College of Education Quality Measures

• Impact on P-12 Learning and Development and Indicators of Teaching Effectiveness

• Satisfaction of Employers and Employment Milestones

• Satisfaction of Completers - Initial Licensure Programs

• Satisfaction of Completers - Advanced Programs

• Graduation Rates

• Ability of Completers to Meet Licensing Requirements

• Ability of Completers to Be Hired in Education Positions

• Student Loan Default Rates and Other Consumer Information

• Student Loan Information – Average Debt

Impact on P-12 Learning and Development and Indicators of Teaching Effectiveness

The demonstrated teaching skills and impact on K-12 students graphic above visualizes the performance evaluations of candidates who have completed a program at the institution and are employed in an Illinois public school.

Teacher performance evaluations consist of two components: student growth and professional practice. Student growth means a demonstrable change in a student’s or group of students’ knowledge or skills, as evidenced by gain and/or attainment on two or more assessments, between two or more points in time.

Districts may designate any percentage of the evaluation toward each component. Student growth must comprise at least 30 percent of the evaluation. Districts may also utilize any rubric in evaluations.

Summative evaluation ratings are not comparable from school to school due to evaluator subjectivity and percentage of evaluation utilized for each component.

USF Graduates’ Demonstrated Teaching Skills and Impact on K-12 Students 2018 (N=39)

51%49%

Performance Evaluation Rating

Proficient Excellent

Employer Satisfaction Interviews: 2017-19 Cycle

In order to assess employers’ satisfaction with our graduates, the College of Education (COE) conducts bi-annual employer interviews. The interview method is a good fit with our institution due to our size (relatively small number of graduates) and the fact that most of our graduates are employed within a 20-mile radius. The interview method with its mix of qualitative and quantitative data provides deeper and more comprehensive view of employers’ satisfaction with our graduates when compare to surveys.

The construction of interview protocol included developing questions that are aligned with the InTASC Standards and that assess our candidates’ impact on PK-12 student learning. The personal face-to-face interviews allow us to probe beyond just basic agreement or disagreement and determine specific areas of strength or areas for improvement. In addition, interviews provide an opportunity for triangulation and increased validity as areas of agreement or divergence among employers and other measures can be observed.

For the interviews, a purposive sample was used to collect a representative sample across all COE programs over the next five years. In order to select this cycle’s sample, the COE reviewed reports indicating where candidates who graduated within the past five years were employed. Schools and principals with more than one graduate employed were considered. Three schools were selected with graduates from the elementary (5), secondary math (1), and visual arts (1) programs.

Satisfaction of Employers and Employment Milestones

Demographics of the three schools included in survey

SchoolEducation Graduate School Information

Grad Year PEL Type Race | Ethnicity Low- Income LEP Mobility

A.O. Marshall Joliet

2017 Elementary

W 3.5% H 12.8% B 68.1%

99.8% 58.9% 8.5%2017Elementary + Bilingual

2016Elementary + Bilingual

Jones Elementary Minooka

2015 Elementary W 59% H 8% B 27%

30.0% 5.0% 6.0%

2015 Elementary

Reed- Custer H.S.Braidwood

2013 Math W 91% H 0% B 6%

36.0% 1.0% 8.0%

2013 Visual Art

1Due to the Covid-19 crisis of 2020, the cycle of data collection was postponed.

The COE’s field experience coordinator contacted the principals to explain the process and request their cooperation in completing an anonymous survey and meeting for an in-person interview. All three principals agreed. Prior to the face-to-face interview, the survey was sent out via Survey Monkey. The survey asked the principals to, “Please respond to the statements regarding teachers at your school who completed an education degree at the University of St. Francis since 2013”. Then they were asked to indicate their level of agreement (Strongly Agree to Strongly Disagree) regarding several statements (see table below). After the principals completed the survey, the field experience coordinator arranged a meeting at each of the schools to conduct the interviews. At the interview, principals were asked to describe the performance of the recent graduates in the following categories: 1) The Learner and Learning, 2) Content Knowledge, 3) Instructional Practice, and 4) Professional Responsibility. The field experience coordinator asked follow-up questions for clarification and to gather more robust evidence of their respective performances. The interviews were recorded and notes were taken by the field experience coordinator.

Survey Results: Satisfaction of Employers and Employment Milestones

Following the interview, the field experience coordinator reviewed the notes and examined relevant themes. The themes that emerged aligned with the INTASC standards and categories: Learner and Learning, Content Knowledge, Instructional Practice, and Professional Responsibility.

Principals reported the following strengths: • Strong ability to make connections and

build relationships with students • Innovative classroom practices for

effective instruction and student learning • Demonstrated leadership with

colleagues • Engagement in school and local

community beyond the classroom

Principals reported the following opportunities for improvement: A potential area for improvement was noted as one principal reported that one alumni was not receptive to constructive feedback and did not effectively build relationships with students. While this was not echoed in the feedback related to any of the other alumni teaching in the three schools, it points to an opportunity to review the COE quality assurance system as the weaknesses did not emerge when the teacher was a candidate in the program.

Survey Statement (n = 7 graduates, 3 principals)Strongly Agree

or AgreeStrongly Disagree

or Disagree

The teacher understands how learners grow and develop and designs and implements developmentally appropriate and challenging learning experiences.

100% 0%

The teacher has a demonstrable (evidence-based) positive impact on student learning and development. 100% 0%

The teacher uses understandings of individual differences and diverse cultures to enable each learner to meet high standards.

100% 0%

The teacher works with others to create environments that encourage positive social interaction, active engagement in learning, and self-motivation.

100% 0%

The teacher creates learning experiences that make the discipline accessible and meaningful for learners to assure mastery of the content.

100% 0%

The teacher understands how to connect concepts and use differing perspectives to engage learners in critical thinking, creativity, and collaborative problem solving.

100% 0%

The teacher understands and uses multiple methods of assessment to engage learners in their own growth, to monitor learner progress, and guide the teacher’s and learners’ decision making.

100% 0%

The teacher understands and uses a variety of instructional strategies to encourage learners to develop dep understanding of content areas and their connections, and to build skills to apply knowledge in meaningful ways.

100% 0%

The teacher engages in ongoing professional learning and uses evidence to continually evaluate his/her practice.

100% 0%

The teacher seeks appropriate leadership roles and opportunities to take responsibility for student learning, to collaborate with learners, families, colleagues and other school professionals, and community members to ensure learner growth, and to advance the profession.

100% 0%

Satisfaction of Completers – Initial Licensure Programs

Exit Survey Results from Program Completers, Fall 2016 - Summer 2019

Satisfaction with overall educator preparation and preparation of program outcomes:

ELEMENTARY EDUCATION SPECIAL EDUCATION VISUAL ARTS & SECONDARY EDUCATION

Preparation2016-2017

N=192017-2018

N=152018-2019

N=182016-2017

N=82017-2018

N=22018-2019

N=42016-2017

N=22017-2018

N=52018-2019

N=3

How well did USF prepare you?Well to Excellently

100% 100% 100% 62.5% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Program OutcomesHigh to Very High

Teaching Diverse Students 94.7% 86.7% 88.9% 77.8% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Content Knowledge 100% 100% 94.4% 44.4% 100% 100% 100% 80% 100%

Differentiated Instruction 100% 100% 88.9% 88.9% 100% 100% 50% 60% 100%

Learning Environment 94.7% 86.7% 100% 88.9% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Instructional Delivery 100% 93.3% 100% 88.9% 50% 100% 100% 80% 66.7%

Reading, Writing, and Oral Communication 63.2% 93.3% 72.3% 55.6% 100% 100% 50% 80% 66.7%

Assessment 100% 100% 94.4% 88.9% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Collaborative Relationships 89.5% 93.3% 100% 88.9% 100% 75% 100% 80% 66.7%

Professionalism 84.3% 93.3% 88.9% 88.9% 100% 100% 100% 100% 66.7%

Serving the Community 89.5% 93.3% 88.9% 44.4% 100% 100% 100% 100% 66.7%

Satisfaction of Completers – Advanced Programs

Exit Survey Results from Program Completers, Fall 2016 - Summer 2019

*If the 2016-2017 completers were fewer than 5, results were combined with 2015-16

SPECIAL EDUCATION READING SPECIALIST TEACHER LEADER PRINCIPAL PREPARATION SUPERINTENDENT

2015-17N=10

2017-18N=16

2018-19N=6

2016-17N=14

2017-18N=8

2018-19N=6

2015-17N=11

2017-18N=3

2018-19N=5

2016-17N=9

2017-18N=3

2018-19N=11

2015-17N=20

2017-18N=10

2018-19N=10

How well did USF prepare you?Well to Excellently

100% 100% 100% 92.8% 100% 90.4% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

College of Education Instructors: Agree to Strongly Agree

Demonstrated thoroughknowledge of content

100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Held high expectations for students in class

100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 85.7% 80% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Encouraged class to become a community of learners

92.8% 100% 100% 92.8% 100% 95.2% 100% 80% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Graduation Rates

Graduation rates based on expected completion of 2018-2019 cohorts National undergraduate graduation rate = 55%; Illinois rate = 62% | National doctoral rate = 57%

Program2019 Percent Completing within

Expected Time2020 Percent Completing within

Expected Time

Initial Teacher Education Programs (Undergraduate)

Elementary Education 91% 90%

Music, Visual Arts, & Secondary Education

• Graduated with content area major degree 100% 100%

• Graduated with teaching license 50% 75%

Special Education 91% 100%

Initial Teacher Education Programs (Graduate, M.Ed.)

All Programs Combined (n < 10) 83% 75%

Subsequent Endorsement

Special Education 92% 93%

Advanced Programs

Educational Leadership: Principal/Teacher Leader (M.S.) 95% 97%

Reading (M.S.) 80% 86%

Teaching & Learning (M.S.) 93% 95%

Educational Leadership: Superintendent (Ed.D.) 82% 87%

Admitted

Undergraduate Fall 2013 - Summer 2014

M.Ed. Programs Fall 2015 – Summer 2016

M.S. Programs Fall 2015 – Summer 2016

Ed.D. Program Fall 2014 – Summer 2015

2020 results based on admit dates as noted with completion by Summer 2019.

Ability of Completers to Meet Licensing (certification) and Requirements

Pass Rates of Completers by Program, Fall 2016 - Summer 2019

Illinois State Board of Education Program Tests

CompletersN 2016-2017

CompletersN 2017-2018

Completers N 2018-2019

Pass Rate2016-2019

Elementary

• Test 1 18 15 18 100%

• Test 2 18 15 18 100%

• Test 3 18 15 18 100%

• Test 4 18 15 18 100%

Special Education

• LBSI 9 <5 5 100%

• General Curriculum 9 <5 5 100%

Art & Secondary <5 <5 5 100%

Special Ed, Subsequent Endorsement

• LBSI 8 24 16 100%

• General Curriculum 8 24 16 100%

Reading Specialist 20 18 24 100%

Superintendent 20 23 24 100%

Principal Preparation

• Test 1 27 39 35 100%

• Test 2 27 39 35 100%

Additional State Requirement for Initial Licensure

CompletersN 2016-2017

CompletersN 2017-2018

Completers N 2018-2019

Pass Rate2016-2019

edTPA 29 21 26 100%

Ability of Completers to Be Hired in Education Positions

2018-19 CohortElementary

Education (18)Special Education (5)

Visual Arts &Secondary Education (5)

TOTAL (28)

Employed Full-time in Education 100% 100% 100% 100%

Not teaching 0% 0% 0% 0%

2017-18 CohortElementary

Education (14)Special Education (2)

Visual Arts &Secondary Education (5)

TOTAL (21)

Employed Full-time in Education 100% 100% 100% 100%

Not teaching 0% 0% 0% 0%

2016-17 Cohort Elementary Education (18) Special Education (9) Secondary Education (2) TOTAL (29)

Employed Full-time in Education 89% 100% 100% 93%

Chose not to pursue licensure 6% 0% 0% 3%

Not teaching 6% 0% 0% 3%

Employment Rates: Initial ProgramsThe tables below indicate the employment status of graduates for the academic year immediately following their graduation.

Student Loan Default Rates

As identified on the Federal Student Aid School Default Rates report, the University of St. Francis rates continue to be in alignment with peer institutions; supplementary loan/debt information can be found on the USF Your Right to Know page (https://www.stfrancis.edu/about/your-right-to-know/).

Data retrieved from the federal Integrated Post-Secondary Education Data System (IPEDS) 2017-2018 report indicate that the average cost to attend USF is comparable with peer institutions.

2017-2018 DATA

Institution % Freshmen with Gift % Gift for all Undergraduates Average Net Price

USF 99% 89% $19,418

Aurora 100% 90% $18,234

Benedictine 99% 85% $25,508

Dominican 100% 90% $18,037

Lewis 99% 85% $18,899

St. Xavier 100% 95% $15,131

Student Loan Average Debt