The faculty and others associated with the School of Curriculum and Instruction have developed an assessment program that incorporates a multidimensional approach. The program strives to utilize a wide variety of qualitative and quantitative measures. The program was developed as a vehicle to educational improvement in evaluating the mission and goals of the school. Measures used in the program view not only the outcomes of students, but also how the students learn and progress over time. The assessment program in the college was developed with the involvement of faculty, staff and students. The information produced by the program is used to evaluate and improve teaching and learning.

The School of Curriculum and Instruction is a professional school whose major goal is to prepare individuals for careers related to education. A variety of programs are offered for teaching in preschool through elementary, middle, and secondary schools as well as special education, gifted and talented, and administrative positions at these levels.

Undergraduate programs include a broad base of general education, intensive preparation in the subject matter field, and professional emphasis that combines theory with practice. Students in these programs are frequently assessed to determine the extent to which they have developed a thorough understanding of the teaching and learning process and a solid foundation of educational strategies and techniques.

Assessment within the school takes many forms, both formal and informal in nature. Our assessment focuses on three main concerns. It deals first with student assessment utilizing several traditional and alternative ways to make sure students are learning what and as they should. A matrix of significant benchmarks for students, and the assessment tools used, has been established to assist in monitoring student progress toward completion of their degree. A second area of assessment is the overall preparation of the students in the college. Questions such as "What kind of student are we producing?", and "Is the market place in need of such a student?", are addressed. A final aim of our assessment efforts is to provide information so that faculty members are capable of making better decisions about the curriculum. Additional assessment efforts concerning areas such as teaching effectiveness and student satisfaction are performed by individual faculty and will be discussed as warranted.

A plan for student assessment has been developed and presented in a matrix format displaying the multiple ways that students are evaluated in the school. The matrix appears in the appendix as Exhibit 1. The assessment plan addresses the significant benchmarks for students that have been designed by faculty in compliance with state, learned societies, and NCATE accreditation standards. As can be seen on examination of the matrix, benchmarks begin with criteria for acceptance to the professional education program and continue through graduation and job placement.

As with many professional programs, there are minimum requirements for admission and continuation in the professional education program. These requirements are detailed in the matrix so that students are aware of them. Most of the other assessment tools described in the matrix are embedded in the courses and utilized by individual faculty members to evaluate student progression and growth. These include some very traditional means as well as the more alternative assessment tools such as journal writing, attitude essays, reflective analyses of performance and professional development, and other informal verbal and written assessments.

Several faculty members incorporate the use of student portfolios as a means of assessment. Three examples include: 1) reading and language arts classes that require undergraduates and graduates to assemble and present developmentally appropriate forms of literature. Off the shelf resources are adapted and original compositions are constructed; 2) adolescent growth and development classes require undergraduates to choose a topic for in depth research, develop learner appropriate teaching materials and techniques, and present visually the best examples of their project in the portfolio; 3) science methods classes require portfolios that illustrate classroom tested materials and professional development plans; and 4) student teachers develop portfolios in order to organize and articulate their whole clinical teaching experience.

A unique aspect of the professional education program is the faculty’s supervision and coaching of student field experiences and student teaching. These experiences allow a degree of personal attention and one-on-one student/faculty interaction that is not available in other programs. This frequent contact provides the opportunity for continual informal assessment of the student by the supervising teacher. This also provides the faculty member with instant feedback concerning the effectiveness of classroom instruction and leads to continual reflective improvement in the teaching process. There is also formal assessment of these field experiences by way of check sheets and writing assignments.

An example of this is the course EDCI 202: Field Experience in Typical and Exceptional Students Development. This is a first field experience in schools for undergraduates enrolled in the teacher preparation program. The experience is common to all teaching fields as part of a new undergraduate core, which is based upon departmental and program area assessments respective to new teaching standards. The course enables teacher education students to connect campus-based course work and the realities of school classrooms, and it serves as a "career choice suitability checkpoint" wherein students investigate their own commitment and capacity to attain a level of effectiveness that is appropriate for beginning teachers. The course uses a manual to guide observations, analysis, and professional development plans. The course contains a system of frequent self-assessment (facilitated by weekly course assignments for this purpose), classroom teacher, instructor, and departmental feedback. The system nurtures the undergraduate student’s creation and implementation of professional development plans, and helps the department to counsel weak students out of teaching. The school could benefit from expansion of this type of system.

The formal assessment of the student teaching experience was developed to reflect the PRAXIS model (ETS) of evaluating first year teachers. They are assessed at least five times during the quarter by their cooperating teacher and at least three times by their university supervisor.

Finally, a unique program that the college has instituted involves a mock interviewing program for

soon to be graduates. Members of the College of Education alumni board conduct interviews with students

and then offers the student both written and verbal feedback on their interview style and content. This unique assessment experience has been well received by students, faculty, and alumni.

The other two aims of the school’s assessment plan are highly intertwined and will be discussed together. The focus here concerns what kind of students we are producing and how well the student s fit the needs of the marketplace. Related to this, the faculty need a source of information concerning these issues so that the highest quality and most pertinent education possible can be provided by the curriculum. There are several ways these two areas are examined. Some of them include exit interviews, alumni evaluations, external advisory groups, focus groups, and employer surveys. Many of these assessments are performed by the Office of Institutional Research, but many are performed in house as well. Specific examples of such efforts are provided on the following pages. Some of these activities have been in place for a period of time, while others are in the planning stages and will be implemented next year.

Departments and individual faculty members have undertaken assessment projects to investigate a number of areas and concerns. In many cases these efforts have been hampered by lack of time and resources but have, nevertheless, resulted in useable and useful data. Each activity uniquely contributes to the overall assessment efforts within the school.

The special education faculty took part in a retreat with a goal of development of a full program assessment plan. Many informal means of assessment occur within the program and this retreat enabled faculty to identify these various activities and develop a plan of action for formalizing the assessment activities, making them more useful and uniform. Another issue discussed was the aligning of the program with the new State of Ohio Teacher Education and Licensure Standards. These new standards have resulted in some changing terminology which may require modifications in course syllabi and delivery of information.

The special education program is in the process of implementing an external advisory committee. The committee’s role will be to provide a formal means of feedback to the program faculty allowing them to make better decisions regarding needed changes to the special education curriculum. The committee will be composed of past graduates representing various certificate areas, practicing professionals, special education faculty, and undergraduate students. The group will meet for one day during the fall quarter to discuss various issues pertaining to special education. The committee’s proceedings will include, but are not limited to, identifying needs of the program, prioritizing those needs, developing strategies aimed at meeting the needs, and making recommendations for changes in the program’s curriculum. The committee will be able to provide vital information concerning the changing needs of the consumers of special education programs and the preparedness of graduates from Ohio University’s program to meet those needs.

Two secondary education faculty members have undertaken an assessment activity that is an extension of the secondary education self-study already completed. Using an exit questionnaire, undergraduate students’ perceptions of how well their education prepared them in several areas was assessed. All graduating seniors in all teacher education programs completed the questionnaire. The 16-item questionnaire related to the stated goals and objectives of the education programs as well as competencies and standards identified by the state of Ohio for the preparation of teachers. Results of the survey have been partially compiled and the comments and recommendations have already been used to modify the program.

Dr. Joan Safran has been involved in another assessment effort examining the structure and credibility of her EDSE 270 course. At the end of the quarter students are asked to complete a form which measures their perceptions of how well the stated course goals and objectives were covered. Each course goal is addressed by one or more questions and students respond by choosing whether the goal was covered extensively, covered some, or not covered at all. An additional choice is whether the goal in question was modeled by the professor during the quarter. The results of the survey are positive but the form has only been used on a pilot basis and is in need of validation and refinement.

Both of these assessment tools appear promising and have provided interesting initial results but lack of personnel and financial resources have limited the analysis of the data. Should we be able to overcome such resource problems in the future, it is hoped we could extend this type of assessment to more classrooms and make better use of the data they provide.

All of the programs in the school make extensive use of studies conducted by the Office of Institutional Research. Studies that have proved invaluable to the school are the Treatment Study, the Placement Study, the Alumni Study and the College Outcomes Measures Project. Each of these studies has been used to identify areas of our programs that needed improvement. These same studies have also shown our successes in meeting the goals of our programs.

Extensive self-studies, such as the one attached as an example from Secondary Education, have made possible specific curriculum and policy decisions. Decisions are grounded in data-based conclusions. These decisions attempt to balance the rigor of university studies against rapidly changing standards issued by the learned societies that govern the many programs in the school assessment. Information from the office of Institutional Research has also proved valuable in our evaluation and led to significant program changes. Shrinking resources challenge the faculty to match pace with the changes in technology and rising student expectations and make it necessary for the faculty and administration to explore quality control measures that limit the number of Athens and regional campus students who can be served by the present faculty capacity of the college.