Skip to content

AAQEP Annual Report for 2023

Provider/Program Name: Pratt Institute Art and Design Education
End Date of Current AAQEP Accreditation Term (or “n/a” if not yet accredited): December 2028

PART I: Publicly Available Program Performance and Candidate Achievement Data

1. Overview and Context

This overview describes the mission and context of the educator preparation provider and the programs included in its AAQEP review.


The mission of Art and Design Education is the preparation of artists and designers as accomplished educators who can work effectively with pupils in diverse cultural contexts and apply interdisciplinary perspectives in a variety of educational settings, including schools, museums, and community organizations. Students work collaboratively with their peers, community members, and professionals in the field, while they learn to develop lessons and construct environments that promote critical inquiry and creative practice. Through individual and community practices students become engaged artists, educators, and researchers. Pratt Institute’s programs in art and design education (with initial teacher certification, visual arts, all grades) provides education for artist-teachers in a top-ranked art and design school which has been preparing professionals to lead the field of art and design education for more than a century. Taught by faculty who are active practitioners in schools and community-based organizations, renowned artists and designers, and published researchers, candidates will observe, teach and conduct research in a broad pool of public schools in New York City.

Department Learning Outcomes

• Integrate studio knowledge and skills–grounded in contemporary art practice– into the art and design curriculum

• Articulate, apply and reflect upon knowledge of pedagogy and instruction in art and design education.

• Apply knowledge of learners, belief in their ability to learn, and cultural awareness to planning and instruction.

• Demonstrate the ability to work collaboratively within school and community contexts to promote culturally relevant pedagogy and equitable learning opportunities.

Pratt’s main campus is located in Brooklyn’s Clinton Hill neighborhood, where the Institute has successfully provided community -based art and design education programs for children for decades.

All candidates attend programs situated on Pratt’s Brooklyn campus with the exception of candidates who choose to major in Art and Design Education in the School of Art in Munson Williams Proctor Arts Institution (MWPAI) located in Utica, New York.  Students choose ADE as their major (out of a range of possible majors)  at the end of their first year at MWPAI and take 3 ADE required courses in their sophomore year at MWPAI. They then transfer to Pratt’s Brooklyn Campus.  On average, 3-4 MWP students choose ADE as their major each year.  We work closely with the faculty member who teaches two of the three required ADE courses at MWPAI to maintain consistency and quality.

The Art and Design Education department (ADE) is part of Pratt’s School of Art, and as such works closely with other departments in the school such as Fine Arts. The ADE department also works closely with departments within the School of Design such as  Communications Design and Industrial Design.  Thus, the administrative and academic boundaries between the professional degrees in art and design education and the content areas—fine arts and design—are permeable and cross-disciplinary.   Pratt is one of the few teacher education programs in the country that prepares teachers in design as well as art.

BFA, Art and Design Education (126 credits)
Pratt Institute has one undergraduate Art and Design Education teacher preparation program leading to initial certification in Visual Arts K-12 with a non-certification option within the course of study for teaching candidates who want to teach in informal settings (CADE).

BFA/MA (Combined Degree) Art and Design Education (156 credits)
Pratt Institute has a combined 5-year program in which BFA graduates take a 5th year to complete an MA degree.  When BFA graduates enter their 5th year they have completed all required courses for certification and most are certified when they start the 5th year.

MA, Art and Design Education (33 credits)
Advanced Certificate in Art and Design Education (24 credits)
Pratt Institute has two graduate Art and Design Education teacher preparation programs leading to initial certification in Visual Arts K-12.

Working closely over the years with the NYC Department of Education (DOE)  Division of Arts and Special Projects, as well as with ADE completers, we have developed strong partnerships with visual arts teachers in more than 40 NYC schools, K-12. (ADE Partnerships with K-12 schools, i.2).  

Community Partnerships: Pratt’s  Center for Art, Design and Community, K-12
The Art and Design Education department is closely affiliated (through faculty and courses) with the Center for Art, Design and Community Engagement  K-12.  The Center K-12  augments the Institute’s historical mission to support community engagement and higher education access by implementing programs that provide studio-based art and design instruction for children and teens. Historically, one of the programs that is part of the center, Saturday Art School (founded in 1897), has served as a clinical placement for ADE’s degree-granting programs providing a student teaching experience in community settings. Saturday Art School, and other pre-­existing campus youth art programs, are now part of the Center K-12 and are, or will be, closely integrated into the ADE teacher education programs.

Pratt launched the Center for Art, Design, and Community Engagement K­-12 in 2013, with current ADE chair, Aileen Wilson as Founding Director and ADE visiting assistant professor, Tara Kopp as  Deputy Director. Professor Wilson served as Director from 2015-2020. The founding of the Center K-12 signaled an increased commitment to K-­12 education at Pratt. The Center’s mission is to increase access to instruction in art and design for young people by leveraging the resources and expertise of the Institute to support school­ age children, city wide public schools, and youth­ serving organizations.

Community-based Partnerships: Museums and Cultural Organizations
Completers in the BFA/MA program, complete courses in their fifth year (post-certification) in museum and community-based education .  Through these courses, faculty have established partnerships with local museums, such as the Brooklyn Museum, and community-based art education models, such as the Black School. Candidates in their final year of the BFA program can take these courses as electives.  In addition, faculty and candidates work with partner schools on special programs to create access to visual arts when there are no certified teachers in the school.

Public Posting URL

Part I of this report is posted at the following web address (accredited members filing this report must post at least Part I):

2. Enrollment and Completion Data

Table 1 shows current enrollment and recent completion data for each program included in the AAQEP review.

Table 1. Program Specification: Enrollment and Completers for Academic Year 2022-2023

Degree or Certificate granted by the institution or organization

State Certificate, License, Endorsement, or Other Credential 

Number of Candidates
enrolled in most recently completed academic year (12 months ending 06/23)

Number of Completers
in most recently completed academic year (12 months ending 06/23)

Programs that lead to initial teaching credentials

BFA (Program Code: U2100)

Visual Arts (all grades)


BFA/MA Undergraduate (Program Code: U2107)

Visual Arts (all grades)


BFA/MA Graduate (Program Code: G2107)

Visual Arts (all grades)


MA Initial (Program Code: G2175)

Visual Arts (all grades)


Advanced Certificate (Program Code: G2170)

Visual Arts (all grades)









Total for programs that lead to additional/advanced credentials


Programs that lead to credentials for other school professionals or to no specific credential




Total for additional programs



TOTAL enrollment and productivity for all programs


Unduplicated total of all program candidates and completers

Added or Discontinued Programs

Any programs within the AAQEP review that have been added or discontinued within the past year are listed below. (This list is required only from providers with accredited programs.)


3. Program Performance Indicators

The program performance information in Table 2 applies to the academic year indicated in Table 1.

Table 2. Program Performance Indicators

A. Total enrollment in the educator preparation programs shown in Table 1. This figure is an unduplicated count, i.e., individuals earning more than one credential may be counted in more than one line above but only once here.
B. Total number of unique completers (across all programs) included in Table 1. This figure is an unduplicated count, i.e., individuals who earned more than one credential may be counted in more than one line above but only once here.
C. Number of recommendations for certificate, license, or endorsement included in Table 1.
Of the 14 completers: 8 Institutional Recommendation Forms (IRF) were submitted; 3 completers went on to Grad school; 1 is teaching internationally; 2 IRF’s are pending.
D. Cohort completion rates for candidates who completed the various programs within their respective program’s expected timeframe and in 1.5 times the expected timeframe.
See Cohort Completion Rates

E. Summary of state license examination results, including teacher performance assessments, and specification of any examinations on which the pass rate (cumulative at time of reporting) was below 80%.

TPA and NYS Examination Results spreadsheet

New York State requires two standardized tests of candidates seeking certification: Educating All Students (EAS) and a Content Specialty Test in the certification area of Visual Arts (CST).

Of the 13 students in the 2022-2023 cohort taking the EST, 11 students passed on their first attempt. One student received a failing score and has not retaken the test. This student has returned to her home state of Massachusetts and is not seeking certification to teach in New York State. The other student who failed on her first attempt retook the exam a month later and received a passing score.

10 students took the CST in Visual Arts. 9 passed on their initial attempt. One student failed on the first try but passed when she retook the exam two months later.

F. Narrative explanation of evidence available from program completers, with a characterization of findings.

We developed and administered an alumni focus group combined with a Reflective Practitioner Narrative submitted in Survey Monkey (for 2022-23 alumni). In addition, we continue to administer the End of Program Survey which is administered to all completers (as well as those few who may be finishing up requirements).

We will also interview a sample pool of alumni in Summer 2024 and 2025. We will revise our interview questions before Summer 2024.

G. Narrative explanation of evidence available from employers of program completers, with a characterization of findings.
We developed and are administering in Fall 2023 a Principal Survey on completers’ performance (2019, 2020, 2021 and 22).  We will provide our findings in the 2023-24 Annual Report.

H. Narrative explanation of how the program investigates employment rates for program completers, with a characterization of findings. This section may also indicate rates of completers’ ongoing education, e.g., graduate study.
On entry to the program students are asked to complete a questionnaire with questions that include their cell phone #’s and personal emails. This info is updated at every advisement meeting throughout their time in the program. The information is entered into a spreadsheet named Program Completion (2-5 years old alumni list) and used along with the Pratt emails as a means to stay in contact. Employment information is also requested in the weekly email blast and in a direct outreach by email and by phone. Alumni (2 years out) are also included in the weekly email blast. Work Study students make the calls, supervised by the Assistant to the Chair. The Assistant to the Chair also reaches out to faculty for their input on the employment status of graduates in order to maintain an accurate and current list. Faculty maintain an active professional relationship with our graduates: meeting in city wide PD’s, inviting alumni to campus to talk to students and enlist alumni support for Fieldwork and Student Teaching placements; hiring alumni as scorers for TPA and more. The questionnaire, the request for employment information in the weekly email blast, direct outreach and the faculty-alumni professional relationships help us maintain an active and current list of employment data.

Completer Employment/Further Schooling Report

2022-2023 (as of  Nov 1, 2023)
14 completers
Employed f/t public school – 6
Not-for-profit/private schools (e.g. Studio in a School or Center K-12)- 1
Graduate studies (inc our 5th year)- 3
n/a- 3
Other (e.g. Program Advisor City College)- 1

2021-2022 (as of Nov 1, 2023)
20 completers
Employed f/t public – 9
Not-for-profit/private schools (e.g. Studio in a School or Center K-12)- 5
Graduate studies (inc our 5th year) – 4
n/a- 1
Other (e.g. self-employed)- 1

4. Candidate Academic Performance Indicators

Tables 3 and 4 report on select measures of candidate/completer performance related to AAQEP Standards 1 and 2, including the program’s expectations for successful performance and indicators of the degree to which those expectations are met.

Table 3. Expectations and Performance on Standard 1: Candidate and Completer Performance

Provider-Selected Measures

Explanation of Performance Expectation

Level or Extent of Success in Meeting the Expectation
ADE-Teacher Performance AssessmentADE TPA for Visual Arts

15 indicators with performance descriptions (see ADE Modified version of the edTPA Handbook)

Task 1) Planning (5 indicators)
Task 2) Instruction (5 indicators)
Task 3) Analysis (5 indicators)

Failing = or < 38/75 Passing => 39/75
Passing with Mastery => 49/75

TPA Results spreadsheet

ADE 403/613 Professional Practices had 12 students preparing their TPA. Of the 12, there were 11 TPA submissions in 2022-2023 (of whom 3 are not program completers. 1 of those 3 non-program completers failed TPA and 1 did not submit).

10 students passed with scores between 39 and 67.5
Of those who passed, 9 got Mastery level with scores of 49 or above
1 student failed with a score of 31 and is revising for a December 2023 resubmission.
1 student did not submit and is preparing for a submission December 2023.

Table 4. Expectations and Performance on Standard 2: Completer Professional Competence and Growth

Provider-Selected Measures

Explanation of Performance Expectation

Level or Extent of Success in Meeting the Expectation

Principal Survey (alumni performance of 2019, 2020, 2021, and 2022 completers)– Administer Fall 2023 and Spring 2024Program Rubric (selected categories)Effective- Level 3
Interviews with Alumni (one-year to 5 years out) Administer Summer 2024  Program Rubric (same as principal survey categories)Effective to Highly Effective – Levels 3-4

Alumni Reflective Practices Narrative and Survey (one year out)   Administer Fall 2023

Alumni Reflective Practices Focus Group
Administer Fall 2023 (same questions as above survey)
Program Rubric (reflective practices categories)Effective to Highly Effective– Levels 3-4

5. Notes on Progress, Accomplishment, and Innovation

This section describes program accomplishments, efforts, and innovations (strengths and outcomes) to address challenges and priorities over the past year.

Collection and Documentation Systems Improvement

Our 2021 accreditation site visit, which led to accreditation approval January 2022), revealed the following: We had been making many improvements but did not have a reliable system of recording and tracking improvements. In response, we designed the following spreadsheets that would support a structured continuous improvement process which could help us collect data, analyze it and take action across the programs.

Collections Chart 2022-23: establishes what is being collected and/or administered, when and how.

Continuous Improvement Action Chart 2021-27: records plans and actions taken across our program and courses according to the categories of improvement identified in the QAR; Meaning Making and Authentic Learning, Knowledge of the Child, Teaching with Contemporary, Culturally Responsive Pedagogy and Equity, Teacher Performance Assessment and Global Learning.

Program Scope and Sequence Chart: tracks major themes and content areas of the degrees and how each of the courses advances students’ knowledge and abilities in those areas. The chart also provides necessary details to supplement our Curriculum Matrix.
    Update on Areas of Improvement Identified in the QAR

    In the Quality Assurance Report (QAR)  we submitted for accreditation, we had analyzed many of the required courses in our program and identified areas for improvement. However, after our successful accreditation decision, we realized that  given the tightly woven nature of our degrees, we needed to analyze ALL of the courses, their embedded assignments to strengthen and refine the scope and sequence of the courses.  We have started to make multi-year improvements to the courses guided by our identified areas for improvement in the QAR: Meaning Making and Authentic Learning, Knowledge of the Child, Teaching with Contemporary, Culturally Responsive Pedagogy and Equity, Teacher Performance Assessment and Global Learning.

    Revised Program Rubric (2023-24): A Focus on Meaning Making, Authentic Learning, CRP)

    In the QAR we determined that the ADE Program Rubric needs to continue to evolve to reflect the improvements we are making to our program as well as changes to our performance assessment (see below NYS Certification). We have revised the rubric twice since our accreditation, in January 2022 and Summer 2023). We have made two revisions to the ADE Program Rubric since our Accreditation. In January 2022 we added a criterion on Meaning Making and in June 2023 we added several other new criteria as well as an “examples” column in all criteria to increase the instrument’s usability by students.

    In January 2022 we revised the ADE rubric to be more explicit and included a new “Meaning Making” criterion and incorporated “meaning making” into additional new criteria “Incorporating Visual Resources” and added a definition of Meaning Making to glossary. This addition was sparked by a discussion between two faculty members who were conducting a Rubric Review of student work from From Studio to Classroom ll, one of our undergraduate methods courses. Faculty noted that students had developed quite a lot of confidence and ability to teach skills and techniques (a positive result of our emphasis on having students use the making of the project example to illuminate the learning potential within a project). But we also noted that students were less aware of the importance of engaging their K-12 pupils in meaning making. As a result, we revised one of the major assignments in the course– the First Learning Segment–and asked students to devote a lesson at the start of every project to engaging pupils to bring their own subject matter, ideas and concerns to the making of the project.

    The ADE Program Rubric was further revised during the summer of 2023 and is being used in Fall 2023 (See description in Section 8) ADE Program Rubric 2023-2024.docx

    Continuous Improvement Chart

    In keeping with our Continuous Improvement Chart which helps us track our plans and actions  on areas for improvement identified in the QAR, we paused our previous practice of doing regular rubric reviews of embedded assignments and making improvements based on the reviews (2018– 2022).  The one area we have continued to assess is the capstone project, Student Teaching II. Related to the capstone assessment is the new NYSED requirements for certification (see NYS Certification below).  

    However, even though we did not conduct rubric reviews at the beginning and middle of the program, we  continued to make improvements to our program based on areas of improvements we specified in our QAR report for accreditation which are included in the Continuous Improvement Chart.


    NYS Certification, ADE-TPA  and changes to our capstone performance assessment

    We responded to changes initiated by the NYSED policy change which required all teacher education programs to administer their own performance assessments as part of teacher certification and submitted our required plan to the NYSED in June, 2023.  Prior to submitting our plan, in Fall 2022 we field-tested a modified edTPA (ADE-TPA) to assess our teacher candidates’ readiness to teach and analyzed our scoring process, as well as the performance assessment itself, We are using the same modified performance assessment for Fall 2023 (we are using 3 of the 2022 scorers and 1 newly trained alumni) and will  begin the process of developing our own performance assessment in Spring 2024, with a roll-out scheduled for Fall 2024.

    Modifications to Fall 2022 and Spring 2023 performance assessment include:

    Length of segment now 4-6 lessons, instead of 3-5

    Students can submit up to 6 video clips instead of 2. Total remains at no more than 20 minutes

    Lesson Plans no longer need to be edited to 4 pages

    Student teachers must support and assess pupils’ language acquisition but language function requirement has been removed

    Documenting language acquisition is uniformly through writing (except for one student teacher who’s working with 1st graders)

    External Scorers:

    Four ADE-TPA Scorers were recruited from ADE alumni. We approached former students who had scored well on their EdTPAs and who we believed would be attentive readers of the current students’ submissions.

    Scorers were instructed to use the resources provided (ADE-TPA Exemplar and a detailed edTPA resource for scorers). Scorers were told that they could consider the candidates’ submissions holistically, could gather evidence broadly from the materials submitted and could make inferences as it seemed appropriate.

    Scoring was complete by February 1st, 2023.

    Anticipating a degree of discrepancy between the scorers’ results, we assigned two scorers to every submission and decided we would average the two scores. While there was indeed lack of agreement in the scorers’ findings, we were not able to discern a pattern in these discrepancies–one where one scorer was consistently scoring submissions higher than the other scorer, for instance. A debrief with the four scorers did not significantly illuminate the source of the discrepancies. Thus, we determined that we needed to implement a protocol to improve inter-rater reliability. Since we are only using this ADE-TPA for one more semester (Fall 2023) and are developing our new TPA, which we will assess using our Program Rubric, we determined that we would wait until next Fall to implement this scoring improvement. At that time, as we roll out our new TPA, we will increase scorers’ compensation and scorers will assess submissions individually and then meet to discuss their findings and arrive at a single score.


    Meaningful Making and Authentic Learning Area of Improvement

    As part of our focus on meaning making, one of the areas of improvement identified in our accreditation report (2021) (see Continuous Improvement Chart ), we designed a professional development event for faculty and alumni.  As we reported briefly in the 2021-2022 SoA Assessment Report, we held a Teacher Rounds event on November 15, 2022. What follows is a more thorough discussion  of that event which was based on an analysis of artifacts from teacher candidates’ work and helped us gain a deeper understanding of the issues around meaning making and how we could improve our curriculum. The student work included the  Project Examples which were the focus of our QAR Plan-Do-Study Act cycle 2018-2021. By looking at our teacher candidates’ instructional artifacts (project examples, lesson plans, and pupil work)  at key stages in the degree program (Student Teaching 1 and SAS), we hoped to identify areas for instructional growth and revise our curriculum accordingly. “Does our candidates’ work (and their pupils’ work) reflect our goals for what candidates should know and be able to do?” More specifically, and related to our year-long focus on meaning making, we were looking at evidence and asking:“Are our student teachers’  pupils making work that is authentic, meaningful to them, and connected to their lives?”  The work being examined was created by teacher candidates and their pupils in Spring 2022.

    Teacher Rounds

    A total of 6 ADE faculty and  6 alumni participated in the Teacher Rounds. Attendees were divided into small groups and given 3 bundles of artifacts from ADE student teachers’ lessons. Artifacts included the teacher’s project example, the questions posed in the art classroom, the visual resources shown to pupils, and finally, 3-5 examples of the work pupils made under our student teachers’ instruction. Work was  selected to demonstrate the range of pupil responses.The event was conducted remotely and participants were directed to spend 5 minutes independently reviewing each group of artifacts before engaging in a 10-minute discussion about the work and the evidence, or lack thereof, of pupils’ meaning making. The discussions confirmed that teacher candidates were teaching skills and techniques with confidence and rigor. Faculty who had been teaching ADE for a number of years noted improvement in this area.  The discussions also confirmed that teacher candidates were struggling to engage their pupils in making art work that was personally meaningful. Participants noted that there was some misalignment between the teacher’s intent, the visual resources, stated learning objectives and the children’s work that resulted. They noted that the  visual resources were problematic: either too sprawling and not focused or too few. They also noted that there were sometimes too many learning objectives and other times too few.  Finally, they noted that candidates’ questions were not organized in a hierarchy that facilitated the pupils’ engagement and association.  

    Actions Taken in Response to Teacher Rounds

    We adapted the ADE Lesson Plan Template to include a prompt that asks the candidate to articulate their own meaning making, thus making it easier for them to help pupils connect to the project’s opportunities for pupils’ meaning making (see below).

    • In what ways does this project engage me– personally, intellectually, emotionally, politically, culturally, etc? How does it stimulate my thinking and invite me to express new ideas?

    Candidates are now encouraged to select visual resources for specific reasons and incorporate those reasons in their questions. i.e. some visual resources exemplify skills and techniques, other visual resources launch discussions about ideas and the artist’s intention. We have included this guideline in the most recent revision of the ADE Program Rubric.

    Have I planned multiple ways for pupils to connect with the project (through theme, materials and processes)?

    • Have I chosen a theme that is relevant to pupils’ lives?

    • Have I planned questions and activities that invite pupils to make choices–to access and work from their personal experiences?

    • Have I demonstrated how to approach skills and techniques in more than one way to express an idea?  

    • Have I chosen some work to support pupils’ meaning making and other work to support skill development?

    Improve access to Global Education

    • Pratt in Puerto Rico program (since 2021)

    Pratt in Puerto Rico program includes a spring break cultural and educational experience. The program requires students to teach in the San Juan public schools or in a museum education program. It is open to ADE majors and to those in the two minors offered by ADE.

    • 16 Pratt students participated in the Pratt in Puerto Rico program in March 2022. Some students were in the minor.

    • Pratt in Portugal program (new)

    Pratt in Portugal includes a semester exchange in the spring of the senior year for BFA students and the spring of the 5th year for BFA/MA students. At Lusofona University, Lisbon students will complete an equivalent semester of study including student-teaching in Lisbon public schools, coursework, and the option of an internship with the Gulbenkian Foundation. 

    • Will start Spring 2025.
      Improve Program Capacity to Ensure that Candidates Meet Standards 1 & 2

      • Hired new full-time faculty member (starting 2023-24) with expertise in secondary school art education and with a diverse cultural and linguistic background.

      Hired new full-time Assistant to the Chair of the department to provide improved administrative support for faculty, students, and the chair.