Assessment Plan

Trinity International University

School of Education

June 2005
Revision 1: January 2006
Revision 2: February 2006

Click on one of the headings below to jump to that section, or just scroll down the page. 

Overview 

Assessment of Candidates

Chart: Assessment of Candidates

"Gateways to Certification"

Assessment of Instruction

Chart: Assessment of Instruction

Assessment of Programs

Chart: Assessment of Programs

Overview

The assessment plan of the School of Education is a subset of the Trinity International University institutional assessment plan. As the university has as its mission "forming students to transform the world through Christ", the School of Education seeks to prepare Christian teachers who "view teaching as a mission" and will transform the world by "touching lives one student at a time". To that end, our assessment plan is a guiding force in decision-making as well as the evaluation and refinement of our education programs across all delivery systems.

The School of Education began the development of its assessment plan in preparation for the Illinois State Board of Education program review in the spring of 1999. This initial assessment plan laid the foundation for the assessment plan as it exists today. A number of key events and elements have contributed to the evolution of the current assessment plan.

• A university-wide emphasis on assessment facilitated School of Education faculty participation in professional development opportunities, both internal and external, focusing on assessment. Insight and knowledge gained from these experiences provided an increased depth of understanding and commitment to continuous and comprehensive assessment.
• Significant growth in the number of candidates in initial certification programs, including those in the new master's level program, mandated focused attention on the means by which our candidates, programs, and instruction are assessed across all delivery formats and the processes by which the assessment data are analyzed and reviewed. Of equal focus were the uniformity, reliability, and validity of our assessments as a reflection of cohesiveness between programs and consistency with our conceptual framework as well as professional standards.
• University-wide advances in technological capability facilitated the utilization of the Internet and a range of systems and software in gathering, recording, and analyzing assessment information. Currently, the university uses TracDat as the system for collecting institution-wide assessment data. While the School of Education has been using a FilemakerPro database designed specifically for the School of Education, the growth in enrollment in its programs and increased technological capabilities led to a decision to house the School of Education data recording system within CARS. This facilitates the data gathering and recording processes, reduces the amount of candidate data to be entered, and eliminates duplication of efforts in recording, accessing, and recovering that information. Additionally, many evaluation forms used in the assessment of candidates and our programs have been re-developed in electronic formats and made available on-line.
• The School of Education held a two-day retreat in February 2001 with assessment as its major theme. In addition to consideration and discussion of the assessment plan in place at that time, assessment information was reviewed. As a result, the junior level "methods block" in the elementary program was re-designed and the field experience structure was enhanced to incorporate all fieldwork into professional education coursework with the number of hours completed in those experiences redistributed.
• The 2004-05 governance re-structuring of the School of Education, the appointment of an interim Director of the School of Education, and the self-study conducted as part of the preparation for the Illinois State Board of Education program review created opportunities for dialogue, assessment of, and re-design of the School of Education assessment system which included:
  • Meetings with School of Education faculty, support staff, program liaisons, the university registrar, Information Technology personnel, and university administration relative to assessment issues; and
  • Focused meetings occurred involving some, or all, of the following: the Director of the School of Education, the Certification Officer, the Coordinator of Field Experience, the Coordinator of Clinical Practice, the Coordinator of the Graduate Programs, and the Associate Dean of the Graduate School helped to define the system by which the assessment data are collected, analyzed, and reviewed.
• Significant changes occurring in the 2005-06 academic year include:
  • Formation and definition of the Teacher Education Council (TEC);
  • The addition of Dr. John Jusu as the Assessment Project Coordinator;
  • Establishment of an Interview Committee with oversight of the entrance interview process;
  • Identification of an assessment team as a subcommittee of the School of Education;
  • Changes to the entrance interview process with a panel approach, on-site writing sample, and candidate self-assessment of dispositions with action plan; and
  • The establishment of portfolio, assessment, and interview committees as sub-committees of the Advisory Council.

The assessment system of the School of Education, in its current form, is the primary vehicle for informed decision-making with regard to candidates, instruction and programs. In doing so, the system examines the:

• Evidence of the knowledge, skills and dispositions of program candidates across all delivery system formats;
• Effectiveness of instructional strategies, curriculum, field experiences, and clinical practice in the preparation of candidates; and the
• Alignment and coherence of programs and unit operations with the School of Education's conceptual framework as well as with professional and state standards.

The unit collects data throughout the fall and spring semesters with the assistance of the Assessment Project Coordinator. Outcomes are typically analyzed during the summer months and reports written. These reports are brought to the professional community in the fall for review and feedback. Suggestions for program and policy improvements are collected and considered. When required, proposals are written and taken through appropriate channels for approval. Changes for the following academic year are completed prior to the end of the spring semester.

By its very nature as an assessment plan, the system continues to evolve and be refined. The School of Education is committed to comprehensive and on-going assessment at all levels utilizing measures and processes which promote equity and establish fairness, accuracy, and consistency within the entire assessment system.

ASSESSMENT OF CANDIDATES

The conceptual framework of the School of Education defines three key areas of focus in the preparation of candidates:

1. Personal: The Teacher as Nurturer
2. Professional: The Teacher as Reflective Practitioner
3. Practical: The Teacher as Facilitator.

With these distinctives at the forefront, a candidate is assessed at five transition points in his/her program. Four of those transition points occur prior to program completion: 1) admission to the School of Education, 2) admission to field experience, 3) admission to clinical practice and 4) recommendation for initial certification. The fifth transition point occurs post-completion in the form of candidate self-report surveys and employer surveys at the one-, three-, and five-year benchmarks. Multiple and varied measures are used in assessing all candidates, in accordance with the conceptual framework as well as professional and state standards, by multiple assessors at all transition points seeking consistency across all programs and delivery systems.

Personal: The Teacher as Nurturer

Viewing teaching as a personal mission suggests that candidates:

• Focus on the student as a whole person; know developmental theories and understand how a student's cognitive, physical, emotional, ethical, and spiritual development influences learning;
• Maintain high expectations for each student, spend time with students, encourage their gifts and support areas of individual special need;
• Function as advocates for all children; are aware of and comply with regulations and guidelines related to all students;
• Understand and value cultural and community diversity; are able to use students' individual experiences, language, and culture to enrich instruction, with a commitment to educational equity for all students;
• Create a learning environment that fosters curiosity, discovery, and problem-solving; modify environmental arrangements to promote positive behavior and engaged learning for all students;
• Facilitate a learning community that supports caring social relationships and effective collaborations, both within the learning environment and among faculty; and
• Collaborate effectively with parents/guardians and professional caregivers to provide appropriate learning opportunities for all students.

Examples of assessment measures include:
1. Portfolios (Initial, Developing, Final);
2. Interviews (Entrance, Exit);
3. Disposition analyses; and
4. Field experience and clinical practice evaluations.

Professional: The Teacher as Reflective Practitioner

Viewing teaching as a professional mission suggests that candidates:

• Are knowledgeable in all content areas; thoroughly prepared in those they intend to teach;
• Display enthusiasm for and commitment to their major field of interest; model life-long learning;
• Know contemporary educational issues and reforms; are able to utilize that knowledge in support of student learning;
• Reflect upon, think critically about, and evaluate educational processes and outcomes; monitor and modify instruction in response to learner feedback;
• Establish rapport with students, co-workers, and administrators and community members; interact appropriately at all levels;
• Demonstrate a commitment to professional and personal ethics; look for ways to foster positive character development in the learning environment; and
• Understand the process of education research; function effectively as teacher-researchers.

Examples of assessment measures include:
1. Minimum cumulative and professional grade point averages;
2. Content area and Assessment of Professional Teaching (APT) test scores;
3. Action research project evaluations;
4. Self evaluation of field experiences and clinical practice;
5. Field experience and clinical practice evaluations by mentoring and supervising teachers, university supervisors; and
6. Post completion surveys from candidates and building administrators.

Practical: The Teacher as Facilitator

Viewing teaching as a practical mission requires that candidates:

• Communicate effectively; speak clearly and listen carefully; evidence a solid command of both spoken and written English;
• Integrate educational theory with classroom practice; incorporate standards, curriculum, content, learning theory, and student development into instructional planning;
• Design and conduct interesting and effective learning experiences in order to accommodate different learning styles and student needs;
• Effectively motivate all students, especially those who are reluctant learners;
• Understand how students construct knowledge and acquire skills; develop experiential and interdisciplinary learning opportunities;
• Foster productive group learning activities; work effectively with student learning teams;
• Conduct both whole class and small group discussions with skill;
• Wisely select and use a variety of teaching materials, tools and technologies to enhance learning for all students;
• Maintain effective classroom management; use conflict resolution strategies;
• Select/construct, and use assessment tools that encourage students to become reflective and independent learners; provide timely and constructive feedback; and
• Use an understanding of professional codes, laws, and standards to guide instruction and practice.

Examples of assessment measures include:
1. Clinical practice evaluations by supervising teacher(s) and university supervisor;
2. Assessment of Professional Teaching test scores;
3. Exit interview evaluations;
4. Final portfolio evaluations; and
5. Post-completion survey of candidates and building administrators/employers.

The School of Education's commitment to develop highly qualified teachers who view teaching as a mission requires initial and on-going assessment of all candidates. It is the belief of the School of Education that it is unethical to admit a student into an education program or to allow a candidate to continue in an education program if there is serious concern about the individual's ability to be an effective educator. Therefore, all candidates are assessed at multiple points in their program to validate their progress or to identify and address areas of concern. Not only is individual assessment data used to monitor candidate performance, but such data are also collected, aggregated, and analyzed to provide information about the relative success of the programs in preparing candidates with the knowledge, skills, and dispositions to successfully teach all students. The results of such analysis are used to modify and improve School of Education programs.

 CHART: ASSESSMENT OF CANDIDATES

GATEWAYS TO CERTIFICATION

“Teaching as a Mission: Touching Lives one Student at a Time”

The conceptual framework of the School of Education defines three key areas of focus in the preparation of candidates:

1. Personal: The Teacher as Nurturer
2. Professional:  The Teacher as Reflective Practitioner
3. Practical: The Teacher as Facilitator

Program specific plans provide an overview of the requirements for program completion and certification for each teacher education program (see Gateways to Certification Plans). Candidates are encouraged to track their progress and to maintain contact with their academic advisor.

ASSESSMENT OF INSTRUCTION

The School of Education seeks to continuously and comprehensively assess, analyze and refine teaching strategies and effectiveness. Qualitative and quantitative data are collected and analyzed across all programs and delivery formats from a variety of sources including:

• Instructor and course evaluations
  Candidates evaluate all education courses and instruction, across delivery formats, anonymously at the end of each course as part of the university-wide assessment cycle. The data are collected and compiled by the office of the Dean of Trinity College and Graduate School (traditional program, MA/T program) or the REACH to Teach Student Services Coordinator (non-traditional programs) and provided to the instructor. As appropriate, the data may be sent to the respective school director for review of course effectiveness, content, and alignment to course objectives. The course evaluations are reviewed again as part of the faculty tenure review process after five (initial tenure) or ten (continuing tenure) years.
• Professional evaluations
  Within the School of Education, professional evaluation of instruction occurs in several contexts: by peers in the traditional programs, by the REACH to Teach Academic Coordinator in the non-traditional delivery programs and by the Coordinator of the MA/T and MEd programs at the master's level. Instructors in the education program are observed annually by the appropriate individual(s) and provided with a written report summarizing the results of that assessment. The opportunity to dialogue about and/or write a response to the findings is always presented. Indicated modifications to course design or instructional strategies occur at the instructor/reviewer level. In the event that a concern about course content is indicated, the assessment findings will become part of a larger pool of assessment data and brought to the appropriate personnel for discussion and decision-making. Additionally, a faculty member within the School of Education may invite a colleague to provide a peer evaluation as part of his/her annual professional development plan.
• Within Trinity College and Trinity Graduate School, peer evaluation is part of the tenure and continuation process. The data from the peer evaluation are provided to the tenure candidate and submitted to the appropriate individuals for consideration as part of the tenure awarding process. As such, it is not part of the overall School of Education assessment plan but may influence a faculty member's personal decisions regarding course structure and teaching effectiveness.
  
• Professional Development Plans and Faculty Update Reports
  As a reflective practitioner, each School of Education faculty member annually designs a professional development plan. After prayerful consideration, personal reflection, and discussion with colleagues and peers, the faculty member sets forth goals and objectives for the academic year in the following areas:
  
  • Teaching and administration
  • Integration of faith and learning
  • Interaction with candidates
  • Scholarship/professional development
  • Service to college, church, community

At the end of the academic year, progress toward these goals is evaluated in a Faculty Update Report. Both the Annual Professional Development Plan and the Faculty Update Report are submitted to the Director of the School of Education.

CHART: ASSESSMENT OF INSTRUCTION  

  ASSESSMENT OF PROGRAMS

Trinity International University currently offers programs leading to initial certification in the following areas:
Elementary (Type 03)

Secondary (Type 09)

• Science: Biology
• English Language Arts
• Mathematics
• Social Science: History

Specialist (Type 10)

• Music Education K-12
• Physical Education K-12 with optional Health Endorsement

The elementary and secondary education programs leading to initial certification are offered at two levels: baccalaureate and master's. Candidates seeking initial elementary certification, with a baccalaureate degree, can complete requirements in either the traditional or non-traditional delivery format. In addition, Trinity College offers non-traditional programs for candidates seeking only initial certification in elementary education (Type 03) or secondary education (Type 09) in the non-traditional delivery format. While the School of Education has oversight and accountability for all programs, the baccalaureate and certification only routes to initial certification are under the auspices of Trinity College while the master's level route is offered through Trinity Graduate School. It is the School of Education that bears the chief responsibility for assessment in all programs across all delivery formats with the support of Trinity College, Trinity Graduate School and the university as a whole.

The School of Education seeks to continuously and comprehensively assess, analyze and refine all programs. Both qualitative and quantitative data are collected for all programs and delivery formats from a variety of sources including:

• Program completers and candidates
  As part of its program assessment plan, the School of Education solicits feedback, via an on-line survey, from candidates completing an initial certification program and their building administrators. The survey instrument is aligned with the conceptual framework and provides valuable information from individuals who are in their first, third and fifth years of teaching. The survey data are collected and summarized for review by the School of Education faculty, including program liaisons for the seven initial certification programs. With the re-institution of the Advisory Council, the School of Education anticipates presenting the data to the council for their review and recommendations.
• As an example of a program modification made as a result of program completer feedback, the pre-clinical experiences for non-traditional and master's candidates were re-structured and aligned with course work in a similar manner to the traditional program. Initial candidate feedback to this change, implemented in the 2004-05 academic year, has been positive with candidates articulating a greater level of confidence and readiness for clinical practice and course instructors reporting a greater level of intensity and enthusiasm by candidates in the methods courses. Analysis of assessment data for clinical practitioner performance and instructor evaluations for the 2004-05 academic year supports the initial feedback.
• Less formally, members of the School of Education faculty and support staff frequently receive unsolicited feedback from program completers in the form of personal notes, e-mail messages or conversations. The School of Education's focus on the personal aspect, as a distinctive of Trinity's education program, often leads to on-going and lifelong relationships between candidates and instructors or service providers. These informal responses from program completers, particularly those who have completed a number of years as practicing teachers, are considered highly valuable assessment information. Any information provided in these communications relative to program critique or constructive input is forwarded to the Director of the School of Education and discussed as appropriate.
• Illinois Certification Tests
  All candidates are required to complete both the appropriate content-area test and Assessment of Professional Teaching test for their initial certification program. Although the tests are not aligned directly to the conceptual framework, the recently rewritten tests are aligned to the same standards upon which program coursework is based. The Certification Officer receives the test results for candidates and the results are distributed to the Director of the School of Education and the appropriate program liaisons. Test performance for all tests and programs over time is gathered, charted, and distributed to the Director of the School of Education, the School of Education faculty and the program liaisons. Any trends indicating an area of particular strength or weakness are discussed and the appropriate steps, if necessary, taken for program revision.
• As an example of such a change, the School of Music, noting an apparent weakness on the part of their candidates with regard to "non-traditional" music genres and instrumentation, developed and added a course, "Survey of World Music". A new faculty line was filled with a qualified faculty member able to teach in that area of specialization. Similarly, the History Department of the School of Humanities has added a program requirement relative to Illinois history in response to both state standards and candidate test performance. Course evaluations
  Candidates evaluate all education courses, across delivery formats, anonymously each semester as part of the university-wide assessment plan. The data are collected and compiled by the office of the Dean of Trinity College and Graduate School and provided to the instructor and the respective school director for review of course effectiveness and alignment to course objectives. The compiled data is to be presented to the Advisory Council for their review and recommendation as part of the re-instatement of the Advisory Council.

• Program evaluations
  Feedback specifically tailored to assess School of Education programs is collected from multiple sources:
  • Mentoring teachers (field experience);
  • Supervising teachers (clinical practice);
  • Program candidates and completers;
  • Employers and building administrators.
  The data received are compiled by semester and analyzed annually as part of the unit assessment cycle. These assessment instruments are aligned with the School of Education's conceptual framework. The instruments were revised in 2003-04 so that qualitative data can be compiled. The Director of the School of Education reviews these results and presents findings to the Advisory Council.
• Professional community
  The re-instatement of the Advisory Council formalizes the analysis and review of data from a cross-section of practitioners representing all programs. The Advisory Council is composed of program completers, practicing teachers who have mentored a Trinity candidate in field experience or clinical practice, and building administrators who have hired Trinity program completers or with whom Trinity works collaboratively. The feedback from the previous Advisory Council provided vital information "from the trenches" on our programs and program completers. The individuals from the previous Advisory Council were participants in the development of the School of Education's initial conceptual framework while the current Advisory Council will play an on-going part in the continual refinement of the conceptual framework, our programs, and our assessment plan.
• Additionally, the School of Education often receives unsolicited informal, yet vital, constructive input from the professional community with whom our candidates complete field experience or in which they are employed. All feedback indicating a strength or weakness in any of our programs is brought to the immediate attention of the Director of the School of Education and the respective program liaison as appropriate. The appropriate representatives of the School of Education determine a course of action if needed.
• State Program Review and Federal Reporting
  As part of compliance with federal Title II regulation, an assessment of program completer performance on state certification tests is compiled. Additionally, as part of the Title II reporting process, the Certification Officer determines the ratio of student teachers to university supervisors as well as the number of program completers as compared to the number of candidates admitted to an initial certification program in a given academic year. Copies of the Title II report are provided to the University Executive Vice-President, the Dean of the College, the Dean of Trinity Graduate School, the Director of the School of Education and the School of Education faculty and support staff. The completion of the 2004-05 Title II data will provide the first opportunity to compare the number of candidates accepted into an initial certification program to the number of completers after four years.
• The cycle of program review by the Illinois State Board of Education provides an opportunity for a focused and extensive self-study of the School of Education and its initial certification programs. While other assessments are completed annually or semi-annually, the five-year study allows the institution to look for trends and patterns across a broad range of data. As such, it has been the impetus for further and continuing changes to our programs and assessment plan. The need for re-instatement of the Advisory Council and for establishing a consistency in the gathering of data from recent program completers has come to the forefront as a result of the self-study for the upcoming state program review. Additionally, the panel review of program folios, as they are aligned to Illinois content area standards, provides valuable feedback for informed decision-making as to course content and program structures.

 CHART: ASSESSMENT OF PROGRAMS