College of Education

The State of Tennessee and Tennessee Tech University track, monitor, and measure the impact of our teachers on student learning, growth, and development. Below are measures that are used to assess this impact. This data is used to inform college-wide as well as programmatic improvement within the College of Education.

Measure 1

Teacher effectiveness is measured by the State of Tennessee and Tennessee Tech University in a few ways that are explained in the sections below.

Tennessee Value-Added Assessment (TVAAS)

The first way is via the Tennessee Value-Added Assessment System (TVAAS). TVAAS measures the impact that teachers have on their students' academic progress. Rather than measuring proficiency, TVAAS specifically captures student growth so as to better represent the effect that teachers and schools can have on students. TVAAS is scored from levels 1-5. Levels 1 and 2 indicate that a teacher's students are making less than expected growth, Level 3 indicates that students are making expected growth, and Levels 4 and 5 indicate that students are exceeding expected growth.

In the most recent State of TN Report Card (2024), Tennessee Tech University had 52% (n = 248) of cohort members score at Level 3 or above and 21% (n = 248) score at Level 4 or above on TVAAS. This was near the state averages of 60.3% and 25.1%, respectively.

A detailed breakdown and disaggregated data can be found on the Tennessee State Board of Education website.

Level of Overall Effectiveness (LOE)

The State of Tennessee also measures completer effectiveness using a metric called the Level of Overall Effectiveness (LOE). LOE scores include multiple measures of a teacher's performance in the classroom including classroom observation scores and TVAAS scores. This metric reports the percentage of cohort members who earned a level of overall effectiveness and includes a scale from 1-5 where a score of 3 indicates "At Expectations" and a score of 4 indicates "Above Expectations".

In the most recent State of TN Report Card (2024), Tennessee Tech University had 89.4% (n = 1,104) of cohort members score at Level 3 or above and 59.8% (n = 1,014) score at Level 4 or above on LOE. This was near the state averages of 89.4% and 61.1%, respectively.

A detailed breakdown and disaggregated data can be found on the Tennessee State Board of Education website.

Previous years' measures of teaching effectiveness are available:

2022 Measures of Completer Effectiveness

2021 Measures of Completer Effectiveness

2020 Measures of Completer Effectiveness 

2019 Measures of Completer Effectiveness

Measure 2

Stakeholder Involvement

The College of Education at Tennessee Tech gathers internal stakeholder feedback and program design/evaluation recommendations on a continual basis. Once gathered, this feedback is summarized and presented to two decision-making bodies within the College of Education, the Executive Leadership Council (ELC) and the Teacher Education Committee (TEC). Both groups evaluate relevant feedback and make recommendations based on existing data and current/future trends (e.g., enrollment, employment trends, etc).

Employer Feedback

Employer feedback is gathered primarily through surveys. The  employer survey was not distributed during AY 2020-2021 due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Additionally, the employer survey instrument was reviewed and updated in AY 2021-2022. Data from the 2022-2023 distribution of the survey is below along with feedback from the 2019-2020 employer survey. 

View 2022-2023 Employer Feedback

2019-2020 Employer Feedback.

Measure 3

The Tennessee Educator Preparation Report Card provides a public view of the competencies of Tennessee Tech's candidates, as measured by multiple assessments required to obtain a teacher or leader licensure. Tennessee Tech met expectations on the 2024 Tennessee Report Card in the area of candidate assessment, which is comprised of pedagogical assessment pass rate and content assessment pass rate.

For the 2022-2023 academic year, 97.9% (n = 665) of Tennessee Tech University teacher candidates passed their pedagogical assessment(s). This percentage includes cohort members who passed either the edTPA assessment within two attempts. This is above the state average of 97.2%.

Additionally, 85% (n = 1,296) of candidates passed content assessments required for their endorsement area(s) within two attempts. This includes both subject-area assessments, which measure cohort members' knowledge of the subject they will be teaching, and literacy assessments, which measure cohort members' knowledge about teaching reading. This is in line with the state average of 88.6%.

Finally, Tennessee Tech graduates had a first-time pass rate of 82.1% for the literacy assessment. This assessment is only required for certain licensure areas and is comparable to the state average of 82.3%.

Previous years' measures of candidate competency at completion:

2022 Measures of Candidate Competency at Completion

2021 Measures of Candidate Competency at Completion

2020 Measures of Candidate Competency at Completion

2019 Measures of Candidate Competency at Completion

Measure 4

Information about Tennessee Tech's teacher candidates and their resulting employment in Tennessee public schools is collected and reported through the Tennessee State Board of Education Report Card. The report card includes important teacher retention metrics such as first-year employment in Tennessee public schools as well as second and third year retention rates. 

The rate of first-year employment in Tennessee public schools reports the percentage of cohort members who were employed in Tennessee public schools within one year of completing their preparation program or within one year of enrolling in a job-embedded program. Additionally, the second and third year retention rates report the percentage of first-year employed cohort members who remained teaching in Tennessee public schools for a second and third year, respectively. 

In the most recent report card, Tennessee Tech reported a rate of first-year employment in Tennessee public schools of 84.3% (n = 778), which is higher than the state average of 80.3%. Tennessee Tech also had higher reported second (93.9%, n = 479) and third year (85%, n = 226) retention rate when compared to the state averages of 93.6% and 78.8%, respectively.  Overall, Tennessee Tech "Exceeds Expectations" in the area of candidate employment on the 2024 State of Tennessee Report Card. 

See a detailed breakdown of these metrics:
2024 Employment and Retention section of the report card.

Employment locations of Tennessee Tech's recent completers and job-embedded candidates can be found on the Tennessee State Board of Education's website (2023).

The provider ensures that candidates develop, through curriculum and experiences, a deep understanding of the critical concepts and principles of their discipline that integrate equity and diversity throughout candidates' courses and their developmental clinical experiences with diverse P-12 students. Upon completion, candidates can use discipline-specific practices and understand student culture and differing needs to advance learning by all students.

Components

R1.1 The Learner and Learning

The provider ensures candidates are able to apply their knowledge of the learner and learning at the appropriate progression levels. Evidence provided should demonstrate that candidates are able to apply critical concepts and principles of learner development (InTASC Standard 1), learning differences (InTASC Standard 2), and creating safe and supportive learning environments (InTASC Standard 3) in order to work effectively with diverse P-12 students and their families.

R1.2 Content

The provider ensures that candidates are able to apply their knowledge of content at the appropriate progression levels. Evidence provided demonstrates candidates know central concepts of their content area (InTASC Standard 4) and are able to apply the content in developing equitable and inclusive learning experiences (InTASC Standard 5) for diverse P-12 students. Outcome data can be provided from a Specialized Professional Associations (SPA) process, a state review process, or an evidence review of Standard 1.

R1.3 Instructional Practice

The provider ensures that candidates are able to apply their knowledge of InTASC standards relating to instructional practice at the appropriate progression levels. Evidence demonstrates how candidates are able to assess (InTASC Standard 6), plan for instruction (InTASC Standard 7), and utilize a variety of instructional strategies (InTASC Standard 8) to provide equitable and inclusive learning experiences for diverse P-12 students. Providers ensure that candidates model and apply national- or state-approved technology standards to engage and improve learning for all students.

R1.4 Professional Responsibility

The provider ensures candidates are able to apply their knowledge of professional responsibility at the appropriate progression levels. Evidence provided should demonstrate candidates engage in professional learning, act ethically (InTASC Standard 9), take responsibility for student learning, and collaborate with others (InTASC Standard 10) to work effectively with diverse P-12 students and their families.

The provider ensures effective partnerships and high-quality clinical practice are central to candidate preparation. These experiences should be designed to develop candidate’s knowledge, skills, and professional dispositions to demonstrate positive impact on diverse students’ learning and development.

High quality clinical practice offers candidates experiences in different settings and modalities, as well as with diverse P-12 students, schools, families, and communities. Partners share responsibility to identify and address real problems of practice candidates experience in their engagement with P-12 students.

Components

R2.1 Partnerships for Clinical Preparation

Partners co-construct mutually beneficial P-12 school and community arrangements for clinical preparation and share responsibility for continuous improvement of candidate preparation.

R2.2 Clinical Educators

Partners co-select, prepare, evaluate, and support high-quality clinical educators, both provider- and school-based, who demonstrate a positive impact on candidates’ development and diverse P-12 student learning and development.

R2.3 Clinical Experiences

The provider works with partners to design and implement clinical experiences, utilizing various modalities, of sufficient depth, breadth, diversity, coherence, and duration to ensure that candidates demonstrate their developing effectiveness and positive impact on diverse P-12 students’ learning and development as presented in Standard R1.

The provider demonstrates that the quality of candidates is a continuous and purposeful focus from recruitment through completion. The provider demonstrates that development of candidate quality is the goal of educator preparation and that the EPP provides support services (such as advising, remediation, and mentoring) in all phases of the program so candidates will be successful.

Components

R3.1 Recruitment

The provider presents goals and progress evidence for recruitment of high-quality candidates from a broad range of backgrounds and diverse populations that align with their mission. The provider demonstrates efforts to know and address state, national, regional, or local needs for hard-to-staff schools and shortage fields. The goals and evidence should address progress towards a candidate pool which reflects the diversity of America’s P-12 students.

R3.2 Monitoring and Supporting Candidate Progression

The provider creates and monitors transition points from admission through completion that indicate candidates’ developing content knowledge, pedagogical knowledge, pedagogical skills, critical dispositions, and professional responsibilities, and the ability to integrate technology effectively in their practice. The provider identifies a transition point at any point in the program when a cohort grade point average of 3.0 is achieved and monitors this data. The provider ensures knowledge of and progression through transition points are transparent to candidates. The provider plans and documents the need for candidate support, as identified in disaggregated data by race and ethnicity and such other categories as may be relevant for the EPP’s mission, so candidates meet milestones. The provider has a system for effectively maintaining records of candidate complaints, including complaints made to CAEP, and documents the resolution.

R3.3 Competency at Completion

The provider ensures candidates possess academic competency to teach effectively with positive impacts on diverse P-12 student learning and development through application of content knowledge, foundational pedagogical skills, and technology integration in the field(s) where certification is sought. Multiple measures are provided and data are disaggregated and analyzed based on race, ethnicity, and such other categories as may be relevant for the EPP’s mission.

The provider demonstrates the effectiveness of its completers’ instruction on P-12 student learning and development, and completer and employer satisfaction with the relevance and effectiveness of preparation.

Components

R4.1 Completer Effectiveness 

The provider demonstrates that program completers: (A) effectively contribute to P-12 student-learning growth; AND (B) apply in P-12 classrooms the professional knowledge, skills, and dispositions the preparation experiences were designed to achieve. In addition, the provider includes a rationale for the data elements provided.

R4.2 Satisfaction of Employers

The provider demonstrates that employers are satisfied with the completers’ preparation for their assigned responsibilities in working with diverse P-12 students and their families.

R4.3 Satisfaction of Completers

The provider demonstrates program completers perceive their preparation as relevant to the responsibilities they encounter on the job and their preparation was effective.

The provider maintains a quality assurance system that consists of valid data from multiple measures and supports continuous improvement that is sustained and evidence-based. The system is developed and maintained with input from internal and external stakeholders. The provider uses the results of inquiry and data collection to establish priorities, enhance program elements, establish goals for improving, and highlight innovations.

Components

R5.1 Quality Assurance System

The provider has developed, implemented, and modified, as needed, a functioning quality assurance system that ensures a sustainable process to document operational effectiveness. The provider documents how data enter the system, how data are reported and used in decision making, and how the outcomes of those decisions inform programmatic improvement.

R5.2 Data Quality

The provider’s quality assurance system from R5.1 relies on relevant, verifiable, representative, cumulative, and actionable measures to ensure interpretations of data are valid and consistent.

R5.3 Stakeholder Involvement

The provider includes relevant internal (e.g., EPP administrators, faculty, staff, candidates) and external (e.g., alumni, practitioners, school and community partners, employers) stakeholders in program evaluation and continuous improvement processes.

R5.4 Continuous Improvement

The provider regularly, systematically, and continuously assesses performance against its goals and relevant standards, tracks results over time, documents modifications and/or innovations, and their effects on EPP outcomes.

The EPP has the fiscal and administrative capacity, faculty, infrastructure (facilities, equipment, and supplies), and other resources as appropriate to the scale of its operations and as necessary for the preparation of candidates to meet professional, state, and institutional standards. For EPPs whose institution is accredited by an accreditor recognized by the U.S. Secretary of Education (e.g., SACSCOC, HLC), such accreditation will be considered sufficient evidence of compliance with Standard 6. If an EPP's institution is not accredited by an accreditor recognized by the U.S. Secretary of Education, the EPP must address each component of Standard 6 in narrative supported by evidence.

Components

R6.1 Fiscal Resources

The EPP has the fiscal capacity as appropriate to the scale of its operations. The budget for curriculum, instruction, faculty, clinical work, scholarship, etc., supports high-quality work within the EPP and its school partners for the preparation of professional educators.

R6.2 Administrative Capacity

The EPP has administrative capacity as appropriate to the scale of its operations, including leadership and authority to plan, deliver, and operate coherent programs of study so that their candidates are prepared to meet all standards. Academic calendars, catalogs, publications, grading policies, and advertising are current, accurate, and transparent.

R6.3 Faculty Resources

The EPP has professional education faculty that have earned doctorates or equivalent P-12 teaching experience that qualifies them for their assignments. The EPP provides adequate resources and opportunities for professional development of faculty, including training in the use of technology.

R6.4 Infrastructure

The EPP has adequate campus and school facilities, equipment, and supplies to support candidates in meeting standards. The infrastructure supports faculty and candidate use of information technology in instruction.

Freestanding EPPs, relying on CAEP accreditation to access Title IV of the Higher Education Act, must demonstrate 100% compliance with their responsibilities under Title IV of the Act, including but not limited to: (1) on the basis of student loan default rate data provided by the Secretary, (2) financial and compliance audits, and (3) program reviews conducted by the U.S. Department of Education. Freestanding EPPs will need to provide narrative and evidence for all components of Standard 7.

The provider ensures that candidates develop, through curriculum and experiences, a deep understanding of the critical concepts and principles of their discipline that integrate equity and diversity throughout candidates' courses and their developmental clinical experiences with diverse P-12 students. Upon completion, candidates can use discipline-specific practices, understand student culture, and differing needs to advance learning by all students.

Components

R1.1 The Learner and Learning

The provider ensures candidates are able to apply their knowledge of the learner and learning at the appropriate progression levels. Evidence provided should demonstrate that candidates are able to apply critical concepts and principles of learner development (InTASC Standard 1), learning differences (InTASC Standard 2), and creating safe and supportive learning environments (InTASC Standard 3) in order to work effectively with diverse P-12 students and their families.

R1.2 Content

The provider ensures that candidates are able to apply their knowledge of content at the appropriate progression levels. Evidence provided demonstrates candidates know central concepts of their content area (InTASC Standard 4) and are able to apply the content in developing equitable and inclusive learning experiences (InTASC Standard 5) for diverse P-12 students. Outcome data can be provided from a Specialized Professional Associations (SPA) process, a state review process, or an evidence review of Standard 1.

R1.3 Instructional Practice

The provider ensures that candidates are able to apply their knowledge of InTASC standards relating to instructional practice at the appropriate progression levels. Evidence demonstrates how candidates are able to assess (InTASC Standard 6), plan for instruction (InTASC Standard 7), and utilize a variety of instructional strategies (InTASC Standard 8) to provide equitable and inclusive learning experiences for diverse P-12 students. Providers ensure that candidates model and apply national- or state-approved technology standards to engage and improve learning for all students.

R1.4 Professional Responsibility

The provider ensures candidates are able to apply their knowledge of professional responsibility at the appropriate progression levels. Evidence provided should demonstrate candidates engage in professional learning, act ethically (InTASC Standard 9), take responsibility for student learning, and collaborate with others (InTASC Standard 10) to work effectively with diverse P-12 students and their families.

The provider ensures effective partnerships and high-quality clinical practice are central to candidate preparation. These experiences should be designed to develop candidates' knowledge, skills, and professional dispositions to demonstrate positive impact on diverse students’ learning and development. High quality clinical practice offers candidates experiences in different settings and modalities, as well as with diverse P-12 students, schools, families, and communities. Partners share responsibility to identify and address real problems of practice candidates' experience in their engagement with P-12 students.

Components

R2.1 Partnerships for Clinical Preparation

Partners co-construct mutually beneficial P-12 school and community arrangements for clinical preparation and share responsibility for continuous improvement of candidate preparation.

R2.2 Clinical Educators

Partners co-select, prepare, evaluate, and support high-quality clinical educators, both provider- and school-based, who demonstrate a positive impact on candidates’ development and diverse P-12 student learning and development.

R2.3 Clinical Experiences

The provider works with partners to design and implement clinical experiences, utilizing various modalities, of sufficient depth, breadth, diversity, coherence, and duration to ensure that candidates demonstrate their developing effectiveness and positive impact on diverse P-12 students’ learning and development as presented in Standard R1.

The provider demonstrates that the quality of candidates is a continuous and purposeful focus from recruitment through completion. The provider demonstrates that development of candidate quality is the goal of educator preparation and that the EPP provides support services (such as advising, remediation, and mentoring) in all phases of the program so candidates will be successful.

Components

R3.1 Recruitment

The provider presents goals and progress evidence for recruitment of high-quality candidates from a broad range of backgrounds and diverse populations that align with their mission. The provider demonstrates efforts to know and address state, national, regional, or local needs for hard-to-staff schools and shortage fields. The goals and evidence should address progress towards a candidate pool which reflects the diversity of America’s P-12 students.

R3.2 Monitoring and Supporting Candidate Progression

The provider creates and monitors transition points from admission through completion that indicate candidates’ developing content knowledge, pedagogical knowledge, pedagogical skills, critical dispositions, and professional responsibilities, and the ability to integrate technology effectively in their practice. The provider identifies a transition point at any point in the program when a cohort grade point average of 3.0 is achieved and monitors this data. The provider ensures knowledge of and progression through transition points are transparent to candidates. The provider plans and documents the need for candidate support, as identified in disaggregated data by race and ethnicity and such other categories as may be relevant for the EPP’s mission, so candidates meet milestones. The provider has a system for effectively maintaining records of candidate complaints, including complaints made to CAEP, and documents the resolution.

R3.3 Competency at Completion

The provider ensures candidates possess academic competency to teach effectively with positive impacts on diverse P-12 student learning and development through application of content knowledge, foundational pedagogical skills, and technology integration in the field(s) where certification is sought. Multiple measures are provided and data are disaggregated and analyzed based on race, ethnicity, and such other categories as may be relevant for the EPP’s mission.

The provider demonstrates the effectiveness of its completers’ instruction on P-12 student learning and development, and completer and employer satisfaction with the relevance and effectiveness of preparation.

Components

R4.1 Completer Effectiveness 

The provider demonstrates that program completers: (A)  effectively contribute to P-12 student-learning growth; AND, (B) apply in P-12 classrooms the professional knowledge, skills, and dispositions the preparation experiences were designed to achieve. In addition, the provider includes a rationale for the data elements provided.

R4.2 Satisfaction of Employers

The provider demonstrates that employers are satisfied with the completers’ preparation for their assigned responsibilities in working with diverse P-12 students and their families.

R4.3 Satisfaction of Completers

The provider demonstrates program completers perceive their preparation as relevant to the responsibilities they encounter on the job and their preparation was effective.

The provider maintains a quality assurance system that consists of valid data from multiple measures and supports continuous improvement that is sustained and evidence-based. The system is developed and maintained with input from internal and external stakeholders. The provider uses the results of inquiry and data collection to establish priorities, enhance program elements, establish goals for improving, and highlight innovations.

Components

R5.1 Quality Assurance System

The provider has developed, implemented, and modified, as needed, a functioning quality assurance system that ensures a sustainable process to document operational effectiveness. The provider documents how data enter the system, how data are reported and used in decision making, and how the outcomes of those decisions inform programmatic improvement.

R5.2 Data Quality

The provider’s quality assurance system from R5.1 relies on relevant, verifiable, representative, cumulative, and actionable measures to ensure interpretations of data are valid and consistent.

R5.3 Stakeholder Involvement

The provider includes relevant internal (e.g., EPP administrators, faculty, staff, candidates) and external (e.g., alumni, practitioners, school and community partners, employers) stakeholders in program evaluation and continuous improvement processes.

R5.4 Continuous Improvement

The provider regularly, systematically, and continuously assesses performance against its goals and relevant standards, tracks results over time, documents modifications and/or innovations, and their effects on EPP outcomes.

The EPP has the fiscal and administrative capacity, faculty, infrastructure (facilities, equipment, and supplies) and other resources as appropriate to the scale of its operations and as necessary for the preparation of candidates to meet professional, state, and institutional standards. For EPPs whose institution is accredited by an accreditor recognized by the U.S. Secretary of Education (e.g., SACSCOC, HLC), such accreditation will be considered sufficient evidence of compliance with Standard 6. If an EPP's institution is not accredited by an accreditor recognized by the U.S. Secretary of Education, the EPP must address each component of Standard 6 in narrative supported by evidence.

Components

R6.1 Fiscal Resources

The EPP has the fiscal capacity as appropriate to the scale of its operations. The budget for curriculum, instruction, faculty, clinical work, scholarship, etc.,supports high-quality work within the EPP and its school partners for the preparation of professional educators.

R6.2 Administrative Capacity

The EPP has administrative capacity as appropriate to the scale of its operations, including leadership and authority to plan, deliver, and operate coherent programs of study so that their candidates are prepared to meet all standards. Academic calendars, catalogs, publications, grading policies, and advertising are current, accurate, and transparent.

R6.3 Faculty Resources

The EPP has professional education faculty that have earned doctorates or equivalent P-12 teaching experience that qualifies them for their assignments. The EPP provides adequate resources and opportunities for professional development of faculty, including training in the use of technology.

R6.4 Infrastructure

The EPP has adequate campus and school facilities, equipment, and supplies to support candidates in meeting standards. The infrastructure supports faculty and candidate use of information technology in instruction.

Freestanding EPPs, relying on CAEP accreditation to access Title IV of the Higher Education Act, must demonstrate 100% compliance with their responsibilities under Title IV of the Act, including but not limited to: (1) on the basis of student loan default rate data provided by the Secretary, (2) financial and compliance audits, and (3) program reviews conducted by the U.S. Department of Education. Freestanding EPPs will need to provide narrative and evidence for all components of Standard 7.