School of Education Portfolio Data

Faculty members rate the portfolios on a three-point scale. A rating of 3 represents exemplary work, while a 2 is considered acceptable and a 1 is not acceptable.  The first score under Aesthetic Engagement (2.42) represents a mean score on the 3-point scale described. The second number identifies the count. So, 97 students had their Aesthetic Engagement portfolio project and reflective statement rated by Unit faculty members on a 3-point scale. The resulting average score was 2.42.

Since the fall of 2009, 1916 faculty ratings of University Ability projects and reflective statements have been entered into the Central Assessment System. Problem Solving is the Ability chosen the most often by teacher education candidates, but the Ability is split into two areas: critical thinking or research. Communication (331) and Collaboration (312) are the two Abilities that end up leading the way for any given column. The School of Education recognizes the value that each Ability contributes to effective teaching. Each program can determine which of the five University Abilities best suits its graduates. The School of Education is open to allowing free choice among the programs. Elementary Education is an example of a program that allows teacher candidates to select any five of the University Abilities for their portfolio.

Analysis of the mean score data involves an understanding of the assessment expectations. The teacher candidates provide an artifact and a reflective statement for each University Ability they choose for their portfolio. Faculty members review the project's connection to the University Ability. Students communicate examples of what they have learned about the Ability during the experience, as well as what students have learned about the Ability as a whole during all their education experiences collectively. The students conclude their reflective statement with a vision of how they will be able to use the Ability as an educator in the future.

Abilities Chosen Most Frequently

Abilities with the Highest Mean Scores

Communication (331)

Aesthetic Engagement (2.42)

Collaboration  (312)

Technology (2.42)

Problem Solving (300 - Critical Thinking)

Collaboration (2.41)

Global Awareness (291)

Communication (2.41)

Technology (280)

Global Awareness (2.40)

Effective Citizenship (210)

Problem Solving (2.38 - Critical Thinking)

Aesthetic Engagement (97)

Wellness (2.32)

Wellness (56)

Effective Citizenship (2.28)

Problem Solving (39 - Research)

Problem Solving (2.15 - Research)

(Problem Solving is subdivided into critical thinking - CT- or research-R.)

The chart above provides a visual of the most frequently chosen Abilities. While some programs such as Music or Art may believe Aesthetic Engagement is essential, as  a whole the data indicate that program instructors are assigning projects and teacher candidates are selecting examples of their best work to come from projects that enhanced their ability to communicate or collaborate with others. The School of Education endorses the program/candidate freedom of candidates to share what they have learned through the completion of the their projects in their senior portfolio.

Student reflections on their learning have been rated the highest by faculty members in the areas of Aesthetic Engagement (2.41), Collaboration (2.40), and Communication (2.38). Faculty members give their highest ratings to quality Ability projects with reflective statements that identify specific examples of learning. The two lowest average score ratings are in the areas of Problem Solving Research (2.30) and Effective Citizenship (2.33).