Eastern
Michigan University
College
of Education
Office
of the Dean
August 13, 2003
To: President Kirkpatrick, Provost Schollaert, Associate Provost Harris; Members of DAC; Ms. Rita Abent; Everyone on ACommunications Chart@; Deans Pritchard, Dugger, and Duley; COE AP=s; Public Information Office; Dr. M. Kinney-Sedgwick (Chair, COE Council); Members of the Basic Programs Committee; Dr. Nick Blanchard; Dr. Mark Byrd
From: Jerry Robbins
Subject: July 2003 Results, Michigan Tests for Teacher Certification,
Attached is a report that includes
EMU results from the July 2003 Michigan Tests for Teacher Certification, as
reported to us and the Michigan Department of Education by National Evaluation
Systems.
State of the Political Process re Test Pass rates in Michigan. In Michigan, one is not eligible to be recommended for licensure as a teacher by an institution until one has (a) completed all the institutional requirements and (b) taken and passed all the relevant state certification tests. For federal Title II reporting purposes, every Aprogram completer@ in Michigan has passed the certification tests and, since the Federal reporting requirement applies only to Aprogram completers,@ every Michigan institution has a 100% pass rate on all tests.
However, Michigan Department of Education officials have established four year cumulative pass rate expectations, subject field by subject field, as reflected in the records of National Evaluation Systems, as part of the state=s Periodic Review/Program Evaluation process, on which we are being evaluated during February-November 2003.
Change effective with the October 2001 administration. Effective with the October 2001 administration of the MTTC a different reporting mechanism has been employed. EMU now has an opportunity (this responsibility has been assigned to the COE Office of Academic Services) to Astrike@ from the test registration rolls, using statewide criteria, Ainappropriate@ persons who have claimed an affiliation with EMU. Test results reported to EMU following the October 2001 administration are only for those persons who names were not Astruck.@ As a result, reporting for October 2001 and thereafter is not exactly comparable to reporting prior to October 2001. We are Astuck@ with reporting decreasing amounts of Amixed@ results until July 2005.
If you would like additional information about either the federal or the state reporting requirements, please let me know.
Cautions in Interpreting the Test Score Data
Please keep in mind that while these are the Aofficial@ statistics, as reflected in the records of the testing company (National Evaluation Systems) and the Michigan Department of Education, there are Apeculiarities@ in the reporting for a given test field for administrations of the test prior to October 2001. These Apeculiarities@ are ones over which we, as an institution, have no control.
Literally anyone who pays the fee may take the test. The institutional affiliation of persons who take the test is self-reported. As a result, it is quite possible to find that persons unknown to us, or persons who have had little course work at EMU, appear in these results for the administrations prior to October 2001. This report does, however, Asort out,@ for the administrations prior to October 2001, the persons who could not possibly have been prepared at EMU because we do not offer programming in the area that has been tested.
Changes in Patterns. Although very labor intensive to do, Acorrecting@ the data by eliminating inappropriate persons prior to the results being reported to us is already showing a positive effect. For example, our overall pass rate for July 2003 is approximately 5.7 percentage points above our calculation of the statewide mean pass rate. Across 16 administrations, our mean overall pass rate is now approximately 3.0 percentage points above our calculation of the statewide overall pass rate. We had a 100% pass rate in 17 of the 40 fields that were tested in July 2003 and we were at or above the state pass rate (for the same teaching field) in 31 of the 40 instances. It appears that, over the next several years, as the current data reporting is phased in, we can and will clearly establish ourselves as substantially more Aahead of the pack,@ overall, than has been the case in the past.
This change is highly fortunate, in that NCATE now has an expectation of at least an 80% overall pass rate and we are now at 84.60% (or 84.68%, depending on what statistics are used) (over 16 administrations).
Changes in Reporting Format. Basic Skills Test results were not reported to us by the testing company for October 2001 and January 2002. However, they resumed with the April 2002 administration.
Data for 16 administrations of each subject field test are reported. From now on, reporting will be on the basis of a Arolling@ set of information, adding one new set of scores and eliminating the oldest set of scores.
Highlights of the July 2003 Report from NES
In all the material below, references to AEMU@ and AEMU students@ include all persons attributed to EMU by the testing company, based on self-identifications by the test-takers, in all cases prior to October 2001. The references are to bona fide EMU teacher preparation students for October 2001 and later.
1. Basic Skills Test
After many years of reporting that EMU students often had a lower pass rate on the Basic Skills mathematics and writing tests, it is now a great pleasure to report that the cumulative pass rate since October 1999 now shows EMU at the state pass rates in each of the Basic Skills mathematics and writing tests. We are one percentage point below the state cumulative pass rate in Basic Skills reading.
Subject-Field/Grade Level Tests
2. EMU maintains high 16-administration pass rates (at/above 95%) in seven subject fields, with dozens of persons tested in most, as reported by NES (i.e., Anon-corrected@ pass rates, except for October 2001 and afterwards). These are:
n College
Reading specialist 100% 7 Education
Technology and Design 100% 7 Technology
Early childhood education 97% 386 Education
Speech language impaired 97% 36 Education
Health education 96% 160 Education
Spanish 95% 56 Arts and Sciences
Economics 95% 19 Arts and Sciences
3. EMU has relatively low 16-administration pass rates (at/below 75%) in twelve subject fields with (usually) dozens (or hundreds) of students tested in most. Note that these are Anon-corrected@ pass rates, except for October 2001 and later. Note that staff members of the Michigan Department of Education have proposed a 75% pass rate or below as the point at which a program Ais in trouble.@
n College
Psychology 75% 146 Arts and Sciences
Mathematics* 74% 295 Arts and Sciences
Political Science 71% 118 Arts and Sciences
Geology/Earth Science 68% 133 Arts and Sciences
Chemistry 68% 79 Arts and Sciences
Biology 66% 159 Arts and Sciences
History 62% 498 Arts and Sciences
Sociology 60% 58 Arts and Sciences
Physics 59% 32 Arts and Sciences
Geography 58% 97 Arts and Sciences
German 56% 16 Arts and Sciences
Visually Impaired 54% 26 Education
16-administration total, test-takers in
Alow performing@ programs: 1,657
- - - - - - - - - - - -
*Now being tested and reported as Asecondary mathematics@ and Aelementary mathematics.@
See item #7 below for comment on each of these.
4. EMU=s collective pass rate, all subject fields, most recent 16 administrations, is approximately 84.60%, about 3.0 percentage points above our calculations of the statewide collective pass rate. In fifteen of the 16 administrations, the EMU pass rate for all fields combined was slightly higher than the calculated statewide pass rate for all fields combined. This is in considerable contrast to the early years of the testing program, when it was rare for the EMU collective pass rate to exceed the statewide calculated pass rate.
5. For the July 2003 administration, there was an EMU pass rate of 100% in 17 (of 40) fields.
6. For the July 2003 administration, there were 31 (of 40) teaching fields in which the EMU pass rate was at or above the statewide pass rate for the same field. The major Apoint spreads@ were in computer science (41 percentage points), chemistry (33 ), French (31), biology and psychology (30 each), geography and Spanish (28 each), political science (23), and middle level (21).
7. See item #3 above.
A. Psychology. The psychology pass rate is three percentage points below the calculated state pass rate for psychology.
B. Mathematics. Effective with the October 2001 test, Amathematics@ was discontinued as a single test. Instead, there are now separate tests in Asecondary mathematics@ (93% pass rate, n = 61 ) and in Aelementary mathematics@ (80% pass rate, n = 166). In July 2005 Amathematics@ will be completely off the Alast four years@ reporting scheme.
C. Political Science. Political science has to be considered in terms of both absolute and relative results. Despite the fact that the 16-administration pass rate in political science for EMU students (and others attributed to EMU) is relatively low, the EMU 16-administration pass rate in political science is seven percentage points higher than the calculated statewide 16-administration pass rate in political science.
D. Geology/Earth Science. Geology/earth science has to be considered in terms of both absolute and relative results. Despite the fact that the 16-administration pass rate in geology/earth science for EMU students (and others attributed to EMU) is relatively low, the EMU 16-administration pass rate in geology/earth science is seven percentage points higher than the calculated statewide 16-administration pass rate in geology/earth science.
E. Chemistry. Chemistry has to be considered in terms of both absolute and relative results. Despite the fact that the 16-administration pass rate in chemistry for EMU students (and other attributed to EMU) is relatively low, the EMU 16-administration pass rate on students attributed to EMU is one percentage point above the calculated statewide 16-administration pass rate in chemistry.
F. Biology. Biology has to be considered in terms of both absolute and relative results. Despite the fact that the 16-administration pass rate in biology for EMU students (and others attributed to EMU) is relatively low, the EMU 16-administration pass rate in biology is one percentage point above the calculated statewide 16-administration pass rate in biology.
G. History. History has to be considered in terms of both absolute and relative results. Despite the fact that the 16-administration pass rate in history for EMU students (and others attributed to EMU) is relatively low, the EMU 16-administration pass rate in history is two percentage points above the calculated statewide cumulative pass rate in history.
H. Sociology. Sociology has to be considered in terms of both absolute and relative results. The cumulative pass rate is relatively low; however, the EMU pass rate in sociology (16 administrations) is four percentage points above the calculated state 16-administration pass rate in sociology.
I. Physics. Physics has to be considered in terms of both absolute and relative results. Despite the fact that the 16-administration pass rate in physics for EMU students (and others attributed to EMU) is relatively low, the EMU pass rate in physics (16 administrations) is one percentage point higher than the calculated state pass rate in physics.
J. Geography. The EMU pass rate in geography (16 administrations) is the same as the calculated state pass rate in geography.
K. German. The 16-administration pass rate for German is 13 percentage points below the calculated state pass rate in German. During the past six administrations, with the use of Acorrect@ data for calculation of pass rates, there were no EMU takers of the German test in three instances. In three of the other instances, the pass rate was 100%.
L. Visually Impaired. The EMU pass rate in visually impaired is 20 percentage points below the calculated state 16-administration pass rate.
If you have questions or need additional information, please let me know.
Attachment
Copy w/attachment: Ms. Carolyn Nelson
EMU SUBJECT TEST PASS RATES
(October 1999-July 2003)
IN COMPARISON WITH STATE PASS RATES
(See preceding chart for detail)
Rank Teaching Field EMU State Difference
1. Computer Science 93% 65% 28
2. Spanish 95% 74% 19
3. Economics 95% 78% 17
4. French 94% 78% 16
5 Secondary Mathematics 93% 80% 13
6. Marketing Education 88% 77% 11
7. Learning Disabled 94% 84% 10
8. Early Childhood Education 97% 90% 7
9. Social Studies 82% 75% 7
10. Geology/Earth Science 68% 61% 7
11. Political Science 71% 64% 7
12. Art Education 94% 88% 6
13. Hearing Impaired 88% 82% 6
14. Business Education 81% 76% 5
15. English as a Second Language 91% 86% 5
16. Physical Education 88% 84% 4
17. Sociology 60% 56% 4
18. Reading Specialist 100% 96% 4
19. English 94% 91% 3
20. Mentally Impaired 88% 85% 3
21. Guidance Counselor 92% 89% 3
22. Language Arts (Elementary) 77% 74% 3
23. Middle Level Education 88% 85% 3
24. Elementary Education 90% 88% 2
25. History 62% 60% 2
26. Speech 88% 86% 2
27. Elementary Mathematics 80% 78% 2
28. Music Education 83% 81% 2
29. Reading 82% 82% 0
30. Industrial Technology 93% 91% 2
31. Science 87% 86% 1
32. Mathematics (now discontinued) 74% 73% 1
33. Health Education 96% 95% 1
34. Biology 66% 65% 1
35. Chemistry 68% 67% 1
36. Physics 59% 58% 1
37. Language Arts 93% 93% 0
38. Geography 58% 58% 0
39. POHI 79% 79% 0
40. Technology and Design 100% 100% 0
41. Speech/Language Impaired 97% 99% - 2
42. Fine Arts 80% 82% - 2
43. Bilingual Spanish 91% 93% - 2
44. Psychology 75% 78% - 3
45. Emotionally Impaired 85% 90% - 5
46. German 56% 69% -13
47. Visually Impaired 54% 74% -20