The Unit has an assessment system that collects, and analyzes data on applicant qualifications, candidate and graduate performance, and Unit operations to evaluate and improve the Unit and its programs.

The Assessment System
The Unit has Developed an Assessment System with its Professional Community that Reflects the Conceptual Framework Collaboration: The Committee on Teacher Education (COTE), is the official governing body for systematic involvement of stakeholders. COTE membership includes students, faculty, and administrators who plan, manage, evaluate program elements, and provide direction for the preparation of teachers. COTE is designed to achieve nine purposes:

• To ensure compliance with national, State, and institutional standards.
• To set policy on the assessment of candidate and Program elements.
• To assure data are defined clearly and concisely to P-12 advisory councils.
• To create programmatic change based on assessment data.
• To annually assess the Conceptual Framework and to revise or retain its components.
• To report to the institutional budget committee regarding possible increases in fiscal support for teacher education.
• To approve candidates for admission to teacher education, to clinical practice, and to exit from the Program.
• To serve as an appeals committee for Candidates While planning the assessment system with school partners, COTE followed the following seven Guidelines.

Guideline 1: COTE should involve internal and external stakeholders in the development and management of the system including faculty, candidates, and P-12 advisory councils. P-12 advisory councils provided advice and counsel for each Program report submitted to the State in February 2003. Members of these councils critiqued drafts of the reports and recommended possible changes either in procedures or evaluation measures. Suggestions for items to be included in the assessment system were also elicited from advisory councils. Candidates serving on COTE also reviewed the plan prior to implementation.

Guideline 2: COTE should adhere to the Conceptual Framework and also link the system to Illinois State Professional Teacher Standards, the Illinois Content Standards, and NCATE standards. The assessment system includes a section outlining how the Program elements match the various standards.

Guideline 3: COTE should include a coherent, sequential, assessment system for individual candidates including performance assessments for use throughout the Program. Program requirements are shared with candidates. Undergraduate candidates are notified of the Program requirements, including the critical checkpoints, while they are enrolled in EDU 101. Graduate candidates are apprised of the Program checkpoints and requirements during informational meetings before they enroll. Guidebooks describing Program elements for both undergraduate and graduate programs are disseminated when candidates enroll in the initial course.

Guideline 4: COTE should use a format that depends upon a range of candidate assessments and related data to document the quality of Programs. Matrices showing linkages between the state and national standards, Program elements, Program outcomes and dispositions, and assessment are included in the Program Reports, the Conceptual Framework and in this document.

Guideline 5: COTE should use aggregated assessments from individual candidates and other sources to refine and revise the Conceptual Framework and to possibly alter Program elements. The assessment system includes a cycle for processing assessment data. All data are entered into computerized databases using Excel, statistically analyzed by SPSS, and presented to stakeholders. Data are used to analyze candidate performance and Program elements including the assessment system.

Guideline 6: COTE should use technology resources to ensure the assessment system is constantly managed. Assessment data are entered into computer data bases and analyzed according to guideline 5.

Guideline 7: COTE should annually review the assessment system. Annual Program assessments include review of the assessment system. P-12 advisory councils propose changes possible in the system to COTE. The Unit’s System Includes a Comprehensive and Integrated Set of Evaluation Measures that are Used to Monitor Candidate Performance and Manage and Improve Operations and Programs.

A primary means for determining success is by evaluating candidates’ achievement of outcomes of the particular Program majors. Each of the 12 approved programs has cross-referenced a specific set of outcomes with the teacher education outcomes and with the Illinois Content Standards. If candidates fulfill the outcomes unique to their major, they also fulfill the Program outcomes and the Illinois Content 28 Standards. Candidates must also manifest the eight dispositions during field and clinical assignments in order to maintain approved status in the Program.

Candidates create developmental portfolios that indicate growth during the Professional Internship. This portfolio includes a collection of artifacts and reflections based on full-time teaching responsibilities that indicate fulfillment of the Illinois Professional Teaching Standards. The portfolio serves as a catalyst for dialogue about good teaching. To exit from the student teaching portion of the Internship, candidates make a Live-Text showcase portfolio presentation to the teacher education faculty, cooperating teachers, college consultants, and peers.

The graduate programs closely parallel undergraduate offerings in content and scope with the exception of courses in diversity, special education, and technology that have been added to the MAT curriculum to meet the standards for all teachers. In all other regards, the MAT requirements are the same as the undergraduate programs and are similarly linked to the Illinois Professional Teaching Standards.

Assessment measures used by cooperating teachers, college consultants, Program graduates, employers of graduates, and faculty are aligned with State and national standards. Such alignment reflects concurrence between the intent of the Program and accreditation expectations. Assessment data collected from such a broad array of sources provide sufficient data to make accurate decisions about candidate and the various Program elements. The tables below show the alignment of national and State standards, Program elements, Program outcomes, and methods of assessment.

Graduate & Undergraduate Assessment Handbook (1 MB .pdf)