A New Model for the Assessment and Evaluation of Student Learning in a University Teacher Education Program: The Role of the Regis Gate System Suzanne Perry Ph.D. Bob Spagnola Ph.D. With Contributions from Sandra L. Foster, Ph.D., Carole Hruskocy, Ph.D. Maureen Simms, M.A. Regis University Denver, CO

History and Background The Electronic Portfolio People & Process Benefits & Limitations Next Steps The Regis GATE System

History and Background Portfolio prior to 2007 Created during Student Teaching/Professionalism Class Lack of Standardization

History and Background Information from accreditation report and self study Needed a new means to collect evidence on student learning and growth Means of evaluating the effectiveness based upon a universal standard

Development of A-Team Accreditation Team The A-Team met at least monthly for full day sessions. It was at this time that rather than trying to fix an inadequate and outdated system, a completely new system was warranted A cross-section of support staff, administrators, undergraduate faculty, and graduate faculty were selected to serve on the team

Result of A-Teams Efforts New evaluation system was created: To identify early, students who: may fail in their program remediation should not be teachers counsel out To provide accrediting bodies with evidence that our students meet standards and are ready to teach.

Significant re-design of the portfolio development and review process via an electronic portfolio and Gates system. Students contribute specific course-based artifacts to their electronic portfolios that address required proficiencies. New Process

Contents of Electronic Portfolio GATE 1GATE 2 GATE 3 Student artifacts evaluated at three gates during the course of their program

Gate Contents Gate 2 Gate 3 Gate 1 Course 1 Course 2 Course 3 Prerequisites Transcripts PLACE or PRAXIS Professional Dispositions Course 1 Course 2 Course 3 Course 4 Course 5 Course 6 Professional Dispositions Student Teaching Professional Dispositions

Professional Disposition Report (PDR) ProfessionalDisposition The PDR is used to document outstanding or unprofessional behavior The PDR is completed for all licensure students at each gate in the Education program

Artifacts During the course of their programs, students submit identified assignments (artifacts) to their electronic portfolios. The artifacts address the nine Regis universal proficiencies as well as professional dispositions. Each proficiency is assessed through artifacts from two different courses.

People –Gatekeeper: an affiliate faculty member selected to review students portfolios –Gate Coordinator: staff member dedicated to the administration of the Gate rubrics, Gate s, etc. –Gatekeeper Trainers: members of the Assessment team and faculty who prepare the Gatekeepers for their role

Instructor evaluates artifacts Student uploads artifacts and rubrics and s GATE Coordinator GATE Coordinator assigns artifacts to a Gatekeeper who evaluates and returns them to GATE Coordinator Student is notified of results by GATE Coordinator Process

Passing Through the GATES Pass a GATE If a student successfully passes a GATE, they move to the next GATE Fail a GATE If a student fails a GATE, the student meets with Advisor to discuss Growth Plan Fail a Gate a 2 nd Time If a student fails a GATE a 2 nd time, the case goes to Faculty Committee

How is the system working? Adjustments Benefits Limitations

Adjustments Number of artifacts has been narrowed to reflect meeting each proficiency twice. Support documents have been revised and created for instructors of Gate courses. Revised remediation plan to a growth plan to allow students to improve their skills and then attempt the gate a second (and final) time.

Benefits additional student data to support evaluation students complete missing pre- requisites before student teaching students can be remediated or counseled into an alternative professional track.

Limitations Instructors: need to provide descriptive feedback need to submit artifacts promptly need further faculty development Gatekeepers: are difficult to recruit are not providing sufficient feedback Students: confused by process delay submitting gate materials

Next Steps Address Limitations Simplify Process Evaluate System for Efficacy