cwu home     site map         

Health Education and Physical Education (Health/Fitness) Program

1.   Please describe your program's assessment process and what standards you are measuring in relation to the NCATE and State standards of knowledge (content, pedagogy and professional), skills (professional and pedagogical) and dispositions. Is the system course based, end of program based, or other? Be sure to reference how the faculty in your program was involved in developing the assessment process. In addition, describe how the assessment of standards relates to the unit's and program's conceptual framework.

Program Interpretations and Conclusions:

The assessment programs currently are offered as two different majors (i.e. Health Education & Physical Education). For the purpose of this report as well as the fact that the state awards only one teaching endorsement (Health and Fitness), the two areas have been combined. Of course this complicates the report in the fact that the separate majors have not worked together to ensure that all of the standards are met and there is limited duplication. The Physical Education artifacts are collected in each course where they are created at the end of that specific quarter and then again when the students reexamine those artifacts in HED 445 a capstone class. The Health Education artifacts are collected in each course where they are created at the end of the students program in HED 445, a capstone class.

It was found that artifacts are assessing student achievement in the following CTL standards: Physical Education; All of the standards in CTL 1 are being assessed within the artifacts except for 1.10, 1.11. CTL 2 is being assessed in a 2 artifacts. Health Education; All but CTL 1.6, 1.7, 1.9-1.11 standards are being assessed in Livetext artifacts.

It was found that artifacts are assessing student achievement in the following State standards: Physical Education; All but Standard 9 are being met numerous times. Health Education; All State standards are being assessed in an end of the program assessment.

Both Physical Education and Health Education classes are very strong encompassing content knowledge, pedagogical knowledge, and pedagogical content knowledge. Physical Education is very strong in the use of field experiences to enhance preservice teacher knowledge, classroom management knowledge and to provide hands on knowledge of the K-12 student characteristics. Students in these programs encounter the constructivist approach to learning through not only classroom experiences where students are given challenges which students must develop an answer to but also in field experiences where students must determine the best approaches to teach concepts to a variety of student populations. After examining the data is clear that the standards are being redundantly assessed and a better approach to data collection may lead to the development of assessments that are based on a primary standard simplifying the tracking of progress.

2. Below is an analysis of the frequency with which your program cites CTL, WA State Standards/Competencies, and/or national standards within your LiveText artifacts, rubrics, and reports. Please examine the charts and write your program's interpretations and conclusions based on the information provided. (e.g., Are the standards dispersed appropriately in your program? Are all the standards represented as you wish them to be? After reviewing this analysis are there changes your program would recommend making to the way you cite standards or assess your candidates using LiveText?)

Program Interpretations and Conclusions:

The data provided in the table doesn’t accurately reflect the data that has been collected. At a glance, the Health and Fitness Standards are met across both Health Education and Physical Education classes that are required for all students in both majors. Additional analysis indicates that with in the content areas of the combined Health and Physical Education areas, all standards are being met. Specifically, all standards are met by content specialists within the content areas which enhances the pedagogical content knowledge of the students.

3. Below you will find one sample of your Live Text Report that identifies an aggregation of candidate learning outcome data. Please examine all of your reports in the LiveText exhibit area and discuss the accuracy, consistency, and fairness of the data, as well as what improvements could be made in the program assessment rubrics, courses, artifacts, or reporting. Include your interpretations relative how well your candidates are meeting standards. After examining all of your report data, list any changes your program is considering.

Program Interpretations and Conclusions:

After examining the reports it became evident that while the majority of the artifacts are appropriately designed, they lack continuity for comparison. Some of the rubrics have 3 levels, others 4 and still others 5. Even in courses where a similar number of levels were measured, the terminology of the levels is not consistent nor the number of points that each level is worth. Therefore, the first recommendation here is to review and establish consistency among the artifact rubrics in both the number of levels and in the terminology of representing each level. Second, is to make a similar effort across all Teacher Education Program Courses for similar benefits.

Other information ascertained by a review of the reports indicates that over 80% of the students were above proficiency in all aspects of the assessments. This would indicate the fact that all of the standards are being met within the Health and Physical Education classes and the vast majority of our students are proficient or better. Consequently current coursework is sound and while tweaking individual courses will always be necessary, there is no major overhaul that is required.

Additionally, in the majority of the reports, a writing or grammar component exists in most of the artifacts. Over 80% exhibited a proficient or higher level. The only courses which appear to have a lower level of grammar/writing are courses that contain non majors (elementary ed) and courses where there are only three levels of the rubric. There is definitely a need to have more than three levels and make sure that they are consistent, so that data may be aggregated across courses.

In HED there is a need to rewrite some of the rubrics to better identify areas of strength and weakness. For example in HED 445, an item that is assessed for quality of works doesn’t break out each component like lesson plans for pamphlets, brochures or other items. Instead rubrics need to include sufficient detail to assess the quality of each item and the aspects of each item that make them effective.

4. Below you will find a chart of the CTL Standards aggregated by course. Please examine the data results and discuss any improvements if any you might consider for your program. Using these data, please reflect upon your candidates' success in meeting standards. Compare these data to the data provided in the WEST B and E charts that follow. Is there consistency in the rates of success? What do these data tell you?


Program Interpretations and Conclusions:

Based on the data, the standards are being met at over a 90% success rate in all instances except with one quarter of a non major class. The data doesn’t indicate a failure rate but does provide evidence of the number of students who did not complete the livetext artifact. It is similar in HED courses. There was easily over a 90% success rate on the WA Comp Health Ed standards. Efforts need to be expended to ensure that there are no completes and all students complete the Livetext artifacts.


Please find below the West B data for the teacher residency program. Please use these data, the LiveText data, and the West E data found below to predict candidate success in your program. Given theses summaries, are there changes to your program or to the unit your program recommends the CTL consider?

  • Between 2005-2007, 49% of the candidates passed all three sections of the exam their first attempt, 84% passed the reading portion in their first attempt, 82% math their first attempt, and 65% passed writing their first attempt.
  • The mean number of candidates not passing reading portion is 11%, math 12%, and writing 25%.

CTL WEST B Data Summary 2002 to Present


Program Interpretations and Conclusions:

When including writing as an assessment item the majority of students in Health Education and Physical Education were at the proficient level which is 3.00 or above. Neither program requires students to pass the West B prior to acceptance into the majors. Thus the results of the west B portrayed in the graphs could potentially be related to the majors in these two majors however it could just as easily be that students are not passing prior to beginning these majors. However since passing of the West B is required of all students to get their teaching endorsement, it is recommended that students in both majors receive an increase in opportunities to write with a high level of expectation. Hopefully with the increased effort, it will ensure that those students who take the West B after starting the Health Education or Physical Education majors will pass with a 100% success rate. Further examination of the data on the West B pass rates would indicate that there are a number of college students who are convinced that they want to teach and persistent to meet the prerequisites. Thus they are committed to return to take the test so that they can fulfill their lifelong dream of teaching. Given the commitment and the persistence demonstrated by these individuals, it might be appropriate for the Teacher Education Core courses that are taken prior to full acceptance into the teacher education program to increase opportunities to practice these skills, especially writing. It would also be interesting to determine whether students are failing the writing component are attempting to take the West B prior to taking the Teacher Education Program prerequisites of ENG 101 and 102.

6. The WEST E is administered by ETS as a state requirement for program Exit, measuring content knowledge by endorsement area. ETS has not sent the final corrected data summary at the time of this report, however, the data we keep on a continuously updated basis is described below in the following graph. The graph compares 2005-2006 and 2006-2007 data by endorsement area. We suspect the 2006-2007 data will change after all scores are received from ETS. According to this set of data, 2005-06 pass rates were 90%. Remember all candidates must pass the test to be certified, so they take it multiple times. We are working on authenticating a different process that will show how many times candidate take the test and when. The 2006-07 data indicates pass rates of 87%. If your program is one of those with a pass rate below 80%; what program recommendations are you considering that will positively affect the rate of passing the WEST-E for 2007-2009?

Program Interpretations and Conclusions:

Both majors are above a 95% pass rate and last year was better than the previous year. Faculty are involved at the state level on committees that are setting expectations for student teachers/majors and are continually involved in validating efforts for these tests. Additionally we stay current by attending conferences. And finally the consistency among faculty who are working together and conversing as to what has been covered and what hasn’t enables faculty to make sure that all necessary content is integrated into the course requirements.


Please find below the EBI teacher and principal data for all program completers. Discuss and report in the space provided what your program recommends the unit should accomplish to improve overall satisfaction, or what your program is doing to improve the trend.

  • This survey is administered through OSPI and is contracted through Educational Benchmarking Inc. These data are collected for all new teachers in public schools by surveying new teachers and their principals.
  • Response rate average over the seven years n=105
  • The graph represents a seven year average satisfaction trend by category
  • Highest satisfaction ratings are in the areas of:
    • Student learning
    • Instructional strategies
    • Management, control and environment
  • Lowest satisfaction ratings are in the areas of:
    • Reading skills
  • 5 year Principal responses followed similar patterns as teachers n=41


Program Interpretations and Conclusions:

Lowest level of satisfaction was in literacy which may correlate with the West B writing results. This then continues to be an area where a greater level of continuity and communication between faculty in increasing writing and reading opportunities with increased expectations needs to occur. As stated earlier, Health Education and Physical Education faculty are going to examine this trend and work toward increasing writing opportunities specifically within the program.


Please find below first year and third year teacher survey results summarized by graphing mean responses for each question.

  • This survey is administered by CTL and data trend summary represents 2004-07
  • The average response rate for 2004-2007 is 15%
  • First year teacher N= 375, Third year teacher n =200
  • The graph and subsequent ANOVA demonstrates a significantly higher average satisfaction rating from first year teachers when compared to third year teachers (p<.05)
  • Highest satisfaction ratings are in the areas of:
    • Subject matter knowledge
    • Application of EALR's
  • Lowest satisfaction ratings are in the areas of:
    • Classroom management
    • Involving and collaborating with parents

Program Interpretations and Conclusions:

While this is a very low rate of return, we have already begun to implement new approaches to change it. For example, while we already have 9 credits of practicum experience not including whatever is done in the Teacher Education program, we are revising these experiences to so that students have a better opportunity to work on their classroom management skills. Even though, we do incorporate classroom management strategies specifically in two courses, students often don’t take advantage of the opportunity to learn this information. Therefore one of the practica now has our students teaching k-6 children in an evening family activity program. Classes are smaller but the problems are the same. This activity night allows our students to both teach the children but then interact with the parents who are involved in activities in another part of the building. Additionally, the other practica experiences are being examined in hopes that more relative school day experiences can be solidified. Additionally it is recommended that the teacher education preautumn experience do a better job of providing content area experiences. Students majoring in Physical Education are consistently being placed in elementary education classrooms instead of Physical Education classrooms.


Please find below a comparative analysis of candidate dispositions from beginning candidates to finishing candidates. Please comment on the changes you observe in your candidates over time and describe how and why you think this occurs. What does your program specifically do to engage candidates in developing professional teacher dispositions?

  • This inventory is administered by the CTL at admissions (N=645), and again at the end of student teaching (N= 195). Some of the 645 candidates have not yet student taught, which is why the n's are different.
  • There is a significant difference in 12 of 34 items (p<.05) between beginning candidates and candidates completing student teaching
  • Change is in the preferred direction from agree to strongly agree
  • This means somewhere between entry and before exit, the teacher program candidates are developing stronger professional beliefs and attitudes that reflect the underlying values and commitments of the unit's conceptual framework. Future work will include data that tells us where this change is occurring and if there are difference caused by demographic variables. If you want to read more about this disposition instrument, the validation study is published on the OREA web site under research.

Program Interpretations and Conclusions:

As a program that the majority of the content takes place outside of the teacher education classes and in knowing better the students who are partaking in the program, it is recommended that disposition data be collected by the content specialists. This disposition data would be more valid than data collected from faculty who don’t really know the students or who have a bias against students from different content areas. Additionally, data that is more valid will have a stronger impact on what is currently being done to improve teacher candidate ‘buy in’ to professionalism in general and specifically the conceptual framework of the CTL. It would also enhance the ability to track and see improvement since the students take a number of credits within the specific unit.

Additionally, we are looking at incorporating several repeated measures from student self assessments that are associated with professionalism literature to examine changes in candidate dispositions.



Final Student Teaching Evaluation Report on LiveText

  • The data report is too large to be placed in this document. Please access the data by going to this link on our assessment system web site
  • The report reveals the final assessment of elements found in state standards IV and V
  • Candidates are generally performing at a high level, although there are some candidates as depicted by the colors green and red who are not performing to standard.
  • Examination of those elements indicates some agreement with results provided in the 1st and 3rd year teacher survey.

Please look at these data carefully and discuss with your program faculty some ways the teacher residency program can begin to address the few but common deficits occurring in candidate knowledge and skills relative to the State standard elements. If you need to refer to state standards please refer to this link in the assessment system website:


Program Interpretations and Conclusions:

This is a very difficult item to respond to due to the plethora of data. So, 3 specific points will be made.

a) The lowest mean in the analysis were 4.29 and 4.31. This is phenomenal on a 5 point scale and likely reflects more of the way in which many schools operate and the timing of the student teaching verses a weakness in the student teachers. In the case of the 4.31 score in the involvement of parents in the learning process, it is likely more of a reflection of the placement than the student teacher. In today’s schools, including parents as part of the school community is a slow process to develop. If student teachers are placed in settings where this community doesn’t already exist, it likely won’t occur. There is limited time and an overwhelming number of items that the student teachers are working to accomplish. Of course there are numerous other possible explanations but in this case, the mean represents almost 90% of the people assessed. Other aspects of the community scored higher when the parents weren’t involved. Other means of areas that evaluated the use of parents also tended to be low.

b) The use of constructivism and constructivist strategies were very high with all of the means being a 4.5 or higher.

c) In earlier reports, classroom management was an area of weakness but in the final evaluation they are above 4.5 in all areas except when applying a specific theory to motivation. Even then the mean was only 4.34.

This report provides a tremendous peek at an enormous amount of information. Having the opportunity to examine this information as a program director is phenomenal. This data will provide a great opportunity to examine what we currently do relative to teaching classroom management, assessment and reporting strategies to name just a few. The only recommendation as the program examines this data is to find a way to create reports that are program specific.


Please examine these data and report any discussions your program has regarding the reported results.

  • This survey is conducted by Career Services and reported to OSPI. The report, however, has been reanalyzed and the summary reflects the new analysis, which covers 2002-2006.
  • Average response rate = 57%
  • Of that 57%, the average percent of graduates who get jobs in state is 94%
  • The average percent of graduate still seeking a position is 27%
  • Two percent of the 57% have decided not to teach
  • For 2005-2006; 35 % of the program graduates responded to questions regarding ethnicity and gender. Out of the 35% who responded, 90% were Caucasian, 5% were Hispanic, 3% were African-American, and 1.8% were Asian.

Program Interpretations and Conclusions:

Again, it is difficult to respond to this not knowing whether Health Education and Physical Education students are part of the group still looking for jobs. Our students are sought by numerous school districts within the state. We are constantly asked whether we have students who need teaching jobs. So, it is assumed that the 64% employment rate is low for our program. It is also difficult to tell whether there are specific programs that are more likely to be unemployed than others. This data is useful but could also be enhanced by examining it by content area.






© Central Washington University   |   All Rights Reserved