SACSCOC Fifth Year Interim Report
Spacer
Assessment : 2012 - 2013 : Educational Programs :
Special Education MED (Educational Diagnostician)
Special Education MED (Educational Diagnostician)
2 Goals 2 Objectives 2 Indicators 2 Criteria 2 Findings 2 Actions
| GOAL: Mastery Of SBEC Knowledge And Skills |
| Objective |
|
||||
|
Graduates will demonstrate competencies in assessment and evaluation as set forth by the State Board of Education Certification (SBEC) for diagnostician certification. The four domains included in the test are: (1) Students with disablities, (2) Assessment & Evaluation, (3) Curriculum & Instruction, (4) Foundations and Professional Roles and Responsibilities. |
| Indicator |
|
|||
| TExES for Educational Diagnosticians developed by the Education Testing Service (ETS) |
| Criterion |
|
|||
|
| Finding |
|
|||
| 83% of candidates passed Domain II (Assessment and Evaluation) of the TExES, a measure of knowledge of Assessment and Evaluation skill. This is the same area identified as weaker in the previous year. While the median score shows improvement from 81% to 83%, we have still have not met our goal. Criterion will remain at 85% as we strive to extensively focus on this area. |
Actions for Objective:
| Action |
|
|||
|
Foundations and Professional Roles and Responsibilities were the lowest areas at an average score of 82.7% . We will emphasize this content in our Sped Practicum Course 6312 and in the Sped 6311 Seminar in Sped course. |
| GOAL: Mastery Of CEC Knowledge And Skills |
| Objective |
|
||||
|
Candidates will demonstrate mastery of knowledge and skills on comprehensive examinations referenced to the standards set forth by the Council for Exceptional Children’s (CEC) Knowledge and Skills for Educational Diagnosticians. |
| Indicator |
|
|||
| Faculty-developed rubric scored independently by faculty members in the specialization area following standards of CEC |
| Criterion |
|
|||
|
100% of candidates will achieve 80% of all possible points or more on the comprehensive exam rubric. Since 100% of candidates reached the 75% criterion last year, we will raise the criterion to 80% of all possible points. The area we identified for improvement is the area of theories. We will be eager to determine whether our interventions have an impact in 2012-2013. |
| Finding |
|
|||
|
Zero percent of our candidates met the 80% criteria on the comprehensive exam rubric. The highest mean score was 74.5% in the area of Knowledge and Application of Evaluation Procedures. The lowest mean score was 50.91 in the area of Knowledge and Understanding of Learners with Disabilities. |
Actions for Objective:
| Action |
|
|||
| New questions will be developed that fit the new CEC advanced standards and the rubric will be reviewed with all sped faculty to increase interrater reliability. |
| Previous Cycle's "Plan for Continuous Improvement" |
|
We met our goal for candidates to demonstrate knowledge on comprehensive examinations for the Council for Exceptional Children's Standards of Knowledge and Skills for Educational Diagnosticians, but we did not meet the goal of having 85% of candidates pass Domain II on their TExES. Using the results of both of these findings, we will place additional emphasis in courses on the areas of greatest weakness: assessment and evaluation methods, and application of theories. In the three assessment courses (SPED 5302, SPED 5305, SPED 6310) we will use a case study approach to plan, administer, and analyze evaluations. These case studies will be viewed from a variety of theoretical perspectives so that candidates can see how theories influence their evaluations, interventions, and practices. In the classes that are directed toward specific disabilities (SPED 5303, SPED 5304, SPED 6305) we also will use case studies that are analyzed from a variety of theoretical perspectives. With these actions in place we believe that candidates will be better prepared to plan and implement evaluations, as well as apply theories in their diagnostic practices.
|
| Update on Previous Cycle's "Plan for Continuous Improvement" |
|
We did not meet the goal of having 85% of candidates pass Domain II on their TExES. We were unable to place addiditional emphais in courses on the areas of greatest weakeness (Sped 5302, Sped 5303, Sped 6310 sped 5303, sped 5304, sped 6305) as turnover in faculty required the use of pool faculty replacements who were unfamiliar with case study approaches. Additionally, the transition of faculty impacted the implementation of consistent instruction.Moreover, the CEC standards were changed to the advanced level which required new emphases on comprehensive exam items.
|
| Plan for Continuous Improvement |
|
With the addition of new faculty, we will provide more systematic instruction in assessment courses and enhance content in the Sped 5301 online course. Review of the new comprehensive exam rubric with all faculty will increase the likelihood of greater inter-rater reliability. |