SACSCOC Fifth Year Interim Report
Spacer
Assessment : 2011 - 2012 : Educational Programs :
Reading MED
Reading MED
2 Goals 2 Objectives 2 Indicators 2 Criteria 2 Findings 2 Actions
| GOAL: Quality And Effectiveness |
| Objective |
|
||||
|
Candidates Will Demonstrate Proficiencies Of The International Reading Association Standards |
| Indicator |
|
|||
| Candidates create a portfolio that demonstrates their proficiency in each standard through work samples and reflection as related to the IRA rubric. See attached rubric. |
| Criterion |
|
|||
| The reading faculty divide the standards among them (two faculty members per standard) to score the portfolios. Candidates must score 85% or better. We are eager to determine if the revised rubric better delineates last year’s weaker standard, Professional Learning and Leadership. |
| Finding |
|
|||
| All candidates mastered the IRA Standards at 85% or better as indicated on the Portfolio Rubric. |
Actions for Objective:
| Action |
|
|||
| The Portfolio Rubric will be changed to more accurately reflect the requirements of the new online portfolio. We will change the criteria to "All students will score at least a 1' (acceptable) on all standards." |
| GOAL: Diagnostic Assessment |
| Objective |
|
||||
|
Students Will Demonstrate Proficiency In Instruction Based On Assessment Data |
| Indicator |
|
|||
| Candidates will demonstrate proficiency in evaluation and instruction in their case study report as indicated by the Case Study Rubric. This rubric was developed by the reading faculty to evaluate students' ability to assess, plan instruction and deliver instruction. This rubric is based on the International Reading Association standards. See attached rubric. Performance on the Case Study will be evaluated by instructors for READ 5307 and READ 5308. |
| Criterion |
|
|||
| Candidates will score 85% or better in the Case Study Analysis, demonstrating that they have met or exceeded standards on the rubric. |
| Finding |
|
|||
| All candidates scored 85% or better on the Case Study Analysis. |
Actions for Objective:
| Action |
|
|||
| We will change the Case Study Rubric to be consistent with the online Portfolio rubric so that candidates are evaluated on a score of "O' - unacceptable, "1" - acceptable, and "2" - target. |
| Closing the Loop |
|
The reading faculty has accomplished all of its objectives for the year, and we conducted an orientation for masters students both online and face-to-face. Because all objectives have been met, we feel our program has been strengthened. We will strive towards meeting all of our objectives. The objectives that were met are as follows: All candidates scored at least 85% on the Case Study Analysis; and all students scored at least 85% on their Masters Portfolios. For next year, we are going to change the rubric so that our goals will be for all students to score at least a "1"(acceptable) on their Case Study Analysis and for all students to score at least a "1" (acceptable) on their Masters Portfolios. The Reading Faculty is in the process of reviewing all evaluation instruments in our program in order to have consistency across coursework.
|