The USC Rossier School of Education implements an assessment system called AEGIS (Assessment and Evaluation Guide for Improvement System; 2.3.a) for ongoing program and unit evaluation and improvement.
Evaluation, primarily through key assessments, occurs throughout five phases of an annual assessment cycle and at critical transition points within every program (2.3.a) to ensure a strong fit with the School’s mission, CTC and NCATE standards, and the Conceptual Framework (CF) and Strategic Plan (SP). Similar efforts are conducted in the School of Social Work (SSW) for the Pupil Personnel Credential (PPS) and the Thornton School of Music (MUED) for the single-subject Music Education credential program. The alignment of the missions among the three schools is found in the CF (1.5.c).
Data collection and analysis follows a continuous improvement cycle established by the unit’s Office of Program Accreditation and Evaluation (OPAE; 2.3.a). This cycle contains five phases to collect data to measure and analyze candidate progress, faculty expectations, and unit performance throughout the academic year. The five phases are: 1) Data Collection, 2) Annual Review and Reporting, 3) Data Analysis and Needs Assessment, 4) Improvement Planning, and 5) Implementation and Formative Assessment. The cycle provides a structure for the unit to collect, summarize, and analyze data to support faculty, staff, and leadership in sustained reflection about program improvement. While each of these is described as a separate phase, they do not occur exclusively in a fixed period of time. The phases interact with one another, often overlapping during the academic year.
Read the complete text of Standard 2: Assessment System and Unit Evaluation excerpted from the Institutional Report.
Exhibits for Standard 2
2.3.a Description of the unit’s assessment system in including the requirements and key assessments used at transition points
2.3.b Admission criteria and data from key assessments used for entry to programs
2.3.b ME Advanced Instruction Admissions Criteria
2.3.b All Program Admissions Data
2.3.b EdD Admissions Criteria
2.3.b MAT Admission Criteria
2.3.b MAT-TESOL Admission Criteria
2.3.b Social Work Admissions Data
2.3.c Policies, procedures, and practices for ensuring that key assessments of candidate performance and evaluations of program quality and unit operations are fair, accurate, consistent, and free of bias
2.3.c_Policies_for_Fairness_Accuracy_and_Free_of_Bias
2.3.d Policies, procedures, and practices for ensuring that data are regularly collected, compiled, aggregated, summarized, analyzed, and used for continuous improvement
2.3.d Annual Program Report Crosswalk
2.3.d Annual Program Report template complete
2.3.d MAT APR_Part 1
2.3.d MAT APR_Part 1a
2.3.d MAT APR_Part 2
2.3.d MAT APR_Part 3
2.3.d MAT APR_Part 4a
2.3.d MAT APR_Part 4b
2.3.d MAT APR_Part 4c
2.3.d MAT APR_Part 4d
2.3.d MAT APR_Part 5
2.3.e Policies, procedures and practices for managing candidate complaints
2.3.e Rossier Appeals Process 2012
2.3.f File of candidate complaints and the unit’s responses and resolutions
The file of candidate complaints in all programs will available during the onsite visit.