Employer and TEAC (Teacher Educator Advisory Council) Feedback

The Masters in Education (M.Ed.) program was approved by the South Carolina Commission of Higher Education in 2019. The first cohort of completers with an N<10 (N=7) were in AY 2020-21. The program was not included in the last CAEP accreditation review in Spring 2020 as the first cohort of completers with a low n (N<10) were in AY 2020-21. All add-on endorsements were approved by the state.

The M.Ed. in Educator Leadership program had its first cohort of completers in 2020-21. As a minimum of 6 months is required to begin collecting completer data, the employer surveys and TEAC feedback will not be collected until the AY 2021-22 and forward.

Further, with a N<10 no valid inferences can be made from the data evidence.

General Program Information

• Designed to develop Teacher Leaders
  • Teacher Leader endorsement
  • Preparation for being a Classroom Leader, Grade Level Leader, Instructional Coach, Mentor, Curriculum Specialist
    *Does not lead to principal certification

• Program Goals
  • develop administrative skills such as management, supervision and decision-making
  • focus on preparing school leaders to be instructional leaders
  • improve instruction and in turn improve student learning

1. 2018 06 13 CHE MEd Ed Leadership Approval

2. MEd Leadership Program

Completer/Recent Alumni Surveys

Upon completion of the M.Ed. Program, six of the seven initial cohort completers evaluated the quality of preparation as educator leaders in the M. Ed. program. Most noted preparation areas were:

• Building leadership capacity
• The value of the Action Research noted
• Graduate level vs. Undergraduate topics

As the first cohort of M.Ed. in Educator Leadership graduates were in the 2020-21 academic year, alumni survey data (minimum of six months post-graduation) was not available for the AY2020-21 cohort.

Capstone projects indicate 100% (n=7) are well prepared to take on educator leadership roles in their school contexts and districts and areas of endorsement.

2.MEd Leadership Program

All completers in the M. Ed. program in AY 2020-21 (N=7) were practicing educators and/or administrators seeking a Master’s in Educator Leadership with an add-on endorsement in one of the following areas:

• English for Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL)
• Gifted & Talented (GT)
• ECE Special Education (ECE-SPED)
• Middle Level Education (MLE)
• Literacy / Read to Succeed Teacher (R2S)
• Online Teaching (Ed Tech)
• Project based Learning (PBL)

We will continue to track the graduates and their career trajectory.

Employer surveys will also be conducted at the end of the AY 2021-22 year.

2.MEd Leadership Program

Graduate Observations of Teaching Effectiveness SC Formal Evaluation Data – (In-Service Teachers – Induction Year Teachers-USCA Graduates)

Contribute to P-12 Student Learning Growth and Apply Professional Knowledge, Skills, and Dispositions:

The Expanded ADEPT evaluation is administered by school districts during a teacher’s second   year in the classroom. Developed by the National Institute for Excellence in Teaching (NIET) the Expanded ADEPT rubric seeks to create an evaluation system that is “…valid, reliable, and fair and that produces actionable and constructive feedback to support professional growth” (Expanded ADEPT Support and Evaluation Guidelines, 2018, p.3). The rubric includes four domains: planning, instruction, environment, and professionalism, and twenty-three indicators. Each indicator is detailed by a series of descriptors found in the ADEPT 4.0 rubric. Central to the South Carolina Teaching Standards is the idea of student growth, which is assessed through Student Learning Objectives (SLOs). The SLO reflects the teacher’s ability  to: “…set appropriate goals for student learning and development, accurately measure and analyze student growth, and to plan, implement, and adjust instruction to ensure maximum student progress” (Expanded ADEPT Support and Evaluation Guidelines, 2018, p.7). Impact data is measured through the Student Learning Objective evaluation (SLO). Student Learning Objectives (SLOs) are a tool for actionable reflection used in teacher evaluation systems as a student growth measure. SLOs are monitored over the duration of time the students are with the teacher for instruction, which may be a full academic year, a semester, or quarter (depending on the context in which the teacher leads instruction).” Retrieved from https://ed.sc.gov/educators/educator-effectiveness/measuring-student-growth/slo/

On an annual basis, classroom teachers select a SLO and provide benchmarking pre and post data and artifacts to demonstrate their instructional impact on student learning. In addition, the 2^nd year teachers (1^st year induction) are evaluated using the 4.0 Rubric. For the AY 2021-22, 100% of USCA graduates evaluated (N=45)  passed their 4.0 and SLO evaluations. For the first three domains and corresponding indicators, USCA graduates scored within .10 (of a 4.0 score) of the SC state averages and within the proficient range of scores.  Of note, in the fourth domain (professionalism),  USCA graduates scored higher (range .13 - .44+) in all indicators than the state averages for professionalism.  Results demonstrate that USCA (2^nd year teacher) graduates in AY 2021-22 are highly effective educators who positively impact P-12 learners’ growth.

1. State Graduate 4.0 and SLO Impact Data and Observations of Teaching Effectiveness

Alumni Surveys

Contribute to P-12 Student Learning Growth and Apply Professional Knowledge, Skills, and Dispositions:

In addition, alumni from the Alumni Advisory board were surveyed using a Likert scale (1-4, needs improvement – exemplary, with a 3  as proficient) regarding how well the EPP prepared teacher candidates for the classroom and their impact on student learning.  The response rate was low with an N of 10.  However, even with the low N, some trends were evident and worth noting.  This alumni survey was sent out alumni of USCA to share their view of their preparedness and impact on P-12 learning. The respondents (N=10; 7 classroom teachers, 2 specialist and 1 other), using a Likert scale of 1-4 (1=needs improvement, 2=approaching, 3=proficient, and 4=exemplary) and open-ended questions, rated and commented on their preparedness to teach based on their professional program at USCA. The target rating for this 4-point scale is a 3.0 (proficient rating). The ratings ranged from 2.67 – 3.2 with a standard deviation range of 0.83 – 1.0. Areas of strength were noted in instruction of diverse learners (3.2), understanding of learner growth and development (3.1), creating collaborative learning  (3.1), student engagement (3.1), and collaboration with families, colleagues, and the community to improve student learning.  The respondents also rated their preparedness to create meaningful learning opportunities across content areas and teaching for mastery at a proficient score of 3.0.  Areas for growth were included content pedagogy (2.67), promoting critical thinking and problem solving (2.7), formative assessment (2.8), design instruction for diverse learners (2.9), multimodal assessment to guide teaching and learning (2.7), and  instructional planning aligned to content (2.9). 

Areas of EPP strength from qualitative data were culturally relevant teaching strategies, best classroom practices, high quality clinical experiences and corresponding methods courses, and professional collaboration.  Multiple respondents mentioned the lack of intervention training for Gen. Ed majors and limited SpEd and Gen. Ed. collaboration (e.g., IEP, 504, BIP) weaknesses in preparation. Other respondents mentioned the need for the science of reading training and behavioral management training.  In response to these survey results, the USCA SoE has integrated more work with Bloom’s Taxonomy to create cognitive learning targets, assessments aligned to Bloom’s Taxonomy and higher order questioning strategies in methods courses.  Strengths in culturally responsive teaching and differentiation for diverse learners were two areas of growth in previous years exit survey data. The EPP has integrated culturally relevant teaching strategies, assessments, and assignments throughout the professional program over the past three academic years. In addition, working with diverse families has become a focus of our EPP.  Many programs has assignments directly aligned to working with diverse families (e.g., equity issue project in elementary) and learning modules in internship. There is clear alignment to our continuous improvement efforts in response to the data.

2. UofSCA School of Education Alumni Survey Fall 2021-Fall 2022

Employer - TEAC (Teacher Educator Advisory Council) Feedback

For AY 2021-22, employers (N=9) were surveyed regarding USCA 1-5 year graduates’ preparedness to teach.  The employers rated the USCA graduates on a Likert Scale (1-4; 1 = 1.0 Needs Improvement; 2 = 2.0 Approaching; 3 = 3.0 Proficient; 4 = 4.0 Exemplary) and qualitative responses on USCA recent (1-5 year) alumni preparedness.

Strengths: (Scores 2.67 – 3.0)

• Multi-modal Assessment to Guide Instruction and Learning
• Student Engagement
• Co-teaching/planning to foster collaborative learning
• Collaboration with students, families, colleagues and community
• Creating challenging learning experiences
• Lesson Planning
• Instructional Strategies
• Professionalism and Professional Development
• Assessing Learner Growth and Progress
• Understanding Learner Development

Weaknesses: (Scores 2.44 – 2.56)

• Teaching Diverse Learners
• Taking on Leadership Roles
• Pedagogy
• Differentiated Instruction
• Creating Meaningful Experiences that show Mastery of Content
• Knowledge of State Standards
• Designing Cross-curricular lessons

Further, employer survey evidence analyzed from AY 2018-19 thru 2020-21 related to USC Aiken graduates who completed their any of their 1^st – 3^rd year of teaching in the 2018-19, 2019-20, and 2020-21.  22 of 52 employers responded (42% response rate) to surveys sent regarding 81 teachers (N=27 total responses or 33%).  Employers rated USCA graduate overall preparedness  at a 3.6/4 (scale of unprepared to well-prepared).  Highest averages (3.63 – 3.78) were demonstrated in content knowledge and pedagogy, summative assessment, lifelong learning, and meeting 1^st year responsibilities.  Scores in the 3.52-3.59 range fell in lesson planning, setting expectations, formative assessment, and learning environment (behavioral management).  Lowest ratings (3.48 average) were noted in long range planning.  Of the 26 qualitative comments offered by school administrators, 20 were positive and spoke to overall preparedness, 4 were negative and centered on behavioral management, and 2 were neutral.   These results align with the trends in preparedness noted in the alumni survey data evidence.

In addition, the TEAC (Teacher Educator Advisory Council) is made up of SoE faculty, school district administration, and mentor teachers has consistently offered feedback regarding the strengths of USCA teacher education graduates: 1) familiarity w/ evaluation process and system; 2) Professionalism; 3) Collaboration; 4) Content Knowledge.  The TEAC members also recommended a stronger focus on the science of reading and cooperative group work strategies in our professional program. Anecdotally, the 2021-22 cohort 13 produced First Year Teachers of the Year and we have had 50+ 1st Year Teachers of the Year over the past 5 academic years. Also, the majority of 2021-22 interns in Aiken County School District (ACPSD), our largest partner district, were offered teaching contracts for the 2022-23 school year. The EPP supports mutually beneficial partnerships with stakeholders through professional development for educators, research collaborations, contract courses for district partner teachers, conference presentations, CT and US quality surveys, Teacher Educator Advisory Council semi-annual meetings where TEAC stakeholders participate in survey validation, revision, and creation, support with dispositional development and completer quality, and promote induction year mentoring ACPSD program plan revision.  

Finally, USC-Aiken has professional development school partnerships for all program areas of study.  Methods courses are taught within partner schools with corresponding clinical experiences.  Clinical educators, cooperating teachers, and university supervisors are highly qualified and are evaluated by professional program teacher candidates and interns each semester.  That survey data is tracked and used to make future placement decisions and to improve clinical field experiences.

3a. Employer Survey Fall 2021-Fall 2022

3b. Employer Surveys (AY 2018-19; 2019-20; 2020-21) – Summary - pdf

4.Teacher of the Year & First Year Teacher of Year AY2021-22

Final Evaluation Internship (Pre-service Teachers)

For the academic years 2015-16 through AY2021-22, 100% of USCA student teacher interns passed their student teacher semester across all School of Education professional programs. Further, a review and analysis of the SCTS 4.0 data (internship evaluation) indicates that USC Aiken student teacher interns were most challenged in domains of Instruction and planning but still scored above the 3.0, proficient score. Interns scored the highest in professionalism and environment. The AY 2021-22 (N=58) composite score for all 4.0 rubric domains (instruction, planning, environment, professionalism) was 3.16/4.0.  The individual domain composite scores were as follows:  Instruction (3.1);  Planning (3.14); Environment (3.22); Professionalism (3.31).  The Elementary program completers consistently scored highest in two domains (environment, and professionalism) and composite scores for the academic year 2021-22.  Deeper disaggregation into the domain subcategories showed lowest scores for most programs in Assessment (Planning Domain). However, interns scored  2.5-3.92 in all rubric areas (scale range 1.0 to 4.0) on average across all 4 ADEPT Domains in the 2021-22 academic year.  The target (proficient_ SC 4.0 Rubric score range in South Carolina for all practicing teachers is (2.26-3.75).

5. AY 2021-22 SCTS Rubric 4.0 Data Tables

6a. 2015-22 Student Teacher Results Summary

6b. Student Teacher Pass Rate Summary AY 2021-22

Praxis II Pass Rates – ETS and Title II

The academic year 2021-22 showed a upward trend in pass rates from the previous academic year for the PLT exams, (PLT pass rates Early Childhood = 92.6%; Elementary Education = 100%), but a downward trend on the content area Praxis II exams. For the Praxis II content area exams, (Early Childhood had a 71-93% pass rate with N=14-23; Elementary Education candidates’ pass rates ranged from 64-94%, N=19-25; Special Education candidates, N=16, earned a 71-89% pass rate.  These lower pass rates mirror the state pass rates, particularly in content area Praxis II exams. However, when we examined the pass rates of our AY2021-22 completers only, the pass rates were above 85% for all PLT and Praxis II content exams for N>5. The pass rates for AY2021-22 completers were above the state average on all Praxis II and PLT exams.  The overall pass rate was 83% for all test takers (multiple areas had a N<5, so the scores were not available).

Taking into account the Praxis exam(s) pass rate data, our program areas are working to focus on content instruction and knowledge of the content area standards in the professional program math, science, social studies and ELA methods courses. This data indicate that we are teaching our candidates how to teach the content, as evidenced by our PLT pass rates. However, content knowledge in elementary education (science, social studies, and math) and in middle level (social studies) needs more emphasis in our methods courses in those programs and content areas.

7. Praxis Data 5 yr. 2018-2022

8. Title II Praxis Test Results AY 21-22

9. 2022-23 USCA- SC ADEPT Aiken Assurances

10. 2023 Title II Report

11. Praxis II Pass Rates – Title II – AY 2021-22 Completers Only

Student Learning Objective (SLO) Assessment

The Student Learning Objective (SLO) assessment was implemented beginning in the fall 2018 semester per South Carolina requirements.  This is a summative internship assessment based on measuring the impact of PK-12 student learning and therefore, the measurement of PK-12 student learning growth, progress monitoring is essential to the assessment goals. The data from the academic year 2021-22 indicated that all teacher interns achieved near mastery (3.0) in every category.  The overall  School of Education (SoE) teacher intern outcomes for the 2021-22 academic year demonstrated an average  2.69 score (out of a possible 3) or 90% mastery of the 10 SLO rubric areas. 

Strengths:

• Assessment (Impact on Learning) – Baseline Data and Historical Trend Data and Student Population (2.5 – 3.0)
• Standards (2.9 -2.97)
• ECE (2.86) and SpEd (2.96). Spring 2022 Composite Scores Highest of SoE
• Fall 2021 Middle Level - Highest Composite Scores with 2.66
• Elementary and ECE matched the overall SoE Composite Score at 2.57

 Weaknesses:

• Progress Monitoring (Formative Assessment; 2.55 – 2.64)
• Instructional Strategies (2.52 – 2.64)
• Growth Targets (2.39 – 2.72)
• Post Assessment (2.54– 2.62)

The USC-Aiken SoE faculty reflected in the AY 2021-22 on how to better implement and analyze formative and post assessment to improve P-12 learning, instructional strategies, and progress monitoring practices throughout the USCA professional program practicum courses.  Further, the SoE faculty reflected on the disaggregated data by program area and overall to determine our continuous improvement areas of focus delineated by program of study. 

12. SLO Data Fall 2021- Spring 2022

13. Continuous Improvement Data (Academic Years 2018-19 thru 2021-22 Data Overview).

Completer/Recent Alumni Surveys

Academic year 2020-22 completer/recent alumni survey (N=43) satisfaction data results indicate high satisfaction ratings with the EPP in all areas. Due to EPP-wide continuous improvement efforts, the EPP completer/recent alumni data from the Fall 2017-Spring 2021 (N=277) academic years (AY’s) indicate that USC-Aiken SOE completers/recent alumni feel well-prepared to teaching in diverse K-12 contexts. The alumni rated their satisfaction level ("satisfied" or "very Satisfied") for overall EPP preparation in a range of 65-96% with significant upward trends each academic year from the spring to fall semesters.  For the AY 2021-22, 91% of recent alumni were satisfied with their educator preparation programs. The majority of satisfaction percentages (82%+) fell in the "very satisfied" to "satisfied" range. Upward trends were noted  from fall 2017 – Spring 22  in the preparation areas of: academic advising, professionalism, and instructional strategies. Areas of strength from fall 2020 – Spring 2022 (N=102) were noted in: overall satisfaction, high expectations, learning environment, content integration,  assessment to improve learning, diverse learners, high expectations, and instructional strategies. Long range planning, teaching and technology course, online methods courses,  and ELL instructional strategies were the areas that the recent alumni had rated as the least satisfactory but still trended upward from the from the fall  2020 to the  spring 2022 semesters.  A discrepancy was also observed with the preparation of recent alumni to prepare diverse learners as an area of strength in AY  2020-21 and 2021-22 yet the biggest area of weakness related to preparation to teach English language learners (ELL’s).  The EPP faculty collaborated on goal setting to strengthen all preparation areas, specifically long range planning,, integrating teaching and technology, and ELL instruction) in the 2021-22 and 2020-21 academic years to include required unit plans or e-portfolio of lesson(s) across programs, integration of teaching and technology, teaching ELLs integrated within all professional program practicum curricula and courses. Culturally responsive lesson planning and more detailed differentiation for diverse learners was added to the USCA Lesson Plan template used across the EPP.  Due to EPP-wide continuous improvement efforts, from spring 2019 to fall 2021 previous areas of weakness grew toward areas of strength in the areas of academic advising and teaching diverse learners. As part of its continuous improvement efforts, the EPP reviews the recent alumni survey data on a bi-annual basis and makes modifications to individual programs and EPP-wide.

14a. Education Post Internship Surveys Fall 2021

14b. Education Post-Internship Survey Results Spring 2022

15. Integration of ELL instruction

Graduate, Certified, & Employment Data

* For the 2017-18 student intern cohort, 88% held full-time teaching positions in academic year 2018-19 while 10% had unknown employment status during the 2018-19 academic year.  One candidate  (2%) did not seek certification or teaching employment.  For the  2018-19 cohort, 86% of completers had contracted teaching positions for the 2019-20 school year.  In academic year 2019-20, 80% had contracted employment for the current 2020-21 school year. For the 2020-21 cohort of completers (N=65), 86% (56/65) had contracted employment by September 2021. For the AY 2021-22 cohort of completers (N=58), 85% (49/58) had contracted employment in a SC school district by August 2022.

For USCA EPP graduates in the academic year 2015-16, over 90% earned licensure in their program of study.  In 2016-17, >80% of SOE graduates had received initial certification status.  In 2017-18, 94% of graduates earned initial teacher licensure in South Carolina.  In 2018-19, 83% of SoE graduates earned initial licensure status.  In 2019-20, 82% or 45/55 of candidates earned initial certification status. In 2020-21,  92% (60/65) earned initial licensure by September 2021. In 2021-22, 79% (46/58) of USCA completers earned SC initial licensure by August 2022.

Candidate Milestone Data:

Enrollment/Graduate Data & Candidate Milestone Data

The graduation data indicate that the last five academic years have shown rising and falling trends in the graduation numbers of candidates completing the USCA School of Education professional program.  The number of EPP completers (graduates with certification) had decreased 5% from AY 2016-17 (n=55)  & 2017-18 (n=50), but rose significantly in AY 2018-19  (+27.5% from AY 2017-18 , n=50; through  2018-19, n=69), AY 2019-20 19  (-20% from AY 2018-19 , n=69; through  2019-20, n=55), AY 2020-21 (+15 % from AY 2019-20, n=55; 2020-21, n=65), AY 2021-22 (-11% from AY 2020-21, n=65; 2021-22, n=58).

Further, the data indicate that the last five academic years have shown a steady trend in the enrollment number of diverse candidates admitted into the professional program. From fall 2017 through spring 2022, the ethnic and racial diversity of the EPP candidates averaged 20% (AY 2017-18:  6% male and 14% diverse candidates; AY 2018-19:  15% male and 25% diverse candidates; AY 2019-20:  11% male and 22% diverse candidates; AY 2020-21: 16% male and 23% diverse candidates; AY 2021-22: 8% male and 19% diverse candidates).  At the program level, from fall 2017-spring 2022 diversity percentage trends ranged from 19-25% for all programs.  Of particular note is the EPP's recruitment of male and diverse candidates.  To further improve male and diverse candidate enrollment, the EPP collaborated with Aiken County Public Schools, Aiken Technical College and the Call Me Mister scholarship program.  The first Call Me Mister cohort was admitted in the 2019-20 academic year at UofSCA.  The EPP also focuses on the critical needs areas in South Carolina including special education, science, math, literacy, middle level (all content areas), and ELA/English and literacy. The EPP is working on developing dual degree programs for science and teacher education majors.  Further, the EPP's Aiken Scholars program recruits high school students identified as gifted in STEM areas.  The students engage in advanced high school classwork and undergraduate level STEM courses at USCA.  The EPP also has a well-established Teaching Fellows program that recruits the highest caliber of high school seniors who are interested in entering the field of education.  Throughout the professional program, EPP candidates' dispositions are tracked and monitored for growth.   An EPP-wide diversity focus has allowed more proactive and effective mentoring of candidates.  Finally, the  EPP  participates in the Rural Teacher Initiative, providing significant financial assistance to candidates who agree to teach in a high need area of the state upon graduation.

Over the past five years, a phenomenon has occurred at our institution that was marked by an increase in the number of first-generation college students. While we value all these dimensions of diversity, our recruitment and retention plan is focused for now on setting benchmarks related to gender and race. We have also seen a decrease in enrollment due to the pandemic and have increased our recruitment efforts.

17a. USCA AY 2021-22 SoE Enrollment Data Table

17b. Education Graduates Enrollment Data Table

Employer and TEAC (Teacher Educator Advisory Council) Feedback

The Masters in Education (M.Ed.) program was approved by the South Carolina Commission of Higher Education in 2019.  All add-on endorsements were approved by the state of South Carolina. The first cohort of completers with an N<10 (N=7) were in AY 2020-21.  The program was not included in the last CAEP accreditation review in Spring 2020 as the first cohort of completers with a low n (N<10) were in AY 2020-21.  The completers in AY2021-22 were an N=5 (1 in December and 4 in May 2022).

The M.Ed. in Educator Leadership program had its first cohort of completers in 2020-21.  As a minimum of 6 months is required to begin collecting completer data and the completers in AY2021-22 were only 5, the employer surveys will not be collected until the AY 2022-23( covering completers in 2020-21, 2021-22, 2022-23) and forward.

Further, with a N<10  no valid inferences can be made from the data evidence. 

General Program Information

• Designed to develop Teacher Leaders
  • Teacher Leader endorsement
  • Preparation for being a Classroom Leader, Grade Level Leader, Instructional Coach, Mentor, Curriculum Specialist

                  *Does not lead to principal certification

• Program Goals
  • develop administrative skills such as management, supervision and decision-making
  • focus on preparing school leaders to be instructional leaders
  • improve instruction and in turn improve student learning

1. MEd Leadership Program Overview

Completer/Recent Alumni Surveys

Upon completion of the M.Ed. Program, 2 of 5 AY2021-22 completers evaluated the quality of preparation as educator leaders in the M. Ed. program. Most noted preparation areas were:

• Building leadership capacity
• The value of the Action Research noted
• Graduate level vs. Undergraduate topics

As the first cohort of M.Ed. in Educator Leadership graduates were in the 2020-21 academic year and there was only five completer in 2021-22, the alumni survey data only had 2 completer respondents.

The 2 respondents rated the overall quality of the program at a 5 (Likert rating 1-5, low to high). The majority of the constructive qualitative comments related to leadership administration of. intervention meetings, working with adults, meeting the needs for leadership, and leadership courses over the specialization area courses. Professional leadership roles taken on by completers since beginning the M.Ed. included Classroom research, conference presentation, team leader, curriculum leader, grants manager, and collective leadership initiative at the state level. The specialization areas of the respondents were GT and ESOL education.

Capstone projects indicate 100% were on Target (n=5) are well prepared to take on educator leadership roles in their school contexts and districts and areas of endorsement.

3. Ed. Exit Survey data

All completers in the M. Ed. program in AY 2021-22 (N=5) were practicing educators and/or administrators seeking a Master’s in Educator Leadership with an add-on endorsement in one or two of the following areas: 

• English for Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL)
• Gifted & Talented (GT)
• ECE Special Education (ECE-SPED)
• Middle Level Education (MLE)
• Literacy / Read to Succeed Teacher (R2S)
• Online Teaching (Ed Tech)
• Project based Learning (PBL)

We will continue to track the graduates and their career trajectory.

Employer surveys will also be conducted at the end of the AY 2022-23 year for the first cohorts of completers in 2021-22 and 2020-21, as we now have an N>10 and will have completers with 6 months+ post-graduation.

1. MEd Leadership Program Overview

Student Learning Objective (SLO) Assessment

The Student Learning Objective (SLO) assessment has been implemented beginning in the fall 2018 semester per South Carolina requirements. The SLO replaced the Teacher Work Sample as a proprietary assessment for all educational preparation programs across South Carolina. This is a summative internship assessment based on measuring the impact of PK-12 student learning and therefore, the measurement of PK-12 student learning growth, progress monitoring is essential to the assessment goals. The data from the fall 2019 semester indicated that all teacher interns achieved mastery in every category. Due to the pandemic and the switch to fully virtual instruction in the Spring 2020 semester, the SLO requirement was exempted by the South Carolina Department of Education. Therefore we have data from the fall 2019 semester only for the SLO for AY 2019-20. The overall School of Education (SoE) teacher intern outcomes for the 2019-20 academic year demonstrated an average 2.77 score (out of a possible 3) or 92% mastery of the 10 SLO rubric areas. The scores were varied across all teacher interns and program areas, indicating sufficient preparation of the fall 2019 interns in all areas. The interns’ performance was highest (range of 2.75 - 3 out of a possible score of 3) in the rubric areas of: historical trend data analysis, baseline data, post-assessment, development of learning goals, and alignment of standards to students’ learning growth targets. Rubric areas where teacher interns performed in a mean score range of 2.61 – 2.72 or higher were understanding of student population, classroom environment, and instructional strategies. As in the previous 2018-19 academic year, the primary area of concern was the progress monitoring plan (formative assessment) where the interns scored lowest of all rubric areas averaging 2.44 across all program areas. Therefore, the USC-Aiken SoE faculty reflected in the fall of 2020 on how to better implement formative assessment and progress monitoring practices throughout the USCA professional program practicum courses. Further, the SoE faculty reflected on the disaggregated data by program area and overall to determine our continuous improvement areas of focus delineated by program of study.

1.SLO Master Data Fall 2018-Fall 2019

2. Fall Retreat 2020 Data Analysis Goal Review (Academic Years 2017-20 Data Overview)

CAEP Standard 4 Embedded Case Study - Developing Case Study of Impact Data.

Data on trends not yet available. Due to the pandemic, impact data was not available from completers in the academic 2019- 20 school year. The upcoming embedded case study will cover impact data from 2020-21 and 2021-22 academic years.

*Instrumental Embedded Case Study - Data is currently being gathered for the 2020-21 and 2021-22 cohort of 1-3 year teachers (USCA alumni). Data will be provided in the 2020-21 Annual Report (submission 2022).

Final Evaluation Internship (Pre-Service Teachers)

For the academic years 2019-20, 100% of USCA student teacher interns passed their student teacher semester across all School of Education professional programs. Further, a review and analysis of the SCTS 4.0 data (internship evaluation) indicates that USC Aiken student teacher interns were most challenged in domain of Instruction. It is the lowest rated domain overall in both semesters (Fall 2019 = 2.97/4.0, Spring 2020 = 2.96/4.0). The Special Education program completers consistently scored highest in all four domains (instruction, planning, environment, and professionalism) for the academic year 2019-20. Deeper disaggregation into the domain subcategories showed lowest scores for most programs in Assessment (Planning Domain) and Managing Behavior (Environment). However, interns scored 2.67+ in all rubric areas (scale range 1.0 to 4.0) on average across all 4 ADEPT Domains in the 2019-20 academic year. The target (proficient_ SC 4.0 Rubric score range in South Carolina for all practicing teachers is (2.26-3.75).

3. AY 2019-20 SCTS Rubric 4.0 Data Tables

4.a. 2015-20 Student Teacher Results Summary

4.b. Student Teacher Pass Rate Summary 2019-20

SC Formal Evaluation Data – (In-Service Teachers – Induction Year Teachers  - USCA Graduates)

The number of 1 st year induction teacher graduates from UofSC Aiken successfully passing their formal evaluations (SCTS Rubric 4.0 & SLO) for AY 2019-2020 was 82.69%. Further for these SCDE evaluations for classroom-based teachers (former SAFE_T) AY 2018-19 USCA graduates (induction teachers) earned a pass rate of 92.86% (within 2 percentage points of the statewide average) in the academic year 2018-19 with the SLO average impact on student learning was 0.03 compared to a 0.06 statewide average for AY 2018-19 and .04 compared to 0.04 statewide for AY 2019-20. Further in former years, for the prior SAFE-T Formal Evaluation (AY 2015-18) over 93% SAFE_T formal evaluation pass rates were evident for the for the 2017-18 academic year, >97% for AY 2016-17, and >92.8% in AY 2015-16.

5. USCA Graduate 4.0 Results AY 2019-20 (SCDE ADEPT Observations of Teaching Effectiveness)

6. Benchmark Data for CAEP Annual Report 2021

*Instrumental Embedded Case Study - Data is currently being gathered for the 2020-21 and 2021-22 cohort of 1-3 year teachers (USCA alumni). Data will be provided in the 2020-21 Annual Report (submission 2022).

Employer - TEAC (Teacher Educator Advisory Council comprised of superintendents, school administrators, master cooperating teachers and university supervisors from partner school districts and SOE faculty) Feedback

Employer survey evidence analyzed from the past 3 academic years related to USC Aiken graduates who completed their any of their 1st – 3rd year of teaching in the 2018-19, 2019-20 school years and/or the 2020 fall semester. 22 of 52 employers responded (42% response rate) to surveys sent regarding 81 teachers (N=27 total responses or 33%). Employers rated USCA graduate overall preparedness at a 3.6/4 (scale of unprepared to well-prepared). Highest averages (3.63 – 3.78) were demonstrated in content knowledge and pedagogy, summative assessment, lifelong learning, and meeting 1st year responsibilities. Scores in the 3.52-3.59 range fell in lesson planning, setting expectations, formative assessment, and learning environment (behavioral management). Lowest ratings (3.48 average) were noted in long range planning. Of the 26 qualitative comments offered by school administrators, 20 were positive and spoke to overall preparedness, 4 were negative and centered on behavioral management, and 2 were neutral. These results align with the trends in preparedness noted in the alumni survey data evidence (See Satisfaction of Completers). Further, the TEAC (Teacher Educator Advisory Council) is made up of SoE faculty, school district administration, and mentor teachers has consistently offered feedback regarding the strengths of USCA teacher education graduates: 1) familiarity w/ evaluation process and system; 2)Professionalism; 3) Collaboration; 4) Content Knowledge. Anecdotally, the 2019-20 cohort produced multiple First Year Teachers of the Year and we have had 40+ 1st Year Teachers of the Year over the past 5 academic years. Also, all 2019-20 interns in ACPSD were guaranteed teaching contracts for the 2020-21 school year. The EPP supports mutually beneficial partnerships with. stakeholders through professional development for educators, research collaborations, contract courses for district partner teachers, conference presentations, CT and US quality surveys, Teacher Educator Advisory Council semi-annual meetings where TEAC stakeholders participate in survey validation, revision, and creation, support with dispositional development and completer quality, and promote induction year mentoring ACPSD program plan revision.

7. Employer Surveys (AY 2018-19; 2019-20; Fall 2020) - Summary

8. Employer (TEAC) Feedback of UofSC Aiken SOE Graduates

Completer/Recent Alumni Surveys

2019-20 completer/recent alumni survey (N=46) satisfaction data results indicate high satisfaction ratings with the EPP in all areas. Due to EPP-wide continuous improvement efforts, the EPP completer/recent alumni data from the Fall 2017-Spring 2020 (N=125) academic years (AY’s) indicate that USC-Aiken SOE completers/recent alumni feel well-prepared to teaching in diverse K-12 contexts. The recent alumni rated their satisfaction level ("satisfied" or "very Satisfied") for overall EPP preparation in a range of 60-95% with significant upward trends each academic year from the spring to fall semesters. For the AY 2019-20, over 70% of recent alumni were satisfied with their educator preparation programs. The majority of satisfaction percentages (70%+) fell in the "very satisfied" to "satisfied" range. Upward trends were noted from fall 2017 – Spring 2020 in the preparation areas of: academic advising, professionalism, and instructional strategies. Areas of strength from spring 2019 – Spring 2020 N=52) were noted in: overall satisfaction, high expectations, learning environment, assessment to improve learning, and instructional strategies. The Special Education program marked the most significant growth compared to the all other programs in the EPP (marked growth in 8 of 12 preparation measurement areas). Further from Spring 2019 - Fall 2020, additional areas of strength were noted in academic advising, qualitative classroom management, and teaching diverse learners. Long range planning and ELL instructional strategies were the areas that student had rated as the least satisfactory but still trended upward from the from the spring 2019 – spring 2020 semesters. A discrepancy was also observed with the preparation of recent alumni to prepare diverse learners as an area of strength in AY 2019-20 yet the biggest area of weakness related to preparation to teach English language learners (ELL’s). The EPP faculty collaborated on goal setting to strengthen all preparation areas, specifically long range planning, academic advising, integrating teaching and technology, and ELL instruction) in the 2018-19 and 2019-20 academic years to include pre-professional academic advisor, more intensive academic advising training and support, required unit plans or e-portfolio of lesson(s) across programs, and revisions to required diversity-focused courses within all professional program practicum curricula and courses. Culturally responsive lesson planning was also considered. In addition, recent alumni’s qualitative feedback overwhelmingly spoke to the quality of instructors and teaching content methods/pedagogy in the School of Education professional program. Due to EPP-wide continuous improvement efforts, from spring 2019 to fall 2020 previous areas of weakness grew toward areas of strength in the areas of academic advising, classroom management, and teaching diverse learners. As part of its continuous improvement efforts, the EPP reviews the recent alumni survey data on a bi-annual basis and makes modifications to individual programs and EPP-wide. Further, more longitudinal data from alumni surveys for 1-5 year graduates (alumni) will be collected starting in AY 2020-21, as the EPP has improved tracking of graduates beyond their first year of teaching.

9.a. Education Post Internship Exit Surveys 2019-20

9.b. Fall Retreat 2020 Data Analysis Goal Review (Academic Years 2017-20 Data Overview)

10. Program Goals and Continuous Improvement 2019-20

Enrollment/Graduate Data & Candidate Milestone Data  

The graduation data indicate that the last four academic years have shown rising and falling trend in the graduation numbers of candidates completing the USCA School of Education professional program. The number of EPP completers (graduates) had decreased 5% from AY 2016-17 (n=55) & 2017-18 (n=50), but rose significantly in AY 2018-19 (+27.5% from AY 2017-18 , n=50; through 2018-19, n=69), and AY 2019-20 19 (-20% from AY 2018-19 , n=69; through 2019-20, n=55). The drop in completers may have been negatively impacted by the pandemic and the move to fully virtual teaching in the Spring 2021 semester.

Further, the data indicate that the last three academic years have shown an upward trend in the enrollment number of diverse candidates admitted into the professional program. From fall 2017 through spring 2020, the ethnic and racial diversity of the EPP candidates averaged 21% (AY 2017-18: 6% male and 14% diverse candidates; AY 2018-19: 15% male and 25% diverse candidates; AY 2019-20: 11% male and 22% diverse candidates). At the program level, from fall 2017-spring 2020 diversity percentage trends ranged from 21-25% for all programs. Of particular note is the EPP's recruitment of male and diverse candidates. From AY 2017-18 through AY 2019-20, there was an 270% increase in male candidates (from 3 in 2017-18 to an average of 8 from 2018-20) and % increase (from 7 candidates or 14% in 2017-18 to an average of 14.5 or 23% diverse candidates from academic years 2018-20) in diverse candidates. To further improve male and diverse candidate enrollment, the EPP collaborated with Aiken County Public Schools, Aiken Technical College and the Call Me Mister scholarship program. The first Call Me Mister cohort was admitted in the 2019-20 academic year at UofSCA. The EPP also focuses on the critical needs areas in South Carolina including special education, science, math, literacy, middle level (all content areas), and ELA/English and literacy. The EPP is working on developing dual degree programs for science and teacher education majors. Further, the EPP's Aiken Scholars program recruits high school students identified as gifted in STEM areas. The students engage in advanced high school classwork and undergraduate level STEM courses at USCA. The EPP also has a wellestablished Teaching Fellows program that recruits the highest caliber of high school seniors who are interested in entering the field of education. Throughout the professional program, EPP candidates' dispositions are tracked and monitored for growth. An EPP-wide diversity focus has allowed more proactive and effective mentoring of candidates. Finally, the EPP participates in the Rural Teacher Initiative, providing significant financial assistance to candidates who agree to teach in a high need area of the state upon graduation.

Over the past two years, a phenomenon has occurred at our institution that was marked by an increase in the number of first-generation college students. While we value all these dimensions of diversity, our recruitment and retention plan is focused for now on setting benchmarks related to gender and race. Using this criteria, our goal is to increase the number of diverse, highly qualified teacher candidates EPP completers by a minimum of 10% across all programs by May 2023.

11. USCA AY 2016-20 Intern Master Data

12. USCA Recruitment & Retention Plan Timeline

13. 2020 Title II Report (AY 2019-20)

Graduate, Certification, Employment

For USCA EPP graduates in the academic year 2015-16, over 90% earned licensure in their program of study. In 2016-17, >80% of SOE graduates had received initial certification status. In 2017-18, 94% of graduates earned initial teacher licensure in South Carolina. In 2018-19, 83% of SoE graduates earned initial licensure status. In 2019-20, 82% or 45/55 candidates earned initial certification status.

Candidate Milestone Data:

11. USCA AY 2016-20 Intern Master Data (Graduate, Certification, Employment Charts)

Praxis II Pass Rates: ETS and Title II  

The licensure exam data (PLT and Praxis II) indicate that for three out of four of the past academic years EPP pass rates have been within 1 percentage point of the statewide South Carolina average (2016-17: 100% pass rate, 2017-18: 98% pass rate, 2018-19: 94% pass rate) However, in 2019-20, the pass rate was 70% overall because 15 candidates struggled with individual subject area tests while passing the majority of the exams) and majority of area the pass rate data was not available because the n<10, due to the low n, confidentiality, and no valid inferences can be made from n<10. In AY 2019-20, where the available pass rate data was limited (majority of areas had an n<10), the Praxis II content area exam pass rates overall (Early Childhood – USCA = 91%; Elementary Education – USCA = 81%; ) and for the PLT exams, only one program had an N>10 test takers (Elementary Education – USCA = 89%) exams. Further, when prior academic year data was disaggregated by program area and exam, all program areas that had a n>10 (in each academic year) demonstrated high pass rates (within 2% of SC pass rates) over the three academic years of fall 2016 – spring 2019 for the Praxis II (Early Childhood – USCA = 96%/SC = 98%; Elementary Education – USCA = 100%/SC = 98%) and the PLT (Early Childhood – USCA = 100%/SC = 98%; Elementary Education – USCA = 100%/SC = 99%; Secondary Education 2018-19 – USCA = 100%/SC=99%) exams.

*Benchmarking Data USCA benchmarked with USC-Upstate to compare and contrast our Educator Preparation Programs’ quality based on Title II data and South Carolina SAFE-T (prior to AY 2018-19) and CBT (SCTS 4.0 and SLO, AY 2018-19 (evaluations of graduates in induction year).

Title II Data: Praxis Exam Pass Rates (Content Areas and Pedagogical Exams) Compared to UofSC-Upstate, the pass rate percentages for UofSCA were 3- 5% points higher than UofSC-Upstate in academic years 2016-17 through AY 2018-19 with a considerably lower number of test takers (222 vs. 512), making the 3-5 percentage point difference more statistically significant. UofSCA’s content and pedagogical preparation of candidates appears to be comparable to UofSC-Upstate’s preparation in content and pedagogy.

For 4 academic years, USCA and USC-Upstate initial licensure program graduates have earned a high pass rate (USCA: 93.02. – 97.37%; USC-Upstate: 95 - 97.5%). Both institutions’ pass percentages for their interns’ evaluations were over 93%.

ADEPT Formal evaluations 2015-2019: UofSCA vs. UofSC-Upstate For the 4 academic years benchmarked (AY 2015-16 through AY 2018- 19), UofSCA and UofSC-Upstate initial licensure program graduates have earned a high pass rate on their induction year SCTS 4.0 (2018- 19) and SAFE-T (evaluations (UofSCA: 93.02. – 97.37%; UofSCUpstate: 95 - 97.5%). UofSC-Upstate’s pass rates were between 2- 4.6% higher than UofSCA’s pass rate, but USC-Upstate each year had almost double the graduates as USCA, making the passing numbers higher for each academic year. Also, it was unclear from the benchmarking materials received from USC-Upstate whether the data was for completers for each calendar year or academic year, making it difficult to compare completers’ pass rates. That said, both institutions’ pass percentages for their student teacher interns’ evaluations were over 93% for all four years measured (UofSCA – academic year and UofSC-Upstate – calendar year). Further, the SLO score serves as an adjustment for an educator’s overall teaching effectiveness rating. An SLO score of 4 will increase the teacher’s overall rating by .25, while an SLO score of 1 will decrease the teacher’s overall rating by -.25. A SLO score of 2 or 3 will have no effect on the teacher’s overall rating. For AY 2018-19, UofSCA induction year teacher graduates earned +.04 increase to their overall evaluation rating compared to UofSC-Upstate at +.06 increase. The difference was not statistically significant.

14 a. Praxis Assessment Pass Rates 2019-20

14 b. Praxis Data 2015-19

14 c. Praxis Test Results IE 19-20

15. 2019-20 USCASC ADEPT Aiken Assurances

13. 2021 Title II Report – AY 2019- 20

6. Benchmarking 2015-19

Graduate, Certified, & Employment Data

* For the 2017-18 student intern cohort, 88% held full-time teaching positions in academic year 2018-19 while 10% had unknown employment status during the 2018-19 academic year. One candidate (2%) did not seek certification or teaching employment. For the 2018-19 cohort, 86% of completers had contracted teaching positions for the 2019- 20 school year. In academic year 2019-20, 80% had contracted employment for the current 2020-21 school year. The remaining 20% of completers in AY 2019-20 employment could not be verified at the time of this report.

Candidate Milestone Data:

11. USCA AY 2019-20 Intern Master Data (Graduate, Certified, & Employment Data Charts)

USC Aiken Student Loan Default Rates. Per financial aid, our Fiscal Year 2017 (October 1, 2016 through Sept. 30, 2017) student loan cohort default rate was slightly lower than the national default rate at 9.3% (the national default rate was 9.7 % for FY 2017)

https://www2.ed.gov/offices/OSFAP/defaultmanagement/cdr.html

2019-20 Average Annual Salary of Teacher in South Carolina was $53,329.00 The average for Aiken County Public Schools was $54,433.00 (SCDE).

https://ed.sc.gov/finance/financial-data/historical-data/teacher-salary-schedules/

1. USC Aiken Average Cost of Attendance $9,712 (in-state); $14,941 (out of state) Academic Year 2019- 20 per the USCA Office of Institutional Effectiveness.