eduweb.education.radford.edueduweb.education.radford.edu/ncate/docs/ncate exhi… · web...

Program Report for the Preparation of Special Education: General Curriculum K-12 Council for Exceptional Children (CEC) StandardsNATIONAL COUNCIL FOR ACCREDITATION OF TEACHER EDUCATION

C O V E R S H E E T

Institution Radford University State Virginia

Date submitted December 15, 2010

Name of Preparer Ellen B. Austin, MS

Phone # 540-831-5549 Email [email protected]

Program documented in this report:Name of institution’s program (s) MS in Special Education: Hearing Impairment Grade levels for which candidates are being prepared PreK-12 Degree or award level Master of Science Degree Is this program offered at more than one site? Yes X No

If yes, list the sites at which the program is offered

Title of the state license for which candidates are prepared Collegiate Professional – Hearing Impairment PreK-12

Program report status: Initial Review Response to a Not Recognized Decision Response to National Recognition With Conditions Response to a Deferred Decision

State licensure requirement for national recognition:NCATE requires 80% of the program completers who have taken the test to pass the applicable state licensure test for the content field, if the state has a testing requirement. Test information and data must be reported in Section III. Does your state require such a test?

X Yes □ No

Special Education Interdisciplinary Studies – Deaf and Hard of Hearing Undergraduate Program Report, 2010 1

GENERAL DIRECTIONS

To complete a program report, institutions must provide evidence of meeting CEC standards based on data from 6-8 assessments. In their entirety, the assessments and data required for submission in this report will answer the following questions:

Have candidates mastered the necessary knowledge for the subjects they will teach or the jobs they will perform?

Do candidates meet state licensure requirements? Do candidates understand teaching and learning and can they plan their teaching or

fulfill other professional education responsibilities? Can candidates apply their knowledge in classrooms and schools? Do candidates focus on student learning?

To that end, the program report form includes the following sections:

Section I. Context (See each question for character limit)Provide general information on the program as specified by the directions for this section. Please attach a copy of the program of study and one (if possible) attachment containing any charts, graphs, or tables.

Master-level courses at Radford University are taken by those seeking the degree of Master of Science in Special Education, offered both with and without licensure options, and those who seek licensure only with no degree. The graduate-level coursework prepares students to be effective teachers for children and youth with hearing impairment in grades PreK-12 and to be advocates for children, families, and the profession. The program emphasizes knowledge and skills in characteristics, assessment and evaluation, communication approaches, understanding and application of service delivery, curriculum and instruction, IEP development and monitoring, transition, proactive classroom management and positive behavior supports, and collaboration and teamwork. The program of study includes a common core of 12 credit hours, and an additional 18 credit hours selected from a menu of courses. Those seeking initial teacher licensure may have 9 or more additional hours of supporting coursework. Internship experiences of 6-12 hours are also required to obtain postgraduate professional licensure or to complete requirements for provisional licensure in one or more areas of specialization within special education. The Masters only, non-licensure option is intended for graduate students who already have initial teacher licensure in an area of special education or those who desire to enhance their knowledge and skills in diverse areas of special education.

Section II. List of Assessments (completion of chart)Using the chart included in this report form, indicate the name, type, and administration point for each of the 6-8 assessments documented in this report. (Note that Section IV of the report form lists examples of assessments that may be appropriate for each type of assessment that must be documented in the program report.)

Section III. Relationship of Assessments to Standards (completion of chart)Using the chart included in this report form, indicate which of the assessments listed in Section II provide evidence of meeting specific program standards.

Section IV. Evidence for Meeting Standards (attachments of the assessment, scoring guide/criteria, and data tables plus a 2-page maximum narrative for each of the 6-8 assessments)


Attach assessment documentation plus a narrative statement for each assessment as specified by the directions for this section. For each assessment attach one (if possible) attachment that includes the 2-page narrative, assessment, scoring guide, and data table(s).

Section V. Use of Assessment Results to Improve Candidate and Program Performance (12,000- character maximum narrative)Describe how faculty are using the data from assessments to improve candidate performance and the program, as it relates to content knowledge; pedagogical and professional knowledge, skills, and dispositions; and student learning.

Section VI. For Revised Reports OnlyDescribe what changes or additions have been made in the report to address the standards that were not met in the original submission. List the sections of the report you are resubmitting and the changes that have been made. Specific instructions for preparing a revised report are available on the NCATE web site at http://www.ncate.org/institutions/process.asp?ch=4.

Format and page limits for narrative sections and attachments:Narrative: Sections I, IV, and V include narrative sections based on specific directions and character limits. Character limits are based on single-spaced text using 12-point type. Attachments: Sections I and IV include attachments. In general, attachments should be no longer than the equivalent of five text pages. NOTE: The report should contain no more than 20 attachments. NCATE staff may require institutions to revise reports that do not follow directions on format and page limits. In addition, hyperlinks imbedded in report documentation will not be read by reviewers and cannot be used as a means of providing additional information.

______________________________________________________Program report information on the web: http://www.ncate.org/institutions/process.asp?ch=10.To download report forms: http://www.ncate.org/institutions/programStandards.asp?ch=4.


http://www.ncate.org/institutions/programStandards.asp?ch=4

http://www.ncate.org/institutions/process.asp?ch=10

http://www.ncate.org/institutions/process.asp?ch=10

SECTION I—CONTEXT

Provide the following contextual information: 1. Description of any state or institutional policies that may influence the

application of CEC standards. [Response limited to 4000 characters]2. Description of the field and clinical experiences required for the program,

including the number of hours for early field experiences and the number of hours/weeks for student teaching or internships. [Response limited to 8000 characters]

3. Description of the criteria for admission, retention, and exit from the program, including required GPAs and minimum grade requirements for the content courses accepted by the program. [Response limited to 4000 characters]

4. Description of the relationship1 of the program to the unit’s conceptual framework. [Response limited to 4000 characters]

5. Indication of whether the program has a unique set of program assessments and their relationship of the program’s assessments to the unit’s assessment system2. [Response limited to 4000 characters]

6. The On-line PRS system will not permit you to include tables or graphics in text fields. Therefore any tables or charts must be attached as files. The title of the file should clearly indicate its content. Word documents, .pdf files, and other commonly used file formats are acceptable. The system will not accept .docx files. [In PRS you will be able to attach files here]

7. Please attach files to describe a program of study that outlines the courses and experiences required for candidates to complete the program. The program of study must include course titles. [This information may be provided as an attachment from the college catalog (not the complete catalog) or as a student advisement sheet.]

8. Candidate InformationDirections: Provide three years of data on candidates enrolled in the program and completing the program, beginning with the most recent academic year for which numbers have been tabulated. Report the data separately for the levels/tracks (e.g., baccalaureate, post-baccalaureate, alternate routes, master's, doctorate) being addressed in this report. Data must also be reported separately for programs offered at multiple sites. Update academic years (column 1) as appropriate for your data span. [A copy of the Candidate and Completers chart is included as Attachment A at the end of this document.]

9. Faculty InformationDirections: Complete the following information for each faculty member responsible for professional coursework, clinical supervision, or administration in this program. [A copy of the Faculty chart is included as Attachment B at the end of this document.]

1 The response should describe the program’s conceptual framework and indicate how it reflects the unit’s conceptual framework2 This response should clarify how the key assessments used in the program are derived from or informed by the assessment system that the unit will address under NCATE Standard 2.


1. CEC Standards Description of any state or institutional policies that may influence the application of CEC standards. [Response limited to 4000 characters]The deaf and hard of hearing teacher preparation program was developed based on CEC / CED (Council on Education of the Deaf) and Virginia Department of Education state standards. When the standards were updated a few years ago, the courses leading to licensure in Hearing Impairment PreK-12 were updated as well to ensure standards based instruction for all candidates. Along with SPA and state standards, research was done on current trends in the field of deaf education. The subsequent intentional planning and development of coursework ensured that Radford University provide a deaf education program focused on a comprehensive approach to deaf education where students gain knowledge and skills necessary to meet the needs of students with hearing loss despite severity and type of loss, audiologic ability, communication preference, cultural diversity, etc. Students leave with proficiency in American Sign Language as well as exposure to best practice used with families who choose an oral approach to education.

2. Description of Field ExperiencesDuring EDSP 628/Language Development and Literacy for Deaf and Hard of Hearing Students, candidates shadow an itinerant teacher for the deaf and hard of hearing and participate in a tutoring program for students with hearing loss for 6-12 hours. If seeking licensure, candidates spend 250-280+ hours in preschool/elementary and/or middle school/high school classrooms during an early field experience if they have not had previous teaching experience. They spend 490-525+ hours (total of 14-15 weeks) of full time class involvement in their Student Teaching Field Experience placement(s) during the final year of their program (often in two classroom settings pre-k/elementary and/or middle/high school). Candidates easily exceed the VA licensure requirement minimum of 150 hours of supervised instruction. Teacher candidates in schools are also closely supervised, supported, and evaluated. Most candidates are given access to placements in inclusive settings with an itinerant teacher, in self-contained classes within a public school setting and in a residential setting at the Virginia School for the Deaf and Blind. They work with children who have cochlear implants, those show wear hearing aids, and those who use no amplification. Early Field "Block" Experience: The Early Field Experience is an integrated semester of coursework, field experiences, and seminars that teacher candidates complete prior to student teaching if they have had no previous teaching experience before entering the Masters program. The goals of the experience are to:

practice and reflect upon the application of professional knowledge in teaching,

enhance the capacity for deliberate self-study and inquiry into


teaching, increase understanding of diverse learners and of strategies

that meet a variety of students' needs, and receive formative and summative evaluation from a variety of

professional educators within multiple task settings. Teacher candidates are in classrooms 20 hours per week across four-five school days for fourteen weeks. Teacher candidates attend classes in the afternoon and evening. Most teacher candidates accumulate 250-280+ clock hours of work in the schools during this experience, including the supervised teaching and embedded assignments from coursework. The university supervisor observes teacher candidates in the field; conferences with individual teacher candidates in the field and on campus; plans and implements professional development seminars based on the needs of candidates and program; serves as the primary liaison in developing and implementing partnership activities with the school(s); works closely with the cooperating teacher in planning and evaluating the candidate's involvement in the classroom; and collaborates with other supervisors in developing, implementing, and evaluating the courses, field experiences, and seminars. University supervisors contact teacher candidates regarding their field experiences on a weekly basis through seminars or through individual communications, observations, and conferences. The program requires teacher candidates to meet certain qualifications for admission and retention in Early Field Experience. In order to participate and benefit from the program candidates must have basic skills and dispositions in the following areas: effective oral, written, and sign communication skills, knowledge of the disciplines, interpersonal skills and dispositions, and appropriate professional conduct.

Teacher candidates are expected to communicate effectively orally and in writing with usage, spelling, pronunciation, and punctuation appropriate to Standard English. They should be able to articulate clearly and effectively and project and modulate their voice. They are also expected to communicate effectively in American Sign Language using appropriate syntax, non-manual markers, classifiers, fingerspelling, etc. They must exhibit skills at least at the intermediate level as demonstrated on the Sign Communication Proficiency Interview Assessment (SCPI). Radford University has several resources to help teacher candidates meet requirement for demonstrating oral, written, and sign communication skills required for retention in the program. Student Teaching Field Experience: In their last semester, teacher candidates complete a fourteen-fifteen week full-day internship (student teaching). Candidates must log a minimum of 300 hours in the classroom, including a minimum of 150 hours of direct instruction. Students usually log in 490-525+ hours in the classroom during this experience. The university supervisor meets with teacher candidates on a weekly basis and


conducts at least six structured observations and conferences. He or she also meets regularly with the cooperating teacher.

Teacher candidates must apply and be accepted for admission to the Teacher Education Program before being placed in the schools.

3. Description of criteria for admission, retention, and exit

REQUIREMENTS FOR ADMISSION TO THE TEACHER EDUCATION PROGRAMAll Candidates have responsibilities both as a university student and as a pre-serviceprofessional. Teacher candidates must meet minimal requirements in three primary areas: academic excellence, basic proficiency skills, and professional dispositions and characteristics of teacher candidates. Policy and procedure requirements for admission into the Radford University Teacher Education Program are outlined on the Field Experiences webpage.

Prior to applying to the Teacher Education Program, teacher candidates should:• document fifty hours of working with children in structured learning situations;• earn a 2.75 or better GPA overall college work and in their major courses;• complete a speech and hearing test;• pass the basic proficiency exams required for entry into Virginia Teacher Preparation Programs:

Praxis I Math with at least a score of 178 or a composite score of 532 from the reading, writing, and math portions of the test,

Virginia Communication and Language Assessment (VCLA);

Prior to Student Teaching, teacher candidates should: submit scores on the Virginia Reading Assessment (being replaced by

the Reading for Virginia Educators assessment in fall, 2011.) pass the Sign Communication Proficiency Interview assessment with a

score of at least intermediate be recommended by departmental faculty using the Departmental

Review process.

In additional Teacher Candidates are expected to: Demonstrate proficiency in oral, written, and sign communication. Demonstrate knowledge of content and content pedagogy. Exhibit responsible professional conduct at all times by assuming the

characteristics and dispositions of a professional educator. The Code of Ethics of the Education Profession and Radford University Teacher


Preparation Programs Professional Characteristics and Dispositions, both of which can be found in the Field Experiences Handbook. Candidates are strongly encouraged to become familiar with this document.

PERFORMANCE EXPECTATIONS FOR EARLY FIELD EXPERIENCEQUALIFICATIONS FOR RETENTION IN EARLY FIELD EXPERIENCECandidates enrolled in early field experience are expected to meet the minimal requirements within the three primary areas of academic excellence, basic proficiency skills, and interpersonal and professional qualities. These qualifications are more fully described in the Field Experiences Handbook.

Oral, Written, and Sign CommunicationCandidates are expected to communicate effectively both orally, through ASL, and in writing. Candidates should be able to:

use appropriate Standard English, including grammar usage, spelling, pronunciation, and punctuation;

articulate clearly and effectively project and modulate their voice; communicate effectively in American Sign Language using appropriate

syntax, non-manual markers, classifiers, fingerspelling, etc.

Content KnowledgeCandidates should demonstrate sufficient mastery of the knowledge and skills they will be teaching to ensure student learning. Candidates are expected to:

exhibit an interest in content subjects, including the knowledge of accommodating and instructing learners with disabilities;

demonstrate a willingness to collaborate with general educators; have the ability to use a variety of resources for enhancing their skills

and understanding.

Interpersonal Skills and DispositionsCandidates must be able to establish a positive and productive working relationship with their peers, teachers, and instructors. (See Field Experiences Handbook for a detailed listing.) They must already exhibit interpersonal skills and dispositions such as:• unconditional positive regard for children, youth and their families;• professional respect for others and for programs in the school;• ability to handle stress and to deal with change, unexpected events, ambiguity;• ability to positively influence others;• ability to work in a manner that contributes to group goals;• maintain a problem-solving attitude;• observe confidentiality;• use active listening skills;


• express opinions in a mature manner in spite of disagreement;• engage in and benefit from constructive criticism.

Professional ConductCandidates are to assume the attitude, bearing, and responsible actions of a personentrusted with the role of a professional educator. (See the Field Experiences Handbook for a detailed listing).Candidates must: know and abide by all school and university policies and procedures; be punctual, reliable, and dependable; maintain satisfactory attendance and time schedules; commit to the work necessary to accomplish requirements and meet

goals; demonstrate a professional attitude in all contacts with the school,

community, and university; recognize situations which require confidentiality and be extremely

cautious in dealing with such situations.

4. Description of relationship of program to the unit’s conceptual framework

Conceptual Framework

Radford University believes that learning to teach is a career-long process, and candidates must therefore demonstrate a commitment to life-long learning. Radford designs programs that integrate knowledge and skills from several areas of study and experience over time: prior beliefs, research, expert counsel of practitioners, guidelines from professional organizations, and the candidates' own study and experience. Radford encourages candidates and faculty to use and examine their own beliefs and concepts of teaching, their continued experiences and experiences of others, the craft knowledge of mentor teachers, and research literature on teaching and learning. Evidence-based practices in education are emphasized in coursework and throughout the internship for the maximum impact on student learning.

Candidates are expected to demonstrate knowledge, skills, and dispositions in six key areas: (a) understanding content and engaging students meaningfully with content; (b) understanding how students learn and develop, understanding individual differences, and being able to adapt instruction for diverse learners; (c) establishing a culture for learning; (d) demonstrating research-based, effective strategies in planning, (e) in instruction and assessment of student learning; and (f) demonstrating professionalism by seeking opportunities for professional growth, being proficient in implementing state and national standards, fostering relationships with colleagues, families, and communities to support students' learning and well-being.


Thus the design of the program, in support of and parallel with the unit's conceptual framework, is that of a professional learning community in which all-candidates, experienced teachers, faculty, university and school administrators-work together in a purposeful and reflective manner to support the development of children, communities, and each other. Inquiring into teaching and learning and exploring the use of inquiry to promote children's literacy in the disciplines serve as departure points for professional development and for collaborative work addressing the needs of children within varying school contexts.

Radford’s Expectations

The expectation for Radford University professional education candidates is that they demonstrate a commitment to life-long learning. Studies of experts and novices in education suggest that professional knowledge and dispositions emerge from lived-experience reflections: situated learning that takes place within an environment that values and pursues inquiry into professional practice and student development and learning. Thus, a second underlying tenet in Radford University's program is the emphasis on professional learning communities that promote the development and wellbeing of students and families, professional education candidates, and university and school-based faculty. Programs are also designed to encourage candidates to integrate knowledge gained over time from several areas of study and experience: from candidates' prior beliefs and understanding, from research in their fields, from the expert counsel of practitioners, from guidelines from professional organizations, and from their own study and experiences as teachers. Research has heightened awareness of the pervasive impact that content knowledge has on professional practice. Deep content knowledge is essential in promoting student learning. Teacher candidates understand the central concepts, tools of inquiry, and structures of the discipline(s). Candidates create learning experiences that make these aspects of subject matter meaningful for students. They are able to address content in ways that motivate and engage students, using multiple modes for representing content and for assessing learning in order to meet the needs of diverse learners. Professional expertise includes the knowledge, skills, and dispositions to engage in learner and family centered work. Informed decision-making requires a strong understanding of various aspects of human development. Candidates understand how children and youth learn and develop, and can provide learning opportunities that support their intellectual, linguistic, social, and personal development. They understand how students differ in their approaches to learning and can create instructional opportunities that are adapted to diverse learners. They use an understanding of individual and group motivation and behavior to create a learning environment that encourages positive social interaction, optimal audiologic enhancement, active engagement in learning, and self- motivation. The increasing diversity of students in schools requires that professionals have strong foundations in multicultural and global perspectives, in the socio-cultural contexts of


human growth and development, in learning styles, in communication and interaction styles, in family systems, and in student exceptionalities. Candidates demonstrate the knowledge, skills, and commitment needed to advocate for quality education for all students, and to recognize and eliminate structures, assumptions, and practices that restrict access or perpetuate inequities in education. Best practice requires a commitment to inquiry and reflection, attention to multiple variables impacting student development and learning, and a proactive stance toward schools as learning communities. Candidates apply best practices in order to ensure that all children and youth are successful learners. Candidates use knowledge of effective verbal, nonverbal, sign, and media communication strategies to foster active inquiry, collaboration, and supportive interaction among students and professionals. Candidates plan instruction and services based upon knowledge of subject matter, students, families, the community, and curriculum goals. They understand and use formal and informal assessment strategies to evaluate and ensure the continuous intellectual, social and physical development of the learner. Candidates are able to explain what they believe, know, and do based upon research and best practice. They are able to integrate technology into their practice to promote student learning, enhance students’ audiologic abilities, to access information to enhance communication, to manage their roles and responsibilities effectively and to extend their own learning. Candidates actively seek opportunities to develop professionally and to promote renewal and best practice in the learning community. Candidates reflect systematically upon their practice and continually evaluate the effects of their choices, decision, and actions on others. Candidates are knowledgeable about and proficient in meeting professional and state standards for practitioners in their field. Candidates foster relationships with school colleagues, families, agencies, and the community to support students' learning and well-being. They are able to communicate effectively and sensitively with families about school programs and about the progress of their children, and are successful in engaging families in the education of their children and youth. Program DescriptionRadford's teacher preparation program in Deaf and Hard of Hearing contains several components that make it successful in preparing teachers. These components are:

CEC/CED and VDOE standards based curriculum requirements, a comprehensive approach to education of the deaf that provides

candidates with a broad range of knowledge and skills to meet the needs of students regardless of audiologic ability or communication preference,

require proficiency in American Sign Language and knowledge and skills in developing listening skills and spoken language,

pedagogical studies, extensive clinical experiences in a variety of education placements

and a variety of educational levels


interaction and mentoring among university faculty and candidates.

Program Vision and Mission

Vision: The Radford University Masters of Science Degree Program with Licensure in Hearing Impairment PreK-12 emphasizes the preparation of effective teachers who can work collaboratively in today’s complex and diverse classrooms and employ specialized instruction to maximize learning for children and youth who are deaf or hard of hearing regardless of audiologic ability, communication preference, or academic ability. The program fosters collaborative teaching and learning experiences that prepare educators of students with hearing loss to work as 21st century agents of positive change.

Mission: Radford University Special Education programs offer practicing educators and those intending to enter the teaching profession the opportunity to engage in a program of study that meets their interests and teacher licensure needs in the area of special education. Our programs emphasize knowledge and skills in characteristics, assessment and evaluation, understanding and application of service delivery, curriculum and instruction, IEP development and monitoring, transition, proactive classroom management and positive behavior support, and collaboration and teamwork. The goal of the program is to develop professionals who can work effectively with children and youth with disabilities, ensure their academic and personal success through collaboration with families, general educators and other team members, and advocate for children, families and the profession to improve the quality of life for all children and youth.

Radford University’s Masters in Science – Deaf and Hard of Hearing Teacher Education Program, in addition to the above, provides teacher candidates with the knowledge and skills necessary to work with children and youth who are deaf / hard of hearing with varying audiologic, linguistic, academic, and communication needs.

5. Indication of whether the program has a unique set of assessments

Common Assessments across the Unit include the following:1. Content Knowledge Licensure Assessment/s – Praxis I, Virginia

Communication and Language Assessment (VCLA) and the Virginia Reading Assessment (VRA) – to be replaced by Reading for Virginia Educators assessment (RVE)

2. Content Knowledge – Departmental Review Process3. Assessment of Student Teaching – Teacher Candidate Evaluation form4. Additional Assessment - Professional Characteristics & Dispositions form5. Additional Assessment – Employer/Alumni Survey


Assessments that are unique to the Masters of Science – Deaf and Hard of Hearing Teacher Preparation Program

1. Content Knowledge – Family Information Website/Booklet Assessment2. Assessment of Candidate ability to Plan – Lesson Plan Assessment3. Assessment of Candidate effect on Student Learning – Written Language

Sample Diagnostic Analysis Assessment4. Additional Assessment – IEP Assignment Assessment, Diagnostic

Report, and Functional Behavior Assessment and Behavior Intervention Plan

PROGRAM OF STUDYMASTERS OF SCIENCE IN SPECIAL EDUCATION

DEAF AND HARD OF HEARING PLUS LICENSURE, PreK-12

INSTRUCTIONS: Please complete this form and meet with your academic advisor for signatures within your first 9 semester hours of graduate course work. Changes in your program of study must be requested and approved using the Change of Program of Study form http://www.radford.edu/gradcollege/current_students/petprogch.pdf

Student Name ID Number

RU Email Phone Number


http://www.radford.edu/gradcollege/current_students/petprogch.pdf

Date of Entry into Program

Catalogue Year

REQUIRED CORE COURSES

CourseNumber

Course Title Credits SemesterPlanned

Grade Sem.

Faculty Use

EDSP 651 Students with Diverse Learning Needs andthe Special Education Process(Prerequisite for all other courses)

3

EDSP 622 Collaboration to Teach and Support DiverseLearners

3

EDSP 670 Proactive Classroom Management andAdvanced Positive Behavior Support

3

EDEF 606 Educational Research(must be taken within first 9 hours of program)

3

REQUIRED CONCENTRATION COURSESCourseNumber


Grade Sem.Faculty Use

EDSP 526 Introduction to Deaf and Hard of Hearing(Prerequisite for EDSP 527 and 628)

3

EDSP 527 Curriculum and Methods for Deaf andHard of Hearing Students

3

EDSP 628 Language Development and Literacy for Deafand Hard of Hearing Students

3

EDSP 625 Audiologic Assessment and Intervention 3

EDSP 669 Diagnostic and Assessment Procedures for Individuals with Disabilities

3

EDSP/EDRD641

Assessment and Intervention for Language Development

3

Total Hours 30ADDITIONAL COURSES FOR LICENSURECourseNumber

Credit fromUG/G Course


Grade Sem.

Faculty Use Faculty UseEDEF 320or 607

Foundations ofEducation

3

HUMD 300orEDEF 600

Human Growth andDevelopment BirthThrough Adolescence

3

EDRD 414or 688

Foundations of LiteracyInstruction

3

EDET 620 Educational Technology:Applications, Applied

3


Research and IntegrationCOSD 223 American Sign Language:

III3

EDSP 432Practicum: Deaf and Hardof Hearing Students

4

TEACHING INTERNSHIPCourseNumber


Grade SemesterFaculty Use

EDSP 755 Deaf and Hard of Hearing Teaching Internship – Preschool / Elementary

6

EDSP 756 Deaf and Hard of Hearing Teaching Internship – Secondary

6

REQUIRED TESTS, MUST PASS TO ENROLL IN INTERNSHIP AND FOR LICENSURETest Name Test Date Test Score

Faculty UseASL Proficiency Examination – Equivalent to LevelIIIPraxis I (for initial licensure candidates only)

Virginia Communication and Literacy Assessment(for initial licensure candidates only)Virginia Reading Assessment (recommended aftercompletion of reading coursework)

Expected Date of Required Comprehensive Exam (completed inyour last semester of coursework)

Student Signature: _________________________________________ Date: _____________________

Advisor Signature: _________________________________________ Date: _____________________

Program Coordinator Signature: ______________________________ Date: _____________________

Dean, Graduate College Signature: ____________________________ Date: _____________________


SECTION II— LIST OF ASSESSMENTSIn this section, list the 6-8 assessments that are being submitted as evidence for meeting the CEC standards. All programs must provide a minimum of six assessments. If your state does not require a state licensure test in the content area, you must substitute an assessment that documents candidate attainment of content knowledge in #1 below. For each assessment, indicate the type or form of the assessment and when it is administered in the program.

Name of Assessment3 Type orForm of Assessment4

When the AssessmentIs Administered5

1 [Licensure assessment, or other content-based assessment]Teacher Candidate Evaluation

Student Teaching Final Teacher Candidate Evaluation

(Category I and IV – Final only)

EDSP 755/756Taken during the final semester of

the program2 [Assessment of content knowledge in special

education]Family Information Website/Booklet Performance Assessment Task

Course ProjectEDSP 526

First course taken in the program specific to deaf education

3 [Assessment of candidate ability to plan instruction]Lesson Plan Performance Assessment Task

Course ProjectEDSP 628

Taken in the latter half of the program after EDSP 526

4 [Assessment of student teaching]Teacher Candidate Evaluation Student Teaching Final Teacher

Candidate Evaluation(All categories)

EDSP 755/756Taken during the final semester of

the program5 [Assessment of candidate effect on student

learning] Written Language Sample Diagnostic Analysis Performance Assessment Task

Course Project / Case Study EDSP 628Taken in the latter half of the

program after EDSP 5266 Additional assessment that addresses CEC

standards (required) ]Diagnostic ReportFBA/BIP Performance Assessment Task

Course Project / Case StudyEDSP 669 / EDSP 670

Typically taken while participating in teaching internship

7 Additional assessment that addresses CEC standards (optional) ]IEP Performance Assessment Task Course Project / Case Study

EDSP 527Typically taken while participating

in teaching internship8 Additional assessment that addresses CEC

standards (optional) ]Employer and Alumni Surveys Survey Following graduation

CANDIDATE PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT FRAMEWORK

3 Identify assessment by title used in the program; refer to Section IV for further information on appropriate assessment to include.4 Identify the type of assessment (e.g., essay, case study, project, comprehensive exam, reflection, state licensure test, portfolio).5 Indicate the point in the program when the assessment is administered (e.g., admission to the program, admission to student teaching/internship, required courses [specify course title and numbers], or completion of the program).

Initial and Advanced Teacher Preparation ProgramsPROGRAM ___Interdisciplinary Studies: Deaf and Hard of Hearing____ Submitted by _Ellen Austin_ Date December, 2010_Decision Points 1* Admission Admission Program To Program to Student Teaching Completion

Assessment Components(NCATE Standards)

Evidence collected prior to admission.

Evidence collected after formal admission and prior to internship

Evidence collected during Teaching Internship

Evidence collected during the first 3 years of practice

Content Knowledge (NCATE 1a)

Departmental Review Sign Communication Proficiency

Interview (SCPI) Scores

-EDSP 432 Early Field Experience Teacher Candidate Evaluation –if required

-EDSP 755/756 Student Teaching Teacher Candidate Evaluation

-Employer and Alumni Survey

Pedagogical Content Knowledge and Skills (1b)

Departmental Review-EDSP 628 Lesson Plan Candidate Performance Assessment

- EDSP 432 Early Field Experience Teacher Candidate Evaluation–if required- EDSP 527 IEP Performance Assessment Task



Professional Knowledge and Skills (1c)

-EDSP 526 Family Information Website/Booklet Performance Assessment-EDSP 628 Written Language Sample Diagnostic Analysis Performance Assessment Task-EDSP 628 Lesson Plan Candidate Performance Assessment

- EDSP 432 Early Field Experience Teacher Candidate Evaluation–if required-EDSP 527 IEP Performance Assessment Task



Impact on Student Learning (1d)

-EDSP 628 Written Language Sample Diagnostic Analysis Performance Assessment Task-EDSP 628 Lesson Plan Candidate Performance Assessment

-EDSP 527 IEP Performance Assessment Task- EDSP 432 Early Field Experience Teacher Candidate Evaluation-if required-EDSP 670 FBA/BIP-EDSP 669 Diagnostic Report



Dispositions (1g) -EDSP 651 Professional Characteristics and Dispositions Rating

- EDSP 432 Early Field Experience Teacher Candidate Evaluation-if required



Technology Knowledge, skills (1c and state requirement)

-EDSP 526 Family Information Website/Booklet Performance Assessment

- EDSP 432 Early Field Experience Teacher Candidate Evaluation-if required



Knowledge, Skills, and Dispositions to Help All Students Learn (3c)

-EDSP 628 /Lesson Plan Candidate Performance Assessment and Written Language Sample Diagnostic Analysis Performance Assessment Task

- EDSP 432 Early Field Experience Teacher Candidate Evaluation-if required-EDSP 527 IEP Performance Assessment Task-EDSP 670 FBA/BIP-EDSP 669 Diagnostic Report



1. *The decision points will vary according to the type of program. For example, Pre-K 12 programs in art, music, dance, and health and physical education admit students after early field experiences and courses are completed and just prior to student teaching. Five year programs admit students after completion of one year of pre- professional courses and experiences (their fourth year) and they complete early field experiences and student teaching in the fall and spring of their fifth year.

SECTION III—RELATIONSHIP OF ASSESSMENT TO STANDARDS


Enter the national or state standard on the chart below, identify the assessment(s) in Section II that address the standard. One assessment may apply to multiple standards.

Council for Exceptional Children (CEC) Knowledge and Skill Base for All Beginning Special Education Teachers

APPLICABLE ASSESSMENTS FROM SECTION II

Standard 1: Foundations X#1 X#2 □#3 □#4□#5 □#6 □#7 □#8

Standard 2: Development and Characteristics of Learners □#1 X#2 □#3 X#4□#5 □#6 □#7 □#8

Standard 3: Individual Learning Differences X#1 □#2 □#3 X#4X#5 □#6 □#7 □#8

Standard 4: Instructional Strategies X#1 □ #2 X#3 X#4□#5 □#6 X#7 □#8

Standard 5: Learning Environments and Social Interactions X#1 □#2 □#3 X#4□#5 X#6 □#7 X#8

Standard 6: Language X#1 □#2 □#3 X#4X#5 □#6 □#7 □#8

Standard 7: Instructional Planning X#1 □#2 X#3 X#4X#5 □#6 X#7 □#8

Standard 8: Assessment X#1 □#2 X#3 X#4X#5 X#6 X#7 □#8

Standard 9: Professional and Ethical Practice X#1 □#2 □#3 X#4□#5 □#6 □#7 X#8

Standard 10: Collaboration X#1 □#2 □#3 X#4□#5 X#6 □#7 □#8


SECTION IV—EVIDENCE FOR MEETING STANDARDS

DIRECTIONS: The 6-8 key assessments listed in Section II must be documented and discussed in Section IV. The assessments must be those that all candidates in the program are required to complete and should be used by the program to determine candidate proficiencies as expected in the program standards. In the description of each assessment below, the SPA has identified potential assessments that would be appropriate. Assessments have been organized into the following three areas that are addressed in NCATE’s unit standard 1:

Content knowledge6

Pedagogical and professional knowledge, skills and dispositions Focus on student learning

For each assessment, the evidence for meeting standards should include the following information:

1. A brief description of the assessment and its use in the program (one sentence may be sufficient);2. A description of how this assessment specifically aligns with the standards it is cited for in Section III.3. A brief analysis of the data findings;4. An interpretation of how that data provides evidence for meeting standards; and5. Attachment of assessment documentation, including7:

(a) the assessment tool or description of the assignment; (b) the scoring guide for the assessment; and (c) candidate data derived from the assessment.

The narrative section for each assessment (1-4 above) is limited to two text pages. It is preferred that each attachment for a specific assessment (5a-c above) be limited to the equivalent of five text pages, however in some cases assessment instruments or scoring guides may go beyond 5 pages.

6 In some disciplines, content knowledge may include or be inextricable from professional knowledge. If this is the case, assessments that combine content and professional knowledge may be considered “content knowledge” assessments for the purpose of this report.7 All three components of the assessment – as identified in 5a-c – must be attached, with the following exceptions: (a) the assessment tool and scoring guide are not required for reporting state licensure data, and (b) for some assessments, data may not yet be available.

#1 (Required)–CONTENT KNOWLEDGE: Data from licensure tests or professional examinations of content knowledge. Provide assessment information (items 1-5) as outlined in the directions for Section IV

SECTION IV: DESCRIPTION OF ASSESSMENTS

Assessment #1Assessment Name: Student Teaching Final Teacher Candidate Evaluation (All questions in Category I and IV – Final evaluation only)

Program Context: Candidates participate in two student teaching experiences, EDSP 755: Teaching Internship in Deaf and Hard of Hearing – Preschool/Elementary and EDSP 756: Teaching Internship in Deaf and Hard of Hearing - Secondary. The intern is evaluated using the Student Teaching Teacher Candidate Evaluation form.

Program Standards:NCATE – Content KnowledgeCEC Standards – #1 Foundations, #3 Individual Learning Differences, #4 Instructional Strategies, #5 Learning Environments and Social Interactions, #6 Language, #7 Instructional Planning, #8 Assessment, and #9 Professional and Ethical Practice.

Description of task: Candidates are placed in two settings during the final semester of their senior year, one in a preschool/ elementary placement and the other in a middle or high school placement. They are paired with a cooperating professional who has a Master’s degree (preferably), licensure in Hearing Impairment PreK-12, and at least 3 years teaching experience. Each experience represents a minimum of 37 clock hours per week over the 14/15 week semester. Interns teach a variety of content areas, including reading, English, spelling, math, and other core content areas including social sciences and sciences, depending upon the specific roles engaged in by the particular cooperating teacher with whom they are paired. Interns are evaluated with the rubric at mid-term and again at the end of the semester. The tool is used to provide formative as well as summative data.

Assessment Rubric/Scoring Guide: The intern evaluation form is 6 pages in length. Category 1 addresses content knowledge and content pedagogy. Category IV addresses planning and implementing instruction. The evaluation form uses the following scale:U=UnsatisfactoryI=Needs ImprovementS=Progressing SatisfactorilyP=ProficientD=Distinguished


EDSP 755 (Student Teaching Category I University Supervisor) —1 student reported/reflected

Rubric Row n Mean StdDev N/AUnsatisfactory

N (%)

Needs Improvement

N (%)

Satisfactory performance

N (%)Proficient

N (%)Distinguished

N (%)Demonstrates strong knowledge of the content being taught (overall rating).

1 4 0 0 0 0 1( 100) 0

Engages students with the content in meaningful ways (overall rating).

1 3 0 0 0 1 (100) 0 0

Applies an understanding of how students learn the content, including typical challenges students may encounter.

1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100) 0

Uses a variety of teaching strategies appropriate for the content being taught.

1 3 0 0 0 1 (100) 0 0

5. Relates the content to students’ lives and interests.

1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100) 0

all percentages

all percentages (%) rounded to nearest integer

EDSP 755 (Student Teaching Category IV University Supervisor) —1 student reported/reflected


N (%)

Needs Improvement

N (%)


N (%)Proficient

N (%)Distinguished

N (%)1. Develops clearly structured instructional plans with objectives, activities, and assessments appropriately aligned.

1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100) 0

2. Aligns instruction with state SOL’s and national curriculum goals.

1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100) 0

3. States instructional objectives in 1 3 0 0 0 1 (100) 0 0


clear, measurable terms.

4. Plans and implements a variety of effective instructional strategies based on an understanding of subject matter, the students, community, curriculum goals, and best practice.

1 3 0 0 0 1 (100) 0 0

5. Selects and uses a variety of effective instructional materials.

1 3 0 0 0 1 (100) 0 0

6. Engages and maintains students’ attention, and is able to refocus their attention if necessary.

1 3 0 0 0 1 (100) 0 0

7. Uses clear directions, explanations, demonstrations, questions, etc.

1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100) 0

8. Uses a variety of strategies that encourages the development of critical thinking, problem-solving, and performance skills.

1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100) 0

9. Selects or develops and implements student learning activities that integrate technology.

1 1 0 0 0 0 0

10. Provides feedback to students in a timely and helpful manner.

1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100) 0

Plans and uses assessment criteria and strategies appropriate to instructional goals and to characteristics of students.

1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100) 0

Summarizes and analyzes evidence of student learning for individuals and groups.

1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100) 0

13. Uses assessment information to improve teaching and/or student achievement.

1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100) 0

14. Persists in assisting students having difficulty learning.

1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100) 0


15. Maintains accurate records of student progress.

1 1 0 0 0 0 0

16. Identifies and uses community resources in enhancing learning.

1 1 0 0 0 0 0

17. Plans and implements instruction based on knowledge of learning theory.

1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100) 0

all percentages (%) rounded to nearest integerNarrative and Analysis:

The candidate was not rated as unsatisfactory or needing improvement in either category, yet was not rated as distinguished in either as well.

In the category of Content Knowledge and Pedagogy, 40% of the candidate’s ratings were satisfactory and 60% were proficient.

In the category of Planning and Implementing Instruction, approximately 22% of the candidate’s ratings were satisfactory, 60% were proficient and 18% of the competencies were not applicable due to the constraints of the placement or not observed.

Scores reflect that the candidate not only demonstrates content knowledge, she also demonstrates good proficient pedagogical knowledge by actively engaging the students through authentic teaching that relates to their lives and interests, through use of varying instructional strategies, by aligning assessments with the content in meaningful and diagnostic ways, and by effectively relaying the content through proficient use of American Sign Language (ASL).

While the ratings do not indicate this, upper level content knowledge proves to be quite challenging for interns. This candidate is to be commended for her effort in studying and relearning content prior to planning her lessons. This intern was diligent about analyzing the content, doing a task analysis, and fully preparing for the instructional process which was difficult for her since learning new content has always been so easy for her. Initially, she struggled to bring the content level down to a level at which the students could understand and then increase the difficulty level. Her cooperating teachers were diligent with helping her until she was able to do this task analysis on her own. This candidate is a native ASL user so she was quite proficient at effectively teaching the content through ASL which led to effective learning and academic success for her students.


#2 (Required)–CONTENT KNOWLEDGE: Assessment of content knowledgeProvide assessment information (items 1-5) as outlined in the directions for Section IVAssessment #2

Assessment Name: Family Information Website/Brochure Performance Assessment Task

Program Context: Candidates complete this assessment during the course, EDSP 526/Introduction to Deaf and Hard of Hearing, which is the first course that is specific to deaf education. This course is a prerequisite course for all other deaf education specific coursework.

Program Standards:NCATE – Content KnowledgeCEC Standards – #1 Foundations, #2 Development and Characteristics of Learners, and #6 Language.

Description of task: The Family Information Website/Brochure Performance Assessment Task is an assignment that is completed during EDSP 526, Introduction to Deaf and Hard of Hearing. It allows the students to assimilate the foundational information in the field of education of the deaf/hard of hearing. Students create a webpage or booklet containing information (for example, about anatomy of the hearing organ, causes of hearing loss, measurement and types of hearing loss, communication options, instructional approaches, language development issues, educational placements, listing of local, state, and national resources, etc.) / information that should be presented to parents in order for them to make informed choices concerning the communication, education, and emotional needs of their deaf/hard of hearing child.

Assessment Rubric/Scoring Guide: This assessment task measures the following CEC and state standards:

Council for Exceptional Children/Council on Education of the Deaf Standards:Initial Standards for Special Education Teachers of Individuals with Exceptional Learning Needs:

Deaf or Hard of HearingD&HH1K3 Etiologies of hearing loss that can result in additional learning challengesD&HH1S1

Develop and enrich cultural competence relative to the deaf community

ICC2K3 Characteristics and effects of the cultural and environmental milieu of the individual with exceptional learning needs and the family

ICC2K4 Family systems and the role of families in supporting development

D&HH2K1 Cognitive and language development of individuals who are deaf and hard of hearing

D&HH2K2 Effects of the interrelationship among onset of hearing loss, age of identification, and provision of services on the development of the individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing

ICC3K4 Cultural perspectives influencing the relationships among families, schools, and communities as related to instruction

D&HH3K1 Influence of experience and educational placement on all developmental domainsD&HH3K2 Influence of cultural identity and language on all developmental domainsICC5S3 Identify supports needed for integration into various program placementsICC6K1 Effects of cultural and linguistic differences on growth and developmentD&HH6K3

Effects of sensory input on the development of language and learning

D&HH6K4

Spoken and visual communication modes

D&HH6K5

Current theories of the development of spoken language and signed languages

D&HH6S1

Apply strategies to facilitate cognitive and communicative development

D&HH6S5

Implement strategies for developing spoken language in orally communicating individuals with exceptional learning needs and sign language proficiency in signing individuals with exceptional learning needs

D&HH9K2

Professional resources relevant to the field of education of individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing

D&HH9K3

Knowledge of professional organizations in the field of deaf education

ICC10K3 Concerns of families of individuals with exceptional learning needs and strategies to help address these concerns

D&HH10K1

Services, organizations, and networks that support individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing

D&HH10S1

Provide families with support to make informed choices regarding communication modes, philosophies, and educational options

Virginia Department of Education Program Status Matrix2007 Special Education Hearing Impairments PreK-12 8 VAC 20-542-460

VHI6-c Understanding of speech, language, and hearing development, including:

a) Speech and language development and the effects of disabling conditions and cultural diversity on typical language development;

b) The effects of hearing impairments and cultural diversity on language development;

c) Anatomy of speech structures, auditory and visual mechanisms, production, transmission and psychophysical characteristics of sound; and

VHI8 Understanding of communication modalities to include various modalities of communication, including cued speech, speech reading, verbal communication, and demonstrated proficiency in sign language communication.

The evaluation form uses the following ratings:4 = Target: Equivalent to an A, or outstanding. All required elements are provided and meet the

requirements that are indicated on the evaluation rubric and modeled in class. In addition, the elements are presented coherently, thoughtfully, and professionally. A clear grasp of the purpose of the task is demonstrated.


3 = Acceptable: Equivalent to a B, or meets expectations. Satisfactory work; all required elements are included, but there may be a few errors in form, and one or two elements that are somewhat weak. A clear grasp of the purpose of the task is demonstrated, but somewhat less coherently, thoughtfully, and/or creatively than Target performance. If a task is missing any element, it should not receive an Acceptable rating.

2 = Minimal: Equivalent to a C. Nominally meets the task requirements. A minor element may be completely missing, two or more elements are weak, and there are several errors in form.

1 = Unacceptable: Equivalent to a D or an F. Performance is below expectations for the student’s level of study. One or more required elements are missing, and/or significantly weak, and there are a number of errors in form.Grading Rubric for the Family Information Website/Brochure Performance Assessment Task:

Grading Rubric for Website/BookletEDSP 426/526: Introduction to Deaf and Hard of Hearing

Student: _ ___________________________Date: ______________________________Instructor: __ ________________________

Ratings:4 = Target: Equivalent to an A, or outstanding. All required elements are provided and meet the requirements that are

indicated on the evaluation rubric and modeled in class. In addition, the elements are presented coherently, thoughtfully, and professionally. A clear grasp of the purpose of the task is demonstrated.

3 = Acceptable: Equivalent to a B, or meets expectations. Satisfactory work; all required elements are included, but there may be a few errors in form, and one or two elements that are somewhat weak. A clear grasp of the purpose of the task is demonstrated, but somewhat less coherently, thoughtfully, and/or creatively than Target performance. If a task is missing any element, it should not receive an Acceptable rating.

2 = Minimal: Equivalent to a C. Nominally meets the task requirements. A minor element may be completely missing, two or more elements are weak, and there are several errors in form.

1 = Unacceptable: Equivalent to a D or an F. Performance is below expectations for the student’s level of study. One or more required elements are missing, and/or significantly weak, and there are a number of errors in form

Element & Number of points

Target Accept-able

Minimal Unaccept-able

Comments

1. Includes information that explains the anatomy of the auditory mechanism, production, and transmission of sound. (VHI6c)

2. Includes information that explains the chart on which hearing assessment is presented (audiogram), and the types of hearing loss. (D&HH1K3, D&HH6K3).

3. Includes information that explains the etiologies of hearing loss, including those that can cause additional sensory, motor and/or learning difficulties for deaf/hard of hearing students (D&HH1K3).


4. Includes unbiased information about communication modes / instructional approaches used with deaf/hard of hearing students:

Includes all 5 communication modes/approaches used with deaf/hard of hearing students

Provides differentiating descriptions of the approaches. (ICC2K3, ICC2K4, D&HH10S1, ICC5S3, D&HH3K2, ICC6K1, NCATE Standard 1).

5. Includes unbiased information about the educational placements/program options for d/hh students. Describes the cultural, linguistic,

academic and social-emotional impact of each option on deaf/hard of hearing students.( D&HH1S1, D&HH3K1, ICC3K4, D&HH1S1, ICC6K1, NCATE Standard 1)

6. Includes information about language development in deaf/hard of hearing students. (D&HH2K1, D&HH2K1, D&HH2K2, D&HH3K2, D&HH6K5, NCATE Standard 1). Include ideas for creating a

language rich home environment (D&HH6K4, D&HH6S1, D&HH6S5, VHI8, NCATE Standard 1).

7. Includes a listing of local, regional, and national services for deaf/hard of hearing students (D&HH9K2, D&HH9K3, D&HH10K1, NCATE Standard 1).

8. Includes name and contact information of a parent mentor willing to offer support (can be fictitious) (ICC10K3, D&HH10K1, NCATE Standard 1)

9. Creativity: Visually pleasing; Creative, carefully planned

(Technology)10. Form & mechanics:

References in APA form; Neat; Correct spelling, grammar,

composition (Technology).

Spring 2010 Candidate Data reported below:


Only one administration of this data is reported because a former faculty member taught the class in fall of 2008. He is no longer with the university and his data from fall 2008 could not be secured


EDSP 526 Family Information Website/Brochure Performance Assessment Task —4 students reported, 4 reflected

Rubric Row n Mean StdDev N/AUnacceptable

N (%)Minimal

N (%)Acceptable

N (%)TargetN (%)

Includes information that explains the anatomy of the auditory mechanism, production, and transmission of sound.

4 4 0 0 0 0 0 4 (100)

Includes information that explains the chart on which hearing assessment is presented (audiogram), and the types of hearing loss.

4 4 0 0 0 0 0 4 (100)

Includes information that explains the etiologies of hearing loss, including those that can cause additional sensory, motor and/or learning difficulties for deaf/hard of hearing students

4 4 0 0 0 0 0 4 (100)

Includes unbiased information about communication modes / instructional approaches used with deaf/hard of hearing students: •Includes all 5 communication modes/approaches used with deaf/hard of hearing students •Provides differentiating descriptions of

4 3.75 2.5 0 0 0 1 (25) 3 (75)

Includes unbiased information about the educational placements/program options for d/hh students. •Describes the cultural, linguistic, academic and social-emotional impact of each option on deaf/hard of hearing students

4 3 10.924 0 1 (25) 0 1 (25) 2 (50)

Includes information about language development in deaf/hard of hearing students. •Include ideas for creating a language rich home environment

4 2.25 8.846 0 1 (25) 1 (25) 2 (50) 0

Includes a listing of local, regional, and national services for deaf/hard of hearing students

4 3.75 2.5 0 0 0 1 (25) 3 (75)

Includes name and contact information of a parent mentor willing to offer support (can be fictitious)

4 2.667 12.097 1 1 (33) 0 1 (33) 1 (33)

Creativity: •Visually pleasing; •Creative, carefully planned (Technology)

4 4 0 0 0 0 0 4 (100)

Form & mechanics: •References in APA form; •Neat; •Correct spelling, grammar, composition (Technology).

4 3.5 2.887 0 0 0 2 (50) 2 (50)


Narrative and Analysis: A majority of the candidates were rated as acceptable or target in all areas except

one. Scoring indicates that 100% of the students clearly understand at the target level

and can effectively explain to parents the process of hearing, the parts of and information depicted on an audiogram, and types of hearing loss and their etiologies.

The candidates’ websites were carefully planned, creatively constructed, and visually pleasing.

One of the areas where a student received an unacceptable rating was in the area of presenting information about the available educational placements in an unbiased way while describing the cultural, linguistic, academic and social-emotional impact of the placements. While it is good that only 1 student of the 4 had an unacceptable rating in this area, it is believed that more would have had a lower rating had they not requested help from the instructor. Since this is a beginning level class, some of the students have no practical experience in educational placements themselves, therefore; their information must come strictly from research or one brief observation in a school setting. While this assignement is quite valuable, it is challenging for those who do not have the background knowledge themselves.

The other area where two of the 4 students only scored in the minimal or unacceptable range and the other two scored in the target area was in sharing information about language development and how to create a language rich environment. Some students supplied a link on their website to an excellent website entitled, “Brown’s Stages,” which was acceptable, but then failed to include ways in which parents could create a language rich environment. This candidate performance assessment is part of the introductory class, EDSP 526 / Introduction to Deaf and Hard of Hearing. The inability for the students to reach a target level on this competency may be due to the fact that at this point in their program of studies, they have not taken any of the language development courses and therefore are not confident with the information themselves.

#3 (Required)–PEDAGOGICAL AND PROFESSIONAL KNOWLEDGE, SKILLS, AND DISPOSITIONS: Assessment that demonstrates candidates can effectively plan classroom-based instruction.

Assessment #3

Assessment Name: Lesson Plan Performance Assessment Task

Program Context: Candidates complete this assessment during the methods course, EDSP 628/Language Development and Literacy for Deaf and Hard of Hearing Students.

Program Standards:NCATE – #1c Professional & Pedagogical Knowledge and Skills and #1d Student LearningCEC Standard #4 Instructional Strategies, #7 Instructional Planning, and #8 Assessment

Description of task: The Lesson Plan Performance Assessment Task requires the students to create four lesson plans which include the critical elements of an effective lesson outlined on the assessment rubric and discussed in detail in class. Two of the lessons must be in written expression and two in reading. Two of these must be at the secondary level and two at the elementary level. One lesson plan is developed together as a class, another in small groups, and the final two are individual projects. A rubric (below) detailing the required components of the lesson plan is used to evaluate the plans. The students teach one of the lessons to the class and receive written feedback from class peers and instructor. They may present the lessons to the class or may record themselves teaching the lesson to children in school and present the DVD to the class.

Assessment Rubric/Scoring Guide: This performance assessment task addresses the following Council of Exceptional Children and Council on Education of the Deaf Initial Standards for Education of the Deaf and Hard of Hearing:

Standard 4 Instructional strategies

D&HH4K1

Visual tools and organizers that support content mastery and retention by individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing

ICC4S2Teach individuals to use self-assessment, problem-solving, and other cognitive strategies to meet their needs

ICC4S3Select, adapt, and use instructional strategies and materials according to characteristics of the individual with exceptional learning needs

ICC4S5Use procedures to increase the individual’s self-awareness, self-management, self-control, self-reliance, and self-esteem

ICC4S6Use strategies that promote successful transitions for individuals with exceptional learning needs

D&HH4S1Develop proficiency in the languages used to teach individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing

D&HH4S2Provide activities to promote print literacy and content area reading and writing through instruction via spoken language and/or the signed language indigenous to the deaf community

D&HH4S3 Apply first and second language teaching strategies to the instruction of the individual.D&HH4S4 Provide balance among explicit instruction, guided instruction, peer learning, and reflection.

Standard 7 Instructional planningICC7K1 Theories and research that form the basis of curriculum development and instructional

practiceICC7K2 Scope and sequences of general and special curriculaICC7K3 National, state or provincial, and local curricula standardsICC7K4 Technology for planning and managing the teaching and learning environment

ICC7K5Roles and responsibilities of the para-educator related to instruction, intervention, and direct service

D&HH7K Model programs for individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing.

ICC7S9Incorporate and implement instructional and assistive technology into the educational program

ICC7S10 Prepare lesson plansICC7S11 Prepare and organize materials to implement daily lesson plans


ICC7S12 Use instructional time effectivelyICC7S13 Make responsive adjustments to instruction based on continual observationsD&HH7S1 Use specialized technologies, resources, and instructional strategies unique to students who

are deaf or hard of hearing.D&HH7S3 Integrate language instruction into academic areas.

The Grading Rubric for the Lesson Plan Performance Assessment Task: next page

Special Education Teacher Preparation Program(Undergraduate and Graduate I-DHH)

Lesson Plan Performance Assessment TaskStudent Name _________________________________________ Semester___________Course ____________________________________________________________________Instructor/Professor _________________________________________________________

Evaluation Rubric for Lesson Plan

Key to ratings: S = self-evaluation O = peer evaluation P = Professor’s evaluation

Not

Ev

iden

ced

Nee

ds

Impr

ove-

men

t/M

inim

a

Mee

ts

Exp

ecta

tions

Out

stan

ding

Comments

A. Context and Organization: 16 pts

1.Basic Information includes: 4 pts Teacher, date, timeframe,

grade level, unit name/theme, lesson topic

Grouping, staff roles/responsibilities (ICC7K5)

1 2 3 4

2. Lesson Objectives: 6 pts Behaviorally-stated

(measurable) SOL and IEP goals listed

(ICC7K2, ICC7K3)

1 2 4 6


3. Materials: 6 pts Copies/representations of

teaching/student materials provided (including visual representation of concept)

Materials - attractive, creative, meet the learning needs of students, utilize technology when appropriate. (ICC4S3, ICC7K4, ICC7S9, ICC7S11)

1 2 4 6

B. Instructional Procedures: 52 pts (D&HH4S4, ICC7K1, D&HH7S1)1. Anticipatory Set: 8 pts

Discuss behavioral expectations/readiness, SOL/objective/rationale (ICC4S5, ICC7K2, ICC7K3)

Build interest and motivation

Review/connections to prior knowledge and experience(ICC4S6)

1 2 4 8

2. Instruction: 18 pts Maximize instructional

time with clear, explicit communication of information through effective demonstration/ modeling of concept using a step by step process for objective mastery, a visual representation of the concept, and appropriate examples and non-examples (D&HH4K1, D&HH7K1, ICC7S12)

1 12 15 18


3. Integrated Language Instruction and Progress Monitoring : 10pts Vocabulary development,

language instruction integrated (D&HH7S3, D&HH4S2, D&HH4S3)

Effective check for understanding

Active responding/verbal rehearsal of the concept / engagement from all students

(ICC7S13)

1 6 8 10

4. Guided Practice: 8 pts Clear description of

task/activity Clearly tied to lesson

objectives Explanation of how

students move into groups and/or obtain materials and assistance

Methods for teacher monitoring and feedback provided(ICC4S2, ICC7S13)

1 4 6 8

5. Summary: 4 pts Gives students an

opportunity to review lesson objective(s) and state what they have learned.

1 2 3 4

6. Individualized Adaptations: 4 pts

Are appropriate to students’ skill levels and ages

Will facilitate full social and instructional participation

1 2 3 4

C. Assessment: 8 pts


1. Independent practice / Student Assessment: 4 pts Evaluation procedures will

show whether lesson objectives were met.

Clear description of activities provided

1 2 3 4

2. Teachers’ Self-Assessment: 4 pts

Reflection identifies strengths and aspects of lesson that need improvement

1 2 3 4

D. Form and Mechanics of Written Plan: 8 pts

Well-organized and professional in appearance (ICC7S10)

Correct spelling, grammar and mechanics

1 4 6 8

E. Presentation: 16 pts1. Presentation:

Presenter: enthusiastic, prepared (ICC7S10, ICC7S11)

Instruction fast paced, engaging and interactive (ICC7S12)

1 4 6 8

2. Communication Efficiency: Attention given to all

students Questioning strategies

provide opportunities for verbal rehearsal of the concept by students

Signing skills and/or spoken language effectively and appropriately relay content in the communication approach used by the student. (D&HH4S1)

1 4 6 8

OVERALL EVALUATION

Total Points: ______


EDSP 628 (Lesson Plan Performance Assessment) — 9 students reported, all reflected

Rubric Row n Mean StdDev N/A

Not Evidenced

N (%)

Needs Improvement/Minimal

EvidenceN (%)

Meets Expectations

N (%)Outstanding

N (%)•Teacher, date, timeframe, grade level, unit name/theme, lesson topic •Grouping, staff roles/responsibilities (ICC7K5)

9 3.111 1.167 0 1 (11) 2 (22) 1 (11) 5 (55)

•Behaviorally-stated (measurable) •SOL and IEP goals listed (ICC7K2, ICC7K3)

9 5.333 0.726 0 0 1 (11) 2 (22) 6 (66)

•Copies/representations of teaching/student materials provided (including visual representation of concept) •Materials - attractive, creative, meet the learning needs of students, utilize technology when appropriate. (ICC4S3, ICC7K4, ICC7S9, ICC7S11)

9 5.667 0.667 0 0 1 (11) 0 8 (88)

•Discuss behavioral expectations/readiness, SOL/objective/rationale (ICC4S5, ICC7K2, ICC7K3) •Build interest and motivation •Review/connections to prior knowledge and experience (ICC4S6)

9 8 0 0 0 0 0 9 (100)

•Maximize instructional time with clear, explicit communication of information through effective demonstration/ modeling of concept using step by step process for objective mastery, visual representation of concept, and appropriate examples/non-examples

9 15 0.866 0 0 2 (22) 2 (22) 5 (55)

•Vocabulary development, language instruction integrated (D&HH7S3, D&HH4S2, D&HH4S3) •Effective check for understanding •Active responding/verbal rehearsal of the concept / engagement from all students (ICC7S13)

9 8.889 0.726 0 0 1 (11) 2 (22) 6 (66)

•Clear description of task/activity •Clearly tied to lesson objectives •Explanation of how students move into groups and/or obtain materials and assistance •Methods for teacher monitoring and feedback provided (ICC4S2, ICC7S13)

9 7.111 0.726 0 0 1 (11) 2 (22) 6 (66)

•Gives students an opportunity to review lesson objective(s) and state what they have learned.

9 3.667 1 0 1 (11) 0 0 8 (88)

•Are appropriate to students’ skill levels and ages •Will facilitate full social and instructional participation

9 2.667 1.581 0 4 (44) 0 0 5 (55)

•Evaluation procedures will show whether lesson objectives were met. •Clear description of activities provided

9 3.111 1.054 0 1 (11) 1 (11) 3 (33) 4 (44)

•Reflection identifies strengths and aspects of lesson that need improvement

9 3.889 0.333 0 0 0 1 (11) 8 (88)

•Well-organized and professional in appearance •Correct spelling, grammar, and mechanics

9 7.333 0.707 0 0 1 (11) 1 (11) 7 (77)

•Presenter: enthusiastic, prepared (ICC7S10, ICC7S11) •Instruction fast paced, engaging and interactive (ICC7S12)

9 7.778 0.333 0 0 0 1 (11) 8 (88)

•Attention given to all students •Questioning strategies provide opportunities for verbal rehearsal of the concept by students •Signing skills and/or spoken language effectively and appropriately relay content in communication approach used by student

9 7.778 0.333 0 0 0 1 (11) 8 (88)


Narrative and Analysis:


77 – 100% of the candidates demonstrated skills that met expectations or were outstanding in the areas of: o writing standards based lessons designed around a measurable, behaviorally stated objective o creating attractive, creative materials that serve as a visual representation of the concept being taught and meet the

needs of the studentso stating behavioral expectations, activating schema so that new knowledge can attach to prior knowledge and to also

build motivation for learningo creating lessons that were engaging, taught through effective modeling of the concept using a step by step procedure

taught through an effective visual representation of the concept with sufficient examples and non-examples.o integrating vocabulary development within their lessons, providing sufficient opportunities for verbal rehearsal of the

concept and summarizing the concept at the close of the lesson.o indicating how students were grouped to ensure academic success o making sure that their guided practice activities and assessments were clearly tied to the objective as it was presented

during modeling. As indicated by the ratings above, students need more opportunities to reflect on their own practice. Most candidates can

identify areas that need improvement, but fail to recognize and verbalize their areas of strength. Candidates were not participating in a field experience during this semester; therefore, the lessons were presented in class in

front of their peers. This is always quite challenging for pre-service teachers who would feel much more comfortable in front of children. Due to this, evaluators were unable to assess if the lessons were appropriate to the “students’” skill levels or if they facilitated full social and instructional participation unless it was specifically noted on the lesson plan, some of which were and some of which were not.

The course in which this assessment is administered is where candidates are first introduced to lesson planning. They construct 4 lesson plans in this class at differing academic levels in both expressive writing and reading in order to gain experience in writing lesson plans at both the elementary and secondary levels. In EDSP 527, they construct a thematic unit where they develop three more lesson plans in the areas of social science, science, and math (wrapped around a common theme) at either the elementary or secondary level.

Candidates construct a draft of their lesson plans and then receive one-on-one feedback from their university instructor before they present one of them in class.


#4 (Required) – ASSESSMENT OF STUDENT TEACHING

Assessment Name: Student Teaching Final Teacher Candidate Evaluation (All categories – Final evaluation only)

Program Context: Candidates participate in two student teaching experiences, EDSP 755: Teaching Internship in Deaf and Hard of Hearing – Preschool/Elementary and EDSP 756: Teaching Internship in Deaf and Hard of Hearing - Secondary. The intern is evaluated using the Student Teaching Teacher Candidate Evaluation form.

Program Standards:NCATE – Content KnowledgeCEC Standards – #1 Foundations, #3 Individual Learning Differences, #4 Instructional Strategies, #5 Learning Environments and Social Interactions, #6 Language, #7 Instructional Planning, #8 Assessment, and #9 Professional and Ethical Practice.

Description of task: Candidates are placed in two settings during the final semester of their program, one in a preschool/ elementary placement and the other in a middle or high school placement. They are paired with a cooperating professional who has a Master’s degree (preferably), licensure in Hearing Impairment PreK-12, and at least 3 years teaching experience. Each experience represents a minimum of 37 clock hours per week over the 14/15 week semester. Interns teach a variety of content areas, including reading, English, spelling, math, and other core content areas including social sciences and sciences, depending upon the specific roles engaged in by the particular cooperating teacher with whom they are paired. Interns are evaluated with the rubric at mid-term and again at the end of the semester. The tool is used to provide formative as well as summative data.

Assessment Rubric/Scoring Guide: The intern evaluation form is 6 pages in length. Category 1 addresses content knowledge and content pedagogy. Category IV addresses planning and implementing instruction. The evaluation form uses the following scale:U=UnsatisfactoryI=Needs ImprovementS=Progressing SatisfactorilyP=ProficientD=Distinguished


Category I – Content and Content Pedagogy - see assessment one for report and analysis

Category II – Applying an Understanding of Learner Development and Individual Differences


N (%)

Needs Improvement

N (%)


N (%)Proficient

N (%)Distinguished

N (%)Applies knowledge of student development (cognitive, physical, social/emotional).

1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100) 0

2. Uses teaching practices based on an understanding of student development.

1 3 0 0 0 1 (100) 0 0

3. Applies knowledge of common student exceptionalities and differences.

1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100) 0

4. Modifies/creates instruction adapted to diverse learners.

1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100) 0

5. Applies an understanding of the interests and cultural heritage of students in his/her teaching.

1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100) 0

all percentages (%) rounded to nearest integerCategory III – Establishing a Culture for Learning


N (%)

Needs Improvement

N (%)


N (%)Proficient

N (%)Distinguished

N (%)1. Maintains existing instructional and administrative routines.

1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100) 0

2. Establishes or reinforces clear standards for behavior.

1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100) 0

3. Regularly monitors behavior and responds to inappropriate behavior effectively.

1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100) 0

4. Develops and employs fair, 1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100) 0


effective, and developmentally-responsive management techniques.

5. Develops safe, equitable, caring, respectful and productive learning environments.

1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100) 0

6. Fosters group motivation and individual self-motivation.

1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100) 0

7. Fosters active inquiry, collaboration, and supportive interaction.

1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100) 0

all percentages (%) rounded to nearest integerCategory IV – Planning and Implementing Instruction


N (%)

Needs Improvement

N (%)


N (%)Proficient

N (%)Distinguished

N (%)Develops clearly structured instructional plans with objectives, activities, and assessments appropriately aligned.

1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100) 0

2. Aligns instruction with state SOL’s and national curriculum goals.

1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100) 0

3. States instructional objectives in clear, measurable terms.

1 3 0 0 0 1 (100) 0 0

4. Plans and implements a variety of effective instructional strategies based on an understanding of subject matter, the students, community, curriculum goals, and best practice.

1 3 0 0 0 1 (100) 0 0

5. Selects and uses a variety of effective instructional materials.

1 3 0 0 0 1 (100) 0 0


6. Engages and maintains students’ attention, and is able to refocus their attention if necessary.

1 3 0 0 0 1 (100) 0 0

7. Uses clear directions, explanations, demonstrations, questions, etc.

1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100) 0

8. Uses a variety of strategies that encourages the development of critical thinking, problem-solving, and performance skills.

1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100) 0

9. Selects or develops and implements student learning activities that integrate technology.

1 1 0 0 0 0 0

10. Provides feedback to students in a timely and helpful manner.

1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100) 0

Plans and uses assessment criteria and strategies appropriate to instructional goals and to characteristics of students.

1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100) 0

Summarizes and analyzes evidence of student learning for individuals and groups.

1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100) 0

13. Uses assessment information to improve teaching and/or student achievement.

1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100) 0

14. Persists in assisting students having difficulty learning.

1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100) 0

15. Maintains accurate records of student progress.

1 1 0 0 0 0 0

16. Identifies and uses community resources in enhancing learning.

1 1 0 0 0 0 0

17. Plans and implements instruction based on knowledge of learning theory.

1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100) 0



Category V – Modeling Professionalism


N (%)

Needs Improvement

N (%)


N (%)Proficient

N (%)Distinguished

N (%)1. Reflects upon his or her own professional development, including setting personal goals and implementing changes.

1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100) 0

2. Makes continuous efforts to improve professional practice; has a plan for continued professional growth.

1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100) 0

3. Expresses concern for and desire to communicate with families about the curriculum or other activities for which he or she is responsible.

1 1 0 0 0 0 0

4. Behaves ethically and in the best interest of the community.

1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100) 0

5. Is supportive of, and advocates for, students, schools, and education.

1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100) 0

6. Uses technologies to communicate, network, locate resources, and enhance professional development.

1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100) 0

7. Is aware of professional organizations or activities within the professional education community.

1 1 0 0 0 0 0

all percentages (%) rounded to nearest integerCategory VI – Special Education Content Knowledge



N (%)

Needs Improvement

N (%)


N (%)Proficient

N (%)Distinguished

N (%)Assists in developing and implementing comprehensive, longitudinal individualized programs in collaboration with educational team members.

Uses age-appropriate, least-intrusive strategies to facilitate social and instructional integration into various settings.

Assists in designing learning environments that encourage active participation in individual and group activities.

Establishes and maintains rapport with individuals with and without exceptional learning needs.

Selects, adapts and administers assessment tools and methods (including assessment of adaptive behavior and problem behavior) to accommodate the abilities and needs of the target population of students with disabilities.

Selects, adapts, and uses instructional strategies suited to the individual characteristics and learning needs of students with the targeted disabilities.

Uses research-supported methods for academic and nonacademic instruction of individuals with targeted disabilities.

Uses a variety of positive classroom


management and individual behavioral support strategies, including environmental management and other prevention techniques.

Practices within the CEC Code of Ethics and other standards of the profession.

Demonstrates commitment to developing the highest education and quality-of-life potential of individuals with exceptional learning needs.

Maintains confidential communication about individuals with exceptional learning needs


Category VII – Professional Characteristics and Dispositions


N (%)

Needs Improvement

N (%)

Progressing Satisfactorily

N (%)Proficient

N (%)verbal expression, number of errors, use of voice

1 1 0 0 0 0

grammatical/mechanical errors, legibility 1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100)

attendance and punctuality 1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100)

quality of work ethic, work performance 1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100)

quality of work, meets deadlines for due assignments

1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100)

dresses professionally or unprofessionally 1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100)

contribution to class activities, student engagement

1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100)

interprets classroom criteria, questions, 1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100)


analyzes data

collaborative skills, contribution to group/team efforts

1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100)

overall behavior, courtesy, reinforcement 1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100)

creativity, resourcefulness, independence 1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100)

interest in students and student activities, contribution to student development

1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100)

responds to constructive criticism 1 3 0 0 0 1 (100) 0

productivity, time management, workload management

1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100)

understanding of diversity, commitment 1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100)


Narrative and Analysis: See assessment one on page 24 for analysis of category I / “Content and Content Pedagogy” The student assessed was deaf herself, but an exceptionally bright student who grew up being exposed to the

English language thereby making it somewhat challenging for her to rate at a distinguished level in the area of ”Applying an Understanding of Learner Development and Individual Differences.” because learning came so easy for her. She rated proficient in all areas except one in which she only earned a satisfactory rating, “Using teaching practices based on an understanding of student development.” I believe this is an area that she will improve on as she encounters more students who wrestle with the English language.

Due to a strong emphasis on proactive classroom management and use of positive behavior supports in both the Behavior Management course (EDSP 462) and in Curriculum and Methods for Deaf and Hard of Hearing Students (EDSP 427), this intern demonstrated knowledge and skills in category III / “Establishing a Culture for Learning “ at the proficient level

See assessment one on page 24 for analysis of category IV / “Planning and Implementing Instruction’” In category V / “Modeling Professionalism”, this intern rated at the proficient level in every category except in

professional organization membership and in communicating with families. Professional organization membership is not a program requirement and most interns state that they have not joined due to financial constraints. This student teaching placement is a residential placement where most of the DHH students live in the dorms; therefore, contact with parents is limited. Some interns will send home newsletters and work folders on the weekend, but do not have the same contact with parents as they would in a general education placement. The rating does not reflect that the intern did not communicate with parents; it reflects the fact that there was no


documentation of contacts, therefore, not enough evidence to give an accurate rating. This is an area that needs to be improved. In the future, as part of the student teaching requirements, interns will be asked to send home bi-weekly newsletters and to make 1 positive phone call to parents per placement. This intern sent home a letter to parents introducing herself, but she needed to follow-up with parents on a regular basis to receive a higher rating.

Category VI did not show up originally in rGrade and therefore data was not submitted in this area. This intern, however, modeled her cooperating teachers methods instead of using the methods and strategies that she learned throughout her program. She seemed somewhat hesitate to deviate from the norm. Greater gains could have been made using assessment based instruction which incorporated evidence based strategies. While the university supervisor has a meeting with the cooperating teachers at the beginning of the semester at which time expectations for both the interns and cooperating teachers are discussed and documented, some are more willing than others to let the interns stray from their approaches.

In category VII / “Professional Characteristics and Dispositions” this intern rated at the proficient level in all areas. RGrade was missing a critical area in this category which is on the student teacher evaluation form, but does not appear in rGrade. The additional area is as follows: “16. Sign Communication Skills: Expresses self with fluidity; has excellent ASL receptive skills; is adept in using ASL effectively.” This area is critical for our interns and is the area in which they are normally rated as needs improvement or satisfactory. While most interns sign at a level in which they can effectively teach, their ASL skills can always be improved. Very few students receive a proficient rating in this area unless they are native signers. This intern, however, graduated with an undergraduate degree from Gallaudet University and is a native signer so she received a proficient rating in this area.


#5 (Required) – EFFECTS ON STUDENT LEARNING: Assessment that demonstrates candidate effects on student learning.

Assessment Name: Written Language Sample Diagnostic Analysis Performance Assessment Task

Program Context: Candidates complete this assessment during the course, EDSP 428/Language Development and Literacy for Deaf and Hard of Hearing Students.

Program Standards:NCATE – Content KnowledgeCEC Standards – #1 Foundations, #2 Development and Characteristics of Learners, and #6 Language.

Description of task: The Written Language Sample Diagnostic Analysis Performance Assessment Task requires the students to obtain a written language sample from a deaf or hard of hearing child by introducing an appropriate writing prompt. Using the Written Language Analysis Rubric, the students will analyze the sample in the following areas: a. Meaning and paragraph developmentb. Conventions of Writing

i. Spellingii. Punctuation

iii. Capitalizationc. Linguistic Features

i. Sentence Usageii. Conjunctions

iii. Sentence Typesiv. Sentence Formationv. Verb and Tense Agreement

vi. Semantic Usagevii. Pronouns

viii. Articlesix. Prepositions and Prepositional Phrases

Based on this analysis and the information learned from the textbook and class lectures and discussions on the following topics, the students will identify written language goals and objectives that could be included on the child’s IEP:

a. Effects of cultural and linguistic differences on growth and developmentb. Characteristics of one’s own culture and use of language and the ways in which

these can differ from other cultures and uses of languagesc. Ways of behaving and communicating among cultures that can lead to

misinterpretation and misunderstandingd. Augmentative and assistive communication strategiese. Components of linguistic and nonlinguistic communicationf. Importance of early intervention to language developmentg. Effects of sensory input on the development of language and learningh. Spoken and visual communication modesi. Current theories of the development of spoken language and signed languages

This performance assessment task addresses the following Council of Exceptional Children and Council on Education of the Deaf standards:

CEC/CED : Initial Standards – Deaf and Hard of Hearing addressed in this assessment:

Standard 6 LanguageICC6K1 Effects of cultural and linguistic differences on growth and developmentICC6K2 Characteristics of one’s own culture and use of language and the ways in

which these can differ from other cultures and uses of languagesICC6K3 Ways of behaving and communicating among cultures that can lead to

misinterpretation andmisunderstanding

ICC6K4 Augmentative and assistive communication strategiesD&HH6K1

Components of linguistic and nonlinguistic communication

D&HH6K2

Importance of early intervention to language development

D&HH6K3

Effects of sensory input on the development of language and learning

D&HH6K Spoken and visual communication modes

D&HH6K Current theories of the development of spoken language and signed languages

ICC6S1 Use strategies to support and enhance communication skills of individuals with exceptional learning needs

ICC6S2 Use communication strategies and resources to facilitate understanding of subject matter for individuals with exceptional learning needs whose primary language is not the dominant language

D&HH6S Apply strategies to facilitate cognitive and communicative development

D&HH6S Facilitate independent communication in all contexts

D&HH6S Communicate proficiently in spoken language or the sign language indigenous to the deaf community

D&HH6S5

Implement strategies for developing spoken language in orally communicating individuals with exceptional learning needs and sign language proficiency in signing individuals with exceptional learning needs

The Grading Rubric for the Lesson Plan Performance Assessment Task:EDSP 428 and EDSP 628: Language Development and Literacy for Deaf and Hard of Hearing Students

Written Language Sample Analysis

Candidate: ______________________________ Date:______________________________

Directions: Evaluate the Written Language Diagnostic Analysis Report as “target,” “acceptable,”, “minimal” or “unacceptable” on each of the following standards.

Target Unacceptable


Information included Information not includedStudent information noted: Name Birthday Grade Level Type and Degree

of Hearing Loss Age of Onset of

Hearing Loss Communication

ApproachTarget Acceptable Minimal Unacceptable

Written Language Sample Obtained

Writing Sample is long enough to allow a quality analysis and serve as a diagnostic instrument for goal development.Writing Sample is reflective of student’s writing ability.

Writing Sample is long enough to allow a quality analysis, but is only somewhat reflective of student’s writing ability.

Minimal Writing Sample collected that only allows minimal analysis, may not be reflective of the student’s writing ability and thereby only serves as a minimal diagnostic instrument.

Writing Sample is not reflective of the student’s writing ability and cannot serve as a diagnostic instrument.

Assessment of Conventions of Writing: Spelling

TargetAll spelling errors noted accurately

Acceptable3 or fewer mistakes in recording errors

Minimal4-5 mistakes in

recording errors

UnacceptableMore than 5 mistakes in

recording errorsWritten Sample scored for: Invented Spellings Omitted Letters Added Letters Transposed

LettersAssessment of Conventions of Writing: Punctuation

TargetAll errors noted

accurately



recording errors


recording errorsWritten Sample scored for: Periods End of declarative

or imperative sentence

In abbreviationsWritten Sample scored for: Commas In a series Joining


independent clauses

Separating dependent clauses

In datesWritten Sample scored for: Apostrophes Possession ContractionsWritten Sample scored for: Question Marks End of

interrogative sentence

Written Sample scored for: Exclamation Marks End of

exclamatory or imperative sentence

Written Sample scored for: Quotation MarksAssessment of Conventions of Writing: Capitalization

TargetAll errors noted

accurately



recording errors


recording errorsWritten Sample scored for: Capitalization Beginning of

sentences Proper nouns TitlesAssessment of Linguistic Features:Sentence Usage

TargetLinguistic features

assessed accurately

Acceptable3 or fewer mistakes

in assessing linguistic features


assessing linguistic features

UnacceptableMore than 5

mistakes assessing linguistic features

Sentence Fragments and Morphological


Units Simple Sentences Compound

Sentences Complex

SentencesAssessment of Linguistic Features:Conjunctions


assessed accurately







Coordinating:Between 2 independent clauses SubordinatingBetween 1 independent and 1 dependent clause

Assessment of Linguistic Features:Sentence Types


assessed accurately







Declarative Imperative Interrogative ExclamatoryAssessment of Linguistic Features:Sentence Formation


assessed accurately







Subject -Verb Subject-Verb-

Object Subject- Linking

Verb -Adjective Subject-Linking

Verb-Complement

Subject-Be Verb-Adverb

Clauses


- Conjoining independent clauses-Conjoining independent with dependent clausesAssessment of Linguistic Features: Verb and Tense Agreement


assessed accurately







Simple Progressive Perfect Perfect

Progressive Modals Subject-Verb

Agreement Advanced Tenses

-Passive-Conditional

Assessment of Linguistic Features: Semantic Usage


assessed accurately







Verbs used- be-action-linking

Adjectives used

Adverbs used

Assessment of Linguistic Features: Pronouns


assessed accurately







Personal Interrogative Demonstrative Indefinite Relative


ReflexiveAssessment of Linguistic Features: Articles


assessed accurately







A, An TheAssessment of Linguistic Features: Prepositions and Prepositional Phrases


assessed accurately







Time Place Movement Manner

Target Acceptable Minimal UnacceptableDevelopment of Language Goals based on Language Analysis

Shows excellent evidence of in-depth, integrated knowledge, skills, and dispositions in analyzing written language, applying knowledge of developmental language acquisition and knowledge of the effects of sensory input on the development of language to form appropriate developmental written language goals

Shows good, solid evidence of integrated knowledge, skills, and dispositions in in analyzing written language, applying knowledge of developmental language acquisition and knowledge of the effects of sensory input on the development of language to form appropriate developmental written language goals

Shows some evidence of integrated knowledge, skills, and dispositions in analyzing written language, applying knowledge of developmental language acquisition and knowledge of the effects of sensory input on the development of language , but language goals are not developmentally appropriate

Shows no evidence of integrated knowledge, skills, and dispositions in analyzing written language, applying knowledge of developmental language acquisition or knowledge of the effects of sensory input on the development of language. Language goals are not developmentally appropriate for the child.

Overall Evaluation


EDSP 528 (Written Language Sample Diagnostic Analysis) — spring 2010


N (%)Minimal

N (%)Acceptable

N (%)TargetN (%)

Written sample scored for invented spelling 1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100)

Written sample scored for omitted letters 1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100)

Written sample scored for added letters 1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100)

Written sample scored for transposed letters 1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100)

Written sample scored for: Periods -End of declarative or imperative sentence -In abbreviations

1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100)

Written sample scored for: Commas -In a series -Joining independent clauses -Separating dependent clauses -In dates

1 3 0 0 0 1 (100) 0

Written sample scored for: Apostrophies -Possession -Contractions

1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100)

Written sample scored for: Question marks -End of interrogative sentence

1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100)

Written sample scored for: Exclamation marks -End of exclamatory or imperative sentence

1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100)

Written sample scored for: Quotation marks 1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100)

Written sample scored for beginning of sentences 1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100)

Written sample scored for proper nouns 1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100)

Written sample scored for titles 1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100)

Sentence fragments and morphological units 1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100)

Simple sentences 1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100)

Compound sentences 1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100)

Complex sentences 1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100)

Coordinating between 2 independent clauses 1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100)

Subordinating between 1 independent and 1 dependent clause 1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100)

Declarative 1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100)

Imperative 1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100)

Interrogative 1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100)

Exclamatory 1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100)

Subject-Verb 1 2 0 0 1 (100) 0 0

Subject-Verb-Object 1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100)

Subject-Linking Verb-Adjective 1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100)

Subject-Linking Verb- Complement 1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100)

Subject- Be Verb- Adverb 1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100)

Clauses -Conjoining independent clauses -Conjoining independent with dependent clauses

1 2 0 0 1 (100) 0 0

Simple 1 3 0 0 0 1 (100) 0

Progressive 1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100)

Perfect 1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100)

Perfect Progressive 1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100)

Modals 1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100)

Subject- Verb Agreement 1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100)

Advanced Tenses -Passive -Conditional 1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100)

Verbs used -be -action -linking 1 3 0 0 0 1 (100) 0

Adjectives used 1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100)

Adverbs used 1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100)

Personal 1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100)


Interrogative 1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100)

Demonstrative 1 3 0 0 0 1 (100) 0

Indefinite 1 3 0 0 0 1 (100) 0

Relative 1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100)

Reflexive 1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100)

A, An 1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100)

The 1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100)

Time 1 3 0 0 0 1 (100) 0

Place 1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100)

Movement 1 3 0 0 0 1 (100) 0

Manner 1 3 0 0 0 1 (100) 0

Development of Language Goals based on Language Analysis 1 2 0 0 1 (100) 0 0

all percentages (%) rounded to nearest integerNarrative and Analysis:

This particular candidate has very strong language analysis skills and did not need as much scaffolding with this process as have other students who have completed this task.

This written language analysis often reveals areas of weakness in the candidates’ own expressive writing because they have difficulty analyzing the language of the students using the rubric because they simply do not have a clear understanding themselves of language labels used to identify grammatical principles. Because of this candidates turn in a rough draft, additional instruction is given to solidify the content for the candidates and then they submit a final draft. While often the scores would not be as positive as the ratings above indicate if candidates were assessed on their initial analysis, the student whose data is presented came to the task with a very strong grammatical framework.

This class, EDSP 628, formerly had an assignment in which interns had to complete an oral language sample. Undergraduate students have to do this in another class within the program of studies; therefore, this assignment was recently changed to a written language analysis. It was felt that this type of language assessment gives students better information on which they could build their language arts expressive writing program. This analysis is a totally different process from that of analyzing oral (sign) language, so it serves the students well giving them knowledge and skills beyond that previously gleaned from the oral language assessment. Since this assignment was just initiated in spring of 2010, there has only been one administration of this assessment with graduate students.


Since expressive writing is a major area of weakness for most students who are deaf, this assignment will prove quite beneficial. Without instructional follow-up, however, it is clear that this assessment alone does not reflect the candidate’s impact on student learning. Therefore, beginning spring 2011, candidates in the full-time MS program are required to complete the written language analysis on a student, identify areas of weakness and goals for instruction, develop 6-8 lesson plans targeting the area(s) of weakness, and provide 6-8 tutoring sessions with the student at the end of which a posttest is administered to determine growth and the candidate’s impact on student learning.

Candidates also complete this analysis on their students during blocking (if required) and student teaching unless they are teaching in an academic content area that is not English.

This assignment will be informative in identifying those candidates who do not have appropriate labels for different grammatical principles, who often cannot describe the rules of language themselves, and who need additional tutoring/instruction in this area before attempting to teach these concepts to students.

#6 Additional assessments that address CEC standards. (Required)

Diagnostic ReportsProgram Context: Candidates complete this task during EDSP 669: Diagnostic Educational Procedures, which is completed during the fall semester of the students’ senior year while they are completing their early field (blocking) experience.Program Standards: NCATE – Pedagogical KnowledgeCEC Standard #4 - Assessment

Description of the Task: The Diagnostic Report provides candidates with the opportunity to administer norm-referenced and criterion referenced tests to a student. It allows participants the experience of collecting formal and

informal assessment information in the preparation of a written report that specifies strategies and recommendations for teachers and parents.

Rubric begins on next page:


EDSP 669: Performance Assessment: Diagnostic Reports

Name: Date:Report #:

Provides accurate information on:

TargetPoints

AcceptablePoints

MinimalPoints

UnacceptablePoints

Correctly scored and complete protocols

5 4 2 0

Identifying Information 4 3 2 0

Reason for Referral and Background Information

4 3 2 0

Behavioral observations 5 4 2 0

Test results Name and acronym Table with all scores

4 3 2 0

Narrative about the tests/subtests 4 3 2 0

Narrative of Results: Clear explanations of what’s in

the table Results explained based on the

normal curve Subtests referenced related to

the student

6 4 2 0

Conclusion: Restate introductory

information Discuss strengths Discuss needs Discuss behavior

8 6 4 0

Recommendations for teachers and parents under each area of need

5 4 3 0

Use of technical writing components Person-first language 3rd person professional Past tense, Sections headings Correct grammar and spelling

5 4 2 0

Diagnostic reports particularly assess RU students’ progress toward the following course objectives: Administer nonbiased formal and informal assessments and use exceptionality-specific

assessment instruments with individuals with disabilities. (CC8S2, GC8S2 & VGCA2a3)

Demonstrate appropriate application and interpretation of scores from informal and formal assessments, using disability specific assessment instruments, including grade score verses standard score, percentile ranks, age/grade equivalents, and stanines (CC8S5, DH8S2, & VGCA2a3)

Administer assessment tools using the natural/native/preferred language of the individual who is deaf or hard of hearing (DH8S1)

Demonstrate the ability to work professionally with school personnel, parents, and students with disabilities, including assessing student achievement, planning instruction, and implementing programs to address the strengths and needs of individual learners, and understand family systems and the role of families in the educational process, and collaborate with families and others in assessment of individuals with disabilities (CC1K7, CC10S2, & VGCA2a3)

Understand the types and importance of information concerning individuals with disabilities available from families and public agencies and how to gather relevant background information (GC8K3 & CC8S1)

Demonstrate the ability to enter a testing situation, establish rapport with the student being evaluated and determine if the testing situation had any effect on the student’s performance. (VGCA2a3)

Implement procedures for assessing and reporting both appropriate and problematic social behaviors of individuals with disabilities (GC8S1 & VGCA2a3)

Demonstrate the ability to integrate informal and formal evaluations in a written report with educationally relevant recommendations addressing the strengths and needs of students, and/or suggest appropriate modifications in learning environments. (VGCA2a3)

The codes included above refer to the Council for Exceptional Children (CEC) Knowledge and Skill Standards and the Virginia Department of Education teacher licensure competencies. Code for CEC Standards: CC = Common Core; GC = General Curriculum, DH = Deaf and Hard of Hearing. Code for VADOE Standards: VGC = Virginia’s General Curriculum.

Fall 2008 – 1 student took this class, but no data was entered

Fall 2009 – 1 student reported. Her assessment data follows:

Previous data/assessments scores

Target 2 / 2

Background information of subject Target 5 / 5


Achievement tests Target 5 / 5

Correctly scored and complete protocols Target 5 / 5

Test results Target 3 / 3

Results Target 5 / 5

Data/test results explained based on the normal curve

Target 5 / 5

Testing conditions/observations during testing

Target 5 / 5

Recommendations for teachers and parents under each area of need

Target 5 / 5

Summarizing information Target 5 / 5

Use of technical writing components Target 5 / 5

Summary:Target 50 / 50

Assignment:100.00% 0.00 / 0


Narrative and Analysis:

One student took this class in fall 2008 and one student took it in fall 2009, but no data was reported on the 2008 student. This course is not taught by faculty in the deaf education program and the faculty member who was in charge of NCATE, is no longer with the university. There was some confusion as to who was to submit data in 2008, the faculty member teaching the class or the advisor of the students in the major. This has been clarified and now the professor of record records the data.

The student who took the class in 2009 wrestled with this course because she is deaf herself and initially felt that the assessments she was being asked to administer to students who were deaf were completely invalid for students with this disability because of the language issues of the deaf. Once she completed the testing, scoring and report writing, however, she voiced how very valuable the course was and how much she had grown from the experience. She did quite well in the course as the data indicates. Her comments, however, were more reflective of the lessons learned. She stated that she became familiar with assessments that are often administered to students with hearing loss which are inappropriate, but because she had the experience, she felt very knowledgeable about being able to share with parents the reasons why the scores are often low with this population of students. She saw the effect of sign language on the results of some of the assessments and felt better able to explain this as well. She learned that while the tests did not always assess what they were designed to assess in students with hearing loss, valuable diagnostic information could still be gleaned from the assessments. She also felt much more able to accurately interpret test scores for this population of students because of her experience in this class.

Students receive extensive feedback on the four reports that are submitted for this assessment task. It is imperative that they make steady progress in administering, analyzing and summarizing individual assessment data and can also successfully report it.

Candidates must have a clear understanding as to why some assessments commonly administered to students with hearing loss are not valid due to the impact sign language has on the results. They must be able to interpret the scoring of assessments for parents and teachers alike, explaining the diagnostic information that can be gleaned from these tests despite the lack of validity due to non-standard administration.

Cognitive and academic assessments specific to deaf and hard of hearing students is addressed in both EDSP 527 and 628.

Administering assessments to students who are deaf or hard of hearing proves to be challenging, but serves as educational experience for a variety of reasons:

o Students must determine how to incorporate the use of American Sign Language in test administration in such a way that the signs do not give away the answers.

o Students must become aware that when signs sometimes give away the answers, resorting to fingerspelling often causes what should be a vocabulary assessment to become a spelling test.

o Students must learn to explain the lack of validity of an assessment due to the impact of sign language on test results, but also be able to relay concepts and skills that the assessment does measure that may not always be what the test was designed to do, but can serve as diagnostic information.

Additional Assessment that Addresses Standards

Functional Behavior Assessment and Behavior Intervention Plan Course or Field Experience: EDSP 670. Proactive Classroom Management and Positive Behavior Supports.Program Context: Candidates take this course normally while they are completing their early field (blocking) experience if they are required to do that. If not, they normally take it just before they begin their teaching internship.Program Standards: NCATE – Pedagogical & Professional Knowledge; Application in Clinical ExperienceCEC Standard #10 – Collaboration; #5 learning Environments and Social InteractionDescription of Task: Candidates complete an in-depth version of a Functional Behavior Assessment and a Behavior Intervention Plan that is based on the assessment results of a child or youth. Based on the rubrics below, this is a revision-based assignment where the students can review and revise their understanding of an FBA based on extensive instructor feedback and guidance.

Grading Rubric:

Expanded Evaluation Rubric for draft FBA for EDSP 462/670

Elements

Not

subm

itted

or

com

plet

ed (0

)

Una

ccep

tabl

e(1

4 an

d un

der)

Min

imal

/Nee

ds

Impr

ovem

ent

(15-

16)

Acc

epta

ble/

Mee

ts

Expe

ctat

ions

(17-

18)

Targ

et/

Exem

plar

y (1

9-20

)

Points(of 20)

Revised Points

Functional Behavior Assessment (FBA) CriteriaObservable, measurable target behavior

+Provided descriptive, factual paragraphs about the individual, including a strong description of capacity, and their situation (age, school, family, etc.)+Included a very clear definition of the target behavior under study.+Described why the behavior is a problem for the individual.+Included facts about the history of the behavior and what methods were used to address it in the past.Other comments:

Description of


data collection system with raw data

+Included at least one paragraph for each of the four methods of data collection used.+Described method and data collection form+ Included where, when and with whom the method was used, dates of administration, and name (pseudonym) and relationship of person to target individual.+Explained why that method was used and how it was used.Other comments:

Other setting events and contributing factors to the behavior

+Described what you learned about the school or home settings or disabilities, and other physical, psychological, social or physiological factors that informants have identified as being related to the behavior+Described setting events with respect and dignity; readable by all involved. +Maintained confidentialityOther comments:

Analysis & Summary of FBA+You collected direct data across minimum of ten days+You collected background data through interviews and record reviews+You attached interval or frequency recording/scatter plots completed by yourself and knowledgeable others+You attached A-B-C recordings of data, at least 4, min. of one hour of direct observation+You attached one other set of data using a form of your choice+You submitted data in its raw form as collected by you and others (handwritten, for example)

+You presented your results for each method of data collection in a systematic and analytical way. Frequency or interval data is reported in both numbers and percentages.+You provided a concise summary of what you learned from each method of data collection.+ You analyzed what you learned about the behavior across the period of data collection.+ You presented the answers to the key questions about the target behavior+You included what you learned about what appears to be triggering the behavior and what is maintaining it.


Other Comments:

Hypothesis paragraph+ A concise paragraph presenting your hypothesis about what function or functions the behavior is serving for the person.+The evidence for your hypothesis is clear from your analysis of data.Other comments:

Format & MechanicsTyped, Double spaced with reg. marginsHeadings for each sectionProfessional tone & lang.Writing is clear & free of mechanical errorsPFL and respectful descriptions

Evaluation Rubric for FBA/BIP plan for EDSP 462

Elements

Not

subm

itted

or

com

plet

ed (0

)

Una

ccep

tabl

e(1

4 an

d un

der)

Min

imal

/Nee

ds

Impr

ovem

ent

(15-

16)

Acc

epta

ble/

Mee

ts

Expe

ctat

ions

(17-

18)

Targ

et/

Exem

plar

y (1

9-20

)

Points Revised Points

Functional Behavior Assessment (FBA)

Observable and measurable target behavior

Data collection system (4 sources) with completed


data

Other setting events and contributing factors to the behavior

Analysis & Summary of FBA

Hypothesis paragraphBehavior Intervention Plan (BIP)

Prevention Strategies (10)

Reactive Strategies (6)

Teaching Strategies (6)

Evaluation System for BIP

Format and Mechanics

***Each section is worth 20 points.

Goals, objectives, and assignments in this class address NCATE Standard 1c Professional and Pedagogical Knowledge and Skills, the Council for Exceptional Children (CEC) Knowledge and Skill Standards, the Virginia Department of Education teacher licensure competencies, and Virginia’s Early Childhood Special Education Competency 5. The FBA/BIP project particularly assesses RU students’ progress toward the following course objectives:

Use procedures to increase the individual’s self-awareness, self-management, self-control, self-reliance, and self-esteem, and teach individuals with disabilities to give and receive meaningful feedback from peers and adults (CC4S5 & GC5S4).Use a variety of non-aversive techniques to control targeted behavior and maintain attention of individuals with disabilities (GC4S9, VGC2c & VPS3).The demands of learning environments, teacher attitudes and behaviors that influence behavior, basic classroom management theories, and strategies for individuals with exceptional learning


needs; and plan for and use effective management of teaching and learning (CC5K1, CC5K2, CC5K3, CC5K4, CC5S10, VGC2c & VPS3)Social skills needed for educational and other environments and identify realistic expectations for personal and social behavior in various settings (CC5K5 &CC5S2).Strategies for crisis prevention and intervention (CC5K6 & VGC2c).Establish and maintain rapport with individuals with and without exceptional learning needs and use skills in problem-solving and conflict resolution (CC5S7& GC5S5).Use the least intensive behavior management strategy consistent with the needs of the individual with exceptional learning needs including planning and implementing individualized reinforcement systems and environmental modifications at levels equal to the intensity of the behavior (CC5S11, GC7S1, & VGC2c).Integrate academic instruction and behavior management for individuals and groups with disabilities (GC7K1).Codes for the CEC Standards above: CC = Common Core; GC = General Curriculum,. Code for VADOE Standards: VGC = Virginia’s General Curriculum; and VPS = Virginia’s Professional Studies.


Functional Behavior Assessment and Behavior Intervention Plan

Narrative and Analysis: With the inclusion of disciplinary language in IDEIA 2004 (and previously in

1997), many special educators in the field are still either untrained or are designing behavioral strategies for students with disabilities without solid functional behavioral assessment. This somewhat detailed and lengthy process can be a difficult task for veteran teachers in the field. Our candidates complete the functional behavior assessments using children and youth who experience misbehaviors that require analysis and intervention.

We chose to use this assessment as a measure of the CEC Standard of Collaboration due to the collaborative nature of the process with families, children and youth and general educators and educational specialists.

One student took this class in fall 2008 and one student took it in summer 2010, but no data was reported on either student. This course is not taught by faculty in the deaf education program and the faculty member who was in charge of NCATE, is no longer with the university. There was some confusion as to who was to submit data, the faculty member teaching the class or the advisor of the students in the major. This has been clarified and now the professor of record records the data.

#7 Additional assessment that addresses CEC standards (optional)Assessment Name: INDIVIDUALIZED EDUCATION PROGRAM (IEP)

Program Context: Candidates complete this task during EDSP 427: Curriculum and Methods for Deaf and Hard of Hearing Students, which is normally taken the semester before they student teach.

Program Standards:NCATE – – #1c Professional & Pedagogical Knowledge and Skills and #1d Student Learning Pedagogical and Professional Knowledge – Planning InstructionCEC #3 Individual Learning Differences and #7 Instructional Planning

Description of task: Students use assessment data as the foundation for designing a complete IEP for one student. They develop a Present Level of Performance, Annual Goals and Objectives/Benchmarks. They determine needed accommodations and adaptations, as well as special education services needed. Students use the sample IEP form developed by the VDOE. Students use the IEP rubric as an informal self-evaluation and professors use the IEP rubric as a summative evaluation.

Assessment Rubric/Scoring Guide: see next page

Radford UniversitySpecial Education Department

Name of Candidate: _________________________________ Date:__________________

Faculty Evaluator(s): ___________________________________________________________ Course in which the IEP was developed:________________

Individualized Education Plan (IEP) Rubric

Directions: Evaluate the IEP as "Target,” "Acceptable," “Minimal” or "Unacceptable" on each of the 3 standards. Then give an Overall Evaluation. See the attached table for requirements and criteria for each standard. Grade equivalents for ratings: Target = A, Acceptable = B, Minimal = C, Unacceptable = D or F.

Standard Unaccep-table Minimal Acceptable Target

1. The IEP is complete (it contains all elements required by law), accurate, and administratively sound (dates, timelines, signatures, team composition are correct). (40%)

(NCATE Standard 1.3)

4+ errors 3 errors 1-2- errors 0 errors

2. The IEP is technically sound and educationally valid; that is, the content meets the requirements of the law and the criteria for best. (50%)

(NCATE Standards 1.2, 1.3, 1.5, & Diversity)

4+ errors 3 errors 2 errors 0-1 error

3. The IEP is professional in form and appearance (includes grammar, spelling and writing mechanics; organization; and overall appearance). (10%) (Note: Count a type of error once. E.g., spelling the same word wrong repeatedly counts as one error.)

(NCATE Standards 1.3 & Technology)

6+ errors 4-5 errors 2-3 errors 0-1 errors

OVERALL EVALUATION

IEP REQUIREMENTS AND CRITERIA


Standard 1. IEP is Complete, Accurate, and Administratively/Legally SoundRequired Elements:___ (1) Cover Page: student info., dates, IEP team names, etc.___ (2) Factors for Team Consideration, including the students’

special needs related to communication, behavior, language, sensory impairments, and assistive technology

___(3) Present Levels of Educational Performance___(4) Diploma Status___(5) Annual goals and short-term objectives/benchmarks___(6) How progress will be measured on each annual goal and how parents will be informed of their child's progress___(7) Accommodations/Modifications, and their frequency location, and duration___(8) Statement of whether student will take district, state

achievement tests with or without accommodations; why student will not participate; alternate assessments to be used

___(9) FAPE: Special education, related services, and supplementary aids and services, and their frequency, location, and duration are complete and accurate.

___(10)LRE and Placement: Decision, justification if student is removed from general education, and explanation of extent to which child will not participate with nondisabled students

___ (11) Prior Notice of IEP and Placement Decision___ (12) Transfer of Rights Notice___ (13) Transition: For students 14+, goals and objectives that

focus on educationally relevant transition needs. For students 16+, description of coordinated activities to promote movement to post-school activities. Interagency Responsibilities and needed linkages specified.

___ (14) The need for extended school year services.___ (15) VA State Assessment Program, SOL Assessments,

&/or Alternate Assessment Program___ (16) Virginia Communication Guide

Comments_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


Dates and timelines: Re-evaluation conducted if due. IEP meeting was held no later than expiration

date on previous IEP. Parents and student were given timely prior

notification of IEP meetingSignatures and team composition:

All necessary team members participated. The student participated, if appropriate.

Comments________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

IEP Assessment Performance Report - EDSP 527- fall 2008


N (%)Minimal

N (%)Acceptable

N (%)TargetN (%)

1) The IEP contains all elements required by law, is accurate and administratively sound.

1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100)

2)The IEP is technically sound and educationally valid, meeting requirements of the law and best practice.

1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100)

3)The IEP is professional in form and appearance

1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100)

4)The one-page Program-at-a-Glance summarizes the most important parts of the IEP

1 4 0 0 0 0 1 (100)

all percentages (%) rounded to nearest integerIEP Assessment Performance Report - EDSP 527- summer 2009


N (%)Minimal

N (%)Acceptable

N (%)TargetN (%)

1) The IEP contains all elements required by law, is accurate and administratively sound.

10 3.7 0.483 0 0 0 3 (30) 7 (70)

2)The IEP is technically sound and educationally valid, meeting requirements of the law and best practice.

10 4 0 0 0 0 0 10 (100)

3)The IEP is professional in form and appearance

10 4 0 0 0 0 0 10 (100)

4)The one-page Program- 10 4 0 0 0 0 0 10


at-a-Glance summarizes the most important parts of the IEP

(100)


Narrative and Analysis: This course is the candidates’ initial introduction into writing Individualized Education

Programs (IEP’s). The process is taught in a very systematic manner, allowing them to work on each section and revise as they receive feedback, yet it is challenging for candidates to reach mastery in the development of IEPs through one course.

Some candidates are involved in an early field experience (blocking) when they take this class. It is a challenging semester in that they are in the schools all morning and attending classes in the evenings. Their primary concern is adequately planning good lessons, teaching, and meeting the needs of their students. Their cooperating teachers share the IEPs of their students which can sometimes confuse instead of enlighten because they may be written differently than that which is being instructed. The IEPs the candidates have access to in the schools can serve as examples or non-examples depending on the quality of the IEP.

Other candidates who have previous teaching experience do not participate in an early field experience. They usually come with previous experience writing IEPs. This can be advantageous if they have experience writing structurally and technically sound IEPs that are accurate and educationally valid. If they do not have experience writing administratively sound IEPs, their previous experience can be a deterrent because they are not always willing to make the necessary changes to correct inaccurate practices.

Since many of the schools use computerized IEPs, Radford is looking into gaining access to a computerized IEP program that can be taught in classes to ensure that the candidates are being taught to use programs that will be used more frequently in the schools. This will help with the problems encountered with more experienced candidates seeking an MS degree.

The data does not adequately reflect the difficulty candidates have learning to develop and write IEPs since the learning process for this task is scaffolded. Additional teaching and practice is needed to fully develop this skill. Candidates need to be exposed to this skill across several courses to ensure competence.

#8 Additional assessment that addresses CEC standards. (Optional)

EMPLOYER AND ALUMNI SURVEYS – see unit report

SECTION V—USE OF ASSESSMENT RESULTS TO IMPROVE CANDIDATE AND PROGRAM PERFORMANCE

Evidence must be presented in this section that assessment results have been analyzed and have been or will be used to improve candidate performance and strengthen the program. This description should not link improvements to individual assessments but, rather, it should summarize principal findings from the evidence, the faculty’s interpretation of those findings, and changes made in (or planned for)


the program as a result. Describe the steps program faculty has taken to use information from assessments for improvement of both candidate performance and the program. This information should be organized around (1) content knowledge, (2) professional and pedagogical knowledge, skill, and dispositions, and (3) student learning.

(response limited to 3 pages)

Content KnowledgeData collected several years ago from interns at the end of their student teaching experience at the Virginia School for the Deaf and Blind indicated that they felt challenged by the upper level content in their secondary placements. They did not feel that they had received adequate practice writing lesson plans for secondary courses or had adequate resources for good examples of lessons at the secondary level. The program was changed in response to this feedback to require lesson plans at both the elementary and secondary level in EDSP 628 / Language Development and Literacy for Deaf and Hard of Hearing Students. The thematic unit plan in EDSP 527 / Curriculum and Methods for Deaf and Hard of Hearing Students is designed to match the level in which the students are placed for blocking when appropriate; thereby, those involved in a secondary blocking placement construct their plans at the secondary level. Subsequent evaluations from students have no longer indicated this to be an area of weakness in the program. Students continue, however, to voice concern over the work required to master the content that they must teach in their secondary placements during student teaching. While the program director at VSDB and the RU university supervisor try to match students with cooperating teachers in their content area of strength, there are times that this cannot happen due to limited placements in the field of deaf education. While the process of relearning content prior to teaching is challenging, it is a great skill to practice as interns because this often happens in the workforce.

This concern over content mastery was voiced differently this year by the principal at the Virginia School for the Deaf and Blind. He justifiably feels that when the students do not graduate highly qualified in a content area, it limits their marketability. He voiced that, while the RU interns demonstrate strong teacher characteristics and dispositions and employ successful teaching strategies which yield good academic results which would lead him to employ them, he is unable to offer them a job at the secondary level because they are not highly qualified in a content area. Since the Masters program is already a 42 hour program with specific courses required for licensure, it has been decided that, while not required, it can be recommended that students with a propensity for a certain content area should be encouraged to take Praxis II in that content area to become highly qualified and therefore graduation.

Professional and Pedagogical Content Knowledge, Skills, and DispositionsStudents develop professional and pedagogical content knowledge, skills, and dispositions through a series of classes, assignments, and experiences. Students are required to observe in programs for students who are deaf/hard of hearing when they take their introductory deaf education course, EDSP 526 / Introduction to Deaf and Hard of Hearing. The Deaf Education Program at Radford University is a comprehensive program in that it does not support one communication approach over another. The philosophy of the Radford program is that teachers should be versed in all the communication approaches so that when children are placed on their caseload, the RU teachers can support the communication approach deemed most appropriate for the student based on family preference, cognitive ability, and audiologic ability. RU teachers are educated to be able to explain all communication


approaches in an unbiased manner recognizing that approaches that work for one child may not work for all. In the initial coursework in the field of deaf education, students are required to do extensive research on the different communication approaches and discuss them in class with confidence and clarity. Students are required to construct a website for parents in which they offer, in an unbiased manner, critical information about communication approaches, educational placements, audiology, language development, available resources and services for the deaf, etc. Information learned in this course is revisited and further developed in subsequent coursework in the program of studies.

While EDSP 526 is a very strong foundational course, students are only required to complete the one observation in a self-contained classroom for children with hearing loss. To support the comprehensive nature of the program, however, consideration is being given to expanding the observation requirement to include visits to both oral and signing programs. Optimally it would be best if students could visit programs representative of all the communication approaches, but that would require extensive travel for some, particularly to visit a program that uses Cued Speech since only a limited number of programs use this approach.

In EDSP 628, students learn the parts of an effective lesson, write four in-depth lesson plans (two at the elementary level and two at the secondary level, two of those in reading and the other two in expressive writing), present 1-2 lessons in class, and receive feedback from their peers and university instructor. In EDSP 527, they develop a thematic unit in which they construct three in-depth plans in math, science, and social science to support the unit plan. One of these lessons must be presented in class and students receive feedback once again from their peers and university instructor. It is strongly encouraged in this class for the students to construct a unit that can be used with the students in their blocking placement. After it became apparent that students viewed visual representations of concepts as simply pictures, students were given additional instruction on visual concept development strategies. These strategies are critical for teaching students with hearing loss. Much improvement has been noted, but full comprehension of the intricacies of the visual representations does not take place until the pre-service teachers are in the schools actually working with children with hearing loss.

Students learn about approaches and resources designed specifically for the deaf such as See the Sound Visual Phonics, Fairview Learning Program, Reading Milestones Reading Curriculum, etc., but they also learn about other evidenced approaches that can be successfully adapted for children who are deaf/hard of hearing.

Several years ago, an alumni who graduated from our program and was hired as an itinerant teacher provided very beneficial feedback. She stated that while she felt extremely prepared to be a self-contained teacher for the deaf, she was not equipped to become an itinerant teacher. Following that feedback, a very qualified effective itinerant teacher was asked to present a session on itinerant teaching. Students are now required to shadow an itinerant teacher for 8 hours during their junior year. Students then are placed in a public school in a variety of settings during their blocking semester of their senior year. They then teach at a residential school for the deaf for student teaching. Exposure to all educational placement options enables


students to discover the environment in which they feel most comfortable. This helps them to know which placements to pursue for employment after graduation.

A major area of weakness in the deaf education program is in finding placements for application of knowledge and skills in oral education for students with hearing loss. We employ a professional outside the university who is one of the leaders in the field of auditory verbal learning. She very effectively teaches our students how to develop auditory potential, how to work through the auditory learning guide, and strategies for developing listening skills and spoken language in children with hearing loss. We have an audiologist teach our course in audiologic assessment and intervention. There are, however, limited placements in which this approach is effectively used in our area. We have one teacher who is skilled in this area who willingly works with our students, but cannot serve them all. There is another speech language pathologist with this area of expertise who will allow our students to observe her, but these placements are so limited that all RU students do not have access to this practical application of the knowledge and skills.

Impact on Student Learning

Shortly after the inception of the program, students were required, during blocking and student teaching, to administer pre-assessments prior to teaching concepts to their students. This practice is still in place. Based on the data gathered from these pre-assessments, the interns develop a series of in-depth lesson plans to teach the concepts, and then administer post assessments following the instructional processes. Interns keep records of their students’ progress as well as copies of the students’ work. They compile all of this information in a notebook and orally reflect on their impact on student learning with university supervisors by describing the data found on comparisons of pre and post assessments. Their instruction throughout blocking and student teaching is standards based and assessment driven.

In addition to the two formal evaluations that cooperating teachers complete on their interns, cooperating teachers also submit weekly written feedback that reflects on the strengths of their interns and establishes focus areas for improvement. This weekly feedback is always tied to the intern’s impact on student learning.

This year in EDSP 628, a new assignment was established for teacher candidates that incorporate one-on-one tutoring with a student who is deaf or hard of hearing who has significant problems in expressive writing. The teacher candidates give their student a writing prompt, collect an adequate written language sample, analyze the sample with an in-depth rubric, and identify goals for expressive writing based on the language sample assessment. The teacher candidates then develop 6-10 lessons that focus on the targeted areas and work one-on-one with the students using these lessons. During the tutoring sessions, the teacher candidates use consistent assessment, questioning techniques, and monitoring techniques to evaluate student growth. At the end of the sessions, a post assessment is collected using a different writing prompt. The written language sample is analyzed again using the same rubric to measure growth and the student’s impact on student learning.

Actions to improve the program’s assessment of candidates’ pedagogical content knowledge, skills and dispositions.


SECTION VI—For Revised Reports Only

Describe what changes or additions have been made in the report to address the standards that were not met in the original submission. List the sections of the report you are resubmitting and the changes that have been made. Specific instructions for preparing a revised report are available on the NCATE web site at http://www.ncate.org/institutions/process.asp?ch=4ATTACHMENT A Candidate InformationDirections: Provide three years of data on candidates enrolled in the program and completing the program, beginning with the most recent academic year for which numbers have been tabulated. Report the data separately for the levels/tracks (e.g., baccalaureate, post-baccalaureate, alternate routes, master’s, doctorate) being addressed in this report. Data must also be reported separately for programs offered at multiple sites. Update academic years (column 1) as appropriate for your data span. Create additional tables as necessary.

Compilation of the last 3 years:Program: MS-HI: Special Education: Deaf and Hard of Hearing ProgramAcademic Year

# of Candidates Enrolled in the Program

# of Program Completers8

2007-2010 11 MS-HI Degree Candidates 22007-2010 17 Licensure Only Students 9 of these now

licensed2007-2010 167 Summer Professional

Development

Last 3 years documented by semesters:Program: MS-HI: Special Education: Deaf and Hard of Hearing ProgramAcademic Year


# of Program Completers9

Spring 2010 9 MS-HI majors 1Fall 2009 9 MS-HI majors 1Summer 2009

9 MS-HI 0

8 NCATE uses the Title II definition for program completers. Program completers are persons who have met all the requirements of a state-approved teacher preparation program. Program completers include all those who are documented as having met such requirements. Documentation may take the form of a degree, institutional certificate, program credential, transcript, or other written proof of having met the program’s requirements. 9 NCATE uses the Title II definition for program completers. Program completers are persons who have met all the requirements of a state-approved teacher preparation program. Program completers include all those who are documented as having met such requirements. Documentation may take the form of a degree, institutional certificate, program credential, transcript, or other written proof of having met the program’s requirements.


Program: MS-HI: Special Education: Deaf and Hard of Hearing ProgramAcademic Year


# of Program Completers

Spring 2009 6 MS-HI majors 0Fall 2008 6 MS-HI majors 0Summer 2008

5 MS-HI majors 0

Program: MS-HI: Special Education: Deaf and Hard of Hearing ProgramAcademic Year


# of Program Completers

Spring 2008 0 MS-HI majorsFall 2007 0 MS-HI majorsSummer 2007

0 MS-HI majors

Since the inception of the program in 2002, we have taught approximately 164 graduate students 799 courses, both 3 semester hour courses and 1 semester hour courses. Many of these graduate students have come to Radford to seek licensure in Hearing Impairment Prek-12. Many have attended our professional development seminars in the summers and a few have received a Master’s degree from Radford. The number of program completers does not reflect the number of students who enroll in our classes.

Data is available on the next page which indicates enrollment numbers by course since 2002. The graduate courses have been highlighted in yellow. Data is also available that lists students’ names and the courses they took at RU. That is not included in this report due to confidentiality.


Enrollment Numbers in all Deaf Education Coursework / Spring 2002-Summer 2011


2002

Spr

ing

2002

Sum

mer

2002

Fal

l20

03 S

prin

g

2003

Sum

mer

2003

Fal

l20

04 S

prin

g

2004

Sum

mer

2004

Fal

l20

05 S

prin

g20

05 S

umm

er20

05 F

all

2006

Spr

ing

2006

Sum

mer

2006

Fal

l20

07 S

prin

g20

07 S

umm

er20

07 F

all

2008

Spr

ing

2008

Sum

mer

2008

Fal

l20

09 S

prin

g

2009

Sum

mer

2009

Fal

l20

10 S

prin

g

2010

Sum

mer

2010

Fal

l20

11 S

prin

g Su

mm

er 2

011

Tota

l

EDSP 426 11 5 9 8 8 11 8 12 6 11 4 3 6 11 1 8 3 125EDSP 526 5 12 9 7 6 4 8 2 5 6 4 9 7 9 93EDSP 427 1 1 11 1 6 4 7 5 3 5 44EDSP 527 7 8 2 16 12 5 9 59EDSP 428 2 2 2 9 5 3 7 1 5 8 7 51EDSP 528 4 18 1 1 15 1 4 44EDSP 432 1 1 8 4 1 1 1 4 2 3 5 31EDSP 455:456 1 6 4 2 4 2 2 4 25EDSP 755:756 1 1 1 2 1 1 7COSD 422 1 8 4 2 6 3 5 29COSD 512 3 6 4 8 7 6 8 6 2 50COSD 221.02 6 21 22 3 26 27 25 23 29 17 20 20 20 259COSD 221.3 43 40 83COSD 222 (3) 6 5 3 9 15 11 14 12 5 14 13 107COSD 223 (3) 3 8 7 10 6 6 4 44COSD 224 7 7AVT 58 78 25 17 43 18 35 3 277Math and Science (1) 16 16Listening for Literacy 25 25

Literacy and the DHH Student 14 32 46Cued Language 34 34Neuro Assessment 25 25Opening Doors /Unlocking Potential 5 5Visual Phonics 44 27 13 34 118Total 22 28 32 52 113 63 15 104 18 31 58 70 46 72 58 33 90 54 54 91 86 85 113 45 40 68 23 23 17 1604


ATTACHMENT BFaculty InformationDirections: Complete the following information for each faculty member responsible for professional coursework, clinical supervision, or administration in this program.

Faculty Member Name

HighestDegree, Field, &

University10

Assignment: Indicate the role of the faculty member11

Faculty Rank12

Tenure Track (Yes/

No)

Scholarship,13 Leadership in Professional Associations, and Service: 14 List up to 3 major contributions in the past 3 years 15

Teaching orother professional

experience inP-12 schools16

Ellen Austin Masters in Special Education, Radford University

FacultyGrant Co-Director,Grant Coordinator,Clinical Supervisor,Program Area Leader for Deaf Education

Professional Faculty

No Member of Virginia Network of Consultants for LEAs Working with Deaf/Hard of Hearing Students – presentations at various state workshops

Serve as consultant for students with hearing loss for Salem Public Schools

Grant Co-Director / Coordinator for VDOE Teacher Preparation and Professional Development Project: Hearing Impairment Prek-12

1 year teaching preschool deaf/hard of hearing students1 year teaching high school students with learning disabilities (started that program at Wm. Fleming High School in Roanoke, VA.)20 years teaching deaf/hard of hearing students at K-5 level2 of these years also teaching children with learning disabilities15 of the 20 years served as coordinator for the Roanoke Valley Regional Program for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing.

10 e.g., PhD in Curriculum & Instruction, University of Nebraska11 e.g., faculty, clinical supervisor, department chair, administrator12 e.g., professor, associate professor, assistant professor, adjunct professor, instructor, administrator13 Scholarship is defined by NCATE as systematic inquiry into the areas related to teaching, learning, and the education of teachers and other school personnel. Scholarship includes traditional research and publication as well as the rigorous and systematic study of pedagogy, and the application of current research findings in new settings. Scholarship further presupposes submission of one’s work for professional review and evaluation.14Service includes faculty contributions to college or university activities, schools, communities, and professional associations in ways that are consistent with the institution and unit’s mission.15 e.g., officer of a state or national association, article published in a specific journal, and an evaluation of a local school program16 Briefly describe the nature of recent experience in P-12 schools (e.g. clinical supervision, inservice training, teaching in a PDS) indicating the discipline and grade level of the assignment(s). List current P-12 licensure or certification(s) held, if any.

Kenna M. Colley Ed.D. in Curriculum and Instruction/Educational Leadership; Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University

Faculty, clinical supervisor, grant coordinator, Program Area Leader for Special Education Programs

Associate Professor

Yes Principal Investigator and Grant director: TTAC, MERGE

Former Grant PI: Self Determination and Virginia Transition Outcomes Project

Presentations at TASH, OSEP, and many state and regional conferences

Special education teacher (middle school) 3 years, inclusion specialist K-12; 5 years;Training and Technical Assistance Coordinator/director 10 years.

Leslie Daniel Ph.D. Curriculum and Instruction, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University

Faculty, clinical supervisor, federal grant co-director, lead of Autism Certificate Program

Assistant Professor

Yes President, VA TASH Presented at TASH in DC,

OSEP conference in DC twicePresented at regional conferences related to autism spectrum disorders.

Taught special ed preschool for 3 years, self-contained middle school for 3 years, and inclusive elementary school for 3 years, T/TAC Project Coordinator for 10 years in public schools and agencies.

Vanessa Haskins Masters in Special Education; Radford University

Faculty and grant coordinator

Special Purpose Faculty

No Grant supervisor for OSEP Personnel Preparation Grant

Presentations to OSEP conference

state and local conferences on multicultural issues, transition, and collaboration

Special Education Teacher, Roanoke City Schools, VA, grades K-5.

Scholarship is defined by NCATE as systematic inquiry into the areas related to teaching, learning, and the education of teachers and other school personnel. Scholarship includes traditional research and publication as well as the rigorous and systematic study of pedagogy, and the application of current research findings in new settings. Scholarship further presupposes submission of one’s work for professional review and evaluation.Service includes faculty contributions to college or university activities, schools, communities, and professional associations in ways that are consistent with the institution and unit’s mission. e.g., officer of a state or national association, article published in a specific journal, and an evaluation of a local school program Briefly describe the nature of recent experience in P-12 schools (e.g. clinical supervision, inservice training, teaching in a PDS) indicating the discipline and grade level of the assignment(s). List current P-12 licensure or certification(s) held, if any


eduweb.education.radford.edueduweb.education.radford.edu/ncate/docs/ncate exhi… · web...

Documents