ŕŁŕŁÖ±˛ĄĐă

Completer Case Study 2023-2024

Purpose and Guiding Question

Because statewide growth percentiles and commercial benchmark tests are not made available to the education preparation providers in the state of South ŕŁŕŁÖ±˛ĄĐă, the education preparation providers elected to conduct a focused case study of five completers for whom classroom evidence could be secured.

The guiding question was:

To what extent do these first‑year SDSU graduates accelerate P-12 student learning, and how consistently do they demonstrate effective instructional practice?

All districts require teachers to complete a student learning objectives process and participate in two Danielson Framework for Teaching observations each year.

Evidence Sources and Benchmarks

P-12 Learning (Standard 4.1)

Student learning objectives attainment: Teachers verified the percentage of their students who meet growth targets and categorize results into high growth (86% to 100% attained), expected growth (65% to 85% attained) and low growth (less than 65% attained).

Teaching Effectiveness (Standard 4.2)

Danielson Domains 2 and 3: Teachers verified their results on evaluation framework. District proficiency cut score is 3 (“Proficient”) on a four‑point scale.

Focus Group Discussion (Standard 4.1 and 4.3)

Qualitative data: Teachers answered the question, “How effective did you feel you were as a teacher impacting student learning?” and “How well did you feel your teacher education program prepared you to be an impactful educator?”

Findings

Impact on Student Learning
Four of the five teachers met or surpassed the student learning objectives benchmark in both goals; the fifth met the target in one goal and narrowly missed in the other (68 %). Mean student learning objectives attainment across the group was 75 %. In science, students in Completer 2’s classroom gained 20 percentage points from pre‑ to post‑test. These results indicate that SDSU graduates moved a substantial majority of their pupils beyond expected growth.

Teaching Effectiveness
Danielson ratings were uniformly strong: three teachers were proficient and two distinguished in both Domain 2 (Classroom Environment) and Domain 3 (Instruction). 

Focus Group Discussion
The five completers participated in a 45-minute, semistructured focus-group interview conducted via Zoom. After an inductive thematic analysis of the verbatim transcript, three salient themes emerged, providing an additional line of evidence for their impact on P-12 learning (4.1) and their satisfaction with the program (4.3).

• Strong Sense of Personal Impact on Student Learning
  All participants described feeling “effective” or “very effective” in moving students forward academically. They anchored their perceptions in concrete indicators such as benchmark-test gains, formative-assessment cycles and student work samples, mirroring the objective growth data reported earlier. One teacher noted, “My kids’ mid-year writing samples were way higher than in September, so I can actually see the difference.” Another added, “When I track exit-ticket data, I usually hit pretty high marks after one or two reteaches, which tells me the strategies are working.” These comments triangulate with the student learning objectives attainment rates and pre/post gains, strengthening the claim that completers positively affect P-12 learning.
• High, but Nuanced, Confidence in Program Preparation
  Four of the five teachers stated that SDSU’s clinical residency and methods courses left them “well prepared” or “extremely prepared” to design lessons, differentiate instruction and analyze student data. They singled out frequent coaching from clinical mentors and practice with formative-assessment tools as especially valuable. The lone dissenting voice from kindergarten noted preparation as “prepared,” explaining that “I felt a little thin on small-group strategies for larger classes.” This nuance suggests the program meets standards overall while still offering a clear point for targeted improvement.
• Alignment Between Preparation and Classroom Realities
  Participants consistently linked specific program components to current classroom practices. For example, they credited opportunities to plan and test teaching sequences with helping them set measurable student learning objectives, and they cited the Residency I and II semesters as foundational for growing as educators. As one completer summarized, “What we rehearsed in coursework is what I’m doing every day: collect data, regroup, reteach.” This alignment demonstrates that the program’s intended outcomes translated into observable teaching behaviors and student-learning gains.

Interpretation and Alignment to CAEP Standard 4

The convergence of student learning objectives results, observation ratings and qualitative data offers credible evidence that SDSU completers positively affect P-12 learning (Standard 4.1) and consistently enact effective instructional practices (Standard 4.2). The fact that evidence spans multiple grade bands, subjects and community contexts supports its representativeness. Collectively, these data demonstrate that the education preparation provider is meeting the Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation expectation that graduates contribute to measurable student growth and exhibit professional competence in their first years of teaching.

The qualitative evidence reinforces the quantitative findings: completers perceive themselves as agents of measurable student growth and attribute that efficacy to their SDSU preparation. Their reflections not only corroborate the documented impact on P-12 learning (Standard 4.1) but also illustrate high levels of completer satisfaction with the program’s relevance and rigor (Standard 4.3). The focus-group themes alongside the quantitative data provide a well-rounded, convergent body of evidence that SDSU meets Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation Standard 4 for both impact and completer satisfaction.

Limitations and Continuous‑Improvement Actions

Because this study only includes five completers, statistical generalization is limited. The education preparation provider will continue to conduct these case studies to increase our body of data on completer effectiveness and the satisfaction of employers and completers. Faculty will also strengthen coursework on results from this case study, such as in small-group instruction, to expand the positive impact documented here.