Standard 2.3: Areas of Improvement

2.3 Areas for Improvement Cited in the Action Report from the Previous Accreditation Review

No AFIs were cited in the action report from our previous accreditation review for initial programs.

AFIs from our previous accreditation review were cited for advanced programs outside the Kremen School of Education and Human Development:

Programs in the schools outside of the KSOEHD have not fully implemented the systematic aggregation, and candidate performance data on dispositions outside the KSOEHD have not been systematically aggregated and summarized.

Since our last review the unit has developed and administers an electronic unit-wide program evaluation exit survey, with emphasis on candidate dispositions, for the purpose of evaluating the effectiveness of all of our nationally accredited programs.

The Kremen Learning Assessment System to Sustain Improvement (KLASSI), is an assessment and accountability system built upon a continuous improvement model. Our assessment is an on-going, goal-oriented process, viewed as the vehicle for continuous improvement. Assessment system activities include not only gathering data (measurement), but also turning that data into rich information through a feedback process used to guide individual candidates, faculty members, programs, and the unit in improving our performance, quality and effectiveness. We view assessment as an integral part of learning to foster improvement, and the first step in a continual learning cycle (an assessment-learning-change cycle), which includes measurement, feedback, reflection, and change. Aimed at improving teaching and learning, our assessment is an iterative process of developing and organizing activities, signature assignments, courses, curricula, or programs, collecting and interpreting data, and using outcome information to guide decisions. These outcomes serve as determinants of program effectiveness and accountability.

Our Unit assessment attends to not only outcomes, but to the experiences that lead to achievement of those outcomes. Since learning is a complex process, Unit assessment includes not only what students know, but also what students can do with what they know. Questions of our decision-makers guide the assessment process, and then involve them in gathering and interpreting data that helps inform and guide continuous improvement. Astin's (2002) input, processes, output conceptual model for assessment provides the framework for our Unit Assessment System. Underpinning our unit assessment system are the Nine Principles of Good Practice for Assessing Student Learning adopted by the American Association of Higher Education (AAHE), and Frye's (1999) assessment precepts which clarify the linkages between assessment and student learning.

At specified transition points, each program uses data from key assessments to determine whether a candidate's progress indicates he or she is ready to continue, or if additional support is indicated. Program faculty use results of key assessments of candidate knowledge, skills, and dispositions as part of the decision on whether a candidate has successfully completed required coursework and/or fieldwork. The Admissions Technician (initial teacher preparation), Graduate Technician (advanced programs in the KSOEHD), or Program Coordinator (programs housed outside the KSOEHD) confirms that a candidate has satisfactorily met the requirements and once confirmed, clears the candidate to continue in the program and enroll in courses for the next semester. When a candidate has completed a credential program and is ready to apply for the credential, the Credential Analyst determines that all requirements for that credential have been met. For master's degrees, the Graduate Technician or Program Coordinator confirms successful completion of all program requirements. Data on numbers and percent of candidates successfully meeting requirements at each decision point are collected in a unit program status report.

Exhibits»

Back to Top