Linking Evidenced-Based Practices and Clinically Rich Experiences in a

Secondary Dual Certification Program

The contents of this document were developed under a grant from the US Department of Education, Cooperative Agreement #H325T100016. However, those contents do not necessarily represent the policy of the US Department of Education, and you should not assume endorsement

by the Federal Government or Project Officer, Dr. Sarah J. Allen.

Edward Pieper, Ed.D., Co-PI Project ASPIRE Margaret T. McLane, Ph.D., Associate Dean

Lally School of Education

1

Project ASPIRE

Adolescence Special Education Preparation for Inclusive and

Reflective Educators

2

The College of Saint Rose

• Private, independent, coeducational college

• Urban campus in the heart of Albany, NY

• 5,000 undergraduate & graduate students

• www.strose.edu

Thelma P. Lally School of Education • 2,000 students • 25 education programs • One of the largest private educators

of teachers in NYS • Special Education Department

established over 40 years ago

3

Project ASPIRE 325T Goals

• Establish 5 year BS/MSEd dual certification in Adolescence Education/Special Education 7-12 Generalist

• Revise existing graduate Special Education: Adolescence programs

• Revise syllabi to reflect Evidenced Based Practices, extensive field work and integrated technology

• Establish school district partnerships to ensure quality field sites.

• Engage candidates throughout their program in high quality field experiences

4

Project ASPIRE - Clinically Rich Experiences

• Developed by Teacher Education, Special Education and Content (ELA, Math, Science, Social Studies, Spanish) Faculty with input from LEA partners

• Field work embedded throughout program o Spans grades 7-12 o Includes experiences in English, Math, Science and

Social Studies classrooms o Multiple, diverse general education and special

education placements • Based on successful elementary level model • Course embedded assessments tied to field work • Candidate participation moves from observation to whole

class instruction

5

Project ASPIRE: Course Embedded Field Work

v

Year 1: SED 146 Individuals w/ Disabilities & Exceptionalities in the School & Community (18 hrs)

Year 3: SIE 365 Inclusive Curriculum & Instruction in Secondary School (25 hr) SED 347 Curriculum & Instruction for Pupils w/ Significant Disabilities (21 hrs)

Year 4: SED 567 Advance Theories & Practices in Teaching Students w/ Behavioral & Emotional Challenges (10 hrs)

SED 529 Transition Planning for Students w/Disabilities (10 hrs) SEC 520 – 525 Teacher Education Methods (20 hrs)

Year 5: SIE 566 Classroom & Students w/Disabilities

Assessment (5 hrs) LRC 528 Reading & Writing for

Adolescents w/Disabilities (20 hrs)

SIE 585-586 Instructional Practice for Diverse Learners (90 hrs) SIE 580 Student

Teaching

Year 2: SEE 249 Principle & Procedures for Promoting Effective Classroom Management & Individual Behavior Support (18 hrs)

6

Project ASPIRE Methods Block with Field Work

SIE 585 - Instructional Practices for Diverse Learners English, Social Studies 3 Credits (45 hrs) SIE 586 Instructional Practices for Diverse Learners Math/Sci./Tech 3 Credits (45 hrs)

• Co-taught classes modeled by Teacher Ed/Special Ed Faculty • 8:00am – 2:15pm two days per week • 5 weeks at the College of Saint Rose, preparing for co-teaching

across the 4 content areas • 10 weeks in the field • Middle School Co-Teaching experience • Candidates plan, teach and evaluate EBP • Emphasis on data driven decision making and meeting the individual

needs of students

7

Challenges at the Secondary Level

• New NYSED Special Education 7 to 12 Generalist Certification (Fall 2012)

• Special Education teachers provide supports across multiple content areas

• Need to identify field sites that model evidenced-based practices

• Need to build capacity for multiple field experiences throughout program

8

LEA Partners

• 7 School districts: o 3 Large Urban Schools (Initial Cohort)

Albany Schenectady Troy

o 3 Smaller Urban Schools (Second Cohort) Cohoes Lansingburg Amsterdam

o 1 Rural School (Second Cohort) Ravena

• All of these schools identified as: o High-Needs o Low Performing on State Tests o Diverse o Economically challenged

9

Diversity(%) in each school district

District White African American

Hispanic Asian Multiracial

Albany 21 61 12 6

Amsterdam 59 5 34 1 1

Cohoes 83 10 4 1 2

Lansingburgh 70 21 6 1 2

Ravena Coeymans Selkirk 91 4 4 1

Schenectady 36 35 15 14

Troy 54 34 11 1

10

Passing rates(%) of students with disabilities

District Regents High School

Level

Middle School Elementary School

Albany 22 61 69

Amsterdam 33 24 31

Cohoes 19 59 47

Lansingburgh 37 58 88

Ravena-Coeymans Selkirk

60 46 52

Schenectady 17 25 50

Troy 61 37 58 11

2012

2010

Developing Partnered Field Sites

Summer: Initial District Grant Partners

Fall: Identify Initial Cadre of 12 Experienced Secondary Co-Teaching Teams

Winter: Evidence-Based Practice Training with New Partners & New Faculty

Fall: Identify Additional District Partners & Develop Wiki

Winter/Spring : Evidence-Based Practice Training for Faculty and District Partners 2011

Spring/Summer : Continue Training All Partners and Faculty

12

Evidence-Based Practices for the Secondary Level

13

University of Kansas Center for Research and Learning

Strategic Instructional Model

• Successfully field tested in academically diverse Middle and High School Classrooms;

• Effective with students at risk for academic school failure and students with learning disabilities;

• Requires consistent use and explicit instruction;

• Well developed training models and experienced trainers available;

• Concrete examples to assist teachers in implementation

www.kucrl.org

14

Content Enhancement Routines

Learning Strategies

Is about Is about

Teachers plan and present subject matter

General Education Classroom

Applied in the That help

Students think and act when approaching a

task

Special Education

Classroom

That help

15

Applied in the

SIM Content Routines ROUTINES FOR PLANNING & LEADING LEARNING • Course Organizer Routine • Unit Organizer Routine • Lesson Organizer Routine

ROUTINES FOR EXPLORING TEXT, TOPICS, & DETAILS • Clarifying Routine • Framing Routine • Order Routine • Survey Routine

ROUTINES FOR TEACHING CONCEPTS • Concept Anchoring Routine • Concept Mastery Routine • Concept Comparison Routine

ROUTINES FOR INCREASING PERFORMANCE • Quality Assignment Routine • Question Exploration Routine • Vocabulary LINCing Routine

= Faculty and co-teachers received PD on these routines.

16

Learning Strategies • STRATEGIES RELATED TO READING • The Fundamentals of Paraphrasing and Summarizing

Strategy • The Paraphrasing Strategy • The Inference Strategy • Word Identification Strategy • The Self-Questioning Strategy • The Visual Imagery Strategy • STRATEGIES RELATED TO EXPRESSING INFORMATION • The Error Monitoring Strategy • The Sentence Writing Strategy • The Paragraph Writing Strategy • The Fundamentals in Theme Writing Strategy

= Faculty and Co-teachers have been trained on strategies

17

Implementation of Evidenced Based Practices (SIM)

• LEA teaching teams select appropriate content enhancement routines and learning strategies.

• Initial teaching plans developed as part of training sessions.

• WIKI provides means to share work of teachers. • Teachers encouraged to engage in action research. • College faculty serve as district liaisons. • On-going development of classroom evaluation

protocol.

18

Teacher Developed and

Implemented SIM Examples

19

Example of Unit Organizers from Public School Co-Teachers

20

Example of Expanded Unit Organizer Map from Public School Co-Teachers

21

22

Teacher Developed and Implemented

SIM Example

Program Evaluation

23

Summative Data from ASPIRE Winter 2011 Session

A total of n=27 surveys were returned post winter 2011 ASIPRE session. • 8 general education teachers (grades 7-12) • 11 special education teachers (grades 7-12) • 4 higher education/general education faculty • 4 higher education/special education faculty

• Variety of evidence-based strategies were reported by 7-12 teachers.

• 100% of participants agreed that the session was

beneficial, informative, and that the presenter was knowledgeable.

24

Content Explanation and Discovery

B. Content Delivery

Provided by

General Ed

Provided by Special

Ed

Provided by both Special

Ed & General Ed

Not Acceptable Acceptable Target

Embedded Strategies (SIM, Cornell Notetaking, Text Marks, Test-taking strategies, etc)

Strategies Used: _______________________

________________________ ________________________

Evidence of strategy delivery Teachers have modeled and hold student accountable for use

Evidence of Strategy Use by Students Students use as lessons evolve

* Page 2 of 4

Classroom Observation Protocol

Additional Resources: UNC Charlotte Clinical Site Checklist for Dual Preparation Program Dr. Kelly Anderson, 325T Project Director, keanders@uncc.edu

25

• No Evidence

• Neither instruction

nor lesson plan reflect

EBP

• Some Evidence

• Instruction or lesson

plan reflect EBP

•EBP linked to

curriculum

• Clear Evidence

• Instruction and lesson

plan clearly articulate

EBP

•EBP linked to pupil

needs and curriculum

Linking Evidenced Based Practices and Clinically Rich Experiences

The Connection for Scholars between the EBP they are exposed to in their college course work and those realized in their field experiences cannot be assumed. Faculty and District field based teachers need to be trained in similar EBP strategies and routines. Steps to ensuring the connections: 1. Faculty and teachers reflect through discussion and surveys on the value and utility of the EBP in their courses and classrooms.

2. Faculty and teachers demonstrate implementation of EBP by providing examples.

3. Faculty and teachers are observed and evaluated implementing EBP.

26

Additional Resources & Contact Information

27

Doing What Works: Link to Expert Interview with Don Deshler

http://dww.ed.gov/Adolescent-Literacy/Intensive-Intervention/do/?T_ID=23&P_ID=62&t=1&iID=65&c1=0&c3=0&c2=1007#cluster-2

28

1122 West Campus Road, Room 521 Lawrence, KS 66045-3101

crl@ku.edu | (785) 864-4780

For Pre-service Professional Development contact: Mona Tipton or Patty Graner

(785)-864-0626 or by email at: monatipton@ku.edu or pgraner@ku.edu

29

The College of Saint Rose

The College of Saint Rose 432 Western Avenue

Albany, New York 12203 1-800-637-8556 www.strose.edu

Project ASPIRE Contacts: Margaret McLane - MCLANEM@mail.strose.edu

Edward Pieper - PIEPERE@mail.strose.edu Jim Burns - BURNSJ@mail.strose.edu

30