MAT Program Information

The State of NJ provides aggregate data to Drew regarding completer’s preparedness when they enter the classroom. Because Drew is a small program (i.e. total enrollment is less than 50 students per year) that encourages interdisciplinary collaboration across certification areas, we have a limited number of completers in each individual certification area. In almost every area, we do not reach the threshold of 10 completers for the state to provide data disaggregated by certification area. The state has provided the following data for the evaluation of Drew completers:

For the 2019-2020 school year, a large percentage of teachers statewide were not evaluated due to the public health emergency. Of the certified Drew program completers from the 2018-2019 school year employed in the 2019-2020 school year, only one was evaluated. Across a three-year aggregate that also includes program completers from the 2016-2017 and 2017-2018 school years who were employed and evaluated one year after finishing at Drew, all (100%) earned an Effective rating as first year teachers. The NJDOE is not able to disaggregate this data because of regulations. For the 2020-2021 school year, most teachers were not rated due to the pandemic context. Therefore, no completer impact data is available for that year from NJDOE. To further examine the effectiveness of completers, in Fall 2024, Drew analyzed available data about licensure and employment persistence provided by the state. NJDOE has not yet provided data to Drew for the 2021-2022, 2022-2023 or 2023-2024 cohorts.

Similarly, the state is not able to provide data for impact on student learning to Drew University, though it does provide an aggregate Student Growth Percentage and Student Growth Objective score in areas of certification where n >10 to all EPPs in the state. Because Drew is unable to assess the impact of completers using the state-provided data, we have utilized an annual system of case studies to learn about how our completers are doing in the classroom, school and district. Each year we invite program completers from the past two years to complete the following surveys: (1) satisfaction survey (2) employer satisfaction survey (3) student perception survey as well as provide impact and teaching effectiveness data. Participation in all surveys is voluntary.

NJDOE Licensure Progression
Between 2015 and 2021, 96.2% of completers earned at least one Certificate of Eligibility with Advanced Standing (CEAS), indicating that the vast majority of graduates met the rigorous requirements for teacher preparation in New Jersey and decided to apply for certification. Additionally, 81.7% of these graduates were hired by NJ schools, and 71.2% ultimately earned a Standard certificate after two years with effective or highly effective evaluations, signaling their successful navigation of the provisional licensure process and their demonstrated effectiveness as teachers. The timeline for licensure progression, including an average of 4 months to begin employment and approximately 23 months to transition from provisional to standard certification, indicates that Drew’s completers met expectations for being hired and then earned effective ratings as early as possible after entering the workforce.

NJDOE Persistence Trends
NJDOE persistence trends data from a three-year cycle indicate that for completers from 2018-2019, 82% were employed in NJ schools immediately after graduating, 71% maintained employment at the school level, 78.6% maintained employment at the district level, and 85.7% maintained employment at the state level for at least two years after graduating. For completers from the 2019-2020 academic year, 95% were employed in New Jersey schools immediately after graduating, 10.5% maintained employment at the school level, 57.9% maintained employment at the district level, and 84.2% maintained employment at the state level for at least two years after graduating. For 2020-2021 completers, 82% were employed in New Jersey schools immediately after graduating, 61.1% maintained employment at the school level, 61.1% maintained employment at the district level, and 88.9% maintained employment at the state level for at least two years after graduating.
The data reflects strong initial employment rates, with over 80% of completers from all three cohorts securing positions in NJ schools immediately after graduating, demonstrating the program’s effectiveness in preparing educators to meet workforce demands. However, the persistence trends highlight variability in long-term employment retention, particularly at the school and district levels, likely influenced by external factors such as the COVID-19 pandemic.

The 2019-2020 cohort’s unusually low school-level retention rate of 10.5% contrasts sharply with district-level retention of 57.9% and state-level retention of 84.2%. This suggests significant employment shifts, potentially driven by pandemic-related challenges, such as school closures, remote learning adaptations, and teacher reassignments. Similarly, the 2020-2021 cohort shows relatively strong state-level retention (88.9%) but lower school and district retention (61.1%). These patterns indicate that while many completers remained in the profession, their movement across schools and districts reflected broader systemic disruptions rather than programmatic deficiencies.

Results of Case Analyses

Each year in early March, between 2021-2023, the Drew MAT program faculty invited program completers to participate in a case study to examine completer effectiveness and satisfaction. Faculty purposefully selected seven participants with diverse certification areas to be included in the study. The participants in the case studies included completers from school years 2018-2019, 2019-2020, 2020-2021, and 2021-2022 and represented the following certification areas: Spanish, French, English, Biological Science, Chemistry, Art, Social Studies, Elementary Education, English as a Second Language, and Teaching Students with Disabilities. The instruments in the case studies included:

1. Completer’s SGP/SGO summative data
2. Completer’s school-based teaching observations (overall rating)
3. Responses to a short survey by completer’s supervisor or principal (Employer Satisfaction Survey)
4. Completion of the MAT Alumni Satisfaction Survey
5. Optional: Use of Panorama Student Perception Survey created by Panorama Education (2014)
6. Optional: A short interview about the completer’s experience as a teacher and reflections on Drew’s program preparation.

Participant 1, a 2020 graduate who received teaching certifications in World Language K-12, Spanish, and ESL, currently works as a Spanish teacher at Frelon High School where she teaches ninth and tenth grade students. She refers to herself as being liked by her students, colleagues, and school leadership, noting that the feedback she has received has been positive. Since graduating, Participant 1 has participated in several professional development opportunities at Drew and within her school district to improve her teaching skills. She suggests that these opportunities have pushed her to think more creatively about her professional practice, providing her a variety of tools and ideas to enhance her pedagogical approaches. Participant 1’s strengths include knowledgeable planning and reflection in lesson preparation, understanding of language acquisition, creating engaging lessons, using digital tools to support best practices, identifying students’ academic struggles and commitment to helping students overcome them, collaborating with colleagues, sharing resources and ideas for learning experiences, incorporating reading and literacy into her lessons, and participating in workshops and social events to improve her professional practice and strengthen her relationships with stakeholders. Participant 1’s mid-year benchmark assessments for presentation writing and grammar both indicate steady improvement of students from Novice High to Intermediate Low 1 and from Intermediate Low 1 to Intermediate Low 2. These assessments also indicated some movement from Intermediate Low 2 to Intermediate Low 3, however, those improvements have been minimal. Participant 1’s areas of improvement include planning and facilitating more effective student group work, deepening her knowledge of OneNote and other Microsoft Tools in order to become a Microsoft certified educator, and explaining grammar concepts in English and Spanish to help students make connections between the two languages.

Participant 2, a 2020 graduate who received teaching certifications in French, History, and English as a Second Language, currently works as a French, History, and ESL teacher at West Morris Regional High School District. She has received very positive feedback on her teaching, with evaluations suggesting that she is exceeding or meeting expectations. Participant 2 was commended during an observation because she and her French 1 students used only the French language when engaging with one another to accomplish interpersonal communication tasks. She received an Educator Practice Score of 3.33, a Composite Score of 3.33, and a Teacher Summative Rating of Effective. Using Stronge’s framework, she received Highly Effective ratings in learning environment and professionalism, which she indicates as her areas of strength. Participant 2 achieved a Full (3) success rate on her first SGO goal where 88% of her students met the target, and a Partial (2) success rate on her second SGO goal where 71% of her students met the target. While her evaluations did not list any areas of improvement, she has made it her professional goal to improve her classroom management skills.

Participant 3, a 2022 graduate who received teaching certifications in secondary biology and secondary chemistry, currently works as an honors chemistry teacher at Livingston High School where he teaches tenth and eleventh grade students. He gets along well with colleagues and has received a lot of praise from his supervisor. Participant 3 notes that his feedback has been very positive from the school community. His strengths include classroom management, rapport with students, and content knowledge. Participant 3’s SGO data indicates that more than 80% of students in each category achieved the minimum score. Thus, his overall SGO rating was a 4. He has also received consistent ratings of 3-3.5 across all domains using the Danielson framework. Participant 3 references supporting students who are struggling to grasp concepts as one of his areas of improvement, along with incorporating more technology and using more “talk moves” when answering student questions.

Participant 4, a 2021 graduate who received a teaching certification in K-12 visual arts with a specialization in secondary education, currently works as a sixth through eighth grade visual arts teacher at a New Jersey middle school. Since graduating, she has participated in several professional development opportunities at Drew to improve her teaching skills, which have allowed her access to a network of educators and future educators with whom she has been able to collaborate with and exchange ideas about teaching practices. Participant 4 has received positive feedback on her teaching from administrators and colleagues, with particular strengths in the areas of communication with students, respect and rapport with them, creating dynamic lesson plans with global connections, setting high expectations for students, using higher order thinking questioning techniques, student engagement and participation, including a variety of instructional technology, cultivating inclusive classroom environment and learning experiences, seeking out professional development opportunities, completing 38.5 hours of professional development, seeking out opportunities for professional growth and exposure, including having her artwork featured in local art galleries and publications. She has scored an evaluation average of 3.58 across all domains using the Danielson framework, indicating highly effective teacher status. Participant 4’s SGO data indicates that 92% of students in her advanced group and 100% of students in her proficient group reached their intended outcomes, thus earning her a teacher SGO score of 4 for her first goal. Her SGO data indicates that 93% of students in her advanced group and 100% of students in her proficient group reached their intended outcomes, earning her a teacher SGO score of 3.483 for her second goal. As an area for improvement, Participant 4 is working on utilizing technology and social media platforms more frequently and effectively in the classroom, as well as to showcase student learning and promote interest in the arts at her school.

Participant 5, a graduate who received a teaching certification in secondary ELA, currently works as an eleventh grade English teacher at a New Jersey high school. Her students describe her as a caring, patient, respectful, cheerful, and enthusiastic teacher, who makes learning relevant and engaging and is genuinely committed to their understanding. According to a student survey, 94% of Participant 5’s students view her as tremendously knowledgeable about class topics, and 88% indicate that they would be excited to have her as a teacher again. Additionally, 100% of her students express that they often or almost always receive feedback from Participant 5 that helps them learn. Participant 5’s strengths include commitment to community, strong work ethic, consistent and detailed planning, being highly prepared, professionalism, and questioning strategies that promote higher order thinking. She has received Effective ratings using the Danielson framework. Participant 5 indicates her areas for improvement as working on her pacing by slowing lessons down or segmenting them more clearly and scaling back on the number of standards focused on within her lesson.

Participant 6, a graduate who received a teaching certification in Secondary English Education, currently works as a sixth grade Language Arts teacher at a New Jersey middle school. Her areas of strength include creating a respectful classroom environment, building rapport with students, establishing a culture for learning, and managing student behavior. Participant 6 received an SGO data score of 4. Additionally, she received ratings of 3.5, 3.7, and 3.9 using the Danielson framework. Her areas for improvement include managing classroom procedures, organizing the classroom space, and using questioning.

Participant 7, a graduate who received a teaching certification in Secondary Science: Biological Science, currently works as a ninth grade Honors Biology and tenth through twelfth grade Oceanography and Marine Biology teacher at a New Jersey high school. Her areas of strength include questioning, lesson planning, reflecting on teaching, content knowledge, and making connections to prior content. Participant 7 has received Highly Effective and Effective ratings for all three of her teaching observations using the Danielson framework. Additionally, for her first SGO goal, she scored a 3.43 teacher SGO score, indicating Effective teacher status. For her second SGO goal, she received a teacher SGO score of 3.77, indicating Highly Effective teacher status. Participant 7’s areas for improvement include incorporating student choice, increasing differentiation, and increasing assessment opportunities to gauge individual students’ progress.

Analysis of all cases indicated that the completers had a positive impact on student learning with 100% of completers having earned effective or highly effective ratings using their schools respective teacher evaluation framework and 100% meeting targets set by their school principals through student growth objectives. Additionally, student perceptions of their teachers were overwhelmingly positive with 94% of student survey participants expressing that their teacher presents information clearly, 100% expressing that their teacher frequently or almost always takes time to ensure they understand the material, 83% expressing that their teacher provides feedback that helps them learn, and 86% expressing that their teacher is good at teaching in the way that they learn best. Ninety-two percent of student survey participants also indicated that their teacher makes their course content interesting. These indicators suggest that students felt the teachers were effective and have had a positive impact on their learning.

Completers strengths included planning and lesson preparation, student engagement, use of digital tools and instructional technology, collaboration, identification of students’ needs, professionalism, cultivating an inclusive learning environment, classroom management, student rapport and communication, content knowledge, questioning strategies, reflecting on teaching practices, and commitment to professional development.

100% of Drew’s completers met NJ required scores for the Praxis Core (or equivalent) and Praxis II.

100% of Drew’s completers scored proficient on the DrewTPA, a performance assessment piloted in spring 2023 and 2024.

100% of Drew’s candidates enrolled in Clinical Practice II earned above a 3.0 (proficient) average on the Clinical Competency Inventory, a valid and reliable instrument created by the New Jersey Teacher Assessment Consortium.

2023 and 2024 CCI Final Mean Scores Disaggregated by Program