October 26, 2010
TO: Indiana University Purdue University- Fort Wayne
FROM: Dr. Marg Mast
Coordinator for Educator Preparation
Office of Educator Licensing and Development
RE: Program Review Rejoinder
Your program rejoinder for the following area was reviewed by the state:
Earth Space Science
Motion to accept the rejoinder for item #1 approved.
Motion to accept the rejoinder for item #3 approved.
Motion to accept the rejoinder for item #5 approved.
Motion to accept the rejoinder for item #7 approved
Motion to accept the rejoinder for item #8 approved
Motion to accept the rejoinder for item #10 approved
The motion to accept the rejoinder for #1 approved.
However, a candidate is required to take GEOL G100, GEOL G103, OR GEOG G107.
Yet the matrix reflects that G107 does not cover the same areas so there is no assurance every candidate is well prepared in this content. This needs to be corrected in your program.
The addition of a field trip to the matrix is perplexing. How is a “field trip” an assessment?
The addition of a philosophy of science class does not alleviate the concern that all content standards have been met.
Alignment is to knowledge standards only. How are performance standards being addressed and assessed?
The motion to accept the rejoinder for #3 approved.
Q200 elementary preparation data should not be included in this program review which is evaluating secondary preparation only.
The concern about the depth of coverage and lack of rigor is still of concern. This program would benefit from continued institutional review and development. When the new state standards are available, this program needs to consider further review and development. Programs will be reviewed for alignment with REPA and it is unlikely that this program will be continued to be state approved if further program changes are not implemented.
While journal reflections are often a part of teacher preparation program, an overreliance on reflection does call into question the level of rigor in the program that was called into question from the original reviewers. Rejoinder has not adequately alleviated those concerns.
Students do not graduate if they fall below the passing score of 150 on the PRAXIS II test.
Using Praxis 2 as a criteria for graduation from your program in inappropriate. The state advises you to change this policy and remove this from all of your program materials. You may (and should) withhold a recommendation for licensure if they do not pass the program, but you may not withhold a diploma or a degree from your institution based on their inability to successfully pass this licensure exam. If you do withhold graduation from a student that results in litigation, your position will most likely result in case resolving in favor of the student. ETS and the State of Indiana would not support this policy and recommends immediate discontinuation of the test being used for graduation.
The motion to accept the rejoinder for #5, #7, #8 was approved.
This criteria has been determined to meet the expectation for now. However, be aware the new state standards and the state’s focus on student learning, standards driven instruction and data driven instruction are not well positioned from what is included in this program review submission. Under REPA, when programs are reviewed for alignment, this area will very likely not be successful if further program changes are not implemented.
The motion to accept the rejoinder for #10 was approved.
Documentation in rejoinder provides evidence this criteria is adequately met.
Your Earth Space Science program has been granted state approval for all standards having been met for this content area.
This letter is important documentation for Standard 1 at your next accreditation visit. Please place it in your exhibit room as it verifies that your program’s status with the State of Indiana.
www.doe.in.gov