Assessment #7 Additional assessment that addresses CEC standards
EDT 344/573
Parent Interview Scoring Guide
Primary CEC Standards: 9, 10
How the Assessment Reflects CEC Standards:
Candidates develop an awareness and understanding of the cultural aspects of families
of children with special needs; collaboration is encouraged between families and the
candidate and a research-based investigation is designed relevant to collaborative
endeavors.
St. 9: Professional and Ethical Practice
St. 10: Collaboration
Candidates must demonstrate respect for
culture, language, and other diversity
issues in families; uphold standards of
confidentiality and ethical practice
Candidates demonstrate strategies for
collaborating with families, recognizing
concerns of families, how educational
decisions and systems impact students and
families, and communicate effectively
Assessment Results from Prior 2 Years:
Undergraduate Candidates
Year
Exceeds
Expectations
2006/07*
20
2007/08
27
PBIL
Year
2006/07*
2007/08*
Exceeds
Expectations
14
23
Expectations
Met
0
0
Expectations
Not Met
0
0
% Meeting
Standards
100%
100%
Expectations
Met
0
5
Expectations
Not Met
0
0
% Meeting
Standards
100%
100%
Summary of Results:
*Asterisks note that these are course grades and not specific benchmark assignment
grades. How this will be addressed in the future is included in Section V.
Overall, data indicate that both UG and PBIL candidates are meeting the referenced CEC
standards for the Parent Interview benchmark assignment. Given a devoted course to
collaboration and emphasis on collaboration throughout the program, it appears that
candidates at both levels are achieving competence in this area. The 2007/2008 PBIL
data may indicate a need to continue monitoring to ensure trends do not emerge
indicating diminishing competence in these CEC standards areas.
Candidates identified parents/caregiver in collaboration with the instructor or
cooperating teachers, conducted interviews, and reported results. The reports included
evidence of respect for diversity, effective communication with parents/caregivers, and a
professional and caring attitude toward family concerns and wishes. Candidates
reflected on the LRE considerations and the impact of educational decisions on families
and students. Candidates used professional and ethical behavior in interviews and
reporting results.
Scoring Guide:
For undergraduate candidates, this project typically is completed during the 4th year.
For PBIL, this project is completed during a summer term of their choosing. Students
are assigned points based on the quality in each area listed below and assigned a final
grade as noted at the end of the scoring guide as having exceeded, met, or not met
expectations. Candidates are given specific written feedback as to overall performance
and areas for improvement.
1. The student interviewed a parent of a child with disabilities.
2. The parents were cooperative and willing to be interviewed.
3. The student utilized effective communication in the interview.
4. The student responded to any questions that parents asked during the interview.
5. The student reinforced parents for their responses.
6. The student listened to the concerns of parents.
7. The student provided enough time for parents to respond.
8. The student made an effort to ensure that parents were comfortable in the
interviewing
process.
9. Based on the information it was apparent that parents were actively involved in their
child’s education.
10. The student asked questions relevant to inclusion.
11. The student was able to discern if the child was placed in the least restrictive
environment.
12. The student was able to discern if there were any behavioral issues that were
evident in the placement.
13. The interview maintained a positive direction.
14. The student ended the interview with positive comments.
Overall UG Candidate Assessment:
Not Met
Expectations Met
(D - F) (<70% pts.) (B+ - C-) (70-89% pts)
Expectations Exceeded
(A – A-) (90%-100% pts)
Overall Grad Candidate Assessment:
Not Met
Expectations Met
(D - F) (<70% pts.) (B+ - C-) (70-89% pts)
Expectations Exceeded
(A – A-) (90%-100% pts)
Over time, it is also apparent that the scoring guide could be adjusted to indicate better
alignment with standards and to provide for communication with candidates as to how
they perform in reference to specific standards.
Faculty have revised the Parent Interview Scoring Guide which will be implemented in
the 2008/2009 academic year.
Revised scoring guide:
St. 9: Professional and Ethical Practice
St. 10: Collaboration
Candidates must demonstrate respect for
culture, language, and other diversity
issues in families; uphold standards of
confidentiality and ethical practice
Candidates demonstrate strategies for
collaborating with families, recognizing
concerns of families, how educational
decisions and systems impact students and
families, and communicate effectively
The project requires candidates to develop sensitivity to and understanding of the
cultural aspects of families of children with special needs. The project encourages
collaboration between the family and candidate and requires the candidate to design an
educational agenda based on these collaborative efforts. Candidates identify a caregiver
in collaboration with their cooperating teacher or university instructor. Candidates must
develop an appropriate questionnaire, conduct the interview in a collaborative and
professional manner, report results of the interview in a caring and professional manner,
demonstrate effective communication skills, demonstrate respect for cultural/linguistic
or other diversity as needed, consider how educational decisions affect family systems
and students. Candidates must demonstrate ethical practice and confidentiality.
Criteria
Candidate
interviewed a
caregiver of a child
with disabilities
Candidate
developed an
appropriate
questionnaire with
0
Expectations Not
Met
Candidate did
not interview a
caregiver of a
child with
disabilities or
was poorly
prepared
Candidate
developed an
inappropriate
questionnaire
2
Expectations
Met
Candidate
interviewed a
caregiver of a
child with
disabilities a
3-4
Expectations
Exceeded
Not applicable
Candidate
developed a
partially
appropriate
Candidate
developed an
appropriate
questionnaire
Score
respect for diversity
issues
with respect for
diversity issues
CEC St. 9
Candidate
conducted the
interview in a
collaborative and
professional
manner
Candidate did
not conduct the
interview in a
collaborative and
professional
manner
CEC St. 10
Candidate
demonstrated
effective
communication
skills
Candidate
demonstrated
ineffective
communication
skills
CEC St. 9
Candidate
demonstrated
respect for diversity
CEC St. 10
Candidate
summarized
interview results
with respect and
caring
Candidate did
not demonstrate
respect for
diversity
Candidate did
not summarize
interview results
with respect and
caring
CEC St. 9
Results reflect
understanding of
impact of
educational
decisions on family
and student
CEC St. 10
Candidate
demonstrated
ethical practices
and maintained
confidentiality
Results do not
reflect
understanding of
impact of
educational
decisions on
family and
student
Candidate did
not demonstrate
ethical practices
and/or maintain
confidentiality
questionnaire
with respect
for diversity
issues
Candidate
conducted the
interview in a
partially
collaborative
but
professional
manner
Candidate
demonstrated
partially
effective
communication
skills
with respect for
diversity issues.
Candidate
demonstrated
respect but
had incomplete
understanding
of diversity
Candidate
summarized
interview
results with
minor
language that
was less
reflective of
caring or
respect
Results reflect
partial
understanding
of impact of
educational
decisions on
family and
student
Candidate
demonstrated
ethical
practices and
maintained
Candidate
demonstrated
respect for
diversity
Candidate
conducted the
interview in a
collaborative and
professional
manner
Candidate
demonstrated
effective
communication
skills
Candidate
summarized
interview results
with respect and
caring
Results reflect
understanding of
impact of
educational
decisions on
family and
student
Not applicable –
ethical practices
must be met
confidentiality
CEC St. 9
Must achieve at least 21 of 30 possible points (or equivalent ratio) and meet
expectations on all criteria for completion of assignment.