and informal

assessment strategies to monitor and

plan for instruction that will promote

continuous growth and learning for K-8

students.

6, 8, 9,

10

3, 4, 5 3, 4, 6 2, 3, 5,

6

6, 8, 9,

10

P4.L

O4.2

Candidates engage in reflective

practices to develop an understanding

of best practices for teaching and

learning.

6, 8, 9,

10

3, 4, 5 3, 4, 6 2, 3, 5,

6

6, 8, 9,

10

P5.L

O4.1

Candidates utilize culturally relevant

authentic assessments to evaluate

student learning and achievement.

6, 8, 9,

10

3, 4, 5 3, 4, 6 2, 3, 5,

6

6, 8, 9,

10

P5.L

O4.2

Candidates engage in continual

reflective practice to connect culture,

language, and content in meaningful

ways to develop cultural competence.

6, 8, 9,

10

3, 4, 5 3, 4, 6 2, 3, 5,

6

6, 8, 9,

10

P6.L

O4.1

Candidates develop effective

assessment strategies and utilize the

results to guide and modify instruction.

6, 8, 9,

10

3, 4, 5 3, 4, 6 2, 3, 5,

6

6, 8, 9,

10

P6.L

O4.2

Candidates demonstrate ethical

practices as they involve students in

scientific studies related to locally

important issues and effectively

collaborate with community agencies in

co-curricular scientific explorations.

6, 8, 9,

10

3, 4, 5 3, 4, 6 2, 3, 5,

6

6, 8, 9,

10

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15


P7.L

O4.1

Candidates develop long-range

individualized education plans that are

translated into shorter-range goals and

objectives based on an individual’s

abilities and needs, and modified based

on assessment of the individual’s

learning progress.

6, 8, 9,

10

3, 4, 5 3, 4, 6 2, 3, 5,

6

6, 8, 9,

10

P7.L

O4.2

Candidates demonstrate ethical

practices and effectively collaborate in

co-curricular activities with families,

other educators, related service

providers, and community agencies to

advocate for the learning and well-

being of individuals with special

educational needs.

6, 8, 9,

10

3, 4, 5 3, 4, 6 2, 3, 5,

6

6, 8, 9,

10





INTA

SC All

Program

s

ACEI Element

ary

Educatio

n

NAEY

C Early

Childho

od

NSTA Physical

Science

CEC Exceptio

nal

Educatio

n

SLO

4.1

Develop authentic assessments for

performance tasks to evaluate student

learning and achievement in real-world

contexts.

8 4 3 3, 5 8

SLO

4.2

Utilize formative and summative

assessment strategies to monitor

learning and plan for instruction.

8 4 3 3, 5 8

SLO

4.3

Reflect upon their own learning,

professional literature and teaching

experiences, resulting in a plan to

promote personal and professional

growth.

9 5 6 6 9

SLO

4.4

Internalize and defend a philosophy of

education that recognizes individual

worth in all children.

9 5 6 6 9

SLO

4.5

Contribute to collegial activities to

accomplish common goals and maintain

professional demeanor when addressing

sensitive or controversial issues.

10 5 6 6 10

SLO

4.6

Demonstrate competency using digital

technologies that support classroom

instruction and enhance professional

productivity.

6 3 4 2, 3 6

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15


4. Describe your Department Assessment system. Please include Criteria for collecting

and analyzing data (taken from your assessment plan).

Assessment Methods

Multiple assessments are used to measure candidate content, pedagogical and professional

knowledge and skills and to evaluate the education programs effectiveness in helping candidates

to meet the criteria established within the assessments.

Name of Assessment Type or

Form of Assessment

When Administered

Entrance

Requirements

Application to Program

GPA & Transcript Review

Interview, Writing Sample &

Portfolio Review

Level 1 - Admission to Program

(following ED 283 or ECH 243)

Praxis II: Content

Knowledge Exam

Standardized Measure of General

and Subject-Specific Teaching

Skills and Knowledge

Required Licensure Exam

Level 1 - Admission to Program

(New Candidates)

Level 2 - Prior to Student

Teaching (Current Candidates)

Lakota Perspectives

Authentic, Project-Based

Assessments

Self, Peer and Instructor Surveys

Level 2 – Selected Education

Courses

Instructional

Planning &

Assessment

Unit Plans with Lesson Plans and

Assessments

Instructional/Assessment Plans

and Presentations

Instructional Projects/Activities

Level 2 – Methods Courses


Courses


Courses

Education

Philosophy

Written Statement of Candidate

Beliefs Regarding Teaching and

Learning

Personal Approach to Education

Based on Preparation and

Experience

Level 2 – Philosophical Base

Developed Throughout

Education Coursework,

Completed During Student

Teaching Seminar

Professional

Portfolio

Portfolio of Candidate Work

Reflecting Content,

Pedagogical, and Professional

Knowledge and Skills in

Chosen Area/Level of Teaching

Level 2 - Developed Throughout

Education Coursework,

Completed During Student

Teaching Seminar

Acceptance into

Student Teaching

Application to Student Teaching

GPA & Transcript Review

Portfolio Review and Scoring

Level 2 – Prior to Student

Teaching

Praxis II: Principles

of Learning and

Teaching

Standardized Measure of

Pedagogical Knowledge

Required Licensure Exam

Level 2 - Prior to Student

Teaching

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15


Assessment of

Student Teaching

Cooperating Teacher Evaluation

Cooperating Principal Evaluation

College Supervisor Evaluation

Candidate Self-Assessment

Level 3 - Student Teaching

Assessment of

Candidate Effect on

Student Learning

Impact on Student Learning

Work Sample

Level 3 - Student Teaching

Follow-up Surveys Survey of Teacher Performance

Completed by Building

Principals

Level 4 – End of 1st and 5th Year

of Teaching

5. What Program outcomes and courses were scheduled to be assessed this year (Place your rotation here)?

AY 2015-2016 Program Outcomes:

P1-7.LO1: Candidates demonstrate Lakota cultural values in all learning contexts.

P1-7.LO2/2.2: Candidates demonstrate understanding of disciplines to enhance learning potential

of all children.

P1-7.LO3/3.2: Candidates engage a variety of strategies engage students in academic and co-

curricular experiences.

P1-7.LO4/4.2: Candidates utilize assessment, engage in reflective practice, act ethically and

advocate for students.

Courses Assessed:

Fall 2015: ECH 213, Math 233, ECH 243, EDECH 413 and ED 463

Spring 2016: ED 213, ECH 253, ED 313, ExEd 333, EDECH 403 and ScEd 443

6. Describe your tools instruments used to collect assessment data (taken from your

assessment plan. For example, some department use ICAF, PLO, SLO’s ICF, for all courses, rubrics, etc. this is dependent upon your department assessment system).

Course-Level Assessment Tools:

The following Common Course Assessments were utilized by individual instructors:

Education Department Faculty/Adjunct Course Assessment Report

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15


5-Point Analytic Rubrics for: Instructional Projects/Activities, Education Philosophy, Lakota Perspective

Research Papers, and the Instructional Unit Assessment (including the Lesson Plan and Assessment

Task/Tool)

5-Point Rating Scale for: Lakota Values Rating

Program-Level Assessment Tools:

The following program level assessment tools were utilized for department review:

3-Point Holistic Rubrics for: Instructional Projects/Activities, Education Philosophy, Lakota Perspective

Research Papers, and the Instructional Unit Assessment (including the Lesson Plan and Assessment

Task/Tool)

TRENDS IN STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOME ASSESSMENT FOR 2015-2016

ACADEMIC YEAR

The following table lists all the outcomes assessed each year and must match you rotation

schedule. This table can be adapted to reflect your program outcomes assessed for each year.

Year

Program 1 AA ECH

Program 2 BA ECH

Program 3 AA Elem

Program 4 BS K-8 ELEM

Program 5 BS K-12

LAK

Program 6 BS 7-12 PHY SCI

Program 7 K-12 EXED

2014-

2015

P1.LO1:

Lakota

cultural

values in

all

learning

contexts.

Fall 2014:

ED213

Sp2015:

ECH233,

ED303E

P2.LO1:

Lakota

cultural

values in all

learning

contexts

Fall 2014:

ED213

ECH403

EDECH463

EDLK489

Sp2015:

ECH233,

ED303E,

ED323,

EDECH453

P3.LO1:

Lakota

cultural

values in

all

learning

contexts

Fall2014

: ED213

Sp2015:

ED303E

P4.LO1:

Lakota

cultural

values in

all

learning

contexts.

Fall2014:

ED213

EDECH463

EDLK489

Sp2015:

ED303E,

ED323,

EDECH453

P5.LO1:

Lakota

cultural

values in

all

learning

contexts.

Fall2014:

ED213

EDLK489

Sp2015:

ED303E,

ED323

P6.LO1:

Lakota

cultural

values in

all

learning

contexts.

Fall2014:

ED213

EDLK489

Sp2015:

ED303E,

ED323

NA No

Cohort

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15


The tools used to assess these learning outcomes in the identified courses were: 5-point

Analytic Rubrics for: Lakota Perspective Research Paper, Lesson Planning/Presentation,

Instructional Projects, and Instructional Unit

Raw Data: Lakota Perspective Research Paper: Fall 2014 = 3.88; Spring 2015 = 4.4 Lesson Planning/Presentation: Fall 2014 only = 4.89 Instructional Project: Spring 2015 only = 4.08 Instructional Unit: Fall 2014 only = 3.21

P2.LO3:

Design and

implement

academic

and co-

curricular

experiences

Fall 2014:

EDECH413E

DECH433ED

ECH463

P4.LO3.2:

Units of

Instructio

n for K-8

students.

Fall 2014

EDECH413

EDECH433

EDECH463

ED443

Program Level Ratings are based on the 3-point holistic rubric utilized for faculty group

review of Instructional Unit artifacts: 3 = Met with Strength, 2 = Met, and 1 = Not Met.

Ten instructional units were selected as artifacts for review by five education

department and faculty members. The artifact selection for those students who

submitted more than one instruction unit was made by random selection. The overall,

average rating for the units reviewed was 2.2 (Met).

Year

Program 1 AA ECH

Program 2 BA ECH

Program 3 AA Elem

Program 4 BS K-8 ELEM

Program 5 BS K-12

LAK

Program 6 BS 7-12 PHY SCI

Program 7 K-12 EXED

2015-

2016

P1.LO1:

Lakota

cultural

values in

all

learning

contexts.

P2.LO1:

Lakota

cultural

values in all

learning

contexts

P3.LO1:

Lakota

cultural

values in

all

learning

contexts

SP 2016:

P4.LO1:

Lakota

cultural

values in

all

learning

contexts.

P5.LO1:

Lakota

cultural

values in

all

learning

contexts.

P6.LO1:

Lakota

cultural

values in

all

learning

contexts.

P7.LO1:

Lakota

cultural

values in

all

learning

contexts.

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15


Fall 2015:

ECH 213

ECH 243

SP 2016:

ED 213

ECH 253

Fall 2015:

ECH 213

ECH 243

ED 463

SP 2016:

EDECH 403

ED 213

Fall 2015:

ED 213

Math 233

EDECH

413

ED 463

SP 2016:

ED 213

ED 313

EDECH403

Fall 2015:

ED 463

SP 2016:

ED 213

ED 313

ScEd 443

Fall 2015:

ED 463

SP 2016:

ED 213

ED 313

ScEd 443

SP 2016:

ExEd 333

The tools used to assess these learning outcomes in the identified courses were:

5-Point Analytic Rubrics for: Education Philosophy, Lakota Perspective Research Paper,

Lesson Planning/ Presentation, Instructional Projects, and Instructional Unit – Criteria

specific to Education Department Goal 1 (Program Learning Outcome 1)

5-point Lakota Values Rating

Aggregated Data for Program Learning Outcome 1 (SLO 1.1, 1.2 and 1.3) for all Programs: SLO 1.1 = 3.98 Lakota Values Rating (SLO 1.2): AY 2015-2016 = 4.40 SLO 1.2 = 3.68 SLO 1.3 = 3.39 3-poing Holistic Rubric Scores Based on Faculty Review of Student Work Samples: Education Philosophy (6 artifacts): Met with Strength = 50%, Met = 33%, Not Met = 17% Lakota Perspective Research Paper (13 artifacts): Met w/ Strength = 70%, Met = 23%, Not Met = 7% Instructional Unit Plans (4 artifacts): Met with Strength = 50%, Met = 50%, Not Met = 0% Lesson Planning (4 artifacts): Met with Strength = 50%, Met = 50%, Not Met = 0% Instructional Project (12 artifacts): Met w/ Strength = 33%, Met = 50%, Not Met = 17%

P1.LO2:

Utilize

strategies

to

enhance

learning

potential

P2.LO2:

Utilize

strategies

to

enhance

learning

potential

P3.LO2:

Support

the

individual

needs of

children

and

P4.LO2:

Support

the

individual

needs of

children

and young

P5.LO2:

Construct

experienc

es to

support

individual

P6.LO2:

Construct

experienc

es that

convey

principles

of science

P7.LO2.1: Demonstrate

understanding

of diverse

human

issues and

special

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15


of all

children.

Fall 2015:

ECH 213

SP 2016:

ECH 253

of all

children.

Fall 2015:

ECH 213

SP 2016:

ECH 253

EDECH

403

young

adolescen

ts

Not

Assessed

2015-

2016

adolescen

ts

Fall 2015:

Math 233

SP 2016:

EDECH

403

needs of

students.

SP 2016:

ScEd 443

to

students.

SP 2016:

ScEd 443

education

services.

P7.L02.2:

Provide

individual

instructio

n for

students

with

special

learning

needs.

SP 2016:

EXED 333


5-Point Analytic Rubrics for: Lesson Planning/ Presentation, Instructional Projects,

Instructional Unit, and Assessment Tool – Criteria specific to Education Department

Goal 2 (PLO 2)

Aggregated Data for Program Learning Outcome 1 (SLO 2.1, 2.2 and 2.3) for all Programs: SLO 2.1 = 4.27 SLO 2.2 = 4.53 SLO 2.3 = 4.52 Goal 2 Average = 4.44 3-poing Holistic Rubric Scores Based on Faculty Review of Student Work Samples: Instructional Unit Plans (4 artifacts): Met with Strength = 50%, Met = 50%, Not Met = 0% Lesson Planning (4 artifacts): Met with Strength = 50%, Met = 50%, Not Met = 0% Performance Assessment Task/Tool (4 artifacts): Met w/ Strength = 25%, Met = 75%, Not Met = 0% Instructional Project (12 artifacts): Met w/ Strength = 33%, Met = 50%, Not Met = 17%

P1.LO3:

Recognize

importanc

P2.LO3:

Design

and

P3.LO3:

Design

and

P4.LO3.1:

Design

and

P5.LO3:

Design

and

P6.LO3:

Engage a

variety of

P7.LO3:

Utilized

evidence

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15


e of co-

curricular

activities

to

enhance

learning

potential.

Fall 2015:

ECH 213

ECH 243

SP 2016:

ECH 253

implement

academic

and co-

curricular

experienc

es.

Fall 2015:

ECH 213

ECH 243

SP 2016:

ECH 253

implemen

t

academic

and co-

curricular

experiences.

Not

Assessed

2015-

2016

implemen

t

academic

and co-

curricular

experienc

es

P4.LO3.2:

Units of

Instructio

n for K-8

students.

SP 2016:

EDECH

403

implemen

t Lakota

Studies

units in

academic

and co-

curricular

activities.

SP 2016:

ScEd 443

strategies

to develop

scientific

units of

instructio

n.

SP 2016:

ScEd 443

based instructional

strategies

to engage

students.

SP 2016:

ExEd 333


5-Point Analytic Rubrics for: Lesson Planning/ Presentation, Instructional Projects,

Instructional Unit, Assessment Tool, and Philosophy of Education – Criteria specific to

Education Department Goal 3 (PLO 3)

Aggregated Data for Program Learning Outcome 1 (SLO 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4, 3.5, 3.6) for all Programs: SLO 3.1 = 2.50 SLO 3.4 = 4.50 SLO 3.2 = 3.78 SLO 3.5 = 4.42 SLO 3.3 = 4.61 SLO 3.6 = 4.27 Goal 3 Average = 4.01 3-poing Holistic Rubric Scores Based on Faculty Review of Student Work Samples: Education Philosophy (6 artifacts): Met with Strength = 50%, Met = 33%, Not Met = 17% Instructional Unit Plans (4 artifacts): Met with Strength = 50%, Met = 50%, Not Met = 0% Lesson Planning (4 artifacts): Met with Strength = 50%, Met = 50%, Not Met = 0% Performance Assessment Task/Tool (4 artifacts): Met w/ Strength = 25%, Met = 75%, Not Met = 0% Instructional Project (12 artifacts): Met w/ Strength = 33%, Met = 50%, Not Met = 17%

P1.LO4:

Engage in

P2.LO4.1:

Understan

P3.LO4:

Engage in

P4.LO4.1:

Utilize

P5.LO4.1:

Utilize

P6.LO4.1:

Develop

P7.LO4.1:

Develop

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15


reflective

activities

of

developm

entally

appropriat

e practice.

Fall 2015:

ECH 243

SP 2016:

ED 213

d effective

assessmen

t

strategies.

P2:LO4.2:

Engage in

reflective

practice

following

ethical

guidelines

to

advocate

for

children

and

families.

Fall 2015:

ECH 243

ED 463

SP 2016:

ED 213

EDECH

403

reflective

practice

of best

practice in

teaching

and

learning.

SP 2016:

ED 213

formal

and

informal

assessme

nt

strategies.

P4.LO4.2:

Engage in

continual

reflective

practices.

Fall 2015:

ED 463

SP 2016:

ED 213

ED 313

EDECH

403

culturally

relevant,

authentic

assessme

nt.

P5:LO4.2:

Engage in

continual

reflective

practices.

Fall 2015:

ED 463

effective

assessme

nt

strategies.

P6LO4.2:

Engage in

continual

reflective

practices.

Fall 2015:

ED 463

long range

plans and

short

range

goals/obj

based on

assessme

nt.

P7.LO4.2: Demonstrate

ethical

practice

and

advocate

for

learners.

Not

Assessed

2015-

2016


5-Point Analytic Rubrics for: Lesson Planning/ Presentation, Instructional Unit,

Assessment Tool, Lakota Perspective Research Paper and Philosophy of Education –

Criteria specific to Education Department Goal 4 (PLO 4)

Aggregated Data for Program Learning Outcome 1 (SLO 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, 4.4, 4.5, 4.6) for all Programs: SLO 4.1 = 4.10 SLO 4.4 = 3.16 SLO 4.2 = 4.21 SLO 4.5 = 4.17 SLO 4.3 = 3.81 SLO 4.6 = 3.75 Goal 4 Average = 3.87

3-poing Holistic Rubric Scores Based on Faculty Review of Student Work Samples:

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15


Education Philosophy (6 artifacts): Met with Strength = 50%, Met = 33%, Not Met = 17% Lakota Perspective Research Paper (13 artifacts): Met w/ Strength = 70%, Met = 23%, Not Met = 7% Instructional Unit Plans (4 artifacts): Met with Strength = 50%, Met = 50%, Not Met = 0% Lesson Planning (4 artifacts): Met with Strength = 50%, Met = 50%, Not Met = 0% Performance Assessment Task/Tool (4 artifacts): Met w/ Strength = 25%, Met = 75%, Not Met = 0%

2016-

2017


PLO 1: Lakota Cultural Values in Learning Contexts

Students are demonstrating “acceptable” performance towards student learning outcomes (as

part of analytic rubrics for major assignments) in this area and “commendable” performance in

practicing Lakota Values (Lakota Values Rating) in their interactions with others.

Students continue to score well on Lakota Perspective when completing an assignment that has

only one main component (i.e. Lakota Perspective Research Paper, Lesson Planning, and

Instructional Project). With increased guidance they are also demonstrating strong

performance in this area when developing instructional unit plans.

How these results are being used: Analytic rubrics continue to be used to reinforce

incorporation of Lakota Perspectives in learning contexts. Education faculty continue to find

ways to provide guidance and modeling to support incorporation of Lakota Perspectives across

the curriculum.

PLO 2: Understanding of disciplines to enhance learning potential of all children.

Commendable performance is noted for all SLOs that contribute to program learning outcomes

focusing on the utilization of a solid academic base and understanding of developmental

concepts and learning theories to construct meaningful learning experiences to support the

individualities of all children.

How these results are being used: Analytic rubrics continue to be used to reinforce teaching

and learning experiences that are student centered and developmentally appropriate, framed

around big ideas (relevant beyond the classroom) that encourage application of knowledge in

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15


meaningful ways, and that demonstrate the candidates ability to utilize multiple strategies

based on solid subject matter knowledge.

PLO 3: Engage a variety of strategies engage students. (Academic and Co-Curricular

Experiences)

Candidates consistently demonstrate the ability to plan academic and co-curricular learning

experiences. An area they struggle with is in communicating theoretical foundations upon

which these experiences are based.

How these results are being used: Analytic rubrics continue to reinforce the development of

learning centers and take-home projects to augment instructional lessons and unit plans. More

attention may need to be given to making connections between historical foundations and

contemporary learning theory to learner development and best practice in teaching and

learning.

PLO 4: Utilize assessment, engage in reflective practice, act ethically and advocate for students.

Candidate performance in this area is acceptable to commendable. Candidates perform higher

on the philosophy of education assignment during their senior year than during the sophomore

year. However, use of the common course assessment at this level provides teacher candidates

with an understanding of the concepts they will be developing through their professional core

and professional coursework. Guidance is continues to be needed in the using professional

literature (research-based best practice) and referencing of sources in reflective practice to

promote professional growth.

How these results are being used: Analytic rubrics reinforce effective assessment strategies and

reflective practice to guide and modify instruction based on student learning strengths and

needs.


1. Continue to monitor student performance and encourage incorporation of Lakota

Perspectives (Lakota language, culture and history) into educational philosophies and learning

experiences (units, lessons and co-curricular activities).

2. Continue to provide modeling and guidance in the use of professional literature (research-

based best practices), assessment strategies and reflective practice to design learning

experiences that are relevant and meaningful for children of all ages.

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15


3. Continue to emphasize writing across the curriculum utilizing APA format with an emphasis

on citing references (including how to reference personal communication and interviews to

document Lakota cultural knowledge gained through oral history).

4. Continue to monitor changes and trends in accreditation and reporting process of SD DOE

and make adjustments as necessary to measure program performance.

MULTIPLE ASSESSMENT MEASURES OR EXITING DEGREE REQUIREMENTS Provide a list of multiple assessment measures used within your department Please indicate

if they are direct and indirect, when administered (As applicable to the department and degree area).

Academic (Intec) Portfolio: Direct Measure, Initiated in ED283/ ECH203 and completed

in EDLK473/EDLK489/ECH496.

Completion of all required course work: Indirect measure, Coursework is checked upon

entrance into the program and during departmental advising. Verified by registrar’s office

when a candidate submits application for graduation.

Grade of “C” or better in student teaching: Indirect Measure, Assigned at the end of the

student teaching experience during the candidate’s last year of school.

Satisfactory completion of both the Praxis II Content and Pedagogy exams: Direct

Measure. A passing score on the content exam is required for entrance into the teacher

preparation program, or for students already admitted into the program, prior to student

teaching. A passing score on the pedagogy exam is required for acceptance into student

teaching, or prior to graduation.

Completion of an Exit Interview: Direct Measure, completed at the end of the student

teaching experience (EDLK489/ECH496).

Meet or exceed the South Dakota State Requirements for GPA: Indirect Measure,

students must have a 2.8 GPA or higher to be accepted into the teacher preparation

program and to student teach. Candidate GPA is checked and discussed during

departmental advising sessions. In order to graduate and be eligible for State certification,

candidate’s must have a 2.6 GPA or higher.

Note: If required for the student’s degree program: Students must pass the required Praxis

II Content and Pedagogy (OLT) area exams to be eligible for graduation. Students

pursuing the Birth to Preschool Early Childhood Degree may “opt out” of taking Praxis II

exams.

If a student is pursuing state certification, it is the responsibility of the student to initiate

and complete application for certification with the State of South Dakota.

Please provide a brief description of the assessment and its use in the program (As applicable to the department and degree area).

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15


The following table lists all the multiple measures used within the academic departments.

This table can be adapted to reflect your program direct or indirect assessments. The table

can also be used to reflect your exit requirements of the degree.

Year Intec Portfolio

Required Course Work

Student Teaching

“C” or better

Praxis II Content

Knowledge

Praxis II PLT Test

Exit Interview

SD DOE GPA 2.6

or higher

2014-2015

(N=5)

3.86 YES = 5 A = 4

B = 1

YES = 5 YES = 5 YES = 5 3.488

2015-2016

(N=5)

3.79 YES = 5 A = 3

B = 1

C = 1

YES = 1

NA* = 4

YES = 1

NA* = 4

YES = 5 3.294

2016-2018

*NA = Not Applicable: Early Childhood majors pursuing the Birth to Preschool (Head Start)

status sheet may opt out of taking the Praxis II exams.


The five bachelor level program completers include one (1) K-8 Elementary w/ Middle Level

graduate and four (4) Early Childhood Birth to Preschool (Head Start) graduates. The elementary

education graduate is eligible for SD DOE teacher licensure. While the Early Childhood Birth to

Preschool Program is also approved by the South Dakota Department of Education for teacher

licensure, neither national nor state regulations require early childhood teachers to be certified.

All four graduates in this program opted out of taking the Praxis exams; and, as a result, not

eligible for State licensure. They are however, based on having completed a bachelor’s degree in

early childhood education, considered highly qualified in accordance with the center-based

teaching staff requirements outlined in the Head start Act for School Readiness Act of 2007.

Education graduates continue to meet or exceed minimum GPA requirements for graduation and

state licensure. Proposed changes in SD DOE requirements will include a minimum GPA of 3.0

to enter into student teaching beginning in the fall of 2019. State licensure will then require that

candidates earn a “B” or better in student teaching. All teacher preparation candidates will need

to work to meet these requirements. This includes the Birth-Preschool candidates who may

choose to take the Praxis II licensure exams at a later date (following graduation) to seek State

certification.


1. Continue to provide co-curricular activities to support candidates in developing InTASC

portfolios through portfolio development sessions.

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15


2. Continue to advise candidates in relation to minimum GPA requirements and provide

specific guidance for meeting the forthcoming 3.0 GPA state requirement for entrance

into student teaching and completing all education coursework, including student

teaching, with a “B” or better.

3. Continue to provide co-curricular activities in the form of Praxis preparation materials

and sessions to assist candidates in preparing for and achieving the required qualifying

scores for State licensure.

ASSESSMENT RESULTS

Feedback to the Program: Please explain what was learned from these assessments. (Descriptive information about

results)

The assessments demonstrate the need for continued student assistance in the form of orientation,

advising, support sessions, instruction and modeling of expectations. The Education Department

must ensure candidates are not only informed of program requirements, but also must work to

support them in meeting high expectations.

What do these results mean to the program? (Department faculty interpretation of results) Communication and consistency are imperative. Faculty, both full-time and adjunct, must be fully oriented to the requirements of the Education Department and communicate these requirements to students during advising and in classes. Furthermore, students, and other key constituents, must be aware of program requirements that are in place, and that may change, to meet accreditation and licensure requirements. Required common course assessments in combination with key assessments required by outside accreditation agencies help to ensure that students are mastering learning outcomes at the course and program levels and entering the workplace with the necessary skills to be effective teachers. Describe how will these assessment results and interpretations be used for program improvement? (Department faculty interpretation of results)

A continuous improvement cycle will be utilized to enhance curriculum and instruction and

improve student learning. Assessment information will be used to make decisions regarding

program effectiveness and any changes that may be necessary. In addition, assessment

information will be utilized to set future goals and direction for the department. Program

decisions and/or changes based on assessment data will be reported along with the assessment

findings.

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15


Explain the recommended changes that will be made to your assessment plan based on your analysis of data? A conceptual framework for the Education Department was developed during the 2005-2006

academic year. The framework outlined the vision, mission and purposes of the teacher

preparation program, identified four overall goals for the program (supported by research-based

best practice) and created the initial program structure and assessment system for South Dakota’s

partnership with NCATE (the National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Educators) for State

accreditation of teacher preparation programs.

The OLC Education Department developed student learning outcomes (SLOs) during the fall

2012 semester and aligned these outcomes to State SD DOE and National teacher preparation

standards in January of 2013. All coursework in the Education Department is aligned to the

following teacher preparation standards: SD Department of Education Administrative Rule

24:53:04:06 (SD DOE), the Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium

(INTASC) Model Standards for Beginning Teacher Licensing and Development, the Association

for Childhood Education International (ACEI) Standards for Elementary Education, the National

Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC) Standards, the National Science

Teachers Association (NSTA) Standards and the Council for Exceptional Children (CEC)

Standards.

Assessment plans were developed for Associate of Arts and Bachelor’s degrees in the Education

Department during the spring semester of 2013. Program learning outcomes (PLOs) were

developed during the 2013-2014 academic year to further clarify the outcomes of each associate

and bachelor degree program within the department.

Common course level assessments, aligned to student learning outcomes as well as State and

National standards, were developed for all education courses during the fall 2012, spring 2013

and fall 2014 semesters. These assessments serve as formative measures that provide specific

feedback to students regarding their performance. In addition, when utilized in conjunction with

Individual Course Assessment Reports completed by instructors, they provide feedback focused

on the teaching and learning process directed toward improving teaching, student learning and

curriculum.

The Individual Course Assessment Reports lead faculty members and adjunct instructors through

a process of interpreting direct measures (common course assessments in the form of analytic

rubrics) and indirect measures (student course evaluations) to making connections to the manner

in which a course contributes to program of study outcomes, the vision and mission of the

Education Department, OLC purposes, and/or in meeting the needs of area PreK-12 schools.

Most importantly the Individual Course Assessments allow instructors to “close the loop” in

making changes based on assessment results.

In March of 2014 the SD Department of Education entered into a partnership with the Council

for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP) for program review and accreditation.

Two members of the OLC Education Department attended a training session, in the fall of 2015,

to become program reviewers for the SD DOE under this new program accreditation system. At

http://legis.state.sd.us/rules/DisplayRule.aspx?Rule=24:53:04:06

http://www.ccsso.org/resources/programs/interstate_teacher_assessment_consortium_%28intasc%29.html

http://www.acei.org/programs-events/ncate.html

http://www.naeyc.org/positionstatements/ppp

http://www.nsta.org/pd/ncate/.../2012NSTAPreserviceScienceStandards.pdf

http://www.cec.sped.org/Standards/Standards-for-Professional-Preparation?sc_lang=en

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15


the present time the Education Department is preparing to revise and refine our programs to meet

CAEP Standards.

OLC’s teacher preparation programs were approved for 5-year continued accreditation by the SD

Board of Education on November 2014 based on recommendation of the SD DOE on-site

program review using the NCATE standards. In July of 2013 NCATE merged with the Teacher

Education Accreditation Council to form the Council for Accreditation of Educator Preparation

(CAEP) with the purpose of advancing excellence in educator preparation through evidence-

based accreditation that assures quality and supports continuous improvement to strengthen P–12

student learning. The SD DOE entered into a partnership with CAEP for program review and

accreditation in March of 2014. In the fall of 2015 SD DOE offered the first CAEP training

sessions; two members of the OLC Education Department attended the training to become

reviewers for SD DOE using this new accreditation system. The 2016-2017 academic year will

be the first year teacher preparation programs in South Dakota will be reviewed using the CAEP

standards. OLC’s teacher preparation programs will undergo accreditation review based on the

new CAEP standards in the fall of 2019.

For the next two years the Education Department will not only work to make the program

improvements identified within this Annual End of Year Report and identified in our

Institutional Effectiveness Plan for the upcoming year, but will also be revising and refining our

programs to meet CAEP Standards for continued SD DOE accreditation.

2013 Standards

Standard 1. Content and Pedagogical Knowledge

The provider ensures that candidates develop a deep understanding of the critical concepts and

principles of their discipline and, by completion, are able to use discipline-specific practices

flexibly to advance the learning of all students toward attainment of college- and career-

readiness standards.

Candidate Knowledge, Skills, and Professional Dispositions

1.1 Candidates demonstrate an understanding of the 10 InTASC standards at the appropriate

progression level(s) in the following categories: the learner and learning; content; instructional

practice; and professional responsibility.

Provider Responsibilities:

1.2 Providers ensure that candidates use research and evidence to develop an understanding of

the teaching profession and use both to measure their P-12 students’ progress and their own

professional practice.

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15


1.3 Providers ensure that candidates apply content and pedagogical knowledge as reflected in

outcome assessments in response to standards of Specialized Professional Associations (SPA),

the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards (NBPTS), states, or other accrediting

bodies (e.g., National Association of Schools of Music – NASM).

1.4 Providers ensure that candidates demonstrate skills and commitment that afford all P-12

students access to rigorous college- and career-ready standards (e.g., Next Generation Science

Standards, National Career Readiness Certificate, Common Core State Standards).

1.5 Providers ensure that candidates model and apply technology standards as they design,

implement and assess learning experiences to engage students and improve learning; and enrich

professional practice.

Standard 2. Clinical Partnerships and Practice

The provider ensures that effective partnerships and high-quality clinical practice are central to

preparation so that candidates develop the knowledge, skills, and professional dispositions

necessary to demonstrate positive impact on all P-12 students’ learning and development.

Partnerships for Clinical Preparation:

2.1 Partners co-construct mutually beneficial P-12 school and community arrangements,

including technology-based collaborations, for clinical preparation and share responsibility for

continuous improvement of candidate preparation. Partnerships for clinical preparation can

follow a range of forms, participants, and functions. They establish mutually agreeable

expectations for candidate entry, preparation, and exit; ensure that theory and practice are linked;

maintain coherence across clinical and academic components of preparation; and share

accountability for candidate outcomes.

Clinical Educators:

2.2 Partners co-select, prepare, evaluate, support, and retain high-quality clinical educators, both

provider- and school-based, who demonstrate a positive impact on candidates’ development and

P-12 student learning and development. In collaboration with their partners, providers use

multiple indicators and appropriate technology-based applications to establish, maintain, and

refine criteria for selection, professional development, performance evaluation, continuous

improvement, and retention of clinical educators in all clinical placement settings.

Clinical Experiences:

2.3 The provider works with partners to design clinical experiences of sufficient depth, breadth,

diversity, coherence, and duration to ensure that candidates demonstrate their developing

effectiveness and positive impact on all students’ learning and development. Clinical

experiences, including technology-enhanced learning opportunities, are structured to have

multiple performance-based assessments at key points within the program to demonstrate

candidates’ development of the knowledge, skills, and professional dispositions, as delineated in

Standard 1, that are associated with a positive impact on the learning and development of all P-

12 students.

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15


Standard 3. Candidate Quality, Recruitment, and Selectivity

The provider demonstrates that the quality of candidates is a continuing and purposeful part of its

responsibility from recruitment, at admission, through the progression of courses and clinical

experiences, and to decisions that completers are prepared to teach effectively and are

recommended for certification. The provider demonstrates that development of candidate quality

is the goal of educator preparation in all phases of the program. This process is ultimately

determined by a program’s meeting of Standard 4.

Plan for Recruitment of Diverse Candidates who Meet Employment Needs:

3.1 The provider presents plans and goals to recruit and support completion of high-quality

candidates from a broad range of backgrounds and diverse populations to accomplish their

mission. The admitted pool of candidates reflects the diversity of America’s P-12 students. The

provider demonstrates efforts to know and address community, state, national, regional, or local

needs for hard-to-staff schools and shortage fields, currently, STEM, English-language learning,

and students with disabilities.

Admission Standards Indicate That Candidates Have High Academic Achievement and Ability:

3.2 The provider sets admissions requirements, including CAEP minimum criteria or the state’s

minimum criteria, whichever are higher, and gathers data to monitor applicants and the selected

pool of candidates. The provider ensures that the average grade point average of its accepted

cohort of candidates meets or exceeds the CAEP minimum of 3.0, and the group average

performance on nationally normed ability/achievement assessments such as ACT, SAT, or GRE:

• is in the top 50 percent from 2016-2017;

• is in the top 40 percent of the distribution from 2018-2019; and

• Is in the top 33 percent of the distribution by 2020.

If any state can meet the CAEP standards, as specified above, by demonstrating a

correspondence in scores between the state-normed assessments and nationally normed

ability/achievement assessments, then educator preparation providers from that state will be able

to utilize their state assessments until 2020. CAEP will work with states through this transition.

Over time, a program may develop a reliable, valid model that uses admissions criteria other than

those stated in this standard. In this case, the admitted cohort group mean on these criteria must

meet or exceed the standard that has been shown to positively correlate with measures of P-12

student learning and development. The provider demonstrates that the standard for high

academic achievement and ability is met through multiple evaluations and sources of evidence.

The provider reports the mean and standard deviation for the group.

Additional Selectivity Factors:

3.3 Educator preparation providers establish and monitor attributes and dispositions beyond

academic ability that candidates must demonstrate at admissions and during the program. The

provider selects criteria, describes the measures used and evidence of the reliability and validity

of those measures, and reports data that show how the academic and non-academic factors

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15


predict candidate performance in the program and effective teaching.

Selectivity during Preparation:

3.4 The provider creates criteria for program progression and monitors candidates’ advancement

from admissions through completion. All candidates demonstrate the ability to teach to college-

and career-ready standards. Providers present multiple forms of evidence to indicate candidates’

developing content knowledge, pedagogical content knowledge, pedagogical skills, and the

integration of technology in all of these domains.

Selection at Completion:

3.5 before the provider recommends any completing candidate for licensure or certification, it

documents that the candidate has reached a high standard for content knowledge in the fields

where certification is sought and can teach effectively with positive impacts on P-12 student

learning and development.

3.6 Before the provider recommends any completing candidate for licensure or certification, it

documents that the candidate understands the expectations of the profession, including codes of

ethics, professional standards of practice, and relevant laws and policies. CAEP monitors the

development of measures that assess candidates’ success and revises standards in light of new

results.

Standard 4. Program Impact

The provider demonstrates the impact of its completers on P-12 student learning and

development, classroom instruction, and schools, and the satisfaction of its completers with the

relevance and effectiveness of their preparation.

Impact on P-12 Student Learning and Development:

4.1 The provider documents, using multiple measures that program completers contribute to an

expected level of student-learning growth. Multiple measures shall include all available growth

measures (including value-added measures, student-growth percentiles, and student learning and

development objectives) required by the state for its teachers and available to educator

preparation providers, other state-supported P-12 impact measures, and any other measures

employed by the provider.

Indicators of Teaching Effectiveness:

4.2 The provider demonstrates, through structured validated observation instruments and/or

student surveys, that completers effectively apply the professional knowledge, skills, and

dispositions that the preparation experiences were designed to achieve.

Satisfaction of Employers:

4.3. The provider demonstrates, using measures that result in valid and reliable data and

including employment milestones such as promotion and retention, that employers are satisfied

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15


with the completers’ preparation for their assigned responsibilities in working with P-12

students.

Satisfaction of Completers:

4.4 The provider demonstrates, using measures that result in valid and reliable data, that program

completers perceive their preparation as relevant to the responsibilities they confront on the job,

and that the preparation was effective.

Standard 5. Provider Quality Assurance and Continuous Improvement

The provider maintains a quality assurance system comprised of valid data from multiple

measures, including evidence of candidates’ and completers’ positive impact on P-12 student

learning and development. The provider supports continuous improvement that is sustained and

evidence-based, and that evaluates the effectiveness of its completers. The provider uses the

results of inquiry and data collection to establish priorities, enhance program elements and

capacity, and test innovations to improve completers’ impact on P-12 student learning and

development.

Quality and Strategic Evaluation:

5.1 The provider’s quality assurance system is comprised of multiple measures that can monitor

candidate progress, completer achievements, and provider operational effectiveness. Evidence

demonstrates that the provider satisfies all CAEP standards.

5.2 The provider’s quality assurance system relies on relevant, verifiable, representative, cumulative and

actionable measures, and produces empirical evidence that interpretations of data are valid and consistent.

Continuous Improvement:

5.3. The provider regularly and systematically assesses performance against its goals and relevant

standards, tracks results over time, tests innovations and the effects of selection criteria on subsequent

progress and completion, and uses results to improve program elements and processes.

5.4. Measures of completer impact, including available outcome data on P-12 student growth, are

summarized, externally benchmarked, analyzed, shared widely, and acted upon in decision-making

related to programs, resource allocation, and future direction.

5.5. The provider assures that appropriate stakeholders, including alumni, employers, practitioners, school

and community partners, and others defined by the provider, are involved in program evaluation,

improvement, and identification of models of excellence.

Faculty Engagement How were individual faculty members engaged in assessing and analyzing student learning outcomes? Individual faculty members engaged in assessing and analyzing student learning outcomes by

collecting artifacts from courses which are evaluated on a rotating basis each semester. Artifacts

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15


for these were then reviewed by faculty members and scored. The data was then analyzed with

input from the faculty members and the data will be used for course and instructional

improvement.

How were individual faculty members engaged in planning for program improvement? (Provide faculty department meeting dates, attendance, etc., membership and participation in governance committees, this can be in the form of a table. You can link to your department minutes). Department Meetings were held as follows:

August 10 & August 28

September 17

October 23

November 20

December 10

January 4 & January 29

February 19

March 11

April 1, April 15 & April 29

May 12

Faculty participated in the following committees for the AY 2015-2016:

Shannon Amiotte - Instructional Affairs-chair

Faculty Peer Review – chair

Strategic Planning Committee

Tom Raymond - Instructional Affairs

Institutional Review Board

Strategic Planning Committee

Dorraine Benson - Assessment Committee

General Education Committee

Tammy Bauck - Instructional Affairs

How were individual faculty members engaged in addressing program improvement in

relation to budget and planning? Grants, reduced text book costs, online resources, etc.). Individual faculty members and adjunct instructors engaged in individual course assessment and analyzing student learning outcomes through collecting artifacts and engaging in reflective practice in courses which are evaluated on a rotating basis each semester. These artifacts are then submitted to the Education Department for faculty review. This data is analyzed and used for course and instructional improvement. The Dean of Education and Education Secretary work with the Vice President for Business and Grants Compliance Officer to submit financial budgets, reports and carry-over requests to the

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15


SD DOE Office of Indian Education Programs. The Dean of Education, one faculty member and the Education Secretary are currently working with the college’s grant writer to submit an Indian Professional Development grant proposal for 2016 – 2020. The Education Department orders paperback versions of course texts, when available, to reduce costs to students. This academic year many of the texts have become available in loose-leaf versions, again, at a cost savings for students.

FACULTY

Faculty/staff changes: (new appointments with short bios, retirement etc.)

Dr. Shannon Amiotte – New appointment/Dean of Education

Thomas Raymond – New appointment/Full-time faculty

Tammy Bauck – New appointment/Full-time faculty

Faculty professional development activities

Title Description of Activity # of Activities

Dr. Shannon Amiotte IPD Project Directors Meeting SDACTE Fall & Spring Meetings (2) SD DOE CAEP Training AACTE Building Quality Assessments & Using Data for

Improvement Online Professional Seminars (2) Title II Institution and Program Report Card Overview

and Training & FAQs and Completing/Certifying the Institution and Program Report Card Webinars (2)

OLC Instructional Division Meetings & Training Sessions (2)

10

Thomas Raymond OLC Instructional Division Meetings & Training Sessions (2)

2

Dorraine Benson SDACTE Fall Meeting SD DOE CAEP Training AACTE Building Quality Assessments & Using Data for

Improvement Online Professional Seminars (2)

4

Dr. Tamara Bauck SDACTE Spring Meeting AACTE Building Quality Assessments & Using Data for

Improvement Online Professional Seminars (2)

3

Linda Olsen AACTE Building Quality Assessments & Using Data for Improvement Online Professional Seminars (2)

Virtual Campus Facilitator Orientation

3

Provide evidence that all faculty (full-time and adjunct) qualified in the discipline they teach.

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15


Fulltime Faculty & Staff

Dr. Shannon Amiotte

Ed.D. Educational Administration

o PK-12 Principal

o Career School Superintendent

o Birth-21 Special Education Director

MS in Curriculum & Instruction

o Curriculum Director

o K-12 Reading Specialist

BS in Elementary Education & Special Education

o K-8 Elementary Education

o K-12 Special Education

o 5-8 Middle Level Education: Language Arts & Social Studies

National Board Certification: early Childhood through Young Adult Exceptional Needs

Tammy Bauck

Ed.D. Instructional Technology & Distance Education

MS in Curriculum and Supervision

o K-12 Educational Technology

MS in Educational Leadership and Administration

o Preschool – 8 Elementary Principal

BS in Elementary Education


o 5-8 Middle Level Education: Language Arts

Dorraine Benson

MS in Curriculum & Instruction

BS in Multi-subject K-8 Education

Linda Olsen

MS in elementary School Administration


BS in elementary & Special Education



o K-12 Gifted Education

o Birth – PK Special Education Endorsement

Tom Raymond

MS in Elementary Education





OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15


Adjunct Instructors

Terry Albers

MS in Education

o K-12 Education

o 7-12 Secondary Principal

BS in Physical Education

o K-12 Health & Physical Education

o 7-12 Social Science Education: History & Psychology

Merle Brave – OLC Full-Time Faculty

MS in Secondary Education with Middle Level

o 5-8 Middle Level Education: Natural Science & Language Arts

BS in Science Composite

o 7-12 Biology, Earth Science & Physical Science

Rhoda Butler

MS in Education

o Special Education

BS in Education


Josephine Brewer

MS in Education Administration


o Superintendent Endorsement

BA in Elementary Education



o 5-8 Middle Level: Social Studies, Language Arts & Mathematics

Brent Charger

BS in Elementary and Special Education

o K-8 Elementary Education w/ 5-8 Middle Level


Robin Cline

MA in Special Education

BS in Elementary & Special Education



o 5-8 Middle Level Education: Social Studies & Language Arts

Deb Cross

MS in Curriculum and Instruction


OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15



BS in Elementary Education & Spanish


o K-12 Spanish

Mary Jo Fairchild

MS in Educational Administration


BS in Secondary Education w/ Middle Level Social Studies

o 7-12 Social Science: History, Political Science, Geography & Sociology

o 5-8 Middle Level Education: Social Science & Natural Science

Jennifer Gilbert

MS in Education

BS in Early Childhood, Elementary and Special Education



o Birth-Preschool Education

o Kindergarten


Peg Henson

BS in Home Economics Education

o 7-12 Secondary Education

o 7-12 Family & Consumer Science



Melissa Iron Cloud

BS in Elementary & Special Education

o K-8 Elementary


o 5-8 Middle Level: Language Arts, Social Studies & Natural Science

Carol Johnson Vaughn




o 5-8 Middle Level: Language Arts & Social Studies

BS in Social Studies, Composite in American Indian Studies and History

o 7-12 Language Arts Literature/Composite/Grammar & Geography

Bryan LaPorte

BA in Education


o 5-8 Middle Level Education: Natural Science & Language Arts

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15


Loris Lindskov – OLC Full-Time Faculty

MS in Educational Administration

o 7-12 Principal


BS in Secondary Education w/ Middle Level

o 7-12 Science Education: Chemistry, Physics & Physical Science

o 7-12 Social Science Education: History, Political Science & Psychology

o 7-12 Mathematics Education

o 5-8 Middle Level: Language Arts, Social Studies & Mathematics

Devona Lone Wolf – OLC Full-Time Faculty

Masters of Education

o Mental Health Counseling

o Chemical Dependency Counseling

BS in Human Services

Valentina Makes Him First

BA in Early Childhood Education

Michelle McIntosh

MS in Education





o 5-8 Middle Level: Language Arts, Social Studies and Mathematics

Linda One Feather

MA in Lakota Leadership: Education Administration

o PK -12 Principal


MS in Criminal Justice Administration

BA in Political Science and Criminal Justice

o 7-12 Secondary Education: Political Science

o 7-12 Social Science Education: History, Sociology & Psychology

Terry Porter

BA in Education


o 5-8 Middle Level: Mathematics, Language Arts & Social Studies

Nancy Pruitt

ME in Educational Administration

o PK-12 Principal

BS in Business Administration w/ Elementary Education Certification

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15



o K-12 Special Education Endorsement

o 5-8 Middle Level Education: Mathematics

Melvin Reiser

MA in Special Education


BA in Elementary Education



Joni Sasse




o 5-8 Middle Level: Language Arts, Mathematics & Social Studies

Dianne Schrader

BS in Early Childhood, Elementary and Special Education




Jennifer Sierra

MA in Elementary School Administration


o 7-12 Secondary Principal Endorsement




o 5-8 Middle Level: Mathematics, Social Studies & Language Arts


Iris Wilson

MA in Lakota Leadership: Education Administration






Gail Winter



BS in Education



OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15


William Young – OLC Full-Time Faculty

PhD in Curriculum and Instruction


ME in Educational Administration


BS in English

o 7-12 Secondary Education w/ 5-8 Middle Level

o 7-12 Language Arts: Literature

o 7-12 Social Science Education: History, Political Science, Geography, Sociology

& Psychology


o K-12 Spanish

Provide evidence of professional development needs for full-time and adjunct faculty (link this

to student learning outcome assessment data).

Professional development needs for Education Department faculty are based on changes in SD DOE program accreditation and teacher licensure as well as needs identified through student course surveys. South Dakota Department of Education (SD DOE) program accreditation has changed from NCATE (the National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education) standards to

CAEP (the Council for Accreditation of Educator Preparation) standards. In addition, teacher

licensure exams will be changing within the next two years; significant changes will be forth

coming in pedagogy exam as it changes from a multiple choice and constructed response exam

to a field-based performance assessment. Education Department faculty and staff will continue

participate in SD DOE, SDACTE (the South Dakota Association of Colleges of Teacher

Education), AACTE (the American Association of Colleges of Teacher Education) and ETS

(Educational Testing Services) Praxis meetings and training sessions to plan for and meet these

new accreditation and licensure standards. Analysis of student course surveys revealed that full-

time faculty are not achieving an overall score of 3.5 or better on the Lakota contexts items

included in the course evaluations (Ed Dept. Strategic Goal 2.2). Education faculty will engage

in professional development through individual WEF plans, departmental and/or faculty

development activities, and/or collaboration with Lakota elders and experts to incorporate Lakota

contexts into courses.

The following table provides evidence that full-time and adjunct faculty members have been

evaluated.

Year

Full time Adjunct # Observed # Student Course

Evaluation

# of Overall Performance Evaluations

2014-2015 5 12 3 216 2

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15


2015-2016 8 23 3 223 3

2016-2017 NA NA NA NA NA

2017-2018 NA NA NA NA NA

Please complete the following table to demonstrate how and to what extent is your

department engaged in academic advising?

Fall 2015

Registration Week

Advising

Fall 2015

Mid Semester

Advising Week

Fall 2015

Academic Advising

Totals

New

student

Existing

Student

New

student

Existing

Student

New

student

Existing

Student

All Faculty 1 38 1 23 2 61

Spring 2016

Registration Week

Advising

Spring 2016

Mid Semester

Advising Week

Spring 2016

Academic Advising

Totals

New

student

Existing

Student

New

student

Existing

Student

New

student

Existing

Student

All Faculty 3 29 0 33 3 62

Please complete the following table to demonstrate how and to what extent your department

is engaged in mentoring, additional assistance, extended tutorials.

Full Time Faculty Fall 2015 Semester Spring 2016 Semester Total # of events

Dr. Shannon Amiotte,

Dean of Education Orientation

Portfolio Workshop

Praxis Prep Session

Orientation

Portfolio Workshop

Praxis Prep Session

OLC Career/Job Fair

12

Tom Raymond,

Assistant Professor

Orientation

Portfolio Workshop

Orientation

Portfolio Workshop 43

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15


Praxis Prep Session

Pennington County

Sheriff’s Office

Grant Committee

Rapid City Police

Department

Citizen’s Advisory

Committee

Praxis Prep Session

Pennington County

Sheriff’s Office Grant

Committee

Rapid City Police

Department Citizen’s

Advisory Committee

Dorraine Benson,

Associate Professor

Orientation

Portfolio Workshop

Praxis Prep Session

Orientation

Portfolio Workshop

Praxis Prep Session

12

Dr. Tamara Bauck,

Assistant Professor -NA- OLC Career/Job Fair 1

Linda Olsen, Assistant

Professor

Orientation

Portfolio Workshop

Praxis Prep Session

Orientation

Portfolio Workshop

Praxis Prep Session

6

Institution 0

Indicator 7: Personnel Demographics, Professional Development, Research, and Outcomes

Table 7.3: Faculty, Administrator, and Staff Professional Development and Service / AY 2014-15

Please enter the number of faculty participating in, and the Person Activities (PA) or Total FTE for professional development activities, research, and service. PA is equal to the number of people attending an activity times the number of activities (e.g., if 2 people attend 2 conferences, and 1 person attends 3 conferences, PA equals (2 x 2) + (1 x 3) = 7. Total FTE is the sum of the FTE of each faculty member involved in research or service.

Professional Development Activities

AY 2015-16

Number of Faculty / Administrator / Staff

Person Activities (PA)

Attended National Conferences 1 1

Attended Workshops/Seminars 3 5

Enrolled in study for advanced degree or certification 0 0

Participated in Summer Programs 0 0

Faculty / Administrator / Staff Service Contribution

AY 2015-16

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15



Total Hours

Student Support Services 5 364

Campus Activities/Committee Services 4 182

Curriculum/Course Development 3 45

Laboratory Development/Enhancement 0 0

Community Service as a representative of the institution (e.g. Tribal Committee)

5 119

Notes:

Institution 0

Indicator 7: Personnel Demographics, Professional Development, Research, and Outcomes

Table 7.4: Faculty/Administrator/Staff Research, Creative Activities, and Outcomes / AY 2015-16

Please enter faculty/administrator/staff research and creative activities and outcomes.

Publications and Presentations

AY 2015-16


Number of Pub. & Pres.

Refereed Journal Papers Submitted 0 0

Refereed Journal Papers Published 0 0

Other Publications (books, chapters, etc.) 0 0

Conference Proceedings Published 0 0

Scholarly creative cultural activities (ex. exhibit, play) 0 0

Professional Presentations at National Conferences 0 0

Professional Presentations at on-campus workshops/ seminars

0 0

Professional Presentations at off-campus workshops/ seminars

3 4

Proposals Submitted and Funded

AY 2015-16


Number of Proposals

Proposals Submitted for External Funding 3 1

External Proposals Funded TBA: August 2016

Total Amount of Funded Awards ($) Up to $1.29 million

OLC

Rev. 2-27-12, 5-14-15


Faculty/Administrator/Staff Support for Research

AY 2015-16


Total Hours

Release Time/Reduction of Course Load 0 0

Provision of Professional Research Staff 0 0

Provision of Student Research Assistant 0 0

Are any of your faculty or students engaged in research? (Yes/No) No

If yes, please describe some of the research projects being conducted by faculty or students (e.g., community-based participatory research, locally relevant (applied) research in which your TCU faculty has particular expertise, research partnerships with other entities, etc.)

Notes:

Community Service and Service Learning

The Education Department incorporates Family Events as a major component in several courses.

These Service Learning Projects relate to and contribute directly to program learning outcomes

and teacher candidates' (students') abilities to design and implement academic and co-curricular

experiences that include families while augmenting learning experiences for children.

Community Members

Faculty-Student

Service Learning

College

Center

# OLC

Faculty

/ Staff

#Teacher

Candidates

#

Adults

#

Children Total

Jumpstart Read for

the Record ENCC 4 6 6 21 37

NAEYC's Week of

the Young Child ENCC 3 0 3 15 21

Totals 7 6 9 36 58

oglala lakota collegewarehouse.olc.edu/local_links/assessment/docs/academic_annual_reports/... ·...

Documents