Rebuilt HTML — PaddleOCR-VL (Baidu)

2022 Annual Accreditation Report

CAEP ID: 10174 AACTE SID: 1730

Institution: Kentucky State University

Unit: School of Education

Section 1. EPP Profile Updates in AIMS

ease review the Educator Preparation Provider's (EPP's) profile in AIMS and update the following information for: contact Persons, EPP Characteristics, Program Listings. [See the Annual Report Technical Guide for additional guidance.] 1.1 Update Contact Information in AIMS: 1.1.1 I confirm that the EPP has listed and updated the contact information for the individual(s) designated as "EPP Head." [The individual(s) identified as the EPP head should have authority over the EPP. This contact may receive time-sensitive communications related to the accreditation of the EPP.] Agree Disagree

1.1.2 I confirm that the EPP has listed and updated the contact information for the individual(s) designated as "CAEP Coordinator". [The individual(s) identified as the CAEP Coordinator should have a role in coordinating accreditation activities. This contact may be carbon copied on communications to the EPP head.] Agree Disagree 1.1.3 I confirm that the EPP has provided updated contact information for two distinct people for these roles. [CAEP requires that EPPs provide information for two distinct contact persons to ensure that automatic communications sent from AIMS are received by the EPP in the event of personal turnover.] Agree Disagree

1.2 Update EPP Information in AIMS:

1.2.1 Basic Information - I confirm that the EPP's basic information (including mailing address and EPP name) are up to date and accurately reflected in AIMS. [The individual(s) identified as the EPP head should have authority over the EPP. This contact may receive time-sensitive communications related to the accreditation of the EPP.] Agree Disagree

1.2.2 EPP Characteristics and Affiliations - I confirm that the EPP characteristics and affiliations (including Carnegie classification, EPP type, religious affiliation, language of instruction, institutional accreditation, and branch campuses/sites) are up to date and accurately reflected in AIMS [The individual(s) identified as the CAEP Coordinator should have a role in coordinating accreditation activities. This contact may be carbon copied on communications to the EPP head.] Agree Disagree

1.2.3 Program Options - I confirm that EPP's program listings (including program name, program

review level, certificate level, program category, and program review option) are up to date and accurately reflected in AIMS for all EPP programs that fall within CAEP's scope of accreditation; (programs outside of CAEP's scope of accreditation should be archived and not listed in AIMS). Agree Disagree O

Section 2. EPP's Program Completers [Academic Year 2020-2021] 2.1 How many candidates completed programs that prepared them to work in P-12 settings during Academic Year 2020-2021?

Enter a numeric value for each textbox.

2.1.1 Number of completers in programs leading to initial teacher certification or licensure1 15

2.1.2 Number of completers in advanced programs or programs leading to a degree, endorsement, or some other credential that prepares the holder to serve in P-12 schools (Do not include those completers counted above.)2 1

Total number of program completers

16

1 For a description of the scope for Initial and Advanced programs, see Policy II in the CAEP Accreditation Policies and Procedures

Section 3. Substantive Changes

Please report on any substantive changes that have occurred at the EPP/Institution or Organization, as well as the EPP's current regional accreditation status.

Have any of the following substantive changes occurred at your educator preparation provider or institution/organization during the 2020-2021 academic year?

3.1 Has there been any change in the EPP's legal status, form of control, or ownership? Change ☑ No Change / Not Applicable 3.2 Has the EPP entered a contract with other providers for direct instructional services, including any teach out agreements? Change ☑ No Change / Not Applicable 3.3 Since the last reporting cycle, has the EPP seen a change in state program approval? Change ☑ No Change / Not Applicable

3.4. What is the EPP's current regional accreditation status?

Accreditation Agency:

Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation

Status: Full Accreditation

Does this represent a change in status from the prior year? Change No Change / Not Applicable

3.5 Since the last reporting cycle, does the EPP have any other substantive changes to report to CAEP per CAEP's Accreditation Policy? Change No Change / Not Applicable

Section 4. CAEP Accreditation Details on EPP's Website

Please update the EPP's public facing website to include: 1) the EPP's current CAEP accreditation status with an accurate listing of the EPP's CAEP (NCATE, or TEAC) reviewed programs, and 2) the EPP's data display of the CAEP Accountability Measures for Academic Year 2020-2021.

4.1. EPP's current CAEP (NCATE/TEAC) Accreditation Status & Reviewed Programs

4.1 Provider shares a direct link to the EPP's website where information relevant to the EPP's current accreditation status is provided along with an accurate list of programs included during the most recent CAEP (NCATE or TEAC) accreditation review.

https://www.kysu.edu/academics/college-acs/school-of-ehdcs/program-accreditation.php

4.2. CAEP Accountability Measures (for CHEA Requirements) [2020-2021 Academic Year]

Provider shares a direct link to its website where the EPP's display of data for the CAEP Accountability Measures, as gathered during the 2020-2021 academic year, are clearly tagged, explained, and available to the public.

CAEP Accountability Measures (for CHEA Requirements) [2020-2021 Academic Year]

• Measure 1 (Initial): Completer effectiveness. (R4.1) Data must address: (a) completer impact in contributing to P-12 student-learning growth AND (b) completer effectiveness in applying professional knowledge, skills, and dispositions.
• Measure 2 (Initial and Advanced): Satisfaction of employers and stakeholder involvement. (R4.2|R5.3| RA4.1)
• Data provided should be collected on employers' satisfaction with program completers.
• Measure 3 (Initial and Advanced): Candidate competency at completion. (R3.3)
• Data provided should relate to measures the EPP is using to determine if candidates are meeting program expectations and ready to be recommended for licensure. (E.g.: EPP's Title II report, data that reflect the ability of EPP candidates to meet licensing and state requirements or other measures the EPP uses to determine candidate competency at completion.)
• Measure 4 (Initial and Advanced): Ability of completers to be hired (in positions for which they have prepared.)

CAEP Accountability Measures (Initial) [LINK] https://www.kysu.edu/academics/college-acs/school-of-ehdcs/public-accountability-measures.php (8 Annual Measures)-https://www.kysu.edu/academics/college-acs/school-of-ehdcs/caeps-annual-reporting-measures.php

CAEP Accountability Measures (Advanced) [LINK] https://www.kysu.edu/academics/college-acs/school-of-ehdcs/public-accountability-measures.php (8 Annual Measures)-https://www.kysu.edu/academics/college-acs/school-of-ehdcs/caeps-annual-reporting-measures.php

Section 5. Areas for Improvement, Weaknesses, and/or Stipulations

CAEP: Areas for Improvement (ITP) 5 Provider Quality Assurance and Continuous Improvement

The EPP provided limited evidence that its' quality assurance system relies on relevant, verifiable, representative, cumulative and actionable measures, and produces empirical evidence that interpretations of data are valid and consistent. (Component 5.2)

The School of Education Human Development and Consumer Sciences provides the following response for areas of improvement specified within CAEP Standard 5 (5.2). The EPP attached evidence documents prior to the on-sight virtual visit, and resubmitted the documents electronically during the sight visit, of which were shared with the on-sight team. After reviewing the concern by CAEP, it was deemed as an oversight due the vast amounts of documents reviewed in three days. To address these concerns, 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) EDU 454 rubric was replaced by the Instructional Assessment rubrics, to reduce redundancy. The CAO and Dispositions, Values and Behaviors non-proprietary assessments were aligned to the ten InTASC standards. They are grouped into four general categories including:1- The Learner and Learning2- Content Knowledge3- Instructional Practice, and4- Professional ResponsibilitiesThe TCCE assessment was replaced by the CAO to reduce redundancy. 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 the TEC 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 provides the following response for areas of improvement specified within CAEP Standard 5 (5.4). The EPP months before the CAEP Accreditation visit linked the eight annual measures on the EPP's webpage, along with EPP data to support the annual measures. In addition, the evidence files provided accurate analysis of trends aligned to the measures. The week of the on-site review, the campus IT department launched the new university website. The untimely launch was due to the CAEP virtual visit dates being changed, and the campus IT unit being unable to reschedule the new website launch, as the launch had been pushed back several times. Unfrontunately, the transition caused some items on the EPP website to be deleted and misplaced. In addition, some of the links were lost simultaneous to the on-site visitor's review of the webpages. The EPP staff did not detect the changeover until the concern was addressed during a scheduled meeting with the site visitors, and interviewers. All of the links should have been reestablished prior to the close of exit interviews. Consequently, the untimely issues with the webpage were cited as an area of improvement, evethough they were addressed with the site-team by multiple administrators. The EPP's webpage has been fully restored by the campus IT department and all data is currently available.

The eight CAEP Annual Reporting measures restored to the webpage, provided reviewers accurate data on P-12 student growth. The content included the eight program impact and outcome measures aligned with evidence instruments (reports, case study, non-proprietary assessment instrument, and survey's used to address each measure. The program outcome measures are aligned with various data reports that provide students and candidates detailed evidence for EPP growth and development in reference to candidate annual cohort data (graduation rates), praxis exam results, educator preparation feedback, and employment information.

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 Core and PLT practice opportunities for students, 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 program has consistently performed well on passing the Praxis II exam, at a rate above 80%. On the first attempt, the EPP has also included the use of 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 is in planning to create model classrooms that mirror current K-12 classrooms, of which includes the latest learning technology to give students a head start on becoming knowledged able and efficient practitioners of the learning equipment. The model classrooms will allow 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 will allow students to become creative thinkers with the ability to assess student performance using technological and research based methods.

1.2 Would the provider be willing to share highlights, new initiatives, assessments, research, scholarship, or other activities during a CAEP Conference or in other CAEP Communications? Yes ☑ No 1.3 Optional Comments A.1.1 Candidate Knowledge, Skills, and Professional Dispositions A.1.2 Provider Responsibilities R1.1 The Learner and Learning R1.2 Content R1.3 Instructional Practice R1.4 Professional Responsibility

Upload data results or documentation of data-driven changes. Kentucky_State_University_EPP_assessment_State_data_20162019.docx

Section 8: Feedback for CAEP & Report Preparer's Authorization

8.1 . [OPTIONAL] Just as CAEP asks EPPs to reflect on their work towards continuous improvement, CAEP endeavors to improve its own practices. To this end, CAEP asks for the following information to identify areas of priority in assisting EPPs.

8.1.1 What semester is your next accreditation visit? Fall of 2028

8.1.2 Does the EPP have any questions about CAEP Standards, CAEP sufficiency criteria, or the CAEP accreditation process generally?

N/A

8.2 Preparer's authorization. By checking the box below, I indicate that I am authorized by the EPP to complete the 2022 EPP Annual Report, and that the details provided in this report and linked webpages are up to date and accurate at the time of submission.

I am authorized to complete this report.

Report Preparer's Information

E-mail: phillip.clay@kysu.edu

I understand that all the information that is provided to CAEP from EPPs seeking initial accreditation, continuing accreditation or having completed the accreditation process is considered the property of CAEP and may be used for training, research and data review. CAEP reserves the right to compile and issue data derived from accreditation documents.

☑ Acknowledge