EPP Data Dashboard
PNW’s Educator Preparation Provider (EPP) considers data essential for continuous program improvement.
By state law, the Indiana Department of Education (IDOE) annually collects and reports information from Educator Preparation Programs (EPPs). The following information is collected from EPPs, principals, teachers and schools.
By state law, the Indiana Department of Education (IDOE) collects and reports information from Educator Preparation Programs (EPPs) annually. The following information is collected from EPPs, principals, teachers, and schools:
- The “attrition, retention, and completion rates of teacher candidates for the previous three (3) calendar years.”
- Average scaled or standard scores of program completers in basic skills, content, and pedagogical testing.
- Average number of times program completers took the basic skills, content, and pedagogy tests before passing.
- Percentage passing the basic skills, content, and pedagogy tests on the first attempt.
- Admission practices of each program as they compare to the Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP) minimum admission standards.
- Principal survey results of the quality of their teachers completing an Indiana program within the previous two (2) years.
- Teacher feedback form results for those receiving initial license within the previous three (3) years.
- Staff performance evaluation results are reported in the aggregate.
- The number of teacher candidates in each content area who complete the teacher preparation program during the year, disaggregated by ranges of cumulative grade point averages.
- The number of teacher candidates in each content area who, during the year:
- (A) do not pass a content area licensure examination; and
- (B) do not retake the content area licensure examination.
This information must be reported using a matrix which is to be posted to the IDOE website. While this matrix is not intended to rank or “grade” programs, it provides an opportunity for the public to interpret or compare program quality based on a variety of data points. Please note that all data points are based upon the September 1– August 31 Title II timeframe.
CAEP Accountability Measures
Measure 1: Completer Impact and Effectiveness
Teacher Effectiveness
Effective 2025, the IDOE will no longer be sharing the Teacher Effectiveness report, therefore, no data is available for AY 24-25 and beyond.
Completer Impact
During the Spring of 2025, the PNW CAEP Team developed a new process for evaluating completer impact and effectiveness. University Supervisors are hired to reach out to recent graduates.
The spring 2025 process included 12 recent graduates and three supervisors. After initiating contact, the supervisor observed the classroom teaching and assessed their effectiveness and impact using the Danielson Rubric. Following the observation, the supervisor conducted an interview (developed by the NeXT group) to discuss assessment data, including student work samples.
Based on the success of this initiative, we aim to expand the program to include more supervisors and alumni, allowing us to gather more comprehensive data for analysis.
Measure 2: Satisfaction of Employers and Stakeholder Involvement
Analysis of Satisfaction of employers for PNW Completers indicate that building administrators perceive completers to be applying the knowledge, skills, and dispositions they learned in their preparation program. Based on the last three years of data from principals, 100% were “Satisfied” or “Very Satisfied” with the preparation of the teachers working at their schools.
The results from the survey also indicates that principals see completers exhibit these understandings ethically and in adherence with the legal requirements of teaching; that completers analyze student assessment data to improve classroom instruction; that they integrate technological tools to advance student learning; and that they are open and accepting of suggestions/constructive feedback. Scores were consistent across all areas of performance with no areas as exceptional but all areas proficient with a 3.4/4.0 average score for the most recent year surveyed.
While no area in the data indicates perceived levels of performance that are concerning, feedback from employers indicated additional training in the following areas could be beneficial…more science of reading for future teachers.
Summary of Findings
100% of principals are satisfied with PNW completers meeting the Knowledge Preparation, Pedagogical Preparation, and Professional Dispositions of Teachers.
- Very Satisfied: 48%
- Satisfied: 52%
- Dissatisfied: 0%
- Very Dissatisfied: 0%
Satisfaction of Employers
Score Means:
- Disagree Strongly (1)
- Disagree (2)
- Agree (3)
- Strongly Agree (4)
| The EPP did an outstanding job of preparing this teacher to… | '23 n=33 | '24 n=35 | ‘25 n=23 | '23 | '24 | ‘25 | 23 | 24 | ‘25 | '23 | '24 | ‘25 | ‘23 | ‘24 | ‘25 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. ...understand how students learn and develop at the grade level they are teaching. | 3.36 | 3.37 | 3.48 | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=21 64% | n=22 63% | n=12 52% | n=12 36% | n=13 37% | n=11 48% |
| 2. ...meet expectations of a beginning teacher for content preparation and knowledge. | 3.39 | 3.37 | 3.57 | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=1 3% | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=18 55% | n=22 63% | n=10 43% | n=14 42% | n=13 37% | n=13 57% |
| 3. ...adhere to the ethical requirements of the teaching profession. | 3.48 | 3.46 | 3.65 | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=17 52% | n=19 54% | n=8 35% | n=16 48% | n=16 46% | n=15 65% |
| 4. ...adhere to the legal requirements of the teaching profession. | 3.42 | 3.41 | 3.61 | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=1 3% | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=17 52% | n=20 57% | n=9 39% | n=15 45% | n=14 43% | n=14 61% |
| The EPP did an outstanding job of preparing this teacher to… | '23 | '24 | ‘25 | '23 | '24 | ‘25 | ‘23 | ‘24 | ‘25 | ‘23 | ‘24 | ‘25 | ‘23 | ‘24 | ‘25 |
| 5. ...provide an appropriateand challenging learning experience. | 3.27 | 3.23 | 3.43 | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=2 6% | n=1 4% | n=24 73% | n=2 66% | n=11 48% | n=9 27% | n=10 29% | n=11 48% |
| 6. ...provide an inclusive learning environment. | 3.33 | 3.34 | 3.52 | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=1 3% | n=1 3% | n=0 0% | n=20 61% | n=21 60% | n=11 48% | n=12 36% | n=13 37% | n=12 52% |
| 7. ...provide a rigorous learning environment. | 3.27 | 3.26 | 3.30 | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=1 3% | n=2 6% | n=0 0% | n=22 67% | n=22 63% | n=16 70% | n=10 30% | n=11 31% | n=7 30% |
| 8. ...use a variety of assessment methods to guide, adjust, and improve instruction. | 3.24 | 3.31 | 3.35 | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=1 3% | n=1 3% | n=0 0% | n=23 70% | n=22 63% | n=15 65% | n=9 27% | n=12 34% | n=8 35% |
| 9. ...develop content specific assessments to test for student understanding of the lesson objectives. | 3.24 | 3.26 | 3.39 | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=1 3% | n=0 0% | n=25 76% | n=24 69% | n=14 61% | n=8 24% | n=10 29% | n=9 39% |
| 10. ..differentiate instructionto meet all students’ learning needs. | 3.27 | 3.29 | 3.35 | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=1 3% | n=1 3% | n=0 0% | n=22 67% | n=23 66% | n=15 65% | n=10 30% | n=11 31% | n=8 35% |
| 11. ..work effectively with students with all exceptionalities. | 3.27 | 3.29 | 3.39 | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=1 3% | n=2 6% | n=1 4% | n=22 67% | n=21 60% | n=12 52% | n=10 30% | n=12 34% | n=10 43% |
| 12. ..analyze student assessment data to improve classroom instruction. | 3.12 | 3.29 | 3.39 | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=2 6% | n=1 3% | n=0 0% | n=21 64% | n=23 66% | n=14 61% | n=9 27% | n=11 31% | n=9 39% |
| 13. ..use effective strategies to manage the learning environment. | 3.15 | 3.26 | 3.35 | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=2 6% | n=3 9% | n=0 0% | n=24 73% | n=20 57% | n=15 65% | n=7 21% | n=12 34% | n=8 35% |
| 14. ..integrate technological tools as appropriate toadvance student learning. | 3.24 | 3.31 | 3.35 | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=2 6% | n=1 4% | n=25 76% | n=20 57% | n=13 57% | n=8 24% | n=13 37% | n=9 39% |
| The EPP did an outstanding job of preparing this teacher to… | ‘23 | ‘24 | ‘25 | ‘23 | ‘24 | ‘25 | ‘23 | ‘24 | ‘25 | ‘23 | ‘24 | ‘25 | ‘23 | ‘24 | ‘25 |
| 15. …openly accept suggestions/constructive feedback. | 3.42 | 3.46 | 3.70 | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=1 3% | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=17 52% | n=19 54% | n=7 30% | n=15 45% | n=16 46% | n=16 70% |
| 16. …exhibit ethical practice expected of educators. | 3.80 | 3.46 | 3.57 | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=17 52% | n=19 54% | n=10 43% | n=16 48% | n=16 46% | n=13 57% |
| 17. …work effectively with other professionals. | 3.45 | 3.44 | 3.61 | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=1 3% | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=16 48% | n=19 56% | n=9 39% | n=16 48% | n=15 34% | n=14 61% |
| 18. …work effectively with parents/guardians. | 3.39 | 3.38 | 3.52 | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=1 3% | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=18 55% | n=21 62% | n=11 48% | n=14 42% | n=13 38% | n=12 52% |
| 19. …work effectively with school leaders. | 3.48 | 3.49 | 3.70 | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=17 52% | n=18 51% | n=7 30% | n=16 48% | n=17 49% | n=16 70% |
| 20. …work effectively within the school culture. | 3.52 | 3.49 | 3.39 | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=16 48% | n=18 51% | n=10 43% | n=17 52% | n=17 49% | n=12 52% |
| ‘23 | ‘24 | ‘25 | ‘23 | ‘24 | ‘25 | ‘23 | ‘24 | ‘25 | ‘23 | ‘24 | ‘25 | ‘23 | ‘24 | ‘25 | |
| 21. Overall, how satisfied are you with the training this teacher received from this EPP? | 3.45 | 3.43 | 3.48 | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=18 55% | n=20 57% | n=12 52% | n=15 45% | n=15 43% | n=11 48% |
| ‘23 | ‘24 | ‘25 | ‘23 | ‘24 | ‘25 | ‘23 | ‘24 | ‘25 | ‘23 | ‘24 | ‘25 | ‘23 | ‘24 | ‘25 | |
| 21. Overall, how satisfied are you with the training this teacher received from this EPP? | 3.45 | 3.43 | 3.48 | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=0 0% | n=18 55% | n=20 57% | n=12 52% | n=15 45% | n=15 43% | n=11 48% |
Measure 3: Candidate Competency at Program Completion
Licensure Exam Pass Rates
| PNW | State | |
|---|---|---|
| Traditional Programs | 77% | 87% |
| Alternative Programs | 100% | 91% |
Multiple points of data regarding candidate competency upon completion are used to determine the EPP’s efficacy in this area. A large portion of this data is captured in the annual Title II report. The Title II single assessment of pass rates on all certification exam results are presented for convenience and maximum transparency. Sample sizes with fewer than 10 examinees are not reported based on privacy reasons.
The data in the table below shows that PNW teacher candidates have a pass rate of 77%, which is below the state average. To address this, several initiatives have been introduced, including tutoring support, integration of test blueprints into courses, and improved communication. These efforts will be explained in more detail in a later section of this report.
Traditional Licensure Programs
| Academic Year | PNW Number taking test | PNW Number passing | PNW Pass Rate | State Pass Rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-2025 | 56 | 43 | 77% | 87% |
| 2023-2024 | 62 | 55 | 89% | 92% |
| 2022-2023 | 74 | 68 | 92% | 92% |
Alternative Licensure Programs
| Academic Year | Number taking test | Number passing | Pass Rate | State Pass Rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-2025 | *3 | 91% | ||
| 2023-2024 | *9 | 94% | ||
| 2022-2023 | *7 | 94% | ||
| All program completers, combined 3 academic years | 19 | 19 | 100% |
Title II Single Assessment Pass Rate
| Licensure Exam | Passing Score | PNW Pass Rate | PNW Pass Rate | PNW Pass Rate | PNW Scaled Score | PNW Scaled Score | PNW Scaled Score | State Pass Rate | State Pass Rate | State Pass Rate | State Scaled Score | State Scaled Score | State Scaled Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 22-23 | 23-24 | 24-25 | 22-23 | 23-24 | 24-25 | 22-23 | 23-24 | 24-25 | 22-23 | 23-24 | 24-25 | ||
| Praxis 5622 Principles of Learning K-6 | 160 | 100% 52/52 | 100% 10/10 | *N=2 | 171 | 173 | *n=2 | 99% | 99% | 95% | 176 | 177 | 176 |
| Praxis 5625 Principles of Learning and Teaching PreK-12 | 157 | n/a | 91% 21/23 | 77% 33/43 | n/a | 167 | 158 | n/a | 94% | 79% | n/a | 171 | 167 |
| 5007 Humanities | 160 | 88% 51/58 | 90% 35/39 | 86% 31/36 | 167 | 166 | 165 | 92% | 92% | 85% | 172 | 172 | 171 |
| 5008 STEM | 158 | 86% 50/58 | 80% 32/40 | 74% 28/38 | 162 | 164 | 158 | 87% | 88% | 71% | 169 | 170 | 165 |
| Praxis 5624 Principles of Learning 7-12 | 157 | 100% 16/16 | 95% 20/21 | *n=6 | 179 | 175 | 168 | 100% | 98% | 95% | 178 | 178 | 177 |
| 5038 Language Arts | 167 | *n=9 | *n=9 | *n=4 | n/a | n/a | 174 | 95% | 95% | 80% | 179 | 179 | 175 |
| 5165 Mathematics | 159 | *n=2 | *n=2 | *n=2 | n/a | n/a | *n=4 | 96% | 93% | 68% | 177 | 179 | 164 |
| 5941 Historical Perspectives | 148 | *n=5 | *n=8 | *n=2 | n/a | n/a | *n=4 | 89% | 81% | 77% | 162 | 158 | 157 |
| 5543 Special Education: Mild to Moderate | 155 | 100% 18/18 | *n=9 | n/a | 169 | n/a | n/a | 96% | 97% | 89% | 171 | 170 | 169 |
| 5355 Special Education: Foundational Knowledge | 145 | n/a | 100% 16/16 | 98% 42/43 | n/a | 168 | 166 | n/a | 99% | 98% | n/a | 171 | 173 |
Data presented in the Table above indicates a decrease specifically for the Principles of Learning and Teaching PreK-12 exam for teacher candidates in the Elementary program. Effective Fall 2025, the exam will return to the Principles of Learning K-6. The Humanities exam for Elementary has remained consistent with a pass rate of 86% which is slightly higher than the state average of 85%.
The STEM exam average score continues to decline. The faculty has addressed these issues and there have been a changes in the curriculum to help address the decline. A return to a math sequence of courses focused on conceptual understandings of math was reinstituted and passed through the curriculum process. Additionally, tutors have been assigned to help manage the high Drop/Withdraw/Fail rates for those math courses. Finally, the math methods course increased one lecture hour going from 2-3 credits for time in class to learn the essential concepts related to teaching math. The literacy methods courses were also increased to address the Humanities pass rates. It is hoped that these and other initiatives will have a positive impact on the students’ performance.
Other scores worth noting are the Special Education Foundational Knowledge pass rate at 98%. Secondary programs content exam do not have enough students to record an average, but the Principals of Learning exam for secondary has shown a recent decline. The use of a program called 240 Tutoring is being used as part of a methods course to help improve that average to closer meet the state average.
Measure 4: Ability of Completers to be Hired in Education Positions for Which They Have Been Prepared
To be hired in educational positions, candidates must graduate from the program and pass the licensure exams required by the Indiana Department of Education.
During the 2024-2025 academic year, there were a total of 65 completers. Across all programs, 60% (39 candidates) were eligible to receive their teaching license.
If you have any questions about this data, please contact us.