Skip to Main Content
Mobile Menu

CAEP Annual Reporting Measures

Boise State received CAEP accreditation as an early adopter for a seven-year term from October 2016 to December 2023. This accreditation is granted for initial preparation programs. In 2023, Boise State will be reviewed for both initial and advanced programs aligned with CAEP standards.

Click here to read more about Boise State’s accreditation status on the CAEP website.

Click here to review all CAEP accredited providers by state and/or provider name on the CAEP website.

CAEP Annual Reporting Measures: Information and Supporting Evidence

The tables appearing on this page include data and analyses for the eight CAEP annual reporting measures. These measures support all parts of Boise State’s accreditation process for educator preparation programs, but in particular standard component 5.4 for initial and advanced programs, standard components 4.1-4.4 for initial programs, and standard components 4.1 and 4.2 for advanced programs.

Annual Reporting Measures (CAEP Component 5.4 | A5.4)

Impact Measures (CAEP Standard 4)Outcome Measures
1. Impact on P-12 learning and development (Component 4.1)5. Graduation Rates (initial and advanced programs)
2. Indicators of teaching effectiveness (Component 4.2)6. Ability of completers to meet licensing (certification) and any additional state requirements; Title II (initial and advanced programs)
3. Satisfaction of employers and employment milestones
(Component 4.3 | A.4.1)
7. Ability of completers to be hired in education positions for which they have prepared (initial and advanced programs)
4. Satisfaction of completers (Component 4.4 | A.4.2)8. Student loan default rates and other consumer information (initial and advanced programs)

Annual reports are available in .pdf versions going back to 2011.

CAEP Annual Reports (all years), Boise State University

Note: there was no annual report submitted for 2013.
Year of CAEP Annual ReportLink to .pdf of Report
2018Click here to link to the 2018 Annual Report
2017Click here to link to the 2017 Annual Report
2016Click here to link to the 2016 Annual Report
2015Click here to link to the 2015 Annual Report
2014Click here to link to the 2014 Annual Report
2012Click here to link to the 2012 Annual Report
2011Click here to link to the 2011 Annual Report

Click here to learn more information about the CAEP annual report and accreditation standards and processes on the CAEP website.

For additional questions about Boise State Educator Preparation Programs accreditation and annual reporting processes, please contact Dr. Carrie Semmelroth, Director for Assessment and Communications, (208) 426-2818,

Impact Measures (CAEP Standard 4)

Boise State has studied the impact of initial program completers through case studies focused on “Studying Practice and Student Learning” (SPSL). During 2014-2015, the unit focused on elementary teachers in grades K-6. In 2015-2016, the next iteration of SPSL included K-12 teachers from a variety of content areas and endorsement programs. This continued inquiry brought together EPP faculty and 19 completers in a community of practice to support the development, teaching, and critical analysis of a classroom unit of study.

Click here to read the conference paper presented at 2017 AERA that includes a discussion of the 2015-2016 completer study. 

During 2016-2017, Boise State EPP work focused on program improvement efforts focused on evidence from the completer case studies. Faculty also shared results with state and national audiences and initiated an innovative partnership among EPPs across the state. As a state coalition, Idaho Coalition for Educator Preparation (ICEP) applied for and received a $263,384 grant from the Idaho State Board of Education in connection with Eligible Partnership Subgrants for Title II Part A Subpart 3 in the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. Funding supported a pilot of Boise State’s completer study, Studying Practice and Student Learning, at the state level as a form of new teacher induction for 2017-2018. Data from three regions in Idaho (southwest, central and southeast) will be reported to the State Board of Education at the end of the funding cycle. Results from this study will also be shared on this website at that time (late summer 2018).

Preliminary analyses from the SAHE grant indicate Boise State completers continue to grow and develop. For example, observation data indicate that new teachers are well-started beginners who continue to add to their strengths and skills over time. Also, the preliminary student learning outcome data shows most completers were able to design and implement instruction in a unit of study that had an impact level of “effective” or “highly effective”.

1. Impact on P-12 Learning and Development

In 2015-2016, initial certification completers engaged in a directed unit study called the Studying Practice and Student Learning (SPSL), which is similar to their preservice performance assessment. Completers planned and enacted a unit of study, analyzed formative and summative student data and student-learning outcomes (SLOs), and reflected and responded to their student data.

From the case study, student learning outcomes (SLOs) demonstrated teachers’ ability to deliver instruction that impacted the learning of their students. Analysis at the whole class level found 75% of SPSL units were rated highly effective or effective for the percentage of students meeting target criteria.

Impact on Student Learning at the Whole Class Level, 2015-2016

This table includes the effectiveness ratings for the whole class student learning outcomes for the percentage of students who met target criteria.
Content Area UnitsNumber of Evaluated Instructional Units Whole Class Student Learning Outcomes,
Highly Effective
Whole Class Student Learning Outcomes,
Whole Class Learning Outcomes,
% Effective or Highly Effective
Whole class student learning outcomes1639475%

Impact on Student Learning at the Individual Level, 2015-2016

This table includes the effectiveness ratings for the learning outcomes of students who received individualized differentiated instruction by our completers. The students who received this instruction were selected for differentiation by the completers based on observations, formative assessments, benchmark data, etc.
Observed Area Targeted for Differentiated Instructional Support
Number of Students Provided Differentiated InstructionIndividual Student Learning Outcomes,
Highly Effective
Individual Student Learning Outcomes,
Individual Student Learning Outcomes,
% Effective or Highly Effective
Academic, Above grade level88189%
Academic, Below grade level2114767%
Language acquisition76186%
Social / Emotional31233%

2. Indicators of Teaching Effectiveness

Aligned with Danielson’s Framework For Teaching (FFT), initial certification completers were observed for teacher effectiveness. Three classroom observations per completer were conducted by certified FFT observers, using the Framework for Teaching observable components on domains 2 and 3. Additional data sources included the Preservice Professional Year Assessment (PYA) and inservice principal evaluations. Observations were scored on the FFT rubric: Unsatisfactory (1), Basic (2), Proficient (3), and Distinguished (4).

Observation scores overall represent a rating of Proficient (3.0) or above. Particular areas of strength for the completers were 2a. Developing Respect and Rapport (3.2) and 2b. Establishing a Culture for Learning (3.1). These findings are also triangulated with high scores on the Tripod Survey of Student Perceptions for the related construct of Care (4.5) and Challenge (4.3) (see: the next table). Comparisons with the scores from the PYA demonstrate continued growth on the components of the FFT over time and principal evaluations were in agreement with university observers.

Observation Data on the Danielson Framework for Teaching Observable Components, 2015-2016

FFT Components Pre-service, Professional Year Assessment (1 total, final evaluation)
In-service, Observations Conducted during Completer Study by University Faculty (average of three over time)In-service, Observation Conducted during Completer Study by Principal (1 total)
2A: Respect & Rapport2.93.23.0
2B: Culture for Learning2.93.12.9
2C: Routines and Procedures2.82.93.1
2D: Managing Student Behavior2.82.92.8
2E: Organizing Physical Space2.93.13.0
3A: Communicating with Students2.93.02.9
3B: Questioning and Discussion2.72.92.8
3C: Engaging Students in Learning2.93.02.9
3D: Using Assessment in Instruction2.82.92.9
3E: Flexibility and Responsiveness2.93.02.9
Average Scores2.83.02.9

The Tripod Survey of Student Perceptions (Ferguson, 2012) was administered as an additional measure of teacher effectiveness. Students in K-12 classrooms complete a survey of their perceptions of their teachers on seven metrics. The tripod survey was used in the Measures of Effective Teaching (MET) study of Teacher Quality (2012) and had the highest correlation with student achievement of any of the measures tested (Ferguson, 2012). The survey measures seven components (scales): Care (7 items), Control (4 items), Clarify (8 items), Challenge (4 items), Captivate (4 items), Confer (7 items), and Consolidate (2 items). A score of 5 indicates a high level of agreement with the items on the scale.

Tripod Survey of Student Perceptions, 2015-2016

Grade LevelnCareControlClarifyChallengeCaptivateConferConsolidate
Early Elementary K-274.893.294.514.674.484.294.42
Upper Elementary 3-664.343.
Secondary 7-1244.193.384.034.113.903.733.98

Results from the tripod surveys found completers were well respected by their students across the seven components. On calculated means, all completer scores were between 3.29 and 4.47 on a 5-point scale. When comparisons were made between study teachers’ percent agreement and teachers from the MET Study (2010), whose student learning outcomes ranked in the 75th percentile, completers’ percent agreement matched or exceeded the MET study teachers in all constructs except Control.

Boise State Completer Tripod Survey of Student Perceptions Results Compared Against the MET Study Findings, 2015-2016

*Results reported by mean for each construct on a 5-point scale
Survey ConstructsEarly Elementary K-2Upper Elementary 3-6Secondary 7-12Boise State MET Study
% Average Agreement9789859070
% Average Agreement5760646074
% Average Agreement8887838681
% Average Agreement9285858782
% Average Agreement8759857776
% Average Agreement8286738072
% Average Agreement8674798080

Employer and Alumni Surveys

In 2014-2015, the Idaho Coalition for Educator Preparation (ICEP) group developed and validated an alumni and employer survey to inform the continuous improvement of Idaho EPPs. The surveys were developed for alumni who have graduated within the past three years from Idaho’s EPPs to measure how prepared they feel for teaching in a classroom, and to measure employer satisfaction of these programs. The surveys are aligned with the Danielson Framework for Teaching (FFT) evaluative rubric (Unsatisfactory, Basic, Proficient, and Distinguished) to maintain consistency across EPPs and evaluation items. The question items are aligned with InTASC standards. The alumni and employer surveys were validated through ICEP in the summer 2015 and distributed that fall across the state of Idaho to inform all EPPs.

Previous results from the alumni and employer surveys are available for initial programs.
Click here to review previous results from the alumni and employer surveys for initial programs.

In 2017-2018, Boise State piloted both the alumni and employer surveys at the initial and advanced program levels. The use of the same survey across the EPP unit allows for analysis of trends and patterns across levels and programs. With future administrations of this survey, collected data will allow for analysis of patterns and trends over time.
Results from these surveys are reported by the mean and median at the unit, initial and advanced programs levels.

3. Satisfaction of Employers

Through surveying the employers of our graduates across initial and advanced programs, Boise State intends to measure the degree to which employers are satisfied with completer preparation for assigned responsibilities in working with P-12 students (CAEP standards 4.3 and A.4.1).

The results from this pilot use of the employer survey at the unit level has provided two important findings for next steps. First, the lower reported mean scores for strategies to support new English language learners is consistent with scores found in the alumni surveys on similar items. This an area identified by the unit for program improvement which reinforces the importance of the ongoing work in this area. Second, the lower response rate (n=57) provides program coordinators with specific next steps for the next survey administration. The trends and patterns from these results will help inform any program changes as the unit heads into 2018-2019.

2017 Employer Survey of completers from 2014-2015 and 2015-2016

Employer Survey QuestionsUnit,
Mean (SD)
Initial Programs,
Mean (SD)
Initial Programs,
Advanced Programs,
Mean (SD)
Advanced Programs,
The teacher/employee applies the concepts, knowledge, and skills of their discipline(s) in ways that enable learners to grow.3.21(.65)3.002.97(.59)3.003.52(.59)4.00
The teacher/employee uses instructional strategies that promote active learning.3.23(.63)3.003.03(.59)3.003.50(.59)4.00
The teacher/employee uses knowledge of learning, subject matter, curriculum, and learner development to plan instruction.3.33(.76)3.003.09(.53)3.003.68(.95)4.00
The teacher/employee uses a variety of assessments (e.g. observation, portfolios, tests, performance tasks, anecdotal records, surveys) to determine learner's strengths, needs, and programs.3.16(.69)3.002.91(.64)3.003.52(.59)4.00
The teacher/employee chooses teaching strategies for different instructional purposes and to meet different learner needs.3.20(.71)3.003.00(.72)3.003.50(.60)4.00
The teacher/employee evaluates the effects of his/her actions and modifies plans accordingly.3.25(.67)3.003.00(.62)3.003.58(.58)4.00
The teacher/employee can encourage learners to see, question, and interpret ideas from diverse perspectives.3.21(.82)3.003.00(.89)3.003.48(.59)4.00
The teacher/employee uses strategies that support new English language learners.3.02(1.14)3.002.81(1.24)3.003.35(.49)3.00
The teacher/employee helps learners assess their own learning.3.16(.70)3.002.84(.63)3.003.56(.58)4.00
The teacher/employee uses strategies that support learners with a wide variety of exceptionalities.3.13(.77)3.002.84(.77)3.003.52(.59)4.00
The teacher/employee honors diverse cultures and incorporates culturally-responsive curriculum, programs, and resources.3.26(.71)3.003.09(.73)3.003.52(.60)4.00
The teacher/employee has a positive effect on student achievement according to state assessments.3.13(.88)3.002.90(.89)3.003.50(.62)4.00
The teacher/employee uses technology to enhance learning and learning environments.3.22(.63)3.002.97(.54)3.003.57(.59)4.00
The teacher/employee understands the value of working with colleagues, families, and community agencies to meet learner needs.3.31(.72)3.003.06(.72)3.003.65(.57)4.00
The teacher/employee uses self-reflection as a means of improving performance.3.28(.67)3.003.00(.62)3.003.64(.57)4.00
The teacher/employee maintains accurate records.3.25(.63)3.002.97(.54)3.003.60(.58)4.00

4. Satisfaction of Completers

Results from the 2017-2018 pilot alumni survey support findings from the employer survey (as well from other assessments in the unit) that supporting new English language learners is an area of improvement for our EPPs. Overall, the scores reveal alumni evaluate our programs to be proficient and above in preparation.

2017 Alumni Survey of completers from 2014-2015, 2015-2016 and 2016-2017

Alumni Survey QuestionsUnit,
Mean (SD)
Initial Programs, Mean (SD)
Initial Programs MedianAdvanced Programs Mean (SD)
Advanced Programs Median
Teach the concepts, knowledge, and skills of my discipline(s) in ways that enable students to learn3.34(.88)3.002.95(.51)3.003.41(.92)3.00
Use instructional strategies that promote active student learning3.31(.88)3.003.05(.60)3.003.35(.92)3.00
Use knowledge of learning, subject matter, curriculum, and student development to plan instruction3.31(.90)3.002.95(.60)3.003.37(.94)3.00
Use a variety of assessments (e.g. observation, portfolios, tests, performance tasks, anecdotal records) to determine student strengths, needs and programs3.28(.89)3.002.95(.69)3.003.33(.92)3.00
Choose teaching strategies for different instructional purposes and to meet different student needs3.37(.89)3.003.10(.45)3.003.42(.94)3.00
Evaluate the effects of my actions and modify plans accordingly3.37(.89)3.003.15(.59)3.003.41(.94)3.00
Encourage students to see, question, and interpret ideas from diverse perspectives3.25(.92)3.003.00(.65)3.003.30(.96)3.00
Teach in ways that support new English language learners2.72(1.01)3.002.50(.76)2.002.78(1.04)3.00
Help students learn how to assess their own learning2.99(.87)3.002.50(.83)2.503.08(.86)3.00
Teach students with a wide variety of exceptional needs3.06(.93)3.002.95(.83)3.003.08(.95)3.00
Honor diverse cultures and incorporate culturally responsive curriculum3.15(.93)3.003.00(.56)3.003.17(.98)3.00
Have a positive effect on student achievement according to state assessments3.22(.96)3.003.10(.72)3.003.24(1.00)3.00
Use technology to enhance learning and learning environments3.41(.87)4.002.85(.93)3.003.52(.83)4.00
Understand value of working with colleagues, families, community agencies in meeting student needs3.36(.89)3.003.10(.79)3.003.40(.90)4.00
Use self-reflection as a means of improving instruction3.39(.83)3.003.15(.67)3.003.43(.85)3.00
Maintain accurate records3.27(.87)3.002.85(.93)3.003.34(.85)3.00

In addition to the Alumni Survey administered through the EPP, Boise State’s Office of Institutional Research administers a Graduating Student Survey to all undergraduate and graduate students graduating in a given academic year. The Graduating Student Survey was revised significantly for the 2015-2016 and later administrations. Results from 2015-2016 and 2016-2017 can be accessed via an interactive dashboard on the Office of Institutional Research’s website. The results can be disaggregated by college, department, programs, etc. Overall results from this university level survey indicates satisfaction from completers. Additional analyses of these data will be completed in 2018-2019 with the results from the pilot use of the alumni and employer surveys at the unit level. The data from this university level survey will provide an additional measurement to help inform program improvement.

Click here to access the 2016-2017 results for the College of Education from the Graduating Student Survey. Additional analyses by program can be viewed on the dashboard.

Outcome Measures

5. Graduation Rates

Boise State’s Office of Institutional Research regularly completes research and analyses on a variety of topics related to student success and other other university performance metrics. Data from these reports can be used to answer multiple questions related to graduation and retention rates.

Click here to access research reports on retention and graduation.

Click here to learn more about retention and graduation rates for undergraduate students.

The EPP quality assurance system at Boise State continues to improve and develop to inform programs with data and evidence. As the quality assurance system becomes more centralized and supported, both cohorted and non-cohorted programs will be better able to track candidates for retention and graduation rates.

6. Licensing and State Requirements

The table below includes pass rates for initial certification completers reported on Title II.
For more information, visit the Title II website:

Title II Summary Pass Rates for Initial Certification

GroupNumber taking testsNumber passing testsPass rate (%)
All program completers, 2016-1716816799
All program completers, 2015-16136136100
All program completers, 2014-15176176100

Additional information about certification rates can be found in the measure below for placement rates.

7. Placement Rates: Initial Certification

The placement analyses in the table below feature the count and percentage of initial certification completers who did and did not choose to go into teaching.

Placement Rates by Totals

Placement Rate2015-2016 Count/Rate2016-2017 Count/Rate
Grand total of completers162178
Count of completers who chose to certify after program completion 136161
Certification rate (count of completers who chose to certify/grand total)84%
Placement rate excluding those choosing not to certify from grand total (Placement count/grand total-not certified)89%

Of those completers who chose to go into teaching, the placement analyses in the table below includes the count and percentage of completers who are teaching in and out of Idaho.

Rates of placement areas by the placed total (initial certification)

Placement areas2015-2016
Count of placed total, n=136
Percentage of placed total
Count of placed total, n=146
Percentage of placed total
In Idaho12390%11377%
Out of Idaho118%139%
Out of United States21%32%

Of those completers who chose to go into teaching, the placement analyses in the table below includes the count and percentage of completers who are teaching in Idaho.
Click here to see a list of all six Idaho regions.

Count and Rates of Placement in Idaho (initial certification)

Count, n=123
Count, n=113
In-state, Private54%44%
Region 111%33%
Region 232%22%
Region 39476%9382%
Region 4 97%33%
Region 5--------
Region 622%1>1%

Of those completers who chose to go into teaching, the placement analyses in the table below includes the count and percentage of completers who are teaching in Idaho’s Region 3.
Click here to see a list of all six Idaho regions.

Count and Rates of Placement in Region 3 (initial certification)

Count, n=94
Count, n=93
001-Boise Independent1819%1415%
002-West Ada3739%3841%
003-Kuna Joint District33%1011%
131-Nampa School District2122%1213%
132-Caldwell District55%55%
133-Wilder District----11%
134-Middleton District33%----
139-Vallivue School District33%11%
193-Mountain Home District11%55%
221-Emmett Independent District----44%
365-Bruneau-Grand View Joint School District 22%11%
422-Cascade District11%

8. Consumer Information: Boise State Educator Preparation Programs that Lead to Licensure

Boise State Educator Preparation Programs that Lead to Licensure

*Programs align with 2016-2017 undergraduate and graduate catalog listings.
Program NameProgram LevelDegree LevelIdaho Licensure
Education Specialist in Executive Educational LeadershipAdvanced Specialist or C.A.S.Superintendent endorsement
K-12 Online Teaching EndorsementAdvanced
Post BaccalaureateOnline Teacher (K-12) (added as endorsement)
*Master of Arts in Counseling (*CACREP)Advanced Master'sSchool Counseling
Master of Arts in Education, LiteracyAdvanced Master'sLiteracy (K-12) (added as endorsement)
Master of Education in Bilingual EducationAdvanced Master'sBilingual Education (K-12) (added as endorsement)
Master of Education in Educational LeadershipAdvanced Master'sAdministrator certificate, school principal endorsement
Master of Education in English as a New LanguageAdvanced Master'sEnglish as a Second Language (ESL) (K-12) (added as endorsement)
Master of Educational Technology (MET)Advanced Master's
Mathematics Consulting Teacher EndorsementAdvanced Post BaccalaureateConsulting Teacher/Teacher Leader Endorsement
Art Education, K-12 or 6-12Initial BaccalaureateArt Education, K-12 or 6-12
Biology - Secondary Education EmphasisInitial BaccalaureateBiological Science (6-12)
Chemistry - Secondary Education EmphasisInitial BaccalaureateChemistry (6-12)
Computer Science- Secondary Education EmphasisInitial BaccalaureateComputer Science (6-12)
Dual Special Education, Early Childhood Intervention CertificationInitial BaccalaureateBlended Early Childhood Education/Early Childhood Special Education (birth-3)
Dual Special Education, Elementary Education CertificationInitial BaccalaureateExceptional Child Generalist (K-12) and All Subjects (K-8) (i.e., elementary education)
Economics, Social Science, Secondary EducationInitial BaccalaureateSocial Studies (6-12)-Economics
Elementary EducationInitial BaccalaureateAll Subjects (K-8) (i.e., elementary education)
Elementary Education TESOL/ENLInitial BaccalaureateAll Subjects (K-8) (i.e., elementary education) and English as a Second Language (ESL) (K-12)
Engineering- Secondary Education EmphasisInitial BaccalaureateEngineering (6-12)
English TeachingInitial BaccalaureateEnglish (6-12)
French, Secondary EducationInitial BaccalaureateWorld Language (6-12) French
Geosciences - Secondary Education Emphasis / Earth Science Teaching Endorsement MinorInitial BaccalaureateEarth and Space Science (6-12)
German, Secondary EducationInitial BaccalaureateWorld Language (6-12) German
Graduate Certificate - Secondary/K-12 TeachingInitial Post BaccalaureateLicensure varies based on secondary content area emphasis
Health Teaching EndorsementInitial Endorsement onlyHealth Endorsement (grade varies based on certification)
History, Secondary EducationInitial BaccalaureateHistory (6-12)
Master in Teaching in Early Childhood InterventionInitial Master'sBlended Early Childhood Education/Early Childhood Special Education (birth-3)
Master in Teaching in Special EducationInitial Master'sExceptional Child Generalist (K-12)
Mathematics - Secondary Education EmphasisInitial BaccalaureateMathematics (6-12)
Music EducationInitial BaccalaureateMusic (K-12)
Physical Education, K-12Initial BaccalaureatePhysical Education (K-12)
Physics - Secondary Education EmphasisInitial BaccalaureatePhysics (6-12)
Political Science, Social Science, Secondary Education EmphasisInitial BaccalaureateSocial Studies (6-12)-American Government/Political Science
Spanish, Secondary EducationInitial BaccalaureateWorld Language (6-12) Spanish
Theatre Arts, Secondary EducationInitial BaccalaureateTheater Arts (6-12)

8. Consumer Information: Student Loan Default Rates

Three-Year Student Loan Default Rate at Boise State and National Averages

Boise State's Office of Financial Aid and Scholarships provides annual default rates for the university and national averages by request.
For more information about these rates, please visit the Financial Aid and Scholarships website:
YearBoise State UniversityNational Average
2016 (released 2019)6.4%Available Fall 2019
2015 (released 2018)6%10.8%
2014 (released 2017)6%11.5%
2013 (released 2016)6.4%11.3%
2012 (released 2015)8.3%11.8%
2011 (released 2014)11.4%13.7%
2010 (released 2013)10%14.7%
2009 (released 2012)7.80%13.4%
2008 (released 2011)7.22%13.8%

8. Consumer Information: Starting Teacher Salaries in Idaho

Starting Teacher Salaries in Idaho and School Districts near Boise State

School District2012-2013
Idaho Average$31,771$32,585$33,278$33,743
West Ada$31,750$31,750$33,400

8. Consumer Information: Idaho Certification Lookup

The Idaho State Department of Education, Certifications and Professional Standards provides a certification lookup application tool on its website. This application allows for searches for educators who currently hold or have help Idaho certification.

Click here to visit the Idaho Certification Lookup Application website tool.

8. Consumer Information: NASDTEC Interstate Agreement

The National Association of State Directors of Teacher Education and Certification (NASDTEC) interstate agreement is a collection of over 50 individual agreements by states and Canadian provinces that defines which other states’ educator certificates will be accepted by that state.

Click here to visit the NASDTEC interstate agreement website.

8. Consumer Information: What can I do with my certification?

Idaho State Department of Education has created the Idaho System for Educational Excellence (ISEE), a K-12 Longitudinal Data System that helps to deliver information to stakeholders involved in education.

ISEE provides an assignment credential manual that crosswalks types of certification with specific types of education employment opportunities.

Click here to visit the ISEE website.

Click here to reference the 2017-2018 SDE Assignment Credential Manual.


Bill and Melinda GATES Foundation (2010, December). Learning about Teaching: Initial findings from the measures of effective teaching. Retrieved June 2014 from

Bill and Melinda GATES Foundation (2012). MET Project. Retrieved June 2015 from

CCSSO’s Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (2013). InTASC: Model Core Teaching Standards and Learning Progressions for Teachers 1.0. (C. o. Officers, Ed.) Washington DC.

Danielson, C. (2013). Enhancing Professional Practice: A Framework for Teaching (2nd ed.). Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Ferguson, R. (2012). Can student surveys measure teaching quality? Teacher Evaluation, 94 (24).