2009 report on the preparation of new teachers by University System of Georgia institutions [2010]

Annual Report 2009
Report on the Preparation of New Teachers by
University System of Georgia Institutions

Cover photo: Macon State elementary education major works with young student while student teaching. Photo by Sheron Smith, Macon State College

Table of Contents
Map of USG Teacher Preparation Programs........................................................................................................i
Executive Summary.............................................................................................................................................1
Educator Recruitment and Preparation................................................................................................................2 Contributing to workforce needs............................................................................................................2 Production growth..................................................................................................................................3 Underrepresented populations................................................................................................................4 Preparation routes...................................................................................................................................4 Preparation routes for minorities............................................................................................................5 Preparation by subject areas...................................................................................................................5 Math and science teacher production.....................................................................................................7 Middle school concentrations.................................................................................................................7 Recruitment efforts.................................................................................................................................8 Online program delivery........................................................................................................................9
Teacher Retention Retention rates......................................................................................................................................10 Map of new teacher distribution...........................................................................................................10
Teacher Retraining Endorsements and professional development......................................................................................12
Customer Satisfaction Surveys Employer survey...................................................................................................................................13 Graduate survey....................................................................................................................................14
APPENDICES
Appendix A: University System of Georgia teacher preparation institutions ..................................................15 Appendix B: Regents' principles for the preparation and actions of teachers for the schools..........................17 Appendix C: Data profiles.................................................................................................................................18 Appendix D: Distribution of 2008 new USG-prepared teachers in 2009 Georgia classrooms.........................22 Appendix E: USG graduate and employer survey summary.............................................................................24

USG Institutions with Teacher Preparation Programs

Institutions with operating teacher preparation programs

Albany State University

Armstrong Atlantic State University

Augusta State University Clayton State University College of Coastal Georgia *

Dalton State College Dalton

North Georgia College & State University Dahlonega

Columbus State University

Dalton State College

Gainesville State College

Kennesaw State University

Gainesville

Kennesaw

Georgia Gwinnett College

Fort Valley State University Gainesville State College

Southern Polytechnic State University Marietta

Lawrenceville University of Georgia Athens

Georgia State University

Georgia College & State University

Atlanta Clayton State University

Augusta State University Augusta

Georgia Gwinnett College*

University of West Georgia Carrollton

Morrow

Georgia Southern University

Gordon College Barnesville

Georgia College & State University Milledgeville

Georgia Southwestern State University

Macon State College Macon

Georgia State University

Fort Valley State University Fort Valley

Gordon College Kennesaw State University Macon State College Middle Georgia College *

Columbus State University Columbus
Georgia Southwestern State University Americus

Middle Georgia College Cochran

Georgia Southern University Statesboro

Savannah State University Savannah

Armstrong Atlantic State University Savannah

North Georgia College & State University

University of Georgia University of West Georgia

Albany State University Albany

College of Coastal Georgia Brunswick

Valdosta State University

Institutions with programs under development

Valdosta State University Valdosta

Savannah State University

Southern Polytechnic State University

* Programs pending developmental approval by Georgia Professional Standards Commission i

Executive Summary
In 2009, the Office of Educator Preparation, Innovation, and Research (EPIR) welcomed the challenge to lead USG institutions in meeting 80% of Georgia's need for high quality teachers by the year 2020.
As has been the case across the state and nation, 2009 was a challenging year. Despite significant budget challenges and demanding accreditation and reporting requirements, USG institutions have demonstrated impressive gains through strong leadership, innovative collaborations, effective use of data for strategic planning, and growing partnerships with K-12 schools. Indicators used to measure progress include 1) the degree to which institutions are recruiting and producing new teachers, 2) the degree to which they are producing teachers who stay in the profession, and 3) the degree to which they support teacher professional development or additional endorsements. USG institutions embrace the potential of a statewide longitudinal data system which is being designed to provide a reliable and valid analysis of teacher effectiveness in Georgia's classrooms.
USG institutions are consistently preparing teachers who have higher one- and two-year retention rates than their peers who were prepared at non-USG programs. Because these teachers stay longer, K-12 students benefit from increased teaching expertise. To this end, EPIR congratulates USG institutions for their hard work, commitment to excellence, and their conviction that all of Georgia's K-12 students deserve an effective teacher.
This 2009 report presents evidence of this success. For example:
.USG strategically added preparation programs at nine USG institutions in the last five years designed to serve specific regional needs for teachers.
.USG institutions demonstrated impressive increases of new, high quality teachers by 72% from 2002 to 2009.
USG institutions are producing outstanding results in increasing the diversity of the teacher workforce, increasing the number of non-white teachers by 98% over the last five years.
.USG institutions diversified the type and manner of delivery for teacher preparation to appeal to a wider audience and attract more prospective teachers. Nearly 30% of all new USG teachers were prepared in a non-traditional, non-baccalaureate program in 2009.
.Though the number of teachers being prepared in math and science has remained steady over the last three years, USG institutions have focused and increased their attention on the number and types of strategies for recruiting, preparing, and supporting math and science students.
USG institutions continue to provide licensing endorsements to teachers in high need areas. As many endorsements are in reading, USG teachers receiving this additional training are even better equipped to meet the literacy needs of our students.
1

Educator Recruitment and Preparation
To meet the "20,000 by 2020" goal of providing 80% of Georgia's need for teachers by the year 2020, the Office of Educator Preparation, Innovation and Research (EPIR) has used three key strategies:
Increase the number of USG teacher preparation programs Broaden the target market for new teachers Develop innovative delivery program
These three strategies explicitly support educator preparation programs at USG institutions in order to gain increases in:
The number of avenues available for Georgians who wish to become certified teachers; The number of newly prepared teachers; and, The number of new teachers from ethnically diverse groups, non-traditional students, and working professionals.
USG teacher preparation programs contribute to Georgia's teacher workforce needs
The Office of Educator Preparation, Innovation, and Research (EPIR) encouraged and supported increases in the number of institutions approved to prepare teachers in the USG system. As such, the number of teacher preparation programs has increased dramatically in recent years bringing to 24 (see map) the total number of USG institutions currently preparing or about to begin preparing teachers, with nine of those institutions developing programs since 2004:
2004: Dalton Sate College
2005: Georgia Gwinnett College and Macon State College
2006: Gainesville State College and Gordon College
2008: College of Coastal Georgia and Middle Georgia College
In 2009, EPIR supported Savannah State College and Southern Polytechnic State College in exploring the potential of offering targeted teacher preparation programs on their campuses.
The strategy is producing results--these institutions are contributing in meaningful ways to the number and quality of teachers prepared. For example, Gordon College produced 28 teachers with its first cohort of dually prepared Early Childhood/Special Education teachers, and Dalton College and Macon State each have shown increases in teacher production over the last two years. Dalton increased its teacher production from 59 to 87 (a 47% increase) and Macon from 49 to 84 (a 71% increase). EPIR will continue to support and leverage these new programs to ensure both the quantity and quality of their teachers.
2

USG teacher production continues to climb
Across all teacher preparation programs, the USG system produced 4,573 teachers in 2009--a 72% increase since 2002 and an 8% increase over last year alone.

Number of teachers produced

5000 4500 4000 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000
500 0

2660 2002

3157 2999

3500

3968

3822

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

72% increase in 7 years

4236

4573

2008 2009

Number of new teachers produced at USG institutions

Five USG institutions, with long-standing highly respected teacher preparation programs, consistently continue to make large contributions to overall teacher production. Together, they prepared approximately 62% of the teachers from USG institutions as outlined below:



Kennesaw State University - 592 teachers;



Georgia State University - 471 teachers;



University of Georgia - 657 teachers;



University of West Georgia - 409 teachers;



Georgia Southern University - 338 teachers; and



Valdosta State University- 366 teachers.

It is important to note that in addition to preparing teachers, USG institutions contribute to the larger educator workforce in Georgia by producing school professionals for other vital roles and for many specialty areas. Of the 24 institutions approved to prepare teachers,



11 prepare educational leaders for an initial certificate in leadership;



9 prepare school counselors;



7 prepare school media specialists; and,



5 prepare speech language pathologists.

Of course, many USG institutions also produce graduates who work in non-certified positions.

3

Educator Recruitment and Preparation
USG institutions attract underrepresented populations into teaching
Georgia's schools have a great need for teachers of both genders from ethnically and professionally diverse groups. The production of minority teachers is rising at impressive rates. In fact, the number of non-white teachers produced has increased 98% since 2005, and in 2009 represented nearly 25% of all teachers, among the best in the nation. Further, the growth of minority teacher production has outpaced overall teacher production resulting in teachers who are more representative of the communities in which they live and work (see Appendix C for historical tables).
98%
Number of new minority teachers produced at USG institutions
USG institutions offer options for Georgians who want to teach
Persons seeking their initial certificate for teaching now have a variety of options. The bar graph on the following page shows the percentage of teachers produced in each option. The `traditional route' to certification includes those students who want to seek a bachelor's degree while becoming a teacher. While students who want to teach elementary school or middle school or want to work with special populations get degrees in education, students who seek to teach high school subjects, such as English or mathematics, receive undergraduate degrees in their disciplinary major (e.g., mathematics) while concurrently obtaining the preparation they need to teach high school students. This route is the most popular and produces the most teachers in the state and the nation (approximately 70% of USG-prepared teachers). Recognizing the need for multiple options, many campuses offer non-traditional routes to certification for students who either want to seek a post-baccalaureate degree while becoming a teacher or work towards a nondegree option. The latter route is often selected by working professionals who want to become teachers without taking all of the courses necessary to receive a degree. These programs vary from institution to institution and are responsible for about 30% of USG's teacher production.
4

Traditional vs. non-traditional routes
USG innovation is one key to increasing minority teachers
As the USG creates more innovative options for preparing teachers, it is important to consider the fact that, while 30% of teachers, generally, complete non-traditional programs, 44% of non-white teachers completed a non-traditional program. Strategically, USG will continue to incubate and support creative thinking about nontraditional teacher preparation programs at USG institutions in an effort to continue attracting minorities to the teaching profession.
Further, while eight institutions reported that 25% of their teachers were non-white (see Appendix C), the USG is committed to fostering collaboration among teacher preparation programs with strategies that have proven effective in recruiting and preparing minority teachers.
USG institutions strive to meet diverse needs of schools across Georgia
In order to meet the range of needs that schools and districts have across the state, USG institutions offer certification in a wide range of areas (e.g., biology or history) and/or at different levels (e.g., elementary versus middle school) and/or for different student populations (e.g., students with health impairments or with cognitive disabilities).
Percentage of teachers prepared in 2009 in six major areas
5

Educator Recruitment and Preparation

The Birth through Five program offered at the University of Georgia certifies personnel to work with special needs children in the earliest years of life. These educators work in schools, hospitals, and a variety of other settings to help families and others work with their special needs child. These teachers represent 2% of new USG teachers in 2009.
Just over one-third (37%) of teachers were prepared to teach students in grades kindergarten through five in a variety of subject areas. They also receive intensive training to teach students reading and literacy skills and to understand the important developmental needs of students at this age.
Approximately 12% of teachers were prepared to provide instruction to students in grades 4-8 in two subject areas. Middle grades teachers are prepared to provide instruction in reading and also in two of four subject areas (English, mathematics, science, social studies).
Approximately 13% of teachers were recommended for certification in special education, allowing a teacher to work with students in grades kindergarten through 12th grade who have special learning needs. In addition to any number of potential teaching assignments, these teachers also often provide the support needed in schools to modify instruction to meet the needs of individual students.
Approximately 20% of students were recommended to teach in high schools. Of these, approximately half are certified to teach in the humanities, (e.g., English and history) and about 5% are certified in an area of business (e.g., economics and computer science).

Partnerships at work: 4-year & 2-year institutions
collaborate
Clayton State University (CSU) recently established a partnership agreement with Atlanta Metropolitan College (AMC) to bridge the education program between the state university and the two-year college. The purpose is to provide a cohort of approximately 20 AMC students with access to upperdivision courses while enrolled during their final semester. The cohort will then transfer to CSU to complete the fouryear baccalaureate degree in middle level education. Currently, the partnership is designed to graduate mathematics and science teachers. Faculty members from the Department of Mathematics, Department of Natural Sciences, and Department of Teacher Education will participate. All middle level education students will have completed 900 field hours by the time they finish their program of study. All field hours are completed in schools located throughout our partnership districts (Clayton, DeKalb, Henry, Fayette, Fulton, Rockdale, and Spalding Counties)

The balance of teachers (just under 20%) were prepared to teach in a P-12 area of certification, which is for teachers who teach subjects applicable for students in all grades (kindergarten through twelfth grade) such as physical education, art, and music.

Of course, many USG institutions also produce teachers to work in specialty areas (such as agriculture) or with special student populations (such as those with learning disabilities and/or physical disabilities). For example, specialized programs exist at Valdosta State for teachers to meet the needs of students who are deaf or hearing impaired and at the University of Georgia for teachers of students with autism.

6

USG institutions hold gains in mathematics and science teacher production

The number of teachers prepared to teach mathematics and scientific disciplines has remained steady since 2005. Approximately

Partnerships at work:

3% of all USG teachers are prepared to teach a scientific discipline STEM education professional

and about 15% to teach mathematics. Given the need for increased

development

numbers of STEM teachers, the USG has become very intentional

about identifying strategies to generate increases in these key areas. One major initiative is the USG STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) Initiative, which works, in part, to create the conditions necessary for students to succeed in STEM majors. Although the initiative is only in its second year, enrollment in the STEM majors at the eleven institutions that participate in the STEM Initiative has grown 11% since 2008. Increase in the number and success rates of students in these disciplines seeds the pipeline for future science and mathematics teachers.

At Georgia College and State University, STEM Partnership work has included the Science and Mathematics Alliance for Regional Teachers (SMART) Institute for teachers of science and math for the past five summers. The primary ownership for this program is in Arts & Sciences, in collaboration with the College of

Education and Oconee RESA. Other promising developments include supporting the continuance

and new development of online "franchise" programs, using Geor-

gia on My Line, to certify math and science teachers at the second-

ary level. This includes one current program started in 2009 that

is 100% online and combines the best expertise of five USG institutions in these areas. Students take courses

online and are supervised for their clinical experiences by appropriate faculty at an institution closest to them.

The institutions offering the online program include Columbus State University, Georgia Southern University,

Kennesaw State University, University of West Georgia, and Valdosta State University.

Middle school concentration areas
Virtually all of USG educator preparation programs produce teachers for the middle grades, and of the 4,573 new teachers, 533 (or 7.6%) received training in middle grades education.
While all middle school majors must have a reading concentration, they also must choose two additional concentration areas from language arts, social science, mathematics, or science.
Of the 533 middle school teachers prepared by the USG, approximately 75% received certification in at least one area of math and/or science.

Percentage of middle school science and/or math vs. other certifications

7

Educator Recruitment and Preparation

USG supports recruiting talented future teachers throughout the state

Recruiting talented students into teaching as a profession is a critical priority. To that end, USG institutions:

often support local future educator auxiliaries in local high schools (such as Future Educators of America) and

actively work across disciplines to encourage faculty and advisors to recommend that outstanding students consider teaching as a viable career option as they work on completing their core curriculum.

At the USG system office, the Office of Educator Preparation, Innovation, and Research (EPIR) fosters and supports these efforts. Examples of this support are listed below.

Articulation agreements allow high school students to receive college credit toward a future degree related to teaching. For example, the Peach State Education Pathway is a program under the Georgia Department of Education's Career, Technical, and Agricultural division. Two of the pathways include Early Childhood and Teaching as a Profession. Through these pathways, students can get a head start on preparing for their career as a teacher.

The USG STEM Initiative offered Academies for Future Teachers on six college campuses in summer 2009. The objective was to attract rising high school seniors into teaching and specifically into teaching math or science. The academies hosted 162 students (120 more students than in 2008).

The Destination Teaching web site is a one-stop shop for Georgians who want more information about teaching. The web site was designed to attract and inform adult career changers who might consider teaching. In 2009, it received over one million hits and attracted 34,000 unique visitors. Of those visitors who contacted EPIR and submitted demographic information, 22% were male, 72% were over the age of 30, and were of diverse races.

Ages of Destination Teaching visitors in percentages

Ethnicity of Destination Teaching visitors in percentages 8

Partnerships at work: GOML Masters of Arts in Teaching
The Master of Arts in Teaching (MAT) with Teacher Certification Options in Mathematics, Biology, Chemistry, Physics, and Earth/Space Science at the Secondary Level is collaboratively offered by five USG institutions: Columbus State University, Georgia Southern University, Kennesaw State University, University of West Georgia, and Valdosta State University through the innovative use of technology--specifically Georgia ONmyLINE.
The degree combines online coursework with practicum experiences in middle and high schools and leads to initial certification at the T-5 level. Certification will be at the secondary level (grades 6-12) in mathematics education or in the specific area of science selected. This program targets career changers who are interested in entering the teaching profession and who possess the prerequisite educational background in science, technology, engineering, mathematics, or a related field.

Innovations in program delivery

GeorgiaONmyLINE provides access to a full array of online and distance education offerings from the 35 colleges and universities in the University System of Georgia. Collaborative programs have been developed specifically for teacher preparation. Enrollment rates with an increase of 1,558% clearly demonstrate the demand for this innovative approach to teacher preparation.

Collaborative online teacher preparation programs through GeorgiaONmyLINE target potential and experienced teachers for high need subject areas, including the following:
Math
Sciences
Language and Literacy Education
English for Speakers of Other
Language (ESOL)
Special Education

Program enrollment numbers

2000 1800 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200
0

110
Spring 2008

508
Summer 2008

769
Fall 2008

1146

1824 1417

Spring 2009

Summer 2009

Fall 2009

Course enroUllSmGeTneatcthherroPurgephaGraetioorngainadOCNermtiyLcaItNioEn Programs
o ered through GeorgiaONmyLINE

9

Teacher Retention
Educators often refer to the problem of teacher workforce shortages as "the leaky bucket." Thus, no matter how many teachers are prepared each year, if teachers leave the profession too quickly (within the first two years), schools will face a deficit of teachers to fill positions. To that end, USG's success with retention is also a success for the state economy, for schools, and for teachers and their students.
USG institutions prepare educators who are more likely to stay in the profession.
A second strategy for enabling the USG to meet 80% of the state's need for teachers by 2020 is to ensure that these teachers have "staying power." To do this, USG programs must prepare teachers that are not only equipped with the content knowledge they need, but the instructional toolkit to reach all types of learners and the professional abilities necessary to be successful in any workplace.

Legend 0 1 - 23 24 - 50 51 - 93 94 - 220
Distribution of new 2008 USG-prepared teachers who were teaching in Georgia's public schools in AY 2009

Partnerships at work: Professional development
High retention rates for teachers require teachers who are well prepared to enter the classroom and who received professional support and continued training while in the classroom.
In the fall of 2009, Clark County School District opened a new elementary school, J.J. Harris Elementary, as a Professional Development School (PDS) in collaboration with the UGA College of Education. Using the model that has been adopted by both NCATE and the National Association of Professional Development Schools, the J.J. Harris PDS is focused on improving the education of children by improving the preparation of new teachers, providing support to practicing teachers and encouraging joint inquiry projects.

10

School districts throughout the state hire USG-prepared teachers with the intention of retaining these teachers in their classrooms. They understand that it is more expensive to train a new teacher than to retain an existing teacher. A high quality teacher requires resources during their first two years. These resources may include professional development about the specific district's curriculum, assessment practices, or student policies.
The map on the preceding page illustrates where USG teachers, prepared during the 2007-2008 academic year, were employed. Virtually every district in Georgia hired a teacher from a USG educator preparation program.
The one year retention rates for USG-prepared teachers in Georgia's public schools are impressive--around 95%. Compare this to the national average: only 83% remained after the first year, and of those without any previous full-time teaching experience, approximately on 66% remained in the profession.
Throughout the first two years, the quality of a teacher's preparation affects his or her ability to cope and, subsequently, develop into a seasoned professional. In the second year of teaching, USG prepared teachers continue to outperform their non-USG counterparts. Of teachers who were recommended for certification at the end of the 2005-2006 academic year and began teaching during the 2006-2007 year, approximately 89% were still teaching two years later.

One and Two Year Reten.on Rates in Percentages

2005 completers 2005 completers 2006 completers 2006 completers 2007 completers

1 year retention 2 year retention 1 year retention 2 year retention 1 year retention

Albany State University

97

97

99

99

96

Armstrong Atlantic State University

91

88

93

87

94

Augusta State University

97

92

93

91

89

Clayton State University

97

97

96

92

92

Columbus State University

97

89

91

87

90

Dalton State College

NEW PROGRAMS NO DATA

Fort Valley State University

100

83

96

96

67

Georgia College & State University

97

94

94

90

92

Georgia Southern University

96

93

97

90

95

Georgia Southwestern State University

98

95

96

94

94

Georgia State University

92

82

94

87

95

Gordon College

NEW PROGRAMS NO DATA

Kennesaw State University

95

89

95

88

92

Macon State College

NEW PROGRAMS NO DATA

North Georgia College & State University

95

93

94

92

96

University of Georgia

94

85

93

83

91

University of West Georgia

97

93

97

93

94

Valdosta State University

95

91

94

91

97

All USG Institutions*

95

90

94

89

94

Retention rate percentages for USG-prepared teachers

11

Educator Retraining
In order for USG to meet 80% of the state's need for teachers by 2020, not only must we recruit and prepare new teachers, as well as produce teachers who stay in the profession, we also must support teachers who want development and training. Whether it is professional development or the addition of other certification areas and/or endorsements, USG and its institutions must support Georgia's teachers who seek to improve their teaching or expand the number of areas in which they are certified to teach.
USG institutions support professional development
Schools and districts use a variety of sources to provide professional development for their teachers; however, one of the most oft called upon resources is faculty and administrators from USG educator preparation programs. Because close relationships exist between teacher preparation programs and schools, principals who need expertise on best practices in algebra instruction, for example, often call on a faculty member with whom they have a good relationship and from whom they have hired quality teacher preparation students.
USG institutions help teachers gain endorsements
USG institutions help educators obtain retraining and expansion of content area expertise through providing the coursework and clinical experiences necessary to receive additional endorsements. For example, in 2009, 918 teachers completed endorsements in a variety of areas with reading endorsements being the most frequently sought (35%). It is important to note that in 2009, endorsements in leadership were eliminated as part of a statewide effort to increase the quality of school leaders. The Education Specialist degree is now the entry degree for the leadership certificate.
(K-5)
Subject areas for endorsements in 2009 12

Customer Satisfaction

USG is an active participant in the development of a statewide P-20 longitudinal data system which will ensure valid and reliable means of tracking teachers from their point of preparation into the classroom and will, in turn, provide appropriate measures of their effectiveness with student achievement. Until such data are available, the system and campuses rely on the best proxy data available, namely input from the employers and the new teachers themselves.

USG institutions receive excellent marks from school principals and from graduates

USG institutions are committed to quality as a poor teacher can have disastrous consequences for student achievement. Thus, EPIR leads in the development, analysis, and dissemination of two surveys each year: one of employers and one of graduates. Employers are largely principals in Georgia's public schools, and graduates are those who completed the program in the previous academic year. Overall, these two groups of stakeholders hold USG programs and their graduates in high regard.

Highlights of 2009 USG employer survey

Principals responded to questions about a particular teacher or teachers in their school and rated each teacher. The rating indicated the degree to which the principal agreed with statements about the teacher's abilities in six categories: (1) Content and Curriculum; (2) Knowledge of Students, Teaching, and Learning; (3) Learning Environments; (4) Classroom, Program, and School-Wide Assessment; (5) Planning and Instruction; and (6) Professionalism.

In AY 2009, 413 principals responded to survey questions for 778 of their teachers, which is up from 458 last year. The overall response rate was 32.7%.
Across 28 indicators of teacher abilities, principals were overwhelmingly in agreement that USG prepared teachers were able to perform key functions necessary for effective teaching. The overall range of agreement to survey items was 82% to 100%. (Appendix E)

Principals agreed 97% of the time that the USG-prepared teacher was able to demonstrate "broad, current, and specialized knowledge in their field." Further, 95% indicated the USG-prepared teacher was able to "integrate technology and other multimedia resources appropriately to maximize learning opportunities for all students."

98.8% of principals responded they would hire teachers from USG educator preparation programs.

CONTENT AND CURRICULUM

Percent Agreement

Percent Disagreement

Demonstrate broad, current, and specialized knowledge in my field(s).

97.0

3.0

Understand and use content and pedagogical knowledge that is ap-

95.4

4.5

propriate for diverse learners.

Interpret and construct school, district, and programmatic curricula that

95.6

4.0

reflect state and national content area standards.

Employer perceptions of content and curriculum knowledge of USG-prepared teachers 13

Customer Satisfaction

Highlights of 2009 USG graduate survey
Graduates also rated their USG educator preparation programs highly. There were 684 graduates who responded to the survey for a response rate of 22%. These respondents rated the quality of their program across 33 items in the same six categories as noted above. Additional questions for graduates assess aspects such as their ability to "stay current in their field" or "support literacy development in their students."
On 30 items, graduates agreed more than 90% of the time that they felt their USG preparation program adequately prepared them to perform key functions necessary for effective teaching. The overall range of agreement to survey items was 82% to 100% (Appendix E).
Nearly 100% of graduates felt they were able to demonstrate "broad, current, and specialized knowledge in their field."
98% felt they were prepared to relate their field to other areas of the school and to everyday life.
94.2% of teachers would recommend their USG educator preparation program to their peers.

KNOWLEDGE OF STUDENTS, TEACHING AND LEARNING

1. I hold high expectations for all because I believe that everyone can learn at high levels.
2. I demonstrate an understanding of how students develop and learn. 3. I am confident in my ability to work with students identified as needing
special education services.
4. I communicate effectively with students from diverse cultural backgrounds.

Percent Agreement 95.7 99.3 82.3
97.8

Percent Disagreement
4.3 .7 17.7
2.2

5. I use the best professional practices to meet the needs of diverse learners.

98.0

2.2

6. I understand how factors inside and outside of school may influence students' lives and learning.
7. I establish respectful and productive relationships with families and communities to support student learning.

99.6

.4

98.0

2.0

USG graduate perceptions of knowledge of students, teaching and learning

Agreement between the two groups clearly speaks to the quality of USG educator preparation programs. Across items that were common to both surveys, employers and graduates were consistently within 5% percentage points of one another. Thus, 99% of teacher respondents felt they were prepared to understand how students develop and learn, and 95% of employers agreed that their teachers had that ability, as well.

Conclusion
University System of Georgia institutions continue to make great strides in improving the quality and number of teachers prepared for Georgia schools. The USG remains committed to innovating, leveraging and evaluating the "power of the system" in ensuring the preparation of highly effective teachers. Working collaboratively with other state agencies, the USG remains committed to a policy environment that fosters innovation and ensures quality.

14

Appendix A - USG Educator Preparation Institutions *

Albany State University 504 College Drive Albany, GA 31705-2717 Wilburn Campbell 229-430-1718 wilburn.campbell@asurams.edu

Dalton State College 650 College Drive Dalton, GA 30720 Merry Lue Boggs 706-272- 2362 mboggs@daltonstate.edu

Armstrong Atlantic State University 11935 Abercorn Street Savannah, GA 31419-1997 Patricia Wachholz 912-344-2797 Patricia.Wachholz@armstrong.edu

Fort Valley State University 1005 State University Drive Fort Valley, GA 31030-4313 Judy Carter 478-825-6365 carterj02@fvsu.edu

Augusta State University 2500 Walton Way Augusta, GA 30904-2200 Gordon Eisenman 706-737-1499 geisenman@aug.edu

Gainesville State College P.O. Box 1358 Gainesville, GA 30503 Maryellen Cosgrove 678-717-3482 mcosgrove@gsc.edu

Clayton State University 2000 Clayton State Boulevard Morrow, GA 30260-0285 Carla Monroe 678-466-4743 carlamonroe@clayton.edu

Georgia College & State University PO Box 23 Milledgeville, GA 31061 Linda Irwin-Devitis 478-445-4546 Linda.irwin-devitis@gcsu.edu

*College of Coastal Georgia 3700 Altama Avenue Brunswick, GA 31520 Kent Layton 912-279-5720 klayton@CCGA.EDU

*Georgia Gwinnett College 1000 University Center Lane Lawrenceville, GA 30043 Cathy Moore 678-407-5837 cmoore@ggc.usg.edu

Columbus State University 4225 University Avenue Columbus, GA 31907-5645 David Rock 706 568-2212 rock_david@colstate.edu

Georgia Southern University PO Box 8055 Statesboro, GA 30460 Stephanie Kenney, Interim 912-478-5649 skenney@georgiasouthern.edu

* Includes those programs that are new or are under development

15

Appendix A - USG Educator Preparation Institutions *

Georgia Southwestern State University 800 Georgia Southwestern State Univ. Drive Americus, GA 31709-4693 Lettie Watford 229-931-2173 ljw@canes.gsw.edu
Georgia State University PO Box 3965 Atlanta, GA 30303-3083 Randy Kamphaus 404-413 8148 rkamphaus@gsu.edu
Gordon College 419 College Drive Barnesville, GA 30204-1762 Sheryl O'Sullivan 678-359-5468 sosullivan@gdn.edu
Kennesaw State University 1000 Chastain Road Kennesaw, GA 30144-5591 Arlinda J. Eaton 770-423-6117 aeaton4@kennesaw.edu
Macon State College 100 College Station Drive Macon, GA 31206 Pamela Bedwell 478-757-2544 pamela.bedwell@maconstate.edu
*Middle Georgia College 1100 Second Street, SE Cochran, GA 31014-1599 Brenda Shuman-Riley 478-934-3063 briley@mgc.edu

North Georgia College & State University 82 College Circle Dahlonega, GA 30597 Bob Michael 706-864-1998 bmichael@ngcsu.edu
*Savannah State University 3219 College Avenue Savannah, GA 31404 Mary Wyatt 912-356-2204 wyattm@savannahstate.edu
*Southern Polytechnic State University 1100 South Marietta Parkway Marietta, GA 30060-2896 Alan Gaberilli Arts & Science Dean 678-915-7464 agaberil@spsu.edu
University of Georgia G-3 Aderhold Hall Athens, GA 30602 Andy Horne 706-542-6446 ahorne@uga.edu
University of West Georgia 1601 Maple Street Carrollton, GA 30118 Kim Metcalf 678-839-5522 kmetcalf@westga.edu
Valdosta State University 1500 North Patterson Street Valdosta, GA 31698 Phil Gunter 229-245-6424 pgunter@valdosta.edu

16

Appendix B - Regents' Principles and Actions for the Preparation of Teachers for the Schools1
Principle # 1: All institutions will meet National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE) Standards at the acceptable level. Principle # 2: The University System will guarantee the quality of any teacher it prepares. Principle # 3: University System institutions that prepare teachers will implement aggressive recruitment, retention, progression, completion, and induction policies to increase the numbers, to expand the diversity of candidates, and to balance supply and demand. Principle #4: University System institutions that prepare teachers will develop and implement innovative teacher preparation programs to respond to state need and to contribute to increased student learning and achievement in Georgia's public schools. Principle #5: Within the University System of Georgia, the Master of Arts in Teaching (MAT) Degree will be a program that leads to initial teacher certification (Because program completion results in a master's degree, certification will be awarded by the Professional Standards Commission (PSC) at level 5.) Principle #6: Graduate programs for teachers who are already certified will focus on both strengthening their content knowledge and on deepening their understanding of teaching and learning. (Following degree completion, PSC will award certification at level 5.) Principle # 7: University System institutions that prepare teachers will support and reward all faculty who participate significantly in approved efforts in teacher preparation and school improvement through decisions in promotion and tenure, pre-tenure and post-tenure review, annual review and merit pay, workload, recognition, allocation of resources, and other rewards. Principle # 8: The University System will continually assess the impact of the Principles and Actions for the Preparation of Teachers for the Schools to determine whether successful implementation contributes significantly to desired changes in preparation programs, to school improvement, and to increased student learning and achievement in Georgia.
1 Revised in 2008 17

Appendix C - Data Profiles

Table C-1. Teacher Production by Institution

Institutional Name

Undergraduate Initial

Albany State University

101

Armstrong Atlantic State University

190

Augusta State University

127

Clayton State University

50

Columbus State University

146

Dalton State College

85

Fort Valley State University

4

Georgia College & State University

94

Georgia Southern University

302

Georgia Southwestern State University

87

Georgia State University

166

Gordon College

28

Kennesaw State University

525

Macon State College

84

North Georgia College & State University

156

University of Georgia

449

University of West Georgia

308

Valdosta State University

300

All USG Institutions

3202

Total number of Teachers is 4573

Graduate Initial 0 92 135 0 14 0 0 91 29 0 267 0 55 0 29 108 20 50 890

Post-baccalaureate Initial
0 61 0 0 30 2 0 0 7 7 38 0 12 0 127 100 81 16 481

Table C-2. Teacher Production by Preparation Route by Institution

Institution Name

Traditional Route

Non-Traditional Route

Armstrong Atlantic State University Augusta State University Clayton State University Columbus State University Dalton State College Fort Valley State University Georgia College & State University Georgia Southern University Georgia Southwestern State University Georgia State University Gordon College Kennesaw State University Macon State College North Georgia College & State University University of Georgia University of West Georgia Valdosta State University All USG Institutions Total number of teachers is 4573
18

101 190 127 50 146 85
4 94 302 87 166 28 525 84 156 449 308 300 3202

0 153 135
0 44 2 0 91 36 7 305 0 67 0 156 208 101 66 1371

Table C-3. Teacher Production by Minority Status by Institution
% of total teachers produced

Institution Name Albany State University Armstrong Atlantic State University Augusta State University Clayton State University Columbus State University Dalton State College Fort Valley State University Georgia College & State University Georgia Southern University Georgia Southwestern State University Georgia State University Gordon College Kennesaw State University Macon State College North Georgia College & State University University of Georgia University of West Georgia Valdosta State University All USG Institutions

2005 2005

74.4 75.3

22.5 26.8

17.1 19.1

31.3 35.3

17.9 22.8

New Program

75.8 77.8

9.3 8.5

19.3 18

13.3 16.9

29.6 40

New Program

8.3 7.5

New Program

3.3

4

7.1 8.3

16.3 13.9

9.1 15.2

16.3 18.8

2007 75.4 24.8 26.4 34.3 17
100 5.7 14.4 18.8 39
9.9
4.1 10.7 18.3 17.3 18.4

2008 79.6 29.4 27.3 58.1 17.9 6.8 40 11.2 16.6 15.9 43.2
10.4 14.3 13.3 13.9 23.7 14.2 21.8

2009 76.2 29.4 32.7 64 25.8 3.4 75 10.8 14.8 26.6 56.5 10.7 12.8 20.2 22.4 16.3 22.5 14.2 24.7

Table C-4. Teacher Production by Minority Status by Institution
# of Minority Teachers Produced

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Albany State University Armstrong Atlantic State University Augusta State University Clayton State University Columbus State University Dalton State College Fort Valley State University Georgia College & State University Georgia Southern University Georgia Southwestern State University Georgia State University Gordon College Kennesaw State University Macon State College North Georgia College & State University University of Georgia University of West Georgia Valdosta State University All USG Institutions

29

70

46

63

84

79

22

26

33

10

12

12

30

44

29

New Program

25

21

3

16

15

10

51

63

44

15

12

18

144 192 180

New Program

30

34

47

New Program

8

12

13

33

46

61

66

65

76

28

49

51

570 745 702

78

77

83 101

56

86

25

32

41

48

4

3

2

3

20

20

54

50

14

25

226 266

4

58

76

7

17

39

70

79 107

88

92

51

52

925 1129

19

Appendix C - Data Profiles

Table C-5. Middle Grades Production by Institution

Institution Name

Total

Math Science

Production

Only*

Albany State University Armstrong Atlantic State University Augusta State University Clayton State University Columbus State University Dalton State College Fort Valley State University Georgia College & State University Georgia Southern University Georgia Southwestern State University Georgia State University Gordon College Kennesaw State University Macon State College North Georgia College & State University University of Georgia University of West Georgia Valdosta State University All USG Institutions

20

9

37

27

13

12

50

33

25

14

No program

2

2

18

11

45

40

13

10

21

13

No program

45

28

No program

90

75

43

29

58

54

53

42

533

399

*teacher has a concentration in at least one math or science area.

20

Table C-6. Retention Rates by Institution

Institution Name
Albany State University Armstrong Atlantic State University Augusta State University Clayton State University Columbus State University Dalton State College Fort Valley State University Georgia College & State University Georgia Southern University Georgia Southwestern State University Georgia State University Gordon College Kennesaw State University Macon State College North Georgia College & State University University of Georgia University of West Georgia Valdosta State University All USG Institutions

2004-2005

2005-2006

1 year 97 91 97 97 97
100 97 96 98 92
95
95 94 97 95 95

2 year 1 year 2 year

97

99

99

88

93

87

92

93

91

97

96

92

89

91

87

Program too new

83

96

96

94

94

90

93

97

90

95

96

94

82

94

87

Program too new

89

95

88

Program too new

93

94

92

85

93

83

93

97

93

91

94

91

90

94

89

2006-2007
1 year 96 94 89 92 90
67 92 95 94 95
92
96 91 94 97 94

Table C-7. USG System Retention Rates

1 year 2 year 3 year

2004-2005 Graduates 2005-2006 Graduates 2006-2007 Graduates

95

90

86

94

89

94

Table C-8. Retention of Non-USG Teachers

Hired in the 2005-2006 Hired in the 2006-2007 Hired in the 2007-2008

Total Non-USG Teachers Hired
105482 110404 114494

Retention

after 1 year
97522 101800 105815

After 2 years
91729 95887

1-year rate
92 92 92

2-year rate
87 87

21

Appendix D - New Teacher Distribution in 2009 Georgia classrooms

System

Number of USG Graduates System

Number of USG Graduates

Appling County

4

Atkinson County

6

Atlanta Public Schools

59

Bacon County

5

Baker County

1

Baldwin County

17

Banks County

5

Barrow County

48

Bartow County

29

Ben Hill County

6

Berrien County

12

Bibb County

27

Bleckley County

2

Brantley County

7

Bremen City

3

Brooks County

12

Bryan County

20

Buford City

7

Bulloch County

36

Burke County

28

Butts County

6

Calhoun City

4

Calhoun County

1

Camden County

15

Candler County

9

Carroll County

51

Carrollton City

8

Cartersville City

6

Catoosa County

2

Charlton County

4

Chatham County

93

Chattahoochee County

1

Chattooga County

4

Cherokee County

69

Chickamauga City

0

Clarke County

37

Clay County

0

Clayton County

58

Clinch County

6

Cobb County

215

Coffee County

19

Colquitt County

12

Columbia County

52

Commerce City

4

Cook County

6

22

Coweta County

34

Crawford County

2

Crisp County

12

Dade County

0

Dalton City

8

Dawson County

13

Decatur City

2

Decatur County

8

DeKalb County

85

Dodge County

4

Dooly County

1

Dougherty County

31

Douglas County

78

Dublin City

10

Early County

3

Echols County

0

Effingham County

36

Elbert County

0

Emanuel County

11

Evans County

9

Fannin County

3

Fayette County

14

Floyd County

11

Forsyth County

54

Franklin County

3

Fulton County

185

Gainesville City

10

Gilmer County

10

Glascock County

0

Glynn County

26

Gordon County

15

Grady County

4

Greene County

3

Gwinnett County

220

Habersham County

5

Hall County

53

Hancock County

3

Haralson County

10

Harris County

12

Hart County

3

Heard County

5

Henry County

43

Houston County

57

Irwin County

3

Jackson County

24

Jasper County

3

System

Number of USG Graduates System

Number of USG Graduates

Jeff Davis County

6

Jefferson City

4

Jefferson County

13

Jenkins County

0

Johnson County

4

Jones County

14

Lamar County

4

Lanier County

9

Laurens County

8

Lee County

10

Liberty County

24

Lincoln County

2

Long County

5

Lowndes County

15

Lumpkin County

13

Macon County

7

Madison County

11

Marietta City

25

Marion County

0

McDuffie County

9

McIntosh County

11

Meriwether County

8

Miller County

1

Mitchell County

5

Monroe County

0

Montgomery County

2

Morgan County

4

Murray County

14

Muscogee County

89

Newton County

26

Oconee County

7

Oglethorpe County

6

Paulding County

76

Peach County

7

Pelham City

3

Pickens County

7

Pierce County

4

Pike County

3

Polk County

9

Pulaski County

4

Putnam County

6

Quitman County

0

Rabun County

1

Randolph County

2

Richmond County

73

Rockdale County

26

Rome City

3

Schley County

6

Screven County

4

Seminole County

2

Social Circle City

4

Spalding County

11

Stephens County

4

Stewart County

0

Sumter County

19

Talbot County

2

Taliaferro County

1

Tattnall County

2

Taylor County

4

Telfair County

2

Terrell County

2

Thomas County

9

Thomasville City (Thomaston-

Upson County)

11

Tift County

26

Toombs County

8

Towns County

3

Treutlen County

1

Trion City

2

Troup County

17

Turner County

11

Twiggs County

0

Union County

1

Upson County

0

Valdosta City

37

Vidalia City

4

Walker County

10

Walton County

12

Ware County

20

Warren County

5

Washington County

1

Wayne County

17

Webster County

2

Wheeler County

1

White County

8

Whitfield County

28

Wilcox County

0

Wilkes County

4

Wilkinson County

2

Worth County

10

23

Appendix E - Customer Service Surveys

2009 Report on Employer's Perceptions of the USG-Prepared Teachers One Year After Teaching in a Georgia Public School

Introduction The purpose of the USG Employer Survey is to provide education faculty and administrators with meaningful feedback from recent employers of program graduates that will be useful in improving future teacher preparation programs across the University System of Georgia.

As the first survey of employers of new USG-prepared teachers to be conducted both system-wide and in an electronic format, the Office of Educator Preparation, Innovation, and Research (EPIR) utilized new online survey technology to both centralize and standardize the approach used by institutions to collect, review, and report information about the teacher preparation experiences of recent graduates.

The USG Employer Survey The Employer Survey consisted of 32 items (29 fixed and 3 open-ended items) grouped into six survey categories or components associated with the delivery of an effective teacher preparation program:

1. Content and Curriculum; 2. Knowledge of Students, Teaching, and Learning; 3. Learning Environments; 4. Classroom, Program and School-Wide Assessment; 5. Planning and Instruction; and 6. Professionalism.

Respondents were asked to use a four point scale (e.g., Strongly Agree, Agree, Disagree, Strongly Disagree) to indicate the extent of agreement to a set of statements in each survey category. Open-ended items asked respondents to indicate the strengths of their employees' respective program, offer suggestions, insights, and other comments that would facilitate overall program improvement.

Response Rates A total of 413 employers responded to the survey, evaluating 778 teachers, for an overall response rate of 32.7%.

Survey Findings

Based on the results of the USG Employer Survey of 2009 graduates, the employers of USG-prepared teachers

were extremely positive about teachers' first year of teaching, consistently giving high marks to the institutions

that prepared them to be a teacher.

Respondents rated all 29 fixed survey items extremely positive. Overall Range of Agreement to Survey Items:

82% to 100%

98.8% of respondents would hire other educational professionals from the USG institution attended by the

teacher, 1.2% would not.

Survey Categories 1. Content and Curriculum

Number of Items
3

Range of Agreement
95% to 97%

2. Knowledge of Students, Teaching and Learning

7

93% to 95%

3. Learning Environments

4

93% to 95%

4. Classroom, Program and School-Wide Assessment

3

95% to 97%

5. Planning and Instruction

4

93% to 97%

6. Professionalism

8

87% to 97%

24

Conclusions University System of Georgia (USG) institutions that prepare teachers have established a solid reputation for producing well-prepared and highly qualified teachers. Based on the results of the USG Employer Survey, employers of USG-prepared teachers are extremely positive about their first year of teaching, consistently giving high marks to the institutions that prepared these new employees to become teachers as soon as one year after employment as fully certified teachers.

Whereas the 2007 and 2008 Report on the Preparation of New Teachers by University System of Georgia Institutions provided empirical evidence to show that when compared to non-USG-prepared teachers in the workforce, USG-prepared teachers have a higher retention rate, a lower attrition rate, and a lower mobility rate (see Report on the Preparation of New Teachers for discussion), the current report underscores this discussion on USG commitment to teacher preparation by showing that employers believe USG-prepared educators have been adequately prepared for the teaching profession.

Table 1 Content and Curriculum

2009 USG Employer Survey Results

CONTENT AND CURRICULUM
1. Demonstrate broad, current, and specialized knowledge in my field(s). 2. Understand and use content and pedagogical knowledge that is appropriate
for diverse learners.

Percent Agreement
97.0
95.4

3. Interpret and construct school, district, and programmatic curricula that

reflect state and national content area standards.

95.6

Percent Disagreement
3.0
4.5
4.0

Table 2 Knowledge of Students, Teaching and Learning

KNOWLEDGE OF STUDENTS, TEACHING AND LEARNING Percent

4. Hold high expectations for all because they believe that everyone can

Agreement

learn at high levels

95.4

56.. .Demonstrate an understanding of how students develop and learn.

94.9

7. Demonstrate a caring learning environment.

96.2

8. Communicate effectively with learners from diverse cultural backgrounds.

95.3

9. Use the best professional practices to meet the needs of diverse learners.

92.9

10. Understand how factors inside and outside of school may influence

students' lives and learning.

94.6

11. Establish respectful and productive relationships with families and

communities to support student learning.

94.9

Percent Disagreement
4.6
5.1 3.5% 4.4% 6.8
5.0
4.7

25

Appendix E - Customer Service Surveys

Table 3 Learning Environment

LEARNING ENVIRONMENT

12. Create learning environments that focus on engaging all students in learning, collaboratively, and individually.
13. Manage time, space, activities, technology, and other resources to provide active and equitable engagement of diverse learners in productive tasks.
14. Use knowledge about human motivation and behavior to develop strategies for organizing and supporting learning.
15. Use knowledge of students' unique cultures, experiences, and communities to sustain culturally responsive classrooms and schools.

Percent Agreement
94.6
93.0
93.8
94.6

Percent Disagreement
5.4
7.0
6.2
4.9

Table 4 Classroom, Program and School-wide Assessment

CLASSROOM, PROGRAM AND SCHOOL-WIDE ASSESSMENT

Percent

Agreement

16. Choose, develop, and use assessment methods appropriate for instructional

and programmatic decisions.

95.4

17. Use available resources including technology to keep accurate and up-to-date records.

97.1

18. Use assessment data to communicate knowledgeably and responsibly to students, parents, community, and school personnel.

94.9

Percent Disagreement
4.2
2.8
4.5

Table 5 Planning and Instruction

PLANNING AND INSTRUCTION

19. Plan and carry out instruction and programs based on knowledge of state and district performance standards, curriculum, students, learning environments, and assessment data.
20. Use a variety of research-based strategies to support learners.
21. Monitor and adjust strategies in response to learner feedback.
22. Integrate technology and other multimedia resources appropriately to maximize learning opportunities for all students.

Percent Agreement
96.5

Percent Disagreement
3.3

93.9

5.7

92.9

7.0

95.2

4.2

26

Table 6 Professionalism

PROFESSIONALISM

23. Work collaboratively with colleagues and other professionals.
24. Communicate respect and concern for all students.
25. Understand and implement laws related to rights and responsibilities of students, educators, and families.
26. Follow established codes of professional conduct, including school and district policies.
27. Play a leadership role in the school community.
28. Actively participate in and contributes to school wide improvement efforts.
29. Seek opportunities to learn based on reflection, input from others, and career goals.

Percent Agreement
94.8 96.5
96.1
96.0
87.3 92.6
94.8

Percent Disagreement
5.2 3.1
2.8
3.7
9.9 6.3
4.7

30. Systematically reflect on teaching and learning to improve own practice.

94.1

5.4

2009 Report on New Teachers' Perceptions of the USG Teacher Preparation Experience One Year After Teaching in a Georgia Public School

Introduction The purpose of the USG Graduate Survey is to provide education faculty and administrators with meaningful feedback from recent graduates that will be useful in improving future teacher preparation programs across the University System of Georgia.

As the first survey of new USG-prepared teachers to be conducted both system-wide and in an electronic format, the USG utilized new online survey technology to both centralize and standardize the approach used by institutions to collect, review, and report information about the teacher preparation experiences of recent graduates.

The USG Graduate Survey The Graduate Survey consisted of 37 items (33 fixed and 4 open-ended items) grouped into six survey categories or components associated with the delivery of an effective teacher preparation program:

1. Content and Curriculum; 2. Knowledge of Students, Teaching, and Learning; 3. Learning Environments; 4. Classroom, Program and School-Wide Assessment; 5. Planning and Instruction; and 6. Professionalism.

Respondents were asked to use a four point scale (e.g., Strongly Agree, Agree, Disagree, Strongly Disagree) to indicate the extent of agreement to a set of statements in each survey category. Open-ended items asked respondents to indicate the strengths of their respective program, offer suggestions, insights, and other comments that would facilitate overall program improvement.

27

Appendix E - Customer Service Surveys

Response Rates A total of 684 graduates responded to the survey for an overall response rate of 22%. Institution response rates ranged from 13% to 46%.

Survey Findings Based on the results of the 2008 USG Graduate Survey, USG-prepared teachers were extremely positive about their first year of teaching, consistently giving high marks to the institutions that prepared them to be a teacher. Respondents rated all 33 fixed survey items extremely positive. Overall Range of Agreement to Survey Items: 82% to 100% 94.2% of respondents would recommend their teacher preparation program institutions to their peers, 5.7% would not.

Survey Categories
1. Content and Curriculum 2. Knowledge of Students, Teaching and Learning 3. Learning Environments 4. Classroom, Program and School-Wide Assessment 5. Planning and Instruction 6. Professionalism

Number of Items 6 7 5 3 4 8

Range of Agreement 89% to 99% 82% to 99% 91% to 97% 97% to 99% 95% to 99% 89% to 100%

Conclusions University System of Georgia (USG) institutions that prepare teachers have established a solid reputation for producing well-prepared and highly qualified teachers, and based on the results of the USG Graduate Survey, USG-prepared teachers are extremely positive about their first year of teaching, consistently giving high marks to the institutions that prepared them to be a teacher as soon as one year after employment as a fully certified teacher.

Whereas the 2007 and 2008 Report on the Preparation of New Teachers by University System of Georgia Institutions provided empirical evidence to show that when compared to non-USG-prepared teachers in the workforce, USG-prepared teachers have a higher retention rate, a lower attrition rate, and a lower mobility rate (see Report on the Preparation of New Teachers for discussion), the current report underscores this discussion on USG commitment to teacher preparation by showing that even the individuals who have been passed the torch for educating Georgia's children the teachers themselves believe they have been adequately prepared for the teaching profession.

Table 1 Content and Curriculum

USG Graduate Survey Results CONTENT AND CURRICULUM

1. I am able to demonstrate broad, current, and specialized knowledge in my field(s).
2. I am able to understand and use content and pedagogical knowledge that is appropriate for diverse learners.
3. I feel well prepared to support literacy development in my students.
4. I stay current in my field(s) of expertise. 5. I am able to interpret and construct school, district, and programmatic
curricula that reflect state and national content area standards.

Percent Agreement
99.6
98.4 88.6 98.8 98.9

6. I relate my field to other areas of the school and to everyday life.

97.7

28

Percent Disagreement
.4
1.6 11.4 1.2 1.1 2.3

Table 2 Knowledge of Students, Teaching and Learning

KNOWLEDGE OF STUDENTS, TEACHING AND LEARNING Percent

Agreement

1. I hold high expectations for all because I believe that everyone can learn at high levels.

95.7

2. I demonstrate an understanding of how students develop and learn.

99.3

3. I am confident in my ability to work with students identified as needing special education services.

82.3

4. I communicate effectively with students from diverse cultural backgrounds.

97.8

5. I use the best professional practices to meet the needs of diverse learners.

98.0

6. I understand how factors inside and outside of school may influence students' lives and learning.

99.6

7. I establish respectful and productive relationships with families and communities to support student learning.

98.0

Percent Disagreement
4.3 .7 17.7
2.2
2.2
.4
2.0

Table 3 Learning Environment

LEARNING ENVIRONMENT

8. I feel confident in my ability to create learning environments that focus on engaging all students in learning, collaboratively, and individually.
9. I am able to manage time, space, activities, technology, and other resources to provide active and equitable engagement of diverse students and adults in productive tasks.
10. I implement effective classroom management strategies in all school spaces.
11. I use knowledge about human motivation and behavior to develop strategies for organizing and supporting learning.
12. I use knowledge of students' unique cultures, experiences, and communities to sustain culturally responsive classrooms and schools.

Percent Agreement
96.4
96.5
91.0 96.5
94.9

Percent Disagreement
3.6
3.5
9.0 3.5
5.1

Table 4 Classroom, Program and School-wide Assessment
CLASSROOM, PROGRAM AND SCHOOL WIDE ASSESSMENT Percent
Agreement

Percent Disagreement

13. I choose, develop, and use assessment methods appropriate for

99.3

instructional and programmatic decisions.

14. I use available resources including technology to keep accurate and

98.5

up-to-date records.

15. I feel competent in my ability to use assessment data to

communicate knowledgeably and responsibly to students, parents,

97.1

community, and school personnel.

.7 1.5 2.9
29

Appendix E - Customer Service Surveys

Table 5 Planning and Instruction PLANNING AND INSTRUCTION

Percent Agreement

16. I plan and carry out instruction and programs based on knowledge of state and district performance standards, curriculum, students,

99.4

learning environments, and assessment data.

17. I use a variety of research-based strategies to support learning.

95.3

18. I reflect on my practice and make necessary adjustments to enhance

98.7

learning.

19. I integrate technology and other multimedia resources appropriately to maximize learning opportunities for all students and monitor and

97.4

adjust strategies in response to learner feedback.

Table 6 Professionalism

PROFESSIONALISM

20. I work collaboratively with colleagues and other professionals. 21. I communicate respect and concern for all students.

Percent Agreement
97.8
100

22. I understand and implement laws related to rights and responsibilities of students, educators, and families.

99.1

23. I follow established codes of professional conduct, including school and district policies.

99.8

24. I treat students equitably.

99.8

25. I play a leadership role in the school community.

89.0

26. I systematically reflect on teaching and learning to improve my practice.

98.6

27. I seek opportunities to learn based on reflection, input from others, and career goals.

98.9

Percent Disagreement
0.6 4.7 1.3
2.6
Percent Disagreement
2.2 0.0 .9
0.2 .2 11.0 1.4 1.1

30

Office of Educator Preparation, Innovation and Research University System of Georgia 270 Washington Street SW Atlanta, Georgia 30334 www.usg.edu/educator_prep