Delivering Excellence in Education
The Ļć½¶Šć Education Department serves as a training ground for future teachers in the upstate. The Education Department is innovating by introducing a degree in English Language Learners and also working on enhancing professional development for teachers after graduation. We work to be transformative for our schools and future teachers. We are ranked in South Carolina as having some of the highest Praxis pass rates for Elementary Education. We take our promises seriously. Our President, Anita Gustafson, reiterates āā¦The Promise of Ļć½¶Šć is essential in todayās higher education marketplace and we must share that promise in ways that engage different individuals and groups and excite them about what Ļć½¶Šć has to offer.ā
Ļć½¶Šć Education Department Alumni in South Carolina Schools
70%
in the Upstate
20%
in the Midlands
10%
in the Lowcountry
56%
in Title I Schools
Proven Results
The Ļć½¶Šć Education Department is committed to making data-driven decisions and all data is logged and extrapolated from Learning Curve Achievement Systems.
We Value:
- Collecting and monitoring performance data
- Reviewing learning outcomes
- Receiving relevant feedback from our completers, employers and other stakeholders
- Using innovative systems to monitor the impact our graduates have on P-12 schools and student learning
- Partnerships with other schools and the community
CAEP-reviewed programs include:
- Early Childhood Education (pre-kindergarten-3rd grade)
- Elementary Education (grades 2-6)
- Middle Level Education (grades 5-8) ā Language Arts, Mathematics,
Science, Social Studies - Secondary Education (grades 9-12) ā English, Mathematics, Social Studies
- Special Education (PK-12) ā Multi-Categorical ā Competitive Scholarships Available!
- English Language Learners PK-12
Measures for Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation CAEP
Measure 1 (Initial): Completer Effectiveness and Impact on P-12 Learning and Development (R4.1)
SC Ready scores were utilized by the department this year. These scores were calculated by Laurens 56, regardless of the studentsā school entry dates. Home-schooled students were excluded.
South Carolina SC Ready Aggregate Scores by Grade Level (2024-2025 Laurens 56 District Scores by percentage)
English/Language Arts
| Grade | Number Tested | Low Performing | Middle Performing | High Performing |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3 | 209 | 27.3% | 34% | 24.4% |
| 4 | 170 | 20.1% | 15.6% | 39.7% |
| 5 | 165 | 24.2% | 23.0% | 35.8% |
| 6 | 183 | 21.3% | 25.1% | 36.6% |
| 7 | 175 | 22.3% | 22.3% | 42.3% |
| 8 | 208 | 27.4% | 29.3% | 25.4% |
Mathematics
| Grade | Number Tested | Low Performing | Middle Performing | High Performing |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3 | 209 | 26.3% | 24.4% | 33.5% |
| 4 | 178 | 26.4% | 21.9% | 23.6% |
| 5 | 165 | 23.6% | 35.8% | 21.2% |
| 6 | 183 | 33.3% | 34.4% | 20.9% |
| 7 | 175 | 41.1% | 28.6% | 30.3% |
| 8 | 208 | 43.3% | 34.6% | 13.5% |
Ļć½¶Šć Candidatesā Scores by Grade Level/Aggregate (2024-2025 Laurens 56)
Language Arts
| Grade | Number Tested | Low Performing | Middle Performing | High Performing |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3 | 41 | 21.0% | 53.0% | 26.3% |
| 4 | 41 | 22.4% | 41.6% | 37% |
| 5 | 25 | 17.3% | 30.3% | 66.7% |
| 6 | 0 | * | * | * |
| 7 | 0 | * | * | * |
| 8 | 61 | 32% | 34.6% | 33.4% |
Ļć½¶Šć Candidatesā Scores by Grade Level/Aggregate (2024-2025 Laurens 56)
Mathematics
| Grade | Number Tested | Low Performing | Middle Performing | High Performing |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3 | 37 | 27.7% | 41.6% | 30.8% |
| 4 | 41 | 27.8% | 42.0% | 36.8% |
| 5 | 25 | 43.3% | 34.6% | 22.1% |
| 6 | 0 | * | * | * |
| 7 | 0 | * | * | * |
| 8 | 61 | 22.1% | 56.7% | 21.2% |
2024-2025 Analysis:
Looking at the Ļć½¶Šć completerās ability to grow students during the 2024-2025 school year, the EPP analyzed the quintiles of students and the ability of the teacher to move students from āLow Performingā to āHigh Performing.ā Beginning with Language Arts 55h Grade, the students taught by Ļć½¶Šć graduates outperformed the other aggregate classroom scores. The most impressive piece was that the Ļć½¶Šć 5th-grade classrooms had a high performing group of 66.7%. This outperformed the aggregate scores of the other classrooms by a little over 45%. The EPP was only able to analyze scores from Ļć½¶Šć candidates in the grades where they were teaching. We currently only have Ļć½¶Šć graduates in the 3,4, 5, and 8th grades in Laurens 56.
Language Arts
The Language Arts The Language Arts 4th Grade scores reveal a stronger pattern of growth. The Ļć½¶Šć aggregate scores in the high-performing range were almost doubled compared to the aggregate scores in the other classrooms. The high performance of 37% was very exciting compared to the aggregate score of 17% for the rest of the classrooms.
The Language Arts 5th Grade scores reveal some of the strongest growth in the district, with a high-performing group of almost 67%. The districtās high-performing group scored in the 36th percentile, which is strong.
The Language Arts 8th Grade ā The Ļć½¶Šć graduate scores once again reveal a gain, with the middle performing at 32%. The other classrooms had a middle performing score of approximately 29.3%. Our students are trained with a targeted intensive tutoring model through our Center of Excellence grant, and it seems to be making a difference in their overall performance.
Mathematics
The Mathematics 3rd Grade scores reveal that the Ļć½¶Šć candidates need more background in mathematics. We revised The Mathematics 3rd Grade scores reveal that the Ļć½¶Šć candidates need more background in mathematics. We revised the MATH 203/MATH 204 track to focus more on numeracy and calculation. The Ļć½¶Šć graduates have a higher percentage of students in the middle-performing (41.6%) range, but fall short in the high-performing range (36.8%) compared to the other 4th-grade classrooms.
The Mathematics 4th Grade scores reveal that the candidates are working with the students and extending their learning with a 36.8% performance, while the district classrooms bumped a little higher with a score of 43.6.
The Mathematics 5th Grade scores reveal we need to realign our advanced MATH 204 class to incorporate more 5th-grade content. The low performing score of 43.3 shows we still have work to do in this area of mathematics.
The Mathematics 8th Grade scores also reveal a trend where the middle-performing group is the only group growing at 56.7%. There needs to be more differentiated instructional opportunities for the middle and low-performing areas so the students can grow to their mathematical capacity. Only 21.2% of the students performed in the high-performing group
Measure 2 (Initial & Advanced): Satisfaction of Employers and Stakeholder Involvement (RA4.1/R4.2/R5.3)
Fall 2024 Employer Satisfaction Survey/Updated
Distinguished (4) Proficient (3) Basic (2) Unsatisfactory (1)
| Criteria | Mean Score |
|---|---|
| The teacher has a strong foundation of knowledge in their content field. | 3.7 |
| The teacher can independently and collaboratively examine performance data to track the learnerās progress and guide planning. | 3.4 |
| The teacher utilizes methods of self-assessment and problem-solving to reflect on his/her own practice. | 2.9 |
| The teacher builds positive relationships with school colleagues, learners and their families, and the larger community. | 2.6 |
| The teacher understands the rights of students and respects the privacy of students and the confidentiality of information. | 3.3 |
| The teacher models the belief that all students can learn at a high level. | 3.5 |
| The teacher understands the needs of diverse learners and devises approaches that are designed to respect all learners. | 3.0 |
| The teacher works effectively with students who have documented exceptional needs. | 3.0 |
| The teacher works well with students who have linguistic differences. | 3.0 |
| The teacher promotes both creative and critical thinking. | 3.75 |
| The teacher effectively uses and interprets both verbal and non-verbal clues to assess understanding. | 3.5 |
| The teacher promotes the responsible use of interactive technologies to actively engage the learner. | 3.6 |
| The teacher effectively manages time, space, and other resources to promote a positive, safe, and disciplined classroom environment. | 3.0 |
| The teacher has enthusiasm for the content he/she teaches and actively engages students in the discipline. | 3.5 |
| The teacher creates developmentally appropriate instruction that takes into account the strengths, interests, and needs of the individual learner. | 3.5 |
| The teacher utilizes assessment data to inform their instruction. | 3.5 |
| The teacher understands how learning occurs and uses a variety of instructional strategies that promote student learning. | 3.0 |
| The teacher understands the importance of assessing the prior knowledge of students and how to adjust instruction based on prior knowledge. | 3.5 |
| The teacher plans an appropriate sequence of learning and experiences that include both short and long-term goals. | 3.5 |
| The teacherās instructional planning is appropriate to the schoolās curricular goals. | 3.25 |
| The teacher uses multiple methods of formative and summative assessments that support, verify, and document learning. | 3.5 |
| Professional Dispositions Graduates from Ļć½¶Šćās Teacher Education Program/Spring 2024 | Early Child. | ML. | Elem. | Sec. Eng. | Sec. S.S. | Special Ed. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 19. engage in collaborative work with families and the community | 3.75 | 3.25 | 0 | 4.00 | 4.00 | 0 |
| 20. understand professional expectations and behavior and conduct themselves as professionals | 3.50 | 4.00 | 0 | 4.00 | 4.00 | 0 |
| 21. reflect critically and consistently on their practice and seek feedback from others to improve their practice | 3.50 | 3.50 | 0 | 3.75 | 4.00 | 0 |
| 22. demonstrate dispositions that indicate fairness and equity; holding all students to higher levels of learning | 3.75 | 3.75 | 0 | 4.00 | 3.75 | 0 |
| 23. assume a leadership role in the school, district, and/or community | 3.50 | 3.50 | 0 | 3.50 | 3.00 | 0 |
| Total Mean for Professional Dispositions: | 3.60 | 3.60 | 0 | 3.85 | 3.75 | 0 |
Stakeholder Involvement
Teacher Education Advisory Committee: The EPP is in its SPA (Special Area Assessment) cycle, and key assessments are currently being reviewed for each program through our Teacher Education Advisory Committee. This committee is comprised of teachers and administrators from both Laurens 55 and Laurens 56. All recommendations on key assessments will be reviewed by the EPP and incorporated into our SPA reports. In the next data cycle, there will be more discussion related to the recommendations and revisions of key assessments.
Our TEAC will meet again in late April with further recommendations for SPA key assessments in every major.
Measure 3 (Initial & Advanced): Candidate Competency at Program Completion (R3.3)
N=5
Rate each key element on how well prepared you are to meet each of the following:
(Rated in percentage of agreement)
Content Knowledge: My teacher preparation experience at Ļć½¶Šć prepared me to | Strongly agree 4 | Agree 3 | Disagree 2 | Strongly disagree 1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Have in-depth knowledge and understanding of the fundamentals and concepts of my specific discipline | 78.75 | 21.25 | 0 | 0 |
| 1. Know and implement professional organization/national/state curricula and learning standards | 93.00 | 7.00 | 0 | 0 |
| 1. Structure content so that it promotes meaningful learning | 94.00 | 6.00 | 0 | 0 |
| 1. Understand the interrelationship of curriculum, instruction, and assessment | 90.00 | 10.00 | 0 | 0 |
| 1. Communicate with professional competence, orally and in writing | 90.00 | 10.00 | 0 | 0 |
| Pedagogical Knowledge and Skills: My teacher preparation experience at Ļć½¶Šć prepared me to | Strongly agree 4 | Agree 3 | Disagree 2 | Strongly disagree 1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Demonstrate long and short-range planning strategies; using knowledge of diversity within student populations (cultural, ethnic, socioeconomic, gender, and exceptionality) | 95.00 | 5.00 | 0 | 0 |
| 1.Use a variety of assessments to inform instructional decision-making | 80.00 | 20.00 | 0 | 0 |
| 1.Establish and maintain high expectations for all students | 90.00 | 10.00 | 0 | 0 |
| 1. Use a variety of appropriate instructional strategies that effectively meet the needs of diverse student populations | 94.00 | 6.00 | 0 | 0 |
| 1. Adjust instruction to accommodate the learning differences or needs of all students | 88.00 | 12.00 | 0 | 0 |
| 1. Use educational technologies to enhance instruction, assessment, and student performance | 90.00 | 10.00 | 0 | 0 |
| 1. Make subject matter meaningful through use of accurate, relevant and current content from multiple sources | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 1. Monitor student learning and adjust practice based on formal and informal assessment strategies | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 1. Provide a safe, positive and secure environment that is conducive to learning for all students | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 1. Use effective and appropriate classroom management strategies | 90.00 | 10.00 | 0 | 0 |
| 1. Have a positive impact on student learning | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Professional Dispositions: My teacher preparation experience at Ļć½¶Šć prepared me to | Strongly agree 4 | Agree 3 | Disagree 2 | Strongly disagree 1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Engage in collaborative work with colleagues, other professionals, and members | 95.00 | 5.00 | 0 | 0 |
| 1. Understand professional expectations and behavior | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 1. Reflect critically and consistently on my own practice and seek feedback from others to improve my practice | 85.00 | 15.00 | 0 | 0 |
| 1. Respect and value others for their diverse talents, abilities, perspectives, cultures and contributions | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 1. Assume a leadership role in the school, district and/or community | 65.00 | 35.00 | 0 | 0 |
| Total (N=5) |
Yearly Evaluation Results Summary (EPP, Program, Evaluations) Report, 2024-2025
This report shows an ADEPT Evaluation Results Summary for all graduates evaluated in the selected year.
| No Data | Met | Not Met | Incomplete | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total | 305/100.00% | 0/0% | 298/97.7% | 0/0% | 7/2.30% |
| Induction 1 | 8/2.62% | 0/0/00% | 8/100% | 0/0/00% | 0/0/00% |
| Annual 1 | 13/4% | 0/0.00% | 13/100% | 0/0.00% | 0/0.00% |
| Annual 2 | 6.1.97% | 0/0.00% | 6/100% | 0/0.00% | 0/0.00% |
| Continuing | 258/84.59% | 0/0.00% | 251/97.29% | 0/0.00% | 7/2.71% |
| Letter of Agreement | 20/6.56% | 0/0.00% | 20/100% | 0/0.00% | 0/0.00% |
Measure 4 (Initial & Advanced): Completer Employability in Education Positions for Which They Have Prepared
*Results from a 6-Year Review 2019-2025
| Program | Placement Rate |
|---|---|
| Early Childhood | 100% |
| Elementary | 97% |
| Secondary | 93% |
| Middle Level | 98% |
| Special Education | 100% |