Program Evaluation

CAEP Accountability Measures

Listings of initial and advanced professional education programs and progression plans outlining program expectations (CAEP Annual Report Section 4.1; Initial R3.3/Advanced RA3.3) Accordion Closed

Initial teacher preparation programs for AY 2023-2024:

The following list of degree program names is linked to the NAU Catalog. The Details tab in the catalog identifies requirements that must be met to earn the degree and qualify for a state Institutional Recommendation. Before candidates receive final clearance for student teaching, an academic advisor as well as PEP (Professional Education Programs) confirms completion of these requirements. PEP again reviews that all requirements are completed prior to issuing a state Institutional Recommendation. To access each program’s Progression Plan in the catalog, open the Overview tab and click on the Progression Plan link. All programs are approved by the Arizona State Board of Education. The asterisk* indicates programs that were reviewed and accredited by CAEP during the last accreditation cycle in 2017.

Secondary Education Programs

Elementary, Early Childhood, and Special Education

Historical listing of initial teacher preparation programs

Advanced professional education programs for AY 2023-2024:

The degree program names listed below are linked to their respective pages in the NAU catalog. The Details tab in the catalog outlines requirements that must be met to earn the degree/certificate and qualify for a state Institutional Recommendation. To access the Program of Study, open the Overview tab and click on the Program of Study link. Completion of program requirements is confirmed by an academic advisor or faculty mentors from Education Leadership or School Psychology before the candidate is cleared to enroll in the final internship course. A second check of requirements is completed by Office of Graduate and Professional Studies (OGPS) staff as part of the candidate’s application for graduation. Finally, the programs complete a final check of requirements prior to issuing a state Institutional Recommendation. All programs are approved by the Arizona State Board of Education. The asterisk* indicates programs that were reviewed and accredited by CAEP during the last accreditation cycle in 2017.

Educational Leadership

Educational Psychology

Historical listing of advanced professional education programs

Enrollment and graduation data (Initial R3.1/Advanced RA3.1) Accordion Closed

NAU’s enrollment and graduation data for all degree programs are publicly available through the Office of Strategic Planning, Institutional Research and Analytics (SPIRA). Listings of the initial and advanced professional education programs are included in the previous accordion, “Listings of initial and advanced professional education programs and progression plans outlining program expectations.” Candidates enrolled in initial teacher preparation programs (and other programs intended for in-service teachers) are eligible to apply for the Arizona Teachers Academy (ATA) Scholarship and Program, which is designed to support recruitment and retention of teachers for Arizona’s public schools; see NAU’s ATA website for more information about this scholarship and program.

Table 1 provides an overview of enrollment and graduation counts for initial teacher preparation programs for the past three years. Figures 1-4 provide NAU’s ATA enrollment and graduation trends by academic year and campus location. Table 2 provides enrollment and graduation counts for advanced professional education programs. Following these data charts, we provide a narrative with analyses, interpretations, and use of data.

Table 1: Initial Teacher Preparation Programs Enrollment and Graduation Data

Academic YearEnrollmentGraduates
2022-20231522495
2021-20221665599
2020-20211748521

Figure 1: ATA at NAU Enrollment Trends by Academic Year

Figure 2: ATA at NAU Enrollment Trends by Academic Year and Campus Location

Figure 3: ATA at NAU Graduation Trends by Academic Year

Figure 4: ATA at NAU Graduation Trends by Academic Year and Campus Location

 

Data Sources: NAU’s SPIRA website for enrollment data; PEP’s Title II reports for graduation rates; PEP’s ATA at NAU reports.

Table 2: Advanced Professional Education Programs Enrollment and Graduation Data

Academic YearEnrollmentGraduates
2022-2023449146
2021-2022685141
2020-2021877266

Current and historical listings of NAU’s advanced professional education programs are included in the previous accordion, “Listings of initial and advanced professional education programs and progression plans outlining program expectations.”

Analyses, Interpretations & Use of Data

Initial teacher preparation programs:

Enrollment for initial teacher preparation programs has been declining for the past three academic years with 1,748 candidates in AY 2020-2021, 1,665 candidates in AY 2021-2022, and 1,552 candidates in AY 2022-2023. NAU overall has also experienced enrollment declines in relation to the COVID-19 pandemic. The number of initial teacher preparation program graduates across these three years reflects some unevenness that is attributable to outside factors (521, 599, and 495, respectively); the bump in AY 2021-2022 is attributed to the number of candidates who delayed student teaching during the COVID-19 pandemic in AY 2020-2021 and deferred to AY 2021-2022. PEP staff overseeing student teaching placements noted a corresponding decline in student teaching applications for AY 2020-2021 and a substantial increase to approximately 630 student teachers for AY 2021-2022.

Enrollment and graduation data, including ATA at NAU enrollment and graduation data, are shared internally with program faculty and leadership through a PEP Initial Teacher Preparation Coordinating Council meeting and through the COE/PEP Recruitment and Retention faculty and staff committee. The past three years of enrollment and graduation data are also shared in programs’ internal biennial reports completed during the fall semesters of even years. Additionally, these data were shared with external stakeholders as part of the NAU PEP’s Annual Career Fair, which is attended by 70 to 90 districts and schools from across Arizona.

There has been significant growth in ATA at NAU due to state approved funding of the program beginning in AY 2019-2020. ATA at NAU enrollment grew from 59 and 161 in AYs 2017-2018 and 2018-2019, respectively, to 900, 951, 1,014, and 1,147 in AYs 2019-2020, 2020-2021, 2021-2022, and 2022-2023, respectively. Interest in the ATA continues to be high, and NAU distributes the full award allocation provided to NAU by the Arizona Board of Regents. In AY 2020-2021, NAU initially expended all funding and maintained an ATA waitlist. When funding was increased in Spring 2021 because of recent, voter-approved ballot initiatives, students on the waitlist were approved for ATA at NAU and provided appropriate scholarship funding.

Similar to the enrollment numbers, the ATA at NAU graduation trend data show an increase. The number of ATA at NAU graduates grew from 26 ATA at NAU graduates for the first cohort graduating in AY 2018-2019 to 305, 371, and 340 ATA graduates in AYs 2020-2021, 2021-2022, and 2022-2023, respectively.  The bump in ATA at NAU graduates in AY 2021-2022 is partly attributed to COVID-19 interruptions in candidate completion rates from the previous year. ATA data reports are shared internally with program faculty and leadership through the PEP Initial Teacher Preparation Coordinating Council as well as through public reports published by the Arizona Board of Regents. ATA’s data reports are available on the ATA at NAU website.

Advanced professional education programs:

Enrollment for NAU’s advanced professional education programs has declined from 877 enrolled in AY 2020-2021 to 685 and 449 in AYs 2021-2022 and 2022-2023. The number of graduates declined substantially between AY 2020-2021 (N = 266) to AY 2021-2022 (N = 141) but leveled off in AY 2022-2023 (N = 146).  One explanation for the decrease in enrollment is a technical reporting issue in that NAU needed to move from a single academic plan with multiple emphases to separate academic plans. This change impacted enrollment numbers for two of our advanced programs. That is, the Educational Leadership (EdD) – K-12 Administration Emphasis and Elementary Education (MEd) Reading K-8 Emphasis became separate academic programs in AY 2020-2021, which allows us to report enrollment and graduation data for only these emphases. Prior to AY 2020-2021, these emphases were part of a larger academic plan with multiple emphases, which resulted in only being able to report enrollment and graduation data at the program level and not for these specific emphases. NAU has also experienced enrollment declines in relation to the COVID-19 pandemic. Further, the number of advanced professional education programs reduced to five programs starting in AY 2021-2022 based on CAEP’s Scope of Accreditation; current and historical listings of NAU’s advanced professional education programs are included in the previous accordion, “Listings of initial and advanced professional education programs and progression plans outlining program expectations.” Enrollment and graduation data are shared internally with program faculty and leadership through the COE/PEP Recruitment and Retention faculty and staff committee. The past three years of enrollment and graduation data are also shared in programs’ internal biennial reports completed during the fall semesters of even years.

Completer effectiveness (Measure 1; Initial R4.1) Accordion Closed

NAU PEP works with the AZ K12 Center, a teacher mentoring center sponsored by NAU’s College of Education, to collect meaningful data regarding completer effectiveness of NAU graduates.

NAU and the AZ K12 Center collect data on the effectiveness of first-year teachers who were participants in the Arizona Teachers Academy (ATA). The ATA offers scholarships to students enrolled in a eligible teacher education program. In exchange, ATA participants commit to teaching one year in an Arizona public school district, charter school, or Bureau of Indian Education school for any portion of a year they are an ATA member. The State of Arizona also funded mentoring services through the AZ K12 Center for ATA graduates during their first year of teaching in an Arizona school.

Given the significant number of initial teacher preparation program candidates enrolled in ATA, NAU gathers data from this sub-population about completer effectiveness (CAEP Standard R4.1). PEP and AZ K-12 Center leadership and staff meet regularly to coordinate services and implement effective communication to student teachers and graduates. Some strategies implemented to more effectively enroll ATA graduates into the AZ K12 Center first-year teacher induction services include adding marketing messages outlining the range of mentoring options to the ATA Welcome Letter, and inviting representatives of the AZ K-12 Center at the NAU PEP’s Annual Career Fair. The data collection instruments are aligned to:

R4.1 Completer Effectiveness – The provider demonstrates that program completers:

      • effectively contribute to P-12 student-learning growth AND
      • apply in P-12 classrooms the professional knowledge, skills, and dispositions that the preparation experiences were designed to achieve.

To provide evidence that NAU graduates “effectively contribute to P-12 student-learning growth,” NAU PEP is exploring the use of the New Teacher Center’s Analyzing Student Learning instrument, which is one tool the AZ K-12 Center provides for mentors to use in their work with beginning teachers. The Analyzing Student Learning tool was developed to create habits of mind when reviewing student work in relation to student learning or performance goals and content standards. This tool allows teachers to reflect on the strengths their students have in relation to a set criteria based on standards. Next, teachers identify challenge areas and consider ways to support students to make categorical growth. The Analyzing Student Learning tool supports the scaffolding process for reviewing assessment data related to student learning, creating immediate next steps to address the various student learning needs and setting expectations for the lesson plan criteria. Mentors use coaching language to find entry points into a conversation with beginning teachers to show how to make connections between teacher efficacy and student performance. The AZ K-12 Center is collecting the Analyzing Student Learning from mentors who worked with NAU graduates. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, many Arizona schools/districts restricted on site visits in classrooms, which limited the use of the Analyzing Student Learning tool by mentors. The AZ K12 Center was able to share four Analyzing Student Learning samples for our graduates from AY 2021-2022. For AY 2022-2023, the AZ K12 Center was able to collect more Analyzing Student Learning samples (for 10 NAU graduates) as COVID-19 restrictions by districts/schools regarding on site visits to classrooms are lifted. A narrative providing analyses, interpretations, and use of these data is provided below.

To seek evidence related to NAU graduates applying “the professional knowledge, skills, and dispositions that the preparation experiences were designed to achieve,” NAU PEP and AZ K12 Center Staff have developed a Beginning Teacher Effectiveness Observation Instrument aligned to this CAEP Standard component. This instrument was designed to be completed by mentors in collaboration with their mentees/NAU graduates. A pilot administration of the instrument was conducted in Fall 2021. There was a very low response rate to the survey in Spring 2022, and therefore these results are not shared nor summarized below. Measures were taken by NAU PEP and the AZ K12 Center to increase response rates for this survey by mentors in collaboration with their mentees/NAU graduates in Fall 2022 and Spring 2023. These results are available through the links below. Following these result files, a narrative providing analyses, interpretations, and use of data is listed.

Analyses, Interpretations & Use of Data

Analyzing Student Learning Results from AY 2021-2022 (Pilot Year) and AY 2022-2023

In AY 2021-2022 (pilot year), the Analyzing Student Learning tool was used by mentors with four NAU AY 2020-2021 graduates. The four Analyzing Student Learning tool samples were for mathematics lessons at the 1st, 3rd, 5th, and 7th grade levels. In completing the Analyzing Student Learning tool, all four completers worked with the Standards-Based Content and Informing Instructional Practice sections of the tool (describe the standard(s) including the knowledge, skills, and actions targeted in the lesson; how the targeted standard(s) are addressed in the lesson; and what student performance would look like for meeting standard(s). Two completers filled out Student Performance Levels section of the instrument in which  they rated each students’ level of performance as well as calculated the number and percentage of students meeting standard(s), approaching standard(s), and far below standard(s). Both NAU completers found that the majority of their students met the lesson standards (25-48%) or earned a score(s) related to approaching the lesson standards (12-37.5%). Very few students were found to be far below standards (8-12.5%).  A performance rating could not be provided for some students at the time the Analyzing Student Learning tool was completed.

In AY 2022-2023, the Analyzing Student Learning tool was used by mentors with 10 NAU AY 2021-2022 graduates of  the following NAU initial teacher preparation programs: Elementary Education (BSEd), Secondary Education – English (BSEd), Secondary Education – Mathematics (BSEd), and Special and Elementary Education (BSEd). One NAU graduate completed the Analyzing Student Learning tool four times with their mentor two times for a mathematics lesson and two additional times for a reading lesson. Overall, the 13 Analyzing Student Learning tool samples were completed for lessons for the following grade levels/subject areas: kindergarten mathematics, kindergarten ELA, kindergarten reading, 1st grade mathematics, 3rd grade ELA, 4th grade ELA, 5th grade ELA, 9th grade Algebra I, and 10th grade English. Twelve of the samples demonstrated that 9 of the NAU graduates completed the Student Performance Levels section of the tool, and overall found that the majority of their students exceeded the lesson standards (6-56%), met the lesson standards (13-37%) or earned a score(s) related to approaching the lesson standards (11-59%). Overall, 13-67% of the students were found to be far below standards; it should be noted that the 67% was for one NAU completer who used the tool with a small group of three students as opposed to the whole class. Additionally, it was noted that a performance rating could not be provided for some students at the time the Analyzing Student Learning tool was completed. Finally, all 10 NAU graduates for all 9 samples completed the Analyzing Student Learning: Areas of Strength; Analyzing Student Learning: Areas of Need, Reflect and Plan; and Next Steps portions of the tool where they reflected on assessment data related to student learning as well as immediate next steps to address the various student learning needs and set expectations for the lesson plan criteria.

The AZ K12 Center will continue to collect, annually, the Analyzing Student Learning data from mentors who use it with NAU’s ATA graduates. In AY 2022-2023, the AZ K-12 Center was able to collect significantly more Analyzing Student Learning samples as well as encourage mentors to utilize the Analyzing Student Learning: Student Performance Levels; Analyzing Student Learning: Areas of Strength;, Analyzing Student Learning: Areas of Need, Reflect and Plan; and Next Steps portions of the tool.

Beginning Teacher Effectiveness Observation Survey Results from Fall 2021 (Pilot), Fall 2022, and Spring 2023

As noted above, the Beginning Teacher Effectiveness Observation Instrument was completed by mentors in collaboration with their mentees (i.e., ATA at NAU graduates) to measure “the professional knowledge, skills, and dispositions that the preparation experiences were designed to achieve.” When completing this survey, mentors had several opportunities to observe mentees’ classroom practices and debrief with their mentees. Additionally, mentees had time in the classroom as a beginning teacher to recognize their strengths and areas for improvement. For the Fall 2021 pilot, 12 survey responses were received from mentors and completers who had graduated in the previous academic year (AY 2020-2021). These mentees/graduates represent NAU’s undergraduate teacher preparation programs in Elementary Education, Secondary Education – English, Special and Elementary Education, Health Sciences – Physical Education, and Music Secondary Education. Based on these pilot survey results, Learning Environments (InTASC Standard 3), Planning for Instruction (InTASC Standard 7), and Learning Differences (InTASC Standard 2) were areas our graduates demonstrated effective teaching practices. The area that respondents indicated our graduates were struggling or lacked confidence in was Classroom Management.

In Fall 2022, survey responses were received for 19 completers (ATA recipients who graduated from NAU in AY 2021-2022) from the following programs: Elementary Education BSEd (42%), Special and Elementary Education BSEd (26%), Elementary Education – Certification MEd (5%), Music Secondary Education BMEd (5%), Secondary Education – General Science BSEd (5%), Secondary Education – History and Social Studies BSEd (5%), Secondary Education – Mathematics BSEd (5%), and Spanish Education MAT (5.3%). Finally, in Spring 2023, 24 survey responses were received regarding completers who had graduated from NAU in in AY 2021-2022 from the following NAU teacher preparation programs: Elementary Education BSEd (42%), Special and Elementary Education BSEd (29%), Early Childhood Education (4%), Elementary Education – Certification MEd (4%), English -Secondary Education MA (4%), Secondary Education – General Science BSEd (4%), Secondary Education – History and Social Studies BSEd (4%), Spanish Education MAT (4%), and Special Education – Mild/Moderate Disabilities Certified MEd (4%). Of the 24 completers who submitted a Beginning Teacher Effectiveness Observation Survey in Spring 2023, 10 were from completers who also submitted the survey in Fall 2022.

Across these three data cycles, respondents indicated that Learning Environments (InTASC Standard 3) was by far the strongest teaching practice area of our graduates (75-92%). In Fall 2021, the next strongest area indicated by respondents was Planning for Instruction (InTASC Standard 7; 67%); while in Fall 2022 and/or Spring 2022, Content Knowledge (InTASC Standard 4; 58% in Fall 2022; 63% in Spring 2023) and Dispositions (58% in Fall 2022) were additional areas our graduates demonstrated effective teaching practices. Across the three data cycles, the area that respondents indicated our graduates were struggling or lacked confidence in relation to their teaching practices was Classroom Management (46-67%).

The Beginning Teacher Effectiveness Observation Instrument will continue to be administered by the AZ K12 Center in October and March. The decision to administer this survey during these months was a collaborative decision by NAU PEP and the AZ K12 Center to allow the mentor and mentee enough time working together to provide meaningful responses. Additionally, in conjunction with completion of this survey, mentors collaborate with their mentees on goals based on a combination of InTASC standards, the district’s evaluation rubric, and priority indicators through the New Teacher Center of the AZ K12 Center. The AZ K12 Center has found that waiting to administer this survey allows for richer conversation that is authentic to the knowledge, skills, and disposition of that beginning teacher. In addition to publicly posting results of this evaluation measure on the NAU PEP Program Evaluation: CAEP Accountability Measures web page, these results along with data from other instruments (e.g., student teaching evaluation measures) and input from stakeholders (e.g., Cooperating Teachers feedback) are shared internally with program faculty and leadership through the PEP Initial Teacher Preparation Coordinating Council meetings. Program faculty and leadership review these data to determine if any program improvements are needed and if so, what curriculum changes should be made.

Satisfaction of employers (Measure 2; Initial R4.2/Advanced RA4.1) Accordion Closed

Initial teacher preparation programs:

NAU PEP gathers employer satisfaction from two main sources: a survey sent to school and district personnel who attend NAU PEP’s Annual Career Fair and a Supervisor Survey that is sent to employers of NAU program completers in their first year of teaching. 

Results of the Career Fair survey are available through the links below followed by an  analysis and interpretation of the data.

Analysis, Interpretation & Use of Data

In Spring 2023, approximately 96 districts and schools attended the Career Fair, and in Spring 2022, 25 districts responded to the survey. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Spring 2021 Career Fair was held virtually. In Spring 2023, PEP partnered with NAU Career Services to offer pre-fair workshops which contributed to our candidates’ readiness for interviews.

The Career Fair survey includes open-ended questions for employers about our graduates’ success as first-year teachers. In the virtual career fair of Spring 2021, we asked the following question of employers who attended the fair: “On surveys administered at the end of student teaching and to new teachers one year after graduation, we received feedback that they felt somewhat unprepared to effectively manage students’ behavior, navigate school politics, understand how to evaluate school progress, and work with school administrators. Do you have any recommendations regarding how to better address these topics of concern?” In response to this open‐ended question, employers noted that “NAU students are generally prepared better than many other candidates. They fit well into our school district.” Other suggestions included offering more leadership preparation and “soft skills” of communicating with school stakeholders, finding ways to prepare candidates for socio‐political aspects of teaching (School Board meetings, data discussions, principal/vice principal observations; aggressive parents). While classroom management appeared as a consistent concern in comments, employers indicated that classroom management is always a first‐year teacher struggle and requires that teachers are willing to work with mentors and school administrators. In Spring 2022, employer responses were very similar to 2021, with a greater emphasis on ways that experienced teachers and administrators could come to our classes to help prepare candidates for first-year teaching politics and classroom management strategies. In the 2023 Career Fair, responses to this open‐ended question included information that our special education first‐year teachers have struggled with the management of paraprofessionals. Interestingly, this concern with management of paraprofessionals was expressed as a concern of Special Education program candidates in the Equity Survey distributed at the end of student teaching, which suggests that there is a strong alignment between one measure of candidate preparation and one employer satisfaction measure.

 In addition to publicly posting results on this NAU PEP Program Evaluation web page, results are shared internally with program faculty and leadership through a PEP Initial Teacher Preparation Coordinating Council meeting.

In AY 2021-2022, NAU transitioned to using the NExT (Network for Excellence in Teaching) Common Metrics Instruments starting . In addition to an Exit Survey and a Transition to Teaching Survey (administered to first-year teachers  approximately one-year post-graduation), the NExT Common Metrics Instruments include a Supervisor Survey to collect employer satisfaction data about program completers for their first-year teaching. NAU utilized the Supervisor Survey for the first time in Summer 2022. All of these NExT surveys are aligned with each other as well as the InTASC standards. The NExT Surveys are proprietary instruments and have evidence of validity and reliability.

In Summer-Fall 2023, 20 employers completed the Supervisor Survey. Almost all respondents (98%-100%) said that our completers were particularly effective in using digital and interactive technologies to achieve instructional goals (InTASC Standard 8) and creating a learning environment in which differences such as race, culture, gender, sexual orientation, and language are respected (InTASC Standard 3). Other areas of strength included effectiveness in teaching in the subject matter of their licensure field (95%; InTASC 4); selecting instructional strategies aligned with learning goals and standards (95%, InTASC 8); designing and modifying assessment to match learning objectives (95%; InTASC 6); and using effective communication skills and strategies to convey ideas and information to students (95%, InTASC 5).

In Summer 2022, employers of 50 NAU program completers discussed their satisfaction with these first year teachers. 

  • In terms of employer satisfaction with completers’ abilities to work with diverse learners (CAEP Standard Component R1.1), 91% of respondents said that our completers effectively teach students from culturally and ethnically diverse backgrounds and communities (InTASC Standard 2). 
  • Almost all respondents (98% to 100%) indicated that NAU completers effectively teach the subject matter in their licensure areas (InTASC Standard 4); use digital and interactive technologies to achieve instructional goals (InTASC Standard 8); select instructional strategies to align with learning goals and standards (InTASC Standard 8); uses formative and summative assessments to inform instructional practice (InTASC Standard 6); and plan lessons with clear learning objectives/goals in mind (InTASC Standard 7). 
  • Over 92% to 96% of employers were also satisfied with our program completers’ abilities to establish positive learning environments (CAEP Standard Components R1.1 and R1.2); use effective communication skills and strategies to convey ideas and information to students (InTASC Standard 5); develops and maintains a classroom environment that promotes student engagement (InTASC Standard 3); and create a learning environment in which differences such as race, culture, gender, sexual orientation, and language are respected (InTASC Standard 3).
  • For employers’ satisfaction related to completers’ levels of professionalism (CAEP Standard Component R1.4), 96% said that seeking out learning opportunities that align with professional development goals (InTASC Standard 9) was a strength of completers, and collaborating with parents, guardians, and colleagues to support students learning and improve student performance (InTASC Standard 10) were considered completer strengths by 92% of respondents. 

Employers identified the following areas for improvement (CAEP Standard Components R1.1 and R1.3) based on higher percentages of lower employer ratings (of Tend to Disagree or Disagree): ability to differentiate to meet the needs of students from various socioeconomic backgrounds (InTASC Standard 2; 17%, n = 8); differentiates instruction for a variety of learning needs (InTASC Standard 2; 15%, n = 7); regularly adjusts instructional plans to meet student needs (InTASC Standard 7; 14.5%, n = 7); and helps students develop critical thinking processes (InTASC Standard 1, ~10%, n = 5).

Advanced professional education programs:

With the approval of the Advanced CAEP Standards, the NAU PEP Advanced Coordinating Council members developed an Employer Survey for advanced programs. The Employer Survey was piloted in Spring 2022, though the response rate for this pilot administration was low. These pilot results are available through the link below. Following this results file, a narrative providing analysis, interpretation, and use of data is listed. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Advanced Programs Employer Survey was not administered in Spring 2021. For the Spring and Fall 2022 administration of the survey, program leadership and faculty used other strategies for locating advanced program graduates’ employers in an effort to improve response rates as well as implementing systematic reminders.

Analysis, Interpretation & Use of Data

Spring 2020 Survey Data Analysis

Across NAU’s advanced professional education programs, 54 employers completed the Employer Survey during the pilot administration in Spring 2020. Of the 54 employers that responded, only 29 employers (or 56%) indicated they had hired NAU advanced professional education program graduates during the past three years. Based on the survey items, these 29 employers appear to have hired NAU graduates representing all advanced professional education programs. However, the number of responses per program were low ranging from 1 to 11 responses. The percentage of responses from these 29 employers indicating that they find NAU advanced program completers competent and worthy of hiring was high with 52% of respondents indicating “always” and 39% indicating “most of the time.” Employers also indicated they would hire another NAU advanced program graduate with 86% of respondents indicating they were “extremely likely” and 24% indicating they were “likely.” The percentage of employers indicating they were satisfied with the overall preparation of NAU advanced program graduates for their position was high with 70% indicating they were “extremely satisfied” and 26% indicating they were “satisfied.” Further results related to advanced program completers’ knowledge, skills, and dispositions by position/program can be found in the results file listed above. Findings from this pilot employer survey were shared internally with program faculty and leadership.

Educational Leadership Focus Group Data Analysis

The EDL faculty explored other methods for collecting employer satisfaction data, including conducting focus group interviews with partner districts (see Focus Group Protocol) and identifying program completers (i.e. principals and superintendents) who were also responsible for hiring EDL program completers. 

Employers from our largest partner districts participated in focus groups in December 2021, May 2022, and December 2022. Employers were complimentary of the hands-on, relevant degree program which enabled graduates to enter district positions with a degree of familiarity of processes and procedures. They indicated that the graduates hired in their district were well-prepared and “have a good understanding of what’s expected of them as an administrator”. The district participants in the focus group encouraged the continuance of the partnership and offering of the degree program locally, which is specifically geared toward producing administrators with the knowledge and skills germane to the district while maintaining the high preparation standards of NELP. All focus groups identified evidence of quality preparation in our programs and complemented programs’ realistic expectations of administrative duties and functions.

School Psychology Survey efforts

The faculty of EdS School Psychology administered an employer satisfaction survey to focus groups in Summer 2022, Fall 2022, and Spring 2023. The Summer and Fall 2022 focus groups consisted of Arizona school psychologists from Phoenix, Tucson, and some rural areas. The Spring 2023 focus group focused on the Phoenix metropolitan area, which involves the majority of our fieldwork placements. 

  • Employers find that our completers tend to present with high disposition and interpersonal skills and are skilled in interacting with parents, children, and professionals in conducting psychoeducational evaluations. Completers tend to present as highly prepared to conduct their assigned tasks, including conducting cognitive and academic achievement evaluations, social-emotional and mental health evaluations, and writing psychoeducational reports, as well as helping multidisciplinary teams in making special education eligibility recommendations. In summary, employers spoke about a track record of high quality regarding the school psychology EdS completers. 

One of our findings was that our EdS School Psychology candidates would benefit from additional training on conducting functional behavioral assessments. We cover these types of assessments in our practicum coursework, but in light of the feedback we received, we have worked to ensure that our practicum classes provide more direct instruction on conducting functional behavioral assessments.

Stakeholder involvement (Measure 2; Initial R5.3/Advanced RA5.3) Accordion Closed

Initial teacher preparation programs:

NAU PEP has established two key approaches to improve our collection of feedback from key stakeholders, cooperating teachers (CTs) and principals/directors.

Student Teaching Cooperating Teacher Survey: For AY 2021-2022, additional feedback items (see General CT Additional Items; Math/Science Additional Items) were added to the mid-term administration of the Student Teaching CT Survey instruments. These new items share data results from the respective student teaching evaluation instruments from the previous academic year and request feedback regarding these data results in relation to the candidate the CT is mentoring. The items also request general feedback regarding communication, training materials, and placement processes/procedures.

Teacher Preparation Advisory Council: A Teacher Preparation Advisory Council was formed in AY 2021-2022 with the first meeting convening in Spring 2022. CTs and principals/directors were invited to participate through the additional instrument items and through direct emails to CTs and principals/directors who frequently accept NAU student teachers. Participation in the Teacher Preparation Advisory Council was approved by the Arizona Department of Education as qualifying for “Serving in a leadership role of a professional organization related to the profession of teaching or the field of public education” (see Educator Certification: Renew Your Certification | Arizona Department of Education (azed.gov), Professional Development Activities).

  • Spring 2023: In February/March 2023, a total of 9 cooperating teachers and 1 principal/director participated in the meeting aligned to their position and/or discipline area. Participants represented schools and districts in Flagstaff as well as other Arizona communities where NAU delivers teacher preparation programs including Chandler, Lakeside and Apache County, Prescott, and Holbrook. The data presentations from Spring 2023 for each group are linked below.
  • Fall 2022: In October 2022, the Teacher Preparation Advisory Council met, and a total of 10 cooperating teachers and 2 principals/directors participated in the meeting aligned to their position and/or discipline area. Participants represented schools and districts in Flagstaff as well as other Arizona communities where NAU delivers teacher preparation programs including Williams, Tucson, Deer Valley, Lakeside and Apache County, Yuma, and Gilbert. The data presentations from Fall 2022 for each group are linked below.
  • Spring 2022: In February/March 2022, a total of 6 cooperating teachers and 3 principals/directors participated in the meeting aligned to their position and/or discipline area. Participants represented schools and districts in Flagstaff as well as other Arizona communities where NAU delivers teacher preparation programs, such as Yuma and Glendale. The data presentations from Spring 2022 for each group are linked below.

 Analyses, Interpretations & Use of Data

Although we have consistently connected with school and district partners through NAU PEP’s Annual Career Fair, NAU PEP sought to improve our collection of feedback from cooperating teachers and principals/directors for program improvement. Results from the Cooperating Teacher Survey as well as feedback noted through the Teacher Preparation Advisory Council meetings have been shared with programs.

At the unit level, the PEP Initial Teacher Preparation (ITP) Coordinating Council acted upon feedback from cooperating teachers who indicated that the scale for the Cooperating Teacher Survey items did not allow for the option of communicating to teacher candidates that while they observed a candidate’s growth/development, there was still room for improvement. This feedback was shared with the Teacher Preparation Advisory Council members as noted in the presentations. The members were in support of this recommended change to the scale to improve feedback to teacher candidates and quality of data collected and reported. At the March 2022 ITP Coordinating Council Meeting, the change to the scale for the Cooperating Teacher Survey instruments was approved for implementation beginning in AY 2022-2023.

Given the data results, the PEP staff who oversee student teaching are working on ways to improve communication regarding expectations to cooperating teachers/principals/directors. A concise handout summarizing key aspects of the mentor teacher role was developed and provided to cooperating teachers/principals/directors beginning in Fall 2022. Expanded details regarding the cooperating teacher role is described in the Teacher Candidate handbook.

At the Fall 2022 meeting of the Teacher Preparation Advisory Council, a cooperating teacher commented that the orientation that they received for mentoring a student teacher in a mid-term-starting 8-week placement was less comprehensive than for the 16-week, start-of-term placement. In response, the PEP Director of Student Teaching emphasized the importance of the orientation meeting between the candidate, university supervisor, and cooperating teacher at the training session for Spring 2023 supervisors. At the Spring 2023 meeting of the Teacher Preparation Advisory Council, PEP shared a proposed change of the Alerts Instrument used for NAU’s initial teacher preparation programs including in student teaching. The attendees offered very positive feedback about a potential instrument, and they suggested some additional considerations for the instrument. These suggestions have been shared with the ITP Coordinating Council Alerts Subcommittee.

Advanced educator programs:

Principal (GCert & MEd) and Superintendent (GCert & EdD)

Educational Leadership faculty members who coordinate the Principal and Superintendent programs participated in several data-gathering efforts regarding satisfaction of employers and stakeholder involvement. These included a focus group in Fall 2021, as well as a stakeholder survey in Spring 2022.

A focus group held in Fall 2021 provided rich data from stakeholders with one partner school district offering an accelerated MEd Education Leadership – Principal K-12, which was co-constructed and implemented between NAU and the district. The stakeholders from the partner school district noted the professionalism of the program, the rigor, as well as its effectiveness. As stakeholders, they expressed interest in keeping the program relevant, real-life, and hands-on. They noted hiring program graduates as a mutual benefit. Other benefits discussed included the ability to augment syllabi to include what candidates want to know more about, the camaraderie of the program, and the practicality of the degree. Given their familiarity with the EdD Educational Leadership-K-12 Administration degree program, focus group participants also discussed this program. Participants described the cohort nature of the program, as well as the ability to draw on one’s experiences while working through the program as two strengths.

A stakeholder survey in Spring 2022 (N = 36) yielded a 44% response rate. Responses were received from school and district leaders, community partners, faculty members, candidates, past graduates, and emeriti faculty. Through the survey results, respondents indicated they had been involved in program design (37.5%), continuous improvement (31.25%), and program evaluation (31.25%). Program design examples included reformatting and implementing new syllabi, developing the American Indian School Leadership Program, supporting accreditation work, and designing new courses. Examples of continuous improvement efforts included providing programmatic feedback, acknowledging the role of readily accessible mentors for part-time faculty who teach in the programs, and improving upon programs such as the American Indian School Leadership Program.

A focus group (N = 6) with another Arizona district was held in Summer 2022. This focus group consisted of elementary and high school principals and members of the superintendency. Additionally, some members were program completers and employers. The Summer 2022 stakeholder responses yielded information regarding their appreciation about the flexibility of the programs and the importance of realizing that candidates are juggling lives of the principalship and superintendency, as well as ways to solicit information for improvement. One program completer stakeholder noted, “I could be able to do all the things I wanted to do in my profession, but then still be able to take the program.” The importance of the cohort model was also emphasized in assisting one another supportively. One participant indicated that asking for program improvement suggestions from district mentors in the program may be beneficial. Program completers as stakeholders mentioned the length of classes in the accelerated programs, both the pros and cons. Most moving, though, may have been the candidate (now administrator) stakeholder who said, “I like the fact that they didn’t give up on me when I had given it up on myself.”

School Psychology (EdS)

In AY 2021-2022, a stakeholder survey was developed and administered to school/district mentors who work with EdS School Psychology candidates. The results of this survey yielded 33 responses, an 18% response rate. Most school/district respondents had participated as a mentor for internship candidates completing an embedded assessment, the Competency Evaluation of Practicum Field/Internship Experiences (CEFE) (85.71%) and one respondent had participated in program evaluation (14.29%). The CEFE is a comprehensive appraisal of the development of candidates’ skills in practice and is organized by each of the 10 NASP 2020 Domains of Practice. Under each of the domains, there are key skill areas that relate to each of the domains. CEFE data, along with ratings on other internship signature assignment submissions and other available data, guide decisions regarding a candidate towards recommending progression to internship semester two or program completion. Survey respondents indicated participating in evaluating interns, supporting placements of practica candidates with supervisors who in turn evaluated the intern, supervised interns in schools, coordinated interns and practicum candidates, had interns in the past, and/or provided university proctors with feedback regarding candidate preparation. Program evaluation comments included evaluating the preparation of interns and practicum candidates.

Following the pilot administration in AY 2021-2022, and to maximize the quality of stakeholder feedback, in AY 2022-2023 the survey protocol was administered to stakeholders and employers through focus groups rather than through emailed surveys. In Summer 2022, the stakeholder survey was administered in a focus group at the June meeting of the Arizona Association of School Psychology. The group included individuals who had supervised practicum candidates and interns as well as employers who had hired graduates of the NAU School Psychology program. In Fall 2022 and Spring 2023, another focus group was conducted with lead school psychologists from the following Arizona school districts: Scottsdale, Deer Valley, Roosevelt, Cottonwood, Gilbert, and Humbolt. These districts represent urban and rural districts as well as Title I schools and affluent suburban districts. The stakeholders indicated that the candidates were extremely well prepared, have high integrity, and are responsible individuals. The stakeholders also noted that the cohort model adopted by the School Psychology program was very effective.

Candidate competency at completion (Measure 3; Initial R3.3/Advanced RA3.3) Accordion Closed

Initial teacher preparation programs:

NAU PEP monitors candidate progression and competency from admission to a teacher preparation program (i.e., meeting Additional Admission Requirements specified in the catalog) through completion through the following practices and measures (CAEP Standards R3.2 and R3.3):

We have established and documented policies and procedures that outline the steps followed by academic advisors when working with teacher preparation candidates. These policies and procedures align with the PEP Data Management System (in Salesforce, a university supported application) and the associated online applications and automated email communications for PEP approval and student teaching clearance.

  • Recent improvements Summary: In relation to the policies and procedures and specified requirements, we implemented new state and university trainings that are required for student teachers in the AY 2021-2022 catalog (see https://nau.edu/pep/required-training-modules/); we refined catalog language related to English composition admission requirements for graduate programs for initial teacher preparation, implemented in the AY 2023-2024 catalog. Work related to established policies and procedures are tracked by the EPP in an evidence file (see Evidence File: Policies & Procedures for Monitoring Candidate Progression and Competency from Admission through Completion). Section 5 Data of this file provides updated and approved policies and procedures. Data documents continued verification of students teachers’ meeting catalog and student teaching course requirements. When student teachers do not meet course requirements, an appropriate grade (i.e., Incomplete, Fail, or Withdraw) is entered in accordance with university policies.

Student teaching requires successful completion of several instruments that measure candidate competency related to InTASC Model Core Teaching Standards. The primary student teaching observation instruments are:

  • National Institute for Excellence in Teaching (NIET) Aspiring Teacher Rubric (used for NAU’s teacher preparation programs except the Secondary Education Math and Sciences programs)
    • Summary: The Aspiring Teacher Rubric (ATR) is a proprietary instrument developed by the National Institute for Excellence in Teaching (NIET). NAU PEP selected the ATR as the student teaching evaluation instrument due to the explicit alignment to the InTASC Standards (CAEP Standard R1). It is a validated instrument that requires training and certification to support the consistent implementation and reliability of the data collected. The AY 2020-2021, 2021-2022 and 2022-2023 ATR data results were shared internally with the Initial Teacher Preparation (ITP) Coordinating Council and with Cooperating Teachers (key stakeholders) through new feedback items added to the midterm survey that mentor teachers complete. The raw data results and data analysis of these additional items as well as open-ended comments provided by Cooperating Teachers were provided to ITP Coordinating Council members and program coordinators at the March 2022 and September 2023 ITP CC meeting and the January meeting of the Secondary Education Programs to review further and determine if any instructional or program improvements are needed and if so, what curriculum changes should be made. Additionally, ATR data are reported at the program level. Work related to the ATR (including examples of use of data from program level assessment report files) are documented by the EPP in an evidence file (see Evidence File: Student Teaching Evaluation: ATR Summary & Data ).
  • University of Texas Austin UTeach Observation Protocol (used for NAU’s Secondary Education Mathematics and Sciences initial teacher preparation programs)
    • The UTeach Observation Protocol (UTOP) is a proprietary instrument developed by the University of Texas at Austin. NAU PEP selected the UTOP as the student teaching evaluation instrument for its secondary education mathematics and sciences programs due to the explicit alignment to the InTASC Standards (CAEP Standard R1). It is a validated instrument that requires inter-rater reliability training to support the consistent implementation and reliability of the data collected. The AY 2020-2021, 2021-2022  and 2022-2023 UTOP data results were shared internally with the Initial Teacher Preparation (ITP) Coordinating Council and with Cooperating Teachers (key stakeholders) through new feedback items added to the midterm survey mentor teachers complete. The raw data results and data analysis from these additional items as well as open ended comments provided by Cooperating Teachers were provided to ITP Coordinating Council members and program coordinators at the March 2022 and September 2023 ITP CC meeting and the January meeting of the Secondary Education Programs to review further and determine if any instructional or program improvements are needed and if so, what curriculum changes should be made. Summary information regarding the UTOP and data analysis are documented by the EPP in an evidence file (see Evidence File: Student Teaching Evaluation: UTOP Summary & Data Analysis).

Arizona has several requirements for teacher preparation programs that are intended to ensure candidate competency as well. These program requirements align with CAEP Annual Reporting Measure 3, Ability of completers to meet licensing and state requirements, and Title II Reports (Initial R3.3/Advanced RA3.3). These requirements include:

Advanced educator programs:

NAU’s advanced professional education programs that fall within CAEP’s scope policy include the EdS School Psychology and four Educational Leadership programs (Principal GCert, Educational Leadership – Principal K-12 MEd, Superintendent GCert, Educational Leadership – Pre K-12 Administration EdD). These programs follow prescribed curricula tied to respective national standards (National Association of School Psychologists [NASP]; and National Educational Leadership Preparation [NELP]).

Entry into these programs requires adherence to NAU’s OGPS admission criteria, as well as individual program admission requirements: School Psychology EdS; Principal GCert, Educational Leadership – Principal Pre K-12 MEd, Superintendent GCert, Educational Leadership – K-12 Administration EdD).

Candidates are guided by faculty and advisors throughout their program of study (POS), which ensures proper class sequencing and mentoring. Programs provide handbooks (e.g. School Psychology Student Handbook) and/or other appropriate guiding documents that are shared internally with their candidates to assist with their progression. Additionally, NAU’s OGPS monitors candidate progress through grade reports. When candidates fall below grade thresholds, academic improvement plans are constructed to assist the candidates toward success. For example, in the School Psychology EdS program, a review of academic and professional progress occurs for each candidate at the end of each semester. Candidates also formally meet with advisors on an annual basis to discuss their progress in the program. At that meeting, the candidate reviews the rating form and comments related to their progress in the areas of didactic coursework; research skills and progress; clinical skills and progress; assistantship performance; interpersonal skills and professionalism; self-awareness, self-evaluation, and critical thinking skills; other accomplishments and/or concerns; and status on graduation requirements. Similar processes and procedures are followed for the EDL Principal and Superintendent programs. In particular, the EDL Principal and Superintendent programs check for successful completion of program requirements prior to final clearance to begin the internship course and again at the conclusion of the program of study before the state Institutional Recommendation is issued to the graduate.

Ability of graduates to meet licensing and state requirements and Title II Reports (Measure 3; Initial R3.3/Advanced RA3.3) Accordion Closed

Initial teacher preparation programs:

Licensure exam pass rates

Note: These data are based on Title II reports filed by Professional Education Programs. Title II reports are due in April or May each year and report the previous academic year’s data. Statewide Average Pass Rate data become available two years later, typically in the spring semester. Statewide Average Pass Rate data for AY 2021-2022 are not yet available, we expect these data to become available in Spring 2024/Summer 2024. Scores are only reported when there are 12 or more candidates.

Table 1. Overall Assessment Pass Rates reported to Title II (Traditional Programs)

Program GraduatesNumber Taking TestNumber Passing TestPass Rate (%)Statewide Avg. Pass Rate (%)
Ay 2022-202347245997
AY 2021-202256454496
AY 2020-20214874839991
AY 2019-20205545509991

Table 2. Overall Assessment Pass Rates reported to Title II (Alternative Programs)

Program GraduatesNumber Taking TestNumber Passing TestPass Rate (%)Statewide Avg. Pass Rate (%)
AY 2022-20232121100
AY 2021-2022353394
AY 2020-202134298590
AY 2019-2020099
AY 2018-2019141410098

Table 3. NAU’s Average Pass Rates for NES Professional Knowledge Exams (Required Exam for Teacher Certification), AY 2020-2021 thru AY 2022-2023

NES ExamNAU's Average Pass RateState's Average Pass Rate
Professional Knowledge: Early Childhood (AZ093)91%75%
Professional Knowledge: Elementary (NT051)95%96%
Professional Knowledge: Special Education (NT601)94%87%
Professional Knowledge: Secondary (NT052)99%99%

Analyses, Interpretations & Use of Data

For the past five reported years (i.e., AYs 2018-2019, 2019-2020, 2020-2021, 2021-2022 and 2022-2023), licensure exam pass rates for initial teacher preparation programs reported to Title II have been high at 96-99% for traditional programs. These high licensure exam pass rates for NAU’s initial program candidates are higher than the state’s average pass rate of 91% for traditional programs.

In AY 2019-2020, NAU had no alternative pathway program graduates. There were 34 NAU alternative pathway program graduates in AY 2020-2021 with 85% of these alternative pathway program graduates passing their licensure exams; the statewide average pass rate for alternative pathway program graduates was 90%. In AY 2021-2022, there were 35 NAU alternative pathway program graduates with 94% passing their licensure exam. In 2022-2023 there were 21 NAU alternative pathway program graduates with 100% licensure exam pass rate. Statewide Average Pass Rate data for AY 2021-2022 are not yet available from Title II, we expect these data to become available in Spring 2024.

Table 3 documents NAU’s average pass rates for specific NES Professional Knowledge Exams for AY 2020-2021 thru AY 2022-2023. The Arizona Department of Education requires a passing score on the appropriate Professional Knowledge Exam for teacher certification. As noted in the chart, NAU’s average pass rate for the three years reported met or exceeded the state’s average pass rate for the same three reporting years.

PEP’s licensure exam pass rates are reviewed each spring, especially in relation to available state pass rate data for all EPP programs. The results are shared internally with program faculty and leadership through the PEP Initial Teacher Preparation Coordinating Council and program review assessment report files. Additionally, the average pass rates for the Professional Knowledge Exams (Table 3) are shared with candidates through an Arizona Teacher Licensure Exams: Information and Preparation Resources webinar and web page (see https://nau.edu/coe/test-preparation-resources/). The webinar has been offered twice each year since it was piloted in AY 2021-2022.

State requirement

Youth suicide prevention training is a state requirement passed by the Arizona legislature requiring all teacher training programs to provide suicide awareness and prevention instruction (see Statue 15-1656. Suicide prevention training). This state required training also aligns to CAEP Standards R1.4, “candidates engage in professional learning” and R3.2, “the provider creates and monitors transition points from admission through completion that indicate candidates’ professional responsibilities.” Additionally, this evidence aligns to CAEP Standard R3.3, “the provider ensures candidates possess academic competency to teach effectively with positive impacts on diverse P-12 student learning and development” and as noted in the CAEP Annual Report for Measure 3 (R3.3) “data that reflect the ability of EPP candidates to meet state requirements.” Information and data reporting regarding this state requirement is being tracked and maintained in an evidence file maintained internally by the EPP.

Arizona EPP’s were asked to implement this new state requirement during AY 2020-2021. During Fall 2020, NAU researched various options and selected a state approved, free, online training option developed by the Society for the Prevention of Teen Suicide (see https://sptsuniversity.org/). It was determined that the “Making Educators Partners in Youth Suicide Prevention: ACT on FACTS” was the best option in terms of being a state approved training and accessible by NAU teacher preparation students located at campus sites throughout the state. This required professional development training was launched in Spring 2021.

The aggregated assessment results for the pilot administration in Spring 2021 showed that 95% of NAU’s teacher candidates completed the Youth Suicide Prevention Training, which is aligned to CAEP Standard Component R1.4. The aggregated results of Fall 2021 (100%), Spring 2022 (98%), Fall 2022 (98%), and Spring 2023 (97%) demonstrate a continued high level of compliance with completion of the mandatory Youth Suicide Prevention Training.

Title II Reports

Traditional Programs, 2022-2023

Alternative Programs, 2022-2023

Traditional Programs, 2021-2022

Alternative Programs, 2021-2022

Traditional Programs, 2020-2021

Alternative Programs, 2020-2021

Traditional Programs, 2019-2020

Alternative Programs, 2019-2020

Traditional Programs, 2018-2019

Alternative Programs, 2018-2019

Traditional Programs, 2017-2018

Alternative Programs, 2017-2018

Advanced professional education programs:

Principal (GCert & MEd) and Superintendent (GCert & EdD)

The Principal and Superintendent programs are the only advanced programs that require completion of a licensure exam for certification. Listed below are the number of program graduates by Principal and Superintendent programs. This information is provided for comparison with aggregate pass rate results for the total number of NAU candidates in Tables 3, 4, 5 and 6.

AEPA/NES principal and superintendent exams pass rates

AY 2022-2023, Program Graduates

  • Principal Graduate Certificate & MEd Educational Leadership – Principal Pre K-12 programs = 102
  • Superintendent Graduate Certificate & EdD Educational Leadership – K-12 Administration programs = 31

AY 2021-2022, Program Graduates

  • Principal Graduate Certificate & MEd Educational Leadership – Principal Pre K-12 programs = 92
  • Superintendent Graduate Certificate & EdD Educational Leadership – K-12 Administration programs = 29

AY 2020-2021, Program Graduates

  • Principal Graduate Certificate & MEd Educational Leadership – Principal Pre K-12 programs = 134
  • Superintendent Graduate Certificate & EdD Educational Leadership – K-12 Administration programs = 15

AY 2019-2020, Program Graduates

  • Principal Graduate Certificate & MEd Educational Leadership – Principal Pre K-12 programs = 132
  • Superintendent Graduate Certificate & EdD Educational Leadership – K-12 Administration programs = 42 *one student completed both programs simultaneously and is counted twice
Table 3. Overall Assessment Pass Rates, aggregated for the Principal Sub-test 1

Program GraduatesNumber taking testNumber passing testpass rate (%)
AY 2022-2023544176%
AY 2021-2022222091%
AY 2020-2021454084%

Table 4. Overall Assessment Pass Rates, aggregated for the Principal Sub-test 2

Program GraduatesNumber taking testNumber passing testpass rate (%)
AY 2022-2023524587%
AY 2021-2022211990%
AY 2020-2021393897%

Table 5. Overall Assessment Pass Rates, aggregated for the Superintendent Sub-test 1

Program GraduatesNumber taking testNumber passing testpass rate (%)
AY 2022-20232*
AY 2021-20222*
AY 2020-20213*

Table 6. Overall Assessment Pass Rates, aggregated for the Superintendent Sub-test 2

Program GraduatesNumber taking testNumber passing testpass rate (%)
AY 2022-20231*
AY 2021-20221*
AY 2020-20211*

*Note: Scores are only reported when there are 12 or more candidates. Additionally, NAU only has access to results if candidates affirm that NAU may receive the results when registering for the exam.

Analyses, Interpretations, & Use of Data

For advanced professional education programs, only the principal and superintendent programs require a licensure exam for certification. The number of principal candidates passing these licensure exams has been high with a 82-97% pass rate for both principal licensure sub-tests over the last three years (i.e., AYs 2020-2021, 2021-2022, 2022-2023). For the superintendent advanced programs, there have been fewer than 12 candidates completing the licensure exams; therefore, pass rates are not reported publicly. Pass rate data are shared with the program faculty. The principal and superintendent program’s faculty analyze and interpret these data and used a these findings as part of their NELP (National Educational Leadership Preparation) program review reports submitted in September 2021 and January 2023. For example, based on the pass rates for program graduates for the principal and superintendent degree programs, Educational Leadership faculty are continuing to monitor the licensure exam data, especially as more data becomes available for the MEd and Graduate Certificate Principal program graduates. Further, to respond to the lower response rates (i.e., data results faculty are able to access), faculty remind candidates about taking the AEPA exam as soon as possible post-graduation and ask that graduates select NAU when completing the exam registration form. These reminders are included in the internship syllabus, and university supervisors are asked to share this request during the final  internship portfolio meeting.

School Psychology (EdS)

All candidates in the EdS School Psychology program must complete the National School Psychology Examination for School Psychologists (i.e., the ETS PRAXIS II #5402 exam). Although Arizona does not require a licensure exam, our program requires candidates to take the Praxis exam so that they can become nationally certified upon graduation. Additionally, to become a National Certified School Psychologist (NCSP), applicants must achieve a passing score (147) on this exam. All EdS School Psychology candidates passed the exam in 2020, 2021, and 2022, with some graduates far exceeding the minimum criterion. These results support candidate attainment of the relevant standards and are a strong indication that NAU’s graduates have mastered the information. NASP publishes the pass rate of candidates on the Praxis School Psychologist exam each year. School Psychology Program Information (nasponline.org) (most recent year only).

Ability of completers to be hired in education positions for which they have prepared (Measure 4; Initial/Advanced) Accordion Closed

Initial teacher preparation programs:

Employment rate

Arizona continues to experience a severe teacher shortage and ranks first in the United States in terms of turnover rate of teachers (Carver-Thomas & Darling-Hammond, 2017). In 2017, Arizona’s turnover rate was calculated as 24% compared to the average turnover rate among all states which was 10% (Carver-Thomas & Darling-Hammond, 2017). For the teacher openings in Arizona needing to be filled for the 2023-2024 school year, as of September 2023, approximately 30% of these Arizona teacher positions across the state remain unfilled and an additional 53% of these Arizona teacher positions were “filled by individuals not meeting standard teacher requirements (using alternative methods)” (Wing, Wilson, Rossini, & Goodwin, 2023). The annual US Department of Education Teacher Shortage Areas report further documents teacher shortages for the state of Arizona. Given the significant teacher shortage Arizona schools/districts continue to face, NAU PEP hosts an annual Career Fair to connect employees with NAU candidates during the final semester of their program of study as well as with recent NAU graduates. Below are marketing flyers for the past three years.

NAU also collects self-report employment data from candidates through the T-PREP Exit Survey administered at the conclusion of student teaching. The survey items ask if the candidate has already been offered a teaching position for the next school year. Starting in AY 2021-2022, NAU transitioned to using the NExT (Network for Excellence in Teaching) Common Metrics Instruments, which include an Exit Survey (to collect satisfaction data from candidates near the end of their final/student teaching semester) and a Transition to Teaching Survey (administered to program completers approximately one-year post-graduation); the NExT Exit Survey replaced the T-PREP Exit Survey. The NExT Common Metrics Instruments also includes a Supervisor Survey to collect employer satisfaction data about program completers for their first-year teaching. All of these NExT surveys are aligned with each other as well as the InTASC standards. These NExT Surveys are proprietary instruments and have evidence of validity and reliability. Additionally, NAU and the state’s third party vendor Heartland ECSI (Educational Computer Systems, Inc.) collect employment verification data for the subset of NAU candidates who were members of the Arizona Teachers Academy (ATA) at NAU. These employment data are collected for ATA at NAU members in order to verify completion of their ATA teaching service commitment, and they started being collected in December 2020 for AY 2019-2020 ATA at NAU program completers.

Analysis, Interpretation & Use of Data

T-PREP Exit Survey data for the ability of our candidates to be hired have been relatively consistent. At the end of student teaching, the percentage of candidates responding to that question indicating they had already been offered a teaching position for the next school year was 46%, 48%, and 53%, and in AYs 2018-2019, 2019-2020, and 2020-2021, respectively. Results are shared internally with program faculty and leadership through a PEP Initial Teacher Preparation Coordinating Council meeting. Due to a data collection issue with the implementation of the NExT Exit Survey, candidates were not asked if they had already been offered a teaching position for the next school year on the AY 2021-2022 NExT Exit Survey administered in Fall 2021 and Spring 2022; this was corrected for the AY 2022-2023 NExT Exit Survey with questions about whether candidates already have teaching positions for the next school year being added to the survey. For AY 2022-2023 NExT Exit Survey, 56% of respondents responded that they have already been offered a teaching position for next school year. Further, 93% of respondents to the Spring/Summer 2023 NExT Transition to Teaching Survey of AY 2021-2022 program completers indicated they were employed in an educational setting. 

Additionally, NAU’s 2016 Self-Study Report provided employment data requested from the Arizona Department of Education (ADE). In March 2021, NAU worked with ADE to approve a new data sharing request contract. In Spring 2021, NAU PEP completed a new data request for employment data for initial teacher preparation program graduates from the past 5 years. The requested employment data for initial teacher preparation program graduates was received from ADE in Fall 2021. NAU PEP is currently working with NAU’s Strategic Planning, Institutional Research, and Analytics (SPIRA) Office on aggregating and reporting for this massive, raw data file. Finally, in September 2023, ADE launched a new data management program; this program allows the state to track employment data of teachers that is tagged to higher education institutions and teacher education programs. PEP was able to request accessible and usable state employment data during AY 2023-2024.

Advanced professional education programs:

NAU PEP collects self-report employment data from advanced professional education program candidates through the Exit Survey administered near the end of the candidate’s final semester in the program. The survey items ask if the candidates from advanced programs have already been hired in education positions for which they were prepared.

Analysis, Interpretation, & Use of Data

The results for AYs 2019-2020 and 2021-2022 showed 76% and 70% of advanced program candidates, respectively, indicated they had a teaching or other education professional position that they would begin or continue upon graduation. The latest results from AY 2021-2022 showed an increase to 80% of advanced program candidates with positions. Due to a data collection issue, the Advanced Exit Survey was not administered in Spring 2023. For Fall 2022 the Advanced Exit Survey was only sent to EDL Graduates because there were no School Psychology graduates in Fall 2022. Of those EDL graduates that responded to the Advanced Exit Survey in Fall 2022, 79% indicated they had a teaching or other education professional position that they would begin or continue upon graduation. The results are shared internally with program faculty and leadership.

As noted above, in March 2021, NAU worked with ADE to approve a new data sharing request contract. NAU PEP has submitted an employment data request to ADE to obtain Arizona employment information for NAU’s advanced program completers for the past five years; these data will allow for tracking of the employment of our advanced program graduates working for a public school or district in Arizona. The requested employment data for advanced program graduates was received from ADE in Fall 2021. NAU PEP is currently working with NAU’s Strategic Planning, Institutional Research, and Analytics (SPIRA) Office on aggregating and reporting for this massive, raw data file. NAU PEP plans to analyze these employment data and share findings with stakeholders during AY 2023-2024.

Satisfaction of completers (Initial R4.3/Advanced RA4.2) Accordion Closed

Initial teacher preparation programs:

NAU PEP surveys teacher preparation program candidates regarding their satisfaction with their degree program at the conclusion of the student teaching course. NAU began using the NExT (Network for Excellence in Teaching) Common Metrics Instruments starting in AY 2021-2022. The NExT Common Metrics Instruments include an Exit Survey (to collect satisfaction data from candidates near the end of their final/student teaching semester) and a Transition to Teaching Survey (administered to program completers approximately one year post-graduation). The NExT Common Metrics Instruments also include a Supervisor Survey (to collect employer satisfaction data about program completers for their first-year teaching). All of these NExT surveys are aligned with each other as well as the InTASC standards. The NExT Exit and Transition to Teaching Surveys are proprietary instruments and have evidence of validity and reliability.

Satisfaction of Completers: NExT Transition to Teaching Survey (administered 2023 to program graduates from AY 2021-2022)

Introduction to NExT and Satisfaction of Completers: NExT Transition to Teaching Survey (administered 2022 to program graduates from AY 2020-2021)

In the Spring 2023 administration of the Transition to Teaching Survey, 151 program completers responded, and in all items associated with preparation for teaching, completers scored items in the 78% to 96% range of “Agree” and “Tend to Agree,” indicating a high level of program satisfaction. In the 2022 administration of the Transition to Teaching Survey, 153 program graduates responded; of these, 110 were program completers. Of the respondents, 90% to 98% indicated the following was strengths of their preparation programs: planning lessons with clear objectives in mind (96%), selecting instructional strategies aligned with learning goals and standards (94%); the use of formative and summative assessments, creating a learning environment in which differences such as race, culture, gender, sexual orientation, and language are respected (93%), use of effective communication skills and strategies to convey information (90%), effectively teach subject matter of their licensure area (93%), and ability to effectively teach students from culturally and ethnically diverse backgrounds and communities (98%). Completers identified less satisfaction in the following areas: collaborating with parents and guardians to support learning, helping students develop critical thinking processes,  and differentiating instruction for a variety of learning needs.

Prior to 2021, PEP surveyed candidate satisfaction using the Exit Survey instrument (T-PREP). This instrument was developed by a group of teacher preparation researchers at Arizona’s three state universities. NAU PEP also surveys graduates using a New Teacher Survey instrument adapted from the Exit Survey. It is distributed to program completers once, approximately one year after graduation. The links below are for results files for the past four data cycles; administrations of the New Teacher Survey data are presented with the corresponding Exit Survey results for comparison purposes. Following these results files, a narrative is presented providing analysis, interpretation, and use of data.

Analysis, Interpretation & Use of Data

For the initial programs Exit Survey administered in the candidates’ final semester, the response rates were 63%, 78%, and 72% for 2017-2018, 2018-2019, and 2019-2020, respectively. For the New Teacher Survey administered approximately one year after graduation, the response rates were 16%, 13%, and 20% for Spring 2019, 2020, and 2021 respectively. Satisfaction data from the Exit and New Teacher Surveys have been consistently high for these three cycles of data. The percentage of respondents indicating they would recommend their program to a future teacher has been 85-91% of respondents indicating they strongly agreed or agreed. During these three data cycles, the percentage of respondents grading initial program experiences with a grade of A or B have also been consistently high in relation to the quality of classes (89-93% of Exit Survey respondents and 72-85% of New Teacher Survey respondents), practicum experiences (80-91% of respondents), and student teaching experiences (85% or more of respondents). Additional narrative related to the high program ratings as well as areas for improvement identified can be found in the results files linked above.

These results are shared internally with program faculty and leadership through the PEP Initial Teacher Preparation Coordinating Council meeting and with external stakeholders participating in the Annual Teacher Career Fair. Additionally, Exit Survey and New Teacher Survey results from AY 2020-2021 related to areas where our candidates indicated they felt somewhat unprepared (i.e., navigating school politics; working with school administrators; and explaining student performance data to parents/guardians, students, and families) were shared through the Teacher Preparation Advisory Council meetings held in February/March 2022 to gather input from external stakeholders (i.e., Cooperating Teachers and Principals/Directors). Feedback noted through the Teacher Preparation Advisory Council meetings have been shared with programs to review further and determine if any instructional or program improvements are needed and if so, what curriculum changes should be made.

Advanced professional education programs:

I Spring 2018, the NAU PEP Advanced Coordinating Council members developed and piloted an Exit Survey with candidates in the final semester of their program. This survey is now a common instrument administered centrally across all advanced programs at the conclusion of both the fall and spring semesters. In Spring 2019, the Exit Survey was modified and administered to program graduates one year after graduation across all advanced programs. In Spring 2021 during the COVID-19 pandemic, the survey was not administered. For the Spring 2022 administration of the survey, leadership and faculty for advanced programs used  alternative methods to gather program graduates’ contact information such as employer information provided by ADE for advanced program graduates. The links below, administrations of the Graduates Survey data are presented with the corresponding Exit Survey results for comparison purposes. Following these results files, a narrative providing analysis, interpretation, and use of data is listed.

Analysis, Interpretation & Use of Data

The Exit Survey response rate was 36% for AY 2018-2019, and the response rate for the Graduates Survey was 8% in Spring 2020 (for advanced program graduates from AY 2018-2019). In AYs 2019-2020 and 2020-2021, the Exit Survey response rates were 35% and 43%, respectively. The percentage of respondents indicating they would recommend their NAU advanced program to others has been consistently high for these data cycles with 90-100% of respondents indicating they were “extremely likely” or “likely.” During these data cycles, quality of program ratings have also been consistently high in relation to the overall quality of their NAU advanced program (84-98% of respondents) and satisfaction with their preparation at NAU to pursue/continue their chosen profession (82-95% of respondents). Additional narratives related to the high quality of advanced program ratings as well as areas for improvement identified can be found in the results files listed above.

Beyond publicly posting results on this NAU PEP Program Evaluation web page, results are shared internally with program faculty and leadership.

Additional Completer Satisfaction Efforts: EdS School Psychology

The Northern Arizona University (NAU) School Psychology faculty strive to produce well-trained school psychologists. Therefore, faculty interview program completers to determine their satisfaction and degree of career readiness. We conducted phone interviews with completers who graduated between 2011 and 2023 from either the Flagstaff or North Valley campuses. Nineteen completers responded. The questions were based on a protocol that mirrors CAEP standards and was created by PEP.  

Overall, completers expressed a high level of satisfaction with the NAU school psychology program. Many completers expressed that the knowledge and skills they gained because of this program were extremely meaningful. Additionally, completers appeared to value hands-on, practical experiences that NAU provides. A few students, specifically from the 2018 cohort, and one student in the cohort that faced the covid-19 pandemic during most of their training, were dissatisfied with their experience; these subset does not appear to represent the program general trends. Overall, NAU completers felt prepared to enter the field.

Educational Leadership Programs

Educational Leadership faculty conducted focus group interviews (Fall 2021, Spring 2022, and Spring 2023) and a survey (Spring 2023) of completers in the four Educational Leadership Programs leading to state licensure (EdD Educational Leadership – K-12 Administration; MEd Educational Leadership – Principal Pre-K 12; GCert Superintendent; GCert Principal). Overall program satisfaction was very high, with an emphasis on how the program offered opportunities to implement knowledge in actual practice situations and in their own workplace. Some suggestions for continuous improvement included taking a look at a year-long internship, better advertisement to recruit students to the program, focus on instructional leaders, more information about the dissertation journey, and a strengthening of the law course. The personal touch of the programs was alluded to more than once, substantiating the EDL faculty’s ongoing efforts to be student centered.

In Spring 2024, EDL faculty administered an additional survey that was distributed to  140 program completers from 2020-2023 who applied for an administrative licensure in Arizona. The response rate was 36.4% (n = 51). Among the respondents to the survey, 47% indicated that they felt “very prepared” and 45% stated that they were “somewhat prepared,” and only 8% indicated that they felt somewhat unprepared. When disaggregated by gender, 75% of men (n = 6) expressed feeling very prepared in contrast to women, of whom 50% (n = 18) felt very prepared.

Educational Leadership Completer Satisfaction Survey Analysis (2020-2023)

Student loan default rates and other consumer information Accordion Closed

The NAU PEP website includes an Exploring the Profession web page. This page provides information regarding degree programs offered, cost of attendance, student loan default rates, average teacher salaries, and resources for future teachers.

Federal Student Aid, an office of the US Department of Education, provides the following report of the most recent three year trend data for Northern Arizona University:

Analysis, Interpretation & Use of Data

National Association Federal Student Aid Administrators (NAFSAA) reports the FY 2020 national cohort default rate dropped to 0.0 percent, in comparison to the 2.3 percent national rate in FY 2019. NAU’s FY 2020 and FY 2019 default rates were 0 and 1.7 percent, respectively, or 0.0 or 0.6 percentage points below the national cohort rate, respectively. NAU’s student loan default rate as compared to the national cohort default rate will continue to be reviewed each spring and updated results reported publicly through this web page.

Professional Education Programs
Location
Room 123 Building 27
Eastburn Education
801 S. Knoles Drive
Flagstaff, AZ 86011-5774
Mailing Address
PO Box 5774
Flagstaff, AZ 86011-5774
Contact Form