Common Metrics 2013 Transition to Teaching Survey Bush Foundation

Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
Common Metrics
2013 Transition to Teaching Survey
Network for Excellence in Teaching (NExT)
Bush Foundation
St. Cloud State University Report
Prepared by:
FHI 360
Hezel Associates, LLC
December 2013
To ensure accuracy in reporting, a review process was instituted for all of the common metrics reports. An advance copy of this
report is being provided to this institution's common metrics group key contact, to give the university thirty (30) days for review
and comment before reports are distributed to the Bush Foundation. Within this period, the university may submit written
request to Hezel Associates to delay this report up to an additional sixty (60) days in order to revise it to protect any confidential
information that may have inadvertently been included in the advance copy. This report will be released 30 days from the date of
delivery or upon written confirmation that the university's review has found that standards stipulated in the data sharing
agreement have been met.
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
Introduction
The Network for Excellence in Teaching (NExT), a partnership of 14 institutions of higher
education (IHEs) and the Bush Foundation, aims to transform how university-based teacher
education programs prepare new, effective teachers in Minnesota, North Dakota, and South
Dakota. The NExT institutions have collaborated to develop and administer a set of four
common surveys to measure their progress toward this goal. Teacher candidates and graduates at
each of the IHEs complete three surveys: upon entry into the teacher education programs; at exit;
and one year after graduation (known as the transition to teaching survey). Supervisors of NExT
graduates working in the teaching field also complete a survey during the graduates’ first year of
employment. This report presents the findings from the transition to teaching (TTS) surveys
administered to first-year teachers during the spring of 2013.1
The TTS (see Appendix B) collects information on recent graduates’ licensure and job status,
perceptions of their teacher preparation programs, current school contexts, and personal
demographics. The findings section highlights useful data emerging from the TTS completed by
St. Cloud State University (SCSU) graduates from the 2011-12 academic year. Quantitative data
for NDSU and the NExT aggregate are presented in tabular format in Appendix A. This
appendix also provides comparisons to 2011 data on a series of questions selected by the
common metrics group; these data are presented in tables 1, 8, 13, 19, and 30.
Survey Administration
NExT IHEs were responsible for providing contact information for their 2011-12 graduates to
Hezel Associates, which administered the survey. Hezel Associates sent paper copies of the
survey to graduates’ mailing addresses and electronic versions to their email addresses. Hezel
Associates provided several reminders to each possible respondent, and many IHEs conducted
their own efforts to promote survey completion. Among SCSU respondents, 20 of 60 reported
that they were prompted to complete the survey by email messages from Hezel Associates, nine
were prompted by a message from their alma mater, and three were prompted by a mailed letter
from Hezel. Continued efforts by SCSU to promote survey completion might lead to a greater
number of survey responses and, consequently, more useful data sets.
Response Rate
The 2013 TTS response rate for SCSU was 16 percent (62 out of 393; see table 1).2 In
comparison, the NExT aggregate response rate was 31 percent. The response rate reported here
for the TTS is calculated by using the number of 2011-12 teacher education program completers
for whom Hezel Associates has contact information as the denominator and the number of
alumni who responded to the survey as the numerator. The NExT aggregate response rate is
somewhat misleading because the TTS sample does not include all of the students who
completed teacher education programs at NExT institutions during the 2011-12 academic year.
SCSU was one of the only IHEs who provided contact information for all of their graduates so
the 23 response rate is more accurate than other NExT institutions. Using the exit survey data
reported by NExT IHEs for 2011-12, SCSU’s response rate remains at 23 percent compared to
1Hezel
Associates administers the TTS survey and performs statistical analysis. Hezel collaborates with FHI 360 to report
findings to each IHE.
2SCSU’s
response rate was higher in 2012 (21 percent) and the survey was administered to fewer students (n=60).
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
the NExT aggregate response rate of 30 percent (687 out of 2310). SCSU’s response rate is
lower than the NExT aggregate; however, there is still opportunity for improvement.
Using this Report
In light of the very low response rate, data presented in this report should be used with caution.
Survey respondents are not necessarily representative of SCSU graduates as a whole. While
these findings could prompt discussions about ways to improve coursework, clinical experiences,
and efforts to connect graduates with teaching jobs, the low response rate limits the extent to
which these data should be used to inform decision making. If the response rate improves over
time, TTS data should help SCSU’s teacher education faculty and staff understand the impact of
changes to their curricula on their graduates’ level of preparedness to enter the profession.
Findings
The findings reported are based on percentages for the 16 percent who completed the TTS.
SCSU respondents applied for jobs at high rates and most were able to find full-time teaching
positions that were being renewed for the 2013-14 academic year. Compared to the NExT
aggregate, SCSU respondents felt less prepared for the realities of teaching, but implement
promising strategies at an equal rate. SCSU respondents reported working in schools with
positive school climates and professional environments; however, they lacked the resources
necessary to teach. SCSU respondents also had less favorable perceptions of their teacher
preparation program compared to the NExT aggregate. The findings reported below provide
more detail on these data.
Survey Section A
Section A of the survey asks about graduates’ job search experiences as well as licensure and
employment status (see tables 3-33 of Appendix A). Below are highlights of SCSU graduates’
responses to section A.3 When higher response rates are attained, TTS data should be combined
with data from exit surveys to help develop strategies that enable graduates to find jobs in
teaching. These data might also be used to inform teacher recruitment strategies so SCSU can
enroll students who are likely to find employment upon graduation.




Of the SCSU respondents,79 percent applied for a teaching license during or after
completing their teacher preparation program (table 3).
Of the graduates who decided to enter teaching, 96 percent applied for a license in
Minnesota. Ninety-six percent of the graduates who applied were granted a license in
Minnesota (table 6).
Among SCSU respondents, the majority are employed full-time (74 percent), 15 percent
are employed part-time, and 12 percent are unemployed and seeking work. More 2013
respondents were employed full-time compared to the 2012 cohort (59 percent employed
full-time) (table 8).
Among SCSU respondents, 36 percent applied for a job outside of teaching (table 10) and
the most popular reason for applying for a non-teaching job was to ensure earning until a
teaching position is obtained (68 percent) (table 11).
Note: tables use the number of respondents to each question when calculating percentages. The number of
respondents therefore varies by table.
3
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel








A large majority of SCSU respondents applied for a teaching position (82 percent) (table
12). The percentage of respondents who applied for a teaching position increased in 2013
(82 percent) from 2012 (72 percent) (table 13).
Table 14 illustrates how many applications for a teaching position each candidate
submitted. Thirty-eight percent submitted between one and five applications, 18 percent
submitted between six and ten, ten percent submitted between 11 and 15, 14 percent
submitted between 16 and 20, while 20 percent submitted more than 20 applications.
Among SCSU respondents, 32 percent applied for jobs over 150 miles away from their
hometown (table 15). Although the majority of SCSU respondents (84 percent) applied
for jobs further than 25 miles away from their hometown, 55 percent said that their ideal
location for a job would be zero to 25 miles away from their hometown (table 16).
All SCSU respondents (88 percent) received at least one job interview and 68 percent
interviewed at least twice (table 17). Of the respondents who interviewed for a teaching
position, 41 percent believe they were very well prepared with 57 percent feeling
somewhat prepared and two percent not being prepared. Overall, SCSU respondents in
2013 felt less prepared for interviews than the 2012 cohort (table 19).
Among SCSU respondents who applied for teaching positions:
o The majority (76 percent) were offered a job (table 22).
o Of those offered teaching positions, 44 percent received one offer and 20 percent
received two (table 24).
o Of those who received an offer, 95 percent accepted a position in teaching (table
25), with 77 percent teaching in a traditional public school, 18 percent in a public
charter school, and none in a private school (table 31).
Of the SCSU respondents who accepted a full-time teaching position, 51 percent had
their contract renewed while the remaining 28 percent of graduates did not get their
contract renewed (table 28).
Of the SCSU respondents with full-time teaching jobs 73 percent had a formal
mentoring/induction program available to them (table 32).
The majority of SCSU respondents with a job plan to teach for 11 or more years (87
percent).
Survey Section B
Section B of the survey asks respondents to rate their levels of preparedness in four aspects of
teaching: instructional practice; diverse learners; learning environment; and professionalism
(tables 34-41). Graduates were asked to respond using the following scale: does not apply;
disagree; tend to disagree; tend to agree; and agree.4 Highlights of SCSU graduates’ responses to
section B are detailed below. When response rates are higher, teacher education programs might
use these data to make changes to their curricula, both coursework and clinical experiences. As
changes are made to the teacher preparation curricula, programs can use future TTS results to
determine the impact of the updated coursework and clinical experiences. These data could also
be used to compare supervisors’ perspective on graduates’ level of preparedness in the
supervisor survey.
The findings highlighted here collapse the ‘tend to agree’ and ‘agree’ categories. See the tables in Appendix A for
detail on ‘tend to agree’ and ‘agree’ responses.
4
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel




Of the instructional strategies listed on the survey, at least 52 percent of the small number
of SCSU respondents agreed that they were prepared to use them (table 34).
Nevertheless, SCSU respondents felt relatively less prepared to
o Plan instruction for the whole class while differentiating for diverse learning
needs (68 percent).
o Use assessment data to diagnose gaps in students’ knowledge and skills (67
percent).
o Design and teach lessons that promote students' abilities to formulate questions
that elicit multiple views on a topic (68 percent).
o Design and teach lessons that promote students' abilities to develop solutions to
abstract problems (67 percent).
o Design and teach lessons that promote students' abilities to create solutions to
global problems (52 percent).
o Design and teach lessons that promote students' abilities to work collaboratively
with teams to solve complex problems (67 percent).
Of the instructional strategies listed on the survey, SCSU graduates felt best prepared to:
o Effectively teach the subject matter in my licensure area (92 percent).
o Align instruction with state subject matter standards of what students should
know and be able to do (92 percent).
o Select instructional strategies to align with learning goals (92 percent).
o Integrate a variety of media and educational technologies into instruction (92
percent).
o Plan lessons with clear learning objectives/goals in mind (92 percent).
Overall, SCSU respondents reported feeling less prepared to address the needs of diverse
learners (table 36). Relatively few respondents felt prepared to:
o Understand the unique needs of refugees among my students (38 percent).
o Design instruction for special education students with physical and other health
impairments (58 percent).
o Design instruction for special education students with sensory impairments (48
percent).
o Design instruction for special education students within the autism spectrum
disorder (56 percent).
o Design instruction for students with mental health needs (56 percent).
o Use community and home resources to foster student learning (58 percent).
o Effectively teach students who have experienced trauma and/or displacement (44
percent).
At least 79 percent of SCSU respondents agreed that they felt well prepared on all items
related to professionalism (table 40). They indicated they were best prepared to:
o Value professional development opportunities to improve teaching (92 percent).
o Uphold legal responsibilities as a professional educator and student advocate
(90percent).
o Collaborate with teaching colleagues (90 percent).
o Use colleague feedback to support my development as a teacher (90 percent).
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
Survey Section C
This section of the survey asks respondents about the practices they implement as a teacher, as
opposed to what they were prepared for, in areas related to instructional practice, diverse
learners, learning environment, and professionalism (tables 42-49).5




At least 72 percent of SCSU respondents reported implementing each of the instructional
practices listed on the survey, with one exception (table 42).
o This held true even for practices where respondents felt relatively less prepared
(see Section B above).
o The only practice where fewer than 72 percent of graduates had implemented the
practice was “I design and teach lessons that promote students' abilities to develop
solutions to abstract problems” (67 percent).
A large majority (at least 70 percent) of SCSU respondents agreed that they had
implemented strategies related to diverse learners in their teaching practice (table 44).
Again, this was the case even in areas where graduates reported feeling relatively less
prepared (see section B).
Nearly all SCSU respondents (97 percent or more) reported that they had used strategies
related to creating a learning environment (table 46).
Nearly all SCSU respondents (81 percent or more) reported that they had engaged in
teaching practices related to professionalism (table 48).
Survey Section D
Section D of the survey asks respondents about their current school context, specifically about
the school climate, professional environment, and resources available (tables 50-57).6 Below are
highlights of SCSU graduates’ responses to section D. Again, the N is very low. With higher
response rates, teacher education programs might use this data to gain a better understanding of
the realities that their graduates face during their first year of teaching.



An equal number of SCSU respondents taught in elementary schools (47 percent) and
middle schools (47 percent), compared to 35 percent in high schools, and none in early
childhood schools (table 56).7
Of SCSU respondents the majority reported teaching in a subject in which they are
licensed (86 percent) (table 57).
SCSU respondents who were employed as teachers reported that they work in schools
with generally positive climates (table 50). For example, 97 percent reported they work in
schools where they feel the school is a physically safe and secure place and where the
school encourages engagement with the community. Only 86 percent, however, believed
students are respectful of one another.
The findings highlighted here collapse the ‘tend to agree’ and ‘agree’ categories. See the tables in Appendix A for
detail on ‘tend to agree’ and ‘agree’ responses.
6
The findings highlighted here collapse the ‘tend to agree’ and ‘agree’ categories. See the tables in Appendix A for
detail on ‘tend to agree’ and ‘agree’ responses.
7 Total percentage is over 100 since graduates were allowed to mark more than one school setting.
5
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel


SCSU respondents who were employed as teachers reported that they worked in schools
with positive professional environments (table 52). Respondents indicated that they feel:
o Respected as a colleague by faculty and staff (97 percent).
o The principal is an effective leader (97 percent).
SCSU respondents were slightly less positive about the availability of resources at their
schools (table 54). For example, only 69 percent reported they had adequate time for
planning, and only 72 percent reported they had the necessary supplies available as
needed and that their classroom was equipped with the furniture and space necessary for
flexible instructional activities.
Survey Section E
Section E of the survey asks respondents about their backgrounds, their general impressions of
their teacher preparation programs, and their first year as teachers (tables 58-66).8 As response
rates increase, the findings in this section may be used to inform recruitment and, in conjunction
with the other common metrics surveys, to improve the teacher preparation curricula.




A large majority of SCSU respondents are white (95 percent). The SCSU cohort is also
largely female (87 percent) (tables 59 and 60).
Most SCSU respondents (90 percent) are committed to the teaching profession and feel
that the rewards of teaching are worth the efforts put in to become a teacher (90 percent).
(table 63)
Among SCSU respondents, 61 percent believe they were effectively prepared to teach in
a variety of settings (urban, suburban, and rural) (table 63).
Among SCSU respondents, 72 percent would recommend their teacher preparation
programs to a prospective teacher (table 64).
The findings highlighted here collapse the ‘tend to agree’ and ‘agree’ categories. See the tables in Appendix A for
detail on ‘tend to agree’ and ‘agree’ responses.
8
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
APPENDIX A: TABULATED RESPONSES FOR
TRANSITION TO TEACHING SURVEY - NExT
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
Table 1.
Response Rate
St. Cloud 2013
St. Cloud 2012
NExT Aggregate
Number of
appropriate
contacts provided
for TTS
distribution*
398
337
2310
Number of
contacts with
valid postal or
email address**
393
281
2244
Number of
responses
62
60
687
Response
rate***
15.8%
21.4%
30.6%
*Note: The appropriate timeframe for graduation for the 2013 cohort spanned 9/1/11-8/31/12. Any contacts provided with no
graduation date were assumed to be the correct cohort. Each IHE reported its cohort size.
**Note: Our response rate calculations were based on the number of graduates that were reachable. Some TTS
communications were not deliverable for the provided postal or email address.
***Note: The survey format for St. Cloud respondents was 61.3% online and 38.7% hard copy. For the NExT aggregate, 76.4%
of graduates responded online and 23.6% of graduates returned hard-copy surveys.
Table 2.
today?*
Which communication method most prompted you to complete this survey
St. Cloud
n=60
n
Percent
NExT Aggregate
n=687
n
Percent
Email message(s) from Hezel
Associates
20
33.3%
263
40.1%
Mailed letter from Hezel
Associates
24
40.0%
127
19.4%
Message from my
university/college
15
25.0%
245
37.3%
Other**
1
1.7%
21
3.2%
*Note: This is a new question added in 2013 to understand effective dissemination strategies for the TTS.
**Note: Other responses from St. Cloud students included: both email and mail (n=1).
PART A. LICENSURE AND JOB STATUS
Table 3. Did you apply for a teaching license either during, or after, completing your
teaching education program?
Yes
No
Source: Q. A1
St. Cloud
n=61
n
Percent
48
78.7%
13
21.3%
NExT Aggregate
n=662
n
Percent
607
91.7%
55
8.3%
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
Table 4.
If no, why did you not apply for a teaching license? Mark ALL that apply.*
St. Cloud
n=13
Percent
n
of Cases
NExT Aggregate
n=63
Percent
n
of Cases
I have not yet taken the state
licensure exams.
1
7.7%
5
7.9%
I have not yet passed the state
licensure exams.
12
92.3%
47
74.6%
I plan to teach in an organization that
does not require a license.
0
0
4
6.3%
0
0
6
9.5%
0
0
0
-
I am not planning to pursue a career
in teaching.
0
0
5
7.9%
Other**
2
15.4%
8
12.7%
I enrolled (or plan to enroll) in
graduate school to pursue an
additional teaching certification or
endorsement.
I enrolled (or plan to enroll) in
graduate school to pursue a nonteaching career.
Source: Q. A1 Includes respondents who answered “no” to the question in Table 3 and in some cases, exceeds the number of
respondents that indicated “no” due to either not responding to the prior question or not properly following the skip pattern in the
hard copy survey version.
*Note: Total percentage may exceed 100, due to being a “mark all that apply” question and the total n may exceed the number
of respondents.
**Note: Other responses from St. Cloud students included: found employment in private sector (n=1) and I received a job
outside of the profession. I do plan to apply for my license soon. (n=1).
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
Table 5. Identify the state(s) in which you applied for a teaching license. Mark ALL that
apply.**
Minnesota
St. Cloud
n=48
Percent of
n
Cases
95.8%
46
Iowa
0
North Dakota
NExT Aggregate
n=610
Percent of
n
Cases
504
82.6%
-
6
1.0%
0
-
90
14.8%
Wyoming
0
-
6
1.0%
Wisconsin
0
-
18
3.0%
Illinois
1
2.1%
5
0.8%
South Dakota
1
2.1%
42
6.9%
Nebraska
1
2.1%
5
0.8%
Other*
3
6.3%
22
3.6%
Source: Q. A2 Includes respondents who answered “yes” to the question in Table 3 and in some cases, exceeds the number of
respondents that indicated “yes” due to either not responding to the prior question or not properly following the skip pattern in the
hard copy survey version.
*Note: Other states reported by St. Cloud respondents included Alaska (n=1); Colorado (n=1); and Texas (n=1).
**Note: Total percentage may exceed 100, due to being a “mark all that apply” question and the total n may exceed the number
of respondents.
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
Table 6.
In which state(s) did you earn a teaching license? Mark ALL that apply.**
St. Cloud
n=47
Percent of
n
Cases
NExT Aggregate
n=600
Percent of
n
Cases
Minnesota
45
95.7%
494
82.3%
Iowa
0
-
5
0.8%
North Dakota
0
-
83
13.8%
Wyoming
1
2.1%
7
1.2%
Wisconsin
0
-
16
2.7%
Illinois
1
2.1%
5
0.8%
South Dakota
1
2.1%
42
7.0%
Nebraska
1
2.1%
4
0.7%
Other*
3
6.4%
22
3.7%
Source: Q. A3 Includes respondents who answered “yes” to the question in Table 3 and in some cases, exceeds the number of
respondents that indicated “yes” due to either not responding to the prior question or not properly following the skip pattern in the
hard copy survey version.
*Note: Other states reported by St. Cloud respondents included Alaska (n=1); Colorado (n=1); and Texas (n=1).
**Note: Total percentage may exceed 100, due to being a “mark all that apply” question and the total n may exceed the number
of respondents.
Table 7. Please describe your current employment situation by choosing the appropriate
response. Select only ONE response.
St. Cloud
n=61
NExT Aggregate
n=663
n
Percent
n
Percent
Employed part-time
9
14.8%
141
21.3%
Employed full-time
45
73.8%
488
73.6%
Unemployed and seeking work
Unemployed and not seeking
work
7
11.5%
26
3.9%
0
-
8
1.2%
Source: Q. A4
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
Table 8. Comparison of St. Cloud 2012 and 2013 responses to current employment
situation
2012
n=59
2013
n=61
n
Percent
n
Percent
Employed part-time
16
27.1%
9
14.8%
Employed full-time
35
59.3%
45
73.8%
Unemployed and seeking work
Unemployed and not seeking
work
7
11.9%
7
11.5%
1
1.7%
0
-
Source: Q. A4
Table 9.
Do you plan to seek a licensed teaching position within the next 12 months?
St. Cloud
n=58
NExT Aggregate
n=626
n
Percent
n
Percent
Yes
46
79.3%
439
70.1%
No
12
20.7%
187
29.9%
Source: Q. A5
Table 10. Did you apply for a job outside of teaching?
St. Cloud
n=61
NExT Aggregate
n=659
n
Percent
n
Percent
Yes
22
36.1%
166
25.2%
No
39
63.9%
493
74.8%
Source: Q. A6
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
Table 11. If yes, why did you apply for a job outside of teaching? Mark ALL that apply.**
St. Cloud
n=22
Percent of
n
Cases
NExT Aggregate
n=165
Percent of
n
Cases
No teaching positions available in my
field
2
9.1%
22
13.3%
A limited number of teaching
positions available in my field
8
36.4%
63
38.2%
Ensure earnings until a teaching
position is obtained
15
68.2%
80
48.5%
Family or personal reasons
4
18.2%
36
21.8%
2
9.1%
21
12.7%
1
4.5%
11
6.7%
Preferred work environment of jobs
outside of teaching
1
4.5%
29
17.6%
Better salary or pay for jobs outside of
teaching
4
18.2%
30
18.2%
2
9.1%
8
4.8%
10
45.5%
45
27.3%
2
9.1%
12
7.3%
0
-
2
1.2%
3
13.6%
29
17.6%
More future prospects outside of
teaching
Better location of jobs outside of
teaching
Better benefits packages for jobs
outside of teaching
Able to find adequate employment
(full-time or part-time) outside of
teaching
More certainty of job security for jobs
outside of teaching
Better evaluation and accountability
policies outside of teaching
Other*
Source: Q. A6 Includes respondents who answered “yes” to the question in Table 10 and in some cases, exceeds the number of
respondents that indicated “yes” due to either not responding to the prior question or not properly following the skip pattern in the
hard copy survey version.
*Note: Other reasons provided by St. Cloud respondents included: additional income (n=1); couldn't pass social studies
teaching exam since I wasn't a history emphasis (n=1); and It took too long to get my license approved and therefore no district
would accept my applications. (n=1).
**Note: Total percentage may exceed 100, due to being a “mark all that apply” question and the total n may exceed the number
of respondents.
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
Table 12. Did you seek employment as a licensed teacher?
St. Cloud
n=61
NExT Aggregate
n=663
n
Percent
n
Percent
Yes
50
82.0%
557
84.0%
No
11
18.0%
106
16.0%
Source: Q. A7
Table 13. Comparison of 2012 and 2013 St. Cloud graduates who sought employment as a
licensed teacher
2012
n=58
2013
n=61
n
Percent
n
Percent
Yes
42
72.4%
50
82.%
No
16
27.6%
11
18.0%
Source: Q. A7
Table 14. How many teaching job applications did you submit?
St. Cloud
n=50
NExT Aggregate
n=555
n
Percent
n
Percent
1-5
19
38.0%
224
40.4%
6-10
9
18.0%
115
20.7%
11-15
5
10.0%
60
10.8%
16-20
7
14.0%
52
9.4%
More than 20
10
20.0%
104
18.7%
Source: Q. A7a Includes respondents who answered “yes” to the question in Table 12.
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
Table 15. When applying for teaching jobs, what was the furthest location from your
hometown that you applied?
St. Cloud
n=50
NExT Aggregate
n=555
n
Percent
n
Percent
0-25 miles
8
16.0%
169
30.5%
26-50 miles
16
32.0%
133
24.0%
51-100 miles
9
18.0%
64
11.5%
101-150 miles
More than
150 miles
1
2.0%
29
5.2%
16
32.0%
160
28.8%
Source: Q. A7b Includes respondents who answered “yes” to the question in Table 12.
Table 16. When applying for teaching jobs, what was your ideal location for a job based
on distance from your hometown?
St. Cloud
n= 49
NExT Aggregate
n=557
n
Percent
n
Percent
0-25 miles
27
55.1%
354
63.6%
26-50 miles
12
24.5%
65
11.7%
51-100 miles
1
2.0%
23
4.1%
101-150 miles
More than
150 miles
Indifferent
0
-
9
1.6%
1
2.0%
23
4.1%
8
16.3%
83
14.9%
Source: Q. A7c Includes respondents who answered “yes” to the question in Table 12.
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
Table 17. How many teaching job interviews did you receive?
St. Cloud
n=50
NExT Aggregate
n=558
n
Percent
n
Percent
None
6
12.0%
40
7.2%
1
10
20.0%
141
25.3%
2-3
19
38.0%
213
38.2%
4-5
8
16.0%
105
18.8%
6-10
6
12.0%
52
9.3%
11 or more
1
2.0%
7
1.3%
Source: Q. A7d Includes respondents who answered “yes” to the question in Table 12.
Table 18. How well prepared do you think you were for your teaching job interview(s)?
St. Cloud
n=44
Very well
prepared
Somewhat
prepared
Not prepared
NExT Aggregate
n=518
n
Percent
n
Percent
18
40.9%
267
51.5%
25
56.8%
234
45.2%
1
2.3%
17
3.3%
Source: Q. A7e Includes respondents who answered “yes” to the question in Table 12 and those that did not answer “none” in
Table 17.
Table 19. Comparison of St. Cloud 2012 and 2013 responses to “How well prepared do you
think you were for your teaching job interview(s)?”
2012
n=41
Very well
prepared
Somewhat
prepared
Not prepared
2013
n=44
n
Percent
n
Percent
21
51.2%
18
40.9%
20
48.8%
25
56.8%
0
-
1
2.3%
Source: Q. A7e Includes respondents who answered “yes” to the question in Table 12.
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
Table 20. How confident were you in your performance in your teaching job interview(s)?
St. Cloud
n=43
Very confident
Somewhat
confident
Not confident
NExT Aggregate
n=516
n
Percent
n
Percent
20
46.5%
265
51.4%
22
51.2%
235
45.5%
1
2.3%
16
3.1%
Source: Q. A7f Includes respondents who answered “yes” to the question in Table 12 and those that did not answer “none” in
Table 17.
Table 21. How well do you think you performed in your teaching job interview(s)?
St. Cloud
n=43
NExT Aggregate
n=517
n
Percent
n
Percent
Very well
25
58.1%
312
60.3%
Somewhat well
18
41.9%
196
37.9%
Not well
0
-
9
1.7%
Source: Q. A7g Includes respondents who answered “yes” to the question in Table 12 and those that did not answer “none” in
Table 17.
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
Table 22. Did you receive job offers for a teaching position?
St. Cloud
n=50
NExT Aggregate
n=559
n
Percent
n
Percent
Yes
38
76.0%
466
83.4%
No
12
24.0%
93
16.6%
Source: Q. A8
Table 23. If no, why do you think you did not receive any job offers? Mark ALL that
apply.**
St. Cloud
n=14
Percent
n
of Cases
NExT Aggregate
n=103
Percent
n
of Cases
Jobs in my licensure area
are very competitive.
8
57.1%
68
66.0%
My interview(s) did not go
well.
0
-
13
12.6%
I only applied for a limited
number of positions.
3
21.4%
27
26.2%
I limited my job search to a
small geographic area.
2
14.3%
32
31.1%
I started my job search
late.
3
21.4%
24
23.3%
My teaching profile did not
reflect my abilities.
1
7.1%
5
4.9%
Other*
3
21.4%
22
21.4%
Source: Q. A8 Includes respondents who answered “no” to the question in Table 22 and in some cases, exceeds the number of
respondents that indicated “no” due to either not responding to the prior question or not properly following the skip pattern in the
hard copy survey version.
*Note: Other reasons reported by St. Cloud respondents included: I had not received my teaching license yet, and not enough
experience. (n=1); No Experience (n=1); and No License (n=1).
**Note: Total percentage may exceed 100, due to being a “mark all that apply” question and the total n may exceed the number
of respondents.
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
Table 24. How many offers for a teaching position did you receive?
St. Cloud
n=50
n
Percent
NExT Aggregate
n=559
n
Percent
0
12
24.0%
94
16.8%
1
22
44.0%
267
47.8%
2
10
20.0%
131
23.4%
3
5
10.0%
38
6.8%
4
1
2.0%
16
2.9%
5
0
-
8
1.4%
More than 5
0
-
5
0.9%
Source: Q. A9
Table 25. Did you accept an offer for a teaching position?
Yes
No
St. Cloud
n=38
n
Percent
36
94.7%
2
5.3%
NExT Aggregate
n=462
n
Percent
449
97.2%
13
2.8%
Source: Q. A10 excludes respondents who answered “0” to the question in Table 24.
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
Table 26. If no, why did you turn down a teaching position offer? Mark ALL that apply.*
St. Cloud
n=1
Percent
n
of Cases
NExT Aggregate
n=16
Percent
n
of Cases
Family or personal reasons
0
-
4
25.0%
Other job offers
1
100.0%
4
25.0%
Location of the teaching
position(s)
0
-
4
25.0%
School environment of the
teaching position(s) (i.e., school
atmosphere, working
relationships)
0
-
3
18.8%
Few future career prospects in
teaching
1
100.0%
1
6.3%
Salary or pay of the teaching
position(s) was inadequate
1
100.0%
5
31.3%
Benefits package was
inadequate
1
100.0%
2
12.5%
Percentage of appointment was
inadequate
0
-
2
12.5%
Uncertainty in job security
0
-
0
-
Evaluation and accountability
policies for teachers
0
-
0
-
Other
0
-
6
37.5%
Source: Q. A10 Includes respondents who answered “no” to the question in Table 25 and in some cases, exceeds the number of
respondents that indicated “no” due to either not responding to the prior question or not properly following the skip pattern in the
hard copy survey version.
*Note: Total percentage may exceed 100, due to being a “mark all that apply” question and the total n may exceed the number
of respondents.
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
Table 27. Are you currently teaching?*
Yes
No
St. Cloud
n=61
n
Percent
39
63.9%
22
36.1%
NExT Aggregate
n=661
n
Percent
499
75.5%
162
24.5%
Source: Q. A11
*Note: Respondents that answered “no” to this question skipped ahead to Part E (see Table 588).
Table 28. Teaching Employment Status:
St. Cloud
n=39
n
Percent
NExT Aggregate
n=476
n
Percent
Full-time — contract renewed
20
51.3%
283
59.5%
Full-time — contract not
renewed
11
28.2%
114
23.9%
Part-time — contract renewed
2
5.1%
32
6.7%
Part-time — contract not
renewed
6
15.4%
47
9.9%
Source: Q. A11a Includes respondents who answered “yes” to the question in Table 27.
Table 29. Type of teaching position:
St. Cloud
n=38
n
Percent
NExT Aggregate
n=497
n
Percent
Regular teaching position
26
68.4%
390
78.5%
Short-term substitute
3
7.9%
31
6.2%
Long-term substitute
6
15.8%
44
8.9%
Other*
3
7.9%
32
6.4%
Source: Q. A11b Includes respondents who answered “yes” to the question in Table 27. Some graduates who responded “no”
to the question in Table 27 elected to answer this question in the hard copy survey version.
*Note: Other types of teaching positions reported by St. Cloud respondents included: EDL after school (n=1); Graduate assistant
and substitute teacher (n=1); and Intervention Education Assistant (n=1).
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
Table 30. Comparison of St. Cloud 2012 and 2013 responses to type of teaching position:
n
2012
n=30
Percent
n
2013
n=38
Percent
Regular teaching position
22
73.3%
26
68.4%
Short-term substitute
2
6.7%
3
7.9%
Long-term substitute
1
3.3%
6
15.8%
Other
5
16.7%
3
7.9%
Source: Q. A11b Includes respondents who answered “yes” to the question in Table 27.
Table 31. Type of school:
St. Cloud
n=39
n
Percent
NExT Aggregate
n=497
n
Percent
Traditional public school
30
76.9%
355
71.4%
Public charter school
7
17.9%
59
11.9%
Private school
0
-
35
7.0%
Other*
2
5.1%
48
9.7%
Source: Q. A11c Includes respondents who answered “yes” to the question in Table 27. Some graduates who responded “no”
to the question in Table 27 elected to answer this question in the hard copy survey version.
*Note: Other school types reported by St. Cloud respondents included: Alternative level 4 (n=1) and Intensive English Center
Instructor and traditional public school (n=1).
Table 32. Is a formal mentoring/induction program available to you in your school or
district?
Yes
No
St. Cloud
n=37
n
Percent
27
73.0%
10
27.0%
NExT Aggregate
n=485
n
Percent
307
63.3%
178
36.7%
Source: Q. A11d Includes respondents who answered “yes” to the question in Table 27.
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
Table 33. How long do you plan on teaching?
St. Cloud
n=39
n
Percent
NExT Aggregate
n=496
n
Percent
1-2 years
0
-
14
2.8%
3-5 years
2
5.1%
32
6.5%
6-10 years
3
7.7%
55
11.1%
11 or more years
34
87.2%
395
79.6%
Source: Q. A11e Includes respondents who answered “yes” to the question in Table 27. Some graduates who responded “no”
to the question in Table 27 elected to answer this question in the hard copy survey version.
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
PART B. YOUR TEACHER PREPARATION—COURSEWORK & FIELD/CLINICAL EXPERIENCE: WHAT WERE
YOU PREPARED TO DO?
Table 34. Instructional Practice: To what extent do you disagree or agree that your teacher preparation program prepared
you to…*
Does Not
Apply
Disagree
Tend to
Disagree
Tend to
Agree
n
%
n
%
n
%
n
%
n
%
Agree
understand processes of inquiry
and ways of knowing that are
central to the subjects I teach.
St. Cloud; n=25
0
-
0
-
3
12.0%
11
44.0%
11
44.0%
NExT Aggregate; n=407
3
0.7%
2
0.5%
20
4.9%
126
31.0%
256
62.9%
effectively teach the subject matter
in my licensure area.
St. Cloud; n=25
0
-
0
-
2
8.0%
14
56.0%
9
36.0%
NExT Aggregate; n=407
3
0.7%
8
2.0%
31
7.6%
116
28.5%
249
61.2%
align instruction with state subject
matter standards of what students
should know and be able to do.
St. Cloud; n=25
0
-
0
-
2
8.0%
13
52.0%
10
40.0%
NExT Aggregate; n=407
5
1.2%
6
1.5%
24
5.9%
132
32.4%
240
59.0%
identify clear subject matter
learning goals for students.
St. Cloud; n=25
0
-
0
-
4
16.0%
10
40.0%
11
44.0%
NExT Aggregate; n=408
0
-
3
0.7%
26
6.4%
123
30.1%
256
62.7%
understand how students' learning
is influenced by their
social/emotional development.
account for students' prior
knowledge and experiences in
instructional planning.
plan instruction for the whole class
while differentiating for diverse
learning needs.
understand the advantages and
limitations of various instructional
strategies for the subject(s) I teach.
St. Cloud; n=25
0
-
1
4.0%
2
8.0%
13
52.0%
9
36.0%
NExT Aggregate; n=406
0
-
6
1.5%
31
7.6%
124
30.5%
245
60.3%
St. Cloud; n=25
0
-
1
4.0%
4
16.0%
12
48.0%
8
32.0%
NExT Aggregate; n=409
1
0.2%
4
1.0%
30
7.3%
120
29.3%
254
62.1%
St. Cloud; n=25
0
-
1
4.0%
7
28.0%
7
28.0%
10
40.0%
NExT Aggregate; n=407
3
0.7%
12
2.9%
59
14.5%
139
34.2%
194
47.7%
St. Cloud; n=24
0
-
0
-
4
16.7%
10
41.7%
10
41.7%
NExT Aggregate; n=405
1
0.2%
10
2.5%
27
6.7%
170
42.0%
197
48.6%
select instructional strategies to
align with learning goals.
St. Cloud; n=24
0
-
0
-
2
8.3%
10
41.7%
12
50.0%
NExT Aggregate; n=405
0
-
7
1.7%
28
6.9%
139
34.3%
231
57.0%
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
Does Not
Apply
Disagree
Tend to
Disagree
Tend to
Agree
n
%
n
%
n
%
n
%
n
%
Agree
integrate a variety of media and
educational technologies into
instruction.
St. Cloud; n=25
0
-
0
-
2
8.0%
9
36.0%
14
56.0%
NExT Aggregate; n=408
2
0.5%
13
3.2%
47
11.5%
143
35.0%
203
49.8%
group students in a variety of ways
for instructional purposes.
St. Cloud; n=23
0
-
0
-
7
30.4%
8
34.8%
8
34.8%
NExT Aggregate; n=402
2
0.5%
8
2.0%
48
11.9%
146
36.3%
198
49.3%
design long-range instructional
plans that meet curricular goals.
St. Cloud; n=24
0
-
0
-
6
25.0%
8
33.3%
10
41.7%
NExT Aggregate; n=407
3
0.7%
12
2.9%
59
14.5%
155
38.1%
178
43.7%
regularly adjust instructional plans
to meet student needs.
St. Cloud; n=24
0
-
0
-
4
16.7%
9
37.5%
11
45.8%
NExT Aggregate; n=403
2
0.5%
3
0.7%
33
8.2%
124
30.8%
241
59.8%
plan lessons with clear learning
objectives/goals in mind.
St. Cloud; n=24
0
-
0
-
2
8.3%
9
37.5%
13
54.2%
NExT Aggregate; n=403
1
0.2%
3
0.7%
9
2.2%
94
23.3%
296
73.4%
design instruction and learning
tasks that connect core content to
real-life experiences for students.
apply basic measurement concepts
to the development of sound
classroom assessments.
strategically use a variety of
assessments to monitor student
learning.
St. Cloud; n=24
0
-
0
-
5
20.8%
8
33.3%
11
45.8%
NExT Aggregate; n=406
1
0.2%
7
1.7%
30
7.4%
127
31.3%
241
59.4%
St. Cloud; n=24
0
-
0
-
3
12.5%
9
37.5%
12
50.0%
NExT Aggregate; n=402
3
0.7%
9
2.2%
51
12.7%
147
36.6%
192
47.8%
St. Cloud; n=24
0
-
0
-
5
20.8%
6
25.0%
13
54.2%
NExT Aggregate; n=406
2
0.5%
6
1.5%
41
10.1%
130
32.0%
227
55.9%
use student self-assessment
strategies.
St. Cloud; n=24
0
-
0
-
5
20.8%
9
37.5%
10
41.7%
NExT Aggregate; n=404
3
0.7%
14
3.5%
71
17.6%
143
35.4%
173
42.8%
provide feedback to students to
improve their performance.
St. Cloud; n=24
0
-
0
-
4
16.7%
9
37.5%
11
45.8%
NExT Aggregate; n=406
3
0.7%
7
1.7%
42
10.3%
134
33.0%
220
54.2%
understand the role and
interpretation of standardized
testing in schools.
St. Cloud; n=24
0
-
1
4.2%
5
20.8%
10
41.7%
8
33.3%
NExT Aggregate; n=404
7
1.7%
22
5.4%
64
15.8%
152
37.6%
159
39.4%
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
use assessment data to diagnose
gaps in students’ knowledge and
skills.
design and teach lessons that
promote students' abilities to draw
conclusions based on the best
analysis.
design and teach lessons that
promote students' abilities to analyze
how parts of a whole interact with
each other to produce overall
outcomes in complex systems.
design and teach lessons that
promote students' abilities to
formulate questions that elicit
multiple views on a topic.
design and teach lessons that
promote students' abilities to develop
solutions to abstract problems.
design and teach lessons that
promote students' abilities to create
solutions to global problems.
design and teach lessons that
promote students' abilities to work
collaboratively with teams to solve
complex problems
Does Not
Apply
n
%
Tend to
Disagree
n
%
Tend to
Agree
n
%
n
%
n
%
St. Cloud; n=24
0
-
2
8.3%
6
25.0%
6
25.0%
10
41.7%
NExT Aggregate; n=405
6
1.5%
23
5.7%
67
16.5%
145
35.8%
164
40.5%
St. Cloud; n=23
0
-
1
4.3%
6
26.1%
8
34.8%
8
34.8%
NExT Aggregate; n=403
7
1.7%
11
2.7%
59
14.6%
157
39.0%
169
41.9%
St. Cloud; n=24
0
-
1
4.2%
6
25.0%
8
33.3%
9
37.5%
NExT Aggregate; n=405
10
2.5%
16
4.0%
66
16.3%
157
38.8%
156
38.5%
St. Cloud; n=31
1
3.2%
1
3.2%
8
25.8%
9
29.0%
12
38.7%
NExT Aggregate; n=454
15
3.3%
13
2.9%
58
12.8%
171
37.7%
197
43.4%
St. Cloud; n=30
2
6.7%
2
6.7%
6
20.0%
10
33.3%
10
33.3%
NExT Aggregate; n=453
15
3.3%
14
3.1%
70
15.5%
173
38.2%
181
40.0%
St. Cloud; n=31
2
6.5%
3
9.7%
10
32.3%
6
19.4%
10
32.3%
NExT Aggregate; n=453
18
4.0%
26
5.7%
94
20.8%
158
34.9%
157
34.7%
St. Cloud; n=30
1
3.3%
1
3.3%
8
26.7%
9
30.0%
11
36.7%
NExT Aggregate; n=452
13
2.9%
12
2.7%
48
10.6%
157
34.7%
222
49.1%
Disagree
Agree
Source: Q. B1a-aa
*Note: Due to an extant error in the response option layout in the TTS hard-copy for some matrix questions (B1a-w), most data for this question represents online respondents.
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
Table 35. Instructional Practice: To what extent do you disagree or agree that your
teacher preparation program prepared you to…*
St. Cloud***
NExT Aggregate
n
Mean**
SD
n
Mean
SD
understand processes of inquiry
and ways of knowing that are
central to the subjects I teach.
25
3.32
0.690
404
3.57
0.612
effectively teach the subject matter
in my licensure area.
25
3.28
0.614
404
3.50
0.724
align instruction with state subject
matter standards of what students
should know and be able to do.
25
3.32
0.627
402
3.51
0.678
identify clear subject matter
learning goals for students.
25
3.28
0.737
408
3.55
0.648
25
3.20
0.764
406
3.50
0.702
25
3.08
0.812
408
3.53
0.675
25
3.04
0.935
404
3.27
0.819
24
3.25
0.737
404
3.37
0.719
select instructional strategies to
align with learning goals.
24
3.42
0.654
405
3.47
0.701
integrate a variety of media and
educational technologies into
instruction.
25
3.48
0.653
406
3.32
0.802
group students in a variety of ways
for instructional purposes.
23
3.04
0.825
400
3.34
0.764
design long-range instructional
plans that meet curricular goals.
24
3.17
0.816
404
3.24
0.807
regularly adjust instructional plans
to meet student needs.
24
3.29
0.751
401
3.50
0.679
plan lessons with clear learning
objectives/goals in mind.
24
3.46
0.658
402
3.70
0.548
design instruction and learning
tasks that connect core content to
real-life experiences for students.
24
3.25
0.794
405
3.49
0.709
understand how students' learning
is influenced by their
social/emotional development.
account for students' prior
knowledge and experiences in
instructional planning.
plan instruction for the whole
class while differentiating for
diverse learning needs.
understand the advantages and
limitations of various instructional
strategies for the subject(s) I
teach.
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
St. Cloud***
NExT Aggregate
n
Mean**
SD
n
Mean
SD
24
3.38
0.794
399
3.31
0.778
24
3.33
0.711
404
3.43
0.734
use student self-assessment
strategies.
24
3.21
0.816
401
3.18
0.846
provide feedback to students to
improve their performance.
24
3.29
0.779
403
3.41
0.745
24
3.04
0.751
397
3.13
0.877
24
3.00
0.859
399
3.13
0.892
23
3.00
1.022
396
3.22
0.799
24
3.04
0.905
395
3.15
0.839
30
3.07
0.908
439
3.26
0.797
28
3.00
0.907
438
3.19
0.816
29
2.79
0.943
435
3.03
0.904
29
3.03
1.048
439
3.34
0.780
apply basic measurement
concepts to the development of
sound classroom assessments.
strategically use a variety of
assessments to monitor student
learning.
understand the role and
interpretation of standardized
testing in schools.
use assessment data to diagnose
gaps in students’ knowledge and
skills.
design and teach lessons that
promote students' abilities to draw
conclusions based on the best
analysis.
design and teach lessons that
promote students' abilities to
analyze how parts of a whole
interact with each other to produce
overall outcomes in complex
systems.
design and teach lessons that
promote students' abilities to
formulate questions that elicit
multiple views on a topic.
design and teach lessons that
promote students' abilities to
develop solutions to abstract
problems.
design and teach lessons that
promote students' abilities to
create solutions to global
problems.
design and teach lessons that
promote students' abilities to work
collaboratively with teams to solve
complex problems
Source: Q. B1a-aa
*Scale: 1=Disagree; 2=Tend to disagree; 3=Tend to agree; 4=Agree. **Note: “N/A” responses were excluded from the mean
calculation. ***Note: Due to an extant error in the response option layout in the TTS hard-copy for some matrix questions, most
data for this question represents online respondents.
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
Table 36. Diverse Learners: To what extent do you disagree or agree that your teacher preparation program prepared you
to…*
effectively teach students from
culturally and ethnically diverse
backgrounds.
design and modify assessments to
accommodate students with diverse
learning needs.
St. Cloud; n=27
Does Not
Apply
n
%
0
-
NExT Aggregate; n=428
5
1.2%
20
4.7%
58
13.6%
137
St. Cloud; n=27
0
-
0
-
7
25.9%
NExT Aggregate; n=426
4
0.9%
11
2.6%
68
understand the unique needs of
refugees among my students.
St. Cloud; n=26
3
11.5%
2
7.7%
NExT Aggregate; n=425
27
6.4%
51
access resources, programs, and
other school personnel for students
needing special assistance.
design instruction for special
education students with cognitive
impairments.
design instruction for special
education students with
emotional/behavioral impairments.
St. Cloud; n=27
0
-
NExT Aggregate; n=424
3
St. Cloud; n=26
Disagree
n
0
%
-
Tend to
Disagree
n
%
6
22.2%
Tend to
Agree
n
%
12
44.4%
Agree
n
9
%
33.3%
32.0%
208
48.6%
9
33.3%
11
40.7%
16.0%
146
34.3%
197
46.2%
11
42.3%
5
19.2%
5
19.2%
12.0%
110
25.9%
118
27.8%
119
28.0%
1
3.7%
5
18.5%
12
44.4%
9
33.3%
0.7%
26
6.1%
74
17.5%
146
34.4%
175
41.3%
0
-
0
-
9
34.6%
7
26.9%
10
38.5%
NExT Aggregate; n=425
11
2.6%
28
6.6%
97
22.8%
144
33.9%
145
34.1%
St. Cloud; n=27
0
-
0
-
9
33.3%
9
33.3%
9
33.3%
NExT Aggregate; n=427
11
2.6%
34
8.0%
123
28.8%
130
30.4%
129
30.2%
design instruction for special
education students with physical
and other health impairments.
St. Cloud; n=26
0
-
0
-
11
42.3%
8
30.8%
7
26.9%
NExT Aggregate; n=425
13
3.1%
29
6.8%
102
24.0%
139
32.7%
142
33.4%
design instruction for special
education students with sensory
impairments (deaf, blind).
design instruction for special
education students within the
autism spectrum disorder.
design instruction for special
education students with specific
learning disorders.
St. Cloud; n=27
1
3.7%
1
3.7%
12
44.4%
7
25.9%
6
22.2%
NExT Aggregate; n=427
19
4.4%
48
11.2%
120
28.1%
128
30.0%
112
26.2%
St. Cloud; n=27
0
-
1
3.7%
11
40.7%
6
22.2%
9
33.3%
NExT Aggregate; n=427
16
3.7%
36
8.4%
108
25.3%
151
35.4%
116
27.2%
St. Cloud; n=27
0
-
0
-
9
33.3%
10
37.0%
8
29.6%
NExT Aggregate; n=427
10
2.3%
32
7.5%
102
23.9%
143
33.5%
140
32.8%
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
design instruction for students with
mental health needs.
St. Cloud; n=27
Does Not
Apply
n
%
1
3.7%
n
1
%
3.7%
Tend to
Disagree
n
%
10
37.0%
NExT Aggregate; n=424
15
3.5%
41
9.7%
117
27.6%
151
design instruction for gifted and
talented students.
St. Cloud; n=27
0
-
2
7.4%
7
25.9%
NExT Aggregate; n=427
11
2.6%
37
8.7%
99
design instruction for English
language learners.
St. Cloud; n=27
0
-
0
-
NExT Aggregate; n=427
12
2.8%
28
use community and home
resources to foster student
learning.
effectively teach students who have
experienced trauma and/or
displacement.
St. Cloud; n=26
0
-
NExT Aggregate; n=425
5
St. Cloud; n=27
NExT Aggregate; n=423
Disagree
Tend to
Agree
n
%
9
33.3%
Agree
n
6
%
22.2%
35.6%
100
23.6%
13
48.1%
5
18.5%
23.2%
156
36.5%
124
29.0%
10
37.0%
7
25.9%
10
37.0%
6.6%
91
21.3%
136
31.9%
160
37.5%
1
3.8%
10
38.5%
8
30.8%
7
26.9%
1.2%
23
5.4%
91
21.4%
163
38.4%
143
33.6%
1
3.7%
3
11.1%
11
40.7%
7
25.9%
5
18.5%
11
2.6%
67
15.8%
142
33.6%
127
30.0%
76
18.0%
Source: Q. B2a-o
*Note: Due to an extant error in the response option layout in the TTS hard-copy for some matrix questions, most data for this question represents online respondents.
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
Table 37. Diverse Learners: To what extent do you disagree or agree that your teacher
preparation program prepared you to…*
St. Cloud***
effectively teach students from
culturally and ethnically diverse
backgrounds.
design and modify assessments to
accommodate students with
diverse learning needs.
understand the unique needs of
refugees among my students.
access resources, programs, and
other school personnel for
students needing special
assistance.
design instruction for special
education students with cognitive
impairments.
design instruction for special
education students with
emotional/behavioral impairments.
design instruction for special
education students with physical
and other health impairments.
design instruction for special
education students with sensory
impairments (deaf, blind).
design instruction for special
education students within the
autism spectrum disorder.
design instruction for special
education students with specific
learning disorders.
design instruction for students
with mental health needs.
design instruction for gifted and
talented students.
design instruction for English
language learners.
use community and home
resources to foster student
learning.
effectively teach students who
have experienced trauma and/or
displacement.
NExT Aggregate
n
Mean**
SD
n
Mean
SD
27
3.11
0.751
423
3.26
0.867
27
3.15
0.818
422
3.25
0.818
23
2.57
0.945
398
2.77
1.018
27
3.07
0.945
421
3.12
0.909
26
3.04
0.829
414
2.98
0.926
27
3.00
0.871
416
2.85
0.955
26
2.85
0.832
412
2.96
0.935
26
2.69
0.834
408
2.75
0.988
27
2.85
0.884
411
2.84
0.934
27
2.96
0.949
417
2.94
0.941
26
2.77
0.808
409
2.76
0.935
27
2.78
0.863
416
2.88
0.938
27
3.00
0.847
415
3.03
0.936
26
2.81
0.877
420
3.01
0.882
26
2.54
0.895
412
2.51
0.973
Source: Q. B2a-o
*Scale: 1=Disagree; 2=Tend to disagree; 3=Tend to agree; 4=Agree. **Note: “N/A” responses were excluded from the mean
calculation. ***Note: Due to an extant error in the response option layout in the TTS hard-copy for some matrix questions, most
data for this question represents online respondents.
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
Table 38. Learning Environment: To what extent do you disagree or agree that your teacher preparation program prepared
you to…*
develop and maintain a classroom
environment that promotes student
engagement.
St. Cloud; n=26
Does Not
Apply
n
%
0
-
n
1
%
3.8%
Tend to
Disagree
n
%
3
11.5%
NExT Aggregate; n=425
0
-
8
1.9%
33
7.8%
119
respond appropriately to student
misbehavior.
St. Cloud; n=26
0
-
1
3.8%
5
19.2%
NExT Aggregate; n=425
0
-
42
9.9%
73
create a learning environment in
which differences such as race,
culture, gender, sexual orientation,
and language are respected.
use classroom management
techniques that foster self-control
and self-discipline among students.
effectively organize the physical
environment of the classroom for
instruction.
St. Cloud; n=26
0
-
0
-
NExT Aggregate; n=425
1
0.2%
10
St. Cloud; n=26
0
-
NExT Aggregate; n=423
0
St. Cloud; n=26
Disagree
Tend to
Agree
n
%
7
26.9%
Agree
n
15
%
57.7%
28.0%
265
62.4%
9
34.6%
11
42.3%
17.2%
128
30.1%
182
42.8%
4
15.4%
8
30.8%
14
53.8%
2.4%
27
6.4%
111
26.1%
276
64.9%
1
3.8%
6
23.1%
9
34.6%
10
38.5%
-
30
7.1%
64
15.1%
133
31.4%
196
46.3%
0
-
2
7.7%
3
11.5%
8
30.8%
13
50.0%
NExT Aggregate; n=422
2
0.5%
29
6.9%
39
9.2%
106
25.1%
246
58.3%
use effective listening techniques
when communicating with students.
St. Cloud; n=26
0
-
1
3.8%
4
15.4%
7
26.9%
14
53.8%
NExT Aggregate; n=424
1
0.2%
15
3.5%
37
8.7%
125
29.5%
246
58.0%
communicate with students using
non-biased language.
St. Cloud; n=26
0
-
1
3.8%
3
11.5%
7
26.9%
15
57.7%
NExT Aggregate; n=424
3
0.7%
14
3.3%
36
8.5%
122
28.8%
249
58.7%
stimulate effective classroom
communication among students.
St. Cloud; n=26
0
-
2
7.7%
3
11.5%
10
38.5%
11
42.3%
NExT Aggregate; n=425
1
0.2%
21
4.9%
40
9.4%
140
32.9%
223
52.5%
clearly communicate expectations
for appropriate student behavior.
St. Cloud; n=26
0
-
1
3.8%
4
15.4%
7
26.9%
14
53.8%
NExT Aggregate; n=423
0
-
21
5.0%
36
8.5%
118
27.9%
248
58.6%
use effective communication skills
and strategies to convey ideas and
information to students.
St. Cloud; n=26
0
-
1
3.8%
3
11.5%
9
34.6%
13
50.0%
NExT Aggregate; n=417
0
-
17
4.1%
22
5.3%
130
31.2%
248
59.5%
Source: Q. B3a-j *Note: Due to an extant error in the response option layout in the TTS hard-copy for some matrix questions, most data for this question represents online
respondents.
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
Table 39. Learning Environment: To what extent do you disagree or agree that your
teacher preparation program prepared you to…*
St. Cloud***
NExT Aggregate
n
Mean**
SD
n
Mean
SD
develop and maintain a classroom
environment that promotes
student engagement.
26
3.38
0.852
425
3.51
0.721
respond appropriately to student
misbehavior.
26
3.15
0.881
425
3.06
0.997
26
3.38
0.752
424
3.54
0.720
26
3.08
0.891
423
3.17
0.934
26
3.23
0.951
420
3.35
0.912
26
3.31
0.884
423
3.42
0.796
communicate with students using
non-biased language.
26
3.38
0.852
421
3.44
0.786
stimulate effective classroom
communication among students.
26
3.15
0.925
424
3.33
0.842
clearly communicate expectations
for appropriate student behavior.
26
3.31
0.884
423
3.40
0.843
use effective communication skills
and strategies to convey ideas and
information to students.
26
3.31
0.838
417
3.46
0.775
create a learning environment in
which differences such as race,
culture, gender, sexual orientation,
and language are respected.
use classroom management
techniques that foster self-control
and self-discipline among
students.
effectively organize the physical
environment of the classroom for
instruction.
use effective listening techniques
when communicating with
students.
Source: Q. B3a-j
*Scale: 1=Disagree; 2=Tend to disagree; 3=Tend to agree; 4=Agree
**Note: “N/A” responses were excluded from the mean calculation.
***Note: Due to an extant error in the response option layout in the TTS hard-copy for some matrix questions, most data for this
question represents online respondents.
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
Table 40. Professionalism: To what extent do you disagree or agree that your teacher preparation program prepared you
to…*
value professional development
opportunities to improve teaching.
access the professional literature to
expand my knowledge about
teaching and learning.
reflect on and use student data to
inform my instruction.
uphold my legal responsibilities as a
professional educator and student
advocate.
actively engage with
parents/guardians about issues
affecting student learning.
collaborate with teaching colleagues.
collaborate with other school
personnel about the well-being of my
students.
use colleague feedback to support
my development as a teacher.
St. Cloud; n=38
NExT Aggregate; n=493
St. Cloud; n=38
Does Not
Apply
n
%
0
1
0.2%
0
-
%
0.8%
-
Tend to
Disagree
n
%
3
7.9%
16
3.2%
5
13.2%
Tend to
Agree
n
%
13
34.2%
97
19.6%
15
39.5%
n
0
4
0
n
22
376
18
%
57.9%
76.1%
47.4%
NExT Aggregate; n=492
1
0.2%
7
1.4%
37
7.5%
145
29.4%
303
61.5%
St. Cloud; n=38
NExT Aggregate; n=491
St. Cloud; n=38
0
1
0
0.2%
-
1
5
1
2.6%
1.0%
2.6%
7
41
3
18.4%
8.4%
7.9%
10
133
9
26.3%
27.1%
23.7%
20
311
25
52.6%
63.3%
65.8%
NExT Aggregate; n=492
1
0.2%
8
1.6%
25
5.1%
99
20.1%
359
73.0%
St. Cloud; n=38
0
-
2
5.3%
4
10.5%
11
28.9%
21
55.3%
NExT Aggregate; n=491
6
1.2%
17
3.5%
47
9.6%
135
27.5%
286
58.2%
St. Cloud; n=38
NExT Aggregate; n=492
St. Cloud; n=38
0
0
0
-
2
7
3
5.3%
1.4%
7.9%
2
17
2
5.3%
3.5%
5.3%
7
103
9
18.4%
20.9%
23.7%
27
365
24
71.1%
74.2%
63.2%
NExT Aggregate; n=492
2
0.4%
17
3.5%
24
4.9%
126
25.6%
323
65.7%
St. Cloud; n=38
NExT Aggregate; n=491
0
2
0.4%
3
11
7.9%
2.2%
1
19
2.6%
3.9%
9
114
23.7%
23.2%
25
345
65.8%
70.3%
Disagree
Source: Q. B4a-h
*Note: Some graduates who responded “no” to the question in Table 27 elected to answer this question in the hard copy survey version.
Agree
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
Table 41. Professionalism: To what extent do you disagree or agree that your teacher
preparation program prepared you to…*
St. Cloud
NExT Aggregate
n
Mean**
SD
n
Mean
SD
value professional development
opportunities to improve teaching.
38
3.50
0.647
493
3.71
0.564
access the professional literature
to expand my knowledge about
teaching and learning.
38
3.34
0.708
492
3.51
0.698
reflect on and use student data to
inform my instruction.
38
3.29
0.867
490
3.53
0.692
38
3.53
0.762
491
3.65
0.665
38
3.34
0.878
485
3.42
0.806
collaborate with teaching
colleagues.
38
3.55
0.828
492
3.68
0.611
collaborate with other school
personnel about the well-being of
my students.
38
3.42
0.919
490
3.54
0.745
use colleague feedback to support
my development as a teacher.
38
3.47
0.893
489
3.62
0.670
uphold my legal responsibilities as
a professional educator and
student advocate.
actively engage with
parents/guardians about issues
affecting student learning.
Source: Q. B4a-h
*Scale: 1=Disagree; 2=Tend to disagree; 3=Tend to agree; 4=Agree
**Note: “N/A” responses were excluded from the mean calculation.
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
PART C. YOUR TEACHING PRACTICE: WHAT DO YOU DO AS A TEACHER?
Table 42. Instructional Practice: To what extent do you disagree or agree that you do the following in your teaching practice?
Does Not
Apply
Disagree
Tend to
Disagree
Tend to
Agree
n
%
n
%
n
%
n
%
n
%
Agree
I align instruction with state subject
matter standards.
St. Cloud; n=36
3
8.3%
0
-
3
8.3%
6
16.7%
24
66.7%
NExT Aggregate; n=481
40
8.3%
4
0.8%
11
2.3%
79
16.4%
347
72.1%
I set clear subject matter learning
goals for students.
St. Cloud; n=36
3
8.3%
0
-
0
-
9
25.0%
24
66.7%
NExT Aggregate; n=480
19
4.0%
2
0.4%
10
2.1%
104
21.7%
345
71.9%
I design activities in which students
learn skills to address issues
central to the subject matter.
I design activities in which students
engage with subject matter from a
variety of perspectives.
I consider students’ prior
knowledge or experience in my
instructional planning.
I create activities that are
appropriate for my students’
social/emotional development.
I create assignments that are at the
appropriate levels of difficulty for
my students’ diverse learning
needs.
St. Cloud; n=36
2
5.6%
0
-
0
-
9
25.0%
25
69.4%
NExT Aggregate; n=482
17
3.5%
1
0.2%
6
1.2%
89
18.5%
369
76.6%
St. Cloud; n=36
2
5.6%
0
-
1
2.8%
10
27.8%
23
63.9%
NExT Aggregate; n=482
17
3.5%
1
0.2%
22
4.6%
125
25.9%
317
65.8%
St. Cloud; n=36
1
2.8%
0
-
0
-
10
27.8%
25
69.4%
NExT Aggregate; n=481
13
2.7%
0
-
3
0.6%
98
20.4%
367
76.3%
St. Cloud; n=36
1
2.8%
0
-
0
-
9
25.0%
26
72.2%
NExT Aggregate; n=482
13
2.7%
0
-
6
1.2%
100
20.7%
363
75.3%
St. Cloud; n=36
1
2.8%
0
-
0
-
7
19.4%
28
77.8%
NExT Aggregate; n=481
20
4.2%
1
0.2%
14
2.9%
126
26.2%
320
66.5%
I align instructional strategies with
learning goals.
St. Cloud; n=36
1
2.8%
0
-
0
-
8
22.2%
27
75.0%
NExT Aggregate; n=478
14
2.9%
3
0.6%
10
2.1%
88
18.4%
363
75.9%
I use a variety of instructional
strategies to support student
learning for the subject(s) I teach.
St. Cloud; n=35
1
2.9%
0
-
0
-
6
17.1%
28
80.0%
NExT Aggregate; n=481
10
2.1%
1
0.2%
13
2.7%
92
19.1%
365
75.9%
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
Does Not
Apply
Disagree
Tend to
Disagree
Tend to
Agree
%
2.8%
n
0
%
-
n
0
%
-
n
14
%
38.9%
n
21
%
58.3%
Agree
I group students in a variety of
ways for instructional purposes.
St. Cloud; n=36
n
1
NExT Aggregate; n=481
20
4.2%
4
0.8%
34
7.1%
115
23.9%
308
64.0%
I integrate a variety of media and
educational technologies into my
instruction.
St. Cloud; n=36
4
11.1%
0
-
1
2.8%
8
22.2%
23
63.9%
NExT Aggregate; n=479
23
4.8%
6
1.3%
27
5.6%
124
25.9%
299
62.4%
I design long-range instructional
plans that meet curricular goals.
St. Cloud; n=36
3
8.3%
0
-
2
5.6%
10
27.8%
21
58.3%
NExT Aggregate; n=481
28
5.8%
8
1.7%
27
5.6%
149
30.8%
270
56.1%
I plan lessons with clear learning
objectives/goals in mind.
St. Cloud; n=36
2
5.6%
0
-
0
-
9
25.0%
25
69.4%
NExT Aggregate; n=479
18
3.8%
1
0.2%
7
1.5%
98
20.5%
355
74.1%
I regularly adjust instructional plans
to meet students’ needs.
St. Cloud; n=36
1
2.8%
1
2.8%
0
-
6
16.7%
28
77.8%
NExT Aggregate; n=481
11
2.3%
1
0.2%
3
0.6%
74
15.4%
392
81.5%
I strategically use a variety of
assessments to monitor student
learning.
I design instruction and learning
tasks that connect core content to
real-life experiences for students.
St. Cloud; n=36
1
2.8%
0
-
1
2.8%
10
27.8%
24
66.7%
NExT Aggregate; n=480
19
4.0%
0
-
26
5.4%
147
30.6%
288
60.0%
St. Cloud; n=36
1
2.8%
0
-
1
2.8%
10
27.8%
24
66.7%
NExT Aggregate; n=474
19
4.0%
5
1.1%
19
4.0%
122
25.7%
309
65.2%
I ask my students to self-assess
their own learning.
St. Cloud; n=36
1
2.8%
1
2.8%
5
13.9%
14
38.9%
15
41.7%
NExT Aggregate; n=480
28
5.8%
13
2.7%
64
13.3%
160
33.3%
215
44.8%
I provide feedback to students to
improve their performance.
St. Cloud; n=36
1
2.8%
1
2.8%
0
-
12
33.3%
22
61.1%
NExT Aggregate; n=479
12
2.5%
2
0.4%
13
2.7%
128
26.7%
324
67.6%
I design and modify assessments to
accommodate students with diverse
learning needs.
I use assessment data to diagnose
gaps in students’ knowledge and
skills.
St. Cloud; n=36
2
5.6%
1
2.8%
1
2.8%
9
25.0%
23
63.9%
NExT Aggregate; n=479
22
4.6%
4
0.8%
25
5.2%
136
28.4%
292
61.0%
St. Cloud; n=36
2
5.6%
1
2.8%
2
5.6%
11
30.6%
20
55.6%
NExT Aggregate; n=478
24
5.0%
9
1.9%
32
6.7%
134
28.0%
279
58.4%
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
I design and teach lessons that
promote students' abilities to draw
conclusions based on the best
analysis.
I design and teach lessons that
promote students' abilities to
analyze how parts of a whole
interact with each other to produce
overall outcomes in complex
systems.
I design and teach lessons that
promote students' abilities to
formulate questions that elicit
multiple views on a topic.
I design and teach lessons that
promote students' abilities to
develop solutions to abstract
problems.
I design and teach lessons that
promote students' abilities to create
solutions to global problems.
I design and teach lessons that
promote students' abilities to work
collaboratively with teams to solve
complex problems.
Source: Q. C1a-z
Does Not
Apply
n
%
Tend to
Disagree
n
%
Tend to
Agree
n
%
n
%
n
%
St. Cloud; n=36
1
2.8%
1
2.8%
2
5.6%
12
33.3%
20
55.6%
NExT Aggregate; n=478
33
6.9%
3
0.6%
28
5.9%
158
33.1%
256
53.6%
St. Cloud; n=36
1
2.8%
1
0.8%
4
11.1%
9
25.0%
21
58.3%
NExT Aggregate; n=477
36
7.5%
7
1.5%
44
9.2%
147
30.8%
243
50.9%
St. Cloud; n=36
1
2.8%
1
2.8%
1
2.8%
13
36.1%
20
55.6%
NExT Aggregate; n=477
32
6.7%
5
1.0%
42
8.8%
144
30.2%
254
53.2%
St. Cloud; n=35
2
6.7%
2
6.7%
6
20.0%
10
33.3%
10
33.3%
NExT Aggregate; n=479
36
7.5%
6
1.3%
38
7.9%
163
34.0%
236
49.3%
St. Cloud; n=36
3
8.3%
1
2.8%
6
16.7%
11
30.6%
15
41.7%
NExT Aggregate; n=478
44
9.2%
9
1.9%
85
17.8%
155
32.4%
185
38.7%
St. Cloud; n=36
1
2.8%
1
2.8%
2
5.6%
13
36.1%
19
52.8%
NExT Aggregate; n=479
33
6.9%
7
1.5%
39
8.1%
128
26.7%
272
56.8%
Disagree
Agree
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
Table 43. Instructional Practice: To what extent do you disagree or agree that you do the
following in your teaching practice?*
St. Cloud
NExT Aggregate
n
Mean**
SD
n
Mean
SD
I align instruction with state
subject matter standards.
33
3.64
0.653
441
3.74
0.544
I set clear subject matter learning
goals for students.
33
3.73
0.452
461
3.72
0.522
34
3.74
0.448
465
3.78
0.461
34
3.65
0.544
465
3.63
0.584
35
3.71
0.458
468
3.78
0.431
35
3.74
0.443
469
3.76
0.456
35
3.80
0.403
461
3.66
0.547
I align instructional strategies with
learning goals.
35
3.77
0.426
464
3.75
0.521
I use a variety of instructional
strategies to support student
learning for the subject(s) I teach.
34
3.82
0.387
471
3.74
0.509
I group students in a variety of
ways for instructional purposes.
35
3.60
0.497
461
3.58
0.667
I integrate a variety of media and
educational technologies into my
instruction.
32
3.69
0.535
456
3.57
0.666
I design long-range instructional
plans that meet curricular goals.
33
3.58
0.614
453
3.50
0.690
I plan lessons with clear learning
objectives/goals in mind.
34
3.74
0.448
461
3.75
0.481
I regularly adjust instructional
plans to meet students’ needs.
35
3.74
0.611
470
3.82
0.414
I design activities in which
students learn skills to address
issues central to the subject
matter.
I design activities in which
students engage with subject
matter from a variety of
perspectives.
I consider students’ prior
knowledge or experience in my
instructional planning.
I create activities that are
appropriate for my students’
social/emotional development.
I create assignments that are at the
appropriate levels of difficulty for
my students’ diverse learning
needs.
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
St. Cloud
NExT Aggregate
n
Mean**
SD
n
Mean
SD
35
3.66
0.539
461
3.57
0.599
35
3.66
0.539
455
3.62
0.622
I ask my students to self-assess
their own learning.
35
3.23
0.808
452
3.28
0.811
I provide feedback to students to
improve their performance.
35
3.57
0.655
467
3.66
0.554
34
3.59
0.701
457
3.57
0.639
34
3.47
0.748
454
3.50
0.715
35
3.46
0.741
445
3.50
0.646
35
3.43
0.815
441
3.42
0.735
35
3.49
0.702
445
3.45
0.711
34
3.44
0.746
443
3.42
0.705
33
3.21
0.857
434
3.19
0.819
35
3.43
0.739
446
3.49
0.721
I strategically use a variety of
assessments to monitor student
learning.
I design instruction and learning
tasks that connect core content to
real-life experiences for students.
I design and modify assessments
to accommodate students with
diverse learning needs.
I use assessment data to diagnose
gaps in students’ knowledge and
skills.
I design and teach lessons that
promote students' abilities to draw
conclusions based on the best
analysis.
I design and teach lessons that
promote students' abilities to
analyze how parts of a whole
interact with each other to produce
overall outcomes in complex
systems.
I design and teach lessons that
promote students' abilities to
formulate questions that elicit
multiple views on a topic.
I design and teach lessons that
promote students' abilities to
develop solutions to abstract
problems.
I design and teach lessons that
promote students' abilities to
create solutions to global
problems.
I design and teach lessons that
promote students' abilities to work
collaboratively with teams to solve
complex problems.
Source: Q. C1a-z
*Scale: 1=Disagree; 2=Tend to disagree; 3=Tend to agree; 4=Agree
**Note: “N/A” responses were excluded from the mean calculation.
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
Table 44. Diverse Learners: To what extent do you disagree or agree that you do the following in your teaching practice?
St. Cloud; n=36
Does Not
Apply
n
%
3
8.3%
n
0
%
-
NExT Aggregate; n=480
35
7.3%
5
1.0%
18
3.8%
129
St. Cloud; n=36
8
22.2%
0
-
5
13.9%
NExT Aggregate; n=479
67
14.0%
6
1.3%
51
St. Cloud; n=36
8
22.2%
0
-
122
25.5%
5
St. Cloud; n=36
2
5.6%
NExT Aggregate; n=478
19
St. Cloud; n=36
Disagree
Tend to
Disagree
n
%
2
5.6%
Tend to
Agree
n
%
8
22.2%
Agree
n
23
%
63.9%
26.9%
293
61.0%
7
19.4%
16
44.4%
10.6%
136
28.4%
219
45.7%
3
8.3%
6
16.7%
19
52.8%
1.0%
24
5.0%
98
20.5%
229
47.9%
0
-
2
5.6%
5
13.9%
27
75.0%
4.0%
4
0.8%
10
2.1%
110
23.0%
335
70.1%
0
-
0
-
0
-
7
19.4%
29
80.6%
NExT Aggregate; n=479
12
2.5%
1
0.2%
13
2.7%
110
23.0%
343
71.6%
St. Cloud; n=36
1
2.8%
0
-
2
5.6%
11
30.6%
22
61.1%
NExT Aggregate; n=478
23
4.8%
6
1.3%
37
7.7%
139
29.1%
273
57.1%
I advocate for students from diverse St. Cloud; n=36
backgrounds.
NExT Aggregate; n=474
1
2.8%
0
-
0
-
6
16.7%
29
80.6%
28
5.9%
1
0.2%
3
0.6%
90
19.0%
352
74.3%
I differentiate my instruction to
meet the needs of special education
students.
I differentiate my instruction to
meet the needs of gifted and
talented students.
I differentiate my instruction to
meet the needs of English language
learners.
I access resources, programs, and
other school personnel for students
needing special assistance.
I use my knowledge about the home
communities of the students I
teach.
I use community and home
resources to foster student
learning.
Source: Q. C2a-g
NExT Aggregate; n=478
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
Table 45. Diverse Learners: To what extent do you disagree or agree that you do the following in
your teaching practice?*
St. Cloud
I differentiate my instruction to
meet the needs of special
education students.
I differentiate my instruction to
meet the needs of gifted and
talented students.
I differentiate my instruction to
meet the needs of English
language learners.
I access resources, programs,
and other school personnel for
students needing special
assistance.
I use my knowledge about the
home communities of the
students I teach.
I use community and home
resources to foster student
learning.
I advocate for students from
diverse backgrounds.
NExT Aggregate
n
Mean**
SD
n
Mean
SD
35
3.83
0.382
445
3.60
0.625
36
3.36
0.867
412
3.38
0.756
34
3.65
0.691
356
3.55
0.684
35
3.74
0.611
459
3.69
0.557
34
3.56
0.746
467
3.70
0.527
35
3.77
0.490
455
3.49
0.702
34
3.71
0.629
446
3.78
0.447
Source: Q. C2a-g
*Scale: 1=Disagree; 2=Tend to disagree; 3=Tend to agree; 4=Agree
**Note: “N/A” responses were excluded from the mean calculation
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
Table 46. Learning Environment: To what extent do you disagree or agree that you do the following in your teaching
practice?
Does Not
Apply
Disagree
Tend to
Disagree
Tend to
Agree
n
%
n
%
n
%
n
%
n
%
Agree
I develop and maintain a classroom
environment that promotes student
engagement.
I create a learning environment in
which differences such as race,
culture, gender, sexual orientation,
and language are respected.
St. Cloud; n=36
0
-
0
-
1
2.8%
8
22.2%
27
75.0%
NExT Aggregate; n=481
8
1.7%
1
0.2%
12
2.5%
83
17.3%
377
78.4%
St. Cloud; n=36
1
2.8%
0
-
0
-
6
16.7%
29
80.6%
NExT Aggregate; n=481
10
2.1%
1
0.2%
2
0.4%
55
11.4%
413
85.9%
I manage student misbehavior
appropriately.
St. Cloud; n=36
0
-
0
-
0
-
9
25.0%
27
75.0%
NExT Aggregate; n=481
4
0.8%
1
0.2%
16
3.3%
140
29.1%
320
66.5%
I use classroom management
techniques that foster self-control
and self-discipline among students.
I effectively organize the physical
environment of the classroom for
instruction.
St. Cloud; n=36
0
-
0
-
0
-
7
19.4%
29
80.6%
NExT Aggregate; n=480
5
1.0%
3
0.6%
19
4.0%
125
26.0%
328
68.3%
St. Cloud; n=36
0
-
1
2.8%
0
-
9
25.0%
26
72.2%
NExT Aggregate; n=481
22
4.6%
5
1.0%
13
2.7%
88
18.3%
353
73.5%
St. Cloud; n=36
I use effective listening techniques
when communicating with students. NExT Aggregate; n=480
1
2.8%
0
-
0
-
9
25.0%
26
72.2%
4
0.8%
1
0.2%
6
1.3%
89
18.5%
380
79.2%
I communicate with students using
non-biased language.
St. Cloud; n=36
0
-
0
-
0
-
7
19.4%
2
80.6%
NExT Aggregate; n=479
3
0.6%
0
-
1
0.2%
88
18.4%
387
80.8%
I stimulate effective classroom
communication among students.
St. Cloud; n=36
1
2.8%
0
-
0
-
9
25.0%
26
72.2%
NExT Aggregate; n=480
6
1.3%
2
0.4%
16
3.3%
112
23.3%
344
71.7%
I clearly communicate expectations
for appropriate student behavior.
St. Cloud; n=36
0
-
0
-
0
-
9
25.0%
27
75.0%
NExT Aggregate; n=479
5
1.0%
0
-
13
2.7%
92
19.2%
369
77.0%
I use effective communication skills
and strategies to convey ideas and
information to students.
St. Cloud; n=36
0
-
0
-
0
-
10
27.8%
26
72.2%
NExT Aggregate; n=480
3
0.6%
1
0.2%
7
1.5%
99
20.6%
370
77.1%
Source: Q. C3a-j
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
Table 47. Learning Environment: To what extent do you disagree or agree that you do the
following in your teaching practice?*
St. Cloud
NExT Aggregate
n
Mean**
SD
n
Mean
SD
36
3.72
0.513
473
3.77
0.492
35
3.83
0.382
471
3.87
0.369
36
3.75
0.439
477
3.63
0.559
36
3.81
0.401
475
3.64
0.591
36
3.67
0.632
459
3.72
0.570
35
3.74
0.443
476
3.78
0.457
I communicate with students using
non-biased language.
36
3.81
0.401
476
3.81
0.397
I stimulate effective classroom
communication among students.
35
3.74
0.443
474
3.68
0.557
36
3.75
0.439
474
3.75
0.492
36
3.72
0.454
477
3.76
0.476
I develop and maintain a
classroom environment that
promotes student engagement.
I create a learning environment in
which differences such as race,
culture, gender, sexual orientation,
and language are respected.
I manage student misbehavior
appropriately.
I use classroom management
techniques that foster self-control
and self-discipline among
students.
I effectively organize the physical
environment of the classroom for
instruction.
I use effective listening techniques
when communicating with
students.
I clearly communicate
expectations for appropriate
student behavior.
I use effective communication
skills and strategies to convey
ideas and information to students.
Source: Q. C3a-j
*Scale: 1=Disagree; 2=Tend to disagree; 3=Tend to agree; 4=Agree
**Note: “N/A” responses were excluded from the mean calculation.
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
Table 48. Professionalism: To what extent do you disagree or agree that you do the following in your teaching practice?
I seek professional development
opportunities to improve teaching.
St. Cloud; n=35
Does Not
Apply
n
%
0
-
NExT Aggregate; n=481
5
1.0%
3
0.6%
14
2.9%
76
15.8%
383
79.6%
I read professional literature related
to teaching.
St. Cloud; n=36
0
-
1
2.8%
6
16.7%
8
22.2%
21
58.3%
NExT Aggregate; n=482
3
0.6%
16
3.3%
53
11.0%
156
32.4%
254
52.7%
I identify needed improvements in
my teaching based on student data.
St. Cloud; n=36
2
5.6%
1
2.8%
1
2.8%
7
19.4%
25
69.4%
NExT Aggregate; n=479
17
3.5%
2
0.4%
12
2.5%
100
20.9%
348
72.7%
I collaborate with other school
personnel about the well-being of my
students.
I actively engage with parents or
guardians about issues affecting
student learning.
St. Cloud; n=36
1
2.8%
1
2.8%
0
-
6
16.7%
28
77.8%
NExT Aggregate; n=478
11
2.3%
1
0.2%
0
-
56
11.7%
410
85.8%
St. Cloud; n=36
2
5.6%
1
2.8%
2
5.6%
8
22.2%
23
63.9%
NExT Aggregate; n=479
22
4.6%
4
0.8%
26
5.4%
110
23.0%
317
66.2%
I collaborate with teaching
colleagues.
St. Cloud; n=36
1
2.8%
0
-
1
2.8%
6
16.7%
28
77.8%
NExT Aggregate; n=478
10
2.1%
0
-
6
1.3%
60
12.6%
402
84.1%
I use colleague feedback to support
my development as a teacher.
St. Cloud; n=36
2
5.6%
1
2.8%
0
-
7
19.4%
26
72.2%
NExT Aggregate; n=480
10
2.1%
2
0.4%
5
1.0%
59
12.3%
404
84.2%
Source: Q. C4a-g
Disagree
n
0
%
-
Tend to
Disagree
n
%
0
-
Tend to
Agree
n
%
6
17.1%
n
29
%
82.9%
Agree
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
Table 49. Professionalism: To what extent do you disagree or agree that you do the
following in your teaching practice?*
St. Cloud
NExT Aggregate
n
Mean**
SD
n
Mean
SD
I seek professional
development opportunities to
improve teaching.
35
3.83
0.382
476
3.76
0.528
I read professional literature
related to teaching.
36
3.36
0.867
479
3.35
0.807
34
3.65
0.691
462
3.72
0.530
35
3.74
0.611
467
3.87
0.351
34
3.56
0.746
457
3.62
0.635
I collaborate with teaching
colleagues.
35
3.77
0.490
468
3.85
0.395
I use colleague feedback to
support my development as a
teacher.
34
3.71
0.629
470
3.84
0.426
I identify needed improvements
in my teaching based on
student data.
I collaborate with other school
personnel about the well-being
of my students.
I actively engage with parents
or guardians about issues
affecting student learning.
Source: Q. C4a-g
*Scale: 1=Disagree; 2=Tend to disagree; 3=Tend to agree; 4=Agree
**Note: “N/A” responses were excluded from the mean calculation.
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
PART D. YOUR SCHOOL CONTEXT: WHAT IS YOUR SCHOOL LIKE?
Table 50. School Climate: To what extent do you disagree or agree with the following statements?
The school is a physically safe and
secure place.
St. Cloud; n=36
Does Not
Apply
n
%
0
-
NExT Aggregate; n=479
4
0.8%
4
0.8%
15
3.1%
98
20.5%
358
74.7%
Students are respectful of one
another.
St. Cloud; n=36
0
-
1
2.8%
4
11.1%
12
33.3%
19
52.8%
NExT Aggregate; n=479
4
0.8%
16
3.3%
54
11.3%
181
37.8%
224
46.8%
Teachers have high standards for
students.
St. Cloud; n=36
0
-
1
2.8%
3
8.3%
8
22.2%
24
66.7%
NExT Aggregate; n=475
4
0.8%
5
1.1%
32
6.7%
116
24.4%
318
66.9%
Teachers respect the dignity and
worth of all students.
St. Cloud; n=36
0
-
1
2.8%
3
8.3%
6
16.7%
26
72.2%
NExT Aggregate; n=477
5
1.0%
5
1.0%
14
2.9%
105
22.0%
348
73.0%
The faculty and staff have positive
relationships with students'
parents/guardians.
St. Cloud; n=35
0
-
1
2.9%
3
8.6%
7
20.0%
24
68.6%
NExT Aggregate; n=477
10
2.1%
4
0.8%
20
4.2%
112
23.5%
331
69.4%
The school encourages
engagement with the community.
St. Cloud; n=36
0
-
0
-
1
2.8%
7
19.4%
28
77.8%
NExT Aggregate; n=478
7
1.5%
4
0.8%
22
4.6%
107
22.4%
338
70.7%
Source: Q. D1a-f
Disagree
n
0
%
-
Tend to
Disagree
n
%
1
2.8%
Tend to
Agree
n
%
8
22.2%
n
27
%
75.0%
Agree
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
Table 51. School Climate: To what extent do you disagree or agree with the following
statements?*
St. Cloud
NExT Aggregate
n
Mean**
SD
n
Mean
SD
The school is a physically safe
and secure place.
36
3.72
0.513
475
3.71
0.568
Students are respectful of one
another.
36
3.36
0.798
475
3.29
0.798
Teachers have high standards
for students.
36
3.53
0.774
471
3.59
0.666
Teachers respect the dignity
and worth of all students.
36
3.58
0.770
472
3.69
0.582
35
3.54
0.780
467
3.65
0.605
36
3.75
0.500
471
3.65
0.609
The faculty and staff have
positive relationships with
students' parents/guardians.
The school encourages
engagement with the
community.
Source: Q. D1a-f
*Scale: 1=Disagree; 2=Tend to disagree; 3=Tend to agree; 4=Agree
**Note: “N/A” responses were excluded from the mean calculation.
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
Table 52. Professional Environment: To what extent do you disagree or agree with the following statements?
I feel respected as a colleague by
faculty and staff.
I receive valuable professional
guidance from faculty mentors or
colleagues regarding the school's
culture.
Staff development in my
school/district has been useful to
me.
The administration is responsive
to the needs of beginning
teachers.
My principal is an effective leader.
Teachers share high standards for
each other's professionalism and
practice.
Teachers are continually learning
and seeking new ideas to enhance
their practice.
Teachers have influence over
establishing the curriculum.
Source: Q. D2a-h
St. Cloud; n=36
NExT Aggregate; n=478
St. Cloud; n=36
Does Not
Apply
n
%
0
4
0.8%
1
2.8%
%
0.8%
5.6%
Tend to
Disagree
n
%
1
2.8%
18
3.8%
0
-
Tend to
Agree
n
%
11
30.6%
116 24.3%
12
33.3%
n
0
4
2
n
24
336
21
%
66.7%
70.3%
58.3%
NExT Aggregate; n=474
7
1.5%
12
2.5%
40
8.4%
115
24.3%
300
63.3%
St. Cloud; n=36
1
2.8%
2
5.6%
5
13.9%
13
36.1%
15
41.7%
NExT Aggregate; n=477
17
3.6%
25
5.2%
56
11.7%
137
28.7%
242
50.7%
St. Cloud; n=36
2
5.6%
0
-
1
2.8%
14
38.9%
19
52.8%
NExT Aggregate; n=476
16
3.4%
29
6.1%
60
12.6%
115
24.2%
256
53.8%
St. Cloud; n=36
NExT Aggregate; n=477
St. Cloud; n=36
1
34
0
2.8%
7.1%
-
0
23
0
4.8%
-
0
47
3
9.9%
8.3%
10
110
11
27.8%
23.1%
30.6%
25
263
22
69.4%
55.1%
61.1%
NExT Aggregate; n=477
7
1.5%
6
1.3%
23
4.8%
142
29.8%
299
62.7%
St. Cloud; n=36
1
2.8%
0
-
1
2.8%
13
36.1%
21
58.3%
NExT Aggregate; n=477
9
1.9%
5
1.0%
26
5.5%
139
29.1%
298
62.5%
St. Cloud; n=36
NExT Aggregate; n=476
1
13
2.8%
2.7%
1
15
2.8%
3.2%
5
38
13.9%
8.0%
11
129
30.6%
27.1%
18
281
50.0%
59.0%
Disagree
Agree
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
Table 53. Professional Environment: To what extent do you disagree or agree with the
following statements?*
St. Cloud
I feel respected as a colleague
by faculty and staff.
I receive valuable professional
guidance from faculty mentors
or colleagues regarding the
school's culture.
Staff development in my
school/district has been useful
to me.
The administration is
responsive to the needs of
beginning teachers.
My principal is an effective
leader.
Teachers share high standards
for each other's
professionalism and practice.
Teachers are continually
learning and seeking new ideas
to enhance their practice.
Teachers have influence over
establishing the curriculum.
NExT Aggregate
n
Mean**
SD
n
Mean
SD
36
3.64
0.543
474
3.65
0.595
35
3.49
0.781
467
3.51
0.759
35
3.17
0.891
460
3.30
0.883
34
3.5
0.563
460
3.30
0.922
35
3.71
0.458
443
3.38
0.873
36
3.53
0.654
470
3.56
0.649
35
3.57
0.558
468
3.56
0.650
35
3.31
0.832
463
3.46
0.780
Source: Q. D2a-h
*Scale: 1=Disagree; 2=Tend to disagree; 3=Tend to agree; 4=Agree
**Note: “N/A” responses were excluded from the mean calculation.
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
Table 54. Resources: To what extent do you disagree or agree with the following statements?
Does Not
Apply
n
%
n
%
Disagree
Tend to
Disagree
n
%
Tend to
Agree
n
%
n
%
Agree
Teachers have adequate time in
their schedules for planning.
St. Cloud; n=36
1
2.8%
2
5.6%
8
22.2%
12
33.3%
13
36.1%
NExT Aggregate; n=477
12
2.5%
59
12.4%
92
19.3%
143
30.0%
171
35.8%
Necessary teaching supplies are
available as needed.
St. Cloud; n=36
0
-
3
8.3%
7
19.4%
10
27.8%
16
44.4%
NExT Aggregate; n=477
7
1.5%
31
6.5%
80
16.8%
140
29.4%
219
45.9%
Necessary technology resources
are available to support my
teaching.
My classroom is equipped with
the furniture and space
necessary for flexible
instructional activities.
Available curricular materials,
such as textbooks, are
appropriate for my students'
developmental level and learning
needs.
St. Cloud; n=36
0
-
3
8.3%
3
8.3%
13
36.1%
17
47.2%
NExT Aggregate; n=478
10
2.1%
42
8.8%
51
10.7%
143
29.9%
232
48.5%
St. Cloud; n=36
0
-
3
8.3%
7
19.4%
10
27.8%
16
44.4%
NExT Aggregate; n=476
16
3.4%
41
8.6%
76
16.0%
119
25.0%
224
47.1%
St. Cloud; n=36
0
-
5
13.9%
2
5.6%
13
36.1%
16
44.4%
NExT Aggregate; n=477
17
3.6%
27
5.7%
48
10.1%
138
28.9%
247
51.8%
Source: Q. D3a-e
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
Table 55. Resources: To what extent do you disagree or agree with the following
statements?*
St. Cloud
NExT Aggregate
n
Mean**
SD
n
Mean
SD
Teachers have adequate time in
their schedules for planning.
35
3.03
0.923
465
2.92
1.034
Necessary teaching supplies are
available as needed.
36
3.08
0.996
470
3.16
0.935
36
3.22
0.929
468
3.21
0.961
36
3.08
0.996
460
3.14
0.995
36
3.11
1.036
460
3.32
0.882
Necessary technology
resources are available to
support my teaching.
My classroom is equipped with
the furniture and space
necessary for flexible
instructional activities.
Available curricular materials,
such as textbooks, are
appropriate for my students'
developmental level and
learning needs.
Source: Q. D3a-e
*Scale: 1=Disagree; 2=Tend to disagree; 3=Tend to agree; 4=Agree
**Note: “N/A” responses were excluded from the mean calculation.
Table 56. What grade level(s) are you teaching? Mark ALL that apply.*
St. Cloud
n=34
Percent of
n
Cases
NExT Aggregate
n=465
Percent of
n
Cases
Early childhood
0
-
5
12.5%
Elementary
16
47.1%
225
48.4%
Middle or Junior High
16
47.1%
155
33.3%
High school
12
35.3%
148
31.8%
Source: Q. D5
*Note: Total percentage may exceed 100, due to being a “mark all that apply” question and the total n may exceed the number
of respondents.
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
Table 57. Are you teaching any subject for which you are not licensed?
Yes
No
Source: Q. D6
St. Cloud
n=35
n
Percent
5
14.3%
30
85.7%
NExT Aggregate
n=466
n
Percent
70
15.0%
396
85.0%
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
PART E. YOUR BACKGROUND
Table 58. Did you ever have a paid or volunteer position working with…? Mark ALL that
apply.*
St. Cloud
n=48
Percent
n
of Cases
NExT Aggregate
n=537
Percent
n
of Cases
Low-income children
38
79.2%
441
82.1%
Children in a rural or remote setting
19
39.6%
196
36.5%
New immigrants
21
43.8%
221
41.2%
Children in an urban setting
24
50.0%
319
59.4%
English language learners
30
62.5%
374
69.6%
Children with special needs
41
85.4%
391
72.8%
Source: Q. E1. Respondents that marked “no” to question A11 were directed to proceed to Part E, however, the “n” dropped for
the remainder of the survey to varying degrees in comparison to the “n” in Table 1.
*Note: Total percentage may exceed 100, due to being a “mark all that apply” question and the total n may exceed the number
of respondents.
Table 59. What is your gender?
Male
Female
Source: Q. E2
St. Cloud
n=61
n
Percent
8
13.1%
53
86.9%
NExT Aggregate
n=653
n
Percent
145
22.2%
508
77.7%
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
Table 60. What is your race/ethnicity? Mark ALL that apply.*
St. Cloud
n=61
Percent
n
of Cases
NExT Aggregate
n=644
Percent
n
of Cases
American Indian or Alaskan Native
0
-
5
0.8%
Asian
2
3.3%
17
2.6%
Black or African American
1
1.6%
12
1.9%
Hispanic or Latino
3
4.9%
13
2.0%
Native Hawaiian and other Pacific
Islander
1
1.6%
6
0.9%
White, non-Hispanic
58
95.1%
608
94.4%
Other**
1
1.6%
6
0.9%
Source: Q. E3
*Note: Total percentage may exceed 100, due to being a “mark all that apply” question and the total n may exceed the number
of respondents.
**Note: St. Cloud respondents who selected “other” did not provide a description.
Table 61. Is English your native language?
Yes
No
St. Cloud
n=60
n
Percent
58
96.7%
2
3.3%
NExT Aggregate
n=651
n
Percent
636
97.7%
15
2.3%
Source: Q. E4
Table 62. Do you speak a language other than English fluently?
Yes
No
Source: Q. E5
St. Cloud
n=60
n
Percent
7
11.7%
53
88.3%
NExT Aggregate
n=647
n
Percent
91
14.1%
556
85.9%
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
Table 63. To what extent do you disagree or agree with each of the following statements?
If I had to do it all over again, I
would choose the same teacher
preparation program.
I would recommend my teacher
preparation program to a
prospective teacher.
St. Cloud; n=60
Does Not
Apply
n
%
0
-
NExT Aggregate; n=655
3
0.5%
44
6.7%
70
10.7%
172
26.3%
364
55.7%
St. Cloud; n=60
0
-
7
11.7%
10
16.7%
15
25.0%
28
46.7%
NExT Aggregate; n=651
3
0.5%
38
5.8%
81
12.4%
160
24.6%
369
56.7%
I am not as happy about teaching
as I thought I would be.
St. Cloud; n=60
5
8.3%
37
61.7%
5
8.3%
10
16.7%
3
5.0%
NExT Aggregate; n=648
35
5.4%
330
50.9%
137
21.1%
78
12.0%
68
10.5%
I am committed to the teaching
profession.
St. Cloud; n=60
2
3.3%
2
3.3%
2
3.3%
11
18.3%
43
71.7%
NExT Aggregate; n=649
15
2.3%
13
2.0%
37
5.7%
127
19.6%
457
70.4%
The rewards of teaching are
worth the efforts I put in to
become a teacher.
I was effectively prepared to
teach in a variety of school
settings (urban, suburban, rural).
St. Cloud; n=60
1
1.7%
3
5.0%
2
3.3%
11
18.3%
43
71.7%
NExT Aggregate; n=646
20
3.1%
15
2.3%
36
5.6%
154
23.8%
421
65.2%
St. Cloud; n=59
0
-
7
11.9%
16
27.1%
17
28.8%
19
32.2%
NExT Aggregate; n=647
14
2.2%
50
7.7%
103
15.9%
247
38.2%
233
36.0%
Source: Q. E6a-f
%
13.3%
Tend to
Disagree
n
%
7
11.7%
Tend to
Agree
n
%
19
31.7%
n
26
%
43.3%
Disagree
n
8
Agree
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
Table 64. Comparison of St. Cloud 2012 and 2013 responses to “I would recommend my teacher preparation program to a
prospective teacher”*
Disagree
Tend to Disagree
Tend to Agree
Agree
n
%
n
%
n
%
n
%
2012; n=59
6
10.2%
9
15.3%
14
23.7%
30
50.8%
2013; n=60
7
11.7%
10
16.7%
15
25.0%
28
46.7%
Source: Q. E6b
*Note: “N/A” responses were excluded from the 2012 frequency calculation; therefore they have been removed from this table.
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
Table 65. To what extent do you disagree or agree with each of the following statements?*
St. Cloud
If I had to do it all over again, I
would choose the same teacher
preparation program.
I would recommend my teacher
preparation program to a
prospective teacher.
I am not as happy about
teaching as I thought I would
be.***
I am committed to the teaching
profession.
The rewards of teaching are
worth the efforts I put in to
become a teacher.
I was effectively prepared to
teach in a variety of school
settings (urban, suburban,
rural).
NExT Aggregate
n
Mean**
SD
n
Mean
SD
60
3.05
1.048
650
3.32
0.916
60
3.07
1.056
648
3.33
0.907
55
1.62
0.972
613
1.81
1.037
58
3.64
0.718
634
3.62
0.690
59
3.59
0.790
626
3.57
0.711
59
2.81
1.025
633
3.04
0.920
Source: Q. E6a-f
*Scale: 1=Disagree; 2=Tend to disagree; 3=Tend to agree; 4=Agree
**Note: “N/A” responses were excluded from the mean calculation.
***Note: This question has negative wording, therefore low mean scores are desirable.
Table 66. Comparison of St. Cloud 2012 and 2013 responses for “To what extent do you
agree or disagree with the following statement?”*
2012
I would recommend my teacher
preparation program to a
prospective teacher.
2013
n
Mean**
SD
n
Mean
SD
59
3.15
1.031
60
3.07
1.056
Source: Q. E6b
*Scale: 1=Disagree; 2=Tend to disagree; 3=Tend to agree; 4=Agree
**Note: “N/A” responses were excluded from the mean calculation.
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
APPENDIX B: 2013 TRANSITION TO TEACHING SURVEY
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
APPENDIX C: INFORMED CONSENT FORM AND SURVEY MESSAGING
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
Bush Foundation NExT Project TTS Informed Consent Form –Hard Copy Version
Why are we conducting the Transition to Teaching Survey (TTS)?
The results of this survey will be primarily used for program improvement. In addition, NExT institutions
may use the aggregate survey results for other purposes, including but not limited to program
accreditation reporting and identification of professional development needs in schools.
What are the benefits of the TTS?
Your participation in the TTS will help the teacher education program at your alma mater monitor
project implementation and operations for program improvement. In addition, the findings may help
your alma mater with institutional approval processes.
What are the procedures?
Your participation in this survey is voluntary. Graduates from NExT institutions are asked to complete
the TTS to describe their teacher preparation experience and current teaching environment. If you are
not currently in a teaching position, you are still requested to complete a limited portion of the survey,
and it will take about 10 minutes. If you are teaching, this survey will take approximately 20 minutes to
complete. You may complete the survey after consenting to participate at the end of this document.
Your responses will be shared with your university, including personally identifiable information. Hezel
Associates will provide a report using only aggregated data to your alma mater and the Bush
Foundation. Your university will be responsible for protecting your identity and data privacy rights when
reporting and sharing the findings.
Your immediate supervisor’s name and contact information is requested in this survey. We intend to
distribute a Supervisor Survey for the chief purpose of improving teacher preparation at the college or
university from which you graduated.
What other options are there?
You may skip individual questions in the survey. You may also choose to refuse or discontinue
participation altogether without penalty or reprisal, but you will be helping your alma mater improve its
teacher education program(s) if you answer all questions.
What are the risks?
Since personally identifiable information is being collected by Hezel Associates and then shared with
your alma mater, there are two potential, but minimal risks: confidentiality infringement and
presentation of personally identifiable information. Protection of study participants is a top priority, and
we consistently work to ensure all information that is stored and transferred remains on a passwordprotected platform and is confidential. The raw data will only be shared with your institution (not with
your immediate supervisor or anyone else at the school where you teach). Hezel Associates applies
internal quality assurance reviews of data and reports to prevent the stated risks. Hezel Associates and
your alma mater are subject to federal standards for the protection of participants in research, the
application of which includes maintaining anonymity in any public release of findings.
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
Contacts and Questions
If you have general questions, concerns, or complaints about the study, you may contact Hezel
Associates or your alma mater:



Kirk Knestis, Director of Research and Evaluation, [email protected], 315-422-3512 x221
Tracy Herman, Project Leader, [email protected], 585-217-6722
<Insert university-specific name and contact information for hard copy version>
If you have any difficulties or questions about completing the questionnaire, you may contact Tracy. If
you have any questions regarding your rights as a participant in the study, you may contact Dana
Gonzales at Solutions IRB (the body that oversees our protection of study participants) at 1-855-2264472 or email [email protected]. If you wish to address someone else, you may contact
Justin Christy from the Bush Foundation at [email protected] or 651-379-2244.
Statement of Consent: I have read all the above information and received answers to any questions I
asked. I may photocopy this form for my records. I am 18 years of age or older, and I consent to
participate in this study.
First and Last Name (required): __________________________________
University/College Name where you obtained your teaching degree (required):
_____________________________________
Student University ID # (helpful, but not required): ___________________________
**Please note, in order to use your TTS data, we must have your name, university/college
name, and consent selection marked. In addition, please keep this form attached to the
survey.
I consent to the following:
Participation in the Transition to Teaching Survey
Distribution of the Supervisor Survey to my employer*
Permission for my university/college to contact me for followup to my TTS responses
*Mark “no” if you are not employed as an educator.
Yes
O
O
O
No
O
O
O
Please provide a phone number and/or email where you’d like to be contacted for follow up:
___________________________________________
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
A. First Email Contact Message
Subject Header: <Institution Name> Education Program Needs Your Feedback
From Line: [email protected]
Dear <name>,
We are contacting you on behalf of <institution name> to request your participation in the Transition to
Teaching Survey (TTS), which asks about your employment status and the extent to which you feel
prepared for teaching responsibilities. This survey is a follow-up to the entry and exit survey that you
probably completed during your teacher preparation program and completing it—whether you’re
teaching or not—will support program improvement efforts as part of the Network for Excellence in
Teaching (NExT).
The survey can be found by clicking on or copying and pasting the link below into the address bar within
your browser.
http://www.hezel.com/cgi-bin/rws5.pl?FORM=TransitiontoTeachingSurvey2013
The first page is a required consent form that describes the purpose and procedures for the survey as
well as steps taken to ensure confidentiality of your responses. We ask for your consent to distribute a
supervisor survey (if applicable), which will help us learn more about our training through their
perspective. As you complete the survey, please click on the “next” and “back” buttons at the bottom of
each page, rather than using the arrows within your browser.
Within two weeks, you will receive a hard copy version of this survey with a pre-paid return envelope.
The return address on the envelope you will receive will be Hezel Associates–please watch for it. If you
have changed your mailing address or your name (e.g., taken a married name) recently, please provide
current information to [email protected].
As noted above, your participation in the TTS will inform improvements in the teacher education
program(s) at your alma mater. Please respond to either the electronic link or the hard copy of the
survey—but do not respond to both.
If you have any questions about the survey, please contact Tracy Herman at [email protected]. Thank
you for your participation.
Insert IHE Rep Name
Insert Rep Title
Insert Institution Name
Insert IHE Rep Name 2 (optional)
Insert Rep 2 Title
Insert Institution Name
Tracy Herman
Project Leader
Hezel Associates
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
B. Mailed Letter
<Insert institutional logo>
<Insert Bush Foundation logo>
Greetings,
We are contacting you on behalf of<institution name>to request your participation in the Transition to
Teaching Survey (TTS), which asks about your employment status and the extent to which you feel
prepared for teaching responsibilities. This survey is a follow-up to the entry and exit survey that you
probably completed during your teacher preparation program and completing it—whether you’re
teaching or not—will support program improvement efforts as part of the Network for Excellence in
Teaching (NExT).
Note: If you have already completed the online version of the survey due to previous invitations, you
can disregard the rest of this letter. Thank you for your participation.
If you have not yet completed the survey, you have two options. Enclosed is a paper copy that you may
complete and return in the postage paid envelope by April 22. Please make sure you sign and return
the consent form with your completed survey; we cannot use your responses without it.
If you prefer to complete the survey online, you may use the following link:
http://www.hezel.com/cgi-bin/rws5.pl?FORM=TransitiontoTeachingSurvey2013
The first page is a required consent form that describes the purpose and procedures for the survey as
well as steps taken to ensure confidentiality of your responses. We ask for your consent to distribute a
supervisor survey (if applicable), which will help us learn more about our training through their
perspective. As you complete the survey, please click on the “next” and “back” buttons at the bottom of
each page, rather than using the arrows within your browser.
In order for your alma mater to better support you after graduation, we would like to know if you had a
name change since you graduated (e.g., change in marital status), a new mailing address, and/or a new
email address. Please send your updates to [email protected]. She will send an updated contact
database to the teacher education department at your alma mater for post-graduation professional
support and communications. It will not be shared for marketing or fundraising purposes.
As noted above, your participation in the TTS will inform improvements in the teacher education
program(s) at your alma mater. Please respond to either the electronic link or the hard copy of the
survey—but do not respond to both.
If you have any questions about the survey, please contact Tracy Herman ([email protected])
Thank you for your participation in this effort to improve educational offerings for future students.
Insert IHE Rep Name
Insert Rep Title
Insert Institution Name
Insert IHE Rep Name 2 (optional)
Insert Rep 2 Title
Insert Institution Name
Tracy Herman
Project Leader
Hezel Associates
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
C. Second Email Message
Subject Header: Survey Link for Transition to Teaching Survey
Greetings,
By now you should have received an email and/or mailed letter inviting you to complete the Transition
to Teaching Survey (TTS), which asks about your employment status and the extent to which you feel
prepared for teaching responsibilities. Your participation in the TTS will help to improve teacher
education through the Network for Excellence in Teaching (NExT).
If you have not yet completed it, please do so electronically or in hard copy format by April 22. The
survey can be found by clicking on or copying and pasting the link below into the address bar within your
browser.
http://www.hezel.com/cgi-bin/rws5.pl?FORM=TransitiontoTeachingSurvey2013
As you proceed through the survey, please click on the “next” and “back” buttons at the bottom of each
survey page rather than using the arrows in your browser.
If you have any questions about the survey, please contact Tracy at [email protected].
On behalf of <institution name>, thank you for your participation in this effort to improve educational
offerings for future students.
Insert IHE Rep Name
Insert Rep Title
Insert Institution Name
Insert IHE Rep Name 2 (optional)
Insert Rep 2 Title
Insert Institution Name
Tracy Herman
Project Leader
Hezel Associates
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
D. Third Email Message
Subject Header: Reminder: Complete Transition to Teaching Survey
Greetings,
This is a reminder to complete the Transition to Teaching Survey recently sent via email and hard copy
by April 22. Regardless of your employment situation, your participation in this survey is critical to
program improvement efforts at < institution name>. The link to the online version is provided below.
http://www.hezel.com/cgi-bin/rws5.pl?FORM=TransitiontoTeachingSurvey2013
As you proceed through the survey, please click on the “next” and “back” buttons at the bottom of each
survey page, rather than using the arrows in your browser.
If you have any questions about the survey, please contact Tracy at [email protected].
On behalf of <institution name>, thank you for your participation in this effort to improve educational
offerings for future teacher candidate students.
Insert IHE Rep Name
Insert Rep Title
Insert Institution Name
Insert IHE Rep Name 2 (optional)
Insert Rep 2 Title
Insert Institution Name
Tracy Herman
Project Leader
Hezel Associates
Exhibit 1.4.d.15; 2.4.b.14: SCSU TTS Report from Hezel
E. Fourth Email Message
Subject Header: Final Reminder - Transition to Teaching Survey Closes April 22
Greetings,
This is a final reminder to complete the Transition to Teaching Survey, which will close on April 22. Your
participation is critical to your alma mater and the Network for Excellence in Teaching. You may
complete either a hard copy or electronic version (please do not complete both).
To complete the online survey simply click on the link below:
http://www.hezel.com/cgi-bin/rws5.pl?FORM=TransitiontoTeachingSurvey2013
As you proceed through the survey, please click on the “next” and “back” buttons at the bottom of each
survey page, rather than using the arrows in your browser.
If you have any questions about the survey, please contact Tracy at [email protected].
On behalf of <institution name>, thank you for your participation in this effort to improve educational
offerings for future teacher candidate students.
Insert IHE Rep Name
Insert Rep Title
Insert Institution Name
Insert IHE Rep Name 2 (optional)
Insert Rep 2 Title
Insert Institution Name
Tracy Herman
Project Leader
Hezel Associates