Master's Programs Assessment


M.Ed. in School Leadership/Certificate in School Leadership

Learning Outcomes

The learning outcomes for these programs are outlined in our accreditation self-study.  

Assessment Planning

Assessment plans are described in the self-study linked above. Briefly, every year we deploy the INSPIRE survey to students who are completing the program. Students are also evaluated using internship evaluations. 

Data Collection

The data is collected every semester for internship evaluations and yearly for the INSPIRE survey. 

Results Used

Annual reports to AAQEP show how the program uses the results to make improvements. 
Annual reports are posted on the CEHS accreditation webpage: https://cehs.usu.edu/about/annual-report-instructional-leadership  

Annual Feedback

Program faculty review the feedback from Nathan Laursen of ODA. Based on that feedback, the accreditation reports are now posted on the department assesment page. 


M.Ed./M.S. in Curriculum and Instruction

Assessment Plan

Students have been surveyed upon completion of the program to assess their learning within each of the Master’s core courses. Historically overall program objectives have been assessed using individual exit interviews during the final semester of coursework. The department conducted periodic evaluations of courses to determine the effectiveness of meeting learning objectives based on student data. The department also used data on the format of courses to make scheduling decisions about how often and in what format courses are offered.

This assessment plan is currently under revision to reduce the number and focus of the learning objectives and improve the alignment to outcomes.  During the 2024-25 academic year we realized as new program directors that the need to be revision of the MS and MEd assessment programs. We are currently working with instructors to align learning objectives with IDEA objectives to have both direct assessment data and indirect assessment data. We have continued to gather data from students exiting the program and plan to formalize our plan over the next 6 months.

Learning Objectives

  1. Define, discuss, and apply a common vocabulary for curriculum development (TEAL 6150).
  2. Define, discuss, and apply a set of broad principles, processes, and practices that pertain to curriculum development (TEAL 6150).
  3. Analyze and explain how a combination of newly acquired curriculum knowledge, principles, and practices applies to my professional context (TEAL 6150).
  4. Increase the knowledge of the nature of scientific theories and how they inform classroom instruction (TEAL 6190).
  5. Increase the knowledge of major models of learning/instruction related to different theories (TEAL 6190).
  6. Develop a personal teaching philosophy based on educational theories (TEAL 6190).
  7. Gain a basic understanding of the subject matter in a Foundations of Education course, such as factual knowledge, methods, principles, generalizations and theories (TEAL 6410). 
  8. Gain exposure to other cultures and develop a global understanding that informs my worldview as it pertains to me as an educator, a graduate student in a Foundations course, and citizen of the human race (TEAL 6410).
  9. Develop intellectual generosity and critical thinking skills by evaluating and analyzing ideas, arguments, and points of view regarding the cultural, social, and historical foundations of education (TEAL 6410).
  10. Develop a research question on a topic that was interesting or useful to me and increase knowledge of this topic, and design a realistic, manageable study that I might conduct at some point in the future (TEAL 6546). 
  11. Increase the knowledge of the social forces that influence our understanding of diversity (TEAL 6710).
  12. Increase the knowledge of the social forces influencing the education of diverse children in school (TEAL 6710).
  13. Build on the strengths of diverse students and their families, and maximize their opportunities for educational success (TEAL 6710).

Note: These objectives are currently being revised and aligned to more appropriately inform and evaluate student learning.

Results and Analysis of Data

2020 - 2024 Data
C&I Students in Program Since Summer of 2020: 138

Graduated: 77

Currently Active: 50

Withdrawn: 7

Excused Leave of Absence: 2

Inactive: 2

Average # of Semesters to Complete Program: 5.135

Current Average GPA: 3.839

 

Qualitative Data Synthesis

Graduates of the program are individually interviewed and complete an exit survey. Exemplars and a discussion of the 2023-24 academic year are provided below.

“In the time I’ve been here, you’ve been really self-reflective, and you’ve been proactive about the feedback you are getting. I see a lot of effort made in trying to make community in this program,” said a student in the TEAL Masters of education program during their graduation exit interview in the summer of 2024. This emphasis on program improvement grounds our decision-making. Student feedback is a central source of data to which we respond. Over the course of the last three years, students have provided important feedback to let us know what is working in the program. They routinely cite the expertise, excellent instruction, and caring interactions of faculty as among our strengths. Some students emphasize the value of having courses available to students throughout the state through regional campus offerings and zoom delivery; other students cite the value they find in the face-to-face courses and the strong presence of faculty at the Logan campus. These different contexts, but shared expressions of satisfaction assure us that the array of options for delivery that we offer meet the needs of many different situations. As we’ve solicited and analyzed this data, we have continued to put resources into maintaining these program strengths. 

Students have also provided us with feedback to guide changes that can improve our program. Recurring themes in student feedback have been a sense of disorientation about program requirements, barriers to accessibility of courses, and unclear or untimely communication from program faculty and staff. We’ve responded to these concerns with significant programmatic improvement. We have updated our website, reviewed and edited the catalog showings for our program, and linked updated planning guides for students. To enable students to make longer-range plans about which courses to take when, and which delivery options will be available from one semester to another, we’ve built a multi-year matrix of course offerings for student advisement. Across our program leadership, we have also brought cohesion to our messaging to students about program requirements, opportunities, and supports, taking advantage of turnover in leadership to build better and more frequent patterns of communication with students. 

Student feedback also points to areas that we can continue to improve moving forward. One notable example that we have begun working towards is a demand for our master’s program to provide a route to Utah teacher licensure. By the next assessment period, we plan to have made this improvement.

Data-Based Decisions

  • 2024 – Submitted Master of Elementary Teaching (MET) and Master of Secondary Teaching (MST) to address need for routes to licensure and with an associated master’s degree.
  • 2023 – Received approval for 30 credit coursework only MEd program and focused MS program to target specific specializations.
  • 2022 – Centralized the MEd program planning guide to address a coursework only approach. Included updated planning guide formats to support students and faculty.

Annual Feedback on Assessment

TEAL Graduate Faculty collect data from completers through an exit survey, conduct exit interviews with each completer, and review student performance data. TEAL Graduate Faculty also use data on the format of courses to make instructor and scheduling decisions, including frequency and delivery format.