CAEP Academic Measures of Success

Call for third-party comments
Submit your feedback to CAEP accreditors by Oct. 1!

The Education Program at Union Adventist University is hosting an accreditation visit by the Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP) on October 14-16. Interested parties are invited to submit third-party comments to the evaluation team. Please note that comments must address substantive matters related to the quality of professional education programs offered, and should specify the party's relationship to the provider (i.e., graduate, present or former faculty member, employer of graduates).

We invite you to submit written testimony to:

CAEP
1140 19th Street NW, Suite 400
Washington, DC 20036
Or by email to: callforcomments@caepnet.org

Such comments must be within the specified period and based on the core tenets of CAEP accreditation standards of excellence, which recognize that:

  • In CAEP's performance-based system, accreditation is based on evidence that demonstrates that teacher candidates know the subject matter and can teach it effectively so that students learn. In the CAEP system, EPPs must prove that candidates can connect theory to practice and be effective in an actual P-12 classroom.
  • A professional education provider that is accredited by CAEP is expected to be involved in ongoing planning and evaluation; engaged in continuous assessment and development; ensure that faculty and programs reflect new knowledge, practice, and technologies; and be involved in continuous development in response to the evolving world of education and educational reform.
  • Comments must address substantive matters related to the quality of professional education programs offered, and should specify the respondent's relationship, if any, to the institution (i.e., graduate, present or former faculty member, employer of graduates). Copies of all correspondence received will be sent to the university for comment prior to the review. .
  • 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=2, graduates from the 2021-2022 school year), there were two graduates (20%) who provided data for evidence regarding Measure. One completer was a junior high history teacher and the other one taught high school science. 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 share data charts and also reflect on their results.

The junior high history completer provided data from a history unit that was taught in the spring of 2023. The data show an average gain of 19% (n=54) with a range of 0 to 93% growth as a result of the unit taught. In this classroom, 82% of the students passed the unit. This class had 30 of 54 (56%) below 61% for the formative pre-test assessment. The majority of students scored below passing on the initial exam. For the posttest, 14 of 54 (30%) achieved a passing score, though the other 31% did not.

This unit, on Imperial Russia, was taught while students were experiencing Covid restrictions. Group work was not allowed and some students struggled to work independently. Many students did poorly on the two tests but also did not turn in the homework required in the unit. Engagement was minimal for some, but for those who took notes and turned in homework, scores were higher. The morning class saw more overall improvement but lower scores overall. Many were late to class and did not attempt to recover lost points. The afternoon class showed more interest in history and even though they saw less overall growth, their scores were fairly high. Minority students had a wider range of scores. More boys failed than did the girls, though they showed better engagement. This may be due to the fact that their teacher was male (one of the few at that grade level). The Completer plans to adjust the curriculum to include more group work and more student presentations.

The high school science teacher tested a class of 9 students. The unit covered weather and cloud formation information. The overall average growth for the entire class was 19%, with a range of 13 to 37%. The class had 9 of 9 (100%) below 43% for the formative pre-test assessment. Just 2 of 9 (22%) passed the posttest with a score of 61% or higher. Other homework in the unit helped them pass the unit. Scores on the post-test showed that 5 of 9 (56%) passed overall. Boys had a better pretest and post-test average score, but the girls had a larger gain percentage between the pre- and post-test. Girls scored higher in their homework, as well. Students in the class were absent often, which made for complications in catching missed material. The schedule of the school disrupted regular classes, as well as not having an LMS on which to rely. The Completer felt that the provided testing system needed revision.

The EPP values the positive growth exhibited in the data, as noted in the 19% overall gain per student. The EPP believes that data from more Completers will produce more robust results and has already begun to solicit participation from more completers.

Completer Teacher Work Sample
Fall 2022 - Spring 2023

Teacher

N=2

Pretest

Range

Post test

Range

Average gain

Overall growth range

% pass

Middle School

54

42%

0-100%

61%

0-100%

19%

0 to 87%

91%

Elementary Ed

9

32%

25-43%

53%

27-69%

19%

0-37%

56%

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 3.30 out of 4.0 (n= 9) 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 2023, surveys were sent to supervisors of first-year teachers (n=8), with a response rate of 50% (n=4). Surveys were also sent to supervisors of third-year teachers (n=9), with a response rate of 56% (n=5).  

For first-year teachers, the range of scores given by their supervisors was from 2.75 to 3.44, with the low for Learning Differences (2.75) and the high given for Christian Influence (3.44). Scores at or above benchmark constitute 80% of scores (12 of 15), which is a rise of 6% from last year’s reporting. Elements with higher scores included Instructional Strategies (3.19) and Assessment (3.17--up from 2.50 a year ago). Lower scores (below benchmark) were given for Learning Environments (2.92), and Technology Integration (2.85--down slightly). The EPP notes that 80% of the scores rose for this cohort.

Third-year teacher scores had a range of 3.13 to 3.67 with a mean of 3.50--up from 3.08 a year ago. All 14 elements were above benchmark (100%) with the highest gain in Impact on Student Learning (2.50 to 3.55). The EPP notes that 100% of scores rose for this cohort (over a year ago). The number of survey responses nearly doubled, providing more robust data.

Union College First- and Third-Year Teacher Survey — Spring 2023
Supervisor Survey


1st Year
n=4

3rd Year
n=5


1st Year
n=4

3rd year
n=5

Standard 1- Student Development

3.17

3.33

Standard 8 - Instructional Strategies (including 8.3 Technology element)

3.19

3.35

Standard 2 - Learning Differences

2.75

3.40

Standard 9 - Professional Learning and Ethical Practice

3.17

3.47

Standard 3 - Learning Environments

2.92

3.47

Standard 10 - Leadership and Collaboration

3.00

3.53

Standard 4 - Content Knowledge

3.11

3.57

Standard 11 - Impact on Student Learning

3.00

3.55

Standard 5 - Application of Content

3.08

3.40

Standard 12 - Professional Dispositions

3.17

3.67

Standard 6 - Assessment

3.17

3.13

Standard 13 - Christian Influence

3.44

3.65

Standard 7 - Planning for Instruction

3.00

3.55

Standard 14 - Technology Integration

2.85

3.38

First Year
Overall Impact = 3.00
Overall Mean = 3.08

Third Year
Overall Impact = 3.60
Overall Mean = 3.50

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. Participation increased for these reported cohorts from 2 to 7 (first year) and from 2 to 5 (3rd year).

Responses ratings ranged from 2.73 to 3.55 with 12 of 14 (86%) of scores remaining above benchmark (3.0 of 4.0). Lower scores surfaced for first-year Completers in Leadership and Collaboration (2.73). This would be understandable for new educators. Overall, third-year Completers rated themselves higher than first-year respondents. Scores went up for both groups in 9 of 14 elements (64%). The EPP notes that one ongoing area of concern--Assessment--rose from 3.13 to 3.36. These data compare favorably with responses from their supervisors who also saw skill increases in Assessment and Impact on Student Learning, to mention a few (see chart above for more details). 

Qualitative comments from first- and third-year teachers showed that they are working hard, wishing for more administrative support, and learning at every opportunity, but also realizing that college preparation cannot cover all the unique settings in which they find themselves. They bear many responsibilities yet are proud when their administrators share praise. One told his teacher that he wanted to clone her and that she was “as advanced as a veteran teacher!”

Union College First- and Third-Year Teacher Survey — Spring 2023
Self Evaluation


1st Year
n=7

3rd Year

n=5


1st Year
n=7

3rd Year

n=5

Standard 1- Student Development

3.14

3.33

Standard 8 - Instructional Strategies (including 8.3 Technology element)

3.31

3.30

Standard 2 - Learning Differences

3.29

3.40

Standard 9 - Professional Learning and Ethical Practice

3.18

3.53

Standard 3 - Learning Environments

3.05

3.04

Standard 10 - Leadership and Collaboration

2.73

3.27

Standard 4 - Content Knowledge

3.14

3.40

Standard 11 - Impact on Student Learning

3.29

3.30

Standard 5 - Application of Content

3.36

3.33

Standard 12 - Professional Dispositions

3.12

3.47

Standard 6 - Assessment

3.13

3.40

Standard 13 - Christian Influence

3.12

3.55

Standard 7 - Planning for Instruction

3.00

3.35

Standard 14 - Technology Integration

3.16

2.96

1st Year
Overall Impact = 2.86
Overall Mean = 3.12

3rd Year
Overall Impact = 3.60
Overall Mean = 3.35

Case Study Interviews

The EPP interviewed three first-year completers from the 2022-2023 cohorts. All three respondents were elementary education teachers (or working with middle school. Completers were asked questions regarding their accomplishments thus far, 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 of their students.

All three respondents had multiple things to share regarding their successes in this first year of teaching. Building relationships leads the list for all of the teachers. Learning student names early made an impression on his students for one middle school teacher. Another teacher has made learning enjoyable and has kept up a great amount of energy in the classroom. A third teacher mentioned her skill at being able to break down the steps of learning for her fifth-grade students, in particular.

The respondents all shared about the varied student needs in their classrooms and the strategies they are using for meeting those needs. Their students struggle with reading comprehension, learning disabilities, and social-emotional development. To assist them, the teachers provide spaces in the classrooms for easier learning, teach vocabulary and reading strategies, and spend time with students individually each day. Some have bought school supplies for their students and others have participated in personal professional development to strengthen their helping skills. Regarding learning environments, the respondents described project-based learning units, collaborative learning, flexible seating, using large (and small) whiteboards, and engaging writing activities. 

One area of particular interest for EPP faculty is that of assessment. The respondents reported using a wide variety of assessment strategies, including tests, reports, projects, making a video or podcast, writing assignments including comic strips, summaries, drill and practice activities, exit tickets, and creative projects (one per quarter). One respondent appreciated the standardized testing done on her students three times a year. The winter data was particularly insightful, allowing her to talk with students as to their development and to set academic goals for themselves, thus empowering them toward success. 

Technology use among the respondents shows commitment to utilizing it only for best purposes and not to entertain or pass time. The IXL program is popular for drill and practice needs. One employs the amenities of the Chromebooks provided to students as they peruse their online textbooks. The online resources for two teachers were highly engaging and provided strong support for learners. Some schools were better equipped than others, such as the mostly affluent suburban middle school with Promethean smart boards in each classroom. One respondent mentioned the undergraduate training she received and noted how well it had prepared her for her school’s technology availability. 

All three teachers provided insight as to the administrative feedback they had received thus far. One administrator suggested more variety in assessment choices. Another was counseled to post objectives more regularly and to endeavor to engage 100% of his middle school students. The third respondent felt extremely thankful for the regular and balanced feedback she received from her principal. They met once a week during the first portion of the school year, which gave the new teacher a chance to ask questions and hear immediate suggestions for developing issues with curriculum and other student needs. 

Finally, the three teachers were asked to provide feedback for the EPP and also to give advice for new teachers ready to start this fall. All three felt the EPP had provided proper guidance for getting started. The various situations in which they work require added study in areas such as reading strategies for late elementary students and other strategies appropriate for middle school. One wanted more training in administration. Another asked that the EPP spend more time teaching candidates about interacting with parents, emotion regulation strategies, more hands-on training in classroom management, and thought that perhaps all candidates should learn Spanish, given the demographics of current schools across the country. To upcoming first-year teachers, these respondents encouraged them to be open, try new things, and give yourself permission to learn even if it is difficult. Model for your students how to manage the challenges of life. Become friends with co-workers and building staff, and remember that tomorrow is a new day!