Continuous Assessment Plan
Program: Masters of Reading Level: Graduate CIP Code: 13.1315
College of Education Assessment Year: 2008-2009; Student Data: 2007-2008
Mission Statement / Data Collection Instruments / Evaluation Criteria / Assessment Results / Program Improvement/ Unit Wide Assessment - Continuing Professional Preparation
Admission Data
GPA / 2.5 or 3.0 / 100% of students admitted to this program held the required GPA. / Analysis of aggregated data through Livetext.
Required Degree / Verified / 100% of students admitted to this program held the required degree. / Analysis of aggregated data through Livetext.
Certification / Verified
Verified
Kentucky letter of eligibility for KTIP program or Kentucky provisional certificate. / 100% of students admitted to this program held the letter of eligibility or Kentucky provisional certification.
Students without certification could be admitted upon departmental review by signing a waiver acknowledging non-certification. / Graduate students will be blocked from enrolling in prerequisite courses after the new Banner system is integrated.
Middle Check Course Assignments:
EDU 633
Exams, competency projects, lesson plans & lesson units. / 80% or higher adequate progress in meeting KTS 8 / 100% of students made adequate progress.
EDU 645
Self analysis and philosophy of education. / 80% or higher adequate progress in meeting KTS 7 / 100% of students made adequate progress.
ADM 630
Action research projects. Ethical limitations of research are explored in the design of research. / 80% or higher adequate progress in meeting KTS 7 / 100% of students made adequate progress.
Entry Data
REA 612/ Foundations of Literacy-Assignments-Students become well-informed about theory and practice in the field and create knowledge through informed reflection on personal teaching practices. Students submit reflection papers at regular intervals in the course. Each reflection/reaction journal entry connects course content to practical application, policy issues, or classroom implications. Students complete a Reading and Disposition self assessment and write a Professional Improvement Plan.
Guidelines for Professional Improvement Plan
http://coekate.murraystate.edu/graduate/reading/guidewrite/
Kentucky Teachers Standards
http://www.kyepsb.net/teacherprep/expstandards.asp
International Reading Association Standards
MSU Dispositions
http://coekate.murraystate.edu/graduate/reading/ / In REA 612/Foundations of Literacy class, seventeen students scored 90-10 and three students scored 80-89 (Fall, 2007). During the spring of 2008, twenty-four students scored 90-100, three students scored 80-89, and two students scored 70-80. During the summer of 2008, twenty-eight students scored 90-100, and six students scored 80-89. / 100% of students made adequate progress.
Analysis of knowledge skills and dispositions / Many graduate courses focus on increasing both the content and pedagogical knowledge of literacy teachers. In these classes students respond to an impact questionnaire to assess the impact of the class as well as progress and needs of students. They reflect on how the class has affected their knowledge of the core content, their methods of assessing students, and their views of how students learn. Answers to these questions allow us to monitor the impact of our instructions on students’ achievements.
Mid-point Data
REA 628/Literacy Assessment-Assignments: Demonstrate how to apply Response to Intervention (RTI) model. Incorporate relevant collaborative efforts with peers, students or the community. Conduct DIBELS & AIMSWEB and reflect on the results / In REA 628/Literacy Assessment class, thirty-eight students were completing masters and one student was completing Rank I and using Livetext (fall, 2007). Out of thirty-nine, twenty-seven students scored 90-100, eleven-students scored 80-89, and one student scored 75-80. During the spring of 2008, seven students scored 90-95 and one student scored 80-85. / 100% of students made adequate progress. / The academic performance of graduate students throughout the program in course work and the evaluation data provide information used in assessing the continuing effectiveness of the program. Individual conferences with the graduate students throughout their programs and upon completion of the program provide informal guidance for continuation or change in program components.
End-Point Data
Practicum – REA 638
Students conduct workshops in order to provide educators and parents with current knowledge regarding reading difficulties.
Each student is responsible for
conducting an assessment and instructional program for one P-12 student. Students are assigned to work with a low-achieving child. They administer various assessment measures and develop a case study. The case study analyzes and summarizes assessment data, documents instructional activities, and provides recommendations.
A summer reading/writing literacy program is offered for students in grades P-12. To practice multiple word analysis strategies and to experience the success of reading with fluency and comprehension, one-to-one tutoring is provided by the classroom teachers enrolled in the graduate reading methods course (REA 638). To practice research-based reading strategies, teachers work with individual students enrolled in the summer reading program during their first reading period of the day which take place early each afternoon. The teachers spend the remaining one hour with the course instructor in a classroom to discuss how to integrate skills with strategies. Determination of achievement is done through the analysis of teachers’ case study reports and reflections. / During the fall of 2007, nineteen students were enrolled in REA 638. Out of nineteen, fourteen students scored 90-100, and five students scored 80-89. During the summer of 2008, eighteen students were enrolled in REA 638. Out of eighteen, fourteen students scored 90-100, two scored 80-89. / 100% of students who completed practicum classes met this requirement. / Evaluations are examined for patterns of strength and concern related to students’ performance in the area of reading. The program coordinators and faculty meet at the end of each semester to review these field experience evaluation data and note
patterns in students’ behavior. Several plans are made to bring about appropriate changes in courses and supervision to address areas of concern. Patterns are examined over time so that improvements are noted. Evaluations for this year are compared to previous evaluations in order to note improvements. Such a process is ongoing. Faculty associated with the reading program review field experience evaluations looking for patterns of
strength and weakness. As a group, they decide on appropriate action to address concerns. The purposes of these meetings are to review overall feedback about students’ success during the semester and students’ feedback on the effectiveness of the program. In turn, any area in which students exhibit difficulty are shared with faculty associated with the program.
Practicum-REA 639
Students develop a rationale for a literacy project which addresses its importance or relevance to students, faculty, and district and or the reading profession in general.
Students submit and present the completed project at a professional seminar, conference, or in a professional journal.
Field Experience Evaluation Form – University Coordinator/Assessing Standards and Dispositions / During the fall of 2007, thirteen students were enrolled and scored 90-100.
During the spring of 2008, twenty-seven students were enrolled scored 90-100. / 100% of students who completed practicum classes met this requirement. / The reading faculty utilizes student data to improve student outcomes as part of an overall program improvement process.
The follow- up graduate and employers’ feedback data are analyzed to determine if the graduate reading professional courses have a profound effect on students’ learning and to determine if the course content and assignments support their needs and concerns.
Graduate Survey
Data collection begins upon students’ application/admission to the program and continues through their last semester. Data include feedback from students; course evaluations, grades, follow-up surveys, and employers’ survey. A key to dissemination of these data and program improvement suggestions is open through communication among all involved in the reading & writing program. The plans for acting on feedback provide a structure for this ongoing communication. / Analysis of Graduate Survey
Study of Employers / The reading survey asks respondents to rate the program’s ability to prepare them for teaching reading and, in particular, meet the Kentucky Teacher Standards, International Reading Association Standards, and MSU dispositions. Survey data are compiled by the reading coordinator and distributed to all faculty who teach in the reading program. The faculty meets to formulate plans to address any program weaknesses noted by current and former students. The following year’s data is examined to insure that improvements have occurred in weak areas.
Summative Assessment
Thesis / Pass/Fail / No students chose this option. / Continue to encourage graduate students to pursue a thesis track by taking REA 698/ Thesis class.
Portfolio
Checkpoint 1: Student and advisor meet to plan program. Group advising occurs during REA 612, 628, 638, and 639.
Checkpoint 2: Student and faculty meet to review Professional Development Plan. Group advising occurs during REA 612, 628, 638, and 639.
Checkpoint 3: Student and advisor meet to review progress on portfolio.
Group advising occurs during REA 612, 628, 638, and 639. Reading faculty conduct
portfolio seminars during REA 612, 628, and 638 in order to provide directions for the student’s selection of entries for the portfolio.
In the Reading/Writing Portfolio, students demonstrate mastery of the Kentucky Teacher Standards (http://www.kyepsb.net/teacherprep/standards.asp) , the International Reading Association Standards for Reading Professionals (available online at http://coekate.murraystate.edu/graduate/reading/), and the MSU Dispositions.
Creating the Reading Portfolio
The Reading/Writing Portfolio documents that students meet the Kentucky Teacher Standards (KTS), the IRA Standards for Reading Professionals (IRA), and MSU Dispositions.
Form B Evaluation of the Portfolio / Pass/Fail
A planned program is signed by the student, graduate coordinator, graduate dean, and the student’s advisor
Student and faculty signatures on Form A: Record of Portfolio Development
All reading faculty are livetext program portfolio advisors. Dr. Sharon Gill modified livetext to document students’ competencies in standards recommended by the International Reading Association and the Kentucky State Department of Education. Graduate students have the opportunity to demonstrate these competencies throughout their program of study within the context of their coursework.
Checklist for MA in Reading and Writing / During the fall of 2007, nine students passed the portfolio requirements (100% pass rate). During the spring of 2008, seventeen students passed the portfolio requirements (100% pass rate). During the summer of 2008, ten students passed the portfolio requirements (100% pass rate).
Checkpoint 1: All students in the Reading/Writing programs have submitted the Professional Improvement Plan as part of the requirements for REA 612.
Checkpoint 2: All graduate students have submitted
four portfolio entries and reflection through Livetext as part of the requirements for REA 628.
Checkpoint 3: All graduate students have submitted three portfolio entries and reflection through Livetext as part of the requirements for REA 638.
A committee of graduate faculty members evaluated the portfolio to ensure that the students have successfully demonstrated knowledge, skills, and dispositions in all of the Kentucky Teacher Standards, MSU’s Dispositions, and in the IRA Standards for Reading Professionals. / The student Portfolio is a critical piece in the continuous assessment plan of the graduate education programs. The graduate students develop a Professional Portfolio throughout the program based on a professional development plan developed with their advisor. Portfolio reviews take place when the students apply for graduation and at the conclusion of their program. The reviews give the reading committee important information concerning the students’ progress and the effectiveness of the program. Concerns in the portfolios are reported back to the chair and the dean for curriculum and instruction review. Appropriate recommendations are made for possible program changes. In the Master’s degree program, faculty advisors evaluate the students' ability to address Kentucky Teacher Standards, International Reading Association Standards, and MSU’s dispositions by examining the artifacts in the portfolio.
The livetext portfolio documents students’ competencies in standards recommended by the International Reading Association and the Kentucky State Department of Education. Graduate students have the opportunity to demonstrate these competencies throughout their program of study within the context of their coursework.
Verification of GPA / 3.0 or higher / 100% of students had this verified at program entrance. / Analyze aggregated data through Livetext.
Verification of Program of
Studies / Coursework completed / 100% of students had this verified at program completion. / Analyze aggregated data through Livetext.
Program Decision Made:
The faculty decided that the reading assessment courses will address reading disorders with an emphasis on using assessment to design appropriate intervention programs and techniques.
In response to graduate students’ concerns regarding availability and suitability of elective courses in Reading & Writing, the faculty explored infusion of timely electives offered.
Technology has been infused into the reading program to effectively improve teaching and learning as well as to prepare students to fulfill statewide educational reforms and standards.
The course content and assignments have been redesigned to provide an integrated curriculum approach to focus on principles of constructivist learning, research-based strategies, project-based learning, and performance assessment. / The Advisory Council Report
Decision-Making Committee:
The Advisory Council and The Graduate Reading Program Evaluation Committee / The Advisory Council was asked to respond to a feedback form to assess the impact of the class as well as progress and needs of students. The Council responded to the following statements: (a) what can we do to better prepare classroom teachers to teach reading effectively, (b) what do today’s reading teachers need to know, and (c) what topics do you feel are important for us to include in our program. Answers to these questions allow us to evaluate the effectiveness of our instructions relative to the reading curriculum and to change those pedagogical strategies as dictated by the needs of our students.
Committee Members:
Reading faculty
Dr. Sharon Gill, Dr. Chhanda Islam, and Dr. Joyce Shatzer
The Advisory Council
Principals
Denise Whitaker, Farmington Elementary, Kathy Crouch, East Calloway, Sarah Saylor, Wingo Elementary, Janet Caldwell, Murray Elementary School, Margaret Cook, North Elementary School, Dennis Fisher , Southwest Calloway Elementary School,
Teachers
Nickie Kellett, Symsonia Elementary School, Stephanie-Pollard Collins, Hopkins County Elementary School,
Debbie Wildharber, Ballard Elementary, Christa Williams, Heritage Christian Academy,
Megan Dotson, Marshall County Elementary, Kara Hatfield, Crittenden County Middle School,
Charlotte Goddard, Hickman County Elementary School, Colleen Hunt