Swarthmore Program in Education Alumni Survey 1996-2000
|
| |
(During the State Review, Copies of the completed questionnaires will be available in the Document Room.)
In October 2001 the attached survey was sent to the 63 students who completed practice teaching in the Swarthmore College Program in Education between 1996-2000. Approximately 12-15 students participated in the program in each of the five years this survey covers. This survey enabled us to systematically supplement the feedback we get from our graduates through phone calls, letters, e-mail, visits and mentorship of graduates teaching in the local area. We received completed questionnaires from 50 former students (79%). In addition, for another six graduates we have been able to gather some basic information (whether a student taught after completing the program, where he or she taught, whether the student has done graduate study), based on phone calls and personal contacts. Thus this survey represents data from 56 alumni or 89% of the graduates of the past five years. Included in this survey are the responses of Swarthmore students who completed secondary certification at Swarthmore of elementary certification through a joint program with Eastern College. We included the responses of the elementary certification students, because while they took additional elementary courses, they completed most of the same core courses at Swarthmore as our secondary certification students, and they did their practice teaching under our supervision.
Of the 56 students for whom we have information, 50 (89%) students have taught in public or private schools since receiving their certification. The number of years they have taught varies by year of graduation and by pursuit of graduate school or other career options). Approximately 68% of the graduates of the past five years are currently teaching. Virtually everyone who looked for a teaching job got one starting the fall after they graduated. Students found teaching positions through a variety of routes including private school placement agencies, job fairs, information through Swarthmore College Career Services, Education program faculty, Swarthmore College alumni, recruitment by schools in which they student taught, local newspapers, hometown connections and informal teacher or school networks.
Of those who have not been regular classroom teachers several have been involved in educationally related positions such as a Sylvan Learning center tutor, asocial worker with educational outreach program, an educational technology consultant, and a college admissions representative.
Grade Level and Subject Area:
Of the graduates of the last five years who have taught, 73% taught or are teaching in middle of high schools and 27% taught or are teaching in elementary schools. Those graduates who taught or are teaching are in the following areas:
|
English |
33% |
|
Math |
18% |
|
Social studies |
23% |
|
Science |
10% |
|
Foreign Language |
5% |
|
*ESL |
5% |
|
*Music |
3% |
|
Elementary |
27% |
(*Certified in these fields after leaving Swarthmore)
Type and Location of School
Slightly over half of are graduates have taught or are teaching in public schools and just under are teaching in private schools. Of the graduates teaching in private schools 45% are in Friends schools. Graduates have taught or have jobs teaching all over the United States including 45% in Pennsylvania, 21% in New York and New Jersey, 15% in Massachusetts, 12% in the South and South West (Virginia, New Mexico, Arizona). In addition one alumna has taught in California and one in Puerto Rico.
Graduates Who Do Not Teach
Students who completed the certification program and chose not to teach made their decisions primarily because they had graduate plans, felt there was too much emphasis in schools on standards and testing, or decided that they preferred to pursue other careers, but not because they could not find a teaching job. The same applies to those who taught after leaving Swarthmore but have since stopped teaching. Of the 19 not currently teaching 7 are in graduate school, and others are working in social work, educational consulting, college admissions, housing development, and law.
Evaluation of the Swarthmore College Education Program
Alumni were asked to evaluate their experiences in the certification program across several dimensions:
- Overall level of satisfaction with the Education Program
- Best aspects of Practice teaching and aspects of Practice teaching that should be strengthened or changed.
- Best aspects of the Curriculum and Methods seminar and aspects of the seminar that should be strengthened or changed
- What about Education courses were most helpful and why.
- What aspects of the Education Program should be strengthened or changed.
- What skills or knowledge learned in the Education Program have been most generally useful since graduation (not related to teaching specifically).
Overall Evaluation of the Education Program
Alumni were asked to give an overall rating to their experiences in the Education Program on a five point scale for Extremely satisfied to Extremely Dissatisfied. Thirty-eight (76%) of the 50 students who returned the questionnaire said they were Extremely Satisfied with the Program in Education. Six (12%) alumni said they were Somewhat Satisfied, five (10%) responded that their level of satisfaction was Mixed (both positive and negative) and no one reported that they were Somewhat Dissatisfied or Extremely Dissatisfied.
While the overall strengths of the program that graduates mentioned were far ranging, some aspects of the program were repeatedly noted. Graduates consistently remarked on the quality of the faculty, especially the individual attention and personal support they received from professors; and the courses (practical and theory based experiences in which they engaged). Alumni remarked that they were empowered and inspired by the Program. Graduates also said that they left the Program with a firm grounding in educational foundations and a beginning sense of their own philosophy of education (one that unites theory and practice). They noted that they were reflective practitioners as a result of their experiences in the Education Program.
Graduates were also asked an open ended question about the best aspects of the Education courses they had taken. While many of the responses reflected individual reactions a couple of responses were echoed by a number of graduates. Of the best aspects listed 34% of graduates valued placements in schools, 30% named course readings, 24% said opportunities for practical applications, and 24% listed the quality of the faculty in general.
For example:
"Wonderful preparation for teaching! Swarthmore gave me a framework which still shapes my practices as a teacher everyday. I stay in teaching because of the standards set by Swarthmore…(I have a) constant desire to keep improving, to keep striving for the excellence demonstrated and studied while at Swarthmore.""I am extremely satisfied with the quality of instruction I received and the opportunities I was afforded in Swarthmore's Education Program. I feel that the Program in Education contributed a great deal to my being a very successful teacher today."
"The professors were great. They designed their courses to truly be examples of good educational practice. The coursework was thought-provoking and relevant."
"It (the Education Program) instills a passion for teaching and social justice that is unparalleled in any other school community I've been in."
General Ideas for the Improvement of the Education Program
Most of the graduates, as noted above, were highly supportive of the Program. Suggestions mentioned more than once or twice include the following: Eight (16%) requested more practical suggestions for teaching (more instruction related to discipline and classroom management, more work with technology, and more on student record keeping and routines.) Five (10%) students suggested that Special Education topics be explored in more depth in coursework.
Strengths of Practice Teaching
Graduates recalled their student teaching experience positively and ranked it as very significant in their preparation for professional teaching. Eighteen (36%) students noted the quality of supervision and support they received from College Supervisors: "It was great to have another ear for listening and another head to think and problem solve with me." Eleven (22%) cited the support of the faculty member teaching the Curriculum and Methods seminar as one of the best aspects of student teaching.
Nine (18%) of the respondents commented positively on the challenge of putting theory into practice ("There were numerous opportunities to talk about how the theory applied to practice"), developing their own teaching style ("I think the best part was having the opportunity to teach in an actual classroom while reflecting on our practice with fellow student teachers and our professor.") and building their confidence ("The practice itself! The opportunity to experiment and even have those experiments fail miserably definitely let me feel confident in my first teaching position.")
Five (26%) students valued the opportunity to build their own curriculum and implement it in a classroom setting while student teaching. One student commented that she valued "the opportunity to try a range of teaching styles within a supportive setting."
Practice teaching: Areas for Improvement
The majority of suggestions about improving practice teaching were individual. But some common themes emerged. Five (10%) graduates wished that practice teaching lasted for a longer period of time (two semesters) and/or involved more opportunities to observe/teach in other classrooms. Four (8%) students commented that they would have liked more support from Cooperating Teachers and/or College Supervisors. Other comments included wanting more three way meetings between student teacher, Supervisor and Cooperating Teacher; and clearer expectations and communications among this group.
Two former students would have liked more help working out difficulties with Cooperating Teachers and two others requested more choice in, or better matches with Cooperating Teachers.
Curriculum and Methods Seminar: Strengths
The Curriculum and Methods seminar seems to have been the lynchpin of the Cedrtification sequence for many of the students who were certified. Twenty-six (52%) graduates commented on the value of the seminar dialogue and reflection with peers: "The opportunity to discuss concerns, issues and questions with a group of like-minded peers."
Another twenty-three (46%) praised the close community feeling and supportiveness of the seminars:" Having a cohort to share with, learn from and commiserate with."
Eleven (22%) of the graduates also noted the excellent faculty and teaching, especially the strong modeling by their professors. One student valued "the professors and their formatting of classes with a mixture of teacher-guided discussion, small group-work and experiential learning."
Twenty-seven (54%) of students commented positively on the curriculum of this course including the practical suggestions they received and many activities they found useful including portfolios, mini-methods units, curriculum planning activities, and course materials and readings: "I was able to develop strategies that could be implemented in my classroom."
Curriculum and Methods Seminar: Areas for Improvement
Suggestions for improving the seminar that were made by more that a few individuals included graduates who would have like more practical teaching ideas (12%), those who wanted more instruction on developing lesson plans and units of study (8%) and those who suggested more instruction in teaching specific content areas (8%). Along the same lines, two students suggested more reading in specific content area pedagogy. The remaining suggestions were individual responses to the seminar experience.
Evaluation of Professional Preparation in Specific Areas
Alumni were asked to rank their satisfaction with the professional preparation they received in a number of areas. Specific areas are listed below with the percentage of respondents who deemed their preparation as Strong, Satisfactory or Weak:
|
Strong |
Satisfactory |
Weak |
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Instructional objectives, lesson and unit planning |
|
|
|
|
Variety of teaching strategies/methods |
|
|
|
|
Classroom management |
|
|
|
|
Variety of assessment strategies |
|
|
|
|
Educational technology |
|
|
|
|
Multicultural approaches |
|
|
|
|
Dealing with students with special needs |
|
|
|
|
Teacher professionalism |
|
|
|
|
Special methods in content areas |
|
|
|
Skills and Knowledge Learned in the Education Program
When asked to rate (from Very Important to Unimportant) what skills and knowledge learned in the Education program that have been most generally useful since graduation, many alumni selected all or nearly all of the skills listed on the questionnaire. Below are the skills listed on the questionnaire followed by the percentage of respondents who deemed them Very Important, Somewhat Important or Unimportant:
|
Very |
Somewhat |
Unimportant |
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Familiarity with technology |
|
|
|
|
Planning and organizational Skills |
|
|
|
|
Interpersonal skills |
|
|
|
|
Communication skills |
|
|
|
|
Problem-solving skills |
|
|
|
|
Time management skills |
|
|
|
|
Critical thinking and analytical skills |
|
|
|
|
Research skills |
|
|
|
|
Societal understanding and Perspective |
|
|
|
|
Understanding of political and economic context |
|
|
|
|
Theoretical perspectives in learning and development |
|
|
|
|
Integrating theory and practice |
|
|
|
Preparation to Teach as Compared to Other Beginning Teachers
We asked graduates to rate how well prepared they felt, in general, compared to other beginning teachers in the school where they first taught. Twenty-eight (56%) graduates felt they were Much Better Prepared than most other new teachers they encountered in their schools. Eleven (22%) said they were Somewhat Better Prepared, Six (12%) said they were About as Well Prepared and not one graduate said they felt either Somewhat Less prepared or Much Less prepared.
In response to an open-ended question about why they ranked themselves as they did, graduates attributed their superior preparation to their ability to apply educational theory to their teaching (22%); to use a variety of instructional strategies effectively (20%); to communicate effectively with students, peers and parents (16%); to prepare, organize and solve problems with confidence (10%); the relevance of Swarthmore's Education curriculum compared to what other new teachers had studied (8%) and the ability to reflect on and evaluate their own teaching and teaching philosophy (8%). In addition, seven graduates noted that other school professionals commented on the strength of their preparation, based on their performance as beginning teachers.
Graduate Study
Twenty-two (44%) graduates for who we have information (including six who did not respond to the questionnaire) have matriculated in programs of graduate study. Institutions attended include: Brown University, Antioch University, Boston College,
Temple University, Columbia University, University of Pennsylvania, University of New Mexico, Harvard University, Bryn Mawr College, Cornell University, Villanova University, and Arcadia University. Eighteen (82%) of those enrolled in graduate study are in Master's level or Doctoral level programs in Education. Other areas of study include Law, Social Work and Classics.
Graduate Work in Education as Compared to Swarthmore's Program in
Education
We also asked graduates to compare the quality of their graduate study with work they did at Swarthmore. Of those graduates who have done Master's or Ph. D. level study 8% said graduate school was Somewhat Better that Swarthmore, 6% said it was Somewhat Equal to Swarthmore, 33% said it was Somewhat Worse than Swarthmore, and 16% said it was Clearly Inferior to Swarthmore. A little under half of the respondents (45%) did not make any comparison between their graduate programs and Swarthmore. Those who thought their graduate work had been Somewhat Worse or Clearly Inferior said their graduate courses were large and impersonal and/or lacking in individual support, attention, mentorship (16%); were not as rigorous as those at Swarthmore (33%); or did not emphasize the theory/practice dynamic or critical thinking world view (42%).
