Accreditation and Annual Reporting Measures

Mayville State University is accredited by The Higher Learning Commission (HLC) and is a member of the North Central Association (NCA).

Higher Learning Commission
Telephone: 1-800-621-7440
Fax: 312-263-7462
E-mail: info@hlcommission.org
Web site: www.hlcommission.org

The Division of Education is currently accredited by the Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP). Program Accreditation provides recognition that the content and quality of the program has been evaluated and meets standards set by the profession. Students and their families can be assured that appropriate knowledge and skill areas are included and that the program is stable, both professionally and financially.  CAEP-accredited programs are reviewed against professionally approved standards, ensuring a high quality academic program. Mayville State's Teacher Education programs received complete accreditation in the fall of 2020 which lasts 7 years.

Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation
Telephone: (202) 223-0077
E-mail: caep@caepnet.org
Website: caepnet.org

Accredited Education Programs

The following list reflects the Initial Licensure programs that were reviewed and accredited by CAEP during the EPP’s last site visit in the Spring of 2020:

*Biology Education BSEd was renamed Composite Science Education BSEd effective 8/5/20.  The last term admit for Chemistry Education was Fall 2020.  Courses are now included in the Composite Science Education BSEd major.  The last term admit for History Education BSEd was Fall 2020.  Courses are now included in the Composite Social Science Education BSEd.

State Program Approval

All North Dakota teacher education and counseling programs must be reviewed on a seven-year cycle. Without this approval, the candidates would not be licensed in North Dakota. Two governing boards, ESPB and NDBCE, are responsible to continually review the North Dakota standards and procedures pertaining to licensure and program approval.

Teacher licensure in the state of North Dakota is regulated by the Education Standards and Practices Board (ESPB). Information about the process of applying for licensure can be found at their website: www.nd.gov/espb/

Teacher licensure and credentialing is also regulated by the ND Department of Public Instruction. Information about requirements can be found at their website: https://www.nd.gov/dpi/educators/credentials-and-certificates

Completion of academic degree programs in education do not guarantee licensure, certification, credentialing, or placement of our graduates. A graduate who seeks licensure, certification, and/or credentialing in any state or jurisdiction needs to check the specific requirements for that state or jurisdiction and, if needed, discuss the policies with her or his advisor.

CAEP Annual Reporting Measures 

The Mayville State University EPP is committed to sharing completer impact and outcomes data with a wide audience.  Each year, the EPP updates and publicly reports completer performance data, employer satisfaction data, and other consumer information on this website.  See below for an outline of the 8 annual reporting measures.

1. Impact on P-12 Learning and Development (Component 4.1)

Mayville State University EPP faculty have been engaged in case study research as a strategy to assess the effectiveness of completers in the classroom and impact on P-12 student learning. Case study was used as an alternative to value-added measures (unavailable at the state level) to holistically examine complex attributes of quality teaching (Merriam, 1998; Yin, 2014).  The Reflective Experiential Teacher framework, developed by the EPP, was used to design methods and guide analysis.  The constructivist framework incorporates the knowledge, skills, and dispositions of the ten core teaching standards of the Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) (CCSSO, 2013) divided into the four CAEP Standard 1 categories of: Learner and Learning, Content, Instructional Practice, and Professional Responsibility. 

This case study was part of a larger investigation of the role EPPs play in graduates’ teaching effectiveness, among a myriad of other complex factors, and the role graduates effectiveness has on student learning.  Data was collected to answer the questions:

  • Do P-12 students in the classrooms of EPP completers demonstrate expected levels of learning and development?
  • What factors do graduates perceive impact students’ learning and development? and
  • How can a EPP improve program quality based on results of P-12 student learning in classrooms in which graduates are teaching?

Mixed methods data collection in the descriptive study included: graduate and supervisor surveys, self and supervisor evaluation of skills and dispositions, interviews, document review, student engagement surveys, achievement data, and pre and post assessment data. Descriptive statistics were used to describe data for each case.  Within each case, the constant comparative method of qualitative data analysis was used (Glaser & Strauss, 1967) to construct codes, categories, subcategories or themes through continuous comparison of data (Merriam, 1998, p. 159).  Validity and reliability of measures within the case study are described in instrumentation in the manuscripts below.

Results indicated most students from participants’ classrooms demonstrated learning growth, and participants viewed their teaching as effective.  Implications for programs include pre-service opportunities to identify and respond to authentic student engagement, collaboration with colleagues, the impact of reflection on teaching practices, and opportunities to build collective teacher efficacy.  Additional insights describe pre-service teacher training to measure student progress and measure impact based on classroom assessments. The investigation provides a replicable case study design for teacher educators to examine relationships between teacher preparation, program graduates, and P-12 student outcomes.  Findings and results are presented in the finished manuscripts available on this webpage as attached files; these include detailed accounts of recruitment, methodology, research questions, and analysis.

Data cycles started with protocol development in 2016 followed by purposeful sampling of participants, implementation, refinement, and further data collection. A pilot study in Spring 2017 included two elementary completers. In Spring 2018, two completers from elementary education and two from secondary science education participated.  To represent all EPP program areas, participants in Spring 2019 were recruited from the remaining areas of early childhood, special education (SPED), and MAT. Recruitment scripts were sent to 11 eligible completers (early childhood n = 6; SPED n = 3; MAT n = 2); none agreed to participate. Of the three SPED graduates, only one was currently teaching in a special education position. All others were employed in a regular education setting. The one SPED completer teaching in a Special Education classroom did not consent to participate. The completers in MAT and EC noted their reasons for not participating: limited time due to other school-related obligations (i.e., coaching, assessment), personal responsibilities, and need for supervisor participation/consent. Further complications for participant recruitment came in March 2020 when the COVID19 pandemic shut down schools across the state and nation.  Because of the stress teachers were under and challenges they were experiencing (and continue to experience), the EPP decided to suspend the case study research and collect data that would regularly be collected from graduates including the Transition to Teaching Survey (TTS) and Supervisor Survey (SS). The TTS includes a question inquiring whether first year teachers would be interested in participating in further data collection to measure their impact on P-12 learning and development.  Of the 44 participants who completed the TTS, 15 first year teachers agreed they would be willing to send the EPP data manager their two most recent supervisor evaluations.  Again, due to the COVID19 pandemic in spring 2020, the EPP decided to postpone data collection from participants.   Beginning in the Spring of 2021, the EPP will continue previous efforts to collect annual measures examining completer performance in different grade levels and content areas.

Also of note, the EPP typically receives a “First Year Teacher Effect on Student Outcomes” report from State Longitudinal Data System (SLDS) in early spring.  This report shares information related to SLDS data for demonstrated growth in math, reading, and language arts of students in Mayville State’s completers’ classrooms.  The data is compared to North Dakota non-first year teachers and other North Dakota first year teachers and is shared visually.  Due to the COVID19 pandemic and closing of schools, SLDS did not collect comparative data for the 19-20 school year and therefore, the report was unavailable this spring.  Either way, the EPP continues to find the state-provided data as inadequate for evaluating program impact due to a limited sample, the inability of state data to be disaggregated by program or directly linked to completers, and test scores limited to reading, language arts and math which accounts for only a portion of EPP completers. In addition, only completers who remained in ND to teach have student data available.

Overall, the EPP continues to determine that state provided, teacher-linked student achievement data does little to inform continuous improvement efforts, and thus the EPP continues to pursue other sources of evidence (i.e., teaching effectiveness survey questions, supervisor evaluations, and case study research).

In conclusion, multiple measures support the fact that Mayville State University Educator Preparation Program completers' students did indeed demonstrate expected levels of learning. As a descriptive case study, the EPP did not attempt to infer direct causality of teacher preparation or effectiveness of teaching on the results of student outcomes; however, it appears completers contributed to positive student outcomes amid multiple influencing factors. Foremost, results from learner outcomes reaffirmed the EPP’s commitment to ensure every learner has a competent, effective, engaging, and reflective educator.

2. Indicators of Teaching Effectiveness (Component 4.2)

As part of our continuous improvement efforts, Mayville State University’s EPP uses case study research to address CAEP Standards 4.1 and 4.2.  Indicators of teaching effectiveness are measured by the EPP in a variety of ways, including:

  • Common metrics: Transition to Teaching Survey;
  • Common metrics: Supervisor Survey;
  • Request to submit copies of supervisor evaluations;
  • Student achievement and growth scores;
  • Student pre and post assessment data;
  • Student engagement surveys;
  • Structured interview questions about teaching impact on student learning;
  • Classroom Observations

The EPP’s use of multiple measures provides a more complete description of student growth and completers’ success in the classroom and followed recommendations of best practices to investigate teaching effectiveness.  For further information, please refer to the manuscripts found in Annual Reporting Measure 1: Impact on P-12 Learning and Development and the attachments below. 

3. Satisfaction of Employers and Employment Milestones (Component 4.3)

Each spring, findings on employer satisfaction are collected from a survey administered to supervisors of first year teachers who graduated from Mayville State University (MSU).  MSU graduates complete a Transition to Teacher Survey (TTS) where contact information for their supervisor is collected and used to administer the Supervisor Survey (SS).  The SS asks supervisors to assess the quality of graduates’ instructional practices, abilities to work with diverse learners, abilities to establish positive classroom environment, and levels of professionalism. The SS is administered to direct supervisors, mainly principals, of EPP graduates employed in schools approximately one year after the completion of their preparation program at Mayville State.

On the survey, employers’ satisfaction with completers’ preparation for their assigned responsibilities in working with P-12 students is indicated with tends to agree (3) and agree (4) ratings.  Mayville State University’s Teacher Education Program has set an acceptable target of an average of 3.0 or higher on all indicators (all tends to agree or agree).  Results of the survey are reviewed annually by the Division of Education and Teacher Education Committee faculty.  The most recent results can be found in the table below:

Supervisor Survey (SS) Scores

(4-point scale)

Year 1

2016

Year 2

2017

Year 3

2018

Year 4

2019

Year 5

2020

Instructional Practice 

3.39

3.19

3.66

3.52

3.54

Diverse Learners 

3.43

3.15

3.64

3.62

3.57

Learning Environment 

3.46

3.28

3.66

3.59

3.57

Professionalism 

3.49

3.40

3.75

3.73

3.57

Overall Supervisor Ratings

3.44

3.23

3.68

3.62

3.56

 

4. Satisfaction of Completers (Component 4.4)

Each spring, findings on completer satisfaction are collected from a survey administered to completers the academic year following their graduation.  All completers/graduates are invited to complete the Transition to Teaching Survey (TTS), but those who are teaching complete an additional section to rate the quality of their preparation.  The TTS asks Mayville State University (MSU) graduates to evaluate their perception of the quality of their instructional practices, their ability to work with diverse learners, ability to establish positive classroom environment, and level of professionalism.  The survey is administered approximately one year after the graduates complete their preparation program.

On the survey, completers’ satisfaction with their preparation being relevant to the responsibilities they confront on the job and their preparation being effective are indicated with tends to agree (3) and agree (4) ratings.  Mayville State University’s Teacher Education Program has set an acceptable target of an average of 3.0 or higher on all indicators (all tends to agree or agree).  EPP results are also compared to North Dakota and super aggregate results to ensure commensurate scores, ultimately aiming for higher scores than both the North Dakota and super aggregate.  Results of the survey are reviewed annually by the Division of Education and Teacher Education Committee faculty.  The most recent results can be found in the table below:

Transition to Teaching Survey (TTS) Scores

(4-point scale)

Year 1

2016

Year 2

2017

Year 3

2018

Year 4

2019

Year 5

2020

Instructional Practice 

3.39

3.28

3.40

3.55

3.59

Diverse Learners 

3.16

2.96

3.06

3.28

3.36

Learning Environment

3.46

3.49

3.37

3.54

3.68

Professionalism 

3.48

3.45

3.33

3.55

3.64

Overall Graduate Ratings

3.37

3.30

3.29

3.48

3.57

 

5. Graduation Rates

 

16-17

17-18

18-19

19-20

Average
4-year graduation rate = 33.5%

Enrolled and Admitted

98

131

188

205

Completers

41

39

61

62

Annual Graduation Rate
Completers divided by Enrolled and Admitted

42%

30%

32%

30%

 

6. Ability of Completers to Meet Licensing and Any Additional State Requirements

Licensing Requirements

Cohort Results for
2019-2020

Praxis Core Pass Rates

Math=98%

Reading=99%

Writing=96%

Praxis II Subject Pass Rates

EC=100%

ElEd=100%

Secondary=67%

SPED=100%

Praxis PLT Pass Rates

EC=90%

ElEd=100%

Secondary=100%

SPED=No PLT

Average Undergraduate GPA

3.54

Average Graduate GPA

3.80

7. Ability of Completers to be Hired in Education Positions for Which They Have Prepared

 

Academic Year

Percentage Employed or Enrolled in Continuing Education

Employed in North Dakota

2014-2015

97.5%

 

72.6%

 

2015-2016

96.6%

72.6%

2016-2017

97.3%

71.2%

2017-2018

 

 

2018-2019

96.2%

83.7%

2019-2020

96.5%

76.4%

2020-2021

Calculated and Reported April 2022

Calculated and Reported April 2022

8. Student Loan Default Rates and Other Consumer Information

Mayville State University’s last official 3-year loan default rate is from 2017 and is 13.2%.  The table below outlines average cost of attendance and average beginning salary for EPP graduates:

Academic Year

Average Cost of Attendance

Average Beginning Salary

2013-2014

$16,445

$31,531

2014-2015

$17,041

$35,767

2015-2016

$17,456

$34,375

2016-2017

$17,524

$35,536

2017-2018

$18,180

$37,865

2018-2019

$18,606

$39,405

2019-2020

$19,164

$42,171

Data for this table was provided by the First Destination Survey Outcomes of Mayville State University Graduates provided by Career Services.

File Attachments:

  1. Anderson, S.K., Hagen, B., Whitsel, C., Dulski-Bucholz, A., Smith, K., & Willeson, A. (2019). Leveraging case study research: A mechanism for measuring teaching effectiveness. Mid-Western Educational
     
  2. Anderson, S.K., Hagen, B., Whitsel. C., Smith, K.D., & Duffield, S. (2020). Graduate impact on student learning: A descriptive case study.
     
  3. Madler, A., Anderson, S. K., & Smith, K. (2020). Perceptions of teacher preparation for classroom diversity: A secondary data analysis.