| The School of Education Human Development and Consumer Sciences has already addressed the following areas of improvement (Annual Report 2022 and Annual Report Response),specified within CAEP Standard 5 (5.2). To continue addressing the areas of improvement, the EPP provided the rubrics indicating how Kentucky Teachers Standards/InTASC Standards align to each of the specific assessment areas on the EDU 202 and Instructional Assessment Rubrics. The Teacher Work Sample (TWS). The CAO and Dispositions, Values and Behaviors non-proprietary assessments were reviewed by the TEC Committee for validity and aligned to the InTASC standards. They are grouped into four general categories including:1- The Learner and Learning2- Content Knowledge3- Instructional Practice, and4- Professional Responsibilities |
| The addition and alignment of the InTASC standards to the rubrics, assessments, and survey's provides the EPP with actionable measures that are cumulative, and produces empirical evidence that intercepts data that is valid and consistent. Each of the rubric and assessment changes were discussed with theTEC and SEHDCS committees to provide rationale and meet the minimal standards of CAEP.. |
| CAEP: Areas for Improvement (ITP) 5 Provider Quality Assurance and Continuous Improvement |
| The EPP provided limited evidence that measures of completer impact, including available outcome data on P-12 student growth, are summarized, externally benchmarked, analyzed, shared widely, and acted upon in decision-making related to programs, resource allocation, and future direction.(Component 5.4) |
| The School of Education Human Development and Consumer Sciences has already addressed and provided the following response for areas of improvement (Annual Report 2022 and Annual Report Response),specified within CAEP Standard 5 (5.4). The EPP continues to review the website links for annual reporting measures and public accountability. In addition, the EPP reviews the data with the TEC committee and stakeholders for transparency and validity purposes. |
===== PAGE 7 =====
### Section 6. EPP's Continuous Improvement & Progress on (advanced level) Phase-in Plans and (initial-level) Transition Plans
Please share any continuous improvement initiatives at the EPP, AND (if applicable) provide CAEP with an update on the EPP's progress on its advanced level phase-in plans and/or initial level transition plans.
### 6.1 Summarize any data-driven EPP-wide or programmatic modifications, innovations, or changes planned, worked on, or completed in the last academic year
This is an opportunity to share targeted continuous improvement efforts your EPP is proud of. Focus on one to two major efforts the EPP made and the relationship among data examined, changes, and studying the results of those changes.
Due to low percentages of students passing the Praxis I, and PLT, the EPP has implemented Praxis review opportunities coordinated by the KEA-SP President and executive committee, of which takes place in reserved areas by the school library. In addition, the library ordered Praxis testing resources to further prepare students to pass the exams. The consistent servicing of students through the KEA-SP and library study opportunities, the EPP has seen an increase in students taking and passing the exams. The EPP continues to provide students, Praxis Core and PLT practice opportunities of which occurs in our foundational courses. These courses are taken by students before they are admitted into the EPP by the TEC (Teacher Education Committee). Each course reviews and covers specific content from the
Praxis I and PLT. After examining undergraduate student praxis data, the initial implementation of the practice opportunities displayed a steady increase in student performance over the course of two semesters. The graduate students continue to consistently perform well on the Praxis II exam, at a passing rate above 90%. On the first attempt, the EPP continues to use online resources to assist students during the preparation phase. The resources are located on the EPP's website, and mentioned/discussed during monthly All Majors Meetings (Student meeting). In addition, the EPP created a model classroom that mirrored current K-12 classrooms, of which includes the latest learning technology to give students a head start on becoming knowledgeable and efficient practitioners of the learning equipment/environment. The model classrooms has allowed students and instructors to be creative and develop out of the box hands-on projects to engage students on multiple levels with high rigor. The innovation has allowed students to become creative thinkers with the ability to assess student performance using technological and research based methods. To further assist students the EPP has created a plethora of programming and events to provide students more insight and skills to be effective educators, and community partners.
#### 6.1.2 Optional Comments
The EPP webpage is publicly assessable and all information provided on the webpage is public information. The EPP is currently using the public data to move the EPP forward, and is reviewed by the TEC (Teacher Education Committee) on a semester basis.
| A.1.2 Provider Responsibilities |
| A.3.2 Candidates Demonstrate Academic Achievement and Ability to Complete Preparation Successfully |
| A.4.1 Satisfaction of Employers |
| A.5.3 Continuous Improvement |
| R1.1 The Learner and Learning |
| R1.2 Content |
| R1.3 Instructional Practice |
| R1.4 Professional Responsibility |
| R2.1 Partnerships for Clinical Preparation |
| R2.3 Clinical Experiences |
Upload data results or documentation of progress on phase-in/transition plans if applicable (This is optional and for the EPP's records as it prepares for the next CAEP review).
