Given the information that the EPP has seen no students enrolled in Chemistry and few in Biology, leading to the closure of both at the undergraduate level, the limited data available for review is a direct consequence of this situation. With no enrollment in Chemistry, there would naturally be no data to analyze regarding enrollment, retention, or graduation for that program.

In Biology, while the 2023-24_Biology Summary & Data Analysis indicates three students were admitted to the Teacher Education Program in Biology during Fall 2023-2024, this very small number highlights the issue of low enrollment. The fact that only one student is scheduled to graduate in Summer 2024 further underscores the low graduation rate.  

The rationale for the closure of the undergraduate programs in Chemistry and Biology can be explained using the metrics of enrollment, retention, graduation, and faculty engagement as follows:

• Enrollment: The primary driver for the closure is the critically low enrollment in both programs. The absence of any enrolled students in Chemistry and the very small number in Biology demonstrate a lack of student demand and interest in these undergraduate teacher preparation pathways.

• Retention: While specific retention data isn't provided for the broader undergraduate programs, the low enrollment numbers inherently suggest challenges in attracting and retaining students in these areas within the EPP.

• Graduation: The low enrollment directly translates to very low graduation numbers. With no enrollment in Chemistry, there are no graduates. In Biology, the expectation of only one graduate in the near term indicates an unsustainable level of program output.

• Faculty Engagement: Sustained low enrollment and graduation rates can negatively impact faculty engagement. Faculty may become less engaged due to a lack of students to teach and mentor, limited program growth and development opportunities, and potential concerns about the program's future viability.

In conclusion, the lack of substantial data to review for these programs is a direct result of the extremely low enrollment numbers. The decision to close the undergraduate Chemistry and Biology programs is a logical response to the consistently low enrollment, which consequently impacted graduation rates and likely faculty engagement, making the programs unsustainable.

All syllabi have been updated to reflect changes for 2024-2025

The science programs are all cohort-based online, hybrid, or face-to-face learning by design and flexible for students who do not meet the requirements to continue with their cohort. The program faculty believes there is greater value to candidates learning from their peers and learning collaboratively. Since many candidates work within the primary partnership (PP) as science teachers, the cohort model offers a rich collaborative approach between the PP and faculty. Chemistry is a program that has traditionally had few candidates [identified as an area for improvement]. 

The Teacher Education Program is designed for Biology majors pursuing a teaching career in secondary education. Program goals include preparing caring and competent professionals with a strong knowledge of content and pedagogy for the biology classroom. All candidates for certification in secondary education must complete a minimum of 122 semester hours, which includes a general education core (42 hours), a professional education core (36 hours, including a 9-hour course in enhanced student teaching), and a major concentration of content and knowledge courses (44 hours). The required courses in Biology are 1110, 1111, 1120, 1121, 2110, 2111, 2120, 2121, 3010, 3011, 4120, 4121, 4300, 4301, 3710, 4724 and 4170. Completing this program provides graduates with licensure to teach Biology in grades 6-12 in secondary schools. 

For admission to Teacher Education, students must complete the application process with the College of Education. The link below provides access to the application and admission requirements. https://www.tnstate.edu/teachered/SP21%20SU21%20UG%20Admissions%20Application.pdf? 

The College of Education (CoED) has a standard process in alignment with the University based on the quality assurance system (QAS) The CoED created a QAS; however, an internal audit found some improvements that are imperative to greater strength and consistency. Unfortunately, the data indicates there was no implementation with fidelity, misalignment of practices, gaps in processes and procedures, and silos. In the spirit of continuous improvement or PLAN, DO, CHECK, ACT (Bernhardt, 2015), this allowed for enhancements to the system that will shape the CoED, which has prompted broad support within the CoED from faculty and staff. Specifically, the CoED found standards alignment practices were not instituted with fidelity. The process is now annual based on the results of the candidate outcomes.

The CoED created the QAS Management Process Review based on the facilitation, which operates independently. It must regularly perform quality review activities (internal audits) to ensure compliance with standards and practices (Manghani, 2011) that are coordinated by the deans of assessment and accreditation,  and program coordinators for each specialty area. This process utilizes the faculty program coordinators responsible for each program and uses the data to determine what standard areas candidates do not perform. The process is managed in the Nuventive platform the University uses for SACSCOC. Specific licensure courses are aligned to the various standards using national standard alignment documents (e.g., TESOL aligned with CAEP). The matrix is included to show alignment with the preparation standards.

The sciences programs are currently being mapped and aligned to the BIOL and CHEM Methods of Teaching courses in mock teaching, written reports, journals, universal lesson plans, and lesson planning. 

• BIO3710

• BIO 4724

1. Biology Program of Study

2. Chemistry Program of Study

The plan was developed based on the 2022-2024 data regarding enrollment and retention.

• Recruitment and Retention Plan

Residency I

The Residency Year comprises the final two semesters of the senior year. Candidates enter Residency I as a cohort and are engaged in authentic field-based experiences for fifty percent of their semester credit load. The remainder of the semester is designated for participation in professional studies and continued involvement in Problem-Based Learning and other effective instructional delivery methods. Candidates are engaged in coursework and experiences designed to develop general and content-specific pedagogy. During Residency I, Candidates initiate efforts toward completion of Task 1(Planning), Task 2(Instruction), and Task 3 (Assessment) of the Teacher Performance Assessment (edTPA). In addition, Candidates successfully submit a minimum of one Signature Formative)] Assessment (SFA) as a requirement for admission to Residency II. During Residency I, candidates spend 90-100 residential hours in a K-12 classroom. Candidates are placed with a classroom teacher, two (2) full days a week, who will serve as their Mentor Teacher during the year-long clinical placement. The program is structured to scaffold greater responsibility, sequenced observations, and participatory experiences, culminating in full-time cohort teaching in Residency II.

Residency II / Student Teaching

Residency II occurs in the spring semester of the senior year. It begins after Mandatory Spring Orientation. Candidates spend all day in the classroom five days a week co-teaching. They follow the same schedule as the mentor teacher and the calendar of the assigned school district. Residency II provides candidates with culminating opportunities on which to transition into the profession as competent and caring educators. Candidates are engaged in authentic experiences that will include co-teaching and problem-based learning.

Context 

Teacher candidates have regular and consistent opportunities to observe and practice in various settings (within and across schools, during different times of day, across different types of instruction, and school/classroom composition) to cover the breadth of the endorsement adequately. Specifically, TSU Educator Preparation Program candidates complete two years of preparation. The first year is considered Pre-Residency, whereby candidates take block courses that require field observations (including some tutoring) at selected school sites. These field experiences are designed to expose candidates to diverse settings (i.e., students with special needs). The second year is the Residency Year (R1 in the first semester, requiring 50% clinical time, and R2 in the second semester, requiring full-time teaching with the school-based provided educator). The Residency Year follows a co-teaching model in which the candidate and the school-based clinical educator are equally responsible for instruction, planning, and assessment. 

Depth. Educator candidates (teacher candidates) can observe, tutor through individual and small group delivery, deliver instruction, and review and collect assessment data in frequent, varied, intentionally planned experiences. Beginning in the Pre-Residency Year, candidates are primarily observed in clinical settings, and continuing to the Residency Year, in which candidates are fully engaged in co-teaching, candidates’ knowledge and skills are progressively developed. Coursework, such as classroom management and differentiated instruction, prepares candidates for managing the classroom and individualizing instruction. Formative feedback from school-based and provider-based clinical educators assists the candidates in developing requisite competencies. 

Coherence. Attention to the goals of each field/clinical experience is sequenced to ensure the developmental progression of the educator candidate (teacher candidate) across the continuum of their program. Coursework develops the requisite knowledge and skills to prepare candidates to become effective educators in their selected areas. Clinical and field experiences allow the candidates to practice the theories obtained from coursework and to receive mentoring and feedback from school-based clinical mentors and provider-based clinical educators to enhance their skills. The culminating assessment, edTPA®, provides evidence to determine the candidates’ mastery and the program’s effectiveness. 

Breadth. EPP faculty, with the support of LEA partners, designs/develops clinical experiences that include teaching and professional experiences reflecting appropriate content and pedagogical models across diverse school/classroom communities and curriculums. Pre-Residency and Residency allow candidates to experience various settings and address the instructional needs of diverse students. Candidates prepare lessons that require an extensive understanding of the content area. Moreover, candidates must differentiate instruction, teaching students with learning challenges and gifted students. As further evidence of competency, candidates are expected to demonstrate meaningful and effective utilization of technology to facilitate learning among their students using the TEAM evaluation. 

Duration. Field experiences are designed and varied in terms of time in various settings based on the goal of preparing successful first-year teachers. Field and clinical experiences span a two-year period, ranging from limited classroom observations to full-year co-teaching. Candidates will complete a full-year residency in a school setting. In the Pre-Residency Year, candidates will observe/participate in selected school sites depending on the subject course taken at the time (e.g., Exceptional Children). 

Diversity. Teacher candidates have regular opportunities to observe and practice in various settings (across different schools, classrooms, types of instruction, and times of day) to adequately cover the breadth of the endorsement and ensure exposure to varied school communities. Candidates have experience in different classrooms and with diverse students, starting in the Pre-Residency Year and continuing into the Residency Year. Before candidates even reach their Residency Year, courses require them to observe classrooms that include students with different needs and diverse backgrounds. Working with the MNPS, the TSU field placement and clinical experience coordinator identifies school settings that provide candidates with these diverse experiences. 

Manuals 

All manuals were designed to support all licensure areas. All initial programs are now aligned to TESS and the clinical requirement.

• Teacher Education Checkpoints - these are designed to provide the specifics of how candidates progress to clinical experience. 

• Revised Teacher Handbook - Teaching and Learning revised the handbook to explain the clinical experience further as the team works to update the process and better support candidates in secondary programs.  

• Residency Booklet Revised Residency Handbook for Clinicians and Supervisors (teacher education only).  The purpose was to ensure all clinicians and supervisors have a reference guide after training.  

Program Matrix Updated (literacy standards)

1. Biology Summary & Data Analysis - This document provides a summary and data analysis for the Biology Teacher Education Program for the 2023-2024 academic year. The Biology Teacher Education Program admitted three students in the 2023-2024 academic year with one more expected to apply. One student is graduating in Summer 2024. The average GPA of the students increased from 2.6 in Fall 2023 to 3.4 in Spring 2024. The program is actively engaged in recruitment through college fairs and events.

2. Praxis - Chemistry had no candidates with results. Biology indicated that over the three years, the passing percentage is low, with only 25% of students achieving the qualifying score. Males tend to score higher in Category 2 and Category 6, while females have a slight advantage in Category 3 and 4. There is individual variability in strengths and weaknesses within each gender. The small sample size, particularly for males, limits the generalizability of these findings. The specific content covered in each category could influence performance differences.

3. TVAAS [CAEP R4, RA4]  - While TVAAS data presents limitations due to low values, the team utilizes it to the fullest extent possible to inform program performance analysis. The number of teachers in each effectiveness level has varied over the 3 years from 2021 to 2023. However,  Science and Social Studies have slightly more representation in Level 2 and Level 3, hinting at variations in subject-specific teaching effectiveness.

4. Observation [CAEP R1, R3, R4, R5] - In response to the previous site visit, the EPP implemented systematic observation data collection in this cycle. This data is now integrated into our comprehensive analysis for enhanced program evaluation. For Biology, the team could only use one teacher. This teacher demonstrates several robust instructional practices, particularly in designing lessons, presenting content, and cultivating thinking skills. Focusing on student motivation, instructional materials, and students' knowledge, as well as strengthening content knowledge, represents key opportunities to refine their teaching further and improve student outcomes.

5. Data Report of Partnership—The data report is designed to capture the key metrics of our partnership, allowing us to assess the impact of TSU's teacher education program and identify areas for continued growth and collaboration. Again, Biology only represented one student.

1. Enrollment Trends:

• Both cycles show fluctuations in enrollment numbers across semesters, with minimal student numbers ranging from 1-3.

• The second cycle consistently has a higher number of enrolled students compared to the previous cycle.

2. Graduation Rates:

• Both cycles have very low graduation rates, with the second cycle having a slightly higher rate of 14%. The one graduate obtained a Biology Certification.

3. Retention Rates:

• The first cycle needs retention data for most semesters, making it difficult to assess student persistence.

• The second cycle shows some retention, particularly in the Fall 2022 to Fall 2023, with a 67% retention rate.

Potential Implications and Concerns

• Program Sustainability

• Program Recruitment and Retention

1. Evidence 

   • The narrative does not include evidence

     1. 1. Clinical Experience

        2. Demographic Data of Candidates

        3. Key Assessments 

        4. Advising 

        5. Program Checkpoints 

        6. Meeting that include 

           1. Data conversations related to QAS

           2. Partnerships