CAEP Annual Report: Impact Measure 1

2026 CAEP Annual Report Impact Measure 1 

Completer Effectiveness and Impact on P12 Learning and Development 

CAEP Component R4.1 

I. INTRODUCTION

Impact on P-12 learning and development is a necessary component for determining effectiveness of a teacher preparation program. CAEP Standard R4.1 requires that the education preparation provider (EPP) demonstrate that program completers effectively contribute to student-learning growth and apply the professional knowledge, skills, and dispositions that the preparation experiences were designed to achieve. To demonstrate this, each year the Wichita State University (WSU) EPP will conducts a multiple case study to ascertain the effectiveness of its program completers and their impact on P-12 learning and development. 

This report presents findings from the 2025 Completer Effectiveness Case Study, synthesizing data from six completers from the academic year 2021-2022 or 2022-2023 who secured teaching positions in local schools.

II. RESEARCH QUESTIONS

1. To what extent are completers effectively contributing to P-12 student-learning growth? 
2. How and to what extent are completers using the knowledge, skills, and dispositions that they learned in their WSU preparation program? 
3. What actions based on R1 and R2 findings is the EPP taking to improve program quality so that completers have a greater impact on student learning growth? 

III. METHODOLOGY

An embedded multiple case study design guided the research. Participants completed pre-interviews, questionnaires, and post-interviews; submitted lesson plans, student work samples, and pre/post-assessment data; and provided formal teaching evaluations. Data were analyzed individually and across cases to identify patterns and actionable insights. Individual case study reports were prepared for each individual participant. This report shares results across cases. Reports are shared with program faculty and Program Advisory Council (PAC) members for feedback during the EPP’s annual reporting cycle. 

IV. CONTEXTUAL INFORMATION

A total of six program completers volunteered to participate. Of these, three graduated from the Secondary Math Education program and three graduated from the Elementary Education (On-Campus) program. Five out of six participants were female, with four identifying as non-Hispanic and White, one identifying as Hispanic, and one identifying as Asian and non-Hispanic. Participants taught across a wide spectrum of grade levels from Kindergarten, 6^th grade and high school. Geographic contexts spanned classrooms in Kansas and outside of Kansas and within urban, suburban, and rural communities. Tables 1-4 share city, school district, school building, and classroom demographics by each case study participant.

V. FINDINGS

In the following sections, cross-case findings are organized by guiding research questions 1 and 2, which are aligned to CAEP R4.1 standards. Case study findings facilitate holistic evaluation of the effectiveness of program completers and their impact, which assists the EPP in identifying areas for continuous improvement. Specific areas identified for improvement (i.e., Research Question 3) are documented in the EPP’s Professional Education Unit Annual Report.

To what extent are completers effectively contributing to P-12 student-learning growth? Each participant completed a student growth activity in which they collected pre- and post-assessment data. Pre-assessment data were gathered prior to implementing a unit or set of lessons, and post-assessment data were collected at the conclusion of instruction. The EPP analyzed the class-level scores using paired samples t-tests to determine the extent of growth from pre- to post-assessment.

The results of the analysis showed that five out of six completers demonstrated statistically significant gains in student performance (p < .001), indicating a strong, positive impact on P–12 student learning. Effect sizes, as measured by Cohen’s d, ranged from 1.00 to 4.37, reflecting large to extremely large effects across participants. These findings provide compelling evidence that completers are effectively designing and implementing instruction that promotes meaningful student growth. The class mean scores, t-test significance, and effect sizes are summarized in Table 5.

One participant (AY25_B) implemented a pre/post activity; however, the assessments differed substantially in structure, content, and point values, rendering direct comparison invalid. While post-assessment scores indicated some evidence of student learning, the lack of a valid baseline limited the ability to draw conclusions about student growth. Notably, the wide variation in post-assessment scores suggests inconsistent impact. Without comparable data, a paired t-test could not be conducted.

How and to what extent are completers using the knowledge, skills, and dispositions that they learned in their WSU preparation program?

InTASC standards identify the knowledge, skills, and dispositions necessary for effective teaching. These standards are used by WSU’s program faculty to guide the training of initial licensure program candidates. As such, all candidates are expected to have demonstrated their classroom application of these knowledge, skills, and dispositions to successfully complete their preparation program. To determine the extent to which program completers are using the knowledge, skills, and dispositions they learned in their WSU preparation program, data were collected from the completer’s formal teaching evaluation and pre/post interviews. 

Each school district may use a different formal evaluation tool. As such, the EPP analyzed the criteria of each formal evaluation and created a cross-walk that aligned the evaluation items to one of the InTASC four categories: 1) The Learner and Learning, 2) Content Knowledge, 3) Instructional Practice, and 4) Professional Responsibility. The cross-walk outlined how performance levels were recorded into either the “Proficient or Higher” category or “Below Proficient” category.

Table 6 shows the number of evaluation items, across 5 out of 6 participants, that aligned to each InTASC category and the percent of ratings that fell within the “Proficient or Higher” range or “Below Proficient “range. The findings shared reveal that 100% of ratings were Proficient or Higher, which highlights the effectiveness of WSU’s teacher preparation program in equipping completers with the necessary knowledge, skills, and dispositions for effective teaching. Areas for improvement include a small percentage of participants ratings below proficient in content knowledge and instructional practice.

Participant AY25_E submitted a narrative formal teaching evaluation completed by her building administrator in Fall 2024. Because the evaluation did not follow a standardized rubric, the EPP conducted a qualitative analysis to align observed teaching behaviors with the InTASC Model Core Teaching Standards. The observation revealed strong evidence of the completer's ability to support learner development, respond to learning differences, and create a warm, inclusive classroom environment (Standards 1–3). Additionally, the notes reflected effective application of content knowledge and instructional strategies (Standards 4, 5, and 8), with examples such as multisensory phonics instruction and the use of real-time behavior cues. Collaborative efforts with the paraprofessional were also highlighted, demonstrating shared responsibility for student growth (Standard 10). While no direct evidence was noted for Standards 6, 7, or 9, the overall analysis indicates that AY25_E is effectively applying the knowledge, skills, and dispositions emphasized in the WSU teacher preparation program.

To understand how completers are applying what they learned in their teacher preparation program in their classroom, the EPP conducted pre- and post-interviews aligned with the four InTASC categories. Pre-interviews focused on how completers utilize knowledge, skills, and dispositions gained during their program, as well as their satisfaction with preparation in each area. Post-interviews explored the reasons behind quantitative student growth results and allowed participants to reflect on their instructional effectiveness in a supportive context. Responses were analyzed by first aligning responses to InTASC standards. Next, responses were analyzed inductively, allowing for key themes to emerge related to how and to what extent completers are using the knowledge, skills, and dispositions they learned in their teacher preparation program (e.g., InTASC standards) in their professional practice as a teacher. Specific areas of strength and improvement are noted within each theme. The following eleven themes emerged.

Theme 1. Differentiation & Scaffolding
Participants consistently applied differentiation in their classrooms, using strategies like tiered questioning, scaffolding for lower-level learners, and stepwise instruction. Many described leveraging mentor modeling and community-based projects to engage diverse learners. The emphasis was on adapting instruction to students’ levels rather than adding more work.

Relevant Completer Quotes:

AY25_A: “Differentiating is not necessarily giving somebody more work, but asking them deeper questions about their understanding of the math.”

AY25_B: “That class helped me just kind of figure out some strategies for scaffolding to…being more open to that idea of just, okay, how can I work with students to get them to where they should be.”

AY25_C: “I was lucky that the teacher that I student taught with…had a lot of needs in that class. So how she differentiated, that’s how I do it now.”

AY25_D: “We had to come up with like a center…and then we had to have one for the kids who were a little bit behind.”

AY25_E: “Using strategies that I learned in my classes at WSU were great…gave me a lot of strategies to use.”

AY25_F: “The Funds of Knowledge Project…helped students engage and connect to what we’re doing.”

Theme 2. Strong Content Preparation
Graduates reported that targeted content courses strengthened both their subject knowledge and teaching confidence. Some highlights include the role of math theory and dual majors, and access to updated literary research. Completers valued subject-specific methods classes, and credited content methods with deepening math understanding. All indicated this preparation helped them answer student questions meaningfully.

Relevant Completer Quotes:

AY25_A: “Taking those theory classes…being able to see ‘I know why that works.’”

AY25_B: “Because I had that opportunity, I’m like, when a student asks me, ‘Why does it work this way?’ I can pull out from my experiences doing both.”

AY25_C: “One that I really remember was about teaching literacy to K-3 students because I know that one was based on the new reading research.”

AY25_D: “We kind of learned, like, how to teach math, if that makes sense.”

AY25_E: “Having courses at WSU that were dedicated to a specific subject…really helps me dive deeper.”

AY25_F: “As I’m exploring the content in those content methods classes, I was like, oh my gosh, this is making so much more sense now.”

 Theme 3. Technology Integration
While participants felt comfortable with technology, its use was often shaped by context. Some completers integrated tools like Desmos and Delta Math, while others described barriers such as lack of student devices or unfamiliar hardware. For example, AY25_F applied technology extensively during student teaching but less in her current role due to limited access.

Relevant Completer Quotes:

AY25_A: “I did learn a lot about the use of those technologies and how to integrate them…really well.”

AY25_B: “Desmos was huge. I know I created a few Desmos activities for projects.”

AY25_C: “Especially this year…none of my kids have their iPads this year. So I haven’t really been able to use that technology.”

AY25_D: “I felt like I had to learn how to use [Clear Touch] from scratch because we didn’t really have that at WSU.”

AY25_E: “Having a class dedicated to technology…helped me create kind of a list of what to use now.”

AY25_F: “Most of the technology experience I got through student teaching. I actually used a lot more technology student teaching than I do now.”

Theme 4. Classroom Management
Classroom management was applied through calm authority, positive relationships, and adaptive strategies. Completers emphasized keeping students in class while redirecting behavior and leaning on mutual respect with high schoolers. The need for more explicit training was noted, as many. D described learning management mainly through field experience.

Relevant Completer Quotes:

AY25_A: “At the end of the day…what’s more effective [is] keeping the kid in class and saying like hey I love that you’re here…but we cannot act like that.”

AY25_B: “My classroom-management style is very…mutual respect sort of thing. I treat them like the young adults that they are.”

AY25_C: “I really enjoyed the classes…about staying calm under pressure and that’s still a textbook that I kept.”

AY25_D: “I think I learned most of the classroom management from student teaching…we need to see an actual kid reacting.”

AY25_E: “A huge focus…was on building relationships and I think that has been key to my success.”

AY25_F: “Classroom management is definitely the thing that I struggled with the most…The fact that I can’t remember what I learned [about it] is kind of telling.”

Theme 5. Assessment
Participants used a mix of informal checks and formal tests. A described sitting with students for step-by-step feedback, while F used modeled informal strategies like “thumbs up/thumbs down.” B and D noted reliance on traditional assessments but a desire for more alternatives, while C and E emphasized formative observation. The trend shows a reliance on informal assessment as a more practical classroom tool.

Relevant Completer Quotes:

AY25_A: “If I ask a student and they either want to not say anything, I’m gonna go sit down next to them and work through something with them.”

AY25_B: “For math, I feel like it was very much just a you can either do a regular pencil paper test or some sort of project.”

AY25_C: “I don’t think I’m collecting the data that I really need to effectively teach.”

AY25_D: “What I wish they would have incorporated more were more of like the non-traditional assessments.”

AY25_E: “I do a lot of informal assessments with the kids, just seeing what they know, watching what they know.”

AY25_F: “She taught us…informal [strategies]: give me a thumbs up if you’ve got it, thumbs in the middle if you’re still confused.”

 Theme 6. Reflection & Professional Development
 Reflection practices were applied regularly through journals, lesson plan add-ons, and recorded lessons. A’s reflections drove his pursuit of a master’s, while B and C described frequent written reflections that shaped their instructional adjustments. D and E used recorded lessons and feedback loops, while F built a daily habit of reflecting through a teaching notebook. PD was valued but described as unevenly emphasized.

Relevant Completer Quotes:

AY25_A: “I am going to be applying to master’s programs here in the spring.”

AY25_B: “I had to do so many reflections…that has just kind of trained me to look at things and determine what’s best for the students.”

AY25_C: “Every week or every other week we’d have a prompt to respond to like a discussion board and then we’d have to respond to it based on how that week went.”

AY25_D: “One thing that we would do was record ourselves teaching a lesson, which I feel like that’s a really good way to give ourselves feedback.”

AY25_E: “Almost after every lesson, we did have to submit with our lesson plan a reflection.”

AY25_F: “We had a teaching notebook…that created a habit for me of after each day of teaching, going and reflecting on my practices.”

Theme 7. Family & Community Engagement
Participants applied engagement practices differently, ranging from frequent calls home (A) to proactive relationship-building (E). B and F felt preparation was more behavior-focused and less about celebrating success. C and D highlighted events, notes, or positive outreach, while E emphasized family relationships as central to managing behavior. Engagement was recognized as important but inconsistently modeled in training.

Relevant Completer Quotes:

AY25_A: “I email, call home pretty frequently, especially for the students that are failing.”

AY25_B: “It was always taught more of as like you do that to help student behavior.”

AY25_C: “I remember there’s a course about how to connect with people outside of the school, like going to events or going to different sports and stuff.”

AY25_D: “Also let parents know like ‘your kid had a really good day in class.’”

AY25_E: “Building relationships with the kids and then also building relationships with the parents helped me a ton.”

AY25_F: “It was definitely talked about a lot to have parent communication. It was not modeled a ton.”

Theme 8. Growth-Driven Instruction
Instructional practices centered on interaction, chunking, scaffolding, and reteaching. A kept lessons light and interactive, while B and C emphasized gradual, scaffolded instruction from concrete to abstract. D used guided practice leading to independence, and E prioritized reteaching before advancing. F highlighted progressive practicum teaching responsibilities as preparation for growth-focused teaching.

Relevant Completer Quotes:

AY25_A: “I tried to keep it interactive…I tried to keep it relatively light and fun.”

AY25_B: “I think that the way I structured the notes, so chunking it up…helped a lot.”

AY25_C: “Staying consistent and all the scaffolding that I was able to do throughout the lessons.”

AY25_D: “Going over things like reviewing, practicing together, having them practice individually.”

AY25_E: “Before the next day…I kind of went back and pulled pieces in from that first lesson and re-taught that before moving on.”

AY25_F: “First semester you’re observing, second semester you’re observing, third and fourth year you’re teaching and it just gradually gets to be more and more.”

Theme 9. Barriers to Growth
Participants identified external barriers—trauma (A), absences and schedule disruptions (B, E), language barriers (C), accelerated pacing (D), and insufficient test-prep strategies (F). Despite these challenges, they consistently worked to mitigate barriers by reteaching, scaffolding, or adapting expectations.

Relevant Completer Quotes:

AY25_A: “There was one student…they came into school…with a really big black eye.”

AY25_B: “Chronic absences was an issue for some students…pop assemblies, weird schedules.”

AY25_C: “One of the students…was still in the process of getting in with the speech language pathologist.”

AY25_D: “The only barrier I guess I would say is in the assessment. It’s an honors class so…the pace is faster.”

AY25_E: “That week I had a ton of kids absent. We had a sickness that hit us that week.”

AY25_F: “I wish I learned a little more about…this is how you teach to a state test.”

Theme 10. Practicum & Mentors
 Fieldwork and mentorship were the most valued parts of the program. A and F described impactful feedback from professors and mentors, while B, C, D, and E credited practicum and varied placements with preparing them for real classrooms. Participants highlighted practicum as where theory “clicked” and confidence developed.

Relevant Completer Quotes:

AY25_A: “First day, I had a student…And I was like, ‘That’s me. I’m the teacher. I’m stepping up right now.’”

AY25_B: “Through the practicum, the completer was able to use the knowledge, skills, and dispositions she learned at WSU.”

AY25_C: “I was lucky that the teacher that I student taught with…differentiated…that was helpful.”

AY25_D: “They put us in a classroom, which is, I think, as realistic as it gets.”

AY25_E: “I think being in different schools in different grade levels allowed me to be able to find kindergarten, which I love.”

AY25_F: “Anytime I had [professor] as my direct advisor…she always gave me amazing feedback.”

Theme 11 Positive Reinforcement & Supportive Climate

Graduates emphasized praise and relationship-building as key classroom tools. A noted frequent praise reinforced by student feedback, D and E linked positivity to stronger family ties, and F highlighted supportive feedback loops. Although less consistently mentioned than other themes, positive reinforcement was clearly tied to effective climate and relationships.

 Relevant Completer Quotes:

AY25_A: “I’m really good at giving praise…my student loves your class.”

AY25_D: “Also let parents know like ‘your kid had a really good day in class.’

AY25_E: “Building relationships with the kids and the parents helped when I did have problems behaviorally.”

AY25_F: “She always gave me amazing feedback…so there was a lot of feedback there.”

 VI. CONCLUSION

The findings of the 2025 Completer Effectiveness Case Study demonstrate that program completers are successfully applying the knowledge, skills, and dispositions acquired during their teacher preparation program to positively impact P-12 student learning and development. Pre- and post-assessment data provided compelling evidence of significant student growth across all participating completers, with paired t-tests showing statistically significant improvements in student performance (p < 0.001) for every completer. These results highlight the ability of completers to design and implement instruction that promotes meaningful learning outcomes for their students.

Across all participants, the WSU program is praised for building a strong foundation in content knowledge, differentiation strategies, and reflective practice, with practicum and mentor experiences emerging as the most valuable preparation for real classrooms. Graduates report confidence in scaffolding instruction, integrating technology when available, and cultivating positive student relationships. At the same time, common areas of improvement include the need for more explicit training in classroom management techniques, broader exposure to assessment methods beyond formal tests, and stronger modeling of family engagement practices. Together, these findings highlight both the effectiveness of the program in fostering adaptable, student-centered teachers and the opportunities for refining preparation in areas that matter most to first-year success. In summary, the AY25 Completer Effectiveness Case Study confirms that these program completers are making a meaningful difference in P-12 learning growth through the application of the knowledge, skills, and dispositions they learned in their teacher preparation program.