Standard 2: Aspect F

Standard 2f: Program completers engage in professional practice in educational settings and show that they have the skills and abilities to do so in a variety of additional settings and community/cultural contexts. For example, candidates must have broad and general knowledge of the impact of culture and language on learning, yet they cannot, within the context of any given program, experience working with the entire diversity of student identities, or in all types of school environments. 

Candidate preparation includes first-hand professional experience accompanied by reflection that prepares candidates to engage effectively in different contexts they may encounter throughout their careers.

---

Data Sources & Analysis

Data Source 1

Program Completer Survey (Pilot)

Description of Data Source:
We realized that the data captured by some of the tools developed by the CSU Educator Quality Center did not allow us to measure the progress of our completers in all the ways we wanted. Thus, when we developed a pilot survey, we specifically worked to solicit feedback from completers about these areas.

The survey included fifteen questions based on the themes of our Education Specialist Program Standards and one open-ended comment question. Some of the questions we developed addressed AAQEP aspects that we had little data on. Specifically, we wanted to measure areas that our graduates currently engage in that are supportive of international and global perspectives. Candidates rated each item on a 4-point likert scale (1=none, 2=a little, 3=somewhat, 4=a lot).

The survey has been distributed three times, once in fall 2021 and at the beginning and end of spring 2021, to current candidates in all three phases and program completers. Although there were 37 responses, we deleted three respondents (two had not yet finished the program and another completed in 2009). Of the remaining 34 respondents, 1 completed the program in 2018, 2 completed in 2019, 16 completed in 2020, one did not identify their graduation year (though we estimate it was in 2020), and the remaining 14 completed in 2021.

Perspective Captured from Data Source: Completers

Rationale for Using Data Source: 
Looking at the self reporting of program completers can help us understand both the contexts where our completers work and their assessment of how well  the program prepared them for the role as Education Specialist. 

Specific Elements of Data Source:
Item 4.1: To what extent do you currently engage the following professional practices?

• Collaborate/co-teach/consult in various educational settings?
• Collaborate with colleagues to support professional learning?

Definition of Success for Each Element:
Our goal is that 85% of our completers would respond with either “A lot” or “Somewhat.”

Displays of Analyzed Data:
Table 1, Program Alumni Survey, Collaboration Items, 2020-21

Link to Full Dataset:   Alumni Program Survey Dataset (Collaborate/Consult)

Interpretation of Data:
For both of these questions, completers reported high ratings about their abilities to collaborate successfully. In both cases, we exceeded our expectation of 85%. Still, we’d like to see these numbers increase given the importance our program places on collaboration. As one example, our residency programs are specifically designed to place teacher candidates and mentor teachers side-by-side in the classroom, working together to create positive and productive learning environments. 

Data Source 2

CSU Educator Quality Center Program Completer Survey

Description of Data Source:
Each year, the CSU Educator Quality Center administers a survey to program completers to learn their perceptions of how well the program prepared them in a number of areas aligned with the California Commission on Teacher Credentialing’s Teaching Performance Expectations (TPE). Program completers from all CSU campuses are invited to respond to each item on a 1-5 scale, where 1 indicates they believed that they were “not at all” prepared and 5 indicates they believe they were “very well” prepared.” Fresno State has a high rate of completion due to the efforts of our credential analyst who requires completion as part of the credential application process. 

Perspective Captured from Data Source: Program Completers

Rationale for using Data Source: 
CSU Educator Quality Center Completer Survey captures program completers’ anonymous perspectives of how well the program prepared them at the conclusion of their teaching credential coursework and field experiences, providing valuable insights into their perceptions of the program. This measure provides the best assessment of our completers’ performance in relation to this aspect. 

Although this source also represents our Completers’ Self-Assessment of their abilities, we feel this is another source that gives us additional data to consider. We selected three of the survey questions asked of program completers. 

Specific Elements of Data Source: 
One domain that clusters together a number of items related to collaboration is Domain 6: Developing as a Professional Educator. Specifically, we looked at the following:

How well did the program prepare you to meet the following teaching competencies?

• Element 3: Establish professional learning goals and make progress to improve your practice by routinely engaging in communication and inquiry with colleagues. 
• Element 4: Demonstrate how and when to involve other adults and to communicate effectively with peers and colleagues, families, and members of the larger school community to support teacher and student learning.  

Definition of Success for Each Element:
Programmatically, our goal is to have our completer average within .2 of the CSU average. A more long term goal would be to have our average at 3.5 or above. 

Displays of Analyzed Data: 

Table 2, CSU Completer Survey, Elements 3 and 4, 2018-21

Link to Full Dataset: The link to the full dataset is unavailable. However, if reviewers would like to view the CSU Educator Quality Center Data Dashboards, we are happy to set up a time to provide them access by sharing screens in a Zoom session.

Interpretation of Data:
In looking at the data, we see that we have not maintained steady growth in these areas, with average scores increasing, but then decreasing. We are pleased that last year, we exceeded 3.0 on both elements, however, giving us confidence that our students feel well prepared in the areas related to collaboration. Moreover, we also have reached our goal of being within .2 of the CSU average. Still, our long-term goal is to reach a 3.5 in all elements, including these two. 

Next Steps Narrative:
Looking at these two data sets, we see strengths in how we prepare our completers to collaborate with others to support student learning. The pilot survey results were especially powerful in identifying that the vast majority of our completers use collaboration skills in their teaching. In some ways this is not surprising as many Special Education teachers in our service area collaborate with teachers in general settings. Because of that facet of their jobs, we want to assure that our completers have excellent preparation in this area. We see potential to strengthen this aspect of our program further through our residency programs. Since 2020-21 was the first year that we had a residency program specifically focused on SPED, we plan to compare the completers who were prepared in residency programs with responders who were in more traditional partnerships with local school districts in the internal completer survey we will administer at the end of the academic year. 

Top of Page