CAEP Academic Measures of Success

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • Endorsements

Measure 1 - Indicators of Completer Impact 

To track candidate and completer impact in their P-12 classrooms, the EPP utilizes two different measures.  The first is a Candidate Teacher Work Sample and the second is data derived from a question on the first and third year teacher survey as completed by their supervisors.

COMPLETER TEACHER WORK SAMPLES

The EPP solicits Completer Teacher Work Samples from first-year completers each year. In the reviewed cohort (n=7, graduates from the 2020-2021 school year), there were two graduates (28.5%) who provided data for evidence regarding Standard 4.1 (now Measure 1). One completer was an elementary teacher (general instruction) and the other one taught middle school physical education. Completers developed their submission by following the instruction rubric used in their senior year Teacher Work Sample during student teaching.  The sections on which we encouraged them to focus for this report were Data Analysis and Reflection. Each completer chose a unit of study, administered a pretest, taught the unit, and then administered the same test as a post test. First-year teachers were asked to reflect on their results.

The elementary education completer provided data from a history unit that was taught in the spring of 2021. The data show an average gain of 34% (n=21) with a range of 13 to 64% growth as a result of the unit taught. In this classroom, 95% of the students passed. This class had 15 of 21 students (71%) below 60% for the formative pre-test assessment. With the majority of students scoring below passing on the initial exam, the summative assessment data point reveals the strength of the teacher’s unit plan and execution. Scores for the post-test nearly doubled with an 81% average on this assessment. The students in this private parochial setting may understand that high academic growth is a regular expectation by teachers and constituents. 

The middle school teacher tested a class of 14 with the majority being female (71%). The unit covered skills in an activity class. The overall average growth for the entire class (n = 14) was 37%, with a range of 0 to 76%. The class had 11 of 14 (79%) below 60% for the formative pre-test assessment.Scores on the post-test showed that 79% passed overall, revealing a strong unit plan in place. The males (n=4) grew less than the females (n=10) by a 29 to 38% margin. The unit topic may have been less interesting to males, and perhaps students in this large public middle school show more varied interest in academic success.

The EPP values the consistent, positive growth exhibited in the data, as noted in the 36% overall gain per student. In the future, the EPP hopes to glean more aggregated data from more completers.

Completer Teacher Work Sample
Fall 2021 - Spring 2022

Teacher

N=2

Pretest

Range

Post test

Range

Average gain

Overall growth range

% pass

Middle School

14

42.8%

17-75%

79.14%

33-100%

37%

0 to 76%

79%

Elementary Ed

21

46%

6-75%

81%

51-90%

34%

13-64%

95%

Average gain per student = 36% | Overall pass rate per student = 87%

SUPERVISOR SURVEY OF FIRST AND THIRD YEAR TEACHERS

Supervisors of the EPP’s first and third year completers rated their teachers an average of 3.12 out of 4.0 (n= 8) when surveyed specifically about the teacher’s impact on student learning in the classroom.

Supervisor Survey

Completers and their employers/supervisors are surveyed at the end of their first and third years of teaching. Survey questions align with the elements of the Nebraska Clinical Practice Evaluation document, as used in the junior-year practicums and the senior-year student teaching experience. The survey elements include Student Development, Learner Differences, Learning Environment, Content Knowledge, Application of Content, Assessment, Planning for Instruction, Instructional Strategies, Professional Learning and Ethical Practice, Leadership and Collaboration, Impact on Student Learning, and Professional Dispositions. The EPP chose to include two extra sections of particular interest to the EPP: Christian Influence and Technology Integration.

In Spring 2022, surveys were sent to supervisors of first-year teachers (n=9), with a response rate of 44% (n=4). Surveys were also sent to supervisors of third-year teachers (n=10), with a response rate of 40% (n=4).  

For first-year teachers, the range of scores given by their supervisors were from 2.50 to 3.33, with the low for Assessment (2.5) and the high given for both Student Development and Professional Dispositions (3.33). Scores at or above benchmark constitute 74% of scores (10 of 15). Elements with higher scores included Student Differences (3.0) and Impact on Student Learning (3.10). Lower scores (below benchmark) were given for Assessment (2.50), Leadership and Collaboration (2.87) and Professional Learning and Ethical Practice (2.93). Since Assessment is below benchmark, the EPP will continue to evaluate training practices in courses and assessment choices during field placements.

Third-year teacher scores had a range of 2.44 to 3.44 with a mean of 3.08. Nine elements were above benchmark (64%) with the remaining five elements below benchmark. The EPP notes consistently low scores from one participant and believe the data are unduly influenced therein. It is also significant that this cohort got training at the beginning of the pandemic and has had to teach during the fallout of its impact on education.

Union College First- and Third-Year Teacher Survey — Spring 2022
Supervisor Survey


1st Year
n=5

3rd Year
n=3


1st Year
n=5

3rd year
n=3

Standard 1- Student Development

3.33

3.01

Standard 8 - Instructional Strategies (including 8.3 Technology element)

3.00

3.00

Standard 2 - Learning Differences

3.10

2.67

Standard 9 - Professional Learning and Ethical Practice

2.93

3.44

Standard 3 - Learning Environments

3.07

2.44

Standard 10 - Leadership and Collaboration

2.87

3.17

Standard 4 - Content Knowledge

3.18

3.39

Standard 11 - Impact on Student Learning

3.10

2.50

Standard 5 - Application of Content

3.07

2.94

Standard 12 - Professional Dispositions

3.33

3.33

Standard 6 - Assessment

2.50

2.83

Standard 13 - Christian Influence

3.19

3.13

Standard 7 - Planning for Instruction

3.05

3.13

Standard 14 - Technology Integration

2.97

3.30

First Year
Overall Impact = 3.00
Overall Mean = 3.11

Third Year
Overall Impact = 3.33
Overall Mean = 3.08

Self-Evaluation Surveys from First-Year and Third-Year Teachers

First- and third-year teachers were asked to rate their success based on the elements from the Nebraska Clinical Practice Evaluation--the same survey content used in the junior and senior years. The benchmark for the First- and Third-Year Teacher Survey was 3.0 of 4.0. Scores for both cohorts were combined due to low participation.

Responses ratings ranged from 3.00 to 3.50 with all scores remaining above benchmark (3.0 of 4.0). Though not reflected here, the third-year completers rated themselves from .5 to 1.5 points lower than did the first-year completers. With a small sample size, these differences may not imply significant concerns, though the EPP plans to attempt case studies on both groups to determine more specific background information.

Union College First- and Third-Year Teacher Survey — Spring 2022
Self Evaluation


Combined 1st/3rd Year
n=4


Combined 1st/3rd Year
n=4

Standard 1- Student Development

3.25

Standard 8 - Instructional Strategies (including 8.3 Technology element)

3.19

Standard 2 - Learning Differences

3.25

Standard 9 - Professional Learning and Ethical Practice

3.25

Standard 3 - Learning Environments

3.00

Standard 10 - Leadership and Collaboration

3.25

Standard 4 - Content Knowledge

3.17

Standard 11 - Impact on Student Learning

3.50

Standard 5 - Application of Content

3.08

Standard 12 - Professional Dispositions

3.46

Standard 6 - Assessment

3.13

Standard 13 - Christian Influence

3.19

Standard 7 - Planning for Instruction

3.19

Standard 14 - Technology Integration

3.50

Combined 1st/3rd Year
Overall Impact = 3.00
Overall Mean = 3.27

Case Study Interviews

The EPP interviewed seven first- and third-year completers from the 2019 and 2022 cohorts. Five respondents were elementary education teachers and the remaining two were teaching in secondary settings. Completers were asked questions regarding their use of best practices in classroom management, assignment design, assessment options, differentiation, technology, and addressing student behavior issues, among other things. All respondents reported they were prepared well for the academic challenges presented during the first year and that they were pleased with their growth and the engagement and advancement of their students.

The various respondents shared their best practices overall, mentioning the extent to which they utilized hands-on, authentic activities (especially for science and history), even to the practice of the sharing of learning beyond the classroom. Many included some gamification to engage students and review content. Because of the wide range of academic abilities in many of the classrooms, respondents shared the challenge of meeting student needs, but then described how they modified approaches to presenting content, designing and modifying assignments and providing alternative assessments for some. Many described assignments that fostered both creativity and critical thinking. Group work and other collaborative ventures were also utilized in their classrooms. Other respondents mentioned experimenting with room arrangements and special “centers” in their room to meet student preferences and needs. 

Completers shared experiences of faith and learning. One teacher was involved in giving Bible studies to her students—several of whom will be baptized soon. Others are reading through specific books of the Bible with their class and are helping them grapple with concepts as they develop their faith along with their learning.

Many completers spoke of the very real concerns they have for their students and their students’ families in the area of social-emotional learning. There is still pandemic residue and along with other evidence of trauma, more than one respondent confessed they helped carry burdens. To manage, the completers resorted to fostering positive momentum in their classrooms. Some encouraged positive feedback to the school community, and others provided a space for relaxing and regenerating peacefully.  

Completers shared that their schools had provided mentors and support in ways they needed it, though two respondents expressed a desire for more help. Other conversations showed courageous teachers who advocated for their own needs, put effort into trying new technology and became encouraging leaders when the unity at the school had dwindled.

Completers were asked for program recommendations. They suggested that candidates be placed in more diverse settings, especially for elementary placements. They hoped for even more contact from the EPP faculty during the first year. In conjunction, a few offered to be guest speakers to encourage and enlighten pre-service candidates. Overall, completers felt their preparations were strong to help them launch their first experiences in teaching. They especially noted the EPP’s program structure and instruction in planning lessons as being particularly useful. They quickly accepted the challenge to keep learning and making a difference in their classrooms. Some mentioned future goals of trying more group work, tightening their classroom management, learning about more technology resources, studying new curriculum, finding better ways to recharge, and accepting their emerging teaching personalities.