Kennesaw State University
Kennesaw State University
Professional Teacher Education Unit
Department of Special Education
Council for Exceptional Children Report
Context Statement
Kennesaw State University (kennesaw.edu) serves a diverse student body in the northern suburbs of Atlanta and extending into northwest Georgia. Effective teaching and learning are central institutional priorities. Service and research that strengthen teaching and address the public's interests are important supportive priorities. Faculty, staff and administrators are committed to providing a challenging and facilitative collegiate environment that fosters high-quality academic preparation, critical thinking, global and multicultural perspectives, effective communication and interpersonal skills, leadership development, social responsibility and lifelong learning. Founded in 1963 as a junior college, Kennesaw State University now offers fifty-five undergraduate and graduate programs serving over 18,000 students and growing.
The Professional Teacher Education Unit governs teacher education at Kennesaw State University. The Dean of the Bagwell College of Education presides over the Professional Teacher Education Unit (PTEU), which oversees all education programs. Membership includes deans, department chairs, faculty and program coordinators in education programs across the University (College of Education, College of Health and Human Services, College of Science and Mathematics, College of Humanities and Social Sciences, and the School of Arts). The PTEU meets monthly to address issues affecting education programs. The PTEU Teacher Education Council governs curriculum and policy and the Program Coordinators address consistency across programs.
The Professional Teacher Education Unit is the second largest and fastest growing teacher preparation program in the state of Georgia. Faculty is strongly committed to developing future teachers through a collaborative process. In addition to academic excellence, its focus is community-based service learning. We value diversity and our role in the community. The Professional Teacher Education Unit prepares Professional Learning Facilitators who extend their understanding of the theoretical and methodological aspects of their teaching in the broader context of theory and research, and employ this knowledge in making decisions as instructional leaders who will enhance the education programs for all students, while advancing knowledge in their fields.
The Department of Special Education is one of four departments housed in the Bagwell College of Education. The Department offers the Master of Education in Special Education, the state required undergraduate Education of Exceptional Students course, and graduate level add-on programs in Interrelated Special Education, Preschool Special Education, Gifted, English to Speakers of Other Languages, and Teacher Support Specialist. The Department of Special Education, in collaboration with the Advisory Board, revised the Departmental mission in 2002:
To provide leadership in the preparation of teacher-leaders who work collaboratively with families, school systems and community agencies to have a positive impact on the educational, social and behavioral development of all students in a diverse society through a focus on best practice in teaching and learning and accountability through assessment of outcomes for individuals and programs. To provide leadership in system change to build the capacity of all schools to meet the needs of all learners.
Conceptual Framework: Collaborative Development of Expertise in Teaching and Learning
Kennesaw State University Professional Teacher Education Unit’s conceptual framework for the preparation of teachers is based on the Collaborative Development of Expertise in Teaching and Learning. (Appendix A). This framework succinctly captures the essence of the university's deep commitment to university-wide and university-school collaboration in the preparation of teachers. The Kennesaw State University Professional Teacher Education Unit (KSU-PTEU) is committed to developing expertise among candidates in initial and advanced programs as teachers and leaders who possess the capability, intent and expertise to facilitate high levels of learning in all of their students through effective, research-based practices in classroom instruction, and who enhance the structures that support all learning. Performance outcomes demonstrating expertise in subject matter, expertise as facilitators of teaching and learning and expertise as collaborative professionals are clearly defined by the Professional Teacher Education Unit within the Conceptual Framework.
The KSU-PTEU fosters the development of candidates as they progress through stages of growth from novice to proficient to expert and leader. Within the PTEU conceptual framework, expertise is viewed as a process of continued development, not an end-state. The Department of Special Education utilizes a developmental framework for the graduate special education program based on the KSU conceptual framework and the Council for Exceptional Children (CEC) Ethics and Standards. As subject matter experts, candidates know the subjects they teach and how to teach those subjects to students (KSU-PTEU 1), and as special educator subject matter experts, candidates demonstrate mastery of the CEC Common Core and Generalized Curriculum standards. Candidates are expected to be knowledgeable of special education policies and procedures (CEC 1), characteristics and needs of students with disabilities (CEC 2, 3, 6) and methods of inquiry and curriculum differentiation (CEC 7) to support students with disabilities in the general education curriculum in collaboration with general education teachers with specific subject matter expertise.
Faculty implement constructivist and behaviorist approaches within graduate classes to model the centrality of expertise as a facilitator of teaching and learning. Candidates are guided through learning activities, self-evaluation and reflection on their practice, and extension of these activities to their teaching practice. Teaching and learning are entwined and only through the implementation of validated practices can all students develop their own mental models or schema and reach high levels of learning. In that way, candidates are facilitators of the teaching and learning process, committed to students, and responsible for managing and monitoring student learning (KSU-PTEU 2). Special education teachers must possess the skills and knowledge to create environments and learning experiences that engage students in active learning and authentic achievement and who constantly assess and use results for improvement of student learning. Candidates are expected to demonstrate knowledge and mastery of research-based practices. In the role of facilitators of teaching and learning, teachers guide, motivate, evaluate, instruct and advise students. Their classroom practices reflect a repertoire of teacher and learner centered methods, which they should be able to implement or adapt in response to changes in the environment and student needs. The awareness of individual differences, knowing when and how to adjust instruction, and formative and summative assessment are essential outcomes of the graduate special education experience (CEC 4, 6, 8, 9). Field experience observations are recorded on the Special Education Performance Outcomes (SEPO), which is aligned with the KSU-PTEU, the University System of Georgia requirements (which are based on National Board for Professional Teacher Standards - NBPTS) and CEC standards. KSU field experience supervisors provide coaching and feedback to assist candidates in refining their practice in the field to meet the needs of all students.
Finally, the PTEU recognizes, values and demonstrates collaborative practices across the college and university and extends collaboration to the community-at-large. Through this collaboration with professionals in the university, the public and private schools, parents and other professional partners, the PTEU meets the ultimate goal of assisting Georgia schools in bringing all students to high levels of learning. Special education graduate candidates meet more than the academic requirements of the graduate degree program. Candidates are expected to be collaborative professionals and think systematically about their practice, learn from experience, and serve as members of learning communities (KSU-PTEU 3). Professionals are enthusiastic about their work and positively influence colleagues and students. They are aware that becoming a better teacher requires a commitment to ownership of the success of all students, use of data based decision making strategies to maximize impact on student learning, currency in subject matter knowledge, and continual assessment of their own strengths and areas of need as facilitators of learning through self-reflection. They take responsibility in their schools for curriculum initiatives, parental involvement, and collaboration with all constituents. In the classroom and in all school matters, their relations with students, parents and colleagues show regard for human dignity. As professionals, KSU candidates are expected to continually seek ways to improve learning experiences for the students they teach. Candidates are also expected to be lifelong learners, participating in learning communities to inform their teaching practice. Collaborating with professional colleagues, participating in the activities of professional associations, engaging in self-evaluation, and working with members of the community served by their schools contribute to their effectiveness as professionals in facilitating student learning (CEC 9, 10).
Link to Kennesaw State University and Professional Teacher Education Unit Mission
Kennesaw State University (KSU) and the Professional Teacher Education Unit (PTEU) value collaborative relationships. The first graduate special education program was developed by a team of educators from Kennesaw State University and local school districts based on the Georgia Professional Standards Commission (PSC) requirements for teachers of students with learning disabilities and approved in 1994. The KSU mission statement emphasizes responsiveness to needs within our scope of influence. Feedback from the Metropolitan Atlanta Learning Disabilities Consortia during 1994-1995, however, indicated that the categorical model for preparing teachers was not in line with district needs. Field experience observations by the program coordinator reinforced the need for a better model of preparation.
By 1995, the program had been revised to meet the Georgia Professional Standards Commission (PSC) standards for teachers of Interrelated special education (Appendix E) and the Council for Exceptional Children Common Core standards. Kennesaw State University was the first university in Georgia to utilize a competency model to document alignment with standards (reference grid) rather than the course-by-course model previously used by the PSC. This model and the KSU program were in greater alignment with district needs, delivery systems, and best practice in special education than the former model.
Further responsiveness to needs within our scope of influence resulted in discussions with Bartow County Schools and a partnership in support of the Bartow County ReEnvisioning initiative. Bartow County Schools were implementing a blended service delivery model to meet the needs of all students in a more inclusive setting. KSU began delivering the Interrelated add-on program on-site in Bartow County in January, 1996, for thirty teachers. The number of courses per semester, sequence of courses, and course assignments were adjusted to meet the needs of the district. A second off-campus cohort program was initiated in 2000 by Project Winning Team (PWT), Georgia's statewide initiative to prepare all teachers in inclusive schooling practices. The PWT cohort participants represented three districts in north Georgia and were funded by a contract with the Georgia Division for Exceptional Students.
The Department of Special Education was formed in 1998. The Department was charged with delivering the special education programs, the state required undergraduate course on educating exceptional students, the English to Speakers of Other Languages and the Gifted add-on programs. The initial faculty allocation included a Department Chair and four faculty positions. This reflected an expansion of the special education inclusive education model to meeting the needs of all students. An Advisory Board including faculty and staff from across campus, current candidates and graduates, parent representatives from the community, and practicing professionals from the community to support program development and program evaluation was convened in Fall 1998. It meets twice a year and provides a forum for discussion and feedback to guide program development.
In addition to graduate program delivery, the Department of Special Education has been actively involved in scholarship and professional service to build the capacity of schools to meet the needs of all learners, especially students with disabilities. Special Education Department scholarship and professional service reflects the KSU mission commitment to scholarly and creative work to enhance instructional effectiveness and to encourage faculty scholarly pursuits, a commitment to applied research, and a commitment to public service. The 2002 KSU Program Review Committee rated the Department’s contribution to achieving KSU mission as very strong. They recommended that the Department continue grant, contract and service projects and collaborative relationships.
The department emphasis on system change and building the capacity of schools to meet the needs of all students have been a major factor in the success in obtaining external funds to support collaborative projects promoting systems change in Georgia schools. Project WINS, the first grant, has expanded over time to include a parent component, leadership training, collaboration with schools and statewide policy analysis. KSU was awarded a contract for Project Winning Team in 2000 to implement the on-site KSU interrelated add-on program in conjunction with the Project WINS technical assistance model. In 2001, a grant for on-site delivery of the ESOL program in Cobb County including data collection and an emphasis on culture sensitive conflict resolution was implemented. A contract to support balanced literacy instruction in Dalton, Georgia Public Schools (80+% ESOL students) was implemented in 2002.
These funded programs provide opportunities for faculty to remain involved in schools and conduct action research that enriches their instruction for candidates in the special education program. Special education faculty is also very involved in university service, community service, professional service (see vita) and professional development at the local, state and national level. They serve as role models for life-long learning and professionalism. Candidates in the EXC 7735 Current Issues course in 2002 were given the opportunity to participate in data collection and analysis for a statewide policy analysis. Candidates and graduates are included in presentations at state and national level conferences.
Special Education Faculty
The KSU Program Review rated the quality of faculty supporting the M.Ed. in Special Education as very strong (exemplary). There are five full-time tenure-track faculty positions and a department chair. All faculty hold a Ph.D. in an appropriate field and have public school experience as a special educator. There is a balance in faculty specializations to support courses in the program. Faculty are involved in professional development opportunities to remain up-to-date for program delivery and they provide leadership in professional service at the department, college, university, state and national level. The involvement of Special Education faculty in grant, contract, service and collaborative relationships in schools is reflective of KSU’s strong emphasis on applied scholarship using Boyer’s (1990) model. In addition to the full-time tenure-track faculty, four part-time faculty members provide support for field experience supervision and instruction. (Appendix B)
Policies and practices
Minor changes in curriculum (realignment of objectives and/or assignments) and policies (rubrics used to evaluate candidates) are departmental functions. The KSU Graduate Program and Policy Committee and the PTEU Teacher Education Council govern major changes in curriculum (new courses), policies (changes in admission standards) and practices.
The Master of Education in Special Education is an advanced program for development of teacher leaders. Although approved by the Georgia Professional Standards Commission as an initial certificate, the Interrelated special education core at KSU is only offered as an add-on to an existing certificate and not as an initial teaching credential. This also supports the Department of Special Education focus on inclusive education. Candidates for the graduate special education program at Kennesaw State University must be fully certified teachers in Georgia in any field (K-12). This provides a grounding in curriculum content, instruction and behavior management skills. Candidates must also provide evidence of coursework in Human Growth and Development, Education of Exceptional Students, and Teaching Reading before admission. These prerequisite requirements are the basis for developing advanced skills.
The Department of Special Education requires that candidates are admitted to the program in a cohort and take all courses together in sequence. This process supports enrollment management and provides an opportunity for candidates to demonstrate collaborative practice throughout the program. Field experience is integrated throughout the program based on candidate job sites or supervised field experience assigned by the Department. Portfolio linked assignments are included in each course and emphasize extensions beyond class assignments. Documentation of impact of student learning is expected throughout the program.
Once admitted into the program, GPA requirements are monitored by the KSU Graduate Office and the Department of Special Education has implemented interim review of candidate progress and dispositions at the completion of 12 and 24 semester hours in the 36-hour program. Candidates must demonstrate mastery of all components of the SEPO and Portfolio Narrative before credit is awarded for the final capstone courses. Syllabi statements outline policies on attendance, academic honesty and respect for human dignity.
Diversity
One of the core values of Kennesaw State University, the Professional Teacher Education Unit and the Department of Special Education is the tenet that society is diverse so we must prepare teachers to teach all students. The Council for Exceptional Children states that, "Diversity, when conceptualized within an educational context, includes culturally, ethnically, and linguistically diverse learners from variant socioeconomic levels, urban and rural learners, as well as any other learner who may have educationally relevant differences." (CEC policy statement,1999).
The Department of Special Education, through campus-based programs, external grant functions, collaboration across the PTEU, and leadership in professional and consumer organizations, promotes inclusive education to address the needs of all students. All courses address the impact of diversity on learning needs and identification. Student diversity is a key element in selection of grant sites. The Department of Special Education participated as a pilot site in the National Clearinghouse for Professions in Special Education use of public service announcements to recruit minority populations to enter the field of special education. As part of this commitment, all full-time and part-time special education faculty and members of the PTEU Diversity Committee attended a two-day professional development workshop on poverty by Ruby Payne in 2002.
The Professional Teacher Education Unit has adopted the following diversity statement to be included in all syllabi:
A variety of materials and instructional strategies will be employed to meet the needs of the different learning styles of diverse learners in class. Candidates will gain knowledge as well as an understanding of differentiated strategies and curricula for providing effective instruction and assessment within multicultural classrooms. One element of course work is raising candidate awareness of critical multicultural issues. A second element is to cause candidates to explore how multiple attributes of multicultural populations influence decisions in employing specific methods and materials for every student. Among these attributes are age, disability, ethnicity, family structure, gender, geographic region, giftedness, language, race, religion, sexual orientation, and socioeconomic status. An emphasis on cognitive style differences provides a background for the consideration of cultural context.
Kennesaw State University provides program accessibility and accommodations for persons defined as disabled under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 or the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. A number of services are available to support students with disabilities within their academic program. In order to make arrangements for special services, students must visit the Office of Disabled Student Support Services (ext. 6443) and develop an individual assistance plan. In some cases, certification of disability is required.
Please be aware there are other support/mentor groups on the campus of Kennesaw State University that address each of the multicultural variables outlined above.
Technology:
On-campus cohorts take classes in a wireless laptop classroom with state-of-the-art technology. Faculty use department laptop computers and projection systems for instruction in off-campus sites. Off-campus cohorts utilize school system technology labs for hands-on activities as needed. In addition to modeling use of technology, faculty teach and require specific technology competencies within the program. Technology skill development is addressed by specific requirements embedded within course requirements. For example, spreadsheet applications and development of graphs and charts are required as part of the EXC 7720 Behavior Management project, candidates in EXC 7735 participate in ListServ discussion groups, and PowerPoint presentations are required in EXC 7970 Internship. Technology accommodations are introduced in EXC 7760 Teaching & Learning I, integration of technology in instructional planning is required in EXC 7765 Teaching & Learning II, and hands-on experience with adaptive/assistive technology is provided in EXC 7770 Psychoneurological and Medical Issues in Special Education.
Professional Roles of Graduates
The M.Ed. in Special Education includes the Georgia Interrelated Special Education add-on as the teaching field component. Candidates completing the M.Ed. program are eligible for a Master’s level teaching certificate, and may take the PRAXIS II exams and apply for the Interrelated add-on to their existing teaching certificate. According to the Georgia teacher certification Rule 505-2.75 (6) (effective January 2003) in-field statement, “An individual with a certificate in Interrelated Special Education is in-field to be a resource teacher in the fields of Behavior Disorders, Learning Disabilities, and Mild Mental Retardation; and to teach students in self-contained classrooms with Behavior Disorders, Learning Disabilities, and Mild Mental Retardation in grades P-12; to teach preschool special education students; to teach autistic students; and to teach remedial mathematics, reading and writing in grades P-12.” (Appendix E)
A task force convened by the Georgia Professional Standards Commission and composed on district personnel directors, special education administrators, National Board Teachers, and University teacher educators met during Spring 2003 to address the impact of the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) mandate for fully qualified teachers. The draft of a proposed Revised Rule 505-3-.37 in-field statement proposes “field-specific content standards for approving programs that prepare teachers to teach all students P-12 with disabilities whose individual education program indicates instruction using the general education curriculum and participation in the general statewide assessment.” The shift proposed by the task force drafting the new rules is to move from the view of special education as a location (placement) to emphasize special education as a service (delivered to the student) to meet the need of each student. The proposed new rules would replace the current standards with a competency-based model based on the CEC standards for Generalized Curriculum.
Accreditation Review
The Kennesaw State University M.Ed. in Special Education and Interrelated program received CEC Accreditation in 1998 based on the CEC General Curriculum Standards. The programs in Learning Disabilities, Behavior Disorders and Intellectual Disabilities were approved by CEC based on the individual disability category standards. The NCATE Board of Examiners and the Georgia Professional Standards Commission (PSC) approved all programs in the Department of Special Education in 2000. The Special Education programs were approved with no weaknesses.
Program self-evaluation and continuous program improvement
The Master of Education in Special Education program was revised from a quarter system format to a semester system format mandated for the University System of Georgia for Fall 1998. Using feedback from student course evaluations and products and observations in the field, the program revisions included realignment of outcomes and objectives to increase the focus on curriculum development and accommodations, instructional strategies, data collection and use, collaborative practice and action research skills.
A learning outcomes assessment was developed by the KSU-PTEU Special Education Program Coordinator in 1998 to track assessment of the CEC standards and candidate performance. The matrix has been reviewed annually by the Department of Special Education to determine program strengths and to implement changes to improve candidate success. Refinement of course outcome indicators and realignment of course objectives to promote improved candidate performance were examples of recommended changes. The development of the accommodations outcome assignment was tried in three different courses and multiple formats before faculty were satisfied that candidates were meeting the desired level of proficiency on the outcome. A report was submitted to KSU administrators each summer to document self-evaluation and implementation of changes.
Program review is an ongoing process built on multiple levels of data collection and discussions. A major goal of the review has been quality program development, but attention is also focused on controlled growth. Program growth is controlled by cohort enrollment, and has leveled off until additional faculty resources are available.
Enrollment Trends in Program Courses FY 2001-FY 2002
| |SU 00 |F00 |SP01 |SU01 |FA01 |SP02 |Mean |
|Professional Sequence | | | | | | | |
|EXC 7790 (new 2001) | | | | | |12 |12 |
|EXC 7700 (new 2002) | | | | | | | |
|EXC 7735 |35 (2) | | |24 | | |30 |
|EXC 7770 |29 |12 | |26 | | |22 |
|EXC 7780 | |12 |27 |27 |23 | |22 |
| | | | | | | | |
|Teaching Field | | | | | | | |
|EXC 7705 |13 | | |22 | | |18 |
|EXC 7715 | |29 | |27 |42 (2) | |25 |
|EXC 7720 | |26 |29 | |27 |38 (2) |24 |
|EXC 7730 | | |23 | | |27 |25 |
|EXC 7760 | |33 | | |22 | |28 |
|EXC 7765 | |28 | | |22 |17 |22 |
|EXC 7970 | | |37 (2) | | |20 |19 |
The first graduates completed the Master of Education in Special Education: Interrelated in Summer 1998. Graduation rates have increased from 17 in Fiscal Year 1999 to 32 in Fiscal Year 2002. Graduation rates vary based on off-campus cohort schedules.
M.Ed. in SPE Degrees Conferred FY 1998-FY 2002
|FY 1998 |FY 1999 |FY 2000 |FY 2001 |FY 2002 |
|0 |17 |24 |26 |32 |
The portfolio component of the program became a source of concern as the program grew. Feedback from candidates and faculty indicated that the portfolio development process was stressful and did not align with other special education program goals. After a careful review of the portfolio process, the department developed and implemented a new model in 2001-2002 that helped students and faculty see the alignment between the learning outcomes matrix and the working portfolio. All course syllabi were revised to include specific portfolio related assignments. Candidates began enrolling in a research course specifically designed to develop skills appropriate for special educators and a capstone portfolio course to document their professional growth. Candidates completing the new portfolio course in Spring 2002 reported satisfaction with the new model. Faculty was still struggling with how to assess the portfolios in relation to the KSU-PTEU and NBPTS model. Written and oral portfolio evaluation forms were modified by portfolio course faculty and the format for the working portfolio was changed for the Spring 2003 course (2001 cohort candidates). The working portfolio was aligned with the KSU-PTEU Candidate Performance Indicators which were linked to the five core propositions of NBPTS.
Revisions in the KSU-PTEU Conceptual Framework, however, resulted in additional discussions across departments about the goals for graduate candidates and how they could be assessed. These discussions resulted in the development of new evaluation instruments that are being implemented in 2003-2004.
A program review process, initiated by KSU in 2001, serves to provide university wide feedback for all academic and service units. Completion of the self-study and related survey developed by the Department provides support for data based decision making at the program and university level. The program review council supports the department’s self-study conclusion that the M.Ed. in Special Education is a strong program and should continue to maximize its potential; however additional resources are needed to support further growth. This KSU level review is forwarded to the University System of Georgia level.
The program review council highlights the Department of Special Education’s excellent use of data based decision-making and continuous improvement. The department is committed to continuous program improvement through formative evaluation and discussion. The relationship with Advisory Board members and local schools impacts program improvement through regular meetings addressing the needs of local schools and how to balance quality and the demand for more teachers. Faculty members are also involved at the state and national level activities such as the Georgia Professional Standards Commission task force on revision of special education certification and participation in discussions on special education teacher preparation issues as part of the executive board of the Teacher Education Division of the Council for Exceptional Children (TED).
Faculty meetings include discussions of candidate progress and coordination of program improvement efforts. A Department of Special Education faculty member serving on the KSU-PTEU Conceptual Framework committee developed a survey of candidates, faculty and advisory board members to address the validity of special education graduate program outcome assignments. The survey results were used to support the Department’s databased decision process. Annual faculty retreats are conducted each summer to map out curriculum, assignments, etc. in response to candidate progress, course evaluations, current best practice literature, and alignment with changing standards. Summer 2002 featured a curriculum mapping activity used as a basis for program improvement. Development and field-testing of the Special Education Performance Outcomes (SEPO) form for documenting candidate classroom performance was a primary goal for 2002-2003. Another major emphasis has been alignment of the portfolio with KSU’s PTEU conceptual framework and outcomes, CEC standards, USG-BoR standards based on NBPTS, Georgia PSC standards, and the department mission.
Key elements of the KSU Special Education program
There are 3 key quality indicators of the KSU Special Education program: (1) Link to CEC standards, (2) Extensive field experience component, and (3) Continuous improvement model. The KSU special education program has been linked to CEC standards since its inception in 1994 and has been modified as needed as CEC standards have been revised. Faculty participation in CEC-NCATE training sessions has contributed to keeping this link up-to-date. The extensive field experience component of the program, implemented in 1994, monitors candidate progress through the developmental framework and informs program faculty of the varied needs of program candidates. The continuous improvement model is based on the program’s commitment to data based decision-making. Efforts continue to refine data-collection to inform program improvement.
Kennesaw State University
Professional Teacher Education Unit
Department of Special Education
Special Education Program Assessment System
The link to CEC Content standards is a key element of the Kennesaw State University Special Education program. Programmatic learning outcomes were originally developed in 1994 in alignment with the Council for Exceptional Children (CEC) Common Core Standards and the Kennesaw State University Professional Teacher Education Unit (KSU PTEU) Conceptual Framework. As part of the continuous improvement emphasis, outcomes have been revised and alignment with other initiatives developed. The following table highlights alignment of the current CEC Common Core standards, the KSU-PTEU conceptual framework, the University System of Georgia Board of Regents (USG BoR) Principles linked to the National Board of Professional Teacher Standards (NBPTS) core propositions, the NBPTS Exceptional Needs Standards and the Georgia Professional Standards Commission (GA PSC) requirements which are linked to the CEC standards plus nine additional standards.
Curriculum Alignment with Standards
|CEC Common Core |KSU-PTEU Conceptual |USG -BoR |NBPTS Exceptional Needs |GA PSC IRR Standards |
|Standards |Framework |NBPTS Core Propositions |Standards | |
|1 Foundations |1 Subject Matter | |Knowledge of Special | |
| |Experts | |Education | |
|2 Development & |1 Subject matter |I Teachers are committed to |Knowledge of Students |I Characteristics of BD, |
|Characteristics of |experts |students and their learning | |LD, MR |
|Learners | | | |VI Early childhood |
|3 Individual Learning|1 Subject matter |I Teachers are committed to |Multiple Paths to |IV Perceptual motor |
|Differences |experts |students and their learning |Knowledge |development |
| | | | | |
| | | |Diversity | |
|4 Instructional |1 Expertise as |II Teachers know the subjects |Knowledge of Subject |V Reading & mathematics |
|Strategies |facilitators of |they teach and how to teach |Matter |difficulties |
| |teaching & Learning |those subjects to students | | |
| | | |Meaningful Learning | |
|5 Learning |2 Expertise as |III Teachers are responsible |Learning Environment |VIII Field experiences for |
|Environments & Social |facilitators of |for managing and monitoring | |levels and categories |
|Interactions |teaching & Learning |student learning |Social Development | |
|6 Language |1 Subject matter |I Teachers are committed to |Knowledge of Students |III Language development, |
| |experts |students and their learning | |disorders and deviations |
|7 Instructional |2 Expertise as |II Teachers know the subjects |Instructional Resources | |
|Planning |facilitators of |they teach and how to teach | | |
| |teaching & Learning |those subjects to students | | |
|8 Assessment |2 Expertise as |III Teachers are responsible |Assessment |II Psychoeducational |
| |facilitators of |for managing and monitoring | |evaluation and assessment |
| |teaching & Learning |student learning | | |
|9 Professional & |3 Collaborative |IV Teachers think |Reflective Practice | |
|Ethical Practice |professionals |systematically about their | | |
| | |practice and learn from |Contributing to the | |
| | |experience |Profession and to | |
| | | |Education | |
|10 Collaboration |3 Collaborative |V Teachers are members of |Communications |VII Effective parent |
| |professionals |learning communities |Family Partnerships |involvement and counseling |
The KSU Special Education program emphasis on data based continuous improvement is a strength of the program highlighted by the KSU Program Review Council in 2002. (Appendix C) The original KSU Special Education learning outcomes assessment was a matrix of learning outcomes linked to program goals (CEC Common Core Standards) developed in 1998. Data collected annually as part of the learning outcomes assessment were continuously used to refine course assignments, content and delivery. Revisions such as moving objectives or assignments among courses, re-sequencing courses, team-teaching courses, and coordination of assignments across courses were implemented to improve candidate mastery of goals. An annual summer retreat including all faculty (full-time and part-time) served to review data collected from candidate evaluations, candidate products, advisory board recommendations and faculty input to make programmatic decisions.
Revisions in the Kennesaw State University Professional Teacher Education Unit (KSU-PTEU) Conceptual Framework as KSU moved to a performance-based assessment system included discussions across departments about the goals for graduate candidates and how they could be assessed. These discussions resulted in revision of the KSU-PTEU unit level and the graduate special education program level assessment derived from the PTEU Conceptual Framework. The Candidate Performance Instrument (CPI), Portfolio Narrative Analysis, and Impact on Student Learning Assessment (ISLA) are part of the Unit level assessment. The following chart highlights the required unit level data for graduate programs.
REQUIRED GRADUATE DATA – Fall 2003
|In What Course? |What is It? |Where Do I |Who Completes It?|Submitted |Submitted in |Where does It |When is It |When is |
| | |Find | |Online? |Hard Copy? |Go? |Completed? |It Due? |
| | |Printable | | | | | | |
| | |Copies? | | | | | | |
|Portfolio class |Graduate |I-Drive and |Professor |Yes |No |*Electronic |By end of |Last Day |
| |Portfolio |CFEP’s |completes rubric | | |submission |Semester |of Finals|
| |Narrative |website | | | | | | |
| |Rubric | | | | | | | |
|EDUC/EDL/ |Impact on |I-Drive and |Professor |Yes |No |*Electronic |By end of |Last Day |
|EECE/EXC and/or|Student |CFEP’s |completes Rubric | | |submission |Semester |of Finals|
|Content course |Learning |website |*Recommend that | | | | | |
| |Analysis | |candidate also | | | | | |
| |Rubric | |complete rubric | | | | | |
| | | |as part of | | | | | |
| | | |narrative | | | | | |
|Portfolio class |Diversity |Online (see |Candidate |Yes |No |*Electronic |By end of |Last Day |
| |Survey |below for | | | |submission |Semester |of Finals|
| | |address) | | | | | | |
*Electronic submission for forms can be accessed at kennesaw.edu/education Click on “PTEU Data System.” Then, after logging in, click on “Forms.” Enter candidate’s SSN.
• Printable copies of all forms reference above are available on the I-Drive by accessing the “TED Teachers Education” folder; then access the “Graduate Reporting Forms and Rubrics” folder.
• The Diversity Survey is available at
The Special Education Performance Outcomes (SEPO) (Appendix D) and selected course assignments are part of the Program level assessment. The SEPO is also aligned with the Unit level Graduate Candidate Performance Instrument (CPI) (Appendix A) and serves as an additional Unit level indicator. The following chart highlights the Program assessment model. Unit level assessments are in bold font. Other assessments are program level.
Candidate Outcomes and Assessment Plan 2002-2003
|CEC |CEC Standard |Product Assessment|Performance |Student |Capstone Assessment |
| | | |Assessment |Impact | |
|1 |Foundations/ Philosophy |7705 exams |7970 | |7790 portfolio & narrative |
| | | |SEPO/CPI | |rubric |
|2 |Learners |7715 exams |7970 SEPO/CPI | |7790 portfolio & narrative |
| | |7770 exams | | |rubric |
|3 |Individual Differences |7715 exams |7970 SEPO/CPI | |7790 portfolio & narrative |
| | |7770 exams | | |rubric |
|4 |Instructional Strategies |7765 rubric |7970 SEPO/CPI |7765 |7790 portfolio & narrative |
| | | | |ISLA |rubric |
|5 |Learning Environments |7720 rubric |7970 SEPO/CPI | |7790 portfolio & narrative |
| | | | | |rubric |
|6 |Language Development |7715 exams 7730 |7970 SEPO/CPI | |7790 portfolio & narrative |
| | |rubric | | |rubric |
|7 |Instructional Planning |7760 rubric 7765 |7970 SEPO/CPI | |7790 portfolio & narrative |
| | |rubric | | |rubric |
|8 |Assessment |7730 rubric |7970 SEPO/CPI | |7790 portfolio & narrative |
| | | | | |rubric |
|9 |Professional & Ethical Practice |7705 exams |7970 SEPO/CPI | |7790 portfolio & narrative |
| | | | | |rubric |
|10 |Collaborative Practices |7780 rubric |7970 SEPO/CPI | |7790 portfolio & narrative |
| | | | | |rubric |
The special education graduate program assessment system includes an external component for program evaluation and an internal component for individual candidate assessment. A continuous data collection model is used to support data based decision making on program evaluation and individual candidate progress.
External Evaluation and Program Review Component
External evaluation includes PRAXIS II data. The KSU M. Ed. in Special Education program has maintained a 100% rate of passage for candidates.
| |Graduation |Praxis Pass Rate * |
|2001 Cohort |2003 |100% |
|2000 Cohort |2002 |100% |
|1999 Cohort |2001 |100% |
|1998 Cohort |2000 |100% |
*M.Ed. in Special Education Candidates only
Over 95% of candidates are employed as teachers while enrolled in the program. As part of a 2002 Program Review by KSU and forwarded to the USG Board of Regents, a survey was sent to candidates, graduates and employers. The external feedback from the 2002 Program Review survey addressed program success in developing advanced level skills that was evidenced in responses to the survey stem, “Since you enrolled in KSU have you: Check all that apply”
Candidate/Graduate Self-Report of Success after Graduation
|N=99 |Honors |Leadership Roles |Promotion |Additional |Formal Research|Action Research|Presentations |
| | | | |Degrees | | | |
|Candidates |10 |13 |2 |1 |4 |10 |21 |
|Graduates |14 |19 |9 |5 |1 |8 |12 |
Another source of external evaluation is the Department of Special Education Advisory Board, including faculty and staff from across campus, current candidates and graduates, parent representatives from the community, and practicing professionals from the community. It meets twice a year and provides a forum for discussion and feedback to guide program development and program evaluation.
Accreditation review provides external evaluation. Kennesaw State University Program Review Council, the University System of Georgia Board of Regents, Georgia Professional Standards Commission, NCATE and CEC, and the KSU Program Review Council have reviewed the M.Ed. in Special Education. The Georgia Professional Standards Commission provided initial approval for the special education add-on programs (LD 1994; BD, MR, IRR 1995). The Board of Regents approved the M.Ed. in Special Education in 1996 and a five-year follow-up review in 2001. The Kennesaw State University M.Ed. in Special Education and Interrelated program received CEC Accreditation in 1998 based on the CEC General Curriculum Standards. The programs in Learning Disabilities, Behavior Disorders and Intellectual Disabilities were approved by CEC based on the individual disability category standards. The NCATE Board of Examiners and the Georgia Professional Standards Commission (PSC) approved all programs in the Department of Special Education in 2000. The Special Education programs were approved with no weaknesses. The KSU Program Review Council in 2002 gave the M.Ed. in Special Education program Strong or Very Strong ratings for all Quality Indicators. (Appendix C)
Internal Candidate Assessment Component
The assessment system begins with data collected at the point of admission to the program. Admission requirements are listed in the Graduate Catalog. The original admission requirements were developed in alignment with other KSU graduate education programs and emphasized undergraduate grade point average (GPA) and scores on the Verbal and Quantitative subtests of the Graduate Record Examination (GRE). All candidates are screened by the Office of Graduate Education to determine eligibility. The following chart reflects Graduate Record Exam (GRE) scores and final Grade Point Average (GPA) for Fall Semester 2001 candidates.
SPE Candidate Performance 2001 Cohort
| |GRE Verbal |GRE Quantitative |Total GRE |Spring 2003 |
| | | | |Graduation GPA |
|M.Ed. in SPE | | | | |
|Candidates |520 |470 |990 |3.86 |
Departmental discussions and informal review of candidate performance has resulted in changes in admission requirements. Consistent concerns were raised about candidate written expression skills and interpersonal skills. A rubric was implemented in the 2003 admission review to provide better documentation of the admissions process. The Special Education Admissions Review Committee (at least 3 faculty) reviewed all candidates during Spring 2003 using the following rubric.
GRADUATE ADMISSIONS CRITERIA REVIEW SHEET
DEPARTMENT OF SPECIAL EDUCATION
STUDENT NAME: ADDRESS: PHONE:
EMAIL: PROGRAM CONCENTRATION: DATE:
Performance Element Meets Provisional Does Not Meet
1. Baccalaureate degree from Documented Not Documented Not Documented
accredited institution
2. Undergraduate cumulative Documented 2.5 – 2.75/4.00 Not Documented
grade point average of 2.75/4.00
3. Minimum score of 800 (Verbal & Documented 700-800 GRE Not Documented
Quantitative combined) on GRE
4. Professional Resume Documents education, Meets Partial Criteria Lacks critical data
teaching experience, service and leadership
5. Two Letters of Recommendation Addresses applicant’s Addresses teaching Tepid review of
success in teaching; ability success or ability for applicant’s abilities/only
for success in M.Ed. program success in M.Ed. program one letter submitted
6. Current Georgia Certificate Documented Pending Not Documented
7. Proof of Completion of Courses HGD ___ HGD ___ HGD ___
in Human Growth & Development, RDG ___ RDG ___ RDG ___
Teaching Reading, and Education EXC ___ EXC ___ EXC ___
Of Exceptional Students All 3 Documented 2-3 Documented 0-1 Documented
8. M.Ed. Personal Statement
• Training, Interests, Contains a sharp focus and Unengaging, poorly Lack of purpose, focus, Needs, Concerns (a) a clearly identifiable focused statement major elements
statement of purpose
• Nature/Quality of Ideas are engaging, Ideas are good but Ideas Undeveloped,
Experiences (b) Insightful, illustrate obscured by unclear Random thoughts
Understanding of self writing or lack of
Information
• Goals/Issues Major points are supported Superficial Support Major Points Unsupported
To Address (c) by strong examples.
• Style Writing is clear, inspiring, Writing is fair, not Writing lacks energy, is
and done with a flair. Particularly engaging narrow, unimaginative
• Organization Contains clearly developed Contains mostly well- Disorganized and difficult
paragraphs in a logical developed paragraphs; to follow
sequence. Unclear in places
• Mechanics No errors 1-3 distracting errors Many major errors
Some minor difficulties
Accept in Full Standing _____ Accept Provisionally ______ Reject _______
Reason for Rejection: _________________________________________________________________________
Decision Approved By: __________________________________________ Date: _______________________
Candidates scoring low on written expression of the admission rubric were brought in for a conference and remediation suggestions. Changes submitted for the 2003-2004 KSU Graduate Catalog include submission of a 1-2 page Teaching Experience Essay outlining and reflecting on a significant teaching event that has personal meaning for the candidate to replace the current personal statement of goals for professional development. This essay format is based on research on teacher dispositions presented at a conference last fall.
The Office of Graduate Education sends out letters informing candidates of the special education admission committee’s decision. Candidates that meet all standards are granted admission in full standing. Candidates that do not meet all requirements are granted provisional admission with specific stipulations and their performance in the program is reviewed before granting full standing. Individual candidate appointments are scheduled as necessary to address issues for provisional admission. Candidates granted provisional admission are reviewed at the end of each semester and must satisfy requirements for full admission by the completion of nine semester hours in the program. Further revisions in admission standards to be addressed during 2003-2004 are the GRE Writing subtest scores and submission of teaching videotapes.
An orientation session is scheduled before initial cohort registration. Candidates receive information on program requirements and websites for accessing forms. Subsequent advising sessions are conducted within cohorts. Candidates receive copies of the unit and program level assessments with references to the aligned standards. Forms have been revised for the 2003 cohorts. The Department of Special Education website is scheduled to be upgraded and all forms will be available online.
Interim review of candidate performance begins with the KSU Graduate School office monitoring course grades. Candidates not meeting standards are issued letters of warning, probation or dismissal.
Special education faculty discusses candidates’ strengths and areas needing improvement as appropriate at faculty meetings. Patterns of concern (written expression skills, professionalism, classroom performance) were identified and an interim review process was developed, beginning with the 2002 cohort. It is scheduled at the completion of 12 semester hours using the Candidate Interim Review Rubric:
CANDIDATE INTERIM REVIEW RUBRIC
|Standards |L1 - L2 |L3 |L4 |Comments |
|Candidate’s written |Two or more faculty members |While the quality of |The quality of the | |
|expression is well |have voiced concerns over the |written expression is |candidate’s written | |
|organized, professional, |candidate’s work in one or |somewhat inconsistent, |expression is | |
|and free of mechanical |more areas of written |it is always acceptable.|consistently well | |
|errors. |expression. | |organized, professional | |
| | | |and free of errors. | |
|Candidate is highly |Candidate is habitually late |Candidate consistently |Candidate consistently | |
|professional in their |for class. Candidate does not|comes to class, is |comes to class, is | |
|approach to their |attend to class discussion nor|punctual and attends to |punctual and attends to | |
|graduate work. |activities. |topics of discussion and|topics of discussion and | |
| | |activities. |activities. | |
| | | | | |
| |Candidate is not respectful of|Candidate is respectful |Candidate is respectful | |
| |the ideas of others. |of colleagues and peers.|of colleagues and peers. | |
| | | | | |
| |Candidate does not listen and | | | |
| |appropriately respond to |Candidate consistently |Candidate consistently | |
| |feedback and dialogue. |listens and |listens and appropriately| |
| | |appropriately responds |responds to feedback and | |
| |Candidate views course |to feedback and |dialogue. | |
| |assignments in isolation and |dialogue. | | |
| |does not find ways to extend | |Candidate consistently | |
| |new skills and knowledge to | |finds ways to extend | |
| |daily practice. |Candidate periodically |skills and knowledge from| |
| | |finds a way to extend |course work to daily | |
| | |skills and knowledge |practice. | |
| | |from course work to | | |
| | |daily practice | | |
|Candidate is professional|Candidate does not use People |Candidate generally uses|Candidate consistently | |
|in their communication, |1st language when referring to|People 1st language when|uses People 1st language | |
|collaboration & teamwork.|people with disabilities. |referring to people with|when referring to people | |
| | |disabilities. |with disabilities. | |
| |Candidate displays | | | |
| |paternalistic attitudes toward|Candidate generally |Candidate consistently | |
| |students with disabilities, |displays a positive |displays a positive | |
| |has low expectations and |attitude towards all |attitude towards all | |
| |increases student dependency |students, including |students, including those| |
| |on teachers and caretakers. |those with disabilities,|with disabilities, has | |
| | |has high expectations |high expectations and | |
| | |and empowers all |empowers all students to | |
| |Candidate is often accused by |students to solve their |solve their own problems | |
| |peers of “social loafing” |own problems and |and increase | |
| |during group work. An |increase independence. |independence. | |
| |analysis of grades clearly | | | |
| |indicates a discrepancy where |Candidate successfully |Candidate consistently | |
| |the candidates “group grades” |collaborates with peers |leads and successfully | |
| |are higher than individual |to complete team-based |collaborates with peers | |
| |grades. |assignments. |to complete team-based | |
| | | |assignments. | |
|Candidate demonstrates |Two or more faculty have |Candidate has obtained |Candidate has obtained | |
|effective teaching and |voiced concerns in either |satisfactory evaluations|exemplary evaluations | |
|classroom management |teaching or classroom |from university |from university | |
|skills during field |management. |supervisory staff. |supervisory staff. | |
|observations. | | | | |
|Candidate maintains a GPA|Candidate has two or more |Candidate maintains a |Candidate maintains a GPA| |
|of 3.0. |grades below a C. |GPA of 3.0, with |of 3.0, with no | |
| | |incompletes for illness |incompletes. | |
| | |only. | | |
Candidates exhibiting deficiencies in any of the five areas are invited for an advising meeting and a remediation plan developed. Letters indicating conditions for continuing in the program are sent out to candidates identified as exhibiting difficulty in completing program requirements. Candidates are reviewed again at the completion of 24 semester hours (out of a 36-semester hour program).
Course requirements reflect a developmental model of program and candidate evaluation. Activities in each course build on skills and knowledge developed in previous courses. Faculty meetings regularly include discussion of candidate progress and standards. These issues are addressed at the summer faculty retreat and formalized in course syllabi for the next academic year.
Course requirements include a variety of types of assessment: multiple choice exams, case study response exams, assessment data collection and reporting, collaborative group projects, individual projects, in-class activities, and field-based activities. Course requirements serve to monitor effectiveness of instruction, model formative assessment, develop skills for extension in the field experience, and document progress in the program. Technology skill assessment is embedded in activities within courses. Documentation of candidate mastery of knowledge competencies is evidenced by evaluation rubrics of course outcomes. The Unit level ISLA is completed in EXC 7765 Teaching & Learning II and the capstone portfolio course (EXC 7970). During 2003-2004 this will be implemented in additional courses.
Course requirements include field-based as well as traditional course assessment. Field-based supervision supports the links between theory and practice. All candidates are observed each semester by KSU faculty and/or field experience supervisors who provide documentation of performance on the Special Education Performance Outcomes (SEPO) form (Appendix D) documenting development of expertise in teaching and learning throughout the program. This instrument is intentionally linked to the Unit level Gradate Candidate Performance Instrument (CPI) outcomes (Appendix A). Candidates must demonstrate mastery of all outcomes at a Level 3 (acceptable) or Level 4 (target) before receiving a satisfactory grade in the capstone Internship course (EXC 7970). Additional supervision visits are scheduled as necessary throughout the program to support candidate development.
Candidates maintain a working portfolio throughout the program including course requirements and evaluation rubrics, personal reflections, extensions in their classroom, student work samples, video-tapes, and feedback from supervision visits. A written portfolio and multi-media presentation documenting personal philosophy, impact on student learning, and professional growth is developed from the working portfolio of products from courses within the program. Candidates are expected to include extensions of skills beyond course requirements. Candidates must complete a working portfolio, written portfolio and presentation with mastery at a Level 3 (acceptable) or Level 4 (target) on all performance rubric indicators before receiving a satisfactory grade in the capstone portfolio course (EXC 7790). The Unit level Portfolio Narrative Rubric (p. 62) and Unit level Candidate Performance Indicators (Appendix A) form are completed at this point.
Candidate assessment: Follow-up: As a result of the 2002 Program Review process, the Department identified follow-up of graduates as an area needing improvement. Ninety-nine candidates, graduates and supervisors responded to the 2002 Program Review Survey. This represented a return rate of approximately thirty-five percent. The Department has maintained many unofficial lines of communication including using graduates as part-time instructors, attending informal reunion groups with former cohorts, and soliciting feedback in the department newsletter. The university and PTEU focus has been on following-up and providing induction services for undergraduates, and with administrative reorganization in 2001, responsibility for follow-up of graduates was not assigned. A major goal for the 2003-2004 academic year will be developing a system to follow-up graduates. This will be discussed with the appropriate PTEU committee and established as a PTEU function.
Kennesaw State University
Professional Teacher Education Unit
Department of Special Education
Field Experiences and Clinical Practice Standard
Field experiences are embedded within the graduate Special Education Program at Kennesaw State University (KSU). Many classes are designed with field-based components to link theory to practice. Ninety-five percent of graduate candidates are employed full time as teachers and complete field-based activities for their teaching field and capstone courses on their job site.
Developmentally sequenced field experiences
The KSU Special Education graduate program provides candidates multiple opportunities to demonstrate mastery and reflect on practice in their job site or KSU selected field experience site. Candidates take classes in a cohort model to ensure sequencing of courses and requirements to promote sequential development and extension of skills. Candidates complete two observation visits and reflections to document a range of experiences and the application of components observed to their teaching practice. Candidates submit videotapes with self-evaluation and reflection, as well as peer and faculty feedback, in specific courses. The candidate is responsible for obtaining parental permission for videotaping and maintaining permission on file to assure confidentiality in compliance with local school/district policies.
A key element in the KSU program is the field-experience supervision component. Kennesaw State University faculty and field-experience supervisors schedule observation visits to monitor progress in development of expertise as facilitators of teaching and learning using the Special Education Performance Objectives (SEPO) Form (Appendix D) that is linked to the CEC Standards and KSU-PTEU Conceptual Framework outcomes (Subject matter experts, Facilitators of teaching and learning, and Collaborative professionals). KSU field-experience supervisors observe candidates in their classrooms at least once each semester and provide written feedback (Observation Summary Form) and verbal coaching. The initial on-site supervision visit during Fall I focuses on baseline data collection and support of candidates in their curriculum development and evaluation role. Subsequent field experience supervision visits are linked to specific course requirements as indicated by the goals column of the following chart. Field experience supervisors rate candidate performance on the Special Education Performance Outcomes (SEPO) Form and provide verbal coaching and written feedback on a separate form (Observation Summary) indicating candidate strengths and areas needing improvement. Additional supervision visits are scheduled when necessary.
The following chart indicates the developmental focus and goals of observation activities, videotape evidence of performance, and supervision visits.
Developmental Field Experience Grid
|Semester |Course |Course |Observation/Supervision Goals |Obs |Videotape |# of visits|
|Summer I |EXC 7700 |EXC 7715 |Observation: Disabilities/diversity |1 | | |
|Fall 1 |EXC 7730 |EXC 7760 |Baseline & curriculum development | | |1 |
| | | |Subject Matter Experts | | | |
|Spring 1 |EXC 7720 |EXC 7765 |Classroom management & instruction | |2 |2 |
| | | |Facilitators of Teaching & Learning | | | |
|Summer 2 |EXC 7770 |EXC 7705 |Observation – Disabilities/diversity | 1 | | |
|Fall 2 |EXC 7780 |EXC 7735 |Co-teaching & extension of skills | |2 |1 |
| | | |Collaborative Professionals | | | |
|Spring 2 |EXC 7790 |EXC 7970 |Mastery of all competencies | | |2 |
There are four levels of field-based activities embedded in courses:
1) Observations of other programs & populations (Subject Matter Experts);
2) Application activities (Subject Matter Experts);
3) Demonstration of skill mastery (Facilitators of Teaching & Learning); and
4) Capstone internship (Subject Matter Experts, Facilitators of Teaching & Learning , Collaborative Professionals)
Observations of other programs and populations are required during summer semesters to develop candidate skills as Subject Matter Experts in the content of Special Education characteristics (CEC Standard 2), Learning Differences (CEC Standard 3), and Language (CEC Standard 6). The observation activity was initially included as an activity within courses during the academic year. The purpose was to provide candidates with experience in a wide range of special education delivery settings and with a wide range of special education populations. The KSU-PTEU provides a system for candidates to monitor racial and socioeconomic diversity of experiences. In order to standardize the observation requirement to address the specific goals of the special education graduate program, the observation activities were moved to courses during the summer sessions for Summer 2003. Candidates in EXC 7715 Nature/Needs: Students with Mild Disabilities (Summer 1) and EXC 7770 Psychoneurological and Medical Issues in Special Education (Summer 2) observe a program for students from a different age level, severity level, disability category, economic level, racial or cultural background than the students in their teaching site and reflect on the application of observations to their teaching practice. The sites selected for candidates during Summer 1 highlight the similarities and differences across categories (LD, MR, BD), levels of severity, and age level (transition). Summer 2 sites target greater diversity of category (medical, autism, TBI), age level (infants), and alternative delivery models.
Application Activities embedded in courses require candidates to apply theory and skills taught in a particular course to their teaching practice to demonstrate mastery of special education and academic content as Subject Matter Experts. Candidates submit a product demonstrating skill mastery. For example, in EXC 7730 Assessment during Fall 1, candidates collect data, plan and implement an evaluation plan to complete a case study report on a student in their classroom or supervised field experience site (Assessment CEC Standard 8), while in EXC 7760 candidates work in cooperative groups on a curriculum mapping and accommodations project (Planning CEC Standard 7). The KSU course faculty member is responsible for evaluation of application activities as detailed in course syllabi and project rubrics. The field experience supervisor notes extensions of course skills demonstrated within classroom practice.
Demonstration of Skill Mastery includes submission of videotapes and observation by a Kennesaw State University faculty member or field-experience supervisor as evidence of skill as a Facilitator of Teaching and Learning (Instruction CEC Standard 4, Environment CEC Standard 5). For example, during Spring 1 in EXC 7765, Teaching and Learning II, candidates develop and deliver instructional lessons. Candidates are required to videotape their lesson, and complete a reflective self-evaluation and exchange with a colleague for a peer evaluation. Faculty evaluates the lesson plan and the videotape of lesson plan implementation according to course syllabi and rubrics. That same semester, for EXC 7720, Behavioral Strategies, candidates conduct an action research project to address impact of behavior change strategies (Environment CEC Standard 5). Faculty evaluates the action research project according to course syllabi and rubrics. A KSU field-experience supervisor observes and evaluates mastery of instructional and behavioral management skills on-the-job. Specific rubrics presented in the course are used as the basis for evaluation of written and videotaped lessons and the Special Education Performance Outcomes (SEPO) Form is used for evaluation of mastery of skills on the job. The Field Experience Supervisor also completes an Observation Summary Form to provide written feedback during the post-observation conference. The Unit level Impact on Student Learning form is also completed at this level.
The capstone internship/practicum experience requires candidates to demonstrate mastery of all objectives for the special education graduate program (Subject Matter Experts, Facilitators of Teaching & Learning, Collaborative Professionals, Foundations CEC Standard 1, Professionalism CEC Standard 9, Collaboration CEC Standard 10) Kennesaw State University faculty and KSU field-experience supervisors evaluate candidates in a full-time teaching position (for at least 15 weeks). Candidates employed in a teaching position complete EXC 7970 Internship. Candidates not currently employed in a teaching position must apply for a supervised field experience site supervised by a KSU cooperating teacher to complete EXC 7980 Practicum. Evidence of mastery of all competencies on the Special Education Performance Objectives (SEPO) at a Level 3 (Acceptable) or Level 4 (Target) is required for satisfactory completion of this requirement. This also documents mastery of Unit level Candidate Performance Instrument (CPI).
Diversity of experience
Candidates employed in a teaching position including responsibility for students with disabilities may complete their field experience for each course on-the-job. Candidates not meeting this condition must apply each semester for a supervised field experience site supervised by a KSU cooperating teacher to complete application activities. The number of contact hours typically involves a minimum of 6 hours per week for at least 15 weeks to complete required field-based activities for each academic year semester. Placements are assigned to include diversity in age level, disability category, severity level, ethnic background and/or socioeconomic status.
One concern has been providing diverse experiences for the graduate candidates in the program who are fully employed. Ninety-five percent of the candidates are fully employed as teachers and complete their field experience on-the-job. Although the individual sites reflect diversity, candidates were limited in their experiences outside of their job site. Collaborative projects and activities expose candidates to content and issues for diverse settings, but do not meet programmatic goals. Infusing observations of diverse sites in academic year classes is not always effective because candidates must obtain release time from their teaching job to complete the observations. Beginning Summer 2003, the observations are linked to specific summer courses and structured to meet the goal of diversity in age level, disability category, severity level, ethnic background and/or socioeconomic status. Course requirements in EXC 7715 Nature/Needs: Students with Mild Disabilities (Summer 1) and EXC 7770 Psychoneurological and Medical Issues in Special Education (Summer 2) were modified to include observation of a special education setting identified by the Department of Special Education that includes students/clients at different age level, disability category, severity level, ethnic background and/or socioeconomic status than the candidate’s teaching site and submission of written reflections on application to their teaching practice.
Supervision by qualified professionals
There are six full-time tenure-track faculty positions (including the department chair) in the Department of Special Education. All hold a Ph.D. in an appropriate field. There is a balance in specializations to support courses in the program. Faculty are involved in professional development and scholarship activities to remain up-to-date for program delivery. In addition, two part-time faculty members provide support for field experience supervision and instruction. (Appendix B) The following chart highlights faculty credentials.
Faculty Degrees & Specializations
|Name of Professor |Degree |Specializations |
|Susan Brown |Ph. D. Special Education, Learning |Working with parents, learning disabilities, balanced |
| |Disabilities |literacy, diversity, medical & neurological |
|Harriet Bessette |Ph. D. Teacher Education |Assessment, curriculum development, research, school |
| |Curriculum & Instruction |administration, collaboration, co-teaching |
| |Special Education | |
|Michaela D’Aquanni |Ph. D. Special Education |Curriculum development, collaboration, school administration, |
| |All categories |diversity, inclusion |
|Kent Logan |Ph. D. Special Education |Low-incidence disabilities, community Based instruction, |
| |Mental Retardation |school change, inclusion, co-teaching, collaboration, behavior|
| | |management |
|Toni Strieker |Ph. D. Special Education |Policy analysis, assessment, administration, school change, |
| |Educational Leadership |inclusion, collaboration, co-teaching |
|Deborah Wallace |Ph. D. Special Education |Administration, special education law, behavior analysis |
| |Behavior Disorders | |
| |Learning Disabilities | |
|Stephanie Dirst |Ed. D. Education |Part-time- supervision |
| |Special Education Administration | |
| |Deaf Education | |
|Gail Fredericks |M.Ed. Education |Part-time- supervision |
| |Supervision/Administration | |
| |Learning Disabilities Behavior | |
| |Disorders | |
Supervision of field experiences is a shared responsibility. KSU Field Experience Supervisors participate in Department retreats and Advisory Board meetings. They meet regularly with KSU faculty and attend class meetings as appropriate to ensure consistency in expectations. They have been involved in development and refinement of the SEPO and Summary form. The Kennesaw State University faculty member teaching the course is responsible for evaluating products. Rubrics are used to evaluate observation reports and application activities. Specific skills are targeted for each supervision visit. Faculty and/or field experience supervisors rate each item on the Special Education Performance Outcomes (SEPO)(Appendix D) during scheduled visits each semester and provide written feedback (Observation Summary Form)(Appendix D) and verbal conferencing on areas of strength and areas needing improvement. Candidates requiring a supervised field experience also receive ratings and feedback from their on-site supervisor.
The on-site cooperating teacher is the master teacher providing direct daily supervision for KSU candidates requiring supervised field experience placement sites. The Kennesaw State University Department of Special Education, KSU Office of Educational Field Experiences, and the school district jointly select the on-site cooperating teacher. Requirements include clear renewable T-5 (master’s level) Georgia teacher certification in the appropriate special education field, at least three years successful teaching experience with students with disabilities, and the Teacher Support Specialist (TSS) endorsement or participation in supervision and peer coaching training provided by KSU. The cooperating teacher’s certification and special education program should be the same as the program the KSU candidate is completing.
Candidates receive a rating on each performance objective on the SEPO and written feedback on strengths and areas needing improvement. The field experience supervisors also provide verbal feedback and suggestions to guide the candidate to a higher level of expertise. Field experience supervisors use a coaching model to provide assistance. They model the application of Vgotsky’s peer assistance based on the zone of proximal development. Supervisors serve as adult peers (Tharp & Gallimore, 1988, 1990) coaching candidates to higher levels of performance. The focus is on implementing best practice in teaching, learning and management strategies to maximizing student outcomes. To receive a grade of satisfactory in the final capstone course, EXC 7970/7980, candidates must demonstrate mastery of all performance objectives at Level 3 (acceptable) or Level 4 (target).
The Special Education Performance Outcomes (SEPO) is the assessment instrument used for supervision in all field experiences to document candidate development of expertise in teaching and learning throughout the program. (Appendix D) The emphasis is on evaluation of candidate expertise in identification of ways to change teaching environments, systems or instructional behaviors to improve student learning. In 1994, the Behaviorally Anchored Supervision System (BASS) was used to document candidate mastery of objectives. The BASS was continuously revised and reviewed until the Department of Special Education Summer 2002 retreat when a new model was developed as a result of curriculum mapping. The new instrument, the Special Education Performance Outcomes (SEPO) Form, was field tested during 2002-2003. The reporting system was reorganized during Summer 2003 to show development over time, and linked to the Council for Exceptional Children Standards, the University System of Georgia Board of Regents standards (based on NBPTS), and the KSU-PTEU conceptual framework.
Confidentiality: The federal Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act of 1974 (FERPA) regulates access to, and disclosure of student information. FERPA serves to assure record access by covered students and their guardians and to prevent disclosure from those records of personally identifying information to unprivileged parties without the written consent of affected students and their guardians. Disclosure of confidential information is NOT to occur. To protect the confidentiality of student information, no identifying information is included when KSU candidates present written or oral reports.
Kennesaw State University candidates video-taping for KSU class requirements must obtain informed permission from parents to videotape. School district permission forms should be used and all returned forms kept on file with the school where videotaping takes place. KSU candidates should include a statement that permission forms were completed and a sample permission form with any videotape material submitted to KSU.
Kennesaw State University candidates completing action research projects or applied research activities required in a KSU syllabus should confer with the course faculty member when planning their research. KSU faculty obtain Institutional Review Board approval for course requirements and activities completed in accordance with course syllabi to ensure protection of participant rights. In some cases, KSU Institutional Review Board approval may be necessary for candidate research projects. Information and forms are available from the Department of Special Education office (770-423-6577).
Professionalism: Candidates represent Kennesaw State University and are expected to maintain high standards of personal and professional ethics. The Council for Exceptional Children (CEC) Code of Ethics and Standards () highlight the guiding principles for professional practice as a special educator. Candidates also follow the guidelines for professionalism for Georgia Teachers (). Professionalism is emphasized in their classroom, their participation in the graduate special education program, and with all constituencies (parents, administrators, peers, faculty).
Kennesaw State University
Professional Teacher Education Unit
Department of Special Education
Performance Data
Since its formation in 1998, the Department of Special Education has utilized a data based model for assessment of candidates and program improvement. Performance data in this report includes objective exam scores and rubric summaries for 2001-2002 and 2002-2003. In addition to assessment activities within courses, candidates are observed in field experience settings (Program level Special Education Performance Outcomes SEPO Appendix D) and candidates must document mastery of standards in a working portfolio (Unit Level Portfolio narrative Rubric, Unit level Impact on Student Learning Assessment ISLA, and Unit level Graduate Candidate Performance Indicators CPI). Program level assessment includes evaluation of course products and evaluation of candidates in the field experience. Data reported for course products includes a description of the assessment activity, related course objectives, rubrics, numerical data, and reflections on practice by the faculty member addressing recommendations for future program improvement.
Evaluation of the field experience component was initially based on the Behaviorally Anchored Supervision System (BASS). The BASS has been continuously adjusted to reflect best practice and program outcomes. In 2002-2003, the department field-tested the Special Education Performance Outcomes (SEPO) (Appendix D) developed by KSU faculty. It is now explicitly aligned with CEC, NBPTS, and PTEU standards. Performance data in this report include BASS summaries for 2001-2002 and SEPO summaries for 2002-2003. The SEPO is explicitly linked to the PTEU Unit level Candidate Performance Indicator (Appendix A) requirement.
KSU PTEU unit level assessment includes the KSU PTEU Impact on Student Learning Rubric, which was implemented with candidates completing the program in Spring 2003. The Department of Special Education will expand this to other courses during 2003-2004. The structure and evaluation of the portfolio has also evolved over time. In response to candidate and faculty feedback, two new courses were developed to support special education graduate candidates in portfolio development (EXC 7700 Teacher Researcher: Data based Decision Making and EXC 7790 Documenting Professional Growth). Specific portfolio requirements were integrated and identified in each course syllabus. The unit level Graduate Candidate Performance Instrument was based on NBPTS and that data is reported for 2001-2002 candidates. The revised Graduate Candidate Performance Instrument is now linked to the PTEU Conceptual Framework and is completed during the portfolio course. The unit level Graduate Portfolio Narrative Rubric was developed and approved by the PTEU and is reported for 2002-2003 candidates. The following chart is a guide to the data presented in this section:
Special Education Graduate Program
Summary Performance Data
|CEC Standard |Standard |Performance Assessment |Product Assessment |Criteria |Page # |
|1 |Foundations | |EXC 7705 Exams |80% minimum |32-33 |
|2 |Characteristics | |EXC 7715 Exams |80% minimum |34-36 |
| | | |EXC 7770 Exams | | |
|3 |Differences | |EXC 7715 Exams EXC 7770 |80% minimum |34-36 |
| | | |Exams | | |
|4 |Instruction |Video-tape |EXC 7765 Lesson Plan |Rubric Level 3 |37-46 |
| | |SEPO/CPI | | | |
|5 |Environments |SEPO/CPI |EXC 7720 |Rubric Level 3 |47-49 |
| | | |Appl Paper & Exam | | |
|6 |Communication |SEPO/CPI | |Rubric Level 3 |50, |
| | |Interim Review | | |34-36 |
|7 |Planning |SEPO/CPI |EXC 7760 Unit Plan |Rubric Level 3 |51-54 |
|8 |Assessment | |EXC 7730 Case Study |Rubric Level 3 |55-58 |
|9 |Professionalism |SEPO/CPI | |Rubric Level 3 |59 |
| | |Interim review | | | |
|10 |Collaboration |SEPO/CPI | |Rubric Level 3 |59 |
| | | | | | |
| | |Interim review | |Rubric Level 3 | |
|SEPO | | | | |60-69, |
| | | | | |APP D |
|ISLA | | | | |70-71 |
| | | | | |76-77 |
|Portfolio | | | | |73-76 |
|Narrative | | | | | |
|CPI | | | | |APP A |
CEC Standard 1 Foundations
Objective Examination Data
Objective examinations are used to assess basic knowledge and application of knowledge. Data is recorded for each cohort indicating the number and percentage of candidates achieving each level of proficiency. Level 4 is the target proficiency (90%+ mastery of content) and represents clear, consistent, and convincing evidence of mastery. Level 3 is acceptable and indicates clear evidence of content mastery (80-90% mastery of content). Level 1 and 2 represent less than 80% mastery of content and candidates would be required to document further evidence of mastery for their portfolio.
In EXC 7705 Special Education Procedures, candidates take a pre-test and post-test to document impact of course experiences on their mastery of the content including judicial, legislative, and collaborative foundations in special education.
In the area of Knowledge, the candidate will be able to:
• Identify the historical foundations of special education, with an emphasis on the sociological and political forces that are the basis for current practice.
• Identify the major judicial cases and legislation that guide special education practice from pre-referral to transition out of special education programs.
• Identify the key principles guiding special education practice and related or support services (transportation, specialized health care, occupational therapy, etc) and the judicial and legislative origins of each.
• Identify the major judicial and legislative protections for student and parent rights with particular attention to students from diverse cultural, racial and socioeconomic backgrounds.
In the area of Skills, the candidate will be able to:
• Trace and articulate the implementation of due process procedures guiding pre-referral (Georgia Student Support Team), assessment, eligibility determination, development of an Individualized Education Plan (Individual Family Service, Plan, Individual Transition Plan and/or Behavior Intervention Plan) and placement in the least restrictive environment.
• Identify resources for implementing due process that meet federal and state guidelines, with special emphasis on documentation procedures and meeting the needs of students with specialized health care needs, transitioning from private schools or treatment programs, and other unique circumstances.
Pre-Proficiency Exam
|Proficiency Exam |Level 1 |Level 2 |Level 3 |Level 4 |
| |Below 70% |(70-79%) |(80-89%) |(90%+) |
| |Little or No |Limited Evidence |Clear Evidence |Clear, Consistent, and |
| |Evidence | | |Convincing Evidence |
|N=27 Su 2002 |8/30% |7/26% |8/30% |4/15% |
|N=21 Su 2002 |6/29% |6/29% |9/43% |0/0% |
|N=23 Su 2002 |6/26% |7/30% |9/39% |¼% |
Post-Proficiency Exam
|Proficiency Exam |Level 1 |Level 2 |Level 3 |Level 4 |
| |Below 70% |(70-79%) |(80-89%) |(90%+) |
| |Little or No Evidence |Limited Evidence |Clear Evidence |Clear, Consistent, and |
| | | | |Convincing Evidence |
|N=27 Su 2002 |0/0% |0/0% |8/30% |19/70% |
|N=21 Su 2002 |0/0% |0/0% |8/38% |13/62% |
|N=23 Su 2002 |0/0% |0/0% |9/39% |14/61% |
Pre/Post Proficiency Exam Comparisons
|Proficiency |Level 1 |Level 2 |Level 3 |Level 4 |
|Exam |Below 70% |(70-79%) |(80-89%) |(90%+) |
|Total for All Sections |Little or No Evidence |Limited Evidence |Clear Evidence |Clear, Consistent, and |
| | | | |Convincing Evidence |
|Pre-test |20/28% |20/28% |25/35% |5/7% |
|Post-test |0/0% |0/0% |25/35% |46/65% |
|Gain Score |(-)20/(-)28% |(-)20/(-)28% |0/0% |(+)41/(+)58% |
TOTAL LEVELS 3+4 = 71/100%
Exam I
|Exam I |Level 1 |Level 2 |Level 3 |Level 4 |
| |Below 70% |(70-79%) |(80-89%) |(90%+) |
| |Little or No Evidence |Limited Evidence |Clear Evidence |Clear, Consistent, and |
| | | | |Convincing Evidence |
|N=27 |0/0% |2/7% |8/30% |17/63% |
|N=21 |0/0% |4/19% |8/38% |9/43% |
|N=23 |0/0% |2/9% |11/48% |10/43% |
Exam II (Comprehensive)
|Exam II |Level 1 |Level 2 |Level 3 |Level 4 |
| |Below 70% |(70-79%) |(80-89%) |(90%+) |
| |Little or No Evidence |Limited Evidence |Clear Evidence |Clear, Consistent, and |
| | | | |Convincing Evidence |
|N=27 |¼% |7/26% |18/67% |¼% |
|N=21 |0/0% |1/5% |16/76% |4/19% |
|N=23 |0/0% |5/22% |15/65% |3/13% |
Reflection: The Pre-Proficiency Exam was first given with the Su 2002 sections of this course. Since so much information was covered during the course I decided to do what I call a “Walk Through” which serves as a review for the Post-test and takes the candidate from the first sign of a student academic or behavior deficiency through the develop of the Individualized Education Program (IEP) if needed. Included in this journey are all related litigation, legislation, requirements and due process procedures.
Exam I & II also cover litigation, legislation, requirements and due process procedures. In addition Exam II covers additional parental and student rights, exceptions, and application questions. To enhance learning and thus performance, reviews prior to the exams were conducted.
The course also requires simulations, role-playing, collaborative activities, and the development of a Parent Resource Manual and a parent workshop.
Note: In most circumstances, where higher pre-test scores were exhibited, the candidates had been enrolled in the program longer and taken more courses prior to taking this course.
CEC Standard 2 Characteristics
CEC Standard 3 Differences
Objective Examination Data
Objective examinations are used to assess basic knowledge and application of knowledge. Data is recorded for each cohort indicating the number and percentage of candidates achieving each level of proficiency. Level 4 is the target proficiency (90%+ mastery of content) and represents clear, consistent, and convincing evidence of mastery. Level 3 is acceptable and indicates clear evidence of content mastery (80-90% mastery of content). Level 1 and 2 represent less than 80% mastery of content and candidates would be required to document further evidence of mastery for their portfolio.
In EXC 7715 Nature/Needs: Students with Mild Disabilities is based on a course-categorical model integrating characteristics of students with disabilities and highlighting similarities and differences across categorical labels. Two objective exams are used to assess mastery of characteristics, individual differences and accommodations for students with mild/moderate learning disabilities, behavior disorders and intellectual disabilities.
In the area of Knowledge, the candidate will be able to:
• Understand the historical foundations, philosophies, theories and classic studies including the major contributors, and major legislation that under gird the growth and improvement of knowledge and practice in the field of special education.
• Understand the evolution and major perspectives from medicine, psychology, behavior and education on the definitions and etiologies (common and unique) of individuals with disabilities.
• Understand the State of Georgia terminology and definitions of disabilities, including the evaluation criteria, labeling controversies, current incidence and prevalence data.
• Understand the continuum of educational placements and services, including alternative programs for students with disabilities.
• Understand the assurances provided by special education law including least restrictive environment; due process; parent involvement; non-discriminatory evaluation; IEP process; and free, appropriate public education.
• Understand all aspects of individuals with disabilities including their psychological and socio-emotional development, language development, attention and memory, health, cognition, and how they related to student ability to read, write, perform mathematical operations, take tests, develop social skills, etc.
• Understand the effects of various medications related to the educational, cognitive, physical, social and emotional behavior of individuals with disabilities.
• Understand the impact of disability on family functioning, community participation, and career development for the life of the student with disabilities.
• Understand the necessity of creating a positive learning environment and providing alternative teaching skills and strategies to students with disabilities.
Exam I & II Nature/Needs: Students with Mild Disabilities
|Exam I |Level 1 |Level 2 |Level 3 |Level 4 |
| |Below 70% |(70-79%) |(80-89%) |(90+%) |
| |Little or No Evidence |Limited Evidence |Clear Evidence |Clear, Consistent, and |
| | | | |Convincing Evidence |
|N=20 |1/5% |0/0% |1/5% |18/90% |
|Fall 2002 | | | | |
|Exam II |Level1 |Level 2 |Level 3 |Level 4 |
| |Below 70% |(70-79%) |(80-89%) |(90%+) |
| |Little or No Evidence |Limited Evidence |Clear Evidence |Clear, Consistent, and |
| | | | |Convincing Evidence |
|N=20 |4/20% |7/35% |8/40% |1/5% |
|Fall 2002 | | | | |
Reflection: There was a review for each exam, however, for the first exam a study guide was provided and the format of the exam was multiple choice. The second exam had short answer and several applied activity questions. I will provide a study guide for second exam in the future to further direct the emphasis of the information to be covered.
In addition, I have added Eligibility Report assignments to this course. Candidates are given a case study, meet as an eligibility team and complete the report for ID, LD & BD.
In EXC 7770 Psychoneurological and Medical Issues in Special Education, the content includes the characteristics and individual differences of students with health, medical, physical, sensory, and neurological issues. The course also addresses Autism, Traumatic Brain Injury, and Attention Deficit Disorder categories. Two objective exams are used to assess mastery of characteristics, individual differences and accommodations for students with physical, health, sensory, autistic spectrum and neurological disorders.
Knowledge of health and medical issues:
• describe the causes and effects of sensory, physical and medical problems on learning and behavior and the implications for special education.
• articulate modifications and accommodations in assessment and instruction for students with sensory, physical and medical problems.
• articulate sources for support in addressing needs of students with sensory, physical and medical problems including assessment, technological support, communication devices, equipment needs and specialized related services.
• describe curricular and instructional needs for medical and behavioral self-management and independent living skills of students with sensory, physical or medical problems.
|EXAM |Level 1 |Level 2 |Level 3 |Level 4 |
| |Below 70% |(70-80%) |(80-90%) |(90%+) |
| |Little or No Evidence |Limited Evidence |Clear Evidence |Clear, Consistent, and Convincing |
| | | | |Evidence |
|N=18 |0 % |6% |33% |61% |
|Su 2002 | | | | |
|N=26 |12% |27% |50% |12% |
|Su 2001 | | | | |
Knowledge of psychoneurological issues:
• describe the causes and effects of cognitive differences and neurological problems on learning and behavior and the implications for special education.
• articulate modifications and accommodations in assessment and instruction for students with cognitive differences and neurological problems.
• articulate sources for support in addressing needs of students with cognitive differences and neurological problems including assessment, technological support, communication devices, equipment needs and specialized related services.
• describe curricular and instructional needs for medical and behavioral self-management and independent living skills of students with cognitive differences and psychoneurological, problems.
•
|EXAM |Level 1 |Level 2 |Level 3 |Level 4 |
| |Below 70% |(70-80%) |(80-90%) |(90%+) |
| |Little or No Evidence |Limited Evidence |Clear Evidence |Clear, Consistent, and Convincing|
| | | | |Evidence |
|N=18 |0% |11% |56% |33% |
|Su 2002 | | | | |
|N=26 |8% |27% |50% |15% |
|Su 2001 | | | | |
Reflection: Instructional activities modified for SU 2002: Having students develop sample questions and then discussing them in class improved mastery of content and test-taking skills
CEC Standard 4 Instruction
Evaluation of written products (lesson plans), videotape evidence of skill and evaluations of on-the-job performance by KSU field-experience supervisors are used to assess instructional skills. Triangulation of data from three sources provides a more complete picture of candidate performance. Data is recorded for each cohort indicating the number and percentage of candidates achieving each level of proficiency. Level 4 is the target proficiency (90%+ mastery of content) and represents clear, consistent, and convincing evidence of mastery. Level 3 is acceptable and indicates clear evidence of content mastery (80-90% mastery of content). Level 1 and 2 represent less than 80% mastery of content and candidates would be required to document further evidence of mastery for their portfolio. The Unit level Graduate Impact on Student Learning is also completed as part of assessment of this standard.
EXC 7765: Teaching & Learning II Assignment: Multi-Level Cooperative Learning, Direct Instruction and Strategy Instruction Lessons, with Embedded Assessment.
As a result of Knowledge, the student will be able to:
1) Articulate and implement research-based practices and alternatives for teaching individuals with disabilities who differ in degree and kind of disability
2) Articulate and apply knowledge regarding the variability (especially in students of differing cultural backgrounds) of expected learning and problem solving strategies in the school context
3) Articulate and apply the theories of learning, motivation and assessment, particularly as they relate to the individualized programming of students with disabilities
4) Articulate and apply theories of classroom and behavior management, particularly as they relate to the social and behavioral development of students with disabilities
As a result of Skills, the student will be able to:
5) Design and implement direct and cooperative instruction to maximize engaged learning time and meet the unique learning strengths and needs of students with disabilities
6) Select, conduct and assess instruction tailored to the individualized learning needs of students with disabilities in a variety of educational, social and community contexts, as appropriate
7) Evaluate, select, develop, and adapt curriculum materials (within copyright laws) and technology appropriate for individuals with disabilities who differ in degree and kind of disability, linguistic and cultural background
8) Use differentiated strategies for acquisition, proficiency building, maintenance and generalization of skills across setting
As a result of Disposition, the student will be able to:
9) Reflect critically on teacher and learner performances and outcomes and modify practices based upon an action research model
10) Utilize instructional and management strategies which create a positive learning environment for individuals with disabilities, including use of positive proactive and reactive techniques
11) Apply instructional and management strategies for all students in educational settings, including non identified individuals who would benefit.
Lesson Plans. Each person is required to develop three lesson plans (2 reading & 1 math) using specialized instruction. To successfully complete this assignment, you must develop one lesson using cooperative learning, one using direct instruction and one using strategy instruction. The fourth lesson can be a combination of direct and strategy instruction or systematic instruction, using prompts and cues. You may not use a commercially prepared lesson plan (e.g. SRA) to count as direct instruction. Rather you are to design your own lessons. The lesson plans must be scripted, of 20 minutes in duration, and follow the rubrics provided in class. In addition to the script, you are required to adopt one of the lesson planning graphics discussed in your class to depict your lesson in an abbreviated format. Each lesson must be tailored to the instructional needs of the students in your classrooms. This activity must be completed in its entirety by October 8, 2002. You are encouraged to discuss your lesson plans with your peers and all of your instructors (particularly those conducting your classroom observations). Your instructors will allow some of this assignment to be done in class, time permitting.
Assessments. Each person is required to develop a minimum of six assessments. All three lessons must use pre-post assessment format to measure the impact of the instruction on student learning for a group of students. In addition, each person is required to design two more embedded assessments for two individual students. One embedded assessment must measure the student’s progress on an IEP objective that is embedded in content area instruction. For example, the student with the disability (SWD) may participate in a cooperative learning activity in reading a social studies text. The SWD may be working on a speech goal (e.g. initiating conversation with peers) during that activity that must be measured as part of the lesson. The second embedded assessment must include an error correction procedure for an individual student. For example, the SWD may need additional support conducting math lessons that require additional prompts and cues.
EXC 7765 Spring 2002 Direct Instruction Lesson Plan: Evaluation Rubric
|Category |4 Level Teacher |3 Level Teacher | ................
................
In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.
To fulfill the demand for quickly locating and searching documents.
It is intelligent file search solution for home and business.
Related download
Related searches
- illinois state university online courses
- illinois state university programs
- illinois state university bachelor degrees
- illinois state university degree programs
- illinois state university online degree
- illinois state university online masters
- illinois state university summer schedule
- illinois state university summer classes
- illinois state university phd programs
- illinois state university online program
- illinois state university online degrees
- illinois state university masters programs