Measure 1 - Indicators of Completer Impact 

The EPP utilizes two measures to track completer impact in their P-12 classrooms.  The first is a Completer Teacher Work Sample and the second is data derived from a question on the first and third-year teacher survey 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=9, graduates from the 2019-20 school year), there were three graduates (33.3%) who provided data for evidence regarding Standard 4.1 (now Measure 1). One completer was an elementary teacher (general instruction), one was an elementary music teacher, and the other one taught secondary 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. 

The data for the science education completer show an average gain of 58% (n=14) with a range of -6 to +75% growth as a result of the unit taught. In this classroom, 71% of the students passed. The teacher reflected that the unit included a variety of teaching strategies, but felt the hands-on activities were particularly helpful in student learning. One student struggled due to a learning disability, but with support, he had growth, as well.

For the music teacher, the overall average growth for the entire class (n = 21) was 69%, with a range of 38 to 90%. The males (n=9) grew slightly less than the females (n=12) by a 71 to 73% margin. The teacher felt the scores indicated the strings students grew in their skills to recognize musical symbols.

Data from the elementary teacher reveal an average overall gain of 47%, with a range of 31 to 64% growth as a result of the unit taught. The teacher notes that the average grade for the unit was 82 with the girls earning a slightly higher average (87.5%) with an overall gain of 60%, while the boys received a 79% average with an overall gain of 50%. Students who scored well were those who completed all assignments in a timely manner. The unit included both artistic opportunities and hands-on projects, adding to student motivation.

Completer Teacher Work Sample
Fall 2020

Average gain per student = 61.3% | Overall pass rate per student = 89.5%

SUPERVISOR SURVEY OF FIRST AND THIRD YEAR TEACHERS

Supervisors of the EPP’s first and third year completers rated their teachers an average of 3.75 out of 4.0 (n= 14) 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. These 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 2021, surveys were sent to supervisors of first-year teachers (n=9), with a response rate of 44% (n=4). Surveys were also sent to supervisors of third-year teachers (n=10), with a response rate of 40% (n=4).  

 For first-year teachers, the overall rating (for all 14 elements) was 3.25 of 4.0, with the overall mean (question #15, an overall general perception) averaged at 3.39. For third-year teachers, the overall rating was 3.75, noticeably higher than the first year teachers, with the overall mean averaged at 3.52, also higher than first-year teachers. The range for first-year teachers was 2.94 (Planning for Instruction) to 3.75 (Impact on Student Learning). The range for third-year teachers was 3.25 (Application of Content) to 3.75 (Impact on Student Learning and Professional Dispositions). With just one score below the 3.0 benchmark, the EPP is pleased with the strong scores from supervisors. 

Data from supervisors of first-year teachers indicate that those teachers are choosing to perform their roles and responsibilities with professionalism and with a positive Christian influence.They are attending to learner differences as they create warm, structured classroom environments that allow them to teach content effectively. Their instructional strategies are varied, as are their assessment choices. They show leadership and collaboration at high levels, even for first-year teachers. 

Survey comments concur, including statements such as “she has proven knowledgeable in her area of study, [and is] an invaluable part of our team,” and “meets the needs” of both online and in-person learners effectively. Another supervisor noted that the teacher displayed a “positive, energetic, flexible” spirit. The majority of responses overall were strong with employers rating first-year teachers at 100% for willingness to hire again. One supervisor claimed that the first-year teacher “has been a delightful addition to our school staff, as he developed positive relationships with students and colleagues.” This same teacher was “open to new learning.” A final supervisor said that the first-year teacher “has proven knowledgeable in her area of study [science], and [has] a willingness to work with colleagues and students to provide the best education possible for our students. I have never met a better prepared first-year teacher!”

Union College First- and Third-Year Teacher Survey — Spring 2020
Supervisor Survey

Self-Evaluation Surveys from First-Year Teachers

First-year teachers were asked to rate their success based on the elements from the Nebraska Clinical Practice Evaluation. The benchmark for the First-Year Teacher Survey was 3.0 of 4.0. Responses ratings ranged from 2.89 (Leadership and Collaboration) to 3.25 (Learning Differences, Assessment). The overall rating (element #15 only) was 3.17, with the overall mean (elements #1-15) 3.05. Below benchmark scores included ratings for Leadership and Collaboration (2.89), Technology Integration (2.93), and Learning Environments, Application of Content (2.94). At or above benchmark scores (n = 10, 67%) included highest scores in Learning Environments, Instructional Strategies, and Impact on Student Learning.

Self Evaluation Surveys from Third-Year Teachers

Third-year teachers were asked to rate their success based on the elements from the Nebraska Clinical Practice Evaluation. The benchmark for the Third-Year Teacher Survey was 3.0 of 4.0. All scores were above benchmark.

Responses ratings ranged from 3.08 (Student Development) to 3.50 (Learning Environments). The overall rating was 3.25 (for element #15 only), with the overall mean of 3.24 (elements #1-15). Particularly strong scores included the elements of Learning Environments (3.50) and Professional Dispositions (3.46). As charted below, all scores for third-year teachers were higher than those of first-year teachers. The EPP observes that candidates improved in important ways upon experience. Especially pleasing were raised scores in creating warm learning environments, and using technology skillfully.

Union College First- and Third-Year Teacher Survey — Spring 2020
Self Evaluation

Case Study

During one focus group conversation, our EPP faculty spoke with a former candidate now teaching high school English. She expressed high enthusiasm for the content, building relationships with students, and felt she was flexible yet professional during the pandemic challenges. Because of the learning gaps and student motivation decrease during this time, her growth in being able to differentiate to meet an even more diverse set of student needs was fully taxed. She found that making rubrics helped to organize the learning objectives and achievements, as did staying in contact with the students who fell behind. 

The supervisor survey data for the case study completer mentioned above shows definite satisfaction for her effectiveness (3.75 of 4.0). Her principal noted high points as content knowledge, use of technology, and assessment choices. Areas on which to improve include planning instruction to meet every student, evaluating student growth based on technology integration choices, and understanding how to connect concepts across disciplines. The EPP feels that these areas of growth are expected for first-year teachers, and that this candidate showed proficient skill in vital categories. The principal agreed by stating that he would hire her again. In sum, he felt that this teacher “has been an amazing gift to [our school] this year and with all the challenges of having to begin her first year in remote learning and for entire year teaching classes through the medium of the computer (Zoom), she has consistently handled each challenge with grace, care, dignity and professionalism.  [She is a] great jewel of blessing” [to us].

Measure 2 - Satisfaction of Employers

Supervisor Survey

The EPP relies on data from the Supervisor Survey to gauge satisfaction of work done by EPP completers each year. The format of the survey aligns with the Nebraska Clinical Practice Evaluation elements, as described above (Measure 1).

First-Year Teacher Survey (sent to supervisors)

For the 2019-20 cohort (reported in 2021), the responses were highly positive.  Supervisors gave EPP completers an overall rating of 3.25 (just element #15), with an overall mean of 3.39 (elements #1-15). Teachers received high scores in thirteen of fourteen elements.  Only scores for planning (2.94) were below the 3.0 of 4.0 benchmark. As this is the second year with lower scores in this area, the EPP will provide more support to candidates in Methods courses and practicum feedback. 

Responses overall were strong with employers rating first-year teachers at 100% for willingness to hire again. Qualitative comments include statements such as, [the teacher] was a gift to [our school] this year” as she handled the technical challenges with “grace, care, dignity, and professionalism.” One supervisor claimed that the first-year teacher “has been a delightful addition to our school staff, as he developed positive relationships with students and colleagues.” This same teacher was “positive, energetic, flexible, and open to new learning.” A final supervisor said that the first-year teacher “has proven knowledgeable in her area of study [science], [is] an invaluable part of our team, and [has] a willingness to work with colleagues and students to provide the best education possible for our students. I have never met a better prepared first-year teacher!”

Third-Year Teacher Survey (sent to supervisors)

The EPP uses the Nebraska Clinical Practice Evaluation elements for surveying supervisors of third-year completers, as well. For the 2019-20 cohort (reported in 2021), the responses were all well above benchmark (3.0 of 4.0). Responses ranged from 3.25 (Application of Content, Technology Integration) to 3.75 (Impact on Student Learning, Professional Dispositions).  The overall rating (element #15 only) was 3.75 with the overall mean averaging 3.52 (scores from elements #1-15).  Supervisors noted that all reviewed teachers would be good candidates for rehire (100%). 

Qualitative comments included praise for bi-lingual capabilities and efforts to communicate with Spanish-speaking parents, creativity, the ability to engage students, providing skills-appropriate tasks, and building a strong classroom community. One teacher’s collaborative skills gives her “great promise to make a significant impact on our profession. She was very well prepared for teaching, thank you!”

Union College First- and Third-Year Teacher Survey — Spring 2020
Supervisor Survey

Stakeholder involvement

The EPP partners with a variety of stakeholders from the local area and beyond. Closest at hand is the Teacher Preparation Committee (TPC) and most remote would be the high schools across the nation that board and host student teachers as need and opportunity arises.

The Teacher Preparation Committee (TPC) meets monthly to provide perspectives regarding all aspects of the Union College Education Department. Started over twenty years ago, this group includes college professors (in relevant content areas), P-12 classroom teachers, school administrators from Union College and local P-12 settings, representatives from the local public school, and teacher candidates. The group regularly votes on regulatory activities such as admitting teacher candidates into the program officially, approving student teacher placements, and endorsing department changes and policy exceptions (curricular and otherwise). A recent collaboration regarding candidate progression through the program yielded a vote from TPC to allow for tutoring and tutoring participation monitoring in order to permit approved candidates to proceed with classes, even though the Praxis Core test had not been passed.

Another major stakeholder is the Mid-America Union Conference (MAUC) of Seventh-day Advenstists. This entity supports and oversees denominational schools (P-12) from a nine-state region, with headquarters located in our city. Leadership at the MAUC attend official education department functions such as the Annual Constituency Meeting, the Education Department Banquet, and the Teacher Dedication ceremony. They host events to recruit and educate teacher candidates in the job-seeking process. Various members present in EDUC courses on topics of expertise. A final element of support by this group includes professional development. The MAUC regularly provides financial support for events aimed at current faculty but also teacher candidates, first-year teachers, and beyond. A recent collaboration with this group regarded the need to recruit more candidates from the MAUC’s nine-state region. An MAUC-funded scholarship allotted to each high school (n=7) resulted.

There are three local schools and/or districts that perform stakeholder functions. Most immediate is the two-teacher, K-8, multigrade lab school on campus. Here, elementary education majors (junior and senior year) are trained in denominational textbooks/expectations and multigrade structuring. Lab-school faculty teach for the EPP during the fall semester each year. A recent collaborative project--a community garden--is under consideration to facilitate experience to the K-8 students and modeling for teacher candidates in providing hands-on, nature-centered instruction.

Across the street is an affiliated high school. This P-12 school with single-grade classrooms is where both elementary and secondary education majors do practicum teaching and some student teaching. Cooperating teachers collaborate with university supervisors regarding specific needs for each placement, and faculty members hold TPC membership. Collaborative activities include technology training (EPP candidates instructing cooperating teachers through a webinar), and music class collaboration, which benefits EPP music education majors in the leadership experience they can acquire.

Finally, Lincoln Public Schools (LPS) administrators sponsor placement meetings, where faculty from all local colleges gather to choose placements. College representatives and LPS leadership offer insights as to quality placement choices. In addition, LPS administration provides training for substitute teaching and student teaching expectations within their system, plus includes the EPP in recruiting for diverse candidates. The EPP has too many candidates in each cohort to utilize only denominational schools, so the EPP appreciates the LPS faculty for their willingness to host practicum and student teachers. The EPP faculty appreciate the  ongoing faculty collaboration. In the recent past, LPS teachers have provided feedback on lesson plan expectations (too many and not useful formats). The EPP has made modifications to expectations to ease the frustrations.

Besides local placements, several candidates have chosen to student teach out- of-state and beyond the Mid-America Union Conference (MAUC).  While there, candidates are given food and board, work opportunities, supervision experience, and multiple prep and teaching opportunities. Cooperating teachers provide feedback and the local administration oversees the experience overall. As with any placement, regular feedback is solicited, so these more remote locations play a role in wider perspectives for EPP consideration.

Completers themselves are stakeholders in the sense that they provide the EPP opportunities to glean Teacher Work Sample data, survey data, and case study locations. EPP faculty visit first and third-year completers as time permits, and for the rest, hosts Zoom meetings for collaboration. Recent feedback from one completer has prompted the EPP to consider revising an aspect of training in one Methods course, in order to prepare candidates to modify the curriculum, based on student academic strengths and also cultural relevance.

A final stakeholder includes the high schoolers from the Mid-America Union Conference (MAUC). During a major recruiting campaign hosted by the college, education faculty met with every highschooler in the MAUC during the past year. Part of the presentation included a survey regarding career plans. For those students expressing interest in becoming a teacher, communications are ongoing as the EPP seeks to recruit. Feedback from each senior is also guiding us in teaching strategies to model and promote for all teacher candidates. The resulting infographic on the 4 C’s of 21st Century Learning was shared with teacher candidates as well as the high schoolers and their faculty.

Measure 3 - Candidate Competency at Completion

The EPP measures candidate competency with four main assessments and has plans to add a fifth for the coming year. Those assessments include Praxis II score, the Nebraska Clinical Practice Evaluation, lesson plan and teacher work sample scores, and results from disposition surveys at the conclusion of the student teaching semester.

The EPP is reporting on Praxis II scores for three years, including elementary education majors (n=12) and secondary education majors (n=11). The elementary majors had 100% passing scores on the first attempt. For the secondary, 9 of 11 passed on the first attempt (82%) and the other two passed before graduation. Regarding the current cohort (n=8, graduated May 2021), all passed before graduation, with 7 of 8 passing on the first attempt. 

A second resource for data collection is the Nebraska Clinical Practice Evaluation (NCPE). The EPP is reporting on the current cohort only (n=8). The cooperating teachers gave the cohort a 3.31 average score with a range of 2.79 to 4.0, while the university supervisors awarded a 3.40 average score with a range of 2.67 to 4.0 (benchmark = 3.0). These scores are very comparable.

For cooperating teachers, lower scores were found in the following areas: using research-based instructional strategies, uses engagement, and differentiates learner differences (all 3.0, which is benchmark). For university supervisors, lower scores were found in the following areas: assesses for learning (2.86), uses classroom assessment (3.0), and develops literacy skills and differentiates instruction (3.13). High points for cooperating teachers include elements such as the following: accepts critique and input (3.8) and several elements that were all 3.4--uses knowledge of students, use of classroom assessment, incorporates digital tools and conveys professional demeanor, and uses professional communication. Highlights for the university supervisor scores include the following: incorporates digital tools into instruction (3.86), uses research-based instructional strategies (3.75), and accepts critique and input (3.75).

During the senior year, teacher candidates submit lesson plans and Teacher Work Samples. Through both of these key assessments, the EPP gleans data as to candidate competency. For lesson plan scores overall, the average was 3.48 with a range of 2.87 to 4.0, with a 3.0 benchmark. High scores were noted in various areas: materials and technology (3.75) and writing quality objectives (3.67). Areas for improvement include diversity and differentiation in the classroom (3.18) and promoting a spiritual and/or value lesson (3.29, both above benchmark). For the Teacher Work Sample, candidates are scored on project quality even as the EPP marks student achievement in each Sample submitted (n=3 of 8, 38%). Because of a change in our data management system, the EPP was unable to report on all candidate work. The overall average gain for the cohort was 18.5% with an 86% pass rate for all students (n=66, range of 43%-100%). 

A final assessment for determining teacher candidate competency is feedback that came from cooperating teachers at the end of the student teaching semester. Cooperating teachers gave an average score of 4.50 of 5.0, with a range of 4.38 (developing rapport with learners) to 4.77 (commitment to service through teaching). Cooperating teachers rated student teachers on critical thinking skills, planning and assessment, and understanding the holistic nature of children (4.46), diversity support (4.58), and exhibiting professionalism (4.69). All scores indicate strong candidate skills.

Measure 4 - Ability of Completers to Meet Licensing and any Additional State Requirements

All EPP completers qualify for Nebraska State Certification and all 11 of our completers pursued their state certification successfully. The state of Nebraska also requires that completers take the Praxis II test in their endorsement area. All of our completers (n=11) successfully passed the Praxis II or designated content knowledge test during the 2019-20 school year as a requirement for graduation. In addition, our completers also meet the academic requirements for certification with the Seventh-day Adventist denomination.

Ability of Completers to be Hired in Education Positions

Eighty-two (82) percent of the 2019-2020 completers (n=9 of 11) were hired in education positions for which they had prepared or were hired as an aid or in a supplementary educational position (dormitory dean). Six (6) of the eleven were hired as full-time classroom teachers.  Three (3) more are using their degree in a school setting as a dormitory dean or in supplementary educational positions. Of the two that did not take education jobs, they took jobs in other fields. This continues the trend of Union College’s completers being “highly sought graduates.”  Most completers are hired in their field of study, and they tend to stay in the field of teaching. In the past three years, 24 of 30 completers (80%) who started jobs in education are still using their degree in a school setting. We have processes in place to assist students in connecting with potential employers both locally and across the country, and those processes appear to be working effectively. In the last five years, 85% of our completers are still utilizing their degree within a school setting spread out over 22 states and one foreign country. 

Union EPP Completers - Hired in Educational Positions