(SAE) of the FTCE. As shown in 1.1 and 1.2 below, UNF has had a 100% institutional pass rate for completers in all programs. Data are also disaggregated by program as shown in section 2. 1.1 Summary of Program Completers Initial Teacher Preparation Programs* Year Program Completers # Taking the Exam # Passing the Exam % Passing the Exam 2014-2015 238 238 238 100 2013-2014 278 278 278 100 2012-2013 304 304 302 100 2011-2012 265 265 265 100 2010-2011 337 337 337 100 2009-2010 332 332 332 100 Source: Florida Department of Education. *Art K-12, Biology 6-12, Chemistry 6-12, Elementary Education/ESOL K-6, English Exceptional Student Education ESOL K-12, Hearing Impaired K-12, Mathematics 6-12, MG Math/MG Science 5-9, Music PreK-Primary Education/ESOL, Physical Education K-12, Physics, Social Science 6-12, and the Educator Preparation Institute (EPI). 1.2 Summary of Program Completers for Other School Professional** Degrees (2009-2010, 2010-2011, 2011-2012, 2012-2013, 2013-2014, & 2014-2015) Year Program Completers # Taking the Exam # Passing the Exam % Passing the Exam 2014-2015 38 38 38 100 2013-2014 29 29 29 100 2012-2013 30 30 30 100 2011-2012 42 42 42 100 2010-2011 43 43 43 100 2009-2010 48 48 48 100 Source: Florida Department of Education. **Educational Leadership and Guidance and Counseling PK-12. Section 2 COEHS Pass Rates Florida Teacher Certification Exam (FTCE) per Subject Exam 2014-2015 Initial Teacher Preparation II Name of Licensure Test (Content) # of Test Takers % Passing State Licensure Test Art K-12 Art K-12 3 100% Biology 6-12 Biology 6-12 3 100% Chemistry 6-12 Chemistry 6-12 Elementary Education/ESOL K-6 Elementary Education K-6 105 100% English 6-12/ESOL English 6-12 4 100% Title
2. What is your employment status for next year? # Answer Response % 1 Contract Signed 12 35% 2 Contract Expected 15 44% 3 Contract not Renewed 0 0% 4 Teaching in Another District 4 12% 5 Teaching in Another State 2 6% 6 Unsure 1 3% 7 Teaching at a Private School 0 0% 8 Leaving Teaching 0 0% Total 34 100% 3. Do you teach in…? # Answer Response % 10 An urban school 13 38% 11 A suburban school 12 35% 12 A rural school 9 26% Total 34 100%
# Answer Response % 1 Highly Effective 12 35% 2 Effective 17 50% 3 Needs Improvement 5 15% 4 Unsatisfactory 0 0% Total 34 100% Statistic Value Mean 1.79 Variance 0.47 Standard Deviation 0.69 Total Responses 34 11. Use diagnostic student data to plan lessons # Answer Response % 1 Highly Effective 10 29% 2 Effective 16 47% 3 Needs Improvement 8 24% 4 Unsatisfactory 0 0% Total 34 100% Statistic Value Mean 1.94 Variance 0.54 Standard Deviation 0.74 Total Responses 34
# Answer Response % 1 Highly Effective 15 44% 2 Effective 17 50% 3 Needs Improvement 2 6% 4 Unsatisfactory 0 0% Total 34 100% Statistic Value Mean 1.62 Variance 0.36 Standard Deviation 0.60 Total Responses 34 16. Respect students' differing needs and diversity # Answer Response % 1 Highly Effective 19 56% 2 Effective 15 44% 3 Needs Improvement 0 0% 4 Unsatisfactory 0 0% Total 34 100% Statistic Value Mean 1.44 Variance 0.25 Standard Deviation 0.50 Total Responses 34
18. How effective was your teacher preparation program in preparing you to do the following: ...deliver engaging and challenging lessons # Answer Response % 1 Highly Effective 13 38% 2 Effective 18 53% 3 Needs Improvement 3 9% 4 Unsatisfactory 0 0% Total 34 100% Statistic Value Mean 1.71 Variance 0.40 Standard Deviation 0.63 Total Responses 34
# Answer Response % 1 Highly Effective 14 41% 2 Effective 15 44% 3 Needs Improvement 3 9% 4 Unsatisfactory 2 6% Total 34 100% Statistic Value Mean 1.79 Variance 0.71 Standard Deviation 0.84 Total Responses 34 23. Integrate appropriate and available communication technologies # Answer Response % 1 Highly Effective 13 41% 2 Effective 15 47% 3 Needs Improvement 2 6% 4 Unsatisfactory 2 6% Total 32 100% Statistic Value Mean 1.78 Variance 0.69 Standard Deviation 0.83 Total Responses 32
# Answer Response % 1 Highly Effective 17 50% 2 Effective 14 41% 3 Needs Improvement 3 9% 4 Unsatisfactory 0 0% Total 34 100% Statistic Value Mean 1.59 Variance 0.43 Standard Deviation 0.66 Total Responses 34 26. ...teach literacy strategies across the curriculum through explicit instruction # Answer Response % 1 Highly Effective 12 35% 2 Effective 15 44% 3 Needs Improvement 5 15% 4 Unsatisfactory 2 6% Total 34 100%
28. ...modify instruction to respond to student needs (e.g., gaps in knowledge, preconceptions or misconceptions) # Answer Response % 1 Highly Effective 12 35% 2 Effective 19 56% 3 Needs Improvement 3 9% 4 Unsatisfactory 0 0% Total 34 100% Statistic Value Mean 1.74 Variance 0.38 Standard Deviation 0.62 Total Responses 34
29. ...relate and integrate the subject matter with other disciplines and/or life experiences # Answer Response % 1 Highly Effective 16 47% 2 Effective 16 47% 3 Needs Improvement 2 6% 4 Unsatisfactory 0 0% Total 34 100% Statistic Value Mean 1.59 Variance 0.37 Standard Deviation 0.61 Total Responses 34
34. ...utilize student feedback to monitor and support instructional needs and to adjust instruction # Answer Response % 1 Highly Effective 16 47% 2 Effective 14 41% 3 Needs Improvement 3 9% 4 Unsatisfactory 1 3% Total 34 100% Statistic Value Mean 1.68 Variance 0.59 Standard Deviation 0.77 Total Responses 34
36. ...analyze and apply data from multiple assessments and measures to drive the learning process # Answer Response % 1 Highly Effective 11 32% 2 Effective 17 50% 3 Needs Improvement 5 15% 4 Unsatisfactory 1 3% Total 34 100% Statistic Value Mean 1.88 Variance 0.59 Standard Deviation 0.77 Total Responses 34
Academic Year Average Entry GPA Average Exit GPA 2014-2015 3.21 3.61 2013-2014 3.25 3.61 2012-2013 3.10 3.64 2011-2012 3.25 3.58 2010-2011 3.22 3.61 Source: Teacher Education File managed by the Office of Institutional Research at UNF. The following programs were included in the calculations: Art K-12, Biology 6-12, Chemistry 6-12, Elementary Education K-6, English 6-12/ESOL, Exceptional Student Education ESOL K-12, Hearing Impaired K-12, Mathematics 6-12, MG Math/MG Science 5-9, Music K-12, PreK-Primary Education/ESOL, Physical Education K-12, Physics, Social Science 6-12, and the Educator Preparation Institute (EPI), School Leadership and Guidance and Counseling K-12. Section 8 Graduation Rates for Students Admitted and Enrolled in COEHS Programs Section 8 Overview: This section summarizes the graduation rate of COEHS admits during the 2010-2011 academic year. One important consideration when analyzing this table is to recognize the significant differences between the cohort sizes of the various programs of study. Of most significance is the Elementary Education program which was comprised of a cohort of 120. Approximately 91 of the 120 (76%) students originally identified as Elementary Education majors graduated from the College but not necessarily from the same major or track they started with, in this case Elementary Education. 91 of 120 (76%) graduated from the original major and track. 108 of 120 graduated from the University but not necessarily from the same college, major or track they started with, in this case, Elementary Education. Section 8 COEHS Graduation for a Cohort of Admits and Enrolled in the 2010-2011 DOE CODE Program by Major and Track Deg. Level Cohort Size n Grad. At Univ. Grad. At Coll. Level(**) Grad. At Major Level (***) Grad. At Track Level (****) 114 Art Education: Art Education K-12 B 4 75% 50% 25% 25% 285 Educational Leadership: School Leadership M 25 76% 76% 72% 60% 287 Math Education: Math 6-12 B 11 82% 64% 36% 36% 288 Science Education: Biology 6-12 B 1 0% 0% 0% 0% (*)
289 Science Education: Chemistry 6-12 B 3 67% 33% 0% 0% 297 Special Education: Deaf Education+ M 11 91% 91% 91% 73% 304 Counselor Education: School Counseling M 15 100% 100% 100% 100% 365 Middle School Education: Math and Science 5-9 B 2 100% 100% 100% 100% 387 PreK-Primary Education B 7 71% 71% 57% 57% 398 English Education: English 6-12 B 19 84% 63% 47% 47% 424 Physical Education: Physical Education B 8 100% 100% 75% 75% 430 Special Education: ESE B 10 100% 90% 60% 60% 430 Special Education: ESE M 2 50% 50% 50% 0% 444 Elementary Education: Elementary Education K-6 B 120 90% 83% 76% 76% Source: Office of Institutional Research and Assessment. Graduation is based on the number of students in year 1 that were retained and graduated in year 4. University Level: COEHS students that graduated from UNF but not necessarily from the same college, major or track they started with. (**) College Level: Students graduated from COEHS but not necessarily from the same major or track they started with. (***) Major Level: Students graduated from COEHS but not necessarily from the same track they started with. (****)Track Level: Students retained in COEHS and in the same major and track they started with. - Current data reflects students retained and graduated in year 4 of their program of study. Students taking longer than 4 years to complete their program of study are not accounted for in this table. Section 9 Employment Retention Rates of COEHS Program Completers Program Name Average number of years completers from the 2008-2009 academic year were employed over the 5 years following placement Performance Level Score for Retention Rate metric. The performance level target points for retention rate range from one (1) to a high of four (4) and are defined in Rule 6A-5.066, FAC.