Educator Preparation Program Public Disclosure Page

3) Employer Satisfaction and Completer Persistence

2017 MAT Employer Survey

Item

Valid N

Mean

ESC MAT alums establish and communicate learning goals and track student progress and growth

9

3.56

ESC MAT alums help students effectively interact with new knowledge.

9

3.56

ESC MAT alums help students practice and deepen their understanding of new knowledge

8

3.63

ESC MAT alums use ongoing formative and summative assessment to help students practice and deepen their understanding of new knowledge

9

3.89

ESC MAT alums help students generate and test hypotheses and new knowledge

8

3.38

ESC MAT alums design instruction that is differentiated for diverse students

9

3.33

ESC MAT alums engage students in a developmentally appropriate and respectful manner

9

3.67

ESC MAT alums demonstrate effective classroom management skills

9

3.56

ESC MAT alums establish and maintain effective relationships with students and families

8

3.75

ESC MAT alums communicate high expectations for all students

9

3.67

ESC MAT alums demonstrate knowledge of content and the structure of the discipline

9

3.78

ESC MAT alums demonstrate knowledge of content-related pedagogy

9

3.67

ESC MAT alums exhibit the characteristics of a reflective practitioner

9

3.67

ESC MAT alums engage in professional development and demonstrate the characteristics of a lifelong learner

9

3.89

ESC MAT alums demonstrate professionalism in decision-making, ethical conduct, and integrity

9

3.67

Note: Mean scores are based on a 1 to 4 scale where 1=strongly disagree, 2=disagree, 3=agree, and 4=strongly agree; percentages do not include ratings of NA (not applicable) or missing.

2017 MEd Employer Survey

Item

Valid N

Mean

Demonstrates the ability to establish and communicate learning goals.

7

3.6

Tracks student progress and growth

7

3.8

Helps students effectively interact with new knowledge.

7

3.6

Helps students effectively interact with new knowledge.

7

3.6

Uses ongoing formative assessment to help students practice and deepen their understanding of new knowledge

7

3.6

Uses ongoing summative assessment to help students practice and deepen their understanding of new knowledge

7

3.6

Designs instruction that is differentiated for diverse students

7

3.6

Engages students in a developmentally appropriate and respectful manner

7

3.8

Establishes and maintains effective relationships with students and families

7

3.6

Demonstrates knowledge of content and the structure of the discipline

7

3.8

Exhibits the characteristics of a reflective practitioner

7

3.8

Engages in professional development

7

3.8

Demonstrates the characteristics of a lifelong learner

7

3.8

Demonstrates professionalism in decision-making, ethical conduct, and integrity

7

3.8

Note: Mean scores are based on a 1 to 4 scale where 1=strongly disagree, 2=disagree, 3=agree, and 4=strongly agree; percentages do not include ratings of NA (not applicable) or missing.

MAT completer persistence in their post-graduation teaching positions is measured through self-reported responses to program inquiries.

2014 graduates

41 graduates

19 of 28 respondents reported having a teaching position upon graduating (68%)

20 of 27 respondents reported having a teaching position one year after graduating (74%)

22 of 29 respondents reported having a teaching position two years after graduating (76%)

20 of 24 respondents reported having a teaching position three years after graduating (83%)

2015 graduates

25 graduates

12 of 14 respondents reported having a teaching position job upon graduating (86%)

13 of 17 respondents reported having had a teaching position job one year after graduating (77%)

16 of 18 respondents reported having a teaching position two years after graduating (89%)

2016 graduates

26 graduates

6 of 8 respondents reported having a teaching position upon graduating (75%)

10 of 12 respondents reported having a teaching position one year after graduating (83%)

4) Completer satisfaction

MAT Completer Survey of 2014-2016 completers

The MAT program at SUNY/Empire State College prepared me to:

Item

Valid n

Mean

Be an effective teacher

39

3.5

Be a leader in my school and/or community

39

3.3

Solve complex educational problems

39

3.3

Be a reflective practitioner

39

3.7

Incorporate feedback into my teaching practice

39

3.7

Be a life-long learner

39

3.6

Be self-directed in seeking out professional development opportunities

39

3.6

Differentiate instruction

39

3.5

Motivate and engage all learners

39

3.6

Address individual student needs

39

3.5

Collaborate with families

39

3.1

Collaborate with colleagues

39

3.5

Work to establish strong community connections

39

3.3

Work in a high needs school and community

39

3.5

Use research based strategies for teaching and assessing all students (e.g., students with disabilities, ELL, economically disadvantaged)

39

3.5

Use research based strategies for classroom management

39

3.5

Utilize technology effectively as a teaching and assessment tool

39

3.4

Incorporate diverse learning styles into my lesson planning and assessments

39

3.6

Note: Mean scores are based on a 1 to 4 scale where 1=strongly disagree, 2=disagree, 3=agree, and 4=strongly agree; percentages do not include ratings of NA (not applicable) or missing.

2017 MEd Completer Survey of 2015-2017 completers

The M.Ed. program at SUNY/Empire State College prepared me to:

Item

Valid n

Mean

Be an effective teacher

14

3.5

Be a leader in my school and/or community

14

3.5

Solve complex educational problems

14

3.4

Be a reflective practitioner

14

3.6

Incorporate new ideas into my teaching practice

14

3.6

Be self-directed in seeking out professional development opportunities

14

3.5

Motivate and engage all learners

14

3.7

Address individual student needs

14

3.6

Work to establish strong community connections

14

3.4

Use research-based strategies for teaching all students (e.g., students with disabilities, ELL, economically disadvantaged)

14

3.7

Use research-based strategies for assessing all students (e.g., students with disabilities, ELL, economically disadvantaged)

14

3.7

Use technology effectively as a teaching tool

14

3.6

Utilize technology effectively as an assessment tool

14

3.1

Incorporate diverse learning styles into my lesson planning

14

3.6

Incorporate diverse learning styles into my assessment

14

3.4

Compare and contrast various perspectives and applications of critical pedagogy

14

3.6

Create a learning reform model that takes into account developments in policies, research, technology, employment and culture

14

3.4

Analyze and critique educational research studies

14

3.9

Develop a community or curriculum project that addresses a specific problem in education related to my content area

14

3.7

Note: Mean scores are based on a 1 to 4 scale where 1=strongly disagree, 2=disagree, 3=agree, and 4=strongly agree; percentages do not include ratings of NA (not applicable) or missing.

5) Completer Employment rate

MAT Completer Employment rate is measured through self-reported responses to program inquiries.

2014 graduates

41 graduates

19 of 28 respondents reported having a teaching position upon graduating (68%)

2015 graduates

25 graduates

12 of 14 respondents reported having a teaching position job upon graduating (86%)

2016 graduates

26 graduates

6 of 8 respondents reported having a teaching position upon graduating (75%)

6) Graduation rate

MEd graduation rate

Graduated in Three Years

 

No

Yes

Total

Start Year

N

%

N

%

N

2013

10

55.6%

8

44.4%

18

2014

32

78.0%

9

22.0%

41

Total

42

71.2%

17

28.8%

59

Note: Analysis as of 8/11/17; this population includes students who started their first MED course in calendar year 2013 or 2014 AND had a first MED course start date subsequent to their earliest MED program active date. The data source for this information was the CPIE Analytics view MED_Graduation_Rates_GPA.

MAT graduation rate

Graduated in Three Years

No

Yes

Total

AY

N

%

N

%

N

2011-12

33

57.9%

24

42.1%

57

2012-13

43

76.8%

13

23.2%

56

2013-14

21

55.3%

17

44.7%

38

Total

97

64.2%

54

35.8%

151

Note: Analysis as of 8/11/17; this population includes students who started their first MAT course in academic years 2011-12, 2012-13, or 2013-14 AND had a first MAT course start date subsequent to their earliest MAT program active date. The data source for this information was the CPIE Analytics view titled MAT_Graduation_Rates_GPA.

7) Licensure rate

MAT program Initial licensure rate

Initial Teaching Certification in 3 Years

 

No

Yes

Total

Program

N

%

N

%

N

AY 2011-12

37

64.9%

20

35.1%

57

AY 2012-13

43

76.8%

13

23.2%

56

AY 2013-14

35

92.1%

3

7.9%

38

Total

115

76.2%

36

23.8%

151

Note: Analysis as of 8/11/17; this population includes students who started their first MAT course in academic years 2011-12, 2012-13, or 2013-14 AND had a first MAT course start date subsequent to their earliest MAT program active date. The data sources for this information were the CPIE Analytics view titled MAT_Graduation_Rates_GPA and the MAT Master Spreadsheet (Certification Tab, variable titled Initial Issued).

MEd program Professional Licensure rate

 

Graduated in Three Years

Professional Certification

 

No

Yes

No

Yes

Total

Cohort

N

%

N

%

N

%

N

%

N

2013-14

18

54.5%

15

45.5%

27

81.8%

6

18.2%

33

2014-15

21

42.9%

28

57.1%

46

93.9%

3

6.1%

49

Total

39

47.6%

43

52.4%

73

89.0%

9

11.0%

82

Note: Analysis as of 9/13/17; this population includes students who started their first MED course in academic year 2013-14 or 2014-15 AND had a first MED course start date subsequent to their earliest MED program active date. The data source for this information was the CPIE Analytics view MED_Graduation_Rates_GPA. The data source for the graduation and professional certification information were the variables titled status and Prof Cert, respectively, from the MED Master Spreadsheet, Master tab.Not all MEd program completers are classroom teachers or seeking licensure.

8) Student loan default rate

Source: National Student Loan Data System:

https://nslds.ed.gov/nslds/nslds_SA/defaultmanagement/search_cohort_3yr_CY_20_13.cfm

School Default Rates
FY 2013, 2012, and 2011

OPE ID

School

Type

Control

PRGMS

 

FY2013

FY2012

FY2011

010286

SUNY EMPIRE STATE COLLEGE
TWO UNION AVENUE
SARATOGA SPRINGS NY12866-4391

Master's Degree or Doctor's Degree

Public

Both (FFEL/

FDL)

Default Rate

5.6

6.5

9.1

No. in Default

203

232

300

No. in Repay

3,591

3,568

3,262

Enrollment figures

Percentage Calculation

20,094

17.8

24,904

14.3

19,856

16.4

ENROLLMENT: To provide context for the Cohort Default Rate (CDR) data we include enrollment data (students enrolled at any time during the year) and a corresponding percentage (borrowers entering repayment divided by that enrollment figure). While there is no direct relationship between the timing of when a borrower entered repayment (October 1 through September 30) and any particular enrollment year, for the purpose of these data, we have chosen to use the academic year ending on the June 30 prior to the beginning of the cohort year (e.g., FY 2013 CDR Year will use 2011-2012 enrollment).

Current Date: 11/19/2017

Take the Next Step

Ready to advance your education and career? There’s no time like the present. Apply now, or learn more about SUNY Empire at one of our information sessions.