STANDARD 5: The provider maintains a quality assurance system comprised of valid data from multiple measures, including evidence of candidates’ and completers’ positive impact on P- 12 student learning and development. The provider supports continuous improvement that is sustained and evidence-based, and that evaluates the effectiveness of its completers. The provider uses the results of inquiry and data collection to establish priorities, enhance program elements and capacity, and test innovations to improve completers’ impact on P-12 student learning and development.
5.1 The provider’s quality assurance system is comprised of multiple measures that can monitor candidate progress, completer achievements, and provider operational effectiveness. Evidence demonstrates that the provider satisfies all CAEP standards.
5.2 The provider’s quality assurance system relies on relevant, verifiable, representative, cumulative and actionable measures, and produces empirical evidence that interpretations of data are valid and consistent.
5.3 The provider regularly and systematically assesses performance against its goals and relevant standards, tracks results over time, tests innovations and the effects of selection criteria on subsequent progress and completion, and uses results to improve program elements and processes.
5.4 Measures of completer impact, including available outcome data on P-12 student growth, are summarized, externally benchmarked, analyzed, shared widely, and acted upon in decision making related to programs, resource allocation, and future direction.
5.5 The provider assures that appropriate stakeholders, including alumni, employers, practitioners, school and community partners, and others defined by the provider, are involved in program evaluation, improvement, and identification of models of excellence.
5.1. The Shepherd University EPP is committed to a quality assurance system that is comprised of multiple measures, ensuring regular monitoring and comprehensive data and feedback on candidate qualifications through crucial benchmark gateways or Junctures, as candidates move from pre-field to field to professional licensed educators. Evidence has been provided for CAEP Standards 1-4 that the SU-EPP uses a quality assurance system that blends external measures of candidate performance with EPP-designed assessments such as the Pro-O5, Teacher Work Sample and ST-11, that are shared with and used by a variety of internal and external stakeholders. Guided by the conceptual framework, Teacher as Reflective Problem Solver (TARPS), this multi-layered process provides the SU-EPP with a decision-making process that is reliable and valid across candidates and programs.
5.2. To ensure compliance with CAEP accreditation standards and the CAEP “8 Annual reporting measures,” the EPP has described in standards 1-4 the current tools utilized for obtaining these data, as well as future plans, and items outlined in the Selected Improvement Plan (SIP). As described in 5.3, cyclical assessment reports demonstrate qualitative and quantitative data in a narrative summary, outlining the significance, impact, and ongoing results and plans for improvement. Additionally, the WV-Department of Education is providing EPP programs in the state with the following data to assist with this process:
1. WVDE issued email address;
2. District and school graduate is currently employed;
3. WVDE issued email address of supervisor (principal);
4. Number of years teaching (progression level);
5. Current type of teaching permit;
6. General summative assessment data (proficiency only);
7. GSA – special education alternative;
8. Fitnessgram grades 4-8;
9. CTE completer by program;
10. Data from early learning reporting system;
11. Formative data from grades K-2 (if possible);
12. Teacher evaluation data – school average and completer average of learning goal.
Standards 1-4 outline changes made based on these data, including external data from the WV-DOE, EPPAC Advisory Council Meetings, PEUC meetings, Principal/Employer Surveys, Student Teacher assessments and surveys, academic program reviews, faculty annual reports, and institutional assessment reports. This information is collected, analyzed, and reported through the EPP and the Center for Teaching and Learning for continuous improvement. The evaluation of candidate- and unit-level data informs the SU-EPP’s efforts to improve the quality of candidate preparation and impact through curriculum and instruction, the use of technology, and the quality of our candidates on an ongoing and increasingly systematized and centralized balanced basis.
Institutionally, strategic indicators allow SU to gauge its performance based on outcomes from regional and national peer groups. Particular attention is paid to retention and graduation rates, which are also reported to the WV-HEPC. Shepherd’s strategic indicators cover the following:
1. Headcount and FTE Enrollment
2. Retention and Graduation Rates
3. Household Income
4. Student Credit Hours Taught by Full-Time Faculty
5. Faculty and Staff Salaries
6. Minority Faculty as a Percentage of Total Faculty
7. Student/Faculty and Student/Staff Ratios
8. Revenue and Expense Trends
9. Cost per Full-Time Equivalent Student
10. Resident Students as a Percentage of Enrollment
11. Utilization of the Residence Halls
12. Annual Development Collections
Other national and reliable peer group data sets that aided in the development of these indicators include the data set from the Council of Public Liberal Arts Colleges and Universities (COPLAC) and the IPEDS annualized data report. These informative peer groups allow SU to gauge its performance based on outcomes from regional and national peer groups.
The Academic Affairs Annual Report focuses on benchmarking Shepherd University against two sets of peer institutions. MGT on all charts and graphs refers to the official West Virginia Higher Education Policy Commission (HEPC) peer institutions for Shepherd. COPLAC refers to the membership institutions of the Council of Public Liberal Arts Colleges. IPEDS annualized data report and the Voluntary System of Accountability track Shepherd’s costs, graduation, acceptance and retention rates, as does the COPLAC Common Data Set. The WV-HEPC Higher Education Report Card compares data from public institutions across the state in relation to the previously mentioned metrics, such as headcount, retention and graduation rates, and student loan CDRs.
5.3. The SU-EPP Professional Education Unit Assessment System (PEUAS) ensures that teacher candidates at SU are prepared to serve as professional teachers who create effective learning environments for meaningful learning and student engagement. Assessments address and align with the Professional Education Unit’s (PEU) conceptual framework (TARPS), the Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (INTASC) standards and SPA-specific standards for individual programs. Candidate assessment occurs at several transition points using multiple assessments in each of the four assessment domains. Assessments of the teacher candidate through strategic gateways or juncture points provide evidence of the candidate’s growth and development. Each transition point uses various formative and summative assessments that collect data to determine the professional and pedagogical content knowledge of candidates and graduates. Licensure pass rates (PRAXIS) provide evidence demonstrating the ability of the EPP’s graduates to meet national and professional standards. When benchmarks are not reached, programs have modified and aligned curriculum with these standards, hired staff, and given referrals to resources for test preparation workshops. The EPP plans to revisit the former practice of offering test preparation workshops for teacher candidates.
The EPP is also aligned with the SU assessment and program review process. Assessment at SU is multi-tiered and highly interconnected. Goals for student learning are clearly articulated at the macro-level through our SU strategic plan and core curriculum, and all academic departments and administrative units are required to articulate and submit student learning goals every 18 months. This process allows academic and administrative units to clearly link student learning goals to the SU mission, strategic plan, and, where applicable, AAC&U’s LEAP goals and core curriculum competencies. Reports generated through the WEAVE assessment system are reviewed and followed by a report from the Assessment Task force. All departments and units are required to establish two to three learning goals, direct and indirect means of measuring these goals, benchmarks for success, and a detailed plan for improvement if goals are not met.
The Center for Teaching and Learning (CTL) also administers several nationally certified standardized academic assessment measures and standardized co-curricular assessments to gain a better understanding of the effectiveness of the student learning experience. These include the CLA (Collegiate Learning Assessment) which measures critical thinking skills and the MAPP (Measure of Academic Progress & Proficiency) to first-year and senior students. These tools test students on general areas of academic study and help us to pinpoint areas of the curriculum that may need to be revisited. (http://www.shepherd.edu/ctl2/standardized-assessment-measures-at-shepherd-university).
The Program Review Process is driven by the WV-HEPC Series 10 Policy, which states, “Each institutional governing board has the responsibility to review at least every five years all programs offered at the institution address the viability, adequacy, necessity, and consistency with mission of the programs to the institutional master plan, the institutional compact, and the education and workforce needs of the responsibility district.” Crucial components of the program review outlined in the SU Faculty Handbook, Appendix G are contained in the unit self-study, which must state accomplishments achieved since the last review, and an external reviewer who evaluates the self-study and completes a site visit. The unit self-study includes the program mission, student learning and career placement outcomes, faculty scholarship, planning documents, costs and the program’s institutional context.
5.4. As outlined in standard 4, the evidence throughout the SU-EPP self-study provides evidence demonstrating candidates complete a rigorous, progressive, and comprehensive program to graduate and be recommended for state teacher licensure. Because of Shepherd’s unique location, candidates may find positions in West Virginia, or in the surrounding states of MD, VA, PA or DC area.
Standard 4 outlines past efforts to track completer impact data and outlines future plans for gathering completer impact on P-12 student learning. Completer impact and available outcome data on P-12 student growth and development will be analyzed, shared widely in advisory council meetings, and will be the basis for decision-making related to EPP programs, resource allocation, and future directions for the EPP. As noted in Standard 4, EPP impact data includes a systematic exit evaluation of program completers, maintenance of employment data, surveys of both graduates and employers and records on the awards and distinctions of our graduates as measures of impact. Additional opportunities through a case-study or thesis option for graduate education students in SU’s M.A. in Curriculum and Instruction under the direction of EPP graduate faculty.
5.5. Shepherd University’s and the EPP’s organizational structure and guiding policies, create at multiple levels a culture of involvement of internal and external stakeholders. Through shared governance, these structures allow internal and external stakeholders to participate in setting strategic priorities and directions for the institution and unit, participate in the decision-making process, and collaborate in decisions regarding the academic enterprise of Shepherd University.
Evidence included throughout the CAEP standards, demonstrates multiple ways candidate and program data is shared with stakeholders. These constituent groups include school partners, alumni, employers, students and faculty within and outside the EPP. As noted in 5.2, data from the WV Department of Education is also shared with the EPP. Collaborative partnerships between the EPP and school districts and the outcomes of these partnerships must also be detailed for all programs. Additionally, the EPP is gathering or developing plans to gather data on an annual basis to ensure that the CAEP “8 Reporting Measures” are addressed, including measures of program impact, program outcome and consumer information. The EPP depends on the input of these internal and external stakeholders to maintain a quality assurance system, regularly assesses performance of the EPP and its impact, and to monitor these results over time.
Professional Education Unit Council (PEUC): The Professional Education Unit is the body responsible for educator preparation at Shepherd University. The (PEUC) is chaired by the Director of Teacher Education and is composed of Specialization Coordinators from each Content Specialty Area, all members of the Department of Education, and two elected educator candidates. In this way, the PEUC exemplifies how faculty across academic programs share responsibility and authority with education faculty in determining what is important in teacher education. The PEUC, through its bi-monthly meetings, administers, coordinates, evaluates, monitors, reviews, and revises the Teacher Education Program at Shepherd University. The PEUC ensures that all specializations are conducted in a manner that is consistent with the stated philosophy, theme, and objectives of the EPP..
Education Personnel Preparation Advisory Committee: The Educational Personnel Preparation Advisory Committee (EPPAC) meets once each semester to discuss programmatic needs, functioning, and implementation of new and revised policies. This important body is also part of the EPP’s conceptual framework. Stakeholder feedback is a crucial component for continuous quality improvement, along with determining program impact. The PEUC, candidates, public school personnel, and EPPAC work collaboratively to benefit and ensure candidates’ and completers’ positive impact on student learning. EPPAC meeting minutes 2015-2017 indicate the diversity of the committee membership (school staff, superintendent, faculty, and students), as well as issues ranging from completer impact to teacher and teacher candidate evaluation.
Institutional Stakeholder Involvement
The following outline institutional participation of stakeholders in evaluating program quality and effectiveness:
A crucial component of the EPP is its curriculum. SU and the EPP maintains effective authority over the curriculum, student learning, and faculty qualifications. Any changes to the curriculum, including prerequisite changes, must be sanctioned by the appropriate department, unit, school, and finally the Curriculum and Instruction Committee. A final review by the Core Curriculum Committee may be necessary if the altered course is an option in the core. Currently the EPP has two courses listed in the Core Curriculum, EDUC 200 (Foundations of American Education) and EDUC 360 (Survey of Exceptional Children), both of which address fulfill the multiculturalism and diversity competency requirement.
The Curriculum and Instruction Committee considers changes in and development of new courses and programs that have been forwarded by the various academic schools (undergraduate only).
The Core Curriculum Committee considers and initiates proposals for course and programmatic change to the general education or core/common curriculum of the institution. Revisions which change the structure of the core curriculum require a vote by all full-time faculty. Committee forms, such as the curricular flow chart, detail the level and process for the progression of approvals at the institutional level for academic programs as well as the core curriculum.
Program Review Process: The Program Review process involves a site visit by an external peer reviewer. Changes made as a result of the program review process are an important component in closing the loop on assessment as it relates to the mission and strategic priorities of the University and academic or professional unit.
SU’s EPP quality assurance system reflects the vision of the TARPS conceptual framework, while simultaneously ensuring compliance with CAEP, national, regional, state and local standards and expectations within the legal framework of teacher preparation programs.
- Juncture 1 and 2 Documents
- Teacher Performance Assessment
- Pro 05
- Student Teaching 2011 Evaluation Tool
- (EPPAC) meetings
- Post Graduate Surveys
- Discussion Notes
- NExT Exit Survey
- NExT Exit Survey Report Fall 2016
- Academic Affairs Annual Report
- WV-HEPC Higher Education Report Card
- SU Strategic Plan
- Core Curriculum
- WV-HEPC Series 10 Policy
- SU Faculty Handbook, Appendix G