Program Evaluation

CAEP Accountability Measures

Listings of initial and advanced professional education programs and progression plans outlining program expectations (CAEP Annual Report Section 4.1; Initial R3.3/Advanced RA3.3) Accordion Closed

Initial teacher preparation programs as of Spring 2025

The following list of degree programs is linked to the NAU Catalog. The Details tab in the catalog identifies requirements that must be met to earn each degree and qualify for an Arizona Institutional Recommendation. Before candidates receive final clearance for student teaching, an academic advisor as well as PEP (Professional Education Programs) confirms completion of all program requirements. PEP again confirms completion all requirements prior to issuing an Institutional Recommendation. To access each program’s progression plan in the catalog, open the Overview tab and click on the progression plan link.

All programs are approved by the Arizona State Board of Education. All programs received CAEP accreditation during the last accreditation cycle in 2024 (except for a new ADE-approved program which launched in 2024, the Physical Education Path to Certification). The BSEd in Early Childhood and Early Childhood Special Education is further accredited by the National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC). The BMEd in Music Education is further accredited by the National Association of Schools of Music (NASM) .

Secondary Education Programs

Elementary, Early Childhood, and Special Education

Historical listing of initial teacher preparation programs

Advanced professional education programs as of Spring 2025

The degree program listed below are linked to their respective pages in the NAU catalog. The Details tab in the catalog outlines requirements that must be met to earn the degree/certificate and qualify for an Arizona Institutional Recommendation. To access a program of study, open the Overview tab and click on the program of study link. Completion of program requirements is confirmed by an academic advisor or faculty mentors from Education Leadership or School Psychology before the candidate is cleared to enroll in the final internship course. A second check of requirements is completed by the Office of Graduate and Professional Studies y when candidates apply for graduation. Finally, programs complete a final check of requirements prior to issuing an Institutional Recommendation. All programs are approved by the Arizona State Board of Education. All programs  were reviewed and accredited by CAEP in 2024. School Psychology is further accredited by the National Association of School Psychologists.

Educational Leadership

Educational Psychology

Historical listing of advanced professional education programs

Enrollment and graduation data (Initial R3.1/Advanced RA3.1) Accordion Closed

NAU’s enrollment and graduation data for all degree programs are publicly available through the Office of Strategic Planning, Institutional Research and Analytics (SPIRA). Candidates enrolled in initial teacher preparation programs (and other programs intended for in-service teachers) are eligible to apply for the Arizona Teachers Academy (ATA) Scholarship and Program, which is designed to support recruitment and retention of teachers for Arizona’s public schools; see NAU’s ATA website for more information about this scholarship and program. Over half of NAU’s initial teacher preparation candidates are members of the ATA. The ATA program also awards scholarships for practicing teachers who are seeking graduate content-area coursework so as to be eligible for dual-enrollment teaching. In AY 2023-2024, NAU supported 97 in-service teachers through the ATA dual-enrollment pathway.

Table 1 provides enrollment and graduation count for initial teacher preparation programs for the past three years. The second column of Table 1, “Enrollment in ITP majors,” identifies total enrollment figures for all undergraduates and graduate students who have selected an initial teacher preparation (ITP) major. The “PEP Admitted” column identifies students in an ITP major who have completed Professional Education Programs requirements including IVP fingerprint clearance cards, first-year coursework, GPA expectations, trainings, and other program and PEP requirements. Figures 1- 4 provide NAU’s ATA enrollment and graduation trends by academic year and campus location. Table 2 provides enrollment and graduation counts for advanced professional education programs. Following these data charts, we provide a narrative with analyses, interpretations, and use of data.

Table 1: Initial Teacher Preparation Programs Enrollment and Graduation Data

Academic YearEnrollment in Initial Teacher Preparation MajorAdmitted to PEPGraduates
2023-202417871432518
2022-202318761522495
2021-202219061665599

Figure 1: ATA at NAU Enrollment Trends by Academic Year

Figure 2: ATA at NAU Enrollment Trends by Academic Year and Campus Location

Figure 3: ATA at NAU Graduation Trends by Academic Year
Figure 4: ATA at NAU Graduation Trends by Academic Year and Campus Location

Data Sources: NAU’s SPIRA website for enrollment data; PEP’s Title II reports for graduation rates; PEP’s ATA at NAU reports.

Table 2: Advanced Professional Education Programs Enrollment and Graduation Data

Academic YearEnrollmentGraduates
2023-2024313132
2022-2023330148
2021-2022496141

Analyses, Interpretations & Use of Data

Initial teacher preparation programs:

Enrollment for initial teacher preparation programs has been declining for the past three academic years with 1,906 candidates in AY 2021-2022, and 1,876 candidates in AY 2022-2023, and 1,787 candidates in AY 2023-2024. Enrollment and graduation data, including ATA at NAU enrollment and graduation data, are shared internally with program faculty and leadership through a PEP Initial Teacher Preparation Coordinating Council meeting and through the COE/PEP Recruitment and Retention faculty and staff committee. The past three years of enrollment and graduation data for each program are also shared in the Arizona Department of Education’s biennial reports and NAU internal biennial reports. Additionally, these data were shared with external stakeholders at NAU PEP Annual Career Fair, which was attended by 91 districts and schools from across Arizona in Spring 2025.

There has been significant growth in ATA at NAU due to state approved-funding of the program beginning in AY 2019-2020. NAU’s ATA enrollment grew from 59 in AY2017-2018 to 1230 in AY 2023-2024 (figure 1). Interest in the ATA continues to be high, and NAU strives to distribute the full award allocation provided to NAU by the Arizona Board of Regents. The ATA at NAU graduation trend data show an increase. The number of ATA graduates grew from 26 in AY 2018-2019 to 415 in AY 2023-2024 (figure 3). ATA reports are shared internally with program faculty and leadership through the PEP Initial Teacher Preparation Coordinating Council as well as through public reports published by the Arizona Board of Regents. ATA’s data reports are available on the ATA at NAU website.

Advanced professional education programs:

Enrollment for NAU’s advanced professional education programs has declined in each of the past three years: 496, 330, and 313 in AYs 2021-2022, 2022-2023, and 2023-2024, respectively (table 2). The Educational Leadership program has begun working directly with several Arizona districts to build new grow-your-own partnerships. Graduation numbers for advanced programs indicate that MEd in Educational Leadership – Principal PreK-12 has remained stable over the past three years, with 73, 78, and 76 graduates in FY 2022, 2023, 2024, respectively. The Superintendent Graduate Certificate has shown the greatest decline, from 20 graduates in FY 2023 to 9 graduates in FY 2024. The three other graduate programs have shown less variation in graduation numbers and have remained fairly stable.

Enrollment and graduation data are shared internally with program faculty and leadership through the COE/PEP Recruitment and Retention faculty and staff committee. The past three years of enrollment and graduation data are also shared in programs’ external biennial reports to the Arizona Department of Education and internal NAU biennial reports completed during the fall semesters of even years.

Completer Impact and Effectiveness (Measure 1; Initial R4.1) Accordion Closed

NAU PEP works with the AZ K12 Center, a teacher mentoring center sponsored by NAU’s College of Education, to collect meaningful data regarding completer effectiveness of NAU graduates.

PEP and the AZ K12 Center collect data on the effectiveness of first-year teachers who were participants in the Arizona Teachers Academy (ATA). Given the significant number of initial teacher preparation program candidates enrolled in ATA, NAU is able to gather data from this sub-population about completer effectiveness. The ATA offers scholarships to any student in good academic standing (2.0 GPA for undergraduates; 3.0 GPA for graduate students) who is enrolled in an initial teacher education program leading to certification. In academic year 2023-2024, 63% of all initial teacher preparation candidates at NAU participated in the ATA.

ATA participants commit to teaching one year in an Arizona public school, public charter school, or Bureau of Indian Education school for any portion of a year they are an ATA member. The State of Arizona also funds mentoring services through the AZ K12 Center for ATA graduates during their first year of teaching in an Arizona school. PEP and AZ K-12 Center leadership and staff meet regularly to coordinate services, and develop recruitment and communication strategies directed to student teachers and graduates.

To provide evidence that NAU graduates “effectively contribute to P-12 student-learning growth,” (CAEP Standard Component R4.1) PEP analyzes the results of the New Teacher Center’s Analyzing Student Learning instrument, which the AZ K-12 Center encourages mentors to use in their work with beginning teachers. The Analyzing Student Learning tool allows first-year teachers to reflect on the learning achieved by students in their classrooms.. Mentors use coaching language to find entry points into a conversation with beginning teachers to show how to make connections between teacher efficacy and student performance. The AZ K-12 Center collects the Analyzing Student Learning tool from mentors  of NAU graduates.  A narrative providing analyses, interpretations, and use of these data is provided below.

To seek evidence related to NAU graduates applying “the professional knowledge, skills, and dispositions that the preparation experiences were designed to achieve” (CAEP R4.1), NAU PEP and AZ K12 Center staff co-developed the Beginning Teacher Effectiveness Observation Instrument. This instrument is aligned with InTASC standards and is completed by mentors in collaboration with their first-year-teacher mentees. Results are available through the links below. Following these result files, a narrative providing analyses, interpretations, and use of data is listed.

Analyses, Interpretations & Use of Data

Analyzing Student Learning Results from AY 2021-2022 (Pilot Year) and AY 2022-2023

In AY 2021-2022 (pilot year), the Analyzing Student Learning tool was used by mentors with four AY 2020-2021 graduates. The four  samples were for mathematics lessons at the 1st, 3rd, 5th, and 7th grade levels. In AY 2022-2023, the Analyzing Student Learning tool was used by mentors with 10 NAU graduates from AY 2021-2022, representing  the following NAU initial teacher preparation programs: Elementary Education (BSEd), Secondary Education – English (BSEd), Secondary Education – Mathematics (BSEd), and Special and Elementary Education (BSEd). One NAU graduate completed the Analyzing Student Learning tool four times with their mentor. Overall results from the instrument indicate that the majority of K-12 students whose learning was evaluated in the Analyzing Student Learning tool exceeded the lesson standards (n = 6, 56%), met the lesson standards (n = 13, 37%) or earned a score(s) related to approaching the lesson standards (n =11, 59%). A performance rating could not be provided for some students at the time the Analyzing Student Learning tool was completed. In AY 2024-2025, the AZ K-12 Center was able to collect 66  Analyzing Student Learning samples, covering 45 first-year teachers, a significant improvement over AY 2022-2023 and 2023-2024. The results of the survey were disaggregated by program and shared with faculty from initial teacher preparation programs. In Fall 2024, faculty reviewed the Analyzing Student Learning data as applied to their unique programs, and program-level biennial reports included an analysis of the data.

Table 1 Distribution of Analyzing Student Learning Instrument across Programs

ProgramAY 2023-2024AY 2024-2025
Elementary Education (BSED)1332
Elementary Education (MEd)210
Special and Elementary Education (BSED)86
Early Childhood Education and Early Childhood Special Education (BSED)-12
Secondary Education – English (BSED)-4
Secondary Education-Mathematics (BSED)-2
Secondary Education-Science fields (BSED)-5
Unidentified program-1

Beginning Teacher Effectiveness Observation Survey Results from Fall 2021 (Pilot), Fall 2022,  Spring 2023, and AY 2023-2024

The Beginning Teacher Effectiveness Observation Instrument measures professional knowledge, skills, and dispositions. When completing this survey, mentors  observe mentees’ classroom practices and debrief with their mentees. Additionally, mentees have time in the classroom as a beginning teacher to recognize their strengths and areas for improvement. The instrument is aligned to InTASC standards.  In AY 2022-2023, 43 survey responses were received for 33 unique completers (first-year teachers and ATA recipients who graduated from NAU in AY 2021-2022). Ten spring responses were received for completers who were also evaluated in fall. Respondents indicated that Learning Environments (InTASC Standard 3) was by far the strongest teaching practice area of our graduates (92% in Fall 2022, n = 11; 75% in Spring 2023, n = 18). Content Knowledge (InTASC Standard 4; 58% in Fall 2022, n = 7; 63% in Spring 2023, n = 15) and Dispositions (58% in Fall 2022, n = 7) were additional areas of strength. Respondents indicated that our graduates were struggling or lacked confidence in relation to their teaching practices in Classroom Management (67% in Fall 2021, n = 8; 58% in Fall 2022, n = 11; 46% in Spring 2023, n = 11). Of the 24 completers who submitted a Beginning Teacher Effectiveness Observation Survey in Spring 2023, 10 were from completers who also submitted the survey in Fall 2022.

Across these three data cycles, respondents indicated that Learning Environments (InTASC Standard 3) was by far the strongest teaching practice area of our graduates (75-92%). In Fall 2021, the next strongest area indicated by respondents was Planning for Instruction (InTASC Standard 7; 67%); while in Fall 2022 and/or Spring 2022, Content Knowledge (InTASC Standard 4; 58% in Fall 2022; 63% in Spring 2023) and Dispositions (58% in Fall 2022) were additional areas our graduates demonstrated effective teaching practices. Across the three data cycles, the area that respondents indicated our graduates were struggling or lacked confidence in relation to their teaching practices was Classroom Management (46-67%).

In AY 2023-2024, the AZ K12 Center received 69 completed Beginning Teacher Effectiveness Instruments across multiple programs, with BSEd and MEd in Elementary Education and the BSEd in Special and Elementary Education receiving 82% of the completed instruments (n = 57).

In AY 2024-2025, the AZ K12 Center received 77 completed Beginning Teacher Effectiveness instruments, representing 63 unique completers. Of these, 14 graduates were observed in both fall and spring, offering insight into their professional growth over the course of their first year of teaching. Respondents identified Planning for Instruction (InTASC Standard 7) and Content Knowledge (InTASC Standard 4) as the most consistently demonstrated strengths by NAU graduates (58% in Fall 2024, n = 20; 63% in Spring 2025, n = 26 and 63% in Fall 2024, n = 22; 58% in Spring 2025, n = 24, respectively). Additionally, Classroom Management (InTASC Standard 3) was reported as a strength by 54% of Spring 2025 respondents (n = 23), up from 37% (n = 13) in Fall 2024—suggesting growth in this domain. While the Learning Environment, previously cited as the strongest in earlier cycles, declined slightly (42% in Spring 2025, n = 18), it still remained a frequently mentioned area of competence. The most consistently identified area for improvement across Fall 2024 and Spring 2025 was again Classroom Management (79% in Fall 2024, n = 28; 54% in Spring 2025, n = 23), maintaining its trend from previous years (e.g., 67% in Fall 2021, 58% in Fall 2022). Other prominent areas where graduates were reported to lack confidence include Learner Differences (68% in Fall 2024, n = 24; 54% in Spring 2025, n = 23) and Instructional Strategies (47% in Fall 2024, n = 16; 42% in Spring 2025, n = 18). This consistent feedback suggests that ongoing support in differentiated instruction and pedagogical planning could further strengthen first-year teacher readiness.

The Beginning Teacher Effectiveness Observation Instrument will continue to be administered by the AZ K12 Center in October and March. The decision to administer this survey during these months was a collaborative decision by NAU PEP and the AZ K12 Center to allow the mentor and mentee enough time working together to provide meaningful responses. Additionally, in conjunction with completion of this survey, mentors collaborate with their mentees on goals based on a combination of InTASC standards, the district’s evaluation rubric, and priority indicators through the New Teacher Center of the AZ K12 Center.

The AZ K12 Center has found that waiting to administer this survey allows for richer conversation that is authentic to the knowledge, skills, and disposition of that beginning teacher. In addition to publicly posting results of this evaluation measure on the NAU PEP Program Evaluation: CAEP Accountability Measures web page, these results along with data from other instruments (e.g., student teaching evaluation measures) and input from stakeholders (e.g., Cooperating Teachers feedback) are shared internally with program faculty and leadership through the PEP Initial Teacher Preparation Coordinating Council meetings. Program faculty and leadership review these data to determine if any program improvements are needed and if so, what curriculum changes should be made.

Satisfaction of employers (Measure 2; Initial R4.2/Advanced RA4.1) Accordion Closed

Initial teacher preparation programs:

NAU PEP gathers employer satisfaction from a Supervisor Survey that is sent to employers of NAU program completers in their first year of teaching.

Analysis, Interpretation & Use of Data

NAU PEP uses three NExT (Network for Excellence in Teaching) Common Metrics Instruments to collect data from candidates and their employers.

  • NExT Exit Survey (administered to candidates as they complete student teaching;
  • NExT Transition to Teaching Survey (administered to first-year teachers approximately one year after graduation);
  • NExT Supervisor Survey (administered to the employers of  the first-year teachers)

The NExT surveys are aligned with each other as well as to InTASC standards. The NExT Surveys are proprietary instruments and have evidence of validity and reliability.

In Summer-Fall 2023, 95 employers received the NExT Supervisor Survey and 20 employers responded (a 21% response rate). Almost all respondents (98%-100%) said that our completers were particularly effective in using digital and interactive technologies to achieve instructional goals (InTASC Standard 8) and creating a learning environment in which differences such as race, culture, gender, sexual orientation, and language are respected (InTASC 3). Other areas of strength included effectiveness in teaching in the subject matter of their licensure field (95%; InTASC 4); selecting instructional strategies aligned with learning goals and standards (95%, InTASC 8); designing and modifying assessment to match learning objectives (95%; InTASC 6); and using effective communication skills and strategies to convey ideas and information to students (95%, InTASC 5).

In Summer 2022, Summer-Fall 2023, and Summer-Fall 2024, employers of NAU program completers discussed their satisfaction with completers’ abilities as follows:

  • To work with diverse learners (CAEP Standard Component R1.1) in that 91% of respondents said that our completers effectively teach students from culturally and ethnically diverse backgrounds and communities (InTASC Standard 2).
  • Almost all respondents (98% to 100%) indicated that NAU completers use digital and interactive technologies to achieve instructional goals (InTASC Standard 8); select instructional strategies to align with learning goals and standards (InTASC Standard 8); use formative and summative assessments to inform instructional practice (InTASC Standard 6); and plan lessons with clear learning objectives/goals in mind (InTASC Standard 7).
  • Over 92% to 96% of employers were also satisfied with completers’ abilities to establish positive learning environments (CAEP Standard Components R1.1 and R1.2); use effective communication skills and strategies to convey ideas and information to students (InTASC Standard 5); develop and maintain a classroom environment that promotes student engagement (InTASC Standard 3); and create a learning environment in which differences such as race, culture, gender, sexual orientation, and language are respected (InTASC Standard 3).
  • For employers’ satisfaction related to completers’ levels of professionalism (CAEP Standard Component R1.4), 96% said that seeking out learning opportunities that align with professional development goals (InTASC Standard 9) was a strength of completers, and collaborating with parents, guardians, and colleagues to support students learning and improve student performance (InTASC Standard 10) were considered completer strengths by 92% of respondents. A higher percentage of employers scored completers in the highest category, “Agree,” in 2024 than in 2023, rising from 55% marking “Agree” to 87% marking “Agree.”
  • Employers identified the following areas for improvement (CAEP Standard Components R1.1 and R1.3) based on higher percentages of lower employer ratings (of Tend to Disagree or Disagree): ability to differentiate to meet the needs of students from various socioeconomic backgrounds (InTASC Standard 2; 17%, n = 8); differentiates instruction for a variety of learning needs (InTASC Standard 2; 15%, n = 7); regularly adjusts instructional plans to meet student needs (InTASC Standard 7; 14.5%, n = 7); and helps students develop critical thinking processes (InTASC Standard 1, ~10%, n = 5).

Advanced professional education programs:

Educational Leadership Focus Group Data Analysis

The EDL faculty began collecting employer satisfaction data through conducting focus group interviews with partner districts (see Focus Group Protocol) and identifying program completers (i.e. principals and superintendents) who were also responsible for hiring EDL program completers.

Employers from our largest partner districts participated in focus groups in December 2021, May 2022, and December 2022. Employers were complimentary of the hands-on, relevant degree program which enabled graduates to enter district positions with a degree of familiarity of processes and procedures. They indicated that the graduates hired in their district were well-prepared and “have a good understanding of what’s expected of them as an administrator”. The district participants in the focus group encouraged the continuance of the partnership and offering of the degree program locally, which is specifically geared toward producing administrators with the knowledge and skills germane to the district while maintaining the high preparation standards of NELP. All focus groups identified evidence of quality preparation in our programs and complemented programs’ realistic expectations of administrative duties and functions.

In an effort to better identify employers of Educational Leadership program completers, PEP developed a data-sharing agreement with the Arizona Department of Education in Fall 2023 which was approved in Spring 2024. ADE agrees to share the employment locations of program completers, which will allow program faculty to develop a greater pool of employers from which to gather employer satisfaction data.

School Psychology Survey efforts

The faculty of EdS School Psychology administered an employer satisfaction survey to focus groups in Summer 2022, Fall 2022, and Spring 2023. The Summer and Fall 2022 focus groups consisted of Arizona school psychologists from Phoenix, Tucson, and some rural areas. The Spring 2023 focus group focused on the Phoenix metropolitan area, which involves the majority of our fieldwork placements.

  • Employers find that our completers tend to present with high disposition and interpersonal skills and are skilled in interacting with parents, children, and professionals in conducting psychoeducational evaluations. Completers tend to present as highly prepared to conduct their assigned tasks, including conducting cognitive and academic achievement evaluations, social-emotional and mental health evaluations, and writing psychoeducational reports, as well as helping multidisciplinary teams in making special education eligibility recommendations. In summary, employers spoke about a track record of high quality regarding the school psychology EdS completers.

One of our findings was that our EdS School Psychology candidates would benefit from additional training on conducting functional behavioral assessments. We cover these types of assessments in our practicum coursework, but in light of the feedback we received, we have worked to ensure that our practicum classes provide more direct instruction on conducting functional behavioral assessments.

The School Psychology faculty are preparing an extensive reaccreditation plan so as to be prepared for their program’s reaccreditation by NASP. This assessment plan includes focus groups and surveys of employers.

Stakeholder involvement (Measure 2; Initial R5.3/Advanced RA5.3) Accordion Closed

Initial teacher preparation programs:

NAU PEP has established two key approaches to improve our collection of feedback from key stakeholders, cooperating teachers (CTs) and principals/directors.

PEP Career Fair Survey: In Spring 2024, approximately 101 districts and schools brought 223 employers and other stakeholders to the NAU Professional Education Programs Career Fair. In addition to employers from across the state, PEP encourages NAU graduate programs, associations such as the Arizona Middle-Level Educators, the AZ K-12 Center, and the Arizona Department of Education to set up tables at the fair and promote post-graduation opportunities. In 2024, PEP partnered with NAU Career Services to offer pre-fair workshops on interviewing techniques.

The stakeholders who attend the career fair—employers, organizations, and state entities–offered multiple thoughtful responses that can be directly applied to initial teacher preparation program coursework. Suggestions included having practicum experiences include higher and lower socioeconomic schools. Another employer suggested having veteran teachers as well as school administrators give classroom presentations about managing workplace politics and communicating with principals and fellow teachers. Career Fair survey results on this NAU PEP Program Evaluation web page are shared internally with program faculty and leadership through a PEP Initial Teacher Preparation Coordinating Council meeting.

Student Teaching Cooperating Teacher Survey: Beginning in AY 2021-2022, additional feedback items were added to the mid-term administration of the Student Teaching CT Survey instruments. These new items share data results from the respective student teaching evaluation instruments from the previous academic year and request feedback regarding these data results in relation to the candidate the CT is mentoring. The items also request general feedback regarding communication, training materials, and placement processes/procedures.

Teacher Preparation Advisory Council: A Teacher Preparation Advisory Council was formed in AY 2021-2022 with the first meeting convening in Spring 2022. CTs and principals/directors were invited to participate through the additional instrument items and through direct emails to CTs and principals/directors who frequently accept NAU student teachers. Participation in the Teacher Preparation Advisory Council was approved by the Arizona Department of Education as qualifying for “Serving in a leadership role of a professional organization related to the profession of teaching or the field of public education” (see Educator Certification: Renew Your Certification | Arizona Department of Education (azed.gov), Professional Development Activities).

  • Spring 2024: On February 14, the advisory council met to discuss the upcoming CAEP site visit and to gather volunteers to meet with the site reviewers. In addition to gathering volunteers to attend the site visit, the council offered feedback on the feasibility of deleting the student teacher biography from applications. In the open questions section, PEP learned that cooperating teachers felt that candidates needed much more preparation in working with IEP and 504 plans. This feedback is in agreement with the feedback from the employer satisfaction survey and the completer’s satisfaction surveys.
  • Spring 2023: In February/March 2023, a total of 9 cooperating teachers and 1 principal/director participated in the meeting aligned to their position and/or discipline area. Participants represented schools and districts in Flagstaff as well as other Arizona communities where NAU delivers teacher preparation programs including Chandler, Lakeside and Apache County, Prescott, and Holbrook. The data presentations from Spring 2023 for each group are linked below.
  • Fall 2022: In October 2022, the Teacher Preparation Advisory Council met, and a total of 10 cooperating teachers and 2 principals/directors participated in the meeting aligned to their position and/or discipline area. Participants represented schools and districts in Flagstaff as well as other Arizona communities where NAU delivers teacher preparation programs including Williams, Tucson, Deer Valley, Lakeside and Apache County, Yuma, and Gilbert. The data presentations from Fall 2022 for each group are linked below.
  • Spring 2022: In February/March 2022, a total of 6 cooperating teachers and 3 principals/directors participated in the meeting aligned to their position and/or discipline area. Participants represented schools and districts in Flagstaff as well as other Arizona communities where NAU delivers teacher preparation programs, such as Yuma and Glendale. The data presentations from Spring 2022 for each group are linked below.

 Analyses, Interpretations & Use of Data

Although we have consistently connected with school and district partners through NAU PEP’s Annual Career Fair, NAU PEP sought to improve our collection of feedback from cooperating teachers and principals/directors for program improvement. Results from the Cooperating Teacher Survey as well as feedback noted through the Teacher Preparation Advisory Council meetings have been shared with programs.

At the unit level, the PEP Initial Teacher Preparation (ITP) Coordinating Council acted upon feedback from cooperating teachers who indicated that the scale for the Cooperating Teacher Survey items did not allow for the option of communicating to teacher candidates that while they observed a candidate’s growth/development, there was still room for improvement. This feedback was shared with the Teacher Preparation Advisory Council members as noted in the presentations. The members were in support of this recommended change to the scale to improve feedback to teacher candidates and quality of data collected and reported. At the March 2022 ITP Coordinating Council Meeting, the change to the scale for the Cooperating Teacher Survey instruments was approved for implementation beginning in AY 2022-2023.

Given the data results, the PEP staff who oversee student teaching are working on ways to improve communication regarding expectations to cooperating teachers/principals/directors. A concise handout summarizing key aspects of the mentor teacher role was developed and provided to cooperating teachers/principals/directors beginning in Fall 2022. Expanded details regarding the cooperating teacher role is described in the Teacher Candidate handbook.

At the Spring 2023 meeting of the Teacher Preparation Advisory Council, PEP shared a proposed change of the Alerts Instrument used for NAU’s initial teacher preparation programs including in student teaching. The attendees offered very positive feedback about a potential instrument, and they suggested some additional considerations for the instrument. These suggestions have been shared with the ITP Coordinating Council Alerts Subcommittee.

In the Spring 2024 Teacher Preparation Advisory Council, PEP learned that cooperating teachers and district liaisons did not feel the need to have student teachers complete a biographical statement as part of their application and profile. Starting in Fall 2024, the biographical statement was removed from the student teaching application.

Advanced educator programs:

Principal (GCert & MEd) and Superintendent (GCert & EdD)

Educational Leadership faculty members who coordinate the Principal and Superintendent programs participated in several data-gathering efforts regarding satisfaction of employers and stakeholder involvement. These included a focus group in Fall 2021, as well as a stakeholder survey in Spring 2022.

A focus group held in Fall 2021 provided rich data from stakeholders with one partner school district offering an accelerated MEd Education Leadership – Principal K-12, which was co-constructed and implemented between NAU and the district. The stakeholders from the partner school district noted the professionalism of the program, the rigor, as well as its effectiveness. As stakeholders, they expressed interest in keeping the program relevant, real-life, and hands-on. They noted hiring program graduates as a mutual benefit. Other benefits discussed included the ability to augment syllabi to include what candidates want to know more about, the camaraderie of the program, and the practicality of the degree. Given their familiarity with the EdD Educational Leadership-K-12 Administration degree program, focus group participants also discussed this program. Participants described the cohort nature of the program, as well as the ability to draw on one’s experiences while working through the program as two strengths.

A stakeholder survey in Spring 2022 (N = 36) yielded a 44% response rate. Responses were received from school and district leaders, community partners, faculty members, candidates, past graduates, and emeriti faculty. Through the survey results, respondents indicated they had been involved in program design (37.5%), continuous improvement (31.25%), and program evaluation (31.25%). Program design examples included reformatting and implementing new syllabi, developing the American Indian School Leadership Program, supporting accreditation work, and designing new courses. Examples of continuous improvement efforts included providing programmatic feedback, acknowledging the role of readily accessible mentors for part-time faculty who teach in the programs, and improving upon programs such as the American Indian School Leadership Program.

A focus group (N = 6) with another Arizona district was held in Summer 2022. This focus group consisted of elementary and high school principals and members of the superintendency. Additionally, some members were program completers and employers. The Summer 2022 stakeholder responses yielded information regarding their appreciation about the flexibility of the programs and the importance of realizing that candidates are juggling lives of the principalship and superintendency, as well as ways to solicit information for improvement. One program completer stakeholder noted, “I could be able to do all the things I wanted to do in my profession, but then still be able to take the program.” The importance of the cohort model was also emphasized in assisting one another supportively. One participant indicated that asking for program improvement suggestions from district mentors in the program may be beneficial. Program completers as stakeholders mentioned the length of classes in the accelerated programs, both the pros and cons. Most moving, though, may have been the candidate (now administrator) stakeholder who said, “I like the fact that they didn’t give up on me when I had given it up on myself.”

The EPP and the Arizona Department of Education signed a data-sharing agreement in Fall 2023 which will allow advanced programs to learn about the location of their program graduates in districts across the state. This new information will allow program faculty to better engage with stakeholders across Arizona.  In the summer of 2024, faculty in the two principalship advanced programs began grow-your-own conversations with Maricopa County school districts.

School Psychology (EdS)

In AY 2021-2022, a stakeholder survey was developed and administered to school/district mentors who work with EdS School Psychology candidates. The results of this survey yielded 33 responses, an 18% response rate. Most school/district respondents had participated as a mentor for internship candidates completing an embedded assessment, the Competency Evaluation of Practicum Field/Internship Experiences (CEFE) (85.71%) and one respondent had participated in program evaluation (14.29%). The CEFE is a comprehensive appraisal of the development of candidates’ skills in practice and is organized by each of the 10 NASP 2020 Domains of Practice. Under each of the domains, there are key skill areas that relate to each of the domains. CEFE data, along with ratings on other internship signature assignment submissions and other available data, guide decisions regarding a candidate towards recommending progression to internship semester two or program completion. Survey respondents indicated participating in evaluating interns, supporting placements of practica candidates with supervisors who in turn evaluated the intern, supervised interns in schools, coordinated interns and practicum candidates, had interns in the past, and/or provided university proctors with feedback regarding candidate preparation. Program evaluation comments included evaluating the preparation of interns and practicum candidates.

Following the pilot administration in AY 2021-2022, and to maximize the quality of stakeholder feedback, in AY 2022-2023 the survey protocol was administered to stakeholders and employers through focus groups rather than through emailed surveys. In Summer 2022, the stakeholder survey was administered in a focus group at the June meeting of the Arizona Association of School Psychology. The group included individuals who had supervised practicum candidates and interns as well as employers who had hired graduates of the NAU School Psychology program. In Fall 2022 and Spring 2023, another focus group was conducted with lead school psychologists from the following Arizona school districts: Scottsdale, Deer Valley, Roosevelt, Cottonwood, Gilbert, and Humbolt. These districts represent urban and rural districts as well as Title I schools and affluent suburban districts. The stakeholders indicated that the candidates were extremely well prepared, have high integrity, and are responsible individuals. The stakeholders also noted that the cohort model adopted by the School Psychology program was very effective.

The EdS School Psychology program is preparing for its next NASP review and has established a multi-year curriculum and assessment action plan. This plan includes a 2025-2026 employer survey/focus group to gain better understanding of needed program improvements.

Candidate competency at completion (Measure 3; Initial R3.3/Advanced RA3.3) Accordion Closed

Initial teacher preparation programs:

NAU PEP monitors candidate progression and competency from admission to a teacher preparation program (i.e., meeting Additional Admission Requirements specified in the catalog) through completion through the following practices and measures (CAEP Standards R3.2 and R3.3):

We have established and documented policies and procedures that outline the steps followed by academic advisors when working with teacher preparation candidates. These policies and procedures align with the PEP Data Management System (in Salesforce, a university supported application) and the associated online applications and automated email communications for PEP approval and student teaching clearance.

Student teaching requires successful completion of several instruments that measure candidate competency related to InTASC Model Core Teaching Standards. The primary student teaching observation instruments are:

  • National Institute for Excellence in Teaching (NIET) Aspiring Teacher Rubric (used for NAU’s teacher preparation programs except the Secondary Education Math and Sciences programs)
    • The Aspiring Teacher Rubric (ATR) is a proprietary instrument developed by the National Institute for Excellence in Teaching. The ATR instrument is explicitly aligned to InTASC Standards. It is a validated instrument that requires NIET training; all university supervisors are certified by NIET to use the ATR instrument. The AY  2021-2022, 2022-2023, and 2023-2024 aggregate ATR data results were shared internally with the Initial Teacher Preparation (ITP) Coordinating Council; aggregate and disaggregated results were shared with program faculty to inform two-year action plans developed in program-level biennial reports. As part of the midterm evaluation, Cooperating Teachers (external stakeholders) were given the ATR results and asked to comment on these results and offer suggestions for program improvements in relation to the ATR results. The raw data results and data analysis of these additional items as well as open-ended comments provided by Cooperating Teachers are provided to ITP Coordinating Council members and program coordinators at ITP CC meetings to determine if any instructional or program improvements are needed and if so, what curriculum changes should be made. Work related to the ATR (including examples of use of data from program level assessment report files) are documented by the EPP in an evidence file (see Evidence File: Student Teaching Evaluation: ATR Summary & Data ).
  • University of Texas Austin UTeach Observation Protocol (used for NAU’s Secondary Education Mathematics and Sciences initial teacher preparation programs)
      • The UTeach Observation Protocol (UTOP) is a proprietary instrument developed by the University of Texas at Austin. UTOP is explicitly aligned to InTASC Standards. It is a validated instrument that requires inter-rater reliability training to support the consistent implementation and reliability of the data collected. The AY  2021-2022, 2022-2023, and 2023-2024 aggregate ATR data results were shared internally with the Initial Teacher Preparation (ITP) Coordinating Council; aggregate and disaggregated results were shared with program faculty to inform two-year action plans developed in program-level biennial reports. As part of the midterm evaluation, cooperating teachers in STEM fields (external stakeholders) are given the UTOP results and asked to comment on these results and offer suggestions for program improvements in relation to the ATR results. The raw data results and data analysis from these additional items as well as open ended comments provided by Cooperating Teachers are provided to ITP Coordinating Council members and program coordinators and are reviewed in each program’s biennial report to inform  instructional or program improvements are needed and if so, what curriculum changes should be made. Summary information regarding the UTOP and data analysis are documented by the EPP in an evidence file (see Evidence File: Student Teaching Evaluation: UTOP Summary & Data Analysis).

Arizona has several requirements for teacher preparation programs that are intended to ensure candidate competency. These requirements include:

Advanced educator programs:

NAU’s advanced professional education programs include the EdS School Psychology and four Educational Leadership programs (Principal GCert, MEd Educational Leadership – Principal K-12,  Superintendent GCert, EdD Educational Leadership – Pre K-12 Administration). These programs follow prescribed curricula tied to respective national standards (National Association of School Psychologists [NASP]; and National Educational Leadership Preparation [NELP]).

Entry into these programs requires adherence to NAU’s OGPS admission criteria, as well as individual program admission requirements: School Psychology EdS; Principal GCert, Educational Leadership – Principal Pre K-12 MEd, Superintendent GCert, Educational Leadership – K-12 Administration EdD).

Candidates are guided by faculty and advisors throughout their program of study (POS), which ensures proper class sequencing and mentoring. Programs provide handbooks (e.g. School Psychology Student Handbook) and/or other appropriate guiding documents that are shared internally with candidates to assist with their progression. Additionally, NAU’s Office of Graduate and Professional Studies (OGPS) monitors candidate progress through grade reports. When candidates fall below grade thresholds, academic improvement plans are constructed to assist the candidates toward success. For example, in the School Psychology EdS program, a review of academic and professional progress occurs for each candidate at the end of each semester. Candidates also formally meet with advisors on an annual basis to discuss their progress in the program. At that meeting, the candidate reviews the rating form and comments related to their progress in the areas of didactic coursework; research skills and progress; clinical skills and progress; assistantship performance; interpersonal skills and professionalism; self-awareness, self-evaluation, and critical thinking skills; other accomplishments and/or concerns; and status on graduation requirements. Similar processes and procedures are followed for the Principal and Superintendent programs. In particular, the Principal and Superintendent programs check for successful completion of program requirements prior to final clearance to begin the internship course and again at the conclusion of the program of study before the state Institutional Recommendation is issued to the graduate.

Ability of graduates to meet licensing and state requirements and Title II Reports (Measure 3; Initial R3.3/Advanced RA3.3) Accordion Closed

Initial teacher preparation programs:

Licensure exam pass rates

Note: These data are based on Title II reports filed by Professional Education Programs. Title II reports are due in April or May each year and report the previous academic year’s data. Statewide Average Pass Rate data become available two years later, typically in the spring semester. Scores are only reported when there are 12 or more candidates. In Table 1 and Table 2, NAU pass rates are disaggregated for traditional programs and alternative programs (defined as a program in which graduate students serve as a teacher-of-record intern rather than as a traditional student teacher). State pass rates are overall rates and are not disaggregated.

Table 1. Overall Assessment Pass Rates reported to Title II (Traditional Programs)

Program GraduatesNumber Taking TestNumber Passing TestPass Rate (%)Statewide Avg. Pass Rate (%)
AY 2023-202446145098%
AY 2022-202347245997%84%
AY 2021-202256454496%88%
AY 2020-202148748399%84%

Table 2. Overall Assessment Pass Rates reported to Title II (Alternative Programs)

Program GraduatesNumber Taking TestNumber Passing TestPass Rate (%)Statewide Avg. Pass Rate (%)
AY 2023-2024545398%
AY 2022-20232121100%84%
AY 2021-2022353394%88%
AY 2020-2021342985%84%

Table 3.  Elementary Education: NAU’s Average Pass Rates for NES Professional Knowledge Exams (Required Exam for Teacher Certification)

NES ExamNAU's Average Pass RateState's Average Pass Rate
AY 2023-2024 96%94%
AY 2022-2023 97%96%
AY 2021-2022 95%96%

Table 4. Secondary Education: NAU’s Average Pass Rates for NES Professional Knowledge Exams (Required Exam for Teacher Certification), AY 2022-2023

NES ExamNAU's Average Pass RateState's Average Pass Rate
AY 2023-202499%95%
AY 2022-2023100%95%
AY 2021-202299%97%

Table 5. Early Childhood Education: NAU’s Average Pass Rates for NES Professional Knowledge Exams (Required Exam for Teacher Certification), AY 2021-2022

NES ExamNAU's Average Pass RateState's Average Pass Rate
AY 2023-2024100%81%
AY 2022-202393%86%
AY 2021-202289%86%

Table 6. Special Education: NAU’s Average Pass Rates for NES Professional Knowledge Exams (Required Exam for Teacher Certification), AY 2021-2022

NES ExamNAU's Average Pass RateState's Average Pass Rate
AY 2023-202491%85%
AY 2022-202395%85%
AY 2021-202295%88%

Analyses, Interpretations & Use of Data

For the past three reported years (i.e., AYs 2021-2022, 2022-2023 and 2023-2024), licensure exam pass rates for completers of initial teacher preparation programs reported to Title II have been at 96%, 97%, and 98% for traditional programs. These high licensure exam pass rates for NAU’s initial program candidates are higher than the state’s average pass rate of 91% for traditional programs.

In AY 2021-2022, there were 35 NAU alternative pathway program graduates taking the tests with 94% passing their licensure exam. In 2022-2023 there were 21 NAU alternative pathway program graduates with 100% licensure exam pass rate. In 2023-2024, there were 54 alternative program graduates with a 98% pass rates. Statewide Average Pass Rate data for AY 2021-2022 are not yet available from Title II, we expect these data to become available in Spring 2024.

Table 3 documents NAU’s average pass rates for specific NES Professional Knowledge Exams for AY 2021-2022 thru AY 2023-2024. The Arizona Department of Education requires a passing score on the appropriate Professional Knowledge Exam for teacher certification. As noted in the chart, NAU’s average pass rate for the three years reported met or exceeded the state’s average pass rate for the same three reporting years.

PEP’s licensure exam pass rates are reviewed each spring, especially in relation to available state pass rate data for all EPP programs. The results are shared internally with program faculty and leadership through the PEP Initial Teacher Preparation Coordinating Council and program review assessment report files. Additionally, the average pass rates for the Professional Knowledge Exams (Table 3) are shared with candidates through an Arizona Teacher Licensure Exams: Information and Preparation Resources webinar and web page (see https://legacy.nau.edu/coe/test-preparation-resources/). The webinar has been offered twice each year since it was piloted in AY 2021-2022.

State requirement

Youth suicide prevention training is a state requirement passed by the Arizona legislature that all teacher training programs provide suicide awareness and prevention instruction (see Statue 15-1656. Suicide prevention training). This requirement aligns to CAEP Standards R1.4, “candidates engage in professional learning”, R3.2, “the provider creates and monitors transition points from admission through completion that indicate candidates’ professional responsibilities.”, and  R3.3, “the provider ensures candidates possess academic competency to teach effectively with positive impacts on diverse P-12 student learning and development”, and as noted in the CAEP Annual Report for Measure 3 (R3.3), “data that reflect the ability of EPP candidates to meet state requirements.” Information and data reporting regarding this state requirement is being tracked and maintained in an evidence file maintained internally by the EPP.

Arizona EPP’s implemented this new state requirement during AY 2020-2021. During Fall 2020, NAU researched various options and selected a state approved, free, online training option called “Making Educators Partners in Youth Suicide Prevention: ACT on FACTS” which was developed by the Society for the Prevention of Teen Suicide (see https://sptsuniversity.org/). This required professional development training was launched in Spring 2021.

The aggregated assessment results for the pilot administration in Spring 2021 showed that 95% of NAU’s teacher candidates completed the Youth Suicide Prevention Training. The aggregated results of Fall 2021 (100%), Spring 2022 (98%), Fall 2022 (98%), and Spring 2023 (97%) demonstrate a continued high level of compliance with completion of the mandatory Youth Suicide Prevention Training. In Spring 2024, the Arizona Department of Education further clarified the state law that EPP’s were required to make youth suicide prevention training available to candidates, but that it was not a program requirement and would not factor into institutional recommendations.

Title II Reports

Traditional Programs, 2023-2024

Alternative Programs, 2023-2024

Traditional Programs, 2022-2023

Alternative Programs, 2022-2023

Traditional Programs, 2021-2022

Alternative Programs, 2021-2022

Traditional Programs, 2020-2021

Alternative Programs, 2020-2021

Traditional Programs, 2019-2020

Alternative Programs, 2019-2020

Traditional Programs, 2018-2019

Alternative Programs, 2018-2019

Traditional Programs, 2017-2018

Alternative Programs, 2017-2018

Advanced professional education programs:

Principal (GCert & MEd) and Superintendent (GCert & EdD)

The principal and superintendent programs are the only advanced programs that require completion of a licensure exam for certification. Listed below are the number of program graduates in these programs. This information is provided for comparison with aggregate pass rate results for the total number of NAU candidates in Tables 4, 5, 6 and 7.

AEPA/NES principal and superintendent exams pass rates

AY 2023-2024, Program Graduates

  • Principal Graduate Certificate & MEd Educational Leadership – Principal Pre K-12 programs = 95
  • Superintendent Graduate Certificate & EdD Educational Leadership – K-12 Administration programs = 23

AY 2022-2023, Program Graduates

  • Principal Graduate Certificate & MEd Educational Leadership – Principal Pre K-12 programs = 102
  • Superintendent Graduate Certificate & EdD Educational Leadership – K-12 Administration programs = 31

AY 2021-2022, Program Graduates

  • Principal Graduate Certificate & MEd Educational Leadership – Principal Pre K-12 programs = 92
  • Superintendent Graduate Certificate & EdD Educational Leadership – K-12 Administration programs = 29
Table 7. Overall Assessment Pass Rates, aggregated for the Principal Sub-test 1

Program GraduatesNumber taking testNumber passing testpass rate (%)
AY 2023-2024323083%
AY 2022-2023312591%
AY 2021-2022222091%

Table 8. Overall Assessment Pass Rates, aggregated for the Principal Sub-test 2

Program GraduatesNumber taking testNumber passing testpass rate (%)
AY 2023-2024292785%
AY 2022-2023302689%
AY 2021-2022211989%

Table 9. Overall Assessment Pass Rates, aggregated for the Superintendent Sub-test 1

Program GraduatesNumber taking testNumber passing testpass rate (%)
AY 2023-20241*
AY 2022-20234*
AY 2021-20222*

Table 10. Overall Assessment Pass Rates, aggregated for the Superintendent Sub-test 2

Program GraduatesNumber taking testNumber passing testpass rate (%)
AY 2023-20240*
AY 2022-20233*
AY 2021-20221*

*Note: Scores are only reported when there are 12 or more candidates. Additionally, NAU only has access to results if candidates affirm that NAU may receive the results when registering for the exam.

Analyses, Interpretations, & Use of Data

For advanced professional education programs, only the principal and superintendent programs require a licensure exam for certification. The number of principal candidates passing these licensure exams has been high with a 82-97% pass rate for both principal licensure sub-tests over the last three years (i.e., AYs 2020-2021, 2021-2022, 2022-2023). For the superintendent advanced programs, there have been fewer than 12 candidates completing the licensure exams; therefore, pass rates are not reported publicly. Pass rate data are shared with the program faculty. The principal and superintendent program’s faculty analyze and interpret these data and used a these findings as part of their NELP (National Educational Leadership Preparation) program review reports submitted in September 2021 and January 2023. For example, based on the pass rates for program graduates for the principal and superintendent degree programs, Educational Leadership faculty are continuing to monitor the licensure exam data, especially as more data becomes available for the MEd and Graduate Certificate Principal program graduates. Further, to respond to the lower response rates (i.e., data results faculty are able to access), faculty remind candidates about taking the AEPA exam as soon as possible post-graduation and ask that graduates select NAU when completing the exam registration form. These reminders are included in the internship syllabus, and university supervisors are asked to share this request during the final  internship portfolio meeting.

School Psychology (EdS)

All candidates in the EdS School Psychology program must complete the National School Psychology Examination for School Psychologists (i.e., the ETS PRAXIS II #5402 exam). Although Arizona does not require a licensure exam, our program requires candidates to take the Praxis exam so that they can become nationally certified upon graduation. Additionally, to become a National Certified School Psychologist (NCSP), applicants must achieve a passing score (147) on this exam. All EdS School Psychology candidates passed the exam in 2020, 2021, and 2022, with some graduates far exceeding the minimum criterion. These results support candidate attainment of the relevant standards and are a strong indication that NAU’s graduates have mastered the information. NASP publishes the pass rate of candidates on the Praxis School Psychologist exam each year. School Psychology Program Information (nasponline.org) (most recent year only).

Ability of completers to be hired in education positions for which they have prepared (Measure 4; Initial/Advanced) Accordion Closed

Initial teacher preparation programs:

Employment rate

Arizona continues to experience a severe teacher shortage. In 2021-22, the National Center for Education Statistics estimated that there was an attrition rate of 7% for public-school teachers with three years or less experience, and a 15% attrition rate for private school teachers. As of September 2024, approximately 25.4% of teacher openings in Arizona remained unfilled and that 52.2% of the vacancies were filled by individuals who did not meet Arizona standard certification requirements (Arizona School Personnel Administrators Association). The annual US Department of Education Teacher Shortage Areas further documents teacher shortages for the state of Arizona, identifying Arizona high-need fields as foreign language, math and science, bilingual education, reading specialists, and special education.

Photographs of candidates and employers from the 2024 Professional Education Programs Career Fair

NAU PEP hosts an annual Career Fair to connect employees with NAU candidates and recent graduates. In 2025, the 11th annual Professional Education Programs Career Fair hosted 91 districts and schools from across Arizona, and 164 students and graduates attended.

 

As of AY 2021-2022, NAU has administered the NExT (Network for Excellence in Teaching) Common Metrics Instruments to candidates, graduates, and completers. These instruments include the following:

  • Exit Survey (to collect satisfaction data from candidates near the end of their final/student teaching semester)
  • Transition to Teaching Survey (administered to program completers approximately one-year post-graduation)
  • Supervisor Survey to collect employer satisfaction data about program completers in their first-year teaching.

The NExT surveys are aligned with each other as well as to InTASC standards. NExT surveys are proprietary instruments and have evidence of validity and reliability. Additionally, Arizona’s third-party vendor Heartland ECSI collects employment verification data for NAU candidates who were members of the Arizona Teachers Academy (ATA). These employment data verify that NAU graduates are fulfilling their ATA teaching service commitment.

Analysis, Interpretation & Use of Data

In the AY 2022-2023 NExT Exit Survey, 56% of respondents said that they had already been offered a teaching position for the next school year. Further, 93% of respondents to the Spring/Summer 2023 NExT Transition to Teaching Survey of AY 2021-2022 program completers indicated that they were employed in an educational setting. In the Spring/Summer 2024 NExT Transition to Teaching Survey of AY 2022-2023 program graduates, 84% (n = 55) indicated that they were working in an education setting and 12% were employed in a field other than education.

In September 2023, ADE launched a new data management program that allows the state to track teacher employment data that is tagged to higher education institutions and teacher education programs. PEP was able to request accessible and usable state employment data during AY 2023-2024.

Advanced professional education programs:

NAU PEP collects self-report employment data from advanced professional education program candidates through the Exit Survey administered near the end of the candidate’s final semester in the program. The survey items ask if the candidates from advanced programs have already been hired in education positions for which they were prepared.

Analysis, Interpretation, & Use of Data

The results for AYs 2019-2020, 2021-2022, and 2023-2024 indicated that 76%, 70%, and 76% of advanced program candidates would begin or continue upon graduation as a teacher or in another education professional position. For Fall 2022 the Advanced Exit Survey was only sent to Educational Leadership graduates because there were no School Psychology graduates in Fall 2022. Due to a data collection issue, the Advanced Exit Survey was not administered in Spring 2023. Of those EDL graduates who responded to the Advanced Exit Survey in Fall 2022, 79% indicated they had a teaching or other education professional position that they would begin or continue upon graduation. The results are shared internally with program faculty and leadership.

As noted above, in 2023-2024, NAU PEP submitted an employment data request to ADE to obtain Arizona employment information for NAU’s advanced program completers for the past five years; these data will allow for tracking of the employment of our advanced program graduates working for a public school or district in Arizona.

Satisfaction of completers (Initial R4.3/Advanced RA4.2) Accordion Closed

Initial teacher preparation programs:

NAU PEP surveys teacher preparation program candidates about satisfaction with their degree program at the conclusion of the student teaching course and again at the end of their first-year experience. The exit survey is one of the NExT (Network for Excellence in Teaching) Common Metrics Instruments which include an Exit Survey (to collect satisfaction data from candidates near the end of their final/student teaching semester) and a Transition to Teaching Survey (administered to program completers approximately one year after graduation). The NExT Common Metrics Instruments also include a Supervisor Survey (to collect employer satisfaction data with program completers whom they have supervised during their first of year teaching). The NExT surveys are aligned with each other as well as to InTASC standards. NExT Surveys are proprietary instruments and have evidence of validity and reliability.

In the Spring 2024 administration of the Transition to Teaching Survey, 66 program completers responded. Of these, 55 indicated that they were employed full-time or part-time in an educational setting. The respondents indicated that the program prepared them to be successful in their current position (96%) and that they would recommend the program to prospective teachers (94%). In questions about preparation for instructional practice, respondents scored items in the 82% to 100% in of “Agree” and “Tend to Agree,” with 100% expressing satisfaction with their preparation to use digital and interactive technologies in the classroom. For questions related to preparation to teach diverse learners, respondents scored items in the 79% to 98% “Agree” and “Tend to Agree,” with the lowest (79%) scores in the areas of differentiating instruction for students with mental health needs and with IEPs and 504 plans (79%). For questions related to Learning Environment, scores ranged from 85% to 100% in the “Agree” and “Tend to Agree” range, with only one question scoring lower: respondent satisfaction with how their program prepared them to help students regulate their own behavior (72%).  In questions related to professionalism, scores ranged from 89% to 98% “Agree” and “Tend to Agree” with one outlier: students felt less prepared to collaborate with parents and guardians to support student learning (74%). In the Spring 2023 administration of the Transition to Teaching Survey, 151 program completers responded, and in all items associated with preparation for teaching, completers scored items in the 78% to 96% range of “Agree” and “Tend to Agree,” indicating a high level of program satisfaction. In the 2022 administration of the Transition to Teaching Survey, 153 program graduates responded; of these, 110 were program completers. Of the respondents, 90% to 98% indicated the following strengths of their preparation programs: planning lessons with clear objectives in mind (96%), selecting instructional strategies aligned with learning goals and standards (94%); the use of formative and summative assessments, creating a learning environment in which differences such as race, culture, gender, sexual orientation, and language are respected (93%), use of effective communication skills and strategies to convey information (90%), effectively teach subject matter of their licensure area (93%), and ability to effectively teach students from culturally and ethnically diverse backgrounds and communities (98%). Completers identified less satisfaction in the following areas: collaborating with parents and guardians to support learning, helping students develop critical thinking processes, and differentiating instruction for a variety of learning needs.

For the initial programs Exit Survey administered in the candidates’ final semester, the response rates were 63%, 78%, and 72% for 2017-2018, 2018-2019, and 2019-2020, respectively. For the New Teacher Survey administered approximately one year after graduation, the response rates were 16%, 13%, and 20% for Spring 2019, 2020, and 2021 respectively. Satisfaction data from the Exit and New Teacher Surveys have been consistently high for these three cycles of data. The percentage of respondents indicating they would recommend their program to a future teacher has been 85-91% of respondents indicating they strongly agreed or agreed. During these three data cycles, the percentage of respondents grading initial program experiences with a grade of A or B have also been consistently high in relation to the quality of classes (89-93% of Exit Survey respondents and 72-85% of New Teacher Survey respondents), practicum experiences (80-91% of respondents), and student teaching experiences (85% or more of respondents). Additional narrative related to the high program ratings as well as areas for improvement identified can be found in the results files linked above.

These results are shared internally with program faculty and leadership through the PEP Initial Teacher Preparation Coordinating Council meeting and with external stakeholders participating in the Annual Teacher Career Fair. Additionally, Exit Survey and New Teacher Survey results from AY 2020-2021 related to areas where our candidates indicated they felt somewhat unprepared (i.e., navigating school politics; working with school administrators; and explaining student performance data to parents/guardians, students, and families) were shared through the Teacher Preparation Advisory Council meetings held in February/March 2022 to gather input from external stakeholders (i.e., Cooperating Teachers and Principals/Directors). Feedback noted through the Teacher Preparation Advisory Council meetings have been shared with programs to review further and determine if any instructional or program improvements are needed and if so, what curriculum changes should be made.

Advanced professional education programs:

In Spring 2018, the NAU PEP Advanced Coordinating Council members developed and piloted an Exit Survey with candidates in the final semester of their program. This survey is now a common instrument administered centrally across all advanced programs at the conclusion of both the fall and spring semesters. In Spring 2019, the Exit Survey was modified and administered to program graduates one year after graduation across all advanced programs. In preparation for the CAEP Self Study, programs collected completer satisfaction data through phone interviews and focus group interviews, which were presented in CAEP self-study evidence. The results of these interviews are presented below. In the links below, results of the graduate survey data from spring 2024 are presented. Following these results files, a narrative provides analysis, interpretation, and use of data.

Analysis, Interpretation & Use of Data: Educational Leadership

Among the respondents to the survey, 47% indicated that they felt “very prepared,” while 45% stated they were “somewhat prepared.” Of the 8 male completers, 75% (n = 6), felt “very prepared.” Conversely, among the 42 female completers, 50% (n = 18) expressed feeling “very prepared” while 42.86% (n = 21) indicated they were “somewhat prepared.” This gap in levels of perception of preparation is significant.

In Spring 2024, EDL faculty administered an additional survey that was distributed to 140 program completers from 2020-2023 who applied for an administrative licensure in Arizona. The response rate was 36.4% (n = 51). Among the respondents to the survey, 47% indicated that they felt “very prepared” and 45% stated that they were “somewhat prepared,” and only 8% indicated that they felt somewhat unprepared. When disaggregated by gender, 75% of men (n = 6) expressed feeling very prepared in contrast to women, of whom 50% (n = 18) felt very prepared.

In February 2024, faculty from the programs discussed results of the survey including the gap in confidence level between genders. The faculty will continue to monitor this trend carefully and determine if program changes need to be implemented.

Completer Satisfaction Efforts: EdS School Psychology

The Northern Arizona University (NAU) School Psychology faculty strive to produce well-trained school psychologists. Therefore, faculty interview program completers to determine their satisfaction and degree of career readiness. We conducted phone interviews with completers who graduated between 2011 and 2023 from either the Flagstaff or North Valley campuses. Nineteen completers responded. The questions were based on a protocol that mirrors CAEP standards and was created by PEP.

Overall, completers expressed a high level of satisfaction with the NAU school psychology program. Many completers expressed that the knowledge and skills they gained because of this program were extremely meaningful. Additionally, completers appeared to value hands-on, practical experiences that NAU provides. A few students, specifically from the 2018 cohort, and one student in the cohort that faced the covid-19 pandemic during most of their training, were dissatisfied with their experience; this subset does not appear to represent a general trend. Overall, NAU completers felt prepared to enter the field.

Educational Leadership Programs

Educational Leadership faculty conducted focus group interviews (Fall 2021, Spring 2022, and Spring 2023) and a survey (Spring 2023) of completers in the four Educational Leadership Programs leading to state licensure (EdD Educational Leadership – K-12 Administration; MEd Educational Leadership – Principal Pre-K 12; GCert Superintendent; GCert Principal). Overall program satisfaction was very high, with an emphasis on how the program offered opportunities to implement knowledge in actual practice situations and in their own workplace. Some suggestions for continuous improvement included taking a look at a year-long internship, better advertisement to recruit students to the program, focus on instructional leaders, more information about the dissertation journey, and a strengthening of the law course. The personal touch of the programs was alluded to more than once, substantiating the EDL faculty’s ongoing efforts to be student centered.

Student loan default rates and other consumer information Accordion Closed

The NAU PEP website includes an Exploring the Profession web page. This page provides information regarding degree programs offered, cost of attendance, student loan default rates, average teacher salaries, and resources for future teachers.

Federal Student Aid, an office of the US Department of Education, provides the following report of the most recent three year trend data for Northern Arizona University:

Analysis, Interpretation & Use of Data

National Association Federal Student Aid Administrators (NAFSAA) reports the FY 2020 national cohort default rate dropped to 0.0 percent, in comparison to the 2.3 percent national rate in FY 2019. NAU’s FY 2020 and FY 2019 default rates were 0 and 1.7 percent, respectively, or 0.0 or 0.6 percentage points below the national cohort rate, respectively. NAU’s student loan default rate as compared to the national cohort default rate will continue to be reviewed each spring and updated results reported publicly through this web page.

Professional Education Programs
Location
Room 123 Building 27
Eastburn Education
801 S. Knoles Drive
Flagstaff, AZ 86011-5774
Mailing Address
PO Box 5774
Flagstaff, AZ 86011-5774
Contact Form