cwu home     site map         
        
    

CTL PROGRAM REPORT
Special Education Program

  
 
1.   Please describe your program's assessment process and what standards you are measuring in relation to the NCATE and State standards of knowledge (content, pedagogy and professional), skills (professional and pedagogical) and dispositions. Is the system course based, end of program based, or other? Be sure to reference how the faculty in your program was involved in developing the assessment process. In addition, describe how the assessment of standards relates to the unit's and program's conceptual framework.
 

Program Interpretations and Conclusions:

The Special Education Program (EDSE) at CWU uses an end of program (EOP) assessment format. Since 1992, the program has utilized a capstone experience, competencies which are demonstrated during a quarter-long, full-day, 16-credit practicum experience in a special education classroom. These competencies are first exhibited in a hard copy portfolio and articulated during an Exit Interview process at the end of the practicum experience involving the CWU supervisor, the mentor teacher and the CWU student. The artifacts/competencies which are applied in practicum, are first introduced in targeted courses taken earlier during the special education sequence of courses. The portfolio and EOP process is continually refined by the special education faculty, with input from the CWU students and other mentor teachers. The aggregate data incorporated in the Livetext system reflects a “met,” “met with assistance,” or “not met” rating for each of 12 target competencies demonstrated by the portfolio artifacts and articulated at the Exit Interview. State, NCATE, CTL, and professional standards are incorporated in courses in the special education sequence and reapplied in the practicum experience. These include pedagogical and professional knowledge, skills and dispositions. Standards representing the 9 areas of the Special Education Common Core in the Washington state P-12 standards are addressed in courses and again assessed in practicum. CTL standard 1 is also addressed. Students utilize a process of reflection both in the EDSE courses as well as throughout the practicum experience evidenced in their portfolio and Exit Interview. The results of these multiple assessments are reported in the aggregate Livetext data. (Note: The exit interview is videotaped for evaluative analysis). This support’s our unit’s conceptual framework of constructivism.

2. Below is an analysis of the frequency with which your program cites CTL, WA State Standards/Competencies, and/or national standards within your LiveText artifacts, rubrics, and reports. Please examine the charts and write your program's interpretations and conclusions based on the information provided. (e.g., Are the standards dispersed appropriately in your program? Are all the standards represented as you wish them to be? After reviewing this analysis are there changes your program would recommend making to the way you cite standards or assess your candidates using LiveText?)
 
 

Program Interpretations and Conclusions:

The relevant standards identified are currently assessed by a variety of artifacts in the EDSE 495/490 end of program assessment. The 9 Special Education Common Core areas are assessed. In the EOP assessment more skills based standards are naturally more frequently assessed as this is a field-based experience. The new 2008 Washington State Special Education standards will need to be incorporated within the EOP assessment (and earlier in courses) if different from current existing standards. The EDSE program will begin discussions in this area in Spring 2008. Relevant changes will be addressed within the EOP assessments and reflected in Livetext data.

3. Below you will find one sample of your Live Text Report that identifies an aggregation of candidate learning outcome data. Please examine all of your reports in the LiveText exhibit area and discuss the accuracy, consistency, and fairness of the data, as well as what improvements could be made in the program assessment rubrics, courses, artifacts, or reporting. Include your interpretations relative how well your candidates are meeting standards. After examining all of your report data, list any changes your program is considering.
 
 

Program Interpretations and Conclusions:

For EDSE 495/490, 14 of the 17 students completing the special education practicum/field experience are represented in the Fall 2007/Winter 2008 data exhibited in Livetext at this time. The 3 remaining students successfully completed the practicum and demonstrated competency on identified standards. The program has followed up to ensure the aggregate data reflects this. It appears that the assessment for the EOP is accurately reflecting student competence and that relevant standards are being met (CTL, State, NCATE). For changes, prior EDSE meeting minutes indicate discussion by EDSE faculty members to consider the potential addition of student reflection in the Livetext data system. These reflections are already generated in a written format, kept within the hard copy portfolio, and shared at the Exit Interview. Please note that evidences supporting student outcomes on each of the competencies measured on the Livetext rubric are available in 2 formats: 1) hardcopy evidences in each student’s written portfolio and 2) a video/DVD of student Exit Interview from the end of the practicum experience.

4. Below you will find a chart of the CTL Standards aggregated by course. Please examine the data results and discuss any improvements if any you might consider for your program. Using these data, please reflect upon your candidates' success in meeting standards. Compare these data to the data provided in the WEST B and E charts that follow. Is there consistency in the rates of success? What do these data tell you?
 
 

Program Interpretations and Conclusions:

The first chart – Table One - entitled “Level of Success Attained on Standards by Course Special Education”uses rubric criteria which differ from the EDSE 490/495 “met,” “met with assistance,” and “not met criteria. This labeling typo can easily be rectified. The second chart entitled: “Level of Success Attained on Standards by Course” includes fall quarter 2007 student data. Spring quarter 2006 EDSE 490/495 data are available in earlier reports. The data analyzed in the chart provided indicate that students are exhibiting success in attaining the targeted professional and pedagogical standards for EDSE 490/495. These standards are first introduced in earlier coursework and later applied contextually in the field experience and assessed in practicum and in the EOP assessment. In reviewing the WEST E data for special education, the results support the excellent performance that the EDSE 490/495 students have exhibited (i.e. a 2006-2007 pass rate of 100% on the WEST E). With respect to WEST-B data, and the writing score performances, within the special education program, there is a consistent standard for course performances which are articulated in writing and a consistent grading scale agreed upon by faculty. This has been helpful in providing consistency to our program.

5.

Please find below the West B data for the teacher residency program. Please use these data, the LiveText data, and the West E data found below to predict candidate success in your program. Given theses summaries, are there changes to your program or to the unit your program recommends the CTL consider?

  • Between 2005-2007, 49% of the candidates passed all three sections of the exam their first attempt, 84% passed the reading portion in their first attempt, 82% math their first attempt, and 65% passed writing their first attempt.
  • The mean number of candidates not passing reading portion is 11%, math 12%, and writing 25%.

CTL WEST B Data Summary 2002 to Present

 
 

Program Interpretations and Conclusions:

The WEST B data on overall performances writing appears to be an area which has a higher mean percentage of students seeking to enter/enroll in the teacher residency program not meeting criterion for passing (25%). Some considerations for the unit may include a) seeking to find out if the candidates not passing are those who have completed general studies here at CWU or otherwise and/or b) investigating the writing requirements and standards within general studies here at CWU to look at expectations and possible implications for students who do/do not complete general studies here at CWU. The WEST E rates indicate that our students in the EDSE program are meeting standards (100% in 2006-2007). No changes are recommended.

6. The WEST E is administered by ETS as a state requirement for program Exit, measuring content knowledge by endorsement area. ETS has not sent the final corrected data summary at the time of this report, however, the data we keep on a continuously updated basis is described below in the following graph. The graph compares 2005-2006 and 2006-2007 data by endorsement area. We suspect the 2006-2007 data will change after all scores are received from ETS. According to this set of data, 2005-06 pass rates were 90%. Remember all candidates must pass the test to be certified, so they take it multiple times. We are working on authenticating a different process that will show how many times candidate take the test and when. The 2006-07 data indicates pass rates of 87%. If your program is one of those with a pass rate below 80%; what program recommendations are you considering that will positively affect the rate of passing the WEST-E for 2007-2009?
 
 

Program Interpretations and Conclusions:

N/A. Pass rate above 80%

7.

Please find below the EBI teacher and principal data for all program completers. Discuss and report in the space provided what your program recommends the unit should accomplish to improve overall satisfaction, or what your program is doing to improve the trend.

  • This survey is administered through OSPI and is contracted through Educational Benchmarking Inc. These data are collected for all new teachers in public schools by surveying new teachers and their principals.
  • Response rate average over the seven years n=105
  • The graph represents a seven year average satisfaction trend by category
  • Highest satisfaction ratings are in the areas of:
    • Student learning
    • Instructional strategies
    • Management, control and environment
  • Lowest satisfaction ratings are in the areas of:
    • Reading skills
  • 5 year Principal responses followed similar patterns as teachers n=41

 

Program Interpretations and Conclusions:

As with many surveys, attaining a response rate can be challenging. The unit may seek to look at ways to strengthen this over time. Within the EDSE program, we have recently completed a program review and are beginning to route curricular changes to address one of the trend areas reflected in the EBI data (and also address state and professional standards) – Reading Skills. The EDSE program has generated a course proposal for a new course EDSE 423- which addresses literacy strategies for students with disabilities (and at-risk for reading failure) and will augment the EDRD 308 and EDRD 309 courses taken currently only by EDSE broad area majors.

8.

Please find below first year and third year teacher survey results summarized by graphing mean responses for each question.

  • This survey is administered by CTL and data trend summary represents 2004-07
  • The average response rate for 2004-2007 is 15%
  • First year teacher N= 375, Third year teacher n =200
  • The graph and subsequent ANOVA demonstrates a significantly higher average satisfaction rating from first year teachers when compared to third year teachers (p<.05)
  • Highest satisfaction ratings are in the areas of:
    • Subject matter knowledge
    • Application of EALR's
  • Lowest satisfaction ratings are in the areas of:
    • Classroom management
    • Involving and collaborating with parents
 

Program Interpretations and Conclusions:

The lowest ratings reported in classroom management is reflected in the national literature for all new teachers as an area of need. Within the EDSE program in the area of classroom management, aggregate data on the End-of-Program data artifact (a Behavior Plan) which addresses this area indicates that students are addressing and achieving this standard within their practicum experience classroom. The EDSE program includes a separate class (EDSE 410) on behavior management. This class is also available as an elective to elementary education majors. Other programs may select to incorporate EDSE 410 (or a focused experience in classroom and behavior management) to address these needs. Another area with an indicated lower satisfaction rating is in the area of involvement and collaboration with parents. The EDSE program also includes a separate course on communication and collaboration with families and professionals/paraprofessionals (EDSE 460). Based on Exit Interviews, students at the EOP assessment are demonstrating competence in this area.

9.

Please find below a comparative analysis of candidate dispositions from beginning candidates to finishing candidates. Please comment on the changes you observe in your candidates over time and describe how and why you think this occurs. What does your program specifically do to engage candidates in developing professional teacher dispositions?

  • This inventory is administered by the CTL at admissions (N=645), and again at the end of student teaching (N= 195). Some of the 645 candidates have not yet student taught, which is why the n's are different.
  • There is a significant difference in 12 of 34 items (p<.05) between beginning candidates and candidates completing student teaching
  • Change is in the preferred direction from agree to strongly agree
  • This means somewhere between entry and before exit, the teacher program candidates are developing stronger professional beliefs and attitudes that reflect the underlying values and commitments of the unit's conceptual framework. Future work will include data that tells us where this change is occurring and if there are difference caused by demographic variables. If you want to read more about this disposition instrument, the validation study is published on the OREA web site under research.
 

Program Interpretations and Conclusions:

The chart and information provided indicate that, overall, there are differences in the student dispositions related to the CTL framework beliefs from beginning to end measured by the disposition inventory. The EDSE program targets ethics, advocacy and professional dispositions as identified by the state and professional (CEC Code of Ethics and Advocacy standards) in a target course (EDSE 489 in an advocacy plan) and exhibited at the End-of-Program in a culminating experience (The Exit Interview). Professional communication and ethics expectations are also articulated in many EDSE syllabi (e.g., EDSE 310, EDSE 311, EDSE 422, EDSE 426, and EDSE 432 among others). The EDSE 490/495 data in Livetext, shared in mentor teacher reports, and recorded during the Exit Interview, indicate that students exit EDSE 495/490 with the professional dispositions necessary for effective teaching. CWU supervisors observe and provide weekly feedback, mentor teachers provide ongoing feedback, and CWU EDSE major students reflect on teaching as well as advocacy and professional skills necessary for teaching in special education.

 

10. 

Final Student Teaching Evaluation Report on LiveText

  • The data report is too large to be placed in this document. Please access the data by going to this link on our assessment system web site http://www.cwu.edu/~ectl/ncate2.0/wastate/fsted-ltr.html
  • The report reveals the final assessment of elements found in state standards IV and V
  • Candidates are generally performing at a high level, although there are some candidates as depicted by the colors green and red who are not performing to standard.
  • Examination of those elements indicates some agreement with results provided in the 1st and 3rd year teacher survey.

Please look at these data carefully and discuss with your program faculty some ways the teacher residency program can begin to address the few but common deficits occurring in candidate knowledge and skills relative to the State standard elements. If you need to refer to state standards please refer to this link in the assessment system website: http://www.cwu.edu/~ectl/ncate2.0/wastate/istandards.html

 

Program Interpretations and Conclusions:

EDSE 490/495 data indicate EDSE students are meeting competencies in the areas in red/green showing potential deficits by all studentteacher candidates  (e.g., communication, classroom/behavior management).  EDSE related discussion in these areas (classroom management and communication) was shared earlier in this report.

11.

Please examine these data and report any discussions your program has regarding the reported results.

  • This survey is conducted by Career Services and reported to OSPI. The report, however, has been reanalyzed and the summary reflects the new analysis, which covers 2002-2006.
  • Average response rate = 57%
  • Of that 57%, the average percent of graduates who get jobs in state is 94%
  • The average percent of graduate still seeking a position is 27%
  • Two percent of the 57% have decided not to teach
  • For 2005-2006; 35 % of the program graduates responded to questions regarding ethnicity and gender. Out of the 35% who responded, 90% were Caucasian, 5% were Hispanic, 3% were African-American, and 1.8% were Asian.
 

Program Interpretations and Conclusions:

EDSE is a high demand area of need and there continue to be existing shortages of teachers. There are no problems in this area for students to obtain teacher positions as a special educator.

   

 

 

 

 

 
© Central Washington University   |   All Rights Reserved