Standard 1

Conclusion and Next Steps

Looking across the findings from the self-study conducted by the preliminary administrative services, reading/literacy specialist, school counseling, and school nursing programs highlights that, based on the available data sources, overall, completers of our programs are prepared to perform as professional educators with the capacity to support access for all learners.

Areas of Strength:
As program faculty engaged in self-study in response to the AAQEP standards, they did so with a long history of successful accreditation from the California Commission on Teacher Credentialing. Many of the findings from Standard 1 confirmed that the strengths of the programs aligned with our School’s mission and goals. In particular, given the high percentage of students in our region who are emergent bilinguals and the diverse range of cultural backgrounds they represent, as an educational unit, our mission is to prepare educators to be leaders in diverse communities. Findings from across the QAR highlighted the ways in which all of our programs emphasize the development of culturally sustaining pedagogy. The self-study programs engaged in led to findings of additional program strengths.

For the Preliminary Administrative Services Credential program, the findings from the faculty’s analysis of three cycles of California Administrative Professionals’ Assessment (CalAPA) in response to 1c show just how well the way the program prepares future administrators to engage in culturally responsive practices--and to support the teachers they work with in doing the same.  As the results showed, while in the program, candidates develop the ability to have detailed conversations with teachers about the classroom context, student assets and learning needs, as well as content-specific learning goals and student work to collect as they plan for the teaching and learning observation. These kinds of productive conversations are exactly what we hope our future administrators will be able to facilitate in order to support the learning of students in our region.

In a similar way, the Reading/Literacy Program’s findings in response to 1c highlighted the ways that program prepares its candidates to use culturally responsive practices when working with students on their literacy development, along with the impact of language acquisition and literacy development on learning. Seeing that emphasis play out in the findings from the data analysis helps us to know that our unit-wide goals are being realized.

The findings of the School Counseling program in response to Standard 1d highlight that program’s emphasis on service and support. When analyzing data from the comprehensive exam essays, faculty found that students’ responses demonstrated their ability to set specific, measurable, achievable, results-focused, and time-bound goals based on the data provided within the vignette, which also closely aligns with the particulars of Aspect D. Students’ responses included plans of specific data that they could collect and analyze while engaging in individual and systemic level interventions to support their clients to meet their goals, demonstrating the ways in which the program prepares its candidates to engage in meaningful continuous improvement to support their transition into professional school counselors. 

The results of the School Nursing Program’s analysis demonstrated how the program provides a smooth and meaningful route towards earning a school nursing credential for candidates all over California. The data revealed how effectively we are doing that and how the program’s flexibility allows it to serve geographical areas across the state. As highlighted in the response to Standard 1a, findings from the midterm and final field-based evaluation demonstrated that, upon program completion, candidates demonstrated significant growth in all areas, meaning the School Nurse Credential Program content was effective in meeting the SNSC Program goals and objectives. Given that students enrolled in the program are non-matriculated students who are currently employed full-time as school nurses while taking online classes in the program, we find this to be particularly impressive.

Areas for Growth:
While the findings of our analyses did highlight the success of the work our programs do to prepare our completers for their future roles, we also discovered several areas for improvement, particularly in terms of how we collect data on the work we do.

As we engaged in this self-study, one of the biggest take-aways we had is that we do not have a unit-wide systematic approach to collecting data from any of our key stakeholder groups--completers, K-12 partners, employers. This pertains to our findings from both Standard 1 and Standard 2. Although between the CSU Educator Quality Center and the California Commission on Teacher Credentialing, surveys are administered to program completers, employers, and year-out professionals, we discovered that their measures do not always align with the analysis we were trying to do in response to the Standard 1 aspects. Another challenge is that, in many cases, we were unable to disaggregate the data in a way that made the findings meaningful to us. While we do plan to advocate for revision both with the CSU survey and the CCTC survey, we also realize that we need to develop a systematic, unit-wide approach to collecting and analyzing data related to our programs. But the result was that, for this QAR, we were not always able to capture the perspectives of each key stakeholder group. More often than not, we relied on the perspectives of our faculty and our candidates.

Moving forward, we intend to develop unit-wide surveys that can be administered annually to each stakeholder group that will include both general programs about the work our institution does as a whole and program-specific questions. The hope is that this will allow us to collect data that will be useful at both levels but that will not lead to survey-fatigue from administering too many surveys, which is already a concern given the administration of both the CCTC and CSU Educator Quality Center surveys. 

On the individual program level, as highlighted in the responses and in the table below, we plan to begin holding annual focus group discussions with key stakeholders as a way to gather additional data. Ideally, these will occur after the administration of the surveys so that survey responses can inform what gets asked in the focus group discussions. We see these discussions as a way to both gather valuable information about how we can improve our program and a way to continue to build relationships with our completers, P12 partners, and employers of our alumni.

Additionally, in order to then make the necessary changes to program practices, program faculty plan to spend time examining current coursework, assessments, and evaluation tools to ensure that coursework aligns with expected outcomes, that assessments provide a valid way for candidates to demonstrate mastery of those outcomes, and to ensure that the tools used for evaluation actually measure what they are intended to measure. As they do so, faculty will also engage in inquiry, examining student work across courses to ensure the validity and reliability of both the assignments used and the tools used to evaluate those assignments. We envision that this work will take time and be ongoing as program faculty will need to try new approaches, examine their effectiveness, make revisions, and then implement those revisions. Related to this work, each of the programs highlighted here is part of a graduate program within the university, which means it also goes through a Program Review that includes designing a Student Outcome Assessment Plan (SOAP) and analyzing student performance on key assignments. Moving forward, we will work with programs to ensure that assignments selected as part of their SOAP also align with AAQEP aspects. For some programs, such as the Reading/Literacy Specialist, this alignment already exists. But for others, this is another way to strengthen the continuous improvement process.

To support faculty in their efforts, as a unit, we will continue holding our Data Summits to further conversations about how to effectively use data to inform program practices.

Standard 1: Candidate and Completer Performance Program Next Steps

Preliminary Admin Services Credential

Action to Take Rationale for Action Steps w/Proposed Timeline
Establish and convene faculty learning community Data from Standard 1 indicate a need for faculty to engage in reflection through rubric analysis, analysis of instructional best practices, and reviewing resources/practices/ materials for increasing candidate mastery on the CalAPA.  By end of 22-23 academic year:
  • Establish monthly program faculty  meetings designed around data based decision making 
  • Utilize candidate data at each meeting to establish best instructional practices
  • Develop a shared folder of best instructional practices 
  • Log in agenda monthly 
Ongoing realignment of the program re-design using data to inform faculty instructional decisions. Findings from Standard 1 highlight candidates need continued support on using data to inform leadership decision-making and school improvement focus. By end of 22-23 academic year:
  • Ensure designee(s) are prepared to come with candidate data to faculty monthly meetings
  • Designate time for improvement science practices using the data 
  • Log on agenda 
Intentional opportunities for rubric centered peer to peer feedback embedded into the courses Data from Standard 1 show that students would benefit from a rubric centered approach to CalAPA cycles which can be done following CTC-appropriate support guidelines through peer-to-peer feedback. By end of 22-23 academic year:
  • Decide as a faculty methods of incorporating peer to peer feedback opportunities within every semester
  • Educate candidates on best practices around peer to peer feedback using rubrics. 
  • Collect evidence of peer to peer feedback. 

Reading/Literacy Specialist

Action to Take Rationale for Action Steps w/Proposed Timeline
Examine existing coursework content, and assignments to make sure content aligns with the theoretical goals for the program and assessment tools allow for critical analysis of candidate knowledge  In looking at the content currently taught in courses, we discovered that not all aligns with theoretical goals of program As a program faculty, engage in program-wide syllabus review to ensure course content and assignments represent theoretical goals of program
  • 2021-2022: Course in Year 1
  • 2022-2023: Course in Year 2
Revise assessments to better align with course content Many of the assessments currently in place are not specific to the content of the course, making it difficult to determine where candidates have challenges 2021-2022:
  • Beginning with SOAP assessments, revise rubrics to better reflect specific course content
2022-2023:
  • Pilot new rubrics
  • Analyze results
  • Make any necessary revisions
  • Continue analyzing rubrics for assessments not included in SOAP
More purposeful data collection and analysis from program completers to inform program practices  The surveys sent to program completers were only recently implemented to help 
  • Little use of data from completers to inform program practices
Annually each fall:
  • Focus group discussion with program completers
Annually each Spring/Summer:
  • Administer exit survey to program completers
  • Administer year+ survey to year+ completers
Ongoing:
  • Analyze data from data collection efforts in program meetings 
  • Share findings from data analysis with advisory board 
  • Use findings + recommendations from advisory board to inform program practices

School Counseling

Action to Take Rationale for Action Steps w/Proposed Timeline
Strengthen counseling interns’ knowledge and understanding of application of learning theories in all three domains: academic success, socio-emotional wellbeing, and career development  Analysis of site supervisors’ evaluations on areas of students proficiency in learning theories showed that, though our students score “very satisfactory” in terms of their knowledge about learning theories, we aspire to further strengthen their capacity to use these theories to effect a positive change in all three dimensions of academic success, socio-emotional wellbeing, and career development.  Fall 2021: 
  • Evaluate COUN 249 syllabus and reading materials to identify the current methods that enable students to learn about and further apply learning theories in K-12 settings. 
Spring 2022: 
  • Expand the knowledge-content and assignments in COUN 249 to strengthen candidates’  understanding of how to use counseling and learning theories to promote K-12 students’ academic success, socio-emotional wellbeing, and career development
  • Collaborate with site supervisors to ensure all interns gain experience in all three dimensions. 
Fall 2022: 
  • Use site-supervisors’ evaluation forms to evaluate growth in students’ and site supervisors’ understanding of all three dimensions of ASCA National Model’s emphasis on K-12 students’ academic success, socio-emotional wellbeing, and career development 
  • Based on findings, revise the curriculum
  • Continue to strengthen collaborations with site supervisors to share resources and knowledge--from faculty to site supervisors and vice versa 
Ensure that techniques to improve learning and working environment beyond counseling skills and group activities will be discussed in the internship course, Coun 249, and other relevant courses (ex. Coun 242 Consultation). Looking across findings from the three data sources of Case Study, Lesson Plan, and Candidate Disposition tool, we realize we are not specifically asking candidates to focus on creating and developing a positive learning and working environment.  Fall 2021: 
  • Review the current school counseling specialization courses to identify the knowledge content and experiential activities that focus on helping school counseling students to foster a positive learning environment while working in K-12 settings. 
Spring 2022: 
  • Add knowledge-content and experiential activities that can help students utilize their counseling skills to strive at a systemic level to advance a positive learning environment especially for youth from under-represented backgrounds and marginalized identities. 
Fall 2022: 
  • To evaluate our efforts in the area, we will look at our current surveys from site supervisors and assess students’ knowledge and ideas on developing and maintaining a positive learning and working environment.
    Fall 2021: 
  • Research and finalize a tool that can help candidates assess and report their own professional growth and dispositions as counselors-in-training. 
Spring 2022: 
  • Implement the candidates’ self-assessment tool at the end of their fieldwork in school counseling course
Fall 2022: 
  • Assess the results, reliability, and validity of the self-assessment tool in evaluating candidates’ perspectives in relation to standard 1 objectives. If needed, explore and implement other tools or continue with the same tool and establish consistency in its use every semester. 

School Nursing

Action to Take Rationale for Action Steps w/Proposed Timeline
Move all course and preceptor evaluations into Qualtrics. Evaluation is calculated manually/ not allowing full utilization of data. 2021-2022:
  • Work with on-campus support services to assist with migration of evaluations to Qualtrics
2022-2023:
  • Administer all evaluations through Qualtrics
Revise Employer/Supervisor Survey to be sent out after candidate completion Administrative turnover is high and candidates work full time during the time of program participation Fall-Winter 2021-2022:
  • Revise survey with SNSC Advisory
  • Develop focus group to review pilot
June 2022:
  • Pilot revised survey
Fall 2022:
  • Analyze results and make any necessary revisions