Educator Preparation

Educator Preparation

Candidate Performance Assessment

Texas Tech University

Educators at Texas Tech University (TTU) strongly believe in public transparency and accountability: we are open for public review and accountable for our actions. The basis for such accountability is the assessment of candidates’ performance and the use of multiple data to inform decision making.

Performance assessment is founded in a clear vision for educator preparation: Through meaningful partnerships with schools, agencies, and communities, the College of Education (COE) producesoutstanding educators while providing programs, services, and research that maximize student success from early childhood through graduate education.

Strategic Goals for Educator Preparation Texas Tech University

The College aspires to be a national leader in education reform and has embraced three strategic goals for doing so, with an aim to produce measurably the best educators in the United States. In so doing, graduatesare provided with the knowledge, skills, and dispositions to make them highly qualified and recruited for whatever education position they seek.

Goal 1: Produce the Measurably Best Educators in the U.S.

The College will produce “trademark” graduates with distinctive skills and outcome-producing capacities that address stated market needs in a cross section of communities and population centers, thereby increasing diversity and enrollment.

Goal 2: Add value to the profession by collaborating with partner schools, agencies, and communities to maximize P-20 students’ college and career readiness, health, and success. (P-20: Students from preschool through grade 20, college.)

The College willengage with school, agency, and community partners to maximize college and career readiness, health, and success; and will maximize the measured impact of graduates on the clients they serve.

Goal 3: Conduct research that brings measurable improvement and innovation to the field. Prepare educators to use research as a tool to continuously improve and innovate.

The College will use client-centered research to maximize a measured impact of graduates on the fields they serve, including maximizing P-20 students’ college and career readiness, health, and success.

The primary means to judge the attainment of strategic goals is throughongoing assessment activities, particularly the measurement of candidate performance. There are multiple points throughout educator preparation programs where candidates’ readiness is examined. Following are assessments utilized to monitor candidate performance and inform decision making. (Note that throughout this document, university students are referred to as “candidates,” while individuals in pre-school through 12th grade are called “students.”)

Multiple Assessments of Candidate Performance

1. Apply and Evaluate Assignments (A&E)

Each educator preparation course has an A&E assignment, which provide opportunities for candidates to practice and develop instructional skills. These skills are first taught and modeled in the college classroom. Then candidates practice those strategies in the safety of the college classroom to improve competency. Finally, candidates apply those strategies in real-world, clinical settings to further refine and demonstrate competency. Candidates use a video-capture device to record their instruction, and then submit the video for evaluations, including self, peer, and instructor evaluation. This evaluation provides important feedback to candidates about their competency.

Dashboard 1 uses the principal certification program as an example to illustrate A&E assessments. The dashboard has numerous filters (year, semester, program specialization, etc.), which allow for varied and detailed analysis of data—all in support of program improvement and better trained candidates.

2. End of Phase Assessments (EOP)

All educator programs and coursesare hierarchically organized into three levels or phases, each reflecting increasing performance expectations. These expectations are reflected in corresponding end-of-phaseperformance assessments.

Phase One (P1) assessments emphasize the foundational knowledge and reasoning required in the discipline.
Phase Two (P2) assessments incorporate the knowledge, reasoning from P1 and assimilate them into practice, or skill,that takes place in guided and hypothetical settings, such as case studies and controlled clinical experiences.
Phase Three (P3) assessments integrate the knowledge, reasoning and skills from Phase 1 with the simulated application from Phase 2, and then employ them in authentic real world settings.

The results from end-of-phase assessments are developed into dashboards, which are analyzed by faculty membersto monitor candidate progress and to evaluate program quality. If a candidate does not meet the proscribed level of competency, remediation is undertaken in order to advance individualsto the next Phase, or to guide them to consider other career options. Dashboard 1 is also an example of End of Phase Assessments.

Dashboard 1

3. Performance Assessments (PA)

The culminating Phase 3 evaluation for candidates takes place during the year-long student teaching practicum or graduate internship. During this year, candidates’ instructional competency is evaluated through four performance assessments (PA) of instructional competency. These assessments focus on six major indicators of competency: instructional plans (Inst. Plans), standards and objectives(S&O), presenting instructional content (PIC), activities and materials (A&M), academic feedback (AF), and managing student behavior (MSB).

Dashboard 2, indicates an increasing tread of competency as candidates move through the four performance assessments. This dashboard also has multiple filters allowing for varied and detailed analysis of data.

Dashboard 2

4. School District Benchmarks

A major focus of assessment is to measure the impact candidates have on the clients and communities they serve. The growth of P-12 students’ knowledge, skills, and dispositions is a basic measure of the success of college candidates. As part of this process, school districts provide a variety of data concerning the performance of their students on district assessments,and on the State of Texas Assessments of Academic Readiness (STAAR) test. These data in turn are used to determine the impact educator candidates have on the public school students.

Dashboard 3 indicates growth in STAAR performance in schools that have teacher candidates in classrooms serving as co-teachers (traditional student teachers). Such data allow school district and university collaboration to advance the education of both the P-12 students and university candidates.

Dashboard 3

5. The Texas Examination of Educator Standards (TExES)

The culmination of all college assessment activities is to produce measurable best educators, a major indicator of which is the passing rate of the state licensure exam—TExES. All portions of the Texas Examination of Educator Standards must be passed for a candidate to become a certified educator in Texas. TExES has both final and practice components, with candidate performance on the exam used in several ways.

Passage of the appropriate Practice Content exam is required for admission to the educator preparation program.
Passage of the appropriate Final Content exam is required for admission to student teaching or graduate internship.
Passage of the Final Pedagogy and Professional Responsibility exam is required for finalcertification.

Texas Tech candidates do well on the TExES, as indicated in Table1. (Note that individuals who don’t pass the first time may retake the exam for eventual success.) Table 2 shows high passing rates are found across all ethnic and gender groups. TTU candidates perform well with certificate specific exams (Table 3), as they are employed as a range of educators—teachers, principals, counselors, and diagnosticians (Table 4). Lastly, Table 5 indicates the multiyear locations of employmentin Texas, as indicated by Educational Service Center Districts. Although data are not currently available, candidates secure jobs throughout the nation—e.g., our special needs programs in vision, hearing, and mobilityare found in Montana, Arkansas, Wyoming, Idaho, and elsewhere.

Table1

TExES Certification Tests Overall

Initial Pass Rates

Year / Initial Pass Rate / Number of Test Takers
2015-2016 / 98% / 435
2014-2015 / 98% / 447
2013-2014 / 95% / 431
2012-2013 / 95% / 652
2011-2012 / 95% / 584
2010-2011 / 92% / 693
2009-2010 / 95% / 606
2008-2009 / 97% / 598
2007-2008 / 97% / 675
2006-2007 / 96% / 679
2005-2006 / 96% / 621
2004-2005 / 93% / 610
2003-2004 / 97% / 473
2002-2003 / 95% / 397
2001-2002 / 92% / 586

Table 2

TExES Pass Rates for Completion Year

Completion Year / All / Female / Male / African American / Hispanic / Other / White
2016 / 98% (435) / 98%(376) / 98% (59) / 89%(15) / 96% (117) / 100% (14) / 99% (289)
2015 / 98% (447) / 98% (366) / 97% (81) / 100%(13) / 97% (128) / 88%(8) / 98% (298)
2014 / 95% (431) / 95% (356) / 91% (75) / 64% (20) / 89% (169) / 91% (11) / 97% (331)
2013 / 95% (652) / 95% (516) / 94%(136) / 100% (12) / 91% (109) / 96% (13) / 95% (518)

Table 3

University vs. State Pass Rates

TExES Pass Rates by Certification Area

Certification Area / TTU 2012 / State 2012 / TTU 2013 / State 2013 / TTU 2014 / State 2014 / TTU 2015 / State 2015 / TTU 2016 / State 2016
Agricultural Science and Technology 6-12 / 84.60% / 93.3 / 95% / 91.8 / 91.7 / 93.4 / 92.9 / No Data Available / 100 / No Data Available
Art EC-12 / 100% / 93.9 / 100 / 93.9 / 100 / 93.1 / 100 / No Data Available / 100 / No Data Available
Bilingual Target Language Proficiency Test (BTLPT)-Spanish / 75% / 57.6 / 76.9 / 60 / 50 / 58.1 / 77.3 / No Data Available / 91.9 / No Data Available
Bilingual Education Supplemental / 94.10% / 67.7 / 100 / 70.5 / 100 / 70.3 / 84.4 / No Data Available / 89.2 / No Data Available
Chemistry 8-12 / 100% / 81.4 / 100 / 73.2 / 100 / 81.7 / n/a / No Data Available / n/a / No Data Available
Dance 8-12 / 100% / 75.9 / 100 / 78.2 / 100 / 75.6 / 100 / No Data Available / 100 / No Data Available
Deaf and Hard of Hearing EC-12 / 100% / 84.8 / 100 / 89.3 / 100 / 83.3 / 100 / No Data Available / n/a / No Data Available
Educational Diagnostician / 93.10% / 84.7 / 100 / 83.5 / 86.2 / 82.1 / 96.9 / No Data Available / 94.4 / No Data Available
English Language Arts and Reading 4-8 / 100% / 88.9 / 100 / 88 / 100 / 84.9 / n/a / No Data Available / n/a / No Data Available
English Language Arts and Reading/Social Studies 4-8 / 100% / 86.9 / 90 / 85.2 / 92.9 / 81.5 / 100 / No Data Available / 100 / No Data Available
English Language Arts and Reading 8-12 and 7-12 / 95.80% / 82.4 / 82.9 / 100 / 59.8 / 100 / No Data Available / 100 / No Data Available
English as a Second Language (ESL) Supplemental / 93.60% / 79.8 / 88.8 / 79 / 95.6 / 78.6 / 91.4 / No Data Available / 86.5 / No Data Available
Generalist EC-6/Core Subjects / 89.80% / 67.4 / 93 / 79.1 / 91.1 / 66.5 / 100 / No Data Available / 100 / No Data Available
History 8-12 / 92.90% / 55.3 / 70.3 / 56 / 88.2 / 60.8 / 100 / No Data Available / 100 / No Data Available
LOTE: French / 50% / 48.9 / n/a / 56 / n/a / 37.1 / n/a / No Data Available / n/a / No Data Available
LOTE: Spanish / 42.90% / 46.3 / 50 / 56 / 100 / 47.1 / n/a / No Data Available / 100 / No Data Available
Life Science 8-12 / 100% / 49.9 / 100 / 56.3 / 100 / 41.9 / n/a / No Data Available / 100 / No Data Available
Mathematics 4-8 / 100% / 73.6 / 100 / 71.2 / 100 / 73.5 / 100 / No Data Available / 100 / No Data Available
Mathematics/Science 4-8 / 90.50% / 73.5 / 96.2 / 75.7 / 0 / 73.5 / 100 / No Data Available / 100 / No Data Available
Mathematics 8-12 / 85.70% / 54.3 / 88 / 54 / 100 / 76.4 / 100 / No Data Available / 100 / No Data Available
Music EC-12 / 100% / 82.3 / 100 / 80.2 / 94.6 / 82.9 / 100 / No Data Available / 100 / No Data Available
Pedagogy and Professional Responsibilities EC-12 / 98.60% / 90.2 / 97.4 / 91.3 / 97.7 / 92.8 / 97.9 / No Data Available / 100 / No Data Available
Physical Education EC-12 / 100% / 85.9 / 97.7 / 84.2 / 95 / 81.8 / 100 / No Data Available / 100 / No Data Available
Physics/Mathematics 8-12 / 100% / 78.6 / 100 / 73.5 / n/a / 77.2 / n/a / No Data Available / n/a / No Data Available
Principal / 90% / 76 / 87.5 / 75.5 / 100 / 75.3 / 100 / No Data Available / 91.7 / No Data Available
Reading Specialist / 100% / 98.3 / n/a / 98.8 / 100 / 100 / n/a / No Data Available / n/a / No Data Available
School Counselor / 100% / 92.9 / 100 / 92.8 / 100 / 91.6 / 100 / No Data Available / 100 / No Data Available
Science 4-8 / 50% / 66.2 / 100 / 64.1 / 100 / 64.7 / n/a / No Data Available / n/a / No Data Available
Science 8-12 / 100% / 56.2 / 100 / 55.9 / 75 / 52.3 / 100 / No Data Available / 100 / No Data Available
Social Studies 4-8 / 75% / 79 / 100 / 78.2 / 50 / 72.8 / n/a / No Data Available / n/a / No Data Available
Social Studies 8-12 / 85.70% / 65.5 / 100 / 65.5 / 100 / 67.7 / 100 / No Data Available / n/a / No Data Available
Special Education EC-12 / 100% / 84.8 / 97.7 / 84.5 / 100 / 85.1 / 98.1 / No Data Available / 100 / No Data Available
Speech 8-12 / 100% / 62.6 / n/a / 84.2 / n/a / 66.2 / n/a / No Data Available / n/a / No Data Available
Superintendent / 100% / 51.9 / 100 / 90.3 / 100 / 91.1 / 100 / No Data Available / 100 / No Data Available
Braille / 100% / 89.6 / 94.1 / 85.7 / 100 / 81.1 / 100 / No Data Available / 96.4 / No Data Available
Visually Impaired / 100% / 81.6 / 95.5 / 89.6 / 100 / 91.8 / 100 / No Data Available / 100 / No Data Available
Technology Applications EC-12 / 100% / 82.2 / n/a / 94.2 / n/a / 80.7 / n/a / No Data Available / n/a / No Data Available
Theatre EC-12 / 100% / 73 / 100 / 76.7 / 100 / 72.1 / 100 / No Data Available / 100 / No Data Available

Table 4

Professional Positions [[1]]

(Texas Education Agency Data, 2004/05 to 2016/17)

Most TTU graduates are employed as teachers, but many individuals also find fulfilling careers as administrators, counselors, diagnosticians, and numerous other positions of responsibility.

Professional Positions / Number
Assistant Principal / 237
Assistant Executive Director / 1
Assistant Superintendent / 28
Athletic Director / 3
Athletic Trainer / 3
Audiologist / 1
Business Manager / 4
Corrective Therapist / 1
Counselor / 260
Department Head / 5
Director of Personnel/Human Resources / 9
District Instructional Program Director / 83
Educational Aide / 85
Educational Diagnostician / 203
Instructional Officer / 8
Interpreter / 2
Librarian / 80
Licensed Specialist in School Psychology / 8
Occupational Therapist / 1
Other Campus Professional Personnel / 77
Other Non-Campus Professional Personnel / 8
Other Non-Instructional District Personnel / 84
Orientation Mobility Specialist / 13
Principal / 219
Social Worker / 2
Special Duty Teacher / 14
Speech Therapist / 11
Substitute Teacher / 8
Superintendent / 89
Supervisor / 1
Teacher Facilitator / 114
Teacher / 8,102
Teacher Supervisor / 22
Visiting Teacher / 1
Vocational Education Coordinator / 3
TOTAL / 9,790

Table 5

Locations of Candidate Employment

Certified by Texas Tech University [[2]]

(Texas Education Agency Data, 2004/05 to 2015/16)

Education Service Center / Employment / Percentage
1 Edinburg District / 52 / < 1%
2 Corpus Christi District / 36 / < 1%
3 Victoria District / 42 / < 1%
4 Houston District / 818 / 8%
5 Beaumont District / 22 / < 1%
6 Huntsville District / 137 / 1%
7 Kilgore District / 102 / 1%
8 Mount Pleasant District / 41 / < 1%
9 Wichita Falls District / 105 / 1%
10 Richardson District / 1,489 / 15%
11 Fort Worth District / 1,094 / 11%
12 Waco District / 203 / 2%
13 Austin District / 641 / 7%
14 Abilene District / 224 / 2%
15 San Angelo District / 156 / 2%
16 Amarillo District / 369 / 4%
17 Lubbock District / 3,152 / 32%
18 Midland District / 516 / 6%
19 El Paso District / 94 / 1%
20 San Antonio District / 443 / 5%
Not Determined / 54 / < 1%
Total / 9,790 / 100%

Moving Forward

Ultimately, candidate performance dataprovide incentive for continued reform of educator preparation programs and set the foundation for research about our programs.

The College of Education is committed to rigorous and focused strategic goals producing the “Measurably best educators in the U.S.” In particular, our reformed teacher education program, Tech Teach, is marking a radical departure from traditional teacher preparation programs by engaging candidates in activities aimed at developing superior instructional competency and professionalism. Transformed coursework focuses on helping candidates learn and apply the skills necessary to foster preschool through 12th grade student achievement. Clinical experiences include extended placements with diverse populations throughout the program, and a full year of student teaching. Through the use of video-capture technology, candidates receive unprecedented feedback about instructional competency; and through the use of a co-teaching model, gain experience that develops the qualifications and skills equal to or above that of a second-year teacher. These experiences allow Texas Tech University graduates to meet the needs of all diverse student populations, and help us produce the “Measurably best educators in the U.S.”

Progress toward the measurably best goal, with Tech Teach as a model of excellence, is recognized by many external groups.

•Lubbock ISD: “We try to hire all the Tech Teach graduates that we can. We have principals fighting over them.”

•Dallas ISD: “We want more Tech Teach graduates, how do we get them and what do we need to do to keep them?”

•The Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation, a national accrediting body, calls educator preparation at TTU, “A National Model of Reform.”

•Texas Tech University has been interacting with several groups that want more involvement with the Tech Teach model:

the Massachusetts Department of Education;
the Louisiana Department of Education;
the University of Memphis;
the Urban Teacher Center with programs in Baltimore and Washington, DC; and
the National Institute for Excellence in Teaching has engaged in early discussions about a teacher prep partnership for TAP Schools across the U.S.
TTU was the only university recipient of a Gates Teacher Preparation Transformation Center grant to support the reform of other university’s teacher preparation programs.

Indeed, Texas Tech University is moving forward to produce the “Measurably best educators in the U.S.”

[[1]] Individuals may have moved several times, with these data as last employments.

[[2]] Individuals may have moved several times, with these data as last employments