Standard 3

Within each of the preliminary credential programs, faculty drew on a range of institutional data to help investigate their practices. For example, for the first time, programs began to look critically at their application, admission, and enrollment rates. They also began to consider what recruitment efforts had taken place and how those efforts had impacted who applied to their programs. Most programs realized they do not collect contact information at recruitment events, and so they began to think about how they might do this in strategic ways moving forward. Programs also documented the range of placements for candidate field experiences and began to consider the affordances and challenges of those placements, as well as the ways in which they collaborated with their P12 partners in those placements. One of the key findings from these efforts is the sheer number of placements we have because of the size of our programs, which also highlights the challenge in developing strong collaborations. Finally, programs documented the various ways they currently engage with stakeholders to evaluate the overall program practices.

The Internal Audit each program undertook provided a way for faculty to really begin to investigate their programs from the perspectives of their candidates. The Multiple Subject, Single Subject, and Educational Specialist programs selected recent completers and then collected institutional data on those individuals from their time in the program, including details about their applications, their success at key points in the program, and any specific advising the candidates may have needed. Similarly, the Agriculture Specialist Program randomly selected one completer from each cohort of recent graduates and examined their institutional data. Within the Bilingual Authorization Program, faculty reached out directly to recent candidates to learn about their perspectives of the different stages of the program--from application to completion. All approaches led to valuable new learning for the programs about the ways in which they support candidates to become successful educators.

As with Standards 1 and 2, the preliminary credential programs used the opportunity of preparing their responses to the Standard 3 aspects as a way to gather a deeper understanding of the work they do--to learn where their strengths are and where their areas for growth are. Because we view this work as the first step in our ongoing journey towards continuous improvement, programs also included next steps plans to address those areas of growth and to investigate their success.