• Assessment System
• Data Collection, Analysis & Evaluation
• Program Improvment
• Support Data

• College of Education
• UW-Whitewater
• NCATE Home

2a. Assessment System

2a1. How is the unit assessment system evaluated and continuously improved? Who is involved?

The unit has an assessment system that collects and analyzes data on applicant qualifications, candidate and graduate performance, and unit operations to evaluate and improve the unit and its programs.  The unit assessment plan is based on the Conceptual Framework, “The Teacher as a Reflective Facilitator.” As a Renaissance Institution, the College of Education has adopted the five essential elements of a functioning unit accountability system, as developed by the Renaissance Title II Partnership Project. These elements are:

• A unit-wide commitment to accountability
• A unit assessment evaluation coordinator
• Ongoing performance assessment development
• An electronic data system
• Use of data for program improvement and decision-making. 

Within the context of these elements, the Unit Assessment System can be conceptualized as standards-based, outcomes-oriented, multi-dimensional and developmental over time and depth. It includes looping remediation for students and is linked to the Conceptual Framework in multiple ways.  The primary responsibility for refining and evaluating the Unit Assessment System is held by the Committee for Program Review and Accreditation (CoPRA).  The membership of CoPRA includes all program chairs for undergraduate and graduate, initial and advanced licensure programs (including those housed outside of COE). The primary purpose of CoPRA is to interpret the data in terms of the effectiveness of the courses, programs and policies, and to make recommendations to the appropriate bodies for modification(s).  As a standing committee, CoPRA meetings are held whenever significant data are available for evaluation. In addition to CoPRA, each department has program review committees (often labeled “assessment committees”) responsible for responding to and evaluating data on a department/program level.

2a2. Please complete the following table (Table 6) to indicate the key assessments used by the unit and its programs to monitor candidate performance at transition points such as those listed in Table 6?

Table 6

Unit Assessment System: Transition Point Assessments

2a3. How does the unit ensure that the assessment system collects information on candidate proficiencies outlined in the unit’s conceptual framework, state standards, and professional standards?

The Unit Assessment System consists of a sequence of evaluation phases and decision points.  At each of five decision points, a determination is made as to whether each student has met certain specified criteria, indicative of the acquisition of knowledge, skills and dispositions related to the ten WTS and the Conceptual Framework.  With few exceptions, students are held at each decision point until they meet the criteria or they withdraw from the program.  Decision points 1 and 2 use achievement measures, while decision points 3, 4 and 5 use outcomes-based data, collected through a portfolio process, or some combination of achievement measures and outcomes-based data.  Evaluation phases are time intervals between the decision points in which students take coursework, generate samples of their work for their portfolios, have their work evaluated, and receive formal feedback on their progress.

Portfolios:

The Unit Assessment System for Initial Licensure includes three phases of portfolio development.  Each phase includes an introduction or philosophical/pedagogical statement that addresses the Wisconsin DPI’s five assessment concepts in the categories to be reflected in teacher licensure programs and answers the question, “How do I demonstrate that I value these concepts in my development as a teacher?” The philosophy statement must indicate how the student views these concepts, applies them in practice, and supports ideas with credible literature support and relevant experiences. The development of ideas and fluency of written expression is also evaluated.  A rubric is used to evaluate this portion of the portfolio. 

In addition to the philosophical/pedagogical statement, each phase of the student portfolio is organized into entries.  Phase 2 includes one entry while phases 3 and 4 generally include three entries each for a total of seven entries upon program completion. Every portfolio entry generally consists of one to three content artifacts, each scored individually. Since its inception 5 years ago, the portfolio has continued to be refined by all program areas and some programs have chosen slightly different portfolio requirements.  However, all portfolios – regardless of program area – continue to utilize the WTS for organization and evaluative purposes. Additionally, all rubrics used in the portfolio scoring process are based on a five-tier scale as follows:

Phases and Decision Points

For graphic representation of the phases and decision points in the initial teacher preparation programs, please see:

Phase 1: General Studies

During Phase 1 (usually the freshman year), students take coursework related to establishing proficiencies in English, mathematics, and speech, and coursework in the general studies program, as specified by DPI’s requirements.  Decision Point 2 occurs at the end of Phase 1. Criteria for this decision point include a minimum grade point average of 2.75, based on at least 12 credits, passing scores on at least two of the three parts of the PPST, and attending a Phase 1 Meeting designed to provide an overview of the Unit Assessment System.  Students who meet these criteria are admitted into Phase 2, the Foundations Block.

Phase 2: Foundations Block

During Phase 2, students are introduced to the purposes, process, and format of the portfolio. They enroll in three interrelated courses and take their first fieldwork class. At the end of Phase 2, student portfolios are assessed for the first time.  Details on student portfolios for the Foundations Block are linked here. Data from these assessments are summarized, analyzed and shared with department faculty and CoPRA.  To meet criteria for advancement to the next decision point, students must perform at least at the “BASIC” level on all rubrics.  In addition to the scores from these rubrics, each student is evaluated by the cooperating teacher assigned to the fieldwork component of the block. If a student does not perform at the basic level they must enroll in and pass the Portfolio Development course EDFOUND 214.  (This course is also used for students who are waived from the fieldwork component of the Foundations Block due to work experience in the teaching field.)  Criteria for Decision Point 3, Admission to Professional Education, includes the following (some programs, such as the Dual-Licensure program, have modified requirements due to cohort program):

• Pass all three portions of the Pre-Professional Skills Test (PPST).
• Attend Phase 2 Meeting:  Professional Education Orientation
• Pass each course of the Foundations Block with a C/S or better
• Pass the Phase 2 portfolio
• Pass Speech 110 with a C/S or better
• Complete a minimum of 40 credits
• Achieve a combined cumulative 2.75 GPA
• Verified Experiences with Learners – a minimum of 350 hours beginning with Freshman year in high school.

Students who meet these criteria are admitted into Phase 3, the Methods Block.

Phase 3: Methods Block:

Following Decision Point 3, students enter Phase 3 which consists of courses in the major, the minor, the area of licensure, and the Methods Block (for some programs).  During Phase 3, students develop another philosophical/pedagogical statement and add more entries to their portfolios. Portfolios are assessed for a second time by a combination of faculty who are methods instructors, seminar instructors, and/or field supervisors (depending on program).  Each portfolio entry includes reflective narratives that link the artifact to the appropriate standard(s) and how that learning will affect the student’s future decisions.  Assessment rubrics, keyed to the standards, are used for evaluation of the philosophical/pedagogical statement, reflective narrative, and  artifacts/entries in the portfolios. An additional assessment instrument is completed by the cooperating teacher assigned to the fieldwork component of the Methods Block. Data from these assessments are summarized, analyzed and shared with department faculty and CoPRA.  As in the case with Phase 2, students who do not score at least at the BASIC level on all parts of the Phase 3 portfolio must either enroll in a half-credit remediation course or work independently with faculty to pass their portfolio prior to enrolling in Phase 4.  Decision Point 4, Admission to Student Teaching, includes the following:

• Minimum grade point average of 2.75
• Passing score on the appropriate PRAXIS II content exam
• A minimum grade of “C” in all methods courses
• Pass Phase 3 Portfolio
• Negative result of a tuberculosis test
• Completion of a background check, if required
• Attend Phase 3 Meeting: Introduction to Student Teaching

Phase 4: Student Teaching

During Phase 4 students add the final philosophical/pedagogical statement and additional entries to their portfolios.  The entries include artifacts developed during the student teaching experience.  The third and final portfolio assessment is conducted by the cooperating teacher(s) and university supervisor(s) depending upon program and field placements.  Cooperating teachers and university supervisors also complete an evaluation of the students using an instrument keyed to the WTS.  Results are shared with students during a feedback session. Data from these assessments are summarized, analyzed and shared with department faculty and CoPRA.  A two-part Phase 4 Meeting: “Graduation and Licensure” is provided at the beginning of Phase 4 to (1) provide an opportunity for student teachers to meet their university supervisors and, (2) to provide information about the application process for graduation and state licensure. Decision Point 5 is the final decision for program completion.  To be recommended for graduation and state licensure, students must:

• Pass the Phase 4 portfolio
• Receive a positive recommendation from university faculty, field supervisors and cooperating teachers
• Have a minimum 2.75 cumulative GPA
• Compete all course and grade requirements for the major, minor, license and degree

Content Assessment

In addition to criteria related to portfolios, progression through the five decision points is also based on content knowledge proficiency, assessed by a series of content examinations and artifacts produced throughout the content courses and some pedagogical courses.  Students are granted admission to the university as freshmen, based in part, on ACT scores.  Passing scores on the PPST in the area of mathematics, reading, and writing, are required at Decision Point 2 for admission to Phase 2, the Foundations Block.  Students must also pass PRAXIS II examination(s) in their license content area as one criterion for admission to Phase 4, Student Teaching. WTS Standard 1 addresses the competence of candidate content knowledge.  In order to provide evidence that UWW candidates for initial licensure understand the central concepts, tools of inquiry, and structures of the disciplines that they will teach and that they can create learning experiences that will make subject matter meaningful for students please refer to the Program Accreditation Reports linked to licensure as part of the DPI program review. 

2a4. What process has the unit adopted to ensure its assessment procedures are fair, accurate, consistent and free of bias?

The College uses a variety of methods to ensure that its assessment procedures are fair, accurate, consistent and free of bias.  First, all unit data are examined and analyzed first by the administrative staff before it is given to CoPRA for review. This eliminates bias in that no department has the responsibility of whole-college assessment.  Second, portfolios are scored by multiple faculty and departments as students move through the program. Third, several programs have conducted reliability studies to determine accuracy of scoring rubrics and consistency of standards application.   Fourth, some programs have conducted blind reviews of philosophy/pedagogical statements to ensure the elimination of bias.  Fourth, some programs use a consensus model to reach decisions on students. Finally, the alumni and employer surveys, cooperating teacher and supervisor ratings, and portfolio scores on the WTS have been in alignment when examined from a whole-college perspective. (Please see support data for question 2a4).

2a5. What assessments and evaluations are used to manage and improve the operations and programs of the unit?

As described in the previous section, the College collects data within the unit and outside the unit on multiple levels.  These include special assessments aimed at particular strategic populations such as teachers and field supervisors.  These provide specific information about the perceived strengths and weaknesses of the programs, in terms of the development of abilities and skills for beginning teachers.  Reports on these assessments are submitted to CoPRA and actions, if indicated, are suggested to the appropriate body in the unit. All unit assessments are used, in one way or another, to assess and improve the operations of the unit.

A second type of assessment includes those provided by the university that are campus-wide. Those assessments for which data can be obtained for the College of Education as a subpopulation are analyzed and reported in the same manner described above. The Institutional Research Office provides information on retention and graduation rates, enrollment figures, headcounts and degree statistics, minority student information and student perception surveys. Information is available online in multiple formats and can be used to enhance information collected by the unit about the success of its operations.