The NeagSchool of Education’s Teacher Preparation Program:

Alumni Survey Results for the graduates of 2003-2007

Madeline Sedovic, Qing Li, and Mary Yakimowski

In conjunction with the TNE Assessment Committee

September 2008

1

Executive Summary

The purpose of this studywas to gather information from alumni of the Neag Teacher Preparation Programs in order to improve the programs and enhance pupil achievement. This survey was designed to provide evidence on the value of teacher preparation in promoting pupil learning and relates to all tenants of the Teachers for a New Era (TNE) initiative, funded by the Carnegie Corporation with additional funding from the Annenberg and Ford Foundations.
Participants in this survey were alumni who graduated between 2003 and 2007 from the Neag Teacher Preparation Program, both the Integrated Bachelor’s/Master’s Teacher Education (IB/M) and Teacher Certification Program for College Graduates (TCPCG) components. The original sample consisted of 131 alumni, 92 from the IB/M program, and 29 from TCPCG.
Research questions focused on alumni satisfaction with multi-faceted aspects of their teacher education program including diversity.
For theprocedures,individuals were contacted through a mailed cover letter, a series of e-mails and one postcard as follow-up. The survey itself was completed online.
Data for analyseswere entered into SPSS. Missing data and less than five group responses were excluded. Frequency distributions, means, and standard deviations were calculated as appropriate. Significance levels for t-tests are reported at the .05 level and effect sizes were calculated using the Cohen’s d formula.
The resultsproduced the following highlights.
What are some background statistics?
The majority of alumni were Caucasian (83.2%), female (79.4%), and identified English (87%) as their primary language. Most had not obtained further degrees (93.1%), but a large percentage were planning, or in the process of furthering their education (45%). / What were their reflections about the teaching training program?
In total 90.1% of alumni said they would chooseUConn again, showing a general satisfaction with the program. There were also generally high satisfactionratings for program components of content and/or areaspecialty, creating meaningful learning experiences forstudents in English, and the degree of preparation forworking in the teaching profession.
What were their reflections about being a teacher?
Almost all of the alumni, 93.1%, were currently involved in education. Most endorsed that they enjoyed working with students (87.8%)and found it rewarding when their students learned (86.3%).
What were their overall dispositions?
Overall, teacher dispositions that had the highest endorsements included valuing diversity, belief that all students can learn, intellectual enthusiasm, and the desire to make the learning process enjoyable.
What were some of their standards?
The standards that were shown to be especially important by alumni included knowledge of their subject area (in English education), respect for students as unique human beings (in special education), and desire for growth and betterment (in science education).
How do they “grade” the NeagSchool of Education?
Overall, most of the alumni seemed satisfied with the quality of the program, as 51.9% awarded the teacher education program an A and 38.2% gave the program a “B.”

Table of Contents

Page
Introduction ………………………………………………………. / 6
Methodology ……………………………………………………... / 7
Participants ……………………………………………………………………. / 7
Instrumentation ……………………………………………………………….. / 7
Research Questions …………………………………………………………… / 9
Procedures …………………………………………………………………….. / 10
Results……………………………………………………………... / 10
Background Information ……………………………………………………… / 11
Reflection on Teacher Education Program …………………………………… / 16
Reflections on You as a Teacher ……………………………………………… / 43
Dispositions and Standards ………………………………………………….... / 48
Grade for Overall Quality...………….………………………………………... / 62
Summary ……………………………………………………………. / 64
References
Appendix A: The Survey Instrument

List of Tables

Page(s)
Table 1 / Personal Background Information Overall and by Program…………… / 11
Table 2 / Personal Background Information by Field……………………………. / 12
Table 3 / Professional Background Information Overall and by Program……….. / 13
Table 4 / Respondents’ Year of Graduation……………………………………… / 14
Table 5 / Respondents’ Years of Graduation by Program………………………... / 14
Table 6 / Respondents Level of Education Attainment by the Parents…………... / 15
Table 7 / Overall Ratings with Program Components……………………………. / 17
Table 8 / Overall Ratings for Importance with Program Components…………… / 18
Table 9 / Comparison of Satisfaction and Importance Ratings…………………... / 19
Table 10 / Comparison of Satisfaction and Importance Rating: Previous and
Current Year…………………………………………………………… / 20
Table 11 / Ratings with Satisfaction for Program Components by IB/M Alumni… / 22
Table 12 / Ratings with Satisfaction for Program Components by TCPCG
Alumni…………………………………………………………………. / 23
Table 13 / Ratings with Importance for Program Components by IB/M Alumni…. / 24
Table 14 / Ratings with Importance for Program Components by TCPCG
Alumni…………………………………………………………………... / 25
Table 15 / Comparison of Satisfaction and Importance Rating for IB/M Alumni…. / 26
Table 16 / Comparison of Satisfaction and Importance Rating for TCPCG
Alumni…………………………………………………………………... / 27
Table 17 / Ratings for Satisfaction with Program Components by Field…………... / 29
Table 18 / Ratings for Importance with Program Components by Field………….... / 31
Table 19 / Comparison of Satisfaction and Importance Rating by Field…………… / 32
Table 20 / Overall Satisfaction, Importance, and Difference Ratings on Select
Diversity Statements…………………………………………………….. / 33
Table 21 / Overall Satisfaction, Importance, and Difference Ratings on Select
Diversity Statements by IB/M Alumni………………………………….. / 34
Table 22 / Overall Satisfaction, Importance, and Difference Ratings on Select
Diversity Statements by TCPCG Alumni………………………………… / 35
Table 23 / Overall Satisfaction, Importance, and Difference Ratings on Select
Diversity Statements by Field……………………………………………. / 36
Table 24 / Overall Ratings on Satisfaction with Learning about the Teaching
Profession………………………………………………………………... / 37
Table 25 / Overall Ratings on Satisfaction with Learning about the Teaching
Profession by IB/M Alumni……………………………………………… / 38
Table 26 / Overall Ratings on Satisfaction with Learning about the Teaching
Profession by TCPCG Alumni………………………………………….. / 38
Table 27 / Overall Ratings on Satisfaction with Learning about the Teaching
Profession by Field………………………………………………………. / 39
Table 28 / Overall Ratings of the Neag School……………………………………… / 40
Table 29 / Ratings of the Neag School by IB/M Alumni……………………………. / 41
Table 30 / Ratings of the Neag School by TCPCG Alumni…………………………. / 41
Table 31 / Ratings of the Neag School by Field……………………………………… / 42
Table 32 / Teacher Education Program Completed Overall and by Program………… / 43
Table 33 / Teacher Education Program Completed by Field…………………………. / 43
Table 34 / Current Involvement in Education Overall and by Program………………. / 44
Table 35 / Current Involvement in Education by Field……………………………….. / 44
Table 36 / Grade Level Current Taught by Neag Alumni…………………………….. / 45
Table 37 / Type of Teaching Position Currently Held by Neag Alumni……………… / 45
Table 38 / Overall Explanation for Involvement in Education: Previous and
Current Year……………………………………………………………….. / 46
Table 38 / Overall Explanation for Involvement in Education by Program…………… / 47
Table 40 / Teacher Dispositions Overall and by Program…………………………….. / 48
Table 41 / Teacher Dispositions by Field……………………………………………… / 49
Table 42 / Special Education Standards……………………………………………….. / 50
Table 43 / English Standards…………………………………………………………... / 54
Table 44 / History/Social Studies Standards…………………………………………… / 55
Table 45 / Science Standards…………………………………………………………... / 56
Table 46 / Mathematics Standards……………………………………………………... / 58
Table 47 / World Language Standards…………………………………………………. / 60
Table 48 / Likelihood of Alumni Choosing to Attend UConn Again, If Possible
Overall and by Program…………………………………………………… / 62
Table 49 / Likelihood of Alumni Choosing to Attend UConn Again, If Possible
by Field…………………………………………………………………….. / 62
Table 50 / Grade for Overall Quality of Teacher Education Program Overall
and by Program…………………………………………………………… / 63
Table 51 / Grade for Overall Quality of Teacher Education Program Overall
and by Field………………………………………………………………. / 63

1

NeagSchool of Education’s

Teacher Preparation Program

Alumni Survey Results for the Graduates of 2003-2007

Madeline Sedovic, Qing Li, Mary Yakimowski

September 2008

Teachers who graduated from the Neag School of Education’s Teacher Preparation Program at the University of Connecticut (UConn) from 2002-2007 were asked to complete a survey by January 30 2008. The purpose of this report is to summarize the results.

Introduction

As stated in Neag School of Education’s Teacher Preparation Program 2002–2007 Alumni Survey Results (Yakimowski, Li, & Nicholson, 2008):

The UConn Neag School of Education’s[1] Teacher Preparation Program is comprised of two components: the Integrated Bachelors/Masters (IB/M) Program and the Teacher Certification Program for College Graduates (TCPCG). The IB/M is a five-year teacher preparation program that integrates coursework and school-based clinical experiences. In addition, the UConn Music Department offers a four-year dual-degree program in music education with courses taken with IB/M students. The school developed the second component of the Teacher Preparation Program, TCPCG, for individuals with a college degree who wish to gain secondary level teacher certification. For example, an individual with a bachelor’s degree in biology may attend TCPCG for a secondary level certification in biology or science education.

In addition to the Teacher Preparation Program, UConn is one of 11 institutions receiving the Teachers for a New Era (TNE) grant award from the Carnegie Corporation. The TNE project adheres to three main principles: (1) using evidence to drive decision-making; (2) supporting collaboration between the schools of arts and sciences and the school of education; and (3) clinical practice as a foundation for pre-service and induction of new teachers. The 2007-2008 year represents UConn’s fifth year participating in TNE.

Both components of the Teacher Preparation Program and the TNE project work collaboratively to improve pre-service teacher quality. Together, they were interested in gathering information from alumni of the Neag Teacher Preparation Program. But, what are the views today of the UConn alumni? Are they similar or different than those found in the past?

Method

Keeping in mind the national and state perspectives detailed in the last TNE report on alumni, pertinent university scholarship, and UConn data, a survey was developed with three goals in mind: (1) identifying alumni feelings about diversity; (2) determining alumni satisfaction with multi-faceted aspects of their program/department such as course content, faculty involvement, and job readiness; and, (3) informing the principle(s) of the TNE project.

Participants

There were a total of 121 alumni of the Teacher Preparation Programs, 92 who were graduates of the IB/M program, and 29 from the TCPCG program.

Instrumentation

The instrument was designed with general research questions to explore what graduates’ reflections have on their teacher education program, perceive themselves as teachers, and background characteristics. The survey represents several different themes which can be displayed in graphic form (see Figure A). The items contained within the survey align with those administered at other institutions, as well as previously administered surveys within UConn. A full detailed explanation of the survey may be found in Yakimowski, Li, and Nicholson, 2008).

1

Figure A. Graphic depiction of the first two major areas of questions, reflections on your teacher education program and on you as a teacher, on the survey.

1

Research Questions

Keeping in mind the conceptual model and the instrument design, the following research questions were posed and are addressed in this ordered under the results section:

Q1: Background information

A. What are the gender, ethnicity, and primary language of the respondents overall, by program, and by field?

B. What is the professional background information of the respondents overall and by program?

C. In which year did the respondents’ graduate?

D. What are the levels of education attained by the parents of the respondents overall and by program?

Q2: Reflections on the teacher education program and diversity

A. What are the overall ratings for satisfaction and importance with the teacher education program components?

B. How do respondents’ importance and satisfaction ratings compare?

C.Are there any interesting patterns by IB/M and/or TCPCG alumni on the overall ratings for satisfaction and importance with the teacher education program components?

D. How do IB/M alumni’s importance and satisfaction ratings compare? How about TCPCG? How about by field?

E. How do respondents feel about diversity preparation overall, by program, and by field?

F. What are the ratings for satisfaction with learning about teaching overall, by program, by field?

G.What are the overall ratings of the NeagSchool for satisfaction with qualities of the Neag School of Education overall, by program, by field?

J.What are the ratings by IB/M and/or TCPCG alumni on the overall ratings for satisfaction of the NeagSchool? By field?

Q3: Reflections on you as a teacher

A.From which teacher program did the respondents graduate overall, by program, and by field?

B.How many respondents are currently involved in the field of education overall, by program, and by field?

C.What grade levels are taught by the respondents?

D.What types of teaching positions are currently held by the respondents?

E.Why are the respondents involved in field of education?

Q4: Dispositions and standards

  1. What are the teacher dispositions overall, by program, and by field?

B. What is the self-reported level of attainment of the respective standards overall and by program?

Q5: Grade for overall program quality

A.What is the likelihood of the alumni choosing to attend UConn again?

B.What is the grade for the overall quality of the Teacher Education Program?

C.What do dissatisfied alumni say about the program?

Procedures

The alumni were contacted with a cover letter, post card, and emails. An incentive was also offered. Alumni who completed the survey had one chance at winning one of 10 amazon.com gift cards. The files were later migrated from Persius into SPSS and all quantitative data was analyzed using this software. Preliminary results were analyzed by two graduate assistants overseen by the Neag School’s Director of Assessment.

Scores reflect those obtained from the available survey responses. Any missing data was not included. Group level analyses responded to by fewer than five alumni were excluded. Results were compiled to reflect all Neag alumni, as well as distributed by program component and, at times, by field. The number of students and the mean score are summarized in charts and trends described. Finally, significance levels for t-tests are reported at the .05 level and effect sizes were calculated using the Cohen’s d formula.

Results

The general characteristics of respondents along with their assessment of the program and descriptions of themselves as educators are presented. More specifically, results will be presented in the following order:

Q1: Background information,

Q2: Reflections on teacher education program and diversity,

Q3: Reflections on you as a teacher,

Q4: Dispositions and standards, and

Q5: Grade for overall program quality.

Background Information

There were four general questions addressed in background information.

Q1a: What are the gender, ethnicity and primary language of the

respondents overall, by program component, and by field?

Alumni provided general background information regarding gender, race/ethnicity and primary language. Table 1 shows that 79.4% of the total students who have completed this program are female, which is consistent with data from past surveys. Alumni from both the IB/M and TCPCG were predominantly female, at 79.3% and 82.8% respectively. IB/M had a higher percentage of white/Caucasian alumni, 84.8%, versus 79.3% from the TCPCG program. The primary language of both the IB/M and TCPCG alumni is predominantly English, with 88% of IB/M alumni and 89.7% of TCPCG alumni rating it as their first language.

Table 1

Personal Background Information Overall and by Program1

Previous2 Total / Total / IB/M / TCPCG
Sex / N / % / N / % / N / % / N / %
Female / 214 / 78.7 / 104 / 79.4 / 73 / 79.3 / 24 / 82.8
Male / 47 / 17.3 / 23 / 17.6 / 18 / 19.6 / 4 / 13.8
Missing / 11 / 4.0 / 4 / 3.1 / 1 / 1.1 / 1 / 3.4
Race/Ethnicity
White/Caucasian / 240 / 88.2 / 109 / 83.2 / 78 / 84.8 / 23 / 79.3
Black or African American / 2 / 0.7 / 1 / .8 / 1 / 1.1 / 0 / .0
Hispanic American / 9 / 3.3 / 5 / 3.8 / 4 / 4.3 / 1 / 3.4
Asian/Pacific Islander / 8 / 2.9 / 6 / 4.6 / 4 / 4.3 / 2 / 6.9
Native American / 0 / 0.0 / 1 / .8 / 1 / 1.1 / 0 / .0
Other / 1 / 0.4 / 3 / 2.3 / 1 / 1.1 / 2 / 6.9
Missing / 12 / 4.4 / 6 / 4.6 / 3 / 3.3. / 1 / 3.4
Primary Language
English / 245 / 90.0 / 114 / 87.0 / 81 / 88.0 / 26 / 89.7
Spanish / 7 / 2.6 / 1 / .8 / 0 / .0 / 1 / 3.4
Other / 13 / 4.8 / 11 / 8.4 / 9 / 9.8 / 2 / 6.9
Missing / 7 / 2.6 / 5 / 3.8 / 2 / 2.2 / 0 / 0

1 Note: IB/M n = 92, TCPCG n = 29. 2 Data from previous survey includes graduates from 1995-2006.

Table 2 illustrates that the alumni in elementary education and special education were comprised mainly of females, at 90.6% and 100%, while alumni in secondary education comprised 73.8% of the participants. Caucasian alumni represented 84.4% of alumni in elementary education, 90% in special education, and 82% in secondary education. The primary language for the majority of alumni in all three fields was English (90.6% in elementary education, 90% in special education, and 88.5% in secondary education).

Of the three alumni working as educators in agriculture, all of them identified themselves female, Caucasian, and speaking English as their first language. Of those teaching English, 14 out of the 18 alumni were female, 14 out of 18 were Caucasian, and 17 chose English as their primary language. The only alumnus teaching reading was a Caucasian male who spoke English as his first language. Nine of the 10 teachers of math were female, 8 were Caucasian, and 8 consider their primary language to be English. In music, 4 of the 6 alumni were female, 4 were Caucasian, and 4 spoke English as their primary language, with the information on the other 2 alumni missing. Ten of the 12 science teachers were female, 10 of whom were Caucasian, and 2 of whom were of Asian or Pacific Island descent, and 10 spoke English primarily, while 2 had other first languages. In contrast to most of the other fields, alumni in social studies were predominantly male with 8 out of the 13 alumni. Twelve identified themselves as Caucasian, and 11 chose English as their primary language.

Table 2

Personal Background Information by Field

ElEd / SpEd / SecEd / Agr / Eng / Rdg / Ma / Mu / Sci / SS
Sex / N / % / N / % / N / % / N / N / N / N / N / N / N
Female / 29 / 90.6 / 10 / 100.0 / 45 / 73.8 / 3 / 14 / 0 / 9 / 4 / 10 / 5
Male / 3 / 9.4 / 0 / 0.0 / 15 / 24.6 / 0 / 4 / 1 / 1 / 0 / 2 / 8
Missing / 0 / 0.0 / 0 / 0.0 / 1 / 1.6 / 0 / 0 / 0 / 0 / 2 / 0 / 0
Race/Ethnicity
White/Caucasian / 27 / 84.4 / 9 / 90 / 50 / 82.0 / 3 / 14 / 1 / 8 / 4 / 10 / 12
Black or Afr Am / 1 / 3.1 / 0 / 0.0 / 0 / 0.0 / 0 / 0 / 0 / 0 / 0 / 0 / 0
Hispanic Am / 1 / 3.1 / 0 / 0.0 / 3 / 4.9 / 0 / 1 / 0 / 1 / 0 / 0 / 1
Asian/Pac Isl / 2 / 6.3 / 1 / 10 / 3 / 4.9 / 0 / 0 / 0 / 1 / 0 / 2 / 0
Native Am / 0 / 0.0 / 0 / 0.0 / 1 / 1.6 / 0 / 1 / 0 / 0 / 0 / 0 / 0
Other / 0 / 0.0 / 0 / 0.0 / 2 / 3.3 / 0 / 1 / 0 / 0 / 0 / 0 / 0
Missing / 1 / 3.1 / 0 / 0.0 / 2 / 3.3 / 0 / 1 / 0 / 0 / 2 / 0 / 0
Primary Language
English / 29 / 90.6 / 9 / 90 / 54 / 88.5 / 3 / 17 / 1 / 8 / 4 / 10 / 11
Spanish / 0 / 0.0 / 0 / 0.0 / 1 / 1.6 / 0 / 1 / 0 / 0 / 0 / 0 / 0
Other / 3 / 9.4 / 1 / 10 / 6 / 9.9 / 0 / 0 / 0 / 2 / 0 / 2 / 2
Missing / 0 / 0.0 / 0 / 0.0 / 0 / 0.0 / 0 / 0 / 0 / 0 / 2 / 0 / 0

Q1b: What is the professional background information

of the respondents overall, by program?

As shown in Table 3, 3.8% of respondents earned an additional degree since the completion of their program at UConn, a significant drop from 21.3% in the previous survey. However, the percentage of alumni considering or currently enrolled in an advanced degree program has remained consistent, at 45% of 2002-2007 alumni from 46% previously. Only 2.2% of IB/M alumni and none of the TCPCG alumni have earned an additional degree, however, 41.3% of IB/M and 48.3% of TCPCG alumni are currently enrolled or planning on earning an advanced degree.

Table 3

Professional Background Information Overall and by Program

Previous Total / Total / IB/M / TCPCG
Have you earned an additional degree since the completion of your degree in education? / N / % / N / % / N / % / N / %
Yes / 58 / 21.3 / 5 / 3.8 / 2 / 2.2 / 0 / 0.0
No / 198 / 72.8 / 122 / 93.1 / 89 / 96.7 / 28 / 96.6
Missing / 16 / 5.9 / 4 / 3.1 / 1 / 1.1 / 1 / 3.4
Are considering or currently enrolled in an advanced degree program?
Yes / 125 / 46.0 / 59 / 45.0 / 38 / 41.3 / 14 / 48.3
No / 134 / 49.3 / 66 / 50.4 / 51 / 55.4 / 14 / 48.3
Missing / 13 / 4.8 / 6 / 4.6 / 3 / 3.3 / 1 / 3.4

Q1c: In which year did the respondents’ graduate overall, by field?

The majority of alumni in the sample who responded, 27%, graduated in the year 2003, (omitting those whose date of graduation was not identified). The largest percentages of alumni graduating from teacher education programs graduated in 2006 (26%) or 2007 (33.6%; see Table 4).