Learning Outcomes:

At the completion of baccalaureate degree studies in the Physical Education Teacher Education program, the student will:
1.    Understand physical education content and disciplinary concepts related to the development of a physically educated person (Content Knowledge);
2.    Understand how individuals learn and develop and can provide opportunities that support their physical, cognitive, social, and emotional development (Growth and Development);
3.    Understand how individuals differ in their approaches to learning and create appropriate instruction adapted to these differences (Diverse Students);
4.    Use an understanding of individual and group motivation and behavior to create a safe learning environment that encourages positive social interaction, active engagement in learning, and self-motivation (Management and Motivation);
5.    Use knowledge of effective verbal, nonverbal, and media communication techniques to enhance learning and engagement in physical activity settings (Communication);
6.    Plan and implement a variety of developmentally appropriate instructional strategies to develop physically educated individuals, based on state and national (NASPE K-12) standards (Planning and Instruction);
7.    Understand and use assessment to foster physical, cognitive, social, and emotional development of students to physical activity (Student Assessment);
8.    Be reflective practitioners who evaluate the effects of their actions on others (e.g., students, parents/guardians, fellow professionals) and seek opportunities to grow professionally (Reflection);
9.    Use information technology to enhance learning and to enhance personal and professional productivity (Technology);
10.    Foster relationships with colleagues, parents/guardians and community agencies to support students' growth and well-being (Collaboration).

These specific learning outcomes are taken from the NASPE/NCATE Standards for Beginning Physical Education Teachers (AAHPERD, 2003).

Annual Report

Since the 1998-1999 academic year, the PETE program has been transitioning from three programs into a single multi-age (PreK-12) licensure program. The 2002-2003 academic year resulted in the graduation of the first class of students under the new program. During the transition, the PETE faculty has continued to review and revise the curriculum. The PETE program has also undergone considerable change in the 2004-2006 academic years primarily due to changes in personnel. Two of the four tenured faculty in PETE have retired and another is serving full-time as the Licensure Officer in the College of EDHD. One new assistant professor was hired for the 2005-2006 academic year and two temporary instructors are also teaching fulltime in the PETE program. During the 2003-2004 academic year much time was spent developing a master assessment plan to evaluate the effectiveness of the revised PETE program in meeting each of the identified program learning outcomes (designated by NCATE). In late Fall 2004 NCATE elected to revise it’s requirements for program accreditation in PETE. Consequently most of the previous academic year’s work spent developing 3-5 assessment rubrics for each of the 10 NCATE standards was rendered useless. During 2005-2006 the intent has been to develop the 6-8 newly required NCATE program assessments. The 2005-2006 SAAC report, therefore, represents beginning efforts in piloting several assessments for select outcomes that will generate student data for program accreditation to be submitted in Fall 2007.

1.         Learning (or Service) Outcomes assessed this year: 

During the 2005-2006 academic year, the PETE program focused on the following three learning outcomes:

• Content Knowledge
• Planning and Instruction
• Technology

2.         Assessment Methods and Procedures:

The methods and procedures used to gather the assessment information for each outcome selected are as follows:

• Content Knowledge—

The content knowledge outcome was assessed by evaluating section “A”(Praxis Domain A) of the Fall 2005 intern final evaluation reports. Evaluation reports were completed for each intern by both the field and university supervisors at the end of the internship semester for Early-Middle Childhood Physical Education Internship (KNS 492) and Middle Childhood-Young Adult Physical Education Internship (KNS 497).

• Content knowledge was also assessed by looking at PETE student scores on the Praxis II: Physical Education Content Knowledge exam. Scores were obtained as a composite in the 2004-2005 Title II reports (the latest available).

• Planning and Instruction—
• The internship final evaluation reports address student planning and instruction skills, knowledge, and dispositions in the four Praxis domains: A, Content Knowledge; B, Environment; C, Teaching, and D, Teacher Professionalism. Evaluation reports were completed for each intern by both the field and university supervisors at the end of the internship semester.
• PETE faculty have developed a key assessment to evaluate lesson planning and execution. The lesson plan rubric is included at Appendix A (p. 10-11). It assesses nine components of lesson planning: Objectives, organization, teaching methods, activities/timing, task presentation, progression (accommodation & safety), feedback, assessment and reflection. Specific criteria allow each component to be scored across a three-part (5-point) scale where each component is ranked as unacceptable, acceptable and target in line with NASPE/NCATE Standards for Beginning Physical Education Teachers.
• Technology—In student teaching (KNS 492/497) and in Teaching-Learning Process in Middle Childhood-Young Adult Physical Education (KNS 472) and Teaching-Learning Process in Early-Middle Childhood Physical Education students create an electronic teaching portfolio to document the Pathwise/Praxis domains for beginning teachers. The digital video of students’ teaching highlights specific instructional domains in this portfolio. The purpose of the electronic portfolio is to provide visual documentation of teaching effectiveness. Students use QuickTime Digital Movies to demonstrate their pre-lesson preparation, effective teaching practices, post-lesson reflection, and developing professionalism as defined by the Praxis Domains and criteria (ETS, 1994).

• Inferences from Assessments:  

1.   Content Knowledge—

• Section “A” of the intern final evaluation report addresses the assessment of intern content knowledge. The four student interns in KNS 492 during Fall 2005 scored an average of 5.00 on a 5.00 scale. The nine PETE student interns in KNS 497 during Fall 2005 scored an average 4.33 on a 5.00 scale, thus, suggesting that students were successful in meeting the content knowledge outcome during their culminating student teaching experience. The interns appear to be “exemplary” (100%) at the elementary level (KNS 492) as opposed to “good” (86%) at the secondary level based on the performance criteria.
• The most current official report of student pass rates on the Physical Education Content Knowledge Test was the 2004-2005 Title II report. This report indicated that the pass rate for 18 BGSU PETE students was 77.8%. This was down from 86.7% for 2003-2004 academic year.

6.   Planning and Instruction—

• Four students were interns during Fall 2005 in KNS 492. Their composite average scores for the four Praxis Domains were as follows: Content Knowledge = 5.00; Environment = 4.75; Teaching = 4.5; and Teacher Professionalism = 5.0. All four areas were out of a possible five points with four being “Good” and five being “Exemplary.” The students averaged 96% on the four Praxis teaching Domains. They scored in the target range based on the NASPE/NCATE guidelines.
• Nine students were interns during Fall 2005 in KNS 497. Their composite average scores for the four Praxis Domains were as follows: Content Knowledge = 4.33; Environment = 4.56; Teaching  = 4.33; and Teacher Professionalism = 4.44. All four areas were out of a possible five points with four being “Good” and five being “Exemplary.” The students averaged 88% on the four Praxis teaching Domains. They scored in the acceptable range based on the NASPE/NCATE guidelines.
• The key assessment for lesson planning has provided some important data. Four students were interns during Fall 2005 in KNS 492. Their composite percentage scores for the nine lesson plan criteria were as follows: Objectives = 96%, organization = 98%, teaching methods = 95%, activities/timing = 94%, task presentation 97%, progression (accommodation & safety) = 90%, feedback = 95%, assessment = 96% and reflection = 98%. The overall percentage for all categories was 96%. On this assessment the interns in KNS 492 all scored in the target range for NASPE/NCATE guidelines.
• Ten students were interns during Fall 2005 in KNS 497. Their composite percentage scores for the nine lesson plan criteria were as follows: Objectives = 85%, organization = 78%, teaching methods = 81%, activities/timing = 82%, task presentation 75%, progression (accommodation & safety) = 86%, feedback = 76%, assessment = 77% and reflection = 80%. The overall percentage for all categories was 80%. On this assessment the interns in KNS 497 all scored in the acceptable range for NASPE/NCATE guidelines. However, the assessment revealed some specific individual lesson plan areas as unacceptable (i.e., below the 80% cut-off for acceptability).

10.   Technology—

• The data obtained from the electronic portfolio assessment indicate that composite average scores for the four Praxis Domains for students in KNS 492 (Fall 2005) were as follows: Content Knowledge = 4.9; Environment for Student Learning= 4.95; Teaching = 4.95; and Teacher Professionalism = 4.875. All four areas were out of a possible five points with four being “Good” and five being “Exemplary.” The students averaged 98% on the four Praxis teaching Domains. Scoring in the target range for NASPE/NCATE guidelines.
•  The data obtained from the electronic portfolio assessment indicate that composite average scores for the four Praxis Domains for students in KNS 497 (Fall 2005) were as follows: Content Knowledge = 4.57; Environment for Student Learning= 4.67; Teaching = 4.09; and Teacher Professionalism = 4.25. All four areas were out of a possible five points with four being “Good” and five being “Exemplary.” The students averaged 88% on the four Praxis teaching Domains. Scoring in the acceptable range for NASPE/NCATE guidelines.

• Actions Taken/Program Improvements: 

1.   Content Knowledge—

• PETE/KNS faculty will continue to emphasize students’ understanding of content knowledge in planning and teaching to maintain and facilitate even higher evaluation in section “A” of the final internship report. The faculty is pleased, however, that students scored in the “good” to “exemplary” range. Additional assessments for movement performance will also be included in the master assessment plan to provide additional verification of student success in this area beginning in Fall 2006.
• The PETE faculty is very concerned regarding the passing rate of PETE students on the 2004-2005 Praxis II Physical Education Content Knowledge exams (most recent data provided). Currently, program scores are below the 80% threshold that is required for a program to be assessed in order to receive national program recognition. In order to address this problem several steps have been taken. Typically, PETE students take Praxis II around the time of student teaching. The faculty believes that a portion of the problem is related to standardized test-taking skills. Tutorial efforts have been undertaken during the PETE student teaching seminar to increase student success rates. A number of resources (web-based e.g., P.E. Praxis and texts e.g., Barron’s) have been suggested to students to aid their exam revision. Movement foundations faculty have also been provided with examples of resource materials during a Kinesiology Division meeting in Spring 2006. The Praxis II examination in Physical education is based around six categories: (i) Fundamental Movements, Motor Development, and Motor Learning, (ii) Movement Forms, (iii) Fitness and Exercise Science, (iv) Social Science Foundations, (v) Biomechanics and (vi) Health and Safety. PETE students have typically performed worst in the categories containing motor learning and motor development and biomechanics based on information derived from a table of physical education category scores provided for the past four years. As of spring 2006 KNS 200 level courses in Motor Development for Physical Educators and Coaches (KNS 240), Principles of Motor Skill Acquisition (KNS 250), and Biomechanics for Teachers, Performers and Coaches (KNS 270) were eliminated. PETE students will now have three additional, hours added to their check-sheets and take Motor Development across the Lifespan (KNS 340), Motor Learning (KNS 350) and Biomechanics of Human Movement (KNS 370) as 300 level classes in an attempt to facilitate better performance on the Praxis II examination.
• It would also be helpful to have full-time tenure track faculty to replace those that have been lost in PETE over the past few years. One assistant professor appointment was made for the 2005-2006 academic year with another to follow for the 2006-2007 academic year. It is difficult to cover the PETE service responsibilities of three tenured faculty members with temporary instructors as diligent as these instructors may be.

6.   Planning and Instruction—

• Although all Internship Final Evaluation Report composite scores fell within the “Good” to “Exemplary” range, PETE faculty will continue to encourage students to strive for even higher levels of competence.
• It is interesting to note that the average score for Praxis Domain C (Teaching) for the intern final evaluation reports was the lowest score among all four Praxis domains for both elementary = 4.5 (KNS 492) and secondary = 4.33 (KNS 497) student interns. This data is noteworthy in light of the results from the Praxis III analysis (2004-05) provided by the State for Physical Education Teacher Education. The data from the State showed that BGSU PETE graduates scored the lowest on Domain C (Teaching). In the Teaching domain PETE was tied with a rank of 14 out of the 16 BGSU programs reported in the Praxis III analysis of teachers. In each of the other Praxis III domains (Content knowledge, Environment for Student Learning and Teacher professionalism) PETE was ranked 5 out of the 16 BGSU programs reported in the Praxis III analysis.
• The key assessment for lesson planning also revealed several weaknesses among PETE students who were interns at the secondary level (KNS 497). The average for all categories was 80% with interns scoring below 80% (unacceptable) on teaching categories that included: task presentation (75%), feedback (76%) and assessment (77%).
• In light of this information on Praxis III from the State and data generated from our own assessments in Planning and Instruction PETE faculty will focus on improving these teaching categories located in Praxis Domain C (Teaching) by utilizing specific clinical supervision instruments designed to improve task presentation, feedback and assessment during the course Teaching-Learning Process in Middle Childhood-Young Adult Physical Education (KNS 472) in 2006-07. This should better orient preservice teachers to these instructional behaviors prior to their internship experiences.

Technology—

In addition to the outcomes assessed above, the PETE program asks its majors to complete two reflective activities, which provided general information about the PETE program. One of these activities was added in Spring 2004 at the request of the Research and Field Experiences Office. The new activity has interns provide a summary reflection on the student teaching experience. The other activity is a PETE program exit survey that students have been submitting for the last seven years as a culminating assessment. The survey has been the motivation for many of the changes made to the PETE program and continues to provide insights not gained through other program assessments. The findings from these reflective activities are summarized below.

PETE students completing their internships and ending their professional development/licensure program are generally well pleased with the quality of their program. They indicate that they appreciate the positive external reputation that the program has. Those who plan to teach in Ohio or in other states that use the Praxis III assessments during their teaching entry year indicate that they feel confident that they will be successful in documenting their effectiveness as a beginning teacher. Other positive comments addressed:

• Personal growth in confidence to deal with classroom management issues;
• Learning to balance teacher professionalism and rapport with students;
• Teaching students as opposed to teaching just the content;
• Learning alternative curricular approaches (Movement Approach—games, dance, gymnastics, Games for Understanding, Sport Education);
• Acquiring the ability to give/explain clear goals and procedures;
• Development of the ability to adjust lessons to meet the needs of the students;
• How to work with colleagues and to research and develop new ideas and the need to continue to do this including attending professional development conferences;
• Although at the time they did not like the degree of planning required by the program, they now realize that extensive planning (lesson and unit) resulted in more confidence as teachers;
• Expressed appreciation for movement foundations classes in providing a strong background for the development of a personal teaching philosophy;
• Have learned to observe students (understand students’ developmental levels), refine movement, and plan and adjust movement tasks to help students become skillful;
• Awareness of the teacher they wanted to be through reflective assignments/opportunities;
• Preservice teachers value the accessibility of PETE faculty to discuss teaching ideas and potential resources in person and via email prior to and during teaching internship experiences. PETE faculty, in general, appear to adopt a very caring attitude to their students and content areas.

Several students mentioned that they had two primary fears:

• Not having enough equipment/space to provide optimal learning experiences for their students and a concern about facing students who are insufficiently motivated.

In terms of suggestions for improvement, students indicated that they would like a longer opportunity to teach in a supervised environment in a greater variety of school types (e.g., more urban teaching experiences) prior to student teaching. Other comments made regarding areas needing improvement included:

• Greater focus on classroom management issues and strategies for behavior management;
• Several students questioned the disconnect between the separation of health and physical education at the state and university levels, yet the required combination of these areas in many schools; BGSU needs to address this issue;
• Wanted extended practicum experiences, perhaps over multiple semesters;
• Desired a more helpful course rotation that allowed students to finish in four years without going to summer school to catch-up;
• More classes in teaching fitness/weight training;
• Expressed the perception that the number of foundations classes needed to be reduced and more focus placed on application and less on theory

Based on student exit surveys, it was also clear that students understand the need for continued professional learning and know strategies to remain active, competent, and effective professionals. PETE majors express concern about job opportunities and politics associated with employment in schools, but also express optimism regarding their role in the education of children.

As has been done in the past, the PETE faculty will use the information learned from the current year assessments to guide program decisions for the future. It is anticipated that the addition of other program outcome assessments beginning in the Fall of 2006 will provide expanded understandings that may further enhance the quality of the PETE program.

Click here to download a Word document containing the appendices.