Masters of Science in Education: Technology and Education

Transcription

1 Masters of Science in Education: Technology and Education 2009 Program Review Submitted by: Elizabeth Osika, PhD Technology and Education Program Special, Early Childhood, and Technology Education Department June 1, 2009

2 Masters of Science in Technology and Education Program Review Spring 2009 History of Program... 3 Capacity In Relation to Student Demand... 4 Enrollment Information... 4 Retention Information... 5 Degrees Conferred... 6 Recruitment Efforts... 7 Advising Requirements... 8 Course Requirements... 9 Faculty Requirements Capacity in Relation to Occupational Demand Employment Outlook Instructional Coordinators Continuing Teachers Training and Development Specialists Breadth of Instructional Unit Quality of Instructional Unit Alignment with Nationally Recognized Standards Program Outcomes Program Outcomes based on the College of Education s Conceptual Framework Program Outcomes based on AECT Guidelines Program Objectives Program Objectives for the Business / Industry Track Program Objectives for the K-12 Track Program Objectives for the Research in Educational Technology Track Assessment Practices Faculty Qualifications Program Coordinator Faculty Teaching in the Program Dr. Moussa Ayyash

3 Dr. Patrice Boyles Dr. Kelvin Gilchrist Dr. Marsha Phelps Success of Graduates Program Costs Comparison with State Averages Potential Cost Reduction Consolidation of Courses Appendices

4 History of Program The Masters of Science in Technology and Education program (MSTE) has gone through some significant changes in the past five years. The first major change occurred in the academic year, when the chair of the Technology and Education department was given responsibility for the program. Under her leadership, the students were held to the standards and requirements of a master-level program. Due to previously loose assessment of the students mastery of objectives, this caused a dip in the graduation rate; however, the quality of the students was improved. More recently, the College of Education decided that all programs needed to be recognized by a national organization, in order to align with the NCATE accreditation process. Therefore, the program was realigned in the fall of 2008 to provide the graduate candidates in the program a solid foundation in the field of Educational Technology, using the national standards of the Association of Educational Communications and Technology (AECT). The current program now consists of seven core courses and six electives. The electives are taken within one of the three tracks offered within the program. These requirements are a dramatic change from what was previously required which included a research methods course, a thesis, and nine electives from the graduate course offerings of the department. The reorganization also helped to align the program more appropriately with the mission of AECT, the university and college, the other programs and degrees within the college, and the students it serves. The mission of the MSTE program is to provide a supportive environment where professionals are prepared to integrate technology effectively into the educational process in order to improve learning and performance. This mission leads to the learning outcomes required of each candidate, which are to be able 1) analyze situations in order to design and develop appropriate technology infused instruction, 2) implement instruction to a wide and diverse audience base, and 3) evaluate its effectiveness. The mission of Chicago State University is to provide access to higher education for residents of the region, the state, and beyond and to produce graduates who are responsible, discerning, and informed global citizens with a commitment to lifelonglearning and service. This mission is the foundation of all programs at the university. The learning outcomes of the MSTE program support the mission by providing candidates in the immediate area and beyond with the knowledge, skills, and abilities necessary to obtain professional positions in the community, while encouraging continual learning and service to others The MSTE program also supports the mission, theme, and belief statement of the College of Education through the provision of developing, implementing, and administering a professional education program while preparing all candidates to succeed. The values of the College of Education is best demonstrated by the focus of the MSTE s program to enhance and differentiate instruction through the infusion of 3

5 technology which helps improve all students ability to learn, especially in fields related to business, technical and consumer related instruction. The reorganized MSTE program now aligns more fully with other degrees and programs offered in the College of Education and across campus. The MSTE program now requires seven core courses focusing on curriculum development, research methods, and learning theory. These required courses are supplemented by a set of electives courses in one of three different tracks business and industry, K-12 education, and instructional research. The culminating project is either a 150 hour professional practicum experience or a thesis of publishable-quality. These requirements are similar in scope to other graduate programs, bringing increased rigor and credibility to the program. Finally, the MSTE program is designed and structured to meet the needs of the candidates it serves. This is being accomplished by offering relevant courses with upto-date content in a format that follows an online or hybrid structure. Candidates demand courses where the content covered is obviously related to the stated outcomes. In addition, the candidates in the program are typically burdened by many responsibilities, such as full-time employment and child-care, and therefore look for courses that are flexible in the requirements for physical attendance on campus. This need drove the decision to continue to move the entire program s curriculum into an online and/or hybrid format. We are expecting to be able to market the program under the umbrella of a Flexible Learning Option to students in the fall of Capacity In Relation to Student Demand This section of the program review outlines quantitatively the capacity of the program relative to the needs of the student as demonstrated through enrollment and retention, advising requirements, faculty presence, and course offerings. The final part of this section will outline recruitment efforts established to increase the student interest in the program. Enrollment Information The enrollment for the MSTE program in the fall of 2007 was at 62% of where it was in fall However, the program was redesigned in the fall of 2008 to meet national standards for recognition and accreditation. Based upon simple word of mouth conversations, we had 10 new students accepted into the program since the summer of 2008, not including the students whose applications are in the pipeline. At this time, no formal announcement or marketing has conveyed the change in program; however, we are expecting that the summer announcement of the redesigned program being offered as a Flexible Learning Option (more than 75% of the courses online, the remainder of the courses offered in a hybrid format), enrollments will return to, if not exceed past enrollments. 4

6 MSTE Enrollments Retention Information Retention information was the hardest element to analyze based on the information available. In order to determine retention ratings, all known students were included in an Excel table and their enrollment, program start date, completion date, and average years of completion was tracked (see appendix A). Students were flagged as being retained if they took a course in one academic year and then successfully completed a course the following academic year; with summer enrollments rolled into fall enrollment numbers. The data for the past two academic years and is fairly solid, as the information was based on the files available in the department and cross checked with information contained in Banner. As seen from the graphic below, when we move further back in time, the retention rates seem to have been higher. However, this could be a direct result of only having students included in the data who have completed the program. Those students who stopped out, resulting in a lower retention rate, may not be included in the data as their folder may have been removed from the department. Retention Percentages 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% In order to continuously improve the retention rate of the students in the program, several administrative tasks have been completed in order to better manage the retention and progress of students. First, starting in the fall of 2008, an Access database has been created that tracks the students progression through the program (see appendix B for an example). This database allows the program coordinator to update students progress, check on registrations for the following semester, and provides easy access to contact information for follow up. 5

7 Second, at the beginning of the spring 2009 semester, all students who had yet to enroll by the last week of registration were called by the program coordinator. Reasons for their lack of enrollment were captured or assistance with enrolling was provided. This call added three students to the enrollment for spring 2009 and those that did not enroll expressed gratitude for the concern shown for their progress. The primary reason for not enrolling was work either lack of it or higher demands on time based on increased work loads. Third, letters were sent to students who were unable to be reached by phone, asking about their plans and offering encouragement for continuing. In addition, each file in the department was reviewed and letters were sent to students who were listed as Graduate Students at Large or those who obviously dropped the program. Again, these students were encouraged to contact the program coordinator regarding their status. The results of these efforts have proven positive. A total of an additional five students registered for classes in the spring of Plus, comments from the contacted students expressed their gratitude. For example, one student stated, I never had a professor contact me at home to see how I was doing. Another student stated, I am so glad that I am not just a number to you. This process will continue for each of the upcoming semesters, with hopefully equally positive results. Degrees Conferred Student completion of the program has been positive. Typically, students who are accepted into the program follow through to graduation, taking on average 4 years to complete the program. The one area where the students progress had stalled is when they reached the final requirement of the program; which is either the completion of a thesis or an extended research paper with two additional courses. At times, students would either take extreme lengths of time to complete or, simply, stop out. In order to address this issue, while working to guarantee the national standards and expectations of rigor were met, an option was included in the revised program that allowed for an indepth practicum instead of a thesis. This provides students who learn in a more applied way to leverage the program for their maximum learning potential, while also allowing those students who are doctorate bound the option of completing a thesis. As for the data supporting the above narrative, the following graphic is provided. As mentioned in the history of the program, the number of degrees conferred dropped after the academic year when students were being held to the requirements and expectations of the program. However, as seen from the graph below, graduation rates have returned and have even exceeded the rates prior to This increase is due to the direct support and coordination of the students by the program coordinator. Significant time is spent following up with students and 6

8 providing extensive help in the design and development of appropriate research projects Degrees Conferred Recruitment Efforts As this point recruitment efforts have been limited based on the time conflicts with the preparation for NCATE, work loads, and resources; however, some significant accomplishments have been made. First, a program brochure was created and is made available to students through the bulletin board outside of the Technology and Education office. (See appendix C) Second, word-of-mouth promotion of the program and s to current and past students regarding the change has generated some interest in students. Finally, better collaborations with the Graduate School have resulted in joint recruitment visits to schools and college fairs. Through these, somewhat limited efforts, ten new students have been enrolled into the program since the summer of 2008 when the changes to the program were announced. Current recruitment plans include a variety of measures. First, and foremost, we are working closely with the Provost s Office to be able to market the program as a Flexible Learning Option, meaning that more than 75% of the courses required are offered online and the remaining are available through a hybrid format. This change, alone, should dramatically increase the interest and enrollment in the program. Second, the website promoting the program will be redesigned over the summer to reflect the program change and, hopefully, the Flexible Learning Option. This should dramatically influence recruitment as, currently, as this is where most students are getting information regarding the program. Third, better communication of the program will be made to the public. This will be accomplished by having the program advertised through the program directory of AECT, working in conjunction with the Graduate School, to continue recruitment efforts at local graduate fairs, and publishing professional looking brochure to use in recruiting. Fourth, the department has requested an additional track be included in the program that focuses on industrial technology. This fourth track will allow students, who are 7

9 interested in pursuing the new Corporate Security certificate, completing CISCO courses, or other technology related courses in the program, the option of continuing through to a Masters degree. The core courses will still focus and align with the standards for AECT; the extra track simply allows the students to better focus their electives on the area in which they will be conducting training in the work force. In addition, this helps address the commitment Chicago State University has made with the IDEA Homeland Security initiative. Fifth, a certificate program focusing on the design and development of online instruction can easily be lifted from the currently offered courses. This would provide an option for students who are unsure about completing a full Masters program the option to obtain a professional certificate in distance learning; hopefully, through effective advising and quality instruction the students will in turn continue in the program and apply for admission to the full MSTE program. Finally, as time allows, efforts will need to be concentrated on working with potential employers of our graduates. These relationships with employers will focus on a board to provide input into the structure and design of the program, creating internship opportunities for students completing their practicum, and general networking opportunities for students with professionals in the field. Advising Requirements Students in the MSTE program are advised primarily by the program coordinator. It was important with the change in program requirements to direct all students to a single advisor who could handle the questions regarding the new requirements, providing consistent information to the students. During the advising process for the MSTE program, students are asked about their career goals, prior experience, and current responsibilities. Based upon their answers, the program is reviewed and a decision is made as to whether or not it fits with what is desired. If the program fits, courses are explained in detail and a program plan is constructed. Students are walked through the enrollment process and plans are made for future advising appointments. Currently, the MSTE program generates approximately 15 to 22 official advising appointments with students during any given semester. In addition to these appointments, numerous phone calls and s are received and processed during the academic year and throughout the summer. In order to continue to improve the advising process and work in tandem with the NCATE requirements, the revised MSTE program requires official portfolio reviews after the student has completed 15 hours in the program, prior to registering for their practicum or thesis, and at the conclusion of the program. These meetings provide an 8

10 opportunity for the program coordinator to review progress with the students, discuss areas that may need improvement, and determine future requirements. Course Requirements Between the core courses and those available in the three tracks, there are sixteen different courses contained within the MSTE program. Thirteen of the courses are offered by the Technology and Education program. The remaining three, Advanced Educational Psychology, Social Statistics, and Instructional Media Technologies, are offered through the departments of Psychology and Educational Leadership, Curriculum, and Foundations. The chart below shows the courses offered by the Technology and Education program and the enrollments for the past five years. Course Number Enrollment History and Title Term Student Enrollment TED 5495: Curriculum Development cancelled Average enrollment 6 TED 4/5381: Distance Learning Technologies (course redesigned for and offered fully online in ) TED 4/5392: Developing Teaching Aids (this course was in the catalog but never taught it was taught as a hybrid in ) cancelled Average enrollment: Average enrollment 9 TED 4/5347: Cyberspace Publishing cancelled I cancelled TED 4/5452: Planning and Financing Technology (redesigned in and offered online) Average enrollment Cancelled Cancelled Average enrollment 3 9

11 TED 4/5346: Presentations I TED 5411: Survey Research Methods (new course created for the MSTE and offered in a hybrid format potential for use in several programs) TED 5490: Research Studies (content is equal to what is offered in ED5490 often these sections are combined) TED 5412: Ethics and Issues (new course designed for the MSTE, will be offered in the future as an online course) TED 5445: Network Administration for Teachers (new course created for the MSTE program will be offered in a hybrid format in the future) ED 5423: Writing Technology Plans (redesign of an existing course listed in catalog; course has yet to be offered) Average enrollment cancelled Average enrollment cancelled Yet to be offered TED 5998: Field Experience Yet to be offered TED 5999: Thesis Hours Average enrollment

12 Faculty Requirements All the courses offered in the MSTE program are taught by full-time, tenure-tracked professors at Chicago State University. The instructors who have taught or will be teaching each course since fall 2008 are identified in the table below. As shown, the MSTE program is supported by efforts from each of the faculty members in the Technology and Education program. Course TED5495: Curriculum Instruction TED5381: Distance Learning Technologies TED5392: Developing Teaching Aids TED5411: Survey Research Methods TED5490: Research Studies TED5412: Ethics and Issues TED5347: Cyberspace Publishing TED5452: Planning and Financing TED5346: Presentations TED5445: Network Admin for Teachers ED5423: Writing Technology Plans TED5998: Field Experience TED5999: Thesis Hours Instructor(s) Osika Osika Osika Ayyash Osika or Gilchrist Boyles Ayyash Boyles Phelps Ayyash Boyles yet to be offered Osika Osika, Ayyash, Gilchrist, Phelps, or Boyles Capacity in Relation to Occupational Demand This section of the program review report focuses on the employment outlook for the field and the breadth of the MSTE program. Employment Outlook The data referred to in this section was obtained from the edition of the Occupational Outlook Handbook (available online at According to this information, the employment categories that best fit the MSTE program included, instructional coordinators and training and development specialists. These two employment categories capture the essence of the MSTE in terms of instructional design, technology integration, and performance improvement. However, a large portion of the students interested in the MSTE program are existing teachers looking to maintain their teaching certification and maintain forward progression on their pay scales. Instructional Coordinators: The employment outlook for this field is favorable and new positions are expected to grow much faster than average. This field is expected to see an increase of approximately 29,000 positions or a 22% increase through The 11

13 primary reason provided for this increase was the need to meet new educational standards, train teachers, and develop new materials. Continuing Teachers: Teachers looking to continue teaching and in of need credits for recertification have historically been drawn to the MSTE program and favorable student comments have been heard regarding the program s new structure. This level of interest in the program should continue given that the employment outlook for teachers is favorable, with about as fast as average growth rate of other positions; however, the rate of increase is significantly impacted by the region and subject taught. The Midwest is one specific area where it is believed that employment will remain fairly constant without significant growth. Training and Development Specialists: Training and development specialists are expected to see an increase in positions of 38,000, which is an 18% overall increase expected by Prospects for these positions are enhanced if the applicant has strong technical skills and advanced degrees. This need aligns directly with the skills and knowledge focused on in the MSTE program. Breadth of Instructional Unit At this time, there are three tracks within the MSTE program, Business/Industry, K-12, and Technology Research. Current students enrolling in the redesigned MSTE program are primarily selecting the Business/Industry track (80%), with the remaining students selecting the K-12 track. All students accepted into the program prior to were not classified into tracks, as the program allowed students to select any nine electives. There is a request from the department to include an additional track for industrial technology that would cater to the individuals looking for a more focused elective core to support their instructional requirements. This may open up the program to others who are interested in learning how to improve performance and learning in a specific area and would like further courses that relate directly to their profession (e.g. network administrators looking to move into training, homeland security training initiatives, or vocational teachers looking for advanced courses). These tracks, either the current three or the proposed four, are taught by tenured-tracked professors and build upon courses primarily offered in other concentrations. This helps limit the cost of the program. Academic support for these students is currently being handled effectively by a single faculty member with responsibility for the advising, program coordination, and assessment tasks of the program. Given the potential for growth of this program, once the Flexible Learning Option is marketed, this may change in the future; however, there is still room for expansion under a single faculty coordinator. 12

14 Quality of Instructional Unit This section of the program review report focuses on the quality of the instruction offered. These includes information on 1) the alignment of the program with nationally recognized standards, 2) program outcomes and objectives that align with the course requirements, 3) assessment practices that measure learning outcomes and objectives, and 4) the quality of faculty teaching in the program. Alignment with Nationally Recognized Standards The MSTE program has been redesigned to align with the standards put forth by the Association for Educational Communication and Technology (AECT). Significant effort has been put forth to guarantee that the students in the program understand the core fundamentals of instructional design and technology integration. In addition, there is heavy focus on the application of these skills and knowledge in real world environments. A complete table of alignment of courses in the program with the AECT standards can be found in appendix D. In addition, as part of the College of Education s 2012 NCATE review process, the MSTE program will be included as one of the 31 programs being reviewed for national recognition. When this occurs, it will be the first time the MSTE program has received national recognition. Program Outcomes The program outcomes for the MSTE are derived from the College of Education s Conceptual Framework and ACET. Below is a brief discussion and listing of the outcomes as required of this program: Program Outcomes based on the College of Education s Conceptual Framework: The MSTE program supports the College of Education in realizing its PACTS vision, which denotes that the College Prepares All Candidates To Succeed. Program majors are prepared to succeed as they develop into Professionals who are knowledgeable and competent practitioners who demonstrate the skills and dispositions needed to follow best practices when teaching and Assessing learners. The program develops requisite Content and pedagogical knowledge among candidates as they matriculate to completion. Completers are able to incorporate Technology in ways that facilitate teaching and learning. Their teaching is informed by state and national Standards and upon exit from their program they are able to effectively design and deliver instruction to diverse populations. Program Outcomes based on AECT Guidelines - The MSTE program s primary focus is to prepare professionals to integrate technology effectively into teaching and learning in order to increase performance of learners. The primary outcomes are: 13

15 1. Design: Candidates demonstrate the knowledge, skills, and dispositions to design conditions for learning by applying principles of instructional systems design, message design, instructional strategies, and learner characteristics 2. Development: Candidates demonstrate the knowledge, skills and dispositions to develop instructional materials and experiences using print, audiovisual, computer-based, and integrated technologies. 3. Utilization: Candidates demonstrate the knowledge, skills, and dispositions to use processes and resources for learning by applying principles and theories of media utilization, diffusion, implementation, and policy-making. 4. Management: Candidates demonstrate knowledge, skills, and dispositions to plan, organize, coordinate, and supervise instructional technology by applying principles of project, resource, delivery system, and information management. 5. Evaluation: Candidates demonstrate knowledge, skills, and dispositions to evaluate the adequacy of instruction and learning by applying principles of problem analysis, criterion referenced measurement, formative and summative evaluation, and long range planning. Program Objectives The objectives for the MSTE program are derived primarily from the requirements of the standards from the Specialty Program Association; however, outcomes were also generated from review of the state expectations for candidates, as well as the department s beliefs as to what is important for graduate students (e.g. ability to apply educational research methodologies to instructional situations.) Objectives for the program are provided below, broken down by track. Again, the following three tracks are available for candidates to choose from: 1) business / industry; 2) K-12; and 3) research in educational technology. Program Objectives for the Business / Industry Track: The following objectives are expected of the candidate who completes the MSTE program within the business / industry track: Design original instructional materials (TED 5495, 5392, 5381, and 5998) Conduct a needs analysis to understand the characteristics of the audience (TED 5495, 5392, 5381, and 5998) Develop original instructional materials which incorporates technology (TED 5495, 5392, 5381, and 5998) Facilitate an original unit of instruction in front of a live audience (TED 5392 and 5998) Establish a process to evaluate the effectiveness of instruction (TED 5495, 5392, 5381, and 5998) Demonstrate alignment between objectives, instructional strategies, and assessments (5495, 5392, 5381, and 5998) 14

16 15 Design media to convey desired meaning, applying appropriate psychological and instructional theories (TED 5495, 5392, 5381, 5346, TED 5998, and Psych 5830) Develop instructional and professional materials in a variety of media (all courses) Use desktop publishing and other integrated application programs to develop media (TED 5392, 5346,, and 5998) Develop audio and video instructional components (TED5346) Create web-based instructional components (TED 5381, 5347, and 5346) Appropriately apply standards and policies in the creation and implementation of instruction (TED 5412, 5392, 5381) Use instructional media in the facilitation of instruction (TED 5392 and TED 5998) Apply project management techniques to instructional projects (TED 381 and TED 5998) Demonstrates leadership attributes in individual and group projects (TED 5382 and TED 5998) Identify root cause of a problem and can develop action to resolve (TED 5998) Conducts and utilizes formative and summative evaluation of instruction (TED 5495, 5381, and 5998) Establish long range plans based on currently available information (TED 5452) Apply educational research methodologies to instructional situations (TED 5490, 5411) Program Objectives for the K-12 Track: The following objectives are expected of the candidate who completes the MSTE program within the K-12 track: Model effective use of technology (all courses) Design original instructional materials (TED 5495, 5392, 5381, and 5998) Conduct a needs analysis to understand the characteristics of the audience (TED 5495, 5392, 5381, and 5998) Design media to convey desired meaning, applying appropriate psychological and instructional theories (TED 5495, 5392, 5381, 5998, and Psych 5830) Locate and evaluate the effectiveness and appropriateness of various technologies for use in the K-12 environment (TED 5381, ELCF 5450) Develop original instructional materials which incorporates technology (TED 5495, 5392, 5381, and 5998) Facilitate an original unit of instruction in front of a live audience (TED 5392 and 5998) Demonstrate alignment between objectives, instructional strategies, and assessments (5495, 5392, 5381, and 5998) Facilitate the use of technology in a variety of classroom situations (TED 5392, 5445, 5998) Apply educational research methodologies to instructional situations (TED 5490, 5411)

17 Establish a process to evaluate the effectiveness of instruction (TED 5495, 5392, 5381, and 5998) Apply technology to prove professional practice and productivity (TED 5381, 5347, 5392) Demonstrate the ability to design instruction for a diverse audience (TED 5495, 5391, 5381, 5412, 5347, and ELCF 5423) Manage and maintain hardware and software for use in K-12 classroom settings (TED 5445) Develop plans for the acquisition and management of technology resources (TED 5452 and ED 5423) Plan for the continual professional development of themselves and the faculty they serve (TED 5490, 5412) Appropriately apply standards and policies in the creation and plementation of instruction (TED 5412, 5392, 5381, ) Actively and effectively contribute to the vision and leadership of technology use in the classroom (TED 5998) Apply project management techniques to instructional projects (TED 381 and TED 5998) Program Objectives for the Research in Educational Technology Track: The following objectives are expected of the candidate who completes the MSTE program within the research track: Design original instructional materials (TED 5495, 5392, 5381, and 5998) Conduct a needs analysis to understand the characteristics of the audience (TED 5495, 5392, 5381, and 5998) Develop original instructional materials which incorporates technology (TED 5495, 5392, 5381, and 5998) Facilitate an original unit of instruction in front of a live audience (TED 5392 and 5998) Establish a process to evaluate the effectiveness of instruction (TED 5495, 5392, 5381, and 5998) Demonstrate alignment between objectives, instructional strategies, and assessments (5495, 5392, 5381, and 5998) Design media to convey desired meaning, applying appropriate psychological and instructional theories (TED 5495, 5392, 5381, 5998, and Psych 5830) Create and administer original research instruments (TED 5411, 5999) Use appropriate statistical methods to analyze data (PSYCH 5185, TED 5411, 5999) Create a publishable article in the field of educational technology (TED 5999) Analyze and interpret researching findings (TED5490, 5999) Synthesize published literature on a specific topic (TED 5490, 5999) Request and receive approval from the Institutional Review Board to conduct original research (TED 5999) 16

18 Assessment Practices The learning outcomes of the Masters of Science in Technology and Education program (MSTE) are assessed using a systematic process in order to provide evidence that each candidate, as well as the program as a whole, meet the benchmarks set by the faculty of the program and the AECT program review board. This systematic assessment process uses eight separate instruments that occur at specific points through the candidate s tenure in the program. The eight assessments are described below: Initial Instructional Design Project Type or Form of Assessment Administration Period Description of Assessment Content Project Within the first three semester during TED 5495: Curriculum Development The candidate will use the ADDIE process to create a module of instruction, including leader and participant guides, required instructional materials, and appropriate assessments. They will be assessed using the College of Education s Content rubric (COE 2). Planning Instruction Type or Form of Assessment Administration Period Description of Assessment Content Portfolio Prior to field experience Sections two five of the portfolio will be evaluated using the College of Education s Assessment of Planning rubric (COE 3) in order to determine the candidate s ability to plan instruction. Elements that candidates can choose to incorporate into these sections of their can include: Research proposals Grant proposals Needs assessment reports Design documents Lesson plans Storyboards for multimedia projects Technology management plans Use of research findings in the planning and designing of instruction Network design documents 17

19 Utilization of Technology in Instruction Type or Form of Assessment Portfolio Administration Period Prior to field experience or capstone experience Description of Assessment Sections six, seven, and nine of the portfolio will Content be evaluated using a rubric unique to the MSTE program in order to determine the candidate s ability utilize technology in instruction. (MSTE 1) Elements that candidates can choose to incorporate into these sections of their can include: Appropriate use documents Lesson plans Tutorials and tip sheets Multimedia examples with demonstrated use of appropriate policies such as fair use, copyright, and ethics Discussions of knowledge of the ethical use of materials in the utilization of instruction Assessing and Evaluating Instruction Type or Form of Assessment Portfolio Administration Period Prior to field experience or capstone experience Description of Assessment Section eight of the portfolio will be evaluated Content using a rubric unique to the MSTE program in order to determine the candidate s ability assess and evaluate instruction. (MSTE 2) Elements that candidates can choose to incorporate into these sections of their can include: Participant or peer evaluations of instruction Original survey and statistical analysis Assessment reports Capstone information In-Service Workshop Type or Form of Assessment Project Administration Period Within the first three semester during TED 5392: Development of Teaching Aids Description of Assessment The teacher work sample methodology will be used Content to assess an original unit of technology instruction the candidate will develop and present to interested staff and students at CSU. This will be assessed using the College of Education s Impact on Student Learning rubric (COE 5). 18

20 Field Experience Type or Form of Assessment Administration Period Description of Assessment Content Clinical Assessment End of Program The candidate s field experience or thesis will be assessed using the College of Education s Assessment of Effective Practice rubric (COE 4) to make sure that all major elements and concepts of the program s objectives and outcomes are effectively put into practice. Exit Interview with Electronic Portfolio Type or Form of Assessment Interview Administration Period Description of Assessment Content For the field experience, a candidate will provide a time log, journal of experiences, instructional materials, assessments of instruction, and evaluations from the on-site supervisor. For the thesis, a candidate will provide a fully developed thesis that is prepared and adequate for submission to a journal in the field. Final activity prior to graduation The candidate will be given a comprehensive interview with questions covering all aspects of the curriculum. Included in this interview will be a final review of the candidate s entire professional portfolio. This will be assessed with the College of Education s Professional Portfolio and Dispositons scoring rubric (COE 6) Survey of Graduates Type or Form of Assessment Administration Period Description of Assessment Content Graduate Survey One and three years after graduation from the program Candidates after graduation will be sent a survey asking them to evaluate their preparedness for their professional roles based on the program. The survey will reflect on all the various standards in terms of their importance on the job and coverage within the program. (MSTE 3) Faculty Qualifications The faculty are the most important aspect of the MSTE program. It is through them that students learn the skills and gain the knowledge necessary to succeed in the field. The information below describes the qualifications of the program coordinator, as well as the faculty who teach in the program. 19

21 Program Coordinator: The faculty coordinator for the MSTE program is currently, Elizabeth Osika. Dr. Osika has worked in the field on Instructional Computing for more than 11 years. During that time she has focused on the various attributes of instructional design, technology integration, and enhancing performance through instruction. She has presented annually at national, regional, and local conferences. In addition, her knowledge of the field is demonstrated through her publications which are listed below: Publications Osika, E., Johnson, R. & Buteau, R. (2009 Spring). Factors Influencing Faculty Use of Technology in Online Instruction: A Case Study. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 12, available online at Osika, E. R. (2006). The Concentric Support Model: A Model for the Planning and Evaluation of Distance Learning Programs. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 9, available on line at Osika, E. R. (2006 June). Assessing Student Learning Online: It s More than Multiple Choice. Online Classroom, p 3 and 7. Ertmer, P. A., Conklin, D., Lewandowski, J., Osika, E., Selo, M., & Wignall, E. (2003) Increasing preservice teachers capacity for technology integration through the use of electronic models. Teacher Education Quarterly, 30(1) Osika, E. R. & Sharp, D. P. (2002). Minimum technical competencies for distance learning students. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 34, Faculty Teaching in the Program: As mentioned previously, all faculty in the Technology and Education program teach at least one course in the MSTE program. Their educational and research summaries are provided below: 20 Dr. Moussa Ayyash Dr. Moussa Ayyash, Ph.D., is an Assistant Professor (Tenure-track faculty) and a program coordinator for the Industrial Technology program option at the Technology and Education department. Additionally, he is an advisor for all department s undergraduate program options. Dr. Ayyash is primarily responsible for teaching industrial and business education courses. He teaches the Cisco Academy and Cyberspace publishing courses that are required by all Industrial Technology Education, Business Education, and M.A.T. (Industrial Technology Education option) majors. Additionally, he teaches several other courses at the graduate levels (Masters and Ed.D.). The graduate level courses are (Statistics I and II, Survey Research Methods, Network Administration Technologies for Teachers, and Network Configuration I, Network Practicum I and II). Dr. Ayyash holds Ph.D. degree in Electrical and Computer Engineering from Illinois Institute of

22 Technology, a Master s degree in Electrical and Computer Engineering from the University of Jordan, and a Bachelor s degree in Communications Engineering from Mu tah University. Publications M. Ayyash (with K. Alzoubi). QoSRT: a Quality of Service Routing Tree for Wireless Ad Hoc Networks. Ubiquitous Computing and Communication Journal, Vol 3, No. 2, April Dr. Patrice Boyles Dr. Patrice Boyles obtained her Ed.D from Northern Illinois University in the field of Adult, Counseling, and Higher Education. She also holds a Masters degree in Occupational Education in Occupational Education and a Bachelors degree in Business Administration from Chicago State University. Dr. Boyles has made numerous presentations in the field of Career and Technical Education. Dr. Boyles has been extremely active in the field of Career and Technical Education working on state-wide, regional, and local committees and associations focused on moving the field forward. Publications Boyles, P. (2009). Learning Microsoft Office 2007 Word 2007 in a Windows XP Environment, A Quick User s Guide, Accurate Publishing Company, South Holland, Illinois. Dr. Kelvin Gilchrist Dr. Kelvin Gilchrist earned both his undergraduate in Industrial Technology and a Master Degree in Educational Administration from Eastern Illinois University; he holds a CAS degree in Special Education and Administration from National Louis University and received his Doctorate in Technology Education from Virginia Technical Institute and University. He has served as a junior/high school teacher, department chairperson, division chairperson technology assistant principal; standards project director, assistant superintendent and Deputy Superintendent. Dr. Gilchrist has the dual responsibility of teaching classes in the graduate program and in the undergraduate technology education program. He teaches the Manufacturing and Drafting courses that satisfy the communication and manufacturing specialization requirements for Industrial Technology Education teacher certification in Illinois. In addition, Dr. Gilchrist teacher the Urban Teacher course and Special Education courses (Method of Teaching Sp. Ed. & Characteristic of Sp. Ed.) Dr. Gilchrist teaches graduate level courses that satisfy requirements for completing the graduate program, supervises graduate research and thesis writing and serve as one of the graduate advisor. Dr. Marsha Phelps Dr. Phelps holds an Ed.D. from Northern Illinois University, with focus on Human Resource Development/Workforce Education, an MBA from the University of 21

23 Chicago, with a triple concentration in Marketing, Finance, and Urban Education, and a B.S. in the Teaching of Secondary English from Chicago State University. She served the Illinois State Board of Education as Chicago Coordinator for Tech Prep/School-To-Work, training teachers and functioning as resource liaison in the set up of School-To-Work programs throughout Chicago Public Schools and Chicago City Colleges. School-To-Work occupational clusters spanned careers in family & consumer sciences, hospitality & culinary arts, allied health services, business, manufacturing technology, and agriculture. Dr. Phelps will be presenting her research Utilizing the Perceptions of Urban Employers to Theorize an Employability Model for Young, Inner-City Adults at the National Center for Black Studies Conference, Atlanta, Georgia this April. She wrote Critical Issues for Minorities in Vocational Education, delivered and published in the proceedings of Northern Illinois University s 1996 Symposium The School-To-Work Initiative: Leadership and Educational Policy. Dr. Phelps has served as speaker on occupational education for a number of state and national organizations and conferences, including those of the American Vocational Association, Illinois Vocational Association, Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies, Illinois Multi-Cultural Committee, Council for Limited-English Proficiency Education, and Women in the Technical Trades. Dr. Phelps plans to continue her past research exploring methods of increasing workforce readiness of students of Chicago State University. Success of Graduates Historically, the graduates of the MSTE program have reported favorably regarding the quality of the program and their satisfaction with instruction. Areas where concern was indicated primarily focused on the quality of the equipment available at the university, including the age and functionality of the computers, response time of the Internet, and presentation equipment. Currently, the MSTE program in its redesigned state is too young to report on the trends of employment of its graduates. As part of the new assessment process, as dictated by NCATE, graduates will be surveyed at the completion of their program, one year out of the program and three years out of the program. This forthcoming data will be an integral data source for the continuous improvement of the program. Program Costs This section outlines the costs of the program as it relates to two specific areas: 1) costs compared to state averages and 2) areas where costs can be reduced. Comparison with State Averages 22

24 The measure of costs for a program at Chicago State is based on a percentage of state averages. The MSTE program has been fairly consistent since 2004 staying just below 100% of other programs in the state. The graph below shows the costs of the MSTE program using the CIP code of 1313, which is shared with other programs such as Business Education, Career and Tech Education, Physical Education; however, only the percentage of costs associated with graduate programs are included. The Form 202A which shows the costs for the department is included as Appendix E Costs as a Percent of State Averages Potential Cost Reduction Consolidation of Courses Currently, there are several different courses in the College of Education with similar content taught during the same semester by different departments. Some examples are courses focused on research methods and curriculum design. Many of these related sections have difficulty making based on section enrollments. If more collaboration would occur between the various departments offering similar courses, the COE could reduce the overall number of sections and replace them with fewer yet higher quality sections taught by faculty members who are passionate about the subject matter. This would increase the quality of instruction by allowing faculty members to focus on their specialized areas, could potentially reduce the number of CUEs across the college, and reduce the number of preps for individual instructors. 23

25 Appendices The following are included as appendices to the Program Review document. A. Excel Spreadsheet of MSTE majors and their progress for this report B. Example of Screen Shots from the MSTE Access Database used to track students C. MSTE Program Brochure D. Alignment of Courses with Standards E. Form 202A Summary of Program Costs 24

26 Appendix A: Data Used for Program Review The Excel spreadsheet on the following page shows the progression of the known MSTE students through the program.

27 Data Used to Support the MSTE Program Review No show / stop out Start of Program Completion of Program Last Name First Name ID# Phone Term Start Term End # of years tretained Retained Retained Retained retained % 83% 95% 94% 91% Dawson Felicia Dropped Work Ferguson Michelle Owens Debra No Ratliff Sonya Stroh Debra Atomori Adeola Chen Zheng (John) Harper Howard Nadirah Lugg Yao D'Jaris Berlin Kurt Barnes Lorrona Joplin Jonnie family ill 1 2 Smith Natasha Stith Reginald F Members Sheri Conditions Shelton James Baisa John London Janice Counts Daron Barden Lubertha Smith Loisteine Genell John Winfield Shaurae Kountz Kimberly Campbell Bessie Carrillo Francisco Fisher Rudolph Williams Kenneth Johnson Rochelle Washington Robyn Bush Chardel Sanders Kellian Sistrunk Clarence McKinney Forestine Lynch James D Lloyd Tanya Haynes Charles Leah Gilmore Johnson Lou P never completed thesis looksto have switched to CJ letter and messages sent Johnson Robert Pryor Tony Jackson Zaneta

28 Appendix B: Screen Shots of MSTE Access Database In order to track the MSTE students through the program, an Access database was created. Below are screen shots from the database. Grades are shaded to protect the student s privacy.