Session: Building a Culture for Continuous Improvement in Educator Preparation Programs

Fri, April 22, 2:30 to 4:00pm PDT (5:30 to 7:00pm EDT), Manchester Grand Hyatt, Floor: 2nd Level, Harbor Tower, Balboa A

Educator preparation programs have much to gain from supporting their faculty to engage in communities of practice and other professional development groups. The papers in this session take a look at how educator preparation programs can co-construct knowledge with their faculty and partners in the field to identify data for program improvements, for a sustainable culture for continuous improvement.

Chair, Mary E Yakimowski, Samford University
Discussant, Brandy M. Jenner, University of Southern California

#1-Accreditation Self-Study: The Development of a Community of Practice through Qualitative Inquiry

Katherine Rose Adams, University of North Georgia
Diana Chang-Blom, University of North Georgia
Donna Governor, University of North Georgia
Sheri Carmel Hardee, University of North Georgia
Kelly McFaden, University of North Georgia
April Nelms, University of North Georgia
Kellie Whelan-Kim, University of North Georgia
Westry A. Whitaker, University of North Georgia
James A Zoll, University of North Georgia

Abstract: This paper highlights lessons learned from utilizing qualitative inquiry methods for the purposes of accreditation, with a particular focus on the development of a community of practice that stemmed, somewhat unexpectedly, from this process. Through the use of autobiographical research vignettes, we explore the idea of faculty buy-in for the accreditation process and how this evolved into a community of practice invested in overall program improvement, enhanced confidence in qualitative work, and the expansion of the initial work into continued research. Our goal is to provide ideas for Educator Preparation Programs engaging in their own accreditation processes to engage faculty and truly create a sense of continuous improvement in which stakeholders are fully invested.

#2-Examining the AAQEP accreditation experience: Moving towards authentic program inquiry

Juliet Michelsen Wahleithner, California State University - Fresno
Debbie Meadows, California State University - Bakersfield
Brad Damon, Brandman University
Heather L. Horsley, California State University, Fresno

Abstract: Historically, the accreditation of educator preparation programs has been focused on compliance, with programs demonstrating to outside agencies that they are doing the best possible job to prepare future educators. But what would happen if the accreditation process invited faculty to engage in authentic analysis of data that led to discussions focused on continuous improvement and, ultimately, programmatic changes that improved outcomes for future educators? This study draws from the experiences of three institutions preparing for accreditation from the Association for Advancing Quality in Educator Preparation (AAQEP) to examine what AAQEP’s emphasis on continuous improvement for accreditation looks like in practice.

#3-Exploring the role of intentions and expectations in sustainability education professional development: A sociocultural contextualized program evaluation

Carlos R. Casanova, Arizona State University
Jordan King, Arizona State University

Abstract: This paper describes a process to design and implement a sociocultural contextualized program evaluation framework. We utilized the framework to evaluate a multi-year sustainability education professional development program by examining both within and across different perspectives, phases, and program iterations. The evaluation demonstrated that participants expect to engage in the co-construction of knowledge that leads to abilities to practice sustainability in professional and personal settings. While instructors and participants converged upon several areas of intentions and expectations, there were also tensions between these two groups suggesting the need to more closely examine their influence. By doing so, SEPD programs may better meet the needs of both teachers and the field more broadly.

Session: Dismantling Assessment Data Demands, Design, and Administration in Educator Preparation

Sat, April 23, 11:30am to 1:00pm PDT (2:30 to 4:00pm EDT), Manchester Grand Hyatt, Floor: 2nd Level, Harbor Tower, Balboa A

When thinking about inequities in education, it is important to consider how assessments are designed and administered. The first paper describes a longitudinal case study on program completer impact on P-12 student learning. The second paper examines survey design and whether an even number of indicators in a Likert scale is preferable to an odd number of indicators. The third paper examines online test proctoring outcomes from eleven professional licensure exams as compared to in-person administration.

Chair: Barbara L. Bales, University of Wisconsin
Discussant: Mehmet “Dali” Ozturk

#1-Measuring Completer Impact in Non-Data-Sharing States: A Multi-Year Case Study Design and Findings

F. Todd Goodson, Kansas State University
Eileen Wertzberger, Kansas State University

Abstract: Session describes a longitudinal case study design employing focus group methodologies to assess completer impact in P-12 classrooms. Findings to date indicate a rich set of factors used both by new teachers and by employers to assess impact on student learning. These data are arguably a more nuanced view of teacher impact than afforded by state assessment data. Certainly, these results are uniquely capable of driving continuous improvement at the program level.

#2-An Examination of Instrument Design Requirement for Educator Preparation Programs

Jianjun Wang, California State University – Bakersfield

Abstract: The Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP) requires data collection to track program quality across Educator Preparation Providers. In its assessment rubric, CAEP advocates an even number of choices to eliminate neutral responses. To examine potential issues in assessment outcomes, survey data are gathered in this study from a unit operation survey that was endorsed by a national accreditation team in the past. Based on a theoretical framework of hypothesis testing that models the dichotomy of odd- vs. even- number of choices, the result did not show negative evidence against the use of a Likert-type scale with a midpoint option for neutral responses.

#3-Comparing Outcomes From Examinations Proctored In Test Centres and Online Using Live Remote Proctoring Technology

Gemma Melissa Cherry, Dublin City University
Michael O'Leary, Dublin City University
Linda Waters, Prometric
Li-Ann Kuan, Prometric

Abstract: The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic brought with it the closure of many bricks-and-mortar testing centres and a concomitant move to the remote (online) proctoring of many credentialing exams that were scheduled to take place throughout 2020. In response to a dearth of research in the area, the study described in this paper uses data from eleven professional licensure examinations taken by 14,097 candidates across four US States to compare outcomes for tests proctored either in Test Centres or remotely in real-time using Live Remote Proctoring software. Candidate outcomes were compared using average percent correct and passing rates. Test psychometric properties were compared using measures of reliability, decision consistency, item difficulty, item discrimination and time taken to complete tests.

AAPE SIG Business Meeting

Sat, April 23, 6:00 to 7:30pm PDT (9:00 to 10:30pm EDT), SIG Virtual Rooms, SIG-Accreditation, Assessment, and Program Evaluation in Education Preparation Virtual Paper Session Room

Come join us for the Accreditation, Assessment, and Program Evaluation in Educator Preparation Special Interest Group (AAPE SIG) Business Meeting. All are welcome - whether you are a current member or just thinking about joining. We look forward to connecting with you.

Share